Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
10/23/84
"SWALLOW YOUR PRIDE OCCASIONALLY, IT'S NOT FATTENING." - Frank Tyger AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, October 23, 1984 - Council Chambers, City Hall Closed Session - 6:00 p.m. Regular Session - 7:30 p.m. All Council meetings are open to the public. PLEASE ATTEND. It is requested that anyone who wishes to speak on any scheduled public hearing matter, please fill out a card (located in foyer) and deposit in the box -adjacent to the podium. Any complaints against the City Council, City Management, or depart- mental operations will be submitted in writing to the City Manager for evaluation by the appropriate department head prior to submission to the City Council. Complete agenda materials are available for public inspection in the Police Department, Public Library and the Office of the City Clerk. --------------------------------------------------------------------- PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL 1. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following 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 good cause is shown by a member prior to the roll call vote. (Items removed will be considered after Municipal Matters.) (a) Approval of Minutes: Regular meeting of the City Council held on October 9, 1984. Recommended Action: To approve minutes. (b) Demands & Warrants: October 23, 1984 Recommended Action: To approve Demands and Warrants Nos. through inclusive. (c) City Treasurer's Report: June, 1984 Recommended Action: To receive and file. (d) City Treasurer's Report-: July, 1984 Recommended Action: To receive and file. (e) City Treasurer's Report: August, 1984 Recommended Action: To receive and file. /'1 w City Council Agenda - October 23, 1984 (f) Cancellation of Warrants: October 23, 1984 Recommended Action: To approve cancellation of Warrant No. 014804 and Warrant No. 015024. (g) Approval of Final Parcel Map No. 16164: Three -unit condominium located at 630-632 Ardmore Avenue. Recommended Action: To adopt resolution approving Final Parcel Map No. 16164. (h) Letter from Board of Supervisors dated September 28, 1984 re. minute order actions taken at their 9/25/84 meeting. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (i) City Manager Activity Report. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 18, 1984. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (j) Tentative Future Agenda Items. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (k) Building Department Activity Report: September, 1984. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (1) Approval of lease agreement with Easter Seals at Community Center. Recommended Action: To approve lease agreement. (m) Police Statistics: September, 1984. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (n) City Treasurer Report: September, 1984 Recommended Action: To receive and file. (o) Revenue Reporting: September, 1984 Recommended Action: To receive and file. (p) Expenditure Reporting: September, 1984 17 n' -,7 T! - �r :f i•},i ���'�r� .�. t�+. •��„f11).'I3 �r.,'i� �•i� �-_ �`•� �..����: u:iK -l��. �1 �-.T,r, � , �:Jz. -: � r1 ;%.'1�:�?�s�t�:�t!'': ::(J3� ��f e�;? j ti .y., r�'LU- • t j _ "' ,t.,--► '^ , . _ \ ".Ii..'. 4 �� �.i�' LLML7.r1 ' i..0 �, :,. lJl!.4"!,_d,initi;i }:; }•�'`��C'Af crifrr �- a ' r,1. �+1`• �: =��! n "' �� '��; � ti :t �,�', s1t` a-'" T, c,� r-. [ < } �r � ? � - r j' t ►.`. .�,,.fi}t..: '' ?mss€..,p`c. j.i-.'aF' i3.f F ,•.�i4� 1 Y •Y F) Y'..� t e �'. {.���ii. (. ,€f-t�.:.r XJ 144 -Tt;al at ' �-;� e�.1�337��?�'t{'i�'��Qrt �., � �.�'�-.�`t S,"' q. �.•�r ``id';Iy2FZr"r;,rir� '^ '• J . , - •L�'r�r,��sJ�..Yi1F�I'�i� .$` �;.��� ! w ^ � s � Z ,r^ - `Ff�: a cj I •� --�.. _. ,moi Cw f f•.� f.'1'� J�' .<' i -t f - E u: 'R 6 ` : r -f t' `�Ci n i * 1 F - ' •;�. ; ` - c -: m, �C <` s -195��. �t�' �:��1,� �'s ! �•'�� �.- C �+`�''� S_; rrii''�'!!: � i.�[� � �.� �c�S� ari ?3 7,. f� - y . �+.-•. �S+(� -��� er?�j P[�.} f i`� � ��_. i:r+ i��i� -�:.fi a r.� 5:.�. ..0 T- LY 1, l.: i'C e - 71 o:. � .Fb f 4;� 'C„ Ytat`�•� l r i ^d�' � f`ri� ecr. ��? � r+ r �� � ,;t1 � ;+s �► •i Tp�', pZ j� r ' ' `' - i. .1 xr rzf .: `-„f- a1'! •2 f 6` 11 3'. `- rt a• 1 '.i �"!r 7 l�^$1 f .y .._E42; - c�a► r3 k •}e (i3 : 1 1, .? �f Z } i:Rt:s tT J rtF. i.pf t.F.';/t3 3ITV t = . j �1� f]'-q+'.,'•r� .� i�'�'� j��'� � _�'PiW�1 � � °�•� '. .�strt r°"�P?= j�R�J .'� ^r}.is {{�t�l:� '�s"�3�_. 7 7 mg �- � �. �v _ � � � .J�;�f.r� .S ���i���+ try '• ��r. - � � -. - -- City Council Agenda - October 23, 1984 (f) Cancellation of Warrants: October 23, 1984 Recommended Action: To approve cancellation of Warrant No. 014804 and Warrant No. 015024. (g) Approval of Final Parcel Map No. 16164: Three -unit condominium located at 630-632 Ardmore Avenue. Recommended Action: To adopt resolution approving Final Parcel Map No. 16164. (h) Letter from Board of Supervisors dated September 28, 1984 re. minute order actions taken at their 9/25/84 meeting. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (i) City Manager Activity Report. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 18, 1984. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (j) Tentative Future Agenda Items. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (k) Building Department Activity Report: September, 1984. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (1) Approval of lease agreement with Easter Seals at Community Center. Recommended Action: To approve lease agreement. (m) Police Statistics: September, 1984. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (n) City Treasurer Report: September, 1984 Recommended Action: To receive and file. (o) Revenue Reporting: September, 1984 Recommended Action: To receive and file. (p) Expenditure Reporting: September, 1984 Recommended Action: To receive and file. (q) ORDINANCE NO. 84-777 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, AMENDING THE ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION FOR LOTS 10-22 INCLUSIVE OF BLOCK "K" OF TRACT NO. 1686 OF SOUTH SCHOOL SITE FROM UNZONED, OPEN SPACE TO R-3PD, HIGH DENSITY. Submitted for waiver of further reading and adoption. 2. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC. a.) Letter from the Hermosa Beach Police Officers Association `'reque�4%irig a"public"hearing the ist regular City -Council meeting of November, 1984. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. REZONING OF PROSPECT HEIGHTS SCHOOL. Memorandum from Planning Assistant Kim Reardon -Crites dated October 18, 1984. -2- �-.- -�.. Jr ,,,r. -t .- "'. ,,.�r.J .,'�.:}s: t_ ..a 1 ,��:}� �inn '-JE�,•. - .r?1C,f 17 3 1':. f1[~J f 'J i. •-�T.�`i :— i �. �_Fs WZI: if � !�') �� t! ). 1�' - ' � .. _;_ iL� •..I:',` Y 75 - ..'P-, �,: }r. .•. 1J 1:A s{'ft° TIT-Y:-,r�•,- . � f_ n _ ,�.-^ pry' -� � � `�'"�'- �.':=4� ^�' :1 � . `°':#: j,:} i :�,`"sF .r.:i i._%•)'.,; �,�: "�Sii�i}) L, f_ [;�}I�:rX' te, T. f -�i7:i 'i.►ti ',�: �} � =f & t t _ `(:Y,�'.$�•$'"-.`T� �'('`'.t. ] f. J !� :'�3'-. x rpfx , '�� ,,::OP3C. : t, -�� j T �%$.1Q'•...t� Ta ¢- - r� -���5 - 7� .tom J,�-'~•�';�i"` .rF�, ��� �'��A~,s..� '=� :`'� � "��-.t- T C` - _ . . . .-����.'h.�,-.1 Fr;'CT . r a`.;• �ft3¢aq{i •r F T? • jrl =i. '> t'i "t „n ��� r fJi�CT t"� 1. lf4f?' } •-•' '. City Council Agenda - October 23, 1984 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) 4. MERGER OF SUBSTANDARD LOTS. Memorandum from Planning Assistant Kim Reardon -Crites dated October 17, 1984. 5. DOWNTOWN AREA POLICY PLAN. Memorandum from Planning Assistant Kim Reardon -Crites dated October 18, 1984. 6. REQUEST BY STORER CABLE T.V. TO INCREASE THE PER OUTLET COMMERCIAL ACCOUNT FEES FROM $3.50 PER OUTLET TO $5.50 PER OUTLET AND, IN ANTICIPATION OF A 2% INCREASE IN FRANCHISE FEES, A 2% INCREASE IN BASIC FEES AS PROVIDED IN THE AGREEMENT, EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1985. Memorandum from General Services Director Joan Noon dated October 9. 1984. 7. PROPOSED ORDINANCE ADDING A SECTION TO THE ZONING CODE DEFINING LOT COVERAGE. Memorandum from Planning Assistant Kim Reardon -Crites dated October 17, 1984. MUNICIPAL MATTERS 8. TRANSIT REPORT - ESEA SHUTTLE. Memorandum from Planning Assistant Kim Reardon -Crites dated October 17, 1984. 9. SOUTH SCHOOL PARKING LOT STATUS REPORT. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 8, 1984. 10. SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION - DECEMBER 11, 1984 a. Resolution ordering canvass to be made by the City Clerk - date change. b. Resolution establishing voting precincts and polling places, appointing precinct board members and fixing compensation for the Special Municipal Election on December 11, 1984. 11. FILING OF GRANT RE. ABANDONED RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY: TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT (TP&D), TRANSIT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 19, 1984. 12. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS REMOVED FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. 13. MEETING OF THE HERMOSA BEACH VEHICLE PARKING DISTRICT COMMISSION. a. Approval of VPD minutes of 10/9/84 meeting b. 1984-85 Vehicle Parking District budget C. Review of valet stack parking system on VPD lots 14. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER a. Gould/27th Street Traffic Circulation: Status :report b. Request for Closed Session 11/13 15. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL a. Railroad right-of-way Subcommittee Report b. Child Abuse Subcommittee Report C. PCH Parking District Subcommittee Report d. Community Development Block Grant Program 1985-88 e. Status of City Council Conference expenses f. Resolution, i.e. Sister City - 17 years anniversary g. City Council Meetings - November, 1984 h. First City Council Meeting, December, 1984 i. Report from Petroleum Consultants 1:6 MATTERS OF AN URGENCY NATURE 17. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNMENT -3- I MINUTES OF IHE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Bea h, California, held on Tuesday, October 23, 1984, at the hour of 8:90 P.M. CLOSED SESSION - 6:12 P.M. Present -Brutsch, Cioffi, DeBellis, Wood (arrived 7:10 P.M.), Mayor Barks Absent - None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Violet Isgreen Y•7AIi�i7sii Present - Brutsch, Cioffi, DeBellis, Wood, Mayor Barks Absent - None 1. CONSENT CALENDAR ACTION - To approve the Consent Calendar items (a) through (q). Motion Mayor Barks, second Brutsch. So ordered noting a "NO" vote by Councilman Wood on the adoption of Ordinance No. 84-777 (item q). (a) Approval of Minutes: Regular meeting of the City Council held on October 9, 1984. ACTION - To approve minutes. (b) Demands & Warrants: October 23, 1984 ACTION - To approve Demands & Warrants Nos. 15188 through 15319 inclusive noting voided warrants 15192 and 15289. (c) City Treasurer's Report: June, 1984 ACTION - To receive and file. (d) City Treasurer's Report: July, 1984 ACTION - To receive and file. (e) City Treasurer's Report: August, 1984 ACTION - To receive and file. (f) Cancellation of Warrants: October 23, 1984 ACTION - To approve cancellation of Warrants No. 014804 and 015024. (g) Approval of Final Parcel Map No. 16164: Three -unit condo- minium located at 630-632 Ardmore Avenue. 1 - Minutes 10-23-84 1a t. V8 -£Z-01 sagnuTW - Z - 'aTTJ Pue aAzaoaa oZ - NOI,LOFI 'tr86L `aagwagdaS :BuzgaodaH aangTpuadxg (d) •aTTJ pue aATaoaa os - NOI.LOFI •t► 61 `aagwagdaS :Buzgaoda8 anuanaH (o) •aTTJ pue aAtaoaa oZ - NOII0V •fi861 `aagwagdaS :gaodaH tainseaal AqT3 (u) •aTTJ pue aAzaoaa oZ - NOIS,OFI 'tt86L `aagwagdaS :sozgszgeqS aOTTod (w) •uquow aqq jo Aep gsalJ aqq uo aTgeAed uquow aad 00'L09`L$ jo agea aqq qe (•gd •bs 09L`z) LL Pue 9L `trL swooH 3o asn aqq aoj 5961 `0E aagwagdaS Butpua pue h86L `L aagogo0 DuTouawwoo sgquow uanaTa jo pozaad e ao3 uotgeziueBa0 TeaS aagseg pue goeag esowaaH JO Agt0 aqq uaaMgaq quawaaa2V aseaq aqq anoadde oZ - NOIZOFI 'h86L 19L aagogo0 paqep saoanosa8 AgzunwwoO ,Io quawgaedaQ `aogoaatQ `uezagseW •W eueTV woaJ wnpueaowaW •aaqua0 Agtunwwo0 qe sTeaS aagseg g4Tm quawaaaSV aseal JO Tenoaddy (T) •aTTJ pue aAzaoaa os - NOIZOy 'h86L `aagwagdaS :gaodad AgTATgoy quawgaedaQ SuipTTng (>I) •aTTJ pue aAtaoaa oZ- NOI.LOFI swagl epuaBV aangn3 aAzgequas, (C) •aTz3 pue aAtaoaa oZ - NOIJOFI 'tr86L `8L aago400 pagep aaAaW •Z AJ02aaO aaSeueW AgT3 woij wnpueaowaW :gaodaH AgTAzgoy aaBeueW AgTo (t) •aTTJ pue aAzaoaa oZ - NOIZOFI �uTgaaW �g-5z-6 atagg qe ua>ieZ suoigoV aapa0 agnuiW as h861 lqz aagwagd@g pagep saostAaadnS ,Io paeog woa3 iaggaj (q) a * VINHOAI'IF/O `HOVES FISOWHHH `ZONHAFI 38OW08V EE9-089 .LFI QH.LFIOO'I ,LOHrOU WIIINIWOQNOO .LINE]-� FI 80A h9 L 9 L *ON dVW 'IHOHU 30 'IFIAOHddFI 'IFINIE ONIINFIHO `FIINHOAI7VD `HOFIHg FISOWHHH 30 )�IIO HHI AO 1IONA03 )CIIO HHS, 30 NOII -n7osHH FIi► PaTq?qua 89Ltr-t 9 'ON uozgnTosa8 qdope os - NOI.LOFI (q) ORDINANCE NO. 84-777 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, AMENDING THE ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION FOR 'LOTS 10-22 INCLUSIVE OF BLOCK "K" OF TRACT NO. 1686 OF SOUTH SCHOOL SITE FROM UNZONED, OPEN SPACE TO R-3PD, HIGH DENSITY. Submitted for waiver of further reading and adoption. ACTION - To waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 84-777 entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, AMENDING THE ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION FOR LOTS 10-22 INCLUSIVE OF BLOCK "K" OF TRACT NO. 1686 OF SOUTH SCHOOL SITE FROM UNZONED, OPEN SPACE TO R-3PD, HIGH DENSITY." Motion Wood, second Mayor Barks. So ordered noting a "NO" vote by Councilman Wood on the adoption. 2. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC a) Letter from Hermosa Beach Police Officers Association requesting a Public Hearing the first regular City Council meeting of November, 1984. ACTION - To set a Public Hearing for the first regular City Council meeting in November granting the request of the Hermosa Beach Police Officers Association to address the City Council. Motion Wood, second Brutsch. So ordered. FINAL ACTION - To advertise this item as a display ad in the South Bay Daily Breeze as well as the Easy Reader. Motion Mayor Barks, second DeBellis. So ordered noting the "NO" vote by Councilman Wood. b) Letter from Jaime Bogane, 317 Culper Court received October 19, 1984. ACTION - To receive and file. Motion Mayor Barks, second Wood. So ordered. c) Letter from Mrs. Walter J. Taylor, 454 Hollowell dated October 9, 1984 re Prospect Heights School. ACTION - To receive and file. Motion Mayor Barks, second Wood. So ordered. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. REZONING OF PROSPECT HEIGHTS SCHOOL. Memorandum from Planning Assistant Kim Reardon -Crites dated October 18, 1984. The staff report was presented by Planning Assistant Kim Reardon -Crites. - 3 - Minutes 10-23-84 V8 -SZ -OT sagnUTW paseaaouT - s4g9TaH goadsoad pue anssT sTgq qe SuT:�ooT UT AouagsTsuoo aoi paNse - gaaaqS gg0,7 - 6L,7L `aapuoZ wTr aTAgsaJTT s,asTa auo -awos ao3 Aed oq suazTgTo aoj aTej qou `suazTgTO og A4TTTq -Tsuodsaa seq TTounoO AgTO - gsaaoTTTH 090,7 `AJawg uTnTeO aoueuTpao pasodoad JO uoTgeoTJTaeTO JOJ pa>lse - gaaaqS gqL - tall `suTSSooS TTTM aaSaaw gsuTeSe - saeGA ao3 ATTweJ uT uaaq aneq sgoT 4003-5z xTs - epuTq egao,T `gaaaqS uTdnq ES,7S `TTeOoW ungqu5' SuTaagge3PueaS pagsaSSns `sgoT TenpTnTpuT TTas oq ggSTa aneg pTnogs - aoeTd ggL - ��LL `gSTeH saTaegO :aaaM aaSaaw goT aqq gsuTeSe SuT>leads uoTgeoTJTaeTo ao3 pa>lse - aaowpay t[EE `uasuaSaor aneg aaSaaw 3o aonej UT - aoeTd gqt - 0,79 `>lOaTd q09 waTgoad SuT>Iaed passaags - aoeTd g4h,7 - 0,79 `uosTTTV aunt sgoT JO SuTSaaw squem - aoeTd ggtt,7 - SL9 `saageM fed pagsTuTwTp sggSTa Agaadoad - aoeTd ggtt,7 - SE9 `aaTgng anagS uoTgengTs aTgTssodwT - aoeTd ggh,7 - S,7L `AaTT8 qed 'panTonuT saTgaadoad 00E ATagewTxoadde - uaaouoo pasneo aSuego Meq agegS - aoeTd ggtt,7 - Ett9 `aagTad uopaoO :aaam aaSaaw goT agg-3o aonej uT Neads oq paemaoj SuTwoO 'pauado sem SuTaeaH o?Tgnd aqZ 'sagTaO-uopaead wTN quegsTssy SuTuueTd Aq paquasaad sem gaodaa jjegs aqZ *t961 `LL aagogoo pagep sagTaO-uopaead wTx quegsTssV SuTuueTd woaJ wnpueaowaW '9107 Q8VQNV1S9nS 20 83083W 'tt 'paaapao os •sTTTagaQ puooas `s>laeg JOAeW UOT40W 'paTTegsuT ST aagwaw paeoq Tooqos ggjT3 aqq aagje pTaq aq oq `sanssT �qTO/Tooqos aaggo se TTam se anssT sTgq ssnosTp oq paeog ToogOS aqq ggTM SuTgaaw guTOC e gsanbaa oZ - NOI13V UNIE s>jaeg JOAeW `TJJOTO - SHON pooM `sTTTagaQ `gosgnag - SE)'v gosgnag puooas `pooM uotgoW 'wagT sTgq aTgeq oZ - NOI13V •pasoTO sem SUTaeaH oTTgnd aql •sgoT 3o aagwnu uo sasnoq jo aagwnu uT aSuego pauoTgsanb - gaaaqS ggOL - OS `aeodS PTOaeH 'Agaadoad AgTO pue Teuosaad 3o SuTuozumop gsuzeSe - gaaaqS ggOL - tL,7L `seWIS weTTTTM •aamod TTounoO AgTO JO asn aTejun `SuTuoz Z -d oq sgoaCgo - gaaaqS qqL - 7SLL `gang ewTTM.. :aaam >leads oq paemaoj SuTwoO 'pauado sem SuTaeaH OTTgnd aqZ V8 -£Z -OT sagnuTW •ueTd ADTTod aqq Jo squawaTa aqq uo WJTJ sig Aq paaedaad STSATeue aqq uo uozgequasaad gaogs e apew `squegTnsuoo `>jo?PPad gpueag sdzTTTgd 3o wai3 aqq 3o snBaa3 w?r 'aW •a@A@W aa2eueW Agz0 Aq paquasaad OEM gaodaa jjegs aqs 'fi86L `8L aagogo0 pagep sagTaO-uopaeag WTN quegsTssy 2utuueTd woaJ wnpueaowaW 'NVZd )�OIIOd VddV NMOZNMOQ 'S 'W'd OL:OL ge pauanuooaa Buzgaaw aqs 'W'd 00:0L qe paTTe& OEM ssaoaa y pooh pue gosqnag Aq sagon „ON„ Buigou paaapao OS TJJOTg puooas IGTTTagaQ uozgoW •paatq uaaq seg aogoaaTG BUTuueTd Mau aqq uagM patpngs aq oq weaSoad >IaoM e se quawgaedaQ 2uzuueTd agq oq >Ioeq wage szgq aaJaa oZ - NOIZOd IVNI3 •pooM uewTTouno0 Aq a40A „ON„ e 2utgou paaapao OS 'TJJOT0 puooas `STTTag.aQ uozgoW •uozgoW uzew aqq awooaq og uoigow agngTqsqnS - NOIZOV •paatq uaaq seg aogoaatQ-ButuueTd Mau aqq uagm pazpngs aq oq wea2oad >IaoM e se quawgaedaQ 2utuueTd agq og >10eq wage szgq aaJaa oZ - NOIZOW HZnZIZSgnS gosqnag puooas `pooM uozgoW •uotssTWWoO 2uzuueTd agq Jo uozgepuawwooaa agq aTTJ pue anzaoaa oZ - N0IZ0V QHSOdOdd •pasoTo OEM OutaeaH azTgnd agZ aangn3 agq ut quem aM op >Ioogs Butsnoq gegM sz anssz sTaaA •sgoT goof -SZ oMq uo auo snsaan qoT 400f-05 auo uo awoq e 3o anTen aqq ageB -Tgsanut TTouno0 pagsaBSns - gaaaqS qq6 - SL `uoPTagS Nong0 :SUTMoTTOJ aqq Aq pagou OEM uozgisod ON atejun si aaSaaw sTaGJ - anzaQ gsaaoTTTH OftOZ "zezQ aor ButpeaguMop szgq sTTeo - gaaaqS ggOL - hLZL `seWTS w2TTTTM TTew paTjTgaao Aq auop aq gsnw uotgeDTJT40u `aaBaaw sasoddo - gaaaqS qqL - ZSLL `gang ewTTM sgoT aaq aSaaw og quem Aagq mou pue L -d oq Z -d woaj pa2uego Agaadoad aaq - ssauaiejun passaags - anuany uaPToO 6ftSL `gPTwgoS AggoaoQ aaBaaW qoT sasoddo - pueagS OOSE `uawnaN aTeQ UO SutoS OEM gegM Mou>j oq paquem - asnoq auo ggtm 'Z -d `sgoT Z sumo - aoeTd qqL - L9eL `aTAg WeTTTTM S96L TTqun gseaT qe JJo qnd aq pTnogs szgq sTa@J - moTTaJBuoq S99/6S9 `>IeT3nx gogng eaae aqq ut Agzsuap ggtm WaTgoad ou si aaagq sTaaj - goadsoad 90Z2 `aanTOoW Aae0 goedWT aTggzT aneq TTTm AgTsuaP fi8-£Z-OT sagnUTW _ 9 _ s,AgTO auq anoadde qou saop uoTssTwwoO suoTgeoTunwwo0 Tea9pa3 aqg 3T geqq BuTpugsaapun aqq ggTm •A•Z aTgeO aaaogS Aq pagsanbaa se aseaaouT agea %,7 aqq anoaddy •L :TTounoO AgTO aqq S26L `L Aaenuer aATgoajja geqq uoTgepuawwooaa jjegs aqq anoadde os - N0I10V •pasoTo sem BuTaeaH oTTgnd auq `paemaOJ BuTwoo auo ON •pauado sem BuTaeaH oTTgnd aqZ •uoTgepuawwooaa jjegs auq oq uoTgoaCgo ou peq Aaqq pageqs `uoTSTAaTal aTgeO aaaogS 2uTquasaadaa `anuany ewoq eaTW LtiO£ `TTeseW AaeO *JW •uooN ueor aogoaaTQ saoTAaaS Teaaua0 Aq paquasaad sem gaodaa jjegs aqj 't96L `6 aagogo0 paqep uooN ueor aogoaaTQ saoTAaaS Teaaua0 woaJ wnpueaowaW 'S86L L )CHVnNvr HAI -103223 1N3WH38 V HHI NI Q3QIA08d SV SHHA OISV9 NI 2SV383NI %,7 V SHH3 HSIHONVHA NI HSV3HONI %,7 V d0 N0I1VdIOIJNV NI 'QNV .l H' Ino HHd OS' S$ OZ ,LH' Ino HHd _0_S_' �$_ W08A S333 ZN0000V 7VI O -H3WW00 137inO HHd HHI ESV380NI OZ Al 379VO 83HOIS Ag 193nb38 ' 9 pooh `gosgnag - SHON s�jaeg aoAeW `SITTagoa `T33oT0 - SH -u T33o.0 puooas `s>jaeg uoTgoW 'S6L`9$ jo qunowe aqq uT saangTpuadxH aATgoadsoad woij jajsueaq uoTgeTadoadde ue aq TTTM sTgs '000`£,7$ oq S0,719L$ woa,T qunowe auq BuTseaaouT pue ueTd AoTTod oq uoTgeTnoaTO oTjjeaZ woaj STsegdwa aqq BuTBuego `saoTAaaS TeuoTssaJoad quaw -gaedaQ BuTuueTd aqg aapun ga2pnq Sg-�g)�3 aqq UT gunowe sTgq ageooTTe oZ •uoTgepuawwooaa uoTssTwwoO BuTuueTd auq oq quensand eaae umoqumop aaTqua aqq .zo,T ueTd AoTTod e doTanap oq 000`£,7$ ageooTTe oZ •z •umoqumop aOJ ueTd AoTTod e ggTm paaooad oq AgTO 'L :uoTgoaTa t96L `LL aagwaoaQ aqq BuTMoTTOJ AEP aqq paguawaTdwT aq uoTgepuawwooaa aqq geqq uoTgeTndTgs aqq ggTm smoTTOJ se uoTgepuawwooaa jjegs aqq qdope oZ - NOIZOd •pasoTo sem 2uTaeaH oTTgnd aql ueTd aagseW e aneq og Aaessaoau aq you Aew qT pageqs - gaaaqS ggOL - OS `aeadS TeH •„�uTggawos„ OP PTnogs TTounoO AgTO 2Taa3 - 4aaa4S q46 - S,7 `uoPTagS >iong0 suoTsToap BUT>Iew UT paATonuT aq sassauTsnq qaT - gaaaqS Pu,7 - LOLL `uoqu2TGa3 aa2OH aaggaSog suoTsToap a>lew pue seapT doTanap oq uoTssTwwoO 2uTuueTd aqg ggTM aaggaBoq ggBnoaq aq pTnogs aTdoad ssauTsnq 4Ta3 - gaaaqS qqL - ,7SLL `gang ewTTM :aaaM >leads oq paemaoj BuTwoO •pauado sem OuTaeaH oTTgnd agZ request for a two percent increase in franchise fees, Storer Cable will rescind the planned rate increase in basic fees. 2. Increase the per outlet commercial account fee to $5.50/outlet/month. Motion DeBellis, second Cioffi. So ordered. 7. PROPOSED ORDINANCE ADDING A SECTION TO THE ZONING CODE DEFINING LOT COVERAGE. Memorandum from Planning Assistant Kim Reardon -Crites dated October 17, 1984. The Public Hearing was opened. No one coming forward, the Public Hearing was closed. ACTION - To waive full reading of Ordinance No. 84-778 entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADDING TO THE ZONING CODE, SECTION 229.1 LOT COVERAGE." Motion Wood, second Brutsch. So ordered. FINAL ACTION - To introduce Ordinance No. 84-778 with a change on line 20 to read "not exceeding a five-foot pro- jection". Motion Wood, second Brutsch. So ordered. MUNICIPAL MATTERS 8. TRANSIT REPORT - ESEA SHUTTLE. Memorandum from Planning Assistant Kim Reardon -Crites dated October 17, 1984. Not heard. 9. SOUTH SCHOOL PARKING LOT STATUS REPORT. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 8, 1984. ACTION - To receive and file. Motion DeBellis, second Brutsch. So ordered. 10. SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION - DECEMBER 11, 1984. Memorandum from City Clerk Kathleen Reviczky dated October 18, 1984. The staff report was presented by City Manager Meyer. a. Resolution ordering canvass to be made by the City Clerk - date change. ACTION - To adopt Resolution No. 84-4769 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO. 84-4764, ORDERING THE CANVASS OF THE SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION - 7 - Minutes 10-23-84 t8 -8Z -OT sagnuTW Paean qoN PooM uewTTouno0 - AcM-3o-gu2�8 peoulTed •e II0Nn00 )�ZIO - SIHU38 ONV SWH.LI SA03NV I'IHOSIW ' S L ' tt86 L '6L aago400 pagep aaAaW •y AJOBGaO .1a2eueW A410 woa3 wnpueaowaW -t8-EL-LL uotssaS pasoTO ao3 gsan ad •q paeaugoN tt86 L '6L aagogo0 pagep a@A@W •Z AaoSaaq aaSeueW AgTo woaj wnpueaowaW •gaodag sngegg :uoi4eTn0aT3 DTJJeJL gaaagS ugLz/PTnoq •e 830VNVW )[LID - SIHOd3H ONV SWHZI SnOHNd'I'IHOSIW 'ttL Paean goN NOISSIWW00 .LOIHISIO ONI?IM H'IOIHHA HOV32 VSOW83H HHZ 20 ONI133W ' � L auoN NOISSn0SI0 H.lV8UES H02 OHAOWEH SWH.LI 8VGN37VO INHSNOD ' Z L •paaapao oS -pooh puooas 0>1aeg aoAeW uotgoW •sasodand uoTgegaodsueag oiTgnd ao3 AeM-JO-gg2Ta peoaTTea pauopuege aatnboe og gueaO guawdoTanaO pue ButuueTd uoTgegaodsueas e aOJ aTTJ og aaBeueW AqTD aug Butzzaougne uotgepuawwooaa jjegs aug anoadde oZ - NOI.L0V 'tt86L `6L aagogoO pagep aaAaW •Z AJOBGaq aaBeueW Agt0 woaj wnpueaowaW •WVH908a lN3W3AO86WI 7V.LIdVO lISNV8l (03261) INZW607ZAHO 0NV ONINNV7d NOI.LVIdOd -SNV8.l :7,VM 20 1HOI8 GVOH7IV8 QHNOQNV9V 38 INVHD 30 DNI 2 ' L L •paaapao oS •uosgnag puooas `s>jaeg a04eW uotgoW ►i " IIONn00 ALIO HHZ 20 LSLtt-h9 'ON NOIIA70SEH 7,g G277VO h26 L ` L L 939W3020 `)CVGSZU NO 7UIO HHZ d0 NOI10372 'IVdIOINnW 7VIOHdS HHZ 803 NOIlVSN2dW00 ONIXIA ONV S839WEW 08VO2 .LONI338d ONIINIOddV `SHOV'Id ONI770d 0NV SIDNI03U ONIlOA ONIHSI' 9VISH `VIN803IUD `HOV32 VSOW93H 30 )ZIO HHZ AO 7I0Nn00 )UID HHZ 20 NOIZn70939 y„ PaTgTqua OLLtt-t2 'ON uotgnTosa8 gdope oZ - NOIl3V •tt26L `LL aagwaoa(j uo uozgoaTH TedzotunW TezoadS aug aoi uoigesuadwoo �utxzj pue saoeTd BUTTTod pue sgouzoaad 2utgoA 'BUTgSTTgegsa uot4nTosa8 •q •paaapao oS •gosgnag puooas `s>jaeg aOAeW uotgoW u ' N8310 )�ZIO HH.L )�g HOFIW He 01 9tt86 L ` L L 83eW3030 `)�V(193nl NO 073H Hg 01 b. Child Abuse Subcommittee Report - Councilman Cioffi Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 19, 1984. Councilman Cioffi reported that this committee had met numerous times and a concensus was reached regarding the need for increased awareness. Three proposals had been received. The staff recommendation calls for hiring a coordinator at $18,000-$22,000/year and sub- contracting with four non-profit agencies experienced in the field of child abuse. ACTION - To approve the proposal for child abuse prevention as submitted by the Child Abuse Subcommittee dated October 22, 1984. Motion Cioffi, second Mayor Barks. So ordered noting the "NO" vote by Councilman Wood. C. Pacific Coast Highway Parking District Subcommittee Report - Councilman Wood Not heard. d. Community Development Block Grant Program 1985-88. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 19, 1984. ACTION - To reconsider the City Council's decision on CDBG program for 1985-1988. Motion Cioffi, second Mayor Barks. So ordered noting "NO" votes by Brutsch and Wood. FINAL ACTION - To instruct the City Manager to send a letter to the Community Development Block Grant of Los Angeles County stating our decision to reenter a contractural agreement with them, this to be done only on the basis of the swapping of the allocated funds. Motion DeBellis, second Cioffi. So ordered noting "NO" votes by Brutsch and Wood. e. Status of City Council Conference Expenses. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 19, 1984. Not heard f. Resolution - Sister City - 17 Year Anniversary. ACTION - To adopt Resolution No. 84-4771 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, COMMEMORATING THE SEVENTEENTH ANNIVERSARY OF THE SISTER CITY RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AND LORETO, BAJA CALIFORNIA, MEXICO." Motion Mayor Barks, second Brutsch. So ordered. - 9 - Minutes 10-23-84 g. City Council Meetings - November, 1984. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 19, 1984. ACTION - To hold the regular City Council meeting on November 13, 1984. Motion Wood, second Brutsch. So ordered. FINAL ACTION - To hold the regular City Council meeting on November 27, 1984. Motion Wood, second DeBellis. So ordered. h. First City Council Meeting, December, 1984. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 19, 1984. ACTION - To approve the City Manager's recommendation to reaffirm that its first regular meeting for December will be December 13 at 7:30 P.M. and schedule a second meeting on December 18, 1984 at 7:00 P.M. for the canvass of the vote from the December 11, 1984 election. Motion Mayor Barks, second Wood. So ordered. i. Report from Petroleum Consultants. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 22, 1984. ACTION - To distribute the final report on slant drilling to appropriate individuals of the Oil Recovery Commission, the Chamber of Commerce and concerned citizens. Motion Brutsch, second Wood. So ordered. 16. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM PUBLIC - MATTERS OF AN URGENCY NATURE Hal Spear, 50 - 10th Street - asked if the City Council had hired a City employee as the coordinator for the Hermosa Beach Child Abuse Prevention Task Force. Councilman Cioffi stated they would contract for a coordinator who would not be a City employee. John Toman, 311 - 27th Street - asked for time to read a report from the 27th Street Environmental Protection Assn. Mayor Barks advised Mr. Toman that this item would be on the agenda for the meeting of November 13, 1984 and that would be the appropriate time to present his material. 17. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL Councilman Cioffi ACTION - To have the City of Hermosa Beach join the Independ- ent Cities Association and investigate the possibility of saving money on workmen's compensation insurance, liabilty insurance and other insurance packages. Motion DeBellis, second Brutsch. So ordered notng a "NO" vote by Councilman Wood. - 10 - Minutes 10-23-84 %8 -£Z -OT sagnuTw - LL - 'W'd 0£:L 3o anou auq qe t261 `El aagwanoN `Aepsany uo pTau aq oq 2uigaaW aeTnBad e oq }861 `Ez aagogo0 `Aepsanj uo -W-d 05:LL jo anon auq qe pauanoCpe sem goeag esomaaH JO AgTD auq Jo Tiounoo Agz0 auq 3o ButgaaW aeTnBaB auq `pooh Aq papuooas `s>jaeg aoAeW Aq uozgoat e u0 lNHWNHnOrGV October 18, 1984 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the City Council of October 23, 1984 POLICE STATISTICS: SEPTEMBER, 1984 Attached for your information is a copy of the Police Department's September, 1984 statistics. By way of recap, the major crime indices indicate a 17% decline from the previous month; a 5% increase from the previous year. By district, the indices show a significant decline in Areas 1 and 3, an increase in Area 2 (North of Pier Avenue, west of Pacific Coast Highway). GTM/ld Attachment C�A a c tAA )A Gr ry T. dyer Cit Manage L L '�' SEPTEMBER 1984 MONTHLY TARGET CRIME TOTALS* AREA 1 AREA 2 459 RES 4 10 459 COMM 459 VEH 211 3 6 SEX CRIMES 0 PREVIOUS MONTH 29 % CHANGE - 45% TOTALS 14 16 3 PREVIOUS 4 MONTH 23 % CHANGE - 39% PREVIOUS 10 YEAR 17 % CHANGE - 18% * Figures based on day of occurrence : 0 0 19 8 +138% HERMOSA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT AREA 3 2 TOTALS PREVIOUS MONTH 29 % CHANGE - 45% PREVIOUS YEAR 18 % CHANGE - 11% 16 3 7 4 + 75% 8 - 13% 0 14 10 + 4o% 8 + 75% 0 1 2 - 50% 2 - 50% 1 1 2 - 50% 1 0% 6 39 47 - 17% 37 + 5% 8 - 25% 12 - 50% 47 - 17% 37 + 5% C�]PooP fjcPa�,a�o AppaaG�o�aao�u Pl?00 omm CRIME ANALYSIS UNIT 011001100 BNA"►MIC! ""'Aft TY[M .01 01AY0" ST"69T 11,00 69ACW CAUPDOWA 0aT 12131 376 %, HERMOSA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT RESIDENTIAL BURGLARIES 1982 — 1984 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 / 1% n r � r � r 4% 1%`vrr,rrrT��►``_ YR TO DATE TOTALS 8 Z CHANGE AS OF SEPs 1982 — 171 ****** 1983 — 155 C— 9x) 1984 — 153 (— 1X) OCT NOV DEC , If If / `i d 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1982 1983 1984 CCAP 9/94 35 PRIOR YEAR 30 SEPT 1983 25 PRIOR MONTH AUG 1984 20 THIS MONTH 15 SEPT 1984 10 k E HERMOSA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT CITYWIDE CRIME STATISTICS SEPTEMBER 1984 CRIMES REPORTED 459 RES 459 COMM 459 VEH 211 1EX CRIMES CRIME TYPE CLAP 8/84 m1 illl all I//// SWING 1600-0000 I N 11 • 11 '1 FI w • ,llwwoml 15 10 Ey w HERMOSA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT CITYWIDE CRIME STATISTICS BY SHIFT SEPTEMBER 1984 :RIMES REPORTED FIGURES BASED ON DATE OF OCCURRENCE AND REPORTS RECEIVED BY CLAP 11 7 5 4 114 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 459 RES 459 COMM 459 VEH 211 SEX CRIMES CRIME TYPE tCAP 9/84 AREA 1 C� AREA 2 AREA 3 15 ]0 5 13 HERMOSA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT CITYWIDE CRIME STATISTICS - AREA COMPARISON BY CRIME TYPE SEPTEMBER 1984 CRIMES REPORTED FIGURES BASED ON DATE OF OCCURRENCE AND REPORTS RECEIVED BY CCAP 10 8 6 ,4 3N U-13 3 2 � 1 El 0 JN 0 0 0 0 1 459 RES 459 COMM 459 VEH 211 SEX CRIMES CRIME TYPE CCAP 6184 25 PRIOR YEAR SEPT 1983 20 PRIOR MONTH AUG 1984 15 THIS MONTH SEPT 1984 10 *TARGET CRIMES BURGLARIES/ ROBBERIES/AND SEX CRIMES 5 10 HERMOSA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT CITYWIDE CRIME STATISTICS BY AREA SEPTEMBER 1984 TOTAL TARGET CRIMES REPORTED* AREA 1 ft AREA 2 PATROL AREA 12 FIGURES BASED ON DATE OF OCCURRENCE AND REPORTS RECEIVED BY CCAP AREA 3 on BEACH CITIES CRIME COMPARISON SEPTEMBER 1984 70 CRIMES REPORTED 65 60 HERMOSA BEACH 55 50 45 LASO LAWNDALE 40 35 MANHATTAN 30 BEACH ® 25 ��l REDONDO 15 BEACH ® 10 5 U 459 RES 459 COMM 459 VEH 211 SEX CRIMES CRIME TYPE CLAP 9/84 e1j, 5" October 15, 1954 HONORABLE MAYOR and MEMBERS of the REGULAR MEETING of HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL October 23, 1954 FINAL MAP #16164 Recommendation Staff recommends final approval of Parcel Map #16164 located at 630-632 Ardmore Avenue as submitted as it is consistent with the tentative parcel map. Tentative parcel map approval was granted on February 21, 1954 and such approval is valid for twenty-four (24) months. It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Approve the map; 2. Find that this project will not violate any of the provisions of Sections 66427.1, 66474, 66474.4, and 66474.6 of the Subdivision Map Act. 3. Instruct the City Clerk to endorse on the face of Parcel Map #16163 the certificate which embodies the approval of said Parcel Map. F in Y � Kim Reardon -Crites Planning Assistant CONCUR: Gre ory FI'. ever City Manager 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 RESOLUTION NO. 84- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF PARCEL MAP NO. 16164 FOR A 3 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECT LOCA'T'ED AT 630-632 ARDMORE AVENUE, HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That pursuant to the recommendation of the Planning Commission and to the recommendation of the County Engineer, the City Council does hereby grant final approval of Parcel Map #16164 in the City of Hermosa Beach, State of Calii'ornia, being a subdivision of Lot 8 of Dr. Dougherty's Hermosa Bay View Tract as per map recorded in Book 10, .#Page 140 of maps;: County Recorder of Los Angeles for a 3 -unit Condominium project on land commonly known as 630-632 Ardmore Avenue, Hermosa Beach, California. Section 2. That this project will not violate any of the provisions of Sec- tions 66427.1, 66474, 66474.4, and 66474.6 of the Subdivision Map Act. Section 3. That the approval of said map shall be subject to all conditions outlined in Planning Commission Resolution P.C. 84-4; adopted after public hearing on February 21, 1984. Section 4. That the City Council hereby instructs the City Clerk to endorse on the face of the map, the certificate which embodies the approval of said map. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 23rd day of October, 1984. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California. ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY ceiF COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF COUNTY ENGINEER -FACILITIES STEPHEN J. KOONCE COUNTY ENGINEER 550 SOUTH VERMONT, LOS ANGELES, CA 90020 (213) 738-2011 HIAM BARMACK CHIEF DEPUTY CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH September 20, 1984 The City Council City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, California 90254 Dear Council Members: PARCEL MAP NO. 16164 OF ,Mos �qCf • O�IIFORR", BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PETER F. SCHABARUM KENNETH HAHN EDMUND D. EDELMAN DEANE DANA MICHAEL D. ANTONOVICH The subject map has been checked by the City Engineer and is ready for your approval. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT YOUR COUNCIL: 1. Approve the map. 2. Make findings as follows: a. The City Council hereby finds that this project will not violate any of the provisions of Section 66427.1, 66474, 66474.4, and 66474.6 of the Subdivision Map Act. b. The City Council hereby finds that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the general plan required by Article 5 (commencing with Section 65300) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of the Government Code, or any specific plan adopted pursuant to Article 8 (commencing with Section 65450) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of the Government Code. t�rrLa�rou .� .a� c:;�", r;o���zu��u>� ,C�'�•�b� . ` r p :-V41;T T*i qr- f)TAYRIcru .7 " G� > taPX T?kjq ► Lsijfi.i'l:riq t)%� Yjx .� ( Slit tE Fifs' ki -tq► pjj' 2dPq.lA1'->: 0IJ mI ,- ji J:Ji6 biOATc"oao t CPO • 7 �; C;)r Con�� jr6K.a.PA ; fuga pp,41: .Vfxr^ 3 ?f TT 50 i�Kr�4rcra y2 E'�floM� LftiT� L;clTl}�, ABe.Fr-2 Eft►�w�.? r ,�;q��t' G� T r.;`oc:cJ r� ;f i; �� or zrs .0 1 G=gin Sol i awl -14 UX RP PRY,— *:- � .• :�r4.�t. 6i icl; E �c'til,+;ntfli�i ��:1^r:� . fi ` �'�' - 4: �.� �' p` >'1 •. F.0 ii.'i,X F. tZG L f�ii 7i: t� 'Zr :3i.'�i�l __ 1� vciir�,�:E:�` - _ r The City Council Parcel Map No. 16164 September 20, 1984 Page 2 3. Instruct the City Clerk to endorse on the face of the map of Parcel Map No. 16164 the certificate which embodies the approval of said map. Very truly yours, STEPHEN J. KOONCE City Engineer D14on ld Y. Milne Deputy City Engineer SJK:DYM WJS:lmd 44 Attachments cc: City Clerk RESOLUTION F.C. 84-4 1 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION? OF THE CITY OF HFRMOSA 2 BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A THREE UNIT CONDOMINIUM, CUP AND 3 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #16164 LOCATED AT 630-632 ARDMORE AVENUE 4 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of Hermosa Beach held a public hearing on 5 2-21-84 to consider a three unit condominium and tentative parcel map #16164 .located 6 at 630-632 Ardmore Avenue; and 7 WHEREAS, the Commission finds: 8 (a) That a final map for this property is recorded with the Los Angeles County 9 Recorder: and 10 (b) That the map is consistent with applicable general and specific plans; and 11 (c) That the site is physically suitable for this type of development; and 12 (d) That the site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development; and 13 (e) That the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause 14 substantial environmental damage; and 15 (f) That the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause serious 16 public health problems; and 17 (g) That the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with 18 easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, 19 property within the proposed subdivision; and 20 (h) Design of the proposed subdivision is compatible and consistent with applicable 21 elements of the City's general plan, and is compatible with the immediate 22 environment. 23 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of 24 Hermosa Beach, California, does hereby approve a three -unit condominium and 25 tentative parcel map #16164 located at 630-632 Ardmore Avenue subject to the 26 following conditions: 27 1. Project shall meet all construction standards in Chapter 9.5-1 thru 9.5-28 of the �� 28 Condominium Ordinance. C 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 2. A fire alarm system approved by the Hermosa Beach Fire Department shall be installed in each unit. 3. A complete utility plan shall be submitted and approved by a registered civil engineer procured by the City at applicant's expense; all utilities to be underground. 4. All meters, utility service connections, major roof chimneys, pipes or structures shall be integrated with the design of the building and screened architecturally and/or by landscaping. 5. Construction of all public improvements such as curbs, gutters, sidewalks, drains and drives, to be approved by a civil engineer of the applicant's choice, at applicant's expense. 6. A passive solar plan shall be submitted by the architect to staff with such passive solar system alternatives that would be appropriate to this project and incorporated in the approval; a report to be brought back to the Planning Director for review and approval. 7. Storage area, in its entirety or aspects thereof, shall be used exclusively as storage space. 8. That a deed restriction be executed limiting the property to three dwelling units. 9. The landscaping plan as submitted and approved by Planning Commission shall be implemented. 10. A final map shall be filed within eighteen (.18) months from the date of the tentative map approval or it shall become null and void. VOTE: AYES: Comm. Brown, Newton, Shapiro, Smith, Soulakis, Strohecker, and Ahmn. Izant. NOES: ABSENT: -2- 1 _ 2 � 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 IV] IM 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution P.C. 84-4 is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California at their regular meeting of 2-21-84 Stephen Izant Chairman 5�1Y34 Date Joel Shapiro Secretary J TICOR TITLE INSURANCE Preliminary Parcel Map Guarantee SUBJECT TO THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE, THE LIMITS OF LIABILITY AND OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS HERETO ANNEXED AND MADE A PART OF THIS GUARANTEE, TICOR TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, herein called the Company, for the fee paid for this Guarantee, the number, amount and effective date of which are shown herein, hereby Guarantees the parties herein called the Assured, against loss not exceeding the liability amount stated herein which the Assured shall sustain by reason of any incorrectness in the assurance which the Company hereby gives that, according to the public records, on the effective date stated herein, The title to the herein described estate or interest was vested in the vestee named, subject to the matters shown as Excep- tions herein, which Exceptions are not necessarily shown in the order of their priority; THIS PRELIMINARY PARCEL MAP GUARANTEE IS FURNISHED FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF FACILITATING COM- PLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ISSUANCE OF A PARCEL MAP GUARANTEE. IT SHALL NOT BE USED OR RELIED UPON FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE. TICOR TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA By President Attest /� Secretary TO 2128 (2-83) Preliminary Parcel Map Guarantee—CLTA Guarantee Form 24—Part 1 CAT. NO. NNO0843 1 C CAT. NO. NNO0844 TO 2128-A (6-78) Preliminary Parcel Map Guarantee —CLTA Guarantee Form 24 — Part 2 Guarantee No. Effective Date Order No. 8155404 June 31 1984 Liability Fee $1,000.00 $ 250.00 Parcel Map Reference: Assured: The City of Hermosa Beach, County of Los Angeles The estate or interest in the land hereinafter described or referred to covered by this Preliminary Guarantee is a fee. Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in: L & M Associates, Inc., A California Corporation The land Deferred to in this Preliminary Guarantee is situated in the County of Los Angeles State of California, and is described as follows: Lot 8 of Dr. Dougherty's Hermosa Bay View Tract as per map recorded in book 10 page 140 of maps in the office of the county recorder of Los Angeles county. In the city of Hermosa Beach, county of Los Angeles, state of California. Exceptions: See Exhibit "A" attached 84172 1046029 733 TICOR TITLE INSURANCE COM?ANY OF CALIFORNIA THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN THE LAND HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TG COVERED BY THIS REPORT IS: A FEE* AT THE DATE HEREOF EXCEPTIONS TO C0VERAGE IN ADDITION T3 THE PRINTED EXCEPTIONS A%D EXCLUSIONS C011TAINED IN SAID POLICY FORM WOULD BE AS FOLLOWS: Is ANY TAXES9 CURRENT OR DELINCUENT9 TAX SALES? STREET ASSESSMENTS9 6ONDS9 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS9 ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS* TAX DEEDS9 TREASURER®S DEEDS' AND CERTIFICATES OF SALES WHICH MAY EXIST AS LIES#S9 CHARGES OR ENCUM3RANCES AGAINST SAID LAND* NO EXAMINATION OF THE RECORDS PERTAINIPNG TO SAID MATTERS HAVING BEEN MADE* 2. AN EASEMENT AFFECTING ALL OF SAID LAND -FOR THE PURPOSES STATED HERFIN9 AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES9 IN FAVOR OF : WARREN GILLELEN FOR. : NATER PIPES RECORDED : JUNE 279 1902 AS INSTRUMENT NQ 80 IN HOOK. 1617 PAGE 47 OF DEEDS NO REPRESENTATION IS MADE AS TO THE PRESENT OWNERStiIP OF Sl IC iASEME4T, 3. COVENANTS9 CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS IN THE DEED EXECUTED BY : HERMOSA BEACH LAND AND WATER COMPANY RECORDED : JUNE 149 1905 AS INSTRUMENT NO® 194 IN BOOK 2335 PAGE 142 OF DEEDS RESTRICTIONS9 IF AN Y9 BASED ON RACES COLCR9 RELIGION OR NATIONAL ORISIN ARE DELETED4 4® AN EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF WAY REMAINING A CHARGE ON SAID LANG ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS OF AN OIL LEASE RECORDED FEKRUARY 199 1958 AS INSTRUMENT NO* 3286 IN BOOK 56489 PAGE- 319 OFFICIAL RECORDS® SAID LEASE HAVING BEEN CANCELLED (AS TO SAID LAPP]) BY DEED RECO'IDED FEBRUARY 39 1959 AS INSTRUMENT 110. 2691 IN 50CX D-353 PAGE 506 OFFICIAL RECORDS. 5. A DEED OF TRUST TO SECURE AN INCEETEONESS IN THE ORIGINAL AMOUNT STATED HEREIN DATED : MARCH 129 1984 AMOUNT : $3269000.00 TRUSTOR : L & M ASSCCIAT S9 INC®9 A CALIFORNIA CCRPCRATION TRUSTEE : 6A!CLAY FINANCIAL CCRPOP,ATIONV A CrLIFiRNIA CORPORATION SENEFICIARY : MEC.HANICS NATI5NAL 3ANK PEC6RDED : MAY 249 1934 INSTRUMENT NO.: 84-619964 CFFICIAL RECop S Exhibit "A" 8155404 R 7 PAGE 02 84172 10460219 R 733 TICOR TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA 60 ANY EASEMENTS AND/OR RELINOUI SHMENTS WHICH MAY BE SHOWN UPON OR DEDICATED BY THE RECORDED MAF OF PARCEL MAP 0, 16164 (AiID ANY INTERS i1WHICH MAY BE DISCLOSE=D ON A COPY OF THE AAP OF SAID PARC=L MAP TO BE FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ROAD COMMISSIONER OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY). NOTE: THIS REPORT IS ISSUED AS AN ACCOMMODATION TO YOU IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUEST OF THE SUBDIVIDER AND IS BASED ON A PRINT OF THE PROPOSED PARCEL MAP Its OUR FILES. NO INFERENCE SHOULD BE DRAWN THAT THE MAP OF PARCEL MAP N0a 16164 WILL BE RECORDED NOR THAT IN THE EVENT IT IS THAT THE LAND OR LOTS SHOWN ON SAID PRINT MILL CONFORM TO THE RECORDED MAP. NEITHER SHOULD ANY INSTRUMENTS BE PREPARED EASED ON THIS REPORT AND THIS COMPANY ASSUMES NO LIABILITY IF THIS REPORT IS USED FOUR ANY PURPOSE Illi VIOLATION -OF THE REAL ESTATE LAW AN:,/CR "SUBDIVISION MAP ACT"* DESCRIPTION: PARCEL 19 IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BE-ACH9 IN THE CCUNTY OF LOS ANGLLES9 STATE OF CALIFORNIA9 AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NOs 161649 FILER IN BOOK -- PAGES AND — OF PARCEL MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. SP/CJ;30 ri 7 i =.f- (l /- f] 7 n A 1" C 01'2 October 1.8, 1984 HONORABLE MAYOR and MEMBERS of the REGULAR MEETING of HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL October 213, 1984 DOWNTOWN AREA POLICY PLAN Recommendation 1. City proceed with a Policy Plan for downtown. 2. To allocate #23,000 to develop a Policy Plan for the entire downtown area pursuant to the Planning Commission recommendation. To allocate this amount in the FY84-85 budget under the Planning Department Professional Services, changing the emphasis from Traffic Circulation to Policy Plan and increasing the amount from $16,205 to $23,000. This will be an appropriation transfer from Prospective Expenditures in the amount of $6,795. 3. Work performed by PBR/TDC as a negotiated extension of their contract for the Land Use Element. Background This Policy Plan has been considered by the City Council on July 10, 1984, and was given approval in concept. The Planning Commission recommended certain revisions at its September 18, 1984 meeting. Staff is returning to City Council with the refined program proposed. Analysis Attached you will find an analysis by PBR of the elements of the Policy Plan. The Coastal Conservancy has available major funding through Bond Acts. The Conservancy staff has indicated that assistance to coastal cities to plan and improve in a beach lOqPlgSTUTWPV aouPuz3 puPTadoD TXOTA -ZOKdWI `IVDSI3 EOJ QQSON 306PUPW AgTO .za�ia • s �,z ba.zO P �D : EnDNOO quPqs'LssV buruuPTd 2agT33-uopaPag WT)l •uPTd P eons ag TTTM uPTd AO?TOd s-rus •arauq Oq uPTd paztgzIOTjd P gTuigns oq AgTD auq paBpanooua PUP AgTJOthd P sr e@aP uMOquMOp 'IVI'd2l 'W QNflO'dDN3Ve October 18, 1984 iEDDICK Mr. Gregory Meyer City Manager Civic Center 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Subject: Downtown Area Policy Plan Work Program Dear Mr. Meyer: We are pleased to submit this revised work program to prepare a Policy Plan for the Downtown Area of Hermosa Beach. This program is based upon the comments and recommendations of the Planning Commission at its Sep- tember 18, 1984 meeting. To summarize, the desire of the Commission was to prepare a land use plan based upon a more analytical and defensible approach, and to defer the design criteria and improvement costs/prioriti- zation tasks (Tasks 3 and 6, and portions of Task 7, Implementation, of the work program dated July 3, 1984) to a subsequent phase of work which could then be funded possibly through outside sources, as has been discus- sed previously. The Planning Commission also recommended a project schedule different than originally proposed. It would consist of community review at the early, formative stages in the schedule, and continue, at milestones, through the project. This approach is reflected in Task 6, Meetings/Presentations, of this work program. The purpose of preparing a Policy Plan remains essentially as proposed in our July 3, 1984 correspondence: to establish land use and development criteria which can regulate development in the Downtown Area; and, to establish a strategic action program which the City may then use to leverage funds for improvements (public and private) to the Downtown Area. PLANNING - ARCHITECTURE - LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE - ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH 18012 SKY PARK CIRCLE -IRVINE, CA 92714 - (714) 261-8820 CALIFORNIA COLORADO HAWAII Mr. Gregory Meyer October 18, 1984 Page Two Funds for improvements such as envisioned for the Downtown Area, as previ- ously stated, may be available through the State Coastal Conservancy. While there is considerable competition for available monies, the inter- ests of the City in its improvements are similar to those of the Con- servancy in its Urban Waterfronts Program. A number of coastal communi- ties today are receiving funding for precisely what Hermosa Beach wishes to accomplish. This Policy Plan should be viewed as a very important "Phase I" direc- tion -setting and prioritization effort. Its products will outline the actions the City determines necessary for improving the Downtown. These subsequent actions, and the accompanying detailed analyses/plans may then be implemented by the continued efforts of the City in cooperation with other agencies, property owners and merchants, and residents and the investment community. The recommended project team is proposed to remain as originally composed, and has been selected due to its expertise in other similar projects, an already established close -working organization, and an intimate knowledge of Hermosa Beach and the issues associated with the downtown area: Phillips Brandt Reddick - lead consultant, urban planning and design, implementation Peat Marwick Mitchell - marketing economist, action program Linscott Law Greenspacn - circulation and parking demand analyses Castaneda and Associates - urban planning and research. Qualifications statements for each firm are available. Should you have any questions or comments on the attached Work Program please do not hesitate to call. We look forward to refining it with you and to initiating work in the very near future. Very truly yours, PHILLIPS BRANDT REDDICK -. tA James lgus Associate October 18, 1984 HERMOSA BEACH DOWNTOWN STUDY WORK PROGRAM Task 1. Conduct Background Studies and Research with City assistance and City information assembled to date) A. Prepare base map(s) at appropriate scale(s). B. Prepare ownership map. C. Prepare land use map (lot by lot). D. Inventory parking spaces: On -street and off-street. E. Identify development projects: Underway and pending. F. Identify existing and proposed public improvements (infrastructure, streetscape, other). G. Review documents and studies: LCP, General Plan, Zoning, special studies, economic reports, project reports, EIR's. Task 2. Prepare Marketing Input A. Prepare overview of market demand, based upon existing and available data, and focusing upon the following land uses (and mixtures of uses): 1. Recreation/visitor-serving 2. Specialty commercial 3. Retail commercial (local/other-serving) 4. Restaurants 5. Commercial -offices 6. Residential B. Define locational criteria necessary for each land use. C. Define, in general terms, absorption potential for each. D. Prepare statistical summaries, in potential square footage, for each identified land use. Task 3. Prepare Land Use Plan A. Prepare two alternative "sketch plans," in coordination with market economist, which sites land uses. Plans will include: 1. Development areas, land use assignments, and intensities. 2. Relationships between land uses. 3. Building areas, parking areas, and access to downtown uses. 4. Plazas. 5. Circulation alignments, hierarchy, including pedestrian. 6. Access to parking. B. Prepare statistic summaries, including square footage yields, for each principal land use. Task 4. Analyze Circulation and Parking A. Provide an overview of existing/available parking in the Downtown Area: on- and off-street. B. Calculate demand, on a general basis, based upon land use plan and including existing demand, with beach parking (overview). C. Review joint -use parking alternatives (overview). D. Analyze circulation system included in sketch plans and provide recom- mendations in preparation of land use plan. Task 5. Prepare Policy Plan A. Prepare Policy Plan meeting City objectives and including: 1. Project Description 2. Implementation Program, with action items including but not limited to: a. Preliminary aggregation study: determine the opportunity, by parcel size and configuration, for owner participation/public intervention. b. Subsequent zoning amendments recommended: development regulations (building heights, setbacks, coverage). c. Policy Plan recommendations for seeking funding. d. Lot consolidation opportunities. e. Incentive programs for private investments. f. Detailed design plans and analyses necessary for improvements (ie., next steps). Task 6. Conduct Meetings and Presentations A. Conduct/attend the following City meetings, or as mutually determined: 1. two public workshops 2. two Planning Commission hearings 3. two City Council hearings SUMMARY OF COSTS Task Cost Estimate 1. Background/Research $ 1,500.00 2. Market Demand Analysis 6,000.00 3. Land Use Plan 5,500.00 4. Circulation and Parking 2,000.00 5. Policy Plan 2,000.00 6. Meetings/Presentations 3,000.00 7. Reimbursable/Printing Costs 3,000.00 TOTAL BUDGET: $ 23,000.00 2F:4 2. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC Letter from Paul V. Robinson, 57 - 14th Court, re errors in proposed Biltmore Site hotel Development Agreement. The City Clerk stated the corrections had been made. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. 1984-1985 GENERAL REVENUE SHARING BUDGET. Memorandum from --------- --- — — ----- ------- ------- City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated July 6, 1984. The staff report was presented by City Manager Meyer. The Public Hearing was opened. No one coming forward, the Public Hearing was closed. ACTION - To approve the staff recommendation as follows: 1. Allocation is reduced from $80,00 to $73,000 (based on revised Federal input). 2. Projects be revised as follows (priority order): a. Ambulance Payment $23,000 b. Civil Defense Emergency Generator 8,000 C. MSI softward do HP 150 11,000 d. Council Chamber Air Conditioning 10,000 e. Clark facilities upgrade 10,160 f. Newsletter 10,840 g. Data processing costs allocated from 249,946 prior years TOTAL $322,946 Motion Barks, second Mayor Brutsch. So ordered. 4. C -POTENTIAL PROCESS _ (ZONING CODE SECTION 1103) - PLANNING 651' i I S S I O<y RECQ�YMENDAT T aN NOT TO AMEND AT TI I T S T I ��ff____ -------------- --- -- ----- -- ---- ----- Memorandum from Planning Director Pamela Saoetto dated July 6, 1984. Withdrawn. -- y1 MUNICIPAL MATTERS --------- ------- 5. PROPOSAL FOR SPECIFIC PLAN IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA. Memorandum — —-------- ---- — -- ---- fr—om-- Pl—ann--ing—-- Director Pamela Sapetto da—ted Ju1— y 6, 1984. Councilman Wood arrived at 8:05 P.M. Planning Director Sapetto presented the staff report. ACTION - To approve the concept and send this issue back to the Planning Commission for appropriate review and public hearings, to be returned to Council in the 1st meeting in August. Motion Mayor Brutsch, second Cioffo. So ordered noting the "NO" vote of Councilman Wood. -7- Minutes 7-10-84 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 18, 1984 page 20 LOT COVERAGE (Cont.) building and decrease the view and light of neighbors on either side. He felt it would also increase the clutter and density of the City. Chmn. Izant asked if there was another section other than 229.1 that would automatically preclude decks from intruding into front, side, and rear setbacks. Comm. Compton stated that the zoning requirements would still be in effect in relationship to what you could project into front, side, and rear yards. Ms. Sapetto stated that there is a section that tells you how far you can protrude into setbacks. She then read the following: "Placement of buildings cannot be closer to the rear property line than a distance of five feet. However, when it abuts an alley, it can be three feet from the rear property line on the first floor and one foot from the property line on the second floor. The distance between any building shall not be less than six feet. The distance between a main building shall not be less than six feet." Ms. Sapetto stated that this would prevail. AYES: Comms. Sheldon, Compton, Shapiro, Newton. NOES: Comm. Peirce and Chmn. Izant. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Comm. Schulte. Motion by Comm. Shapiro, seconded by Comm. Newton, that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution P.C. 84-26 recommending to the City Council to add to the Zoning Code Section 229.1 Lot Coverage. AYES: Comms. Sheldon, Compton, Shapiro, and Newton. NOES: Comm. Peirce and Chmn. Izant. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Comm. Schulte. DOWNTOWN WORK PROGRAM Mr. Fergus referred the Commissioners to a flow chart presented by himself. This flow chart was prepared in response to the Planning Commission's request at the meeting of August 21, 1984, that a revised work program be prepared. Mr. Fergus then went over each step indicated on the flow chart. Comm. Peirce noted on the chart where it said, "funding improvements." He asked if that money would come from the Costal Conservency. Mr. Fergus replied in the affirmative. Comm. Peirce asked whether this money would be a grant or a loan and what the amount of the money would be. Mr. Fergus replied that the Costal Conservency works on a revolving fund basis where they do expect to get paid back at some point in time. He stated that the terms of payment and interest rates are negotiable but that it is not a free grant. Comm. Peirce asked what Mr. Fergus intended to bring into the process PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 18, 1984 page 21 DOWNTOWN WORK PROGRAM (Cont.) to make Tasks Two and Three more interesting and viable to interest more people in doing something about the downtown area. What did he intend to produce that has not already been done in the last five years. Mr. Fergus stated that the issue of urban design has not been addressed in any great detail. That is one of the issues that has to be dealt with at the City level. Mr. Fergus described urban design as improvements to streets, median lines, planters, a single architectural design that is desired in the downtown area, and signing aesthetics. Comm. Peirce felt that the City already had a lot of these types of designs on the shelf. Ms. Sapetto stated that they did not. She stated that the plans that have been produced to date have been piecemeal, and there has been no consensus behind them. Their ultimate goal now would be to develop a zoning regulation and a specific plan to govern development in the downtown area as well as getting funding for street improvements and any other type of improvements that would be generated in this plan through the Costal Conservency. She felt it was important for the Planning Commission to address how they would guide the downtown development in the way they wanted to, such as preserving the village character as opposed to development to the maximum zoning standard. Comm. Peirce asked if they would be making specific recommendations for rezoning whole areas. He didn't feel he was hearing any specific results or actions that will be coming out of this plan. Mr. Fergus disagreed. He referred to the first product which is the land use plan. He stated that that product specifically deals with the Biltmore Hotel site. Comm. Peirce felt that they should first define what the land use is and make the recommendation based on that and then move on to the next issue. He was opposed to getting a report which doesn't have hard recommendations as far as what to do in specific areas. Mr. Fergus indicated that he was also opposed to doing a report like that. He stated that in addition to land use, he would be providing a shopping list of improvements that are necessary to make, and those costs will be prioritized. Comm. Sheldon stated that he was void of an appreciable sense of urgency among a variety cf ccnstituencies -- the City Council, the Planning Commission, and the citizens of the community. He was afraid that without that sense of urgency, this stuay would go nowhere. Chmn. Izant felt that the citizens wouldn't come to them until the structures start to go up, and then the citizens will come to the Commission and complain. The downtown land owners wouldn't come to them because less regulation is better regulation as far as they are concerned. He pointed out that the City Council has returned this to the Planning Commission saying that, "Yes, we think it's a good idea." PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 18, 1984 page 22 DOWNTOWN WORK PROGRAM (Cont.) Chmn. Izant stated that this process will probably take at least ten months to a year to do. If they don't go through with this plan and a year from now a big land owner wants to put up his big building, then it will be too late. Then the citizens and the City Council will be asking why the Planning Commission didn't do something to protect the downtown area. Chmn. Izant stated that he would like to see the study go foward in a slightly different order. He would like Task One to be done first. He would then label Task Two as land use recommendations where specific recommendations are presented to the Planning Commission and then the Planning Commission shares those recommendations with the land owners in the work shops. Then he would come back and do Task Three which includes the pictures and signs and graphs. Comm. Compton concurred with Chmn. Izant. He then asked Mr. Fergus what he meant by,'Urban design studies are studies relating to massing that they would want to allow light and ventilation." Mr. Fergus replied that they would not be getting into a great deal of detailing regarding that. He stated that they would be trying to address the basic heighth issue. Comm. Compton stated that he would be adamant about getting as much public testimony early in the procedure as possible. Comm. Peirce stated that they needed to get data collection and land use recommendation plans before they move on to urban design. He also felt that the money should be put into Task One and Two. Chmn. Izant stated that he would rather spend the whole $20,000 on Tasks One and Two and Three and let the Planning Commission and the City Council carry everything else further on. Comm. Peirce concurred that the money should be spent up front. Mr. Fergus agreed with the Commissioners. He felt that he would be most useful to the Commission in establishing a foundation for land use and establishing a program that the City can carry forward in the future. Comm. Sheldon asked, in regards to the chart presented, if Mr. Fergus would be able to expand on the products that they would be receiving if they were to put all $20,000 in to Tasks One, Two, and Three. Mr. Fergus replied that they would get serious about land use and the mixture of land use and the statistics behind them. They could also get more seriously into marketing. He stated that if the Commission wanted to go ahead with this idea, he would need to come back to the Planning Commission with an expanded work program. Comm. Compton stated that in Mr. Fergus's earlier outline there seemed to be a lot of worthwhile items in Tasks Four through Eight. He wanted to see if there were things in Four through Eight that should be included in Tasks One through Three. He did agree that Tasks One through Three were the most important. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 18, 1984 page 23 DOWNTOWN WORK PROGRAM (Cont.) Comm. Compton also stated that in regards to the application process for the Costal Conservency, some cities win and some cities lose. And if Hermosa Beach is going to win in the application process, the City should get some input from these consultants. Comm. Peirce felt that that decision should be made later on, perhaps six months to a year from now. Comm. Compton asked whether the elimination of items four through eight also meant the elimination of the policy plan. Mr. Fergus replied that a policy plan is in the eyes of the beholder. Ms. Sapetto felt that they needed four through eight. She felt that what they were talking about eliminating was after number eight. Comm. Compton felt that what they needed was the basic data input and Mr. Fergus's recommendation as to what should be done to the downtown area. Comm. Sheldon told Mr. Fergus that they wanted most of the money put into Tasks One, Two, and Three and a sprinkling of money to take them from there with specific recommendations on land use for the Commission to deal with. Comm. Peirce felt that the Commission needed recommendations from the consultants as to what they think the best configuration for the downtown area is. Comm. Compton asked if that would be the action program. Mr. Fergus replied that Tasks Six through Eight -- improvement costs, implementation, and policy plans -- is basically considered the action program. This is where they would be looking forward to the City telling what it wants in terms of land use. After that, a shopping list of public improvements necessary to make that plan happen would be formulated. He felt that the Commission was now stating, "Let's emphasize the first part and deemphasize the second part." He stated that they would take part of the $6,500 originally to be used for the latter half and put it in the first half. Comm. Compton felt that the recommendations on implementation are very important and that that is where they needed the consultants. Comm. Newton asked Mr. Peirce if it was correct that he did not want the consultants spending time participating in the work shops. Comm. Peirce stated that that was correct. He felt that the consultants should be involved in the initial data collection which will evolve into several plans. The Commission should then take those plans through the public hearing process themselves. After the public hearings are over, the Commission will give those plans back to the consultants to redo their master plan. After that, the consultants will then help to implement those plans. Comm. Newton asked how much money was allocated to attendance at public hearings and workshops. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 18, 1984 page 24 DOWNTOWN WORK PROGRAM (Cont.) Mr. Fergus replied that $3,000 is allocated for that. Comm. Peirce felt that they would have to convince the City Council that this is a good plan. Mr. Fergus stated that he has a fairly clear direction on what the Planning Commission wants and that he would get together with Ms. Sapetto to work out the details of reassigning the money. Comm. Peirce didn't feel that Mr. Fergus should have to come back to another meeting with the revised plan. He felt a writtn presentation would be sufficient. Motion by Comm. Peirce, seconded by Comm. Sheldon, to recommend to the City Council that the firm of PBR be employed to work on the downtown program with the majority of the money being spent up front on data collection and plans, and with some money being spent on implementation of the plan. AYES: Comms. Sheldon, Compton, Newton, Peirce, and Chmn. Izant. NOES: None. ABSENT: Comms. Shapiro and Schulte. ABSTAIN: None. Chmn. Izant noted for the record that Comm. Shapiro left the meeting at 11:10 P.M. Comm. Peirce asked about the finance subcommittee meeting for C -Potential. Ms. Sapetto replied that the City Council is not meeting until October 9. She said that she will need to firm up some dates with the City Council subcommittee and that she will notify the Planning Commission subcommittee of that meeting. Comm. Peirce asked what happened to the land use element. Ms. Sapetto stated that she included a memo in the Commissioner's packet about that and she thought that the Commissioners might like to schedule a special meeting to discuss only the land use element. She stated that the Commission could direct staff to have the October 2 meeting focus only on the land use element. Chmn. Izant asked that it be scheduled for October 2. Comm. Compton stated that at an earlier work session in regards to this, they had talked about having a work session to plan the plan and come up with some schedule of items that were going to be addressed. He thought this discussion would be included at the October 2 meeting. Ms. Sapetto stated that she did give the Commissioners a list of priorities at their orientation session. She stated that if the Commissioners had any other ideas, they were welcome to expand on that list. Chmn. Izant felt that the Commissioners should look at that list and PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 18, 1984 page 25 see if they agree with it. He felt that it would not hurt if the Commissioners talked about what they wanted to bring up next under "Commissioners' Items" on the agenda. Comm. Sheldon asked if Ms. Sapetto could put the priority question on the agenda and give the Commissioners her thoughts on it at the next meeting. Ms. Sapetto informed the Commissioners that she has accepted a position elsewhere and she is leaving the City of Hermosa Beach and probably would not be at the next meeting. She felt that a lot of these things would probably have to be put on hold because there will be no public works director, no planning director, and no city attorney at the next meeting. Comm. Compton remarked on a complaint made by one of the audience participants about the notices that went out. He stated that they had talked about adding a "plain language" version to the advertising. Ms. Sapetto replied that that staff did try to do this. Comm. Compton stated that he would like to see a copy of it in their next package and then maybe they can make suggestions that would help. Motion to adjourn at 12:05 P.M. No objections. So ordered. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of Hermosa Beach at their regularly scheduled meeting of September 18, 1984. Steven Izant, Chairman Date Leslie Newton, Secretary f P 1 CITU OF H EPMOSA BEACH INTER -OFFICE MEMO lanning Commission DATE: August 21, 1984 �:T: FROM- Merger of substandard lots William Grove, Director Department of Bldg. & Sa e y After further counting of eligible lots and in response to questions raised at the July 31, 1984 meeting, I offer the following information: 1) The breakdown of affected parcels by zone is: a) R-1 283 parcels ( 291 potential new lots); b) R-2 67 parcels ( 95 potential new lots) c) R-3 46 parcels ( 58 potential new lots) 2) Approximately 15 parcels would have been able to develop at least one lot separately under Section 1203.1 ( Combined Lot Ordinance ) 3) Since 1980, 14 R-1 parcels comprised of 2 lots each have been developed resulting in 28 new single family residences.. .//"w 7�� S Ocotber 17, 1984 HONORABLE MAYOR and MEMBERS of the REGULAR MEETING of HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL October 23, 1984 LOT COVERAGE Recommendation The Planning Commission recommends that the definition of Lot Coverage be amended to specify that architectural projections and open and unenclosed balconies that project from the face of the building, not to exceed five feet, will be excluded when calculating lot coverage. That the City Council approve the attached ordinance. Background At their regular meeting of Septem'-)Pr_ 1.1, 1984, the City Council adooted a Resolution of Intention directing the F Planning Commission to examine the sections of the zoning code that pertain to lot coverage to determine whether or not it was the intent to include square footage of second story balconies in calculations of lot coverage. The Planning Commission , at their regular meeting of September 18, 1984, adopted Resolution 84-26 which recommends adding to the Zoning Code a definition of lot coverage. The Planning Commission also determined, at their meeting of 9-18-84 that this project will not have significant adverse environmental impacts and granted it a negative declaration. Analysis Currently, the Zoning Code does not contain a definition of lot coverage. Instead, under each zone (R-1, R-2, R -2B, and RP) there is a section that defines permissible Lot Coverage. For Zones R-1 to R-3 the maximum lot coverage permissible is 650 of the area of the lot. For Zone RP, the maximum lot coverage permissible is 70% of the area of the lot. Currently, the unofficial interpretation to include cantilevers and balconies in the 65% or 70% figure without allowing exceptions, has encouraged the building of box shaped houses with little architectural relief. The tendency has been to utilize all allowable space for living quarters. In adding a definition of lot coverage and allowing balconies that do not exceed five feet, to be excluded from the maximum lot coverage permissible, this would allow for a break in the facade, (with decks, planters, etc.) This would result in a more pleasing architectural scheme. It is not anticipated that this project would encourage growth nor would it increase the density of the City. Neither architectural projections nor balconies will be used as living space. And, limiting the balconies to a five feet maximum will maintain a small scale. An alternative to the Planning Commission's recommendation would be to add another section to the zoning code. Such a section would specify that an additional 5% of lot coverage (above the 65% or 70% lot coverage maximum) would be allowed for balconies. This, however, is not considered to be the best alternative. For example, a building built on a 30' x 100' lot would probably be 24 feet wide. The allowance for and extra 5% lot coverage for balconies would enable this building to have one balcony of 24' x 6.25' along one side. This is not as flexible as the Planning Commission's recommendation that would allow many decks of 5' width or less. Both alternatives are subject to setback requirements. Staff is recommending that the as per the Planning Commission. CONCUR: Bill Grove Director - Building and Safety QQCC-U, r Greory T. I Meyer Cit Manager attached ordinance be adopted Stacy Pat -k -Victory Planning Intern N11 fu" rm " 0V lila Kim Reardon -Crites Planning Assistant 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 251 26 27 28 ORDINANCE 84 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADDING TO THE ZONING CODE, SECTION 229.1 LOT COVERAGE. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 18, 1984; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on October 23, 1984, to consider this matter; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission and the City Council have determined pursuant to the Initial Study that this project causes no significant adverse environmental impact and that a negative declaration shall be filed with the County Recorder; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code does not currently contain a definition of Lot Coverage; and WHEREAS, classification as to whether or not the square footage of a second story balcony and architectural projections are included in the calculation of lot coverage is needed: NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Section 229.1 be added to the Zoning Code as follows: Section 229.1 "Lot Coverage shall include the footprint of the building plus cantilevers and decks higher than thirty inches above grade. Exceptions, not to be included when calculating lot coverage are: architectural projections, eaves, and open and unenclosed balconies that project from the face of the building, not exceeding five feet." Section 2. That this Ordinance shall take effect thirty days after the date of its adoption. Section 3. That prior to the expiration of fifteen days after the date of its adoption the City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be published in the Easy Reader, a weekly newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Hermosa Beach. 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 nn I PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 23rd day of October, 1984. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach. ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY 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 i RESOLUTION P.C. 84-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNII TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADD TO THE ZONING CODE, SECTION 229.1 Lot Coverage. P1HEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 18, 1984; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code does not currently contain a definition of Lot Coverage and WHEREAS, classification as to whether or not the square footage of a second story balcony and architectural projections are included in the calculation of lot coverage is needed; NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa. Beach does hereby resolve to recommend an addition to the Zoning Code as follows: 1. Section 229.1 "Lot Coverage shall include the footprint of the building plus cantilevers and decks higher than thirty inches above grade. Exceptions, not to be included when calculating lot coverage are: architectural projections; eaves; and. open and unenclosed balconies that project from the face of the building, not exceeding five feet." VOTE: AYES: Comm. Sheldon, Compton, Shapiro, Newton NOES: Chmn. Izant, Comm. Peirce ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Comm. Schulte CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the above Resolution P.C. 84-26 is a true and accurate reflection of the action taken by the Planning Commission at their regular �®eta�ig�of.- SeU4ber 18, 1984, Izant, Chairman Leslie Newton, Secretary lel, /b'''% Date PEIR: PROJECT: LOCATION: APPLICANT: ZONE: GENERAL PLAN: HB 84 - Lot Coverage City Wide t City of Hermosa Beach All Residential Zones All Designations L PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project consists of adding to the Zoning Code a definition of lot coverage. This definition would exclude open and unenclosed balconies that project from the face of the building and do not exceed five (5) feet, from being calculated in lot coverage. The definition is as followes: Section 229.1: "Lot Coverage shall include the footprint of the building plus cantilevers and decks higher than thirty inches above grade. Exceptions not to be included in lot coverage calculation are: architectural projections, eaves, and open and enclosed balconies that project from the face of the building, not exceeding five feet." II. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING This project will affect all residential zones of the City. Currently, square footage of a balcony is included when calculating lot coverage. For Zones R-1, R-2, RP the maximum lot coverage permissible is 65% of. the area of the lot. For Zone RP the maximum lot coverage permissible is 70% of the area of the lot. III. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND ANALYSIS The current requirement tends to encourage the building of box shaped houses with little architectural relief. Developments have generally utilized all allowable space for living quarters. The result is a building with no break in the facade. If the requirement was amended to allow for architectural projects and balconies of five feet or less, it would allow more flexibility in designing houses. This would encourage a more aestheticlly pleasing project. It would allow for a break in the facade with balconines, planters, etc. Also, a development that is already covering the maximum percentage allowable would be able to add a second story balcony. IV. UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS This project results in no forseeable adverse impacts. V. MITIGATION MEASURES This project -would help alleviate the demand for variances needed when adding a second story balcony on a development already covering the maximum percentage allowable on a lot. - VI. ALTERNATIVES The alternative to this project is to allow an additional 5% of lot coverage for balconies. (Above the 65% or 70% maximum.) This alternative allows too much flexibility. The size of the balcony would differ with the size of the lot, however, it could exceed five feet. If a balcony was too large, the area underneath would not be considered usable open space. In limiting balconies to five feet, the area underneath would be considered usable open space. . VII. SHORT-TERM vs. LONG-TERM GOALS This project fulfills the long-term goals indicated in the urban design element of the General Plan of Hermosa Beach. This element calls for "preserving Hermosa Beach as a creative environment for people to live . . :', and "maintaining smaller scale visula features that give character to Hermosa Beach." Allowing architectural projections and balconies, not exceeding five feet, to be excluded in lot coverage calculations would allow creativity while maintaining a small scale. VIII. GROWTH -INDUCING IMPACT 4 •91-eDs JJEwS P UTPIuTew dial( IJTM wnwTXT3w JOOJ anTJ P 01 Saruoz)Taq BUTTIWTT `pUV -aOmds BUTATJ SE pasn aq TJTM SaTUOZ)JEq iou suoTlOa[oid T-einjoallgz Te .aagl!aN •jz)edwT 2UTonpUT gjMo S I aAey TTTm joafaid STL(i ip,41 pajpdTOTjUB J.OU ST 11 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 RESOLUTION P.C. 84-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNI, TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADD TO THE ZONING CODE, SECTION 229.1 Lot Coverage. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on September 18, 1984; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Code does not currently contain a definition of Lot Cove and WHEREAS, classification as to whether or not the square footage of a second story balcony and architectural projections are included in the calculation of lot coverage is needed; NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereb: resolve to recommend an addition to the Zoning Code as follows: 1. Section 229.1 "Lot Coverage shall include the footprint of the building plus cantilevers and decks higher than thirty inches above grade. Exceptions, not to be included when calculating lot coverage are: architectural projections; eaves; and. open and unenclosed balconies that project from the face of the building, not exceeding five feet." VOTE: AYES: Comm. Sheldon, Compton, Shapiro, Newton NOES: Chmn. Izant, Comm. Peirce ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Comm. Schulte CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the above Resolution P.C. 84-26 is a true and accurate reflection of the action taken by the Planning Commission at their regular meeting of September 18, 1984, Stephen Izant, Chairman Leslie Newton, Secretary I Date I), I; September 7, 1984 HONORABLE MAYOR and MEMBERS of the REGULAR MEETING of CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH September 11, 1984 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECLARING ITS INTENT TO DIRECT THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO EXAMINE SECTIONS 405, 505, 5559 6069 AND 706 OF THE ZONING CODE AS THEY PERTAIN TO LOT COVERAGE TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT SQUARE FOOTAGE OF SECOND STORY BALCONIES IS INCLUDED IN CALCULATIONS OF LOT COVERAGE. Recommendation To adopt the attached Resolution of Intention. Background At the regular meeting of August 14, 1984, the City Council expressed its desire to have the Planning Commission examine this issue. The impetus for this direction is the idea that a development that is already covering the maximum percentage allowable on a lot would not be able to add on a second story balcony. The Council is directing the Planning Comission to review ,lot coverage and return with a recommendation. NOTED: Bill Grove Building Director CONCUR: Gregory T. Meyer City Manager 0 - Kim Reardon -Crites Planning Assistant b Pamela Sapetto Planning Director 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 RESOLUTION NO. 84- rOI LUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL DECLARING ITS INTENT TO DIRECT THE NG COMMISSION TO EXAMINE SECTIONS 404, 505, 555, 606, AND 706 OF E ZONING CODE AS THEY PERTAIN TO LOT COVERAGE TO DETERMINE ETHER OR NOT SQUARE FOOTAGE OF SECOND STORY BALCONIES IS 'LUDED IN CALCULATIONS OF LOT COVERAGE. WHEREAS, clarification of whether or not the square footage of a second story alcony is included in the calculation of lot coverage is needed; and WHEREAS, Sections 404, 505, 555, 606, and 706 of the Zoning Code do not specify the factors used in calculating residential lot coverage; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, does hereby resolve as follows: ection 1. That the Planning Commission be directed to research and assess Sections 4040 505, 555, 606, and 706 of the Zoning Code to determine whether or not it was the intent to include square footage of second story balconies in calculations of lot coverage. Section 2. That the Planning Commission shall return their recommendation with appropriate Zoning Code amendments (if applicable) within forty (40) days to the City Council. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 11th day of September, 1984. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California. ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY 4 § 402 APPENDIX A—ZONING § 405 Sec. 402. Off-street parking. Off-street parking requirements and regulations for the R-1 zone are as provided in Article 11.5 of this ordinance. Sec. 403. Lot area. The minimum lot area for new lots in the R-1 zone created by subdivision or other means shall be four thousand (4,000) square feet- (Ord. No. N.S. 507, § 1, 5-27-75) 404. Permissible lot coverage. l buildings, including accessory buildings,' shall not E r more than sixty-five (65) percent of the area of the lot. . No. N.S. 507, § 1, 5-27-75) Sec. 405.. Placement of buildings. Placement of buildings on any lot shall conform to the following: (1) No building may occupy any portion of a required ` yard. (2) Any building used for human habitation shall not be located closer to the rear property line than a distance of five (5) feet; however, where a rear yard abats a street or alley, the building may be located three (3) feet from the rear property line on the ground floor level, and one (1) foot from the rear property line on the upper stories. (3) The distance between any buildings used for human habitation shall be not less than eight (8) feet. The distance between a main building and an accessory building shall be not less than six (6) feet. (4) No buildings may be erected over any easement dedicated for public or utility uses except over those easements of record granted to Warren Gillelen. �yz (5) No accessory building may be located closer than t, ^: three (3) feet to any side or rear property line. (Ord. No. N.S. 507, § 1, 5-27-75) Supp. No. 7-81 473 4Wt,ts F J 502 HERMOSA BEACH CITY CODE 1 506 its discretion and upon good cause shown, vary the provi- sions of subsections (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) above, subject to the final approval of the city council. (Ord. No. 79-617, § 1, 9-11-79; Ord. No. 80-638, 5-13-80) Sec. 502. Off-street parking. Off-street parking requirements and regulations for the R-2 zone are provided in Article 11.5 of this ordinance. (Ord. No. 79-617, § 1, 9-11-79) Sec. 503. Lot area. The minimum lot area for new lots in the R-2 zone created by subdivision or other means shall be four thousand (4,000) square feet. (Ord. No. 79-617, § 1, 9-11-79) Sec. 504. Lot area per dwelling. The minimum lot area per dwelling unit shall not be less than twelve hundred (1,200) square feet per dwelling unit. (Ord. No. 79-617, § 1, 9-11-79) a Sec. 505. Permissible lot coverage. All buildings, including accessory buildings, shall not cover more than sixty-five (65) percent of the area of the lot. (Ord. No. 79-617, § 1, 9-11-79) _ Sec. 506. Placement of buildings. Placement of buildings on any lot shall conform to the following: (1) No building may occupy any portion of the required yard. (2) Any building used for human habitation shall not be located closer to the rear property line than a distance of five (5) feet; however, where a rear yard abuts a street or alley, the building may be located three (3) feet from the rear property line on the first floor and one (1) foot from the property line on the second floor. Supp. No. 7-80 478 r § 552 APPENDIX A—ZONING § 555 on the first floor and one (1) foot from the property line on the second floor. (e) Additional yard regulations. R -2B zones shall be subject to additional yard regulations as provided in Article 12 of this ordinance. (f) Residential Planned Development (RPD -2). Upon application, any property owner may cause a change of land use to RPD -2 whereupon the planning commission may, at its discretion and upon good cause shown, vary the provisions of subsections (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) above, subject to the final approval of the city council. (g) Minimum floor area for two-family dwellings. All dwellings hereafter constructed, enlarged or divided con- taining two (2) dwelling units shall provide a floor area of at least one thousand three hundred (1,300) square feet for one (1) dwelling unit and at least seven hundred fifty (750) square feet for the second dwelling unit. (Ord. No. 79-617, § 1, 9-11-79; Ord. No. 80-638, 5-13-80) Sec. 552. Off-street parking. Off-street parking requirements and regulations for the R -2B zone are as provided in Article 11.5 of this ordinance. (Ord. No. 79-617, § 1, 9-11-79) Sec. 553. Lot area. The minimum lot area for new lots in the R -2B zone created by subdivision or other means shall be four thousand (4,000) square feet. (Ord. No. 79-617, § 1, 9-11-79) Sec. 554. Lot area per dwelling. The minimum lot area per dwelling unit shall be not less than twelve hundred (1,200) square feet per dwelling unit. (Ord. No. 79-617, § 1, 9-11-79) ESec.55. Permissible lot coverage. buildings, including accessory buildings, shall not more than sixty-five (65) percent of the area of the lot. No. 79-617, § 1, 9-11-79) o. 7-80 481 El § 605 APPENDEK A—ZONING § 607 tance of five feet. However, where a rear yard abuts a street or alley, the building may be located three feet on the ground floor level, and one foot on upper stories, from the rear property line. (3) The distance between any building used for human habitation shall be not less than eight feet. The dis- tance between a- main building and accessory building shall be not less than six feet. (4) Reserved. (5) No buildings may be erected over any easement dedi- cated for public utility uses except those easements of record granted to Warren Gillelen. (6) No accessory building may be located closer than three feet to any side or rear property line. (Ord. No N. S. 234, § 3, 2-6-62; Ord. No. N. S. 284, § 1, 5-18-65) Sec- 605. Area. The minimum required lot area shall be four thousand square feet. , Sec. 606. Permissible lot coverage. All buildings, including accessory buildings and structures, } shall not cover more than sixty-five per cent (651,11o) of the area of the lot. ( Ord. No. N. S. 356, § 2, 5-20-69; Ord. No. N. S. 477, § 2, 12-4-73) Sec. 607. Usable open space. Every dwelling shall provide two hundred (200) square feet of usable open space for each dwelling unit. Up to fifty per cent (50%) of such open space may be provided in balconies or decks directly accessible to the dwelling unit and not less than five (5) feet wide and twelve (12) feet long. The re- mainder shall be provided in courts, rear yards, or decks over nonliving space and shall have a minimum width of ten (10) feet. (Ord. No. N. S. 356, § 3, 5-20-69; Ord. No. N. S. 430, § 1, 10-24-72) Supp. No. 12-73 484.1 �J F1 § 705 APPENDIX A—ZONING § 708 on the ground floor level, and one foot on upper stories, from the rear property line. (3) The distance between any buildings used for human habitation shall not be less than eight feet. The dis- tance between a main building and an accessory build- ing shall not be less than six feet. (4) Reserved. (5) No buildings may be erected over any easement dedi- cated for public utility uses except those easements of record granted to Warren Gillelen. (6) No accessory building may be located closer than three feet to any side or rear property line. (Ord. No. N. S. 234, §, 3, 2-6-62; Ord. No. N. S. 284, § 1, 5-18-65) Sec. 705. Area. The minimum required lot area shall be four thousand > square feet. Sec. 706. Permissible lot coverage. All buildings, including accessory buildings and structures. shall not cover more than seventy per cent of the area of the lot; however, if the lot contains less than four thousand 1 square feet, or less than a forty foot width and is devoted to residential purposes, it shall be limited to not more than two dwelling units. Sec. 707. Lot width. Every lot shall have a width of not less than forty feet at the rear line of the required front yard; provided, that any lot existing on the effective date of this ordinance and having a substandard width of less than thirty feet can be utilized for a single-family dwelling only. Sec. 708. Lot area per dwelling unit. The minimum lot area per dwelling unit shall be the same for the R-3 zone, as set forth in section 608 of this ordinance. (Ord. No. 255 N. S., § 4; Ord. No. N. S. 284, § 1, 5-18-65; Ord. No. N. S. 464, § 1, 6-19-73) Supp. No. 6-75 487 E § ._ 225 APPENDIX a—ZONING j 229 Sec. 225. Kennel. "Kennel" means a place where two or more dogs or cats, or any combination thereof, of four months of age or older are kept. Sec. 226. Kitchen. "Kitchen" means any room or space used or intended or designed to be used for cooking or for the preparation of food. Sec. 227. Lot. (1) Means a parcel of real property with a separate and distinct number or other designation shown on a plat recorded in the office of the county recorder as part of an approved subdivision having its principal frontage upon publicly dedi- cated street, or (2) A parcel of real property delineated on a record of survey, lot split, or sub -parceling map approved by the city. (Ord. No. N. °S. 300, ; 1, 2-21-67) Amendment note—Ord. No. N. S. 300, § 1, amended § 227 by sub- stituting (1) and (2) for a general definition of "lot" as land with its principal frontage upon a publicly dedicated street. The catchline must be read as part of the section. Sec. 223. Lot area. "Lot area" means the total horizontal area within the boundary lines of a lot or parcel. For the purpose of deter- mining area in the case of an irregular, triangular or. gore - shaped lot a line ten feet in length within the lot and farthest removed from the front lot line and at right angles to the line representing the lot depth of such lot shall be used as the rear lot line. Sec. 229. Lot, corner. "Corner lot" means a lot situated at the intersection of two or more streets, which streets have an angle of intersection of not more than one hundred thirty-five degrees. Supp. No. 12-69 459 'Jae- -M § 330 HER OSA BENCH CITY CODE § 234 Sec. 230. Lot depth. "Lot depth" means the horizontal length of a straight line drawn from the midpoint of the front line and at right angles to such line connecting with a line intersecting the midpoint - y of the rear lot line and parallel to the front lot line. In the case of a lot having a curved front line the front lot line, for purposes of this section, shall be deemed to be a line tangent to the curve and parallel to a straight line connecting the points of intersection of the side lot lines of the lot with the front lot line. - See. 231. Lot, interior. "Interior lot" means a lot other than a corner lot or re- versed corner lot. Sec- 232. Lot, key. "Key lot" means the first Iot to the rear of a reversed corner lot and whether or not separated by an alley. See. 233. Lot line, front. "Front lot line" means in the case of an interior lot, a line separating the lot from the street. In the case of a corner lot the front lot line shall be the line separating the narrowest street frontage of the Iot from the street. See_ 234. Lot line, rear. "Rear lot line" means a lot line which is opposite and most a distant from the front lot line. For the purpose of establish- ing the rear lot line of a triangular or trapezoidal lot, or of a lot the rear line of which is formed by two or more lines, the following shall apply: (a) For a triangular or goreshaped lot a line ten feet in length within the lot and farthest removed from the front lot line and at right angles to the lot depth line shall be used as the rear lot line; (b) in the case of a trapezoidal lot the rear line of which is not parallel to the front lot line, the rear lot line shall be deemed to be a line at right angles to the lot depth line and drawn through a point Says. Na 12-69?"ti 460 M 1. Location a. Address: b. Legal: 2. Description ACT I ti ITI 1D1;N"I'Ii'IC:i"PION City -Wide l Amending Lot Coverage Defination to exclude Architectural. projections and open and unenclosed balconies that project from the face of the building, 3. Sponsor not ecceeding five feet. a. Name: b. Mailing Address: City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA NEGATIVE DECLARATION Phone: 376-690. In accordance with Resolution 79-4309 of the City of Hermosa Beach, which implements the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 in Hermosa Beac the Environmental Review Committee must make an environmental review of all private projects proposed to be undertaken within the City, and the Board o Zoning Adjustments must make an environmental review of all public projects proposed to be undertaken within the City, which are subject to the Environ mental Quality Act. This declaration is documentation of the review and, i it`becomes final, no comprehensive Environmental Impact Report is required for this project. FINDING OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE We have undertaken and completed an Environmental Impact Review of this pro- posed project in accordance with Resolution 79-4309 of the City Council of Hermosa Beach, and find that this project does not require a comprehensive Environmental Impact Report because, provided the attached mitigation. -meas- ures are included in the project, it would not have a significant effect on the environment. Documentation supporting this finding is on file in the Building Department. Date of Finding Chairman, Environmental Review Committee We have undertaken and completed an Environmental Impact Review of this pro- posed project in accordance with Resolution 79-4309 of the City Council of Hermosa Beach, and find that this project does not require a comprehensive Environmental Impact Report because it mould not have a significant effect on the environment. Documenta is finding is on file in the Buil in Department. r _ DatV o inding Cha ' Planning Commissiory Stephen Izant FINDING OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS We have undertaken and completed an Environmental.Impact_Review of this pro- posed project in accordance with Resolution 79-4309 of the City Council of Hermosa Beach, and .find that this project does not require a comprehensive Environmental Impact Report because, provided the attached mitigation meas- ures are included in the project, it would not have a significant effect on the environment. Documentation supporting this finding is on file in the Building Department. Date of Finding Secretary, Board of Zoning Adjustments We have undertaken and completed an Environmental Impact Review of this pro- posed project in accordance with REsolution 79-4309 of the City Council.of Hermosa Beach, and find that this project does not require a comprehensive Environmental Impact Report because it would not have a significant effect o the environment. Documentation supporting this finding is on file in the Building Department. Date of Finding Secretary, Board of Zoning Adjustments HONORABLE MAYOR and MEMBERS of the HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Recommendation October 19, 1984 REGULAR MEETING of October 23, 1984 MERGER OF SUBSTANDARD LOTS The Planning Commission and Staff recommend that the City Council: 1) Introduce the attached ordinance (Exhibit A) which amends Sections 1203 through 1203.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to conform with Articles 1.5 and 1.7 of the California Government Code as it pertains to lot mergers. 2) Adopt the attached emergency interim ordinance (Exhibit B) prohibiting development on lots eligible for merger for a period of forty-five days. Background On June 12, 1984, the City Council adopted a 45 day emergency moratorium (Ordinance 84-752) to prevent contiguous substandard lots with common ownership form being separately developed. This moratorium was not extended at the July 24, 1984, meeting due to a failure to gather four (4) affirming votes. The Planning Commission has reviewed this item and held public hearingson July 31, 1984, August 21, 1984, and September 18, 1984. Their recommendation is that a merger ordinance be adopted according to Resolution P.C. 84-25. Analysis The attached ordinance that is being recommended to City Council conforms with state regulations as set out by Articles 1.5 and 1.7 of Chapter 3, Division 2 of Title 7 of the California Government Code. In addition, the Planning Commission has stipulated other conditions for merger that are outlined below: 1. Each lot comprises less than 3,000 square feet and has an average lot width of less than 30 feet. 2. Contiguous lots of common ownership meeting above criteria are currently developed with a residential structure, or structures, that is situated over the lot line; or the residential structure(s) is located wholly on one lot but an accessory structure, or structures, is located on a contiguous lot. 3. The lots are zoned R-1 or R-2. The rationale behind these criteria is to consider for merger only those lots which are currently developed as a single parcel. The effect of this will be to prevent a property owner who owns such lots from razing the existing structure(s) and either selling or developing the lots as separate parcels. Merger does not change the amount of taxes the property owner pays. It does remove the ability of the owner to later sell one lot separately from the other. R-3 developments were not included in this due to the factor that the density of an R-3 development would not be increased by unmerging lots: rather, fewer units would be allowed due to minimum lot area required for R-3 developments. (e.g. in the case where a person owns two contiguous 2,900 square foot lots that are zoned R-3; that owner can develop five units on the combined site, but only two units on each lot if the lots are developed separately. Another example can be found in the condominium ordinance which requires that 4,275 square feet of lot area is required before three units may be built on an R-3 lot.) The Planning Commission has recommended that the City Council adopt the attached ordinance. If this ordinance is adopted, some practical considerations must be resolved. The primary concern is one of implementation. Due to noticing and timing requirements, the Planning Commission and BZA will not be considering all of the lots that are eligible for merger at one time: the noticing and merging will need to be staggered so that the public hearings will be able to be accommodated in a timely manner. This, however, has the potential of creating vast inconsistencies. If certain lots are considered at one time while other properties with identical circumstances are not considered for merger until months later, the lots that are not being considered have an advantage in that the owner may take action so that the lots would not be considered for merger (i.e. demolishing the structure; or putting one of the lots under a different ownership). A method of preventing these inconsistencies is to adopt a moratorium that would specify the same criteria as the merger ordinance. In this way, lots that will not be considered for merger will not be affected by a moratorium. An appropriate time frame for this moratorium would be 45 days. The City Council may then extend this moratorium for a period of 10 months and 15 days after a public hearing has been conducted. Staff is recommending adoption of the attached ordinances. rX AM Kim Reardon -Crites Planning Assistant CONCUR: aA AA Bill Grove Director of Building and Safety Greg ry T. Ayer,' City Manager 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDINANCE NO. 84 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RESCINDING SECTIONS 1203 THROUGH 1203.2 OF THE ZONING CODE AS THEY NOW EXIST AND AMENDING SUCH SECTIONS IN ORDER THAT THE ZONING CODE MAY BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH ARTICLES 1.5 AND 1.7 OF CHAPTER 3, DIVISION 2 OF TITLE 7 OF THE CLAIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE AS IT PERTAINS TO LOT MERGERS. WHEREAS, Sections 1203 through 1203.2 of the zoning code of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, does not conform to Articles 1.5 and 1.7 of Chapter 3, Division 2, of Title 7 of the California Government Code; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, does ordain as follows: Section 1. Sections 1203 through 1203.2 of the Zoning Code shall be rescinded and replaced with new Sections 1203 through 1203.2 as follows in order to conform with Articles 1.5 and 1.7 of Chapter 3, Division 2 of Title 7 of the California Government Code. Section 2. Section 1203 shall read as follows: "Section 1203: LOTS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR MERGER. When a lot of less than 3,000 square feet contiguous is to another lot of less than 3,000 square feet and both lots are held by the same owner, then those lots can be legally merged if the following requirements are met: a. One of the lots is currently developed with a residential structure, or structures, that is partially sited on the contiguous lot (i.e. over the lot line), or the residential structure is located wholly on one lot but an accessory structure, or structures, is located on the contiguous lot. b. Each of the contiguous lots having common ownership comprise less than 3,000 square feet in area and has an average lot width of less than 30 feet. C. The lots are zoned R-1 or R-2. If the contiguous lots of common ownership which comprise less than 3,000 square feet in area each do not meet the above criteria, the lots may still be merged if one or more of the following conditions exists: a. Was not created in compliance with applicable laws and ordinances in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19I' 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 effect at the time of its creation. b. Does not meet current standards for sewage disposal and domestic water supp ly. C. Does not meet slope stability standards. d. Has no legal access which is adequate for vehicular and safety equipment access and manueverability. e. Its development would create health or safety hazards. f. Is inconsistent with the applicable general plan and any applicable specific plan, other than minimum lot size or density standards." Section 3. Section 1203.1 shall read as follows: "Section 1203.1: PROCEDURE FOR MERGER. a. For purposes of determining whether contiguous parcels are held by the same owner, ownership shall be determined as of the date that notice of intention to determine status is recorded. The City shall mail, by certified mail, to the current property owner of the contiguous lots a notice of intention to determine status. This notice will serve to alert the owner that the affected lots may be merged pursuant to standards specified herein, and advise the owner of the opportunity to request a hearing in order to present evidence that the property does not meet the criteria for merger. On the date that the notice is mailed to the property owner, the City shall also file for record the notice of intention to determine status with the Los Angeles County recorder. b. The property owner then has 30 days from the time the notice of intention is recorded in which to file a request for a hearing with the City. C. Upon receiving a request for a hearing by the property owner, the City shall specify a time, date, and place for a hearing to be conducted and shall so notify the property owner by certified mail. 1 2 3 J 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Hearings shall be divided betweeen the Planning Commission and the Board of Zoning Adjustments. The hearing shall be conducted not less than 30 days following the City's receipt of the property owners request therefor, but may be postponed or continued with the mutual consent of the City and the property owner. (In accordance with Section 66451.15, Article 1.5 of Chapter 3, Division 2 of Title 7 of the California Government Code as it now exists or as it may be amended). d. At the hearing, the property owner shall be given the opportunity to present any evidence that the affected property does not meet the standards for merger specified in this ordinance. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission or the Board of Zoning Adjustments shall make a determination that the affected lots are to be merged or are not to be merged and shall so notify the owner of its determination. e. If the City (through the Planning Commission or the Board of Zoning Adjustments) determines that the lots shall be merged, a determination of merger, specifying the names(s) of the record owner(s) and particularly describing the real property, shall be recorded within 30 days after the conclusion of the hearing with the Los Angeles County Recorder, and within 90 days of the date the notice was mailed (by certified mail) informing the owner of the date and time of the hearing. If the City (through the Planning Commission or the Board of Zoning Adjustments) determines that the lots shall not be merged, a release of the notice of intention to determine status shall be recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder. Such release shall specify the name(s) of the record owner(s) and particularly describe the real property; and shall be recorded within 30 days of the conclusion of the hearing. Concurrently, the City shall mail a clearance letter to the current owner of record. f. If the property owner fails to request a hearing within 30 days of the me, 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 recording of the notice of intention to determine status, the City may at any time thereafter make a determination that the affected lots are to be merged or are not to be merged. A determination of merger shall be recorded as provided for in Subpart E of Section 1203.1 of this ordinance. At the same time the notice of merger is recorded with the County Recorder, the City shall mail a notice of merger to the property owner. If the City decides that the lots are not to be merged, a release of the notice of intention to determine status shall be recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder. Such release shall specify the name(s) of the record owner(s) and particularly describe the real property. Concurrently the City shall mail a clearance letter to the current owner of record." Section 4. Section 1203.2 shall read as follows: "Section 1203.2: PROCEDURE FOR UNMERGER. a. Property owners who wish to unmerge lots that have been legally merged under this ordinance or previous ordinances may apply for unmerger if the lots meet each of the following criteria: 1. Each of the lots that make up the merged parcel comprises at least 3,000 square feet and has an average lot width of 30 feet or more. 2. Each of the lots that comprise the merged parcel was created in compliance with applicable laws and ordinances in effect at the time of the creation of the lots. 3. Each separate lot meets current standards for sewage disposal and domestic water supply. 4. Each separate lot has legal access which is adequate for vehicular and safety equipment access and maneuverability. 5. The unmerger and separate development of each lot would create no health or safety hazards. 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 6. Each separate lot meets slope stability standards. 7. Each separate lot would be consistent with the applicable general plan and any applicable specific plans, other than minimum lot size or density standards. b. The City may impose a fee not to exceed the actual costs of the unmerger proceedings, payable by the owner for those costs incurred with respect to a parcel for which application for unmerger has been processed. C. Upon application by the owner and payment of any fees authorized by subpart B of Section 1230.2, the City shall make a determination that the affected lots have merged or, if meeting the criteria of subpart A of Section 1203.2, are deemed not to have merged. d. Upon a determination that the lots have merged and do not meet the criteria spedified in subpart A of Section 1203.2, the City shall issue to the owner and record with the County Recorder a notice of merger as provided in Section 1203.1. Upon a determination that the lots meet the standards specified in Subpart A of Section 1203.2, the City shall issue to the owner and record with the county recorder a notice of the status of the parcels which shall identify each lot and declare that the lots are unmerged pursuant to Article 1.7 of Chapter 3, Division 2 of Title 7 of the California Government Code." : WEOd OZ Sal QSAOEddK :IS211V •20 Iuo2ag P20wzaH Jo AgTD atlq J0 Mi VW put Tzouno0 AgTD aqq Jo ZNSQISSEd Jo Alp STq; QSSdOGV pup QSAOEddK 'QSSSVd 8z LZ 9z 9z fz £z zz [z oz 6[ 8[ L[ 9[ 9[ 6l £l z[ o[ 6 8 L 9 6 £ z l 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, BEING AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 65858 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE, PROHIBITING INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT OF CONTIGUOUS LOTS WITH COMMON OWNERSHIP COMPRISING LESS THAN 3,000 SQUARE FEET EACH WHEN SUCH LOTS ARE DEVELOPED WITH A RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE(S) OVER THE LOT LINE. WHEREAS, the City is in the process of merging substandard, contiguous lots with common ownership that are currently developed with a structure over the lot line; and WHEREAS, the time constraints specified by state law prevent the City from being able to merge all of the eligible properties at one time; and WHEREAS, this staggering of mergers may create inconsistencies and disparities between property owners; WHEREAS, Section 65858 of the Government Code of the State of California authorizes the adoption of an interim ordinance as an emergency measure prohibiting any usage of land which may be in conflict with a contemplated zoning proposal which the legislative body or Planning Commission is considering or studying or intends to study within a reasonable period of time; WHEREAS, there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety or welfare in the form of proposed development of sub -standard lots due to the cumulative effect of increased density, traffic congestion, and reduction of available street parking and the approval of such developments and issuance of building permits therefore would result in a threat to public peace, health, safety or welfare; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. No use shall be commenced or established on lots which are eligible for merger are those that possess the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 following criteria: a. contiguous lots with common ownership. b. such contiguous lots comprise less than 3,000 square feet each and have lot widths of less than 30 feet each. C. such contiguous lots are currently developed with residential structure(s) over the lot line; or one lot is developed with a residential structure and the contiguous lot is developed with an accessory structure. d. lots are currently zoned R-1 or R-2. SECTION 2. Common ownership of contiguous parcels is determined as of the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION 3. This ordinance is adopted as an urgency measure to protect the public safety, health or welfare, and shall take effect upon its adoption and shall continue in effect for a period of no longer than foty-five days; provided, however, that after notice pursuant to Section 65856 of the Government Code and a public hearing the City Council may extend the effectiveness of this ordinance for a period of ten months and fifteen days and thereafter for an additional period of one year. SECTION 4. The City Council expressly finds that there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety or welfare in the form of proposed development of substandard lots in the community and that the approval of such proposed developments or issuance of building permits therefore would result in a threat to public peace, health, safety or welfare. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 23rd day of October, 1984. 2MU011V 2�ZIO ?ISTD 2SIO =WEO3 OZ SV QSAOEddK =ssssssv •PTUIOJTTPD 'uO2ag PSOW-gag 3O AgTO au; 3O 'dO WW Put TTOunOO A;rO auq 30 ZNSQIS2dd 8Z LZ 9Z 9Z 6Z EZ ZZ [Z OZ 61 81 Ll 9[ 91 6l 8I Z[ I 0[ 6 8 L 9 9 b Z 1 4 'I VI'd 2l ' W a N f1 O d D N:) X q TO: CITY OF H ERMOSA BEACH INTER -OFFICE MEMO Kim Reardon -Crites, Planning Assistant DATE• October 4, 1984 SUBJECT: Lots eligible for merger FROM• Bill Grove, Director Dept. of Bldg. & Safety Commissioner Sheldon, at the Planning Commission meeting of October 2, 1984 requested an update on those lots which would be eligible for merger under the proposed guidelines which have in fact been developed with two single family residences. Since 1981 to present there have been 12 developments of multiple lots resulting in 24 new single family residences. Another two developments (4 single family residences) are under construction and two developments (4 single family residences) are presently in plan check. The total number then is 16 developments resulting in 32 new single family residences. Depending on the action taken on Prospect Heights School, there is a possibility of 17 additional single family residences on that site. RESOLUTION P.C. 84-22 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH THAT A MORATORIUM BE ENACTED TO PREVENT THE UNMERGING OF SUBSTANDARD, CONTIGUOUS LOTS HELD BY THE SAME OWNER WHEN SUCH LOTS HAVE A RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE BUILT OVER THE LOT LINE. 2 3 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission is in the process of amending the Zoning Code as 4 it pertains to combined lots to bring the code in conformance with AB894; and 5 WHEREAS, there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety or 6 welfare in the form of proposed development of substandard lots due to the cumulative 7 effect of increased density, traffic congestion, and reduction of available street 8 parking and the approval of such developments and issuance of building permits 9 therefore would result in a threat to public peace, health, safety or welfare. 10 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of I I Hermosa Beach does hereby recommend to the City Council of Hermosa Beach that a 12 moratorium on future development on lots which contain the following conditions: 13 1. Contiguous Lots. 14 2. Owned by same owner. 5 3. Unmerger would result in lots less than 30' wide and less than 3,000 16 square feet. 17 4. Currently developed with residential structure(s) over lot line or accessory building(s) on contiguous lot. 8 5. Exempt R-3 Lots. 19 VOTE: AYES: Chmn. Izant, Comm. Compton, Schulte, Sheldon, Newton. 20 NOES: Chmn. Shapiro 2 ABSENT: None 22 CERTIFICATION 23 I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution P.C. 84-22 is a true and complete record 24 of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, 25 Californiat eir egular meeting of August 21, 1984. 26 27 �tep Izant, Chairman el Shapiro, Secretary 28 Date Assess if parcel qualifies for merger, I Notice owner by certified mall of intent to merge. At same time, Notice of Intention to Determine Status filed with the County Recorder. 30 days for owner to request Public Hearing. Owner does not request Public Hearing. Owner requests Public Hearing. 90 days following mailing of Notice 30 days from receipt of Request to to file determination of merger. hold Public Hearing. Notify owner by certified mail of time and date of Public Hearing. Ne Public Hearing: Owner presents evidence showing that parcel does not meet standards for merger. Planning Commission or BZA considers and makes decision. If DAerge . If not Merge. Within 30 days from Public Hearing Mail Clearance letter to owner. determination of Merger recorded with County. Record Release of Notice of Intention to determine status with County. ,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 23 ORDINANCE NO. 84- 752 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, BEING AN EMERG$NCY ORDINANCE ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 65858 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE, PROHIBITING INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT OF LOTS LESS THAN FOUR THOUSAND SQUARE FEET IN AREA WHEN SUCH 1LOTS ARE CONTIGUOUS TO LOTS HELD BY THE SAME OWNER, FOR A PERIOD OF FORTY-FIVE DAYS. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, has referred to the Planning Commission for study and consideration, possible amendments to the Zoning Ordinance limit: (development of sub -standard lots in the City by'implementing the - !requirements of Articles 1.5 and 1.7 of Chapter 3, Division 2 of (Title 7 of the'California-Government. Code relating to the merger of contiguous parcels held by the same owner; WHEREAS, Section 65858 of the Government Code of the State of California authorizes the adoption of an interim ordinance as emergency measure prohibiting any usage of land which may be in - conflict with a contemplated zoning proposal which the legislative body or Planning Commission is considering or studying or intends to study within a reasonable period of time; WHEREAS, there is a current and immediate threat to,the public health, safety or welfare in the form of proposed develop - meat of sub -standard lots due to the cumulative effect of-increasec density, traffic congestion, and reduction of available street parking and the approval of such developments and issuance of building permits therefore would result in a threat to public peace, health, safety or welfare; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOZ°S: aECTION 1. No use shall be commenced or established on - lots which are eligible for merger pursuant to Articles 1.5 -Z- AaNUO T T V A T I D (7 /,�//n/ = NHO3 OZ SV GaAOHddV xHagD A,II isaiiv u?uao�tl�O `goeag EsouiaaH To AZ?O aq TO 2i0)WN pu-e IzounoO AITO GLIZ NaISaud 8z LZ 9Z SZ tIz £z Zz eg— IZ fi86T `aunt TO V8P g4ZT stgz QalcloCII C[NV `QaAO-dddH `SsVd 0z • 'aav;Iain ao Azaj�es `gzlvaq `aotead otlgnd oz 61 4�9ag4 v uz ZInsaa pinom aaolaaaq; slzuiaad 2uTPTTnq To aouenssT ao 8I szuauidolanap pasodoad Bons So I-eAoaddv aqZ I-L'g4 Pu-e AZTun=oo aqZ LI uz S4ol.p.I-eput';sgns To q-uawdolanap pasodoad To uao; 01q: ut as-6;tam 91 ao AZa;-es `qZI-eaq oilgnd aq; off. ZV@Jg4 GZVTPGWWT pu73 zuaaano v S[ ST aaagl Z-egl spud Alssaadxa ITOunOD Aq-tO aqy ' £ �-,zouoas t�I 'a-eaA auo To potaad I1BuO'4TPpu ue ao; aaZ;t-Gaaq; £T Puu sAvp u9a4TTI Puu sgZuout uaj ;o potaad v aO; aou-eutpao stgZ 10 ZI ssauaAlzoalla aqz pua4xa AtUl ITOunOO AZT3 aqZ luta-eaq otlgnd -e pu-e TT apoO 4uacuuaanOq aqZ TO 95859 UOT40GS OZ zuunsand GOT40u aaz;v Z-egz OI `aanamoq `papzAoad !SA-ep OAT;-AZaOj utgZ aa2uol ou To potaad 13 ao; 6 439;19 uz GnuTluOD Il-eqs Puu uoTZdop-e s;T uodn 40a;;a 931rZ TTugs 8 Puv `Gale;lam JO gjlvaq `Aja;-es Ozlgnd aq4 :�oaZoad off. aansuaui, L Aoua2an me su p@Zdopv si aOuEutpaO stgy 'Z NOIZOaS 9 -aounuzpao szgj 10 azup aAz100110 aq4 10 s-e pautuiaa4ap S st slaoaud snon2ut:�uoo To dtgsaaumo uounuoo I-eqj gdooxa `papuauzu y .Ian.;-eaaaq ao paq-o-eua Alluasaad sv apoO ZuauzuaanOO VzuaO;Tl-eO £ 011:1 To L-aJITL TO Z uOtszAt(I `E aaZdugO To (9Z'T9V99 uOTZQGS Z q4zm 2uzouaunuoo) L • T Pule COT ' T5f,S9 uOt;oaS 4ZTm fUTOuaunuoo.) I w. PEIR: PROJECT: HB 84 - Merger of Parcels LOCATION: City wide APPLICANT: City of Hermosa Beach ZONE: R-1 and R-2 GENERAL PLAN: All Densities I, PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Project consists of repealing City Zoning Code Section 1203 through 1203.1 inclusive and implementing new provisions which satisfy the State require- ments of Article 1.5: Merger of Parcels. According to the above-mentioned law, the lots which were combined by the City's Combined Lot Ordinance are no longer merged. In order to legally merge the lots the City must adopt a specified set of procedures involving owner notification and public hearings. The lots in question are sub- standard, contiguous parcels held by the same owner: the same lots which were affected by the combined lot ordinance. II. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING This project encompasses all the lots currently affected by Zoning Code Sections 1203 - 1203.2. Section 1203. Combined lots. When a common boundary line separating two contiguous lots is covered by a building or permitted group of buildings, such lots shall constitute a single building site and the side yard as required by this ordinance shall then not apply to such common boundary line. When improvements required to be provided and maintained pursuant to this or other ordinances of the City of Hermosa Beach exist or are to be constructed upon two or more contiguous lots owned by one or more persons under common ownership, such required improvements shall not be removed so as to result in any nonconformity of this ordinance on any one or more of such lots. Section 1203.1. Combined lot area, When a common boundary line separating two (2) or more con- tiguous lots is covered by a building or permitted group of buildings, such lot shall constitute a single building site and thereafter may not be so divided so as again to create a parcel or parcels having less than four thousand (4,000) square feet of lot area without permission first having been granted by the Manning Commission. Section 1203.2. Planned development of combined lots. An undivided combined lot may, at the option of the owner of the combined lot, be developed with the same number of units that could have been constructed had the lot not been combined, in accordance with this ordinance and subject to review by the Planning Commission in accordance with the planned development procedures set forth in Articles 7.5 and 8.5 of Zoning Ordinance No. N.S. 154, as amended. These lots occur City-wide, in all zones and General Plan designations. III. ENVIRONMENTAL DVIPACT The environmental impact occurs if this project is not implemented. By implementing this project, the status quo is maintained: lots that have been merged in the past will remain merged. There will be a fiscal impact on the City due to noticing, public hearing, filing, and administrative requirements specified by State law. The effect of not implementing this merger procedure will be the increase in the number of developable lots. If all of the lots that are contiguous, same owner and non -merged were allowed to develop, an increase of 4-5% in the possible number of dwelling units would be experienced. This would increase the demand for public services, utilities, and sewage disposal. It would increase dendity and congestion in an already critical area and possibly add to air pollution, compcation of soil, and surface water runoff. IV. ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED IF PROJECT IS _RA PT.FiT/ffi T\TT'Rn Implementing this merger process will not create unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. It will have a financial impact on the City, but no environmental impacts. V. MITIGATION MEASURES. No mitigation measures are proposed as no environmental impacts are anticipated. VI. ALTERNATIVES TO THIS PROJECT. A. The City may in fact do nothing. The State law does not mandate that the City have a Merger Ordinance: it merely requires that if a City wishes to have a valid Merger Ordinance, it must follow certain criteria. This alternative would allow the lots that were merged under the combined lot ordinance to be developed as separate parcels. Aside from the adverse public reaction to this alternative are con- siderations of environmental concerns. B. That the ordinance be implemented by routine discovery of mergings. (i.e. pre -zone checks, plan checks, building permits, or residential building reports). This method would incur a greater total labor burden plus might not be effective in terms of timing: the City has only until January 1, 1956 in which to merge the lots they desire to merge. Even if the City wished to do this on a "discovery" basis, an ordinance would have to be adopted. VII. SHORT TERM UTILIZATION vs. LONG TERM GOALS. This project will be eliminating many substandard lots (by merging them) at the cost of the financial burden to the City. This will facilitate the long term goals of decreased density. VIII. GROWTH - INDUCING DVIPACT. This project will not induce growth in the City. Rather, it will prevent a situation whereby growth may proliferate and density be exacerbated. rs'.-1�E•4'—.- .. r --..._- ITS .... .i. .�+��-.:Y�:�.��i''.. ••'. ACTICI'r1 um..- ..'r IFIC.l"I'ION 1 -Location .City-wide a. Address: b. Le;;a1 City of Hermosa Beach, California 2. Description Adoption of Lot Merger Ordinance to amend Sections 1203-1203.2 of the Zoning Code of the City of Hermosa Beach in order to conform with Articles 1.5 and 1.7 of Chapter 3, Division.2 of Title 7 of the California Government Code. 3. Sponsor a. Name • City of Hermosa Beach , California b . Mailing Address • 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Phone: (213)376-6984 NEGATIVE DECLARATION In accordance with Resolution 79-4309 of the City of Hermosa Beach, which implements the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 in Hermosa Beach the Environmental Review Committee must make an environmental review of all private projects proposed to be undertaken within the City, and the Board of Zoning Adjustments must make an environmental review of all public projects proposed to be undertaken within the City, which are -subject to the'Environ- mental Quality Act. This declaration is documentation of the review and, if it`becomes final, no comprehensive Environmental Impact Report is required for this project. FINDING OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE We have undertaken and completed an Environmental Impact Review of this pro- posed project in accordance with Resolution 79-4309 of the City Council of Hermosa Beach, and find that this project does not require a comprehensive Environmental Impact Report because, provided the attached mitigation --meas- ures are included in the project, it would not have a significant effect on the environment. Documentation supporting this finding is on file in the Building Department. Date of FindingChairman, Environmental Review Committee We have undertaken and completed an Environmental Impact Review of this pro- posed project in accordance with Resolution 79-4309 of the City Council of Hermosa Beach, and find that this project does not require a comprehensive Environmental Impact Report because it wouldn t h �e a significant effect on the environment. Documentation su ort nth finding is ori file in the Building Department. A Date of Finding Chair anning Commission FINDING OF THE BOARD OF ZA*I�ING ADJUSTMENTS We have undertaken and completed an Environmental Impact Review of this pro- posed project in accordance with Resolution 79-4309 of the City Council of Hermosa Beach, and find that this project does not require a comprehensive Environmental Impact Report because, provided the attached mitigation meas- ures are included in the project, it would not have a significant effect on the environment. Documentation supporting this finding is on file in the Building Department. Date of Finding Secretary, Board of Zoning Adjustments We have undertaken and completed an Environmental Impact Review of this pro- posed project in accordance with REsolution 79-4309 of the City Council of Iiermosa Leach, and hind than this project docs not require a comprehensive Environmental Impact Report hecau5e`it would not have a significant effect of the environment. Dc,cume-ntation supporting; this finding is on file in the Building Department. DM.L.e of Finding Secretary, Board. of Zoning. Adjustments 9 October 1984 Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Hermosa Beach, California 90254 Dear Council Members; As a property owner and resident of Hermosa Beach, I feel it is essential that the "Open Space" zoning of the Prospect Heights School tract remain "Open Space". Both bordering streets, Hollowell and Gentry are very narrow streets and with cars parked on both sides of the street, there is no room for cars to pass each other when they're coming from opposite directions. Any additional density in the area would make the area extreemly hazardous. Secondly, I am against the sale of any school property. The community will need those schools in a very few years, and there will be no money to replace them and no land ,to build them on. Leasing currently unused school property will serve the community and insure that the future children of Hermosa Beach will have schools to attend in their own community without the added expense and danger of bussing. Sincerely, Mrs. Walter J. Taylor 454 Hollowell Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 S U P P L ENIi ENTAL October 22, 1984 Ho orale Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the City Council of October 23, 1984 FINAL REPORT ON SLANT DRILLING FROM THE C TY MAINTENANCE YARD INTO THE TIDE AND SUBMERGED LANDS GRANTED TO THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Recommendati on It is recommended that: 1. At this time the City Council receive and file the attached reports from Messrs. Watson and Hacker pending possible further discussion based on the results ofBallot "P". 2. That copies of these reports be distributed to members of the Oil Recovery Investigation Committee, Planning Commission and Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors. Background This report was directed at the July 21, 1984 City Council meeting. Analysis In response to the questions directed to the consultant, 1) Yes, the City has the right to drill for and extract oil from tide and submerged lands granted to the City by the State. 2) Yes, the City must obtain a drilling permit from the Division of Oil and Gas, California Department of Conservation. Additionally, the City must comply with CEQA and obtain a coastal permit in order to drill into the offshore lands. 3) There are lease limitations and bidding procedures required. These are described in more detail in Mr. Watson's report beginning on Page 11. 4) Yes, there are restrictions on the City's use of surface rentals, bonuses, royalties and other cash considerations. These are described in more detail in Mr. Watson's report beginning on Page 17. 5) In general, other revenues generated by the oil drilling into the tidelands (from taxes, fees, licenses, permits, etc.) would not be restricted in use. A --more detailed analysis of this is con- tained in Mr. Watson's report beginning on Page 31. 6) Charges by the City fora surface lease "must be reasonable". This should probably involve the use - Continued -15� i .i •jdaa sNaoM ottgnd •j-daQ 2utuu-eTd •�daQ 2uipTtng :oo PT/WID ,za�Say� • �; .zo a.z� • aTgts-eaj ATT-eFojaulwoo aq pTnom paB2� aou-eualui-eW AITO aqj wo.Tj Ou'TTt.zp ju-els 1•zoda.z siq ut sapnTauoo jaxoeg ju-e4TnsuoD wnaToal@d CL • liodai s,uosl-eM -ayj To tE a2led uo OuiuutOaq pagTjosap ,zaupsnj si sisATBu-e stq,L •sastezddB parjtTBnb B So Z a2,ed pxe)� aouauaqut-ew sjtD wosl OutTITa(I Ttp uo jjodag T-eura :ag V86T `EZ jagoloo To Outlaayi TLounoj SITO FINAL REPORT ON SLANT DRILLING FROM THE CITY MAINTENANCE YARD INTO THE TIDE AND SUBMERGED LANDS GRANTED TO THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA October 19, 1984 By: Richards, Watson, Dreyfuss & Gershon Attorneys at Law Special Counsel TABLE OF CONTENTS 841020 Ik 0011ABD 4 Page INTRODUCTION .......................................... 1 I. STATE OF CALIFORNIA'S GRANT OF TIDELANDS AND SUBMERGED LANDS TO CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ........................... 2 II. SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ............... 5 III. MAY THE CITY OR ITS LESSEE EXTRACT OIL FROM THE TIDE AND SUBMERGED LANDS OFFSHORE FROM HERMOSA BEACH? .................... 6 IV. MUST THE CITY OBTAIN PERMISSION TO DRILL INTO THE OFFSHORE LANDS AND FROM WHAT AGENCIES? ............................. 9 V. WHAT LEASE AND BIDDING PROCEDURES MUST THE CITY FOLLOW? ............................ 11 VI. WHAT RESTRICTIONS ARE THERE ON THE CITY'S USE OF SURFACE RENTALS, BONUSES, ROYALTIES AND OTHER CASH CONSIDERATIONS? ................................. 17 VII. WOULD OTHER REVENUE GENERATED BY DRILLING INTO THE TIDELANDS (SUCH AS FROM TAXES, FEES, LICENSES, PERMITS) BE RESTRICTED? ......................... 31 VIII. WHAT RESTRICTIONS WOULD THERE BE ON CHARGES BY THE CITY FOR A SURFACE LEASE? ................................... 34 841020 Ik 0011ABD 4 S 08d1100 Al tZ60V9 -T- •pa4p4s asTMlaggO ssaTun „spueT pa6lawgns„ sapnTOuT OSTe „spueTapT;„ 0:1 uTalau aOua1a3a1 'aouaTuanuOO 30 apps ayl Zo3 •(086T) T 'u3 '8TS 'STS P£'TpO 9Z 'gZnoO soTia nS aTaxlag 90 4TO '@PTI au4 30 MOTS Pup qqa AZeuTplo auq UT palanooun 40u pup apT4 MOT upaw au4 30 pleMpas asoyq alp „spueT pablawgns„ pup 'apT4-MOT upaw pue apTq-gbTq ueaw 3O sauTT aqq uaaMgaq spueT alp ,spupTapTy„ T/u3 Z(uueO) V uOTgTsodold Zo (sTnler) £T uoTgTsodold ZaggTa Zapun pagOTlgs81 aq (sgTwlad 'sasuaOTT 'saa3 'saxpq wo13 se Bons) spueT pa6lawgns pup apTq ayq wo13 uOTgonpold TTo Aq pagpsauab anuanal Zau4o pTnoM 'S ZsuOTgplapTsuoO gSPO ZaugO pue s9TgTeI�01 'sasnuoq 'STe4u91 aoujins 3o asn s,A4TO aul uo aq alalia pTnoM suOT40T1gsa1 geuM •V ZMOTTO3 A4TO aqq gsnw salnpaoold 6uTppTq pup aseaT gpgm •£ ZsaTOuabe 4?qm wo13 pue spueT a1OgSJJO au4 04uT TTTZP 04 uoTssTwlad uTpggo 1�4TO auq gsnW 'Z ZgOeag esowlag wo13 a1OgSJJO spueT pa6lawgns pup apTq auq wo13 TTO 40p14xa aassaT SqT Zo AITO auq ApW 'T :6T6T UT eTusOJTTe0 3O a4p4S auq �q 44TO au4 Oq Pa4uelb T/u3spueT pablawgns pue apT4 aqj 04UT p1eT, aoueua4uTeW AgTO au4 w019 6uTTTT1p 4ueTs Oq buT4PTa1 suoTgsanb buTMOTTOJ aqq ZaMsue 04 TasunOO TeToads sp uogslaO 5 ssngAa1Q 'uosgpM 'splpgoTg paZTloggne 'VB$T 'T£ ATnr uO TTOunoO AgTO alis NOIZOnQOEINI 6. What restrictions would there be on charges by the City for a surface lease ("platform fee")? A summary of our responses to these questions is contained in Section II of this report and more detailed responses are contained in the following sections. I. STATE OF CALIFORNIA'S GRANT OF TIDELANDS AND SUBMERGED LANDS TO CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH. In 1919 the State of California granted to the City of Hermosa Beach the tidelands and submerged lands of the State of California within the boundaries of the City. The grant provides as follows: "SECTION 1. There is hereby granted to the city of Hermosa Beach, a municipal corpor- ation of the State of California, and to its successors, all the right, title and interest of the State of California, held by said state by virtue of its sovereignty, in and to all the tidelands and submerged lands, whether within the present boundaries of said city, and situated below the line of mean high tide of the Pacific ocean, to be forever held by -2- 840921 Ik OO11ABD 5 S GOV1100 Al 1Z60V9 -c- Jog 'sieaA Agjo3 5uTpaaoxa qou poTiad e jog 3oajagq gjed Aue so 'spueT pTes aseaT Aeux pue 'sasodind pup sasn OTTgnd jaggo pup sanlegM so3 'sseaA Agso3 buTpaaoxa qou poTiad e IO3 'uoaJagq sasTgOuez3 queJ6 Aeui 'sjossaoons s4T sO 'A3TO pTes 4eg4 'papTnOsd :ianaos3egm asodsnd Aue JOJ uoTgejodioo 10 uizT3 'Tenpin -TpuT Aue 04 '3oaiagq g3Pd Aue zo 'spueT pTes a4euaTTe JO anTS 'AaAuOO 'ques6 'auiT4 Aue 3e '40u TTegs 'szossaoons sqT zo 'A4TO pTes pue 'A4TO pTes uTggTM spueT agq 3o uoTgoagozd aqq pue 'uOTgebrneu pue aOJaun 00 3O uoTgepounu000e JO uOT3ouozd aqq Jog 4uaTuanuoO JO AJessaOau saOueTTdde pup sasngonjgs 'saT4TTTgn jaggo pup 'sAenb 'sdTTs 'ssaTd 's�goop 'sanjegm 3o uoaJagq uOTgezado pup aOueuaquTeui 'uoTgonjgs -uoo eqq so3 pus 'sogzeq sqT 3O uoT4oagojd aqq JO3 JO 'saTzepunoq s4T uTggTM spueT 3O uOT40a4 -ojd aqq so3 sjageMiqeajq ao speaq�,ITnq 3O uOTq -onigsuoo pue quaWgSTTgeqsa aqq jog pus sogzeq P 3o lonpuoo pus quawanoiduzT ' quauigsTTgegsa aqq 103 ATaTOs 'sjossaoons sqT Aq pup AgTO pTes Aq pasn aq TTegs spueT PTeS (e) :4TM 04 'buTMOTTO3 suoT4TpuoO ssajdxa aqq uodn pup 'sasodlnd pup sasn aq; jog gsnzq UT 'siossaOons sqT Aq pus 'A4TO pTes S 08b1100 Al IMOV8 „•PTUIo3TTPO 30 a4PgS auq 3o aTdoad aq4 oq panlasal ,�galaq ST 'asodind pTPs Jog spuPT pTPs IanO SIagPM pTPs 04 ssaooP quaTuanuoO 3O qubTl auq ggTM 'Iogjpq pTPs 3o sIa;PM auq UT usT3 o4 4gSTl agnTosgP ays 'siossaoons sqT 4q Io d4TO pTPs Aq pa4gTwJad Io pazTloggnP 'apPlu aq Jana TTPus u4TMalag4 uOT40auuo3 UT aOTnlas Io asn AuP jog 'SaT4TTToPJ UT IO 'sablPuo IO 'STT04 'SagPI UT UOTgPUTUITIOSTp OU '(P) gdPIbPIPd UT pauoTqualu saoUPTTddP Io saTq -TTTgn aqq go pup 3o Io 'Iogjpq pTPs 3o UOTq -Prado Io gonpuoo 'quawabPuPlu aqq uI (o) :PTUIO3TTPO 3o a4P4S au; �q pa;Prado so pauMo 'pPOITTPI IO '43PIo Ia4PM Iau4o IO Tassan puP I03 '3oalau4 gIPd AuP Io 'spuPT pTPs uo pa4onlgsuoo s4uaw -anoldUIT I@g4O PUP 'sAPnb 'sdTTs 'slard 'sxoop 'sanlPgm TTP 'ablPuo gnogqTM 'asn oq qubTJ auq 'saWT4 TTP 4? '@A?q TTPgs 'PTUIOJTTPD 30 9q?4S au4 PUP 'UOTgPBTnPu PUP aolaunOO 3o sasodlnd TTP Jog Iogjpq OTTgnd P UTPIuaI SAPMTP TTPgs pup 'agPgs auq oq asuadxa gnogqTM AgTO pTPs Aq panoldWT aq TTPgs Iogjpq pTPs (q) :Iogjeq pTPs ;P UOT;PbTAPU so aOlaUrWOO 3O SgUaUIalTnbal aqq ggTM pup PTUIo3TTPD 3o egpgS auq e�q PTau aIP spuPT pTPs gDTuM uodn sgsnlq ay4 ugTM ;ua;sTsuoo sasodind II. SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 1. May the City or its lessee extract oil from the tide and submerged lands offshore from Hermosa Beach? Yes, subject to meeting the requirements set out below. 2. Must the City obtain permission to drill into the offshore lands and from what agencies? Yes. The City must obtain a drilling permit from the Division of Oil and Gas, must comply with CEQA and must obtain a coastal perm- it. The lessee must comply with various State and Federal laws, rules and regulations. 3. What lease and bidding procedures must the City follow? Before tidelands may be leased, the State Lands Commission ("Commission") must make certain findings including that the tidelands are being drained by means of wells on adjacent lands. The City must adopt a Resolution of Intention to enter into such a lease. Competitive bidd- ing is required. Unit or co-operative agreements are not subject to competitive bidding requirements. The Commission must approve the Resolution of Intention, the lease, and any unit or co-operative agreement. 4. What restrictions are there on the City's use of surface rentals, bonuses, royalties and other cash consi- derations? There is no restriction on the use of reasonable rentals for use of the surface or drilling site. This may -5- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 S 084/1100 �] lZ60b9 aqq Aq �qT0 aqq oq pa4uel6 spueT pabjawgns pus api4 WOJJ Tio 43eJ4xa pup io3 TTTJP 04 4u6TJ aq4 spq AgTO aqq 'sad ZHOVag VSOWHaH W0HJ aU0HSdd0 SQNVI CaDHaWSnS CNV SQIZ 3HZ W0Hd qIO lDVEZX3 SSSSSq SZI HO 2=D 3HZ 2�VW •anuanal Tediorunui oq gsniq oTTgnd au; oq goaCgns aJe gDTgM sanuanal TTo buTgianTp 30 ;oaJ3a auq anew o-4 ;ou se os--„aTgpuosea:i„ aq gsnw a61euo aus ll1zO3-4eTd„) aspaT aoe.zns e ao3 �qz0 auq .�q sablego uo aq asau4 pTnoM suoTgoTJgsaJ geuM '9 •suoTgdaoxa paz3Toads uTugjao glTM 'ON Z(uue0) V uoTgTsodoid zo (sTA12f) ET uoT4isodozd I@g4T@ japun pa40TJgsas aq (s4Tuisad 'sasuaoTT 'saa3 'saxp4 wojg se eons) spueT pabjauigns put apT4 auq uio.z3 uoTgonpoid Tzo Aq pagelauab anuanaj zaugo pTnoM 'S •sesodind TpdTDTunw 'TeooT ATaind jog aq ueuq saugp.z a4e4S au4 30 aTdoad aqq TTP ;T3auaq gsnw sajn4Tpuadxa aus •aozaunuoo zo uoTgpbznpu 'jogleq aqq agouioid 10 spueTapzq au4 go asn eqq agP4TTTop3 Jo aouPqua ,�Tgoazip 10 spueTapi4 au4 gtjaueq �Tgoasip JaggTa uoiuM sasodznd pup saoTAjas 'squawanoidWT 04 pa40Tl4S@J ST (Te4uas aTgeuoseaz e 3o uoigonpap jagje) spueTapi4 au4 uioz3 panTiap anuanas 3o asn aql •snuoq e go uoT;jod aTgpuoseaa e apnTouT State of California on meeting the requirements discussed under Sections IV and V, infra. The drilling operations must not impair the "public trust" purposes for which the tide- lands are held, traditionally defined as the promotion of commerce, navigation and fisheries in the public inter- est.Fn/2 It is well established by the cases that drilling operations may be conducted consistently with the public trust. The question whether a city which had received a tidelands grant from the state had the right to drill for and extract oil from its tidelands arose in the case of City of Long Beach vs. Marshall, 11 Cal.2d 609 (1938). The Supreme Court held that the tidelands grant conveyed the granted lands to the city in fee simple, subject to certain conditions and upon certain trusts. The court further held that the conveyance carried with it the mineral rights in the land. subject to the same trusts. The court went on to hold that the City had the right to drill for and extract the oil from those lands which it owns, stating that its authority to do so was beyond question in view of the city's charter provisions. The court observed that the drilling operations must not be conducted in a manner that would Fn/2 The public trust has been expanded over the years by court decisions to include such additional purposes as conservation, hunting, swimming and other recreation. Marks v. Whitney, 6 Cal.3d 251 (1971); City of Berkeley v. Superior Court, 26 Cal.3d 515, 521 (1980). See Section VI for a discussion of the "public trust doctrine." -7- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 S 08d1100 Al 1Z60b8 (panuTquoo) :saPTnoid SO£9 uoTgoaS apo saoinosag oTTgnd £/u3 £/ P TSOL 'SO£9 'TO£9§§ apoD *sag •gndl •4T oq p94uPJb spuPT pabzauigns pup apTq aq4 aspaT 04 'agngpqs Aq paijaguoo 'uoT4sanb puoAaq AgTZogqnp SPq asTM@NTT 'A4To MPT TPiauab P 'goPag PsOwJag 90 AgTD aqs „•uoT-4sanb puoAaq„ aq oq pTag SPM PUP Z94IPgo -�4To aqq Aq pazlaguoo spm TT0 103 TTTJP 04 A4Tzoggnp 'gopag buoi 3o asPo aq4 ui •goa33a gons AuP anPq PTnom pjPA aoupuaquTPuj aqq uo SUoTgPooT aopjzns ggTm spuPTaPT4 aq4 04UT sTTam zo TTam P 3o uoTgPjado Jo buTTTTIP gpgq gsa65ns PTnom gpgq sn oq umou�,f azP sgop3 ou 'TTPgs'?W •n gopag buo7 3o AgTD UT se '4nq :gsnsq aq; 3o sasodznd aq; J03 spuPTapT; ao zogzpq aqq go asn apaduT 4ou TTTm 4Pq; JauuPUI P UT pagonpuoo aq gsnw suoTgejado 6uTTTTJP aqs •S4SnJ4 PUP suoT4TPuoo @WPS aq4 04 goaCgns 'PuPT aqq UT sggbTs TP1auTW aq4 sapnTouT sTgs •gsniq OTTgnd aqq 04 PUP 4UP16 aq4 UT pagPgs suoTgTPuoo aq4 04 goaCgns 'aTdwis aa3 UT spuPTaPT4 s4T PalTnbop asTMa�,ITT goPag PsouI'ag 3o �;TD aqq gpgq ;gnop zog wool ou sanPaT TTPgssPW •n goPag uoq 30 AqTD UT uoruTdo s,gznoD awazdnS aq; puP 'gopag buo7 3o �qTD aq; oq qu2z6 aq; uT a5Pn6uPT aqq oq JPTTWTs ST goPag Psowzag 90 A4TD aq; 04 4UP15 aqq UT a5pn6uPT aqs •goa33a gons AuP anPq PTnom 6UTTTTJP aq4 4Pg4 4Sa6bnS 04 4T azojaq SUTggou SPM asag4 gpgq pagou qnq sogsPq aqq 3o asn apaduiT Public Resources Code §7057 and Government Code § 37384 also grant authority to the city to lease its property including granted tide and submerged lands. The City or its lessee must obtain the necessary easements or other rights for slant drilled wells to pass through the subsurface of any privately owned property which lies between the drill site and the tidelands in order to reach the tidelands. IV. MUST THE CITY OBTAIN PERMISSION TO DRILL INTO THE OFFSHORE LANDS AND FROM WHAT AGENCIES? Yes. The City must obtain a drilling permit from the Division of Oil and Gas within the State Department of Conservation. In addition, the City must comply with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and obtain a coastal permit. Written approval by the Supervisor of the Division of Oil and Gas is required prior to drilling. [14 Cal. "The powers granted by this chapter to the Commission as to leasing or granting of rights or privileges with relation to such lands owned by the State are hereby conferred upon the counties and cities to which such lands have been granted." The municipal grantee's leasing power has been confirmed by the California Supreme Court. Higgins v. City of Santa Monica, 62 Cal.2d 24, 32 (1964). cm 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 5 08VII00 AI IMM -OT- 3o uoTSTnTQ auq '@W?g PUP gST3 3o quaiugjPdac aqq 'SPO PUP TTO 3o uoTSTnTQ au3 3o asouq 04 pagTuiTT qou qnq buTpnTouT 'PTu1o3TTPD 30 a;P4S au; 30 PUP sa;P;S Pa;Tun au4 30 suoT4PT -nbaz pup saTnj 'sMPT g4TM ATdwoo gsnw aassaT auy -dDZ au4 g4TM ATdwoo gsnw gTuizad TP4sPoo aql-gTulzad P eons anssT oq AgTsogqnp seq '(„dDZ„) u2J6o'd TP:ISPOD TPoo2 s4T 3o uoT4P3T3T4Ja3 panTaoal 6uTnPq 'AgTD @qL •gTwJ@d TP4SPoo P S9JTnbaz osTP goa[ojd buTTTTsp pasodoad aqj •suoTgPsado buTTTTsp �uP pup asPaT SPb PUP TTo SUP 3o uOTgnoaxa aqq 04 JOTjd pa48Tdwoo aq 4snui VbSD sapun pasTnbaz uoTgpquauinoop Pup MaTnaz TPquauiuOITnua aus ',�ouabP oTTgnd P �q panojddP JO qnO paTJJP0 aq oq pasodoid goa[oid „.Lz?UOTq@J0STP,, AuP 04 ATddP gDTgM '(„��SO„) q3V -1�4TTPnb TP4uauiuOJTnuS PTusO3TTPD au4 3o suoTSTnOzd aqq oq goaCgns aq pTnoM pjpA aouPuaquTPui ,�4To au4 qP goaCojd 6uTTTT=P TTo SUV [(P)ZZLT§ @POD 'uTWPV 'TPD VT] •uOTgPn3asuOD 3o quauigjpdaQ pup �ouabv saojnos@H aqq 30 suOT3PTn6aj pa4PToossP PUP squauiazTnbai VbSD 6uTpnTouT 'PTu303TT2D 30 a4P4S aqq 3o squawasTnbai TP4uauiuOJTnua PUP T014uoo uoTgnTTod TTP 30 4uauiTTT3Tn3 aqq uodn qua6uTquoo ST suoTgpsado 6uTTTTzp 30 TPnosddP S,uOTSTnTQ aus [TE6T§ 'uTWPV -TPD VT] 'puoq �gTuuiapuT UP PUP 'buTTTTsp aouaunu0o 04 uoT4 -uaquT 3o aoTgou P sosTnjadnS aqq ggTM aTT3 gsnw 1ogejado jo JauMO auq buTTTTsp 04 JOTsd 'uoTgTppP uI [�TLT§ @POD •uTuipV Industrial Safety, the State Water Resources Control Board, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, the California Coastal Commission, and their respective successors. 2 Cal. Adm. Code 2125, et. sec. In addition, as noted above under III, the City or its lessee must obtain easements or other rights for slant drilled wells to pass through the subsurface of any privately owned property lying between the maintenance yard drill site and the tidelands in order to bottom wells in the tidelands. w WHAT LEASE AND BIDDING PROCEDURES MUST THE CITY FOLLOW? A. Limitations on Leases Public Resources Code § 7057 provides that tide and submerged lands which may be leased by a city must be within one nautical mile of the ordinary high water mark, that the conditions of the Public Resources Code and requirements of the State Lands Commission must be met, and that the drill- ing must be done by means of slant drilling from an upland site.Fn/4 This statute provides that the lease period shall not exceed 35 years. Fn/4 These requirements are also contained in Public Resources Code §§ 6872(b) and 7061.1. -11- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 Government Code Section 37384 provides that a city may lease tide or submerged lands for a period not to exceed fifty years, except when the State grant specifically pro- vides otherwise. In the case of the City of Hermosa Beach, the State grant limits a lease of tide or submerged lands to a period not to exceed forty years. In order to avoid legal questions as to the term of any lease that may be made, we would recommend that the term not exceed 35 years. B. State Lands Commission Requirements The State Lands Commission ("Commission"), a part of the Resources Agency of the State of California, has broad power to regulate the city's lease of its tide and submerged lands for the development of oil and gas. 1. Required Findings By State Lands rnmmiccinn Before tide and submerged lands may be leased by the City, the State Lands Commission must determine the following: "(1) That oil or gas deposits are believed to be contained in such lands, (2) that the same are being drained by means of -12- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 S a8d1100 AI IZ60b8 -ET- „• • • apoo sTgq 90 Z'TL89 uoTgoaS 30 (a) Put (p) '(o) '(ej Suors?n?pgns uT paq?josap ease Aue UTu1TM spueT Aue 6UTPJP6aJ apoo STuq 30 ZL89 uo?40aS 3o SuoTS?noid aqq g4TM aouep�000e UT s6u?pu?3 apew seu uoTss?wwoD spueZ agegs auo T?qun • • • 'apoo STgq 90 Z-TL89 uo?goaS 30 'an?snTou? '(a) u6noJgq (?) suo?S -TnTpgns UT paq?Josap ease Aue uTggTM spueT pa6jawgns pue apT4 eons woz3 suogseoozpAq lau40 10 sub 'T?o 3o uo?goeigxa aqq I03 quaw -aa15e 10 aseaT Aue 04uT Za4ua.TTugs STe1au?w buTAIaSa3 gnogqTM spueT pa61a>ugns jo apTq paqu?16 seu agegs auq gOTgM 04 uoTSTn?pgns TeoTgTTod jo e�qunoo 'Aq?o ou 'uTaJaq AIez4 -uoo auq oq UOTSTnoid Aue bUTpuegsuq?M4ON •spueT eons buTATlapun STeiauTw saugo so sub Jo T?o Jo uoTgoeJgxa au -4 aZTloggn? zo 4oe34Xa oq gg6TJ aqq oq Jo UT anew Aew 'Jag4O auq uo 'uoTSTnTpgns TeoTq?Tod so Aqunoo '2�4?o eons Jo 'pueq auo auo uo 'agegs aqq w?eTo Jana4euM ao?pnCajd o4 jauuew due UT sou 'uoTSTnTpgns T?oT4TTod zaggo jo Aqunoo '1�4?o Aue 04 '886T 'TT aunt oq JoTsd apew spueT pa6lawgns so ap?4 90 4u?16 Aue 3o 43a33a auo S4TwTT jagdeuo sTgq UT buTu-4oLq„ :quau?giad se s?3osuT sap?nosd 8L89§ apOD saoznosag o?Tgnd 'S96T u? papuawe se '8L89§ apoD saoinosad oTTgnd 3o gdesbeaed puooes aqq Aq (uoeag esowzag bu?pnTouT) sea -4uelS Ted?otunw oq aTgeoTTdde apew ale 'SS6T u? papuewe se 'ZL89§ apoD saoinosag o?Tgnd 90 squawaiTnbaz asaus S/u3 'T'T90L PUP LSOL§§ apoD •sag •qnd •�,Iaew za4eM gbTq AJeu?pso auo 90 aT?w TeoTgneu auo UTugTM aq gsnw spueTapT4 paseaT auo pue 'a4Ts pueTdn ue woJ3 buTTTTIP 4ueTs 3o sueew Aq aq gsnw 6u?TT?Jp auq 'qaw az? (?)ZL89 UOT409S 3o eTzaq?so aazuq auq 3I u3 S/'(?)ZL89§ apoD *sad •qnd ,,agegS aqq Jo S4sazaqu? gsaq auq UT aq TTTM se6 pue T?o 3o uo?gonposd aqq J03 awes auq 3o buTseaT auo 4eu4 (£) pue 'spueT queoeCpe uodn sTTaM S 08Ht100 '4I 1Z60b8 -VT- UT pauado aq TTTM sTPsodoid aqj •sNaaM ino3 J03 PagSTT -qnd aq TTpus uOTgnTosal auy •Pa1aPTSUOD PUP panra0aa aq TTTM sTPsodoid paTPas gDTgM qp TTounoo AqTo aqq 3o 6uTgaaw P 109 Jag3P@JGg4 sAPP p£ uPg4 ssaT qou @WTq P xT3 TTpus UOT4 -nTosaz aus •uodn PTq aq oq zogop3 ajgPTIeA auo AgToads pup '44TPAOJ jo TPquai uinWTUTW auq PUP asPaT 90 w'OJ au4 A3Toads 'pasPaT aq oq Agzadoid aqq agTJOsaP 'TPzauab UT 'TTPus uoTuM asPaT sP6 Pup TTO UP 04UT saqua Oq UOTquaqul go UOTgnTosag P gdopP TTounoo ,�qTo aqq g2gq saJTnbaj 9su9T P Bons 04UT buTsaqua UT paMoTT09 aq oq ainpaooid ,U ogngPqs aqj •saT4TO MPT TPsaua6 Aq saspaT sP6 Pup TTO 04 goadsas ggTM aznpaooid 6uTppTq anTgTgaduioo P pagopua spq azngPTST6@q aus, UTPPTE anTgTga woD •z •1040p3 gUPOTJTubTs P aq TTTM TTaM 5UTUTPsp auq 90 UOT4POOT aTOq woggoq aqj •aTgPTTPnP aiP uOTUTdo giadxa pup Pgpp eons gpgq sauznssp UOTUTdo STus •P4PP Tpngop3 I@g4o PUP TPOT6oToa5 uo paspq uOTuTdo s,gjadxa up go STspq aqq uo appul aq pTnoo 6uTPuTJ P u0ng •apptu aq oq 6uTpuTJ paJTnbai aqq JO3 zap.zo UT abeUTPJP 3o aouapTna sabuoigs 6uTzTnbai snug 'pauTPJP 6uTaq asp spuPT au; 1pg4 6uTpuT3 P sajTnbaj 94ngp4s -4uasasd aqj, ,-sPuPT 4uaOPCPP uO sTTaM go supaw tIq pauTPIP buTaq azp jo aq 4ewl, sgTsodap sP6 10 TTO 3T qaw aq pTnoo ZL89§ apoD saosnosad OTTgnd 90 quauiazTnbaj a6PUTPzp auq 'SS6T 04 3OTId public session of the council and the property shall be leased to the highest responsible bidder. (Pub. Res. Code §§7058.5 and 7059). The State Lands Commission has discretionary authority to exempt particular leases or operating agree- ments from competitive bidding procedures "where by reason of the small size of the property or drainage, actual or imminent, such procedure would . . . be impractical." [Pub. Res. Code §7061]. This exemption may not, as a practical matter, be applicable due to the size of the tidelands area. Drainage is another matter and is, of course, a factual rather than a legal question. On the basis of present information it should be assumed for purposes of planning that competitive bidding will be required. 3. Unit or Co -Operative Agreements. Notwithstanding the competitive bidding procedure prescribed by the above referenced sections, Public Resources Code Section 7058 specifically authorizes a city to enter into unit or co-operative agreements with owners of other lands in the oil or gas field in the interest of increasing the ultimate recovery of oil or gas or the pro- tection of oil and gas from unreasonable waste. This section, which expressly applies to unit or co-operative agreements involving granted tidelands, authorizes the city -15- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 to execute all documents necessary to effectuate any such agreements which may extend over the life of the field or for any other indefinite term. The California Supreme Court has recognized that in the context of this section competi- tive bidding is not required. (City of Long Beach v. Vickers, 55 Cal.2d 153 (1961)). Accordingly, the City may enter into a unit or cooperative agreement with nearby owners of uplands which lie over the oil field without competitive bidding. How- ever, as discussed in the next section, the Commission must approve any such agreement before it is effective. 4. State Lands Commission's Approval of Resolution of Intention, Lease, Unit and or Co-operative Aqreements. The State Lands Commission must approve the Resolution of Intention prior to any lease or operating agreement becoming effective. [Pub. Res. Code §7060.] The Resolution of Intention must include all material provisions of the proposed lease such as the minimum rental, royalty, other consideration, term, and one variable, biddable factor. [Pub. Res. Code §7058.5.] -16- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 The lease must also be approved by the State Lands Commission before it is delivered or becomes effective. [Pub. Res. Code §7054.5.]Fn/6 A unit or cooperative agreement also must be approved by the Commission, which must find that "the public trust for commerce, navigation and fisheries" is not impaired by the agreement. [Pub. Res. Code §§7058 and 6879.1 The Commission must also find that the agreement is in the public interest. VI. WHAT RESTRICTIONS ARE THERE ON THE CITY'S USE OF SURFACE RENTALS, BONUSES, ROYALTIES AND OTHER CASH CONSIDERATIONS? A. Summary and Conclusions. The question itself implies that there are restrictions and this is correct. Essentially, the City's Fn/6 Pub. Res. Code 57054.5 provides in part: "No lease or modification thereof or amendment thereto for the production, extrac- tion, or removal of minerals, oil, gas or other hydrocarbons from tide or submerged lands which have been granted by the State to a public agency in trust wherein the State has not reserved the minerals, shall be effective or shall be delivered to the lessee unless and until it has been approved by the State Lands Commission." -17- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 share of proceeds from the production of oil and gas from the tidelands (excluding a reasonable allocation of proceeds to site rentals) may not be used for general municipal pur- poses; rather, such proceeds may be used only in furtherance of the trust under which the tidelands have been transferred to the City and for the purposes expressed in the legislative grant of the tidelands to the City. The use of revenue derived by the City from the tidelands (excluding revenue from use of the drill site) is restricted to improvements, services, and purposes which either directly benefit the tidelands or directly enhance or facilitate the use of the tidelands. The expenditures must be for the benefit of all of the people of the State of California rather than for purely local, municipal purpos- es. Purposes benefiting all of the people of the State generally include the furthering of commerce, navigation, fisheries, conservation, and recreation on the granted tidelands. Some uses are clearly permissible, others clearly prohibited, while others are in the grey area. For instance, an expenditure to construct or improve the pier would be clearly permissible; an expenditure to improve city streets generally would be prohibited; an expenditure to provide police protection immediately adjacent to the tide- lands would be in the grey area. We discuss possible uses in more detail below. If an expenditure is questioned, -18- 840921 Ik 0011AB0 5 either the State or an individual taxpayer could challenge the matter in court. B. Evolution of the Public Trust Doctrine. When California was admitted to statehood in 1850, it acquired title to the tidelands within its borders not in its proprietary capacity but as trustee for the public.Fn/7 City of Berkeley v. Superior Court, 26 Cal.3d 515 (1980). The public trusts were for navigation, commerce and fisher- ies. Borax Consolidated v. Los Angeles, 296 U.S. 10 (1935). In 1919 the State granted to Hermosa Beach the tidelands within the city's boundaries. Hermosa Beach took these tidelands on the same terms as they were held by the State and received whatever rights the State had, subject to reservations and restrictions in the grant. City of Long Beach v. Marshall, 11 Cal. 2d 609 (1938); City of Long Beach v. Morse, 31 Cal.2d 254 (1947). The grant is subject to the "public trust doctrine"Fn/8, the purposes of which have traditionally been delineated in terms of navigation, Fn/7 English common law evolved the concept of the public trust under which the sovereign owns "all of its navigable waterways and the lands lying beneath them 'as trustee of the public trust for the benefit of the people.'" See, Note, California's Tideland Trust: Shoring It U (1971) 22 Hastings L.J. 759, 761-762. Fn/8 See City of Oakland v. Oakland Waterfront Co., 118 Cal. 160, 189-90 (1897). -19- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 5 09V1100 *ItI 1Z60V9 'JaugouP Jano uoTgPzTTTgn 3o apoW auO 6uTJOAP3 uOTgPOTJTssPTo Papow4no up ggTM pauapinq qou ST a4Pgs aqq gsnzq aq4 6uTJagsTuTWpe UI •spaau oTTgnd 6uT5ueyo ssediuooue oq aTgTxaT3 AT4uaT3T33ns eiP 4oalgns ale spuPTaPT4 uoTuM 04 sasn oTTgnd aus„ •spuPTapTI 04 PUP UT squ6Tz @WPs auq seq oTTgnd aql •sasodznd jaggo jo '6uTpupgs '5uTjogoue jog sza4eM aTgPbTAPu auq go woggoq aqq asn oq pup 'a4Pgs au4 90 sJ94eM aTgebTAPu aqq sasodind uOT4ea13al TPzaua6 pup 6uTgpoq jog asn oq 'UlTMs 'aggpq 'gums 'usT3 oq ggbTs aqq apnTouT 04 pTau uaaq aApq haus 'saTlagSTg PUP aozaUI -wOo 'uOTgP6TAPu 3o sUIJaq UT pauT3ap ATTeuOTq -TPP14 aje squawasea gsniq oTTgnd (9)„ :auT1400p gsniq oTTgnd aqq pauTPTdxa gjnoD awasdns aq4 '(TL6T) 6SZ 'TSZ PC'TPD 9 au4TuM •A sx1eW UI •,�pngs oTgTquaTos jog sgTun TP0T6oTO3a se spuPTapT4 auq 3o uoTgeAsasajd pue uoTge@JO@J se sasodind eons osTP qnq sasodind TPuoTgTpeJq asauq i�Tuo qou apnTouT 04 s1PaA aq4 nano papupdxa aApq sasodind gsnjq oTTgnd ays '(OL6T) Z8V 'Z9D, PC'TPo C 'TTasueW •A uoeag 5UOq 90 7qTD •saTzausT3 PUP aozaunuoo "(7) There is a growing public recogni- tion that one of the most important public uses of the tidelands - a use encompassed within the tidelands trust - is the preserva- tion of those lands in their natural state, so that they may serve as ecological units for scientific study, as open space, and as envi- ronments which provide food and habitat for birds and marine life, and which favorably affect the scenery and climate of the area. It is not necessary to here define precisely all the public uses which encumber tidelands." The concept of flexibility of the public uses for which the tidelands may be utilized, which was embraced by the California Supreme Court in Marks v. Whitney, should be applicable to the oil revenues derived from the tidelands. C. Application of Trust Principles in Other Cities and Counties. Although the tidelands grants to the City of Long Beach and to Orange County differ in some particulars Fn/9 Fn/9 The Long Beach grant of 1911 was amended in 1925 and 1935 and has been clarified by 1964 legislation discus- sed later in this section. The Orange County "Dana Point" grant of 1961 stated as its purpose the promotion of harbor (continued) CROC 840921 1k 0011ABD 5 from the grant to Hermosa Beach, the basic trust principles are the same. Various court cases involving these entities illustrate the practical application of the above trust principles. 1. City of Long Beach v. Morse, 31 Cal.2d 254 (1947), involved an attempt by the City to use tidelands revenues for general municipal improvements. The California Supreme Court held the diversion improper, invoking general trust principles. The Morse court stated that "the city is a trustee, and as such 'assumes the same burdens and is subject to the same regulations that appertain to other trustees of such trust'" Morse supra, at 257. The court concluded as follows: "The proceeds from the sale of oil and gas from the lands in question may not be used for any purposes other than those specified in the trust conveyances under which the city claims title to the lands. The Legislature specified purposes relating to the harbor that are deemed beneficial to the state as a whole and did not authorize the City of Long Beach to use the corpus or the income of the trust for strictly local improvements." Morse, supra at 262. construction, operation and related purposes. -22- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 2. In Mallon v. City of Long Beach, 44 Cal.2d 199 (1955), the Supreme Court again invoked traditional trust principles. In that case the state legislature had express- ly enacted a partial abandonment of the trust over one-half of the oil and gas proceeds, and the city sought to use these liberated funds for local capital improvements. Expressly analogizing the Long Beach situation to a private trust, the Mallon court stated that a "revocation of the trust results in a reversion of the trust property to the settler." Mallon at 208. Because of this principle, among other reasons, the court held that the liberated funds belonged to the state rather than being available for local municipal purposes. Mallon confirms that tidelands revenue cannot be used for general municipal purposes and gives examples of prohibited uses: "Applying that principle to the present case, we cannot hold that the construction and establish- ment by the City of Long Beach of storm drains, a city incinerator, a public library, public hospi- tals, public parks, a fire alarm system, off-street parking facilities, city streets and highways, and other expenditures that have been authorized to be made from the "Public Improvement Fund," are of such general state-wide interest that state funds -23- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 could properly be expended thereon. Such expendi- tures are for purely "municipal affairs" within the meaning of section 6 of article XI of the Constitu- tion. (See City of Grass Valley v. Walkinshow, 34 Cal.2d 595, 599 [212 P.2d 894] [sewer]; Jardin v. City of Pasadena, 199 Cal. 64, 68 [248 P. 225, 48 A.L.R. 5091 [isolation hospital]; Stege v. City of Richmond, 194 Cal. 305, 312 [228 P. 4611 [city streets]; City of Pasadena v. Paine, 126 Cal.App.2d 93, 98 [271 P.2d 5771 [city library]; Alexander v. Mitchell, 119 Cal.App.2d 816, 826-827 [260 P.2d 2611 [off-street parking facilities]; Perez v. City of San Jose, 07 Cal.App.2d 562, 566 [237 P.2d 548] [city highways]; Beard v. City and County of San Francisco, 79 Cal.App.2d 753, 755 [180 P.2d 744] [public hospital]; Armas v. City of Oakland, 135 Cal.App. 41, 420 [27 P.2d 666, 28 P.2d 422] [fire protection].) Moreover, they are normal expendi- tures for a municipal corporation to make, and to hold that a grant of public monies from the state to defray such expenditures is not a gift within the meaning of section 31 of article IV of the Constitution would render meaningless the express prohibition therein against gifts to "municipal corporations." (44 Cal.2d at 211) ME 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 3. In People v. City of Long Beach, 51 C.2d 875 (1955), the city brought an action to secure a declaration of its right to use trust funds to construct a building on filled tidelands to be leased to the Y.M.C.A. The trial court entered judgment approving the proposed expenditures and lease, and the State appealed. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment in favor of the city, taking note that the specific purpose set forth in the 1935 statute amending the terms of the grant to the City of Long Beach was to promote the "moral and social welfare of seamen, naval officers and enlisted men, and other per- sons engaged in and about the harbor and commerce, fishery and navigation." The Supreme Court held that this amendment was consistent with and in direct aid of the basic trust purpose to establish and maintain a harbor and necessary or convenient related facilities for the "promotion and accommodation of commerce and navigation." While the amended grant to Long Beach spelled out a purpose to promote the moral and social welfare of seamen, and the grant to Hermosa Beach does not, we believe that the court would reach the same conclusion if a similar use should be proposed by Hermosa Beach. The court's reasoning, that the proposed use was in direct aid of and consistent with the trust purposes and that facilities for maritime personnel cannot be distinguished from facilities for ships, -25- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 provides a solid basis for the use on basic trust principles. 4. In State of California Rel. State Lands Commission v. County of Orange, (1982) 134 Cal.App.3d 20, the state brought an action to enjoin the county from spend- ing for its own municipal purposes revenues derived from improvements constructed by the county on tidelands granted to it through a trust grant from the state.Fn/10 The facts were that at a cost of some 12 million dollars of its own funds, the county had completed construc- tion of a small craft harbor at Dana Point, as contemplated by the trust grant. It leased out various concessions at the harbor (food, fuel, entertainment, etc.) and accumulated considerable revenue from these arrangements. These reve- nues were expended on such municipal services as lifeguard services on nearby city beaches, membership in local green- belt commissions and tourists and visitors' bureaus. In 1979-1980 alone, one million dollars of these revenues were spent for such purposes. The state objected to this prac- tice by the county on the ground that the revenues were Fn/10 The purpose of the trust was stated to be the promo- tion of harbor construction at Dana Point, operation of the harbor, and related activities. The state asserted that the revenues should be used on the trust lands. The county argued that the statutory clause allowing it to "collect and retain rents" from improvements it constructed at the harbor authorized its spending of the revenues and that the county's development of the harbor was a form of considera- tion for the continuing receipt of the revenues. -26- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 5 OBVII00 �1I 1Z60b8 -LZ- •9 uoT4oaS 'uoTssaS AieuTpaoei4xg 4SJTd 'V96T 'sgegS '8ET *LID TT/UJ UT sMOTTo3 se pagTjosap pup SC6T pup SZ6T 'TT6T 90 s40e pies uT pagTjosap sesodznd pup sasn gsn1q aqq 90 quawTTTJTn3 aqq 109 AgTO PTes Aq paZTTTgn ATTpOTwouoOa aq ueo pup papeau ST u0e9g 6uoZ 90 A4TD au4 oq pa4eooTTe anogpuTasau anuanai TTo 6uTUTewal auq gpgq spup3 Agajaq a1n:4eTsT6aZ aus„ TT/uduoeag esowsag Jog sauTTapTn6 apTnojd saop anTgTsodsTp qou g6nog4Tp a:ln,4e:4s aql ,'4Tg@u@q pup gsajaquT 'TeOOT w013 pagSTn6 -UT-4sTp sp 'agpgs go ssa-4-4ew aq o-4„ sa-Tn-4Tpuadxa uTe41a0 paseTOap uoTgM gOpag BUOq 90 AgT3 au4 UT spupTapT4 6uTg0a33p a4ngegs p pagopua ajngPTsT6aT au4 V96T uI 'S •spupT pa4UPJ5 au4 04 pa4PTa1 Jo uo pa4pOOT qou squawanoidwT pup sasodind 'saOTn3as jog pasn aq 40u Apw spueTapT4 au4 WOJJ panTsap sanuanaj gPgq ST uoTsTOap auq 3o 4opdwT aus •Aqunoo aqq go sone) UT quaw6pnC aqq paSJanaJ TpaddV 3o gznoD aql •4qunoo aqq 30 Jonp3 UT paTni gznoo jaMoT aql •L�qunoo aqq Aq spunj 3o asn auq uTOCua 04 gTns gg6nolq agpgs aql „•spuPT@PTq quTod eueQ au4 go anTpn gsnjq au4 a0ueuua oq spueTdn quaopCpe anojdwT pup aseuosnd oq io spupT gsnzq aqq uo pasn aq -4snw„ sanuanaz -4sniq gpgq A-4unoo auq PaTJT40u pup 'spupT pa4upJ6 auq oq pa4eTaz zo uo pa4pOOT qou squawanojdwT pup sasodlnd 'saOTnlas jog pasn 6uTaq .. a this act, which are hereby found to be matters of state, as distinguished from local, interest and benefit. (a) The construction, reconstruction, improvement, repair, operation and maintenance of works, lands, waterways, and facilities necessary for the harbor within the boundaries of the harbor district of said city (as said boundaries were defined on April 1, 1956.) (b) The construction, reconstruction repair, operation and maintenance of streets, roadways, bridges and bridge approaches within the boundaries of, or reasonably necessary to provide immediate access to, said harbor district (as such boundaries were defined on April 1, 1956). (c) The construction, reconstruction, repair, operation and maintenance of the bulkheads, piers, earthfills, streets, roadways, bridges, bridge approaches, buildings, structures, recreational facilities, landscapinq, parkinq lots, and other improvements on or adjacent to the Long Beach tidelands or on or adjacent to the Alamitos Beach Park Lands for the benefit and use of said tide- lands or the Alamitos Beach Park Lands. (d) The construction, reconstruction, repair, operation and maintenance of small boat harbors, 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 -28- marine stadiums, maritime museum, marine parks, beaches, waterways, and related facilities, on or adjacent to the Long Beach tidelands or on or adjacent to aquatic recreational areas of the aforesaid nature. (e) The acquisition, filling, improvement, rehabilitation and disposal of lands, which have, prior to January 1, 1964, been damaged by subsi- dence, located in the City of Long Beach westerly of Alamitos Avenue, easterly of the harbor district and southerly of Ocean Boulevard (as said streets and district now exist). (f) The acquisition of property or the rendition of services reasonably necessary to the carrying out of the foregoing uses and purposes. (g) In addition to the foregoing, expen- ditures for any other use or purpose of state, as distinguished from purely local, interest and benefit which are in fulfillment of those trust uses and purposes described in said acts of 1911, 1925 and 1935, and which are approved in advance by the State Lands Commission." (Emphasis added) While this statute is specifically directed to the tidelands grant to Long Beach and makes reference to certain features of Long Beach which may not be applicable anywhere -29- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 else, the statute does declare certain expenditures to be for state, as distinguished from local, interest and benefit and therefore for trust purposes. Fn/12 The courts may well follow this declaration by the legislature as expressing proper state and trust purposes that may be applied to other cities with trust tidelands. The cases and statutes suggest that the following uses may be made of the restricted revenues: Upkeep, maintenance, sanitation and policing of the tidelands and areas comprising a part of the same beach or area. Recreation and sports in the tidelands area and areas used with the tidelands as part of the same beach or area. The construction and maintenance of facilities necessary or convenient to facilitate use of the harbor, or if a harbor district is established, for the use of the harbor district. Construction, reconstruction, repair, operation or maintenance of streets necessary to provide immediate access to the harbor, tidelands Fn/12 The statute requires that the expenditures other than those specifically set out in the statute first be approved by the State Lands Commission. -30- 840921 Ik OOIIABD 5 or harbor district (if any). (This should not be broadly construed to apply to streets generally.) Maintenance of recreational facilities, landscaping, parking lots and other improvements on or adjacent to the tidelands for the use and benefit of the tidelands. Construction and maintenance of small boat facilities on or adjacent to the tidelands. Acquisition of property or rendition of services reasonably necessary for the carrying out of the above uses and purposes. This listing is not intended to be all-inclusive or to preclude other uses which may fall within the trust purposes or benefit the tidelands. Obtaining approval of uses by the State Lands Commission would be advisable to avoid a legal test over the propriety of the uses. VII. WOULD OTHER REVENUE GENERATED BY THE OIL DRILLING INTO THE TIDELANDS (FROM TAXES, FEES, LICENSES, PERMITS) BE RESTRICTED? Revenues to the city arising from the exercise of its police powers and its authority to levy taxes for muni- cipal purposes are not restricted by the fact that drilling -31- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 into or production from tidelands may be involved. This assumes, of course, that the taxes, fees, and requirements for licenses and permits are of general application, are uniformly applied and are not designed to reach tidelands drilling or production in a manner different from any other similar drilling or production operation which might occur in the city. Thus, in our opinion a business license tax applicable to any oil drilling or production in the city could validly be applied to an oil operator who drills into the tidelands and the tax could go into the general fund like other business license taxes. The building fees pro- vided for in the Building Code could validly be collected and could go into the general fund of the city in like manner as other building permit fees. Insofar as the question refers to restrictions unrelated to the tidelands trust, and in particular to the Jarvis -Gann and Gann property tax limitations, our answer is the same as presented in our Final Report dated July 6, 1984. The answer is "No," with certain exceptions. For a detailed answer reference is made to that report. For convenience, the summary answer in that report is repeated here. "With the exceptions noted below, these revenues may be placed in the general fund to be used for general governmental purposes. With the qualifications noted below, -32- 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 -CE- S (18V1100 )iI LZ60VS :apnTouOo am („anT'4PT-4TUI uuPD„ paTTPO-os aq4 -zo „, UOTgTsodo:ld„) UOTgngT-4suo:) PTUJO3 -TTPD aq4 3o HIIIX aToTgzTd 04 goadsal ggTM 'Z 'TTO 3O UOTgonpoid aqq wo13 �qTo aqq q panTaoal saT3TPAOJ 04 UOTgPDTTdde ou aneq pTnoM VIIIX aTOTgJV 'o •4uana SUP UT VIIIX aTOT4=V 3o SUOTgP4TWTT aq4 04 goaCgns aq 4ou pTnoM saa3 ssaoxa aqq 'sasodind Tequauiulanob Telauab JO3 pasn pup puna TPJaua6 aqq UT paoeTd aje saa3 ssaoxa asogq 3T 'uOT4PTn6az 30 Sgsoo aTgeuospai aqq Spaaoxa aa3 ZO asuaoTT aqq gegq quagxa aqq o3 'saugznd *VIIIX aToT31V japun ,xe,4 TPToads„ P agn3Tgsuoo Sou scop aa3 zo asuaoTT eons 'sasodind anuanaj pa4eTa.Iun 303 paTAaT qOu ST PUP tgTATgOe aqq a4PT -nbaj oq SaoTnIas buTpTnoid 3o s4SOO aTgeuospaj aqq paeoxa 4ou saop TTO 3o uoTgonpoid aqq g3TM uOTgoauuoo UT 1�4TD aq4 Aq pabjpgo aa3 4TiuJad 10 asuaoTT Niue 31 'q •sasodind TP4uauiuJanO6 TPZauab io3 pasn aq oq puna TPzaua6 aq4 UT paOeTd aip xeq aqq 3o spaaooid aqq gpgq paprnosd VIIIX aTOTgJV 3O SUOTSTnoid aqq o3 goaCgns aq 4ou pTnoM UOTq -onpoid TTO uO .1�4TD aq4 Aq paTnaT xPI V •P :apnTOuoo am '(„anTgPTgTuI UOTgPgTWTrj xes �gaadojd uupg-sTnspr„ paTTPo-Os aq-4 Jo „£T UOT'4 -TsodoJd,,) VIIIX aToT4JV 04 goadsaj g4TM 'T '(„uuPE)„) v sO („uueD -STAJPr„) Cl uOTgTsodo3d Aq pagoa33p qou azp sanuanal asag4 ; 4b • a. If the city were to levy a tax upon the production of oil, the proceeds of that tax would be subject to the limitations on appropriations set forth in Article XIIIB as in the case of other taxes. b. The proceeds of licenses and permit fees would not be subject to the appropriation limitations, provided they did not exceed the costs reasonably borne by the city in providing the regulation. On the other hand, if the proceeds of the licenses and permit fees did exceed the costs of regulation, such proceeds would be subject to the appropriations limitation. C. Royalties would not be subject to the limitations on appropriations set forth in Article XIIIB." VIII. WHAT RESTRICTIONS WOULD THERE BE ON CHARGES BY THE CITY FOR A SURFACE LEASE? The surface lease or drill site charge or rental must be reasonable. This revenue could be placed in the gen- eral fund and used for general governmental purposes.Fn/13 Fn/13 The State Lands Commission and Attorney General have informally expressed similar opinions. Reference: letter dated August 16, 1983, from Robert G. Collins, Deputy Attorney General, to City Attorney Charles J. Post; letter dated August 10, 1983, from Claire T. Dedrick, Executive Officer, State Lands Commission, to Mrs. Etta A. Simpson, (continued) 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 -34- 5 CBVtt00 �I IMM „*asn s4T 3o anTPn auq JO3 PUP 's4uan9 TTP uT A4a3Ps s4T J09 aTgPTT sT 'aauMo agnTosgp sqT aouejuaddP uT 9TaSwTLI agn4T4suOO 04 SP OS 'uMO STI.( ggTM Agjadojd 4sniq aq4 saT6urw ATTiessaoauun pup ATTn3TTTM Oqm aagsnjq v„ :sMOTTO3 sP saprnozd 9£ZZ § @POD TTATD ST/u3 „'IauuPw Aup uT ' gsniq aqq ggTM pagoauuooun asodznd jaggo Aur log 10 'gT3oid uMo STq jog Agjadojd gsnjq au4 u4TM TPap jo asn qou Apw aagsniq V :SMOTT09 su sapTnojd 6ZZZ § apOD TTnT' *asn TPOOT uMo s4T jog woj3asagq sanuanai sO spuPTapT4 aqq asn oq qou UOTgP6TTgO Tp6aT P iapun ST as;snsq sP AqTD aus VT/u3 •quapTs@J uOPag Psowlag 90 A4TD sv •spOggaw TPSTeaddP pagsTTgeqsa 6uTsn zasTP3ddP paTJTTpnb P Aq pauTwsagap aq APw TPqu@J aTgpuospa.z P pup anTPn 4a3,IJPw JTeJ ays -Agiadosd psPA aoupua4uTpw atI4 3o anTPn 4a3,{JPw ZTP3 aqq uo uzngal aTgpuospaj P aonpoid pTnoM gDTgM appw aq APw a6Jpu0 Tpqual gvT3 P uOTUTdo ino uI •ggoq jo 'sanuanaz T?404 aqq 3o a6Pquaojad P uodn paspq TP4ual P 10 TPquas 4PT3 P saugTa aq Apw a6lpuo asPaT aoP3jns aql ST/--egejpdas qday aq pTnogs a4Ts TTTzp puPTdn aqq go asn UIOJ panT.zap asOgq PUP SpuPTapT4 @qq woz3 panTiap sanuanag •4Oa3Ja 4?q4 6uTAeq asPaT p anozddP oq pagoadxa aq qou pTnogs uoTssTwwoD spupq agpgS aqq pup 'a61Pu0 TP4u9l a4Ts anTssaOxa up q qun000p SqT Oq sanuanaz spuPTapTq 4JanTp AT40alTpuT 4ou 4snw AgTz) aql fiiT/u a4Ts TTT.zp TPT;ua;od auq 30 jauMo AzPgaTsdozd sp PUP spuPTapT4 aq4 3o aa4sniq ggoq sP A4TopdPO TPnp P uT 5UT40P aq pTnoM A4TD GqI 'a4P4S au4 90 aTdoad aqq oq aagsnzq spuPTapT4 se Aqnp s,AgTD aqq go gopajq P paJapTsuOD aq pTnoM aTgpuospal ST gDTgM gPgq JaAO qunowP up 6uT5jpgD � M ; an illustration only and not as an expression of opinion, for example, a site valued at $800,000 and producing an annual return of 12% would yield a rental of $96,000 per year. There is precedent for an alternative method of fixing the rental for an upland site to be used for drilling into the tidelands. The records show that in 1967 the City of Los Angeles leased an uplands drilling site which it owned to a major oil company for drilling into the adjacent tide and submerged lands for a royalty of one-sixth (16 2/30) of the oil produced. A floor was placed under the percentage so that the lease would yield a return of not less than 60 of the fair market value of the drill site, plus taxes. The resolutionadopted by the Board of Public Works provided for 300 of the 16 2/3% royalty, and also 30% of the bonus paid for the lease (subject to a ceiling) to be allocated as consideration for the use of the drill site. The lease was approved by the State Lands Commission. This precedent suggests that a similar plan with respect to the City of Hermosa Beach maintenance yard might be consider- ed. If, on analysis, such an arrangement were adopted and approved, 30% of the lessor's share of oil revenue, with a minimum rental floor, would flow into the City's general fund. The City as trustee would have to make a detailed accounting of all tidelands revenues to the State Lands Mr -11 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 *; Commission each year. The Commission would have authority to examine the City's financial and operating records relating to the production and sale of the oil. [Public Resources Code § 70621 Thank you for the opportunity of serving you in this assignment. Respectfully submitted, %'`:'`-2 %-L---�-LL � G✓ •,v��-t--1.,..; ,��✓t--t��,�-c,�-� u '�t�1�t-c-v� 840921 Ik 0011ABD 5 -37- ROBERT N. HACKER, INC. /)PI".[rnm J,Apk)ruIion 4907 TOPANGA CANYON BOULEVARD WOODLAND HILLS, CA. 91364 OFFICE (818) 884-4071 RESIDENCE (818) 348-2115 Re: Hermosa Beach City of Hermosa Beach Civic Center Hermosa Beach, CA. 90254 ATTN: Anthony B. Drewry Richards, Watson, Dreyfuss & Gershon Thirty Eighth Floor 333 South Hope Street Los Angeles, CA. 90071 Gentlemen: At your request I have made a supplemental study of subject prospect with particular emphasis on the question of past hydrocarbon drainage from the Hermosa Beach tidelands to the Redondo Beach tidelands. I sdbmit herewith two maps to illustrate my conclusions with regard to the feasibility of de- veloping the Hermosa Beach tidelands from the City yard as well as past drainage from the Hermosa Beach tidelands as follows: 1. OIL PRODUCTION MAP REDONDO BEACH OIL FIELD: This map portrays cumulative production through 1975) of areas within the Redondo Beach tidelands adjacent to the Hermosa Beach tidelands. As can be seen, areas along the property line have cumulative production of less than 50,000 barrels to as much as 200,000-300,000 barrels. These production trends may be confidently projected across the property line on to the Hermosa Beach tidelands. It can be seen that at least 10 of the Redondo Beach wells bottomed within 660 feet (10 acre spacing) of the Hermosa Beach tidelands and some as close as 100 feet from this line. Based on these data, there is absolutely no ques- tion that Redondo Beach has drained hydrocarbons (oil and gas) from the Hermosa Beach tidelands. 2. CONTOUR MAP, TOP MAIN ZONE: This map portrays the sub -surface structure at the top of the Main Zone. (2) ROBERT N. HACKER As can be seen, the structure dips to the north east in which the south corner of the Hermosa Beach tidelands lies at less than 1500 feet below sea level while the north corner lies at 2500 feet below sea level. Within this depth interval, oil has been produced at Redondo Beach and there is every reason to believe that similar production will exist on the Hermosa Beach tidelands. The only possible reason that com- mercial production could not be established over the entire Hermosa Beach tidelands would be a lessening of the fracture pattern of the productive shales such that the formation would be too tight to give up fluids. Although there is no reason to expect such a change, wells will have to be drilled and tested to determine with absolute certainty the extent of fracturing at Hermosa Beach tidelands. 3. FEASIBILITY OF DEVELOPING HERMOSA BEACH TIDELANDS: On the Top Main `Lone contour map I have super- imposed circles which show the maximum potential bottom hole locations of wells to fully develop the Hermosa Beach tidelands. There are 35 such potential locations based on a 10 acre drainage patterns These wells, drilled from the City yard drillsite, would be slant drilled and therefore the exact location and number of wells would be modified as indicated as each well was drilled and the information integrated into the development picture. The maximum horizontal distance these wells would have to be drilled from the City yard is approximately 6000 feet. This slant drilled distance was achieved numerous times at Redondo Beach with no great difficulty. In my judgement there is no question that commercial production can be developed on the Hermosa Beach tidelands. i Vey truly yours, j' Robert N. Hacker Registered Geologist California #443 Sept. 11, 1984 (1b u.w `t •:,, t .17 UJ J l .� Ute" �. 1 N 006 - moot, // N OOb - N00£ N 00£ - )qOOZ / o \ H OOZ - x001 ••. \ N 0 01 - N 0 S l u N 0S uoyl ssal i NO113n008d 110 j j. 4-1313 HOd38 OaNOd3�1 PROSPeCT t W TRACT NO, 733 WB. 17-92 1 PL.In w ` 71" — 20 J 15 3 y QQ 14 u O O ., ©'.s.' N y p N ST ^ : v b N siMeJ.<sE . ST. ro _ � Q N � N W I jV� G O CARLSON o LN. eo '19 ., V� rlf O O 0 0 2S 24 2 22 21 3 i961H Y ft v �O ° $ O 21 �n 0 ro 36 N Q$ 3� --- • O o 0 Iv 8 39 37 A ,^ _ =,^-oI V �1 F 17 O 19 20 WK .O IS 10 4 V1 4 , ° .o V•VNO 0 20 NO N �O ao --- in 10 11 12 � y,. �2 �/, Kvvs � V• '^^ O IB V• W �-3 �( V♦a� U d WO _ S To 51. N N a O 17 o Q Ie U • ' — 15 S� Owe O ; N Q ----N 43 m PROSPeCT t W TRACT NO, 733 WB. 17-92 1 {, � T � - tom, �L r •�, � r �` �. 4� AF T F - '�� -_ � l `'` '• _ _ .!`^ .,� � � �_� - = Y rte'? 44- 42 �_a: _+ •do- 'b. '•�. J• 1� ,. - _ -- J+�1'.•- � - n' _ �- .�.; �_. -ry f��� �_r-�5...-,. py[ - •� °a �'�' fir. _ - � � - 1, - _a. � •- - � s �.. �� • ' �'=n- ��� CIT ml -71 oz � s � � _.,. .J` '�- _ ,` � " � Vit• _ LI �- i8 l - •� 'p' L ti --- .`� F F. , � t� �( '-' ., { _ ; _. ,r ��s �,� 'z .xray r �• .�,� sa�_. yr •'� _ _ -'-. r^- _ .� -.3_. • .'F �-�+-4'�rr�,�•.v !r �--c�i'- � a• � ,} '1 _ - ' � .: :r"� J ,eat j•� �,r — -'. �� t �' - -- - -- ——f • - — — _ — _ —— _ _ _ 0 Z6 -LI '8'W EEL ON 1OV8-L � r f E2 LS ��" iib=0w $ d°x, �✓ ...,�. �y ov� W Q aq s (O3dsO&d o H19 E S a s � H,.L i. 8 NLL �r-�, U � / s +° Al l - .\ � ° ! -tea #`(1A_! 'a. ®'d//\oma �`°``■�ƒ\ . - - o* •��_ @\:I� % . . e� e/ � \� /� . •\ ..� _ %ILI" . . . .aJ \g§ /� " 1 9 ;f- � Al l .\ ° ! -tea m � D . � » . \� � � ,,OLLO,NELL AVE t co vioo"Xt4s > o 3AV -As 00 —0-D, '117018 IND all i6D ,,OLLO,NELL co o 3AV H 26 -LI .9'W 15 s I EEL ON 17VU-L >� f2 1 5 r om te092 Oo �+�✓r°S �' V T i a _ H19S 3'1 b os 1 6 1J3dSObd o 019 S S 11?•�- l� vu �- 9 • au u.m.$sdio. 30ti7 py£ U is u 5 )oQ`% bf a ,4L 6a�� •Q �Q O E fie, S �� oO] O s99✓! '0' / Y;=!©' es 13 ®• ` .1�' � im Isi S 5 �Z �•% y 5 oy `t.�0"O oya, • \f nr\ srs] rO v ]• w N'j° Sni � S 22 G 2+ iofl .SS 7 6\ oZ..e. 6< S s o 6i \ 5 \ •5 9 � _ oe l N N1S 15 s I rya r N a _ H19S H 0 e E© H1L D October 18, 1984 HONORABLE MAYOR and MEMBERS of the REGULAR MEETING of t HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL October 23, 1984 PROSPECT HEIGHTS SCHOOL Recommendation The Planning Commission recommends rezoning Lots 5-12 of the Hollowell Tract and Lots 23-31 of the Dillon Tract from unzoned to R-2, PD with a maximum development of 15 units: General Plan designation changed from open space to Medium Density. Staff concurs with the Planning Commission with the exception of Lot 12 of the Hollowell Tract which staff recommends be acquired by the City to be maintained as permanent open space. The City Manager has some additional thoughts - see page 4 Note. Background The School District asked for a correction of NS 517 to amend the zoning of Lots 1.0, 11, and 12 of the Hollowell Tract and Lots 30 and 31 of the Dillon Tract from open space to unzoned. The Planning Commission reviewed the request and made a recommendation that the entire site (with the exception of the open space property the City has purchased) be rezoned to R-2, Planned Development, with a maximum of 15 units allowed. The Planning Commission adopted a statement of overriding considerations and certified the adequacy of the EIR on August 27, 1984. Analysis The Planning Commission and staff recommendations of 1975 (that were implemented in NS 517) were based on the assumption that the five lots in question were not occupied by any buildings. The minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of September 22, 1975, indicate that for the Prospect Heights site the boundary 1 between the unzoned portion and the open space portion is a line to be drawn at the buildings. The School District is asking for a correction in NS 517 because the legal description in that ordinance fails to correctly describe the property according to the intent of the Planning Commission: the built-up portion extends south to the retaining wall (see attached map) and NS 517 does not coincide with this. However, even if NS 517 were corrected to reflect the actual placement of the buildings, it was clearly intended by the Planning Commission and the City Council that Lot 12 was to be designated as open space: it is south of the retaining wall. Additionally, an "unzoned" designation is assigned when a property's future utilization is undetermined. In this case, the property is in the middle of a residential area and the most reasonable zoning for this site would be a residential one. The zoning should reflect the use the City desires to be implemented on that site. An "unzoned" designation, therefore, is not appropriate. Hence, two issues must be resolved. The first issue is that of the fate of lot 12 of the Hollowell Tract. It was intended to be (and is designated as such) open space. The City, however, did not purchase it along with the other nine lots south of the retaining wall. Perhaps negotiation could be conducted between the City and the School District to resolve this question. The second issue isone of the unzoned lots. Merely correcting NS 517 to "unzoned" for lots 10 and 11 of the Hollowell Tract and lots 30 and 31 of the Dillon Tract does not solve the problem of proper planning/zoning. The Planning Commission recommended R-2, PD for these lots but placed a maximum allowable development at 15 units. If the School District was granted their request (all 4 lots in question changed fromopen space to unzoned) then they would 2 be allowed 16 units with no Planning Commission review required. Several questions were raised at the 10-9-84 City Council meeting. One issue raised was that of Proposition EE. This measure was passed in 1980 by the voters of Hermosa Beach and, in essence, it provides that in situations where zoning and General Plan designations do not coincide the designation that specifies the lowest density shall prevail. This sector of the City is affected by this measure due to the fact that several block groups are zoned R-2 but the General Plan designation is Low Density. The General Plan designation for Prospect Heights will need to be changed from open space to some other designation regardless of how many units are allowed or what zoning is specified. Hence, the zoning and General Plan designations for the Prospect Heights property will be consistent. However, such designations may differ from the surrounding area. For example, if the City Council took action to rezone this site to R-2 and medium density, the zoning would be consistent with that of the blocks to the east, north, and west. The General Plan designation of medium density would be dissimilar to the Low Density that is currently specified for most of that portion of the City. Proposition EE would not affect this property, however, because whatever changes in zoning and General Plan designations are made will be internally consistent: i.e. R-1 zoning will get a low density designation, R-2 zoning will get a medium density designation, and so on. The existing uses of the surrounding properties are predominately single family dwelling units with a fair sprinkling of duplexes. The Planning Commission recommends an R-2, PD zoning with a General Plan Designation of Medium Density (to conform with R-2) and a maximum development of 15 units. The Commission felt that a Planned development 3 designation would ameliorate the situation whereby a row of 19' wide houses are built on 25' wide lots. Additionally, the Planning Commission will be able to review the project before approval is given. The EIR for this project must first be certified as adequate. Staff is recommending that Lots 5-11 of the Hollowell Tract and Lots 23-31 of the Dillon Tract be rezoned to R-2, PD with a maximum development of 15 units; and that the General Plan be amended to Medium density. Kim Reardon -Crites Planning Assistant CONCUR: See Note Gregory T. Meyer City Manager Citv Manaqer Note: There are some other considerations: 1. What "commitments" have been made to the property owner vis-a-vis prior District/City meetings and actions? 2. What is the current position, or "demand" of the property owner? 3. Has adequate thought been given to zones such as R -2B? In summary, I think it would be prudent to not conclude the hearing until after there is a formal joint meeting between the City and the School District? r In NOIIVIUOANI QNIlO110HOVE STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS August 22, 1984 The California Environmental Quality Act requires a public agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to approve the project. The City of Hermosa Beach has determined that the unavoidable environmental risks of this project are acceptable when balanced against the benefits of this project. In making this determination, the following public benefits were considered or decisions made: 1. In the event that the Mello -Roos ballot measure fails (thereby leaving the City bereft of funds by which to purchase open space) the rezoning of these properties will allow some development in order to realize the gain of the remainder as permanent open space. 2. The rezoning will be compatible with the surrounding area. 3. The proposed project represents a recycling of underutilized urban land where adequate utilities, facilities, and services are available. 4. The majority of impacts associated with this project are of a cumulative nature and considered potentially significant only in the context of regional growth. The project's incremental contribution to these impacts is considered minimal and acceptable from a regional perspective. 11911 f6NLr`_i ry_ i cti O N W �� z 3 0 •Hrl co , - 0 0 R tjco a 6' o W a o d d O 0 r{ 0 -P � H 0 24 � 0 ° N a c v l 2 3� f � HOLLOW ELL ; �•„ f ' ., •►5 •• �O<<o N t4j' I ` 3- 11 -30 '1130 �' 1 O 61 -7 O 20 2 31 4 , o .v r4pi 86 ION 31 I , 1 35 ; 17 32 ' 2 Q/ 0 31 7 � � 6 2g _`- � 7 2 O JQ ii ) 33 �' 21 22 23 24 25 26 - y, l0 34 Y ST GENTRY (E) co� 0 co+� H �a0 coc TRACT NO. 5209 a M.B. 91-34 f�i'4c•.•t c r r ��ri! 1 nth/f—I ! 7--)/I/`T MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Tuesday, October 23, 1984, at the hour of 8:00 P.M. CLOSED SESSION - 6:12 P.M. Present -Brutsch, Cioffi, DeBellis, Wood (arrived 7:10 P.M.), Mayor Barks Absent - None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Violet Isgreen ROLL CALL Present - Brutsch, Cioffi, DeBellis, Wood, Mayor Barks Absent - None 1. CONSENT CALENDAR ACTION - To approve the Consent Calendar items (a) through (q). Motion Mayor Barks, second Brutsch. So ordered noting a "NO" vote by Councilman Wood on the adoption of Ordinance No. 84-777 (item q). (a) Approval of Minutes: Regular meeting of the City Council held on October 9, 1984. ACTION - To approve minutes. (b) Demands & Warrants: October 23, 1984 ACTION - To approve Demands & Warrants Nos. 15188 through 15319 inclusive noting voided warrants 15192 and 15289. (c) City Treasurer's Report: June, 1984 ACTION - To receive and file. (d) City Treasurer's Report: July, 1984 ACTION - To receive and file. (e) City Treasurer's Report: August, 1984 ACTION - To receive and file. (f) Cancellation of Warrants: October 23, 1984 ACTION - To approve cancellation of Warrants No. 014804 and 015024. (g) Approval of Final Parcel Map No. 16164: Three -unit condo- minium located at 630-632 Ardmore Avenue. 1 - Minutes 10-23-84 V8 -CZ -OT sagnuzW - Z •aTTj pue aATaoaa os - NOII3V *ftH L `aagwaqdaS :SuTgaodad aan4Tpuadx3 (d) •aTTJ pue aATaoaa oZ - NOII3V •�26L `aagwaqdaS :2uTgaoda8 anuana8 (o) •aTT3 pue aATaoaa oZ - NOIZOy •t26L `aagwaqdaS :gaoda8 aaanseail AgTO (u) •aTT3 pue aATaoaa os - NOIIDV 'tr86L `aagwaqdaS :soTgsTgegS aoTTod (w) •gquow auq jo Aep gsaTJ auq uo aTgeAed uquow aad 00-L09`L$ 3o agea auq qe ('qj 'bs 09L`,7) LL pue 9L `trL swood jo asn auq ao3 S86L `08 aagwaqdaS Suipua pue te6L `L aagogo0 SUTouawwoD sgquow uanaTa Jo poTaad e aoj uoTgezTueSaO TeaS aa4se3 pue goeag esowaaH 30 AgTO auq uaaMgaq quawaaaSy aseaq auq anoadde oZ - NOIZOy 'h86L 19L aagogo0 paqep saoanosad AgTunwwoO 3o quawgaed@G `aogoaaia `ueiagseW •W eueTy woa3 wnpueaowaW •aaquaO AgTunwwoO ge sTeaS aagse3 ggTM quawaaaSy aseag JO Tenoaddy (T) •aTTJ pue antaaaa os - NOII0V •ti86L `aagwaqdaS :gaoda8 AgTATgoy quawgaed@G SuTpTTng (:�) 'aTT3 Pue aATaoaa oZ- NOII3V swagl epuaSy aangnA aATgequas (C) •aTTJ pue aATaoaa oZ - NOII3V 'tr86L `8L aagogoO paqep a@A@W -1 AaoSaaO aaSeueW AgTO woa3 wnpueaowaW :gaodad AgTATgoy aaSeueW AgTO (T) •aTTJ pue aATaoaa oZ - NOII0V !luzgaaW t78 -SZ -6 atagq qe ua:�es suotgoy aapa0 agnuTW as tr86L 18z aagwaqdaS paqep saosTAaadnS do paeog woa3 aaggau (q) u'VIN8OEIlV3 `HOy39 VSOW�13H `3nN3Ay 38OWG8V z89-089 Zy Q31VDO'I .LO3P02id WnINIWOQNOO IINA-8 y 800 tr9 L 9 L *ON dyW 'I308Vd 20 'IVAOHddy UNI3 ONIINVH0 `VIN803I7VO 9HOV32 VSOWH3H 30 )=3 3H.L 30 'IIONAOO )=3 3HI 20 NOII -n7os38 yu PaTgTqua 89Ltr-t 9 *ON uoTgnTosad qdope oZ - NOI.LOy (q) ORDINANCE NO. 84-777 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, AMENDING THE ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION FOR 'LOTS 10-22 INCLUSIVE OF BLOCK "K" OF TRACT NO. 1686 OF SOUTH SCHOOL SITE FROM UNZONED, OPEN SPACE TO R-3PD, HIGH DENSITY. Submitted for waiver of further reading and adoption. ACTION - To waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 84-777 entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, AMENDING'THE ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION FOR LOTS 10-22 INCLUSIVE OF BLOCK "K" OF TRACT NO. 1686 OF SOUTH SCHOOL SITE FROM UNZONED, OPEN SPACE TO R-3PD, HIGH DENSITY." Motion Wood, second Mayor Barks. So ordered noting a "NO" vote by Councilman Wood on the adoption. 2. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC a) Letter from Hermosa Beach Police Officers Association requesting a Public Hearing the first regular City Council meeting of November, 1984. ACTION - To set a Public Hearing for the first regular City Council meeting in November granting the request of the Hermosa Beach Police Officers Association to address the City Council. Motion Wood, second Brutsch. So ordered. FINAL ACTION - To advertise this item as a display ad in the South Bay Daily Breeze as well as the Easy Reader. Motion Mayor Barks, second DeBellis. So ordered noting the "NO" vote by Councilman Wood. b) Letter from Jaime Bogane, 317 Culper Court received October 19, 1984. ACTION - To receive and file. Motion Mayor Barks, second Wood. So ordered. c) Letter from Mrs. Walter J. Taylor, 454 Hollowell dated October 9, 1984 re Prospect Heights School. ACTION - To receive and file. Motion Mayor Barks, second Wood. So ordered. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3. REZONING OF PROSPECT HEIGHTS SCHOOL. Memorandum from Planning Assistant Kim Reardon -Crites dated October 18, 1984. The staff report was presented by Planning Assistant Kim Reardon -Crites. - 3 - Minutes 10-23-84 t8 -8Z -OT sagnuTW - tt - t PaseaaouT - s4u2TaH qoadsoad pue anssT sTuq qe BuT>100T UT AouagsTsuoo ao3 passe - gaaaqS ugOZ - 6LZL `aapuos wTr aTAgsa3TT s,asTa auo -awos ao3 Aed oq suaZTgTo and aTe3 qou `suaZTgTo oq A4TTTq -Tsuodsaa seu TTounoO AgTO - gsaaoTTTH 0902 `Aaawg uTnTeO aoueuTpao pasodoad JO uoTgeDIJTaeTo ao3 Paxse - gaaagS uqL - ttttL L `suT22009 TTTM aa2aaw 4suTe2e - saeaA aOJ ATTweJ UT uaaq anew sgoT goof -5z xis - epuTq egao)� `gaaaqS uTdnq ESZS `TTeOoW anugay SuTaaugejpueaB pagsaBSns `sgoT TenPTnTPuT TTas og ggBTa anew PTnogs - aoeTd uqL - ML `gBTeH saTaego aaaM aaOaaw qoT auq gsuTeBe SuTNeadS uoTgeoTJTaeTo ao3 Passe - aaowpay ttLEZ `uasuaBaor aneQ aaSaaw JO aone,I UT - aoeTd ugtte - OZ9 `>ioaT3 qog waTgoad BuTNaed passaags - aoeTd ugtte - OZ9 `uosTTTy aunr sgoT JO 2uTBaaw squeM - aoeTd ugttZ - SL9 `saageM A88 pausTuTwTp squ2Ta Agaadoad - aoeTd ugtte - SE9 `aaTgng anagS uoTgengTs algTssodwT - aoeTd ugttZ - SZL `AaTTB qed •panTonuT saTgaadoad 00£ ATagewTxoadde - uaaouoo pasneo aSueuo Meq agegS - aoeTd ugtte - Eh9 `aa4Ta8 uopao0 :aaaM aaSaaw qoT auq 3o aone3 uT >leads oq paeMaoj BuTwoO •pauado SEM BuTaeaH oTTgnd aus •sagTa3-uopaea8 WIN guegsTssy BuTuueTd Aq paquasaad sem gaodaa jjegs aq,L •tt861 `LL aagogo0 pagep sagTaO-uopaead WIN guegszssV OuTuueTd woaj wnpueaowaW •S.LOq Q8V(INV.L(SgflS 30 83588W It •Paaapao OS •sTTTagaQ puooas `2>1aeg aOAeW uoTgoW •paTTegsuT sT aagwaw paeoq Toouos ugjT3 auq aagde PTaq aq oq `sanssT A4T3/ToouoS aaggo se TTM se anssT sTuq ssnosTp og paeog ToouoS auq ugTM 2uTgaaw quToC e gsanbaa oZ - NOI1OV IVNI3 s>Jaeg aOAeW `TJJOTO - S80N PooM `sTTTagaQ `gosgnag - S2)V uosgnag puooas `pooM uoTgoW •wagT sTuq aTgeq 01 - NOI13V •pasoTo seM SuTaeaH oTTgnd auZ •sgoT jo aagwnu uo sasnou jo aagwnu uT aDuego pauoTgsanb - gaaaqS ugOL - OS `aeadS PToaeH •Agaadoad AgTO pue Teuosaad jo BuTuozuMop gsuTeSe - gaaaqS ugOL - ttLZL `seWIS weTTTTM •aaMod TTounoO AgTO jo asn aTejun `BuTuoZ Z-8 oq sgoaCgo - gaaaqS uqL - 7SLL `gang ewTTM.. :aaaM >leads oq paeMaoj BuTwoO •pauado SEM OuTaeaH oTTgnd auL t8 -£Z -OT sagnUTW •ueTd AOTTOd aug 3o sguawaTa agg uo waTJ siu Aq paaedaad sTGATeue aqq uo uoTgequasaad gaogs e apew `sguegTnsuoo `>joippad gpueag sdilTTgd 3o waT3 aqq jo sn2aa2 wir •aW •aaAaW aaBeueW AgTO Aq paquasaad sem gaodaa jjegs aqy 'h86L `8L aagOgo0 pagep sagTaO-uopaeag wzx quegstssV BuTuueTd wOJJ wnpueaowaW •NV'ld XOI'IOd V38V NMO.LNMOQ 'S 'W'd OL:OL qe pauanu009a BuTgaaw aT41 'W'd 00:OL qe PaTTeo sem ssaoaa y pooh pue gosqnag Aq sagon 0%i BuTgou paaapao oS TJJOT0 puooas `sTTTagaQ uoTgoW •paaiq uaaq seg aogoaaTQ SUTuueTd Mau aqq uagM paTpngs aq oq weaBoad xaom e se quawgaedaQ BuTuueTd aqq oq Noeq wagT sTgq aaJaa oZ - N0II3V IVNI3 *pooh uewTTounoO Aq 040A uONu e BuTgou paaapao OS 'TJJOTO puooas `sTTTagaQ UOT40W •uoTgow uTew aqq awooaq oq uoTgow agngTgsqnS - NOIIDV •paaTq uaaq seq aogoaaTQ BuluueTd mau aqq uagm paTpngs aq oq weaBoad >Iaom e se quawgaedaQ BuTuueTd auq oq xoeq wagT sTgq aGJaa oZ - NOIZOW g.LnILLSHS gosqnag puooas `pooM uoTgoW •uoTssTwwoO BuTuueTd aqg jo uoTgepuawwooaa aqq aTT3 pue anTaoaa oZ - NOI.LDV Q390d08d 'pasOTo sem BuTaeaH oTTgnd aq,L aangni aqq uT quem am op Noogs BuTsnoq gegm sT anssT sTaa3 'sgoT 400,-5z omq uo auo snsaan got qooJ-05 auo uo awoq e jo anTen auq ageB -TgsanuT TTounoO pagsaBBns - gaaaqS gq6 - SL `uopTagS Nong0 :BuTMOTTOJ aqq Aq pagou sem uoTgTsod ON aTejun sT aaBaaw sTaGj - anTaQ gsaaoTTTH OhOz `zeTQ 90r BuTpeaBumop sTgq sTTeo - gaaaqS ggOL - trLZL 'sew's weTTTTM TTew paTJTgaao Aq auop aq gsnw uoTgeoTJTgou `aaBaaw sasoddo - gaaaqS qqL - ZSLL `gang ewTTM sgoT aaq aBaaw oq quem Aagq mou pue L -d oq z -d wo-ii paBuego Agaadoad aaq - ssauaTejun passaags - anuany uapToO 6hSL `gPTwgoS AggoaoQ aaBaaw qoT sasoddo - pueagS OOS� `uawnaN aTeQ UO BUT02 sem gegm mou>t oq paquem - asnoq auo ggTm 'z -d `sgoT Z sumo - aoeTd qqL - L8ZL `alAl weTTTTM S86L TTqun gseaT qe JJO qnd aq pTnogs sTgq sTaa3 - moTTa3Buog S99/6S9 `>ieTjnx gogng eaae aqq uT AgTsuap ggtm waTgoad ou sT aaagq sTaa3 - goadsoad 90ee `aan100W-AJeO' goedwT aTggTT aneq TTTm AgTsuap v8-8Z-oT sagnUTW t. ti. s,AgTD aqq anoadde qou saop uotsszwwo0 suotgeoiunwwo0 Tea9pa3 auq 3T geuq Buzpugsaapun auq ugTm •A*l aTgeo aaaogS Aq pagsanbaa se aseaaouz agea %Z auq anoaddy •L :TTouno0 AgT3 auq S26L `L Aaenuer aAtgoajja geuq uotgepuawwooaa jdegs auq anoadde oZ - N0Il3V •pasoTo OEM OuzaeaH ozTgnd auq `paeMaoJ Buiwoo auo ON •pauado OEM ButaeaH o?Tgnd aqj •uotgepuawwooaa 33egs auq oq uoTgoaCgo ou peq Aaqq pagegs `uotstAaTal aTgeo aaaogS 2utquasaadaa `anuany ewol eJTW LOE `TTesey Aaeq •aW •uooN ueor aogoaaTa saotnaaS Teaauao Aq paquasaad OEM gaodaa jjegs aqj •tr86L `6 aagogoo pagep uooN ueor aogoaaTQ saoTAaaS Teaaua0 woaJ wnpueaowaW •S86L L 7,gVANHr HAI -1323d3 IN3WH380V RHI NI QHQIA08d SV SHHA OISVe NI 3SV380NI �Z FI S332 HSIHONVHA NI 3SV2H3NI %e V 30 NOIlVdIOIINV NI QNV ZH'IZno 8Hd oS • S$ oz 1371no 83d oS • �$ -WOHA S_32- LNflO33V 'IVI O -83WWOO 1371AO 83d HHI ES` 383NI 01 Al 372VO 8H801S )�g IS2n038 •9 pooh `uosgn-ag - SHON s>Jaeg aoAeW `STjTagaQ `TJJOTO - S3)iV zJJo.0 puooas `s>Iaeg uozgoW •S6L`9$ 3o qunowe auq ut saangTpuadxg aATgoadsoad woaj aajsueaq uotgezadoadde ue aq TTTm stgl •0oo`EZ$ oq SOz19L$ woaj qunowe auq Buiseaaaut pue ueTd ADTTod oq uotgeTnoaT3 otjdeal woaj stsegdwa auq 2uTDuego `saotnaaS Teuozssajoad quaw -gaedaQ BuzuueTd aqq aapun q@Dpnq S8-tr7,2 auq u? qunowe stgg ageooTTe oZ •uotgepuawwooaa uoz2stwwo0 BuzuueTd auq oq quensand eaae uMoquMop aatqua auq aOJ ueTd Ao?Tod e doTanap oq 000`�Z$ ageooTTe oZ •Z •uMoquMop aoJ ueTd A0TTod e ggTM paaooad oq Aq?O 'L :uozgoaTa t26L `LL iagwaoaG auq 2UTMoTTOJ Aep auq paquawaTdwz aq uotgepuawwooaa auq geuq uotgeTndtgs auq ggTM sMoTTOJ se uotgepuawwooaa jjegs auq qdope oy - N0Il3V •pasoTo OEM ButaeaH ozTgnd aqj ueTd aagseW e anew oq Aaessaoau aq qou Aew qt paqeqs - gaaagS ggOL - OS `aeadS TeH •„Suzggawos„ op pTnogs TTouno0 AgT3 sTaGJ - gaaagS q46 - SZ `uopTagS >ionu0 suotszoap Buz:�ew uz paATonut aq sassauzsnq qaT - gaaagS puZ - LOLL `uo4g2Taa0 aa208 aagga9oq suozstoap a>Jewpue seapt doTanap oq UOT091WWOO OutuueTd aqq ggTM aaggaBoq ggSnoaq aq pTnogs aTdoad ssautsnq qT@J - gaaagS qqL - 7SLL `gang ewTTM :aaaM heads oq paeMaoj Buzwo0 •pauado OEM But..ieaH otTgnd aqj request for a two percent increase in franchise fees, Storer Cable will rescind the planned rate increase in basic fees. 2. Increase the per outlet commercial account fee to $5.50/outlet/month. Motion DeBellis, second Cioffi. So ordered. 7. PROPOSED ORDINANCE ADDING A SECTION TO THE ZONING CODE DEFINING LOT COVERAGE. Memorandum from Planning Assistant Kim Reardon -Crites dated October 17, 1984. The Public Hearing was opened. No one coming forward, the Public Hearing was closed. ACTION - To waive full reading of Ordinance No. 84-778 entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADDING TO THE ZONING CODE, SECTI-ON 229.1 LOT COVERAGE." Motion Wood, second Brutsch. So ordered. FINAL ACTION - To introduce Ordinance No. 84-778 with a change on line 20 to read "not exceeding a five-foot pro- jection". Motion Wood, second Brutsch. So ordered. MUNICIPAL MATTERS 8. TRANSIT REPORT - ESEA SHUTTLE. Memorandum from Planning Assistant Kim Reardon -Crites dated October 17, 1984. Not heard. 9. SOUTH SCHOOL PARKING LOT STATUS REPORT. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 8, 1984. ACTION - To receive and file. Motion DeBellis, second Brutsch. So ordered. 10. SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION - DECEMBER 11, 1984. Memorandum from City Clerk Kathleen Reviczky dated October 18, 1984. The staff, report was presented by City Manager Meyer. a. Resolution ordering canvass to be made by the City Clerk - date change. ACTION - To adopt Resolution No. 84-4769 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUPERSEDING RESOLUTION NO. 84-4764, ORDERING THE CANVASS OF THE SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION 7 - Minutes 10-23-84 TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1984, TO BE MADE BY THE CITY CLERK." Motion Mayor Barks, second Brutsch. So ordered. b. Resolution establishing voting precincts and polling places and fixing compensation for the Special Municipal Election on December 11, 1984. ACTION - To adopt Resolution No. 84-4770 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING VOTING PRECINCTS AND POLLING PLACES, APPOINTING PRECINCT BOARD MEMBERS AND FIXING COMPENSATION FOR THE SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION OF THE CITY ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1984 CALLED BY RESOLUTION NO. 84-4757 OF THE CITY COUNCIL." Motion Mayor Barks, second Brutsch. So ordered. 11. FILING OF GRANT RE ABANDONED RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY: TRANS- PORTATION PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT TP&D), TRANSIT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 19, 1984. ACTION - To approve the staff recommendation authorizing the City Manager to file for a Transportation Planning and Development grant to acquire abandoned railroad right-of-way for public transportation purposes. Motion Mayor Barks, second Wood. So ordered. 12. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS REMOVED FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION None 13. MEETING OF THE HERMOSA BEACH VEHICLE PARKING DISTRICT COMMISSION Not heard 14. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER a. Gould/27th Street Traffic Circulation: Status Report. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 19, 1984. Not heard b. Request for Closed Session 11-13-84. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 19, 1984. 15. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL a. Railroad Right -of -Way - Councilman Wood Not heard 4 - 8 - Minutes 10-23-84 RON c. 0 e. Child Abuse Subcommittee Report - Councilman Cioffi Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 19, 1984. Councilman Cioffi reported that this committee had met numerous times and a concensus was reached regarding the need for increased awareness. Three proposals had. been received. The staff recommendation calls for hiring a coordinator at $18,000-$22,000/year and sub- contracting with four non-profit agencies experienced in the field of child abuse. ACTION - To approve the proposal for child abuse prevention as submitted by the Child Abuse Subcommittee dated October 22, 1984. Motion Cioffi, second Mayor Barks. So ordered noting the "NO" vote by Councilman Wood. Pacific Coast Highway Parking District Subcommittee Report - Councilman Wood Not heard. Community Development Block Grant Program 1985-88. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 19, 1984. ACTION - To reconsider the City Council's decision on CDBG program for 1985-1988. Motion Cioffi, second Mayor Barks. So ordered noting "NO" votes by Brutsch and Wood. FINAL ACTION - To instruct the City Manager to send a letter to the Community Development Block Grant of Los Angeles County stating our decision to reenter a contractural agreement with them, this to be done only on the basis of the swapping of the allocated funds. Motion DeBellis, second Cioffi. So ordered noting "NO" votes by Brutsch and Wood. Status of City Council Conference Expenses. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 19, 1984. Not heard f. Resolution - Sister City - 17 Year Anniversary. ACTION - To adopt Resolution No. 84-4771 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, COMMEMORATING THE SEVENTEENTH ANNIVERSARY OF THE SISTER CITY RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AND LORETO, BAJA CALIFORNIA, MEXICO." Motion Mayor Barks, second Brutsch. So ordered. - 9 - Minutes 10-23-84 .T g. City Council Meetings - November, 1984. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 19, 1984. ACTION - To hold the regular City Council meeting on November 13, 1984. Motion Wood, second Brutsch. So ordered. FINAL ACTION - To hold the regular City Council meeting on November 27, 1984. Motion Wood, second DeBellis. So ordered. h. First City Council Meeting, December, 1984. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 19, 1984. ACTION - To approve the City Manager's recommendation to reaffirm that its first regular meeting for December will be December 13 at 7:30 P.M. and schedule a second meeting on December 18, 1984 at 7:00 P.M. for the canvass of the vote from the December 11, 1984 election. Motion Mayor Barks, second Wood. So ordered. i. Report from Petroleum Consultants. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated October 22, 1984. ACTION - To distribute the final report on slant drilling to appropriate individuals of the Oil Recovery Commission, the Chamber of Commerce and concerned citizens. Motion Brutsch, second Wood. So ordered. 16. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS FROM PUBLIC - MATTERS OF AN URGENCY NATURE Hal Spear, 50 - 10th Street - asked if the City Council had hired a City employee as the coordinator for the Hermosa Beach Child Abuse Prevention Task Force. Councilman Cioffi stated they would contract for a coordinator who would not be a City employee. John Toman, 311 - 27th Street - asked for time to read a report from the 27th Street Environmental Protection Assn. Mayor Barks advised Mr. Toman that this item would be on the agenda for the meeting of November 13, 1984 and that would be the appropriate time to present his material. 17. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL Councilman Cioffi ACTION - To have the City of Hermosa Beach join the Independ- ent Cities Association and investigate the possibility of saving money on workmen's compensation insurance, liabilty insurance and other insurance packages. Motion DeBellis, second Brutsch. So ordered notng a "NO" vote by Councilman Wood. - 10 - Minutes 10-23-84 v8 -8Z -OT sagnuTw - Ll - 'W'd OE:L jo anou auq qe h861 `El iagwaAON `AepsanZ uo pTag aq oq ButgaaW aeTnBad e oq t96L aagogo0 `AepsanZ uo -W -d 05 LL jo anou auq qe pauanoCpe sem goeag esowaaH JO AgTO auq JO TTounoO AgTO auq 3o SuzgaaW aeTnSad auq 1pooM Aq papuooas `sxaeg aoAeW Aq uoTgow e u0 INHWN8nOPQd 0 V N N � � T W � /L �N F-7 V V M p Q � Y1J M J y U I? U 7 K M M ' NO M -It 'AS IM jr M 15 U V I!1 O _ � U U U ONO" lf. O&INl M M M M M Q C � NJY/IOy U O MirM C NI/I/ 4, Nf F JS 2 r NJ&n0/ 15 4' i Of U h M l0 W M , NI K Q Q R IS LS is N1!// S N1 XIS � M n I It u � � '�p f NI N3A3S N M N U1 U N U M M M M In M N)^ N1MSl3 > M •1116 W JS N1N J U U a� 2 ]A35 4 � G M Q NJNJl3 It O 7 0 M M S Ir M C In ir Ir a V 7 Q.0 N � 7 fS NJN/N U (f V Q y N Q M M ry n N!N)A)7] t M Gf /� �• �{ Ii O, Nf N3A]1] 11 Q U U V U 4 Q 7f NJNlt]7] C N f V W M O M N RAW LP v as ul (DI TA - XS -Idea = Q AVE. N�d153?! ri71W V-:' -a'1 A i > NIs =s OZ agNC ,_ Y8 . 3n4 SNIydOH �y 7 LiS iS id3�k� o ,3^V QNWW3� AS Irl 103dSOtid s o0 � ` "¢O Nryroa41— Orn_ v as ul (DI TA - O AVE. a o" A i > e. � iQ i agNC Lj oc .r). o ,3^V O 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 RESOLUTION P.C. 84- 24 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA EACH, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN .MENDMENTS FOR THE PROPERTY OTHERWISE KNOWN AS PROSPECT HEIGHTS CHOOL. =iEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach has considered the !clining enrollment in the Hermosa Beach School District and its detrimental effect School District operations and the well-being of the community; and HEREAS, the present open space element of the General Plan assumes all possible eps will be taken to preserve open space recreation land without causing detriment the education system; and EAS, zoning does not and cannot prohibit private use of Hermosa Beach School istrict property; and HEREAS, the City has already purchased the portion of Prospect Heights that it ishes to maintain as permanent open space; and HEREAS, the Planning Commission has taken into account the surrounding zoning;and HEREAS, a public hearing was held on September 4, 1984; OW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach does .reby recommend the following changes to the zoning and General Plan designations at Prospect Heights School: Section 1. That the zoning be changed on the following lots from open space to R-2 PD: Lots 11,12, and the southern 15' of Lot 10 of the Hollowell Tract; and Lot 31 and the southern 15' of Lot 30 of the Dillon Tract. Section 2. That the zoning be changed on the following lots from unzoned to R-2 PD : Lots 23-29 and the northern 10' of Lot 30 of the Dillon Tract; and Section 3. Lots 5-9 and the northern 10' of Lot 10 of the Hollowell Tract. That the General Plan designation be changed from open space to Medium Density for the following Lots: Lots 23-31 of the Dillon Tract and Lots 5-12 of the Hollowell Tract. Section 4. That the total development of the above-mentioned lots be limited to 15 units for the overall site. 1///// 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 13 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24' 25 26 ` 27 28 VOTE: AYES: Chmn. Izant, Comm. Compton, Sheldon,. Peirce NOES: Comm. Newton, Schulte ABSENT: Comm. Shapiro CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the above Resolution P.C. 84-24 is a true and accurate reflection c)f the action taken b the Planning Commission at their regular meeting of September. 48.4,_ S Izant, Chairman 'Joel Shapiro, Secretary 00 C'ry SC r ez ye - n °o ;3 fe, i'l-'i co h C a -* r Y Schools rso& P.O. Box Number 338 Hermosa Beach, California 90254 September 20, 1984 Ms. Pamela Sapetto Planning Director City of Hermosa Beach Civic Center Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Dear Ms. Sapetto: MEMBERS OF THE GOVERNING BOARD John Cioffi Karen Gale Peggy O'Brien Carol G. Reznichek Leslie N. White SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS Marilyn Harris Corey (213) 376-8961 HAND DELIVERED The purpose of this letter is to certify that the Prospect Heights School was built in two phases, 1951 and 1959. There have been no further additions. Attached is a plot plan, attachment A, showing the location of the structures as they exist today. The City's plot plan, labeled attachment B, does not show the construction of 1959. Hopefully, this information will be of assistance in correcting the error in the rezoning ordinance of 1975. Sincerely, 22f,A4:� Marilyn Harris Cor?y District Superintendent MHC/mg cc: Greg Meyer, City Manager Board of Trustees Attachments i i d Attachment A r � 70 I i 1 , i � 1 1 1 i i i d Attachment A l GVYr 6e goo6 l Nom / � Off• C/s � \ •+.J -71 oI i I w ri S OFI/ H19 o ch I._ i No rqi s, err —0 a - 700HOS 3/1 V 103dSOdd i �s"DI •� 96 <u ' • ' / .� ¢•� 3 /5-11 Iv � /h ^r LTJ I O 1011 ria �r , /r/ �• 0/7 +tA+/�a� RtiL/ 0/ H19 �i6. `dSOW�3H ll Z.zsl -IAds L� T Y •1 Q Q cr Y � .. rwr rr d srrv� 1 " w•g1F1/ • i 8/ r r sra •�r�r /j'JrnyJ I yYYJIX3 j 7Yorn l GVYr 6e goo6 l Nom / � Off• C/s � \ •+.J -71 oI i I w ri S OFI/ H19 o ch I._ i No rqi s, err —0 a - 700HOS 3/1 V 103dSOdd i �s"DI •� 96 <u ' • ' / .� ¢•� 3 /5-11 Iv � /h ^r LTJ I O 1011 ria �r , /r/ �• 0/7 +tA+/�a� RtiL/ 0/ H19 �i6. `dSOW�3H ll Z.zsl -IAds L� fiZT�ifivu WaVIMUSIMI ==IMS, " 1' � M 22j, 2,975 vale= 4 '�1Jpf.Le7,.esolutian is to be p.�IaV,{,�I mem lnt-11 +YIh Yd+YW..i.Smomt is LGt�t.Y.6Acid from WIG Board ning Adjuala=t for dig's 3ax'.�ifymm= 24r - raid t City Cerci l tis a i : tPk�e ix'opo 3als for o �sga� ce �:anir� �; in j°G trd Ch" -W property and ra c".nC district; lands. He rNAM"I taut t; M fO UM7iaz�; mdifications via maps; North 3ehoo13 '"he rroparby tbMt vould be Mccluded are tlie existing bmtldiras on 25th Street.. iz;o remain unwamd,, Sa -UCh s; 11-1.. T:0 School DOW,.. concurred in 1mvi ng the near brick bui3sUng, vha ch could f -j t�r :%tae city in the xA.11um j also the arm tit 3s the net 'slam a. L� at erly of €i, paint 104east of the ncart�be� edge of lot 12 and 13, to LIM: would become oypen space, baa ifflew t The build?ug and rarkimg arms are excluded. Prospect Heid t z: Me 11.ne to d=m at Uic buildinas. South School: The line would by drmm mlo sloes, cci.t:h the farr±t lata excluded. Va 13.ay View 2 All GDW apace. aParkiz)g Ai.atrictrs S The t.r rz behind the tboater and lank of America is excluded from thc: 0, M -.VUCO zM.13; try feel stat the parking, distriob 3and is not at tt .Lo tim o7m s ce; Umy do not k:m I,= it will be developed. Minn. Ebueh wid this vould raduce potence tial rer4c - 3oar1 fmm nbout 4+, to a5 acres., wizen according bo mUmal stems We a ould be appro it��3�y 100 acres i.� W113 cormuli.yy. She mdd the lxmch is a apCc19-1l.zesd reGional use E11r d c mmot be coua3tt-3 in W13 city's cpm space. Cam. Loasli questioned the proposed modificat:im at Horth 3chool., which is curje,Itly a p3ssya'1'vmd and wotuI'Al VOMMMt the I= of an Irmtricumble resourae. CFaTm.. Ibith atated for the record -.that she unclaraiands that tf>e.C-?t;;, Counall and School Depto are vorl:iixa t-..ry bard to corm up with the beat pDosibe-1 pace for opon arse and jraxiwb and that; the school rmst car.,ider i'i=nelai and educat; oml aspects an c:4U acs pracervrAt;:ioil of opon opac a. Sho maid she ;,'ould encoumLm =4 510port t oir cfforts, brAmvefo, as a proDw :i,mmi in the are as purl..^, and rearv3tion, abe i z Mare of he need for pass, the camun ty's needs, ax' tha taU? i yl ez? MUCM_. _. sta-ndaxdu Which am 5 acre ger 1000 She saithis io an outdoor eorumi 'y, r4eedinG. a3 much op= s ,, as rpsaib , mid for these re aaam :aha �Al.l vote no on this :.tem and cannot concur AW the mDdif._1aat:tom of the City Comcil. 210tion by Com. Z,00aii, Seconded by Cam. Roocnberrgypr, to supmrt; tacC_.tky Council mocl3.fication3 of theca cU-iamted open --,ace areas t:l_t h the exception of thea p;Wy- GMund azo bOrdc-rL-13 26th St3�aet, 10b; �-13 mid t -Z- tioim os Lobs 6-6 of Block ?.�, Shahespeare:•act. Ayea s Com. Burt, Loosli Now: Com. Hurled, RooanberMr, Cbm: lough. Aboe ntz Chm. ColLIS The ration WW, Subst3t►ate wtdon I r Com, au;.b, sets ded by Comte. Rosenber q to cmc vltb thz City Council. VaO0 Ayes t C a BLtrv, Learnwap R'aaw-lb*raer lnoez3 IDM. 7.00s j Qzma ltel Absent: a-im. Com a'i.W'yaiVn by !y `y;za Bart iA-4+ n:yse.: 6.IV COM. .S,lf.➢c::nY:iZLgers , 4460 adopt, €.eso af�jcn P.C. While the Plarxznz; aorxxs.r aiw vouj.j 1xra'c-tO s !�t' 4 tjcmj --,-ewaA in opm sraae,. Wievy xmilze, the intr:? cac? na cf tf a ze-Imo? I'llei ' c tr;', clL:%';,4,V%xGiljv and{i"a`t i °�` +2lozgg 17i tI3 their re -coma n4 ati a AYW I so Q art, � � Rosenbuwoa Now,. a • LcoaLL, lig.,� Hvngal cbm. Ma-Oural Olre^t vI-mt a MrM be attacbad cont--iring Awe c:or. is of the 26 2ZT-rD SUMIT Ow, Ywr mrr ev': BObtle Iml- Mr- yw�rl sa1.6 X`'vz I'Laz chedlm3 and found no gi-oblem Motion by Qwm., �ose� ��rs Uccos-Ided by CA�,..aa' e r mtcrja to app'°ave:, with ratrim" :.ir one yeara a3y00 3 AA'cM,. . ku y Noes Collis t1 ?i'1%�es^nth 1"t �:.�+. : p Import «'Er'•,i ;sae..s �' ,. Merl ��i � Irii_orl I'll r'3 ' e u%- s sem., Cor � icmLl. UsePe."1: it for a Li.l a o:a aat- W I es -to vMbI. j 1 ;OrtG"-'c. b -xin", his rv'ia79 cr by We 8"oxlac Part. in lb, tion by LXMOrd, t0 , ,t3 th •vio17 I one year. Ayes Comm. Dart,, Learned,, Macs p a Ros mbez t er Now Dam Abs � CW, na JbIlg a Absent2 Cha Co1Us O.Ix f".1C71it.h wcavlaE j, Me ,�''lCE;;ohlp. llh' 1barl said t5' c::c ha.,; xyeno.,l a pe -i oon to paroan ta'a lofer ill A Ztjst; tp KVt�4� v pro3"^i'rGLp; C k, .acti3z�L�s; a_� tly noOP hot ?. ; M-ld iL corn 110410 rC+"�'ieGaat u ocri—o .s -Lollcc probleu according to the chief. _ff?IQl apr.6r1.3ra_.L Lf aza:.i.iA L46i. 1;1u f.'. e1m .SGA Ofh':Jr i/v NwnAbO dLa 0L3 i'L Vbgy sLiS Va hot iS4��Li�Cl��i.l and spccia13 on lone, `taco, n rd nklia':1 f°y; rht-y linve a hitt hen., they 'r.'�.:vz-t a vudar oven; the Curtccl as", am Ilot intere3ted IM e3abol:-.t�^ 1, �sncl t!'O',v "—'12-1 only about 1.; snra€t..Ichc:, a day taot on by e® 1,000115 secmded secb;,r COM. <ane , to approve z:ith onve year rev2v:)a Altos t € mm. BLtxt, Learnod., 33p Rosenberger, Chmn. lbugh 1,100s: None RESMUTION P.C. ]54-lW� A RESOLUTICH OF THE CITY Pi„AiaidlPd€x CMISSMI OF JIM-ioSA BEACH APPRO M AAD CONC1RR UM WITH THE C B Y COUNCIL FOR OPEN SPACE ZGINIM MODIFICATioni WHEREAS, the City Planning Comaission of Henmsa Beach at a wmetIng held September 22, 1975, considered the request for opera space zoning nmd1firations recoww1, led by the City Council; said madif ications as follows: North Sc:hooi: rhe }property that would be excluded are Lhv existing buildings on 25&. Street, to remain wzeiied, t -Mich is R-1. ne aooa District concurred n leaving the nm—j brick buildlnag, %A;ich cGuld go to the city in the future; also the area that is the imw kindergartea. Everything easterly of a point iG feet east of the nortkwrn edge of Lot 12 and 13, to Vahey, would becoma open space Hermosa View: The building and ;parking areas are encliad. Prospect Heights: he 11m Is dr. -win at the buildings. South Sch-ml: Tine line uould be dram along the sib, with the front lots excluded. Valley Vii. m 'Ai i open space. Parking Districts: The parking beiiind the Uieater and Dank of Ami rica is exclwded from the cpen space zona; they feel that the parking district: land is not at &is tines open spacer and they do not kr"m how it void bre developed. WHERE—ASO concern was expressed that this mauld reduce poteralal park land from about 45 to 35 acres, when according to national s"andards there siaould be approximately 100 acres in tis i s c rtrun i icy; and WHEREAS, after dua cons derat:lam* it is €:its opiniQl of the Planning Cmraissicn that. w6lle the Cam, fission would prefer to see addidaml school lands remin In Open spa<.en they realize the intricacies of tis;- school financial situation and their discussions with the City Ccunell, and therefore gQ ala% with their recamm- adation; NOUo TiiEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Plannimj C tisslan of €iermsa Beach con- curs with the recchmmendatimis of the City Council concerning open space zoning nmdlm ficaticasis as listed abc %m. VOTE: AYES: Camra. Hurt, Learned. and Rosenbarger lda`$ES+ Com. Loosl i and Acting Chairman Mough NDSMT: Chinn. Collis I hereby certify that the foregoing resolutkni was adopted by the PlaniniN Co al -551M of tiva City of iierimsa Beach at a meting hold thin 22nd of Sapterabcr, 1975. DATE GLORIA HOLM, ACT IM CHAIRMAN MIKE Li :;Bs D,, A'CT11M + CPxTARV : ? c. OUT Ic TT�f mor A;, ar��C?sa7(ntLE ET ion - ' i T :. T �Z �oCa:i,a u..1 T ,r , S tC LY t..>J .�� z 4 oieas az-psdsa`Iie-iS ' Z £T xooTE 'S �3nortC� T s-. c,I - t goPa 7 eaEadsaxngS ' SZT �(ooTE ' C £ tlLnortll T s4 ori ( ozz�s��r TootioS) 'tonal aanads0XZ? c 'TET XPoTi3 'TT qsno:qq T x00,1 gDl2z •, 9aPadsa?(l2RS 'OCT SfoOT9 'aA'CSnToui 'pE -LT,,bnca-q . T S:zO7 (Toot<oS Llgaols) -�.onas oaPedsaXPTIS 'TTT %tooTS 'zaa ZL / TaGiLlq ao;., bT. lg6a,oxa 'S qOa 90 uoz and n pun 'antsnTouz 19 gBnazULq T s2•o ,. :4onz,7l aonzaay nsowlag 'T x30T9 'T 407 90 qGG: OT J�Ta04^n` , ":~ •1 - l K 1 t �►+ >/ � !l �t.(yCtyy �- [ 1r .. �r.OR I (� ` i r1 R• .I. ..•1J• N,M. (•,r � ,•• • jlf ♦'• 1 F• •r!�'• , �(•I lrr�!� �f� 1� �� j r: w• t /. t �^ tom.__,_-..�. �• • s . r.-•. r✓ 1 J[ ; (`�}1(t�'. i. i�r` t' 6� '.��, •�' 'L fl '_V•" 't�1r• rn •i7. 1 ��..•'f t - �j�'�+i� �� _ � . '.i t �• •�.�••_..- .-. A t tlt:�:. : ✓- i �p� ',vl• 't a/�_ "- iI • Y -NR G .ON ( N. �li� -/' 'lit: d ✓�...--r� ; .I U 1.� r'F1'' ti„•' r -.r! itrJ1 - 1✓ `� ; - .� ; v- � ��� �•`ar'.w ,fit, , b �-t'►• . «r'" � �•� - !. � �!� ri • =u�I 'rI ,.,,,_,.. `•t J �• fa.�'�,1 r .�y/rte ��pl,.-� ' • �l M ' F f- 0,F. - 7v All! 44 7v� �� = l"r . ~.v �...,.�. _ — •rye • �t 1 �•.1•ar •i,. G:+ r,,,,s�'i: R✓t �C ._..� . 1't}=_1.,i•.i�"-+c' % •j� i vit. _ -.: �", L? . • Ora ../ .wry ll Jt!.rl' �Tla ``rr. t �'�.R_ :. r,> >'.r"�r• k ' .. s.t ' . L ...r:. - _ a•.•• _ �L� . ' All —�; t•" L�l�-�.--'-««-:.� �. riy�' �,. 1 _ --- Via- .., .. - - � =otc`• - Ar �:•r:.`•:."'��r arC' .'lr.f Y/" r-•� f.. 2 _, ._ +• iK .• d .. _ ^ai ..-- ..,7w: 1 R{'•_ - _ - t 1 1 � `• t ��cw -r:- eti�_: �.'•:.r...s• }} '!L-'•. �_ _ - .,tt,. it-! r -_^ .K�.••- -_c � �� r- C,%S _ . '.�" -�_ `F f.l�' ...:v rte• �d - ' .i��� • -4.. \ lrY,_,�,E7'...:- ' l'6 [. yC... :y�' i. GE � �' ; - _ '• _- �.F • wt•:' cn JF ., �•� `� J. �/i [ ['4.. ..-�/:d~"..,-.f..rt�t.,.;-�+:>;_.�.�r r. "�gy$ ( _ `fir. ?,-r- • � + r •'� ;a, �::k.,�;;,;�"�• � ' c••n_ � -:.= ii.-•:--Y�;J:.;� �"_'::'.a`�i2i r..�ii � _ _ A .•..' `i '. '.-4. - may'. �� .:�^ ` �P► - � r J y =� i_v' ,ue".�c -f 1.1., �-- y� i'3 ..�•� -L �= { Wil}~ .- .�.� _ -y-^O•-ti ._.�•- _. _ .. •'�._ 4•�;rC -00 .0 � ••v'1 �!`-.C• r `� •�"'� rr :c � x, `„-� ,-j` ,��.,��'•a;;.� _ r. � er � �� ,•'-t � ..�� w. 23, -'rf • ••J • ,•r} 1�4 _ •! C � 1�-`�.:+". y'. lyri 4 �' �',•. _ i;.r't� rh _ G/. _ —-�,.Z/"ti Yl � '� •_OS. \•� " •.:f:. ♦ %...• � i a.� <t^-••„'� � �c '•-,--" C,y,•`I �;;.-t T �[t a:, �l•T- rr/ O.t a r� F u T '� L -,, -L .ci �fy -i r `v �: •.r•. ;h'` ,y ,�; *- -•�- * , c r.•-1.T"..�, v aI" - 1,,,� 'ta'^ iii •�.r ly , � ,y� � F . _ �J�' � h - Z�. '<7 f .i � f �S���{ �._-.T. �• f .�� a ^^_'..� _ {'I'_ r al (�' ' i " t' • , ~ - tt' lr • .. • ::-`�z ter, 7_ � .r,�. Vii:- ,,.; a•;.= _ :.� -- J..t��"�'^_) 4;a'r- c .s. FS` =y,.:.. :. =• . � •. 1<�_ �« ••t. `-U_.,/K' tl--` y_.c^,.Y - fir.,-✓�';e.� r. o •.Y • w:r • n ♦ y�. l 4'-; }.. •.. {u!" .. T �` / -j F, �`r cr.;hr'=i-::;.o,_-'ti-1-,y-r-"��sCr.:.. _'� ��:=�:>q'�,�c,�-'�� o - t'" `_' _ "l'• ' � _ •�%` 4' ,. ''j,.-,.;.%.- .-S�;aj':�'�".�.^-� lri,•�`^-•�r�_a •r'_, _-t'�� �e3..;., � _ 'a, �� - _.3. ♦•_ !�/� '^i ,;c,•-,p�-vt �:-'}.."�i;' �_...�_�'� -i +iv_''.�'-..�,^-;..-�i •". p.lrl�r y _ _ _ ?. r• t s' a�� Y 4�-:.:f tam :-i +.,-?--1' ..t' �-'�•� :. _ -' . -'- i r � ..�- j� �r_ ) •„tet- 7 . ^.s.' ,�,�,i-,R"�^.-.,,..- =--'� X -r"^"+_'- • � . •.' `'-,r..�-_. _ .r •a• l { it / `'s`r� f .� 3 �t ��x� dy1y7/it-:� �. •-t i .�„rr 3 t --.r•. q ' Y � 3a.r _'',•t 1, ,t - - .._ -•• l r 1�_.-.-y. ,[, � _ _ It.7af l: f.d--fjr: ;. _ - y fl ;r: : �:.� .Y�` Y yam., f .+-,::. "•^:: _ '.�y'1•,"=-:: �' -_ - -_ :;....rr- - - • ' -� •-�- ?a' �. lr "V f. rt; iI• _ `?-���?t�'r. _�- fix. c..,� (. 1, �• `•f - _ `+:� '" � •v' '. dr'- �-�` L' _ _ �.y -r - _ -_ _ • `_ ^� `7 _-%ice' : �`' ,_' _ :. _ .� ;or --moi ...:r: •-:[/ - � - S �-✓ .•� , � r• �...> _ _ „ `��;+z't� �,� r • . [/ t; [1 _= -•_-•..r .Z., - ,.� /� �•. • \ ` .[JJ _ - i .ro \V/. r _`y .1^ _ -Y_'• '-:'•i-r?_ 1 IL _ - fir'• _ _ � ; • ' `��/ �/y - . '�' \` o° ?_•, /.�O �' � - ,� .� ''y.� VVV ',.` . '' t _-"� �Jt +-����:f I � {: -'' CA'`-•4\:�./-�%•t \-tt,`,S ''P'..A\ �yCr.a,�.�`�.�f '•�/`� ^•",�--• _����� ^•_T�l.� � ��l\��l•�T. �� L 1 �,%..}-` -'rpt _ ,/{/�- '• �• \ • _ 4^ Ytl- _ D \� ,1. / y. '\. _ _ ,Q~•� tL L x..�•,J �_ `•''• tf _ •i - �`.� tt'��• I .1r.�'Jr l 7 V ,1 •.'� ' / lI* .�� •t p ��. " `/� y^' a\" \^ /fes-^ l..' ,� !'r '! L•'\ �;.. L 90 Z 'DBcd 'IV. ilizilixET (TOOLIDS PqSTP, AOTTeA) -qDPGS PSOWaOH Oq LTO-E*qTPPV PU7- "LL <iDOTU '-1Z Pul--' 'ST 'ST SqO1 Jr., 7777- — -1 le, 11 1''" 43ff -*6 -tL luc 1 I A .r 4:� P of x OV It Ff L ty I puZ ra FO 71 JV WS Cr &pr. - C .7 ZZ K fF Ik Or -;; —i7 7 VA 7t 14- r '7't 7j - L t -1b IT t7 1�j IT �.:i L C-TrIV — ...-I f. N7 ------- ---------- ------- .............. r .. (. '.'_.. .:_ `_C�•-��CJ��i'� V-s�J, `''•ef _xti •••'1`•� ��:�:_'r _ � •rr; \• �_` _ yam• ,.: ,� � � - .. ' . , _ _ _ _ 'r. �• � ;i - -... x.0.•..1`,•1• �y.11'4 M• ''�•' - ... T. —1. •t_ �,,,.f 6l •:.. �t—ter'-- ' r�.r� L' L �. � - _r:'� :. _'.-� •, — -_ __e�;,,,'`� -'''— �*.��r•' , L .. �' , -;. - -�-...�,.�h `i�.r`�", s:�v'ir'•v ♦ .."�j1' -epi : i - . Oj..•-},. ` ,...�.. .�'`�v _•.:`��-- _ _s n / -� V r1� '..} '��� �, .3-. �.�•.: yr v J�� ` f� f r� �'^ '• �� £' _ir r-_,.�r'_i_....}i'�'Sy`,, .� :I•' ,: �-r.�J,+• n•:. O. ��`_Y `_r r :. '�.'. `" �"� /`7c -%!-ice .- �. ,,� y L k� }}) i ,.. 'I Vii• - ` {( _� -.�„ ,..� L _ ./. :.'•..1 �� .c��'•'7�`i'+�Tts�+�.,. t •i,. _'`�_ d C •1-ytr�, :r• jy}.-_'��: ? ✓a• :.+y •.1 �•.. ,�lti i. `� !nt _ ..t. � ��. �• ;,._ . -''}f •sf 1V T �2f :4� r+ r x k :, }' ''.. /B . /o � .ta/ � Y•T� ��� L� - � ? k " .C% • , f � "r ..,r„ r,.,. i 'z 1 � r/ : r( J1 a i �. finS r.. ,• �E� tJ r• 1� M ... ��', �- � -J `ice--. �.a � l{--;x'��f i' _ F. - .. ••• :_ -cr. �J'1-r-�,�..' _. t'+ :�' - _ - - '-' k7y '•PJ ' l.-,.. .xa .,,� •ws -:.,, - •�,,- i .-"�1'�.. Ff Y!�/� �. �, . a _ � . _ ' -• _ nal 1 � � .��� ,1 .- `� -+i." � .\ ; s.�, :s�ti 1 y: c >> �1 �, _`x .. , •, t • . +1( ? �(�1 _ J r( 1 �n. :r g Jf{-'J snl,,,. .?i,-ti..T."-, ,,i.. rAJ <'r 'moi,,, ��d���```i �d // % , %� �., 7. •4 1( ,>_ r:- a r ofa Wit.. ..IL ej 76 .: 7`f�e?�i%Jf ip /J /y T d D ••%' •�� � ^1� a � 3• �`...,t T I a' ,r�� ; r.,.l'�• , ..; _ a�s� b - � r jot �f,'��i{3 ,. f ' - •_t, ? �i- }�1t/��• _ya. _�' +r �r : -• 1jf �s dbJn, 7 s \i tr.. l�lf , •a �fT',jj{y� a t fry p` _ - a r /�-7�rV''-- _ - n"'• ��1 �, 1 1 L t� 1'� Q , 9 : _� - ;1' . I /1 ..x %h A. � Jf.7 '�:�1�'�3n✓37t3s��•_>.y-Sayy� � 4 '�'-. f. _ � '�tl. —�"¢". •Ta /j r��(/� a 99999 s i 1 'e ai• � �'�'w ? NW 150 feet of Lot 1, Tract 780; Lots 1 through 3, and Lots 7 through 12, inclusive, Block 73, 2nd Addition to Hermosa Beach. (Civic center) Portion of Lots 5 and 6, Block.74, 2nd Addition to Hermosa Beach; Lots 1 through 4, inclusive, Knutsen Tract; Lot 1, Tract 1516; Portion of Lot A, Block S, Tract 2002. (Clark Stadium) EXHIBIT "A" Page 3 of 7 L 90 t eBPd 'IV,, zlc"-iHx SL; Z/5 PaSTAO _T (TOOgOF q-Qn0S') 'Z0: Z g0rzs JO 'qaa? OT -)�TzaqsalA aqq Pua 4GGJ ST ITaO4seaqqaON aq4 buz�.da0xa „d,r NZ)OTE PUP 'qaa� ST ��Taa-4seaq�aON aLI but�daOxa „O,�vOoTQ 'TaaS •`_'T 1TT.z2TSGIV, ails BUT=}C_:co=. PLIC S=C'i '4eO3F CT �Taags9b oqq bLTT4az.7Xv 'S PUP 17 SJ.C':r 30 Su0Tom..:Cv --_._.. - ... + twit ( , _• ui Vi ci i r/ F/ ►•^-:.i . i X Or � ;_ . - ' % � 1 •r .. a -i!'.. �} I 1 r i-�i�y••...iG-rru. ti y. ��ti-• • i;"'d' `ti !lit pa7-- 7 Ll ! t j-. ��•di /i of 6 0• ,.' -Loa- 15 •ter— .�-�C �'w e:�. �--•�t � `�'`` t. r � a /` "�.� , r 1� - in " `1�G ,7-jQ/is+o c( �W•fF•, /^•~ `h-+`� y-+�•--1 rya/_!.%� ce r� '-tom —~�; .i � r/ r :+, 1J•f �.If�, P,( 1 i - -µ1 r. � �N �n-r•• C.� I r 1 --_._.. - ... + twit ( , _• ui Vi ci i r/ F/ ►•^-:.i . i X Or � ;_ . - ' % � 1 •r .. a -i!'.. �} I 1 r i-�i�y••...iG-rru. ti y. ��ti-• • i;"'d' `ti !lit pa7-- 7 Ll ! t j-. ��•di /i of 6 0• ,.' -Loa- 15 •ter— .�-�C �'w e:�. �--•�t � `�'`` t. r � a /` "�.� , r 1� - in " `1�G ,7-jQ/is+o c( �f�D� r � � . A - Ir. In — `_ _ `fir.•' --._�, J-.-- i 3�y :.4 »�44 C1 \ � � R` _ - - s '�I '- � i -- l' f _— r .-l.X-.. •w �wa��i.'j. �ti.J.r�.j{� N ,.fL t4 I y. 1 r✓'i_-l-�J'_i � --M. vim_?\t^!_ ..i.1+i..a- \'L:..ILy .�� � ��/ 1 ^ ' dd.i " x 1. -mss y J» {jI ,cst� ay �•a (tilt •may i ti./ Y • y • .- }— jam_ _ _ - /.V j �� a- r-�5-.;.�r^t�' 1 1 1. �_-�.+ - fall �.I '• __/ 'J"• .7'��r i• i�,.�'l`•y 1 � � W� V O Jo '� �. , ..� ,..---.. .. � �„--� `•./ .n-�_...� �' > 'moi �, d T� f Lam' r rr Vi-µ J. a..`r`r 1:'• ,.�L. 3 l �.. rr . - t� r✓ �� � _rte' - �' ` � ..�. _ t._' � �••'��'"�._`.`c�-� '"' _ 7 - G'� - - . 1 2 ar � • � ,\F]J +aJ•�f i IY' _ — i4= _ �'-'H _ _ - _ •- I _ � I � t� . � •[\t . _ :� `\ tt � `\♦ Jr� •�. ,4' ?'•:x .y�+.4`3 I `t ? ,I•�1+ t •,, Jii, � � +� � � 1 ` ; '• V 3ps. t_ ' i - 0� , .. _ � _ ♦ 1 t - ^. ii Jar•=' CT._ ' `�` ? - _ - s-; .. - � 1 '�_ '' , - f! • ♦'? I! !. Ji -.- '1. 1-71 3tij - ��• Tyr -.:.'•,; ',9 �.. _ .' :: !/!� i' EZ ..+ I_ ! �• 1 ! �'1: _� 7..•rj r� "T /� 's �r"�r/�rrrllsr�j!' ' _.- rs /y' .: _,..- .., - - C. w} „'��"" :+��j irs It"' Ai•• . _ ,»�/� "`�"' 177!4 1 i • 3t - Ja . r0 5a art-ls I and 2, excepting the �outnerly 32� . o :�eet by the 1•�3terly 325 meat of: ?arcal r'iap Nio. 'lie.• Scl-nool; 3eaview '=arkette) _\^`.•'.3P.t3 :.3/2 `%S S�i_T_3 u- to -)wg8 v / L 90 9 eBpd nVn IIEURM -qDl--Gg -eSOU12GT-I Oq UOT-I.TPPV PUZ: "}[.IPJ LDOOMUG@':C9 . I . ell C � k- t�-., 7 'i 1 64� vF..ryy 1, W 7-- S,I4II'X�- un-- cl L'•%: S� r �C£ uJ5nag-q TE S-.O:_✓pUt' -y.VGaLT• LLGIf• L L - CY is i.a • l� IT i�bncauq TT 2q0 PT -T -e 14aag ;,T riTaau:4a0lZ a'Llq fiU•-,ndTc+.7Xv '0L ={�' �St'�� _ - -_ _ �...G•,,:.f... �� ` - �A QI � - i/ : y �..•_ 141 ,��� � , ��lr • iJ� �•� V ' - 'i !� z. .S ti•:::- - r- l - - --t �. _ /V_.�` �41iIII\ N.t• a c - 4f •O • < Cz _ r'.'s^ •,-ti . l: LN 4 �� -{_} •-1 # ' ' . -,- .,y i , J,. t:-..I1f��I1F,1� - - • •%:iRG'�J Z L7_t NI - -_= L o � � O � --cam _' C��_•�_D�.C� „# e. ��-��,. jJI'C^/`�-{t/ ; 1 _`.__3LL...: ��= c ; -__ _.-Y.. :..tl: o ....-_-� _ -'- � S Ot __f C' 1 � 1 - i. �'-.-J,--_' .'• '- � '' � _ ... •.-rvrc-. _ j'. _ - ..�''`` �t.., • \ o - _ ti - rf _rb a `' I • ��^.._ � 2 �- -.. r 1. r •a•. ,_ J, 'p 'rr•`.. `•o�i..6` P: G,: 71_ . f- 'i .) ?�.. _ ".,�= _ •gyp'. 1. 1 t'. kms; -„u `.. .._. (# .._ .r>.'�'.F�\L .J zS -. ,c .a�iih.r��.•. -`��i - rvr �4 - �' O/.fC�' Jorr --j _ - _ 'J 1{�.•J MMM., !1 - s' -.+�G �`r..:G -. '•�.: ./_r. T �- ,�w �'. - r r: �'"• � ... _ �j^- .;S s � cT�_'-.,.-r.:.. "(i'�.'�%f"r"ies _� }• - rT, :r• �'�L_: -c? �.-mss_—. _ytiC _ 1�•/:.f•vNN6✓ - .,” .:L• 1_ ..v- p _i'� �,''- � Cf 4j _ c/__��'-c.' �. Y{ _ - t L � 1, ---�1%;.. .`,'.._._: _ r.-.-•oc.. .jr :;Q(.- �' / tt _ .=TI�/`r�.•/ .. _ - � til • y cp rr _ =�. •-.� FG !s .. Y\ J tii. - a,•t_._•- �tL�^J� L. Li -. -..� _. ___% �i- . wi•••' _ • _ •" - -` •a. -, .> _-'t-�L-"��f�/r y + iii .fin � V ; .fes -��..-,....� - � ,: r<r -� '• .. t I C, rJ r0. ? : a' . STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ) I, BARBARA FLEMING, City Clerk of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. N. S. 517 was duly and regularly passed, approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach at a regular meeting of said Council held at the regular meeting place thereof on the 9th day of December, 1975, by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Doerfling, Post, Tyson, Widman, Mayor Barks Noes: None Absent: None Dated: December 9, 1975 (SEAL) i i City Clerk and Ex Off iio Clerk of the City Council, City of Hermosa Beach, California 4 ORDINANCE NO. N. S. 517 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ZONING ORDINANCE NO. N. S. 154, AS AMENDED, BY CLASSIFYING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY IN SAID CITY O -S OPEN SPACE ZONE AS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. WHEREAS, the Open Space Zone is intended to prohibit inten- sive urban development to those primary open space areas of the City of Hermosa Beach which are necessary to assure permanent open space in and for public parks and recreation areas, and where such intensive urban development would adversely affect public use and natural environ- mental benefits, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, following public hearing by the Planning Commission and said Council as prescribed by Zoning Ordinance No. N. S. 154, as amended, does find that the recommendations set forth in Planning Commission Resolution P.C. 154-1039, adopted June 9, 1975, and modified by Planning Commission Resolution P.C. 154-1069, adopted September 22, 1975, after recon- sideration at the request of the City Council following public hearing held on September 10, 1975, serve the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the following real property situated in the City of Hermosa Beach, County of Los Angeles, State of California, being certain properties owned by the City of Hermosa Beach, Vehicle Parking District No. 1 of the City of Hermosa Beach, and the Hermosa Beach City School District, that is: City -Owned Property Municipal Beach, ocean front lot line to the line of mean high tide,- Lots ide;Lots 1 through 7, Block 135, Shakespeare Tract; _ Lots 1 through 30, Block 129, Shakespeare Tract; Lots 1 through 13, Block 134, Shakespeare Tract; Lots 1 through 17, Block 133, Shakespeare Tract; Lots 1 through 5, Block 132, Shakespeare Tract; Greenwood Park, 2nd Addition to Hermosa Beach; Portion of Lots 5 and 6, Block 74, 2nd Addition to Hermosa Beach,- Lots each;Lots 1 through 4, Knutsen Tract; NW 150 feet of Lot 1, Tract 780; Lots 1 through 3 and Lots 7 through 12, Block 73, 2nd Addition to Hermosa Beach; Portion of Lot 2, Block 74, 2nd Addition to Hermosa Beach; Lot 1, Tract 1516; and Portion of Lot A. Block S, Tract 2002; and: Hermosa Beach City School District Lot 10 excepting Nly 10', and Lots 11 through 17, inclusive, Hollowell Tract; Lot 30, excepting Nly 10', and Lots 31 through 35, inclusive, Dillon Tract; Lots 37 through 39, Tract 5209; Ely 10' of Lot 1, Block 1, Hermosa Terrace Tract; Lots 1 through 4, inclusive, and a portion of Lot 5, excepting N 72 feet, Block 111, Shakespeare Tract; Lots 1 through 30, inclusive, Block 130, Shakespeare Tract; Lots 1 through 11, inclusive, Block 131, Shakespeare Tract; Lots 15, 18, and 21, Block 71, 2nd Addition to Hermosa Beach; Parcels 1 and 2 of Parcel Map 5406, excepting a portion comprised of the Sly 325' and the Wly 325.6'; Portions of Lots 4 and 5, excepting Wly 10'; Lots 6 and 7, excepting Wly 10', Tract 1686; and Block O, excepting NE 15', and Block P, excepting NE 15' and Wly 10', Tract 2002, be and the same are hereby classified Open Space Zone (O -S). SECTION 2. That the Zoning Map of Article 3, Section 302 of Zoning Ordinance No. N. S. 154, as amended, shall be and the same hereby is hereby further amended as herein set forth pursuant to the provisions therefor set forth in said ordinance. SECTION 3. That said City Council has caused to be pre- pared small area maps of the areas affected by the zone changes here- inabove ordered to be made, which said maps are hereunto attached, designated as Exhibit "A", pages 1 through 7, and are hereby referred to and by this reference incorporated herein and made a part hereof. Said area maps are hereby adopted as, and shall be an amendment to the extent of the areas shown thereon and affected thereby, of "Zoning Map of the City of Hermosa Beach", referred to in, and which is adopted by, the provisions of Section 302 of Article 3 of said Zoning Ordinance, as amended. -2- A- SECTION 4. That this ordinance shall take effect thirty days after the date of its adoption. SECTION 5. That prior to the expiration of fifteen days after the date of its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published at least once in the Hermosa Beach Review, a weekly newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Hermosa Beach. 1975. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 9th day of December, PRESIDENT of the City Council, and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: )WA'.etj±jU CITY ATTORNEY W! !!