Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/16/15Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 15-0565 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Joint Meeting of July 16, 2015 PREFERRED LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION PLAN (Community Development Director Ken Robertson) During the Joint Study Session with Planning Commission and City Council held on May 11, 2015, City Staff and the General Plan consulting team to discuss the land use and transportation aspects of the General Plan. During this meeting, a range of potential land use and transportation scenarios were presented and the community, Planning Commission, and City Council were asked to evaluate and discuss the range of alternatives, ask questions, and provide initial preferences or direction. The following is a summary of the input provided during that meeting. Land Use ·Need to pay attention to the interaction with the surrounding cities ·Concern over trying to fit too many things, buildings, bulk, density into the community ·Activation at ground level along pier avenue is necessary ·Mixed use with residential on Upper Pier is not the right location ·Easy access to local neighborhood markets like the Green Store should be maintained/expanded ·Identifying gateways as their own land use could include higher floor area ratios ·There’s a huge opportunity in the Cypress Area, but a need be careful to ensure it is consistent with surrounding neighborhood Transportation ·Emphasis on east-west connections need to be improved ·Plan pays too much attention to bicycles and not enough attention to pedestrians and safe, passable sidewalks ·8th St is not the right place for bicycle lanes or a bike friendly street due to the limited right of way ·Need more focus on sidewalks - consider connectivity to key destinations ·Need a balanced system of walking, biking, and transit ·Support for parking strategy for more space outside of downtown/beach with local transit The scenarios have been refined, adjusted, and consolidated to present a proposed land use and transportation plan (Attachment 1) for consideration by Planning Commission and City Council. Changes made to the land use and transportation network maps and plans, based on the input provided, include: Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Staff Report REPORT 15-0565 ·Reduced intensity in some areas - and addition of examples to show scale and intensity ·Re-arrangement of mixed use area from upper Pier Ave to Aviation Blvd and PCH key sites ·Addition of potential neighborhood commercial uses in Eastside and South Ardmore areas in locations that are currently public facility uses. ·Focus of service commercial in area of PCH with larger parcel sizes ·Focus of gateway commercial on larger parcels, where higher intensities may be preferred ·More emphasis on pedestrians and a balanced transportation network (with inclusion of wider sidewalks and priority sidewalks (those that are essential for a complete network) ·More emphasis on safe east-west connections for all modes (as an alternative to Pier Ave) ·Focus of bicycle improvements and clearer distinction on types of improvements For additional context a series of examples or case studies have been provided to illustrate the types of facilities or development that may be appropriate within Hermosa Beach within the different land use designations. Reviewing and Evaluating the Land Use and Transportation Scenarios The purpose of tonight’s meeting is to review the proposed land use and transportation plan and confirm or validate direction prior to development of the policy plan. For consideration and discussion purposes, the land use and transportation plan can be disassembled or certain aspects can be considered individually. To help frame the discussion, the land use and transportation plan can be split into the following components: -Land Use o Designations o Definitions o Densities or Intensities o Location on Map -Transportation Network o Classification System or Types of Facilities o Frequency/Distribution of Facilities (north-south or east-west) o Location on Map In considering the Proposed Land Use and Transportation Network, it may be helpful to consider the following questions: •Do you feel the changes identified in the Land Use and Transportation Network adequately capture previous discussions? •Does the proposed land use and transportation network reflect the concepts of the Vision Statement? •Are the examples provided appropriate types of facilities or developments in Hermosa Beach? Following direction from City Council and the Planning Commission, the plan will serve as the Project Description for the General Plan Environmental Impact Report and will be used to inform the goals, policies, and standards included in the policy document component of the General Plan. Next Steps and Continued Community Participation The General Plan work products prepared thus far are available on the General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan webpage at <http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=767>. Previous activities as well as Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™ Staff Report REPORT 15-0565 plans already adopted by the City and other background resources may also be reviewed at this webpage. These items will be folded into the General Plan, ensuring that the City’s work-to-date remains relevant and usable. Once the recommended land use and transportation plan is set, the next several months of work effort will focus on developing the goals and policies of the General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan, within input throughout the process from City Staff in multiple departments, the Community Working Group, and the Technical Advisory Committee. The Draft General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan and associated environmental document will be released in the fall, with multiple opportunities for the community to review and provide feedback prior to initiation of the formal public hearing and adoption process. Since the Planning Commission is statutorily charged with making a recommendation on the draft General Plan to the City Council, the Commission will be involved in each phase of review. Other City Commissions will also be consulted at key points in the process to review and provide input on topics within their purview. City Council will take formal action on the General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan and Environmental Impact Report. Attachments: 1. Proposed Land Use and Transportation Network for Review 2. May 11, 2015 Joint City Council/Planning Commission Study Session Staff Report 3. Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios for Study Session Respectfully Submitted by: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Approved: Tom Bakaly, City Manager Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™ PROPOSED LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION NETWORK PLAN Hermosa Joint City Council/ Planning Commission Study Session –7.16.15 Introduction Vision Statement Hermosa Beach is the small town others aspire to be: A place where beach culture and active healthy lifestyles, strong sense of community, and commitment to sustainability and innovation intersect. Our beautiful beach, eclectic neighborhoods, unique commercial districts, and welcoming gateways create an unrivaled coastal destination. Our outstanding local schools and municipal services contribute to an extraordinarily high quality of life at the beach. Our vibrant economy capitalizes on our entrepreneurial spirit and commitment to unique local businesses. Our economy balances small town, beach culture with our enviable position as a regional and statewide coastal destination. We are committed to investing in our future, protecting our coastal resources, and reducing our environmental footprint. Our sustainable beach culture supports our desire to live, shop, work and play locally. Our prominent beach, open spaces, and complete streets that connect places we go by car, bike and walking support our active, healthy lifestyle. What we heard on May 11, 2015 Land Use Need to pay attention to the interaction with the surrounding cities Concern over trying to fit too many things, buildings, bulk, density in the city Activation at ground level along pier avenue is necessary Mixed use with residential on Upper Pier is not the right location Easy access to local neighborhood markets like the Green Store should be maintained/expanded Identifying gateways as their own land use could include higher floor area ratios There’s a huge opportunity in the Cypress Area, but need to ensure compatibility with surrounding neighborhood Transportation Emphasis on east-west connections need to be improved Plan pays too much attention to bicycles and not enough attention to pedestrians and safe, passable sidewalks 8th St is not the right place for bicycle lanes or a bike friendly street due to the limited right of way Need more focus on sidewalks –consider connectivity to key destinations Need a balanced system of walking, biking, and transit Support for parking strategy for more space outside of downtown/beach with local transit land use + transportationLand Use •Designations •Definitions •Residential Density and Commercial Intensity •Land Use Map Transportation •Street and Active Transportation Network •Neighborhood and Site Enhancements •Parking Facilities/Policies •Transportation Network Maps Land Use and Transportation Network Overview Land Use •HIGHLIGHT OF PROPOSED CHANGES •SUMMARY OF EACH DESIGNATION •EXAMPLES AND CASE STUDIES proposed changesHighlights Modifications to Floor Area Ratios to ensure appropriate scale Focus of service commercial to areas with larger parcel sizes Moved mixed use designation to Aviation Blvd and key spots on PCH Addition of two neighborhood commercial sites on Eastside Definition Minimum: 2.0 dwelling units/acre Maximum: 13.0 dwelling units/acre low density residential LDSingle-family residential (attached or detached) Density/Intensity Existing Condition Range: 2 -77 dwelling units/acre Average: 15.4 dwelling units/acre Definition Minimum: 13.1 dwelling units/acre Maximum: 25.0 dwelling units/acre medium density residential MDSingle-family residential and small-scale multi- family residential (duplex, condominium) Density/Intensity Existing Condition Range: 8 -120 dwelling units/acre Average: 25.7 dwelling units/acre Definition Minimum: 25.1 dwelling units/acre Maximum: 33.0 dwelling units/acre high density residential HDMedium (8-20 unit buildings) and large-scale (20+ unit building(s)) Multiple-family residential Density/Intensity Existing Condition Range: 8 -156 dwelling units/acre Average: 42.4 dwelling units/acre Definition Minimum: 0.5 Floor Area Ratio Maximum: 1.0 Floor Area Ratio neighborhood commercialNCConvenience stores, markets, eateries, laundromats, or similar uses to primarily serve local walk-in traffic Density/Intensity Existing Condition Range: 0.3 –1.5 Floor Area Ratio Average: 0.7 Floor Area Ratio Definition Minimum: 0.5 Floor Area Ratio Maximum: 1.25 Floor Area Ratio community commercialCC Density/Intensity Existing Condition Range: 0.1 –2.0 Floor Area Ratio Average: 0.7 Floor Area Ratio Locally oriented uses including retail stores, restaurants, professional and medical offices, and personal services Definition* Minimum: 1.0 Floor Area Ratio Maximum: 1.75 Floor Area Ratio recreational commercialRCCoastal related uses such as hotels, beach/bike rentals, restaurants, snack shops, entertainment and similar uses Density/Intensity Existing Condition Range: 0.2 –2.4 Floor Area Ratio Average: 1.1 Floor Area Ratio * This proposed designation is consistent with the goals/intent of the proposed Downtown Plan. Definition Minimum: 1.0 Floor Area Ratio Maximum: 2.0 Floor Area Ratio gateway commercialGCLower floor community or regionally-oriented commercial uses with upper floor high-visitor office uses or hotel uses Density/Intensity Existing Condition Range: 0.2 –1.6 Floor Area Ratio Average: 0.7 Floor Area Ratio Definition Minimum: 0.25 Floor Area Ratio Maximum: 0.5 Floor Area Ratio service commercialSCHome improvement stores, furniture stores, auto dealerships, and light automotive service stations Density/Intensity Existing Condition Range: 0.2 –1.0 Floor Area Ratio Average: 0.5 Floor Area Ratio Definition Minimum: 0.25 Floor Area Ratio Maximum: 1.0 Floor Area Ratio light industrialLIProduction uses for light manufacturing, creative art, or design services with professional office as an allowed accessory use Density/Intensity Existing Condition Range: 0.3 –2.1 Floor Area Ratio Average: 0.8 Floor Area Ratio Definition Minimum: 0.5 FAR (+25 du/ac) Maximum: 1.0 FAR (+33 du/ac)mixed-useMUGround floor retail and restaurant uses with residential or office uses in mixed-use or live/work format. Density/Intensity Existing Condition Range: 0.1 –1.4 Floor Area Ratio Average: 0.5 Floor Area Ratio Land Use Summary public facilityPF Definition Minimum: 0.10 Floor Area Ratio Maximum: 1.0 Floor Area Ratio Civic-related offices, community centers, operational facilities and educational/institutional facilities Density/Intensity Existing Condition Acres Definition Minimum: 0.0 Floor Area Ratio Maximum: 0.10 Floor Area Ratio open spaceOSPassive and active park, recreational, and open space uses. Density/Intensity Existing Condition 43.6 Acres of Parks/Open Space Definition Minimum: 0.0 Floor Area Ratio Maximum: 0.05 Floor Area Ratio city beachCBCoastal related recreational activities and essential public facilities (lifeguard and restrooms) Density/Intensity Existing Condition 63.4 Acres of City Beach intensity comparisonEstimate of Current GP*Proposed GP Land Use Designation Max Min Max units/acreLow Density 13.0 2.0 13.0 Medium Density 25.0 13.1 25.0 High Density 33.0 25.1 33.0 Floorarea ratioNeighborhood Commercial 1.0 0.5 1.0 Community Commercial 1.75 0.5 1.25 Recreational Commercial 2.5 1.0 1.75 Gateway Commercial 1.5 1.0 2.0 Service Commercial 1.0 0.25 0.75 Light Industrial 0.75 0.25 1.0 Mixed Use 1.0 0.5 1.0 Public Facility n/a 0.1 1.0 Open Space n/a 0.0 0.1 City Beach n/a 0.0 0.05 * The Estimate of Current GP is not a defined maximum, but an estimate based on recent projects and what is allowed under the current zoning code. Pacific Station Encinitas Project Attributes Lot Size: 1.4 Acres Floor Area: 105,200 Sq Ft Density/Intensity: 1.76 FAR, 34 du/ac Height: 30 ft Uses: retail, restaurant, office, residential relevant examplesAppropriate in MU, GC West Hollywood Gateway Project Attributes Lot Size: 4.7 Acres Floor Area: 258,000 Sq Ft Density/Intensity: 1.25 FAR Uses: retail, restaurant, office, community center Appropriate in GC relevant examples Metlox Manhattan Beach Project Attributes Lot Size: 2.2 Acres Floor Area: 119,759 Sq Ft Density/Intensity: 1.23 FAR Height: 30 ft Uses: retail, restaurant, office, lodging Appropriate in CC, MU, GC relevant examples One Colorado Plaza Pasadena Project Attributes Lot Size: 0.83 Acres Floor Area: 52,970 Sq Ft Density/Intensity: 1.45 FAR Height: 40 ft Uses: retail, restaurant, office, public space Appropriate in CC relevant examples Front Street Avila Beach Project Attributes Lot Size: 3.25 Acres Floor Area: 70,000 Sq Ft 145 residential units Density/Intensity: 0.5 FAR + 45 du/acre Height: 25 ft Uses: retail, restaurant, office, public space Appropriate in CC, MU relevant examples Transportation •HIGHLIGHT OF PROPOSED CHANGES •SUMMARY OF DIFFERENT FACILITIES •EXAMPLES AND CASE STUDIES proposed changesHighlights Greater emphasis on east-west connections Greater emphasis on pedestrian realm and complete network Bike facility moved from 8th St to 5th/6th St. Need a balanced system of walking, biking, and transit Identification of multi-use path connections to parks, schools, and key destinations alleyway Local streets provide connections within and between neighborhoods. Local streets are not intended to serve through vehicular traffic, are generally one-lane each direction with lower volume of vehicles. street classificationsAlleyways provide access to private properties, including parking spaces and garages. local street arterial (major + minor) Arterials carry the majority of vehicles entering, leaving, or traveling through the city. Major and minor arterials are differentiated by the volume of vehicles using the street and width of the right-of-way. local sidewalk Wide sidewalks provide adequate space for a frontage zone, pedestrian zone, and buffer/greenspace zone on commercial streets. pedestrian facilitiesLocal sidewalks provide contiguous and level walking space primarily on low-volume residential streets. wide sidewalk priority sidewalk Priority sidewalks are facilities essential to providing a safe, accessible, and well-connected pedestrian network. walk street A street segment designed to exclude vehicular usage, for pedestrians and non-motorized transportation. A two-way facility separated from motor vehicles (adjacent to or independent of roadways) for use by pedestrians, joggers, skaters, and bicyclists. multi-use facilitiesmulti-use path shared roadway A street segment that functions as a space for multiple users and intermittently as a gathering space, without delineations for each mode. bike lane Sharrows combine bicycle stencils with chevrons placed in the center of a travel lane. They bring awareness to drivers that bicycles share the lane and “may use full lane.”bicycle facilitiesBike lanes provide preferential or exclusive use of a portion of the roadway for bicyclists through striping or markings. sharrows bike boulevard Bike boulevards allow for bicyclists and motorists to share the same travel lanes to facilitate safe and convenient bicycle travel. They are low- volume streets optimized for bicyclists and pedestrians. local trolley* Electric vehicle and bike parking facilities support the use of alternative modes to key destinations.transportation amenitiesA local trolley, in coordination with parking facilities, provides enhanced access to the beach and downtown. ev + bike parking crossing control parking district Crossing control facilities (stop sign, signal, traffic circle) ensure efficient and safe intersections for all travel modes. District-based parking helps to manage parking supply and more efficiently use space dedicated for parking. * Exact route/stops of a local trolley would be identified as future parking facilities and development occur. Berkeley CA -Bike Blvd Network Project Attributes 15 mile network on 7 corridors Initiated as demonstration projects in 2001 Have spent approximately $330,000 on implementation (90% from grant sources) 75% increase in bicycle counts between 2000 and 2011 (some count locations with more than 250 per hour) Network includes: diverters, traffic circles, signage, bicycle signal detectors, pavement maintenance relevant examples Morro St, San Luis Obispo -Bike Blvd Project Attributes 7 blocks (~ 1/2 mile) Closed gap between railroad bike path and downtown core Residential street with low vehicle volumes (parallels busier vehicle street) Gives priority to bike boulevard travel (removed stop signs) Uses signs, pavement, markings, and diverters to discourage through travel for vehicles Special signs incorporated into street signs highlight route ~$775k for design and construction relevant examples Bell Street Park, Seattle -Shared Roadway Project Attributes 4 blocks (1.3 acres) Continuous level plane between street and sidewalks Stamped concrete design Provides landscaping, lighting, public art, and open space $5 million for planning, design, and development Post-development art and space activation plan ~3,400 vehicles per day relevant examples Connecting Back to the Vision Hermosa Beach is the small town others aspire to be: A place where beach culture and active healthy lifestyles, strong sense of community, and commitment to sustainability and innovation intersect. Our beautiful beach, eclectic neighborhoods,unique commercial districts, and welcoming gateways create an unrivaled coastal destination. Our outstanding local schools and municipal services contribute to an extraordinarily high quality of life at the beach. Our vibrant economy capitalizes on our entrepreneurial spirit and commitment to unique local businesses. Our economy balances small town, beach culture with our enviable position as a regional and statewide coastal destination. We are committed to investing in our future, protecting our coastal resources, and reducing our environmental footprint. Our sustainable beach culture supports our desire to live, shop, work and play locally. Our prominent beach, open spaces, and complete streets that connect places we go by car, bike and walking support our active, healthy lifestyle. Questions for Consideration •DO YOU FEEL THE CHANGES IDENTIFIED IN THE LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION NETWORK ADEQUATELY CAPTURE PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS? •DOES THE PROPOSED LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION NETWORK REFLECT THE CONCEPTS OF THE VISION STATEMENT? •ARE THE EXAMPLES PROVIDED APPROPRIATE TYPES OF FACILITIES OR DEVELOPMENTS IN HERMOSA BEACH? Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Joint Meeting of May 11, 2015 GENERAL PLAN/COASTAL LAND USE PLAN UPDATE: DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION ON LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION SCENARIOS (Community Development Director Ken Robertson) Summary This report provides the Council, Planning Commission and public with the materials for the May 11th Study Session. Staff and the City’s General Plan consultants will provide a brief overview and request initial feedback /direction from the public, Planning Commission and City Council. The purpose of the Study Session is to provide initial direction on the degree and type of changes to the land use and transportation network that should be considered for the future of Hermosa Beach over the next 20-30 years. The scenario recommended by Council and the Planning Commission will inform the policies and standards included in the policy document component of the General Plan and will serve as the Project Description for the General Plan Environmental Impact Report. The General Plan work products prepared thus far are available on the General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan webpage at <http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=767>. Previous activities as well as plans already adopted by the City and other background resources may also be reviewed at this webpage. These items will be folded into the General Plan, ensuring that the City’s work-to-date remains relevant and usable. Reviewing and Evaluating the Land Use and Transportation Scenarios The General Plan will consist of two primary components, a policy document and a set of maps to identify the physical layout of the community. For Hermosa Beach, the land use map serves a critical role in communicating the location, mix, and intensity of future uses, while the transportation map identifies the future network, connections, and capacity that facilitate the movement of people, goods, and vehicles about the community. It is important to identify the preferred physical layout of the community through these maps prior to creating the policy document. This stepped approach ensures that the policies, goals, and actions of the policy document are consistent with and take the steps needed to achieve the desired physical layout portrayed within the land use and transportation maps. Identifying the preferred land use and transportation network first, will also ensure that the physical changes can be properly evaluated in the context of infrastructure capacity, environmental constraints, and economic development potential. File #:REPORT 15-0387,Version:1 Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:REPORT 15-0387,Version:1 In terms of identifying a future land use and transportation network, there are many approaches Hermosa Beach can consider in deciding how to incorporate new development in a context sensitive manner, enhance economic development and entrepreneurship, and encourage a healthy environment and active lifestyle. To help focus the wide range of potential land use and transportation possibilities, staff and the consulting team have developed four scenarios for consideration and evaluation (detailed in Attachment 1). The intent of creating four scenarios is to provide the community, Planning Commission, and City Council with a framework and forum to review, discuss, and evaluate the desired level of change to the land use and transportation network and ultimately select a preferred scenario. As the summary report of land use and transportation scenarios is meant to stimulate discussion, it purposely does not recommend a particular scenario or attempt to make conclusions about how well each scenario might accomplish City goals. However, the City’s Decision Making Tool can be used as a resource by the public, Planning Commission, and City Council to compare and evaluate the potential benefits and tradeoffs between the four scenarios. To assist in this evaluation, a worksheet with the decision making tool questions has been prepared (Attachment 2). How the Land Use and Transportation Scenarios Were Crafted The four land use and transportation scenarios have been developed through a multi-faceted process that considers the following: ·Vision and Guiding Principles - Over the course of 2014, the community working group, with input from staff, consultants, and the community worked to craft a Vision Statement and Guiding Principles that articulate the community’s desired future based. This vision was developed through the Community Dialogue process, the Sustainability Plan, and especially the Working Group members’ experiences living and working in Hermosa Beach. In December 2014, the Council and Planning Commission held a joint study session to review and provide input on the Vision Statement and Guiding Principles. This refined Vision Statement and Guiding Principles (Attachment 3) serve as the base foundation in the development of subsequent components of the General Plan to ensure that the Policy document and maps help to achieve the community’s vision. ·Community Input and Feedback- In terms of public participation throughout the process, we started with a broad range of possibilities and gathered ideas relevant to key issues through community events and workshops in July 2013, May 2014, and November 2014. In March 2015, we invited the community to join us on a series of walking tours or participate in group discussions to explore the community’s ideas and interest in enhancing or transforming key non-residential areas of the community. The concepts and materials presented to the community during this workshop, as well as the results of the workshop and follow-up online participation are provided in Attachment 4. The feedback on various concepts proposed during the walking tours has been incorporated into the land use and transportation scenarios presented. ·Existing Local Plans and Recent Efforts - The City has adopted or is working on a number of plans and programs that have relevance to the land use and transportation network, or can be further implemented through proposed changes to land uses or the transportation network. Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:REPORT 15-0387,Version:1 Relevant plans and efforts include the Downtown Core Revitalization Strategy, PCH/Aviation Corridor Master Plan, Sustainability Plan, Carbon Neutral Scoping Plan, South Bay Bicycle Master Plan, and the Beach Cities Livability Plan. A key objective of this Update is to integrate and align the City’s General Plan with all of these recent plans and efforts. ·State Legislation and Best Practices - In updating the General Plan and integrating the Coastal Land Use Plan, there are multiple items relevant to the land use and transportation network that must (or should strongly) be considered to be in compliance with State Law associated with General Plans. Additionally, since the General Plan was last updated, there are several best practices or technological innovations surrounding the topics of sustainability and livability that have not previously been considered within the General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan. Connection to Community Carbon Neutral Planning Process In order to facilitate a more inclusive process around the topic of community carbon neutrality, the carbon neutrality planning approach has been aligned with the ongoing General Plan update process. One particular area of coordination focuses on the development of a “Community Carbon Tool” which will help in analyzing and determining what it would take for the City of Hermosa Beach to achieve carbon neutrality. The Carbon Tool (Attachment 5) is intended to provide a user-friendly platform for community stakeholders to explore what it would take to achieve carbon neutrality, including estimated costs and benefits of the carbon reduction strategies. The Carbon Tool includes four major categories of potential emissions reduction strategies: building efficiency, renewable energy, transportation and land use, and purchase of offsets. The transportation and land use category provides users with an option to select their preferred land use and transportation scenario, as each scenario varies in their ability to reduce vehicle miles traveled and contribute toward achieving the City’s greenhouse gas reduction goals. The community’s input on the Carbon Tool will assist with the development of the General Plan in two specific ways: 1.Selection of their preferred land use and transportation scenario will help to confirm which scenario is most palatable to the community, particularly in the context of reducing greenhouse emissions. 2.Identification of preferred building efficiency, renewable energy, and transportation demand management policies through the Carbon Tool will help to inform General Plan goal and policy development by gauging the community’s interest in pursuing or prioritizing certain programs. Next Steps and Continued Community Participation Once the recommended land use and transportation plan is set, the next several months of work effort will focus on developing the goals and policies of the General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan, within input throughout the process from City Staff in multiple departments, the Community Working Group, and the Technical Advisory Committee. The Draft General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan and associated environmental document will be released in the fall, with multiple opportunities for the community to review and provide feedback prior to initiation of the formal public hearing and adoption Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:REPORT 15-0387,Version:1 process. Since the Planning Commission is statutorily charged with making a recommendation on the draft General Plan to the City Council, the Commission will be involved in each phase of review. Other City Commissions will also be consulted at key points in the process to review and provide input on topics within their purview. City Council will take formal action on the General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan and Environmental Impact Report. Attachments: 1.Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios for Review 2.Decision Making Tool 3.Updated Vision Statement and Guiding Principles 4.Materials and Results of 3/28 Community Workshop 5.Draft Carbon Planning Tool User Guide 6.Draft Carbon Planning Tool Respectfully Submitted by: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Approved: Tom Bakaly, City Manager Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ Hermosa Beach General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Admin Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios 1 Introduction General Plans are typically divided into a physical improvement plan related to land uses and the transportation network, and the policy plan, which establishes goals, policies, objectives, and actions aimed toward implementing the community’s vision for the future of Hermosa Beach. The physical improvement plan, commonly referred to as the Land Use and Transportation Plan, process starts with the development of multiple scenarios or alternatives that detail they physical improvements that could occur through changing land uses or the transportation network. Prior to developing the policy plan, it is important that the community and decision-makers identify a preferred land use and transportation scenario, so that it may be further evaluated for potential environmental impacts and so that the policy plan is written in a way that implements the preferred physical changes. This document details and qualitatively evaluates four different land use and transportation scenarios (titled A, B, C, and D) for consideration and to assist the community and decision-makers to identify a preferred land use and transportation scenario. The figure below categorizes the types of land use and transportation enhancements proposed within each scenario. Ground Rules & Parameters As this plan identifies the physical land use and transportation network changes that may occur within the General Plan, there are a series of commonly asked questions or concerns that should be clarified: • Changing or re-defining designations does not require any existing uses to change. • Establishing new designations is meant to provide MORE options for property owners. • There are certain changes that must occur to the land use map and transportation network for the City’s General Plan to be consistent with State Law including: o Establishing a range of appropriate development intensities or densities for all land use designations o Reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, in part by facilitating the reduction of auto- dependency and vehicle miles traveled o Ensuring that all users and modes have a safe and convenient network o Providing adequate visitor-serving uses (lodging) to address local coastal plan requirements, which require an increase in opportunities for these uses • Proposed densities and intensities within Scenarios A-C are generally based on existing, “on the ground” uses in each area. Land Use •Designations •Definitions •Residential Density and Commercial Intensity •Land Use Map Transportation •Street and Active Transportation Network •Neighborhood and Site Enhancements •Parking Facilities/Policies •Transportation Network Map Hermosa Beach General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Admin Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios 2 Adopted General Plan The community’s land use goals and development patterns are reflected in its adopted General Plan and Coastal Land Use Plan. This table provides a summary or synopsis of the basic physical framework of the adopted General Plan. Land Use Program Adopted General Plan Land Use Program Land Use Designation Land Use Definition Allowed Density/Intensity Low Density Residential Single-family residential Max: 13 du/ac Medium Density Residential Multiple-family residential Max: 25 du/ac High Density Residential Multiple-family residential Max: 33/du/ac Mobile Home Park Mobile homes None formally established (13 du/ac recommended) Specific Plan Area Defined by specific plan based on unique characteristics of area. Max: 14.7 du/ac Neighborhood Commercial Convenience stores, deli/markets, and similar personal services uses to serve local walk-in traffic. None Established Commercial Recreation Visitor serving uses such as motels/hotels, bicycle shops, beach equipment, entertainment, clothing and similar uses None Established General Commercial Uses such as auto and truck related uses, lumber yard, equipment rental. None Established Commercial Corridor Retail, service, and office uses. Automotive uses by CUP. Residential uses allowed to remain. None Established Industrial Manufacturing and similar uses such as electronic assembly, bakeries, bottling, garment manufacturing, laboratories, machine, sheet metal and carpentry shops, oil production, plastic and rubber fabrication. None Established Open Space Recreational and park uses as well as institutional and civic facilities. None Established The adopted Plans contain background material and analysis to support the policies and actions that were adopted initially in the early 1980s. Since that time the Plans have been amended several times but have not been comprehensively updated. Since this synopsis does not provide context, the reader is encouraged to look over the adopted documents: General Plan: http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=500 General Plan Land Use Map: http://www.hermosabch.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=640 Coastal Land Use Plan: http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=501 Hermosa Beach General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Admin Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios 3 Adopted General Plan Land Use Map Hermosa Beach General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Admin Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios 4 Scenario A: Comply with State Laws This scenario proposes only minimal changes to the land use and transportation program to ensure that those components are in compliance with State Law and provide Hermosa Beach with a legally adequate General Plan framework. Summary of Land Use Program Changes • Land use definitions for General Commercial, Commercial Corridor, Commercial Recreation, and Industrial designations are clarified to ensure they are consistent with the intended use and vision for each area. • Maximum non-residential land use intensities are established for each designation Land Use Program Scenario A Land Use Designation Land Use Definition Density/Intensity Map Changes Low Density Residential Single-family residential Max: 13 du/ac No Medium Density Residential Multiple-family residential Max: 25 du/ac No High Density Residential Multiple-family residential Max: 33/du/ac No Mobile Home Park Mobile homes Max: 13 du/ac No Specific Plan Area Defined by specific plan based on unique characteristics of area. Max: 14.7 du/ac No Neighborhood Commercial Convenience stores, deli/markets, and similar personal services uses to serve local walk-in traffic Max: 1.5 FAR No Commercial Recreation Coastal-dependent uses such as motels/hotels, bicycle shops, beach equipment, entertainment, clothing and similar uses Max: 2.0 FAR No General Commercial Retail, professional office, and local-oriented uses including supermarkets, retail stores, theaters, restaurants, professional and medical offices, and specialty retail stores. Max: 2.0 FAR No Commercial Corridor Home improvement stores, furniture stores, auto dealerships, and light automotive service stations. Max: 1.0 FAR No Industrial Manufacturing and similar uses such as electronic assembly, bakeries, bottling, garment manufacturing, laboratories, machine, sheet metal and carpentry shops Max: 0.5 FAR No Open Space Recreational and park uses as well as institutional and civic facilities Max: 0.1 FAR No * New Designation Proposed | Change to designation, definition, or density proposed beyond previous scenario Land Use Map No changes are proposed to the land use map in this scenario. Summary of Transportation Network Changes • All local streets provide a safe and ADA accessible street network for users of all ages and abilities (Implements complete streets requirements). • Shared roadway networks are provided and clearly marked for bicyclist use • Minor connectivity/access improvements are made to ensure timely/safe pedestrian street crossings at Gould/Greenbelt, Pier/Greenbelt, Artesia/PCH, Pier/PCH, Aviation/PCH Hermosa Beach General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Admin Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios 5 Scenario A: Transportation Network Map Hermosa Beach General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Admin Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios 6 Scenario B: Clarify and Align with Existing Uses & Zoning Code This scenario would make minor clarifications and changes to the land use program and transportation network to clarify and align the General Plan land uses with the zoning code, existing uses, and adopted plans such as the Bicycle Master Plan. Summary of Land Use Program Changes (+ Changes listed in Scenario A) • The following designation names are changed for consistent nomenclature and clarity: o Commercial Recreation to Recreational Commercial o General Commercial to Community Commercial o Commercial Corridor to Service Commercial • Specific Plan Area designation and Mobile Home designation are removed/combined (not appropriate as separate designations – more appropriate as overlay zone in Zoning Code) • New Public Facilities designation is created and applied to institutional and civic facilities (city, school district, or utility owned) currently unclassified or designated open space. • Designation changes applied to specific parcels identified in land use map for consistency with current zoning districts. Land Use Program Scenario B Land Use Designation Land Use Definition Density/Intensity Map Changes Low Density Residential Single-family residential, including mobile home uses Max: 13 du/ac Parcel Specific Medium Density Residential Multiple-family residential Max: 25 du/ac Parcel Specific High Density Residential Multiple-family residential Max: 33/du/ac Parcel Specific Neighborhood Commercial Convenience stores, deli/markets, and similar personal services uses to serve local walk-in traffic Max: 1.5 FAR No Recreational Commercial Coastal-dependent uses such as motels/hotels, bicycle shops, beach equipment, entertainment, clothing and similar uses Max: 2.0 FAR No Community Commercial Retail, professional office, and local-oriented uses including supermarkets, retail stores, theaters, restaurants, professional and medical offices, and specialty retail stores. Max: 2.0 FAR No Service Commercial Home improvement stores, furniture stores, auto dealerships, and light automotive service stations. Max: 1.0 FAR No Industrial Manufacturing and similar uses such as electronic assembly, bakeries, bottling, garment manufacturing, laboratories, machine, sheet metal and carpentry shops Max: 0.5 FAR No Open Space Park, recreational, and open space uses including the beach Max: 0.1 FAR No Public Facilities* Civic-related administrative offices, community centers, operational facilities and educational/institutional facilities Max: 1.5 FAR Yes * New Designation Proposed | Change to designation, definition, or density proposed beyond previous scenario Summary of Transportation Network Changes (+ Scenario A) • Street Classifications on Prospect Ave, Valley and Ardmore, Gould Ave/27th St., Pier Ave, 2nd St. are renamed to better align with current or desired speeds, volumes, and lane widths. • Bicycle facilities and enhancements are implemented along Valley/Ardmore Ave, Prospect Ave, and Pier Ave consistent with the adopted South Bay Cities Bicycle Master Plan. • Key parking facilities for consolidated downtown parking lots/structures are identified and protected for parking facility uses. Hermosa Beach General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Admin Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios 7 Scenario B: Land Use Map Hermosa Beach General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Admin Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios 8 Scenario B: Transportation Network Map Hermosa Beach General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Admin Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios 9 Scenario C: Enhance Key Areas This scenario would make minor adjustments to key activity nodes in the residential neighborhoods and propose moderate changes to land use designations and the transportation network in non-residential districts and corridors to achieve the intended vision and objectives articulated by many of the City’s other plans such as the Downtown Core Revitalization Strategy, or PCH/Aviation Corridor Streetscape Master Plan, and would go further than the South Bay Cities Bicycle Master Plan currently proposes. Summary of Land Use Program Changes (+ Changes listed in Scenario A & B) • Industrial designation is changed to Creative Industrial to allow creative art, production and design type uses • Allowable intensity within Creative Industrial designation is increased to facilitate additional creative production uses in Hermosa Beach • Neighborhood Commercial designation is applied to additional key activity nodes within neighborhoods • Recreational Commercial designation is expanded to areas within Downtown and around Pier Plaza • Community Commercial designation is expanded to additional areas along PCH Corridor Land Use Program Scenario C Land Use Designation Land Use Definition Density/Intensity Map Changes Low Density Residential Single-family residential, including mobile home uses Max: 13 du/ac No Medium Density Residential Multiple-family residential Max: 25 du/ac No High Density Residential Multiple-family residential Max: 33/du/ac No Neighborhood Commercial Convenience stores, laundromats, and similar uses to serve local walk-in traffic Max: 1.5 FAR Yes Recreational Commercial Coastal dependent uses such as motels/hotels, bicycle shops, beach equipment, entertainment, clothing and similar uses Max: 2.0 FAR Yes Community Commercial Retail, professional office, and local-oriented uses including supermarkets, retail stores, theaters, restaurants, professional and medical offices, and specialty retail stores. Max: 2.0 FAR Yes Service Commercial Home improvement stores, furniture stores, auto dealerships, and light automotive service stations. Max: 1.0 FAR No Creative Industrial Light industrial and creative art, production, or design studio uses that are connected to creating physical products. Max: 2.0 FAR Yes Open Space Park, recreational, and open space uses including the beach Max: 0.1 FAR No Public Facilities* Civic-related administrative offices, community centers, operational facilities and educational/institutional facilities Max: 1.5 FAR No * New Designation Proposed | Change to designation, definition, or density proposed beyond previous scenario Summary of Transportation Network Changes (+ Scenario A & B) • Moderate connectivity enhancements (added trails, paths, lanes, and signal prioritization, bicycle boulevards) are made and facilities added to equalize the role of biking or walking in the Hermosa Beach transportation network. • Major intersections with the Greenbelt are signalized to enhance pedestrian safety and vehicle movement. • A district-wide parking management/consolidation strategy is implemented for Downtown/Upper Pier/Civic Center to reduce the need for on-site parking on each property. • Parking for alternative modes such as car-sharing, NEVs, electric vehicles, and bicycles is prioritized within Downtown District and provided at major City facilities and parks. • Major corridors are reconfigured to manage speed, smooth traffic flow, increase comfort of public realm • Streetscapes, greenspace, and pop-up parklets are enhanced and designed to implement living streets policy on a wide scale Hermosa Beach General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Admin Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios 10 Scenario C: Land Use Map Hermosa Beach General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Admin Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios 11 Scenario C: Transportation Network Map Hermosa Beach General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Admin Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios 12 Scenario D: Transform Key Areas This scenario would make minor adjustments to key activity nodes in the residential neighborhoods and propose more drastic changes to land use designations and the transportation network in non-residential districts and corridors to achieve, or in some cases go beyond, the intended vision and objectives articulated by many of the City’s other plans such as the Downtown Core Revitalization Strategy and PCH/Aviation Corridor Streetscape Master Plan. Summary of Land Use Program Changes (+ Changes listed in Scenario A, B, & C) • New Gateway Commercial designation is added to key entryways and large corner sites along PCH, Aviation, and Artesia to facilitate the creation of additional commercial and office use spaces that signify arrival in Hermosa Beach. • New Mixed Use designation is added to facilitate ground floor retail and upper floor office or residential (stepped back from street fronts) within Downtown (east of Hermosa Ave) and along Upper Pier Ave. • Community Commercial designation is expanded to additional key areas along PCH and Aviation. • Creative Industrial designation is expanded to include the City Yard, and in turn Public Facilities Designation on Civic Center area is expanded to provide adequate space for a consolidated Civic Center Complex and Storage Yard. Land Use Program Scenario D Land Use Designation Land Use Definition Density/Intensity Map Changes Low Density Residential Single-family residential, including mobile home uses Max: 13 du/ac No Medium Density Residential Multiple-family residential Max: 25 du/ac No High Density Residential Multiple-family residential Max: 33/du/ac No Neighborhood Commercial Convenience stores, laundromats, and similar uses to serve local walk-in traffic Max: 1.5 FAR No Recreational Commercial Coastal dependent uses such as motels/hotels, bicycle shops, beach equipment, entertainment, clothing and similar uses Max: 2.0 FAR No Community Commercial Retail, professional office, and local-oriented uses including supermarkets, retail stores, theaters, restaurants, professional and medical offices, and specialty retail stores. Max: 2.0 FAR Yes Service Commercial Home improvement stores, furniture stores, auto dealerships, and light automotive service stations. Max: 1.0 FAR No Gateway Commercial* Lower floor community or regionally-oriented commercial uses with upper floor high-visitor office uses or hotel uses Max: 3.0 FAR Yes Mixed Use* Ground floor retail and restaurant uses with upper floor office or residential use (stepped back from street fronts) Max: 2.0 FAR & 25 du/ac Yes Creative Industrial Light industrial and creative art, production, or design studio uses that are connected to creating physical products Max: 2.0 FAR Yes Open Space Park, recreational, and open space uses including the beach Max: 0.1 FAR No Public Facilities* Civic-related administrative offices, community centers, operational facilities and educational/institutional facilities Max: 1.5 FAR Yes * New Designation Proposed | Change to designation, definition, or density proposed beyond previous scenario Summary of Transportation Network Changes (+ Scenarios A & B & C) • Dramatic connectivity enhancements are made for bike, pedestrians, and neighborhood electric vehicles to encourage their role as primary means of travel in Hermosa Beach • An extensive bike share program is established and bicycle support facilities (i.e. bike share station, repair shop, extensive parking hubs) are provided • Additional Non-motorized zones or bike friendly streets are created • A Transit/Trolley line along Pier Ave and Aviation Blvd is created to take people to Downtown and the Beach. • Reduced on-street parking (in coordination with parking management strategy) to create space for bike lanes, wider sidewalks, green spaces. Hermosa Beach General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Admin Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios 13 Scenario D: Land Use Map Hermosa Beach General Plan/Coastal Land Use Plan Admin Draft Land Use and Transportation Scenarios 14 Scenario D: Transportation Network Map Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 15-0554 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Special Meeting of July 16, 2015 STRAND AND PIER HOTEL PROJECT UPDATE (Community Development Director Ken Robertson) Recommended Action: Receive and file. Background: The purpose of this item is to provide Council and the public an update on the Strand and Pier Hotel/Mixed use development proposal. ·On July 29, 2014 the Council granted Bolour Associates permission to include Parking Lot B and Beach Drive between 13th Court and Pier Avenue in a development application for a hotel project, including a restaurant and other amenities, at the northeast corner of The Strand and Pier Avenue. ·The developer filed an application with the Community Development Department which was deemed incomplete on September 3, 2014. Prior to application the developer held several community workshops to present concepts and obtain input. ·Staff conducted a request for proposal process and on November 13, 2014 recommended execution of a contract to retain a consultant to prepare an environmental impact report for the project; however, the matter was tabled upon request by the applicant. ·On February 24, 2015 the Council accepted the Downtown Core Revitalization Strategy and Guidelines which addresses catalyst projects. Analysis: Over the past 9 months, the developer has conferred with staff on various issues relating to development of the subject property, such as the required land use entitlements, height and parking regulations, potential for subterranean parking, emergency vehicle access, and consistency with the Downtown Core Revitalization Strategy and Guidelines, and similar issues. The developer has additionally held several meetings with community members and stakeholders, and has also gained control of key properties between Parking Lot B and Beach Drive between 13th Court and Pier Avenue. At this time Bolour Associates will be updating the Council on the status of its application and their revised concepts for development of the site. The developer will provide a supplemental no later than Monday July 13 to support this update. Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Staff Report REPORT 15-0554 Respectfully Submitted by: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Approved: Tom Bakaly, City Manager Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 7/13/15   1   Original  Project  Concept  –  July  2014   • Site  Approx.  27,000  sq.  D.  –   “L”  Shaped  site   • Full-­‐Service  Hotel   – Approx.  86,000  square  feet   – 111  Guest  Rooms  &  Suites   – 15,000  +/-­‐  sq.  D.  Restaurant  / Retail  Space   – Public  RooDop  Terrace   – Pool  Deck   – Public  Lobby  /  Lounge   – Spa  /  Fitness   – 45-­‐foot  maximum  height   – City  Lot  “B”  included  a  parking   structure   7/13/15   2   Site  Plan–  July  2014   Sec[on  A  –  July  2014   7/13/15   3   Sec[on  B  –  July  2014   Architectural  Concept  –  July  2014   7/13/15   4   • 45’  feet  –  exceeds  current  height   permits   • Ini[al  renderings  were  ‘cold’  and   not  reflec[ve  of  the  unique   character  of  Hermosa   • Ac[vate  ground  level  along  the   Strand  &  Pier  Ave  sides  with  retail,   dining  op[ons   • Create  public  access  and  ameni[es     • Consider  on-­‐site  parking   • Build  a  sustainable  project  with   environmental  features  including   pedestrian  programs     Community  /  Council  Feedback   July  2014   LOT  B   SITE   7/13/15   5   August  2015   SITE   Proposed  Conceptual  Plan  –  Ground  Floor   7/13/15   6   Proposed  Revised  Upper  Level  Plan   105-110 TOTAL Proposed  Revised  Basement  Level   PARKING  (approx.  150  spaces)   7/13/15   7   Current  Scheme  -­‐  Benefits   • Acquisi[on  of  addi[onal  proper[es  allows  a  more  flexible  site  plan   • En[rely  self-­‐contained  project     • Does  not  include  Lot  B  or  require  public/private  partnership   • 30’  height     • Fewer  guestrooms  –110  guestrooms  instead  of  117   • Over  20,000  sf  of  public  area  including  plazas  and  retail   • Superior  vehicular  access/drop  off  zone  (on-­‐site)   • Ground  floor  en[rely  accessible  as  public     • No  rooms  on  ground  floor  facing  the  Strand   • On-­‐site  /  subterranean  parking     • New  architectural  direc[on  based  on  community  feedback   • More  of  a  “mixed-­‐use”  project   Staff & collateral encourage guests touse public transit Next time you want to sle e p o v e r , d o n ’ t b e s h y ! Woof! Woof! Meow! (Welcome!) 1/28/13 11:24 AM The Driftwood Room opened in 1954 and we’re celebrating six decades of decadent cocktails al month long with guest bartenders every Monday in May and a mid-century inspired party on Memorial Day, May 26 from 4-7 pm with classic cars, vintage fashion and more. Details atwww.hoteldeluxe.com/60 CHANNEL NETWORK2 . . . . . . A B C - H D 3 . . . . . . H O T E L I N F O R M A T I O N 4 . . . . . . H D N E T V A R I E T Y 5 . . . . . . H D N E T M O V I E S 6 . . . . . . C B S - H D 7 . . . . . . T N T - H D 8 . . . . . . N B C - H D 9 . . . . . . H B O - H D 10 . . . . . P B S - H D 11 . . . . . U N I V E R S A L - H D 12 . . . . . F O X - H D 13 . . . . . E S P N - H D 14 . . . . . E S P N 2 - H D 15 . . . . . E S P N N E W S 16 . . . . . E S P N C L A S S I C 17 . . . . . E S P N U 18 . . . . . F O X N E W S 19 . . . . . M S N B C 20 . . . . . C N N 21 . . . . . C N N H E A D L I N E N E W S 22 . . . . . I O N 23 . . . . . C N B C 24 . . . . . B L O O M B E R G 25 . . . . . W E A T H E R C H A N N E L 26 . . . . . D I S C O V E R Y - H D 27 . . . . . D I S C O V E R Y CHANNEL NETWORK28 . . . . . A N I M A L P L A N E T 29 . . . . . L E A R N I N G C H A N N E L 30 . . . . . H G T V 31 . . . . . S Y F Y 32 . . . . . C W - H D 33 . . . . . U S A 34 . . . . . T B S 35 . . . . . W G N 36 . . . . . L I F E T I M E 37 . . . . . T R U T V 38 . . . . . H I S T O R Y 39 . . . . . A & E 40 . . . . . C S P A N 41 . . . . . C S P A N 2 42 . . . . . A M C 43 . . . . . A B C F A M I L Y 44 . . . . . N I C K E L O D E O N 45 . . . . . E ! 46 . . . . . C O M E D Y C E N T R A L 47 . . . . . F O O D N E T W O R K 48 . . . . . T R A V E L C H A N N E L 49 . . . . . M Y N E T W O R K 50 . . . . . V H 1 51 . . . . . M T V 52 . . . . . M T V 2 53 . . . . . H O T E L C H A N N E L Now Playing . . . Is Portland’s favorite ice cream on your bucket list? Press the Get It Now button on your guest ro o m phone and we’ll deliver a pin t r i g h t t o y o u r r o o m ! ■ Sea Salt with Caramel Rib b o n s ■ Strawberry Honey Balsamic ■ Almond Brittle with Salted Ga n a c h e ■ Pear with Blue Cheese ■ Freckled Woodblock Cho c o l a t e ■ Selection of the Season Be ready to eat the whole p i n t … i t ’ s e a s i e r t h a n you would imagine! In-room recycling bins provided throughout hotels Employees receive subsidized public transit passes Paper collateral is minimal & printed on recycled materials Bath amenities & packaging are ecologically friendly Standard Sustainability Practices Housekeeping options encourage water conservation 7/13/15   8   Public  Outreach  –  Past  9  months   • Focus  Groups  /  Community  Outreach   • Visual  Iden[ty   • Strategic  Partnerships     • Social  Media  Presence   7/13/15   9   Stay%In%The%Know!% % %% www.Facebook.com/StrandPier%%% %%www.Twitter.com/StrandandPier%%% %%www.Instagram.com/StrandandPier%%% %%www.StrandandPier.com%%% %%% % We  are  s[ll  listening!   Joint City Council / City Planning Commission July 16, 2015 Original  Project  Concept  –  July  2014   • Site  Approx.  27,000  sq.  A.   Site Plan– July 2014 • Full-­‐Service  Hotel   – Approx.  86,000  square   feet   – 117  Guest  Rooms  &  Suites   – 12,000  +/-­‐  sq.  A.   Restaurant  /Retail  Space   – Public  RooAop  Terrace   – Pool  Deck   – Public  Lobby  /  Lounge   – Spa  /  Fitness   – 45-­‐foot  maximum  height   – City  Lot  “B”  included  a   parking  structure   SecZon  A  –  July  2014   SecZon  B  –  July  2014   Architectural  Concept  –  July  2014   • 45’  feet  –  exceeds  current  height   limit   • IniZal  renderings  were  ‘cold’  and   not  reflecZve  of  the  unique   character  of  Hermosa   • AcZvate  ground  level  along  the   Strand  &  Pier  Ave  sides  with  retail,   dining  opZons   • Create  public  access  and  ameniZes     • Consider  on-­‐site  parking   • Build  a  sustainable  project  with   environmental  features  including   pedestrian  programs     Community  /  Council  Feedback   July  2014   LOT  B   SITE   August  2015   SITE   Proposed  Conceptual  Plan  –  Ground  Floor   Proposed  Revised  Upper  Level  Plan   105-110 TOTAL Proposed  Revised  Basement  Level   PARKING   (approx.  150  spaces)   Current  Scheme  -­‐  Benefits   • AcquisiZon  of  addiZonal  properZes  allows  a  more  flexible   site  plan   • EnZrely  self-­‐contained  project  /  does  not  include  Lot  B     • 30’  height     • Fewer  guestrooms  –110  guestrooms  instead  of  117   • Over  20,000  sf  of  public  area  including  plazas  and  retail   • Superior  vehicular  access/drop  off  zone  (on-­‐site)   • Ground  floor  enZrely  accessible  as  public     • On-­‐site  /  subterranean  parking     • New  architectural  direcZon  based  on  community  feedback   • More  of  a  “mixed-­‐use”  project   Economic  Benefits   • Catalyst  project  for  the  downtown  core   • New  temporary  and  permanent  job  creaZon     • Economic  generator  for  exisZng  downtown   businesses     • New  TOT  and  sales  taxes  to  the  City  of   Hermosa  Beach     • New  partnerships  with  local  businesses  and   recreaZonal  programs  in  the  community     Electric vehicle charging stations provided onsite Interior spaces utilize reclaimed wood, recycled stained glass Innovative Market Specific Green Programs & Initiatives Car-sharing service offered onsite, with discounts for guests Rooftop gardens supply herbs to bars and restaurants Locally roasted coffee is delivered to hotels via bicycle Rooftop beehives supply bars and restaurants with local honey Brown bag room service eliminates waste with compostable products Hotels feature “Clean the World” soap/ amenity donation program Local Partner Inspiration for Strand + Pier sin-min Yuketen Mixt Studio Skechers Isabella’s Cookies Tarsan Stand Up Paddleboarding Bath Bar JK Surfboards Social  Benefits   • Long  term  sustainability     • Leader  in  alternaZve  forms  of   transportaZon  for  guests  and  staff     • Local  community  partnerships  and       co-­‐branding  opportuniZes     • Public  access  to  food  and  beverage   and  visitor  serving  accommodaZons   Staff & collateral encourage guests to use public transit Next time you want t o s l e e p o v e r , d o n ’ t b e s h y ! Woof! Woof! Meow! (Welcome!) 1/28/13 11:24 AM The Driftwood Room opened in 1954 and we’re celebrating six decades of decadent cocktails al month long with guest bartenders every Monday in May and a mid-century inspired party on Memorial Day, May 26 from 4-7 pm with classic cars, vintage fashion and more. Details at www.hoteldeluxe.com/60 CHANNEL NETWORK2 . . . . . . A B C - H D 3 . . . . . . H O T E L I N F O R M A T I O N 4 . . . . . . H D N E T V A R I E T Y 5 . . . . . . H D N E T M O V I E S 6 . . . . . . C B S - H D 7 . . . . . . T N T - H D 8 . . . . . . N B C - H D 9 . . . . . . H B O - H D 10 . . . . . P B S - H D 11 . . . . . U N I V E R S A L - H D 12 . . . . . F O X - H D 13 . . . . . E S P N - H D 14 . . . . . E S P N 2 - H D 15 . . . . . E S P N N E W S 16 . . . . . E S P N C L A S S I C 17 . . . . . E S P N U 18 . . . . . F O X N E W S 19 . . . . . M S N B C 20 . . . . . C N N 21 . . . . . C N N H E A D L I N E N E W S 22 . . . . . I O N 23 . . . . . C N B C 24 . . . . . B L O O M B E R G 25 . . . . . W E A T H E R C H A N N E L 26 . . . . . D I S C O V E R Y - H D 27 . . . . . D I S C O V E R Y CHANNEL NETWORK 28 . . . . . A N I M A L P L A N E T 29 . . . . . L E A R N I N G C H A N N E L 30 . . . . . H G T V 31 . . . . . S Y F Y 32 . . . . . C W - H D 33 . . . . . U S A 34 . . . . . T B S 35 . . . . . W G N 36 . . . . . L I F E T I M E 37 . . . . . T R U T V 38 . . . . . H I S T O R Y 39 . . . . . A & E 40 . . . . . C S P A N 41 . . . . . C S P A N 2 42 . . . . . A M C 43 . . . . . A B C F A M I L Y 44 . . . . . N I C K E L O D E O N 45 . . . . . E ! 46 . . . . . C O M E D Y C E N T R A L 47 . . . . . F O O D N E T W O R K 48 . . . . . T R A V E L C H A N N E L 49 . . . . . M Y N E T W O R K 50 . . . . . V H 1 51 . . . . . M T V 52 . . . . . M T V 2 53 . . . . . H O T E L C H A N N E L Now Play i n g . . . Is Portland’s favorite ice cream on your bucket lis t ? Press the Get It Now button on your guest r o o m phone and we’ll deliver a p i n t r i g h t t o y o u r r o o m ! ■ Sea Salt with Caram e l R i b b o n s ■ Strawberry Honey Ba l s a m i c ■ Almond Brittle with S a l t e d G a n a c h e ■ Pear with Blue Cheese ■ Freckled Woodblock Ch o c o l a t e ■ Selection of the Season Be ready to eat the w h o l e p i n t … i t ’ s e a s i e r t h a n you would imagine! In-room recycling bins provided throughout hotels Employees receive subsidized public transit passes Paper collateral is minimal & printed on recycled materials Bath amenities & packaging are ecologically friendly Standard Sustainability Practices Housekeeping options encourage water conservation Compost program for food and plant waste Thinking Green for Hermosa Beach Rooftop green space and herb gardens Sustainable fitness focus to include beach yoga and eco-friendly gym facilities Food programs focus on using certified sustainable seafood Solar panels to offset electrical usage Partnerships with local bike shops for guest use Preferential valet service for bicycles to encourage bike use by locals Literature, events and activities focusing on marine ecology Public  Outreach  –  Past  9  months   • Focus  Groups  /  Community  Outreach   • Strategic  Partnerships     • Social  Media  Presence   • Visual  IdenZty     Stay%In%The%Know!% % %% www.Facebook.com/StrandPier% % % %% www.Twitter.com/StrandandPier% % % %% www.Instagram.com/StrandandPier% % % %% www.StrandandPier.com% % % % % % % We  are  sZll  listening!   Visual  IdenZty   Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 15-0569 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Special Meeting of July 16, 2015 REVIEW OF POLICY AND PROCEDURE FOR CITY RESPONSES TO PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS (City Clerk Elaine Doerfling) Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council receive and file this report. Background: At its meeting of May 26, 2015, the City Council requested that the City Clerk and staff review the existing procedures for responding to Public Records Requests (PRR) pursuant to the California Public Records Act, Government Code § 6250, et. seq. Analysis: The City’s existing practice has been decentralized. Record Requests received by the City Clerk were logged in and forwarded to the appropriate department(s) for response. The responsive department would gather the requested information and forward same to the requestor. There was no formal practice for the City Clerk’s office to be notified that the department had complied with the Request. In preparation for this report, staff surveyed numerous cities to ascertain whether they had formal written PRR policies in place. The response was mixed, with many reporting that their only “policy” was to comply with the Act as it was written. However, several cities responded that they did have a formal written policy. From this input, staff prepared the attached policy, which will be formalized into a City of Hermosa Beach Administrative Policy. Under this policy ALL Public Record Requests will either come directly to the City Clerk’s office or be immediately forwarded to that office if received in another department. The City Clerk’s office will document receipt of the Request and advise the responsive department of the information being sought. The department will acknowledge receipt of the Request, gather the responsive documents, and forward them to the City Clerk’s office for delivery to the requestor. Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Staff Report REPORT 15-0569 The City Clerk’s office will be responsible for tracking the department’s responsiveness and, if necessary, formally advise the requestor if there is a need for an extension of the 10-day response period. Within 10 days, either the requested documents will be provided OR the requestor will receive notification of the necessity for an extension of time, up to an additional 14 days. As part of the Policy, if it is uncertain whether or not a document is subject to disclosure, the department will advise the City Clerk of the need to seek City Attorney assistance. The attached Administrative Policy also provides guidelines regarding determination of whether or not a document is subject to disclosure. The City Clerk’s office is in the process of researching compatible software needed to facilitate this new policy and track the status of all Requests to ensure compliance with all state and federal laws. Attachments: 1. PRR Policy 2. Flow Chart Submitted by: Elaine Doerfling, City Clerk Concur: Tom Bakaly, City Manager Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ ,. Page 1 of 10 CITY OFHERMOSA BEACH Administrative Policy No. xxxx Title: Dissemination of Public Records I.Policy Objective: To establish procedures that are to be followed when processingrequeststo review or copy public records in the possession of the City. II.Authority: California Public Records Act,Government Code Section 6250, et.seq. Ill. Procedure: Attached Dissemination of Public Records Policy. City Clerk Approval: _____________________________ City Manager Approval: __________________________ Effective Date:Month, day, 2015 ,. Page 2 of 10 DISSEMINATION OF PUBLIC RECORDS POLICY I.Purpose When it enacted the California Public Records Act, Government CodeSection6250, et seq., the State Legislature declared that "access toinformationconcerningthe conduct of the people's business is a fundamental and necessary right of every person in this State."{6250}This policy is designed to implement the Act by describing the procedures that are to be followed when processing requests to reviewor copy records in the possession of the City. This policy is intentionallygeneral in scope as it is impossible to anticipate all of the types of records that may be requested,especially considering the multitude ofoperations and functions provided by the various departments of theCity of Hermosa Beach. II.Definitions A."Public record" is any "writing" containing information relating to the conduct of the public's business prepared, owned, used or retained by the City,regardless of physical form or characteristics.{6252(d)} B."Writing" is broadly defined to include any handwriting,typewriting, printing, photostating, photographing, photocopying, transmitting by electronic mail or facsimile, and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing any form of communication or representation, including letters, words,pictures,sounds,or symbols,or combinations thereof,and any record thereby created, regardless of the manner in which the record has been stored. {6252(e)} Ill.Procedures to Be Followed In Processing Requests for Public Records A.Records that are subject to public disclosure shall be available for review and copying during the normal business hours of the City, which is 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.,.Monday through Thursday, except holidays.[6253(a)] B.The City Clerk is hereby designated as the coordinator of public records and is authorized to direct all departments of the City to make public records available for public inspection during regular business hours and to provide copies of all records to members of ,. Page 3 of 10 the public requesting such copies except those records exempt fromdisclosure herein or by applicable provisions of statutory law. The City Clerk shall serve as the contact point for all public record requests.Those wishing to personally inspect public records as wellas those making written or oral requests for copies of such records shall be referred to the City Clerk. C.Individuals personally inspecting public records, and requesting a copy thereof, may request said copy from the City Clerk and shall be presented with the requested copy by the City Clerk at the earliest practicable time,provided such request has been accompanied by payment of the appropriate.fee as authorized by Section 6253 of the California Government Code. D.Individuals seeking information in accordance with provisions of the California Public Records Act, but not wishing to personally inspect municipal records, may submit a written or oral request identifyingthe specific documents sought to the City Clerk, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach,CA 90254. E.Upon receipt of a written request for a copy of a specific public record,the City Clerk shall provide a copy thereof at the earliest practicable time, provided that such request has been accompanied by payment of the appropriate fee as authorized by Section 6253 of the California Government Code. F.Upon receipt of an oral request for a copy of a specific public record, the City Clerk shall prepare written documentation of the request for public record and shall thereafter provide a copy thereof at theearliest practicable time, provided that such request has been accompanied by payment of the appropriate fee as authorized by Section 6253 of the California Government Code. G.Any individual requesting a copy of a specific public record shall be provided with an exact copy of such record unless not practicable to do so. H.Copies of computerized data shall be provided in a form determined by the City of Hermosa Beach in accordance with provisions of Section 6253 of the California Government Code. I.Any record that is subject to disclosure, and that was prepared for discussion or consideration at a public meeting of the City Council or ,. Page 4 of 10 a City board/commission, shall be available to the public immediately upon distribution to a majority of the Council, commission or board. {54957.5} J.Upon request for a copy of any identifiable record that is subject to disclosure, the record shall be exactly photocopied or otherwise duplicated, unless impractical to do so. Computer data shall beprovided in a form determined by the City. A fee, as established byresolution of the City Council, shall be charged to cover the directcosts of photocopying or otherwise providing a copy of the record. {6253} K.The City, upon receiving a request for a copy of public records,shall, within 10 days from receipt of the request, determine whetherthe request, in whole or in part, seeks copies of disclosable publicrecords in the possession of the City and shall promptly notify the person making the request of the determination and the reasonstherefore. In unusual circumstances,the time limit prescribed in thissection may be extended by written notice by the City Clerk or his orher designee to the person making the request, setting forth thereasons for the extension and the date on which a determination is expected to be dispatched.No notice shall specify a date that wouldresult in an extension for more than 14 days. When the City dispatches the determination, and if the City determines that therequest seeks disclosable public records, the City shall state theestimateddate and time when the records will be made available. As used herein, "unusual circumstances" means the following, butonly to the extent reasonably necessary to the proper processing ofthe particular request: (1) The need to search for and collect therequested records from field facilities or other establishments thatare separate from the office processing the request; (2) The need to search for, collect,and appropriately examine a voluminous amountof separate and distinct records that are demanded in a singlerequest; (3) The need for consultation, which shall be conducted withall practicable speed,with another agency having substantial interestin the determination of the request or among two or more components of the agency having substantial subject matter interesttherein; (4) The need to compile data,to write programminglanguage or a computer program, or to construct a computer reportto extract data. {6253} L.If the record is not subject to disclosure, the person making the request shall be so notified in writing within the initial period or the ,. Page 5 of 10 extended period, whichever is applicable. The notice shall state thereason why the record is being withheld from public disclosure. M.If the request is for a copy of a record that is subject to disclosure and the person making the request does not personally appear toobtain the copy, then within the initial period or the extended period, whichever is applicable,the City Clerk shall give written notice to the person making the request that the record shall be released upon receipt of the fee.If the records requested are not examined, or therequested copied records are not paid for within 14 days of notification, the records shall be returned to their appropriate files and that records request application shall be terminated. The notice shall specify the amount of the fee and shall be signed by the person who prepared the notice. N.If a request is made for any record which City staff believes it may be in the best interest of the City to withhold the record from public disclosure,the request shall be immediately referred to the CityAttorney. O.Fees:A request for copies of an identifiable public record or information or for a certified copy of such record shall be by payment of a fee or deposit to the City of Hermosa Beach.Such fee shall not exceed the actual cost of providing the requested record or the prescribed statutory fee, if any, whichever is less. Cost of providing a copy of an identifiable public record includes but is not limited to, the cost of duplication;personnel expenses incurred in duplicating (running the copy machine) requested records; and the cost of postage, if applicable.The cost does not include the ancillary tasks necessarily associated with the retrieval, inspection and handling of the file from which the copy is extracted." North County Parents Organization v. Department of Education,23 Cal. App. 4th 144,148. IV.General Rules Regarding Disclosure of Public Records A. Every record of the City is subject to public disclosure, unless exempted under the Public Records Act. The City cannot withhold a record simply by stamping it "confidential" or representing to any person that the information contained in the record will be kept confidential. {58 Ops.Cal. Atty. Gen.629} ,. Page 6 of 10 B. If a record contains both exempt and nonexempt information,any reasonably segregatable portion of the record shall be disclosed after deletion of the portions that are exempt. {6257} C.The person making the request does not have to justify his need for the record. If the record is subject to disclosure, the use to which it will be used is immaterial. D. Public disclosure means general,non-selective disclosure. Once arecord has been disclosed to one person it cannot be withheld fromother persons. E. A person who is the subject of a particular record does not have any greater right of access to that record than any other person, even though he is personally affected. Conversely,the subject person hasno right to prevent disclosure of the record to any other person. {65Cal.App.3d 661} V.Public Records That Are Exemptfrom Disclosure A. All Departments 1. Preliminary drafts,notes,and interdepartmental or intradepartmental memoranda,if: (a)the record is not retained in the ordinary course ofbusiness;and(b)the public interest in withholding the record clearlyoutweighs the public interest in disclosure.{6254(a)} 2.Records, the disclosure of which is exempted or prohibited pursuant to federal or state law, including, but not limited to, provisions of the Evidence Code relating to privilege. {6254(k)} 3. Any additional information or records specifically exempt from disclosure under Section 6250 et.seq. of the California GovernmentCode or by other applicable law. B. City Clerk 1. Claims and pending litigation,records pertaining to,until the matter is finally adjudicated or settled.{6254(b)} (The claim itselfisnot exempt.) ,. Page 7 of 10 2.Memoranda of closed sessions regarding litigation,potential or actual, until the matter is finally adjudicatedor settled.{6254.1} 3.Initiative, referendum and recall petitions, except as provided in Section 6253.5. 4. Bilingual ballots or ballot pamphlets, requests for, except as provided in Section 6253.6. 5. All other election materials, the disclosure of which is exempt or prohibited under federal or state law, including the ElectionsCode. {6254(k)} 6.Sealed bids, prior to the bid opening, submitted for the purpose of competitive bidding on City projects, products or services. {6255} 7. Information required from any taxpayer in connection with the collection of local taxes that is received in confidence and the disclosure of the information to other personswould result in unfair competitive disadvantage to theperson supplying the information. {6254(i)} 8.Geological and geophysical data, plant production data, and similar information relating to utility systems development, or market or crop reports, that are obtained in confidence from any person. {6254(e)} C.Licensing 1. Statements of personal worth or personal financial data from an applicant for a license, permit or certificate.{6254(n)} 2.. Test questions, scoring keys and other examination data usedto administer a licensing examination.{6254(g)} D.Personnel 1. Personnel, medical and similar files,if disclosure would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. {6254(c)} An employment contract between the City and any City ,. Page 8 of 10 employee is not exempt.{6254.8} 2. Test questions, scoring keys, and other examination data used to administer an examination for employment. {6254(g)} E.Police 1. Records of complaints to, or investigations by, the Hermosa Beach Police Department: Records of complaints to, or investigations conducted by, or records of intelligence information or security procedures of, the Hermosa Beach Police Department, or any investigatory or security files compiled by any other state or local police agency, or any investigatory or security files compiled by the Hermosa Beach Police Department or any other state or local agency for correctional,law enforcement,or licensing purposes.However, the Hermosa Beach Police Department shall disclose the names and addresses of persons involved in, or witnesses other than confidential informants to, the incident, the description of any property involved, the date,time,and location of the incident, all diagrams, statements of the parties involved in the incident, the statements of all witnesses, other than confidential informants,to the victims of an incident, or an authorized representative thereof, an insurance carrier against which a claim has been or might be made, and any person suffering bodily injury or property damage or loss, as the result of the incident caused by arson, burglary, fire, explosion,larceny, robbery, carjacking, vandalism, vehicle theft, or a crime as defined by subdivision (b) of Government Code Section 13951, unless the disclosure would endanger the safety of a witness or other person involved in the investigation, or unless disclosure would endanger thesuccessfulcompletionof the investigation or a related investigation. However, nothing in this policy shall require the disclosure of that portion of those investigative files that reflects the analysis or conclusions of the investigating officer. {6254(f)} 2. Customer lists provided to the Hermosa Beach PoliceDepartment by an alarm or a security company at the requestof the Hermosa Beach Police Department shall be construed to be records subject to exemption. {6254(f)} ,. Page 9 of 10 3. Information contained in applications for licenses to carryfirearmsissued pursuant to Section 12050 of the Penal Code by the chief of the Hermosa Beach Police Department thatindicates when or where the applicant is vulnerable to attack orthat concerns the applicant's medical or psychological historyorthat of members of his or her family. {6254(u)(1)} 4. The home address and telephone number of peace officers, judges, court commissioners, and magistrates that are set forthin applications for licenses to carry firearms issued pursuant to Section 12050 of the Penal Code by the chief of the Hermosa Beach Police Department. {6254(u)(2)} 5.The home address and telephone number of peace officers, judges, court commissioners,and magistrates that are set forth in licenses to carry firearms issued pursuant to Section 12050ofthe Penal Code by the chief of the Hermosa Beach PoliceDepartment. {6254(u)(1)} 6. A document prepared by or for a state or local agency that assesses its vulnerability to terrorist attack or other criminal acts intended to disrupt the public agency's operations and that is for distributionor considerationin a closed session. {6254(aa)} 7.Critical infrastructure information,as defined in Section 131(3)of Title 6 of the United States Code,that is voluntarily submittedto the California Office of Homeland Security for use by that office, including the identity of the person who or entity that voluntarily submitted the information. As used in this subdivision, "voluntarily submitted" means submitted in theabsence of the office exercising any legal authority to compelaccess to or submission of critical infrastructure information. {6254(bb)} F. Purchasing /Construction 1. The contents of real estate appraisals and engineering and feasibility estimates and evaluations made by or for the Cityrelative to the acquisition of property, until all of the property is acquired. However,the law of eminent domain shall not beaffected by this provision. {6254(h)} 2. Engineering and feasibility estimates and evaluations made by ,. Page 10 of 10 or for the City relative to a public supply or constructioncontract,until all of the contract agreements have been obtained. (6254(h)} G. Tapes of Public Meetings When an audio or video tape recording is made of any open andpublic meeting by,or at the directionof,the City: (a)any person may review the tape without charge onCity equipment, subject to equipment availability andscheduling {54953.5(b)}; (b)any person may obtain a copy of the tape, whichincludes the right to buy a duplicate copy from the Cityas provided in C of Section Ill of this policy, but does not include the right to have a written transcript made; and (c)the tape may be erased or destroyed at any time 30or more days after it was made. {54953.5(b)} Public Records Request City Clerk’s Office 1.Review/Log Request 2.Determine Appropriate Department 3.Forward Request to Department Department 1.Receive & Review Request 2.Gather/Produce Documents 3.Determine Whether Disclosable Disclosable (Forward to Clerk. Clerk Advises Requestor) 1. Make Documents Available to Review OR 2. Forward Documents to Requestor OR 3. Advise Requestor Additional Time Req’d. Question Re: Disclosable 1. Forward to CA 2. Advise City Clerk 3. City Clerk Advise Requestor of Delay Beyond 10 Days (Up to 14 Days) 4. CA Make Determination Disclosable (Forward to Clerk. Clerk Advise Requestor) 1. Make Documents Available for Review OR 2. Forward Documents to Requestor Not Disclosable (Notify Department & Clerk. Clerk Notifies Requestor) Within 10 Days 14 Day Extension Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 15-0564 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Special Meeting of July 16, 2015 UPDATE REGARDING USER FEE STUDY AND CONSIDERATION OF POTENTIAL FEES FOR APPLICATIONS FOR DISABLED PARKING, VOLLEYBALL COURTS, AND DAMAGE TO CITY PROPERTY AND REMOVAL OF TREES (Finance Director Viki Copeland) Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council: 1.Receive and file information about the update of user fees and the master fee resolution; 2.Consider setting fees for applications for disabled parking and volleyball courts; 3.Consider the noticing procedure for applications for volleyball courts with the separate agenda item that will be on the July 28th agenda relating to overall City noticing procedures; and 4.Consider whether a permit fee should be charged for permits in Section 12.36 Trees and whether this section should be added to HBMC section 1.10.040, which enumerates the provisions for which a civil administrative cite may be issued. Background: At the meeting of April 14,2015 (carried over to May 12,2015), the City Council directed staff under Other Matters to report back about evaluating and updating the City’s Master Fee Resolution as needed to ensure that appropriate fees are designated for specific city services. It was noted that the City currently has resolutions that provide for payment of processing or application fees as set forth in the city’s master fee resolution, but no such processing fees are provided. Specific examples of applications for disabled parking and volleyball courts were mentioned as well as a fine or fee for damage to a tree. Analysis: Update on User Fee Study The City last conducted an update of our user fees in 2011 to identify total costs for each service offered by the city. At that time, staff indicated that it would be appropriate to conduct a user fee study every five years to ensure that we are recovering costs at the desired level and to incorporate changes that occur over time. Staff plans to engage the consultant used in 2011, Revenue & Cost Specialists, to update the user Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ Staff Report REPORT 15-0564 fee study. Funds are budgeted in the 2015-16 Adopted Budget. The study involves every department, and looks at existing fees as well as new fees for services that may not have existed at the time of the last study. The study calculates the full business cost of providing each service offered by the city as required by Article XIII B of the Constitution. The fee for the service cannot exceed the “costs reasonable borne” by the city in providing the service. The duration of the project is estimated at 20 weeks. If the City needs to establish fees in between updates of the actual study, that can be accomplished by calculating the cost of the service and bringing a resolution to the City Council to set the fee. Fee, Application for Disabled Parking A resident’s request for an on street disabled parking space was brought before the City Council on 6/9/15. It was noted at that time that Ordinance 13-1340, which codified the process for establishing on street disabled parking spaces, referred to an application processing fee set forth in the City’s master fee resolution. The last fee study was done in 2011 and did not include an application fee for this purpose. A fee could have been established at the time the ordinance was submitted or subsequently however that was not done. If the City Council wishes to establish an application fee for on street disabled parking spaces, staff can calculate the cost and bring a resolution back for City Council approval. Fee, Application for Volleyball Courts There is currently no fee for requests for additional volleyball courts. The Community Resources Department has a departmental policy requiring a public hearing at both the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission and City Council when requests for additional beach volleyball courts are received. A public notice for these meetings is placed in a local newspaper to inform the community of the meetings and a copy of this notice is mailed to residents within 500’ of the location of the proposed court. While this process was modeled after the public hearing procedures of the Community Development Department, it is a departmental policy and is not one required under the city’s municipal code. Costs associated with noticing the residents can be very costly to the city and currently, there are no fees charged to the applicant for making this request. The cost for typical requests generally ranges from $125 - $250, which includes the public notice ad and postage for the residential mailers. This cost estimate does not include staff time to prepare the ad or mailers, which could take several hours. In December 2013, the Community Resources Department followed this process for a request at 8th Street. An ad was placed in the Easy Reader and 133 copies of this ad were mailed to all residents and property owners within the 500’ radius. After the public hearing with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, the entire process and applicable fees were duplicated for the public hearing with City Council. The applicant was not charged a fee for this request. Another example, which brought this process and potential fees into question, includes a more Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ Staff Report REPORT 15-0564 extensive request to install up to 20 volleyball courts at various locations along the beach. This request was received at a time of high resident and beach volleyball player sensitivity to volleyball courts on the beach. Due to this level of concern along with the high number of locations spanning the beach, staff felt that a notice should be mailed to all residents within 500’ of the beach. For the initial public hearing with the Commission, the cost for the mailed notices to Strand residents as well as the notice in the paper was approximately $2167. This does not include staff time for preparation of the documents, the public hearing, or the additional public hearing with City Council, doubling the cost to the City. While this example was extensive and not typical, it demonstrates the need for further review of the approval process to determine if Council would like to continue this practice for new volleyball court requests or not. If Council would like to continue, staff is recommending the development of a fee to help offset associated costs. Staff recommends that the City Council first determine if a fee should be charged for the application for a volleyball court. Staff can calculate the cost and bring a resolution back for City Council approval. A separate agenda item will be submitted on the July 28, 2015 meeting that will evaluate the City’s noticing procedures and payment for such procedures. It is recommended that the determination of the noticing procedure for volleyball court requests be determined as part of this separate item for overall City noticing procedures. Damage to City Property, Removal of Trees A request involving removal of trees without a permit and damage to city property was brought before the Public Works Commission on 1/21/15 (minutes and agenda item are attached). There is no fee in the master fee resolution for the permit. The City requested that the owners remove the trees due to damage they caused to city infrastructure. The homeowners began removing the trees without getting a permit and did not follow the proper procedure. The Public Works Commission directed that permits be approved and that the owners be held responsible for all costs associated with the repair of the sidewalk and damage due to tree roots. Trees are to be replaced with similar sized trees from the City approved tree list. Public Works staff has received a quote from the city’s tree trimming contractor and presented it to the homeowner. A check has been delivered per the quote. The trees are scheduled for removal next Monday, July 13, 2015. Damage to parkway trees is an infraction according to City Code section 12.36.040 (see attached HBMC Chapter 12.36 Trees) which means that the homeowner could be prosecuted criminally. This code section could, alternatively, be added to the code section for which civil administrative cites may be issued. It is recommended that the City Council determine whether a permit fee should be developed for activities listed in Chapter 12.36 Trees. It is also recommended that the City Council determine whether violations of this chapter should continue to be subject to criminal prosecution or whether Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ Staff Report REPORT 15-0564 they should be listed in the section for which civil administrative cites may be issued. Fiscal Implications: Funds in the amount of $30,000 are included in the 2015-16 Adopted Budget in the Finance Administration Division for the user fee study. Attachments: 1. Public Works Commission Meeting Action Minutes 1/21/15 and Agenda Item 2. HBMC Chapter 12.36 Trees Respectfully Submitted by: Viki Copeland Approved: Tom Bakaly, City Manager Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ ACTION MINUTES PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION MEETING OF WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21, 2015 CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1315 VALLEY DRIVE COMMISIONERS Janice Brittain Andrea Giancoli Kimberlee MacMullan Rob Saemann Justin Schnuelle All public testimony and the deliberations of the Public Works Commission can be viewed on the City’s website at http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=358. 1. Call to Order 7:00 PM 2. Flag Salute 3. Roll Call Present: Commissioner Brittain, Commissioner Giancoli, Commissioner Saemann, Commissioner Schnuelle and Chairwoman MacMullan. Also present: Diane Strickfaden, Interim Director of Public Works and Liz Zeigler, Administrative Assistant 4. Approval of Action Minutes: November 19, 2014 ACTION: MOTION was made to approve the minutes of November 19, 2014, seconded and the motion carried by a vote of 4-0; Giancoli abstained. 5. Public Comment: Anyone wishing to address the Commission on items not on the agenda and pertaining to Public Works may do so at this time. No action. 6. Correspondence No action. 7. Presentations – Mr. Andrew Brozyna introduced himself to the Commission as the new Director of Public Works. 8. Items for Consideration a. Removal of Two Parkway Trees at 1325 Owosso Avenue Commissioner Giancoli recused herself to become part of the public. Public comments were as follows: Thomas Rose, 1301 Owosso Avenue, noted that the sidewalk in the area had been ground down in the past because of irregularities in the sidewalk. He also requested that the trees be replaced with trees that have minimally invasive root systems. Andrea Giancoli, 1045 14th Street, stated that Staff should require the replacement of the trees. The Commissioners comments included: 2 Commissioner Schnuelle asked who is responsible for repairing the sidewalk and Ms. Strickfaden informed him that per the Municipal Code the owner is responsible. Commissioner Saemann asked about the fines that can be imposed on the owner for failing to obtain a permit prior to cutting the trees and Ms. Strickfaden stated that she had consulted with the Code Enforcement Officer and there is no fee that can be charged, but that the City would require the repair of the sidewalk and that the owner replace the trees with the largest possible trees listed on the City’s approved tree list. Commissioner Saemann requested that the tree be of similar size and type. Commissioner MacMullan said she found a clear safety issue that required the removal of the trees. Commissioner Schnuelle added that Staff should require that the sidewalk be repaired. ACTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Brittain to have the Commission approve a permit to remove a parkway tree at 1325 Owosso Avenue and a retroactive permit for a second tree at the same address and that the owner be held responsible for all costs associated with the repair of the sidewalk and other City property that is damaged by the trees’ roots or by the removal of the trees and that the trees be replaced with similar sized trees from the City approved tree list; seconded by Schnuelle, the motion passed by a vote of 4-0; Giancoli recused herself. b. Installation of Collapsible Traffic Delineators at Various Strand Entrance Locations between Lyndon and 35th Street. Commissioners’ comments included the following: Commissioner Schnuelle: • stated he supported the project, but expressed reservations about how these particular bollards would prevent cars from going on the Strand • inquired as to the City’s liability if someone was injured on The Strand by a vehicle • noted most locations don’t have signage and when they do the signs are small • wants distinction made between walk streets and drive streets and proposed that different solutions are required for each type of street • bollards need to be moveable to allow Police vehicle access Commissioner Brittain: • inquired as to the extent of the problem of cars going on the Strand • asked if the police department or fire department initiated the project and inquired as to how the project came about. Commissioner Saemann: • he has seen cars on the Strand by Scotty's • collapsible bollards are not meant to stop people determined to get on the Strand from doing so and they allow for emergency vehicles to access the Strand • inquired on other types of bollards • indicated that commercial streets and some drive streets should bollards, but is unsure about drive streets, suggested reducing the number of locations for bollards to every other one Commissioner Giancoli: • asked for more statistical information that shows how much of a problem the City has of cars getting onto the Strand • suggested researching using other methods and additional signage • suggested reducing the number of locations for bollards • suggested looking at more aesthetically pleasing bollards Commissioner MacMullan: • asked if data existed that showed which point of entry on the Strand had the most cars get onto the Strand • stated she had seen cars on the Strand by Scotty's and no sign on the Strand wall indicating the area was pedestrian only 3 Ms. Strickfaden informed the Commission that: • she did not have statistics on the number of cars driving on the Strand • the project was approved by the City Council as part of this year’s Capital Improvement Plan in 2014 • the bollards proposed are devised as deterrent, not necessarily to prevent individuals intent on entering the Strand from doing so, but that these bollards are the same type as those installed by the City of Venice after their major accident • there are other types of bollards, very similar in style, but varying in cost and not all collapsible • she did not have statistics on which Strand entry points were more problematic, but thought that commercial areas posed more risk • indicated she could follow up with the Police Department and inquire about the history of cars entering the Strand • stated she has seen cars on the Strand • the City is part of an insurance pool and is self-insured for $250,000 per incident, but that the City’s liability is hard to determine Public Comments included: Ralph Corbel, resident at 25 3rd street, indicated: • support for the bollards on drive streets like 2nd St., 10th St., 11th St., but not where there is no direct car access; he opposed to bollards on 3rd Street • too many bollards would not be aesthetically pleasing • the maximum distance on some streets is already 8 feet, so cars can't fit anyway • inquired what the damage would be to vehicles when bollards come back up after being run over James Scott, resident at 2117 Hermosa Avenue commented that: • he did not believe the proposed bollards would prevent drunks and those intent on entering the Strand to do harm from entering the Strand; and noted the need for steel poles like those on Pier Plaza to do so • asked the Commission to reduce the number of access points where the bollards are to be installed; asked how many access points are needed for the emergency vehicles; suggested combining the proposed bollards with other stronger and more aesthetically pleasing bollards at some of the locations where emergency vehicles do not need entry Sandy Saemann, 28 year resident on the Strand, stated: • he hasn't seen more than 10 cars on the Strand, and those were mostly neighbors • proposed delineators won’t prevent cars from entering the Strand • the delineator are ugly and will look worse over time; will detract from the beauty of the Strand • the City has no statistics supporting the problem of cars on the Strand • if there are certain areas where bollards are really needed, these areas should have bollards, but only where needed and instead increase fines and signs in most areas Darrell Greenwald, resident at 3210 10th Street, representing the Sea Sprite Motel, 1016 The Strand, and residents Greg and Doris Morton at 940 The Strand expressed opposition to the bollards for the following reasons: • the bollard proposed at 10th St. and The Strand would restrict access to residents’ garages at 940 The Strand and the Sea Sprite Hotel • the bollards are not effective in preventing persons intent on entering The Strand from entering • instances of cars driving on The Strand is very rare • the bollards are not aesthetically pleasing, they look like construction cones • budget and resources should be directed at pothole problems ACTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Saemann to direct Staff to bring back the item to the Public Works Commission and present the Commission with research and recommendations that includes: 4 • statistics that show the extend of the problem of cars driving onto The Strand • Police, Fire, and Lifeguard input as to the necessary access points for emergency vehicles • alternative solutions for drive streets vs. walk-streets, including list of areas where bollards could be reduced • list of bollards choices that are more aesthetically pleasing from which the Commission can choose and make a recommendation to the City Council Motion was seconded by Commissioner Brittain, and Motion passed by a vote of 5-0. c. Project No. 10-661 Surf Legends Memorial Project Progress Report ACTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Schnuelle that the Public Works Commission receive and file the report, seconded, and the motion passed by a unanimous vote. 9. Commissioners’ Reports Commissioner Schnuelle stepped down from the bike parking subcommittee and all the Commissioners agreed that Commissioner Seamann would serve as the committee’s chair and Commissioner Giancoli would join the subcommittee. Commissioner Schnuelle reported that he and Victor Chavez, the City’s Assistant Engineer, met with the Hermosa Beach School District and discussed funding options available to address the parking and traffic congestion created during the school’s drop-off and pick-up times. The traffic congestion needs to be addressed prior to the installation of bike sharrows on Valley Drive. 10. Monthly Reports a. Monthly Activity Report – October 2014 and November 2014 b. Project Status Reports – October 2014 and November 2014 Above items are presented for information purposes only. c. Verbal Capital Improvement Report by Ms. Strickfaden – NO ACTION 11. Commissioners’ Announcements – NO ACTION 12. The Regular Meeting of the Public Works Commission for January 21, 2015 was adjourned at 8:41p.m. to the Regular meeting of Wednesday, March18, 2015 at 7 pm. 8a 1325 Owosso Avenue Attachment 1 CHAPTER 12.36 TREES Sectons: 12.36.010 Definitions 12.36.020 Planting of Trees in Parkway. 12.36.030 Maintenance of Trees in the Parkway. 12.36.040 Prohibition of Damage, Destruction or Removal of Parkway Trees. 12.36.050 Permit Requirement for Tree Removal. 12.36.060 Prohibition of Attaching Objects to Parkway Trees. 12.36.070 Protection of Parkway Trees During Construction 12.36.075 Abatement of Nuisance Conditions. 12.36.080 Remedies 12.36.090 Violations. 12.36 010 Definitions As used in this chapter: “Director” means the Public Works Director or his/her designee. “Parkway” means that portion of the public right-of-way that is not paved as a street or sidewalk, including encroachment areas used as yards by abutting property owners. “Property Owner” means the person or entity that owns the real property abutting and usually extending to the centerline of the immediately adjacent public-right-of-way, where a parkway tree is located. In the case where the parkway tree is located on the property line between two properties, then the “Property Owner” shall refer to both property owners. “Public right-of-way” means any area owned by or dedicated to the City for highway purposes. “Tree” means any perennial plant having a self-supporting woody main stem or trunk measuring at least five inches in circumference at a height of six feet above the ground, usually characterized by the ability to grow to considerable height or size and to develop woody branches. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-20) 12.36 020 Planting of Trees in Parkway. No person other than the City and the Property Owner shall plant a tree on any parkway. The Property Owner requesting to plant a tree in the parkway shall first obtain a permit from the Director. Only those species of trees specified on the City’s official list of approved parkway trees shall be planted in the parkway. Trees planted on the parkway by the Property Owner shall be planted in accordance with horticultural standards promulgated by the Director. All work under a permit shall be performed within thirty days of the issue date of the permit, and shall be performed in accordance with the conditions and requirements set forth in the permit. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-21) Page 1 of 3City of Hermosa Beach : Chapter 12.36 Trees 7/8/2014http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=448 Attachment 2 12.36 030 Maintenance of Trees in the Parkway. A. With the exception of those trees maintained by the City (as set forth in an inventory of City- maintained trees published by the Director), it is the duty of the Property Owner at his or her expense to cultivate, care for and provide for the complete maintenance of all trees on the parkway adjacent to their real property. Trees shall be maintained in accordance with horticultural standards promulgated by the Director, and shall be maintained in a manner as not to cause or constitute a nuisance. The Property Owner shall be liable for all damages or injuries incurred by any person or to any real or personal property arising from his or her failure to maintain parkway trees as required by this Section. B. No person other than the City and the Property Owner, including but not limited to utility companies and others owning facilities or performing work in the public right-of-way, shall trim, prune or cut a tree without first obtaining a permit from the Director. All work under a permit shall be performed within thirty days of the issue date of the permit, and shall be performed in accordance with the conditions and requirements set forth in the permit. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-22) 12.36 040 Prohibition of Damage, Destruction or Removal of Parkway Trees. A. No person, including the Property Owner, shall willfully injure, deface, mutilate, poison or destroy a parkway tree. B. No person shall place or maintain any stone, concrete, cement, asphalt, brick or other substance or object within the drip-line of a parkway tree so as to impede free access of water and air to the roots of the tree. C. No person shall cause or allow any substance deleterious to tree life, including but not limited to oil, dye, brine or any other substance, to pour, flow or drip on any parkway tree or around the base of any such tree. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-23) 12.36 050 Permit Requirement for Tree Removal. A. No person, including the Property Owner, shall remove a parkway tree without first obtaining a permit from the Director except under exigent or emergency services. A permit to replace a tree may be issued if the tree is dead, otherwise constitutes a public nuisance or interferes significantly with the use and enjoyment of the immediately adjoining property. All work under a permit shall be performed within thirty days of the issue date of the permit, and shall be performed in accordance with the conditions and requirements set forth in the permit. B. Applications for permits to remove a tree with a trunk diameter in excess of twelve inches (measured six feet above the ground) shall be referred to and decided by the Public Works Commission following a public hearing. Notice of the hearing shall be provided to the owners of all real property within a radius of three hundred feet of the subject tree. The decision of the Commission may be appealed to the City Council. Appeals shall be filed in writing within ten days of the final decision of the Commission. The City Council’s decision shall be final. Page 2 of 3City of Hermosa Beach : Chapter 12.36 Trees 7/8/2014http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=448 Attachment 2 C. A permit to remove a tree shall include imposition of a condition requiring replacement of the tree at the same or a different location with a tree from the City’s official list of approved parkway trees, unless the Director or the Commission find that replacement is physically impractical or infeasible. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-24) 12.36 060 Prohibition of Attaching Objects to Parkway Trees. No person shall tack, nail, paste or otherwise attach by any means whatsoever any sign, notice, advertisement or any other printed matter, or place any board, platform or other object on a tree. No person shall attach any rope or wire to any tree for the purpose of maintaining or repairing the tree without first receiving a permit from the Director. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-25) 12.36 070 Protection of Parkway Trees During Construction During the construction, repair or renovation of any structure, utility facility or right-of-way improvement, the person responsible for such activity shall take all necessary precautions to protect parkway trees in the vicinity of the construction project. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-26) 12.36 075 Abatement of Nuisance Conditions. The Property Owner shall abate any condition of a parkway tree determined by the Director to constitute a public nuisance. For purposes of this section, “tree” shall include shrubs and other vegetation in the parkway. Conditions constituting a nuisance include, but are not limited to, dead or diseased trees, trees constituting a danger to persons or property, trees impairing vehicular visibility, trees endangering utility wires, trees damaging the sidewalk pavement, or trees impairing pedestrian use of the sidewalk. The nuisance condition shall be abated in the manner prescribed by the Director. In the event the Property Owner fails or refuses to abate the nuisance, the provisions of Chapter 8.28 pertaining to abatement of public nuisances shall be applicable. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006) 12.36 080 Remedies In addition to any other remedies provided for in this Code and State law, a person who damages, mutilates, removes or destroys a parkway tree shall be liable to the City for the full replacement cost of the tree. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-27) 12.36 090 Violations. Violations of the provisions of this Chapter shall be infractions, punishable in accordance with Section 1.12.010 of this Code. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-28) Page 3 of 3City of Hermosa Beach : Chapter 12.36 Trees 7/8/2014http://www.hermosabch.org/index.aspx?page=448 Attachment 2 City of Hermosa Beach PUBLIC NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Public Works Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach shall hold a public hearing on Wednesday, January 21, 2015, to consider the following: 1. Request for permit to remove a parkway tree at 1325 Owosso Avenue and a retroactive permit for a second tree at the same address that are damaging the City sidewalk. SAID PUBLIC HEARING shall be held at 7:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254. ANY AND ALL PERSONS interested are invited to participate and speak at this hearing at the above time and place. All written comments will be accepted prior to or at the scheduled time on the agenda for the matter. Please submit your written comments to the City of Hermosa Beach, Public Works Department, 1315 Valley Drive, CA 90254. IF YOU CHALLENGE the above matter(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Public Works Department, at, or prior to, the public hearing. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, please contact the Public Works Department, at (310) 318-0222 or email Liz Zeigler at lzeigler@hermosabch.org. The Department is open from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Thursday. A copy of the staff report in the Commission packet will be available for public review at the end of the business day on, Thursday, January 15, 2015 at the Hermosa Beach Public Works Department and on the City’s website at www.hermosabch.org. Elaine Doerfling City Clerk Attachment 3 City of Hermosa Beach IMPORTANT NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Public Works Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach shall hold a public hearing on Wednesday, January 21, 2015, to consider the following: 1. Request for permit to remove a parkway tree at 1325 Owosso Avenue and a retroactive permit for a second tree at the same address that are damaging the City sidewalk. SAID PUBLIC HEARING shall be held at 7:00 P.M., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254. ANY AND ALL PERSONS interested are invited to participate and speak at this hearing at the above time and place. All written comments will be accepted prior to or at the scheduled time on the agenda for the matter. Please submit your written comments to the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Department, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254. IF YOU CHALLENGE the above matter(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Public Works Department, at, or prior to, the public hearing. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, please contact the Public Works Department, at (310) 318-0238 or email lzeigler@hermosabch.org. The Department is open from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Thursday. A copy of the staff report in the Commission packet will be available for public review at the end of the business day on, Thursday, January 15, 2015 at the Hermosa Beach Public Works Department and on the City’s website at www.hermosabch.org. Sincerely, Diane Strickfaden Diane Strickfaden, Interim Director of Public Works/ Assistant to the City Manager Attachment 3 1325 964 1411 1322 1416 1400 1507 1413 1315 1325 1241 1250 1263 1291 1315 1255 1301 1264 1312 1256 1322 1274 1326 1235 945 937 939 938 956 949 960 1430 1440 15171516 1515 1401 1415 1312 1292 1250 1268 1280 1265 1415 1251 1294 1502 1431 1302 1421 14361435 1420 1430 1260 1286 1308 1302 1253 1257 10591045104110331053 1307 1027 1407 1401 1021 1004 1315 1326 1306 1243 1255 1231 1301 1251 1253 1307 1235 1239 14th StOcean DrBonnie Brae StPr o s p e c t A v e Corona St15th St Owosso Ave13th St Joy St Campana StG o l d e n A v e 15th St ±1325 Owosso Ave300' Radius Attachment 3 Title 12 Street, Sidewalks and Public Places Chapter 12.36 TREES Chapter 12.36 TREES Sections: 12.36.010 Definitions. 12.36.020 Planting of Trees in Parkway. 12.36.030 Maintenance of Trees in the Parkway. 12.36.040 Prohibition of Damage, Destruction or Removal of Parkway Trees. 12.36.050 Permit Requirement for Tree Removal. 12.36.060 Prohibition of Attaching Objects to Parkway Trees. 12.36.070 Protection of Parkway Trees During Construction 12.36.075 Abatement of Nuisance Conditions. 12.36.080 Remedies 12.36.090 Violations. 12.36.010 Definitions. As used in this chapter: “Director” means the Public Works Director or his/her designee. “Parkway” means that portion of the public right-of-way that is not paved as a street or sidewalk, including encroachment areas used as yards by abutting property owners. “Property Owner” means the person or entity that owns the real property abutting and usually extending to the centerline of the immediately adjacent public-right-of-way, where a parkway tree is located. In the case where the parkway tree is located on the property line between two properties, then the “Property Owner” shall refer to both property owners. “Public right-of-way” means any area owned by or dedicated to the City for highway purposes. “Tree” means any perennial plant having a self-supporting woody main stem or trunk measuring at least five inches in circumference at a height of six feet above the ground, usually characterized by the ability to grow to considerable height or size and to develop woody branches. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-20) 12.36.020 Planting of trees in parkway. No person other than the City and the Property Owner shall plant a tree on any parkway. The Property Owner requesting to plant a tree in the parkway shall first obtain a permit from the Director. Only those species of trees specified on the City’s official list of approved parkway trees shall be planted in the parkway. Trees planted on the parkway by the Property Owner shall be planted in accordance with horticultural standards promulgated by the Director. All work under a permit shall be performed within thirty days of the issue date of the permit, and shall be performed in accordance with the conditions and requirements set forth in the permit. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-21) 12.36.030 Maintenance of trees in the parkway. A. With the exception of those trees maintained by the City (as set forth in an inventory of City-maintained trees published by the Director), it is the duty of the Property Owner at his or her expense to cultivate, care for and provide for the complete maintenance of all trees on the parkway adjacent to their real property. Trees shall be maintained in accordance with horticultural standards promulgated by the Director, and shall be maintained in a manner as not to cause or constitute a nuisance. The Property Owner shall be liable for all damages or injuries incurred by any person or to any real or personal property arising from his or her failure to maintain parkway trees as required by this Section. B. No person other than the City and the Property Owner, including but not limited to utility companies and others owning facilities or performing work in the public right-of-way, shall trim, prune or cut a tree without first obtaining a permit from the Director. All work under a permit shall be performed within thirty days of the issue date of the permit, and shall be performed in accordance with the conditions and requirements set forth in the permit. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-22) 12.36.040 Prohibition of damage, destruction or removal of parkway trees. A. No person, including the Property Owner, shall willfully injure, deface, mutilate, poison or destroy a parkway tree. B. No person shall place or maintain any stone, concrete, cement, asphalt, brick or other substance or object within the drip-line of a parkway tree so as to impede free access of water and air to the roots of the tree. C. No person shall cause or allow any substance deleterious to tree life, including but not limited to oil, dye, brine or any other substance, to pour, flow or drip on any parkway tree or around the base of any such tree. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-23) 12.36.050 Permit requirement for tree removal. A. No person, including the Property Owner, shall remove a parkway tree without first obtaining a permit from the Director except under exigent or emergency services. A permit to replace a tree may be issued if the tree is dead, otherwise constitutes a public nuisance or interferes significantly with the use and enjoyment of the immediately adjoining property. All work under a permit shall be performed within thirty days of the issue date of the permit, and shall be performed in accordance with the conditions and requirements set forth in the permit. B. Applications for permits to remove a tree with a trunk diameter in excess of twelve inches (measured six feet above the ground) shall be referred to and decided by the Public Works Commission following a public hearing. Notice of the hearing shall be provided to the owners of all real property within a radius of three hundred feet of the subject tree. The decision of the Commission may be appealed to the City Council. Appeals shall be filed in writing within ten days of the final decision of the Commission. The City Council’s decision shall be final. C. A permit to remove a tree shall include imposition of a condition requiring replacement of the tree at the same or a different location with a tree from the City’s official list of approved parkway trees, unless the Director or the Commission find that replacement is physically impractical or infeasible. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-24) 12.36.060 Prohibition of attaching objects to parkway trees. No person shall tack, nail, paste or otherwise attach by any means whatsoever any sign, notice, advertisement or any other printed matter, or place any board, platform or other object on a tree. No person shall attach any rope or wire to any tree for the purpose of maintaining or repairing the tree without first receiving a permit from the Director. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-25) 12.36.070 Protection of parkway trees during construction During the construction, repair or renovation of any structure, utility facility or right-of-way improvement, the person responsible for such activity shall take all necessary precautions to protect parkway trees in the vicinity of the construction project. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-26) 12.36.075 Abatement of nuisance conditions. The Property Owner shall abate any condition of a parkway tree determined by the Director to constitute a public nuisance. For purposes of this section, “tree” shall include shrubs and other vegetation in the parkway. Conditions constituting a nuisance include, but are not limited to, dead or diseased trees, trees constituting a danger to persons or property, trees impairing vehicular visibility, trees endangering utility wires, trees damaging the sidewalk pavement, or trees impairing pedestrian use of the sidewalk. The nuisance condition shall be abated in the manner prescribed by the Director. In the event the Property Owner fails or refuses to abate the nuisance, the provisions of Chapter 8.28 pertaining to abatement of public nuisances shall be applicable. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006) 12.36.080 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies provided for in this Code and State law, a person who damages, mutilates, removes or destroys a parkway tree shall be liable to the City for the full replacement cost of the tree. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-27) 12.36.090 Violations. Violations of the provisions of this chapter shall be infractions, punishable in accordance with Chapter 1.10. (Ord. 06-1261 §1, 2006; Prior code § 22-28) Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 15-0553 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Special Meeting of July 16, 2015 ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION AMMENDING THE P.A.R.K. AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM FEE FOR THE 2015/2016 SCHOOL YEAR (Senior Recreation Supervisor Kelly Orta) Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution for a fee increase for the P.A.R.K. after school program to bring it more in line with industry standards as well as better position it as a “partner program” with the STAR Enrichment program starting in the 2015/2016 school year. Background: In 2010, the Community Resources Department created the P.A.R.K. (Positive, Active Recreation for Kids) after school program for children attending school in the Hermosa Beach school district. This program was created in 2010 due to parent concerns over an impacted wait list for the school district’s after school program and a growing concern over the need for more after school options in the community. The programming emphasis of the P.A.R.K. program is on active recreation while still providing time for homework help for children in grades first through eighth. P.A.R.K. runs from 2:30 - 6:00 Monday through Friday, except for Wednesdays, which run from 1:30 - 6:00pm due to early release. The registration fee for this program started at $1,110 and continues to provide care for children following the regular school schedule. While the fee has increased slightly since the program’s inception, this increase has been gradual and followed the city’s annual fee increase recommendations applied to all city fees each year. Analysis: The current price for the P.A.R.K. after school program is $1284. Parents are given the option of completing payment within two payment plans throughout the school year; either in two installments or three. Historically, this fee has increased from its original price at approximately 2% each year, although there was just over a 10% increase at the start of the 2012/2013 school year due to the high demand for the program and the necessity to bring the program up to industry standards. While the program is not too far behind in pricing when compared to other municipal recreation programs, it has been a little lower comparatively, although it has always covered direct costs. For the upcoming school year, staff is recommending an increase of the registration fee to $1900 annually Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ Staff Report REPORT 15-0553 (approximately $190 monthly for 10 months or $10.50 per day) for a five-day program, which would increase the price by just under 50%. Additionally, an added three-day option for $1200 annually ($120 monthly for 10 months or $11 per day) for a three day program would be offered to parents only needing after school care on select days. It is staff’s desire that this added option will help accommodate additional children on the program’s waitlist. Recently, staff contacted the City of Manhattan Beach as they are currently working to update their after school program structure and pricing. Their updated fee for the upcoming school year will be $1700 per child. While the proposed fee for P.A.R.K. exceeds the cost for this similar program in a neighboring city, staff also took into consideration the cost of the upcoming STAR Enrichment program, which is being developed as a “partner program” providing enrichment and recreational programming for kindergarten children in the district. The cost for this program is $360 monthly, running concurrently with the school schedule. The added benefit of this partnership is the ability to provide additional enrichment programming opportunities at the Community Center for P.A.R.K. program participants through STAR Enrichment when the kindergarten children leave their program at 3:00pm. Fiscal Implications: This fee increase would increase program revenue from $116,460 to $171,000, a difference of $54,540. This money would help offset indirect costs associated with the program that aren’t currently being collected such as maintenance and general upkeep of the classrooms, equipment, and supplies. Additionally, the hourly wage of staff working in the P.A.R.K. program was recently increased to be more in line with industry standards, so this increase in revenue will help offset this additional cost. Attachments: 1.STAR Enrichment Program flyer 2.P.A.R.K. Program Fee Update - Resolution Respectfully Submitted by: Kelly Orta, Senior Recreation Supervisor Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Approved: Tom Bakaly, City Manager Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™                     Pro v en Results 25 1986 for over25YEARS   Philosophy The Hermosa STAR Exploration Station at the Hermosa Community Center is an exploratory, creative center designed to unlock children’s natural curiosity. Students are encouraged to explore, create and build as they develop their skills in a variety of activities. Imagination leads the way at this facility! Our staff is trained in Neuroscience based education and all programs are aimed at helping students develop self-awareness, confidence and the ability to do anything they set their minds to do. ABOUT OUR PROgRAm Our Program includes a theme-based curricula and incorporates S.T.E.A.M. (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and Math), storytime, music, dance, and fitness as well as a variety of innovative enrichment classes. All enrichment classes are included in the fee. ImPORTAnT InFORmATIOn • We will be a fully licensed facility. • The staff is fingerprinted, background checked and TB tested. • The staff has been trained in CPR and first aid. • Program will be closed on school holidays. • On minimum days, all Kinder students, AM and PM, attend Hermosa View from 8:00am to 11:30am. The STAR PM program will be open from 11:30am to 3:00pm for all students enrolled in either the AM or PM STAR Program. A shuttle will be provided for students coming to the Community Center. • All children need to bring a bag lunch. • Children will be transported from the Hermosa Community Center on Pier Ave. to Hermosa View Elementary School on a shuttle provided by the city through Measure A. • PM STAR students will board the shuttle at Hermosa View School at 11:30 and will be transported to the Hermosa Community Center on Pier Ave. • A.M. children will board the shuttle at 11:15 from the Community Center to Hermosa View School. SCHOlARSHIPS Scholarships are available on a sliding scale. STAR ECO STATIOn REgISTRATIOn OPTIOnS & FEES 10 monthly payments of $360 for 5 days per week $21 per day for 2 - 4 days per week Hermosa STAR Kinder Program is open every day when school is in session. We will be closed on student free days and all holidays. A.M. Kinder STAR Program 8:00am – 11:30am P.M. Kinder STAR Program 11:30am – 3:00pm Daily Schedule A.M. Kinder STAR program 8:00am – 8:30am Good Morning Show! 8:30am – 9:15am Imagination Stations (Glee, puppets, storytime and songs) 9:15am – 9:45am Healthy Snack & Outdoor Activities 9:45am – 10:30am S.T.E.A.M. Exploration Centers (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and Math) 10:30am – 10:45am Kinder Fitness (Yoga, outdoor activities, tumbling etc.) 10:45am – 11:15am Lunchtime 11:15am All Aboard -No boarding pass required (Transportation will be provided) P.M. Kinder STAR program 11:45am – 12:15pm Lunchtime 12:15pm – 12:30pm Kinder Fitness (Yoga, outdoor activities, tumbling, etc.) 12:30pm – 1:15pm Imagination Stations (Glee, puppets, storytime and songs) 1:15pm – 1:45pm Healthy Snack & Outdoor Activities 1:45pm – 2:30pm S.T.E.A.M. Exploration Centers (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and Math) 2:30pm- 3:00pm Good Afternoon Show Environmental Science Museum & Exotic Wildlife Rescue Center Healthy Snacks! AS SEEn On TV!!! Wednesday’s Schedule A.M students at the Hermosa Community Center will board the shuttle at 10:45 to arrive at Hermosa View by 11:00 am P.M. students will leave Hermosa View School at 10:45 and will arrive at the Hermosa Community Center at 11:00 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 RESOLUTION NO. 16-xxx A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION 11-6749 (MASTER FEE RESOLUTION) TO INCREASE THE FEE FOR THE P.A.R.K. AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM NOW THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the City Council hereby increases the fee for the P.A.R.K. after school program to recover costs and to bring the fee in line with industry standards , SECTION 2. That resolution 11-6749 is amended to revise Recreation Services fees, by amending the fees as follows: 5 Day Option $1,900 annually, per child 3 Day Option $1,200 annually, per child SECTION 3. That fee shall be effective immediately upon approval of this resolution and implemented for the upcoming 2015/2016 school year, SECTION 4. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 14th day of July, 2015. ________________________________________________________________________ PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________ _______________________________ City Clerk City Attorney Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 15-0563 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Special Meeting of July 16, 2015 HERMOSA BEACH PARTICIPATION IN REDONDO BEACH AES TASK FORCE TO STUDY ZONING AND LAND USE ALTERNATIVES (Community Development Director Ken Robertson) Recommended Action: To make an appointment to the AES Task Force, or provide direction on a process for making a selection to the task force. Background: On June 30, the Redondo Beach City Council adopted the attached resolution establishing a task force to study and report on the preferred zoning and land use alternatives for the 50 acre AES site. The task force will be comprised of 17 members including one Hermosa Beach representative “appointed by the Hermosa Beach City Council.” The task force will meet at least once per month and has been given a 4 month time frame to provide a progress report to the Redondo Beach City Council. The attached Resolution sets forth the duties and responsibilities of the Task Force. Attachment: 1. Resolution from the City of Redondo Beach Respectfully Submitted by: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Concur: Elaine Doerfling, City Clerk Approved: Tom Bakaly, City Manager Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ RESOLUTION NO. CC-1506-051 AES TASK FORCE PAGE NO. 1 RESOLUTION NO. CC-1506-051 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING AN AES TASK FORCE AND SETTING FORTH THE DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITES OF SAID TASK FORCE TO STUDY AND REPORT ON THE PREFERRED ZONING AND LAND USE ALTERNATIVES FOR THE AES SITE WHEREAS, sustaining a healthy and economically viable community is central to the work of the Mayor and City Council as elected representatives of Redondo Beach’s citizens; and WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council have recommended that a task force be appointed whose purpose would be to identify and recommend comprehensive rezoning and Land Use Plan amendments for the re-use of the AES property. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the Redondo Beach City Council shall establish a 17 member AES Task Force. The Mayor shall appoint the Chair of the task force and the remaining members subject to confirmation by the City Council as set forth below. SECTION 2. That the composition includes participants and advisors as follows: Authorized Participants (Total of 17) · Each Council Member and the Mayor appoint 2 representatives from anywhere in the City (12 total) · AES representative · R4 representative · Voices representative · Hermosa Beach representative appointed by Hermosa Beach City Council · Beach Cities Health District representative Overall Task Force Composition o At least three district representatives o No current or former elected officials may be selected as participants o Task Force members will be removed after more than two absences City Advisors · City planner · City Clerk – Brown Act Committee RESOLUTION NO. CC-1506-051 AES TASK FORCE PAGE NO. 2 · Facilitator and land use experts- Task Force to be led by a paid facilitator with technical support from experts in various fields including land use, finance, traffic, parks, etc. as needed. Each organization will be responsible for providing nominations for their representative to the Task Force. The City Council members will be responsible for providing nominations for their District representatives. Similar to City Commissions, the Mayor will be responsible for appointing the members of the Task Force subject to confirmation by the City Council. SECTION 3. That the Mayor and City Council have determined the study area to be the 50 acre AES site. The Task Force will focus their efforts on developing zoning and land use plan requirements for this site. SECTION 4. That the specific duties, responsibilities, and Guiding Principles of the AES Task Force shall be as follows: 1. Develop broad zoning land use distribution and cap recommendations for AES property. 2. Elicit public feedback during process to be incorporated by the group. 3. Produce report and drawings of recommendations - include assessment of areas of consensus and any dissenting opinions. 4. Achieve a plan that can be implemented. 5. Deliver a plan that contains a balance of uses including public and private open space, parks, neighborhood and community-serving uses, local and visitor- serving uses, uses that generate jobs and revenues, uses that are coastal dependent and uses consistent with the Coastal Act. Park as defined in this section is an area of land in a largely natural state, for the enjoyment of the public, having facilities for rest and recreation, often owned, set apart, and managed by a neighboring business, city, state or nation. Parks can include walking paths, sports fields, amphitheater, native gardens, bicycle paths, water features, swimming facilities or any other feature strictly for public use. Does not include buffers between land uses, traffic medians, bioswales or drainage areas, or any other area of a development currently required by the Redondo Beach Municipal Code or design guidelines. 6. Provide at least 20 percent high quality public park open space. 7. Develop a plan that ensures a high-quality visual and aesthetic environment. 8. Create a plan that delivers a strong “sense of place” by incorporating placemaking concepts and design and land use concepts from the Project for Public Spaces (PPS). 9. Consider the needs of all age groups and demographics in the plan. 10. Incorporate Blue Zones and Living Streets concepts in the planning and design. 11. Ensure that the land uses recommended are economically viable in the current market and provides significant economic benefits to the City. 12. Provide for allowable uses of the property and development standards that result in an underlying land value of between $150- 200 Million. RESOLUTION NO. CC-1506-051 AES TASK FORCE PAGE NO. 3 SECTION 5. That in order to assist the Mayor and City Council in making a determination on the best facilitated process to develop consensus on the preferred land use trajectory for the AES site, the following are the recommended process and operational details for the AES Task Force. The process seeks to balance the need to move forward quickly with sufficient community engagement and includes 3 Task force meetings and 2 Public Feedback Workshops over a 3 month time frame. Three Task Force Meetings and Two Community Workshops Month 1- Task Force Meeting 1: Introduction, Education and Situational Assessment- Where are we now? · Scope description, process and rules of engagement · Zoning concepts and explanation of General, Plan, Zoning, Coastal Plan and other documents · Overview of the Coastal Act · Fiscal, environmental, recreational impacts of zoning overview Month 2- Task Force Meeting 2: Visioning and Overall Broad Zoning Goals · Develop consensus on broad overall zoning goals and vision · Assessment of goals and constraints · Adjustment of goals and constraints · Public feedback on broad goals and constraints (Public Workshop 1) · Finalize broad zoning goals and constraints Month 3- Task Force Meeting 3: Consensus Building and First Draft of Broad Zoning. · First draft of broad zoning · Break down areas and broad uses and constraints in each sub- area · Expert assessment · Adjustment · Public feedback on broad zoning and land uses (Public Workshop 2) · Adjust broad zoning for each sub-area Month 4- Progress Report to City Council Operational details: · Task Force to be a Brown Act Committee complete with published Agendas and Minutes · Meet every two weeks or less frequently but no less than once per month. · Meeting on weeknight at 7:00 PM, or Saturdays at 10:00 AM, 2 hour sessions max. · Group can appoint subcommittees to conduct work between meetings and present findings/recommendations at regular meeting. RESOLUTION NO. CC-1506-051 AES TASK FORCE PAGE NO. 4 · Quorum - At least half plus 1 for quorum. If any appointee resigns/declines, may be replaced by appointment of Council Member who appointed or lower group size is acceptable at Council’s discretion. · Facilitator - runs process and can change process as required, but cannot participate in solutions or votes. · Facilitator may make recommendation on replacing member if member is disruptive and does not participate in good faith. · City to keep minutes/actions/findings, etc. To be reviewed at start of each meeting. SECTION 6. That the AES Task Force shall be advisory to the Mayor and City Council, and be subject to the provisions of the Brown Act. SECTION 7. That the facilitator will be present at the initial meetings of the Task Force to assist in meeting the above stated goals of the Task Force. SECTION 8. That the Chair of the Task Force shall be appointed by the Mayor subject to confirmation by the City Council and will serve as Chair through the duration of the Task Force. The Task Force shall elect a member to serve as Vice Chair. The Vice Chair will handle the duties of the Chair in the event the Chairperson is absent from a meeting. In the event both the Chairperson and the Vice Chairperson are absent from a meeting, the Task Force shall appoint one of its members to serve as Acting Chairperson for the duration of that meeting. In the event that the Chairperson resigns or is removed from the Task Force, a new Chair will be appointed by the Mayor subject to confirmation by the City Council. SECTION 9. That a member of the Task Force shall be removed for missing more than 2 meetings of the Task Force, unless by permission of the City Council expressed in its official minutes. A replacement may be appointed by the Mayor at his discretion subject to City Council confirmation. If the removed member was the representative of one of the community groups, then the sponsoring organization of the member may nominate another representative to the Task Force. The sponsoring organization may not nominate the same individual who was previously removed. SECTION 10. That this Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. SECTION 11. That the City Clerk is directed to immediately accept nominations for the Task Force. SECTION 12. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and shall enter the same in the Book of Original Resolutions. RESOLUTION NO. CC-1506-051 AES TASK FORCE PAGE NO. 5 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 30th day of June, 2015. ________________________ Steve Aspel, Mayor ATTEST: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF REDONDO BEACH ) I, Eleanor Manzano, City Clerk of the City of Redondo Beach, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. CC-1506-051 was duly passed, approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Redondo Beach, California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 30th day of June, 2015, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ___________________________ Eleanor Manzano, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ Michael W. Webb, City Attorney Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 15-0560 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Special Meeting of July 16, 2015 VACANCIES - BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS CIVIL SERVICE BOARD APPOINTMENTS FOR TWO FOUR-YEAR TERMS ENDING JULY 15, 2019 (City Clerk Elaine Doerfling) Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council appoint the two applicants to the two seats available on the Civil Service Board, for four-year terms ending July 15, 2019. Background: At its meeting of May 26, 2015, the City Council directed the City Clerk to advertise, consistent with standard practice, the two Civil Service Board terms expiring July 15, 2015, inviting applications from persons interested in being considered for appointment to four-year terms ending July 15, 2019. As directed, a notice was placed on the City’s website, posted in the normal Civic Center locations, and published twice in the Easy Reader (June 4 and 11), with an application-filing deadline of 6 p.m., Tuesday, July 7, 2015. The two incumbents were notified (by mail and by phone) of their expiring terms and the deadline for filing applications if they were interested in being considered for re- appointment. The only applications received were from the two incumbents: E. Thomas Maroney and Barry Warner. Since the number of applicants does not exceed the number of seats available for appointment, and both applicants are currently serving on the Board, it is recommended that the Council simply re-appoint them without interviews. Attachments: 1. Civil Service Board applications Submitted by: Elaine Doerfling, City Clerk Noted: Tom Bakaly, City Manager Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 15-0561 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Special Meeting of July 16, 2015 VACANCIES - BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS ADVISORY COMMISSION ONE OPEN SEAT FOR A TERM ENDING MAY 31, 2019 (City Clerk Elaine Doerfling) Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council direct the City Clerk to re-advertise the open seat for a term ending May 31, 2019 on the Emergency Preparedness Advisory Commission (EPAC). Background: At its meeting of May 26, 2015, the Council made appointments to fill three of the four EPAC vacancies - the unexpired term ending May 31, 2017, and two of the three four-year terms ending May 31, 2019. Since no additional applications have been received, the seat remains unfilled, leaving the Commission short by one member. It seems appropriate to advertise again and invite interested persons to apply for the open seat. If direction is given, a notice inviting applications will be placed on the City’s website, posted in the normal Civic Center locations, and published in the Easy Reader twice, on July 23 and 30, setting an application filing deadline of Tuesday, September 1, with a report back to the City Council at its meeting of September 8 for the scheduling of applicant interviews, with appointment to be made at the meeting of September 22. Submitted by: Elaine Doerfling, City Clerk Noted: Tom Bakaly, City Manager Hermosa Beach Printed on 7/9/2015Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™