Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-07-16 PC AgendaPlanning Commission City of Hermosa Beach Regular Meeting Agenda - Final City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Chair David Pedersen Vice Chair Peter Hoffman Commissioners Michael Flaherty Rob Saemann Marie Rice Council Chambers7:00 PMTuesday, July 16, 2019 1 July 16, 2019Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda - Final Note: No Smoking Is Allowed in The City Hall Council Chambers THE PUBLIC COMMENT IS LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES PER SPEAKER Planning Commission agendas and staff reports are available for review on the City's web site at www.hermosabch.org. Wireless access is available in the City Council Chambers for mobile devices: Network ID: CHB-Guest, Password: chbguest Written materials distributed to the Planning Commission within 72 hours of the Planning Commission meeting are available for public inspection immediately upon distribution in the Community Development Department during normal business hours from Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. and on the City's website. Final determinations of the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council within 10 days of the next regular City Council meeting date. If the 10th day falls on a Friday or City holiday, the appeal deadline is extended to the next City business day. Appeals shall be in written form and filed with the City Clerk's office, accompanied by an appeal fee. The City Clerk will set the appeal for public hearing before the City of Hermosa Beach City Council at the earliest date possible. If you challenge any City of Hermosa Beach decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described on this agenda, or in a written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. To comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, Assistive Listening Devices will be available for check out at the meeting. If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please call or submit your request in writing to the Community Development Department at (310) 318-0242 at least 48 hours (two working days) prior to the meeting time to inform us of your needs and to determine if/how accommodation is feasible. Page 2 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 3/20/2024 2 July 16, 2019Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda - Final Submit your comments via eComment in three easy steps: Note: Your comments will become part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name, but please do not provide any other personal information (i.e. phone numbers, addresses, etc) that you do not want to be published. 1. Go to the Agendas/Minutes/Video webpage and find the meeting you’d like to submit comments on. Click on the eComment button for your selected meeting. 2. Find the agenda item for which you would like to provide a comment. You can select a specific agenda item/project or provide general comments under the Oral/Written Communications item. 3. Sign in to your SpeakUp Hermosa Account or as a guest, enter your comment in the field provided, provide your name, and if applicable, attach files before submitting your comment. eComments can be submitted as soon as the meeting materials are published, but will only be accepted until 12:00 pm on the date of the meeting to ensure Planning Commission and staff have the ability to review comments prior to the meeting. 1. Call to Order 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Roll Call 4. Oral / Written Communications 5.19-0445 Information Only: Public Hearing Notices and Projects Zoning Map Section I CONSENT CALENDAR 6.REPORT 19-0446 Approval of the June 18, 2019 Planning Commission Action Minutes Recommendation:To approve the Planning Commission action minutes of the June 18, 2019 regular meeting. 7.REPORT 19-0456 Variance 19-1- A Variance from the Multiple Family Residential (R-3) open space zone provisions and parking standards to allow a new single-family residence to provide less than required open space, 230 square feet, rather than the required 300 square feet with a parking space located within the front 20 feet of the lot not leading to a garage at 1515 Monterey Boulevard and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. Recommendation:Adopt the attached resolution denying Variance 19-1 a request to deviate from the open space provisions and parking standards of the Multiple Family Residential (R-3) zone, and determine that this action is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Page 3 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 3/20/2024 3 July 16, 2019Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda - Final *************************************************************************************************************** THE RECOMMENDATIONS NOTED BELOW ARE FROM THE PLANNING STAFF AND ARE RECOMMENDATIONS ONLY. THE FINAL DECISION ON EACH ITEM RESTS WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION. PLEASE DO NOT ASSUME THAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WILL BE THE ACTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. *************************************************************************************************************** Section II HEARING 8.REPORT 19-0444 Receive tri-annual report for on-sale alcoholic beverage Conditional Use Permits Recommendation:Receive and file the report for informational purposes. The tri-annual review was submitted on June 18, 2019 and covers the period from November 1, 2018 to April 30, 2019. Based on the information in the report, no establishment has reached the "Standard Initiating Planning Commission Review." 9.REPORT 19-0460 SIGN REVIEW - S4 #36 Determination on whether a proposed 302.19 square foot display on the west wall of the building at 2212 Pacific Coast Highway is a mural, and determination that the proposed display is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act. Recommendation:Adopt the attached resolution and determine that the proposed display covering 302.19 square feet of surface area on west side of an existing building is consistent with the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code (HBMC) definition of 'Mural' at 2212 Pacific Coast Highway, and determine that the proposed display is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 10.REPORT 19-0468 Planning Commission interpretations on whether seating plan modifications are minor and acceptable for a Limited live Entertainment Permit for Hermosa Brewing Company, 1342 Hermosa Avenue. Recommendation:To confirm by minute order that the proposed seating plan modifications are minor and, as modified, are also are acceptable for a Limited Live Entertainment Permit. Section III PUBLIC HEARING Page 4 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 3/20/2024 4 July 16, 2019Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda - Final 11.REPORT 19-0466 PDP 19-5 -Precise Development Plan Amendment to extend the building permit expiration date, pursuant to Section 15.04.050 of the Municipal Code, for a 30-room hotel currently under construction at 1429 Hermosa Avenue Continued from June 17, 2019 meeting Recommendation:Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution amending the Precise Development Plan to extend the building permit expiration date one additional year. 12.REPORT 19-0454 CUP 19-7- A request for a Conditional Use Permit to extend by one hour the indoor operating hours till 11:00 PM daily and to allow outdoor dining from 8:00 AM to 10:00 PM daily at an existing restaurant with on-sale beer and wine (Mosa, previously Serve on 2nd) located at 170 Hermosa Avenue, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Recommendation:Adopt the attached resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit request (CUP 19-7) to extend by one hour the indoor operating hours till 11:00 PM daily and to allow outdoor dining from 8:00 AM to 10:00 PM daily at an existing restaurant with on-sale beer and wine (Mosa, previously Serve on 2nd) located at 170 Hermosa Avenue, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 13.REPORT 19-0447 Zone Change 18-1- A request to rezone property located at 820 9th Street from General Commercial (C-3) to Single-Family Residential (R-1) and determine that the request is within the scope of the project considered in the PLAN Hermosa Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Recommendation:Adopt the attached resolution recommending the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach approve Zone Change 18-1, thereby rezoning the subject site from C-3 to R-1 and determine that the request is within the scope of the project considered in the PLAN Hermosa Environmental Impact Report (EIR). 14.REPORT 19-0467 A-14#63- Planning Commission consideration of a small lot exception to open space and lot coverage requirements otherwise required in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) zone for a new single-family residence at 3411 The Strand, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Recommendation:Continue to the August 20, 2019 Planning Commission hearing for Planning Commission consideration of a small lot exception to open space and lot coverage requirements otherwise required in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) zone for a new single-family residence at 3411 The Strand, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Page 5 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 3/20/2024 5 July 16, 2019Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda - Final 15.REPORT 19-0451 CUP 19-3- Conditional Use Permit Amendment request to modify an existing non-conforming rooftop wireless telecommunication facility by removing and relocating antennas within new screening boxes below the existing building height and upgrading equipment (AT&T Mobility) at 2447 Pacific Coast Highway, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Continued from June 2019 Public Hearing Recommendation:Adopt the attached resolution approving Conditional Use Permit Amendment 19-3, to modify an existing non-conforming rooftop wireless telecommunication facility by removing and relocating antennas within new screening boxes below the existing building height and upgrading equipment (AT&T Mobility) at 2447 Pacific Coast Highway, and determine that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Section IV 16. Staff Items a.19-0449 Verbal Report on City Council Actions b.19-0450 Verbal Status Report on Major Planning Projects. c.REPORT 19-0424 August 20, 2019 Planning Commission Tentative Future Agenda Items Recommendation:To receive and file the August 20, 2019 Planning Commission tentative future agenda items. d.REPORT 19-0448 Community Development Department Activity Report of April, 2019 Recommendation:To receive and file the April, 2019 Community Development Department activity report. 17. Commissioner Items 18. Adjournment Page 6 City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 3/20/2024 6 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 19-0445 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 Information Only: Public Hearing Notices and Projects Zoning Map Attachments: 1.Public Notices 2.Projects Zoning Map City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 2/20/2024Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™7 8 9 © OpenStreetMap contributors 0.2 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Miles0.2 Notes Legend The map generated is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map do not have survey grade accuracy but represent close approximation. 0.090 City of Hermosa Beach-Projects Zoning Map City Boundary Parcels Zoning R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-1A LIMITED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-2B LIMITED MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-3 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-P RESIDENTIAL-PROFESSIONAL RPD RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R-3PD MULTIPLE FAMILY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT C-1 LIMITED BUSINESS AND RESIDENTIAL C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL C-3 GENERAL AND HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL M-1 LIGHT MANUFACTURING OS OPEN SPACE OS-1 RESTRICTED OPEN SPACE OS-2 RESTRICTED OPEN SPACE OS-O OPEN SPACE OVERLAY MHP MOBILE HOME PARK SPA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA (RESIDENTIAL USES) SPA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA (COMMERCIAL USES) 10 © OpenStreetMap contributors 0.1 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Miles0.1 Notes Legend The map generated is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map do not have survey grade accuracy but represent close approximation. 0.050 City of Hermosa Beach-Projects Zoning Map City Boundary Parcels Zoning R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-1A LIMITED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-2B LIMITED MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-3 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-P RESIDENTIAL-PROFESSIONAL RPD RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R-3PD MULTIPLE FAMILY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT C-1 LIMITED BUSINESS AND RESIDENTIAL C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL C-3 GENERAL AND HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL M-1 LIGHT MANUFACTURING OS OPEN SPACE OS-1 RESTRICTED OPEN SPACE OS-2 RESTRICTED OPEN SPACE OS-O OPEN SPACE OVERLAY MHP MOBILE HOME PARK SPA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA (RESIDENTIAL USES) SPA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA (COMMERCIAL USES) 11 © OpenStreetMap contributors 0.1 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Miles0.1 Notes Legend The map generated is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map do not have survey grade accuracy but represent close approximation. 0.050 City of Hermosa Beach-Projects Zoning Map City Boundary Parcels Zoning R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-1A LIMITED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-2B LIMITED MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-3 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-P RESIDENTIAL-PROFESSIONAL RPD RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R-3PD MULTIPLE FAMILY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT C-1 LIMITED BUSINESS AND RESIDENTIAL C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL C-3 GENERAL AND HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL M-1 LIGHT MANUFACTURING OS OPEN SPACE OS-1 RESTRICTED OPEN SPACE OS-2 RESTRICTED OPEN SPACE OS-O OPEN SPACE OVERLAY MHP MOBILE HOME PARK SPA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA (RESIDENTIAL USES) SPA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA (COMMERCIAL USES) 12 © OpenStreetMap contributors 0.1 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere Miles0.1 Notes Legend The map generated is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map do not have survey grade accuracy but represent close approximation. 0.050 City of Hermosa Beach-Projects Zoning Map City Boundary Parcels Zoning R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-1A LIMITED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-2B LIMITED MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-3 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-P RESIDENTIAL-PROFESSIONAL RPD RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R-3PD MULTIPLE FAMILY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT C-1 LIMITED BUSINESS AND RESIDENTIAL C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL C-3 GENERAL AND HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL M-1 LIGHT MANUFACTURING OS OPEN SPACE OS-1 RESTRICTED OPEN SPACE OS-2 RESTRICTED OPEN SPACE OS-O OPEN SPACE OVERLAY MHP MOBILE HOME PARK SPA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA (RESIDENTIAL USES) SPA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA (COMMERCIAL USES) 13 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 19-0446 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 Approval of the June 18, 2019 Planning Commission Action Minutes Recommended Action: To approve the Planning Commission action minutes of the June 18, 2019 regular meeting. Attachment: 1. June 18, 2019 Planning Commission action minutes Respectfully Submitted by: Frances Estrada, Building and Planning Technician Approved: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™14                                             ! "# $"%   !"#$ %!& '!(  &'()*&+),())&*-&&)+'&,&-,&.&- )!!!"!" !%!%** + ( *  $! ,$ (  $$$- (-"-.   ( ! '!( *( %    $ #/0' )$%("'  . ! %(' % )!!!"!$!1' * )!!!"! !" ( *+'(!+ ! %  '+!%('!! '!  + ! + !%'!"!('! ' *2!%'"&'%1--/3+--!%! ,$ ( - 4!%  !!* )!!!"!( ++  % '!$! %*  ! 5 "''! !"% -#*  %*!4%% ++  % %!  5 !% % ! 5('! %-++ ( !$ !*!%* %$    ,** +! %(!++ * -&   $  ++ *+'( !" ( *  *  '!   % +( - #*' !" !*  % !!''(  %!"!  ' ' !    % +'( !"% ( %!" !%!$ !  +!% ! %   % )!!!"!+ +'( !"- &+$  !$( 67*  8 !!"  $(  ( *  '  !"-#*'! %+ ! ++ ! !" +  '(' 9' !$!" '!  + ! + ! 6 7 :/ :'6$$ !"%7+  !" !*' *'! %!%%  ! *;$%!* ( - ,    /       0       DRAFT15 ! "# $"%        <' !$(  +* ** !" %-<''+% '*'!  ('+  %!+% ! + !!*!6- -+! !'( %%   7' %!$!( +'( %- -0 " !%;2!' ; % $ (+" !%*!%  !"'=% '( !!-  !   !('!*'   % !"- -4!% " !% *$'$'% +%  !-<'!  + * " !% ;+> +% " !  !'!%  ?;. !'!! - -"!!'+  @+ '!"'  ! ' !! * %+% % +% '! !%*++( * ( * '(!"' !-  !!( '( %!  !"  +'( %('$!(   + %'! +! % *  !" !' )!!!"!!%**   (  $ !+  !"-      DRAFT16 ! "# $"%       "1 *  $1     21-   )  **!! 2 A ! A( !! !%+ !%) %  !  / ! 2 4   / )  !B !A( !'!  + !  8' !8!" !!  %' !! !)!!   C )!!  BB!"!)!!  <'DA!% !)!!  31* 45     !"*$%+  !!""! , ) *+,&+(&+- 61 AC)?A& / 1 ++* 2  )!!!"!!2!'  2  *!2!' ! " )*+   -          00 /   $" $"%   7   /   % /- 0  !  8 / 9 :      $"%1            :  1 ;1- 8 9   + EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE &CAC?22C&#??&CC8?.AC4A?2&C)8#0&44AC AC?22C&#??8<-&C4#8C##??C#&C2AC&.#&&C)8#0 ?22##?-)8CC??&@2C&&&C&44AC?22C&#?.#88C&C &#??4&C)8#0?22##?- EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE AC)?A& / : #!*!?!)'( !" !%)> F!!"2+  #    DRAFT17 ! "# $"%       -)'(  -)> F!!"2+ ! " , )) '()&-)+< 1 AC)?A& /  @) / !%!@ )  !% ! 9' %*! 5!"!!/!*!"*+$    '!!*(  !"!% !"! !!$!! $ !!"(5 ( $  5!"('%!" "!%'+"%!" 9'+ !6&G&2(71 )*"$!%%  !! +>  " 5 +* *!C!! !H'6CH7- ++!,A 9' ! "   7  0 =+        7   >  ?         0   ?    00         :  1 #1 AC)?A& /  )    + !)! /!%) !")! /$5/'!  +> (!'!"! $ /%  %19'  * ('%!"!!!"* '!( !' %( !%  5!" : 9' *!" /* % ! $$( !  % !%%!'!$ 9' *! "!** !% ) !")!$ 3/+ + !" 9'  !(  $ !/ + 6!'%!" !% + 7+'* ! '*+  ! 9' *! /6A  % 7D!!" %1  I!%%+!*2" % "   !-  $    DRAFT18 ! "# $"%       -*A '!*++*)+ %)    + ! )! -*A '!*++*)+ %) !")! -)A  :/  !!")1  )>  - ) -)> )!!%)> A !% !" 3-++!4 !%')'(*?'  1-#!'%!%2" % "  ! :-A ' A + - *! !%+2" % "  !6*!" !'(    17 -' !#! !*/++ %) !"#!/8 '+  -8! =$!$!A%  F!  -)'(*! 4A%'2+ -)'(*!8 ")  -)'( !8  / -)'( !8   !% 3-'++  !/ +!% !  % %3; ; J  ! "   7  0 =   (  ! ,   ,!  1 )*+   ,                    00    /   0 >       n  0 =1     7/     **!! A !  !!!%+ ! ) %  ! /  ! 4  / %1 AC)?A& /  @) /!%!@ )  9' *! ( !% *! "*!'! ! 6@!) *! 7 ! ' %!%%  !! +>  " 5 +*  *!C!! !H'6CH7- -)+ %++A '! -++!'( - ) -F!!"2+G ) -8 ") !%A%'2+ 3-)!!!"!A '! /1 ! "   7  0 =.   7 )*+            %    DRAFT19 ! "# $"%       ,  0   00 /  '  1     7/     **!! A !  !!!%+ ! ) %  ! /  ! 4  / "1 AC)?A& /  !  / / ! * 2'+ 4A % !6A/ 7+ ! + D! +!!%+ !"!%%$! $!" /*  % ! +%  ! 9' %+ !+  9' *   !  9' % 9' * $+ !"+  % $! *!* * ! %!"""  2!   (' %!%%  !! +>  " 5 +*  *!C!! !H'- -)+ %A '! -8!!%A%'2+ -8D 2+ - )  *! -++!'( 3-'++  !/ +!% ! %% %3; :; + ! "   7  0 = ,  )*+          -    @    ?       =      !"; $"%   01     7/     **!! A !  !!!%+ ! ) %  ! /  ! 4  / ""1 AC)?A& / )    + !)! !% ! 5 !% ('%!"+  5+!% +''! ! -- * 2'!+% * / ' !'!% !'!   !' -)+ %A '! - )!%)'( )  -++!'(#!'%!"!'! %' -'++  !/ +!% ! %% %3; :; + ! "   7  0 =+        ! < =       ,     & 1 )*+   -       - ,  !"; $"%       00  0 /      00      / 0     A  1     7 /   &    DRAFT20 ! "# $"%          **!! A !  !!!%+ ! ) %  ! /  ! 4  / , ))) &-)+< "$1 AC)?A& / 3 / K3/)!!!"!!% !* 5 +! + !+  9'  ! $  9' %! !" /4 A % !6A/ 7D! *! $!" /* % !   %  !%%  !! +>  " 5 +*  *!C!! !H'6CH7- -)+ %A '! - ) -++!'( -8D 9' 4" ! # %  "(% -8!"9' 4" ! # %  "(% 3-   $*  "(% 1-)  *! ! "   7  0 =.  )*+          -   00 /    A 07   0   1     7/     **!! A !  !!!%+ ! ) %  ! /  ! 4  / , )@ "21, ) 1 AC)?A& /  / 3//A   &/!!'A +*?!/   "  !%!@ )  -) !%!%%'+% %  -) ;A +*+ % -) *+ % -) ?**   *+ % -8'!4  +-'! 8 ! #!+ !A + 3-% C!*  ! (  :/+  1-% C!*  !L'/  (  : ! "  '    DRAFT21 ! "# $"%              7   /       0      /   '          :  1 (- (A +!'!! - ('A +!2>)!!!")> - 1 AC)?A& /  L' 3 )!!!"!& ! 4'' " !%#  )!!!"!& ! " !%*1/ 3/ ! "        7   /    !"; $"%   / :          :  1 "31   ) 1 AC)?A& /  '!>! !"$%!%! %' %* L' : /)!!!"!!!' +!%!  !!"- %!%!A +& + /)!!!"!! " "61>     7  >   ""320   0   1  A            !"; $"%1  (    DRAFT22 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 19-0456 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 Variance 19-1- A Variance from the Multiple Family Residential (R-3) open space zone provisions and parking standards to allow a new single-family residence to provide less than required open space, 230 square feet, rather than the required 300 square feet with a parking space located within the front 20 feet of the lot not leading to a garage at 1515 Monterey Boulevard and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. Recommended Action: Adopt the attached resolution denying Variance 19-1 a request to deviate from the open space provisions and parking standards of the Multiple Family Residential (R-3)zone,and determine that this action is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Background: On June 18, 2019, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider a proposed Variance at 1515 Monterey Boulevard. The applicant’s request involves deviating from Section 17.16.080 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code to reduce their required open space, which is 300 square feet, by 70 square feet. Additionally, their request is to deviate from Section 17.44.090 (D) of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code, to allow parking within the front 20 feet of the lot that does not lead to a garage. During the hearing, only the applicant addressed the Planning Commission; however, two letters in opposition were submitted prior to the hearing. Approval of a Variance requires the Planning Commission to adopt four specific findings. During their deliberations on the project, the Commission noted that they could not make two of the required findings. A summary of the Planning Commission’s comments, as they apply to these two findings, is as follows: Finding 1:There are exceptional circumstances applicable to the property involved. The subject site has a lot site of 1,154 square feet, whereas the minimum lot size for the R-3 zone is 4,000 square feet. While this parcel is a small lot, it is not a unique circumstance in the City of Hermosa Beach. Other small parcels in the City have been able to construct new single-family residences, while meeting all of the zoning standards. The applicant’s “hardship” is being driven by the size of the proposed home. The applicant could propose a smaller home that provides all of the necessary open space and a two-car enclosed garage to meet the parking requirements, thus eliminating the need for the deviations. Finding 2:The variance is necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™23 Staff Report REPORT 19-0456 possessed by other properties in the vicinity of the subject property. The substantial property right that exists for the subject site is the ability to provide a residence. There is no guarantee as to the size of said residence. Inasmuch as the property is currently improved with an 888 square foot single-family residence, the owner is already being provided the same property rights as other properties in the vicinity. It is possible for the applicant to provide a new, larger home on the property and meet of the development standards on the site. Elimination of the third bedroom on the first floor will give sufficient space to provide a two-car garage, thus meeting the parking requirements. Furthermore, a 70 square foot reduction of the living space on the third floor will provide additional space on the balconies to meet the open space requirements. After accepting the written and oral testimony,and duly deliberating on the matter,the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to deny the Variance and directed staff to return with a denial resolution for the Commission’s consideration. Attachments: 1.Proposed Resolution Respectfully Submitted by: David Blumenthal, AICP, Senior Planner Approved: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Legal Review: Lauren Langer, City Attorney City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™24 Page 1- Variance 19-1 Attachment 1 P.C. RESOLUTION 19-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DENYING VARIANCE 19-1, A REQUEST DEVIATE FROM MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS 17.16.080 AND 17.44.090(D) ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1515 MONTEREY BOULEVARD, AND DETERMINATION THAT THIS ACTION IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). The Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereby resolve and order as follows: Section 1. An application was filed by Steve Lazar for Design and Build by SouthSwell, Inc., for Variance 19-1, requesting to: 1) deviate from Section 17.16.080 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code to reduce their required open space; 2) to deviate from Section 17.44.090(D) of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code, to allow parking within the front 20 feet of the lot that does not lead to a garage; and 3) to determine that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act for property located at 1515 Monterey Boulevard. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application on June 18, 2019, at which time testimony and evidence, both oral and written, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning Commission voted 5-0 to deny the project and directed staff to return with the appropriate resolution for the Planning Commission’s consideration. Section 3. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the project is found to be categorically exempt from CEQA as defined in Section 15305(a), Class 5 Exemption, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations, because the request is a minor variance that is on a property with an average slope of less than 20%, and will not result in any changes to the land use or allowed density. This action is further found to be statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15270, which exempts projects that are denied or rejected by the public agency. Section 4. Pursuant to Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Section 17.54.020(B), the Planning Commission is required to make four findings to approve the request. Based on the testimony and evidence received, however, the Planning Commission could not make two of the findings. As such, the Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings to deny Variance 19-1: A. There are no exceptional circumstances that are applicable to the property involved. The subject site has a lot site of 1,154 square feet, whereas the minimum lot size for the R-3 zone is 4,000 square feet. While this parcel is a small lot, it is not a unique circumstance in the City of Hermosa Beach. Other small parcels in the City have been able to construct new single-family residences, while meeting all of the zoning standards. The applicant’s “hardship” is being driven by the size of the proposed home. The applicant 25 Page 2- Variance 19-1 could propose a smaller home that provides all of the necessary open space and a two-car enclosed garage to meet the parking requirements, thus eliminating the need for the deviations. B. The variance is not necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the vicinity of the subject property. The substantial property right that exists for the subject site is the ability to provide a residence. There is no guarantee as to the size of said residence. Inasmuch as the property is currently improved with an 888 square foot single-family residence, the owner is already being provided the same property rights as other properties in the vicinity. It is possible for the applicant to provide a new, larger home on the property and meet of the development standards on the site. Elimination of the third bedroom on the first floor will give sufficient space to provide a two-car garage, thus meeting the parking requirements. Furthermore, a 70 square foot reduction of the living space on the third floor will provide additional space on the balconies to meet the open space requirements. Section 5. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby denies the request for Variance 19-1. Section 6. Pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, any legal challenge to the decision of the Planning Commission, after a formal appeal to the City Council, must be made within 90 days after the final decision by the City Council. VOTE: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: CERTIFICATION I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution P.C. No. 19-XX is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California at its regular meeting of June 18, 2019 and memorialized by adoption of this resolution at its meeting of July 16, 2019. ______________________________ ______________________________ David Pedersen, Chairperson Ken Robertson, Secretary __________, 2019 Date 26 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 19-0444 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 Receive tri-annual report for on-sale alcoholic beverage Conditional Use Permits Recommended Action: Receive and file the report for informational purposes. The tri-annual review was submitted on June 18, 2019 and covers the period from November 1, 2018 to April 30, 2019. Based on the information in the report, no establishment has reached the “Standard Initiating Planning Commission Review.” Background: Since 2017 the tri-annual reviews of on-sale alcoholic beverage establishments includes the two-step process of providing an informational report before scheduling a hearing. The Process and Standards, updated in 2019, is Attachment 1. Changes to the process and reporting for this review, recommended by the Planning Commission, were approved by the City Council in September 2017, and include reporting and conducting the review three times a year. This is the second report in 2019 and covers the prior 6 months. The next report will be presented in October and will cover the period between March and August. The establishments required to prepare food to alcohol ratio reports for the second half of 2018 are included in this report. Analysis: Police Reports and ABC Activity: The Police Report and ABC Activity are included as Attachment 2, with their current data sheet as Attachment 3 and officer security checks as Attachment 4. The report indicates that one establishment was determined to be in violation of their CUP, this case is still pending and details are not included. Occupant Load: The threshold to trigger review is one (1). Code Enforcement routinely checks on-sale City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™27 Staff Report REPORT 19-0444 establishments and did not report occupant load violations during the review period. The presence of Code Enforcement and HBPD efforts has resulted in few warnings being issued. Warnings typically are issued when a place of business appears to or has been counted and confirmed to be close to its posted occupant load. Code Enforcement and Fire Prevention: We are working with the Los Angeles County Fire Department and include their business license inspection report for the first quarter of 2019 as Attachment 5. It indicates approximately 146 businesses were inspected, of which 8 were late night establishments. No violations were reported. (Note: the quarterly report format is standard for LA County Fire.) Statistical Data Relating to Business Checks of Alcohol Serving Establishments November 1, 2018 to April 30, 2019 is contained in Attachment 6, with the last reporting period report as Attachment 7. Code Enforcement/Violation of CUP Conditions: Violations that are both a code violation and a CUP violation are only counted once. Code Enforcement issued two citations during this reporting period. Although many other businesses received warnings, policy is to request compliance prior to issuing a Citation during a single shift. On April 12, 2019, Abigaile & Ocean Bar received an Administrative Citation for the CUP violation of excessively loud music, audible to the surrounding residential neighborhood. On April 28 2019, Patrick Molloy’s received an Administrative Citation for the CUP violation of changes to the interior layout by adding an elevated stage altering the primary function of business. Businesses required to submit food-to-alcohol sales ratio reports per conditions in their CUPs must continue to do so; failure to do so is counted as part of the CUP review. As these are required every six months, their status will be reported in the October report. Based on the “Procedure for Review of On-Sale Alcoholic Beverage Conditional Use Permit” no businesses have reached the “Standard Initiating P.C. Review” based on the “standards that would trigger a referral to the Planning Commission for a CUP review and potentially for a subsequent modification/revocation hearing.” General Plan Consistency: Evaluation of the City’s enforcement and police responses to achieve safety goals is consistent with Goal 5 of the Public Safety Element:High Quality police and fire protection services provided to residents and visitors and the following policies under Goal 5: • Public Safety 5.1 Crime deterrence.Regularly evaluate the incidence of crime and identify and City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™28 Staff Report REPORT 19-0444 implement measures to deter crime. •Public Safety 5.2 High level of response.Achieve optimal utilization of allocated public safety resources and provide desired levels of response, staffing, and protection within the community. • Public Safety 5.3 Use of technology.Provide and use smart surveillance technology and communication systems to improve crime prevention and inform the community regarding actions to take in case of emergency. •Public Safety 5.4 Physical design standards.Reduce opportunities for criminal activity through physical design standards and Crime Prevention through Environmental Design principles. • Public Safety 5.8 Nuisance abatement. Encourage Police Department review of uses which may be characterized historically by high levels of nuisance (noise, nighttime patronage, and/or rates of criminal activity) providing for conditions of control of use to prevent adverse impacts on adjacent residences, schools, religious facilities, and similar “sensitive” uses. Additionally, Goal 2 of the Governance Element speaks to the importance of having the community, including business partners, be active and engaged in the decision-making process. Staff has found that collaboration with the Pier Plaza establishments to address safety concerns and improve access, lighting, and other aesthetics on the Plaza to be an effective partnership. Summary and Recommendations: The data relating to the Semi-Annual Review criteria is summarized below for specific businesses. Process Criteria Statistics for All Businesses (November 1 - April 30, 2019) Criteria Summary of All Businesses Violation of Operating Hours 0 ABC Violations (underage serving, violation of hours, etc. 0 Overcrowding Citation 0 Serious Crime on Premises indicative of Lack of Adequate Security 1 Criminal Citation of Staff while Working/on Premises 0 Noise Citation 1** Outdoor Encroachment Permit Violation 0 Building Code Violation (incl. remodeling without permit) 0 Health Department Violation 0 Sign Ordinance Violation 0 NPDES Violation 0 Violation of any CUP Condition** 2** City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™29 Staff Report REPORT 19-0444 Criteria Summary of All BusinessesViolation of Operating Hours 0ABC Violations (underage serving, violation of hours,etc.0Overcrowding Citation 0Serious Crime on Premises indicative of Lack ofAdequate Security 1Criminal Citation of Staff while Working/on Premises 0Noise Citation 1** Outdoor Encroachment Permit Violation 0 Building Code Violation (incl. remodeling without permit) 0 Health Department Violation 0 Sign Ordinance Violation 0 NPDES Violation 0 Violation of any CUP Condition** 2** *There were five assault reports; however only one was determined to be a result of Lack of Adequate Security, and the case is pending. ** Most Code violations are also CUP violations and are not counted twice. Attachments: 1. Process and Standards, updated 2017 2. Police/ ABC Report for this period 3. Police Statistics for this period 4. Police Officer Checks for this period 5. LACoFD Business License inspection report 6. Code Enforcement Data for this period 7. Code Enforcement Data for last period Respectfully Submitted by: Robert Rollins, Building/ Code Enforcement Official Approved: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™30 Process and Standards for Review of On-Sale Alcoholic Beverage Conditional Use Permits 1) The CUP review process will consist of an administrative review process in which the on-sale establishments’ activities would be reviewed against an established set of criteria three times per year. 2) On-sale establishments with a CUP would be referred to the Planning Commission for a CUP review, and subsequently for a modification/revocation hearing if the Commission so decided upon its review, when they exceed established standards for each criteria to trigger such a review. 3) The standards that would trigger a referral to the Planning Commission for a CUP review and potential modification/revocation hearing will be based on the frequency or number of incidents/violations within a stipulated timeframe. 4) The standards that would trigger a referral to the Planning Commission for a CUP review and potentially for a subsequent modification/revocation hearing are as indicated in Table 1 below. 5) The administrative review of CUPs should be conducted three times per year with an evaluation of the on-sale establishments’ activities for the prior 6-month period. 6) The standards or criteria of the CUP review system will be made readily available to all on-sale establishments with CUPs and the public via the City website and/or other appropriate media (including direct mailings) to minimize any confusion over what standards will initiate a Planning Commission review and potential modification/revocation hearing. 7) Information from Police and Fire Department related to patterns of patronage of on-sale establishments (as indicated by investigations of intoxicated persons after incidents) and consistency with “Model House Policies” may be generally considered by the Planning Commission as factors in whether the business is being operated responsibly and engaging in the responsible service of alcohol. This information may be considered by the planning commission, as additional justification for holding a CUP review hearing after referral based on the criteria above has been determined and as evidence in any CUP modification/revocation hearing. Table 1. CUP Review Standards Standard Initiating P.C. Review(a) Criterion (Number of incidents in any 6 months) Violation of Operating Hours 2 ABC Violations (underage serving, violation of hours, etc.) 2 Overcrowding Citation 1 Criminal Citation of Staff while Working/on Premises 2 Serious Crime on Premises indicative of Lack of Adequate Security 2 (Combination of any 3 or more) Violation of any CUP Condition (b) ABC Violations (underage service, violation of hours, etc.) Overcrowding Citation Criminal Citation of Staff while Working/on Premises Serious Crime on Premises indicative of Lack of Adequate Security Noise Citation Health Department Violation Outdoor Encroachment Permit Violation Building Code Violation (incl. remodeling without permit) Sign Ordinance Violation NPDES Violation (Administrative Determination) “Excessive Number” of Calls for Police Service “Excessive Number” of Public Complaints to City “Excessive Number” of Criminal Events on/adjacent to Premises NOTE: (a) – Recommended threshold number; Chief of Police may recommend CUP review to Commission at his/her discretion—at any time regardless of number of incidents in any period of time, to determine whether revocation/medication is appropriate under HBMC 17.70.010—as stipulated in many current CUPs and the Municipal Code. (b) Non-submittal of food to alcohol sales ratio reports in a timely manner when required by a CUP is considered a violation of the CUP condition. Reporting of the food to alcohol sales ratio required by a CUP, ABC license, or the Municipal Code may be required and considered during any modification/revocation action. 31 Hermosa Beach Police Department November 2018 - April 2019 CUP Review 1 Police Reports: The Hermosa Beach Police Department (HBPD) conducts a thorough review of all police reports related to establishments which hold an ABC alcohol permit. Each report is reviewed individually by more than three people. The typical review process is initiated by the Crime Analyst, then a review by the Operations Bureau Division Commander (Lieutenant), the Police Captain and ultimately the Chief of Police. The Lieutenant and the Captain make recommendations to the Police Chief regarding their determination of an establishment’s culpability related to Conditional Use Permit (CUP) standards. In addition, the Operations Bureau Division Commander personally makes contact with owners and managers of establishments related to any concern(s) the Police Department may have of issues that do not rise to a CUP violation. The purpose of this communication is to ensure that the establishment hears directly from the Police Department in an effort to address issues before they rise to CUP violations or other potential safety concerns. Police reports are initiated by a Call for Service (CFS). A CFS begins when someone requests the help of the police (typically by a call to dispatch) or if an officer observes an incident/violation/or contacts someone in an enforcement capacity. A CFS may result in a report, citation, arrest, or no action may be taken. HBPD reviews both CFS and police reports related to ABC permitted addresses. It is important to understand that a CFS or a report at a specific address does not mean an incident happened inside the address. As an example, a traffic accident or a fight reported at 1234 Main Street does not mean the incident occurred inside the address or is associated with the business. The address may simply be associated as a landmark (identifying the location of an incident) wherein the location itself had nothing to do with the incident. That said, a location with a CFS or report should not be assumed to be problematic or involved in the incident as the CFS or report may have nothing to do with the location other than used as a landmark/identifying the location of an incident which occurred outside of the location. In reporting back to the Planning Commission, HBPD will note the number of CFS and Reports associated with an address. We also report back the category of the reports (e.g. Drunk, Disturbance, Assault, etc.). An establishment does not have a CUP violation charged against them, unless, in HBPD’s review process it is determined that the establishment was complicit or clearly negligent in its actions which results in a violation of the CUP standards (Table 1.) As an example, two people bump into each other inside of an establishment and one person hits the other person without warning. Without additional information demonstrating the establishment’s complicity or negligence, the establishment would not be charged with a CUP violation. As the Planning Commission reviews HBPD’s statistics related to each location, it should be understood that a location may have 4 “Total” reports, of which only 3 are “reviewed” would mean one of the four reports has nothing to do with the location. The number under the type of report (e.g. Drunk, Disturbance, Assault, etc.), may or may not be charged against the establishment based on the determination made the HBPD Chief of Police. As noted, this determination will be made based on information demonstrating the establishment’s complicity or negligence. If it is determined that an establishment is complicit or negligent, a number will be assigned to the “Counted for CUP” column. 32 Hermosa Beach Police Department November 2018 - April 2019 CUP Review 2 For context, the HBPD and the FBI categorizes assaults, sexual assaults and narcotics violations as ‘serious crime.” With this in mind and with the agreement of the Planning Commission, it has been determined that two (2) incidents of “Serious Crime on Premises Indicative of Lack of Adequate Security” is the established criteria needed for the Chief of Police to request a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) review by the Planning Commission (as noted on Table 1 of the CUP review standards). That said, the municipal code also provides: “the Chief of Police retains authority to recommend CUP reviews to the Planning Commission at his/her discretion— regardless of the number of incidents in any period of time, as stipulated in many current CUPs and the Municipal Code. Between 11/01/2018 and 04/30/2019, 20 police reports and 30 CFS related to establishments with CUPs merited review by police staff. It was determined that one (1) of these incidents occurring at American Junkie was in violation of the CUP Review Standards or rose to the level of a serious crime indicative of lack of adequate security. This case is still pending criminal prosecution outcome. See attached chart. Reports CFS* Total Reviewed Drunk in Public Disturbances Assaults Sexual Assaults Narcotics Other Reports Total Review Disturbance or Assault CUP Violations 20 7 1 5 0 0 7 30 27 1 *CFS- Calls for Service ABC Activity: The Hermosa Beach Police Department participates in a tri-city (Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach and El Segundo) grant with Alcohol Beverage Control (ABC). This grant provides funding for officers from each agency to work together to impact alcohol related issues in each city. While this program is primarily enforcement related, there is an educational component where police and ABC personnel meet with the staff/ownership at on-site and off-site sales establishments to review expectations and provide guidance. Below is a recap of the police department’s efforts for the months of November 2018 through April 2019:  November 9, 2018 Shoulder Tap Operation – 2 cited for providing alcohol to a minor  December 14, 2018 Shoulder Tap Operation – 1 cited for providing alcohol to a minor  January 18, 2019 Party Patrol Operation – Responded to 2 parties with minors, no alcohol  February 15, 2019 Trap Door Operation - No citations  March 9, 2019 Minor Decoy Operation – No citations 33 Hermosa Beach Police Department November 2018 - April 2019 CUP Review 3 Update to Prior ABC Activities: No reportable updated information. General Enforcement Activity: Below is a summary of officer initiated (non-ABC related) reports the Hermosa Beach Police Department wrote from November 2018 through April 2019 regarding alcohol related issues:  In November 2018 staff at Baja Sharkeez flagged down uniformed officers regarding a person attempting to us a fraudulent identification for entry. The subject was issued a citation for a possession of a Fraudulent Identification. Definitions: IMPACT (Informed Merchants Preventing Alcohol-Related Crime Tendencies) Inspection- objective of the project is to educate licensees about the various ways they can participate in reducing alcohol-related crimes such as sales to underage and obviously intoxicated persons. Licensee Education on Alcohol and Drugs (LEAD) Training- A free, voluntary prevention and education program for retail licensees, their employees and applicants, designed to promote the legal and responsible sale and service of alcoholic beverages in California. Minor Decoy- This operation allows law enforcement to use persons under 20 years of age as decoys to test establishments ID check process to determine if they will sell alcohol to minors. Party Patrol Enforcement- This operation focuses on under aged alcohol related parties. Responsible Beverage Service (RBS) Training- (Similar to LEAD Training) Free alcohol beverage service training provided by Behavioral Health Services (BHS) to sellers/servers designed to promote the legal and responsible sale and service of alcoholic beverages in California. Responsible Beverage Service (RBS) Training- Similar to LEAD training, this free training is provided by the Behavioral Health Services. Shoulder Tap- During these operations, a minor decoy, under the direct supervision of law enforcement officers, solicits adults outside ABC licensed establishments to buy the minor decoy alcohol. Trap Door- During these operations, law enforcement works with establishments to interview and cite minors who have attempted to gain access to an establishment using a false ID. 34 Hermosa Beach Police Department November 2018 - April 2019 CUP Review 4 DUI and Drunk in Public Summary: As part of DUI and Drunk in Public arrests, HBPD officers, to the best of their abilities, ask arrestees to tell them where they have previously been drinking, and more specifically the last place they recall drinking. Not all contacts with arrestees provide an opportunity to ask these questions. The answers are documented and are presented here. November 2018- April 2019 DUI Summary November 2018 – April 2019 Public Intoxication Summary Location Totals Location Totals American Junkie 3 Abigail’s 1 Chelsea 1 American Junkie 6 Hermosa Beach 7 Barnacles 1 House/Home/Residence 1 Dia De Campo 1 Other Cities 13 Hennessey’s 1 Lighthouse 1 Hermosa Saloon 1 Saint Rocke 1 Lighthouse 1 Sharkeez 2 Other 9 Slaters 50/50 1 Patrick Molloy’s 1 Steak and Whiskey 1 Rebel Republic 1 Tower 12 1 Sharkeez 6 Unknown 10 Slaters 50/50 1 Totals 42 Steak and Whiskey 1 Tower 12 3 Underground 1 Unknown 24 Totals 59 35 Total # # Reviewed Drunk in PublicDisturbances/Fights Assaults Sexual Assaults Narcotics Other Reports # ReviewedDisturbance/AssaultAbigaile's (Ocean/Alta House), 1301 Manhattan Avenu10000000330American Junkie, 68 Pier Plaza 115201002221Baja Sharkeez, 52 Pier Plaza64100003220Banzai Beach, 934 Hermosa Ave 1 2 300000000000Barnacles, 837 Hermosa Ave42010001220Beach House, 1300 The Strand10000000000Bottle Inn, 26 22nd St00000000000California Sushi & Teriyaki, 429 PCH00000000000Chelsea, 1340 Hermosa Ave00000000110Comedy & Magic, 1018 Hermosa Ave40000000110Crème De La Crepe, 424 Pier Ave.00000000000The Deck, 1272 The Strand00000000110Dia de Campo, 1238 Hermosa Ave00000000110El Pollo Inka, 1100 PCH 150000000000Fusion Sushi, 1200 PCH00000000000GreenBelt Restaurant, 36 Pier Plaza00000000000Hennessey's Tavern, 8 Pier Plaza11100000000Hermosa Beach Fish Co. 719 Pier Ave00000000000Hermosa Bch Yacht Club, 66 Hermosa Ave10000000110Hermosa Saloon, 211 Pacific Coast Hwy10000000000La Penita, 200 Longfellow Ave.00000000000La Playita, 37 14th St.00000000000Laurel Tavern, 1220 Hermosa Ave.00000000000Lighthouse, 30 Pier Plaza32002000220Locale 90 Neapolitan Pizzeria, 1040 Hermosa Ave.00000000000North End Bar, 2626 Hermosa Ave21001000100Paisano's, 1132 Hermosa Ave31100000220Palmilla Cocina y Tequila, 39 Pier Plaza10000000000Patrick Molloy's, 50 Pier Plaza61001000440Pedone's Pizza, 1332 Hermosa Ave20000000110Poulet Du Jour, 233 Pacific Coast Hwy10000000000Rebel Republic, 73 Pier Ave.11100000000Rok Sushi, 1200 Hermosa Ave00000000000Round Table Pizza, 2701 PCH00000000000Sabra Beirut Mix, 500 PCH20000000000Scotty's, 1100 The Strand00000000000Silvio's BBQ , 20 Pier Plaza00000000000Slaters 50/50, 11 Pier Ave21100000100St. Rocke, 142 Pacific Coast Hwy00000000000The Spot, 110 2nd St00000000000The Standing Room, 1320 Hermosa Ave10000000330Steak & Whiskey, 117 Pier Ave.10000000000Suzy's Bar & Grill, 1141 Aviation Blvd00000000000Tower 12, 53 Pier Plaza00000000110Uncorked, 302 Pier Ave00000000000The Underground, 1334 Hermosa Ave20000000100Watermans, 22 Pier Plaza11000001000Totals 73 2071500730271CFSCounted for CUPReports2018 November - 2019 April CUP 6 Month Review36 Location Count Abigaile's (Ocean/Alta House), 1301 Manhattan Avenue 2 American Junkie, 68 Pier Plaza 25 Baja Sharkeez, 52 Pier Plaza 26 Barnacles, 837 Hermosa Ave 28 Beach House, 1300 The Strand 2 Bottle Inn, 26 22nd St 1 2The Deck, 1272 The Strand 40El Pollo Inka, 1100 Pacific Coast Hwy 4 1 GreenBelt Restaurant, 36 Pier Plaza 17 H.B. Fish Co., 719 Pier Ave 2 Hennessey's Tavern, 8 Pier Plaza 24 Hermosa Bch Yacht Club, 66 Hermosa Ave 18 30 Hermosa Saloon, 211 Pacific Coast Hwy 3 18 Lighthouse, 30 Pier Plaza 1 North End Bar, 2626 Hermosa Ave 13 5 Palmilla Cocina y Tequila, 39 Pier Plaza 1 Patrick Malloy's, 50 Pier Plaza 2 1 52 20 Sabra Beirut Mix, 500 PCH Saint Rocke, 142 Pacific Coast Hwy Scotty's, 1100 The Strand Silvio's BBQ , 20 Pier Plaza Slaters 50/50 Standing Room, 1320 Hermosa Ave The Underground, 1334 Hermosa Ave Watermans, 22 Pier Plaza Totals 363 2018-2019 November - April Officer Security Checks Tower 12, 53 Pier Plaza 6 19Suzy's Bar & Grill, 1141 Aviation Blvd 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 C o d e E n f o r c e m e n t C U P R e v i e w November 2018 – April 2019 Statistical Data Relating to Business Checks of Alcohol Serving Establishments: Total Establishment Checks (6 month period) 4569 Average Total Checks Per Month 759 Average Total Checks Per Shift 36 Average Checks Per Establishment Per Month 31 *These checks are for: occupancy load, fire exits, floorplans, live entertainment, and overall condition. Business Name Total Checks Nov – Apr North End Bar 148 Alta House / Ocean Bar 172 Saint Rocke 143 Hermosa Saloon 143 Slater 50/50 166 Hennessey’s Tavern 159 Silvio’s 194 Waterman’s HB 204 The Lighthouse 233 Palmilla 213 Patrick Molloy’s 231 Baja Sharkeez 239 Tower 12 237 American Junkie 245 The Deck 201 Barnacles 147 Serve on 2nd 102 Laurel Tavern 194 Dia De Campo 194 The Standing Room 208 Underground 229 Chelsea 229 Rebel Republic 198 Suzy’s 140 Civic Center, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, California 90254-3884 47 C o d e E n f o r c e m e n t C U P R e v i e w July – December 2018 Statistical Data Relating to Business Checks of Alcohol Serving Establishments: Total Establishment Checks (6 month period) 3139 Average Total Checks Per Month 784 Average Total Checks Per Shift 34 Average Checks Per Establishment 130 *These checks are for: occupancy load, fire exits, floorplans, live entertainment, and overall condition. Business Name Total Checks Sept – Dec North End Bar 116 Alta House / Ocean Bar 138 Saint Rocke 97 Hermosa Saloon 97 Slater 50/50 139 Hennessey’s Tavern 137 Silvio’s 134 Waterman’s HB 136 The Lighthouse 151 Palmilla 138 Patrick Molloy’s 153 Baja Sharkeez 151 Tower 12 153 American Junkie 153 The Deck 146 Barnacles 124 Serve on 2nd 93 Laurel Tavern 124 Dia De Campo 115 The Standing Room 138 Underground 149 Chelsea 149 Rebel Republic 111 Suzy’s 97 Civic Center, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, California 90254-3884 48 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 19-0460 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 SIGN REVIEW - S4 #36 Determination on whether a proposed 302.19 square foot display on the west wall of the building at 2212 Pacific Coast Highway is a mural, and determination that the proposed display is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act. Applicant/Property Owner:Gary Lane 2212 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Recommended Action: Adopt the attached resolution and determine that the proposed display covering 302.19 square feet of surface area on west side of an existing building is consistent with the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code (HBMC) definition of ‘Mural’ at 2212 Pacific Coast Highway, and determine that the proposed display is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Background: The subject property is located at 2212 Pacific Coast Highway, the main north/south arterial and commercial corridor through the city. The applicant proposes a 302.19 square foot (sq. ft.) display on the west side of the existing building at 2212 Pacific Coast Highway. The proposed display is 22’8” wide by 13’4” high and depicts a lifeguard tower along with various vintage beach items to enjoy at the beach. The original drawing was sketched by Gary Lane, and Bob Brugger translated the drawing into a painting. The building wall will be plastered first to create a flat and smooth surface. The display will then be hand painted directly onto the west wall of the existing building by a professional muralist. The applicant has been informed that he will need to obtain a Right-of-Way Permit from the Public Works Department and also provide traffic control plans to the Public Works Department for review and approval in order to occupy the right-of-way while painting the display. In addition, the applicant will also need to obtain a separate permit from Caltrans in order to occupy the right-of-way along Pacific Coast Highway. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™49 Staff Report REPORT 19-0460 Analysis: ‘Mural’ as defined in HBMC Section 17.50.030 means a “pictorial representation not specifically identifying goods or services offered by the business on the premises”. Lane Design + Build is a business that offers design and construction services for residential and commercial projects. The building provides 24 feet of frontage along Pacific Coast Highway, which allows the business to have a maximum sign area of 72 sq. ft. pursuant to HBMC Section 17.50.140. Currently, the existing building has one 8 square foot (4’ length x 2’ width) sign. Therefore, the current remaining sign area allowed is 64 square feet (sq. ft.). Pursuant to HBMC Section 17.50.140.B.7, the Planning Commission may waive specific provisions of the sign ordinance relating to total sign area, coverage, height, type, and style for a display deemed to be a mural. If determined to be mural, the Planning Commission may allow the display to exceed the total 72 sq. ft. maximum sign area by 238.19 sq. ft. and exceed the 25% maximum wall coverage on the Pacific Coast Highway by occupying 63% of the wall area. General Plan Consistency: The project site is located within the Pacific Coast Highway Corridor Character Area. The Hermosa Beach General Plan (Plan Hermosa) future vision for this corridor includes encouraging new gateway monuments and signage to be added to promote Hermosa Beach’s identity. In addition, the public realm design for this corridor encourages the prominence of entryways to Hermosa Beach be increased through the provision of artwork, monuments, and signage along Pacific Coast Highway. Furthermore, as indicated in the Public Art and Design section of Plan Hermosa’s Land Use Element, the artistic culture in Hermosa Beach involves “community groups, social events, and the larger community that participates in and values the beauty of public art and creative artistic expression.” Environmental Analysis: The proposed display is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(a), because the display will be painted directly onto the west wall of the existing building, and will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Conclusion: Staff finds the display is a mural because it does not directly advertise products or goods offered on the premises, but instead depicts the City’s artistic beach culture, which includes public arts that enhance the public realm along the Pacific Coast Highway Corridor. Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution and determine that the proposed display is a mural and that it be allowed to exceed standards for total sign area and wall coverage pursuant to HBMC Section 17.50.140.B, and determine that the proposed display is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™50 Staff Report REPORT 19-0460 Attachments: 1.Proposed Resolution 2.Site Photograph 3.Applicant Submittal 4.Notice Poster Verification Respectfully Submitted by: Kathy Khang, Assistant Planner Approved: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Legal Review: Lauren Langer, City Attorney City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™51 1 P.C. Resolution 19-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DETERMINING THE PROPOSED 302.19 SQUARE FOOT DISPLAY ON THE WEST WALL OF THE EXISTING BUILDING AT 2212 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY IS A MURAL AND DETERMINING THE PROPOSED DISPLAY IS NOT A PROJECT UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. The Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereby resolve and order as follows: Section 1. An application was filed on April 29, 2019 by Gary Lane, seeking determination of whether the proposed display covering 302.19 square feet of the west side of an existing building is consistent with the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code (HBMC) definition of ‘Mural’ for Lane Design + Build at 2212 Pacific Coast Highway. Section 2. HBMC Section 17.50.030 defines a mural as “a pictorial representation not specifically identifying goods or services offered by the business on the premises”. Section 3. The building provides 24 feet of frontage along Pacific Coast Highway, which allows the business to have a maximum sign area of 72 square feet (sq. ft.) pursuant to HBMC Section 17.50.140. The existing building has one 8 sq. ft. sign measuring four feet in length and two feet in width. Therefore, the remaining allowable sign area is 64 sq. ft. Section 4. The Planning Commission at its public meeting of July 16, 2019 considered testimony and evidence, both oral and written, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission. Section 5. The proposed display is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(a), because the building wall will be plastered to create a flat and smooth surface, then the mural will be hand painted directly onto the west wall of the existing building, and the mural will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Section 6. Based on the evidence received at the public meeting, the Planning Commission makes the following findings: 1. The display meets the definition of a mural as set forth in HBMC Section 17.50.030, because the business on the premises offers design and construction services for residential and commercial projects, and the proposed display, a pictorial representation of beach culture and marine life, does not specifically identify goods or services offered by the business on the premises. 52 2 2. Pursuant to HBMC Section 17.50.130.B, it is appropriate to waive the specific provisions of the sign code pertaining to sign area, cover, height, type and style for the 302.19 sq. ft. mural display because the display meets the definition of a mural. The building frontage is 24 feet, which allows the business to have a maximum sign area of 72 sq. ft. pursuant to HBMC Section 17.50.130. The existing building has one 8 square foot (4’ length x 2’ width) sign. Therefore, the remaining allowable sign area is 64 sq. ft. Pursuant to HBMC 17.50.140.B.7, the Planning Commission allows the proposed display to exceed the total 72 sq. ft. allowable sign area by 238.19 sq. ft. and exceed the 25% maximum wall coverage on the Pacific Coast Highway by building frontage occupying 63% of the wall area. Section 7. The project site is located within the Pacific Coast Highway Corridor Character Area. The Hermosa Beach General Plan (Plan Hermosa) future vision for this corridor includes encouraging new gateway monuments and signage to be added to promote Hermosa Beach’s identity. In addition, the public realm design for this corridor encourages the prominence of entryways to Hermosa Beach be increased through the provision of artwork, monuments, and signage along Pacific Coast Highway. Furthermore, as indicated in the Public Art and Design section of Plan Hermosa’s Land Use Element, the artistic culture in Hermosa Beach involves “community groups, social events, and the larger community that participates in and values the beauty of public art and creative artistic expression”. Section 8. Pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, any legal challenge to the decision of the Planning Commission, after a formal appeal to the City Council, must be made within 90 days after the final decision by the City Council. VOTE: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: CERTIFICATION I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution P.C. 19-XX is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, at its regular meeting of July 16, 2019. Dave Pedersen, Chairman Ken Robertson, Secretary July 16, 2019 Date 53 Attachment 2 Site Photograph 54 55 Attachment 4 Notice Poster Verification 56 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 19-0468 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 Planning Commission interpretations on whether seating plan modifications are minor and acceptable for a Limited live Entertainment Permit for Hermosa Brewing Company, 1342 Hermosa Avenue. Recommended Action: To confirm by minute order that the proposed seating plan modifications are minor and, as modified, are also are acceptable for a Limited Live Entertainment Permit. Background: On October 13, 2015, the City Council granted a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for on-sale beer and wine in conjunction with a restaurant at 1342 Hermosa Avenue (“Brat and Brau”) with a closing time of 11:00 P.M daily. Hermosa Brewing Company has taken over the business, and currently is operating under the terms of that permit. The current business owner has made some changes in the seating plan as compared to the seating arrangements approved for Brat and Brau. These changes involve the removal of fixed bench seating and their replacement with movable tables and chairs located towards the front the business. The business owner is also preparing to make further improvements to the front façade to create window openings facing Hermosa Avenue (see proposed plans as compared to CUP approved plans). The business owner has also applied for a Limited Live Entertainment permit pursuant to the terms of Section 17.42.190 of the Municipal Code. Staff has put this submittal on hold because of the inconsistency with the CUP approved seating plan. Analysis: Staff is requesting Planning Commission interpretation on whether the seating modifications are minor under the terms of the CUP. Specifically in regards to condition #8 of the CUP which reads as follows: 8.The use consisting of a restaurant with on-sale beer and wine shall be substantially consistent with submitted plans reviewed by the City Council on October 13,2015,and as required by project conditions.Minor modifications to the floor plan shall be reviewed and may be approved by the Community Development Director.Any substantial deviation to the floor planCity of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™57 Staff Report REPORT 19-0468 approved by the Community Development Director.Any substantial deviation to the floor plan or seating arrangement or intensification of use,or which alters the primary function of the business, shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. Staff does not consider these changes to be a substantial deviation, nor do they intensify or alter the primary function of the use, and thus staff considers them minor. However, staff is seeking Commission’s confirmation because of past concerns about changing out fixed seating; although, staff would note that those circumstances involved substantially more seating and were done in a late night alcohol establishment. A more common concern in the past has been the conversion of movable seating to fixed benches in an attempt to increase occupant load in larger establishments . Also, while the proposed change does not change the occupant load for the business it reduces the seating capacity since the fixed benches allowed for more patrons to be seated along the north and south walls. Further the Commission should consider these modifications in the context of the planned improvements to the front windows which are intended to create a more open and inviting atmosphere. The window changes do not require Planning Commission approval, and are consistent with prior Planning Commission policy direction on what constitutes open air or outdoor dining, as the opening is far less than 60% of the area between 3’ and 8’ in height and include a 3-foot high barrier at the front of the building. The request for Limited Live Entertainment is an administrative permit issued by Staff part of the “pilot” program approved by the City Council pursuant to Section 17.42.190. Among other requirements, the entertainment is limited to no later thatn 9:00 P.M. While staff was initially was concerned with the modifications in the seating arrangement, staff otherwise believes the proposal is consistent with the standards for the permit. Of specific concern is Section 17.42.190 of the code which states: 4. Operations/Seating. The activity must be confined to completely enclosed premises and does not result in the need for additional seating or change in an approved floor plan to accommodate the limited live entertainment and/or accommodate a stage for the entertainment, dancing or hosting of an activity or event Staff is of the opinion that while tables and chairs will have to be removed for the performers, that it is not a change to the floor plan, and will reduce seating of the premises. Further, it is the only feasible way to provide limited entertainment in a small restaurant like this, consistent with the objectives for the Limited Live Entertainment program. Further, the stipulations in the permit will limit the types of live entertainment, require the doors and windows to be closed during entertainment, and restrict entertainment until 9:00 P.M. The permit will be effective for two years from the adoption of the Limited Live Entertainment ordinance (December 2020) unless extended. Attachments: 1.Conditional Use Permit for 1342 Hermosa Avenue 2.Proposed floor plan and seating plan 3.CUP approved floor plan and seating plan City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™58 Staff Report REPORT 19-0468 4.Public Notice Poster Respectfully Submitted by: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 RESTROOM MENS RESTROOM 107 DINING AREA 101 KITCHEN 103 CLOSET BAR AREA 102 SIDEWALKSIDEWALK - NOT PART OF SCOPE OF WORK - - NOT PART OF SCOPE OF WORK - EXISTING FIXED STOREFRONT UNIT TO BE REPLACED RESTROOM MENS RESTROOM 107 DINING AREA 101 KITCHEN 103 CLOSET BAR AREA 102 SIDEWALKSIDEWALK - NOT PART OF SCOPE OF WORK - - NOT PART OF SCOPE OF WORK - NEW 11'-0"X5'-1" ROLL-UP SECTIONAL WINDOW UNIT OPTIONAL MUSICIAN LOCATIONS 11'-0"(N) 4X4 CORNER POST NEW ROLL-UP SECTIONAL WINDOW UNIT TRACK 5'-0"± V.I.F. EXISTING FIXED STOREFRONT UNIT TO BE REPLACED12'-4"±V.I.F.9'-4"1'-9"23'-6"± V.I.F.7'-7"V.I.F.11'-4" V.I.F. NEW 11'-0"X5'-1" ROLL-UP SECTIONAL WINDOW UNIT9'-4"V.I.F.1'-9"7'-7"1'-3"5'-1"NEW 11'-0"X1'-3" FIXED STOREFRONT WINDOW UNIT1'-3"NEW 11'-0"X5'-1" ROLL-UP SECTIONAL WINDOW UNIT 9'-4"±V.I.F.5'-1"1'-9"1'-3"1'-3"3'-0"NEW ROLL-UP SECTIONAL UNIT TRACK A2.01 EXISTING AND PROPOSED FLOOR PLANS, ELEVATIONS, AND SECTIONSAll ideas, designs, arrangements, andplansindicated or represented by this drawingare owned by and the property of PEHA &ASSOCIATES and were created, evolved, anddeveloped for use on and in connection withthe specific project. None of suchideas,designs, and plans shall be reproducedin part or in whole without the express priorwritten permission of PEHA & ASSOCIATES.PEHA & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE Larry Peha, A.I.A 67 14TH STREET HERMOSA BEACH, CA. 90254 PHONE: (310) 372 - 1755 FAX: (310) 376 - 6837 E-MAIL: pa@pehaarch.com Web: www.pehaarch.com DATE ISSUE/REVISION DATE: DRAWN: JOB NO. DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER 1342 PS 19.07.10 2019.07.10_PROGRESS SET - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION·PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION.FACADE RENOVATION FOR:HERMOSA BREWERY1342 HERMOSA AVENUE, HERMOSA BEACH 90254PROPOSED STOREFRONT UNIT REPLACEMENT. EXISTING FIXED STOREFRONT UNIT TO BE REPLACED WITH OPERABLE VERTICAL BI-FOLD STOREFRONT UNIT. SCALE:31/4"=1'-0"EXISTING ELEVATION - WEST SCALE:21/4"=1'-0"PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN SCALE:11/4"=1'-0"EXISTING FLOOR PLAN SCALE:41/4"=1'-0"PROPOSED ELEVATION - WEST SCALE:51/4"=1'-0"PROPOSED SECTION A 70 71 72 73 Public Notice Poster 74 From: noreply@granicusideas.com <noreply@granicusideas.com> Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2019 2:34 PM To: Planning Commission-Group <PlanningCommission-GROUP@hermosabch.org>; Ken Robertson <krobertson@hermosabch.org>; Frances Estrada <frances@hermosabch.org> Subject: New eComment for Planning Commission Meeting New eComment for Planning Commission Meeting Sean Dennison submitted a new eComment. Meeting: Planning Commission Meeting Item: 10. REPORT 19-0468 Planning Commission interpretations on whether seating plan modifications are minor and acceptable for a Limited live Entertainment Permit for Hermosa Brewing Company, 1342 Hermosa Avenue. eComment: Hermosa Brewing Company is an example of a resident investing in his community, and doing so in a first-class manner. Not only is it locally-owned, but it is strongly encouraged to bring family/kids to have a bite and play a game (or watch one!). It said something about the place that they gave essentially the same staff that the opened with and, to the extent that they believe that live entertainment will bring additional business to their venue (& tax revenue to our city), we need to be leaning into that idea with everything we have. Let’s not overthink the chance to improve one of our already-bright spots. View and Analyze eComments This email was sent from https://granicusideas.com. Unsubscribe from future mailings 75 76 77 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 19-0466 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 PDP 19-5 -Precise Development Plan Amendment to extend the building permit expiration date, pursuant to Section 15.04.050 of the Municipal Code, for a 30-room hotel currently under construction at 1429 Hermosa Avenue Continued from June 17, 2019 meeting Applicant/Owner:1429 Hermosa Avenue LLC 3730 Pacific Coast Hwy Torrance, CA 90505 Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution amending the Precise Development Plan to extend the building permit expiration date one additional year. Executive Summary: The applicant is requesting is to extend the building permit expiration date an additional year. The building permit is otherwise is limited to a period of two years, with two six-month extensions allowed to be granted by the Building Official. The Planning Commission has the authority to consider this extension pursuant to the recent amendments to Municipal Code Section 15.04.050, which authorize the Planning Commission to set alternate building permit schedules through the entitlement process. Background: The Planning Commission continued this item from the June 17 meeting, seeking additional information from the applicant regarding construction schedule and milestones, verification of contractor and subcontractor commitments and staff obtaining verification from the applicant that adequate funding is available to complete the project within the scheduled time period. The Planning Commission approved a Precise Development Plan for 30-room hotel at 1429 Hermosa Avenue in October 2015. Building permits were issued February of 2016 and construction started early that summer. Section 15.04.050 of the Municipal Code establishes that building permits expire within two years of the date issuance of the permit. The Building Official has also granted two 6-month extensions and the current expiration date based on when the latest extension was granted and the final date for completion, based on the approval of the latest extension is September 2, 2019. (Note: staff previously reported that the expiration was July 31 2019) The applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission consider further extension of the building permit in order to complete the project. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™78 Staff Report REPORT 19-0466 In response to the Commission’s requests they have now provided a more detailed construction schedule (attached) prepared by the contractor which indicates that the project will be complete within the next 8 months (February 2020). The applicant has also provided detailed information to staff regarding the construction budget, payment progress, and the contract commitments for all the various trades and materials necessary to complete the job. Also, the contractor has called for inspections, conducted on July 11, 2019, and visible progress is being made. Staff anticipates to update the Commission on further progress on July 16, and encourages Commissioners to visit the site before the meeting. Section 15.04.050 of the Municipal Code pertaining to expiration of permits was recently amended by the City Council in January 2018, based on recommendations from the Planning Commission, to provide flexibility for the Commission to allow longer periods for discretionary projects because of their size and complexity. Since the subject project was approved before this amendment, there was no opportunity to request or consider a longer construction period at the time of the initial application and project approval. Due to the project’s size and complexity and challenges of a constrained site, a longer than two year period would have been a reasonable condition had the applicant been able to and requested a longer period at the time of original approval. Now that the code has been changed to create this opportunity, the developer is requesting this consideration. Analysis: The project delays have raised concerns from neighbors as well as City Council. The developer has been candid about his difficulties with financing and efforts to sell the project and has been seeking a method to extend the permit. The developer now plans to complete the project and has provided financial and contract documents satisfactory to staff to verify they have secured the necessary funding to complete the project, and to fund any unanticipated cost overruns. As noted previously, based on our Building Official and the Inspectors assessment the project is about 75% done, the exterior scaffolding is about to be removed when the exterior tile work is complete. The financial information submitted also shows that 65% of the project budget has been spent as of June 28, 2019. This is the first time the Commission has received a request for a time extension under the new provisions in the code. As noted above, this developer did not have the opportunity to request additional time at the outset because the provision was not available as an option in the Code. The city added this authorization upon determining that some projects require more than two years to complete. While moving forward this will be handled at the entitlement stage, staff supports the request to have the Planning Commission amend the PDP to provide a later expiration date for the building permits. Staff believes that given that the project is almost done and the renewed commitment of the developer to complete the project, supported by the ample evidence now provided that this extension is the best option for the developer and City to see this project through completion. California Environmental Quality Act: The proposed extension is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, as it is not a project under CEQA. The project is 75% completed and this decision will allow the developer City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™79 Staff Report REPORT 19-0466 to complete the already approved project. Summary Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the requested amendment the Precise Development Plan to allow the applicant the additional time needed to complete the project. Attachments: 1.Proposed Resolution 2.Refined Construction Schedule 3.6/17 Staff Report and Attachments Respectfully Submitted by: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™80 65270.00001\32121682.1 1 P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 19-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT TO EXTEND THE BUILDING PERMIT EXPIRATION DATE, PURSUANT TO SECTION 15.04.050 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, FOR A 30-ROOM HOTEL CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION AT 1429 HERMOSA AVENUE AND DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT IS NOT A PROJECT UNDER CEQA The Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereby resolve and order as follows: Section 1. An application for an amendment to Precise Development Plan No.15-11 was filed by the property owner, 1429 Hermosa Avenue LLC, requesting extension of the building permit expiration for a 30-room hotel project at 1429 Hermosa Avenue. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the subject application on February 19, 2019, at which time testimony and evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission Section 3. Pursuant to Hermosa Beach Municipal Code 15.04.050, pertaining to building permit expiration, the Planning Commission may establish a different permit expiration date for discretionary projects. The subject project was granted a discretionary Precise Development Plan in October of 2015. (Planning Commission Resolution 15-25) Section 4. The Planning Commission considered the staff report, testimony and evidence, both written and oral, presented to the Commission. Due to the project’s size and complexity and challenges of a constrained site, the Planning Commission finds that a longer than two year period for the building permit is appropriate for this project. Section 5. The proposed extension in not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(a), because the extension of time to complete a construction project that is already near completion will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Section 6. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves an amendment to Precise Development Plan, as set forth in Planning Commission Resolution 15- 25 to add a new condition to read as follows. All other parts of resolution 15-25 remain unchanged. : 31. Under Hermosa Beach Municipal Code 15.04.050, the Building Permits for the subject project shall expire on September 2, 2020. Section 7. Pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, any legal challenge to the decision of the Planning Commission, after a formal appeal to the City Council, must be made within 90 days after the final decision by the City Council. 81 65270.00001\32121682.1 2 VOTE: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: CERTIFICATION I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution P.C. No. 19-XX is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California at their regular meeting of July 16, 2019. David Pedersen, Chairperson Ken Robertson, Secretary ____________ Date 82 3730 Pacific Coast Hwy, Suite 202, Torrance CA 90505, Ph. 424-282-1001, Fax 310-861-0124 | California Custom Homes Gen. Construction Inc. 1429 Hermosa Ave. Construction Schedule Date: 6/27/19 June 2019 - Continue MEP rough in at roof and second/third floor (Begin calling inspections week of July 1st) - Continue exterior tile veneer install. (Expected to be substantially complete by week of July 8th) July 2019 - Inspections to be called in month of July • Partial rough mechanical 2nd/3rd floor • Partial rough plumbing 2nd/3rd floor • Rough gas • Partial rough garage exhaust 2nd/3rd floor • Partial rough fire sprinkler 2nd/3rd floor • Partial rough electrical 2nd/3rd floor • Partial insulation inspection at 2nd/3rd floor Exterior: - Complete exterior tile veneer installation - Complete finish stucco walls at all balcony/deck areas - Begin glass railing installation - Remove scaffold Interior: - Get ground floor drop ceiling and fire rating detail approved by city - Start ground floor drop ceiling - Begin insulation installation at 2nd/3rd floor walls/ceilings MILESTONES: • Full rough inspections done at 2nd/3rd floor • Insulation start • Scaffold removal 83 3730 Pacific Coast Hwy, Suite 202, Torrance CA 90505, Ph. 424-282-1001, Fax 310-861-0124 | California Custom Homes Gen. Construction Inc. August 2019 - Inspections to be called in month of August • Inspection of ground floor ceiling drop • Partial drywall nailing inspection 2nd/3rd floor Exterior: - Begin west side setback backfill/drainage work - Electrical underground work at southwest corner - Gas line work at southwest corner - Continue glass railing installation Interior - Installation of interior door jambs - Drywall installation start at 2nd/3rd floor areas - Continue ground floor/garage ceiling drop work - Continue rough MEP at ground floor/garage MILESTONES: • Drywall work start • Ground floor ceiling drop complete to allow finish of rough MEP at ground floor/garage September 2019 - Inspections to be called in month of September • Partial rough mechanical ground floor/garage • Partial rough plumbing ground floor/garage • Partial rough fire sprinkler ground floor/garage • Partial rough electrical ground floor/garage • Partial insulation inspection at ground floor/garage Exterior: - Glass railing installation complete - Begin city right of way work at north sidewalk area - Complete drainage and backfill work at west side setback Interior: - Drywall work complete at 2nd/3rd floor area - Installation of lightweight concrete at 2nd/3rd floor area - Prime interior walls/ceilings at 2nd/3rd floor areas - Begin tile installations at 2nd/3rd floor bathrooms - Install insulation at ground floor area and garage - Begin drywall installation at ground floor area - Begin lid installation at entire garage area Continued on next page 84 3730 Pacific Coast Hwy, Suite 202, Torrance CA 90505, Ph. 424-282-1001, Fax 310-861-0124 | California Custom Homes Gen. Construction Inc. MILESTONES: • Drywall work complete at 2nd/3rd floor levels • Begin tile installation • Rough Inspections complete at ground floor/garage • Begin drywall work at ground floor/start garage lid installation October 2019 - Inspections to be called month of October • Drywall nailing inspection at ground floor area • Partial inspection of garage lid • Public works inspections exterior work Exterior: - Install site drainage at north side of property in coordination with city right of way work - Work on exterior signage - Work on exterior fixtures Interior: - Continue tile installation at 2nd/3rd floor bathrooms - Continue drywall work at ground floor - Continue installation at lid and walls of garage area - Continue installation of garage exhaust ducting MILESTONES: • Begin drywall installation at ground floor • Begin installation of lid at garage area and walls November 2019 - Inspections to be called month of November • Inspection of garage exhaust • Various site inspections Exterior: - Begin cleaning up of exterior - Work on exterior fixtures - Begin landscape rough irrigation/soil amendment and finish site work Interior: - Continue tile installation at 2nd/3rd floor areas - Drywall complete at ground floor area - Prime interior walls/ceiling at ground floor area - Begin tile installation at ground floor area MILESTONES: • Complete tile installation at 2nd/3rd floor areas • Drywall complete at ground floor area 85 3730 Pacific Coast Hwy, Suite 202, Torrance CA 90505, Ph. 424-282-1001, Fax 310-861-0124 | California Custom Homes Gen. Construction Inc. December 2019 - Inspections to be called month of December • Elevator inspection Exterior: - Installation of finish garage topping slab - Installation of garage drains Interior: - Interior paint work - Installation of interior doors - Installation of shower/glass doors - Installation of cabinets - Installation of interior finish fixtures MILESTONES: • All interior tile work complete • Begin finishes throughout building January 2020 - Inspections to be called month of January • Meter release • Begin final inspections end of the month • Public work final Exterior: - Complete exterior this month - Clean exterior - Public works final Interior: - Continue interior paint work - Continue installation of interior doors/hardware - Continue installation of cabinets - Continue installation of shower/glass doors - Installation of all finish MEP - Continue installation of interior finish fixtures - Begin installation of interior carpets MILESTONES: • Meter release • Near completion of interior finish work Continued on next page 86 3730 Pacific Coast Hwy, Suite 202, Torrance CA 90505, Ph. 424-282-1001, Fax 310-861-0124 | California Custom Homes Gen. Construction Inc. February 2020 - Inspections to be called month of February • Complete building final inspections Interior: - Complete all interior finishes - Complete interior carpet installation - Complete interior cleaning of building - Complete all security/low voltage/hotel systems installation - Test all building systems MILESTONES: • Building energized • Final building inspections complete • Building ready for installation of furnishings • Ready for opening _ 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 Supplemental from H. Longacre to the July 16. 2019 Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Meeting, Public Hearing Item-11 Page 1 of 2 11 Supplemental to Public Hearing Item-11 July 16, 2019 Planning Commission Meeting Planning Department Clerk: Please deliver this "supplemental" communication to the Planning Commission at the meeting, add to the Internet agenda materials, and forward a copy by email to the Commissioners, the City Clerk, City Council members, City Manager, City Attorney, and Community Development Director for their review in advance of the meeting. Thank You. July 16, 2019 To: The Hermosa Beach Planning Commission c/o Community Development Department, City Clerk, City Council members, City Manager, and Community Development Director From: Howard Longacre, Hermosa Beach resident RE: H2O Hotel’s lack of advertised Public Notice in the Easy Reader as per the promised policy for Planning Commission Public Hearings continued to a date- certain. Honorable Chairperson, Planning Commissioners, and others: After repeated confusion by the public with respect to being noticed for Public Hearings continued to a “date-certain”, the Director of Community Development, at the request of the Planning Commission, indicated some years ago that he would be sure to re-notice all such continued to a “date- certain” Public Hearings by including, at the minimum, in the Easy Reader, a Public Notice (10-days in advance) for Public Hearings continued to a “date certain” and also updating the fluorescent-orange notice placard(s) on the subject property. However on such continuations the 300- or 500-foot radius mailings would not be included. Item-5 of your July 16 agenda, re: the Notices for items of this agenda, clearly indicates that this Public Hearing was not re-noticed per these minimum standards with respect to the Easy Reader advertisement. I do not know if the fluorescent-orange placards were updated to reflect the date of this current meeting. Please ask if such was accomplished. 104 Supplemental from H. Longacre to the July 16. 2019 Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Meeting, Public Hearing Item-11 Page 2 of 2 11 I thus request, due to the faulty noticing, and for the public’s benefit and transparency, that this item be continued to the August Planning Commission meeting as such for proper noticing per de facto expected policy by the public. Given the snail’s-pace of this particular project and property’s history, such continuation should not represent a significant issue, especially notwithstanding that the Commission is essentially being arm-twisted into approving another permit extension on this project. Thank you for your attention. Kindly place Public Noticing FIRST. End of supplemental information. 105 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 19-0454 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 CUP 19-7- A request for a Conditional Use Permit to extend by one hour the indoor operating hours till 11:00 PM daily and to allow outdoor dining from 8:00 AM to 10:00 PM daily at an existing restaurant with on-sale beer and wine (Mosa, previously Serve on 2nd) located at 170 Hermosa Avenue, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Applicant:Mary Ann Lombardo Build It Strong Enterprise, LLC 3187 Airway Avenue Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Owner:John & Mary Holliday Trust 1602 8th Street Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Recommended Action: Adopt the attached resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit request (CUP 19-7) to extend by one hour the indoor operating hours till 11:00 PM daily and to allow outdoor dining from 8:00 AM to 10:00 PM daily at an existing restaurant with on-sale beer and wine (Mosa, previously Serve on 2nd) located at 170 Hermosa Avenue, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Background: City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 10 powered by Legistar™106 Staff Report REPORT 19-0454 The project site at 170 Hermosa Avenue is located at the south end of the city on the southeast corner of Hermosa Avenue and 2nd Street. The approximately 1,850 square foot building shares the lot with The Spot Natural Food Restaurant and three residences which are not a part of this application. City records show that the property has been operating as a restaurant with beer and wine since 1976 when it was converted from a commercial/retail use (a surfboard shop). The zoning code, in effect at the time, did not require any greater parking requirements for restaurant uses than other commercial uses thus continuing the properties’ nonconformity to parking. Records are not clear as to whether outdoor dining was established at that time. Before Serve on 2nd occupied the restaurant space, Tammie’s Corner House Café and Le Petite Café operated pursuant to a CUP amended and approved by the Planning Commission in 1988 which allowed on-sale beer and wine in conjunction with a restaurant and outdoor dining (limited to 16 seats). Hours of operation allowed by the CUP were between 8:00 AM to 10:00 PM weekdays and 8:00 AM to 11:00 PM weekends. During the June 20, 2017 meeting, the Planning Commission approved a CUP amendment authorizing floor plan modifications and extended hours of operation. During an inspection in May 2018 the city staff found the floor plans to be inconsistent with the CUP floor plan. The City informed the applicant that a CUP amendment was required for alterations to the floor plan. The business was temporarily operating as allowed by a City agreement to allow a temporary modified floor plan and a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO) while the CUP amendment was being processed and a final determination was made. An application was filed on May 31, 2018 for a request for a CUP amendment at a restaurant establishment with on-sale beer and wine and outdoor dining (Serve on 2nd) to allow floor plan alterations which had been implemented and were inconsistent with the Planning Commission approved floor plan and city approvals. At their June 25, 2018 meeting the Planning Commission considered the request and with a 4-0 vote denied the CUP amendment request (CUP 18-7). The Commission affirmed their June 2017 decision as memorialized in PC Resolution 17-17, with modifications to provide additional conditions of approval to clarify the intent of the previously approved conditions; determined the project was categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and established a 30-day timeframe in which the physical modifications to the restaurant must be completed and asked staff to City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 2 of 10 powered by Legistar™107 Staff Report REPORT 19-0454 report back on the status of compliance with the timeframe. The applicant and property owner decided to abandon all CUPs for the restaurant site and all rights and obligations therewith. Planning Commission Resolutions 88-94 and 17-17 are now null and void and the abandonment has been recorded with the Los Angeles County Recorder’s Office. Since the obligations of the CUP were abandoned, the TCO is no longer applicable and the windows (including roll-up style windows and door facing Hermosa Avenue) may be opened. The restaurant is authorized to operate as a “by right” restaurant with on-sale beer and wine as allowed by the code. The restaurant must close no later than 10:00 PM daily and is otherwise subject to the requirements of Hermosa Beach Municipal Code (HBMC) Section 17.26.060. The only outdoor seating currently authorized is through the Limited Outdoor Seating Permit #18-2. Limited outdoor seating is restricted to the on-site front patio area between 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM daily and allows 9 seats and prohibits service or consumption of alcohol in that area. The rear patio cannot be established for restaurant purposes unless approved for a CUP. The new operator notified the City of their intent to modify the floor plan. None of the proposed changes required a permit from the City. However, the City asked for an updated occupant load plan reflecting the new floor plan. City staff met with the applicant on July 7, 2019 and conducted a site visit (photos attached). The applicant is currently implementing the proposed occupant load plan which also matches the current proposed CUP floor plan as detailed below. Analysis: The lot is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-1) in which the restaurants with on-sale beer and wine operating no later than 10:00 PM are permitted by-right. The restaurant has a new business owner and operator who on May 15, 2019 submitted a request for a new CUP to extend indoor operating hours by one hour till 11:00 PM daily and to allow outdoor dining from 8:00 AM to 10:00 PM daily. Both outdoor dining and requesting indoor operating hours between 10:00 PM and 11:00 PM for a restaurant with on-sale beer and wine require approval of a CUP. Current Conditions: The primary building entrance is from Hermosa Avenue, with additional emergency exits at the northwest corner of the building and at the southeast of corner of the property leading to the rear outdoor dining patio exiting onto Palm Drive. A 42” guardrail separates the front outdoor dining area from the sidewalk along Hermosa Avenue. There are two outdoor patios which are currently not in use, one along the Hermosa Avenue (west) frontage and the other at the rear (east) of the property. The restaurant provides three openable windows along the 2nd Street frontage. The Hermosa Avenue frontage contains four roll-up style windows. A 42” rail is provided between the front outdoor patio and the sidewalk. The kitchen/prep areas, walk-in cooler and counter seats are located toward the middle of the restaurant, three restrooms are located at the northwest portion of the restaurant, and tables and seats are located primarily along the north, west and south perimeter of the restaurant. There are City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 3 of 10 powered by Legistar™108 Staff Report REPORT 19-0454 currently two indoor TVs. There is approximately 1,850 square feet of indoor restaurant area and 595 square feet of outdoor restaurant area (150 sq.ft. front patio and 445 sq.ft. rear patio). The occupant load, as established by the Uniform Building Code, specifies the number of persons (patrons and employees) which can safety occupy and exit a building or portion thereof in an emergency. The current occupant load plan approved by the City in 2019 is assigned at 60 persons and accounts for indoor uses only; with no use of the outdoor dining areas. The occupant load floor plan consists of 64 indoor seats and 15 tables. All tables are 30” high with the exception of the 42” high bar counter and two indoor tables each seating 6 customers. Proposed Modifications: The applicant will maintain all existing walls, guardrails, windows and doors and there will be no expansion in the restaurant use. The kitchen/prep areas, walk-in cooler, and restrooms will be also not be modified. The applicant proposes four indoor TVs. The applicant proposes to reintroduce outdoor dining within the front and rear patios. In doing so, the proposed occupant load will return to 92 persons. The restaurant will contain a total of 94 seats (64 indoor and 30 outdoor) and a total of 26 tables (15 indoor and 11 outdoor). All tables will be 30” high with the exception of the 42” high bar counter, two indoor tables each seating 6 customers and two outdoor tables each seating 2 customers within the front dinging patio. The front patio is proposed to contain 4 tables and 8 seats. The rear patio is proposed to contain 7 tables and 22 seats. The table below summarizes the restaurant modifications which have occurred over time as well as the most recent proposal. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 4 of 10 powered by Legistar™109 Staff Report REPORT 19-0454 Conditional Use Permit: Hermosa Beach Municipal Code (HBMC) Section 17.40.020 specifies criteria to be considered when evaluating a CUP request. These factors are evaluated below, based on the applicant’s request to reintroduce outdoor dining and to extend by one hour the indoor operating hours till 11:00 PM daily. A.Distance from existing residential uses:Surrounding zoning is C-1 Neighborhood Commercial to the west and R-3 Multiple-Family Residential to the north, east and south. Restaurant access is from Hermosa Avenue, and emergency access is provided at the northwest corner of the building and at the rear (southeast corner) of the property near the residences. Business operations are oriented to the west towards Hermosa Avenue with the exception of the 455 square foot side outdoor dining patio. The existing restaurant is located approximately 60 feet from residential uses to the north and east and four feet to the residential use to the south. Three residences are located on the same lots, to the east along Palm Drive. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 5 of 10 powered by Legistar™110 Staff Report REPORT 19-0454 Members of the Commission have expressed concern regarding additional seats for a restaurant which can accommodate up to 92 persons. The Commission has additionally expressed concern with bench and booth style seating lending to additional seating opportunities. The restaurant establishment directly abuts the property line and the side outdoor patio is located approximately eight feet from the nearest residence on Palm Drive. The side and front patios are located approximately four feet from residential uses south of the project site. The rear patio is enclosed by concrete walls which provide sound deadening qualities. A 13 foot block wall is located directly to the south (adjacent to the residences), a 9-foot 6-inch block wall is located to the east and north of the patio and the building wall is located to the west. The project is conditioned to prohibit live entertainment and customer dancing indoors and outdoors, to prohibit entertainment, music, speakers, televisions, or audio or visual media of any type, whether amplified or unamplified within the outdoor dining areas and to prevent loitering, unruliness and boisterous activities of the patrons outside the business or in the immediate area. Hours of operation for the interior dining areas shall not exceed 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. daily and outdoor dining areas shall not exceed 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily after which the area shall be secured and loitering shall not be permitted. Noise emanating from the property shall be within the limitations prescribed by the City's Noise Ordinance and shall not create a nuisance to surrounding residential neighborhoods, and/or commercial establishments. All exterior lighting shall be downcast and fully shielded, and illumination shall be contained within the property boundaries. In addition, a manager who is aware of the conditions of this permit shall be on the premises during business hours. The Conditional Use Permit shall be maintained on the premise in a location where employees can easily read the conditions. The applicant has also already implemented sound dampening measures such as installing sound dampening material (Tectum by Armstrong) within the restaurant ceilings (photo attached). The applicant also proposes and the project is conditioned to provide signage within the front and rear outdoor dining areas notifying customers to “Please be respectful of our neighbors who live just beyond our walls.” Retractable patio awnings will be installed to deaden noise which will be extended over outdoor patio areas while in use and potted vertical bamboo will be provided within the rear patio along the south patio wall. As part of the business operation, the applicant proposes to limit groups and parties to the main dining room which is located at the north portion of the restaurant space and furthest away from nearby residential uses. The City’s Noise Ordinance prohibits continuous, repeated or sustained noise from the premises of any commercial establishment which is adjacent to one or more residential dwelling units, including any outdoor area part of or under the control of the establishment, between the hours of 10:00 PM and 8:00 AM that is plainly audible from the residential dwelling unit’s property line (HBMC Section 8.24.040). The Noise Ordinance indicates it applies to everyone and protects the public health, safety and welfare. The requested indoor operating hours are 7:00 AM to 11:00 PM daily, and the requested outdoor operating hours are limited to 8:00 AM to 10:00 PM daily, consistent with the Noise Ordinance. As conditioned, the project is not anticipated to result in noise impacts on nearby residential uses. B.The amount of existing or proposed off-street parking facilities, and its distance from the proposed use: The existing restaurant use is legally non-conforming to parking with no existing parking on-site. City records show that the property has been operating as a restaurant with beer City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 6 of 10 powered by Legistar™111 Staff Report REPORT 19-0454 and wine since 1976 when it was converted from a commercial/retail use (a surfboard shop). The zoning code, in effect at the time, did not require any greater parking requirements for restaurant uses than other commercial uses thus continuing the properties’ nonconformity to parking. Records are not clear as to whether outdoor dining was established at that time. In 1988 the Planning Commission approved a CUP amendment formally establishing outdoor dining (limited to 16 seats at the rear patio) finding parking not to be an issue. A CUP Amendment was approved by the Planning Commission in 2017 for Serve on 2nd restaurant with 16 seats at the rear patio. Parking requirements are based on the gross square footage of the building and other areas used for seating or commercial purposes and not on seat count or number of occupants. No additional square footage is proposed, and no additional parking is proposed. While it is not definitively clear whether the area proposed to be re-established for outdoor seating has been in continuous use while the restaurant has been in operation, staff supports its re-establishing seating due to its longstanding use for that purpose. The area is very small, and the applicant proposes only 22 seats within the rear patio. C.Location of and distance to churches, schools, hospitals and public playgrounds: There are no nearby churches, schools or hospitals, as the nearest of these sensitive receptor is a public park (Kay Etow Parkette) and is located approximately 770 feet (.146 miles) from the project site. Therefore, negative impacts to these sensitive uses are not anticipated. D.The combination of uses proposed: The requested outdoor dining and interior floor plan alterations will not increase the number of late-night alcohol beverage establishments pursuant to HBMC Section 17.40.080(B). Late-night alcohol beverage establishments are on-sale establishments with a CUP that allows operation after 11:00 pm, including restaurants, establishments that serve or allow alcoholic beverages as the primary use (e.g., bars), and establishments that provide live entertainment. The objective of the City’s late-night alcohol beverage establishment policy is to reduce the potential for adverse impacts associated with late- night alcohol beverage establishments after 11:00 pm. The restaurant is not currently considered a late-night alcohol establishment since the business closes indoor operations at 10:00 PM daily. The request to increase by one hour indoor operating hours till 11:00 PM daily and to reintroduce outdoor dining closing at 10:00 PM daily will not increase the number of late-night alcohol beverage establishments. The restaurant is located in the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial zone which aims to provide sites for a mix of small local businesses appropriate for, and serving the daily needs of nearby residential neighborhoods; while establishing land use regulations that prevent significant adverse effects on nearby residential uses. Surrounding commercial uses include general commercial services, snack shops, restaurants, and retail. E.Precautions taken by the owner or operator of the proposed establishment to assure compatibility of the use with surrounding uses: The applicant has already implemented sound dampening measures such as installing sound dampening material (Tectum by Armstrong) within the restaurant ceilings (photo attached). The applicant also proposes and the project is conditioned to provide signage within the front and rear outdoor dining areas notifying customers City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 7 of 10 powered by Legistar™112 Staff Report REPORT 19-0454 to “Please be respectful of our neighbors who live just beyond our walls.” Retractable patio awnings will be installed to deaden noise which will be extended over outdoor patio areas while in use and potted vertical bamboo will be provided within the rear patio along the south patio wall. As part of the business operation, the applicant proposes to limit groups and parties to the main dining room which is located at the north portion of the restaurant space and furthest away from nearby residential uses. F.The relationship of the proposed business-generated traffic volume and the size of streets serving the area:Reintroducing outdoor dining and the proposed floor plan alterations will not affect existing streets or significantly impact traffic volume, as the proposal does not involve a change in the type of use or square footage of the building and outdoor dining areas. G.The proposed exterior signs and decor,and the compatibility thereof with existing establishments in the area:Building design/aesthetics will be retained with the exception of removal and replacement of the vertical living planters along the Hermosa Avenue building frontage with textured opaque glass.The vertical living planters along the 2nd Street building frontage will be removed and patched and repaired with stucco to match the existing building.A sign permit shall be obtained for new signage at the subject site in conformance with HBMC Section 17.50. H.The number of similar establishments or uses within close proximity to the proposed establishment:All three nearby existing on-sale alcohol establishments have Type 41 alcohol licenses which authorize the sale of beer and wine (but not distilled spirits) for consumption on or off the premises where sold. One nearby establishment is a late-night alcohol beverage establishment closing at 2 A.M. daily with outdoor dining, and the other two establishments close no later than 11:00 P.M. daily. The request to reintroduce outdoor dining and the floor plan alterations will not increase the number of late-night alcohol beverage establishments. I.Noise, odor, dust and/or vibration that may be generated by the proposed use: The Noise Ordinance prohibits continuous, repeated or sustained noise from the premises of any commercial establishment which is adjacent to one or more residential dwelling units, including any outdoor area part of or under the control of the establishment, between the hours of 10:00 pm City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 8 of 10 powered by Legistar™113 Staff Report REPORT 19-0454 and 8:00 am that is plainly audible from the residential dwelling unit’s property line is prohibited (HBMC Section 8.24.040). The restaurant is conditioned to prohibit televisions and other similar equipment within the outdoor patio areas. The applicant requests to reintroduce outdoor dining closing at 10:00 PM daily and to extend by one hour the indoor operating hours till 11:00 PM daily. The restaurant operation (interior and exterior) are required to comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance. In addition, outdoor patios are required to close by 10:00 PM daily which is consistent with the hours provided in the City’s Noise Ordinance. Odor, dust and/or vibration disturbances are not anticipated with the use. J.Impact of the proposed use to the City’s infrastructure, and/or services: The existing restaurant use will be maintained and current infrastructure is adequate. K.Will the establishment contribute to a concentration of similar outlets in the area:The requested floor plan alterations will not add to the concentration of similar outlets in the area because an alcoholic beverage establishment with outdoor dining (previously Tammie’s Corner House Café and Serve on 2nd and now Mosa restaurant have already been established at this location. L.Other considerations that, in the judgment of the planning commission, are necessary to assure compatibility with the surrounding uses, and the city as a whole:None noted. Environmental Determination: The project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(a), Class 1 Exemption, Existing Facilities, because the project is comprised of interior and exterior alterations involving things such as furniture, guardrails, and interior finishes and does not involve an increase in square footage. General Plan Consistency: The project site is located within the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) General Plan land use designation area and within the Sand Section neighborhood. The purpose of the NC land use designation is to create neighborhood activity centers that are easily accessible from many directions, typically along main thoroughfares, and primarily serve residents within a half-mile radius so they may walk, bike, or make a short trip by car. Establishments located in close proximity to the beach should serve as a location for beachgoers to purchase food and appropriate uses should provide nearby residents with convenient access to daily shopping or personal service needs, including eateries. The request to reintroduce outdoor dining till 10:00 PM daily and to extend by one hour the indoor operating hours till 11:00 PM daily is generally consistent with the following Land Use goals and policies by supporting a high quality of life for residents with access to daily activities, such as restaurants, (GP Land Use Goal 1, Policy 1.3) and creating a balance between resident and visitor needs (GP Land Use Goal 1, Policy 1.5), all while providing complete neighborhoods by encouraging, where appropriate, goods and services within a short walking distance to residents of all ages and abilities to support healthy and active lifestyles (GP Land Use Goal 1, Policy 2.1). Summary: City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 9 of 10 powered by Legistar™114 Staff Report REPORT 19-0454 Based on the analysis above, staff finds that the proposed Conditional Use Permit 19-7, as conditioned, are consistent with applicable sections of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code and PLAN Hermosa. Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution approving the CUP determining that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Attachments: 1.Draft Resolution of Approval 2.Current City approved Occupant load/ Floor Plan 3.Proposed Plans and Building Elevations 4.Site Photos 5.Legal Posters 6.Radius Map 7.Public Comment Letter Received 6-27-19 Respectfully Submitted by: Nicole Ellis, Associate Planner Approved: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Legal Review: Lauren Langer, City Attorney City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 10 of 10 powered by Legistar™115 Page 1 – Conditional Use Permit 19-7 Attachment 1 P.C. RESOLUTION 19-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO EXTEND BY ONE HOUR THE INDOOR OPERATING HOURS TILL 11:00 PM DAILY AND TO ALLOW OUTDOOR DINING FROM 8:00 AM TO 10:00 PM DAILY AT AN EXISTING RESTAURANT WITH ON-SALE BEER AND WINE (MOSA, PREVIOUSLY SERVE ON 2ND) LOCATED AT 170 HERMOSA AVENUE, CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH; AND DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). The Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereby resolve and order as follows: Section 1. An application was filed on May 15, 2019 by Mary Ann Lombardo with Build It Strong, LLC, requesting approval of Conditional Use Permit 19-7 to extend for one hour the indoor operating hours till 11:00 PM daily and to allow outdoor dining from 8:00 AM to 10:00 PM daily for an existing restaurant with on-sale beer and wine (Mosa, previously Serve on 2nd) located at 170 Hermosa Avenue. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application on July 16, 2019 at which time testimony and evidence, both oral and written, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission. Section 3. The project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(a), Class 1 Exemption, Existing Facilities, because the project is comprised of interior and exterior alterations involving things such as furniture, guardrails, and interior finishes, and does not involve an increase in square footage. Section 4. Based on the foregoing factual findings the Planning Commission makes the following findings that the Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Hermosa Beach Municipal Code (HBMC) Section 17.44.020 and incorporation of the conditions set forth in HBMC Section 17.40.080, finding that the use as conditioned will be compatible with the surroundings and all impacts can be reduced to an insignificant level: A. Distance from existing residential uses: Surrounding zoning is C-1 Neighborhood Commercial to the west and R-3 Multiple-Family Residential to the north, east and south. Restaurant access is from Hermosa Avenue, and emergency access is provided at the northwest corner of the building and at the rear (southeast corner) of the property near the residences. Business operations are oriented to the west towards Hermosa Avenue with the exception of the 455 square foot side outdoor dining patio. The existing restaurant is located approximately 60 feet from residential uses to the north and east and four feet to the residential use to the south. Three residences are located on the same lots, to the east along Palm Drive. 116 Page 2 – Conditional Use Permit 19-7 Members of the Commission have expressed concern regarding additional seats for a restaurant which can accommodate up to 92 persons. The Commission has additionally expressed concern with bench and booth style seating lending to additional seating opportunities. The restaurant establishment directly abuts the property line and the side outdoor patio is located approximately eight feet from the nearest residence on Palm Drive. The side and front patios are located approximately four feet from residential uses south of the project site. The rear patio is enclosed by concrete walls which provide sound deadening qualities. A 13 foot block wall is located directly to the south (adjacent to the residences), a 9-foot 6-inch block wall is located to the east and north of the patio and the building wall is located to the west. The project is conditioned to prohibit live entertainment and customer dancing indoors and outdoors, to prohibit entertainment, music, speakers, televisions, or audio or visual media of any type, whether amplified or unamplified within the outdoor dining areas and to prevent loitering, unruliness and boisterous activities of the patrons outside the business or in the immediate area. Hours of operation for the interior dining areas shall not exceed 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. daily and outdoor dining areas shall not exceed 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily after which the area shall be secured and loitering shall not be permitted. Noise emanating from the property shall be within the limitations prescribed by the City's Noise Ordinance and shall not create a nuisance to surrounding residential neighborhoods, and/or commercial establishments. All exterior lighting shall be downcast and fully shielded, and illumination shall be contained within the property boundaries. In addition, a manager who is aware of the conditions of this permit shall be on the premises during business hours. The Conditional Use Permit shall be maintained on the premise in a location where employees can easily read the conditions. The applicant has also already implemented sound dampening measures such as installing sound dampening material (Tectum by Armstrong) within the restaurant ceilings (photo attached). The applicant also proposes and the project is conditioned to provide signage within the front and rear outdoor dining areas notifying customers to “Please be respectful of our neighbors who live just beyond our walls.” Retractable patio awnings will be installed to deaden noise which will be extended over outdoor patio areas while in use and potted vertical bamboo will be provided within the rear patio along the south patio wall. As part of the business operation, the applicant proposes to limit groups and parties to the main dining room which is located at the north portion of the restaurant space and furthest away from nearby residential uses. The City’s Noise Ordinance prohibits continuous, repeated or sustained noise from the premises of any commercial establishment which is adjacent to one or more residential dwelling units, including any outdoor area part of or under the control of the establishment, between the hours of 10:00 PM and 8:00 AM that is plainly audible from the residential dwelling unit’s property line (HBMC Section 8.24.040). The Noise Ordinance indicates it applies to everyone and protects the public health, safety and welfare. The requested indoor operating hours are 7:00 AM to 11:00 PM daily, and the requested outdoor operating hours are limited to 8:00 AM to 10:00 PM daily, consistent with the Noise Ordinance. As conditioned, the project is not anticipated to result in noise impacts on nearby residential uses. 117 Page 3 – Conditional Use Permit 19-7 B. The amount of existing or proposed off-street parking facilities, and its distance from the proposed use: The existing restaurant use is legally non-conforming to parking with no existing parking on-site. City records show that the property has been operating as a restaurant with beer and wine since 1976 when it was converted from a commercial/retail use (a surfboard shop). The zoning code, in effect at the time, did not require any greater parking requirements for restaurant uses than other commercial uses thus continuing the properties’ nonconformity to parking. Records are not clear as to whether outdoor dining was established at that time. In 1988 the Planning Commission approved a CUP amendment formally establishing outdoor dining (limited to 16 seats at the rear patio) finding parking not to be an issue. A CUP Amendment was approved by the Planning Commission in 2017 for Serve on 2nd restaurant with 16 seats at the rear patio. Parking requirements are based on the gross square footage of the building and other areas used for seating or commercial purposes and not on seat count or number of occupants. No additional square footage is proposed, and no additional parking is proposed. While it is not definitively clear whether the area proposed to be re-established for outdoor seating has been in continuous use while the restaurant has been in operation, staff supports its re-establishing seating due to its longstanding use for that purpose. The area is very small, and the applicant proposes only 22 seats within the rear patio. C. Location of and distance to churches, schools, hospitals and public playgrounds: There are no nearby churches, schools or hospitals, as the nearest of these sensitive receptor is a public park (Kay Etow Parkette) and is located approximately 770 feet (.146 miles) from the project site. Therefore, negative impacts to these sensitive uses are not anticipated. D. The combination of uses proposed: The requested outdoor dining and interior floor plan alterations will not increase the number of late-night alcohol beverage establishments pursuant to HBMC Section 17.40.080(B). Late-night alcohol beverage establishments are on- sale establishments with a CUP that allows operation after 11:00 pm, including restaurants, establishments that serve or allow alcoholic beverages as the primary use (e.g., bars), and establishments that provide live entertainment. The objective of the City’s late-night alcohol beverage establishment policy is to reduce the potential for adverse impacts associated with late-night alcohol beverage establishments after 11:00 pm. The restaurant is not currently considered a late-night alcohol establishment since the business closes indoor operations at 10:00 PM daily. The request to increase by one hour indoor operating hours till 11:00 PM daily and to reintroduce outdoor dining closing at 10:00 PM daily will not increase the number of late-night alcohol beverage establishments. The restaurant is located in the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial zone which aims to provide sites for a mix of small local businesses appropriate for, and serving the daily needs of nearby residential neighborhoods; while establishing land use regulations that prevent significant adverse effects on nearby residential uses. Surrounding commercial uses include general commercial services, snack shops, restaurants, and retail. 118 Page 4 – Conditional Use Permit 19-7 E. Precautions taken by the owner or operator of the proposed establishment to assure compatibility of the use with surrounding uses: The applicant has already implemented sound dampening measures such as installing sound dampening material (Tectum by Armstrong) within the restaurant ceilings (photo attached). The applicant also proposes and the project is conditioned to provide signage within the front and rear outdoor dining areas notifying customers to “Please be respectful of our neighbors who live just beyond our walls.” Retractable patio awnings will be installed to deaden noise which will be extended over outdoor patio areas while in use and potted vertical bamboo will be provided within the rear patio along the south patio wall. As part of the business operation, the applicant proposes to limit groups and parties to the main dining room which is located at the north portion of the restaurant space and furthest away from nearby residential uses. F. The relationship of the proposed business-generated traffic volume and the size of streets serving the area: Reintroducing outdoor dining and the proposed floor plan alterations will not affect existing streets or significantly impact traffic volume, as the proposal does not involve a change in the type of use or square footage of the building and outdoor dining areas. G. The proposed exterior signs and decor, and the compatibility thereof with existing establishments in the area: Building design/aesthetics will be retained with the exception of removal and replacement of the vertical living planters along the Hermosa Avenue building frontage with textured opaque glass. The vertical living planters along the 2nd Street building frontage will be removed and patched and repaired with stucco to match the existing building. A sign permit shall be obtained for new signage at the subject site in conformance with HBMC Section 17.50. H. The number of similar establishments or uses within close proximity to the proposed establishment: All three nearby existing on-sale alcohol establishments have Type 41 alcohol licenses which authorize the sale of beer and wine (but not distilled spirits) for consumption on or off the premises where sold. One nearby establishment is a late-night alcohol beverage establishment closing at 2 A.M. daily with outdoor dining, and the other two establishments close no later than 11:00 P.M. daily. The request to reintroduce outdoor dining and the floor plan alterations will not increase the number of late-night alcohol beverage establishments. Restaurant Name Address License Type CUP Hours of Operation The Spot 110 2nd Street Type 41 (on-sale beer and wine) 11 am to 9:30 pm weekdays and 9 am to 9:30 pm weekends (All alcohol to be consumed in the premises) Hermosa Beach Yacht Club 66 Hermosa Avenue Type 41 (on-sale beer and wine) 6 am to 2 am daily (Late-night alcohol beverage establishment) Outdoor service 9 am to 9 pm Patio 9 am to 9 pm daily 119 Page 5 – Conditional Use Permit 19-7 Uncle Stavros Café 201 Hermosa Avenue Type 41 (on-sale beer and wine) 9 am to 11 pm daily I. Noise, odor, dust and/or vibration that may be generated by the proposed use: The Noise Ordinance prohibits continuous, repeated or sustained noise from the premises of any commercial establishment which is adjacent to one or more residential dwelling units, including any outdoor area part of or under the control of the establishment, between the hours of 10:00 pm and 8:00 am that is plainly audible from the residential dwelling unit’s property line is prohibited (HBMC Section 8.24.040). The restaurant is conditioned to prohibit televisions and other similar equipment within the outdoor patio areas. The applicant requests to reintroduce outdoor dining closing at 10:00 PM daily and to extend by one hour the indoor operating hours till 11:00 PM daily. The restaurant operation (interior and exterior) are required to comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance. In addition, outdoor patios are required to close by 10:00 PM daily which is consistent with the hours provided in the City’s Noise Ordinance. Odor, dust and/or vibration disturbances are not anticipated with the use. J. Impact of the proposed use to the City’s infrastructure, and/or services: The existing restaurant use will be maintained and current infrastructure is adequate. K. Will the establishment contribute to a concentration of similar outlets in the area: The requested floor plan alterations will not add to the concentration of similar outlets in the area because an alcoholic beverage establishment with outdoor dining (previously Tammie’s Corner House Café and Serve on 2nd and now Mosa restaurant have already been established at this location. L. Other considerations that, in the judgment of the planning commission, are necessary to assure compatibility with the surrounding uses, and the city as a whole: None noted. Section 5. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves the request for Conditional Use Permit 19-7 subject to the following Conditions of Approval: 1. The project shall be substantially consistent with plans and application submitted and approved by the Planning Commission on July 16, 2019. The Community Development Director shall review and may approve minor modifications that do not otherwise conflict with the Municipal Code or requirements of this approval, provided that the use is not changed, intensity of use is not increased and the arrangement of space would not increase negative impacts. Any substantial deviation, changes to the floor plan, site plan, or building exterior which alter the primary function of the use as a motel shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission. 2. Prior to the submittal of structural plans to the Building Division for plan check an ‘Acceptance of Conditions’ affidavit and recording fees shall be filed with the Planning Division of the Community Development Department stating that the 120 Page 6 – Conditional Use Permit 19-7 applicant/property owner is aware of, and agrees to accept, all of the conditions of this permit of approval. 3. The permitted hours of operation for the interior dining areas shall not exceed 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. daily. 4. The permitted hours of operation for the outdoor dining areas shall not exceed 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily after which the area shall be secured and loitering shall not be permitted. a. Entertainment, music, speakers, televisions, or audio or visual media of any type, whether amplified or unamplified, shall be prohibited within the outdoor dining areas. 5. A minimum 42” high railing shall be installed and maintained around the front outdoor dining area. 6. Architectural treatments and accessory facilities shall be as shown on building elevations, site and floor plans. 7. The business shall be operated as a bona fide restaurant. The restaurant shall make available to customers and serve prepared food items of their choice until sixty (60) minutes prior to the close of business. 8. The restaurant shall maintain sales reports showing the actual items sold and price charged and invoices for all food, nonalcoholic beverages and alcohol beverages sold for the prior twelve (12) months. Should the Planning Commission or City Council initiate a CUP modification or revocation proceeding, the Commission, or the Council, may at its discretion require the subject business to provide: (a) a statement of the percentage of gross sales, computed monthly, that resulted from the sale of prepared food for not longer than the prior twelve (12) months; and (b) the supporting data upon which the percentage is based. The Planning Commission, or City Council, may also require an audit of the records of the business by a certified public accountant to determine the gross sales of food and alcohol, or a forensic audit by a qualified auditor selected by the City of the information and data systems by which the information is produced. The results of these audits may be used to determine whether the grounds for modification or revocation exist. When considering revocation or modification, a restaurant that sells or provides on-sale alcoholic beverages will be presumed to be operating as a restaurant if the restaurant maintains a minimum of fifty (50) percent of the total gross sales, computed monthly, from the sale of prepared food is presumed to be a restaurant. An on-sale restaurant that does not meet these percentages has the burden of demonstrating that it operates as a restaurant, as that term is defined in the municipal code. Refusal to provide the information requested under this subsection within sixty (60) days shall be deemed prima facie evidence that the business is not operating as a restaurant. 121 Page 7 – Conditional Use Permit 19-7 9. Live entertainment (including amplified music, disc jockeys, live music whether acoustic or amplified, and live performances of all kinds) per HBMC Section 17.04.050, (“Entertainment, Live”) and customer dancing, are prohibited. 10. The provision of alcoholic beverages shall comply with the following: a. All alcoholic beverages shall be served in non-disposable drinkware. b. Signs shall be posted in a conspicuous location warning patrons of the illegality of removing alcoholic beverages from the restaurant, and carrying and consuming alcoholic beverages in any public place such as the public sidewalk or beach. 11. Noise emanating from the property shall be within the limitations prescribed by the City's Noise Ordinance (Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Chapter 8.24) and shall not create a nuisance to surrounding residential neighborhoods, and/or commercial establishments. 12. Signage shall be displayed and maintained within the front and rear outdoor dining areas notifying customers to “Please be respectful of our neighbors who live just beyond our walls,” to the Satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 13. Potted vertical plants shall be provided within the rear outdoor dining area, along the south patio wall, to the Satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 14. Group dining and parties shall be limited to the main dining room. 15. The restaurant ceilings shall be maintained with sound dampening material to the Satisfaction of the Community Development Director. 16. Awnings shall be installed within the front and rear outdoor dining areas to deaden noise and awnings shall remain extended over outdoor dining areas while in use. 17. The establishment shall not adversely affect the welfare of the residents, and/or commercial establishments nearby. 18. The business shall prevent loitering, unruliness and boisterous activities of the patrons outside the business or in the immediate area. 19. The Police Chief may determine that a continuing police problem exists, and may, subject to the review of the Planning Commission, direct the presence of a Police Department approved doorman and/or security personnel to eliminate the problem. If the problem persists, the Chief then shall submit a report to the Planning Commission, which will automatically initiate a review of this Conditional Use Permit by the Commission. 20. The exterior of the premises shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner, and maintained free of graffiti at all times. 122 Page 8 – Conditional Use Permit 19-7 21. All exterior lighting shall be downcast and fully shielded, and illumination shall be contained within the property boundaries. Lighting shall be energy-conserving and motion detector lighting shall be used for all lighting except low-level (three feet or less in height) security lighting and porch lights. Lamp bulbs and images shall not be visible from within any onsite or offsite residential unit. Exterior lighting shall not be deemed finally approved until 30 days after installation, during which period the Building Official may order the dimming or modification of any illumination found to be excessively brilliant or impacting to nearby properties. 22. Lighting for signage must be downcast and non-disruptive to nearby uses and compliant with HBMC Section 17.50 (Signs). 23. A sign permit shall be obtained for new signage at the subject site in conformance with HBMC Section 17.50. 24. To reduce marine debris associated with take-out containers, the establishment shall not use take-out containers with a “No. 6” recycle code. 25. The practice of washing and rinsing restaurant floor mats, equipment, tables, etc., or discharge of any liquids, other than stormwater, onto the public right-or way, into the parking lot drain or stormdrains, is strictly prohibited. Discharge of liquids or wash water shall be limited to the sanitary sewer. 26. A manager who is aware of the conditions of this Conditional Use Permit shall be on the premises during business hours. The Conditional Use Permit shall be maintained on the premise in a location where employees can easily read the conditions. 27. The restaurant with on-sale alcoholic beverage service may be subject to a periodic review process established by the City to verify conformance with the conditions of approval. 28. Exterior and interior water use shall comply with HBMC Chapter 8.56. 29. The modifications and the operation shall comply with all requirements of the Building, Fire and Public Works Departments. a. The applicant shall submit a plan for occupant load calculation and approval prior to issuance of the Certificate of Final Occupancy. 30. The project shall maintain in conformance with all other applicable City of Hermosa Beach and regulatory agency requirements and standards, including but not limited to: California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, Los Angeles County Health Department, California Disabled Access Standards (Government Code Title 24), and Los Angeles County National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit (NPDES). 123 Page 9 – Conditional Use Permit 19-7 31. The subject property shall be developed, maintained and operated in full compliance with the conditions of this grant and any law, statute, ordinance or other regulation hereafter adopted that is applicable to any development or activity on the subject property. Failure of the permittee to cease any development or activity not in full compliance shall be a violation of these conditions. 32. The Planning Commission may review this Conditional Use Permit and may amend the subject conditions or impose any new conditions if deemed necessary to mitigate detrimental effects on the neighborhood resulting from the subject use. 33. Approval of this permit shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the date of approval by the Planning Commission, unless significant construction or improvements or the use authorized hereby has commenced. One or more extensions of time may be requested. No extension shall be considered unless requested, in writing to the Community Development Director including the reason therefore, at least 60 days prior to the expiration date. No additional notice of expiration will be provided. Section 6. This permit shall not be effective for any purposes until the permittee and the owners of the property involved have filed at the office of the Planning Division of the Community Development Department their affidavits stating that they are aware of, and agree to accept, all of the conditions of this permit. The Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded, and proof of recordation shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. Each of the above conditions is separately enforced, and if one of the conditions of approval is found to be invalid by a court of law, all the other conditions shall remain valid and enforceable. To the extent permitted by law, Permittee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Hermosa Beach, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside, or void any permit or approval for this project authorized by the City, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorney’s fees and costs in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its choice. The permittee shall reimburse the City for any court and attorney's fees which the City may be required to pay as a result of any claim or action brought against the City because of this permit. Although the permittee is the real party in interest in an action, the City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of the action, but such participation shall not relieve the permittee of any obligation under this condition. 124 Page 10 – Conditional Use Permit 19-7 Section 7. Pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, any legal challenge to the decision of the Planning Commission, after a formal appeal to the City Council, must be made within 90 days after the final decision by the City Council. VOTE: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: CERTIFICATION I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution P.C. No. 19-XX is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California at its regular meeting of July 16, 2019. ______________________________ ______________________________ David Pedersen, Chairman Ken Robertson, Secretary _________ , 2019 Date 125 Current City approved Occupant load/ Floor Plan 126 PASSAGEWAY TO STREET(E) COUNTERSERVICE(E) WALK INCOOLER(E) WALK INFREEZER(E) ICE MACHINE(E) KITCHENFRONT OUTDOORPATIODINING ROOM AMAIN DININGROOMRESTROOMRESTROOMRESTROOMREAR OUTDOORPATIOEQEQEQEQ5' - 0"CLEAR44" MINCLEAR44" MINCLEAR44" MIN(E) ADAADAADAADAADAENTRY30' - 0"TVTVTV(4)RETRACTABLE AWNINGSTO DEADEN NOISE(E) 9'-6" BLOCK WALL30X4830X4830X4830X4830X3030X3030X3042" HIGHRAIL(E) 3 THREE OPERABLE ROLL UPWINDOWS & DOOR OVER 19" HIGHLOW WOOD FRAMED W/ PLASTEREXTERIOR WALL WHICH MEETS CITY'SDEFINITION OF "OPEN AIR DINING"(E) 13' BLOCK WALL30X4830X4830X4830X6030X7142" HIGH30X7142" HIGHTV30X2444" MIN CLEAR30X2442 HIGH(E) OPERABLE WINDOWSTECTUM CEILING BY ARMSTRONG SOUND DEADENING INSTALLED IN DINING SPACETECTUM CEILING BY ARMSTRONG SOUND DEADENING INSTALLED IN DINING SPACEMIN 3 SIGNS READING:"PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL OF OUR NEIGHBORS WHO LIVE JUST BEYOND OUR WALLS" TO BE INSTALLED IN PATIO AREACLEAR44" MIN(E) 9'-6" BLOCK WALL(E) COVEREDROOFOVERHANG30X2442 HIGH123456789101112131415161718192021221234657810911121314315164181952122617201230X7142" HIGH30X2442 HIGH24257272882326123456781514131211109242526272021222316171819FIXED SCREEN TO DEADEN NOISE(2)NEWRETRACTABLESCREENS TODEADEN NOISE363534333231302937GHAArchitecture/DevelopmentDO NOT SCALE DRAWINGSCONTRACTOR TO VERIFYALL EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDDIMENSIONS-NOTIFY ARCHITECTOF ANY DISCREPANCIES PRIORTO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTIONPROJECT NUMBERSHEET NUMBERDATE OF THIS PRINTING -3187 Airway AveSuite ACosta Mesa, CA 92626Ph: (714) 966-9400Fax: (949) 258-5655ISSUE7/2/2019 5:06:19 PM190 HERMOSA AVEHERMOSA, CA 90254PFP------MOSA07/02/19 1/4" = 1'-0"1PROPOSED FLOOR PLANAREA(E) TABLE COUNT(E)SEAT COUNTPROPOSED TABLE COUNT PROPOSED SEAT COUNTDINING ROOM A 7 TABLES28 SEATS6 TABLES37 SEATSMAIN DINING ROOM 8 TABLES32 SEATS9 TABLES27 SEATSFRONT PATIO 4 TABLES8 SEATS4 TABLES8 SEATSREAR PATIO 4 TABLES16 SEATS7 TABLES22 SEATSTOTAL27 TABLES 92 SEATS26 TABLES94 SEATSNOTE: ALL TABLES 30" HIGH UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 1/8" = 1'-0"22017 CUP - FOR REFERENCE ONLY2017 CUPPROPOSEDINDOOR TOTAL64 SEATSOUTDOOR TOTAL30 SEATSNO REVISION 127 EXISTING OPERABLE CUSTOM STEEL WINDOWS W/ INSULATED GLASSEXISTING ALUM. EXIT DOOR W/ INSULATED GLASSEXISTING LIVING WALL - LOW WATER PLANTS TO BE REMOVED AND SURFACE PAINTED TO MATCH BUILDINGEXISTING STUCCO FINISH TO REMAIN11' - 10"2' - 4 1/4"5' - 0"2' - 10 1/8"6' - 0"6' - 0"6' - 0"ALUM. EXIT DOOR W/ INSULATED GLASSEXISTING EXTERIOR STUCCO FINISH TO REMAINEXISTING PARAPET WALLSEXISTING LIVING WALL - LOW WATER PLANTSREMOVE AND REPLACE WITH TEXTURED OPAQUE GLASSEXISTING CUSTOM STEEL DOOR W/ INSULATED GLASSEXISTING OPERABLE OVERHEAD DOORSEXISTING 42" HIGH GUARDRAIL & GALV. TS COLS TO SUPPORT AWNING SHOWN IN OUTLINE FOR CLARITYEXISTING FABRIC CANOPY9' - 2 3/4"0' - 4 3/4"5' - 0 1/2"14' - 8"6' - 0"6' - 0"5' - 0"11' - 10"GHAArchitecture/DevelopmentDO NOT SCALE DRAWINGSCONTRACTOR TO VERIFYALL EXISTING CONDITIONS ANDDIMENSIONS-NOTIFY ARCHITECTOF ANY DISCREPANCIES PRIORTO BEGINNING CONSTRUCTIONPROJECT NUMBERSHEET NUMBERDATE OF THIS PRINTING -3187 Airway AveSuite ACosta Mesa, CA 92626Ph: (714) 966-9400Fax: (949) 258-5655ISSUE7/2/2019 11:49:39 PM190 HERMOSA AVEHERMOSA, CA 90254A401------MOSA07/02/19NO REVISION 1/4" = 1'-0"1EXISTING / PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION 1/4" = 1'-0"2EXISTING / PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION128 Site Photos 129 130 131 132 Public Notice Posters 133 134 ti ::ii (\ i \ $CU( 1· • UlO" ADDRESS: 190 HERMOSA AVE 500' RADIUS MAP .ONTINENTAL MAPPING SERVICE 63.1'5 VAN NUYS BLVD. VAN NU'l'S, 91401 (618)787-1663 257 CASE NO.: DATE: 7-1·19 I 135 06/26/19 Hello Nicole, My wife and I have lived in Hermosa Beach for 19 years. We have lived in our current location, 162 Hermosa Avenue, for over 17 years. We live in the middle townhome unit in the rear building of the Victoria II complex next to what was recently Serve Restaurant, now, Build It Strong Enterprises. My next-door neighbors, standing on their front porch look down directly down into the patio of the restaurant. Noise from the restaurant sends loud echo into the common area between our two buildings. The residents of our complex are all professional people who must get a good night's sleep. We get up early in the morning to go to work and must go to sleep between 9:00 PM and10:00 PM to get a full night's rest. Three of the owner residents also have small children regularly visiting for multiple days at a time, and the children deserve the right to rest peacefully at night. While we are not averse to having a nice restaurant next door, the primary concerns are the added noise and traffic in our residential location. Build It Strong Enterprises is the 4th restaurant to occupy the space directly next to our North wall. The Petit Cafe was followed by Tammie's, then Serve and now Build It Strong Enterprises. Patio use by the restaurants has always been associated with significant additional noise which we all clearly hear, especially at night. Even closing at 10 PM does not stop the noise, since handling of silverware, dishes and conversation by restaurant employees after closing sends a loud echo into our common space and goes on for at least another hour after closing. Restaurant operation of even a 16-person patio in the evening is like living next to a continual party. Increasing the number of persons on the patio and longer hours only increases the noise level and disturbance to the residents on the other side of the wall and in surrounding areas. Since we live in a residential area of Hermosa Beach and not at the Pier, we want the Restaurant inside to close by 10:00 PM Sunday through Thursday, with service of alcohol to cease by 9:00 PM. Friday and Saturday nights we want the main restaurant to close by 11:00 PM with alcohol service to cease by no later than 10:00 PM. We request that the patio close by no later than 9:00 PM every night. We feel these are not unreasonable requests, since our area is clearly residential, and the residents deserve the right to peaceful evenings at their homes. Tammie's did not use the patio in the evenings for over 5 years. Serve was not permitted to use the patio. Thank you! Karl John Schlottig 310-493-1022 136 7/16/19 AGENDA, ITEM 12 - CUP 19-7 FOR MOSA LOCATED AT 170 HERMOSA AVE SUPPLEMENTAL EMAIL SUBMITTED BY LEN KISSEL TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ON 7/12/19 AT 3:55 P.M. 137 138 139 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 19-0447 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 Zone Change 18-1- A request to rezone property located at 820 9th Street from General Commercial (C-3) to Single-Family Residential (R-1) and determine that the request is within the scope of the project considered in the PLAN Hermosa Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Recommended Action: Adopt the attached resolution recommending the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach approve Zone Change 18-1, thereby rezoning the subject site from C-3 to R-1 and determine that the request is within the scope of the project considered in the PLAN Hermosa Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Background: EXISTING ZONING:General Commercial (C-3) PROPOSED ZONING:Single-Family Residential (R-1) GENERAL PLAN:Low Density Residential LOT SIZE:3,908 square feet LOT IMPROVMENTS:Single-family Residence The subject site is a 3,908 square foot rectangular shaped parcel that is located on the south side of 9th Street, east of Pacific Coast Highway. The site is improved with a 1,877 square foot, two-story residence, which includes an attached two-car garage. The residence was originally constructed in 1940. The first floor contains one bedroom, one bathroom, the family room, and the garage while the second floor consists of three bedrooms, one bathroom, kitchen, dining room, and living room. The site has a General Plan Land Use Designation of Low Density Residential and is currently zoned General Commercial (C-3). The properties to the east of the project, which front 9th Street, have land use designation of Low Density Residential and are zoned Single-Family Residential (R-1). These parcels are all improved with single-family homes (the residence on the lot immediately to the east of the subject site is under construction). The properties to the north and west of the site have a land use designation of Community Commercial and are zoned General Commercial (C-3). These parcels are improved with a variety of commercial businesses. The property to the south of the project site has a land use designation of Low Density Residential and is zoned General Commercial (C-3). This property is improved with a portion of the used car dealership that fronts Pacific Coast Highway. On November 21, 2017, the Planning Commission considered a similar request for the adjacent parcel on the east of the subject site. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™140 Staff Report REPORT 19-0447 Commission recommended the City Council approve the Zone Change. The City Council approved the request at their January 9, 2018 meeting. Analysis: In August 2017 the City adopted its updated General Plan (PLAN Hermosa), the City's first general plan update since 1979, which changed the subject lot’s land use designation from Commercial Corridor to Low Density Residential; however, this action did not update the zoning of the parcel. As a result, the current zoning is inconsistent with the General Plan. The land use designation changes were to reflect that these properties have either historically been in use as residential or that properties currently in use as commercial would be more appropriate to continue as residential in to the future. This change, along with a handful of others, were included in the General Plan update to bring consistency to the properties where the designation conflicted with the actual use and where it did not make sense to encourage commercial uses to extend further into residential areas. The 1980 General Plan Map had identified these areas commercial (changed from residential) as a means to encourage greater depth for potential commercial redevelopment along PCH. Over the course of approximately 40 years, that additional commercial depth has not occurred and instead perpetrated the non-conforming status for the residential properties, thereby limiting potential investment and improvements to the properties. Due to the inconsistency between zoning and general plan, the applicant is now requesting the City rezone the property from C-3 to R-1. Rezoning the subject lot to R-1 will allow improvements that are compatible with the existing residential development. Under the permitted uses in the R-1 zone, only a single dwelling unit is allowed on the parcel. The lot is does not meet the minimum 4,000 square feet to provide an accessory dwelling unit. Further review of the existing residence shows it complies with all development standards of the R-1 zone, except the east side setback. This setback is required to be a minimum of 4’-4” (10% of the lot width), but currently there is only a 2’-10” setback. As with all properties in the R-1 zone, the nonconforming setback may remain; but any new construction is required to comply with the development standards. Environmental Determination: In accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21083.3 and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guideline Sections 15162 and 15168(c)(2), this rezone is consistent with the General Plan designation for the property and is within the scope of the project considered in the PLAN Hermosa Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which was certified by the City Council on August 22, 2017. Pursuant to CEQA, no additional analysis is required. General Plan Consistency: According to PLAN Hermosa, “The purpose of the Low Density Residential land use designation is to provide for the retention, maintenance, and investment in single-family residential neighborhoods and protect residential uses from potential nuisances of nonresidential uses. This low density designation is intended to provide the lowest levels of density, offer a high quality environment for family life, and ensure the preservation of residential property values.” PLAN Hermosa additionally states, “Land use designations and zoning districts must be compatible, but need not be exactly the same. Zoning districts must be within the range of the allowed intensity and uses found in this Plan.” The R-1 zone allows densities that are within the range for the Low Density Residential designation. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™141 Staff Report REPORT 19-0447 The site is also within the Hermosa Hills Neighborhood character area. PLAN Hermosa states, “The intent is to improve key pedestrian connectivity and access while preserving the single-family development pattern of this area.” Approval of the zone change will limit the future use of the site to those uses allowed in the R-1 zone, such as the existing single-family home. This action will implement PLAN Hermosa since the R-1 zone is compatible with and allows the types and density of uses outlined in the Low Density Residential land use designation. It will also insure that future development will be consistent with the Hermosa Hills Neighborhood character area, as outlined in the General Plan. Summary: Based on the analysis contained in this report, staff is of the opinion that the proposed zone change is consistent with the area and will implement the City’s General Plan (PLAN Hermosa). As such, staff is recommending the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution, recommending the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach approve Zone Change 18-1, thereby rezoning the subject site from C-3 to R-1 and determine that the request is within the scope of the project considered in the PLAN Hermosa Environmental Impact Report (EIR) pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Attachments: 1.Proposed Resolution 2.Radius Map 3.Notice Poster Verification 4.General Plan Map 5.Existing Zoning Map 6.Proposed Zoning Map 7.Aerial Photograph Respectfully Submitted by: David Blumenthal, AICP, Senior Planner Approved: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director Legal Review: Lauren Langer, City Attorney City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™142 1 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION NO. 19-X A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A ZONE CHANGE FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C-3) TO SINGLE- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN HERMOSA LAND USE DESIGNATION OF LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LD) FOR PROPERTY LOCATE AT 820 9TH STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 17 OF TRACT NO. 5650, IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. The Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereby resolve and order as follows: Section 1. An application was filed by Tim Hovland, representing 1160 MB Blvd LLC, to rezone a 3,908 square foot parcel at 820 9th Street from General Commercial (C-3) to Single- Family Residential (R-1). Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application for a Zone Change (ZON18-1) on July 16, 2019, at which time the Staff Report and testimony and evidence, both oral and written, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission. Section 3. Pursuant to Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Section 17.66.060, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed zone change is in the public interest because it will implement state law, the Land Use Element of PLAN Hermosa, and conform the zoning to the existing General Plan Land Use designation of Low Density Residential. The rezoning of the C-3 lot to R-1 is compatible with the existing residential development, zoning and land use on the surrounding lots. Section 4. The Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council approve of the proposed zone change from C-3 to R-1 on property known as 820 9th Street (APN: 4186-008- 024), as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Section 5. In accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21083.3 and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guideline Sections 15162 and 15168(c)(2), the Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council find the Zone Change to be within the scope of the project considered in the PLAN Hermosa Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which was certified by the City Council on August 22, 2017 because the EIR assessed all changes in designation and this rezone conforms with the designation set forth in PLAN Hermosa. 143 2 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution P.C. 19-XX is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, at its regular meeting of July 16, 2019. __________________________ ___________________________ David Pedersen, Chairperson Ken Robertson, Secretary __________________________ Date 144 3 Exhibit A to PC Resolution 19-XX ZONE CHANGE FROM C-3 TO R-1 LOT 17 OF TRACT NO. 5650, IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 105, PAGES 28 AND 29 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. APN: 4186-008-024 145 146 ATTACHMENT 3 Public Notice Poster 147 148 ATTACHMENT 4 General Plan Land Use Designation 149 ATTACHMENT 5 Existing Zoning 150 ATTACHMENT 6 Proposed Zoning 151 ATTACHMENT 7 Aerial Photograph 152 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 19-0467 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 A-14#63- Planning Commission consideration of a small lot exception to open space and lot coverage requirements otherwise required in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) zone for a new single-family residence at 3411 The Strand, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Applicant:Frank Khulusi 942 Highland Avenue Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Recommended Action: Continue to the August 20, 2019 Planning Commission hearing for Planning Commission consideration of a small lot exception to open space and lot coverage requirements otherwise required in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) zone for a new single-family residence at 3411 The Strand, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Summary: The applicant requested their application be continued to the August 20, 2019 Planning Commission Hearing date. Attachment: 1.Applicant’s Request Respectfully Submitted by: Kathy Khang, Assistant Planner Approved: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™153 154 From: noreply@granicusideas.com <noreply@granicusideas.com> Sent: Sunday, July 14, 2019 1:25 PM To: Planning Commission-Group <PlanningCommission-GROUP@hermosabch.org>; Ken Robertson <krobertson@hermosabch.org>; Frances Estrada <frances@hermosabch.org> Subject: New eComment for Planning Commission Meeting New eComment for Planning Commission Meeting Richard Gotthoffer submitted a new eComment. Meeting: Planning Commission Meeting Item: 14. REPORT 19-0467 A-14#63- Planning Commission consideration of a small lot exception to open space and lot coverage requirements otherwise required in the Single-Family Residential (R-1) zone for a new single-family residence at 3411 The Strand, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). eComment: Please do not allow the exception of the Open Space requirements and this lot's current & future CEQA compliance. As the older homes are replaced, they should be brought up to the current planning standards. View and Analyze eComments This email was sent from https://granicusideas.com. Unsubscribe from future mailings 155 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 19-0451 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 CUP 19-3- Conditional Use Permit Amendment request to modify an existing non-conforming rooftop wireless telecommunication facility by removing and relocating antennas within new screening boxes below the existing building height and upgrading equipment (AT&T Mobility) at 2447 Pacific Coast Highway, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Continued from June 2019 Public Hearing APPLICANT:AT&T C/O Chris Pell 1452 Edinger Avenue, 3rd Floor Tustin, CA 92780 OWNER:2447 Pacific Coast Highway, LLC 2447 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Recommended Action: Adopt the attached resolution approving Conditional Use Permit Amendment 19-3, to modify an existing non-conforming rooftop wireless telecommunication facility by removing and relocating antennas within new screening boxes below the existing building height and upgrading equipment (AT&T Mobility) at 2447 Pacific Coast Highway, and determine that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Summary: Based on the analysis above, the proposed wireless telecommunications facility relocation and expansion at 2447 Pacific Coast Highway, as conditioned, is consistent with the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code and Plan Hermosa. Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution approving CUP 19-3, and determine that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Background: ZONING:Specific Plan Area No. 8 (SPA-8) City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 8 powered by Legistar™156 Staff Report REPORT 19-0451 GENERAL PLAN:Commercial Corridor LOT SIZE:Approximately 15,136 Square feet BUILDING HEIGHT EXISTING:Approximately 37’ BUILDING HEIGHT PROPOSED:No change EXISTING EQUIPMENT HEIGHT:Approximately 4’ above the existing building height PROPOSED EQUIPMENT HEIGHT:Equipment will be mounted on the side of the existing northeast, southeast and west parapet walls and will not exceed the existing building height ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:Categorically Exempt, Section 15303 Class 3 Exemption, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures, as the proposal pertains to a wireless facility Located at the southwest corner of 24th Place and the Pacific Coast Highway, the project site is an existing multi-tenant general office building, which is nonconforming to height requirements, at 2447 Pacific Coast Highway. The closest residential uses are located immediately to the west, southwest and northwest of the multi-tenant office building. General commercial uses are located to the north, east, and south of the subject site. The existing wireless facility is governed by Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 01-3, which was approved to allow the construction of four additional panel antennas and a bell-shaped GPS antenna on top of an existing commercial office building nonconforming to height requirements at 2447 Pacific Coast Highway. The Planning Commission determined that the 2001 proposed antenna equipment would be located so that it did not exceed the roofline of the parapet wall and found that all equipment located below the building parapet would be exempt from the surface area calculations. In 2011, the applicant (AT&T) applied for a CUP and Variance to modify an existing wireless facility by replacing antennas of the building roof with new antennas and remote radio unit (RRU) that would exceed the height allowance. Because the Planning Commission could not make the CUP and Variance findings for the request, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to continue the item to the next Planning Commission meeting and direct the applicant to redesign the project without the Variance request. However, a redesigned project was not submitted, and the application was deemed formally withdrawn. Between 2011 and 2018, roof mounted antennas were installed by the applicant without approval or permits. Thus, the existing plans of the wireless facility are inconsistent with the 2001 approved plans and the 2011 submitted plans. Following is a summary of the existing and proposed facilities: Existing Facility Proposed Facility Location/Height:- Existing antennas located on top of roof; exceeding the existing building’s height; no existing screening (removed/relocated) - Support equipment located below the building’s existing parapet walls - Equipment room located inside basement/parking level - Antennas to be relocated to the sides of the building and screened with a non -reflective lattice screening box to match the texture and color of the building -Support equipment located below the building’s existing parapet walls -Equipment room located inside basement/parking level Rooftop Sector/Antennas: - 3 roof-mounted Sectors, 3 panel antennas on each sector, panel antennas measures 4’ long (to be removed/relocated); - Remove existing Quintel Antennas (1 per sector), remove Microwave Radio unit and Microwave dish, remove existing Diplexer (1 per sector), remove existing DC-2 box - Support equipment: cable trams, Remote Radio Units (RRUS) and surge suppresser - 3 Sectors, 4 panel antennas on each sector, panel antenna measures 4’ long -6 New Quintel antennas (2 per sector) (measurement: 4’L X 1’W X 9.6”D) -Support equipment: New cable tray, new Remote Radio Units (RRUS) mounting rack, New RRUS, New DC-6 surge suppressor -New 6’H X 15’W X 3’D Screening box 1st Floor Basement/Garage Level Equipment Area: - Approximately 175 square feet - Remove existing support equipment: (3 existing RRUS-11, 2 existing 24VDC, Argus DCPP and 2 existing 2VDC batteries) - Approximately 175 square feet (no change) -New 48VDC Battery rack - New 48VDC Netsure City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 2 of 8 powered by Legistar™157 Staff Report REPORT 19-0451 Existing Facility Proposed Facility Location/Height:- Existing antennas located on top of roof; exceeding the existing building’s height; no existing screening (removed/relocated) - Support equipment located below the building’s existing parapet walls - Equipment room located inside basement/parking level - Antennas to be relocated to the sides of the building and screened with a non -reflective lattice screening box to match the texture and color of the building -Support equipment located below the building’s existing parapet walls -Equipment room located inside basement/parking level Rooftop Sector/Antennas: - 3 roof-mounted Sectors, 3 panel antennas on each sector, panel antennas measures 4’ long (to be removed/relocated); - Remove existing Quintel Antennas (1 per sector), remove Microwave Radio unit and Microwave dish, remove existing Diplexer (1 per sector), remove existing DC-2 box - Support equipment: cable trams, Remote Radio Units (RRUS) and surge suppresser - 3 Sectors, 4 panel antennas on each sector, panel antenna measures 4’ long -6 New Quintel antennas (2 per sector) (measurement: 4’L X 1’W X 9.6”D) -Support equipment: New cable tray, new Remote Radio Units (RRUS) mounting rack, New RRUS, New DC-6 surge suppressor -New 6’H X 15’W X 3’D Screening box 1st Floor Basement/Garage Level Equipment Area: - Approximately 175 square feet - Remove existing support equipment: (3 existing RRUS-11, 2 existing 24VDC, Argus DCPP and 2 existing 2VDC batteries) - Approximately 175 square feet (no change) -New 48VDC Battery rack - New 48VDC Netsure AT&T requests a CUP Amendment in order to modify the existing non-permitted wireless facilities located on the rooftop of the subject multi-tenant building and relocate and replace the existing wireless facilities with three stealth designed antenna sectors to be mounted on the sides of the existing building. The existing AT&T facilities are located on the roof near the north wall of the commercial building facing 24th Place and the south wall facing the adjacent building. The proposed facilities would be located on the northeast, southeast, and west sides of the multi-tenant office building. All existing AT&T and Sprint wireless facilities that predated the requirements for a CUP have since been removed. The applicant’s request is an effort to bring the existing site into compliance with the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code (HBMC) and to rectify the panel antennas that were installed without City review or approval. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 3 of 8 powered by Legistar™158 Staff Report REPORT 19-0451 The applicant has furnished required materials in accordance with Municipal Code Section 17.40.170 (A), including reasons for the needed equipment upgrade at the existing site, map of the service area, nature of existing facilities, a letter stating willingness to allow for future co-location, Radio Frequency Radiation evaluation report dated March 25, 2019 showing the facility meets FCC regulations and recommending safety compliance measures, and plans and standards for construction. Colored photo simulations of the proposed facility upgrade are also provided by the applicant. The City is precluded from considering health impacts other than ensuring the facility complies with FCC Radio Frequency Radiation requirements, and the applicant’s report confirms compliance and an updated report must be submitted biennially. Analysis: Conditional use permit: A Conditional Use Permit is required for wireless telecommunications facilities pursuant to Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Sections 17.40.020 and 17.40.170 to ensure compatibility with existing and future uses in the vicinity of the project site. Section 17.40.170(A)(7) requires the Planning Commission to find that the proposed upgrade results in fewer or less severe environmental impacts than any feasible alternative at the existing site. Section 17.46.210 (Antennas, satellite dishes and similar equipment) also regulates height. Design and Development Standards: The applicant’s proposal includes removing three antennas, relocating six antennas, and adding six new antennas to the subject site. The wireless facility has a total of three unpermitted sectors mounted on mounting brackets above the existing legal nonconforming building height, with three antennas per sector with a total of nine panel antennas. The existing mounting brackets will be removed and the proposal is to have three sectors with four antennas per sector with a total of twelve panel antennas. All twelve proposed panel antennas will be screened with new (6’H X 6’W X 3’D) non -reflective lattice screening boxes mounted on the northeast, southeast, and west sides of the existing building below the parapet walls. The material and color of the screening boxes will match all existing building materials. Additional support equipment, such as cable trams, relocated Remote Radio Units (RRUS), new RRUS, surge suppresser etc., will be placed on the rooftop below the parapet wall height. Finally, the applicant proposes to remove and replace batteries, remove three RRUS, and add a new NetSure DCPP (support equipment) in the existing 175 square foot equipment room located at the basement/garage level of the existing multi-tenant office building. Staff reviewed the proposed wireless facility for compliance with Subsections 17.40.170(B) though (C) finding the proposal is generally compliant as follows: City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 4 of 8 powered by Legistar™159 Staff Report REPORT 19-0451 1.The facility will not bear signs or private advertising devices other than for public safety purposes. 2.The wireless facility will be serviced by the existing 175 square foot equipment room located at the basement/garage level. All additional support equipment will be located below the existing parapet wall. 3.The facility will be screened by a non-reflective architectural lattice (6’H X 15’W X 3’D) screening box. Materials will match the existing horizontal wood pickets with tubular steel frame and painted to match the existing building. 4.Although the facility will not be placed to the centermost location of the roof top, the proposed antennas will be screened, which will screen the facility view from the street and adjacent properties. The applicant’s design team considered placing the antennas near the center of the roof, but this option would not achieve the project objectives to increase coverage because the signal would be partially blocked or absorbed by the parapet wall and mechanical equipment. 5.The facility is not located on a residentially zoned property. 6.The facility does not involve the installation of a monopole; existing mounting frames above roof surface will be removed. 7.The facility is located within 200’ of a residential use and therefore is subject to residential setback requirements. The nearest residential zoning district abutting the project to the west is R-1, and the required residential rear yard setback is 5’. Sector B and the proposed screening box will be located approximately 7’ 4” from the west property line abutting the residential property. Approximately 2’ greater than the required residential rear yard setback. Sectors A and C will be mounted on building walls abutting commercially zoned properties. Sector A and the proposed screening box will be set back approximately 7’4” from the south property line. However, Sector C mounted on the north building wall which abuts 24th Place, is proposed to encroach 3’ into the City’s Public Right-of-Way. As such, a condition of approval has been added to the draft resolution requiring the applicant to obtain all necessary permits from the City’s Public Works Department. 8.The facility will not increase noise, traffic, utility use, air or water quality or result in other demands or impacts. Construction impacts and noise are controlled by Municipal Code Section 8.24.080 (construction noise) and Chapter 15 (Building and Construction). Screening and Site Selection Guidelines: Section 17.40.170(D) requires that the City consider the extent to which the proposed facility is screened or camouflaged by existing or proposed new topography, vegetation, buildings, or other structures. As proposed, 12 antennas will be wall mounted on an approximately 37 foot high building, with support equipment contained within an existing and proposed equipment racks bellow the building parapet wall and within an equipment room in the basement. The factors in Section 17.40.170(D) are considered as follows: City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 5 of 8 powered by Legistar™160 Staff Report REPORT 19-0451 1.The extent to which the proposed facility blends into the surrounding environment or is architecturally integrated into a concealing structure, taking into consideration alternate sites that are available. The applicant proposes to screen the facility with screening boxes to match the existing architectural features of the building. Thus the proposed facility will be architecturally integrated into a concealed structure. The proposed screening boxes are further detailed below. 2.The extent to which the proposed facility is screened or camouflaged by existing or proposed new topography, vegetation, buildings, or other structures. The proposed antennas will be screened by a non-reflective architectural lattice (6’H X 15’W X 3’D) screening box. The proposed screening boxes will match the existing horizontal wood pickets with tubular steel frame and painted to match the existing building. All existing and proposed support equipment will be located below the existing building parapet wall within an equipment rack. Additional equipment will be located within the existing 175 square foot equipment room located on the basement/parking floor level. 3.The total size of the proposed facility, particularly in relation to surrounding and supporting structures. The overall footprint on the building of the antennas and associated equipment encompass approximately 216 square feet on a 12,740 square foot rooftop and on a 37 foot high building on a commercial corridor. Based on these factors alone, the facility does not appear out of scale. 4.The availability of suitable alternative locations for the facility. The applicant proposes to remove three existing antennas, relocate six existing antennas, and add six new antennas to the subject site in order remove the existing non-permitted facility and increase signal coverage. The site meets the applicant’s objectives and has not identified other alternatives that meet the applicant’s objectives while reducing environmental impacts. 5.Preference shall be given to facilities located on publicly owned structures, co-location and shared sites. The private building has exhibited a co-located facility in the past; however it is not publicly owned. 6.Preference shall be given to sites which are not located along primary street frontage, front yard areas or adjacent to residential uses. The site is located adjacent to both arterial and residential streets, as are many sites in the city. 7.Whenever possible, wireless communication facilities should be located on existing buildings, existing poles, or other existing support structures. The facility will be located on an existing building. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 6 of 8 powered by Legistar™161 Staff Report REPORT 19-0451 Facility Height, Location and Other Issues: The height limit in SPA-8 is 35’. The building is 37’ in height to the top of the two-foot high parapet wall. The proposed panel antennas will be mounted to the northeast, southeast and west side of the existing parapet walls above the roofline but below the top of the parapet wall in each location. Section 17.46.210(C) addresses facility height, location and other issues. Under this section wireless facilities may exceed the height limit only to the extent that the surface area of the device on its widest side does not exceed 12 square feet of surface area over the height limit, but not more than 15’ above the highest point of the building. When the building is nonconforming to height, the surface area measurement only includes the surface area of the device that exceeds the height of the existing roof or parapet wall, whichever is greater. The proposed antennas and related equipment on the rooftop will not exceed the height of the parapet wall. Each antenna panel is 12 inches (1 foot) at its widest point and 4’ high. However, the proposed panel antennas will be mounted to the northeast, southeast and west sides of the existing parapet walls above the roofline but below the top of the parapet wall, which precludes it from the surface area calculations for allowable rooftop antennas. Section 17.46.210(C) also requires the following, which have been incorporated as conditions if the project is approved: §All devices regulated under this section and the construction and installation thereof shall conform to applicable city building code, zoning code, and electrical code regulations and requirements. §Such devices shall meet all manufacturer’s specifications, and all antennas and screens shall be fire-resistive and of corrosive resistant material, and shall be erected in a secure, wind resistant manner. They shall also be maintained in good condition. §Every such device shall be adequately grounded for protection against a direct strike of lightning. Staff notes that the applicant has submitted a Radio Frequency Report. Staff recommends the applicant implement all safety recommendations stated in the report (Attachment 1). Environmental Determination: The proposed project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as defined in Section 15303, Class 3 Exemption, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures because the proposal pertains to an existing structure and involves only minor alterations to the existing wireless facility. Moreover, none of the exceptions to the Categorical Exemption apply. Nor will the project result in a significant cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place over time, or have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances, or damage a scenic highway or scenic resources within a state scenic highway. The site is not located on a hazardous waste site and will not cause a substantial adverse change in the City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 7 of 8 powered by Legistar™162 Staff Report REPORT 19-0451 significance of a historical resource. General Plan Consistency: Chapter 7 of the City’s General Plan Infrastructure element states that telecommunication systems support advanced and innovative communication methods between residents, businesses, visitors, and the City. Telecommunications infrastructure and services are critical to businesses for economic growth and job creation. Residents rely on telecommunications for quality of life, education, research, and access to health care and government services. Telecommunications services in Hermosa Beach include cable television, high speed Internet, and wireless and ground-line telephone services. A variety of private companies provides these services and have infrastructure located throughout the City to provide consistent and reliable telecommunication services to the community. In August 2015, Hermosa Beach had a total of 5 mobile providers. The proposed wireless facility has been evaluated for their consistency with the City’s General Plan and it implements the following PLAN Hermosa goals and policies:Infrastructure 1.1 Infrastructure systems plan, 1.5 new technologies, 1.6 Utility Infrastructure Siting, 1.7 Aesthetic and urban form, 7.1 Accommodate future technologies, 7.2 Appropriate siting of telecommunications infrastructure, 7.3 Co-location of facilities, 7.5 Access for all. Attachments: 1.Proposed Approval Resolution 2.Applicant’s submittal 3.P.C. Resolution 01-28 4.CUP 11-3 and Variance 11-2 Staff Report 5.Legal Poster and Radius Map 6.Zoning Map and Aerial Photo 7.Site Photos 8.Wireless Facilities in Public Rights-of-Way Municipal Code Section Respectfully Submitted by: Yuritzy Randle, Assistant Planner Approved: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 8 of 8 powered by Legistar™163 1 P.C. RESOLUTION NO. XX-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT FOR A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY (AT&T) TO BE LOCATED ON THE NORTHEAST, SOUTHEAST AND WEST SIDES OF THE EXISTING 3RD LEVEL PARAPET BUILDING WALLS AND A 175 SQUARE FEET EQUIPMENT ROOM ON THE GARAGE BASEMENT LEVEL AT 2447 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 5 TO 10, BLOCK 2, MONTMARIE TRACT. The Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereby resolve and order as follows: SECTION 1. An application was filed by Chris Pell, on behalf of AT&T, seeking approval of a Conditional Use Permit amendment for a wireless telecommunications facility (AT&T) pursuant to the requirements of Sections 17.40.020 and 17.40.170 of Zoning Ordinance. SECTION 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on July 16, 2019, to consider the application for Conditional Use Permit 19-3 at which time testimony and evidence, both written and oral, was presented to and considered by the Planning Commission. SECTION 3. The proposed project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as defined in Section 15303, Class 3 Exemption, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures because the proposal pertains to an existing structure and involves only minor alterations to the existing wireless facility. Moreover, none of the exceptions to the Categorical Exemption apply. Nor will the project result in a significant cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place over time, or have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances, or damage a scenic highway or scenic resources within a state scenic highway. The site is not located on a hazardous waste site and will not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. SECTION 4. Based on the testimony and evidence received, the Planning Commission makes the following findings pertaining to the Conditional Use Permit as outlined in Hermosa Beach Municipal Code (HBMC) Section 17.40.020, thereby determining the project, as conditioned, will be compatible with the surroundings and all impacts can be reduced to an insignificant level: the facility will meet setbacks requirements, will not increase noise, traffic, utility use, air, or water quality or result in other demands or impacts and will not negatively affect the surrounding residential uses or sensitive receptors. SECTION 5. Based on the testimony and evidence received, the Planning Commission makes the following findings pursuant to Sections 17.40.020 and 17.40.170 of the Municipal Code substantiating that the proposed the facility will be compatible with existing and future uses in the vicinity and not be materially detrimental to property or improvements in the vicinity and zone: 164 2 1.The extent to which the proposed facility blends into the surrounding environment or is architecturally integrated into a concealing structure, taking into consideration alternate sites that are available. The applicant proposes to screen the facility with screening boxes to match the existing architectural features of the building. Thus the proposed facility will be architecturally integrated into a concealed structure. The proposed screening boxes are further detailed below. 2.The extent to which the proposed facility is screened or camouflaged by existing or proposed new topography, vegetation, buildings, or other structures. The proposed antennas will be screened by a non-reflective architectural lattice (6’H X 15’W X 3’D) screening box. The proposed screening boxes will match the existing horizontal wood pickets with tubular steel frame and painted to match the existing building. All existing and proposed support equipment will be located below the existing building parapet wall within an equipment rack. Additional equipment will be located within the existing 175 square foot equipment room located on the basement/parking floor level. 3.The total size of the proposed facility, particularly in relation to surrounding and supporting structures. The overall footprint on the building of the antennas and associated equipment encompass approximately 216 square feet on a 12,740 square foot rooftop and on a 37 foot high building on a commercial corridor. Based on these factors alone, the facility does not appear out of scale. 4.The availability of suitable alternative locations for the facility. The applicant proposes to remove three existing antennas, relocate six existing antennas, and add six new antennas to the subject site in order remove the existing non-permitted facility and increase signal coverage. The site meets the applicant’s objectives and has not identified other alternatives that meet the applicant’s objectives while reducing environmental impacts. 5.Preference shall be given to facilities located on publicly owned structures, co-location and shared sites. The private building has exhibited a co-located facility in the past; however it is not publicly owned. 6.Preference shall be given to sites which are not located along primary street frontage, front yard areas or adjacent to residential uses. The site is located adjacent to both arterial and residential streets, as are many sites in the city. 7.Whenever possible, wireless communication facilities should be located on existing buildings, existing poles, or other existing support structures. The facility will be located on an existing building. SECTION 6. Based on the foregoing, the Planning Commission hereby approves the request for Conditional Use Permit (CUP 19-3), subject to the following Conditions of Approval: 165 3 1. The details of the project application and supplemental materials are incorporated as Conditions of Approval unless modified herein. Any changes to, or relocation of, antennas or other equipment associated with the wireless telecommunications facility shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. Antenna upgrade, repair and replacement with devices of equivalent or lesser number, dimensions, height in the same locations, may be considered to be routine maintenance or minor, provided visual impacts are not increased, and may be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. 2.Three sets of antennas, each containing four (4) panel antennas and two (2) remote radio units shall be fully concealed within screening walls at approximately 35 feet above the street surface level mounted on the northeast, southeast, and west side façades of the existing multi-tenant office building. The screening walls shall be architecturally compatible with the existing building façade. The exterior of all screening walls shall be comprised of non-reflective material(s). 3. The applicant shall obtain all permits, as necessary, to encroach into the PublicRight-of-Way, such as an encroachment permit and a wireless encroachment permitfrom the City’s Public Works Department. 4. This approval applies to the proposed wireless telecommunications facility only. Anyother wireless telecommunications facility companies or affiliates must obtainseparate Conditional Use Permit approval for co-location of additional wirelesstelecommunications facilities. 5.A Radio Frequency (RF) Environmental Evaluation Report shall be prepared by theapplicant and submitted to the Community Development Director substantiating thatthe proposed wireless telecommunications facility meets FCC regulations andstandards for construction, maintenance and operations within ten (10) days afterinstallation of the facility. Every two (2) years thereafter, the telecommunicationsservice provider shall submit a certification report attested to by a licensed RFengineer that the facility is compliant with applicable FCC regulations for RFemissions. 6.No exterior lighting, signs, logos or other commercially identifying graphics shall beinstalled on the wireless communication facility (excluding those required by law) inconnection with the equipment enclosure use. 7. The facility shall meet all manufacturer’s specifications, and all antennas and screens shall be fire-resistive and of corrosive resistant material, and shall be erected in a secure, wind resistant manner. 8. The installation and operation of the facility shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Building and Fire Department requirements, and applicable building, zoning, and electrical code regulations and requirements of the Municipal Code, and all State and Federal requirements. To the extent applicable, every such device shall be adequately grounded for protection against a direct strike of lightning. 9. Future removal of the wireless communication facilities shall comply with the following: 166 4 a. The applicant shall provide notification to the Community Development Director upon cessation of operations on the site. The applicant shall remove all obsolete or unused facilities from the site within six (6) months of termination of its lease, cessation of operations, or expiration of its permit, subject to the determination of the director of community development. Should the owner fail to effect such removal, the property owner shall be responsible for the removal of the equipment. b. A new permit shall be required if the site is to be used again for the same purpose as permitted under the original permit, if a consecutive period of six (6) months has lapsed since cessation of operations. c. Any FCC licensed wireless communications carrier that is buying, leasing, or considering a transfer of ownership of an already approved facility shall submit a letter of notification of intent to the community development director. 10. If a review of this Conditional Use Permit occurs, the Planning Commission may amend the above conditions and/or impose any new conditions deemed necessary to mitigate detrimental impacts on the environment or neighborhood arising from use of the premise. 11.Approval of this permit shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the date ofapproval by the Planning Commission, unless significant construction orimprovements or the use authorized hereby has commenced. One or moreextensions of time may be requested. No extension shall be considered unlessrequested, in writing to the Community Development Director including the reasontherefore, at least 60 days prior to the expiration date. No additional notice ofexpiration will be provided. SECTION 6. This permit shall not be effective for any purposes until the permittee and the owners of the property involved have filed at the office of the Planning Division of the Community Development Department their affidavits stating that they are aware of, and agree to accept, all of the conditions of this permit. The Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded, and proof of recordation shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. Each of the above conditions is separately enforced, and if one of the conditions of approval is found to be invalid by a court of law, all the other conditions shall remain valid and enforceable. To the extent permitted by law, Permittee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Hermosa Beach, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside, or void any permit or approval for this project authorized by the City, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorney’s fees and costs in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its choice. 167 5 The permittee shall reimburse the City for any court and attorney's fees which the City may be required to pay as a result of any claim or action brought against the City because of this permit. Although the permittee is the real party in interest in an action, the City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of the action, but such participation shall not relieve the permittee of any obligation under this condition. The subject property shall be developed, maintained and operated in full compliance with the conditions of this permit and any law, statute, ordinance or other regulation applicable to any development or activity on the subject property. Failure of the permittee to cease any development or activity not in full compliance shall be a violation of these conditions. The Planning Commission may review this Conditional Use Permit and may amend the subject conditions or impose any new conditions if deemed necessary to mitigate detrimental effects on the neighborhood resulting from the subject use. SECTION 8. Pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, any legal challenge to the decision of the Planning Commission, after a formal appeal to the City Council, must be made within 90 days after the final decision by the City Council. VOTE: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CERTIFICATION I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution P.C. XX-XX is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, at their adjourned regular meeting of July 16, 2019. ____________________________ Ken Robertson, Secretary ___________________________ David Pedersen, Chairman July 16, 2019 Date 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 Attachment Legal Poster and Radius Map 195 196 Attachment Zoning Map and Aerial Photo 197 198 Attachment: Site Photos East Building Elevation North Building Elevation West Building Elevation 199 Chapter 12.18 WIRELESS FACILITIES IN PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF WAY Revised 3/19 12.18.010 Applicability. Revised 3/19 The siting and construction of wireless facilities in the ROW are subject to the provisions of this chapter. The siting and construction of wireless facilities on all other property are subject to the provisions in Title 17 of this Code (the Zoning Ordinance). (Ord. 19-1390 §1 (part), 2019) 12.18.020 Purpose. Revised 3/19 The purpose of this chapter is to establish a process for managing, and uniform standards for acting upon, requests for the placement of wireless facilities within the ROW of the city adjacent to all zoning districts consistent with the city’s obligation to promote the public health, safety, and welfare, to manage the ROW, and to ensure that the use and enjoyment of the ROW are not inconvenienced by the use of the ROW for the placement of wireless facilities. The city recognizes the importance of wireless facilities to provide high-quality communications service to the residents and businesses within the city, and the city also recognizes its obligation to comply with applicable federal and state law regarding the placement of personal wireless services facilities in its ROW. This chapter shall be interpreted consistent with those provisions. (Ord. 19-1390 §1 (part), 2019) 12.18.030 Definitions. Revised 3/19 The terms used in this chapter shall have the following meanings. In the event of any conflict between these definitions and applicable definitions in federal law, the applicable provisions of federal law shall control over these definitions. "Applicant" means a person filing an application for placement or modification of a wireless facility in the ROW. "Application" means a formal request, including all required and requested documentation and information, submitted by an applicant to the city for a wireless encroachment permit. "Base station" shall have the meaning as set forth in Title 47 Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) Section 1.40001(b)(1), or any successor provision. "Director" means the city’s director of public works or designee. "Eligible facilities request" shall have the meaning as set forth in 47 C.F.R. Section 1.40001(b)(3), or any successor provision. "FCC" means the Federal Communications Commission or its lawful successor. "Hearing officer" means a person designated by the city council to conduct hearings. "Municipal infrastructure" means city-owned or controlled property, structures, objects, and equipment in the ROW, including, but not limited to, street lights, traffic control structures, banners, street furniture, bus stops or other poles, lighting fixtures, or electroliers located within the ROW. "Permittee" means any person or entity granted a wireless encroachment permit pursuant to this chapter. 200 "Personal wireless services" shall have the same meaning as set forth in 47 U.S.C. Section 332(c)(7)(C)(i). "Personal wireless services facility" means a wireless facility used for the provision of personal wireless services. "Public right-of-way (ROW)" means any public street, alley, sidewalk, street island, median or parkway that is owned or granted by easement, operated, or controlled by the city. "Small cell facility" means (and is intended to be consistent with and declaratory of the definition of "small wireless facility" in 47 C.F.R. 1.6002(l), or any successor provision) a personal wireless services facility that meets any of the following conditions: 1. The facility: a. Is mounted on an existing or proposed structure fifty (50) feet or less in height, including antennas, as defined in 47 C.F.R. Section 1.1320(d); or b. Is mounted on an existing or proposed structure no more than ten (10) percent taller than other adjacent structures; or c. Does not extend an existing structure on which it is located to a height of more than fifty (50) feet or by more than ten (10) percent, whichever is greater; 2. Each antenna associated with the deployment, excluding associated antenna equipment (as defined in the definition of antenna in 47 C.F.R. Section 1.1320(d)), is no more than three (3) cubic feet in volume; 3. All other wireless equipment associated with the structure, including the wireless equipment associated with the antenna and any preexisting associated equipment on the structure, is no more than twenty-eight (28) cubic feet in volume; 4. The facility does not require antenna structure registration under 47 C.F.R. Part 17; 5. The facility is not located on tribal lands, as defined under 36 C.F.R. Section 800.16(x); and 6. The facility does not result in human exposure to radio frequency radiation in excess of the applicable safety standards specified in 47 C.F.R. Section 1.1307(b). "Structure" means an apparatus located in the ROW which is in any way attached to, constructed on, or built into the ground, either directly or indirectly. This term includes, without limitation, street lights, traffic signals, and utility poles, but it does not include towers. "Support structure" means any structure capable of supporting a base station. "Tower" means any apparatus built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any FCC-licensed or authorized antennas and their associated facilities, including those that are constructed for personal wireless services, including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul, and the associated site. This definition does not include utility poles. 201 "Underground areas" means those areas where there are no electrical facilities or facilities of the incumbent local exchange carrier in the ROW; or where the wires associated with the same are or are required to be located underground; or where the same are scheduled to be converted from overhead to underground. Electrical facilities are distribution facilities owned by an electric utility and do not include transmission facilities used or intended to be used to transmit electricity at nominal voltages in excess of thirty-five thousand (35,000) volts. "Utility pole" means a structure in the ROW designed to support electric, telephone and similar utility lines. A tower is not a utility pole. "Wireless encroachment permit" means a permit issued pursuant to this chapter authorizing the placement or modification of a wireless facility of a design specified in the permit at a particular location within the ROW; and the modification of any existing support structure to which the wireless facility is proposed to be attached. "Wireless facility" or "facility" means the transmitters, antenna structures and other types of installations used for the provision of wireless services at a fixed location, including, without limitation, any associated tower(s), support structure(s), and base station(s). "Wireless infrastructure provider" means a person that owns, controls, operates or manages a wireless facility or portion thereof within the ROW. "Wireless regulations" means those regulations adopted by the city council or director implementing the provisions of this chapter. "Wireless service provider" means an entity that provides personal wireless services to end users. (Ord. 19-1390 §1 (part), 2019) 12.18.040 Scope. Revised 3/19 A. In General. There shall be a type of encroachment permit entitled a "wireless encroachment permit," which shall be subject to all of the same requirements as an encroachment permit would under Chapter 12.16 in addition to all of the requirements of this chapter. Unless exempted, every person who desires to place a wireless facility in the ROW or modify an existing wireless facility in the ROW must obtain a wireless encroachment permit authorizing the placement or modification in accordance with this chapter. Except for small cell facilities, facilities qualifying as eligible facilities requests, or any other type of facility expressly allowed in the ROW by state or federal law, no other wireless facilities shall be permitted pursuant to this chapter. B. Exemptions. This chapter does not apply to: 1. The placement or modification of facilities by the city or by any other agency of the state solely for public safety purposes. 2. Installation of a "cell on wheels," "cell on truck" or a similar structure for a temporary period in connection with an emergency or event, but no longer than required for the emergency or event; provided, that installation does not involve excavation, movement, or removal of existing facilities. C. Other Applicable Requirements. In addition to the wireless encroachment permit required herein, the placement of a wireless facility in the ROW requires the persons who will own or control those facilities 202 to obtain all permits required by applicable law, and to comply with applicable law, including, but not limited to, applicable law governing radio frequency (RF) emissions and all requirements for encroachments under Chapter 12.16. D. Preexisting Facilities in the ROW. Nothing in this chapter shall validate any existing illegal or unpermitted wireless facilities. All existing wireless facilities shall comply with and receive a wireless encroachment permit, when applicable, to be considered legal and conforming. E. Public Use. Except as otherwise provided by California law, any use of the ROW authorized pursuant to this chapter will be subordinate to the city’s use and use by the public. (Ord. 19-1390 §1 (part), 2019) 12.18.050 Administration. Revised 3/19 A. Review Authority. The director is responsible for administering this chapter. As part of the administration of this chapter, the director may: 1. Interpret the provisions of this chapter; 2. Develop and implement standards governing the placement and modification of wireless facilities consistent with the requirements of this chapter, including regulations governing co-location and resolution of conflicting applications for placement of wireless facilities; 3. Develop and implement acceptable design, location and development standards for wirelessfacilities in the ROW, taking into account the zoning districts bounding the ROW; 4. Develop forms and procedures for submission of applications for placement or modification of wireless facilities, and proposed changes to any support structure consistent with this chapter; 5. Collect, as a condition of the completeness of any application, any fee established by this chapter; 6. Establish deadlines for submission of information related to an application, and extend or shorten deadlines where appropriate and consistent with federal laws and regulations; 7. Issue any notices of incompleteness, requests for information, or conduct or commission such studies as may be required to determine whether a permit should be issued; 8. Require, as part of and as a condition of completeness of any application, that an applicant for a wireless encroachment permit send notice to members of the public that may be affected by the placement or modification of the wireless facility and proposed changes to any support structure; 9. Subject to appeal as provided herein, determine whether to approve, approve subject to conditions, or deny an application; and 10. Take such other steps as may be required to timely act upon applications for placement of wireless facilities, including issuing written decisions and entering into agreements to mutually extend the time for action on an application. B. Appeal. 1. Any person claiming to be adversely affected by the decision of the director pursuant to this chapter may appeal the director’s decision. The appeal will be considered by a hearing officer appointed by the 203 city manager. The hearing officer may decide the issues de novo and whose written decision will be the final decision of the city. An appeal by a wireless infrastructure provider must be taken jointly with the wireless service provider that intends to use the wireless facility. As Section 332(c)(7) of the Telecommunications Act preempts local decisions premised directly or indirectly on the environmental effects of radio frequency (RF) emissions, appeals of the director’s decision premised on the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions will not be considered. 2. Where the director grants an application based on a finding that denial would result in a prohibition or effective prohibition under applicable federal law, the decision shall be automatically appealed to the hearing officer. All appeals must be filed within two (2) business days of the written decision of the director, unless the director extends the time therefor. An extension may not be granted where extension would result in approval of the application by operation of law. 3. Any appeal shall be conducted so that a timely written decision may be issued in accordance with applicable law. The appeal shall be conducted in accordance with any procedures adopted in the wireless regulations. (Ord. 19-1390 §1 (part), 2019) 12.18.060 General standards for wireless facilities in the public right-of-way. Revised 3/19 A. Generally. Wireless facilities in the ROW shall meet the minimum requirements set forth in this chapter and the wireless regulations, in addition to the requirements of any other applicable law. B. Regulations. The wireless regulations and decisions on applications for placement of wirelessfacilities in the ROW shall, at a minimum, ensure that the requirements of this section are satisfied, unless it is determined that the applicant has established that denial of an application would, within the meaning of federal law, prohibit or effectively prohibit the provision of personal wireless services, or otherwise violate applicable laws or regulations. If that determination is made, the requirements of this chapter may be waived, but only to the minimum extent required to avoid the prohibition or violation. C. Minimum Standards. Wireless facilities shall be installed and modified in a manner that minimizes risks to public safety, utilizes installation of new support structures or equipment cabinets in the ROW only after all existing and replacement structure options have been exhausted, and, where feasible, places equipment underground, and otherwise maintains the integrity and character of the neighborhoods and corridors in which the facilities are located; ensures that installations are subject to periodic review to minimize the intrusion on the ROW; and ensures that the city bears no risk or liability as a result of the installations, and that such use does not inconvenience the public, interfere with the primary uses of the ROW, or hinder the ability of the city or other government agencies to improve, modify, relocate, abandon, or vacate the ROW or any portion thereof, or to cause the improvement, modification, relocation, vacation, or abandonment of facilities in the ROW. D. Location and Design Standards. All applicants shall locate the facilities in accordance with the design standards and wireless regulations. All applicants shall, to the extent feasible, incorporate specific concealment elements to minimize visual impacts and incorporate design requirements in accordance with the design standards adopted by resolution of the city council and wireless regulations and ensure compliance with all standards for noise emissions, unless it is determined that another design is less intrusive or placement is required under applicable law. (Ord. 19-1390 §1 (part), 2019) 12.18.070 Applications. Revised 3/19 204 A. Submission. Unless the wireless regulations provide otherwise, the applicant shall submit a paper copy and an electronic copy of any application, amendments, or supplements to an application, or responses to requests for information regarding an application to the director. B. Content. An application must contain: 1. Any information required pursuant to the wireless regulations. 2. The name of the applicant, its telephone number and contact information, and, if the applicant is a wireless infrastructure provider, the name and contact information for the wireless service provider that will be using the wireless facility. 3. The name of the owner of the structure, if different from the applicant, and proof of owner’s authorization for use of the structure. 4. A complete description of the proposed wireless facility and any and all work that will be required to install or modify it, including, but not limited to, detail regarding proposed excavations, if any; detailed site plans showing the location of the wireless facility, and dimensioned drawings with specifications for each element of the wireless facility, clearly describing the site and all structures and facilities at the site before and after installation or modification; and a dimensioned map identifying and describing the distance to the nearest residential dwelling unit and any historical structure within five hundred (500) feet of the facility. Before and after three hundred sixty (360) degree photo simulations must be provided. 5. Documentation sufficient to show that the proposed facility will comply with generally applicable health and safety provisions of the Municipal Code and the FCC’s radio frequency emissions standards. 6. A copy of the lease or other agreement between the applicant and the owner of the property to which the proposed facility will be attached. Proprietary information may be redacted. 7. If the application is for a small cell facility, the application shall state as such and shall explain why the proposed facility meets the definition of small cell facility in this chapter. 8. If the application is for an eligible facilities request, the application shall state as such and must contain information sufficient to show that the application qualifies as an eligible facilities request, which information must show that there is an existing wireless facility that was approved by the city. Before and after three hundred sixty (360) degree photo simulations must be provided, as well as documentation sufficient to show that the proposed facility will comply with generally applicable health and safety provisions of the Municipal Code and the FCC’s radio frequency emissions standards. 9. Proof that notice of the application has been mailed to owners and occupants of real property, and the resident manager for any multifamily dwelling unit that includes ten (10) or more units, within three hundred (300) feet of the proposed wireless facility. 10. If the applicant contends that denial of the application would prohibit or effectively prohibit the provision of service in violation of federal law, or otherwise violate applicable law, the application must provide all information on which the applicant relies on in support of that claim. Applicants are not permitted to supplement this showing if doing so would prevent the city from complying with any deadline for action on an application. 205 11. The electronic version of an application must be in a standard format that can be easily uploaded on a web page for review by the public. 12. Any required fees. C. Fees. Application fee(s) shall be required to be submitted with any application for a wireless encroachment permit, as established by city council resolution. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no application fee shall be refundable, in whole or in part, to an applicant for a wireless encroachment permit unless paid as a refundable deposit. D. Waivers. Requests for waivers from any application requirement of this section shall be made in writing to the director or his or her designee. The director may grant or deny a request for a waiver pursuant to this subsection. The director may grant a request for waiver if it is demonstrated that, notwithstanding the issuance of a waiver, the city will be provided all information necessary to understand the nature of the construction or other activity to be conducted pursuant to the permit sought. All waivers approved pursuant to this subsection shall be (1) granted only on a case-by-case basis, and (2) narrowly tailored to minimize deviation from the requirements of the Municipal Code. E. Incompleteness. Wireless facility applications will be processed, and notices of incompleteness provided, in conformity with state, local, and federal law. If such an application is incomplete, the director may notify the applicant and specify the material omitted from the application. (Ord. 19-1390 §1 (part), 2019) 12.18.080 Findings--Decisions--Consultants. Revised 3/19 A. Findings Required for Approval. 1. Except for eligible facilities requests, the director or hearing officer, as the case may be, shall approve an application if, on the basis of the application and other materials or evidence provided in review thereof, all of the following findings can be made: a. The facility is not detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare; and b. The facility complies with this chapter and all applicable design and development standards; and c. The facility qualifies as a small cell facility; and d. The facility meets applicable requirements and standards of state and federal law. 2. For eligible facilities requests, the director or hearing officer, as the case may be, shall approve an application if, on the basis of the application and other materials or evidence provided in review thereof, it finds the following: a. That the application qualifies as an eligible facilities request; and b. That the proposed facility will comply with all generally applicable laws. B. Decisions. Decisions on an application by the director or hearing officer shall be in writing and include the reasons for the decision. 206 C. Independent Consultants. The director or hearing officer, as the case may be, is authorized, in its discretion, to select and retain independent consultant(s) with expertise in telecommunications in connection with the review of any application under this chapter, at the expense of the applicant. Such independent consultant review may be retained on any issue that involves specialized or expert knowledge in connection with an application, including, but not limited to, application completeness or accuracy, structural engineering analysis, or compliance with FCC radio frequency emissions standards. (Ord. 19-1390 §1 (part), 2019) 12.18.090 Conditions of approval. Revised 3/19 A. Generally. In addition to any supplemental conditions imposed by the director or hearing officer, as the case may be, all permits granted pursuant to this chapter shall be subject to the following conditions, unless modified by the approving authority: 1. Code Compliance. The permittee shall at all times maintain compliance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and other rules, including, without limitation, those applying to use of the ROW. 2. Permit Duration. A wireless encroachment permit shall be valid for a period of ten (10) years, unless, pursuant to another provision of the Code or these conditions, it expires sooner or is terminated. At the end of ten (10) years from the date of issuance, such permit shall automatically expire, unless an extension or renewal has been granted. A person holding a wireless encroachment permit must either (a) remove the facility within thirty (30) days following the permit’s expiration (provided that a support structure owned by the city, a utility, or another entity authorized to maintain a support structure in the ROW need not be removed, but must be restored to its prior condition, except as specifically permitted by the city); or (b) at least ninety (90) days prior to expiration, submit an application to the director to renew the permit, which application must, among all other requirements, demonstrate that the impact of the wireless facility cannot be reduced. The wireless facility must remain in place until it is acted upon by the city and all appeals from the city’s decision exhausted. 3. Timing of Installation. The installation and construction authorized by a wireless encroachment permit shall begin within one (1) year after its approval, or it will expire without further action by the city. The installation and construction authorized by a wireless encroachment permit shall conclude, including any necessary post-installation repairs and/or restoration to the ROW, within ninety (90) days following the day construction commenced. 4. Commencement of Operations. The operation of the approved facility shall commence no later than one hundred eighty (180) days after the completion of installation, or the wireless encroachment permit will expire without further action by the city. The permittee shall provide the director notice that operations have commenced by the same date. 5. As-Built Drawings. The permittee shall submit an as-built drawing within ninety (90) days after installation of the facility. As-builts shall be in an electronic format acceptable to the city. 6. Inspections--Emergencies. The city or its designee may enter onto the facility area to inspect the facility upon twenty-four (24) hours’ prior notice to the permittee. The permittee shall cooperate with all inspections and may be present for any inspection of its facility by the city. The city reserves the right to enter or direct its designee to enter the facility and support, repair, disable, or remove any 207 elements of the facility in emergencies or when the facility threatens imminent harm to persons or property. The city shall make an effort to contact the permittee prior to disabling or removing any facility elements, but in any case shall notify permittee within twenty-four (24) hours of doing so. 7. Inspections and Reporting. The permittee, when directed by the city, must perform an inspection of the facility and submit a report to the director on the condition of the system to include any identified concerns and corrective action taken. Additionally, as the city performs maintenance on municipal infrastructure additional maintenance concerns may be identified. These will be reported to the owner of the facility. The city shall give the permittee thirty (30) days to correct the identified maintenance concerns after which the city reserves the right to take any action it deems necessary, which could include revocation of the permit. The burden is on the permittee to demonstrate that it complies with the requirements herein. Prior to issuance of a permit under this chapter, the owner of the facility shall sign an affidavit attesting to understanding the city’s requirement for performance of annual inspections and reporting. 8. Contact. The permittee shall at all times maintain accurate contact information for all parties responsible for the facility, which shall include a phone number, street mailing address and email address for at least one (1) natural person. 9. Insurance. The permittee shall obtain and maintain throughout the term of the permit a type and amount of insurance as specified in the wireless regulations. The relevant policy(ies) shall name the city, its elected/appointed officials, commission members, officers, representatives, agents, and employees as additional insured. The permittee shall use its best efforts to provide thirty (30) days’ prior notice to the director of the cancellation or material modification of any applicable insurance policy. 10. Indemnities. The permittee and, if applicable, the owner of the property upon which the wireless facility is installed shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the city, its agents, officers, officials, and employees (a) from any and all damages, liabilities, injuries, losses, costs, and expenses, and from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, writs of mandamus, and other actions or proceedings brought against the city or its agents, officers, officials, or employees to challenge, attack, seek to modify, set aside, void or annul the city’s approval of the permit, and (b) from any and all damages, liabilities, injuries, losses, costs, and expenses, and any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, or causes of action and other actions or proceedings of any kind or form, whether for personal injury, death or property damage, arising out of or in connection with the activities or performance of the permittee or, if applicable, the private property owner or any of each one’s agents, employees, licensees, contractors, subcontractors, or independent contractors. In the event the city becomes aware of any such actions or claims the city shall promptly notify the permittee and, if applicable, the private property owner and shall reasonably cooperate in the defense. The city shall have the right to approve, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, the legal counsel providing the city’s defense, and the property owner and/or permittee (as applicable) shall reimburse the city for any costs and expenses directly and necessarily incurred by the city in the course of the defense. 11. Performance Bond. Prior to issuance of a wireless encroachment permit, the permittee shall file with the city, and shall maintain in good standing throughout the term of the approval, a performance bond or other surety or another form of security for the removal of the facility in the event that the use is abandoned or the permit expires, or is revoked, or is otherwise terminated. The security shall be in the amount equal to one hundred (100) percent of the cost of removal of the facility as specified in the 208 application for the permit or as that amount may be modified by the director in the permit based on the characteristics of the installation. The permittee shall reimburse the city for staff time associated with the processing and tracking of the bond, based on the hourly rate adopted by the city council. Reimbursement shall be paid when the security is posted and during each administrative review. 12. Adverse Impacts on Adjacent Properties. The permittee shall undertake all reasonable efforts to avoid undue adverse impacts to adjacent properties and/or uses that may arise from the construction, operation, maintenance, modification, and removal of the facility. 13. Interference. a. The permittee shall not move, alter, temporarily relocate, change, or interfere with any existing structure, improvement, or property without the prior consent of the owner of that structure, improvement, or property. No structure, improvement, or property owned by the city shall be moved to accommodate a permitted activity or encroachment, unless the city determines that such movement will not adversely affect the city or any surrounding businesses or residents, and the permittee pays all costs and expenses related to the relocation of the city’s structure, improvement, or property. Prior to commencement of any work pursuant to a wireless encroachment permit, the permittee shall provide the city with documentation establishing to the city’s satisfaction that the permittee has the legal right to use or interfere with any other structure, improvement, or property within the ROW or city utility easement to be affected by permittee’s facilities. b. The facility shall not damage or interfere in any way with city property, the city’s operations or the operations of prior-existing, third-party installations. The city will reasonably cooperate with the permittee and/or carrier to carry out such activities as are necessary to correct the interference. i. Signal Interference. The permittee shall correct any such interference within twenty-four (24) hours of written notification of the interference. Upon the expiration of the twenty-four (24) hour cure period and until the cause of the interference is eliminated, the permittee shall cease operation of any facility causing such interference until such interference is cured. ii. Physical Interference. The city shall give the permittee thirty (30) days to correct the interference after which the city reserves the right to take any action it deems necessary, which could include revocation of the permit. c. The city at all times reserves the right to take any action it deems necessary, in its sole discretion, to repair, maintain, alter, or improve the sites. Such actions may temporarily interfere with the operation of the facility. The city will in all cases, other than emergencies, give the applicant thirty (30) days’ written notification of such planned, nonemergency actions. 14. No Right, Title, or Interest. The permission granted by a wireless encroachment permit shall not in any event constitute an easement on or an encumbrance against the ROW. No right, title, or interest (including franchise interest) in the ROW, or any part thereof, shall vest or accrue in permittee by reason of a wireless encroachment permit or the issuance of any other permit or exercise of any privilege given thereby. 15. No Possessory Interest. No possessory interest is created by a wireless encroachment permit. However, to the extent that a possessory interest is deemed created by a governmental entity with 209 taxation authority, the permittee acknowledges that the city has given to the permittee notice pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 107.6 that the use or occupancy of any public property pursuant to a wireless encroachment permit may create a possessory interest which may be subject to the payment of property taxes levied upon such interest. Permittee shall be solely liable for, and shall pay and discharge prior to delinquency, any and all possessory interest taxes or other taxes, fees, and assessments levied against permittee’s right to possession, occupancy, or use of any public property pursuant to any right of possession, occupancy, or use created by this permit. 16. General Maintenance. a. The site and the facility, including, but not limited to, all landscaping, fencing, and related transmission equipment, must be maintained in a neat, safe and clean manner and in accordance with all approved plans. All graffiti on facilities must be removed at the sole expense of the permittee within forty-eight (48) hours after notification from the city. The permittee shall ensure that all equipment and other improvements to be constructed and/or installed in connection with the approved plans are maintained in a manner that is not detrimental or injurious to the public health, safety, and general welfare and that the aesthetic appearance is continuously preserved, and substantially the same as shown in the approved plans at all times relevant to the permit. b. The permittee shall repair, at its sole cost and expense, any damage including, but not limited to, subsidence, cracking, erosion, collapse, weakening, or loss of lateral support to city streets, sidewalks, walks, curbs, gutters, trees, parkways, street lights, traffic signals, improvements of any kind or nature, or utility lines and systems, underground utility line and systems (water, sewer, storm drains, gas, oil, electrical, etc.) that result from any activities performed in connection with the installation and/or maintenance of a wireless facility in the ROW. The permittee shall restore such areas, structures and systems to the condition in which they existed prior to the installation or maintenance that necessitated the repairs. In the event the permittee fails to complete such repair within the number of days stated on a written notice by the director the city will engage resources at the permittee’s sole cost and expense to complete such repairs. Such time period for correction shall be based on the facts and circumstances, danger to the community and severity of the disrepair. Should the permittee not make said correction within the time period allotted the director shall cause such repair to be completed at permittee’s sole cost and expense. c. The permittee shall keep the site area free from all litter and debris at all times. Each year after the permittee installs the wireless facility, the permittee, if requested by the director, shall submit a written report to the satisfaction of the director, documenting the then-current site condition. 17. RF Exposure Compliance. All facilities must comply with all standards and regulations of the FCC and any other state or federal government agency with the authority to regulate RF exposure standards. After transmitter and antenna system optimization, but prior to unattended operations of the facility, the permittee or its representative must conduct on-site post-installation RF emissions testing to demonstrate actual compliance with the FCC Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin 65 RF emissions safety rules for general population/uncontrolled RF exposure in all sectors. For this testing, the transmitter shall be operating at maximum operating power, and the testing shall occur outwards to a distance where the RF emissions no longer exceed the uncontrolled/general population limit. 210 18. Testing. Testing of any equipment shall take place on weekdays only, and only between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., except that testing is prohibited on holidays that fall on a weekday. In addition, testing is prohibited on weekend days. 19. Modifications. No changes shall be made to the approved plans without review and approval in accordance with this chapter. 20. Agreement with City. If not already completed, the permittee shall enter into the appropriate agreement with the city, as determined by the city, prior to constructing, attaching, or operating a facility on municipal infrastructure. This permit is not a substitute for such agreement. 21. Conflicts with Improvements. For all facilities located within the ROW, the permittee shall remove or relocate, at its expense and without expense to the city, any or all of its facilities when such removal or relocation is deemed necessary by the city by reason of any change of grade, alignment, or width of any ROW, for installation of services, water pipes, drains, storm drains, power or signal lines, traffic control devices, ROW improvements, or for any other construction, repair, or improvement to the ROW. 22. Abandonment. If a facility is not operated for a continuous period of six (6) months, the wireless encroachment permit and any other permit or approval therefor shall be deemed abandoned and terminated automatically, unless before the end of the six (6) month period (a) the director has determined that the facility has resumed operations, or (b) the city has received an application to transfer the permit to another service provider. No later than thirty (30) days from the date the facility is determined to have ceased operation or the permittee has notified the director of its intent to vacate the site, the permittee shall remove all equipment and improvements associated with the use and shall restore the site to its original condition to the satisfaction of the director. The permittee shall provide written verification of the removal of the facilities within thirty (30) days of the date the removal is completed. If the facility is not removed within thirty (30) days after the permit has been discontinued pursuant to this subsection, the site shall be deemed to be a nuisance, and the city may cause the facility to be removed at permittee’s expense or by calling any bond or other financial assurance to pay for removal. If there are two (2) or more users of a single facility or support structure, then this provision shall apply to the specific elements or parts thereof that were abandoned, but will not be effective for the entirety thereof until all users cease use thereof. 23. Encourage Co-location. Where the facility site is capable of accommodating a co- located facility upon the same site in a manner consistent with the permit conditions for the existing facility, the owner and operator of the existing facility shall allow co-location of third-party facilities, provided the parties can mutually agree upon reasonable terms and conditions. 24. Records. The permittee must maintain complete and accurate copies of all permits and other regulatory approvals issued in connection with the facility, which includes without limitation this approval, the approved plans and photo simulations incorporated into this approval, all conditions associated with this approval and any ministerial permits or approvals issued in connection with this approval. In the event that the permittee does not maintain such records as required in this condition or fails to produce true and complete copies of such records within a reasonable time after a written request from the city, any ambiguities or uncertainties that would be resolved through an inspection of the missing records will be construed against the permittee. 211 25. Attorney’s Fees. In the event the city determines that it is necessary to take legal action to enforce any of these conditions, or to revoke a permit, and such legal action is taken, the permittee shall be required to pay any and all costs of such legal action, including reasonable attorney’s fees, incurred by the city, even if the matter is not prosecuted to a final judgment or is amicably resolved, unless the city should otherwise agree with permittee to waive said fees or any part thereof. The foregoing shall not apply if the permittee prevails in the enforcement proceeding. 26. The permittee is responsible for obtaining power to the facility and for the cost of electrical usage. 27. Failure to comply with the city’s adopted noise standard after written notice and opportunity to cure have been given shall be grounds for the city to revoke the permit. 28. The permittee shall remove all nonoperational equipment from any structure on which it installs new equipment under the permit. B. Eligible Facilities Requests. In addition to the conditions provided in this section and any supplemental conditions imposed by the director or hearing officer as the case may be, all permits for an eligible facility request granted pursuant to this chapter shall be subject to the following additional conditions, unless modified by the approving authority: 1. Permit Subject to Conditions of Underlying Permit. Any permit granted in response to an application qualifying as an eligible facilities request shall be subject to the terms and conditions of the underlying permit. 2. No Permit Term Extension. The city’s grant or grant by operation of law of an eligible facilities request permit constitutes a federally mandated modification to the underlying permit or approval for the subject tower or base station. Notwithstanding any permit duration established in another permit condition, the city’s grant or grant by operation of law of a eligible facilities request permit will not extend the permit term for the underlying permit or any other underlying regulatory approval, and its term shall have the same term as the underlying permit or other regulatory approval for the subject tower or base station. 3. No Waiver of Standing. The city’s grant or grant by operation of law of an eligible facilities request does not waive, and shall not be construed to waive, any standing by the city to challenge Section 6409(a) of the Spectrum Act, any FCC rules that interpret Section 6409(a) of the Spectrum Act, or any modification to Section 6409(a) of the Spectrum Act. C. Small Cell Facilities Requests. In addition to the conditions provided in this section and any supplemental conditions imposed by the director or hearing officer, as the case may be, all permits for a small cell facility granted pursuant to this chapter shall be subject to the following condition, unless modified by the approving authority: 1. No Waiver of Standing. The city’s grant of a permit for a small cell facility request does not waive, and shall not be construed to waive, any standing by the city to challenge any FCC orders or rules related to small cell facilities, or any modification to those FCC orders or rules. (Ord. 19-1390 §1 (part), 2019) 12.18.100 Breach--Termination of permit. Revised 3/19 212 A. For Breach. A wireless encroachment permit may be revoked for failure to comply with the conditions of the permit or applicable law. Upon revocation, the wireless facility must be removed within thirty (30) days; provided, that a support structure owned by the city, a utility, or another entity authorized to maintain a support structure in the ROW need not be removed, but must be restored to its prior condition, except as specifically permitted by the city. All costs incurred by the city in connection with the revocation and removal shall be paid by entities who own or control any part of the wireless facility. B. For Installation without a Permit. A wireless facility installed without a wireless encroachment permit (except for those exempted by this chapter) must be removed within thirty (30) days of notification by the city; provided, that a support structure owned by the city, a utility, or another entity authorized to maintain a support structure in the ROW need not be removed, but must be restored to its prior condition, except as specifically permitted by the city. All costs incurred by the city in connection with the revocation and removal shall be paid by entities who own or control any part of the wireless facility. C. Violation. Any violation of this chapter will be subject to the same penalties as a violation of Chapter 12.16. (Ord. 19-1390 §1 (part), 2019) 12.18.110 Infrastructure controlled by city. Revised 3/19 The city, as a matter of policy, will negotiate agreements for use of municipal infrastructure. The placement of wireless facilities on those structures shall be subject to the agreement. The agreement shall specify the compensation to the city for use of the structures. The person seeking the agreement shall additionally reimburse the city for all costs the city incurs in connection with its review of, and action upon the person’s request for, an agreement. (Ord. 19-1390 §1 (part), 2019) 12.18.120 Nondiscrimination. Revised 3/19 In establishing the rights, obligations and conditions set forth in this chapter, it is the intent of the city to treat each applicant or ROW user in a competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory manner, to the extent required by law, and with considerations that may be unique to the technologies, situation and legal status of each particular applicant or request for use of the ROW. (Ord. 19-1390 §1 (part), 2019) 213 From: noreply@granicusideas.com [mailto:noreply@granicusideas.com] Sent: Friday, July 12, 2019 4:11 PM To: Leeanne Singleton <lsingleton@hermosabch.org> Subject: New eComment for Planning Commission Meeting New eComment for Planning Commission Meeting Jay Schuster submitted a new eComment. Meeting: Planning Commission Meeting Item: 15. REPORT 19-0451 CUP 19-3- Conditional Use Permit Amendment request to modify an existing non-conforming rooftop wireless telecommunication facility by removing and relocating antennas within new screening boxes below the existing building height and upgrading equipment (AT&T Mobility) at 2447 Pacific Coast Highway, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Continued from June 2019 Public Hearing eComment: As the owners of the building immediately south of 2447 PCH (2401 PCH) since 1999, we, Jay Schuster and Patricia Zingheim, oppose the current and further proposed wireless telecommunication facility. The proposal moves the apparatus even closer to our building and transmitting directly toward our building. AT&T and the owners violated City and State regulation and installed this wireless facility on the roof illegally without a permit or approval. It was installed on the south side next to our building. The illegally installed apparatus should be removed until it is properly approved and permitted. The current request for increasing the number of antennae from 9 to 12 and putting 4 of them significantly closer to our building should be denied outright. We strongly request that the City does not approve a facility, especially on the south side of 2447 PCH because it is too close to our building—7 feet, 4 inches in a N/S direction and 4 feet closer vertically. Most all of our tenants work at least 40 hours per week and most tenants work many more hours because they own their businesses. We believe radiation exposure poses a serious health hazard. The full extent of danger is not fully exposed, much as cigarette smoking and asbestos dangers took half a century to be exposed. The chance of this is reduced if the equipment is placed farther from an occupied building. In the alternative, we strongly request that 2447 PCH and AT&T place the proposed south side equipment on the north or east side where it would be closer to a street, and not an occupied building. Our tenants are interested in the results of this hearing and the outcome will likely impact our ability to lease the units in our building. We also request that as the City has required in its Resolution, that “Permittee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the owner of 2401 PCH, its employees, etc. who are the ‘indemnified parties’ from and against any claim, action or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties, reimbursing the owner its actual attorney’s fees and costs in defense of litigation regarding AT&T’s business and facilities at 2447 PCH.” We believe this may become an issue in the future as longer-term research becomes available. American Cancer 214 Society stated that “The energy level behind an antenna is hundreds to thousands of times lower than in front.” Therefore, if an antenna is mounted on the south side of 2447 PCH, the exposure level in the building and units in front, i.e. 2401 PCH, is “hundreds to thousands of times” higher than to 2447 PCH because we are in front of the proposed apparatus and constantly being bombarded with the radiation being emitted. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) is part of the World Health Organization and is the agency that American Cancer Society looks to for this agency to evaluate risks based on studies. One of its goals is to identify causes of cancer. IARC classifies RF radiation as ‘possibly carcinogenic to humans’ (Group 2B).” There has not been enough time to learn the long-term effects of radio frequency radiation. In 2011, when the City required AT&T to make changes to gain approval and a permit, AT&T never came back to the City and instead installed equipment where it had never been before (the south side by our building) and never did the State’s required Radio Frequency (RF) Environmental Evaluation or Safety Report. The City said in Section 3 of its proposed resolution that AT&T is making alterations to “an existing structure.” The south side is not an approved or permitted existing structure and was installed after AT&T failed to return to the City to gain approval and a permit in 2011. The south side should require a separate study, determining how the four antennae on the south side can be placed elsewhere and not expose our building to excessive radiation. We strongly request that the City require, before approval and permit, that AT&T provide a RF Safety Report on the current illegal equipment before allowing them to make any new installation. We need to know before approval if AT&T and 2447 PCH’s owner have liability for failing to meet City and State requirements about radiation safety. For the reasons we have mentioned and more, including the fact that it is an ugly eyesore from our property and for the public, we believe that the AT&T facility on the south side of 2447 PCH will be materially detrimental to property or improvements in the vicinity and zone—specifically 2401 PCH. This is in contrast to Section 5 of the proposed Resolution. Because of this, we strongly request the City does NOT approve the Resolution at this time. Patricia Zingheim will specify what we request the City require of AT&T and the owner of 2447 PCH in her e-Comment. View and Analyze eComments 215 From: noreply@granicusideas.com [mailto:noreply@granicusideas.com] Sent: Friday, July 12, 2019 4:17 PM To: Leeanne Singleton <lsingleton@hermosabch.org> Subject: New eComment for Planning Commission Meeting New eComment for Planning Commission Meeting Patricia Zingheim submitted a new eComment. Meeting: Planning Commission Meeting Item: 15. REPORT 19-0451 CUP 19-3- Conditional Use Permit Amendment request to modify an existing non-conforming rooftop wireless telecommunication facility by removing and relocating antennas within new screening boxes below the existing building height and upgrading equipment (AT&T Mobility) at 2447 Pacific Coast Highway, and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Continued from June 2019 Public Hearing eComment: Because of Jay Schuster’s prior eComment, we as owners of the immediately south 2401 PCH strongly request the City does NOT approve the Resolution at this time and require AT&T and the owner of 2447 PCH to: 1. Provide evidence in a thorough study, not merely a statement, that the south-side facility cannot be placed somewhere else so it is further from our building and our building is not being radiated by the transmission energy. Before 2011, AT&T did not need the south side and subsequently illegally placed equipment on the south side in violation of at least City and State regulations. 2. Provide a Radio Frequency (RF) Environmental Evaluation or Safety Report on the current equipment. We want to know if in the 8 years since AT&T’s illegal installment, what has been the safety of the current equipment before installing more powerful equipment. And what the difference in energy being sent to 2401 PCH would be under the current illegal equipment and the proposed future equipment. 3. Move the equipment from the south side of the building to another location that is not so close to people occupying 2401 PCH. 4. If the City decides to allow AT&T to put equipment on the south side of 2447 PCH, require AT&T and the owner of 2447 PCH to indemnify and hold harmless the owner, its employees, etc. from litigation related to AT&T’s facility. 5. Require AT&T to provide evidence that according to Code Section 17.40.170(A)(7) that the “proposed upgrade results in fewer or less severe environmental impacts than any feasible alternative at an existing site.” AT&T has not shown this in their submittal—there is no comparison of current illegal equipment and proposed equipment, strength of signal and impact on 2401 PCH of the energy transmission directed toward our building. 6. Require AT&T and 2447 owner to go back to the City for approval if and when they add more antennae or strengthen the signal capacity and also provide the Radio Frequency (RF) Environmental Evaluation or Safety Report to all the adjacent neighbors every two years because of its history of violating City and State Regulation. The City told us that the City required AT&T to comply; otherwise AT&T and the owner of 2447 PCH 216 would have continued to violate regulation. Further, this proposal should be denied until all of the questions below are satisfactorily answered: 1. How much more power/coverage is AT&T transmitting under the proposal versus the current illegal power/coverage? 2. Why does AT&T need to increase the number of antennae and the power being transmitted at 2447 PCH instead of another location? 3. In the future, how many more antennae does AT&T plan to install either legally as the City has required AT&T to do now or illegally as AT&T has done in the past? 4. Where is the main transmission beam on the south side entering 2401 PCH? Where is the rest of the beam going to be entering 2401 PCH? Where is it directed, what is the range and the intensity at different locations at 2401 PCH? 5. Please explain how AT&T has met the guidelines of the FCC for radiofrequency radiation exposure. 6. Explain in detail why AT&T should not move the south facility to the other side of 2447 PCH where there is not constant radiofrequency radiation entering an occupied office building? 7. AT&T has acquired DirecTV, which means the equipment is now working all the time. Describe how this has been factored into AT&T’s analysis and request for approval. 8. How does this proposed facility meet FCC’s Guidelines? 9. How is it made categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act? We appreciate the Planning Commission’s time and effort to review this matter. Yours truly, Jay Schuster and Patricia Zingheim View and Analyze eComments 217 218 219 AT&T Radio Frequency Safety Survey Report Prediction (RFSSRP) AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. Site Name: Hermosa Beach FA#: 10085847 USID: 12049 Site ID: LAC646 Address: 2447 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, California 90254 County: Los Angeles Latitude: 33.871694 Longitude: -118.395278 EBI Project Number: 6219000892 M-RFSC Name: Essie Polard Site Structure Type: Rooftop PACE#: MRLOS042681, MRLOS043411 Prepared For: AT&T Mobility, LLC c/o Smartlink, LLC 18301 Von Karman Avenue Suite 910 Irvine, California 92612 Report Information: Report Writer: Adam Piombino Report Date: June 13, 2019 CDs: LAC646_CDs_02.28.2019 RFDS: CLL02805_2018-LTE-Next-Carrier_LTE-7C_bi8575_3551A0CEBH_10085847_12049_06-10- 2017_As-Built-In-Progress_v2.00 Compliance Statement: AT&T Mobility Compliance Statement: Based on the information collected, AT&T Mobility will be Compliant with FCC Rules and Regulations at the nearest walking surface if recommendations in the Compliance Summary are implemented. 220 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 i AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................... 1 2.0 SIGNAGE AND MITIGATION PLAN ........................................................................................ 3 3.0 ANTENNA INVENTORY.......................................................................................................... 4 4.0 WORST-CASE PREDICTIVE MODELING ................................................................................. 6 5.0 ROOFVIEW® EXPORT FILE.................................................................................................. 13 6.0 COMPLIANCE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................... 14 7.0 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................ 15 APPENDIX A: FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (FCC) REQUIREMENTS ................. 16 APPENDIX B: AT&T RF EXPOSURE POLICY REQUIREMENTS .................................................. 19 APPENDIX C: AT&T SIGNAGE AND MITIGATION .................................................................... 20 APPENDIX D: LIMITATIONS ...................................................................................................... 22 APPENDIX E: ROOFVIEW®....................................................................................................... 23 APPENDIX F: CERTIFICATIONS ................................................................................................ 24 221 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 1 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EnviroBusiness Inc. (dba EBI Consulting) has been contracted by AT&T Mobility, LLC to conduct radio frequency electromagnetic (RF-EME) modeling for AT&T Site LAC646 located at 2447 Pacific Coast Highway in Hermosa Beach, California to determine RF-EME exposure levels from proposed AT&T wireless communications equipment at this site. As described in greater detail in Appendix A of this report, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has developed Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) Limits for general public exposures and occupational exposures. This report summarizes the results of RF-EME modeling in relation to relevant FCC RF-EME compliance standards for limiting human exposure to RF-EME fields. This document addresses the compliance of AT&T’s transmitting facilities independently and in relation to all collocated facilities at the site. 1.1 SITE SUMMARY Recommended Mitigation at the Site:  Access Point(s): o To reduce the risk of exposure and/or injury, EBI recommends that access to the rooftop or areas associated with the active antenna installation be restricted and secured where possible.  Signage at AT&T Mobility Sectors: o A: Yellow CAUTION 2C sign on the parapet wall above the antennas. Yellow CAUTION 2 signs on the barriers on the lower rooftop. o B: Yellow CAUTION 2C sign on the parapet wall above the antennas. o C: Yellow CAUTION 2C sign on the parapet wall above the antennas.  Barriers at AT&T Mobility Sectors: o A: 4’ barriers installed on both sides of the antennas on lower roof 1. Barriers are only recommended for installation up to 6 feet from the edge of the rooftop because the accessible areas of concern are within 6 feet of an area with no guard rail or parapet greater than 36 inches high. o B: N/A o C: N/A 222 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 2 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. Predictive Modeling Results: The maximum predictive power density generated by the antennas is approximately 3,164.80 percent of the FCC’s general public limit (632.96 percent of the FCC’s occupational limit) at the main roof level. At the lower roof 1 level, the maximum predictive power density generated by the antennas is approximately 587.0 percent of the FCC’s general public limit (117.4 percent of the FCC’s occupational limit). At the lower roof 2 level, the maximum predictive power density generated by the antennas is approximately 66.3 percent of the FCC’s general public limit (13.26 percent of the FCC’s occupational limit). At the adjacent roof 1 level, the maximum predictive power density generated by the antennas is approximately 27.3 percent of the FCC’s general public limit (5.46 percent of the FCC’s occupational limit). At the adjacent roof 2 level, the maximum predictive power density generated by the antennas is approximately 3.3 percent of the FCC’s general public limit (0.66 percent of the FCC’s occupational limit). At ground level, the maximum predictive power density generated by the antennas is approximately 31.2 percent of the FCC’s general public limit (6.24 percent of the FCC’s occupational limit). 223 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 3 Proposed CAUTION 2C Signs on the parapet wall above the antennas Proposed Hard Barrier Proposed CAUTION 2 Signs on Proposed AT&T Barriers Sector A Sector B Sector C AT&T Antennas Adjacent Roof 1 Adjacent Roof 2 Ground Level Lower Ground Level Lower Ground Level Main Roof 4’ Lower Roof 1 Lower Roof 2 2.0 SIGNAGE AND MITIGATION PLAN 224 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 4 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. 3.0 ANTENNA INVENTORY Antenna # Operator Antenna Type TX Freq (MHz) # of TX ERP (Watts) Gain (dBd) Antenna Model Azimuth (deg.) Length (feet) Horizontal Beamwidth (Degrees) X Y Z (main roof level) Z (Ground) ATT A1 AT&T Panel LTE 700 2 778.20 10.55 CCI OPA- 65R-LCUU- H4-K 150 4.0 65 134 47 -2.0 32.0 ATT A1 AT&T Panel UMTS 850 1 258.26 11.15 CCI OPA- 65R-LCUU-H4-K 150 4.0 63 134 47 -2.0 32.0 ATT A1 AT&T Panel LTE 2300 4 2460.37 14.65 CCI OPA-65R-LCUU- H4-K 150 4.0 58 134 47 -2.0 32.0 ATT A2 AT&T Panel LTE 700 2 709.72 10.15 Quintel QS4658-3e 150 4.3 68 138 48 -2.2 31.8 ATT A2 AT&T Panel LTE 850 2 820.52 10.85 Quintel QS4658-3e 150 4.3 63 138 48 -2.2 31.8 ATT A2 AT&T Panel LTE 2100 4 3428.62 14.05 Quintel QS4658-3e 150 4.3 65 138 48 -2.2 31.8 ATT A3 AT&T Panel LTE 700 2 709.72 10.15 Quintel QS4658-3e 150 4.3 68 142 49 -2.2 31.8 ATT A4 AT&T Panel LTE 700 2 625.39 10.85 CCI HPA- 65R-BUU- H4-K 150 4.0 67 145 50 -2.0 32.0 ATT A4 AT&T Panel LTE 1900 4 2986.21 13.45 CCI HPA-65R-BUU- H4-K 150 4.0 62 145 50 -2.0 32.0 ATT B1 AT&T Panel LTE 700 2 778.20 10.55 CCI OPA- 65R-LCUU- H4-K 240 4.0 65 42 41 -2.0 39.0 ATT B1 AT&T Panel UMTS 850 1 258.26 11.15 CCI OPA- 65R-LCUU- H4-K 240 4.0 63 42 41 -2.0 39.0 ATT B1 AT&T Panel LTE 2300 4 2460.37 14.65 CCI OPA-65R-LCUU- H4-K 240 4.0 58 42 41 -2.0 39.0 ATT B2 AT&T Panel LTE 700 2 709.72 10.15 Quintel QS4658-3e 240 4.3 68 43 37 -2.2 38.8 225 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 5 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. Antenna # Operator Antenna Type TX Freq (MHz) # of TX ERP (Watts) Gain (dBd) Antenna Model Azimuth (deg.) Length (feet) Horizontal Beamwidth (Degrees) X Y Z (main roof level) Z (Ground) ATT B2 AT&T Panel LTE 850 2 820.52 10.85 Quintel QS4658-3e 240 4.3 63 43 37 -2.2 38.8 ATT B2 AT&T Panel LTE 2100 4 3428.62 14.05 Quintel QS4658-3e 240 4.3 65 43 37 -2.2 38.8 ATT B3 AT&T Panel LTE 700 2 709.72 10.15 Quintel QS4658-3e 240 4.3 68 44 33 -2.2 38.8 ATT B4 AT&T Panel LTE 700 2 625.39 10.85 CCI HPA- 65R-BUU- H4-K 240 4.0 67 45 30 -2.0 39.0 ATT B4 AT&T Panel LTE 1900 4 2986.21 13.45 CCI HPA- 65R-BUU- H4-K 240 4.0 62 45 30 -2.0 39.0 ATT C1 AT&T Panel LTE 700 2 778.20 10.55 CCI OPA-65R-LCUU- H4-K 10 4.0 65 123 148 -2.0 32.0 ATT C1 AT&T Panel UMTS 850 1 258.26 11.15 CCI OPA- 65R-LCUU- H4-K 10 4.0 63 123 148 -2.0 32.0 ATT C1 AT&T Panel LTE 2300 4 2460.37 14.65 CCI OPA- 65R-LCUU-H4-K 10 4.0 58 123 148 -2.0 32.0 ATT C2 AT&T Panel LTE 700 2 709.72 10.15 Quintel QS4658-3e 10 4.3 68 119 146 -2.2 31.8 ATT C2 AT&T Panel LTE 850 2 820.52 10.85 Quintel QS4658-3e 10 4.3 63 119 146 -2.2 31.8 ATT C2 AT&T Panel LTE 2100 4 3428.62 14.05 Quintel QS4658-3e 10 4.3 65 119 146 -2.2 31.8 ATT C3 AT&T Panel LTE 700 2 709.72 10.15 Quintel QS4658-3e 10 4.3 68 115 146 -2.2 31.8 ATT C4 AT&T Panel LTE 700 2 625.39 10.85 CCI HPA- 65R-BUU- H4-K 10 4.0 67 112 145 -2.0 32.0 ATT C4 AT&T Panel LTE 1900 4 2986.21 13.45 CCI HPA- 65R-BUU- H4-K 10 4.0 62 112 145 -2.0 32.0 • Note there are 4 AT&T antennas per sector at this site. For clarity, the different frequencies for each antenna are entered on separate lines. 226 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 6 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. 4.0 WORST-CASE PREDICTIVE MODELING In accordance with AT&T’s RF Exposure policy, EBI performed theoretical modeling using RoofView® software to estimate the worst-case power density at the site rooftop and ground-level and nearby rooftops resulting from operation of the antennas. For this report, EBI utilized antenna and power data provided by AT&T and compared the resultant worst-case MPE levels to the FCC’s occupational/controlled exposure limits outlined in OET Bulletin 65. The assumptions used in the modeling are based upon information provided by AT&T and information gathered from other sources. There are no other wireless carriers with equipment installed at this site. Per AT&T’s corporate policy, the FCC’s general population limits are applicable to all rooftop sites, regardless of the level of access control. Based on worst-case predictive modeling, the worst-case emitted power density may exceed the FCC’s general public limit within approximately 22 feet of AT&T’s Sector A, B, and C antennas on the main roof level and 9 feet of AT&T’s Sector A antennas on the lower rooftop 1 level. Modeling also indicates that the worst-case emitted power density may exceed the FCC’s occupational limit within approximately 9 feet of AT&T’s Sector A, B, and C antennas on the main roof level and 1 foot of AT&T’s Sector A antennas on the lower rooftop 1 level. Additionally, there are areas where elevated workers may be exposed to power densities greater than the occupational limits. The worst-case emitted power density may exceed the FCC’s occupational limit within approximately 14 feet of AT&T’s proposed antennas at the antenna face level. Workers and the general public should be informed about the presence and locations of antennas and their associated fields. At the nearest walking/working surfaces to the AT&T antennas on the rooftop and ground, the maximum power density generated by the AT&T antennas is approximately 3,164.80 percent of the FCC’s general public limit (632.96 percent of the FCC’s occupational limit). The composite exposure level from all carriers on this site is approximately 3,164.80 percent of the FCC’s general public limit (632.96 percent of the FCC’s occupational limit) at the nearest walking/working surface to each antenna. Based on worst-case predictive modeling, there are no areas at ground/street level related to the proposed AT&T antennas that exceed the FCC’s occupational or general public exposure limits at this site. At ground/street level, the maximum power density generated by the antennas is approximately 31.2 percent of the FCC’s general public limit (6.24 percent of the FCC’s occupational limit). It should be noted that RoofView® is not suitable for modeling microwave dish antennas; however, these units are designed for point-to-point operations at the elevations of the installed equipment rather than ground-level coverage. Based on AT&T’s RF Exposure: Responsibilities, Procedures & Guidelines document, dated October 28, 2014, microwave antennas are considered compliant if they are higher than 20 feet above any accessible walking/working surface. There are no microwaves installed at this site. 227 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 7 ATT Sector A ATT Sector B ATT Sector C AT&T Antennas Main Roof Level (34’ AGL) Simulation Max MPE: 3164.8% General Population MPE at Main Roof Level Adjacent Roof 1 Adjacent Roof 2 Ground Level Lower Ground Level Lower Ground Level Main Roof *For Clarity, Fields are Extended into Free Space Lower Roof 2 Lower Roof 1 228 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 8 AT&T Antennas Lower Roof 1 (24.5’ AGL) and 2 (10’ AGL) Levels Simulation ATT Sector A ATT Sector B ATT Sector C Max MPE: 587.0% General Population MPE on Lower Roof 1 Level Adjacent Roof 1 Adjacent Roof 2 Ground Level Lower Ground Level Main Roof Lower Ground Level Lower Roof 1 Lower Roof 2 Max MPE: 66.3% General Population MPE on Lower Roof 2 Level 229 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 9 AT&T Antennas Adjacent Roof 1 (19.17’ AGL) and 2 (5.5’ AGL) Levels Simulation ATT Sector A ATT Sector B ATT Sector C Max MPE: 27.3% General Population MPE at Adjacent Roof 1 Level Adjacent Roof 1 Adjacent Roof 2 Ground Level Lower Ground Level Main Roof Max MPE: 3.3% General Population MPE at Adjacent Roof 2 Level Lower Ground Level Lower Roof 1 Lower Roof 2 230 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 10 AT&T Antennas Max MPE: 6,329.70% General Population MPE at Antenna Face Level Antenna Face Level Simulation ATT Sector A ATT Sector C Adjacent Roof 1 Ground Level ATT Sector B Adjacent Roof 2 Lower Ground Level *For Clarity, Fields are Extended into Free Space Lower Ground Level Main Roof Lower Roof 1 Lower Roof 2 231 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 11 AT&T Antennas Ground Levels (0’ AGL and -7’ AGL) Simulation ATT Sector A ATT Sector B ATT Sector C Adjacent Roof 1 Adjacent Roof 2 Ground Level Lower Ground Level Main Roof Max MPE: 20.9% General Population MPE at the Lower Ground Level Max MPE: 31.2% General Population MPE at Ground Level Lower Ground Level Lower Roof 1 Lower Roof 2 232 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 12 AT&T Antennas Note that the areas shown in brown are where AT&T antennas contribute more than 5% of the FCC’s general exposure RF limit. These do not overlap any areas in front of other carrier antennas exceeding the FCC’s general exposure RF limit because there are no other carriers as shown in Figure 1. Under FCC regulations, AT&T is therefore not responsible for predicted exceedances of another carrier’s antennas. ATT Sector A ATT Sector B ATT Sector C Adjacent Roof 1 Adjacent Roof 2 Ground Level Lower Ground Level Main Roof Lower Roof 1 Lower Roof 2 Lower Ground Level 233 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 13 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. 5.0 ROOFVIEW® EXPORT FILE 234 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 14 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. 6.0 COMPLIANCE SUMMARY Based on the information collected, AT&T Mobility will be Compliant with FCC Rules and Regulations at the nearest walking surface if recommendations in the Compliance Summary are implemented. The following mitigation measures are recommended for this site.  Access Point(s): o To reduce the risk of exposure and/or injury, EBI recommends that access to the rooftop or areas associated with the active antenna installation be restricted and secured where possible.  AT&T Mobility Sectors: o Sector A:  Yellow CAUTION 2C signs on the parapet wall above the antennas.  Yellow CAUTION 2 signs on the barriers on the lower rooftop.  4’ barriers installed on both sides of the antennas on lower rooftop 1 o Sector B:  Yellow CAUTION 2C signs on the parapet wall above the antennas. o Sector C:  Yellow CAUTION 2C signs on the parapet wall above the antennas. 235 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 15 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. 7.0 APPENDICES 236 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 16 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. Appendix A: FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION (FCC) REQUIREMENTS The FCC has established Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits for human exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic (RF-EME) energy fields, based on exposure limits recommended by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) and, over a wide range of frequencies, the exposure limits developed by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) and adopted by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) to replace the 1982 ANSI guidelines. Limits for localized absorption are based on recommendations of both ANSI/IEEE and NCRP. The FCC guidelines incorporate two separate tiers of exposure limits that are based upon occupational/controlled exposure limits (for workers) and general public/uncontrolled exposure limits for members of the general public. Occupational/controlled exposure limits apply to situations in which persons are exposed as a consequence of their employment and in which those persons who are exposed have been made fully aware of the potential for exposure and can exercise control over their exposure. Occupational/ controlled exposure limits also apply where exposure is of a transient nature as a result of incidental passage through a location where exposure levels may be above general public/uncontrolled limits (see below), as long as the exposed person has been made fully aware of the potential for exposure and can exercise control over his or her exposure by leaving the area or by some other appropriate means. General public/uncontrolled exposure limits apply to situations in which the general public may be exposed or in which persons who are exposed as a consequence of their employment may not be made fully aware of the potential for exposure or cannot exercise control over their exposure. Therefore, members of the general public would always be considered under this category when exposure is not employment-related, for example, in the case of a telecommunications tower that exposes persons in a nearby residential area. Table 1 and Figure 1 (below), which are included within the FCC’s OET Bulletin 65, summarize the MPE limits for RF emissions. These limits are designed to provide a substantial margin of safety. They vary by frequency to take into account the different types of equipment that may be in operation at a particular facility and are “time-averaged” limits to reflect different durations resulting from controlled and uncontrolled exposures. The FCC’s MPEs are measured in terms of power (mW) over a unit surface area (cm2). Known as the power density, the FCC has established an occupational MPE of 5 milliwatts per square centimeter (mW/cm2) and an uncontrolled MPE of 1 mW/cm2 for equipment operating in the 1900 MHz frequency range. For the AT&T equipment operating at 850 MHz, the FCC’s occupational MPE limit is 2.83 mW/cm2 and an uncontrolled MPE limit of 0.57 mW/cm2. For the AT&T equipment operating at 700 MHz, the FCC’s occupational MPE limit is 2.33 mW/cm2 and an uncontrolled MPE limit of 0.47 mW/cm2. These limits are considered protective of these populations. Table 1: Limits for Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) (A) Limits for Occupational/Controlled Exposure Frequency Range (MHz) Electric Field Strength (E) (V/m) Magnetic Field Strength (H) (A/m) Power Density (S) (mW/cm2) Averaging Time [E]2, [H]2, or S (minutes) 0.3-3.0 614 1.63 (100)* 6 3.0-30 1842/f 4.89/f (900/f2)* 6 30-300 61.4 0.163 1.0 6 237 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 17 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. Table 1: Limits for Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) (A) Limits for Occupational/Controlled Exposure Frequency Range (MHz) Electric Field Strength (E) (V/m) Magnetic Field Strength (H) (A/m) Power Density (S) (mW/cm2) Averaging Time [E]2, [H]2, or S (minutes) 300-I,500 -- -- f/300 6 1,500-100,000 -- -- 5 6 (B) Limits for General Public/Uncontrolled Exposure Frequency Range (MHz) Electric Field Strength (E) (V/m) Magnetic Field Strength (H) (A/m) Power Density (S) (mW/cm2) Averaging Time [E]2, [H]2, or S (minutes) 0.3-1.34 614 1.63 (100)* 30 1.34-30 824/f 2.19/f (180/f2)* 30 30-300 27.5 0.073 0.2 30 300-I,500 -- -- f/1,500 30 1,500-100,000 -- -- 1.0 30 f = Frequency in (MHz) * Plane-wave equivalent power density Based on the above, the most restrictive thresholds for exposures of unlimited duration to RF energy for several personal wireless services are summarized below: Personal Wireless Service Approximate Frequency Occupational MPE Public MPE Personal Communication (PCS) 1,950 MHz 5.00 mW/cm2 1.00 mW/cm2 Cellular Telephone 870 MHz 2.90 mW/cm2 0.58 mW/cm2 Specialized Mobile Radio 855 MHz 2.85 mW/cm2 0.57 mW/cm2 Long Term Evolution (LTE) 700 MHz 2.33 mW/cm2 0.47 mW/cm2 Power Density (mW/cm2) 238 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 18 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. Personal Wireless Service Approximate Frequency Occupational MPE Public MPE Most Restrictive Freq, Range 30-300 MHz 1.00 mW/cm2 0.20 mW/cm2 MPE limits are designed to provide a substantial margin of safety. These limits apply for continuous exposures and are intended to provide a prudent margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size, or health. Personal Communication (PCS) facilities used by AT&T in this area operate within a frequency range of 700-1900 MHz. Facilities typically consist of: 1) electronic transceivers (the radios or cabinets) connected to wired telephone lines; and 2) antennas that send the wireless signals created by the transceivers to be received by individual subscriber units (PCS telephones). Transceivers are typically connected to antennas by coaxial cables. Because of the short wavelength of PCS services, the antennas require line-of-site paths for good propagation, and are typically installed above ground level. Antennas are constructed to concentrate energy towards the horizon, with as little energy as possible scattered towards the ground or the sky. This design, combined with the low power of PCS facilities, generally results in no possibility for exposure to approach Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) levels, with the exception of areas directly in front of the antennas. 239 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 19 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. Appendix B: AT&T RF EXPOSURE POLICY REQUIREMENTS AT&T’s RF Exposure: Responsibilities, Procedures & Guidelines document, dated October 28, 2014, requires that: 1. All sites must be analyzed for RF exposure compliance; 2. All sites must have that analysis documented; and 3. All sites must have any necessary signage and barriers installed. 240 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 20 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. Appendix C: AT&T SIGNAGE AND MITIGATION SIgns are the primary means for control of access to areas where RF exposure levels may potentially exceed the MPE. As presented in the AT&T guidance document, the signs must:  Be posted at a conspicuous point;  Be posted at the appropriate locations;  Be readily visible; and  Make the reader aware of the potential risks prior to entering the affected area. The table below presents the signs that may be used for AT&T installations. Informational Signs – No longer in Use Alerting Signs INFO 1 NOTICE 1 NOTICE 2 INFO 2 NOTICE DECAL INFO 3 CAUTION 2 – ROOFTOP CAUTION 2B - TOWER INFO 4 CAUTION 2C - PARAPETS WARNING 2 241 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 21 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. 242 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 22 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. Appendix D: LIMITATIONS This report was prepared for the use of AT&T Mobility, LLC to meet requirements outlined in AT&T’s corporate RF safety guidelines. It was performed in accordance with generally accepted practices of other consultants undertaking similar studies at the same time and in the same locale under like circumstances. The conclusions provided by EBI are based solely on the information provided by the client. The observations in this report are valid on the date of the investigation. Any additional information that becomes available concerning the site should be provided to EBI so that our conclusions may be revised and modified, if necessary. This report has been prepared in accordance with Standard Conditions for Engagement and authorized proposal, both of which are integral parts of this report. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. 243 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 23 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. Appendix E: ROOFVIEW® RoofView® is a widely-used predictive modeling program that has been developed by Richard Tell Associates to predict both near field and far field RF power density values for roof-top and tower telecommunications sites produced by vertical collinear antennas that are typically used in the cellular, PCS, paging and other communications services. The models utilize several operational specifications for different types of antennas to produce a plot of spatially-averaged power densities that can be expressed as a percentage of the applicable exposure limit. 244 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 24 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. Appendix F: CERTIFICATIONS 245 Site Name: Hermosa Beach Site USID: 12049 Site FA: 10085847 25 AT&T Proprietary (Internal use only). Not for use or disclosure outside the AT&T companies, except under written agreement. ©2019 AT&T Intellectual property. All rights reserved. Preparer Certification I, Adam Piombino, state that:  I am an employee of EnviroBusiness Inc. (d/b/a EBI Consulting), which provides RF-EME safety and compliance services to the wireless communications industry.  I have successfully completed RF-EME safety training, and I am aware of the potential hazards from RF-EME and would be classified “occupational” under the FCC regulations.  I am familiar with the FCC rules and regulations as well as OSHA regulations both in general and as they apply to RF-EME exposure.  I have been trained in on the procedures outlined in AT&T’s RF Exposure: Responsibilities, Procedures & Guidelines document (dated October 28, 2014) and on RF-EME modeling using RoofView® modeling software.  I have reviewed the data provided by the client and incorporated it into this Site Compliance Report such that the information contained in this report is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. 246 247 248 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 19-0449 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 Verbal Report on City Council Actions City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™249 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report 19-0450 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 Verbal Status Report on Major Planning Projects. City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™250 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 19-0424 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 August 20, 2019 Planning Commission Tentative Future Agenda Items Recommended Action: To receive and file the August 20, 2019 Planning Commission tentative future agenda items. Attachment: 1. Planning Commission August 20, 2019 Tentative Future Agenda Respectfully Submitted by: Frances Estrada, Building and Planning Technician Approved: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™251 Tentative Future Agenda PLANNING COMMISSION City of Hermosa Beach August 20, 2019 Regular Meeting 7:00 P.M. Project Title Public Notice Meeting Date  107 Manhattan Avenue—CON19-2 & PDP19-4Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 70061 for a two unit condominium. 8/8/19 8/20/19  307 Pacific Coast Highway, Game Ready Performance—CUP18-9 Conditional Use Permit Amendment for a fitness facility. 8/8/19 8/20/19  847 Bard Street—CON19-1 & PDP19-1 Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 80296 for a two unit condominium. 8/8/19 8/20/19  1559 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 103 Corepower Yoga—CUP19-6 & PARK19-3 Conditional Use Permit and Parking Plan Amendment for an assembly hall health and fitness center with shared parking. 8/8/19 8/20/19  70 10th Street—PDP19-2 & PARK19-2 Precise Development Plan and Parking Plan for a motel project. 8/8/19 8/20/19  715 Pier Avenue, Vons—CUP19-8 Conditional Use Permit Amendment to allow instructional tasting of beer, wine and liquor. 8/8/19 8/20/19 f:\b95\cd\pc\future items\tent. future agendas\planning commission tentative agenda 8-20-19 252 City of Hermosa Beach Staff Report City Hall 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Staff Report REPORT 19-0448 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Regular Meeting of July 16, 2019 Community Development Department Activity Report of April, 2019 Recommended Action: To receive and file the April, 2019 Community Development Department activity report. Attachment: 1. Community Development Department activity report of April, 2019 Respectfully Submitted by: Frances Estrada, Building and Planning Technician Approved: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director City of Hermosa Beach Printed on 5/3/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™253 1 City of Hermosa Beach Community Development Department Activity Report April, 2019 BUILDING DIVISION MONTHLY REVENUE REPORT NUMBER OF PERMITS TYPE OF ACTIVITY CURRENT MONTH THIS MONTH LAST FY FY TO DATE LAST FY TO DATE LAST FY TOTAL Building 37 38 383 401 515 Plumbing 27 19 233 219 256 Mechanical 18 8 174 139 177 Electric 27 28 259 264 321 Plan Check 23 20 205 185 237 Sewer Use 0 0 8 10 11 Res. Bldg. Reports 19 15 145 182 230 Parks & Recreation 0 0 0 0 0 In Lieu Parks & Rec 0 0 15 13 14 Board of Appeals 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Review 5 1 26 25 32 Fire Flow Fees 3 4 58 53 59 Legal Determination 0 0 0 0 0 Zoning Appeals 0 0 0 0 0 Temporary Sign 2 1 28 17 18 Gen. Plan Maintenance 5 2 86 58 65 TOTALS 166 136 1,620 1,566 1,936 FEES COLLECTED TYPE OF FEE CURRENT MONTH THIS MONTH LAST FY FY TO DATE LAST FY TO DATE LAST FY TOTAL Building $29,835.72 $29,809.53 $486,197.04 $428,476.04 $506,838.00 Plumbing $10,348.00 $4,871.30 $66,810.00 $56,023.30 $65,786.10 Mechanical $6,599.00 $1,692.00 $39,378.00 $34,530.30 $42,084.30 Electric $7,816.50 $5,091.70 $67,630.00 $79,262.10 $91,513.60 Plan Check $49,616.29 $29,391.36 $324,536.32 $568,510.86 $636,657.81 Sewer Use $0.00 $0.00 $20,058.00 $39,630.98 $45,394.98 Res. Bldg. Reports $5,175.00 $3,555.00 $34,986.00 $42,532.20 $53,908.20 Parks & Recreation $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 In Lieu Parks & Rec. $0.00 $0.00 $184,511.00 $115,963.00 $150,758.00 Board of Appeals $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Sign Review $3,185.00 $613.00 $15,744.00 $13,353.00 $17,626.00 Fire Flow Fees $279.75 $446.60 $14,063.52 $13,773.89 $15,549.87 Legal Determination $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Zoning Appeals $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Temporary Sign $170.00 $155.00 $2364.00 $1,371.00 $1,453.00 Gen. Plan Maintenance $5,802.00 $2,484.00 $100,818.00 $76,245.00 $87,840.00 TOTALS $118,827.26 $78,109.49 $1,357,095.88 $1,469,671.67 $1,715,409.86 254 2 April 2019 CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES *Patrol Checks are citywide proactive patrols. **Short Term Vacation Rentals Cases are properties receiving citations. ***Miscellaneous complaints are any other violations not listed. BUILDING INSPECTION ACTIVITIES CURRENT MONTH THIS MONTH LAST FY FY TO DATE LAST FY TO DATE 290 276 3028 3177 TYPE OF ACTIVITY CURRENT MONTH THIS MONTH LAST FY FY TO DATE LAST FY TO DATE Radio Calls 9 6 97 77 Citations 1 1 13 43 Citizen Contacts 42 102 1171 492 Patrol Checks* 62 54 594 974 Short term vacation rentals Cases** 3 9 79 31 Smoking 296 402 3374 2925 Trash can storage 28 11 205 101 Sign violations 21 5 124 70 Construction 9 20 120 122 Noise 6 18 61 52 Public Nuisance 12 3 82 55 Encroachment 26 8 173 55 CUP Violations 22 0 188 23 Storm water pollution 5 6 40 32 Clean Bay Inspections 0 0 4 37 Styrofoam 1 1 3 6 Plastic bag ban 1 9 11 27 Miscellaneous complaints*** 17 21 266 139 255 3 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BUILDING DIVISION BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED REPORT MONTH OF APRIL, 2019 TYPE OF STRUCTURE PERMITS DWELLING UNITS VALUATION 1 101 New Single Family Houses Detached 1 1 $614,531.94 2 102 New Single Family Houses Attached 3 103 New Two Family Buildings 4 104 New 3 or 4 Family Buildings 5 105 New 5 or More Family Buildings 6 213 New Hotels/Motels 7 214 New Other Non Housekeeping 8 318 New Amusement & Recreation 9 319 New Churches/Other 10 320 New Industrial Buildings 11 321 New Parking Garages. 12 322 New Service Stations/Repair Garages 13 323 New Hospitals/Other Institutional 14 324 New Offices/Banks 15 325 New Public Works/Utility Buildings 16 326 New Schools/Other Educational 17 327 New Stores/Other Merch Bldgs. 18 328 New Other Non Residential Buildings 19 329 New Structures Other Than Building 5 $108,727.00 20 434 Add/Alter Dwelling/Pools 23 $877,200.00 21 437 Add/Alter Non Residential 3 $475,900.00 22 438 Residential Garages/Carports 23 645 Demolition - Single Family Houses 24 646 Demolition - 2-Family Buildings 1 2 $60,000.00 25 647 Demolition - 3-4 Family Buildings 26 648 Demolition - 5+ Family Buildings 27 649 Demolition - All Other Buildings 28 434/ 437 Solar System (Fee waived if 2 or more systems are installed) 2 $57,510.00 35 $2,193,868.94 TOTAL UNITS ADDED FY 2018-19 TO DATE: __39__ (Including One Unit Gained from Converting Maids Quarters to Dwelling Unit) TOTAL UNITS DEMOLISHED/LOST FY TO DATE: __35___ (See Attached List) TOTAL NET UNITS FY TO DATE: _4_ FY 2015-16 FY 2016-17 FY 2017-18 Total New Dwelling Units: 49 Total New Dwelling Units: 53 Total New Dwelling Units: 34 Total Demolished/Lost Units: 68 Total Demolished/Lost Units: 58 Total Demolished/Lost Units: 50 Net Unit: -19 Net Unit: -5 Net Unit: -16 256 4 Dwelling Units Demolished/Lost as of March, 2019 (FY 2018-19) ADDRESS TYPE PERMIT DATE PERMIT NO. NO. OF UNIT 434 30th Street Single Family Residence 7/19/18 B18-00338 1 1610 Loma Drive 3-Unit Building 8/6/18 B18-00365 3 2457 Myrtle Avenue Single Family Residence 8/7/18 B18-00367 1 1706 Manhattan Avenue Single Family Residence 8/7/18 B18-00369 1 1037 2nd Street Single Family Residence 8/8/18 B18-00371 1 2131 Monterey Blvd. Single Family Residence 8/14/18 B18-00382 1 916 The Strand Single Family Residence 8/28/18 B18-00402 1 349 26th Street Single Family Residence 9/5/18 B18-00408 1 1401 Corona Single Family Residence 9/27/18 B18-00446 1 2428 The Strand Single Family Residence 10/9/18 B18-00466 1 1246 20th Place Single Family Residence 10/18/18 B18-00478 1 1830 The Strand Single Family Residence 10/18/18 B18-00479 1 157 Monterey Blvd. Single Family Residence 10/23/18 B18-00486 1 744 Longfellow Ave. Single Family Residence 11/21/18 B18-00505 1 1012 2nd Ave. Single Family Residence 11/15/18 B18-00540 1 701 Longfellow Single Family Residence 11/26/18 B18-00550 1 411 29th Street Single Family Residence 12/3/18 B18-00495 1 541 Gravely Court Single Family Residence 12/27/18 B18-00575 1 961 5th Street Single Family Residence 12/24/18 B18-00581 1 959 5th Street Single Family Residence 12/24/18 B18-00582 1 240 34th Street Single Family Residence 1/16/19 B19-00017 1 522 24th Place Single Family Residence 1/22/19 B19-00022 1 230 The Strand 3-Unit Building 3/19/19 B19-00088 3 2722 Hermosa Avenue Single Family Residence 3/25/19 B19-00093 1 945 15th Street 2-Unit Building 3/26/19 B19-00081 2 255 28th Street Single Family Residence 3/27/19 B19-00101 1 125 30th Street 2-Unit Building 3/27/19 B19-00104 2 816 Manhattan Avenue 2-Unit Building 4/9/19 B19-00124 2 Total: 35 257 5 ACTIVITY REPORT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION April 2019 STAFF REPORT PREPARED SUBJECT THIS MONTH THIS MONTH LAST FY FY TO DATE LAST FY TO DATE LAST FY TOTAL Appeal / Reconsideration 0 0 0 1 1 Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P.) - Condominiums 1 1 5 9 10 Conditional Use Permit (C.U.P.) - Commercial 0 1 3 1 2 C.U.P. / Precise Development Plan Amendment 0 0 3 2 3 Conditional Use Permit Modification / Revocation 0 0 0 1 2 Conditional Use Permit / Map Extension 0 0 0 3 3 Environmental Impact Report 0 0 1 0 0 Final Map 1 0 6 10 11 General Plan Amendment / Update 0 0 0 1 1 Height Limit Exception 0 0 0 0 0 Lot Line Adjustment 0 0 1 0 0 Precise Development Plan 0 0 2 2 2 Parking Plan 0 0 2 1 3 Vesting Tentative Parcel Map 0 0 0 0 0 Text Amendment 0 1 4 9 11 Transit 0 0 0 0 0 Variance 0 0 0 0 0 Zone Change 0 0 0 2 2 Miscellaneous 9 7 72 61 68 Total Reports Prepared 11 10 99 103 119 NOTE: A staff report may be written for one or more of the items listed above, but it will be listed and counted only once. Respectfully submitted, Frances Estrada Building and Planning Technician CONCUR: Ken Robertson, Director Community Development Department f:\b95\cd\activity 258