Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_70.08.31MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, HERMOSA BEACH, ON MONDAY, AUGUST 31, 1970, AT 7:30 P. M. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AT 7:35 p. m. by Chairman Stabler ROLL CALL: Present: Comm. Foote, Mulfinger, Stabler, Watters, and Comm. Collis arrived at 8:00 p. m. Absent: Comm. Noble, Toole Motion by Comm. Foote, seconded by Comm. Mulfinger, to approve the minutes of the August 17, 1970 meeting with a correction on Page 10, adding the word "break" as the first word on that page. Resolution P. C. 154-780 Motion by Comm. Watters, seconded by Comm. Mulfinger to approve Resolution P. C. 154-780. AYES: Comm. Foote, Mulfinger, Watters and Chairman Stabler. NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Collis, Noble and Toole. Resolution P. C. 15 4-7 81 Motion by Comm. Watters, seconded by Comm. Foote, to postpone approval until the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission on September 21, 1970. AYES: Comm. Foote, Mulfinger, Watters and Chairman Stabler. NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Collis, Noble, Toole. C-70-9 Pioneer Take -out - Request of Pioneer #30 Incorporated for a conditional use permit to conduct a take out food business on lots 28 and 29, block 13, Hermosa Beach tract known at 1201 Hermosa Avenue, City Planner Crawford noted that the Commission had received minutes of the previous hearing and reviewed past actions of a similar nature by the Planning Commission, and the discussion at the August 17 meeting by the Commissioners and members of the audience. He said that the Police Chief didn't anticipate any loitering problems due to the nature of the business if certain precautions were taken. Mr. Crawford felt that due to the design of the parking lot, there would be a tendency of patrons to violate the one way pattern on 13th Court -2- Planning Commission August 31, 1970 and exit into Hermosa Avenue. Comm. Collis arrived at 8:00 p. m. The proposals of the staff regarding signing, roofing materials, lighting, walls, landscaping and colors were acceptable to the applicants. Public hearing continued: 8:06 p. m. Mr. Hank Gordon, P. O. Box 34668, Los Angeles, reiterated his testimony of the August 17 meeting for the Commissioners who had been absent, and added that the takeout emblem sign would be an 8' x 10' sign, that they would light the parking area with an area light and a 1,000 watt quartz light with a timing device contingent on the sun, and that they would erect a 3' high slump stone wall on the Hermosa Avenue side and the alley side, and will meet all staff recommendations except continuing the mansard roof on Pier Avenue. They would add a smaller mansard instead. Mr. Roger Johnson, 3405 Strand, did not wish to object to the business, but did object to its locating in this prime Hermosa Beach shopping location. Public hearing closed at 8:22 p. m. Questions followed from Comm. Foote concerning the menu offered, and the ladder leading to the roof. Mr. Roger Schwimer, 1310 Echo Park Avenue replied that they would have chicken, shrimp, sandwiches, desserts, onion rings, french fries and cold slaw. He indicated that although the business began as a total takeout, like McDonald's, they were providing tables and seats for thirty-eight people, but no table service. He also explained that a slump stone wall will enclose the ladder and refuse containers. Comm. Stabler questioned whether the Planning Commission, if they granted approval to Pioneer Systems, would be approving of any franchisee who might take over in the future, even if it were unsatisfactory. Mr. Schwimer assured him the Company had control and could buy it back. Mr. Stabler also asked Mr. DeSimone whether he had considered the potential for a larger develop- ment and Mr. Desimone said Coldwell Banker had not carried out their pro- posal, and in the meantime he had decided to go ahead with the present offer. Comm. Foote stated that because the property in question is the major corner in Hermosa Beach, he is against this type of development. In his opinion, based on the menu and lack of service, it is definitely a takeout. -3- Planning Commission August 31, 1970 Comm. Mulfinger indicated that merchants he had talked to in the area were not enthusiastic about the proposal, but wished to see some sort of development. He added that it would probably ruin the long term plan for the area. Comm. Watters suggested that the General Plan showed tourist oriented type of development, and said his committee planned to make a study of the down- town area when they finish with Herondo Street study. He added that the pro- posed use might spoil downtown and drive away major developments. Comm. Collis stated that he agreed with Comm. Watters sentiments. City Planner Crawford agreed that he had misgivings about the proposed use of this land, since he felt that considering the high value of this location, it would be temporary. Motion by Comm. Foote, seconded by Comm. Watters, to approve the request as presented, subject to recommended conditions of the staff. AYES: Comm. Mulfinger NOES: Comm. Collis, Foote, Stabler and Watters ABSENT: Comm. Noble and Toole Motion by Comm. Foote, seconded by Comm. Collis, to adopt Resolution P. C. 154-782 denying the request as submitted for the following reasons: 1. The use as proposed is not compatible with the particular site, or the existing and potential uses of this major corner. 2. The General Plan indicates that this location should be a tourist - oriented commercial use. 3. The proposed take-out business would be better located in a neigh- borhood shopping area or on Pacific Coast Highway. 4. The limited menu indicates that the proposed business is not a family - type restaurant. 5. Based on past experiences with similar establishments, juvenile pro- blems be generated by the establishment. m ight Planning Commission August 31, 1970 AYES: Comm. Collis, Foote, Stabler and Comm. Watters NOES: Comm. Mulfinger ABSENT: Comm. Toole and Noble C-70-10 Request of Melvin Hochman aba H.M.S. Bounty for a conditional use permit to provide entertainment and dancing on lots 4 and 5, block 109, 1st Addition to Hermosa Beach Tract, known as 2626 Hermosa Avenue. City Planner Crawford reviewed the required considerations, and explained that this was a request for entertainment and dancing in an existing non -con- forming restaurant and cocktail lounge at 2626 Hermosa Avenue. The building had become non -conforming when the commercial zone was separated into C-1, C-2 and C-3, and it was placed in a C-1 zone. Although beer and wine is allowed in this zone, hard liquor is not permitted, and the request would create an intensification of the non -conforming use. He further stated that a petition from fifty-eight property owners had been received opposed to the request and a letter from Iris McKinley, also in opposition. The police report recommended denial, but if the request is granted, it suggested an increase in sound proofing, no outside speakers, doors closed except to let people in and out. Mr. Crawford recommended denial on the basis that the request would be an imposition on existing residents in the immediate vicinity, it would cause congregation of large numbers of people in a youth -oriented area, and it is not compatible with existing and potential uses in the general area. Public hearing opened: 9:08 p. m. Mr. Melvin Hochman, 2955 Imperial Boulevard, Inglewood, applicant, explained that he did not intend to have a night club, but just moderate entertainment with three instruments and soft dancing. He said the prior.., tenant did have an entertainment permit. Those who spoke in opposition on the basis of noise and general disturbance and lack of parking were Wilma Vogue, 2626 Palm Drive, Emily Dolan, 2618 Manhattan Avenue, Sherwin Phinney, 3411 Hermosa Avenue, Donna La Valle, 2634 Strand, Roger Johnson, 3405 Strand, Mr. John, 2643 Palm Drive, Margo Ashmore, 2634 Strand, Raymond Dexter, 2654 Hermosa Avenue. MIN Planning Commission August 31, 1970 Public hearing closed at 9:26 p. m. Comm. Watters questioned Mr. Hochman on the entertainment he has had recently, and Mr. Hochman explained that he had been auditioning an organist for about three weeks. Further questioning concerned the adjacent parking lot, number of patrons expected, possible air conditioning and the lease. Motion by Comm. Collis, seconded by Comm. Watters to approve the request for dancing and music. AYES: None NOES: Comm. Collis, Foote, ABSTAIN: Comm. Mulfinger ABSENT: Comm. Toole, Noble Watters and Chairman Stabler Motion by Comm. Watters, seconded by Comm. Collis, to adopt Resolution P. C. 154-783 denying the request for a Conditional Use Permit for music and dancing at 2626 Hermosa Avenue for the following reasons. 1. There exists insufficient off-street parking to support this type of use. 2. The proposal would create an imposition to other residents in the area because of noise and amplified instruments. 3. Current establishment is a non -conforming use and the granting of this permit would further increase the non-conformance. 4. Music and dancing would tend to create a "night club" of the restaurant, which is not permitted in a C -1 zone. 5. Based upon experience with similar establishments in the city, there would be large crowds and noise. 6. The Commission has received strong opposition from residents complain- ing about noise. 7. The proposed use is incompatible with the potential use in the area. AYES: Comm. Collis, Foote, Watters and Chairman Stabler NOES: None ABSTAIN: Comm. Mulfinger ABSENT: Comm. Noble, Toole Q:m Planning Commission August 31, 1970 C-70-11 Hermosa Entertainment Cor oration Request of Hermosa Entertainment Corporation (Schlumpfelders), for a conditional use permit to provide entertainment and dancing on lot 6, block 12, Hermosa Beach Tract, known as 22 Pier Avenue. City Planner Crawford reviewed the considerations the Commission must take into account in deciding to approve or disapprove the application for entertain- ment and dancing at 22 Pier Avenue. He recommended approval subject to conditions. He said they would have folk rock music and dancing was not the primary purpose for the request. Advertising of entertainment and dancing was not included in the request and would have to be approved by the Commis- sion at a later time, if such were desired. Public hearing opened: 9:55 p. m. Mr. Jack Martinez, 236 Strand, said that about fourteen months ago the Hermosa Entertainment Corporation embarked on a proposal to upgrade exist- ing businesses, and took over Pier 52. They have been very successful, appealing to a higher type of crowd ranging from five hundred to one thousand people from out of town. They now wished to do the same thing with the Hermosa Inn, and develop a business which is complementary to Pier 52. It will be called Schlumpfelders and will have two small bars with a mezza- nine area over the bars. They will also have turtle races. In answer to questions from Comm. Watters, he explained that his lease is for the first floor only, that Mr. Ed Cocy owns the hotel. Public hearing closed: 10:;5 p. m. Comms . Stabler and Foote commented on the environmental improvements in the downtown area and the contribution made by Dr. Martinez to the area. David Letchworth, one of the applicants, assured the Commission that they were working with the Building Department to make the building safe. Motion by Comm. Collis, seconded by Comm. Watters to approve the Condi- tional Use Permit subject to conditions. AYES: Comm. Collis, Foote, Mulfinger, Watters and Chairman Stabler. NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Noble and Toole -7- Planning Commission August 31, 1970 Motion by Comm. Collis, seconded by Comm. Mulfinger, to approve Resolu- tion P. C. 154-784 allowing live entertainment at 22 Pier Avenue, subject to the following conditions: 1. Hours of entertainment and dancing not to exceed 4:00 p. m. to 2:00 a. m. seven days a week. 2. Final floor plan and elevations, color and signs to be approved by Improve- ment Commission. 3. Steps to control sound to be taken as recommended by the Building Depart- ment with all sound to be confined to the premises. 4. The permit to be reviewed in one year by the Planning Commission. 5. If the liquor license changes ownership, the Planning Commission will again review the permit. 6. Exterior signs advertising music and dancing are not approved at this time. AYES: Collis, Foote, Mulfinger, Watters, and Chairman Stabler NOES: None ABSENT: Noble and Toole C-70-12 Poop Deck Incorporated Request of Poop Deck, Inc. for a conditional use permit to establish a beer bar with rear patio service on lots 5 and 6, block 14, Hermosa Beach Tract, known as 1332 Strand. City Planner Crawford explained that the applicants planned to move the existing business to a new location at 1332 Strand, and because of this, it must be considered as though it were a new beer bar. He said that the Planning Commission had denied a request to locate a beer bar on the same premises on December 15, 1969 which denial was upheld by the City Council and the Alcoholic Beverage Control Department. The Biltmore site is just north of the premises and is planned for high density residential use. He said his recommendation, since no substantial change had occurred in the condition of the area since the last denial, would be to deny on essentially the same basis. The police report had cited that police actions had been required in the area, and the use would extend additional policing problems into this area. They recommended denial. Planning Commission August 31, 1970 Public hearing opened: 10:45 p. m. Mr. Sam C. Polk, attorney representing the owner, Mr. Joseph Conley, said that he had the approval of all three residents across the alley, Jerry Freece, Donald Miles and David Reece, and also the South Bay Publishing Company, 38 - 14th Street. He said that they had been unable to make a sound test, but that a previous test had been made. He indicated special accoustical material had been used in the walls. He wished to point out that this application differs from the previous application for a beer bar on the premises in that it is a transfer of an existing license and would cause no problem with A. B. C.; no entertainment is proposed such as the other application had asked for; Mayor Thelen's personal interest is involved as a property owner since he had raised the rent from $200 to $300 and refused to give a longer lease than a year. He said that Mr. Conley stood to lose his investment of $25,000 if the application was denied. He said the Police Chief had verbally commented that there would be no problem with the appli- cation, but the written report listed police actions, although no such police actions had been reported to A. B . C. He further commented on the staff re- port with which he did not agree since he felt that the zoning ordinance pro- vides for a variety of uses which do not interfere with each other. He indi- cated that he felt there would be no juvenile problem since the bar can't serve juveniles and older beach visitors will be encouraged to go inside. He listed several benefits to the city: attract visitors by providing what they need conveniently, sales tax will benefit the city, the appearance of the city will be helped by occupation of the building. He suggested that if the Planning Commission could not approve the request, that it be continued in order to ask the Police Department to furnish cases. Mrs. Rosemary Foreman, 68 - 14th Street, spoke in opposition to the move, commenting that the present establishment creates disturbances to the neigh- bors in the early hours, and caters to a rude type of individual. She stated that she and her teen age daughter were afraid to walk past the establishment due to past experiences where the customers insulted her and propositioned her daughter. She would like to see the existing establishment closed, would object violently to its being moved even closer to her home. Public hearing closed at 11:15 p. m. Comm. Foote asked whether the signatures approving the request were tenants or owners. The residents are tenants, the South Bay Publishing Company is an owner. He asked whether the applicants were licensed in their present loca- tion. The applicants replied affirmatively. He asked if they could move to Planning Commission August 31, 1970 some other location than that requested, the answer was yes. He asked why they felt they had to have the subject location, they replied that their customers liked the beach. He asked if their present location was satisfac- tory to their customers, and was answered yes. Comm. Collis indicated that he felt comments regarding ownership of property were not proper. He stated that his concern was with proper planning and the location in question. He could find no change in conditions since previous denial, the applicant's past record was not good, and he could see no benefit to the city or the area in allowing a beer bar at this location. Comm. Stabler requested that the police report made at the time of the previous (Bliss and Lee) consideration be read. Comm. Watters indicated that he was not opposed to the location of a beer bar at this site. He said that he was opposed to locating the Poop Deck here. He recited two incidents he had personally observed take place in the Poop Deck with no apparent attempt by the present management to halt or prevent: one where a male customer disrobed a woman customer to her waist; another where a man and woman entered a restroom together and remained half an hour. He felt the use would be highly detrimental to the area. Motion by Comm. Watters, seconded by Comm. Mulfinger, to approve con- tinuation of the public hearing for consultation with City Attorney and more detailed police report. AYES: Comm. Mulfinger and Watters NOES: Comm. Collis, Foote and Stabler ABSENT: Comm. Noble and Toole Motion by Comm. Collis, seconded by Comm. Foote that the application be approved. AYES: None NOES: Comm. Collis, Foote, Mulfinger, Watters and Chairman Stabler. ABSENT: Comm. Noble, Toole Watters justified his vote by saying that he was not against the establishment of a beer bar in this location, but against the establishment itself because of their previous record. -10- Planning Commission August 31, 1970 Motion by Comm. Collis, seconded by Comm. Mulfinger, to adopt Resolu- tion P. C. 154-785 denying the request of the applicant to transfer a beer license to a location at 1332 Strand for the following reasons. 1. A similar request was denied on December 15, 1969, and conditions in the area have not materially changed since that time. 2. The police report submitted to this Commission indicated the use was undesirable at this location and recommended that the application be denied. 3. The proposed use would be detrimental to the public; would tend to interfere with quiet enjoyment of a public bathing beach. 4. Based on past experience in the area, the proposed use would create a police problem which does not now exist. 5. The proposed use would be an imposition on existing residents in the immediate vicinity. 6. The proposed use would cause congregation of large numbers of people in a youth -oriented area. AYES: Comm. Collis, Foote, Mulfinger, Watters and Chairman Stabler. NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Noble and Toole Contessa Ceramics Revocation of conditional use permit Resolution P. C. 154-693 granted to Contessa Ceramics, located at 601 Pacific Coast Highway. Public hearing opened at 11:38 p. m. Mrs. Rosemary Foreman, 68 - 14th Street, explained that she was chairman of a committee for the Pacific Coast Highway improvement, and her observa- tion of the premises was inactive and that it should be screened as it was not an attractive business. Public hearing closed: 11:40 p. m. -11- Planning Commission August 31, 1970 Motion by Comm. Foote, seconded by Comm. Collis, to revoke the Condi- tional Use Permit for Contessa Ceramics, 601 Pacific Coast Highway. AYES: Comm. Collis, Foote, Mulfinger, Watters and Stabler. NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Noble, Toole Motion by Comm. Foote, seconded by Comm. Mulfinger, to adopt Resolu- tion P. C. 154-786 revoking the Conditional Use Permit for Contessa Ceramics, 601 Pacific Coast Highway for the following reasons: 1. That on several occasions beginning on December 2, 1968 the operators of Contessa Ceramics have been called before both the City Council and the Planning Commission in the matter regarding the condition of the property on which they have been doing business and have each time agreed to perform the conditions imposed by Resolution P. C. 154-693; 2. That the business has been exercised contrary to the conditions or terms of the permit as granted. 3. That the apparent inability of the permittee to maintain the business open and meet the conditions warrants that at this time we revoke the perm it. AYES: Comm. Collis, Foote, Mulfinger, Watters and Stabler. NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Noble, Toole Dee's Health Bar, 1227 Hermosa Avenue The City Planner reported that Dee's Health Bar has requested a four-color panel above the windows, which the Planning Commission has to approve since the Sign Ordinance approves only one color for the wall and another for the trim. Motion by Comm. Watters, seconded by Comm. Mulfinger, to allow Dee's Health Bar to keep four-color panelling above the windows subject to the staff's recommendations. AYES: Comm. Collis, Mulfinger, Watters and Chairman Stabler. NOES: None ABSTAIN: Comm. Foote ABSENT: Comm. Noble, Toole -12- Planning Commission August 31, 1970 Amendment to City Zoning Ordinance N. S. 154, Amending Sections 1412, 1413, 1414, 1511, 1512 and 1513. Recommendation for a change in the city Zoning Ordinance N. S. 154, rela- ting to City Council procedures. City Planner Crawford explained that the ordinance was drawn up by the City Attorney to simplify the Council procedures relieving them of notification to the applicants by resolution of public hearings and with the voting procedure changed so that they can overrule the Planning Commission or Board of Zoning Adjustments on a 3-1 vote. Public hearing opened: 11:55 p. m. Public hearing closed: 11:56 p. m. Motion by Comm. Mulfinger, seconded by Comm. Foote, to adopt Resolution 154-787 recommending that the proposed ordinance be adopted by the City Council as a desirable amendment to the City Zoning Ordinance. AYES: Comm. Collis, Foote, Mulfinger, Watters and Stabler. NOES: None ABSENT: Comm. Noble, Toole. Amendment to City Zoning Ordinance, Article #6, relating to uses and develop- ment standards in the R-3 zone was continued to September 21, 1970 regular meeting of the Planning Commission. Adjournment at 12:00 Midnight until September 21, 1970. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minute have been approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Henn sa Beach at a regular eeting held on 3 st' of August, 1970. //ry'�' nATF LAIRD STABLER VICE-CHAIRMAN i WIZ44 . COLLIS , SECRETARY