Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_Minutes_69.10.20NIINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMIISSION, HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, HERMOSA BEACH, ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1969, AT 8t00 P.M. N=TING CALLED TO ORDER AT 8:04 P.M. BY CHAIRMAN BOICE ROLL CALL - Present: Comm. Armer, Collis, Himmel$ Mulfinger, Noble, Stabler, Chairman Boice Absent: None Motion made by Comm. Noble, seconded by Comm. Armer, to approve the minutes from the special, study session of September 29, 1969, as sub- mitted; to approve the minutes from the regular meeting of October 6, 19699 as submitted. Motion carried unanimously. Motion made by Comm. Stabler, seconded by Comm. Armer, to approve Resolutions P.C. 154-7539 754 and 755. Motion carried unanimously. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Comm. Armer and Comm. Noble were nominated for the position of chair- man, nominations having been opened at previous meetings. Prior balloting produced a tie and the voting was continued until a full commission of 7 was present. Commissioners voted by ballot. Comm. Noble was elected chairman with a 4-3 vote. Motion made by Comm. Armer, seconded by Comm. Collis, to nominate Comm. Stabler for the position of vice chairman, Motion carried unan- imously. PROPOSED ORDINANCE AmEND7NG ARTICLE 14 OF N.S. 1 4 Proposed ordinance amending Article 14 of the City Zoning Ordinance N.S. 154 in order to transfer variance procedures to the Board of Zoning Adjustment. The City Planner stated that the proposed ordinance has been advertised in the September 259 1969, issue of the Hermosa Beach Review, as a public hearing. It proposed that the words "Board of Zoning Adjust- ment" will be substituted in place of the words "the Planning Commis- sion" on items having to do with variances and the words "Board of Zoning Adjustment" will be included along with the Planning Commission in those sections which refer to procedures for processing variances and conditional use permits. The one textual change which is not - 2 - merely "housekeeping" is the addition of the phrase at the bottom of Section 1400 which will read, "that no variance may be granted which would permit any listed use in a less restrictive zone." Mr. Crawford stated that this is and has been the intent of the Zoning Ordinance, although it is not specifically stated at present. Comm. Amer referring to Section 1400, as proposed, stated that the "its" in the phrase, "such variances from this ordinance as may be in harmony with its general purpose and intent" is quite ambiguous because the "its" might refer to the Board of Zoning Adjustment or the Zoning Code itself. Mr. Crawford stated that the City Attorney felt that the amendment should state what the Planning Commission wants to preclude, like the fact that the Board of Zoning Adjustment may not grant variances to permit commercial uses in residential or in more restrictive commercial zones. Comm. Himmel stated that the amendment seemed to set up three guide- lines: "practical difficulties, unnecessary hardships, or results inconsistent with the general purpose of the ordinance." He felt that at present practical difficulties are not grounds for granting a variance; therefore, would it be possible to reword the preamble to reflect the four conditions necessary for the granting of a variance. Mr. Crawford explained that the subject opening paragraph is not a basis for granting variances but a statement of intent for the entire variance section. He added that the Board of Zoning Adjustment could grant a variance for height restrictions, for example, but it would be a violation of the State law to allow them to grant "use variances," and that the Board would still have to make the four findings of Section 1402. Public hearing opened at 8a26 P.M. No one present in audience to be heard on the question. Public hearing closed at 8:27 P.M. Motion made by Comm. Armer, seconded by Comm. Stabler, to redraft the ordinance in order to clarify the ambiguity in the first paragraph under Section 1, Section 1400; and to incorporate correct phraseology with respect to restrictions of the Board of Zoning Adjustment in not granting use variances. Comm. Himmel stated that he would like to see the phrase, "no variance will be granted that would permit any listed use in a less restricted zone and provided that no variance will be granted unless the required showings of Section 1402 are met" be added to the amendment. Comm. Noble stated that the Planning Commission might be restricting the Board of Zoning Adjustment and the citizens unduly through Comm. -3- Himmel's wording and that the Commission should study all factors at this time rather than just a mandatory restriction wording. Conan. Mulfinger stated that the Planning Commission should give the Board of Zoning Adjustment more responsibility not less, otherwise it is a waste of their time and effort. The City Planner stated that the paragraph, 1400, was intended as a statement of intent and that the Commission at present was really seeking to attack the mechanics of the Ordinance, which are found in Sections 1401 through 1408 and such considerations should be with- held until a later date. AYES: Comm. Armer, Collis, Himmel, Mulfinger, Stabler NOES: None ABSTAIN: Comm. Noble, Chairman Boice Comm. Himmel stated that he voted yes conditionally because of his understanding that the four required showings will have to be made by the Board of Zoning Adjustment, even if the recor=ended wording is adopted. Comm. Noble stated that he abstained until the draft is received back from the City Attorney in finished form. REVIEW - ZONE VARIANCE WALLACE & PEELER Resolution P.C. 154-680, granted to permit use of open parking space for construction of a chemical storage tank at 601 1st Place. The City Planner stated that the variance was granted by the Planning Commission, subject to a review in one year. The variance was granted for the storage of a chemical tank of liquid plastic in an off-street parking place. The Planning Commission granted it subject to a solid fence being erected or the existing fence being made opaque in an attractive manner in order to camouflage the tank; fence has been maintained in an opaque condition by inserting plastic strips into chain link. Mr. Crawford explained that the Planning Commission could now approve the variance on a permanent basis, approve the request for another period of time or cancel for a good cause. He further added that complaints have not been received regarding the tank. Samuel Wallace, 603 1st Place, Hermosa Beach, stated that the tank holds a plasticizer, which is a liquid that goes into the making of plastic. The liquid is non-flammable, which will burn but will not support itself. He further added that the fence is 6 feet and it is built right to the property line and it is invisible from the pro- posed development site on the ConRock property. Motion made by Comm. Noble, seconded by Comm. Collis, to extend the - 4- variance for another year if the applicant maintains proper camou- flage, subject to the same conditions. Comm. Stabler btated that he would like to see something done to better camouflage the tank, something more opaque, like wood. Mr. Crawford replied that a wood fence was not allowed in the manufacturing zone and the only alternate would be landscaping. AYES: Comm. Armer, Collis, Himmel, Mulfinger, Noble, Chairman Boice NOES: Comm. Stabler CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - PIZZA PALACE Resolution P.C. 154-?31, granted to allow the sale of beer in conjunction with a pizza restaurant at 1110 Pacific Coast Highway. Communication was received from Mr. Kerhart of the Pizza Palace, re- questing withdrawal of the request for a conditional use permit due to the fact that the lessor is rouble to fulfill his obligations. Motion made by Comm. Stabler, seconded by Comm. Noble, to cancel Res- olution P.C. 154-731 on the basis of Mr. Kerhart's correspondence to the Planning Commission. AYES: Comm. Armer, Collis, Himmel, Mulfinger, Noble, Stabler, Chair- man Boice NOES: None NON -CONFORMING BUILDING Date of abatement for non -conforming building set at October 209 19699 for 412 Hermosa Avenue (Resolution P.C. 154-684). The City Planner stated•;'that the building owner has been notified that the building is to be demolished by October 21, 1969, and also he was to inform the City as to his demolition plans. Mr. Crawford further stated that technically the owner's time has not expired. Motion made by Comm. Stabler, seconded by Comm. Noble, to continue the abatement of a non -conforming building to the next regular meeting, November 3, 1969. AYES: Comm. Amer, Collis, Himmel, Mulfinger, Noble, Stabler, Chair- man Boice NOES: None SPk;CIAL STWDY SESSION - OCTOBER 0,D62 Mr. Crawford stated that the City received a bill from Frank Gehry -5- for $150.00 for three hours of consultation. Although a motion was passed at the October 6, 1969, meeting not to exceed more than $100.00 for two hours of consultation, the City will honor Mr. Gehry's bill. The City Planner said that if the Planning Commission wished to con- tinue seeking advice and comments of outside experts, they could hire Dale Levander and John► Mahon of Development Research Associates to conduct seminars on any phase of planning the Commissioners wished to discuss. Development Research Associates have been doing economic surveys in the South Bay cities for several years. He further stated that the consultants had agreed to comment on specific problem areas like the south Pacific Coast highway section, and to give the Planning Commission a perspective as to what is going on in our region. The consultants could also give advice on the possibility of use of the State redevelopment program, the utilization of a parking district and the use of County funds. Both Comm. Collis and Comm. Amer stated that many good ideas were received from the session with Frank Gehry and that the Planning Com- mission needs consultation with private industry and analysts. Chairman Boice stated that he felt the evening with Mr. Gehry was unproductive because only three members of the Commission were there and the discussion lacked direction; therefore, general rather than concrete ideas were discussed. Motion made by Chairman Boice, seconded by Comm. Armer, to remunerate $150,00 to Frank Gehry for three hours of consultation rendered to the Planning Commission, October 13, 1969, Although the Commission orig- inally requested the consultation not to exceed $100.00 for two hours. The Commissioners felt the meeting merited full payment. AYES: Comm. Amer, Collis, Himmel, Mulfinger, Noble, Stabler, Chair- man Boice NOES: None REVIEW OF 1066 lot STREET - ZERO SIDE YARD RE UEST Ted Cysewski, 522 No. Paulina, Redondo Beach, presented his plot plans and elevations before the Planning Commission. The structures will be two separate buildings with separate foundations; the only physical contact between buildings will be the facade, roof, etc. Each build- ing will have 1,360 square feet. A common zero foot side yard is included in the plans, subject to the Commission's approval. Mr. Cysewski stated that each building will sell for approximately $32,000. The City Planner stated that Resolution P.C. 154-7171, adopted by the Planning Commission, allowed zero side yards, subject to approval by the Commission of the plot plan and elevations of the proposed structures. Photographs of the existing buildings and adjoining buildings were - 6- presented and discussed. Motion made by Comm. Noble, seconded by Comm. Mulfinger, to approve the plot plans and elevations. After further discussion of the proposed front yard set back, Comm. Mulfinger stated that he would like to familiarize himself with the property in question. Motion to approve was withdrawn. Motion made by Comm. Noble, seconded by Comm. Armer, to continue the review until the next regular meeting, November 3, 1969. AYES: Comm. Armer, Collis, Himmel, Mulfinger, Noble, Stabler, Chair- man Boice NOES: None R-3 ZONE REVISION Mr. Crawford read the opening paragraphs of the proposed R-3 zone in- dicating that the various proposals had been under study by the Planning Commission for several months, and were now being presented in collected form to the Commission. The Commissioners discussed Section 600: Permitted Uses. Comm. Collis stated that he felt churches, educational institutions and day nurseries did not belong in the R-3 multiple family residence zone, even as conditional uses. Comm. Stabler stated that he could see no difficulty with those uses in the R-3 zone since each of them would require a conditional use permit, which allows the Planning Commission some control over the development. The City Planner explained the proposed "planned development" uses to be allowed in the R-3 zone, and noted that if the -newly proposed "P.D." zone were to be adopted, the mechanics of allowing these uses would be greatly simplified. Mr. Crawford also stated that the staff was working on the development of a Precise Plan for the 1400-1500 block of Hermosa Avenue blocks with the Planning Commission and the developer. The Commission discussed the need for intensive study to refresh their thoughts on the proposed revisions. Comm. Noble felt that Comm. Mulfinger should be given some time to read and study the R-3 zone report, since this was his first meeting as a Commissioner. The Planning Commission asked Mr. Crawford to place this item on the agenda for the next regular meeting, November 3, 1969. -7- REPORT OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDING RECORD ORDINANCE The City Plattner stated that Manhattan Beach was in the process of adopting a "Report of Residential Building Record" ordinance and that the City staff was working on an ordinance for use by Hermosa Beach. The "Report of Residential Building Record" would be a report furnished by the City upon the required request of the seller. He added that the Southwest Planning Council was sponsoring a model ordinance, which the City's was based upon. Comm. Noble explained that the "Report of Residential Building Record" would assure the buyer of knowledge of the permitted usage, occupancy and zoning classification of real property prior to sale or exchange. He stated that a further intent is to protect the buyer of residential property against undisclosed restrictions on the use of property. Comm. Noble also stated that he favored the ordinance because it would eventually bring all properties in the City up to Code. "P.D." PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE The City Planner stated that the Planning Commission was working on the Precise Plans for the 1400-1500 block of Hermosa Avenue and the 1800-2100 blocks of the Strand. He commented that there was a strong possibility of using this zone for the 14h to 16'ul Streets block of Hermosa Avenue. He added that maximum flexibility and property owner protection would result since the ordinance provided that the development standards for each PD zone would be adopted at the time each zone change was granted. Chairman Boice asked if Mr. Howard's architect had designed some plans for the two Hermosa Avenue blocks. Mr. Crawford replied that Mr. Walter's plans will be presented at the next regular meeting. Commissioners unanimously agreed to continue the Planned Development Zone Ordinance to the next regular meeting, November 3, 1969. Meeting adjourned at 10:25 P.M. Next regular meeting will be November 3, 1969. .e ./. 4-14; ROBERT BOICE CMEMAN DATE JOE B. NOBLE, SECRETARY