The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About01/27/87"To escape criticism, do nothing, say nothing, be nothing." -Elbert Hubbard AGENDA REGULAR MEETING HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 27, 1987 - Council Chambers, City Closed Session - 6:00 p.m. Regular Session - 7:30 p.m. MAYOR Tony DeBellis MAYOR PRO TEM John Cioffi COUNCILMEMBERS Jim Rosenberger Etta Simpson June Williams All Council meetings are open to the Complete agenda materials are the Police Department, Public Clerk. Hall CITY CLERK Kathleen Midstokke CITY TREASURER Norma•Goldbach CITY MANAGER Gregory T. Meyer CITY ATTORNEY James P. Lough public. PLEASE ATTEND. available for public inspection in Library and the Office of the City PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES: 3c 1( IPb 1, ,C51L David Sheri Bohacik - Police Officer; Hartmann - General Services Officer APPOINTMENT OF MAYOR AND MAYOR PRO TEM: A. Motion to designate a Mayor for nine month term, ending November, 1987. B. Motion to designate a Mayor Pro Tem for nine month term, ending November, 1987. C. Intergovernmental agencies requiring appointment of Mayor as delegate: 1. Southern California Rapid Transit District (by resolution) 2. Los Angeles County/City Selection Committee 3. South Bay Cities Sanitation District. ANNOUNCING CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS - LITIGATION. CITIZEN COMMENTS Citizens wishing to address the City Council on any items on the Consent Calendar or Consent Ordinances and Resolutions may do so at this time. 1 1. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following routine matters will be acted upon by one vote to approve with the majority con- sent of the City Council. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless good cause is shown by a member prior to the roll call vote. (Items removed will be considered after Municipal Matters.) (a) Approval of Minutes: Regular meeting of the City Coun- cil held on January 13, 1987. Recommended Action: To approve minutes. (b) Approval of Minutes: Special meeting of the City Coun- cil held on January 15, 1987. Recommended Action: To approve minutes. (c) Demands and Warrants: January 27, 1987. Recommended Action: To approve Demands and Warrants Nos. through inclusive. (d) Tentative Future Agenda Items. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (e) City Manager Activity Report. Memorandum from City Man- ager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 20, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. Building and Safety Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. Community Resources Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (h) Finance Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. Fire Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. General Services Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (f) (g) - 2 (k) Personnel Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (1) Planning Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. Police Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (n) Public Works Department Monthly Activity Report: Decem- ber, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (o) City Treasurer's Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (p) Monthly Revenue Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (q) Monthly Expenditure Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (r) Cancellation of Warrants. Memorandum from City Treasurer Norma Goldbach dated January 17, 1987. (m) (s) (t) Recommended Action: To approve cancellation of Warrants Nos. 021656, 021824 and 021138. Approval of specifications and authorization to call for bids for Fuel Management System for City Yard, CIP 86- 601. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony An- tich dated January 16, 1987. Recommended Action: Approve specifications and au- thorize call for bids for fuel management system. Authorization to proceed with design process of Beach Drive drainage for 6th Street storm drain project (CIP 86-302). Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 15, 1987; with neighborhood letter from Gerald A. Littman, 638 Strand, dated January 12, 1987. Recommended Action: To authorize staff to proceed with the design process; and to appropriate $6,000 from State - 3 - (u) (v) (w) (x) (y) Gas Tax to CIP 86-302 and transfer $3,000 from CIP 86- 405 to CIP 86-302 for design services. Recommendation to approve payment of customs fee on do- nated ladder truck, not to exceed $1,000; and to ap- propriate the necessary funds from Prospective Expendi- tures. Memorandum from Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski dated January 20, 1987. Recommended Action: Approve payment of custom's fee; •authorize payment inamount not to exceed $1,000 with monies to be appropriated from Prospective Expenditures fund. Request for street vacation. Memorandum from City Man- ager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 20, 1987. Recommended Action: Direct staff to meet with the petitioning parties and advise them of the process whereby they may have consideration of their request for a street vacation. Proposal to conduct Community Noise Study and Develop- ment of a Revised Noise Control Ordinance. Memorandum from Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski dated January 20, 1987. Recommended Action: To (1) proceed with noise analysis; (2) to appropriate $1,000 from Prospective Expenditures to fund analysis; and (3) consider at mid -year budget review funding of a noiew enforcement program. Report re. overall financing of the Inglewood Fire Training Facility Authority. Memorandum from City Man- ager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 19, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. Claim for Damages: 1) Kenneth Gaskampe, 4170 Inglewood Avenue, L.A., represented by Stephen A. Ebner, Esq., 723 Ocean Walk, Venice, CA 90291, filed January 14, 1987. Recommended Action: To deny claim and refer to City's Claims Adjuster. (z) Relocating the barricade and widening 14th Street east of Pacific Coast Highway and to establish additional parking and turning area. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 7, 1987. Recommended Action: To approve proposed relocation of existing barricade and widening of 14th Street. (aa) Acceptance of work as complete - 1986 Sidewalk Repair Program, CIP 85-160 and CIP 85-163. Memorandum from 4 Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 19, 1987. Recommended Action: Accept the 1986 Sidewalk Repair Program as complete and authorize staff to release the 570 retention payment to J. T. Garza, release the Labor and Materials Bond and Faithful Performance Bond from J. T. Garza for subject project. (bb) Approval of encroachment permit application at 2851 Pacific Coast Highway. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January.16, 1987., Recommended Action: Approve Encroachment Permit Ap- plication and authorize staff to prepare necessary En- croachment Permit Agreement for signature by Mayor. (cc) Request for Proposals for CIP 85-502, Asphalt area re- pair and resurfacing for park development at Prospect Avenue, Hollowell Avenue, and Gentry Street. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 13, 1987. Recommended Action: Approve request for Proposals for asphalt area repair and replacement; and authorize staff to solicit proposals for the above work. (dd) Request for approval of Mayor and Councilmember atten- dance at Torrance League of Women Voters 25th Anniver- sary Gala. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 19, 1987. Recommended Action: Policy determination on whether to attend, and appropriate funds not to exceed $250 from City Council Department, Conference Expense. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS (a) ORDINANCE NO. 86-868 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SEC- TION 2-2.4, AGENDA, OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE MODIFYING THE DEADLINE TIME FOR SUBMISSION OF AGENDA ITEMS TO THE CITY MANAGER. For waiver of further reading and adoption. (b) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP BY CHANGING THE ZONE FOR AREAS DESCRIBED BELOW AND SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBITS A AND B. For waiver of full read- ing and introduction. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 20, 1987. (c) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN FOR VARIOUS AREAS WITHIN THE CITY AS SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBITS A THROUGH E. For waiver of full reading and adoption. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 20, 1987. 5 (d) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA FIXING ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY COMPENSA- TION TO BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY CLERK. For waiver of full reading and adoption. Memorandum from City Clerk Kathleen Midstokke dated January 7, 1987. (Conti.nued. from 1/13/87 meeting.) 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC. • (a) Letter from Messrs. D. W. Gardiner, 3031 Strand, and. Jack Taylor, 3116 Strand, re. underground utilities for north end of Hermosa (35th St. to 24th St.) adjacent to the Strand. Recommended Action: To refer to staff for report back to City Council. PUBLIC HEARINGS i �-� 5. APPEALS OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, VARIANCE, PARKING PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL NEGA- TIVE DECLARATION FOR HOPE CHAPEL -FOURSQUARE CHURCH, 2420 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY. Memorandum from Planning Direc- tor Michael Schubach dated January 19, 1987. 6. AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXTENDING THE MORATORIUM ESTABLISHED IN ORDINANCE NO. 86-866 TO PROHIBIT THE SEPARATE SALE OR SEPARATION OF CONTIGUOUS LOTS WHEN A SINGLE IMPROVEMENT STRADDLES THE DIVIDING PROPERTY LINE. Memorandum from City Attorney James P. Lough dated January 20, 1987. 7. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING APPENDIX A, ARTICLE 2 (DEFI- NITIONS) AND ARTICLE 4, (R-1 ONE -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE) OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE PUR- POSE OF STRENGTHENING ILLEGAL UNIT ENFORCEMENT CAPABILI- TIES. Memorandum from Building and Safety Director Wil- liam Grove dated January 15, 1987. ***x****************************max******************************* Citizens wishing to address the City Council on any of the remaining items on the agenda may request to do so at the time the item is called. MUNICIPAL MATTERS 8. REPORT ON SURVEY RE: CHANGING SEVEN (7) SILVER POSTED METERS TO YELLOW POSTED METERS IN THE 2600 BLOCK OF HER- MOSA AVENUE. Memorandum from General Services Director Joan Noon dated January 6, 1987. (Continued from 1/13/ 87 meeting.) - 6 - 9. REPORT ON ADVISABILITY OF RE-CREATING BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS. Memorandum from Building and Safety Direc- tor William Grove dated January 16, 1987. 10. HERMOSA BEACH PAVILION - TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Memoran- dum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 19, 1987. 11. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER (a) Status report re. Assembly Bill 2926. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 8; 1987 with resolution. (Continued from 1/13/87 meeting.) (b) Proceeding with sale of city -owned lands to HMS Hermosa Partnership re. hotel proposal. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 8, 1987. (Con- tinued from 1/13/87 meeting.) ;,.1 °615) (c) 1985-86 Outside Audit Report. Memorandum from City Man- ager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 20, 1987. 12. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL (a) Oral status report from Strand Bicycle Safety Committee (Councilmember Williams). (Continued from 1/13/87 meeting.) (b) Oral status report from Business Relations Subcommittee (Councilmember Rosenberger). (Continued from 1/13/87 meeting.) (c) Discussion re. Beach Cities Symphony funding (Mayor De- Bellis). Continued from 1/13/87 meeting.) 13. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL 14. MEETING OF THE HERMOSA BEACH PARKING AUTHORITY. (Con- tinued from 1/13/87 meeting.) (a) CONSENT CALENDAR (b) 1) Minutes of the December 17, 1986 meeting. 2) Status report re. Hermosa Pavilion Public Parking Structure. Memorandum from General Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 8, 1987. Report from Economic Research Associates re. the economic feagibIlity-of building a parking structure in the vicinity of the Community Center with recommendation to accept report and proceed with EIR and design consid- erations. Memorandum from Parking Administrator Joan Noon dated December 26, 1986. (c) Other matters. 7 (b) MEETING OF THE HERMOSA BEACH VEHICLE PARKING DISTRICT COMMISSION. Continue rom 1 meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR 1) Approval of minutes of the October 14, 1986 meeting. Proposal from Ridgemont Parking Systems, Texas, to oper- ate parking lots A, B and C and to construct at their -expense and operate a 450 unit parking structure on Lot C. Memorandum from Parking Administrator 'Joan Noon dat- ed December 26, 1986. (c) Other matters. APPEARANCE OF INTERESTED CITIZENS Citizens wishing to address the City Council on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Council not elsewhere considered on the agenda may do so at this time. Citizens with complaints regard- ing City management or departmental operations are requested to submit those complaints in writing to the City Manager. ADJOURNMENT 8 7`M c?4)1-J-4 ( 4/4 J c_ uwk (1,=Jc 1, 3 o-vZ, -eqc dm,4. /‘74 4t0c K ? C N -j ``kft 1261`)T cc (iv '1% GooLo Av(awovj Where there is no vision the people perish... HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA WELCOME! By your presence in the City Council Chambers you are participating in the process of representative government. Your government welcomes your interest and hopes you will attend the City Council meetings often CITY VISION A less dense, more fami-1_y oriented pleasant low profile, financially sound community comprised of a separate and distinct business district and residential neighborhoods that are afforded full municipal services in which the maximum costs are borne by visitor/users; led by a City Council which accepts a stewardship role for community resources and displays a willingness to explore innovative alternatives, and moves toward public policy leadership in attitudes of full ethical awareness. This Council is dedicated to learning from the past, and preparing Hermosa Beach for tomorrow's challenges today. Adopted by City Council on October 23, 1986 NOTE: There is no smoking allowed in the Council Chambers THE HERMOSA BEACH FORM OF GOVERNMENT Hermosa Beach bas the Council -Manager form of government, with a City Manager ap- 1 pointed by and responsible to the City Council for carrying out Council policy. The Mayor and Council decide what is to be done. The City Manager, operating through the entire City staff, does it. This separation of policy making and administration is considsered the most economical and efficient form of City government in the United States today. GLOSSARY The following explanations may help you to understand the terms found on most agen- das for meetings of the Hermosa Beach City Council. Consent Items A compilation of all routine matters to be acted upon by one vote; approval re- quires a majority affirmative vote. Any Councilmember can remove an item from this listing thereby causing that matter to be considered under the category Consent Cal- endar items Removed For Separate Discussion. Public Hearings Public Hearings are held on certain matters as required by law. The Hearings afford the public the opportunity to appear and formally express their views regarding the matter being heard. Additionally, letters may be filed with the City Clerk, prior to the Hearing. Hearings Hearings are held on other matters of public importance for which there is no legal - requirement to conduct an advertised Public Hearing. Ordinances An ordinance is a law that regulates government revenues and/or public conduct. All ordinances require two "readings". The first reading introduces the ordinance into the records. At least one week later Council may adopt, reject or hold over the ordinance to a subsequent meeting. Regular ordinances take effect 30 days after the second reading. Emergency ordinances are governed by different provisions and waive the time requirements. Written Communications The public, members of advisory boards/commissions or organizations may formally communicate to or make a request of Council by letter; said letters should be filed with the City Clerk by the Wednesday preceeding the Regular City Council meeting. Miscellaneous Items and Reports - City Manager The City Manager coordinates departmental reports and brings items to the attention of, or for action by the City Council. Verbal reports may be given by the City Manager regarding items not on the agenda, usually having arisen since the agenda was prepared on the preceding Wednesday. Miscellaneous Items and Reports - City Council Members of the City Council may place items on the agenda for consideration by the full Council. Other Matters - City Council These are matters that come to the attention of a Council member after publication of the Agenda. Oral Communications from the Public - Matters of an Urgency Nature Citizens wishing to address the City Council on an urgency matter not elsewhere con- sidered on the agenda may do so at this time. Parking Authority The Parking Authority is a financially separate entity, but is operated as an inte- gral part of the City government. Vehicle Parking District No. 1 The City Council also serves as the Vehicle Parking District Commission. It's pur- pose is to oversee the operation of certain downtown parking lots and otherwise pro- mote public parking in the central business district. "To escape criticism, do nothing, say nothing, be nothing." -Elbert Hubbard AGENDA REGULAR MEETING HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, January 27, 1987 - Council Chambers, City Hall Closed Session - 6:00 p.m. Regular Session - 7:30 p.m. MAYOR Tony DeBellis MAYOR PRO TEM John Cioffi COUNCILMEMBERS Jim Rosenberger Etta Simpson June Williams CITY CLERK• Kathleen Midstokke CITY TREASURER Norma•Goldbach CITY MANAGER Gregory T. Meyer CITY ATTORNEY James P. Lough All Council meetings are open to the public. PLEASE ATTEND. Complete agenda materials are available for public inspection in the Police Department, Public Library and the Office of the City Clerk. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANC ROLL CALL: aA INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES: David Bohacik - Police Officer; .1e 1 , e Sheri Hartmann - General Services . _ )S0 f Loektrikm ' choJ o_fkco �' $+4B cie4 cc qg,,i, APPOINTMENT OF MAYOR AND MAYOR PRO TEM: A)44.1 A. B. C. AQ. Motion to designate a Mayor forine month term, i$ ending November, 1987.TT/jR Std Motion to designate a Mayor Pro Tem for nine,R month term, ending November, 1987. Intergovernmental agencies requiring appointment of Mayor as delegate: 1. Southern California Rapid Transit resolution) 2. Los Angeles County/City Selection Committee 3. South Bay Cities Sanitation District. District (by OUNCING CLOSED CITIZEN COMMENTS SESSION ACTIONS - LITIGATION. Citizens wishing to address the City Council on any items on the Consent Calendar or Consent Ordinances and Resolutions may do so at this time. •71,(t 1. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following routine matters will be acted upon by one vote to approve with the majority con- � ,sent of the City Council. There will be no separate W&.)f'� discussion of these items unless good cause is shown by C> a member prior to the roll call vote. (Items removed will be considered after Municipal Matters.) (a) Approval of Minutes: Regular meeting of the City Coun- cil held on January 13, 1987. Recommended Action: To approve minutes. (b) Approval of Minutes: Special meeting of the City Coun- cil held on January 15, 1987. Recommended Action: To approve minutes. (c) Demands and Warrants: January 27, 1987. Recommended Action: To approve Demands and Warrants Nos. through inclusive. (d) Tentative Future Agenda Items. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (e) City Manager Activity Report. Memorandum from City Man- ager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 20, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (f) Building and Safety Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (g) Community Resources Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (h) Finance Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. Fire Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. General Services Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. - 2 (k) Personnel Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (1) Planning Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (m) Police Department Monthly Activity Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file.' (n) Public Works Department Monthly Activity Report: Decem- ber, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (o) City Treasurer's Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (p) Monthly Revenue Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (q) Monthly Expenditure Report: December, 1986. Recommended Action: To receive and file. (r) Cancellation of Warrants. Memorandum from City Treasurer Norma Goldbach dated January 17, 1987. Recommended Action: To approve cancellation of Warrants Nos. 021656, 021824 and 021138. (s) Approval of specifications and authorization to call for bids for Fuel Management System for City Yard, CIP 86- 601. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony An- tich dated January 16, 1987. (t) Recommended Action: Approve specifications and au- thorize call for bids for fuel management system. Authorization to proceed with design process of Beach Drive drainage for 6th Street storm drain project (CIP 86-302). Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 15, 1987; with neighborhood letter from Gerald A. Littman, 638 Strand, dated January 12, 1987. Recommended Action: To authorize staff to proceed with the design process; and to appropriate $6,000 from State 3 (u) (v) (w) (x) (y) (z) 11)13 it c. Yikutv2N (aa) Gas Tax to CIP 86-302 and transfer $3,000 from CIP 86- 405 to CIP 86-302 for design services. Recommendation to approve payment of customs fee on do- nated ladder truck, not to exceed $1,000; and to ap- propriate the necessary funds from Prospective Expendi- tures. Memorandum from Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski dated January 20, 1987. Recommended Action: Approve payment of custom's fee; authorize payment in amount not to exceed $1,000 with monies to be appropriated from Prospective Expenditures fund. Request for street vacation. Memorandum from City Man- ager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 20, 1987. Recommended Action: Direct staff to meet with the petitioning parties and advise them of the process whereby they may have consideration of their request for a street vacation. Proposal to conduct Community Noise Study and Develop- ment of a Revised Noise Control Ordinance. Memorandum from Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski dated January 20, 1987. Recommended Action: To (1) proceed with noise analysis; (2) to appropriate $1,000 from Prospective Expenditures to fund analysis; and (3) consider at mid -year budget review funding of a noiew enforcement program. Report re. overall financing of the Inglewood Fire Training Facility Authority.- Memorandum from City Man- ager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 19, 1987. Recommended Action: To receive and file. Claim for Damages: 1) Kenneth Gaskampe, 4170 Inglewood Avenue, L.A., represented by Stephen A. Ebner, Esq., 723 Ocean Walk, Venice, CA 90291, filed January 14, 1987. Recommended Action: To deny claim and refer to City's Claims Adjuster. Relocating the barricade and widening 14th Street east of Pacific Coast Highway and to establish additional parking and turning area. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 7, 1987. Recommended Action: To approve proposed relocation of existing barricade and widening of 14th Street. Acceptance of work as complete - 1986 Sidewalk Repair Program, CIP 85-160 and CIP 85-163. Memorandum from 4 Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 19, 1987. Recommended Action: Accept the 1986 Sidewalk Repair Program as complete and authorize staff to release. the 5% retention payment to J. T. Garza, release the Labor and Materials Bond and Faithful Performance Bond from J. T. Garza for subject project. (bb) Approval of encroachment permit application at 2851 Pacific Coast Highway. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 16, 1987..x. Recommended Action: Approve Encroachment Permit Ap- plication and authorize staff to prepare necessary En- croachment Permit Agreement for signature by Mayor.. (cc) Request for Proposals for CIP 85-502, Asphalt area re- pair and resurfacing for park development at Prospect Avenue, Hollowell Avenue, and Gentry Street. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 13, 1987. Recommended Action: Approve request for Proposals for asphalt area repair and replacement; and authorize staff to solicit proposals for the above work. Request for approval of Mayor and Councilmember atten- dance at Torrance League of Women Voters 25th Anniver- sary Gala. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 19, 1987. Recommended Action: Policy determination on whether to attend, and appropriate funds not to exceed $250 from City Council Department, Conference Expense. 2. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS (a) ORDINANCE NO. 86-868 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SEC- TION 2-2.4, AGENDA, OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE MODIFYING THE DEADLINE TIME FOR SUBMISSION OF AGENDA ITEMS TO THE CITY MANAGER. For waiver of further reading and adoption. (b) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP BY CHANGING THE ZONE FOR AREAS DESCRIBED BELOW AND SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBITS A AND B. For waiver of full read- ing and introduction. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 20, 1987. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN FOR VARIOUS AREAS WITHIN THE CITY AS SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED EXHIBITS A THROUGH E. For waiver of full reading and adoption. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 20, 1987. 5 (d)A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA FIXING ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY COMPENSA- TION TO BE RECEIVED BY THE CITY CLERK. For waiver of full reading and adoption. Memorandum from City Clerk. Kathleen Midstokke dated January 7, 1987. (Conti.nued.... from 1/13/87 meeting.) 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE. DISCUSSION. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC. (a) Letter from Messrs. D. W. Gardiner, 3031 Strand, and. Jack Taylor, 3116 Strand, re. underground' utilities for north end of Hermosa (35th St. to 24th St.) adjacent to the Strand. Recommended Action: To refer to staff for report back to City Council. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. APPEALS OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, VARIANCE, PARKING PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL NEGA- TIVE DECLARATION FOR HOPE CHAPEL -FOURSQUARE CHURCH, 2420 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY. Memorandum from Planning Direc- tor Michael Schubach dated January 19, 1987. AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXTENDING THE MORATORIUM ESTABLISHED IN ORDINANCE NO. 86-866 TO PROHIBIT THE SEPARATE SALE OR SEPARATION OF CONTIGUOUS LOTS WHEN A SINGLE IMPROVEMENT STRADDLES THE DIVIDING PROPERTY LINE. Memorandum from City Attorney James P. Lough dated January 20, 1987. 7. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING APPENDIX A, ARTICLE 2 (DEFI- NITIONS) AND ARTICLE 4, (R-1 ONE -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE) OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE PUR- POSE OF STRENGTHENING ILLEGAL UNIT ENFORCEMENT CAPABILI- TIES. Memorandum from Building and Safety Director Wil- liam Grove dated January 15, 1987. ********************x*************************************x****** Citizens wishing to address the City Council on any of the remaining items on the agenda may request to do so at the time the item is called. ***************************************************************** MUNICIPAL MATTERS 8. REPORT ON SURVEY RE: CHANGING SEVEN (7) SILVER POSTED METERS TO YELLOW POSTED METERS IN THE 2600 BLOCK OF HER- MOSA AVENUE. Memorandum from General Services Director Joan Noon dated January 6, 1987. (Continued from 1/13/ 87 meeting.) 6 L J -60 a) ma 9. REPORT ON ADVISABILITY dF RE-CREATING BOARD OF ZONING . ADJUSTMENTS. Memora •um from Building and Safety Direc- tor William Grove d ed January 16, 1987. 10. HERMOSA BEACH P dum from Publi January 19, 11. MISCEL ILION - TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. Memoran- Works Director Anthony Antich dated 87. OUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER (a) Status report re. Assembly Bill 2926. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 8, 1987 with resolution. (Continued from 1/13/87 meeting.) (b) Proceeding with sale of city -owned lands to HMS Hermosa Partnership re. hotel proposal. Memorandum from City. Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 8, 1987. (Con- tinued from 1/13/87 meeting.) (c) 1985-86 Outside Audit Report. Memorandum from City Man- ager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 20, 1987. 12. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL (a) Oral status report from Strand Bicycle Safety Committee (Councilmember Williams). (Continued from 1/13/87 meeting.) (b) Oral status report from Business Relations Subcommittee (Councilmember Rosenberger). (Continued from 1/13/87 L$1 mee (c) Pl3/se. itaTiv Vtwo Discussion re. Beach Cities Symphony funding (Mayor De- lis). Continued from 1/13/87 meeting.) 145 (�071.�GOG�R i�:� ! S •, /Y n•�.�il. / A 14. MEETING OF THE HERMOSA BEACH PARKING AUTHORITY. (Con- tinued from 1/13/87 meeting.) (a) CONSENT CALENDAR (b) 1) Minutes of the December 17, 1986 meeting. 2) Status report re. Hermosa Pavilion Public Parking Structure. Memorandum from General Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 8, 1987. Report from Economic Research Associates re. the economic feasibility of building a parking structure in the vicinity of the Community Center with recommendation to accept report and proceed with EIR and design consid- erations. Memorandum from Parking Administrator Joan Noon dated December 26, 1986. (c) Other matters. 7 15. MEETING OF THE HERMOSA BEACH VEHICLE PARKING DISTRICT COMMISSION. (Continued from 1/13/87 meeting.) (a) CONSENT CALENDAR 1) Approval of minutes of the October 14, 1986 meeting. (b) Proposal from Ridgemont Parking Systems, Texas, to oper- ate parking lots A, B and C and to construct at their expense and operate a 450 unit parking structure on Lot C. Memorandum from Parking Administrator Joan Noon dat- ed December 26, 1986. (c) Other matters. APPEARANCE OF INTERESTED CITIZENS Citizens wishing to address the City Council on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Council not elsewhere considered on the agenda may do so at this time. Citizens with complaints regard- ing City management or departmental operations are requested to submit those complaints in writing to the City Manager. ADJOURNMENT 8 1 Where there is no vision the people perish... 6‘0 Toi5 cv°`-' Jb HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL AGENDA WELCOME! By your presence in the City Council Chambers you are participating in the process of representative government. Your government welcomes your interest and hopes you will attend the City Council meetings often CITY VISION A less dense, more family oriented pleasant low profile, financially sound community comprised of a separate and distinct business district and residential neighborhoods that are afforded full municipal services in which the maximum costs are borne by visitor/users; led by a City Council which accepts a stewardship role for community resources and displays a willingness to explore innovative alternatives, and moves toward public policy leadership in attitudes of full ethical awareness. This Council is dedicated to learning from the past, and preparing Hermosa Beach for tomorrow's challenges today. Adopted by City Council on October 23, 1986 NOTE: There is no smoking allowed in the Council Chambers THE HERMOSA BEACH FORM OF GOVERNMENT Hermosa Beach bas the Council -Manager form of government, with a City Manager ap- pointed by and responsible to the City Council for carrying out Council policy. The Mayor and Council decide what is to be done. The City Manager, operating through the entire City staff, does it. This separation of policy making and administration is considsered the most economical and efficient form of City government in the United States today. GLOSSARY The following explanations may help you to understand the terms found on most agen- das for meetings of the Hermosa Beach City Council. Consent Items A compilation of all routine matters to be acted upon by one vote; approval re- quires a majority affirmative vote. Any Councilmember can remove an item from this listing thereby causing that matter to be considered under the category Consent Cal- endar items Removed For Separate Discussion. Public Hearings Public Hearings are held on certain matters as required by law. The Hearings afford the public the opportunity to appear and formally express their views regarding the matter being heard. Additionally, letters may be filed with the City. Clerk, prior to the Hearing. Hearings Hearings are held on other matters of public importance for which there is no legal requirement to conduct an advertised Public Hearing. Ordinances An ordinance is a law that regulates government revenues and/or public conduct. All ordinances require two "readings". The first reading introduces the ordinance into the records. At least one week later Council may adopt, reject or hold over the ordinance to a subsequent meeting. Regular ordinances take effect 30 days after the second reading. Emergency ordinances are governed by different provisions and waive the time requirements. Written Communications The public, members of advisory boards/commissions or organizations may formally communicate to or make a request of Council by letter; said letters should be filed with the City Clerk by the Wednesday preceeding the Regular City Council meeting. Miscellaneous Items and Reports - City Manager The City Manager coordinates departmental reports and of, or for action by the City Council. Verbal reports may be given by the City Manager regarding items not on the agenda, usually having arisen since the agenda was prepared on the preceding Wednesday. Miscellaneous Items and Reports - City Council Members of the City Council may place items on the agenda for consideration by the full Council. Other Matters - City Council These are matters that come to the attention of a Council member after publication of the Agenda. Oral Communications from the Public - Matters of an Urgency Nature Citizens wishing to address the City Council on an urgency matter not elsewhere con- sidered on the agenda may do so at this time. Parking Authority The Parking Authority is a financially separate entity, but is operated as an inte- gral part of the City government. Vehicle Parking District No. 1 The City Council also serves as the Vehicle pose is to oversee the operation of certain mote public parking in the central business brings items to the attention Parking District Commission. It's pur- downtown parking lots and otherwise pro - district. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Tuesday, January 13, 1987 at the hour of 7:30 P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Karen Gale ROLL CALL Present: Cioffi, Rosenberger, Simpson, Williams, Mayor DeBellis Absent: None A moment of silence was observed in memory of Lorraine Hales, long time resident of Hermosa Beach and co -originator, with her husband John, of the Hermosa Beach City Seal, who passed away recently. PRESENTATION: Plaque presented by Leah Jeffrie's'bn behalf of Supervisor Deane Dana commemorating the 80th Anniversary of Incorporation of the City of Hermosa Beach CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATION: Most Valuable Players, South Bay Union High School District - Tracy Brown Karen Horter Sarah Enders Brook White Scott Yessner PROCLAMATIONS: Youth Employment Week, January 25 - 31, 1987 - accepted by Arnold Zimmerman, Secretary of South Bay Private Industry Council 80th Anniversary City of Hermosa Beach incorporation, January 14, 1907 - accepted by Rick Learned, Hermosa Beach Historical Society INTRODUCTION OF NEW EMPLOYEES: Scott Romer, General Services Officer CITIZEN COMMENTS Those wishing to speak on item 2(c) may do so under item 3. 1. CONSENT CALENDAR Action: To approve Consent Calendar items (a) through (w) with the exception of the following items which were pulled for further discussion but are listed in order on the Consent Calendar for clarity: (h) DeBellis, (m) Williams, (n) rescheduled for January 27 meeting - City Manager, (p) Rosenberger, (s) Rosenberger, (t) Rose- nberger and (w) DeBellis. Motion Rosenberger, second Cioffi.• So ordered. 1 Minutes 1-13-87 la (a) Approval of Minutes: Regular meeting of the City Coun- cil held on December 16, 1986. Action: To approve minutes. (b) Demands and Warrants: January 13, 1987. Action: To approve Demands and Warrants 21790, 21931, 22063 through 22072 and 22074 through 22221 inclusive noting voided Warrants 22074, 22075, 22124 and 22126. (c) Tentative Future Agenda Items. Action: To receive and file. (d) City Manager Activity Report. Memorandum from City Man- ager Gregory T. Meyer dated January , 1987. Action: To receive and file. (e) Request for Closed Session. Memorandum from City Man- ager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 5, 1987. (f) (g) Action: To calendar a closed session for Tuesday, January 27, 1987 at 6:00 p.m. Annual Investment Policy for 1987. Memorandum from City Treasurer Norma Goldbach dated January 7, 1987. Action: To receive and file. Monthly Investment Report - December, 1986. Memorandum from City Treasurer Norma Goldbach dated January 8, 1987. Action: To direct the Mayor to send a letter to CDBG administration requesting payment to the City of the money owed them 4243,269.20). Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Simpson. So ordered. Final Action: To receive and file. Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Rosenberger. So ordered. (h) City Treasurer's Report: November, 1986. Action: To receive and file. (i) Monthly Revenue Report: November, 1986. Action: To receive and file. (j) Monthly Expenditure Report: November, 1986. Action: To receive and file. 2 Minutes 1-13-87 (k) Request for design proposals CIP 85-137 Highland Avenue and CIP 85-102 Valley/Ardmore at Gould Street Improve- ments. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated December 30, 1986. (1) Action: Authorize staff to solicit design proposals issue addendums as necessary for CIP 85-102 - Widen Highland Avenue, and CIP 85-137 - Redesign Valley/ Ardmore/Gould Intersection. Child Abuse Monthly. Report. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Alana Mastrian dated December 23, 1986. Action: To receive and file. (m) Piano Use Policy. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Alana Mastrian dated January 5, 1987. Action: To acknowledge the piano policy adopted by the Community Center Foundation ($100/day charge for use of grand piano - no charge for upright piano) and convey to the Foundation the City's desire to take advantage of the use of both pianos per the conditions of this policy. Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Cioffi. So ordered. (n) 1985-86 Outside Audit Report. Memorandum from City Man- ager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 8, 1987. Supplemen- tal information - memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 13, 1986. (o) (p) (q) At the request of the City Manager, this item was rescheduled for the meeting of January 27, 1987. Request for appropriation - performancy pay. Memoran- dum from Finance Administrator Viki Copeland dated January 8, 1987. Action: Appropriate $42,000 to departmental regular salaries accounts. Approval of consultant agreement for traffic signal design for various CIPs. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated December 22, 1986. Action: To authorize the Mayor to sign agreement with Mohle, Grove & Associates, 901 East Imperial Highway, Suite A,. La Habra, CA, traffic signal design consultant. Motion Rosenberger, second Mayor DeBellis. So ordered. Approval of plans and specifications and authorization to call for bids - asphalt street repair (CIP 86-163). Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated January 5, 1987. Action: To approve the plans and specifications and authorize call for bids. Request for Proposals for electrical upgrade at City Hall (CIP 86-602). Memorandum from Public Works Direc- tor Anthony Antich dated January 5, 1987. Action: Authorize issuance of request for proposals. Request for Proposal for a transportation study to im- prove and expand the HERMAN Commuter Bus Service and examine other bus services in the area. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 6, 1986. Action: To approve the RFP for a transportation study to expand and improve the HERMAN Commuter Bus Service, and examine other viable bus services in the area with the addition of the following items under "Scope of Work": 8. The feasibility of corporate participation and partnership in promoting and operating the system. 9. To determine the possible and likely participation of other cities and what conditions and stipula- tions other cities might have or not participate. 10. Examine the alternatives currently provided by various corporations in the area such as El Segundo Employee's Association. Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Rosenberger. So ordered. Request for Proposal for Parking, Circulation, and Transportation Element, and Environmental Impact Report. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 6, 1987. Action: Authorize issuance of request for proposals with an amendment to give the City Council the discre- tion to accept or reject bids, or request rebidding based on the qualifications of the bidders. Motion Rosenberger, second Cioffi. So ordered. Request to authorize a clerical revision in the Police/ Fire staffing within current budget. Memorandum from Public Safety Director Steve S. Wisniewski dated January 6, 1987. Action: To authorize one full time Clerk Typist posi- tion in the Fire Department (effective March 1, 1987) and delete one Secretary position and add one Clerk Typist position in the Police Department effective January 9, 1987. - 4 - Minutes 1-13-87 rl (v) (w) Supplemental MOUs with. Teamsters. 911: 1) General Bar- gaining Group re. Planning, Aide; 2) Administrative Bar- gaining Group re. Planning Associate. Memorandum from Personnel Administrator Robert Blackwood dated January 2, 1987. Action: Authorize City Manager to sign on behalf of City. Notice of 1987 - '88 increase in dues from SCAG. Memo- randum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated December 26, 1986. Action: To endorse the proposed By -Laws modifications for SCAG and authorize Councilmember Simpson as delegate to vote in favor of the dues increase at the January 29, 1987 Business Session of the SCAG General Assembly. Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Cioffi. So ordered. 2. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS (a) ORDINANCE NO. 86-867 - AN ORDINANCE OF, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA,. AMENDING CHAP- TER 19-1/2, ARTICLE 11, SECTION 19 1/2-10 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, REGULATING THE USE. OF LEAF BLOWERS. For waiver of further reading and adoption. Action: To waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 86-867 entitled "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 19-1/2, ARTICLE 11, SECTION 19 1/2-10 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, REGULATING THE USE OF LEAF BLOWERS." Motion Rosenberger, second Cioffi. So ordered. (b) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING. SECTION 2-2.4, AGENDA, OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE MODIFYING THE DEADLINE TIME FOR SUB- MISSION OF AGENDA ITEMS TO THE CITY MANAGER. For waiver of full reading and introduction. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated January 6, 1987. Action: To waive full reading of Ordinance No. 87-868 entitled"AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 2-2.4, AGENDA, OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE MODIFYING THE DEADLINE TIME FOR SUBMISSION OF AGENDA ITEMS TO THE CITY MANAGER." Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Rosenberger AYES - Cioffe, Rosenberger, Simpson, Williams, Mayor DeBellis NOES - None Final Action: To introduce Ordinance No. 87-868. Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Rosenberger. So ordered. - 5 - Minutes 1-13-87 (c) AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO PROHIBIT THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS FOR DEVELOPMENTS THAT DO NOT MEET THE STANDARDS OF BOTH THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION AND ZONING CLASSIFICATION FOR A PARTICULAR PROPERTY TO BE DEVELOPED OR IMPROVED. For waiver of full reading and adoption by a 4/5 vote. Memorandum from City Attorney James P. Lough dated January 7, 1987. Supplemental information - Elysian Heights Residents Assn. v. City of Los Angeles, June 6, 1986, letter from MJC Properties, Michael J. Clelland dated January 12, 1987. Speaking regarding this proposed ordinance were: Steven Labelle, 2600 Colorado Ave., Santa Monica - opposed Jack Wood, Triad Design, 200 Pier Ave #38 - opposed Ronald Schendel, 143 - 7th Street - in favor Patrick Killen, 652 Gould - opposed Action: Toreschedule this item as a regular advertised public hearing, properly noticed, for February 10, 1987. Motion Rosenberger, second Williams AYES - Rosenberger, Simpson, Williams NOES - Cioffi, Mayor DeBellis Staff was asked to investigate the Attorney General's opinion regarding inconsistencies. (d) A RESOLUTION.OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, EVIDENCING ITS INTENT TO SEND TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION A CHARGE TO. HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING AND INVESTIGATE WHAT STEPS ARE NECESSARY TO ALLEVIATE PROBLEMS CAUSED BY SEPARATE SALE OR SEPARATION OF CON- TIGUOUS PARCELS WHEN A SINGLE IMPROVEMENT STRADDLES THE DIVIDING PROPERTY LINE AND TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE SEPARATE SALE OR SEPARATION OF SUCH CONTIGUOUS LOTS WHEN A SINGLE IMPROVEMENT STRADDLES THE DIVIDING PROPER- TY LINE. To adopt report and adopt the resolution. Memorandum from City Attorney James P. Lough dated January 7, 1987. Action: To adopt Resolution No. 87-5008 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, EVIDENCING ITS INTENT TO SEND TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION A CHARGE TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING AND INVESTIGATE WHAT STEPS ARE NECESSARY TO ALLEVIATE PROBLEMS CAUSED BY SEPARATE SALE OR SEPARATION OF CON- TIGUOUS PARCELS WHEN A SINGLE IMPROVEMENT STRADDLES THE DIVIDING PROPERTY LINE AND TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE SEPARATE SALE OR SEPARATION OF SUCH CONTIGUOUS LOTS WHEN A SINGLE IMPROVEMENT STRADDLES THE DIVIDING PROPER- TY LINE." Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Cioffi. So ordered. - 6 - Minutes 1-13-87 Final Action: To accept the staff report as the City Council report. Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Simpson. So ordered. (e) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, URGING THE 100TH CONGRESS. TO PASS THE REAUTHORIZATION LEGISLATION OF THE. CLEAN WATER ACT AS SWIFTLY AS POSSIBLE. For adoption. Action: To adopt Resolution No. 87-5009 entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, URGING THE 100TH CONGRESS TO PASS THE REAUTHORIZATION LEGISLATION OF THE CLEAN WATER ACT AS SWIFTLY AS POSSIBLE." Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Rosenberger. So ordered. 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. Consent Calendar items (h) DeBellis, (m) Williams, (p) Rosenberger, (s) Rosenberger, (t) Rosenberger and (w) DeBellis were discussed at this time but are listed in order on the Consent Calendar for clarity. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC. Letter from Gerald A. Littman dated January 12, 1987 re Beach Drive Flood Drainage - referred to Public Works Department. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN/ZONING AMENDMENTS AS FOLLOWS: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS: Straw Vote SW AREA IVA - REDESIGNATE FROM HIGH DENSITY 5/0 RESIDENTAL TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL; SW AREA V - REDESIGNATE FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO 5/0 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL; SW AREA VI - REDESIGNATE FROM HIGH DENSITY 5/0 RESIDENTIAL TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL; SW AREA VII - REDESIGNATE FROM MEDIUM DENSITY 3/2 RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL OR MAKE NO AMENDMENT TO EXISTING MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION (SEE ZONE CHANGES BELOW); 5/0 SW AREA II - REDESIGNATE FROM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (SEE ZONE CHANGE BELOW) OR MAKE NO AMENDMENT TO EXISTING HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; ZONING CHANGES: SW AREA I - REZONE FROM M -ZONE AND OPEN SPACE ZONE TO R-3, MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, OR REZONE R-3, M, AND OPEN SPACE AREAS TO R-2 ZONE, OR TO SUCH OTHER ZONE AS DEEMED APPROPRIATE BY THE CITY COUNCIL; SW AREA II - REZONE FROM R-2, TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO R-3, MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL OR TO SUCH OTHER ZONE AS DEEMED APPROPRIATE BY THE CITY COUNCIL INCLUDING NO CHANGE TO EXISTING R-2 ZONE; SW AREA IV - REZONE FROM C-1, LIMITED BUSINESS AND 4/1 RESIDENTIAL TO R-3, MULTIPLE FAMILY, OR TO SUCH OTHER ZONE AS DEEMED APPROPRIATE BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 5, 1987 with accompanying resolution and ordinance. Supplemental information - letter from Douglas A. J. Mockett dated January 13, 1987. The staff report was presented by Planning Director Michael Schubach. The Public Hearing was opened. Coming forward to speak were: Geoff Rue, 641 - 25th Street, Planning Commissioner - upheld Planning Commission recommendation Jack Wood, Triad Design - re SW Area II Wilma Burt, 1152 - 7th Street - objected to reducing commercial in SW Area II Ken Loomis, Bob Creech Auto Repair, 602 - 5th Street - objected to rezoning SW area I Rob Catalano, owns LaGarage, 323 Ardmore - objected to rezoning SW area I Bob Berriage, Twin Body Shop, 242 Ardmore - objected to rezoning SW area I - submitted petitions L. H. Johnson, 1st and Ardmore - favors zoning to R-3 - opposed to downzoning Allen Langstaff, 401 So. Ardmore - opposed downzoning Bill Drury, 200 Pier Avenue - opposed downzoning Gary Bulsagian, 620 - 2nd Street - opposed to zone change Jack Brown, 613 - 3rd Street - opposed to changes Dave Braithwait, 651 - 4th Street - in favor of changes Tom Biagi, 231 Manhattan Avenue - opposed to changing M zone The Public Hearing was closed. Dragan Djuric, 530 - 25th Street, was allowed to speak to Council after the Public Hearing was closed regarding both the proposed General Plan and Zoning changes. The following straw votes were taken on the proposed changes: Straw Vote - Proposed Action: To designate the area east of the line separating M and R-3 on the Area I map as General Plan High Density R-3. Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Cioffi AYES - Cioffi, Mayor DeBellis - 8 - Minutes 1-13-87 NOES - Rosenberger, Simpson, Williams Motion fails. Straw Vote - Action: To leave the area east of the line on the Area I map as Medium Density R-2 and rezone all properties from 1st to 5th Street as R-2. Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Rosenberger AYES - Rosenberger, Simpson, Williams, Mayor DeBellis NOES - Cioffi Straw Vote - Action: To refer the M (Manufacturing) zone to the Planning Commission for consideration of amending the General Plan to try to preserve the businesses that are located in these zones, encourage the expansion thereof and allow comparable businesses to locate in these zones; deal with the issue of housing and existing housing and what can be done about it; and look at special use permits to allow new commercial or manufacturing. Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Cioffi Amendment. to Motion: Planning Commission to also look at possible amortization for Conditional Use Permits to protect the residents from the noise, dust, etc. (allowable uses). Motion Williams with concurrence of the maker of the motion and the second. Straw Vote on Motion with Amendment AYES - Cioffi, Rosenberger, Simpson, Williams, Mayor DeBellis NOES - None Action; To direct staff to take all changes straw voted on tonight into consideration and to bring back an ordinance and a resolution to the next meeting incorporating these changes. Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Rosenberger. So ordered. A recess was called at 11:00 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 11:20 P.M. HEARINGS. 6. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 86-824 TO MAKE ALLOWANCES FOR PROJECTS UNABLE TO MEET THE PERMIT DEAD- LINE DUE TO. COASTAL COMMISSION HEARINGS. Memoranda from Building and Safety Director William Grove dated January 5, 1987 and City Attorney James P. Lough dated December 10, 1986. The Hearing was opened. Coming forward to speak were: - 9 - Minutes 1-13-87 Ronald Schendel, 43 - 7th Street - opposed Jack Wood, Triad Design, 200 Pier Avenue - in favor Rick Icaza, 911 - 14th Street - in favor Robert Marks, 56 - 8th Street - opposed Susan McFarlane, 31 - 8th Street - opposed Richard Quinn, 20 - 4th Street - in favor The Hearing was closed. Action: To receive and file this report. Motion Rosenberger, second Simpson. So ordered noting NO vote by Mayor DeBellis PROPOSED EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION RELATIONS RESOLUTION. Memorandum from Personnel Administrator Robert Blackwood dated January 5, 1987. Supplemental information - memorandum from Bill Grove, President, Hermosa Beach Management Association dated January 12, 1987. The staff report was presented by City Manager Gregory T. Meyer. The Hearing was opened. Coming forward to speak were: Michael Hanna, Attorney for Hermosa Beach Police Officer's Association - asked Council to look at effect of Bagley case Wilma Burt, 1152 - 7th Street - City Council should not delegate rights The Hearing was closed. Action; To approve the staff recommendation to hold in abeyance any formal action and to calendar the matter of the EEOR Resolution for Closed Session on January 27, 1987 in order to give management an instruction for "meet and consult" with the Employee Organizations. Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Simpson. So ordered. ADJOURNMENT The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, adjourned on Wednesday, January 14, 1987 at the hour of 12:10 A.M., in memory of Lorraine Hales, to a Special Meeting to be held on Thursday, January 15, 1987 at the hour of 6:30 P.M. for the purpose holding a Closed Executive Session. 711°11112...- Deputy'City Clerk - 10 - Minutes 1-13-87 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Thursday, January 15, 1987 at the hour of 6:37 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Rosenberger, Simpson, Williams, Mayor DeBellis, Cioffi (Arrived 6:40 P.M.) City Attorney James Lough made the announcement that the Closed Session is for the purposes of discussing: 1. Potential purchase of "Prospect Heights" property from Hermosa Beach City Elementary School District 2. Ligitation involving, among other matters: Creighton v. Barks Hermosa Beach School District v. City of Hermosa Beach under Govt. Code § 54956.9 a. Action: To adjourn to a Closed Session. Motion Mayor DeBellis, second Simpson. So ordered. The Special Meeting of the City Council reconvened at 8:50 P.M. Mayor DeBellis declared that there were no announcements o action taken from the Closed Session. ADJOURNMENT The Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, adjourned on Thursday, January 15, 1987 at the hour of 8:52 P.M., to a regular meeting of the City Council Tuesday, January 27, 1987, at 6:00 P.M. for a Closed Session. 1b Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council January 16, 1987 Regular Meeting of January 27, 1987 APPROVAL OF SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZATION TO CALL FOR BIDS FOR FUEL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR CITY YARD - CIP 86-601 Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council: Kgam,) J7, 1. Approve the attached specifications for a fuel management system for the City yard. 2. Authorize call for bids for the fuel management system. Background: There are three (3) existing gasoline pumps at the City Yard. Virtually any City employee can access these pump, and is expected to record the amount of gasoline he/she dispensed in a log book on site. Not surprisingly, this system is extremely inefficient. In fact, from July, 1985 to June, 1986, there were over 2,000 gallons of fuel unaccounted for (i.e., purchased by the City, but not charged to a particular department). The FY 86-87 CIP Budget included funds to purchase and install an automated fuel dispensing system at the City yard for inventory control of gasoline dispensation to City vehicles. Such a system would not only provide the data necessary to monitor and manage fuel dispensation, but would also provide an excellent security system. Analysis: Electronic fuel dispensing equipment is a rapidly growing state of the art technology, propounded by numerous qualified vendors. Throughout the past few months, staff has researched these systems and compiled specifications that will best meet the needs of the City. Staff will evaluate all proposals received based on adherence to these specifications, in addition to oral presentations and proven "track record". Attached is the Request for Proposals (Exhibit A) for Council approval and a tentative project schedule (Exhibit B). Fiscal Impact: CIP 86-601 total FY 86-87 budget allocation of $54,450 included funding of both the fuel management system and precision testing and/or removal of the City's underground gasoline storage tanks as follows: 1 Engineer's Project Estimate Amount Funding Budgeted Source 1.`1 Fuel Mgmt. $33,100 System 2. Tank testing and/or removal (pending notifi- cation of L. A. Co. Public Works) 21,350 $33,100 General Fund Lighting Fund Sewer Fund Subtotal 21,350 SB 90 $10,000 13,100 10,000 $33,100 21,350 Total $54,450 $54,450 $54,450 The Engineer's Estimate is within the budgeted amount. Staff intends to proceed with researching a compatible Fleet Management system, and will return to Council with an appropriate recommendation at a later date. Respectfully submitted, Deborah M. Murphy Assistant Engineer Concur: /� c Greg 'ry �. /Myer A City Manager DMM:mv fuelman/m Attachments: Exhibit A Exhibit B - 2 ur: ony Antich Director of P is Works Noted for Fiscal Impact: &Lg.) Viki Copeland Finance Administrator Exhibit A CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH State of California Request for Proposals for FY 86-87 Fuel Dispensing System CIP 86-601 Included herein: Part I A. Notice to Bidders B. Instruction to Bidders Part II Proposal Package Part III Specifications PART 1-A CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH State of California NOTICE TO BIDDER SEALED PROPOSALS will be received at the Office of the City Clerk, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 until 11:00 a.m. Friday, February 20 1987 , at which time they will be publicly opened and read for performing work as follows: FUEL DISPENSING SYSTEM CIP 86 -601 - FY 86-87 The bid shall be enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed to the City Clerk, City of Hermosa Beach, CA 90254, and shall be iden- tified on the lower left corner of the envelope "Sealed Bid" - CIP NO. 86-601 No bid will be considered unless it is properly submitted on a proposal form available at the office of the Department of Public Works. Proposals must be completed in the manner and form indi- cated therein, clearly indicating proposed prices and properly signed by the bidder, with his name (and any partner) and ad- dress. If made by a corporation, the proposal must show the name of the state under the laws of which the corporation was char- tered and the names, titles and address of the President, Secre- tary and Treasurer. A proposal so presented may be withdrawn by the bidder, provided the request therefore is made in writing, is signed by the bidder or his authorized representative and is filed prior to the time established for the opening of bids. The withdrawal of a bid proposal does not prejudice the right of the bidder to file a new bid. In accordance with the provisions of Sections 1770 through 1780 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the Director of Industrial Relations has ascertained the general prevailing rate of wages and employer payments for health and welfare, vacation, pensions, and similar purposes applicable to the locality in which work is to be done for each craft or type of workman needed to execute the proposed contract. It will be required that not less than said rates shall be paid to all such workmen employed or engaged on the work. Complete wage rate schedules are on file at the City Hall. NOTICE TO BIDDER The Contractor and any sub -contractor under him shall comply with the requirements, of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 (of'the Labor Code) in the employment of apprentices. 1 •Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of In- dustrial Relations, ex -officio the Administrator of Apprentice- ship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Appren- ticeship Standards and its branch offices. All bids are to be compared on the basis of the Director of Public Works estimate of the quantities of work to be done. No bid will be accepted from a Contractor who has not been li- censed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 9 of Division 3 of the Business of Professions Code. A City business license is required to do contracting work in the City of Hermosa Beach. The City of Hermosa Beach reserves the right to reject any or all bids and to waive any irregularity or informality in any bid to the extent permitted by law. Dated CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH By Anthony Antich Director of Public Works 2 INSTRUCTION TO BIDDERS PART 1-B Section 1. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS (a) Examination of Plans, Specifications, Special Provisions and Site of Work: Bidders must satisfy themselves by personal examination of the location of the proposed work and by such other means as they may prefer as to the proposal, plans, specifications, agreement form and actual conditions and require- ments of the work, and shall not at any time after submission of the bid dispute, complain, or assert that there was any misun- derstanding in regard to the conditions to be encountered. The submission of a proposal shall be considered conclusive evidence that the bidder has made such examination. (b) Addenda: --City may, from time to time, issue addenda to the Agreement documents during the period o=f --advertis- ing for bids, for the following purposes: (1) revising Prevailing Wage Scales, (2) clarifying or correcting special provisions, plans or bid proposal; provided however that any such addenda shall not change the original scope and intent of the project. Securers of Agreement documents shall be notified of, and furnished with, copies of such addenda, either by certified mail or personal delivery, during the period of advertising. (c) Proposal Guarantee: --Each proposal submitted must be accompanied by cash, or by a certified or cashier's check, or surety bond, payable to the City of Hermosa Beach, in an amount equivalent to at least ten (10) percent of the total base bid price of such proposal, as a guarantee that the bidder, if his proposal be accepted, will enter into and execute the awarded Agreement; and no proposal will be accepted unless such cash, check or surety bond is enclosed therewith. However, the use of a surety bond in this connection shall be subject to the condition that the surety thereon be approved by the City Attorney. Should any bidder to whom an award is made fail to properly enter into and execute the awarded Agreement, the cash, check or bond submitted with his proposal shall be forfeited to, and become the property of the City of Hermosa Beach, whereupon the City shall have the right to collect the amount thereof by an appropriate means. Following the award of Agreement, the proposal guarantees will be returned to the respective bidders by whom they were submitted, except as otherwise hereinbefore provided. (d) Disqualification of Bidders and Proposals: --More than one proposal for the same work from any individual, firm, partnership, corporation or association under the same or dif- ferent names will not be accepted; and reasonable grounds for believing that any bidder is interested in more than one proposal for the work will be cause for rejecting all proposals in which such bidder is interested. Apparent collusion among the bidders 1 will likewise be sufficient cause for rejecting any or all bids, and the participants in such collusion may be barred from future bidding. Proposals in which the prices are obviously unbal- anced, and those which are incomplete or show any alteration of form, erasures or irregularities of any kind, or contain any ad- ditions or conditional or alternate bids that are not called for or otherwise permitted, may be rejected. (e) Competency of Bidders: --Bidders must be thoroughly competent, and capable of satisfactorily performing the work covered by the proposal; and when requested shall fur- nish such statements relative to previous experience on similar work, the plan or procedure proposed, and the organization, machinery, plant and other equipment available for the contem- plated work, and the financial condition and resources of the bidder, as may be deemed necessary by the City in determining such competence and capability. The City will not enter into an Agreement with any bidder who is not properly licensed to do the work of this Agree- ment under the provisions of Chapter 9 of Division 3 of the Busi- ness and Professions Code, unless particularly exempted by the terms thereof. Section 2. AWARD AND EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT (a) Comparison of Proposals and Award Agreement: -- After the proposals for the contemplated work have been opened and read as provided herein, the respective totals thereof, determined by applying the unit prices bid to the estimated quan- tities shown, will be extended and compared; and the results will thereupon be made public. The award of the agreement, if it be awarded, will be made to the lowest responsible and qualified bidder whose pro- posal complies with all the prescribed requirements and best meets the needs of the City. Until an award is made the right will be reserved to reject any or all bids, and to waive techni- cal errors or discrepencies, if to do so is deemed to best serve the interests of the City. In no event will an award be made until all necessary investigations are made as to the respon- sibility and qualifications of the bidder to whom it is proposed to make such award. Such an award if made, will be made within forty-five (45) days after the opening of the proposal. (b) Execution of Agreement: --The agreement shall be signed by the awardee and returned to the City together with the Agreement bonds, and other documents required in the proposal package, within ten (10) calendar days, not including Sundays and legal holidays, after it has been delivered or mailed to him or his authorized agent. No proposal shall be considered as being binding upon the City until the agreement is fully executed; and failure of 2 the awardee to properly execute the awarded agreement and file acceptable bonds within ten (10) days, not including Sundays and legal holidays, shall be just and sufficient cause for the annul- ment of the award by the City and the forefeiture of his proposal guarantee. (c) Return of Proposal Guarantees: --Within ten (10) days after the award of the Agreement, the City of Hermosa Beach will return the proposal guarantee, accompanying such of the pro- posals which are not further considered in making the award. All other proposal guarantees will be held until the agreement has been finally executed, after which all proposal guarantees, ex- cept those forfeited, will be returned to the respective bidders whose proposals they accompany. (d) Faithful Performance Bond: --The Contractor shall secure with a corporate surety or sureties satisfactory to the Owner, a bond in the amount equal to 100% of the Agreement amount to guarantee faithful performance. (e) Labor and Material Bond: --The Contractor shall secure with a corporate surety or sureties satisfactory to the Owner, a bond equal to 100% of the Agreement amount to guarantee payment of claims of laborers and materialmen under the Agreement. (f) Maintenance and Guarantee: --The Contractor shall guarantee the entire work constructed by him under the Agreement to be free of defects in material and workmanship for a period of one (1) year following the date of acceptance of the work by the Owner's governing body. The Contractor shall agree to make, at his own expense, any repairs or replacements made necessary by defects in materials and workmanship which become evident within said guarantee period. The Contractor shall further agree to indemnify and save harmless the Owner and Engineer, and their officers, agents, and employees against and from all claims and liability arising from damage and injury due to said defects. The Contractor shall make all repairs and replacements promptly upon receipt of written order from the Engineer. If the Contrac- tor fails to make the repairs and replacements promptly, the Owner may do the work and the Contractor and his surety shall be liable to the Owner for the cost of such work. The guarantee and conditions shall be secured by a surety bond which shall be delivered by the Contractor to the Owner prior to the date on which final payment is made to the Contractor. Said bond shall be in an approved form and executed by a surety company or companies satisfactory to the Owner, in the amount of 10 percent of the Agreement price, equipment and property, the salvage value at completion of the work shall be deducted from the depreciation value at the time the Agreement was terminated, and the difference shall be considered as an expense. (g) Insurance: --In order to indemnify and save harm- less the City of Hermosa Beach and all officers, employees and 3 'agents of the City; the Contractor shall carry public liability and property damage insurance, with the City named as an insured, per the requirements of Section 7-3 of the Standard Specifica- tions amended to include personal injury or death in amounts not less that five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) for injury to or death to any one person, one million dollars ($1,000,000) for injuries or deaths arising out of any one accident and one hun- dred thousand dollars ($100,000) for property damage. The Contractor shall, prior to commencement of any work by him or by any subcontractor working under him, fur- nish to the City satisfactory evidence that the required in- surance has been obtained and is in effect. If the Contractor fails to provide and maintain such insurance; the.City may obtain and maintain the insurance from any monies due the Contractor under the Agreement, or the City may terminate the Agreement without further liabililty to the Contractor of any nature whatsoever. (h) Failure to Comply: --If the Contractor should refuse or neglect to comply with the provisions of the Agreement or the orders of the Engineer, the Owner may have such provisions or orders carried out by others at the expense of the Contractor. Section 3. BID PROPOSAL FORM INSTRUCTIONS Bids are required for the entire work. The amount of the bid for comparison purposes will be the total of all items. The bidder shall be set forth for each item of work, a total for each item, including all overhead and profit in the spaces provided for this purpose. Section 4. TAXES No mention shall be made of Sales Tax or Use Tax as all bid prices submitted will be considered as including such taxes. SECTION 5. SPECIAL CONDITIONS (a) Time Limit: --A11 work shall be completed within 60 Calendar days following the issuance of the Notice to Proceed. The City will not authorize any work to be done under these specifications before the Agreement has been signed; and any work thatis done by the Contractor in advance of such time shall be considered as being done at his own risk and on his own responsibility, and as a consequence will be subject to rejection by having not, been done in the presence of an Engineer or Inspector. 4 (b) Liquidated Damages: --The Contractor shall pay to the City of Hermosa Beach the sum of one hundred fifty ($150) dollars per day for each and every calendar day's delay in finishing the work in excess of the number of working days pre- scribed above. (c) Scheduling of Work: --After notification to pro- ceed and prior to start of any work, the Contractor shall submit to the Engineer for approval his proposed schedule. The proposed schedule shall indicate in a chronological relationship, the ex- act starting and completion dates for the various work. The con- struction schedule shall reflect completion of all work under the Agreement within the specified time and in accordance with the plans and specifications. If the Contractor desires to make a change in the approved schedule, or if his schedule fails to reflect the actual progress, he shall submit to the Engineer for approval a revised schedule 48 hours in advance of beginning revised operations. (d) Changes in Work: --The City may change the plans, specifications, character of the work or quantity of work. Change orders shall be in writing and state the dollar value of the change or establish the method of payment, any adjustment in Agreement time, and when negotiated prices are involved, shall provide for the Contractor's signature indicating acceptance. If a change is ordered in any item of work covered by a Agreement unit price, an adjustment in payment will be made based upon the increase or decrease in quantity and the Agreement price. The Agreement unit price shall remain unchanged during the term of this agreement. (e) .Extra Work: --Extra work, when ordered and ac- cepted. shall be paid for under a written work order in accor- dance with the terms therein provided. Payment for extra work will be made at the unit price or lump sum previously agreed upon by the Contractor and the Engineer. 5 ,1 PART II PROPOSAL PACKAGE The following attached documents shall be signed and returned to the City with the Bid Proposal: A. Proposal and Bid Schedule B. Bidder's Bond, Certified or Cashier's check or cash C. Bidder's Required General Information D. Contractor's Industrial Safety Record E. Service and Maintenance Agreement (Contractor to furnish) F. List of References G. Specifications' Proposal (See Part III) Documents which are to be signed and returned to the City after - the award of Agreement are: 1. Agreement 2. Faithful Performance Bond equal to 100% of the Agreement amount. 3. Payment Bond (for material and labor) equal to 100% of the Agreement amount. 4. Statement relative to Worker's Compensation Insurance 5. Certificate of Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance, and name the City of Hermosa Beach as additional insured. The issuing company will include a thirty (30) day notice cancellation period. 1 PART 11...-A PROPOSAL PROPOSAL TO: City of Hermosa Beach, California The undersigned bidder hereby proposes to furnish all labor, materials, equipment, tools, and services necessary to perform all work required under the bidding schedule(s) of the Owner's specifications entitled Fuel Dispensing System CIP 601 in accor- dance with the intent of said specifications, drawings, and all addenda issued by said owner prior to opening of the proposals. The undersigned, as bidder, declares that: (1) this proposal is made without collusion with any other person, firm or corpora- tion, and that the only persons or parties interested as prin- cipals are those named herein; (2) bidder has carefully examined the project plans, specification, instructions to bidders, pro- -'posal, notice to contractors and all other information furnished therefore and the site of the proposed work; (3) bidder has in- vestigated and is satisfied as to the conditions to be encoun- tered, the character, quality and quantities of work to be per- formed and materials to be furnished. Furthermore, bidder agrees that submission of this proposal shall be conclusive evidence that such examination and investigation have been made and agrees, in the event this contract be awarded to bidder, to enter into a contract with the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, to perform said proposed work in accordance with the plans, if any, and the terms of the specifications, in the time and manner therein prescribed, and to furnish or provide all materials, labor, tools, equipment, apparatus and other means so to do, except such thereof as may otherwise be furnished or pro- vided under the terms of said specifications, for the following stated unit prices or lump sum price as submitted on the Schedule A attached hereto. The bidder shall submit as part of this proposal a completed copy of the Contractor's Industrial Safety Record as shown herein. Licensed in accordance with an act providing for the registration of contractors, California Contractor's License No. Class Signature(s) of bidder 1 If an individual, so state. If a firm or co -partnership, state the firm name and give the names of all individual co-partners composing the firm. If a corporation, state legal name of cor- poration, also names of president, secretary, tresurer, and man- ager thereof. Two notarized officer's signatures and the corpo- rate seal are required for corporations. Legal Business Name: Address: Telephone Number: Proposals which do not show the number and date of the Bidder's License under the provisions of Chapter 9 of Division 3 of the Business & Professional Code may be rejected. Said bidder agrees that, within ten (10) calendar days after receipt of the contract from said Owner, he will execute said contract in the required form, of which the Notice Inviting Bids, instructions to bidders, proposals, information required of bid- der, specifications, drawings, and all addenda issued by said Owner prior to the opening of proposals, are a part, and will secure the required insurance and bonds and furnish the required insurance certificates; and that upon failure to do so within said time, then the proposal guarantee furnished by said bidder shall be forfeited to said Owner as liquidated damages for such failure; provided, that if said bidder shall execute the con- tract, secure the required insurance and bonds, and furnish the required insurance certificates within said time, his check, if furnished, shall be returned to him thereafter, and the bid bond, if furnished, shall become void. Said bidder further agrees to complete all work required under the contract within the time stipulated in said specifications, and to accept in full payment therefor the price(s) named in the abovementioned bidding schedule(s). Date - 2 sdwlkd By Bidder Signature Title Contractor's Bid Schedule Date: Contractor's Name: Address: Phone: Contractor's Signature: City of Hermosa Beach Fuel Dispensing System CIP 86-601 Part II -A (cont'd) Please carefully fill in your bid price as indicated. Include all applicable taxes and contingencies, overhead and profit costs for each item. The City reserves the right to delete any item from the total bid. Note: Words shall govern when there is a discrepency between numbers and words. Item Bid Price ($ and Words) 1. Fuel pumps a. equipment b. installation 2. Fuel dispensing system a. equipment b. installation 3. Initial training costs (lump sum) 4. Annual maintenance agreement Total Bid Price Maximum time required (in calendar days) for project completion 2 PART II -B CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA BIDDER'S BOND TO ACCOMPANY PROPOSAL KNOWN ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That we, as Principal, and as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Hermosa Beach, in the sum of ($ ) dollars, to be paid to the said City or its certain attorneys, its successors and assigns; for the payment of which sum, well and truly made, we bind ourselves, our heirs. executors and ad- ministrators, successors or assigns, jointly and severally, firm- ly by these presents. - THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH That if the certain proposal of the above bounden to dated , 1987, is accepted by the City of Hermo- sa Beach, and if the above bounden his heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, shall duly enter into and execute a contract for such construc- tion, and shall execute and deliver the two bonds described within ten days (not including Sundays), from the date of the mailing of a notice to the above bounden. by and from the said City of Hermosa Beach that said contract is ready for execution, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and virtue. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we hereunto set our hands and seals this day of , 1987. sdwlkd In the event any suit, action or proceeding is instituted to recover on this bond or obligation, said Surety will pay, and does hereby agree to pay, as attorney's fees for said City, such sum as the Court in any such suit, action or proceeding may ad- judge reasonable. EXECUTED, SEALED AND DATED this day of 1987: 2 PRINCIPAL SURETY PART II . -C REQUIRED BIDDER INFORMATION GENERAL INFORMATION The bidder shall furnish the following information. Failure to comply with this requirement will render the Proposal informal and may cause its rejection. Additional sheets may be attached as required. 1. Contractor's Name and Address: 2. Contractor's telephone number: 3. Contractor's License: Primary Classification State License No: Supplemental classification held, if any: 4. Number of years as a contractor in construction work of this type: 5. Names and titles of all officers of contractor's firm: 6. Name of person who inspected site of proposed work for firm: your Name: Date of inspection: 7. Name, address, and telephone number of surety company and agent who will provide the required bonds on this contract: 1 .4 The above information was compiled from the records that are available to me at this time and I declare under penalty of perjury that the information is true and accurate within the limitations of those records. Name of Bidder (print) Signature Address State Contractor's Lic. No. & Classification City Zip Code Telephone PROPOSAL 2. PART II -D To be submitted with each Project Identification bid to contract for CIP 86-601 1987 Fuel 'Dispensing System Bid date Friday, February 20, 1987 This information must include all construction work undertaken in the State of California by the bidder and partnership joint ven- ture or corporation that any principal of the bidder participated in as a principal or owner for the last five calendar years and the current calendar year prior to the date of bid submittal. Separate information shall be submitted for each particular partnership, joint venture, corporate or individual bidder. The bidder may attach any additional information or explanation of data which he would like taken into consideration in evaluating the safety record. An explanation must be attached of the cir- cumstances surrounding any and all fatalities. CONTRACTOR'S INDUSTRIAL SAFETY RECORD Record Last Five (5) Full Years Year of Record 1983 1. No. of Contracts 2. Total dollar amt. of contracts (in thousands of 70) *3. No. of fatalities Current 198 4 1985 1986 Total Year *4. No. of lost workday cases *5. No. of lost workday cases involving per- manent transfer to another job or ter- mination of employment *6. No. of lost workdays * The information required for these items is the same as re- quired for columns 3 to 6, Code 10, Occupational Injuries, Summary --Occupational Injuries and Illnesses, OSHA No. 102. sdwkb Part II -F LIST OF REFERENCES Please supply a minimum of three (3) locations where you have supplied and installed the proposed system. Include name and telephone number of contact person. rfpfds/m 1/19/87 3 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AGREEMENT FOR FUEL DISPENSING SYSTEM_ FY 86-87 THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this -day of , 1987, by and between the CITY OF HERMO- SA BEACH, hereinafter referred to as "City", and "Contractor". , hereinafter referred to as WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, City and Contractor have executed the bonds at- tached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference, and WHEREAS, City desires to contract with Contractor to perform the services detailed in said bonds and in the Proposal, and WHEREAS, Contractor has represented that it is fully qualified to assume and discharge such responsibility; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto do agree as follows: 1. Scope of Services. City hereby employs Contractor to furnish and install Fuel Dispensing System at•.the.City yard, 555 6th Street. Such work shall be performed in a good and workman- like manner, under the terms as stated herein and in the Notice to Bidder, Instructions to Bidders, and Proposal Package, and in accordance with the latest edition of the Joint Cooperative Com- mittee, Southern California Chapters of the American Public Works Association and the Associated General Contractors of America, 1 document entitled, "Standard Specifications for Public Work- sConstruction". In the event of any conflict between the terms of this agreement and any of the above -referenced documents, the terms of this agreement shall be controlling. 2. Compensation. In consideration of the services rendered hereunder, Contractor shall be paid according to the prices as submitted on the Proposal. ..Bi -monthly progress payments will be made after submission of invoice. 3. Hold Harmless; Insurance. It is specifically understood and agreed by all parties hereto that Contractor is, for the pur- poses of this Agreement, an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Accordingly, Contractor shall not be deemed the City's employee for any purpose whatsoever. Contrac- tor shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obliga- tion or liability whatever for or against City and shall hold harmless and defend the City of Hermosa Beach from and against any and all obligations, claims, liens, or causes of actions, arising out of or related to Contractor's services hereunder. Contractor shall file and maintain a file with the City at all times during the term of this Agreement, a copy or certificate of general liability insurance for bodily injury and property damage protecting Contractor in amounts not less than $500,000.00 for injuries to one person, $1,000,000.00 for injuries to more than one person and $100,000.00 for property damage. Such insurance shall not be cancelled without thirty (30) days' prior written notice to City, shall name the City and its officers and em- ployees as additional insured, and shall include all automobiles 2 utilized by Contractor's personnel in the performance of this Agreement. 4. Assignment. This Agreement may not be assigned by Con- tractor, in whole or in part, without the prior consent of City. 5. Termination. This agreement may be cancelled by City at any time without penalty upon thirty (30) days' written notice. In the event of termination without fault of Contractor, City shall pay Contractor for all services rendered prior to date of termination, and such payment shall be in full satisfaction of all services rendered hereunder. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed the within Agreement the day and year first above written. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ATTEST: City Clerk By CONTRACTOR By Part III SPECIFICATIONS I. General Requirements The City of Hermosa Beach is requesting proposals for a fuel dispensing and management system which will control and automatically record dispensing of gasoline fuels. The system must be capable of operating unattended, 24 hours a day, in a "stand-alone" mode. Selection of the system which best meets the needs of the City will be based on: 1. Conformance to the specific hardware and software and software performance specifications as defined herein. 2. A presentation/demonstration of the system in operation, 3. the proven "track record" of the system (per referen- ces, etc.), and 4. the service and maintenance agreement of the system In addition, the proposed fuel dispensing system must be compatible with the City's Hewlett Packard 3000 series 48 main frame computer, and must be accessible from any au- thorized HP 3000 series 48 terminal linked to mainframe computer within the City. It is the intent of these specifications to detail and specify the requirements for the furnishing and installa- tion of an electronically controlled solid state fuel dis- pensing and monitoring system and access control with op- tions to include inventory and costs control data entry. The bid price shall include all costs of shipping instal- lation and training. The modems, controller, video display terminal and serial line printer and any other equipment necessary for inter- facing with hose and outlaying sites, should be provided. All equipment must be new and meet all applicable Federal, State, and local codes and regulations. It shall be the responsibility of each bidder to inspect the site and make his/her own determination as to connec- tion distance and necessary modifications to existing system. Existing Condition(s) The City presently has two (2) fueling sites (The Police Department and the City Yard). The scope of the work for this project is only to include the City Yard operation. The yard is located at: 555 - 6th Street Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 There are three existing gasoline dispensers at this loca- tion to be replaced, per the specifications of this pro- posal. Currently, when fuel is dispensed, the employee man- ually records the vehicle number, odometer reading and amount of fuel dispensed to approximately 100 vehicles by approximately 100 employees. III. Scope of Work This proposal is to include the supply and installation of both: 1. Mechanical Fuel Pumps: The proposal shall include the furnishing and installation of the three (3) self- contained commercial refueling pumps. (Installation shall include re -piping at the island, only, not from the underground storage tanks to the island. Island shall be re -cast.) 2. Fuel Dispensing System: The system shall be desig- ned to provide control and access to 1-3 mechanical fueling dispensers. The system shall have the capability to print out on demand a variety of transactions, inventory, and infor- mational reports via local printing device, as well as certain authorized terminals linked to the mainframe computer. The "card" terminal shall be designed for island mount- ing atop the manfacturers pedestal or suitable equivalent. Programming of the system shall be via the system key- pad or, optionally, through a locally connected keyboard/printer, or remotely via computer connections. The system software shall be user prompting for entry of data. All user access (i.e. "card") characteristics and system parameters shall be individually program- mable and changeable as required. Specific requirements are indictated in the Bidder's Proposal. 2 PROPOSAL Instruction: The specifications indicated in the left hand column indicate those characteristics required by the City. Bidder shall complete the right hand column indicating exactly what is being proposed. If the proposed item is no different from the specification in the left hand column, simply indicate by an "X" in the right hand column. You must complete each item or your bid may be disqualified. Specification Proposal Bidder to certify that the proposal is capable of the following: Section I: Fuel Pumps 1. Rated to a minimum 15 gpm capacity 2. Equipped with 1/3 hp motor for use with either 110 v or 220v 3. 4 wheel non -computing register with up to 1,000 gal per delivery; totalizer to 1,000,000 gallons 4. Electric power resets 5. Gear type suction pump with built in air separator 6. Positive displacement piston meter 7. Pulsar to interface with proposed fuel management system 8. Cabinet to be constructed of all steel and and be equipped with stainless steel removable doors, 9. Single, 1" dia., 12' co -axial hoses (with static wire) with high hose retrievers, dual swivels, automatic nozzle, and filters, all in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Control District. requirements, and the requirement of the Los Angeles Co. Fire Dept. 10. Must be UL listed 11. "Weather resistant", i.e., suitable for outdoor use in an unprotected marine environment 12. What type of warranty is included with your proposal: a. ,equipment (attach copy) b. installation 1 ,13. What brand of dispenser are you proposin•? 14. Other (take this opportunity to further qualify your proposal) Attach additional sheets if necessary Specification Proposal Section II: Fuel Management System -Hardware 1. Have capacity to serve 100 vehicles, 100 employees, initially 2. Have capacity to upgrade, to provide for possible future expansion (150 vehicles, 150 employees, 2 fuel sites, gate security) 3. In the event of a system failure the pumps may be manually operated 4. Must allow for simultaneous fueling from each pump and pump in use indicater 5. Shall be enclosed in a weatherized cabinet with an operating temperature range of - 20 degrees F to + 120 degrees F. 6. Shall be of rugged construction to discourage vandalism and include a tamper switch to initi- ate an alarm at the controller if forced entry is attempted. 7. Shall include a numeric keypad for entering data and pump selection and a visual display of numeric entries 8. Shall have an emergency stop button to to disable all pumps in the event of an emergency. 9. The front panel shall be illuminated at night 10. The "terminal" shall be designed to allow access through a removable panel, which must be secured with a lock 11. Transactions and authorizations memory must be protected for at least 72 hours in the event of power failure. The system must be capable of complete automatic recovery from an AC power - 2 - failure to a fully operational status without loss of programmed authorization information or transaction 12. Shall include a memory erase safeguard to include a minimum of two (2) separate commands before any memory is erased. Specifications Proposal Section III: System Activation 1. Shall be self -prompting to guide the user through each operating step. 2. The fuel dispenser activation process shall shall require the following data to be input by the user: a. Employee identification code (manual or via card) b. Vehicle identification code (manual or via card) c. Fuel pump identification number (regular, unleaded, etc.) d. Odometer readings to the nearest whole mile (not tenths) e. Capability to enter a tank identificaton number and five digit quantity for recording fuel deliveries at moment of delivery by authorized personnel 3. Please indicate the type of user access your system proposes (i.e. one card, two card, no card, etc., including type of card - keypunch, magnetic stripe, etc.) and cost of additional cards. Proposal shall include equipment for coding additional identification cards, if necessary. 4. Before fuel can be dispensed, the system must have the capability to make the following checks and deny access, if necessary: a. Review the user and vehicle information and compare this information to either an authorized or unauthorized identity validation system. b. Check the odometer reading for reason- ableness (based on an estimated mpg and tank capacity of vehicle used). c. System will check the fuel pump number to determine if type of fuel being selected is correct for equipment being fueled. d. If user is denied access because of any of the above checks, he shall be allowed - 3 - failure to a fully operational status without • • loss of programmed authorization information or transaction 12. Shall include a emeory erase safeguard to include a minimum of two (2) separate commands before any memory is erased. Specifications Proposal Section III: System Activation 1. Shall be self -prompting to guide the user through each operating step. 2. The fuel dispenser activation process shall shall require the following data to be input by the user: a. Employee identification code (manual or via card) b. Vehicle identification code (manual or via card) c. Fuel pump identification number (regular, unleaded, etc.) d. Odometer readings to the nearest whole mile (not tenths) e. Capability to enter a tank identificaton number and five digit quantity for recording fuel deliveries at moment of delivery by authorized personnel 3. Please indicate the type of user access your system proposes (i.e. one card, two card, no card, etc., including type of card - keypunch, magnetic stripe, etc.) and cost of additional cards. Proposal shall include equipment for coding additional identification cards, if necessary. 4. Before fuel can be dispensed, the system must have the capability to make the following checks and deny access, if necessary: a. Review the user and vehicle information and compare this information to either an authorized or unauthorized identity validation system. b. Check the odometer reading for reason- ableness (based on an estimated mpg and tank capacity of vehicle used). c. System will check the fuel pump number to determine if type of fuel being selected is correct for equipment being fueled d. If user is denied access because of any of the above checks, he shall be allowed 3 one additional attempt before final denial. System shall record all attempts, whether successful or not. e. When all activation requirements have been met, an indicator light shall come on and/or a message will be displayed indicating the system is ready to disperse fuel. Fuel shall be dispensed within 5 seconds. If an error has occurred, the system will display a message indicating what data is in error. f. The transaction will be completed when either the fuel dispenser is manually shut off or a minimum of 3 minutes have elapsed since the authorization was initiated. Specifications Proposal Section IV: System Reporting 1. The system shall record and have the capa- bility to report at a minimum, the following data for each activity transaction: a. Day of the year and time of day b. Employee identification c. Vehicle or equipment identification d. Odometer reading e. Product type dispensed f. Product quantity dispensed in gallons, with units of measure g. Vehicle performance, since the last fueling, in miles per gallon (MPG) h. Alarm and exception messages (in English text) i. Current calculated tank inventory level (after compensating for evaporation) j. Tank re -order level k. Quantity of fuel delivered during report period 2. The system must include with the printer all stored inventories and transaction records. 3. System shall have the capability of providing a print-out listing of all valid cards on request. 4. The system shall have the capability of storing up to 3000 transactions in a "device" located at the fueling site, and up to 30,000 transactions at th'e central computer (HP 3000) 4 5. Record Retrieval - The information contained ' in the fuel system data storage memory shall be accessible to the central computer (HP3000). Reports or records of any transaction may be generated from either the local or remote (HP150) terminals, and may be printed on either the local or remote printing device, upon request. (Note: the "local printing device" is that which is included in "the system". It must be of the quality required for industrial use.) 6. Reports relative to stored transactions in system memory may be sorted and extracted by either: (1) Amount #, (2) ID#, (3) User #, (4) Vehicle #. Reports may be extracted by only authorized personnel. 7. The system is to include a pricing and billing program with the capabilities listed below. The objective is to provide the means of billing a particular department for their portion of the products used. Capabilities of the pricing and billing program must include the following: a. Assignment of a price per unit for fuel b. Cost total per transaction c. Assignment of a transaction to a department or more than one department -for example, a particular vehicle may be charged (divided proportionally) to four different departments d. Provide a total cost per Department on a periodic basis (weekly, monthly, etc.) e. Provide a listing of all transactions per Department on a periodic basis f. Invoice the Department of the dispensed product Specifications Proposal Section V: Installation 1. The system and fuel pumps to be installed shall be wired and color coded uniformly; wiring shall be approved and inspected by the City of Hermosa Beach electrical inspector and Fire Dept., prior to acceptance. Schematics and technical data on hardware and installation shall be provided to the City. 2. All lines to card, readers shall be installed underground. 5 3. All electrical connections other than those • y already in place shall be provided by the contractor. 4. Included in the successful installation shall be the training and instruction of six (6) City of Hermosa Beach employees in all aspects of the system to insure continued use of the system. The bid shall include all training and implementation costs. 5. The acceptance criteria shall be: a. Vendor shall perform all tests of hardware and software and present data on day before cutover. A.system performance report shall be prepared and presented by the successful low bidder. b. Vendor personnel shall remain on site until all components of the system, including hardware and software, and training are functional according to specs. c.. System will not be judged to satisfy the acceptance criteria until thirty (30) days have passed without major fault. Specifications Proposal Section VI: Miscellaneous 1. Include the ability to easily add or delete "card" numbers, change individual or vehicle authorization data and update inventory files as required. 2. For off-site fueling, or fueling from a site that is not automated, manual transaction entries shall be used to enter fuel and non - fuel transaction data from the Video Display Terminal. These entries shall provide a transaction record indicative of a one or two card, fuel or non -fuel, with or without odo- meter entry transaction. Additionally, manual entries shall allow recording of a bulk fuel delivery, or fueling from a retail fueling station. 3. The system shall incorporate a "watchdog" feature to continuously monitor hardware and software performance. 4. Bidder shall indicate on bid proposal the maximum time required in calendar days for project completion. In any event, installation and completion shall be accomplished within - 6 - I v t sixty (60) calendar days to be calculated from date of written notification to proceed. Bidder shall submit a project schedule prior to job commencement. 5. Manuals, brochures and descriptive literature describing the equipment and/or features bid shall be submitted in duplicate with each bid proposal. A schematic drawing of the proposed fuel dispensing system is to be submitted with the bid. The successful bidder shall submit with his/her bid proposal the terms and conditions of the warranty, including all parts, equipment and installation. 6. Is you fuel dispensing system proposal capable of expanding to interface with a Hewlett Packard compatible fleet management system? If so, indicate which fleet manage- ment system your proposal is compatible with. DMM:mv fueldis/m 1/15/87 CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE LEGEND ; t PROJECT NAME : Fit -EL %JiSP SlnIEr c=TYST-7i1 ACCOUNT NUMBER : C/P SG - Coal TENTATIVE SCHEDULE : Noimmismom ACTUAL SCHEDULE : X : 100% COMPLETE I I I I I I I TASKS JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC I I Final design approval before advertising 1 i I for construction Prepare advertisement & set bid opening date Advertising period (issue addendums as necessary) Accept sealed bids & public bid opening Review bids . Award contract Sign contract (bonds,insurance & workers comp. cert.) Preconstruction meeting procedure Issue "Notice to Proceed" Construction Period . Monitor progress & maintain records Progress payment and change order procedure Acceptance of work as complete Issusing and recording a "Notice of Completion" Retention Payment .3, Project close out 1 i■■ 1 1� 1 .I■■1■�I a.I. 1 1--IIT-1 1 1 iiii 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 lir----1 1--•----1 1 1 1 1 1 -war' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 January 15, 1987 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council January 27, 1987 AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH DESIGN PROCESS OF BEACH DRIVE DRAINAGE FOR 6TH STREET STORM DRAIN PROJECT, CIP 86-302 Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Appropriate $9,000 to CIP 86-302 for design services for the above -referenced project as follows: a. Appropriate $6,000 from the State Gas Tax to CIP 86-302. b. Transfer $3,000 from CIP 86-405 to CIP 86-302. 2. Authorize staff to proceed with the design process to alleviate drainage concerns on Beach Drive (from 6th Street to 10th Court) in conjunction with the 6th Street Storm Drain Project. Background: At their regular meeting of November 25, 1986, City Council took formal action to receive and approve the plans and specifications for storm drain construction at Hermosa Avenue -6th Street, and authorized Los Angeles County Public Works to proceed with the bid process. Analysis: On Tuesday evening, November 12, 1986, the Los Angeles County Public Works conducted a community meeting for the subject project in the Hermosa Beach City Council Chambers. Several Beach Drive residents attended this meeting expressing their street drainage concerns in this area. The L.A. County Public Works assured the audience that they would investigate these concerns and determined the following: (See Exhibit A) 1. The drainage concerns can be alleviated by re -surfacing Beach Drive (between 6th Street and 10th Court) with an inverted crown and concrete gutter. 2. This street work is estimated to cost $90,000, and because it is considered a betterment, neither the construction nor the design will be funded by the County. Staff evaluated the situation and determined that if the construction schedule were delayed by waiting for the County to prepare these betterment plans, storm drain construction would inevitably extend into the summer beach season. Consequently, in 1t the best interests proceed with their In addition, staff sewer line upgrade of the City, staff advised the County to bidding process. considered the possibility of a necessary in this area. It is more practical if the sewer improvements could be scheduled in conjunction with the street work, rather than tearing up the street in a few years. The Santina & Thompson report has already identified one sewer pipe segment needing replacement. The rest of the line will be videoed to determine the extent of sewer replacement. Staff recommends proceeding with the design process for the Beach Drive sewer/street improvements. The municipal code exempts professional services from the City's bidding process and allows for negotiation. We can successfully negotiate with a design consultant immediately so that the actual design can be approved by Council and the L. A. County Public Works in time for cost negotiations with the successful low bidder for the storm drain project. (See Exhibit B: Construction Schedule). Once the design is approved and the funds are transferred, Los Angeles County Public Works will administer the construction and inspection of this betterment in conjunction with the storm drain project. Fiscal Impact: The cost of these design services is estimated at $9,000. Construction costs are estimated at approximately $150,000, which may be less if the the sewer does not warrant replacement. Staff has compiled the following preliminary estimate and recommended funding sources: Preliminary Estimate BEACH DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS. Item Design Services (Street & Sewer) Construction: Budget Street Sewer (at $90/foot) Subtotal 10 Contingency Total Cost up to: for Design only: Sewer Fund State Gas Tax Total Estimated Cost $ 9,000 90,000 45,000 144,000 14.400 $ 158,400 1/3 ($9,000) _ $3,000 2/3 ($9,000) _ $6,000 2 $9,000 Funding Sources for Design only: Estimated Fund Proposed Adjusted Fund Balance 6/30/87 Expenditure Fund Balance State Gas Tax $305,758 $6,000 $299,758 Sewer Fund Transfer: $3,000 from CIP 86-405 to CIP 86-302 No construction costs are being requested at this time. Staff will return to Council at a later date with actual construction costs, and our recommended funding sources. There are currently sufficient funds in both State Gas Tax and the Sewer Fund (CIP 86-405) to pay for construction. Alternatives: Other alternatives available to Council and considered by staff: 1. Do nothing about the Beach Drive drainage concerns at this time and consider this project at a later date. Due to the valid concern of the affected residents (see Exhibit C), staff does not concur with this alternative. 2. Negotiate with the County. Respectf ubmitted, Deborah M. Murphy Assistant Engineer Concur: DMM:mv bchdr/m Attachments: ‘eliiit&tat Exhibit A, Exhibit B, Exhibit C, Concur: Ai An "ony Antich Director of Pub is Works Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Administrator Letter from L. A. County Public Works Construction Schedule Letter from Residents 3 THOMAS A. TIDEMANSON. Director WYNN L. SMITH. Chief Deputy Director CECIL E. BUGH . Assistant Director COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC: WORKS. December 31, 1986 1540 ALCAZAR STREET LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90033 'Telephone: (213) 226-8111 Mr. Tony Antich Director of Public Works City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254-0299 Dear Mr. Antich: RECEIVED JAN 0 5 1986 PUBLIC WORKS DEPT. EXHIBIT A ADDRESS ALL CORRESPONDENCE TO: P.O. BOX 4089 LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90051 IN REPLY PLEASE REFER TO FILE PD -3 634.41 HERMOSA AVENUE - SIXTH STREET DRAIN - STREET IMPROVEMENT After our recent community meeting on the above project, we investigated the localized flooding problem brought to our atten- tion by the residents of Beach Drive. We have determined that reconstructing Beach Drive from Sixth Street to Tenth Court with an inverted crown and concrete gutter would be the most economical way to alleviate this problem. This work is estimated to cost $90,000 and, since the problem is localized, would be considered a betterment. In a recent meeting with Mr. Tim Bazinet of my staff, you requested that we maintain our present construction schedule and not include the above work at this time as preparation of plans for this addi- tional work would delay awarding of our construction contract and could result in extending the contractor's operations into the summer beach season. In addition, you indicated that the 8 -inch sewer in Beach Drive from Sixth Street to Eighth Court may need to be replaced in conjunction with this street work. An option of including this additional work in our contract at a later date by change order still exists. This would require that the City complete the plans for this betterment work in time to allow for negotiations with our contractor and preparation and pro- cessing of the necessary betterment agreement. Please keep us advised of your intentions on this matter. If you have any further questions, please contact Mr. Tim Bazinet at (213) 226-4066. Very truly yours, T. A..TIDEMANSON Di ct or of blic Works,' HHARHYJW. STONE Deputy Director TKB:pg/LAHER 7ALT T/✓E �E2mF C7 - PROJECT SCHEDULE / PROJECT NAME : �T �T6/eM Di -A. /A LEGEND ACCOUNT NUMBER : GIP SC -%32.) TASKS �OL1G/r ,BE 1-1 DEQ. DFS t6. -1.t P,2[3 Pas�K-5 DE -5(6-A/ pe.mPc 564tom. E TrA TE d Au ,€-o 17&61c --,V ec>,J ri qcy 7:),e, ve- `Thraz LGA/tPE -/ 6 0 ed c c&uJC/c- DES16A/ f1 PP,2-o v/4 ( wow 5 Softc,t4De, D E5/6 n/ A DD€717X[m 7b S'T,yl LDe.-I C -c sjTieacr Fre 86L1 Ae //11 AeE,1/E'M1 Doe/ vPPeE- CoAlsT,eucT/OAJ Srcverv1.= 4DR. AiAl .'a .o, : um in. sF4e424- tee. 50-#Eatte X : 100% COMPLETE JAN FEB' MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 13E -4-e4-1 D/2i r/E 0-or457 CT/a,[ 12E4460 64.57-rio P --,a, pc/e /00 C 1 1 1 1 1 I '1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 EXHIBIT C I' January 12, 1987 City of Hermosa Beach Dept. of Public of Works RE: Beach Drive Flood Drainage Dear Sirs: It has come to the attention of the residents near the 6th Street "Storm Drain Project" that the LA County Flood Control District has just completed their drainage study of Beach Drive from 6th Street to 8th Street and informed us that the responsibility lies with the City of Hermosa Beach for correcting the drainage problem on Beach Drive. We the residents living and owning our property adjacent to Beach Drive are making a formal re- quest to have this problem resolved by the City of Hermosa Beach. We understand that the County surveying team has completed the necessary maps to alleviate the problem. The City Public Works told the County not to include these plans with the 6th Street Drain Project as it could delay the opening of the bids. In addition, the City said it did not have necessary funds at this time for the improvements and they wanted to construct a sewer along with the drain. We feel this is unfair, as all work could be completed at the same time. We feel we were set up for this delay. Two months ago we attended a special hearing at the City Council Hall, stated our position and were told that immediate action would be taken to correct the problem. We made numerous attempts to contact the Flood Control District and were told they were working on it. Not until Friday, January 9, 1987 were we informed that the Flood Control District was not including the remedy plans for our area at the request of the City of Hermosa Beach Public Works Department because it would delay opening of the bids. We, the residents of the affected area, plan to commence law suits against the City of Hermosa Beach for damages in the past and in the future resulting from water damage from flooding. It is noted that special consideration and remedies are always given to property owners located north of 9th Street, the "Sea Sprite Area" and so forth, while those south of the 9th Street are forgotten. Our re- quests for flood drainage work in our area dates back several years. See enclosed documents. There is a definite health problem because of stagnant standing water which breeds mosquitos and fleas, and attracts other insects. We can't even hose our yards or wash a car without worrying about the water that will not drain. The collection of water takes a week or more to disappear through natural evaporation. We request immediate r;sponse to this letter as we believe the City wants to do the right thing for its taxpaying residents and property owners. Attached are names and signatures of the affected residents and property owners. Sincerely Gerald A. Littman. Please Contact: Gerald A. Littman Committee Chairman (213) 379-6410 / Home (213) 979-1582 / Office Copy to: - Planning Dept. - City Council - City Manager Enclosure - as above PRINT NAME Li T tile? n/ J4c=i2014-4c /I. CECILE-REf<k.vick etauti J. / o4 iJu, ck eV- a%rye / �Nn1-1 P ,cam Linda )q ^VJ J Pocze BEACIi URiVE EI..00I) DRAINAGE PETI11ON Slil?I':F ADDRESS PHONE # 4 V Z e Sirr „La /.f 379-69/0 6341 7./t4 S7,e/1-m iff- %3• SIGNATURE 37Y-oo3L Ow. '• �.�.uG 63 . (' B_ ,?74 es.o (.,(� TiI 401-4 Triepoir, 161•8 6o V 7l4 ch -r9-1.11, 265 z i6 3)ass 642- 7Xi6 S1A'/\ f/ / 7 Z- 57(2_ TrLe SOete-fl J9- (76.E e 2-/ .-?-) 9-,R 9zo </c 6z41 s? // mss- FEW (3G 14 3%, % • /9 - C ieEe -, 37?-oz4/o C; -ca 4t1 \-\()) '() ':a__ 143, _3f g- S% 5q J/P tecli_es /16 C_ (fr-P `3 ") 7 219 PRINT NAME • - BEACH DRIVE FLOOD DRAINAGE PETITION SHEET ADDRESS S U6 (+0 1FA9 A IU Ii 6130e -A6 P/ -'44 MST Arr Am -1)G Ee 6.tzE wpri. re.ni Pi 7. 57- 18 altaffil Siteer 1-2 SA). -1_4(- -7‘1‘ /7 .. r'9 M - < #3 I -1 t1T OCAAvOPi2ev(.4 l77 °4 L 4,67v3i1ms/,. 11 14'ST lib 2. K µos . 61-1 t `j V-kC-V ARL1tJ L -o it/as/ //rcci /i#m,i/ �9-G'-) 4/,f1534 &?ac 4 Goo /71i3 6.3r the sti"and, fE, IS PHONE # ti SIGNATURE 3 7i - `718a I..." Len,' 7f -rt-17 318_655% 37Y/tel e 6S 7 -7 4a zc • • 7-(i-&)-It977 (L)77itetdeof L,Azt6 /97 7112609i> , /42 A/?/)2( AalVi& d_/1- e -ed Lathe .alZer/ 75f4 7/a- Az4-ze-4, Yke /4t»& off--t9$`t n M A4 e a. ; rd -a. g?..c Ae - /57�-7Iza, .xg 2S4' 104.<4 a.Azge% d &.ecr9.21-.1' 7,e-4ecea4e/24-/2zzlieze-d/ne p24I1dq4e24VA"-aaJzit.) 7-- • 19 iow ptAz /zme A.,irte9defez2edgf We_146,2t ,f‘4-612& 04-99ze aziA,415)-z_ : _5F `Z-E67zit /C66 -l -A-- -e-a Fez;/ 603) 79- 6 ciD G3/5) 97q- /57,2 - 77.8 S -rz-sl S7,4 'D co"lib o /151.7 l i co A.l 632.) 43`1) 634'63F T},►F_ STI"'A 711 sT January 20, 1987 Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the City Council of January 27, 1987 REQUEST TO APPROVE PAYKENT OF CUSTOMS rhh ON DONATED LADDER TRUCK, AND TO APPROPRIATE THE NECESSARY MONEY FROM PROSPECTIVE EXPENDITURES. REC IDATION: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Approve payment of the customs fee on the donated ladder truck. 2. That the money be appropriated from the prospective expenditures fund. 3. That authorization for payment be for an amount not to exceed one thousand dollars($1,000.). BACKGROUND: Vasek Polak has purchased an aerial ladder truck in Germany. He is having the truck shipped to the United States and is donating it to the City of Hermosa Beach Fire Department. The Customs Fee, which is based on the cost of the truck, will have to be paid by the City. ANALYSIS: Mr. Polak recently purchased a Mercedes, Model 321, ninety foot aerial ladder truck in Germany. The truck is a diesel and has recently been overhauled and referbished. While it is a 1959 model, it has only 10,000 miles on it and is listed in excellent mechanical and safety condition. The truck has a ninety foot aerial ladder capability and is operated by Metz hydralics, a canpany located in the Los Angeles area. The truck is a short wheelbase vehicle which is self-contained and will easily fit in our fire station. The City of Hermosa Beach has no capability of reaching higher than 30 feet with ladders at this time. As we all know, most of our structures are well over that height. This ladder truck would enable us to reach up to 90 feet in case of an emergency lu The current Custans Fee is 5.3% of the value of the article. The value listed for the truck on the bill of laden is 25,000 Marks. The most recent exchange rate of U.S. currency for German Marks was .5255. This would mean a Customs fee of approximately $697.00. CCUCOR: Gr ory�T. QuulM er�,�City Manager A-Q Vi�Copeland, Finance Administrator cr NOTED: fully . . tted, Steve S. Wisniewski Director of Public Safety Honorable Mayor and members of the Hermosa Beach City Council January 20, 1987 City Council Meeting of January 27, 1987 REQUEST FOR STREET VACATION RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that staff be directed to meet with the petitioning parties and advise them of the process whereby they may have consideration of their request for a street vacation. BACKGROUND The attached letter requests that the City Council permit the vacation a portion of the alley between 738/740 Longfellow and 737/739 30th Street. ANALYSIS A street vacation is a precise process requiring a formal application and hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council. Gr gory cm-ir Meyeer 1 Ci y Manager attachment cc Public Works Director Antich Planning Director Schubach Applicants January 16 , 1987 Hermosa Beach City Council Hermosa Beach Civic Center Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 re: Closing alley behind 738/740 Longfellow Dear Sirs, This letter is to request that you permit the closing of the alley between 738/740 Longfellow and 737/739 30th Street in Hermosa Beach. The following are details. • Current Owner of 738/740 Longfellow: John Brett Construction Company 1642 Voorhees Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 ph. 379-5599 • Current Owner of 737/739 30th Street: Virginia Peacock (formerly Minasi) 1065 Lomita Blvd. Harbor City, CA 90710 ph. 530-0176 • We are in the process of purchasing 738 Longfellow from. Brett Construction (currently in escrow). • The alley from the east boundary of 740 Longfellow to Pacific Coast Hwy appears to already be closed, since there is a fence running down the middle of the alley (see accompanying drawing). • All affected parties have aggreed to the closure (Brett Construction, Ms. Peacock, and us). If written verification is required, please let us know. • The closure will not restrict access to any other property that currently has access via the alley. Please let us know of your decision and any conditions for closure as soon as possible as it affects the construction of a fence on our (future) property. Also, please let us know if there is anything we can do to expedite this evaluation. Sincerely., Mel and Patty Takata 12626 Woodgreen Street Los Angeles, CA 90066 res. 391-8005 Mel's Office: 450-9111 (ext. 2607) Pat's Office: 556-3942 cc: Darrow Fiedler Lyn Teuscher (Equity Escrow) Virginia Peacock Brett Construction Company i ;I. 100 LONGFELLOW .i• ',it 1,7 1011 .. I 30 1U2 ti• Yo: 30 1103 1 s 104 ;s 105 106 I�2 107 108 109 Z5 110 III•., z 112 113 P"'',1 / 1l 0,r--✓ ,,,,o, ,b 1 1141115 6 117 118 119 120 I 147 146' ‘114..111 14i1 t _1sVI.s .� 30 T" _s 142 139 257 2 138 1137 512n 25 135 134 133 8 132 13r 2S 129 128 127 126 125 ST. J tE • Qd 4 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CONVENTION HALL AND MARINE VIEW PARK M. NI -1-3 1 0 <, 0• w J 3 a w THIS ISR FRENNEITHER A PLAT NOR A SURVEY. TO STREETS AND OTHER 1T IS LANO. P40 LIABILITY IS ASSUMED BD AS A Y REASOE TO LOCATE RELIANCE Efl ON. INDICATED HEREON WITH REFERENCE January 19, 1987 1642 Voorhees Avenue Manhattan Beach, California 90266 City of Hermosa Beach Civic Center - 376-6984 Hermosa Beach, California 90254 Dear City of Hermosa Beach, REGARDING: Vacation of 50 feet of alley between Longfellow and 30th Street The purpose of this letter is to request vacation of 50 feet of the alley to the south of my property located at 738-740 Longfellow (Lots 118 and 119). We want to relocate the. fences to include the North half of this portion of the alley. Sid erely, Jbhn Brett esident 1-19-87 1065 Lomita Blvd. Suite 289 Harbor City,Ca. 90710 530-0176 City of Hermosa Beach Civic Center -376-6984 Hermosa Beach, Ca., 90254 Dear City of Hermosa Beach, Re: Vacation of 50 feet of alley between Longfellow and 30th Street. The purpose of this letter is to request vacation of 50 feet of the alley to the north of my property located at 737 30 th Street, (Lots 128 and 129). We want to relocate the fences to include the south half of this portion of the alley. Sincerely, Virginia J. Minasi ( 14 January 19, 1987 Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the City Council of January 27-, 1987 NOISE STUDY AND ORDINANCE UPDATE RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Transfer $1,000 from Prospective Expenditures to Police, Government Contract Services account to employ the County of Los Angeles to complete a community -wide noise study for use in developing a revised Noise Control Ordinance later this fiscal year. 2. Consider at the mid -year budget how to fund additional noise monitoring equipment. BACKGROUND: City Council previously instructed the department to study up- grading the existing Noise Ordinance and to return with recommen- dations in January, 1987. Dr. Frank Gomez, the Environmental Management Training Coordina- tor for L.A. County was contacted in regards to this direction. Dr. Gomez reviewed our existing Ordinance, which was developed in 1971, and revised in 1974 and 1984. He also reviewed all pre- vious Council documentation of the problem, specific complaints, etc. Based on his total review, Dr. Gomez made several findings and recommendations: 1. The existing Noise Ordinance is a "first generation" en- vironmental management attempt and requires major rewrite after a supportive study. 2. A new Ordinance should be designed "around the problem" and should address all noise problems in the City, in- cluding traffic, construction, etc. 3. "State-of-the-art" monitoring equipment, including print- out readings for Court and C.U.P. violation documenta- tion, is available at a relatively low cost and should be purchased; and 4. Training and certification of enforcement officers can be provided "on-the-job" to minimize the cost to the City. 1 1:i Dr. Gomez has recently submitted a written proposal (attached) for a comprehensive noise study and development of a control ordinance. ANALYSIS: The proposal by Dr. Gomez appears to be a logical approach to studying the problem city-wide and developing a comprehensive ordinance for control and enforcement. The study would cost $1,000. The cost of proper monitoring equipment would be between $1,000. and $3,000., depending on the needs, as determined by the study. The proposed study includes 24 hour monitoring to determine am- bient noise levels at problem locations as well as throughout the City. Dr. Gomez advised that the best time to complete -the study is during the late spring or early summer months. Some of the rea- soning includes weather related transmission of noise, business doors being closed in colder weather, etc. Funding for an approriate study was not included in this fiscal budget. If City Council chooses to approve funding for the study in this year's budget, we could move ahead and develop the Or- dinance and budget the equipment for the next F/Y. CO CUR: 1' Gr:•go y r. Meye Ci y y!anager Respectfully submitted, Zjtucz. A Steve S. Wisniewski Public Safety Director FI CAL IMPACT NOTED Viki Cope and, Finance Administrator 2 S COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES • DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES ,.D115/ 313 NORTH FIGUEROA STREET • LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012 • (213) 974- 7841 December 8, 1986 . John Mebius Interim Public Safety Director Hermosa Beach Police Department City 'of Hermosa Beach Civic Center Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Dear Captain Mebius: PROPOSAL FOR COMMUNITY NOISE STUDY AND DEVELOPMENT OF REVISED NOISE CONTROL ORDINANCE The following is a summary of the proposal we discussed in the meeting of November 14, 1986 concerning a community noise study and recommendations for revision of the City's Community Noise Ordinance. I. City-wide Community Noise Study This Department will conduct a noise survey of Hermosa Beach to determine (estimate) ambient noise levels. The study will consist of two days of 24-hour monitoring at two preselected secure sites. Ambient hourly noise levels' will be taken randomly throughout the City and adjusted to 24-hour values. Ambient noise levels will be reported in 24-hour and hourly values. A detailed study of the downtown area of the City will be conducted with special emphasis on nighttime noise levels. II. Revised Community Noise Control Ordinance The Department will make recommendations for changes in the City's Community Noise Control Ordinance. Recommendations will be made to streamline the monitoring and enforcement procedures and update the vehicle noise enforcement provisions. III. Equipment and Training This Department will assist the City in the selection of required noise monitoring equipment and will train the enforcement officers as required. John Mebius December 8, 1986 Page 2 IV. Initial Enforcement The Department will assist the City in the initial enforcement of the Noise Ordinance in cooperation with the Police Department. V. Cost for Services . The total cost for the whichever is less. If you should have any me at (213) 974-7841. Sincerely, above services will be $1,000.00 or 30 man-hours questions concerning this matter, please contact January 16, 1987 HONORABLE MAYOR and MEMBERS of Regular Meeting of the HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL January 27, 1987 APPROVAL OF ENCROACHMENT PERMIT AT 2851 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY Recommendation It is recommended that City Council: 1. Approve an encroachment permit application for a. A rolling gate enclosing a portion of an alley behind Borrelli's Restaurant, b. A four foot wide cornice on Thirtieth Street, c. A three foot section of foundation on Thirtieth Street. All work is for the project located at 2851 Pacific Coast Highway. 2. Authorize staff to prepare the necessary Encroachment Permit Agreement for signature by the Mayor. Background On April 15, 1986 the City of Hermosa Beach entered into a Development Agreement with the applicant to allow expansion of the BMW Dealership. A four foot wide cornice, extending from the structure will be twelve feet above the sidewalk and will encroach into the public right-of-way air space for the length of the building. A three foot section of foundation for the proposed structure will encroach three feet into the public right-of-way and be located one foot beneath the sidewalk. Also, the applicant is requesting permission to place a rolling chain link gate across the public right-of-way. The gate will be rolled onto and off of the public right-of-way, and will be attached to a wall located entirely on private property in the alley behind Borrelli's Restaurant. When the gate is closed, a portion of the public right of way will be enclosed. Analysis The applicant owns two structures adjacent to Thirtieth Street housing one business. The foundation for the structures extends three feet horizontally and one foot beneath the existing sidewalk. The cornice extends four feet onto the public right-of-way air space and will be twelve feet above the sidewalk. Both existing foundation and cornice were built many years before the current Encroachment Ordinance became 1 effective.The applicant proposes to join the two buildings together using the same type of architecture for aesthetics. FOUNDATION ENCROACHMENT The new structure's foundation will encroach three feet horizontally and will be placed one foot under the sidewalk on Thirtieth Street. This new foundation will match the existing foundation of the older structure. Thirtieth Street, adjacent to the project is currently widened to the maximum street width and is set to the proper grade. No grade changes are planned for this street. Continuing to place the foundation under the sidewalk at this location will cause no problems for the City. The added benefit is that the sidewalk will be replaced after construction is completed with new sidewalk. CORNICE ENCROACHMENT The proposed cornice will encroach four feet horizontally from the building into the public right-of-way air space. The cornice is proposed to be twelve feet above the sidewalk, generating no concern for safety of pedestrian or vehicular travel. This encroachment is necessary for consistant architecture along Thirtieth Street. GATE ENCROACHMENT The rolling chain link gate is proposed to be placed across the alley behind the applicants business and adjacent to a previously vacated street. The gate will enclose a portion of the public right-of-way, when the gate is closed. This department has determined an "turn around" located at the proposed gate line will be adequate for emergency vehicle use. The project design is complete and the applicant is ready to pull the necessary building permits. Staff recommends that City Council approve the proposed rolling chain link gate, cornice encroaching into air space above the public right-of-way and the encroaching foundation beneath the existing sidewalk. Also, it should be noted the applicant has displayed a willingness to work within the guidelines as set forth by the Public Works Department and Building Department. C. 1 R: Or4A Iii oiu4A. An"'ony Antich " Director of Pu,ilic Works Gr Ci gor y Manager Attachment: eyer Respectful) submitted � 't A(J) Lyn Stevens Ad inistrative Aide Diagram indicating: 1. Proposed Wall with Foundation 2. Proposed Cornice 3. Proposed Rolling Gate 4. Encroachment Permit Application - 2 - QITV OF 1RYtOM )3EIKZJ)J CIVIC CENTER HERMOSA BEACH CALIFORNIA 9 0 2 5 4 CITY HALL: (213) 376-6984 POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS: 3 7 6- 7 9 8 1 PROPOSED ENCROACHMENT AT 2851 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY 1 GRAY AREA INDICATES ENCROACHMENT QM.W. QLDG. :.<.. <::n>::::, Cornice NOTE: DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALE ATTACHMENT ,30Tt/ ST. CITY OF bsetliVIOM )3E405 CIVIC CENTER HERMOSA BEACH CALIFORNIA 9 0 2 5 4 CITY HALL:TY HAL 3 7 6- 6 9 8 4 POLICE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS: 3 7 6- 7 9 8 1 PROPOSED INCROACHMENT AT 2851 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY GRAY AREA INDICATES ENCROACHMENT NOTE: DRAWING IS NOT TO SCALE •' 6 a '�� X'. ' (Private Property) APPRox• .':*:>3t:{s:i'.:.;"'°``:�::o;<�:;;,.::�:�?;a�aX..;�:..:..,.>�::., b:lr i::u �:.:�.:::: .. ............ :.... (Private Property) ATTACHMENT 2 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT APPLICATION PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CITY HALL 1315 VALLEY DRIVE HERMOSA BEACH, CA. 90254 PERMIT NUMBER Inspection Required Phone 376-6984 Ext. 214 24 Hr. Notice Required for all inspections Date of Application 12-23-86 Job Address Alley behind 2851 Pacific Coast Highway AKA Borrelli's Restaurant, and 30th Street, Hermosa Beach, California Legal Description: Lot No. Block No. , Tract SEE ATTACHMENT FOR DESCRIPTION OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. Processing Fee: IX 7117. XsiRX $108.00 Note: This is a non-refundable fee. No portion of this fee will be returned whether or not encroachment is approved by the City Council. Date request heard by Hermosa Beach City Council 1-27-87 Approved Denied Owner/Permittee Vasek Polak BMW Agency Mailing Address 2901 Pacific Coast Highway City Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Telephone No. 376-0935 Inspection Approved Date Contractor Address City N/A Telephone No. State Lic No. City Lic. No. Description of Proposed Encroachment: Movable gate onto public right-of-way,in alley and foundation for wall and air .space for decorative corniceon 30th Street. SEE ATTACHED PLANS. Note: Refer to attached Encroachment Agree- ment and all conditions set forth therein. The City of Hermosa Beach is held harmless frau the results of any action or accidents caused by the permittee, his employees or equipment in the performance of the work described or covered in this permit. I HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION AND STATE THAT THE INFORMATION GIVEN IS CORRECT. I AGREE TO COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE CITY ORDINANCES AND STATE LAWS AND WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS PERMIT. SIGNATURESrr PERMITTEE 1-.L AUTHORIZED AGENT January 13, 1987 HONORABLE MAYOR and MEMBERS of Regular Meeting of the HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL January 13, 1987 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR CIP 85-502 ASPHALT AREA REPAIR AND RESURFACING FOR PARK DEVELOPMENT AT PROSPECT AVENUE, HOLLOWELL AVENUE & GENTRY STREET Recommendation It is recommended that City Council: 1. Approve the attached request for proposals for Asphalt Area Repair and Replacement, 2. Authorize staff to solicit proposals for the above work. Background City Council approved CIP 85-502 on June 13, 1985 as part of the Capital Improvement Budget. Analysis Design work for the park is complete. Construction work is scheduled to begin in the spring and is before City Council at this time so we may begin the work. Respectfully submitted n Stevens Administrative Aide UR: hony Antich Director of Pu Gr Ci gor Manager lic Works eyer Attachments: Request For Proposal - CIP 85-502 - Asphalt Area Repair and Resurfacing for Park Development at Prospect Avenue, Hollowell Avenue and Gentry Street. 1 �C� T CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA CIP 85-502 - PROSPECT PARK DEVELOPMENT 1. Notice to Contractors 2. Instructions to Bidders 3. Special Provisions and Specifications 4. Proposal 5. Agreement for: ASPHALT AREA REPAIR AND RESURFACING FOR PARK DEVELOPMENT AT PROSPECT AVENUE, HOLLOWELL AVENUE AND GENTRY STREET Approved , 1987. Anthony Antich Director of Public Works PART 1. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH State of California NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS SEALED PROPOSALS will be received at the office of the City Clerk, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, California until Friday, February 13, 1987 at 11:00 a.m. at which time they will be publicly opened and read for performing work as follows: ASPHALT AREA REPAIR AND REPALCEMENT FOR PARK DEVELOPMENT AT PROSPECT AVENUE, HOLLOWELL AVENUE AND GENTRY STREET. NOTE TO ALL BIDDING CONTRACTORS: All contractor's proposing to bid on this project shall go on a field visit with a Public Works Department representative prior to bidding. Bids shall be enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed to the City Clerk, City of. Hermosa Beach, California, 90254, and shall be identified on the lower left corner of the envelope: "SEALED BID - ASHPALT REPAIR" No bid will be considered unless it is made on the enclosed proposal form furnished by the City Engineer. Each bid must be accompanied by cash, certified or cashier's check or bidder's bond made payable to the City of Hermosa Beach for an amount equal to at least ten (10) percent of the amount of the base bid, such guaranty to be forfeited should the bidder to whom the contract is awarded fail to enter into the contract. The City Enginer referred to hereinafter shall be the Director of the Department of Public Works of the City or his designee. In accordance with the provisions of Sections 1770 to 1780 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the Director of Industrial Relations has ascertained the general prevailing rate of wages and employer payments for health and welfare, vacation, pensions, and similar purposes applicable to the locality in which work is to be done for each craft or type of workman needed to execute the proposed contract. It will be required that not less than said rates shall be paid to all such workmen employed or engaged on the work. Complete wage rate schedules are on file at the City Hall. The contractor and any sub -contractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 (Chapter 1411, Statues of 1986) in the,employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requiremetns may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex officio the Administrator of NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. All bids are to be compared on the basis of the City Engineer's Estimate of the quantities of work to be done. No bid will be accepted from a Contractor who has not been licensed in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 9 of Division 3 of the Business of Professions Code. Plans and forms of proposal, bonds, contract, and special provisions may be obtained at the office of the Public Works Department, City of Hermosa Beach, CA 90254. There is no cost for the bid package. The special attention of prospective bidders is called to Part 2, Instructions to Bidders, for full directions as to bidding, etc. A business license is required to do contracting work in the City of Hermosa Beach. The City of Hermosa Beach reserves the right to reject any or all bids and to waive any irregularity or informality in any bid to bhe extent permitted by law. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DATED: Anthony Antich Director of Public Works NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS PART 2. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH State of California INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS To be used in conjunction with the STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORK CONSTRUCTION (1985 EDITION) and to be made part of: ASHPALT AREA REPAIR AND RESURFACING FOR PARK DEVELOPMENT AT PROSPECT AVENUE, HOLLOWELL AVENUE AND GENTRY STREET INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS -1- Section 1. PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS (a) General: --Proposals shall be submitted to the City Council on forms prepared and furnished for the purpose, which may be obtained at the office of the Public Works Department. When presented they must be completely made out in the manner and form indicated therein, showing the proposed prices clearly and legibly, and must be properly signed by bidder. Proposals presented otherwise may not be considered. Each proposal so submitted, together with the required proposal guaranty hereinafter prescribed, shall be presented under sealed cover; and must be filed prior to the time, and at the place, designated in the Notice to Contractors. A proposal so presented, however, may be withdrawn by the bidder, provided the request therefore is made in writing, is signed by the bidder or his authorized representative, and is filed prior to the time fixed for the opening of bids. The withdrawal of a bid proposal does not prejudice the right of the bidder to file a new bid. All proposals submitted as hereinabove prescribed will be publicly opened and read at the time and place indicated in the Notice to Con- tractors. (b) Examination of Plans, Specifications, Special Provisions and Site of Work: --Bidders must satisfy themselves by personal examina- tion of the location of the proposed work and by such other means as they may prefer as to the proposal, plans, specifications, contract form and actual conditions and requirements of the work, and shall not at any time after submission of the bid dispute, complain, or assert that there was any misunderstanding in regard to the conditions to be encountered, the character, quality, and quantities of work to be performed and materialsto be furnished, and the requirements of the proposal, plans, specifications, and the contract form. The submission of a proposal shall be considered conclusive evidence that the bidder has made such examination. (c) Approximate Estimate: --The quantities shown in the proposal form, and in the estimate included in the Special Provisions, shall be considered as approximate only, being listed therein for the purpose of serving as a general indication of the amount of work or materials to be performed or furnished, and as a basis for the comparison of bids; and the City does not guarantee nor agree, either expressly or by implication, that the actual amounts required will correspond therewith, but reserves the right to increase or decrease the amount of any item or portion of work or material to be performed or furnished, or to omit any such item or portion, in accordance with the provisions relative thereto set INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS -2- forth in the Special Provisions or Standard Specifications, under which the work is to be constructed, without any way invalidating the contract, should such increase, decrease or omission be deemed necessary or expedient. Addenda: --The Engineer may, from time to time, issue addenda to the contract documents during the period of advertising for bids, for the :following purposes: la) Prevailing Wage Scales, (b) clarifying or correcting special provisions, plans or bid proposal; provided however that any such addenda -shall not change the original scope and intent of the project. •.•Securers of contract documents shall be notified of, and furnished with copies of, such addenda, either by certified mail or personal • - delivery, during the period of advertising. ;:.:.(e) Proposal Form: --All proposals must be signed by the bidder, -- with his -address. If the proposal is made by an individual, his name and post office address must be shown. If made by a firm or partnership,the name and post office address of each member of the firm or partnership must be shown. If made by a corporation, the proposal must show the name of the state under the laws of which the corporation was chartered and the names titles, and business addresses of the president, secretary, and treasurer. .(f) Proposal Guaranty: --Each proposal submitted must be accompanied either by cash, or by a certified or cashier's check, or a surety bond, payable to the City of Hermosa Beach , in an amount equivalent to at least ten (10) percent of the total base bid price of such proposaT, as a guaranty that the bidder, if his proposal be accepted, will enter into and execute the awarded contract; and no proposal will be accepted unless such cash, check or surety bond is enclosed therewith. However, the use of a surety bond in this connnection shall be subject to the condition that the surety thereon be approved by the City Attorney. Should any bidder to whom an award is made fail to properly enter into and execute the awarded contract, the cash, check or bond submitted with his proposal shall be forfeited to, and become the property of the City of . Hermosa Beach , whereupon the City shall have the right to collect the amount thereof by an appropriate means. Following the award of contract, the proposal guarantees will be returned to the respective bidders by whom they were submitted, except as otherwise hereinbefore provided. (g) Disqualification of Bidders and Proposals: --More than one INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS -3- •proposal for the same work from any individual, firm, partnership, corporation or Association under the same or different names will not be accepted; and reasonable grounds for believing that any bidder is interested in more than one proposal for the work will be cause for rejecting all proposals in which such bidder is interested. Apparent collusion among the bidders will likewise be sufficient cause for reject- ing any or all bids, and the participants in such collusion may be barred from future bidding. Proposals in which the prices are obviously unbalanced, and those which are incomplete or show any alteration of form, erasures or irregu- larities of any kind, or contain any additions or conditional or alternate bids that are not called for or otherwise permitted, may be rejected. A proposal on which the signature of the bidder has been omitted may, at the discretion of the City of . Hermosa Beach , be rejected. The right is reserved to reject any and all proposals. (h) Competency of Bidders: --Bidders must be thoroughly competent, and capable of satisfactorily performing the work covered by the proposal; and when requested shall furnish such statements relative to previous experience on similar work, the plan or procedure proposed, and the organization, machinery, plant and other equipment available for the contemplated work, and the financial condition and resources of the bidder, as may be deemed necessary by the Engineer in determining such competence and capability. The City will not enter into a contract with any bidder who is not properly licensed to do the work of this contract under the provisions of Chapter 9 of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code, unless particularly exempted by the terms thereof. The sheet for bidder's signature in the Bid Proposal (PROPOSAL, PART 4), shall clearly show the contractor's name, address, telephone number, State of California License number, classification and date of expiration. Section 2. AWARD AND EXECUTION OF CONTRACT (a) Comparison of Proposals and'Award Contract: --After the proposals for the contemplated work have been opened and read as provided herein, the respective totals thereof, determined by applying the unit prices bid to the estimated quantities shown, will be extended and compared; and the results will thereupon be made public. The award of the contract, if it be awarded, will be made to the INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS -4- lowest responsible and qualified bidder whose proposal complies with all the prescribed requirements, but until an award is made the right will be reserved to reject any or all bids, and to waive technical errors or discrepancies, if to do so is deemed to best serve the interests of the City. In no event will an award be made until. .all ..necessary investigations are made as to the responsibility and qualifications of the bidder to whom`i.t is proposed to make such award. Such an award if made, will be' made within thirty (30) days after the opening of the proposal. (b) Execution of Contract: --The contract shall be signed by the awardee and returned to the City together with the contract bonds, and other contract documents as required in the Special Provisions, within ten (10) days,.not including Sundays and legal holidays, after it has been delivered or mailed to him or his authorized agent. ;Noproposal shall be considered as being binding upon the City until the contract is fully executed; and failure of the awardee to properly execute the awarded contract and file acceptable bonds and other contract documents as provided herein within ten (10) days, not including Sundays and legal holidays, shall be just and sufficient cause for the annulment of the award by the City and the forfeiture of his proposal guaranty. (c) Return of Proposal Guaranties: --Within ten (10) days after the award of the contract, the City of Hermosa Beach will return the proposal, guaranty,. accompanying such of the proposals which are not to be further considered in making the award. All other proposal guaranties will be held until the contract has been finally executed, after which all proposal guaranties, except those forfeited, will be returned to the respective bidders whose proposals they accompany. (d) Contract Bonds: --The successful Contractor shall furnish two bonds required by the State Contract Act. Each of the said bonds shall be exectued in a sum equal to the contract price. One of the said bonds shall guarantee the faithful performance of the said contract by the Contractor; and the other of the said bonds shall secure the payment of claims for labor and material. Section 3. BID PROPOSAL FORM INSTRUCTIONS Bids are required for the entire work. The amount of the bid for comparison purposes will be the total of all items. The bidder shall set forth for each item of work, in clearly legible figures, a unit price and a total for the item in the respective spaces provided for this purpose. In the case of unit price items, the amount set forth under the "Total" column shall be the extension of the unit tOINSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS -5- price bid on the basis of the estimated quantity for the item. In case of discrepancy between the unit price and the total set forth for the item, the unit price shall prevail, provided, however, if the amount set forth as a unit price is ambiguous, unintelligible or uncertain for any cause, or is omitted, or in the case where the unit price is the same amount as the entry in the "Total" column, then the amount set forth in the "Total" column for the item shall prevail in accordance with the following: (1) As to lump sum items, the amount set forth in the "Total" column shall be the unit price. (2) As to unit price items, the amount set forth in the "Total" column shall be divided by the estimated quantity for the item and the price thus obtained shall be the unit price. Section 4. TAXES No mention shall be made of Sales Tax or Use Tax as all bid prices submitted will be considered as including such taxes. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS -6- PART 3. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH State of California SPECIAL PROVISIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS for: ASHPALT AREA REPAIR AND RESURFACING FOR PARK DEVELOPMENT AT PROSPECT AVENUE, HOLLOWELL AVENUE AND GENTRY STREET Section 1. GENERAL (a) Contract Document: - Documents which shall be signed and returned to the City with the Bid Proposal are: Proposal - Part 4. Bid Bond, Certified or Cashier's Check, or Cash Contractor's Industrial Safety Record Contract Document: - Documents which are to be signed and returned to the City by awardee are: Contract Agreement Bond for Faithful Performance Payment Bond (for Material and Labor) Certificate of Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance. Statement relative to Workmen's Compensation SPECIAL PROVISIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS -1- (b) Specifications: --The work to be done shall be performed or executed in accordance with the Special Provisions included herewith, and in accordance with "Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction," 1985 Edition, hereinafter referred to as Standard Specifications. The Standard Specifications are published by Building News, Inc., 3055 Overland Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90034. In case of conflict between the Standard Specifications and these Special Provisions, these Special Provisions shall take precedence.over and be used in lieu of such conflicting portions. (c) Contractor's Representative: --The third sentence of Section 7-6 of the Standard Specifications is amended to read as follows: The representative or alternate shall be present at the worksite whenever work is in progress or actions of the elements necessitate his presence to protect public or private properties. Section 2. SCOPE OF WORK (a) Work to be Done: --The work to be performed or executed under this project consists of and includes the furnishing of all labor, materials, tools, equipment and other incidental and appurtenant work necessary for the proper construction and completion of the contract in a satisfactory and workmanlike manner. The scope of the work shall conform to Section 2 of the Standard Specifications and as hereinafter specified. (b) Other Work: --The scope of the work may also include among other things alterations, extra work, increases or decreases, and final cleaning up, as specified in Section 3 of the Standard Specifications. (c) Plans: --Included herein AMPOOMMX is a copy of Concept "D" showing the location enckx oteat of the work to be done. Section 3. CONTROL OF WORK (a) General: --Control of the work including, but not limited to, acceptability of materials and work, authority of the Engineer, interpretation, coordination and changes in plans, superintendence and inspection shall conform to Section 2 of the Standard Specifications. Section 4. CONTROL OF MATERIALS (a) General: --The control of the materials required to complete the SPECIAL PROVISIONS -2- work including, but not limited to, the sources, handling, testing, and rejection shall conform to Section 4 of the Standard Specifications. Section 5. LEGAL RELATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITY (a) General: --In connection with laws to be observed and respon- sibility of the Contractor, attention is directed to Section 7 of the Standard Specifications and to the laws therein applicable to this contract. (b) Labor: --Attention is directed to Section 7 of the Standard Specifications with regards to the provisions and penalties applicable to workmen permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in a calendar day, to labor discrimination, and to employment of alien labor. (c) Prevailing Wages: --Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1770 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the Director of Industrial Relations has ascertained the general prevailing rate of.wages and employer payments for health and welfare, vacation, pension, and similar purposes in the City to be as on file at the City Hall. (d) Insurance: --In order to indemnify and save harmless the City of Hermosa Beach and all officers, employees and agents of the City; the Contractor shall carry public liability andproperty damage insurance, with the City named as an insured, per the requirements of Section 7-3 of the Standard Specifications amended to include personal injury or death in amounts not less than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00) for injury to or death to any one person,' one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) for injuries or deaths arising out of any one accident and one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) for property damage. The Contractor shall, prior to commencement of any work by him or by any subcontractor working under him, furnish to the City satisfactory evidence that the required insurance has been obtained and is in effect. If the Contractor fails to provide and maintain such insurance; the City may obtain and maintain the insurance for the Contractor and may deduct the cost of such insurance from any monies due the Contractor under the contract, or the City may terminate the contract without further liability to the Contractor of any nature whatsoever. The Contractor shall provide the Certificate of Workmen's Compensa- tion Insurance required in Section 7-4 of the Standard Specifications and comply with all other provisions of that section. SPECIAL PROVISIONS -3- Section 6. PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND SAFETY • (a) General: --Attention is directed to Section 7-10 of the Standard Specifications and the Manual of Warning Signs, Lights and Devices for Use in Performing the Work Upon Highways published by the California Department of Transportation. Full compensation for conforming to the requirements of Section '7-10 of the Standard Specifications, the above referenced Cal -Trans Manual and these special provisions not otherwise provided for, shall be considered as included in the prices paid for the various contract items of• work and no additional compensation will be allowed therefor. Ab) Changes in Requirements: --Sections 7-10.1 and 7-10.3 of the Standard Specifications are amended as follows: Section 7-10.1, paragraph one (1), last sentence is amended as follows: Unless otherwise authorized, or set forth below, at all times the traffic shall be permitted to pass through the work and one lane kept open with flagmen control. Section 7-10.3, paragraph one (1) is amended as follows: The Contractor shall not close adjacent or intersecting ,;streets on the same day, unless approved by. the Engineer. On ,streets longer than.1,500 feet between intersections, only one •side of .the street shall be closed on one day. Section 7-10.3, paragraph two (2) is amended as follows: In addition to these provisions and as set forth in Section 6 (c) below, it will be the responsibility of the Contractor to notify, by personal contact or mail, all residents in advance of closing the street. (c) Warning and Protection Devices: --The Contractor will be respon- sible for providing, placing, and maintaining approved signs, barricades, pedestals, flashers, delineators, fences, barriers, and flagmen where needed, and other necessary facilities in the vicinity of the construction area and where any dangerous conditions may be encountered as a result thereof, for the protection of the motoring public. The Contractor will not be allowed to proceed with the work until a sufficient number of these protection facilities have been delivered to the project site. Where parked vehicles are likely to interfere with the proposed work, the City will supply "Temporary No Parking" signs to the Contractor. The Contractor will be required to post these signs 24 hours before the start SPECIAL PROVISIONS -4- of construction and to report the time of posting to the City's Police Department for the purpose of establishing "Tow Away" provisions. During the course of the work, opposing lanes of traffic must be separated by striping or delineators. The delineator posts shall be a minimum of 3" in width or diameter. The minimum height shall be 37" above the driving surface of the highway regardless of where the delineator is placed. The vertical portion of the delineators shall be luminous and bright in color. Two 3 -inch amber reflectorsshall be mounted on a minimum of 1-1/2 inches apart and in such a manner that one shall be 3 feet above the driving surface. The reflectors shall conform to the Standard Specifica- tions of the Division of Highways, Department of Public Works, State of California, for reflex reflectors. All delineators placed in close proximity to the edge of the traffic lane shall be of material that will withstand impact without damage to the delineators, striking vehicle and/or passing traffic. These deline- ators shall be composed of a material that has sufficient rigidity to remain upright while unattended and shall be either flexible or collaps- ible upon impact with a vehicle. The base shall be of such shape as to preclude roll after impact. It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to maintain the aforementioned delineators until such time as the striping is actually accomplished. The use of traffic cones, while unattended, to delineate traffic will be subject to the approval of the Engineer. Should the Contractor appear to be neglectful or negligent in furnishing warning and protection devices as outlined above, the Engineer may direct attention to the existence of a hazard and the necessity of additional or different measures which shall be furnished and installed by the Contractor at his own expense, free of any cost to the City. Should the Contractor refuse to correct a hazardous condition, the Engineer may direct City forces to provide necessary additional protective and warning devices of a type and amount that he, or his authorized representative, may deem necessary. The actual costs accrued by the City in connection therewith will be deducted from the Contractor's contract payment. Any action on the part of the City in directing attention to the inadequacy of warning and protective measures or in providing additional protective and warning devices shall not relieve the Contractor from responsibility for public safety or abrogate his obligation to furnish and pay for these devices. SPECIAL PROVISIONS -5- (c) Notification: --The Contractor shall give written and reasonable notice to occupants or owners of property adjacent to the construction site at least 48 hours prior to the beginning of construction in their respective areas. The notification shall include the date and time of street closures, parking and traffic access information and requirements, and precautionary information regarding the work to be done.. A copy of all notifications shall be submitted to the Engineer for approval. =Section 7. PROSECUTION AND PROGRESS. (a) General: --The prosecution and progress of the work shall conform to Section 6 of the Standard Specifications and these Special Provisions. •'(b) Subletting: --The Contractor shall give his personal attention to the fulfillment of the contract and shall keep the work under his control. No sub -contractor will be recognized as such, and all persons engaged in the work of construction will be considered as employees of the Contractor.' . _ - ':(c) Time Limit: --A11 work shall be completed within 30 calendar days. The Contractor will be required to commence construction within 15 calendar days following the date of the notice to proceed. The City will not authorize any work to be done under these specifica- tions before the contract agreement has been signed; and any work that is done by the Contractor in advance of such time shall be considered as being done at his own risk and on his own responsibility, and as a consequence will be subject to rejection by having not been done in the presence of an Engineer or Inspector as provided in Section 2-10 of the Standard Specifications. (d) _Liquidated Damages: --The Contractor shall pay to the City of Hermosa Beach the sum of one hundred ($100.00) dollars per day for each and every calendar day's delay in finishing the work in excess of the number of working days prescribed above. (e) Scheduling of Work: --After notification to proceed and prior to start of any work,. the Contractor shall submit to the Engineer for approval his proposed schedule. The -proposed schedule shall indicate in a chronological relationship, the exact starting and completion dates for the various work on each individual street. Exact dates that each street or portions of a street will be completely or partially closed shall also SPECIAL PROVISIONS -6- be indicated. The construction schedule shall reflect completion of all work under the contract within the specified time and in accordance with the Special Provisions and the Standard Specifications. If the Contractor desires to make a change in the approved schedule, or if his schedule fails to reflect the actual progress, he shall submit to the Engineer for approval a revised proposed schedule 48 hours in advance of beginning revised operations. It shall be the responsibility of the Contractor to notify the affected residents and the City's Police and Fire Departments of any authorized hours in advance of beginning revised operations. The Contractor shall cooperate with the various parties involved in the delivery of mail and the collection and removal of trash and garbage to maintain existing schedules for these services. Section 8. MEASUREMENT AND PAYMENT (a) General: --Attention is directed to Section 9 of the Standard Specifications which includes procedures for determination of payments, partial payments and final payments. Section 9. CHANGES IN WORK - (a) Changes in Work: --Paragraph 3-2.1 of the Standard Specifications is amended as follows: 3-2.1 General. The Agency may change the plans, speci- fications, character of the work, or quantity of work. Change orders shall be in writing and state the dollar value of the change or establish the method of payment, any adjustment in contract time, and when negotiated prices are involved, shall provide for the Contractor's signature indicating acceptance. Paragraph 3-2.2.1 of the Standard Specifications is amended as follows: 3-2.2.1. Contract Unit Prices. If a change is ordered in an item of work covered by a contract unit price, an adjustment in payment will be made based upon the increase or decrease in quantity and the contract unit price. The contract unit price shall remain unchanged during the term of this agreement. SPECIAL PROVISIONS -7- -(b) Extra Work: --Extra work, when ordered and accepted, shall be paid for under a written work order in accordance with the terms therein provided and as provided in Section 3-3 of the Standard Specifications. Payment for extra work will be made at the unit price or lump sum previously agreed upon by the Contractor and the Engineer; or by force account as provided for in Section 3-3 of the Standard Specifications. The Contractor shall furnish the Engineer report sheets in duplicate of each day's extra work and extra work paid for by force account no later than the working day following the performance of said work. After comparison with the Engineer's records, any necessary adjustment is to be made and agreed upon. When these reports are agreed upon and signed by both parties, they shall become the basis of payment for the work performed. Section 10. ESTIMATED QUANTITIES The Engineer's estimate of the quantities of work to be done and materials to be furnished are approximate only. Being given as a basis for the comparison of bids, the City of Hermosa Beach does not expressly or by implication agree that the actual amount of work will correspond therewith, and reserves the right to increase or decrease the amount of any class or portion of the work or to omit portions of the work that they may be deemed necessary or expedient by the Engineer. .'The estimated quantities of work and materials to be performed, constructed, or furnished by the Contractor under these specifications are set forth in Schedule A provided herewith and made a part hereof. SPECIAL PROVISIONS -8- Section 11. UTILITIES (a) General: --Attention is directed to Section 5 of the Standard Specificatio s. The following utilities have facilities located within City right-of-way. CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE COMPANY Post Office Box 2490 Palos Verdes Peninsula, CA 90274 377-5525 Attn: Mike Collins SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. 505 Maple Avenue Post Office Box 2944 Torrance, CA 90505 674-9441 Attn: Stu Avera SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS CO. 100 East Nutwood Post Office Box 6100 Inglewood, CA 90301 419-2453 Attn:' Jim Sharp LOS ANGELES COUNTY ENGINEER 24320 Narbonne Avenue Lomita, CA 90717 534-3760 • Attn: Building & Safety Counter PACIFIC TELEPHONE CO. OF CALIF. 4021 Wilshire Boulevard ' Room 401 Los Angeles, CA 90010 468-7633 Attn: Roger Smith LOS ANGELES COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL 2250 Alcazar Street Los Angeles, CA 90033 226-4351 . Attn: Charles J. Wilt GENERAL TELEPHONE CO. OF CALIF. Post Office Box 500 .Long Beach, CA 90801-0500 435-9373 Attn: Bernard Francis RC 3772-W04 LOS ANGELES COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT 1955 Workman Mill Road Post Office Box 4998 Whittier, CA 90601 685-5217 Attn: Walter E. Garrison TM CABLEVISION 31244 Palos Verdes Drive West Suite 207 Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90274 541-9143 Attn: John Burris • (b) Obstructions: --All of the existing utility facilities will remain in place and the Contractor will be required to work around said facilities. SPECIAL PROVISIONS -9- Section 12. DESCRIPTION OF WORK CIP 85-502 - ASPHALT AREA REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT FOR PARK DEVELOPMENT AT PROSPECT AVENUE, HOLLOWELL AVENUE AND GENTRY STREET BACKGROUND The park development site is located on the old school grounds at the intersection of Prospect Avenue, Hollowell Avenue and Gentry Street. Design work for the park is complete. Construction work is scheduled to begin in the spring of 1987. Work includes weed abatement, creack filling, repair of low or damaged areas and resurfacing the entire asphalt area. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH SPECIFICATIONS FOR ASPHALT PLAY AREA REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT FOR PARK DEVELOPMENT AT PROSPECT AVENUE, HOLLOWELL AVENUE AND GENTRY STREET 1. Existing asphalt area to be cleared of weeds and debris. 2. Existing cracks to be weed killed, routed out and sterilant applied. Cracks to be filled with "Crafco" or equal. 3. Existing surface to be prepared, potholes and low spots to be filled with asphalt. 4. One and one-half inch (1 1/2") leveling course to be applied to the existing surface with a self propelled paving machine. Asphalt cap application shall conform to Public Works Specification, 1985 edition and shall be Type II D AR4000 (3/8" stone). 5. Contractor shall provide a smooth finish surface with no hills or valleys and no ponding of water. The test for this shall be a 10 foot straight edge and a deviation of no more than one-eighth inch (1/8"). 6. The manhole in the south/east section shall be raised or lowered as the case may be. 7. Contractor shall remove and haul all debris and shall be responsible for the daily clean up of the surrounding pedestrian areas. All questions relating to the extent of the project are to be directed to Michael Flaherty at (213) 376-6984, extension 216 or Lynn Stevens at (213) 376-6984, extension 212. SPECIFICATIONS PART 4. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH State of California PROPOSAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH The undersigned, as bidder, declares that: 1. this proposal is made without collusion with any other person, firm or corporation, and that the only persons or parties interested as principals are those named herein; 2. bidder has carefully examined the project plans, specification, instructions to bidders, proposal, notice to contractors and all other information furnished therefore and the site of the proposed work; 3. bidder has investigated and is satisfied as to the conditions to be encountered, the character, quality and quanititesof work to be performed and materials to be furnished. Furthermore, bidder agrees that submission of this proposal shall be conclusive evidence that such examination and investigation have been made and agrees, in the event this contract be awarded to bidder, to enter into a contract with the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, to perform siad proposed work in accordance with the plans, if any, and the terms of the specifications, in the time and manner therein prescribed, and to furnish or provide all materials, labor, tools, equipment, apparatus and other means necessary to do so, except such thereof as may otherwise be furnished or provided under the terms of said specifications, for the following stated unit prices or lump sum price as submitted on the Schedule A attached hereto. The bidder shall submit as part of this proposal a completed_copy of the Contractor's Industrial Safety Record as shown on Page 4 . PROPOSAL Accompanying this proposal is (Insert "$ cash", "Cashier's Check", "certified check", or "Bid Bond", as the case may be) in the amount equal to at least ten percent (10%) of the total aggregate bid price hereof based on the quantities shown and the unit prices quoted. The undersigned further agrees that should he be awarded the contract on the basis hereof and thereafter, defaults in executing the required contract, with necessary bonds and documents, within ten (10) days, not including Sundays and legal holidays, after having received notice that the contract has been awarded and is ready for signature, the proceeds of the security accompanying his bid shall become the property of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and this proposal and the acceptance thereof may be considered null and void. Licensed in accordance with an act providing for the registration of contractors, California Contractor's License No. , Class Signature(s) of bidder If an individual, so state. If a firm or co -partnership, state the firm name and give the names of all individual co-partners composing the firm. If a corporation, state legal name of corporation, also names of president, secretary, treasurer, and manager thereof. Two notarized officer's signatures and the corporate seal are required for corporations. Legal Business Name Address Telephone Proposals which do not show the number and date of the Bidder's License under the provisions of Chapter 9 of Division 3 of the Business & Professional Code may be rejected. PROPOSAL -2- SCHEDULE A CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA AGREEMENT FOR ..- ASPHALT AREA REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT Bid Date Contractor's Name ITEM NO. ITEM APPROX. QUANTITY• ASPHALT -AREA REPAIR AND RESURFAC- ING:. 100% UNIT UNIT OF PRICE - MEASURE (IN FIGURES) LUMP SUM ( TOTAL DOLLARS IN FIGURES' PROPOSAL -3- To be submitted with each bid to Project Identification contract for Bid date This information must include all construction work undertaken in the State of California by the bidder and partnership joint venture or corporation that any principal of the bidder participated in as a principal or owner for the last five calendar years and the current calendar year prior to the date of bid submittal. Separate information shall be submitted for each particular partnership, joint venture, corporate or individual bidder. The bidder may attach any additional information or explanation of data which he would like taken into consideration in evaluating the safety record. An explanation must be attached of the circumstances surrounding any and all fatalities. CONTRACTOR'S INDUSTRIAL SAFETY RECORD Record *The information required for these items is the same as required for columns 3 to 6, Code 10, Occupational Injuries, Summary --Occupational Injuries and Illnesses, OSHA No. 102. PROPOSAL -4- B Year of Record 19 19 19 19 19 Total Current Year 1. No. of contracts 2. Total dollar amount of contracts (in thousands of%) *3. No. of fatalities *4. No. of lost workday cases *5. No. of lost workday cases involving permanent transfer to another job or termina- tion of employment *6. No. of lost workdays . *The information required for these items is the same as required for columns 3 to 6, Code 10, Occupational Injuries, Summary --Occupational Injuries and Illnesses, OSHA No. 102. PROPOSAL -4- B The above information was compiled from the records that are available to me at this time and I declare under penalty of perjury that the information is true and accurate within the limitations of those records._ Name of Bidder (print) Signature Address • City State Contractor's Lic. No. & Classification - Zip Code Telephone : 1 - --• PROPOSAL -5- - • - CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA BIDDER'S BOND TO ACCOMPANY PROPOSAL KNOWN ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That we, as Principal, and as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Hermosa Beach in the sum of ($ ) Bollard, to be paid to the said City or its certain attorneys, its successors and assigns; for the payment of whic sum, well and truly made, we bind our- selves, our heirs, executors and administrators, successors or assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. THE CONDITION OF THIS OBLIGATION IS SUCH That if the cedrtain proposal of the above bounden to dated , 19 , is accepted by the City of Hermosa Beach , and if the above bounden his heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, shall duly enter into and execute a contract for such construction, and shall execute and r. deliver the two bonds described within ten days (not including Sunday), from the dateof the mailing of a notice to the above bouden by and from the said City of Hermosa Beach that said contract is ready for execution, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and virtue. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we hereunto set our hands and seals this day of , 19 . PROPOSAL -6- CITY OF. HERMOSA BEACH STATE OF CALIFORNIA NON -COLLUSION AFFIDAVIT The undersigned in submitting a bid for performing the following work by contract, being duly sworn, deposes and says: _ That he has not,.eitherdirectly or indirectly, entered into any agree- ment, participated in any collusion, or otherwise taken any action in restraint of free competitive bidding in connection with such contract. City Project No.: Federal Project No.: Business Address Place of Residence _..._Signature of Bidder Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 198 Notary Public in and for the County of Los Angeles, State of California. My Commission Expires , lg PROPOSAL -7- PART 5 CITY OF HERMOSA...BEACH AGREEMENT ;FOR THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of , 19, by and between the CITY OF HERMOSA, 'BEACH, CA ; hereinafter referred to as "City," and , hereinafter referred to as "Contractor." WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, City and Contractor have executed the bonds attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference, and WHEREAS, City desires to contact with Contractor to perform the services detailed in said bonds and in the Proposal, and WHEREAS, Contractor has represented that it is fully qualified to assume and discharge such responsibility; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto do agree as follows: 1. Scope of Services. City hereby employs Contractor to AGREEMENT -1- • ...u......_ . .-�'3.:f1i.r'.L�i �f:T6. •;.rlawr� r.ylii�yC�6Vi�J� including miscellaneous appurtenant work. Such work shall be performed in a good and workerlike manner, under the terms as stated herein and in the Notice to Contractors, Instructions to Bidders, Special Provisions and the Proposal, and in accordance with the latest edition of the Joint Cooperative Committee, Southern California Chapters of the American Public Works Association and the Associated General Contractors of America, -document entitled, "Standard Specif- ications" (a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated by this reference). In the event of any conflict between the terms of this agreement and any of the above -referenced documents, the terms of this agreement shall be controlling. 2. Compensation. In consideration of the services rendered hereunder, Contractor _shall be paid according to the prices as submitted on Schedule A of the Proposal. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days after completion of Contractor's services. 3. Hold Harmless; Insurance. It is specifically understood and agreed by all parties hereto that Contractor is, for the purposes of this Agreement, an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Accordingly, Contractor shall not be deemed the City's employee for any purpose whatsoever. Contractor shall not incuror have the AGREEMENT —2— power to incur any debt, obligation or liability whatever for or against City and shall hold harmless and defend the City of "Hermosa Beach from and against any and all obligations, claims, liens, or causes of actions, arising out of or related to Contractor's services hereunder. Contractor shall file and maintain on file with City at all times during the term of this Agreement, a copy or certificate of general liability insurance for bodily injury and property damage protecting Contractor in amounts not less than $500,000.00 for injuries to one person, $1,000,000.00 for injuries to more than one person and $100,000.00 for property damage. Such insurance shall not be cancelled without thirty (30) days' prior written notice to City, shall name the City and its officers and employees as additional insureds, and shall include all automobiles utilized by Contractor's personnel in the performance of this Agreement. 4. Assignment. This agreement may not be assigned by Contractor, in whole or in part, without the prior consent of City. 5. Termination. This Agreement may be cancelled by City at any time without penalty upon thirty (30) days' written notice. In the event of termination without fault of Contractor, City shall pay Contractor for all services rendered prior to date of termination, and such AGREEMENT -3- payment shall be in full satisfaction of all services rendered hereunder. '' = IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed the within Agreement the day and year first above written. ATTEST: City Clerk CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH By: CONTRACTOR By: Mayor AGREEMENT -4- KNICKERBOCKER, DAVIDSON, HOWARD, BILLINGS & CARVER Laws en+ RICHARD L. KNICKERBOCKER MERRILL DAVIDSON USA M. HOWARD JOSEPH M. BILLINGS EDGAR R. CARVER, JR. 4720 LINCOLN BOULEVARD, SUITE 320 MARINA DEL REY, CALIFORNIA 90292 (213) 305-1020 January 27, 1987 Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Hermosa Beach RE: Appeals to the Planning Commissions Approval of a Conditional Use Permit, Parking Plan, Zone Variance & Environmental Negative Declaration for 2420 Pacific Coast Highway, Hope Chapel Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council: Hope Chapel has requested that I submit a legal opinion concern- ing the legal validity of your Planning Commission decision granting its variance application subject to certain conditions. CONCLUSION In my opinion based upon my education and experience and an analysis of the law, the decision of the Planning Commission to grant the variance is legally and factually correct, and was supported by substantial evidence. It is my view also that there is no clear basis for the conditions imposed in that they sub- stantially exceed what is required to meet the objectives under which they were imposed. MY QUALIFICATIONS I have over 22 years of experience in the field of Municipal Law..I was City Attorney of Santa Monica for over 9 years, was Chief of Civil Litigation and advisor to the P-Ianning mmission in the City of Torrance. I taught Environmental Law at University of West Los Angeles, was a Clinical Profession of Municipal Law at Southwestern, have been a speaker numerous times on planning and other matters at the League of California Cities, and taught the course in governmental approvals in the subdivision process for the Continuing Education of the Bar. ANALYSIS As a General Law City, the City of Hermosa Beach is governed by the State Planning and Zoning Law, Government Code 65000 et seq. Section 65906 of the Government Code sets forth the stat- utory requirements for the granting of a variance. Your Planning Director has correctly paraphrased this section in terms applica- ble to the facts of the present case. Specifically, the required findings are: 1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circum- stances or conditions applicable to the property involved. 2. That such variance is necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone and denied to the property in question; and 3. That the granting of such variance will not be mate- rially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. 4. That granting of the variance is not in conflict with any of the goals, objectives, policies or provisions of the General Plan and therefore, is not detrimental to the implementa- tion of the general plan. The Planning Commission was of a view that -these requirements had been met. The Appellant and the Planning Department were of the view that they were not. It is my opinion that the Planning Commission was correct and that it properly made the required findings. It is my further belief that the position of the Appellant and Planning Director were incorrect and based upon a misconception of the law. In Miller vs Board of Supervisors (1981) 122 Cal. App. 3d 539, 176 Cal. Rptr. 136, the Court of Appeals went beyond the mere topography of the land, and considered exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions relative both to the land and the building constructed thereon. It also considered the fact that existing buildings were constructed prior to amendments of the zoning ordinance. In Zakessian vs City of Sausalito 28 Cal. App. 3d794, 797, 800, 105 Cal.Rptr. 105 the Court considered the problem of having to demolish a portion of an existing building as a hardship as an economic hardship and special circumstance. The court stated: "Zack's contends that since the owners are in a financial position and if necessary, willing, to make parking space available on the property without any variance there can be no hardship. It is true that financial hardship alone, at least ordinarily will not constitute unnecessary hardship. But where the unique condition of one's property causes the financial hardship the rule is otherwise. Professor Anderson states: "Although financial loss alone will not supply the essential element of unnecessary hardship, such loss may be considered by the board of adjustment along with other circumstances. . . .1(2 Anderson, op. cit ¶14.22.) * * * And the Court in Broadway, Laguna etc. Assn. v Board of Permit Appeals, supra 66 Cal. 2d 767, 775, 59 Cal Rptr. 146, 151, 427 P.2d. 810, 815, declared that "[V]irtually any circumstance which would lead [one] to seek a variance may be translated into economic terms." It would be a rare case of topographical uniqueness of land that could not be alleviated by some amount of financial expenditure. The instant contention is found to be unsound." The essential rationale behind a variance is that it is granted in order to avoid practical difficulties and unnecessary hardships that would otherwise result from literal enforcement of the terms of a zoning or planning enactment. Rubin vs Board of Directors 16 C2d. 119, 101 P2d 267. Variance procedures are in the nature of safety values, to prevent the oppressive operation of the zoning regulations in particular instances. Metcalf vs County of Los Angeles, 24 C2d 267, 148 P2d 645. In order for a zoning ordinance to be constitutionally valid, it must not be arbitrary or discriminatory, and it would be impossible to enumerate all of the circumstances where the application of the ordinance did not serve a legitimate police power objective and would be invalid as applied. Metcalf, supra. Even if it were not for the specific provisions of the Government Code authorizing variances, the City Council would have authority to grant relief where to apply the ordinance would be a depriva- tion of constitutional liberties. In applying the law to the facts of the present case, it must be recognized that considerable latitude is granted to Planning Commissions and City Councils in the granting of vari- ance application. The grant or denial of a variance will not be disturbed by the courts in the absence of a clear and convincing showing of an abuse of discretion. If the evidence is in con- flict the determination of the administrative board is conclu- sive. Where a variance is granted, it is presumed that official duty was performed in investigating the matter and that the existence of the necessary facts was found. Siller vs Board of Supervisors 58 C2d 479, 25 Cal. Rptr. 73. In the present case, there is no police power objective served in applying the ordinance and under the facts of the present case would be unjust, discriminatory, and illegal. Required variance findings constitutional limitations and introduce into the interpretive with an' eye on its purpose, should be considered in light of the flexibility that variances process. In so applying the law it is easily seen that the requirements have been met. There were exceptional or extraordinary circumstances appli- cable to the property involved. This project was planned and considerable money expended on the basis of the law applicable when the property was purchased. Substantial liabilities were incurred and good faith expenditures were made in reliance on the law. The law was changed mid stream and the subject property purely and simply is the only project in town that was trapped by such a legislative change. There is substantial hardship in the present case relating to the size, shape or topographical features of the property in relation to the building thereon and that uses and expansion potential existing when the property was purchased. The Govern- ment Code does not specifically limit the case to size, shape or topographical features of the land alone. Improvements must be considered, along with the fact that if the size of either the land or the building were different at the time that the ordi- nance was amended, a variance would not be needed. There is a substantial property right involved to develop the property in accordance with the law in existence at the time that theproject was submitted. The same requirements, have not been imposed on other properties in the area since no other property was in the same position of reliance and development as this property. The value of allowing the existing structure to be recycled preserves and maintains community values without unnecessary economic: waste. Economic waste to the church takes money away from those that the church serves such as the homeless, the poor, and the sick. The variance, therefore, not only is not detrimental to public welfare but is of substantial benefit and meets social service needs which would either go unmet or result in additional burdens to the taxpayers of the community. Encroaching on an arbitrary buffer area is not a social, political, or economic harm. Encroaching on the rights of the poor, the sick, on the homeless, and the rights to the exercise of religious expression clearly is. The decision of your Planning Commission should be affirmed to the extent that the variance was granted, and the amendments to the conditions 6 and 8 should be granted so as to meet but not exceed the objectives for which they were imposed. truly your Vichd1 a . K ickerbo 412_ 4 46_ ,(1,,thr, /d/ Cis///111-/-' -3AteA7,444-4A___, �� tov„,/b 02, /ei)s/ frif /)(-c_ i7e524 JAN 22 19V r/d)S--/ SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 07/4(1,4) . 12XL-14-4r (14zzyL) .f• 7LIt a • J Q/; �/ZOfvy� °-e)A a , 4 L(q 00466 ST' "• 1 � 13 / Nrt. £f- mo i- 71/S !sem r4tI3. 3i `�C �e�► \)(L- CoH KT.—ticte„ Zoo a KA. Qcs,)4.1. 2,61(L/ 92 -2-1. 41,41, J t,u '-&e,4 4 QO 2.)-44 o 4 - /'(_ %re,est P a ki`8 Lei" h 1 �4 ( /1: 1(c' .€0-1 gs- 016 D Ow--- ,t -b /0e-laAd 9o/ Wil- Irl /c-?;- ) �. A 1/16/87 WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE AGAINST THE PROPOSED PARKING PLAN SUBMITTED BY HOPE CHAPEL. WE FEEL THAT THE CHAPEL SHOULD RESTRICT ITSELF TO PERMANENT PARKING THEY HAVE AVAILABLE ON THE CHURCH GROUNDS. ANY ADDITIONAL PARKING CLAIMED FOF: CHURCH USE SHOULD BE PARTING THAT IS AVAILABLE TO THE CHURCH 24 HOURS A DAY WITHOUT OBSTRUCTING ANY OTHER FLOW OF BUSINESS FROM SURROUNDING BUSINESSES. LE 0,-4442 q 3C0 �' U/G' &.". t c c_ ''- /. -- -. '{� 33'0 , kti--e .7-7, 0 4/ � -f �> - L tt zeA, 1/16/B7 ATTN: CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS OF HERMOSA BEACH WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE AGAINST THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE TO HOPE CHAPEL ON DEC. 2ND AND ARE SUPPORTING THE APPEAL OF THIS DECISION. WE FEEL THE FINDINGS ARE NOT SUBSTANTIAL ENOUGH TO ALLOW THIS PRECEDENCE TO BE SET. • 2-2c)Lk, \-1 C DjimaL, z, fes' -(1 . d/d -edeqe C c>) 1071 q.'(` 5b, ef- th /G)7/L074 e-lnZa- / C' z -, 1/16/87 ATTN: CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS OF HERMOSA BEACH • WE THE UNDERSIGNED, INDIVIDUALS IN PROXIMITY OF HOPE CHAPEL, ARE DISSATISFIED WITH THE PARKING PLAN ADOPTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON 12/2/86 FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. IT I5 IMPRACTICAL TO ENFORCE 2. PEOPLE WILL CONTINUE TO PARK: ON RESIDENTIAL STREETS IT CONFLICTS WITH COMMERCIAL PARKING HOURS 12/09/B6 ATTN: CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE AGAINST THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE TO HOPE CHAPEL ON DEC. 2ND AND ARE SUPPORTING THE APPEAL OF THIS DECISION. WE FEEL THE FINDINGS ARE NOT SUBSTANTIAL ENOUGH TO ALLOW THIS PRECEDENCE TO BE SET. v;,L I3'&7L M�V V. Wa-Tv -- _9d. *Jo -A ,4,1)J- Q4514i4J, aSCAtt4i)E ° CILA C2u 4 ?,_9',„Az-, -CL Aztehf Pei/V-L41,, 6'0,</41`"\i 2.032, 1 Z�33 °/°3-1-t gv24 1211.267 . - 1 5 � % -1 e 19'4( A o e s 1 3 i_ 2c/ - zoo 8iho rS'- it C l (( Z a t -+(C Y e ve Krol Pi-/1cr f p -- k: /(cvecd- r 4"b.14.P> • IS r gil .0 7z/ ggy --71 // J,/J- -/z)/ - ?}1 Zoe 5/- 14'0, 12/ 04/86 ,"',TTN: CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH 12/09/B6 WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE AGAINST THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE TO HOPE CHAPEL ON DEC. 2ND AND ARE SUPPORTING THE APPEAL OF THIS DECISION. WE FEEL THE FINDINGS ARE NOT SUBSTANTIAL ENOUGH TO ALLOW THIS PRECEDENCE TO BE SET. J�- ao 1D //// Da?f(i3. 379- L/2-/ (/,9 - 1/-2-r2U 1-4, kaj a ��z 3 7 9- i� 2--(�y9 19-(4-5V-) 3i6 -386D. 41/46- 1 szt_441-er‘:•3/4- a-er-D -12-k•aCt-tA9 k -VB -3 cl• � etc 1,56 h Ri75 �� C)7.6,6 git-.4 4gd- �f / N,3 37 p ^ �l SwC '3a / ,Ai 37. Y/d- 5,3 oa_i kt,LeicAfirj /413. 3)2 29" He yI C/ /z.,/ 371 /3 z �u GAG 2.9/ f %/8 Law Offices of James P. Lough JAMES P. LOUGH January 20, 1987 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH MEMORANDUM 1605 WEST OLYMPIC BLVD. SUITE 9018 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90015 (213) 381-6131 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 27, 1987 TO: Members of the City Council FROM: James P. Lough, City Attorney RE: Extension of Moratorium Prohibiting the Separate Sale or Separation of Contiguous Lots When a Single Improvement Straddles the Dividing Property Line. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council waive further reading and adopt the attached ordinance which extends the existing moratorium regarding the above-mentioned matter for a period of six months. BACKGROUND: This matter has been before the City Council on December 16, 1986 and January 13, 1987. At the December meet- ing, the City Council adopted a 45 day moratorium prohibiting the sale or separation of lots where there is a building over the common boundary between the two lots. The purpose of this was to prevent problems that could arise from people owning separate lots yet having to maintain a common structure. At the first meeting in January, the council formulated a plan of action to remedy this problem. The council sent the matter to the Planning Commission for review and study. After that review and study, the Planning Commission must recommend an ordinance which will regulate property in a manner to prevent the problems listed above. This recommendation must return to the council by March 1st. Hopefully, the proposed ordi e_pf the Planning Commission will be set before tie City Council at e ing n Marc . This ordinance will be in place for a period of six months. This should give time for the Planning Commission to hold its hearings, refer the matter back to City Council, and have the City Council act on the matter before the six month deadline. This hearing has been regularly noticed and public comment will be taken at this hearing. Please be advised that as with all emergency moratorium -type ordinances, this ordinance requires a four-fifths (4/5) vote for 14/SR0127A -1- REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 27, 1987 TO: Members of the City Council FROM: James P. Lough, City Attorney RE: Extension of Moratorium Prohibiting the Separate Sale or Separation of Contiguous Lots When a Single Improvement Straddles the Dividing Property Line. adoption. Passage by less than a 4/5 vote would mean that the moratorium will expire. Respectfully s,• ;-tted `AMES P. LOUGH, ity Attorn-y ITY OF HERMOSA BEACH NOTED: GREGORY T. MEYER, City Manager JPL/gp Enclosure 14/SR0127A -2- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 � Jwo.z. 6), 747sbe ORDINANCE NO. 87- LtA AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY S C OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, EXTENDING THE MORATORIUM ESTABLISHED IN ORDINANCE NO. 86-866, TO PROHIBIT THE SEPARATE SALE OR SEPARATION OF CONTIGUOUS LOTS WHEN A • SINGLE IMPROVEMENT, STRADDLES THE DZV.IDING PROPERTY LINE. WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 86-856 establishes a moratorium on the issuance of demolition permits on lots on which at least one of the contiguous parcels held by the same owner does not conform to standards for minimum lot size; WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 86-866 amends that moratorium to also prohibit the separate sale or separation of contiguous lots when a single improvement straddles the dividing property lines. WHEREAS, development of such contiguous lots into separate developments causes increased density within the City of Hermosa Beach which creates an unreasonable burden of noise, water runoff, parking congestion, pollution and other environmental effects; WHEREAS, the sale or separation of individual, contiguous lots of nonconforming size usually results in further develop- ment which increases density and harms the public welfare; WHEREAS, the failure of the City Council to act at this time to stop the separation or separate sale of individual, noncon- forming, contiguous lots owned by the same person or legal entity would allow the harm to continue while the City follows the procedures necessary to implement Ordinance No. 86-851; WHEREAS, Sect' 65858 of the Government Code authorizes the adoption of an interm rdinance as an emergency measure which 14/ORD14 -1- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 can act to prevent conflicts with a contemplated proposal that the City Council has adopted and which the Planning Department will be directed to implement; WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted an ordinance to imple- ment lot merger procedures which has not yet taken effect and, in•the interim, lots affected by the lot.merger ordinance could be separately developed; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. It is prohibited to separately sell or separate two or more nonconforming contiguous lots owned by the same person or legal entity that have an existing dwelling unit straddling their common property line. For property not owned by the same person or legal entity which has been conveyed in violation of this ordinance, no permits for the demolition, construction or addition to a dwelling unit shall be issued by the Hermosa Beach Building Department. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach. Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective for a period of six months from today's date unless extended pursuant to the provision of California Government Code Section 65858. Section 4. The City Council shall draft a report for presen- tation to the public at its first meeting in March. Such report shall state what steps are being taken by the City to correct the problems referenced in this ordinance and what steps are planned to be taken in the future to remedy the situation. 14/ORD14 -2- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Section 5. Prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days after the date of its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published in the Easy Reader, a weekly newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the City of Hermosa Beach, in the manner provided by law. • Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify•to the passage and adoption of this ordinance, shall enter the same in the book of original ordinances of said city, shall make minutes of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1987. ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: 14/ORD14 -3- PRESIDENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council January 15, 1987 City Council Meeting January 27, 1987 PROPOSED REVISIONS TO ZONING CODE DEFINITIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF STRENGTHENING ILLEGAL UNIT ENFORCEMENT CAPABILITIES RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that in order to facilitate improved illegal unit enforcement capabilities, the City Council adopt the at- tached ordinance revising relevant definitions of the Hermosa Beach Zoning Code. BACKGOUND On May 27, 1986 the City Council adopted a resolution directing the Planning Commission to ''review provisions of the municipal code which will aid in the enforcement of and hinder the creation of illegal dwelling units." On November 5, 1986, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution P.C. 86-50 recommending amendments to the Hermosa Beach Code (see attached). ANALYSIS Having surveyed several municipalities, staff determined that illegal unit enforcement is a universally difficult function. The cities most successful in obtaining compliance (e.g., Man- hatttan Beach) employ a combination of a concerted public educa- tion campaign, a well -organized enforcement program and a strong legal foundation provided by the municipal code. The definitions targeted for revision are: "Dwelling unit or apartment", "fami- ly", "Guest house or accessory living quarters" and "kitchen." There is also a proposed addition to ARTICLE 4 , Section 4-1 (One -Family Residential Zone, permitted uses). The following is a list of existing definitions and recommended amendments to ARTICLE 2 (Definitions) and ARTICLE 4 , (R-1 One Family Residential Zone), of the Zoning Code: ARTICLE 2: 1) SECTION 215. "DWELLING UNIT" OR "APARTMENT" Existing: "Dwelling unit" or "apartment" means one or more rooms in a dwelling or apartment house or apartment hotel designed for occupancy by one family for living or sleeping purposes, and having only one kitchen. 1 7 S lir Recommended revision: ADD: All rooms comprising a dwelling unit shall have interior ac- cess through an interior doorway not containing a dead -bolt lock to other parts of the dwelling unit with the exception of accessory living quarters, provided that where a dwelling unit occupies two stories, interior access shall be provided between stories by an open unenclosed stairway. For the purpose of this section, "open stairway" shall mean a stairway which has a minimum of one wall which is not more than 42 inches high opening into at least one room from which the stairway connects each floor. If in the opinion of the director of Building & Safety the design of a dwelling has the potential to be converted to additional delling units, the. dircctor may require a deed restriction to be recorded prior to issuance of a building permit. SECTION 220. FAMILY Existing: "Family means an individual, or two or more persons related by blood or marriage, or a group of not more than four (4) persons, excluding servants, who are not related by blood or marriage, living together as a single housekeeping unit in a dwelling unit." Note: The California Supreme Court has ruled that it is unconstitu- tional to distinguish between groups related by blood or mar- riage and other groups of people. Recommended Revision: CHANGE TO READ: "Family. Two or more persons living together in a dwelling unit, sharing common cooking facilities, and possessing the character of a relatively permanent single bona fide house- keeping unit in a domestic bond of social, economic and psy- chological committment to eachother, as distinguished from a group occupying a boarding house, club, dormitory, fraterni- ty, hotel, lodging house, motel, rehabilitation center, rest home or sorority. 3) SECTION 223. GUEST HOUSE OR ACCESSORY LIVING QUARTERS. Existing: "Guest house" or "accessory living quarters" means living quarters within an accessory building for the use of persons employed on the premises, or for temporary use by guests of the occupants of the premises. Such quarters shall have no kitchen facilities and shall not be rented or otherwise used as a separate dwelling." Note: The City Council has recently revised the "permitted uses" and accessory living quarters are not listed as permit- ted in accessory building (See proposed revision of Article 4, Section 4-2, R-1 One -Family Residential Zone, permitted uses below). Recommended Revision: CHANGE TO READ: "Guest House or Accessory living quarters" means living quarters within a main building for the use of persons em- ployed on the premises, or for temporary use by guests of the occupants of the premises. Such quarters shall have no kitchen facilities and shall not be rented or otherwise used as a separate dwelling unit. Guest houses and accessory living quarters are subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit and are not allowed in accessory buildings." 4) SECTION 226. KITCHEN. Existing: "Kitchen" ned to be means any room or space used or intended or desig- used for cooking or for the preparation of food." Recommended Revision: ADD: The installation of a cooking appliance constitutes a kitchen within the meaning of this definition, and where such a kitchen is installed or maintained in a room or suite of rooms said room or suite of rooms shall constitute a dwelling unit. ARTICLE 4: Section 4-2. Permitted Uses: Recommended Revision: ADD: 8. Accessory living quarters shall be allowed within a main building only, subject to a conditional use permit. ALTERNATIVES 1) Maintain existing definitions. 2) Determine alternate revisions. 1 4 Concur: Gre ory Meyer Ci y Manager Concur: Respectfully submitted, Q -?A Jap ce Silver, Adiinistrative Aide William Grove Director, Bldg. & Safety 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 tS SID '. 104SC- ORDINANCE NO. 87 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA AMENDING APPENDIX A, ARTICLE 2 (DEFINITIONS) AND ARTICLE 4, (R-1 ONE -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE) OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE FOR THE PURPOSE OF STRENGTHENING ILLEGAL UNIT ENFORCEMENT CAPABILTIES. WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on January 27, 1987 and determined that successful illegal unit enforcement requires a zoning code requirements that will be effective in a court of law; and WHEREAS, it was determined that amending portions of ARTICLE 2 (Definitions) of the Hermosa Beach zoning code pertaining to "dwelling unit or apartment", "family," guest house or accessory living quarters" and "kitchen" would facilitate more effective illegal unit enforcement; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach does ordain as follows: Section 1. That ARTICLE 2 (Definitions), Section 215, "Dwelling Unit or apartment", be amended to read as follows: "'Dwelling unit' or 'apartment' means one or more rooms in a dwelling or apartment house or apartment hotel designed for occupancy by one family for living or sleeping purposes, and having only one kitchen. All rooms comprising a dwelling unit shall have interior access through an interior doorway not containing a deadbolt lock to other parts of the dwelling unit with the exception of accessory living quarters, provided that where a dwelling unit occupies two stories, interior access shall be provided between stories by an open unenclosed stairway. -1- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 For the purpose of this section, 'open stairway' shall mean a stairway which has a minimum of one wall which is not more than 42_ inches high opening into at least one room from which the :stairway connects each floor. If in the opinion of the Director of Building & Safety the design of a dwelling has the potential to be converted to additional dwelling units, the Director may require a deed restriction to be recorded prior to issuance of a building permit." Section 2. That ARTICLE 2 (Definitions) Section 220, "Family.", be amended as follows: "Family. Two or more persons living together in a dwelling unit, sharing common cooking facilities, and possesing the character of a relatively permanent single bona fide lose house -keeping unit in a.domestic bond of_social, economic_ psycholgical committment_to eachother, as distinguished from a group occupying a boardinghouse, club, dormitory, fraternity, hotel, lodging house, motel, rehabilitation center, rest home or sorority." Section 3. That ARTICLE 2, (definitions), Section 223. "Guest house or accessory living quarters", be amended as: follows: "'Guest house or accessory living quarters' means living quarters within.a main building for the use of persons employed on the premises, or for temporary use by guests of_the occupants of the premises. and shall not be Such quarters shall have no kitchen facilites rented or otherwise used as a separate dwelling unit. Guest houses and accessory living quarters are subject to 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit and are not allowed in accessory buildings." Section 4. That ARTICLE 2 (Definitions) Section 226, "Guest house or accessory living quarters" be amended as follows: "'Kitchen' means any room or space used or intended or designed to be used for cooking or the preparation of food. The installation of a cooking appliance constitutes a kitchen within the meaning of this definition, and where such a kitchen is installed or maintained in a room or suite of rooms said room or suite of rooms shall constitute a dwelling unit." Section 5. That ARTICLE 4, Section 4-2. (R-1 One -Family Residential Zone, Permitted Uses) be amended by adding: 8. "Accessory living quarters shall be allowed within a main building only, subject to a conditional use permit." PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of January, 1987. PRESIDENT of the City Council, and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: CITY CLERK ��/ t��.� - \ .•� l CITY ATTORNEY -3- 11,A 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION 86-4946 A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HER- MOSA BEACH CALIFORNIA, DIRECTING THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO RE- VIEW PROVISIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE WHICH WILL AID IN THE EN- FORCEMENT OF AND HINDER THE CREATION OF ILLEGAL DWELLING UNITS. WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that the creation and maintenance of illegal dwelling units is detrimental to the residents of Hermosa Beach due to additional demands for governmental services and demands for limited available parking; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that illegal dwell- ing units often constitute substandard housing due to inadequate facilities; and WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that amendments to the municipal code may prevent the creation of illegal dwelling units and may aid in enforcement proceedings necessary to abate illegal dwelling units. NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the Planning Commission be directed to review for possible amendment the definitions of accessory build- ing, dwelling unit, family room, guest house and kitchen. SECTION 2. That the Planning Commission be directed to review for possible amendment the permitted use of accessory buildings in all residential zones. SECTION 3. That the Planning Commission be directed to consider additional regulations to limit designs conducive to illegal unit creation. 1/1 /11 -1- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 SECTION 4. That the Planning Commission be directed to review for possible amendment the initiation of legal determina- tion. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 10 TH DAY OF June, 1986 PRESIDENT o the City Council and MAYOR f the City of Hermosa Beach Attest /r Approved as to form,! ,.;/`4^.—`' �ty Attorney -2- c MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 5, 1986 AT 7:30 P.M. IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS Meeting called to order at 7:32 P.M. by Chmn. Sheldon. Pledge of Allegiance led by Chmn. Sheldon. ROLL CALL Present: Comms. Peirce, Compton, Rue, Chmn. Sheldon Absent: Comm. Schulte Also Present: Michael Schubach, Planning Director; James P. Lough, City Attorney; Harry Palter, Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION by Comm. Rue, seconded by Comm. Peirce, to approve the Planning Commission minutes of October 21, 1986, as submitted with the following changes: On page 3 at the bottom, the correct spelling is "La Playita" for that restaurant; on page 4, reference to "Mr." Schulte shall be changed to "Comm." Schulte. Noting the abstention of Comm. Compton, no objections; so ordered. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTIONS MOTION by Comm. Rue, seconded by Comm. Compton, to approve Resolution P.C. 86-46, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REQUEST FOR VARIANCE FOR THE ENCLOSURE OF AN EXISTING PORCH AT THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE AT 243 THIRTY-FIRST STREET. No objections; so ordered. MOTION by Comm. Rue, seconded by Comm. Peirce, to approve Resolution P.C. 86-49, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDMENT OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR BEER AND WINE AND OUTSIDE DINING AND A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IN CONJUNCTION WITH A RESTAURANT AT 23-25 TWENTY-FIRST STREET. Coram. Rue asked of the Planning Director whether the reference to "lead pipe" in item No. 4 couldn't be changed to "welded -steel pipe." The Planning Director agreed to change it accordingly. Chmn. Sheldon asked of the Planning Director to remove the.last "only" from item No. 21(a). Noting the abstention of Comm. Compton, no objections; so ordered. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY CODE REGARDING ILLEGAL UNITS FOR THE PURPOSE OF STRENGTHENING PREVENTION AND ENFORCEMENT CAPABILITIES Mr. Schubach gave staff report and stated that, historically, the City has attempted to enforce their ordinance concerning "bootlegged" units, or units without any building permits and zoning approval. He stated that staff has come up with some new definitions in order to make the wording in the laws more explicit as to what the City means. Janice Silver, from the Building Department, stated that it was generally universally difficult to enforce illegal dwelling -unit problems. She stated that the Building Department has come up with some recommended wording changes for the definitions. Ms. Silver read from the document titled "Proposed Amendments to the City Code" regarding the existing definition of "dwelling unit." She then read the first paragraph of the "Recommended Addition" to the definition. Ms. Silver stated that the text of the Building Department was taken from the City of Manhattan Beach as they are doing quite well regarding enforcement of their ordinances, and she explained that William Grove, Director of Building and PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - NOVEMBER 5, 1986 PAGE 2 Safety looked at theirs and thought that it would be pertinent to use for the City of Hermosa Beach. Ms. Silver then went on to read the next paragraph, referring to the definition of "open stairway." Comm. Rue asked whether these new additions have any effect on the previous rulings regarding "Granny" quarters. Mr. Schubach stated that it didn't have any effect in that it was a state law. Public hearing opened at 7:47 P.M. by Chmn. Sheldon. No response from audience. Public hearing closed at 7:47 P.M. by Chmn. Sheldon. .MOTION by Comm. Compton, seconded by Comm. Rue, to move staff's recommendation. COMM. Compton expressed concern to the City Attorney about making sure that the language in this document would be tough enough to stand up to any problems that might occur. Mr. Lough stated that this document was better than anything he had seen and the best one out of all of the local cities. Chmn. Sheldon stated for the record that the motion before the Commission at this moment is to adopt a resolution to adopt staff's recommendations vis a vis the definitions on illegal units. No objections; so ordered. Comm. Compton stated in regard to a meeting he had with a subcommittee of the .City Council the possibility of creating a violation process to fine people that were in violation. The process would be like issuing a citation rather than going through the whole legal process. Mr. Lough stated that at present his office is working on such an issue. Five minute recess taken at 7:57 P.M. REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 8 Pira{ AVENUE, HENNESSEY'S Mr. Schubach gave staff report explaining that based on police observations and a complaint that was received by the City, that the Commission review the C.U.P. for the bar. He stated that upon review, quite a few violations were realized. He stated, however, that the Building Director has reviewed the situation and found that some of the violations that existed a week or two ago have been cleared up. He stated that he believes that there are now screens on the windows and possess an occupancy sign. He stated that he was unsure whether Hennessey's has a sign stating that there is to be no drinking or loitering in the area around the outside of the bar. He stated that an ongoing problem is that of loitering around the front of the bar and also that of noise from musical entertainment. Mr. Lough stated to all present that this is not a hearing to decide whether or not anyone is violating or complying with a C.U.P. He stated that the purpose of this is to determine whether or not there are any grounds for setting either a revocation hearing or whatever. He stated that staff can reach an agreement as far as whether he wants the respondent to come back in front of the Commission for a hearing. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION P.C. (--50 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF STRENGTHENING ILLEGAL UNIT ENFORCEMENT CAPABILITIES. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 5, 1986 and determined that successful illegal unit enforcement requires a city ordinance that will be effective in court of law; and WHEREAS, it,was determined that amending portions of ARTICLE 2 (DEFINITIONS) of the Hermosa Beach Zoning Code would strengthen enforcement capabilities relating to illegal units. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California recommends to the City Council the following zoning ordinance amendments to ARTICLE 2 (DEFINITIONS) of the Hermosa Beach Zoning Code: A. Amend Section 215. Dwelling unit or apartment., as follows: "'Dwelling unit' or 'apartment' means one or more rooms in a dwelling or apartment house or apartment hotel designed for occupancy by one family for living or sleeping purposes, and having only one kitchen. All rooms comprising a dwelling unit shall have interio access through an interior doorway not containing a dead -bol lock to other parts of the dwelling unit with the exception of accessory living quarters, provided that where a unit occupies two stories, interior access shall be between stories by an open unenclosed stairway. For the purpose of this section, 'open stairway' shall dwelling provided 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 mean a .tairway which has a minimum of one wall which is not more than 42 inches high opening into at least one room from which the stairway connects each floor. If in the opinion of the Director of Building & Safety the design of a dwelling has the potential to be converted to additional dwelling units, the Director may require a dee restriction to be recorded prior to issuance of a building permit." B. Amend Section 221?. Family., as follows: "Family. Two or more persons living together in a dwelling unit, sharing common cooking facilities, and possessing the character of a relatively permanent single bona fide house -keeping unit in a domestic bond of social, economic and psychological committment to eachother, as distinguished from a group occupying a boarding house, club, dormitory, fraternity, hotel, lodging house, motel, rehabilitation center, rest home or sorority." C. Amend Section 223. Guest house or accessory living quarters, as follows: "'Guest house or accessory living quarters' means livin quarters within a main building for the use of persons employed on the premises, or for temporary use by guests of the occupants of the premises. Such quarters shall have no kitchen facilities and shall not be rented or otherwise used as a separate dwelling unit. Guest houses and accessory living quarters are subject to the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit and are not allowed in accessory buildings." D. Amend Section 226. Kitchen., as follows: Y 1, "'Kitchen' means any room or space used or intended or - 2 - r� :Ltir Y� '• •?"��. .i' EYP t+,4'+G �"`S°' .. -�.. :' Yui . �"_.ef:ck .�«..� re 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 design( to be used for cooking or( or the preparation of food. The installation of a cooking appliance constitutes a kitchen within the meaning of this definition, and where suc a kitchen is installed or maintained in a room or suite of rooms said room or suite of rooms shall constitute a dwellin unit." VOTE: .Ayes: Comms. Pierce, Compton, Rue,Chmn. Sheldon Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Comm. Schulte Certification I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution P.C. 86-50 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 11/5/86. Chuck Sheldon, Chairman Michael Schubach, Secretary Date DEFINITIONS RELATING TO ILLEGAL UNITS CITY DEFINITION Hermosa Beach Redondo Beach Manhattan Beach Dwelling Unit "Dwelling unit" or "apartment" means one or more rooms in a dwelling or apartment house or apartment hotel designed for occupancy by one family for living or sleeping purposes, and having only one kitchen." "Dwelling" or "dwelling unit" shall mean any building, or portion thereof, consisting of one or more rooms, including a kitchen which is designed and/or used exclusively as a residence by one family and which otherwise conforms to the provisions of this chapter. Dwelling unit means one or more rooms suitable for occupancy by one family for living or sleeping quarters. All rooms com- prising a dwelling unit shall have interior access through an interior doorway not con- taining a dead -bolt lock to other parts of the dwelling unit, with the exception of guest house or accessory living quarters subject to the limitation of Section 10- 3.241, provided that where a dwelling unit occupies two stories, interior access shall be provided between stories by an open, un- enclosed stairway. The establishment or the closing off of any portion of a dwelling unit containing a full bath, a 3/4 bath, or a 1/2 bath in Area District II and IV in any manner so as to permit occupancy by a sepa- rate household shall constitute an addition- al dwelling unit. An accessory building in Area Districts I, II, and II A only shall be permitted to contain a "1/2 bath" provided no kitchen facilities are installed; except that guesthouse or accessory living quarters shall be allowed to contain a full bath as provided by Section 10-3.241. For the purpose of this section, "open stairway" shall mean a stairway which has a minimum of one wall which is not more than 42 inches high openinginto at least one room from which the stairway connects each floor. Huntington Beach Pismo Beach Hawthorne All portions of a main bulding shall be con- nected by an interior wall no less than seven feet (7') in length. The purpose of the above provisions is to make difficult the future conversion of le- gal dwelling unit(s) to additional illegal dwelling unit(s). The Director of Community Development shall strictly enforce the above Code provisions consistent with Section 10- 3.1901. If in the opinion of the Director of Com- munity Development, the design of the dwell- ing(s) has the potential to be converted to additional illegal dwelling units, such design can be reviewed by the City pursuant to Section 10-3.2103, Enforcement. If in the opinion of the Director of Com- munity development, it is improbable or im- practical for the proposed dwelling(s) to be converted to an illegal unit(s), such design may be approved as being consistent with the intent of this section, notwithstanding the fact that it varies from the design criteria provided for in this section. Dangerous buildings code: Dwelling Unit is any building or portion thereof which contains living facilities including provisions for sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation, as required by this code, for not more than one family. Dwelling: A building or portion thereof designed and occupied exclusively for residential purposes including single -unit and multiple -unit dwellings, but not includ- ing hotels or boarding houses. An indi- vidual dwelling unit shall contain only one kitchen andcanbe designed for occupancy as a unit by one family for living and sleeping purposes. Dwelling: A building or portion thereof designed and used exclusively for transient residential occupancy, including one family, two family, three family dwellings and apartments and multiple family dwellings. "Dwelling unit" means one or more rooms desiged for or occupied by one family for living or sleeping purposes and containing kitchen facilities for use solely by one Seal Beach Culver City family. All rooms comprising a dwelling unit shall have access through an interior door to other parts of the dwelling unit. A bachelor apartment constitutes a dwelling unit within the meaning of this title. "Dwelling Unit" means one or more rooms in a dwelling or apartment house and designed for occupancy by one family for living or sleep- ing purposes and having kitchen facilities for the exclusive use of only one family. A bachelor apartment also constitutes a dwell- ing unit within the meaning of this chapter. "Dwelling Unit." A building or portion thereof designed for or used by one (1) fam- ily for living or sleeping purposes and having not more than one (1) kitchen. Guest house or accessory living quarters Hermosa Beach Redondo Beach "Guest house" or "accessory living quarters" means living quarters within an accessory building for the use of persons employed on the premises, or for temporary use by guests of the occupants of the premises. Such quarters shall have no kitchen facilities and shall not be rented or otherwise used as a separate dwelling. "Accessory building shall mean a building, part of a building, or structure which is subordinate to, and the use of which is in- cidental to, that of the main building, structure, or use on the same lot. "Accessory living quarters" shall mean living quarters within an accessory build- ing located on the same premises with the main building for use by temporary guests of the occupant. Such quarters shall not have kitchen facilities and shall not be rented or otherwise used as a separate dwelling unit. "Accessory use" shall mean a use incidental, related, appropriate, and clearly subordi- nate to the main use of the lot or building, which accessory use does not alter the prin- cipal use of the subject lot or affect other properties in the district. Manhattan Beach Guest house or accessory living quarters. "Guest house" or "accessory living quarters" Huntington Beach Pismo Beach Hawthorne means living quarters within a main or an accessory building for the sole use of per- sons employed on the premises, or for tem- porary use by guests of the occupants of premises. Such quarters shall have no kitchen facilities and shall not be rented or otherwise used as a separate dwelling unit. Said accessory area shall not be required to be served by access through an interior doorway as noted in Section 10-3.228, but may be provided with access to an interior courtyard if there is not other exterior access and the following provisions are maintained: Guest house or accessory living quarters shall be limited to one room, to be a maximm of 500 square feet in size, and to contain a maximum of three (3) plumbing fixtures. Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit secondary residential units as provided in Sections 56852.1 or 65852.2 et seq. of the California Government Code. Accessory building. A detached building on the same site as a main building, the use of which is incidental to that of the main building, and which is used exclusively by the occupants of the main building. Accessory: A'use, customarily incidental to a building, part of a building or structure, which is subordinate to and the use of which is incidental to and detached from the main building, structure, or use on the same lot. If an accessory building is attached to the main building, either by a common wall, or if the roof of the accessory building is a continuation of the roof of the main build- ing, such accessory building shall be con- sidered a part of the main building. Accessory living quarters. "Accessory living quarters" means living quarters within an accessory building for the sole use of the family or of persons employed on the premises, or for the temporary use of guests of the occupants of the premises. Such quarters shall have no kitchen facili- ties and shall not be rented or otherwise used as a separate residence. 4 Torrance Seal Beach Culver City Hermosa Beach Redondo Beach Manhattan Beach Huntington Beach Pismo Beach Living quarters, within an accessory build- ing for the sole use of persons employed on the premises or for temporary use by guests of occupants of the premises; such quarters having no kitchen facilities and not rented or otherwise used as a separate residence. "Accessory" means a building, part of a building or structure or use which is subor- dinate to that of the main building, struc- ture or use on the same lot. If an accessory building is attached to the main building it shall be considered a part of the main building. "Accessory Building." A detached subordi- nate building, or structure, which is lo- cated on the same lot or parcel with a main building or use, and which, when subordinate to a residential building, is not used as a dwelling for income purposes or does not contain a kitchen; or, when subordinate to a commercial or industrial building, is not used by or for a business separate from the main business conducted on the lot or parcel. Kitchen "Kitchen" means any room or space used or intended or designed to be used for cooking or fo the preparation of food. "Kitchen" shall mean any room in a building or dwelling unit which is used for the cook- ing orpreparation of food. B.Z.A. resolution: ...finds and determines that the installation of a cooking appliance consitutes a kitchen within the meaning of the Municipal Code, and where such a kitchen is installed or maintained in a room or suite of rooms, said room or suite of rooms constitutes a dwelling unit.... A room or portion thereof containing facili- ties designed or used for the preparation of food including a sink and stove, oven, range and/or hot plate. Kitchen shall not include a wet bar. Any space used, intended or designed to be used for cooking and preparing food. 5 Hawthorne Seal Beach Culver City Hermosa Beach Redondo Beach Manhattan Beach Huntington Beach Pismo Beach Seal Beach "Kitchen" means any room or portion of room used or intended or designed to be used for cooking or the preparation of food. "Kitchen" means any room or portion of a room used intended or designed to be used for cooking or the preparation of food. "Kitchen." Any room or portion of a room used or designated for the cooking or prepa- ration of food. Family "Family" means an individual, or two or more persons related by blood or marriage, or a group of not more than four (4) persons, excluding servants, who are not related by blood or marriage, living together as a sin- gle housekeeping unit in a dwelling unit. "Family" shall mean an individual or two (2) or more persons related by blood, marriage, or adoption, or a group of not more than five (5) persons, excluding servants, who need not be related by blood, marriage or adoption, living together in a dwelling unit, but not including homes for the aged or rest homes. Family is an individual or two or more per- sons related by blood or marriage or a group of not more than five persons (excluding servants) who 'need not be related by blood or marriage living together in a dwelling unit. Family. Two or more persons living together in a dwelling unit, sharing common cooking facilities, and possessing the character of a relatively permanent single bona fide housekeeping unit in a domestic bond of so- cial, economic and psychological commitment to each other, as distinguisehd from a group occupying a boarding house, club, dormitory, fraternity, hotel, lodging house, motel, rehabilitation center, rest home or sorority. Family: An individual or household of two or more persons living together in a dwell- ing unit, who need notbe related by blood or marriage. "Family" means an individual or two or more persons related by blood or marriage, or a Culver City group of not more than five persons who are not related by blood or marriage, living together as a single housekeeping unit in a dwelling unit. "Family." An individual, or group of persons living together in a dwelling unit as a bona fide single housekeeping. 7 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council '&416%; January 8, 1987 City Council Meeting January 13, 1987 PROCEEDING WITH SALE OF CITY OWNED LANDS TO HMS PARTNERSHIP RE HOTEL PROPOSAL RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to sign escrow papers and other legal documents to effect the sale of two city owned parcels (located at the southwest corner of Manhattan Avenue & 14th Streets, Hermosa Beach) to HMS Hermosa partnership along the following terms and conditions: 1. Sale price to be $ 450,000 consistent with the agreed upon appraisal conducted by the Losson Appraisal Company dated December 18, 1986; 2. Sale to be on the following terms as outlined in Article III, Section 5, Terms of Purchase: 307 cash down with the balam.ce in the form of a- note secur=ed' by 'a first trust deed on the subject properties, bearing interest at 127 per annum, payments of interest only payable quarterly; the accured principal and interest shall be due and payable in three years, or upon the funding of the construction loan, whichever shall occur first; And further, that all such monies to be deposited in the Parking Fund, reserved for future parking facilities Citbin downtown area; 1R 4it le 3. Escrow to be handled by Warranty Escrow in Hermosa Beach (this is agreeable with the buyer); Proration of Costs & Income and /Closing Costs to be pursuant to Sections 9 and 10 of the Ground Lease With Option to Buy; 4. Escrow to close within 60 days, pursuant to Section 7 of the Ground Lease With Option to Buy; 5. Title to Premises and Title Insurance to be pursuant to Sections 6 and 8 of the Ground Lease With Option to Buy; 1 6. Deed restriction to read as follows: "Use of this property is restricted to the construction, maintenance and operation thereon of a hotel, including related restaurant, bar and commercial facilities; said property shall revert to City of Hermosa Beach should the property be developed in any other manner." 7. Concurrent with the close of escrow, City Manager is authorized to release the $ 30,000 Lessee Deposit now maintained at the Bank of America, Torrance Main Branch; failure to fully exercise this purchase option shall result in forfeiture by Lessee to Lessor of the full deposit and any accrued interes(t� t ereon. aeACG"/ ►iA ti BACKGROUND The Groh�nd Leaseith "0 tio� o' f Parkin Lot�D b�wtt�eC�ity P Y g to the HMS Hermosa partnership (copy attached) provides for the right of the partnership to purchase the lands for hotel development purposes, see Article VI - Option to Purchase (pages 5 - 10 of the document). As authorized by the City Council on May 28, 1985, the terms of the Lease expire on February 24, 1987. ANALYSIS The City owns two lots immediately to the rear (east) of Besties. We operate those two parcels as one, metered public parking lot (known as Lot D). Since 1980 the City has had a formal, legal arrangement with the optioned owner to the south, HMS Hermosa partnership; such arrangement being that the City would consent to a combined development of the entire block (bordered by Manhattan Avenue, Pier Avenue, Palm Drive and 14th Street...see attached map). The original agreement envisioned a retail complex; Planning Commission and City Council approval were obtained for the project but it was never developed. Subsequently, Planning Commission and City Council approvals were given for a similar configuration but as an office condominium. The project was never developed. In 1982 the developers proposed a 176 unit hotel; received Planning Commission, City Council and Coastal Commission approval but never obtained final financing. That hotel proposal was never built. The original Agreement was entered into in March, 1980 and would have expired on February 24, 1985. However, on February 12, 1985 the City Council authorized an addendum to the option to Lease and approved in concept the pursuing of a Development Agreement and a Ground Lease for a new hotel project. 2 On March 26, 1985 the Council authorized the Mayor to sign the Second Addendum to Option".to Lease. This had the effect of extending the Option for a 24 month period which expires February 24, 1987. Such extension required $ 5,000 option payments in 1985 and 1986 (both such payments have been made) and a $ 30,000 deposit in trust (this was done in accordance with Article III, Section 2, of the Option), said monies to apply toward the purchase of the City parcels or to be forfeited if the Option was not exercised. There is a continuing interest by investors to develop the so called "Church" commercial property. The City is, and has been for years, formally involved via a Council/Developer Agreement and Option to sell our ownership, said sale subject to there being a hotel developed on the entire site. Staff has received a formal application by Mr. James Yun to develop the site as a five story hotel with restaurant, banquet and conference facilities; that application was heard by Staff review on December 18, 1986. The Staff Review Committee made a determination that a focused EIR would have to be done; the appropriate EIR will be now be prepared under direction of the City and the matter will then be scheduled for Planning Commission and City Council consideration. In the meantime the provisions of the Option have been exercised re sale of the City's lands, subject to there being a hotel developed. Gr T . M(yle/S-61- g Ci y Manager GTM/ld • cc City Treasurer Goldbach HMS Hermosa Partnership attachments NOTED FOR FISCAL IMPACT: Viki L. Copeland Finance Administrator LOSSON AI'I'F AISAI COM /en AvE. HERMO SA CT. ADDITION TO HERMOSA BEACH M. B.I-59-60 NO. 1069 _ _ M. B._17 - 136 T NO, 1124 M. B. 17 - 141 CT. 0 TRACT NO 1125 M. B. 17 - 141 CONDOMINIUM TRACT NO. 30954 M. B. 848-41-42 CONDOMINIUM TRACT NO.36407 M. J3. 937-47-48 CONDOMINIUM PARCEL MAP P M..137 - 89 CONDOMINIUM PARCEL MAP CONDOMINIUM TRACT NO. 42255 Ma MO Ei • • S:&3 St= i . GROUND LEASE WITH OPTION TO BUY ARTICLE I - PARTIES CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH (hereinafter "Lessor"), hereby leases to H.M.S., HERMOSA, A California General Partnership, consisting of ROBERT S. McCLELLAN, NORMAN STEINER and VILMA HASTINGS, (hereinafter "Lessee"), the land and premises herein called "said premises" in the County of Los Angeles, State of California, described as follows: Lots 13 and 14 of Block 34, first edition to Hermosa Beach Tract, as recorded in book 1, page 59 and 60 of the Maps of the Los Angeles County Recorder. ARTICLE II= TERM The term of this Lease shall commence on June 1, 1985 and end on February 24, 1987, unless sooner terminated as herein provided. ARTICLE III - RENT AND OTHER COVENANTS 1. RENT Lessee agrees to pay Lessor rental for the use and occupancy of the leased land during the term* of the lease payable $5,000 upon execution hereof, and $5,000 payable March 31, 1986 for the balance of the lease term. All rent due and payable under this Lease shall be paid to Lessor as follows: Hermosa Beach City Clerk, City Hall, Hermosa Beach, California, 90254, or such other place or places as Lessor may from time to time designate by written notice given to Lessee. Lessee further agrees to make application with Lessor for a development agreement, as specified herein, within 90 days after execution thereof. 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 1 2. DEPOSIT Upon execution herewith, Lessee shall additionally deposit the sum of $30,000 with the Bank of America, Torrance Main Branch to be held in an account bearing the highest available rate of interest in the name of Lessor and under the following terms and conditions: Should Lessee exercise its option to purchase, then the sum of $30,000 plus any accrued interest, shall be released to Lessee and to he applied towards the purchase price of the property. Should Lessee fail to exercise its option within the option period, as specified hereinafter then the sum of $30,000 and any accrued interest shall be forfeited by Lessee to Lessor. ARTICLE IV - USE OF THE PREMISES 1. PRINCIPAL USE Until Lessee exercises its option to purchase the property as delineated hereinafter, Lessor shall retain the right to continue to use the property as a parking facility and Lessor shall continue to derive the benefits of any income generated from the parking facility, except that during the period of Lessor's use, Lessee shall have the right • to enter upon the property for purposes of conducting such studies, surveys, tests and investigations as are necessary for the planning, design and preparation for the improvements mentioned in paragraph 1 of Article V. During the period of Lessor's use, Lessor shall provide all equipment necessary for the parking facility at no cost to Lessee and Lessor shall be solely responsible for the maintenance of the parking facility. During the period of Lessor's use, Lessor agrees to indemnify and hold Lessee harmless against any claim, debt, liability, demand, obligation, cost or expense arising out 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 2 d of or in connection with Lessor's operation or maintenance of the property as a parkin:; facility. 2. LAWFUL USES Neither Lessor nor Lessee shall not use or permit said premises or any portion, thereof to be improved, developed, used or occupied in any manner or for any purpose that it is in any way violative of any valid law or ordinance or regulation of any federal, state, county or local governmental agency body or entity. Furthermore, Lessee shall not maintain, commit, or permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance as now or' hereafter defined by any statutory or decisional law applicable to said premises on said premises or any part of said premises. ARTICLE V - IMPROVEMENTS 1. LESSEE'S RIGHT TO BUILD - GENERAL CONDITIONS Lessee agrees that it will, subsequent to exercising the option to purchase herein and at its own expense, construct or cause to be constructed on the premises improvements consisting of a hotel, including related restaurant, bar and commercial facilities. All plans, specifications and architectural drawings, for any and all buildings, installations, or other improvements proposed by Lessee for construction on the premises • shall be subject to the reasonable review and approval by Lessor prior to Lessee's application for the issuance of any building permits. 2. EASEMENTS AND DEDICATIONS In order to provide for the more orderly development of the leased land, it may be necessary, desirable or required that the street, water, sewer, drainage, gas, power lines, and other easements and dedications and similar rights be granted or dedicated over or within portions of the leased land. As one of the primary considerations to Lessee for the execution of this lease, Lessor shall, upon request of Lessee, join with the Lessee in executing and delivering such documents, from time to time, and throughout 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 3 the term of this lease, as may be appropriate, necessary or required by the several governmental agencies, public utiities, and companies for the purpose of granting such easements and dedications. 3. ZONING In the event that Lessee deems it necessary or appropriate to obtain use, zoning, or subdivision and precise plan approval and permits of the leased land, or any part thereof, Lessee shall be entitled to make appropriate application and request for such approval and/or permits before the appropriate governmental agency. Nothing in this' lease, shall be construed as giving the Lessee any greater or lesser rights to such requested approvals, nor shall Lessee receive any greater or lesser benefits from the Lessee's position of being a Lessee with the City of Hermosa Beach as Lessor. 4. RESTRICTIONS At the request by Lessee, Lessor shall, from time to time, execute and deliver or join in the execution and delivery of such documents as are appropriate, necessary or required to impose upon the leased land covenants, conditions, and restrictions providing for the granting of exclusive uses of the leased premises, or any part thereof, the establishment of common and parking areas, the establishment of party walls and provisions for the enlargement of the common and parking areas by the establishment of • mutual and reciprocal parking rights and the rights of ingress and egress, and other like matters, all of which are for the purpose of the orderly development of the land. 5. NOTICE OF NONRESPONSIBILITY Lessor shall, at any and all times during the term of this Lease have the right to post and maintain on said premises and to record as required by law any notice or notices of nonresponsibility provided for by the Mechanic's Lien Laws of the State of California. 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 4 6. COMPLIANCE WITH LAW Said improvements shall be constructed and all work performed in accordance with all valid laws, ordinances, regulations and orders of all federal, state, county or local governmental agencies or entities having jurisdiction over said premises. All wort:,k performed on said premises pursuant to this Lease shall be done in a good workmanlike manner with material of good quality and high standard. 7. MECHANIC'S LIENS At all times during the term of this Lease, Lessee shall keep said premises' free and clear of all liens and claims of liens for labor, services, materials, supplies or equipment performed on or furnished to said premises. 8. LESSEE'S OWNERSHIP OF IMPROVEMENTS AND FIXTURES It is expressly understood and agreed that any and all buildings, improvements, fixtures, machinery and equipment of any nature whatsoever, placed or maintained upon any part of the leased land shall be the property of the Lessee during the term of this Lease. In the event that the option to purchase has not been exercised and upon termination of this Lease for any reason, either by expiration, or by default, any and all buildings, improvements, fixtures, machinery and equipment of whatsoever nature at any constructed, placed or maintained upon any part of the leased land shall then become the • property of Lessor. ARTICLE VI - OPTION TO PURCHASE 1. GRANT OF OPTION Lessor grants to Lessee the option to purchase the premises in accordance with the provisions of this Lease, as long as Lessee is not in default at the time Lessee exercises the option. Lessor's grant to Lessee of the option to purchase shall be conditioned upon Lessor and Lessee entering into a development agreement or Lessee obtaining a written loan commitment for construction financing and entering into an 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 5 operating agreement whereby Lessee is to develop said premises, in conjunction with adjoining lands, by constructing and maintaining and operating thereon a hotel including related restaurant, bar and commercial facilities. If the parties have yet to enter into the development agreement at the time Lessee exercises its option to purchase the property,; then Lessor shall proceed to sell the subject property to Lessee subject to a deed restriction, restricting the use of the property to the construction, maintenance and operation thereon of a hotel, including related restaurant, bar and commercial facilities with a reversionary interest back to the Lessor should the property be developed in a' manner inconsistent with said deed restriction. 2. OPTION PERIOD Lessee shall have the right to exercise the option to purchase at any time during the term of the Lease. 3. METHOD OF EXERCISING OPTION Lessee shall exercise the option by giving written notice to Lessor within the option period as specified in Article IX, paragraph 4. 4. PURCHASE PRICE The parties shall have 30 days after Lessor receives the option notice in which to agree upon a qualified appraiser to determine the purchase price. If the parties are unable to agree on an appraiser within that period, then within 10 days after the expiration of that period each party, at its respective cost and by giving notice to the other party, shall appoint a qualified real estate appraiser with at least 5 years' full-time commercial appraisal experience in the area in which the premises are located to appraise and set the purchase price of the premises. If a party does not appoint an appraiser within 10 days after the other party has given notice of the name of its appraiser, the single appraiser appointed shall be the sole appraiser and shall set the purchase price of the premises. If the two appraisers are appointed by the parties as stated in this paragraph, they shall meet promptly and attempt to set the purchase price of the premises. If they 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 6 are unable to agree on the purchase price within 30 days after the second appraiser ha been appointed, they shall attempt to select a third appraiser meeting the qualifications stated in this paragraph within 10 days after the last day the two appraisers are giv' to set the purchase price. If they are unable to agree on the third appraiser, either of the, parties to this lease by giving at least 10 days' notice to the other party can apply to the presiding judge of the superior court of that county, for the selection of a third appraiser and of paying the third appraiser's fee. The third appraiser, however selected, shall be a person who has not previously acted in any capacity for either party. Within 30 days after the selection of the third appraiser, a majority of the appraisers shall set the purchase price of the premises. If a majority of the appraisers are unable to set the purchase price within the stipulated period of time, the three appraisals shall be added together and their total divided by three; the resulting quotient shall be the purchase price of the premises. If, however, the low appraisal and/or the high appraisal are/is more than 7.596 lower and/or higher than the middle appraisal, the low appraisal and/or the high appraisal shall be disregarded. If only one appraisal is disregarded, the remaining two appraisals shall be added together and their total divided by two; the resulting quotient shall be the purchase price of the premises. If both the low appraisal and the high appraisal are disregarded as stated in this paragraph, the middle appraisal shall be the purchase price of the premises. In appraising the two 40' x 100' lots which are the subject of this agreement, the appraiser shall appraise the property as if it were to be improved with a hotel, including related restaurant, bar and commercial facilities. After the purchase price for the premises has been set, the appraisers shall immediately notify the parties. If Lessee objects to the purchase price that has been set, Lessee shall have the right to elect not to purchase the premises, as long as Lessee pays All the costs in connection with the appraisal procedure that set the purchase price. Lessee's election not to purchase the premises must be exercised within 15 days after 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 7 receipt of notice from the appraisers of the purchase price. If Lessee does not exercise its election within the 15 -day period, Lessee shall purchase the premises from Lessor as provided in this paragraph. Any costs occasioned by the appraisal process shall be apportioned among the. parties as follows: Should the parties agree on one appraiser to determine purchase price, the parties shall share equally in all costs of said appraisal. Should the parties be unable to agree on an appraiser, such that each party appoints' its own appraiser, then the parties shall each separately bear the costs of their respective appraiser. Should a third appraiser be appointed as provided hereinabove, then the parties shall share equally in all costs of the third appraisal. 5. TERMS OF PURCHASE Lessee shall purchase the property on the following terms: 3096 cash down payment with the balance of the purchase price to be carried in the form of a note secured by a first trust deed on the subject properties, hearing interest at 12°6 per annum, payments of interest only payable quarterly. The accrued principal and interest shall be due and payable in three years, or upon the funding of the construction loan, whichever • shall occur first. 6. TITLE TO PREMISES Lessor shall deliver to Lessee an executed grant deed in recordable form conveying the premises. If the property is deeded to Lessee prior to the parties having entered into a development agreement, then the grant deed shall be subject to the deed restriction coupled with a reversionary interest as set forth in Article VI, paragraph 1, hereinabove. 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 8 If the property is deeded to Lessee after the parties have entered into a development agreement then the grant deed to Lessee shall not contain a deed restriction or reversionary interest. Furthermore, and in elaboration of Article VI, paragraph 1, it is understood that. should the title be conveyed to Lessee prior to the parties having entered into a development agreement, that the grant deed shall record concurrently with the trust deed securing the construction financing as specified in Article VI, paragraph 1. Title to the premises shall be conveyed by Lessor to Lessee free and clear of all' liens, encumbrances, covenants, conditions, restrictions, easements, and rights of way of record, leases or other tenancy agreements, and other matters of record, except current taxes, a lien not yet delinquent, those portions of current assessments not yet due and payable, anything of record or not of record that in any way affects title to the premises resulting from the acts or omissions of Lessee. 7. ESCROW The sale shall be consummated through an escrow with an independent escrow to be selected by Lessor ("escrowholder") to be opened within 5 days after the option notice has been given to Lessor. Escrow shall be deemed to be opened under this paragraph on the date both parties have executed the escrow instructions. The parties • shall execute all documents required by escrowholder as long as they are consistent with the provisions of this paragraph. Escrow shall close within sixty days after the opening of escrow as defined hereinabove. Escrow shall be deemed to be closed pursuant to this paragraph on the date the grant deed is recorded. 8. TITLE INSURANCE At the close of escrow, escrowholder must be prepared to have issued by a reputable national title company, an ALTA Extended Coverage Policy of Title Insurance in the amount of the purchase price insuring title to the premises vested in Lessee subject only to the matters set forth in paragraph 6. 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 9 9. PRORATION OF COSTS AND INCOME Rent shall be prorated as of close of' escrow. Any security or other deposits or prepaid rent previously paid by Lessee to Lessor shall be credited to Lessee in the escrow. 10. CLOSING COSTS Transfer taxes and recording fees on the deed shall be paid by Lessor. The cost of the title policy referred to hereinabove shall be paid by Lessor. 11. CLOSE OF ESCROW - TERMINATION On close of escrow this lease shall terminate, and the parties shall be released from all liabilities and obligations under this lease. ARTICLE VII - ASSIGNMENT 1. NO ASSIGNMENT WITHOUT LESSOR'S CONSENT Except as provided in paragraph 2 of this Article, Lessee shall not assign or otherwise transfer this Lease, any right or interest to this Lease, or any right or interest in the premises without the express written consent of Lessor first had and obtained. Lessor's consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. A consent by Lessor to one assignment shall not be deemed to be a consent to any subsequent assignment. Consent by Lessor shall not relieve the Lessee or any subsequent Assignee from liability under this Lease without the express consent of Lessor. 2. PERMITTED ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFER Notwithstanding provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article, Lessee may without the prior written consent of Lessor, transfer and assign all Lessee's interest under this Lease and the leasehold estate hereby created in Lessee to: 1) Any trustee named in a deed of trust or any person named in any other type of security interest for the purpose of incurring an encumbrance on Lessee's interest in such leasehold estate. 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 10 2) A corporation now or hereafter organized in which Lessee owns at 1eaF` 80% of all outstanding shares of stock. 3) Those persons or that entity necessary to complete a Section 1031 Tc-: Deferred Exchange which persons or which entity is known to Lessor. 4) The transfer or assignment of Lessee's interest to any person or entity as a result of the death of one of the individual Lessee's is exempted from the provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article. ARTICLE VIII - DEFAULT AND TERMINATION 1. ABANDONMENT BY LESSEE Should Lessee breach this Lease and abandon said premises prior to the natural expiration of the term of this Lease, Lessor may continue this Lease in effect by not terminating Lessee's right to possesion of said premises, in which event Lessor shall be entitled to enforce all Lessor's rights and remedies under this Lease including the right to recover the rent specified in this Lease as it becomes due under this Lease. 2. INSOLVENCY OF LESSEE Should Lessee become insolvent as defined in this paragraph Lessor may by giving 90 days written notice to Lessee or to the person appointed to manage Lessee's • affairs at the address for such person appearing in the official records of the court that appointed him, terminate this Lease and forfeit Lessee's interest in said premises. For purposes of this Section, Lessee shall be conclusively presumed to have become insolvent if Lessee has a receiver appointed to take possession of all of its property because of insolvency; makes a general assignment for the benefit of creditors; or, allows any judgment against Lessee to remain unsatisfied and unbonded for a period of 90 days or longer. 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 11 3. CUMULATIVE REMEDIES Remedies given to Lessor in this Article shall not be exclusive but shall be cumulative in addition to all remedies now or hereafter allowed by law. 4. WAIVER OF BREACH A waiver by Lessor of any breach by Lessee of any of the provisions of this Lease shall not consitute a continuing waiver or waiver of any subsequent breach by Lessee. 5. SURRENDER OF PREMISES On expiration or sooner termination of this Lease, Lessee shall surrender said premises, all improvements in or on said premises, and all facilities in any way appertaining to said premises, to Lessor. ARTICLE IX - MISCELLANEOUS 1. FORCE MAJEURE - DELAYS Should the performance of any act required by this Lease to be performed by either party be prevented or delayed by reason of any act of god, strike, walkout, labor trouble, inability to secure materials, governmental laws or regulations or any other cause not the fault of the party required to perform the act, the time for performance of the • act will be extended for a period equivalent to the time of delay. 2. RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL If Lessor determines to sell all or any part of the premises, Lessor shall notify Lessee of such intent. If Lessee, within 30 days after receipt of Lessor's notice, indicates in writing its agreement to purchase the premises or a part of the premises Lessor shall sell and convey the premises or a part of the premises to Lessee on the price and terms equal to the best written offer, made in good faith, from a bona fide and financially qualified purchaser. If Lessee does not indicate its agreement within 30 days, Lessor thereafter 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 12 shall have the right to sell and convey the premises or a part of the premises to the purchaser mentioned above on the same terms stated in said written offer. If Lessor does not sell and convey the premises or a part of the premises within 90 days, any further transaction shall be deemed a new determination by Lessor to sell and convey the premises or a part of the premises and the provisions of this paragraph shall again be applicable. If Lessee purchases all of the premises, this Lease shall terminate on the date title vests in Lessee, and Lessor shall remit to Lessee all prepaid and unearned rent. If Lessee' purchases a rt of the premises, this Leasa as to the part purchased shall t -"urinate on the date title vests in Lessee, and the rent shall be reduced in the same ratio that the value of the premises before the purchase hears to the value of the premises covered by the lease immediately after the purchase. 3. ATTORNEY'S FEES Should any litigation be commenced between the parties to this Lease concerning said premises, this Lease, or the rights and duties of either in relation thereto, the party prevailing in such litigation shall be entitled to a reasonable sum as and for attorney's fees. 4. NOTICES • Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, any and all notices or other communications required or permitted by this Lease or by law to be served on or given to either party shall be in writing and shall be deemed duly served and given when personally delivered or in lieu of such personal service two (2) days after deposit in the United States Mail, first-class, postage prepaid, addressed to Lessor at: city of Hermosa Beach "Hermosa Baac. . _CA 90254 and addressed to Lessee at: 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 13 with a copy to: Vilma Hastings 1040 Hermosa Avenue Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 and Robert S. McClellan 820 Manhattan Avenue, Suite 205 Manhattan Reach, rA 9n266 and Norman P. Steiner 820 Manhattan Avenue, Suite 205 Manhattan Beach. rA 9n2FF Stanley T. Denis, Jr. Spierer, Woodward, Willens & Denis 707 Torrance Blvd., 2nd Floor Redondo Beach, CA 90277 Any party may change his address for notices pursuant to this Lease by giving written notice of such change to the other party in the manner provided in this paragraph. 5. GOVERNING LAW This Lease and all matters relating to this Lease shall be interpreted and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 6. HEIRS AND SUCCESSORS This Lease shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, adminstrators, successors and assigns of the parties hereto, however, this paragraph shall not be construed to permit an assignment of this Lease by Lessee except as provided in Article VII of this Lease. 7. PARTIAL INVALIDITY Should any provision of this Lease be held by a court of competent jursidiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable the remaining provisions of this Lease shall remain in full force and effect. 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 14 6 8. ONLY AGREEMENT This instrument constitutes the only agreement between Lessor and Lessee respecting said premises. No modification or addendum hereto may be made except by a writing executed by the parties hereto or their successors or assigns as the case may be. 9. MEMORANDUM FOR RECORDING Either party shall at the request of the other during the term of this Lease execute a memorandum or "short form" of this Lease for purposes of and in a form suitable for recordation. The memorandum shall describe the parties, set forth a' description of the leased premises, specify the term of this Lease and such other terms as either party may be deemed appropriate and shall incorporate this Lease by reference. • LESSEE: H.M.S. Hermosa, A California General Partnership B.-lys--4/944,7‘67/1 01/ By: By: 851133/2 6-20-85 LSE(12)I 15 14. REPORT RE. PROPOSED REVISED OPTION TO LEASE, HMS HERMOSA RE. CHURCH PROPERTY HOTEL. Memorandum from City Manager Gregory T. Meyer dated May 23, 1985. The staff report was presented by City Manager Meyer. Speaking to Council was Stan Dennis representing HMS Hermosa. Proposed Action: To direct HMS Hermosa to provide a substantial deposit ($20,000-$50,000) to move this item, this deposit to be forfeitable at the end of two years. Motion Wood - dies for lack of a second. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to enter into the attached Ground Lease with Option to Buy with a change to page 9, line 11, to read "The sale shall be con- sumated through an escrow company within the City of Her- mosa Beach", which provides for: 1. Option Lease payments of $5,000/year by HMS Hermosa to preserve their option to utilize City Parking Lot D for a Hotel Development. 2. Sale of Parking Lot D, at market appraisal value, to HMS Hermosa for hotel development purposes only and subject to the project being initiated within 24 months. 3. A Development Agreement to be consumated concurrent with provision 2 above. Motion Mayor Barks, second Cioffi (discussion) AYES - Cioffi, Wood, Mayor Barks NOES - Brutsch, DeBellis FURTHER ACTION: To reconsider the above motion. Motion Wood, second Brutsch AYES - Brutsch, Cioffi, DeBellis, Wood NOES - Maypr Barks FURTHER ACTION: The action as stated above with the addition of: Staff to attempt to negotiate a deposit, a portion of which would apply to the option payment and a portion which would be forfeited if permits are not is- sued within a specific amount of time, this item to be returned at the next meeting. The existing contract with HMS Hermosa is to be extended for two weeks. Motion Wood, second DeBellis. So ordered noting a "NO" vote by,Brutsch. FINAL ACTION: To accept the proposal of the for a $30,000 deposit, up -front money, which applied to the purchase price, this money to deposited; this money to be forfeited if the not purchased within two years. Motion Wood, second Cioffi. So ordered noting "NO" votes by Brutsch and DeBellis. developer, is to be be property is Minutes 5-28-85 LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY, Inc. APPRAISAL REPORT CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH VACANT PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MANHATTAN AVENUE & 14TH STREET HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 APPRAISED BY: DELMER E. LOSSON, ASA DECEMBER 18, 1986 FILE NO. 61105 PD LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY, Inc. 2100 Sepulveda Boulevard, Suite 21, Manhattan Beach, Califomia 90266, (213) 545-1661 December 19, 1986 Gregory T. Meyer City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Civic Center Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Appraisal Report: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH VACANT PROPERTY MANHATTAN AVENUE AND 14th STREET Dear Mr. Meyer: In reply to your request, I am submitting this report of the vacant property located at the southwest corner of Manhattan Avenue and 14th Street in the City of Hermosa Beach. The property is described as Lots 13 & 14, Block 34, First Addition to Hermosa Beach Tract. It is also identified as Assessor Parcel Number 4183-013-900. As a result of my investigation and analysis, it is my opinion that the fair market value of the property, as of December 18, 1986, is: FOUR HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($450,000) Your attention is directed to the accompanying report for specific details, market data, methods of analysis and the basis of the valu- ation. Yours very truly, LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY, Inc. c:c.„ Delmer E. Losson, ASA DEL:dcl Encl. LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page Letter of Transmittal Table of Contents Introduction . Property Identification Purpose and Use Fair Market Value Definition Date of Value Appraised Fair Market Value . 1 Appraisal Methods 2 Vicinity Map . 3 Neighborhood Photographs . 4 Neighborhood Data . 6 Subject Property Photographs . 7 Appraisal Map 8 Property Data • 9 Appraisal Factors 11 Highest and Best Use . 11 Valuation Analysis . . 12 Appraisal Problem Defined . 12 Sales Comparison Approach 12 Correlation & Value Conclusion 17 Limiting Conditions & Assumptions 18 Appraiser's Certificate Addenda 19 LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. INTRODUCTION PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION The property rights being appraised constitute the fee simple estate of the real property located at the southwest corner. of Manhattan Avenue and 14th Street, Hermosa Beach, California. It is a municipal parking lot. PURPOSE AND USE The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the Fair Market Value of the above referenced property. This report presents the data and analy- sis which was utilized to arrive at the opinion of value. It was pre- pared to function as a basis for exercising an option to buy the property. FAIR MARKET VALUE DEFINITION The most probable price in terms of money which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a speci- fied date and the passing of title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: buyer and seller are typically motivated, are well informed or well advised and each acting in their own best interest; a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; payment is made in cash or its equivalent; financing, if any, is on terms generally available at the specified date and typical for the property type in its locale; the price represents a normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special financing amounts and/or terms, services, fees, costs, or credits incurred in the transaction. DATE OF VALUE The Market Value estimate is based upon economic conditions prevailing as of December 18, 1986. APPRAISED FAIR MARKET VALUE FOUR HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($450,000) -1_- LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. APPRAISAL METHODS There are three basic approaches to value that are instrumental in appraising any real property. A simplified overview of the three approaches is as follows: SALES COMPARISON APPROACH In the sales comparison approach, consideration is given to sales and other market data of comparable properties. Adjustments are made for the differences between the subject and the comparable properties. These comparables are then analyzed to reflect the market value of the subject property. COST APPROACH - The cost approach is a reproduction cost analysis. First the land is valued as if vacant. Next, the current reproduction cost of the improvements is estimated. Then accrued depreciation, due to all causes, is deducted from the reproduction cost. The resultant de- preciated value of the improvements is added to the land value for an indication of market value. INCOME CAPITALIZATION APPROACH The income capitalization approach is concerned with the present value of future economic benefits of the property. Items that may be considered are economic rent, actual rent, leases, expenses, fi- nancing arrangements, vacancy factors, quality, age and condition of the improvements, and competing investment markets. The net income expected to be produced during the building's remaining economic life is then capitalized into an estimate of market value. -2- LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY +r>e !Kim. � y AN VICINITY MAP Inc'' ^O.'� -:moi '~ ; 1■■ 1IIlU i �-� N.N.YN .r NN EL SEGUNDO C �� iuiiiu:' 1-114111-.1 •NL7 ON[ G L ^ 00 111116ilillit111111 rot Nary.e•. .■. I.r amillourki ' 11 MATT! yr 4 1111/1.1.1".11011111111IC.111�! 1 �I 1 "°°i -1■ IIIErI HAWTHORNE 7.. MANHATTAN BEACH N\N1YTT .. LAWNDAL „^T , GARDENA HERMO BEACH REDONDO BEAC H TORRANCE PALOS VERDES ESTATES 'n,F-_'tMI1M6 1//„ 'IMMORAL 1 �.�N,.�.,..0 w.1.00.^ f.. I.d,. I., -3- PR feral* LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY, Inc. N EIGHBORHOOD PHOTOGRAPHS View south along Manhattan Avenue from 14th Street. The sub- ject property is on the right. View north along Manhattan Avenue with the subject prop- erty on the left. -4- 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. View west from Manhattan Avenue along 14th Street toward the Hermosa Avenue intersection at the bottom of the slope. The subject is on the left. View south along Palm Drive from 14th Street. -5- J LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. NEIGHBORHOOD DATA The subject property is located on the north edge of Hermosa Beach's central business district. It is one block distance from Pier Avenue and Hermosa Avenue which are the primary commercial streets. Resi- dential uses are north of the subject. Hermosa Beach is a desirable beach community that has gone through its development, stable, and declining phases, particularly the down- town commercial area. In recent years, the commercial area has re- ceived renewed interest which has contributed to new development and renovation of older structures. In addition to the downtown core de- velopments, a large neighborhood shopping center was recently de- veloped just five blocks east along Pier Avenue. The Pacific Ocean and broad beaches of Hermosa Beach have long been a magnet, drawing tourists, summer vacationers and full time resi- dents alike. The business area is a reflection of this mix, with its eclectic style, casual ambience, and businesses serving all seg- ments of the customer base. The business district, as well as sur- rounding residential area are well maintained and present a good over- all neighborhood appearance. -6- LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. SUBJECT PROPERTY PHOTOGRAPHS View southwest toward the subject from the intersection o Manhattan Avenue and 14th Street. View southeast toward the subject from the intersection of 14th Street and Palm Drive. 1 -7- 1 6901 'ON -1 HOV32 VS01^1a3H 01 NOilld0V LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. APPRAISAL MAP -0Z • -AZO '-1zz !D >0 700 ;o n JJO DO >0 -1 r▪ Z I�Z -1Z I• o C Z C Z C • K K 10 :0 !— D W W N -13 01 o o ►O °(P 1 J 4, n 0 o - .> Q 7J 0 z? rZ 1Oc. c IN 1 01 O 01 s� g N p 1' 13 4 -8- --a J OWNER City of Hermosa Beach. LOCATION/ADDRESS LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY, Inc. PROPERTY DATA The property is located on the southwest corner of Manhattan Avenue and 14th Street, in the City of Hermosa Beach. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Lots 13 & 14, Block 34, First Addition to Hermosa Beach Tract, M.B. 1-59-60. ASSESSOR INFORMATION (1985-86) REFERENCE: Book 4183 Page 013 Parcel 900 ASSESSED VALUES: Land $60,570 Impvts $ 0 Total $60,570 TAXES: None (exempt) PRESENT USE The property is used for public parking lot purposes. ZONING The zoning is C2 (General Commercial). UTILITIES All public utilities are available to the subject property. -9- STREETS LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. Manhattan Avenue and 14th Street are 60 foot right-of-ways and are improved with asphalt paving, concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks, and street lighting. Manhattan Avenue has two traffic lanes and curb side parking on both sides. 14th Street has two traffic lanes and curb side parking on the south side only. Palm Drive, a 20 -foot, asphalt paved right-of-way provides access to the rear of the sub- ject property. SITE DESCRIPTION The site is rectangular in shape, measuring 80 feet by 100 feet and containing 8000 square feet. The natural terrain is a coastal sloping sand hill but the subject has been excavated and terraced to provide two parking levels. It is below the grade of Manhattan Avenue and has vehicle access from 14th Street and Palm Drive. Drainage appears to be adequate. Although no soils report was available, the age and con- dition of adjoining buildings in the neighborhood would seem to indi- cate that the site is stable. IMPROVEMENTS DESCRIPTION Improvements consist of asphalt paving, parking meters and landscaping. The improvements are in average condition. -10- i LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. APPRAISAL FACTORS The subject property is encumbered by a Ground Lease with Option to Buy. The City of Hermosa Beach is lessor and H.M.S. Hermosa, a California General Partnership, consisting of Robert S. McClellan, Norman Steiner, and Vilma Hastings, is lessee. The lease does not have a significant inpact on the value of the property because the lease term is so short and already nearing its end. However, under the provisions of the Option to Buy, the property is to be valued as if it were to be improved with a hotel, including related restau- rant, bar and commercial facilities. HIGHEST AND BEST USE The highest and best use of a property is that available, reasonable and legally permitted use or program of utilization that supports the highest present value of the property, as of the date of the appraisal. It is the most profitable, likely use for land. Pursuant to the provisions of the Ground Lease With Option to Buy, the highest and best use of the subject property is assumed to be its development with a hotel, including related restaurant, bar, and commercial facilities. This use is consistent with the zoning and adjoining uses. Based upon the analyses in this report, this use is also recognized as representing the real highest and best use of the property. -11- LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY, Inc. VALUATION ANALYSIS APPRAISAL PROBLEM DEFINED The objective of this appraisal is to estimate the fair market value of the subject property for hotel and related use. Just such a hotel development has been proposed for a larger parcel which encompasses the subject property as a part. The larger parcel is bounded by Man- hattan Avenue, Pier Avenue, Palm Drive, and 14th Street. The sub- ject property, with 8000 square feet, encompasses 20.8% of the total 38,414 square feet of the larger parcel. Preliminary planning led first to a 7 story, 231 room hotel proposal for the larger parcel. That plan has been scaled down to a 5 story scheme with 201 rooms. This current proposal may have to be scaled back further to comply with height limits. The loss of another floor could reduce the room count to approximately 155. These preliminary proposals show about one-half of the rooms as suites and include res- taurant, bar, commercial and subterranean parking. Considering the preliminary nature of the proposed hotel development plan, this valuation will examine value indicators derived from several comparison methods. SALES COMPARISON APPROACH Two types of property sales are judged to be pertinent to this analysis. Sales of commercial properties in the vicinity of the subject provide value indicators for commercial land with locational features equal to the subject. Sales of land for hotel or motel developments pro- vide value indicators for land with specific use features equal to the subject. HERMOSA BEACH COMMERCIAL SALES COMPARISON Recent sales of commercial properties in the Hermosa Beach downtown business district were investigated and allocated into their land and improvement value contributions. The sales are summarized following. -12- ADDRESS LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. SALES SUMMARY HERMOSA BEACH COMMERCIAL OVERALL TYPE DATE PRICE LAND (SF) IMP (SF) $/SF LAND $/SF -IMP. $/SF -LAND 19 Pier Av. Store 9/83 350,000 8550 6950 40.94 20 24.68 239 Pier Av. Office 11/82 138,000 2620 715 52.67 40 41.76 117 Pier Av. Store/Off. 7/84 730,000 7310 14273 99.86 30 41.29 30 Pier Av. 8est/Bar 7/84 225,000 2850 2604 78.95 30 51.54 72 Pier Av. Store 7/83 150,000 2850 2820 52.63 20 32.84 36 Pier Av. Store 9/84 435,000 8550 6750 50.88 20 35.09 1034 Hermosa Av. Store 3/83 795,000 8000 6540 99.38 30 74.85 1106 Hermosa Av. Store 5/84 180,000 4000 3200 45.00 20 29.00 240 Pier Av. Store 5/83 275,000 5340 1625 51.50 40 39.33 9/84 300,000 5340 1625 56.18 40 44.01 906 Hermosa Av. Auto Serv. 9/86 285,000 5867 4900 48.58 10 40.22 934 Hermosa Av. Stores/Off. 8/85 1,275,000 11733 8363 108.67 80 51.65 205 Pier Av. Store 4/86 200,000 5400 720 37.04 25 33.70 -13- LOCATION/NAME 901 Aviation 81., HB 210 S. PCH, RB Redondo Pier Inn 625 S. PCH, RB East-West Motel 300 N. Harbor, R8 Sheraton at RB 400 N. Harbor Dr., RB Sunrise Motor Hotel 2730 Artesia Bl., RB 1700 Sepulveda B1., MB Residence Inn 850 Sepulveda B1., MB Royal Pacific Inn LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. SALES SUMMARY SOUTH BAY AREA HOTEL/MOTEL LAND SITES SF LAND/ DATE PRICE AREA -SF UNITS UNIT $/SF $/UNIT REMARKS 12/3/85 1,100,000 27,990 76 368 39.30 14,474 7/2/85 950,000 22,500 35 643 42.22 27,143 10/1/84 340,300 11,640 23 506 29.24 14,796 1985 6,000,000 225,456 353 639 26.61 16,997 Includes large commer- cial area and excess parking. Final land cost may go higher in current court action. 1985 1,863,000 101,000 113 894 18.45 16,487 Price based on 1985 land rent of $149,000 and 8% cap. rate. 10/18/85 525,000 29,190 38 637 17.99 13,816 3/21/85 4,750,000 198,000 176 1125 23.99 26,989 Suites 9/27/85 940,000 22,500 45 500 41.78 20,889 1440 E. Imperial Hwy., ES 2/15/83 5,000,000 100,800 351 287 49.60 14,245 Suites Embassy Suites -15- / LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. The proposed 5 story, 201 room hotel development scheme for the sub- ject is a very dense plan utilizing an average of 191 square feet of land per room. If the plan is scaled back to 155 rooms, the density lessens to an average of 248 square feet of land per room. In either plan, the intensity of development would be greater than that exhibited by any of the data. Embassy Suites in El Segundo is the most densely developed of the data. It uses 287 square feet of land per suite. Since they are all two -room suites the actual density of development on this site is very near that of the subject. Overall, this development is most like that proposed for the subject. Effectively utilizing their long narrow sites, they both have five story plans with rooms opening onto a central atrium. Comparing the data to the subject with consideration given to loca- tion, land size, type and density of development, among other factors, value indicators were selected for the subject property. At the high density of the 201 room plan a value of $12,000 per room is suggested. When consideration is given to a 155 room plan, $15,000 per room is deemed appropriate. The data also supports a value indicated by $50 per square foot. Value indications for the subject are calculated following. Indicated value of total site: 201 rooms @ $12,000/room = $2,412,000 155 rooms @ $15,000/room = $2,325,000 38,414 s.f. @ $50/s.f. = $1,920,700 Indicated value of subject property: $2,412,000 x 20.8% = $501,700 $2,325,000 x 20.8% = $483,600 $1,920,700 x 20.8% = $399,500 (total site 38,414 s.f. = subject property 8000 s.f. = 20.8%) -16- J LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. CORRELATION AND VALUE CONCLUSION This valuation relies exclusively upon the Sales Comparison Approach. The Cost Approach is not applicable in this instance. The Income Capitalization Approach was not used because it would be a hypotheti- cal exercise. At this early stage of development planning, any in- come and expense estimates would be speculative. Value indicators from the Sales Comparison Approach follow. Hermosa Beach Sales Comparison $400,000 Hotel/Motel Sales Comparisons $501,700 $483,600 $399,500 The indicated value range is rather wide with the lower end firmly supported by land sales and the upper end being somewhat speculative since it is founded on early planning proposals. It is this appraiser's opinion that the final development plan will probably have to be scaled down. For this reason, and considering the general strength of the value indicators, a value near the midpoint of the range is suggested. Based on the proposed use of the subject property for hotel purposes and considering the value indications derived from the data, I have reached an opinion of value. The appraised Fair Market Value of the subject property, as of December 18, 1986, is: FOUR HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($450,000) -17- LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. LIMITING CONDITIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS Title to the property is assumed to be good and marketable. Any existing liens and/or encumbrances have been disregarded and the property is appraised as though free and clear. Information and data in this report have been obtained from public records and other sources considered to be informed and reliable but no guarantee is made as to the accuracy thereof and the appraiser assumes no responsibility for such items. Maps, sketches and other exhibits in this report are intended to assist the reader in visualizing the property. They should not be considered as surveys or relied upon for any purpose other than illustration. This appraiser assumes no responsibility for any opinion, data or information con- tained herein if this report is used for any purpose other than originally in- tended or by anyone other than the client for whom the report was prepared. The value estimates reported herein are presented as the appraiser's considered opinion based primarily upon the facts and data set forth in this report. The appraiser assumes no responsibility for later discovery of changes or differences in the physical condition or characteristics of the property, quality of title or governmental regulations which may affect the value of the subject property. Upon review of any such revised information, the appraiser reserves the right to amend his opinion of value. Due to the many economic factors and individual motivational influences that may affect a transfer of title to property, the appraiser assumes no responsibility for the sale price of the property if it is transferred. The appraiser, by reason of this appraisal, is not required to give testimony in a court of law or settlement hearings unless contractual arrangements have previously been made. The appraiser does not authorize any out -of -context quoting from or partial re- printing of this appraisal report. Neither all nor any part of this appraisal report shall be disseminated to the general public by the use of the media for public communication without the prior written consent of the appraiser. -18- J LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY, Inc. APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATE I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, - I have been employed to appraise the fair market value of the property identified herein. - I have personally conducted a visual inspection of the property appraised. - I have no present or prospective interest in the subject property and I have no personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. - The compensation received for this assignment is in no way contingent upon the analyses or opinions. - The opinions and statements of fact given herein are correct as reported. - The reported appraisal analyses and opinions are limited only by the reported qualifying conditions and are my personal, unbiased, professional analyses and opinions. - The analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and the Standards of Professional Practice of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers. - I shall not divulge the conclusions or opinions to anyone unless autho- rized by the client, except as required by law or to meet the. requirements related to review by the duly authorized representatives of the American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers. - No other person provided significant professional assistance for the analy- ses or opinions in this report. -19- LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY ADDENDA ARTICLE I - PARTIES LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. SYNOPSIS GROUND LEASE WITH OPTION TO BUY Lessor City of Hermosa Beach Lessee - H.M.S. Hermosa, a California General Partnership, con- sisting of Robert S. McClellan, Norman Steiner, and Vilma Hastings Premises - Lots 13 and 14, Block 34, first addition of Hermosa Beach Tract, M.B. 1-59-60 ARTICLE II - TERM Commence on June 1, 1985, and end on February 24, 1987, unless sooner terminated as provided. ARTICLE III - RENT AND OTHER COVENANTS 1. RENT - $5000 payable upon execution and $5000 payable March 31, 1986 2. DEPOSIT - $30,000 to be held in an interest bearing account in the name of lessor. - Deposit and interest to be applied towards pur- chase price if Lessee exercises option to purchase. - Deposit and interest to be forfeited by Lessee to Lessor if Lessee fails to exercise its option. ARTICLE VI - OPTION TO PURCHASE 1. GRANT OF OPTION - Lessor grants to lessee the option to pur- chase the premises in accordance with the provisions of the lease. 2. OPTION PERIOD - Any time during the term of the lease. 3. METHOD OF EXERCISING OPTION - By written notice to Lessor. .1 LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. 4. PURCHASE PRICE - Parties to agree upon a qualified appraiser to determine the purchase price. "In appraising the two 40' x 100' lots which are the subject of this agreement, the appraiser shall appraise the property as if it were to be improved with a hotel, including related restaurant, bar, and commercial facilities" (emphasis added). ADDRESS LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. SALES SUMMARY HERMOSA BEACH COMMERCIAL OVERALL TYPE DATE PRICE LAND (SF) IMP (SF) $/SF LAND $/SF -IMP. $/SF -LAND 19 Pier Av. Store 9/83 350,000 8550 6950 40.94 20 24.68 239 Pier Av. Office 11/82 138,000 2620 715 52.67 40 41.76 117 Pier Av. Store/Off. 7/84 730,000 7310 14273 99.86 30 41.29 30 Pier Av. Rest/Bar 7/84 225,000 2850 2604 78.95 30 51.54 72 Pier Av. Store 7/83 150,000 2850 2820 52.63 20 32.84 36 Pier Av. Store 9/84 435,000 8550 6750 50.88 20 35.09 1034 Hermosa Av. Store 3/83 795,000 8000 6540 99.38 30 74.85 1106 Hermosa Av. Store 5/84 180,000 4000 3200 45.00 20 29.00 240 Pier Av. Store 5/83 275,000 5340 1625 51.50 40 39.33 9/84 300,000 5340 1625 56.18 40 44.01 906 Hermosa Av. Auto Serv. 9/86 285,000 5867 4900 48.58 10 40.22 934 Hermosa Av. Stores/Off. 8/85 1,275,000 11733 8363 108.67 80 51.65 205 Pier Av. Store 4/86 200,000 5400 720 37.04 25 33.70 .1 s,. le IM LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. MARKET DATA MAP HERIMOSA BEACH COMIMERCIAL a �J >I' J n f S N FBF TEENTH T 111?TEENTH MVA/CIPAg PI(• ELEVENTH ST. ELEVENTH sT. ELEVEN N/NTN LOCATION/NAME 901 Aviation 81., HB 210 S. PCH, RB Redondo Pier Inn 625 S. PCH, RB East-West motel 300 N. Harbor, RB Sheraton at RB 400 N. Harbor Dr., RB Sunrise Motor Hotel 2730 Artesia 81., RB 1700 Sepulveda B1., MB Residence Inn 850 Sepulveda B1., MB Royal Pacific Inn LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. SALES SUMMARY SOUTH BAY AREA HOTEL/MOTEL LAND SITES SF LAND/ . DATE PRICE AREA -SF UNITS UNIT $/SF $/UNIT REMARKS 12/3/85 1,100,000 27,990 76 368 39.30 14,474 7/2/85 950,000 22,500 35 643 42.22 27,143 10/1/84 340,300 11,640 23 506 29.24 14,796 1985 6,000,000 225,456 353 639 26.61 16,997 Includes large commer- cial area and excess parking. Final land cost may go higher in current court action. 1985 1,863,000 101,000 113 894 18.45 16,487 Price based on 1985 land rent of $149,000 and 8$ cap. rate. 10/18/85 525,000 29,190 38 637 17.99 13,816 3/21/85 4,750,000 198,000 176 1125 23.99 26,989 Suites 9/27/85 940,000 22,500 45 500 41.78 20,889 1440 E. Imperial Hwy., ES 2/15/83 5,000,000 100,800 351 287 49.60 14,245 Suites Embassy Suites 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY. Inc. MARKET DATA MAP SOUTH BAY AREA HOTEL/MOTEL LAND SITES Airport c- 1440 E. Imperial Hwy., ES Embassy Suites GRAND El Segundo Manhattan Beach z 2 SEPULVEDA z 0 C9 w w U Q l\ Roce T`oc JCa MARINE Q MARINE 1700 Sepulveda 81., m8 Hawthorne 0 0 _J • Residence Inn vZ MANHATTAN BEACH O 850 Sepulveda Bl., m8 Royal Pacific Inn Hermos Beach Redondo Beach ARTESIA cr EL SEC Lawndale ROS COMPTON 901 Aviation 81., HB 2730 Artesia 81., RB 190TH 400 N. Harbor Dr., RB Sunrise motor Hotel 300 N. Harbor, RB Sheraton at RB AcO INC E 210 S. PCH, RB Redondo Pier Inn 625 5. PCH, RB East-West Motel -."14."""'""••-41. Z z cr 0 Torrar z1CARSON 0 u) 1"*..4.Q1,44 LOSSON APPRAISAL COMPANY QUALIFICATIONS DELMER E. LOSSON, ASA Real Estate Appraiser Appraisal Experience Twenty-one years experience appraising real property for the purpose of ex- pressing value opinions ranging from the full fee market value to partial interests and estates therein. These appraisals have provided a basis for eminent domain acquisition, inverse condemnation proceedings, dissolution of marriage or partnership and tax hearings. They have also served as a basis for purchase, sale, lease, easement and license of real property, loans on real property and economic feasibility studies. Types of properties appraised fall within the broad categories of single and multiple family residential, commercial, industrial, vacant land, and special purpose properties. Specific examples include a variety of water- front properties, apartments, shopping centers, commercial office buildings, medical office buildings, service stations, schools, parks, manufacturing and warehousing properties. Court Experience Qualified as an expert witness in the valuation of real property in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Appraisal Education Certificate in Real Estate, UCLA Certificate in Real Estate, Appraisal Specialization, UCLA Real Estate courses completed include: Principles, Finance, Law and Practice; Intermediate, Advanced and Condemnation Appraising; Appraising for Investment Purposes; Investment Analysis; Income Tax Factors of Investment; Residential Design; Tools of Real Estate Research. Additional related courses have been taken in the field of Business. American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers - Case Study Courses Course I Basic Principles, Methods and Techniques Course II Urban Properties Course II Urban Properties (Revised) Course VI Real Estate Investment Analysis Seminars - Many specialized 1 to 3 day sessions sponsored by the American Society of Appraisers, International Right of Way Association and American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, among others. Professional Affiliations Senior Member American Society of Appraisers, in the discipline of Real Property, Urban. Member, International Right of Way Association 5/86 3R,140 - ANA olaPil At Qq -----t.; C.is.v.r.lir I onor.I.ableyor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council January 19, 1987 Regular Meeting of January 27, 1987 Appeals to the Planning Commission's Approval of a Conditional Use Permit, Parking Plan, Zone Variance & Environmental Negative Declaration for 2420 Pacific Coast Highway, Hope Chapel Recommendation Staff recommends the following: afta TPS •av�� 1. Denial of the zone variance Approval of the Conditional Use Permit, Parking Plan and environmental Negative Declaration subject to Conditions of the Planning Commission Resolution P.C. 86-53 (attached). Denial of requested amendments to 'Numbers 6 and 8 of conditions of approval, and Number 8 should be interpreted to elimjnate all access to Borden Street. Background qiwaii)(04cihAvoli;‘,2); • 100n Deceber 2,�P1986, Ae Planning Commission approved the above Ientioned items (refer to Resolutions P.C. 86-54 and 86-53 for Findings and conditions of approval).c Two separate appeals have been submitted. The neighboring property owners have appealed all the items noted above and the applicant, Hope Chapel, has appealed the" conditions of approval, flu 'fO Numbers 6 and 8.toL hibloot:etrit* Variance: Staff concurs with the appellant that the grounds for a variance to allow the stairwell and emit -hallways to encroach into the setback have not all been met. A zone variance runs with the land and is applicable to the land because of an exceptional circumstance such as size, shape, or topographical features. In this instance, there is nothing unusual about the land; it is simply less expensive and easier to construct the expansion as proposed. A substantial property right possessed by others in the area is not being denied since the same requirements are imposed equally on all properties in the same circumstances, and the property is being used as permitted within the zone in which it exists. This variance could be detrimental to the public welfare, since it is encroaching into the commercial residential buffer area, and allows exit access to- a residential street. Even though the Conditional Use Permit limits access through the exits for emergencies only, future permitted uses may not need a 1 Conditional Use Permit and consequently no limitation would be imposed. Conditions of Approval No's. 6 and 8: Condition No. 6, limiting use of the church facility to those services noted in the submitted Parking Plan was based on not having any data available as to when the peak parking period for Lucky's market is; also how much on -street parking within the neighborhood occurred during church services. If the church is allowed to have large assemblies with no limitations, a significant parking impact may occur in the surrounding residential areas on a daily basis. The reason that shared parking is feasible between church uses and other uses is that churches are generally not in daily use. If the church intends to have services regularly then shared parking may not be feasible. Condition No. 8 was intended to limit disturbances to the neighbors and was, in part, a condition of the original Conditional Use Permit. Even though the one proposed exit does exit towards Lucky's, the proximity to the residential areas to the east could cause noise -type disturbances, particularly if it is children who are exiting. It should be noted that the church obtained a Building Permit to create a wall opening onto Borden Street which was contrary to the original Conditional Use Permit which limited the use of the Borden Street exits to emergencies only. Neighbors have complained that church patrons park on the neighboring streets and use this access. The Building Permit is two years old, has not been "finaled" and no inspections have ever been requested. Staff believes that this access should be sealed. Staff Report: The attached Staff Report provides detailed analysis for the Parking Plan, Conditional Use Permit, Variance and Negative Declaration. P.C. Liason No representative was designated for this item. Attachments 1. Staff Report to Planning Commission - 12/2/86 2. Resolutions P.C. 86-53 and 86-54 3. Background Materials a. Planning Commission Minutes of 12/2/86 b. Staff Environmental Review Committee Minutes of 9/17/86 and 10/8/86 d. Written appeal from Hope Chapel e. Written appeal from property owners' representative f. Hope Chapel's Parking Survey g. Written correspondence regarding appeals CONCUR: Gr gor T Meyer Ci y Manager 2 R pectfully�su��it �d, Michael chubach Planning Director 4 C November 24,1986 HONORABLE CHAIRMAN and MEMBERS of the Regular Meeting of HERMOSA BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION December 2,1986_ ZONE VARIANCE, AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, and PARKING PLAN for 2420 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, HOPE CHAPEL RECOMMENDATION _. Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit, and Parking Plan, subject to the Conditions of Approval noted in the attached Resolution. Staff recommends denial of the Zone Variance. BACKGROUND The Environmental Review Committee reviewed the subject proposal on October 8, 1986 and recommended a negative declaration, after finding no significant impacts. ANALYSIS Conditional Use Permit: The applicant is essentialy proposing to expand the floor area by adding a second level within the existing structure. This addition is possible because of the existing ceiling height. Also 4,465 square feet of additional floor area is proposed extending to the front property line, and over the existing ground level parking. The following notes the existing, and changes to the total floor area: Ground Level: Existing Lobby & Shop, excluding Exits, and excluding ground level parking 1,647.00 S.F.* Main Level: Existing Auditorium, Changed Maintenance Changed General Use New Administration New Classrooms New Ancillary New Storage Upper Level: Existing Ancillary New Administration New Classroom New Storage New Ancillary Assembly, Ancillary 14,448.25 S.F.* 2,859.00 S.F. 7,614.00 S.F.* 3,499.50 S.F. 3,973.00 S.F. 5,626.25 S.F. 120.00 S.F. New Subtotal 13,218.75 S.F. 2,051.75 S.F.* 3,328.50 S.F. 4,593.00 S.F. 1,377.00 S.F. 2,045.50 S.F. New Subtotal 11,344.00 S.F. _3 4 Existing Subtotals, sum of items marked *25,661.00 S.F. Changed Subtotals 2,859.00 S.F. New Subtotals 24,562.75 S.F. Gross Grand Total 53,082.75 S.F. Parking Plan: The applicant has an easement for parking with Lucky's Market to the North of the subject property, and also has an agreement with the office development at 2200 Pacific Coast Highway. In addition to deeded parking, verbal agreements have been made with several other businesses within the area. The following indicates total parking available to Hope Chapel: HOPE CHAPEL PARKING Item # 1 1 Description 1 Number 1 1 of 1 1 Spaces 1 1. On site parking spaces 120 2. Deeded off site parking, Lucky's Market 97 3. Deeded off site parking, Office project, 37 40 total deeded Subtotal of deeded spaces 254 4. Reciprocating verbal Agreement 31 Loomis & Eick 5. Reciprocating verbal Agreement 80 Liquor Barn 6. Reciprocating verbal Agreement 30 Coast Federal Bank 7. Reciprocating verbal Agreement 32 Crocker Plaza Total available parking 427 The applicant is proposing a maximum occupancy of 1130 persons. Based on the zoning ordinance parking requirements, a total of 226 spaces are required. The applicant has prepared a parking survey in conjunction with the proposed parking plan. This survey, in essence, indicates that 83/0 of the overall total number of spaces on-site, and deeded off-site parking is utilized at any one time (refer to attached Parking Study for details). Based on the submitted study, and the City requirements, the proposed parking appears adequate in all respects. However, some guarantee that the off-site parking could not be reduced, or eliminated is needed. 4 4 Zone Variance: The proposed plans include a 6 foot hallway and two stairwell exits which encroach into the required 12 foot rear setback. Also, no landscaping is being proposed which is also required. Staff believes that the following findings required for the granting of variance cannot be met. 1) That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved. 2) That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property.right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, ancj denied to the property in question. 3) That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. Further, both Building, and Public Works Staff believe that there are alternative methods to provide the required hallway and exits. The proposed method appears to be the least expensive. ATTACHMENTS 1) Resolution approving Parking Plan and Conditional Use Permit. 2) Resolution denying Zone Variance. 3) Parking Study prepared by applicant. 4) Deeded easement for parking at Lucky's Market. 5) Deeded easement for parking at 2200 Pacific Coast Highway. 6) Staff Review Minutes of October 8, 1986 meeting 7) Zone Variance Application 8) Conditional Use Permit Application 9) Parking Plan Application 10) Previous C.U.P. Resolution P.C. 154-10.3 7. I 5 Michael Schubach Planning Director ,,. ar 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 5 rl 17 x,18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION P.C. 86-53 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PROPOSED EXPANSION TO AN EXISTING CHURCH AT 2420 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, A PARKING PLAN FOR OFF-SITE PARKING, AND A NEGATIVE DECLARATION. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 2, 1986 and made the following Findings: A. The size and shape of the property is adequate for the proposed development; B. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan; C. The imposition of conditions and mitigation measures will minimize any significant impacts; D. Through common parking arrangements with adjacent uses, parking will be provided; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach does hereby approve an amendment to the Conditional Use Permit for the expansion church at 2420 Pacific Coast Highway subject to below, a Parking Plan subject to the conditions a Negative Declaration with mitigation measures. klra 1. The proposed dev lopment shall substantially conform to the submitted planVand to the following conditions. 2. A11 architectural treatment shall be as shown. 3. Parking shall be as shown and consist of a minimum of 250 parking spaces. a. An area for 10 motorcycles shall be provided. of the existing conditions listed listed below, and b. Covenants shall be recorded with the deeds for both of the deeded off-site parking areas at 2200 Pacific Coast Highway and also at the Lucky's market, 2510 Pacific Coast Highway, making the City a party thereto, and prohibiting the elimination of said off-site parking without City approval. 4. Landscaping areas shall be as shown on submitted plans. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (- a. A `landscape plan indicating the type, quantity and size of all plant materials shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director. b An'automatic sprinkler system shall be provided. `c. A minimum five (5) foot wide planter shall be provided along the rear property line; parking spaces may be reduced in depth by five (5) feet to accomodate planter. • 5. A covenant recorded with the deed for the Hope "Chapel property at 2420 Pacific Coast. Highway with the City a party thereto, limiting the use of the property to a church without prior City approval to modify, or change said use shall be provided. 6. The hours of church services shall be limited to Fridays and Saturdays commencing at 7:00 P.M., and Sundays commencing at 8:00 A.M. and 10:15 A.M. co cool' a. Any modification or addition to the hours of church services and/or additional assembly type uses shall require prior approval by the Planning Director with appeal to the Planning Commission, or the function shall be limited to available parking on-site. 7. There shall be compliance with all requirements of the Public Works Department, .Fire Department, Police and Building Department. 8. The door on Borden Street a..dd.,- a pLop s shall not be used as general access doors but for emergency purposes only. Panic hardware for said door shall be provided limiting access for. emergencies only. 9. Any modifications or alterations of the block wall along the south boundary of the lot must be approved by the Planning Commission. 10. Any signs shall require sign permit approval .prior to installation. 11. Three (3) revised copies of site plans, floor plans, elevations and landscape plans in conformance with the above conditions of approval: "shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to the issuance of any Building Permits. a. Covenants as required shall also be submitted with proof of recordation. 12. This esolution supercedes Resolution P.C. 154-1098. VI % 1 °v‘14146 -""•r lit-% P.c.., VOTE: AYES: Comms.Compton,Peirce,Rue,Chmn.Sheldon NOES: Comm.Schulte ABSENT:, • None ABSTAIN: None CERTIFICATION 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I hereby cC tify thatthe foregoing resolution P.C. 86-52 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 December 2, 1986. Ch c. S e1:on, u air an Date --Mich"ael `Schubach, Secretary • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 C � RESOLUTION P.C. 86-54 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO EXPAND INTO THE REQUIRED REAR SETBACK AT 2420 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, HOPE CHAPEL. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held a public hearing on December 2, 1986 and made the following Findings: 1. This project was submitted . to the City before more restrictive setback requirements became effective; 2. Such variance will preserve a substantial property right which has been granted to other property owners within the vicinity for lots of similar size, shape, and location since it will allow an existing structure to be recycled and expanded which can be anticipated. 3. No evidence, reason, or factual data has been found which indicates that this variance will be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located and will allow for the safety of the building occupants in cases of fire and other emergencies; 4. The granting of this variance is found to not be in conflict with any of the goals, objectives, policies or provisions of the General Plan and therefore, is not detrimental to the implementation of the General Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California does hereby approve a request for variance to expand into the required rear setback at 2420 Pacific Coast Highway, Hope Chapel. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 VOTE: AYf.,: Comms.Compton,Rue,Schu(7 lte NOES: Comm.Peirce,Chmn.Sheldon ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution P.C. 86-54 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 on December 2, 1986. . Michel ScYi'u�ach, Sec etary Chuck sq eldon, Chairman Lr?' Date -to- • r.:.tC, T6atitgrvitub Platrr.ialg MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON DECEMBER 2, 1986, AT 7:30 P.M. IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PARKING PLAN, VARIANCE AND NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR EXPANSION AT 2420 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, HOPE CHAPEL Chmn. Sheldon noted that the Commission had received a telegram and a number of letters pertaining to this request. Mr. Schubach gave staff report dated November 24, 1986. He stated that the applicant is requesting an amendment to a conditional use permit, a parking plan, and a variance. In regard to the zone variance, the proposed plans include a six-foot hallway and two stairwell exits which encroach into the required 12 -foot rear setback. Also, no required landscaping is being proposed. Mr. Schubach stated that staff believes that three of the four essential findings required for the granting of a variance cannot be met: (1) That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved; (2) That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property PLANNING COMMIS( ,'I MINUTES - DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 2 right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone and denied to the property in question; and (3) That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. Mr. Schubach further noted that both the Building and Public Works staff believe that there are alternative methods to provide the required hallway and exits. The proposed method appears to be the least expensive. Mr. Schubach discussed the conditional use permit amendment request and stated that the applicant is essentially proposing to expand the floor area by adding a second level within the exisjing structure. This addition is possible because of the existing ceiling height. Also, 4,465 square feet of additional floor area is proposed•extending to the front property line and over the existing ground -level parking. The expansion will provide for additional office space and Sunday school rooms. He continued by discussing the square footages in regard to the project. Mr. Schubach discussed the parking plan and stated that the applicant has an easement for parking with Lucky's Market to the north of the subject property, and there is also an agreement with the office development at 2200 Pacific Coast Highway. In addition to the deeded parking, verbal agreements have been made with several other businesses in the area. There are currently 120 on-site parking spaces, 97 deeded off-site parking spaces at Lucky's Market, and 37 deeded off-site parking spaces at the office project, for a subtotal of 254 deeded spaces. Further, there are reciprocating verbal agreements with Loomis & Eick (31 spaces), Liquor Barn (80 spaces), Coast Federal Bank (30 spaces), and Crocker Plaza (32), to bring the total number of available parking spaces to 427. Mr. Schubach stated that the applicant is proposing a maximum occupancy of 1,130 persons. Based on the zoning ordinance parking requirements, a total of 226 parking spaces is required. The applicant has prepared a parking survey in conjunction with the proposed .parking plan. This survey, in essence, indicates that 83% of the overall total number of spaces on-site and deeded off-site parking is utilized at any one time. Based on the submitted study and City requirements, the proposed parking appears adequate in all respects. However, some guarantee that the off-site parking could not be reduced or eliminated is needed. He stressed that, since this is a C-3 zone, parking would not be adequate if the use of this property changed from a church use. Mr. Schubach concluded by stating that the environmental review committee reviewed the subject proposal on October 8, 1986, and recommended a negative declaration after finding no significant impacts. Staff recommended approval of the conditional use permit and parking plan, subject to conditions noted in the proposed resolution. Staff recommended denial of the zone variance, based on the fact that the necessary findings could not be made. Chmn. Sheldon asked what form of deed exists with the Lucky's Market and the office building. Mr. Lough explained that there is a grant deed which runs with the land in perpetuity. He was not aware of any restrictions on these deeds. Mr. Schubach stated that the deeds could be dissolved at any time by the parties involved. He stressed the importance of a provision providing for such an outcome. PLANNING COMMIS(J MINUTES - DECEMBER 2, 1986 C PAGE 3 Chmn. Sheldon noted concern over a grant deed which restricts the use. He questioned whether there are restrictions stating that Hope Chapel may use the subject parking only at low-volume times for the businesses providing the parking. Mr. Lough stated that the Commission can impose conditions to ensure that the parking plan is sufficient. Chmn. Sheldon questioned whether there is a legal basis for verbal agreements. Mr. Lough stated that oral contracts are valid; however, he would prefer something in writing. Comm. Compton noted concern over deeds of this type with businesses whose parking requirements may change. He felt that issues of this nature should be periodically reviewed by the City. Mr. Schubach concurred, stating that currently such deed agreements are not legal. He stated that there is no power, to authorize such deeds. He stated that the parking agreement between Lucky's and the Hope Chapel has been in effect for many years, noting that the agreement was actually made between Lucky's and the previous tenant, a bowling alley. Mr. Schubach stated that the hours of operation of the church are different from the high-volume hours of business at Lucky's. Mr. Lough stated that the necessary issue in regard to this proposal is that the Commission add sufficient conditions to the parking plan to ensure adequate parking now and in the future. He stated that the primary mechanism.:.. forsuch assurance is the parking plan and the conditions attached thereto. Comm. Compton suggested that there be articles in the City Code addressing such situations and providing for periodic City review. Comm. Compton asked whether staff felt it necessary to have a professional parking plan done. Mr. Schubach stated that a detailed study of the parking was made by staff in conjunction with the parking plan provided by the applicant. He felt that adequate information has been obtained. He stated that there has been no precedent made by the applicant in providing his own parking study. Further, there is no requirement that the applicant hire a private consultant to prepare such a study. Comm. Rue stated that in the application for variance the applicant had noted that a substantial amount of planning had been undertaken before October of 1985. He questioned how this would affect the issue at hand. Mr. Lough stated that a variance must be granted on the basis of the merits of the variance, not on the amount of money spent. Public Hearing opened at 8:03 P.M. by Chmn. Sheldon. Dan Goodrich, 839 S. Beacon Street, Suite 225, San Pedro, architect, addressed the Commission. He gave background information on the building in question, stating that this building was converted to a church in 1976. He stated that much of what is being PLANNING COMMISS(,J MINUTES - DECEMBER 2, 1986 C PAGE 4 requested is within the confines of the present configuration of the church. He said that the existing occupancy is 850, and they would like to expand to an occupancy of 1,130. Mr. Goodrich discussed the proposed relocation of the Sunday School from the center portion of the structure to the rear portion which is currently unused. He displayed to the Commission a drawing depicting the location of the proposed changes, explaining Phase I of the project. He continued by discussing Phase II. • Mr. Goodrich stated that the height of the stair tower from grade will be 18 feet. The top of the stair tower will be at the top of the corridor; therefore, at the highest point there Will be a continual line. Mr. Goodrich stated that Hope Chapel attendants control the parking at Lucky's Market during services. The attendants 4uide people to the parking location to ensure that people park in the proper locations. He stated that there have been no problems with this arrangement. Mr. Goodrich stated that the amount of parking available is adequate, noting that they are required to have only 226 spaces. He stated that 92% of the available parking is used. He continued by explaining the parking survey. Mr. Goodrich stated that the proposed expansion will create no additional environmental impacts than currently exist to the surrounding neighborhood. Mr. Goodrich discussed the variance application, stating that the proposal is not to move the existing building back to the rear property line; rather, the proposal calls for an expansion of a six-foot wide by ten -foot tall wall with stair towers at each end. He stated that this proposal is below the existing roof line. There•will be no blockage of light. The corridor will be completely enclosed; therefore, there will no be additional noise, lights, or pedestrian traffic. He said that the corridor will be located at the back of the building because this provides for the most efficient use of space, noting that this is an existing floor structure with an existing frame within which to work. He noted that exits must be located on streets adjacent to the property. Mr. Goodrich felt that this use is a very efficient use of money. He stated that it is desirable to use the building during the course of construction. He stated that the project is phased in a manner which would allow such use to continue during construction with a minimum of impact to the ongoing work. He stated that if the corridor were to be located inside, it would cost more and would cause a loss of use of space. He noted that 147 fewer people would be able to attend each service were the corridor to be located inside. Mr. Goodrich stated that work has been taking place on this project since 1984. 1 -le noted that they have worked with the Planning Department and Fire Department on the project. He stated that in working with the Fire Department, it was determined that there was an inadequate water supply to this building. During the course of time in which they were obtaining a water study, the rear yard ordinance was passed in November of 1985. Therefore, they were not aware they had satisfactory evidence to commence with the project until a month had passed from the approval of the ordinance. Mr. Goodrich stated that there will be no environmental impact to the surrounding area. He stated that the corridor needs to be located where proposed because of the conditions of the property. He stated that the corridor will be an extension of the second floor. PLANNING COMMISS(LJ MINUTES - DECEMBER 2, 1986 PAGE 5 Mr. Goodrich stated that this is the first request for a modification to the existing conditional use permit. Don Stewart, 417 East 12th Street, Carson, associate pastor at Hope Chapel responsible for this project, addressed the Commission. He stated that Hope Chapel is very nearly public property, noting that it is used exclusively for religious and charitable purposes. The money given, -therefore, in the eyes of the church, is given as a public trust. He noted that it would be costly to relocate the stairs to a different location, stating that it would be approximately $12,000 for redesign and $50,000 in additional costs to place the stairs inside the building either at the back of the building or in the middle. Mr. Stewart stated that he would like to use the money in the most efficient manner possible. More than a financial loss, if the variance is denied, there would be a loss of space inside the building. He notedtthat there could be a potential loss of 147 people per service who could not attend church if the stairs need to be relocated. Mr. Stewart stated that there are special circumstances applicable to this property. He stated that this is an existing building. He stated that possible loss of community service is a very significant special circumstance applicable to this property. He felt that it would be morally wrong not to ask for the variance. Ak Dazarian, 413 Faye Lane, Redondo Beach, senior pastor at Hope Chapel, addressed the Commission, stating that there are approximately 5,000 members of Hope Chapel, including approximately .500 families living in Hermosa Beach. He explained the various outreach programs sponsored by the church. He discussed the various drug and alcohol rehabilitation programs offered by Hope Chapel. He described the prison outreach project. He stated that this church is of incredible benefit to the community in all respects. He stated that they have tried very hard to be good neighbors. He saw no reason why the variance could not be granted in order to maximize the benefits of the church. Timothy Personius, Hermosa Beach, member of Hope Chapel for six years, favored the request not only as a church member, but also as a long-time resident of the City. He stated that Hope Chapel is particularly effective in dealing with societal problems. He stated that the drug programs at the church are very effective. He stated that the church has a positive impact on the community. He felt that the property is being used in a very effective manner, and he urged the Commission to grant the variance request. Steven Klugman, attorney and resident of Hermosa Beach, favored. He stated that there are only benefits to be obtained by the granting of this variance. He stated that the footprint of the property will be identical after the expansion. He stated that there will be no loss of light or air. There will be no additional noise created by this proposal. He stated that great harm will be done to the community if the variance request is denied. Mary Du Pres, 1229 1st Street, Hermosa Beach, favored She stated that after her divorce several years ago, she received a great deal of emotional and monetary support from the Hope Chapel. She requested the Commission to grant the variance request. Paul Molman, 904 24th Street, Hermosa Beach, opposed. He stated that his house is near the southeast corner of Hope Chapel. He opposed the granting of the variance based on the following reasons: the proposed extension into the rear setback will be very close to his bedroom; the market value of his home will be lowered; the quiet enjoyment of his neighborhood will be damaged; possible difficulty of emergency vehicles getting to his house; the threat of fire at the church damaging his home; closer proximity during earthquakes would create a higher likelihood of his home being damaged; ventilation and PLANNING COMMIS(N MINUTES - DECEMBER 2, 1986 C PAGE 6 lighting will be reduced; trespassing; increased trash being thrown over the wall; increased pedestrian traffic; increased noise and traffic; opposition to an opening in the wall at the head of Rhodes Street because of the possibility of criminals escaping via that route; increased parking difficulties. He urged the Commission to deny the zone variance request and to modify the conditional use permit to not permit any opening in the wall at the head of Rhodes Street. Christine Pruseau, 812 24t4 Street, Hermosa Beach, opposed, stating that she concurred with the comments made by Mr. Molman. She also opposed the granting of the variance based on the fact that when she purchased her house, she thought land use would be enforced. She felt that the variance is not necessary and not of benefit to all adjacent properties. She felt that there are no extraordinary circumstances applicable in this case, stating that religious preferences are by choice. She felt that the taxpayers and neighbors will bear the brunt of }the inconveniences caused by the granting of this variance. She felt that there is no undue or unjust hardship if the variance is 'not granted. She stated that the granting of such variance would be a great detriment to the surrounding area, especially to the value of life. Ann Latner, 936 24th Street, Hermosa Beach, opposed the granting of the variance, but she had no objections to the impact of Hope Chapel on the community. She is looking at this establishment solely as a business. She objected to the exit going out onto a residential street which would allow access from neighboring streets into the church, where such access is not currently provided. If the stairwell is provided, there will be increased traffic and pedestrians. She felt that the parking plan as proposed is adequate. She felt that church members should be encouraged to park at Lucky's Market, Liquor Barn, and Crocker Bank. She felt that some are discouraged from doing so because it is farther away from the church. She stated that if the proposed exit were only for emergency exits, her objections would be lessened. Lynn Lindhurst, 941 24th Street, Hermosa Beach, opposed, stating that he felt the church has outgrown its current facility. He felt that to encourage growth at this location would be detrimental to the surrounding neighbors and their quality of life. Mr. Goodrich stated it is intended that the door in question will be used only as an emergency exit. He stated that panic hardware is to be installed on the door. He further stressed that the ordinance applicable in this case was approved in October of 1985. Comm. Compton discussed the aesthetics of the rear of the building. Mr. Goodrich stated that currently the rear wall is unadorned. He stated that a corridor will be introduced and another projection in order to add more character. He stated that there are currently no firm plans in regard_to the wall. He stated that landscaping will be done in the area, noting that it is possible to add plants on the top of the corridor. Mr. Goodrich discussed the fire exit door, stating that panic hardware will be installed. He stated that he understood the concerns expressed by the neighbors in this regard. Comm. Rue asked whether there will be an increase of traffic and pedestrians near the emergency exit door. Mr. Goodrich stated that there will be no entrance through the door. He stressed that the door will be used only in case of emergency for exiting purposes. He stated that both doors can be designated emergency exits only. He stated that emergency exit doors must be located on a public right of way. • 1 PLANNING COMMISSCN MINUTES - DECEMBER 2, 198'6 PAGE 7 Public Hearing closed at 8:58 P.M. by Chmn. Sheldon. Comm. Peirce stated that he was torn between the meritorius services of this facility and the zoning. He felt that several of the necessary findings for granting of a variance cannot be made in this case. He felt that there are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable in this case, noting that the circumstances are to apply to siting and geologic or geographic factors. He felt that the fact that this is an existing structure is not adequate in order to meet the finding. He felt that the variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone. He did not•feel that the granting of the variance would be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property in the vicinity and zone in which the church is located. He did note, though, that each of the four findings must Ife met. Comm. Peirce stated that in the City there are a number of cases where commercial property abuts residential property, noting that this is a real problem. Although he felt that Hope Chapel is a good establishment, he could not make the necessary findings. Comm. Schulte felt that the exceptional or extraordinary circumstance in this case is the fact that this is an existing structure. One expects churches to grow, if possible; and in an effort to grow, the church must have exits. The proposed emergency exits are an effort to accommodate an existing structure. Comm. Schulte felt that a finding that this variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right is a difficult finding to make. He felt that the fact that this is an existing building could also be applicable to this finding, stating that a church has an obligation to itself to grow. As a church, he: felt that it could be argued that it is a property right of a church to try to grow. He noted that the question becomes whether or not there are others in the same situation that have grown and have received similar variances. Comm. Schulte felt that the granting of this variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property, especially if the proposed doors are to be used only as emergency exits. He noted that if the current door, which is currently being used for ingress and egress, is also made an emergency -only exit, this would actually be an improvement. Comm. Schulte felt that the granting of this variance would not be detrimental to the general plan. Based on these findings, he noted that he could support the variance. Comm. Schulte asked whether other churches in town have grown to such an extent that it has become necessary for them to request variances in order to accommodate their growth. Mr. Schubach stated that he knew of no such cases. Comm. Compton explained that up until one year ago, this church could have built all the way to the property line. He explained the code modifications for the benefit of the audience. Comm. Compton stated that such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, based on the fact that there are many buildings in the City built right to the property line. PLANNING COMMIS5(..1 MINUTES - DECEMBER 2, 1986 ( PAGE 8 Comm. Compton stated that financing is not to be `taken into account when deciding whether there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to a case. He noted that such costs are to borne by an owner. He did not feel that the location of this existing building could be considered a finding. Comm. Rue stated that this is an existing building and the encroachment space is used for emergency exiting purposes only. The structure will not add to the existing footprint of the building. Further, light and/or air will not be restricted in any way. Comm.'Peirce felt that the footprint of the building will be increased. Comm. Compton noted that both stair towers encroach into an area not now covered, albeit this is a very small area. Chmn. Sheldon felt that this is a very difficult case. He stated that he had difficulty in making the necessary findings. He noted that there will be future applications for encroachments into setbacks. He noted concern over such actions, and he stressed that this building should be looked at as another commercial structure. He noted that commercial structures are located all along Pacific Coast Highway. He felt that very specific findings need to be made in this case; otherwise, a precedent will be set. MOTION by Comm. Peirce, seconded by Comm. Compton, to approve the conditional use permit for a proposed expansion of the existing church and the parking plan as described in Resolution P.C. 86-53, as proposed by staff. Comm. Peirce felt that the conditions proposed in Resolution P.C. 86-53 are adequate. Comm. Schulte commented on the staff proposed conditions, noting that Condition No. 6 states: "The hours of church services shall be limited to Fridays and Saturdays commencing at 7:00 P.M. and Sundays commencing at 8:00 A.M. and 10:15 A.M." Condition 6 (a) states: "Any modification or addition to the hours of church services and/or additional assembly -type uses shall require prior approval by the Planning Commission." He noted that many activities other than church services take place at this establishment. He questioned whether those are considered "services" and would not apply to this condition. Mr. Schubach stated that those other uses are considered to be "assembly" uses. Technically, they should have approval for such uses. So far as church uses, they should not exceed the available parking. Comm. Schulte noted that a church typically has other functions such as weddings and funerals. It is not always possible to determine at what time these events will occur. He felt that Condition No. 6 needs to be reworded as liberally as possible in order to avoid their having to come before the Planning Commission to request permission each time the issue arises. AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION by Comm. Peirce as maker, and agreed to by Comm. Compton as second, to amend Condition No. 6 to state that "The hours of normally scheduled church services...." Comm. Schulte stated that the problem remains with such an amendment. Chinn. Sheldon reminded the Commission that such a condition has been included because of the limited off-site parking available to the church during specific hours. If the PLANNING COMMISSCI MINUTES - DECEMBER 2, 1986 ( PAGE 9 church is given carte blanche to have large gatherings at any time, parking becomes a problem. He felt that the church has a right to have gatherings, but within the specifications of the available parking. Mr. Schubach favored an amendment stating that other programs beyond those mentioned in Condition No. 6 would not exceed the available on-site parking. AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION (above) WITHDRAWN by Comm. Peirce as maker, and agreed to by Comm. Compton as second. AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION by Comm. Peirce as maker, and agreed to by Comm. Compton as second, to add a Condition No. 6 (b) stating "that any functions beyond those mentioned shall not exceed the available on-site parking." -Z Comm. Schulte noted concern over functions such as weddings which would draw a large number of people. He noted that Condition No. 6 (a) requires prior approval by the Planning Commission. He suggested that approval be obtained from the Planning Director instead of the Planning.Commission. Comm. Compton questioned whether Condition No. 8 is adequate: "The door on Borden Street will not be used as a general purpose access door, but for an exit for emergency purposes only." AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION by Comm. Compton as second, and agreed to by Comm. Peirce as maker, to add wording to Condition No. 8 stating "that an alarm bell shall be installed on the emergency exit door." Comm. Schulte noted concern over large events such as weddings. He felt that it would be necessary for them to come before the Planning Commission each time such an event is to take place. For this reason, he stated that he could not support the motion. AYES: Comms. Compton, Peirce, Rue, Chmn. Sheldon NOES: Comm. Schulte ABSENT: None MOTION by Comm. Compton, seconded by Comm. Schulte, to approve the zone variance, but with a restriction to the extension of the stair towers into the setback area. Comm. Compton stated that by so doing, it would be required that any additional area added to the building not extend the existing footprint of the building as it currently exists. The stair towers would then need to be self contained. Comm. Peirce stated that approval of a -motion as proposed, would make a variance unnecessary. Comm. Compton stated that a variance would still be necessary for the extension of the corridor. He did not favor allowing the stairwells to encroach all the way to the rear setback. He noted that by restricting them from doing so, there would be a minimal impact to the surrounding neighbors. Further, the tall elements on the exterior of the building would not be as detrimental. He noted that this may present a cost to the church, but he felt that this is a compromise. Comm. Compton discussed' the findings. He stated that this is an exceptional circumstance, based on the fact that this is an existing building. It is sited originally in a -20- PLANNING COMMISLN MINUTES - DECEMBER 2, 1986 \. PAGE 10 location that was not extended to its full boundaries at the time it was built. Instead, it is pulled back approximately six feet from the existing property line. Mr. Lough stated that a variance is a legislative act, noting that legislative acts cannot be conditioned. He stated that a variance can be granted only if the proper findings are made. He stated the variance may be granted by stating that there can be a six-foot encroachment, but the variance cannot be conditioned. AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION by Comm. Compton as maker, and agreed to by Comm. Schulte as second, to allow a six-foot encroachment into the setback to allow for the corridor. The stairwells would then have to conform to the six feet •or be pulled back inside. There myst be a six-foot setback. Comm. Rue felt that if a six-foot Nncroachment is allowed, they should then be allowed to go all the way to the property line. He felt that this is a recycled existing structure and has been there for many years. The only way to expand the existing floor area is to add emergency egress. This emergency egress is being added only to maintain and enjoy full use of the interior of this structure. AYES: Comms. Compton, Schulte NOES: Comms. Peirce, Rue, Chmn. Sheldon ABSENT: None MOTION by Comm. Rue, seconded by Comm. Schulte, to approve the variance based on the following findings: that this is an exceptional and extraordinary circumstance, based on the fact that this is an existing recycled structure; that the interior area can only be utilized to its fullest by adding the emergency egress; that emergency egress can only be obtained by the addition of the rear area; that the rear area is the only emergency egress. Further, that this is an exceptional circumstance, based on the fact that this is an existing building sited originally in a location that was not extended to its full boundaries at the time it was built. Instead, it is pulled back approximately six feet from the existing property line. Comm. Rue stressed that this is an existing building and that cases such as this very seldom occur in the City; therefore, this is an exceptional or extraordinary circumstance. Comm. Compton discussed the landscaping. Mr. Lough stated that the issue of landscaping should have been discussed during the conditional use permit portion of the discussion. Chmn. Sheldon stressed the importance of making sufficient findings. Comm. Compton noted that until a year ago, this project would not have required a variance. He stated that many buildings were able to do what is being requested here; therefore, this variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone and being denied to the property in question. He noted that many businesses can be found in the City which are built to the property line. Comm. Schulte questioned whether approval of this variance would set a precedent. He noted, though, that it is required by the Building Department that emergency egress must be provided. That in and of itself is a unique or extraordinary circumstance. PLANNING COMMISSI el MINUTES - DECEMBER 2, 1986 C PAGE 11 Comm. Peirce stated that this particular emergency access could be provided within the present confines of the building. Had this project come up soon after the October 1985 ordinance, he could be more sympathetic to this project; however, he noted that more than a year has gone by. He noted concern over granting variances in the future, and he noted that there must be a cut-off period. Therefore, he could not support the motion. Comm. Compton noted that this project had commenced long before October of 1985. He stated that preliminary examinations had been made by the Planning Department before the new ordinance took effect. AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION by Comm. Rue as maker, and agreed to by Comm. Schulte as second, to add a finding noting that this project had commenced long before October 1985 when the new ordinance took effect. Further, that the granting of this variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. Comm. Peirce felt that this variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the sane vicinity and zone. AYES: Comms. Compton, Rue, Schulte NOES: Comm. Peirce, Chmn. Sheldon ABSENT: None MOTION by Comm. Rue, seconded by Comm. Compton, to reconsider the conditional use permit request. AYES: Comms. Compton, Peirce, Rue, Schulte, Chmn. Sheldon NOES: None, • ABSENT: None MOTION by Comm. Rue, seconded by Comm. Compton, to place the following restrictions on the egress of the building: Condition No. 8 shall state that both exit doors shall not be used as general access, but will be used as emergency egress only and will be equipped with appropriate panic hardware which would sound when used; further, that there shall be mitigating landscaping put on top of the corridor in order to break up the facade for the benefit of the adjacent neighbors; and that landscaping be put between the cars in the rear of the area, as approved by the Planning Director. Chmn. Sheldon noted that this reconsideration of the conditional use permit is an amendment to the C.U.P. as previously approved. lea Comm. Rue stated that the motion requires_ that all other conditions of the conditional use permit as previously approved shall remain in full force and effect. AYES: Comms. Compton, Peirce, Rue, Chmn. Sheldon NOES: Comm. Schulte ABSENT: None Chmn. Sheldon noted that any decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed by writing to the City Council within ten days. Recess taken from 9:43 P.M. until 9:50 P.M. C C MINUTES OF THE STAFF REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER'' 17, 1986 IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 10:00 A.M. PROJECT 85-50 2420 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY - REVISED PARKING PLAN & CUP Mr. Schubach informed the Committee that this project is scheduled to be heard at the next meeting. 1Tl MINUTES OF THE STAFF REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON OCTOBER 8, 1986 IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS AT 10:00 A.M. PRESENT: Michael Schubach, Planning Director William Grove, Building & Safety Director Val Straser, Police Department Captain Lee Lickhalter, Fire Department FF/PM ABSENT: Anthony Antich, Public Works Director PROJECT 85-50 2420 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY - HOPE CHAPEL - Revised Parking Plan in Conjunction with a Zone Variance & CUP for Expansion. (Continued item from the 9/17/86 Staff Review Meeting) Applicant: Dan Goodrich, Architect Mr. Schubach informed the applicant that revisions needed to be made to the parking study to show the correct number of regular and compact spaces. FF/PM Lickhalter said the Fire Department will require the upgrading of the hydrant. Motion by Mr. Schubach to recommend that a Negative Declaration be prepared for Project #85-50 for Hope Chapel at 2420 Pacific Coast Highway with mitigation measures as follows: 1) fire hydrant to be upgrade to Fire Department specifications and 2) a revised parking study be prepared to show correct number of regular and compact size parking spaces. Seconded by Capt. Straser. No objections, so ordered. C r_il. THE KOLINAS GROUP December 12, 19 Kathleen Midstokke, City Clerk City of Hermosa Beach Civic Center Hermosa Beach, California 9.0254 Re: Approval of Three Planning Commission Actions Parking Plan, CUP Amendment and Variance Hope Chapel - Four Square Church 2420 Pacific Coast Highway Honorable City Clerk: This is a request to appeal the actions of the Planning Commission approving a Parking Plan, Conditional Use Permit Amendment and Variance Application and the Negative Declaration filed in conjunction therewith acted on December 2, 1986 for the Hope Chapel - Four Square Church, 2420 Pacific Coast Highway, Hermosa Beach, California 90254. The appeal of these actions is based on substantive evidence that the Planning Commission extended its decision beyond the objectives established by the City Council. The Planning Commission in approving the Variance Application failed to show that all the required findings have been met. In approving the Conditional Use Permit Application, the Planning Commission failed to consider the proximate location of the surrounding parking areas with respect to street traffic, pedestrian safety and potential to park within the residential areas surrounding the church property. The Planning Commission in approving its parking plan failed to consider the impracticality of establishing a land covenant for parking purposes and having no city police enforcement procedures or code enforcement staff. Further, the Planning Commission failed to consider that this lack of regulation and control has created adverse impacts of parking intrusion on surrounding property owners. It is requested with the appeal, that the public hearing schedule date be set for the first regular City Council meeting in the month of February, 1987. The request for this date for public hearing is to allow the property owners sufficient time to develop their case. 1334 PARK VIEW AVE., SUITE 100, MANHATTAN BEACH, CA 90266 (213) 546-7444 • c Kathleen Midstokke December 12, 1986 Page 2 This appeal letter is being filed by The Kolinas Group, advocate planning consultants for surrounding property owners. Should you have any questions or desire further information, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Respectfully submitted, JAM:jeg.136 cc: Property Owners c December 11, 1986 City Council City of Hermosa Beach Civic Center Hermosa Reach, California RE: Resolution F.C. 86-53 Project: Hope Chapel - Foursquare Church 2420 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Hmnorabl e Cc Ltnci l mpmb. Kr s, After careful consideration and on behalf of the Hope Chapel I submit this appeal to the following conditions applied to the Modified Conditional Use Permit granted by the Planning Commission on December 2, 1986. We have reviewed our request with the Direc- tor of the Planning Department and he is in concurrence that an appeal is necessary to revise the issues at hand. Page 2, Item 6. now reads: We 6. The hours of church services shall be limited to Fridays and Saturdays commencing at 7:00 F.M., and Sundays com- mencing at 8:00 A.M. and 10:15 A.M. a. Any modifications or addition to the hours of church services and/or additional assembly type uses shall require prior approval by the Planning Director with appeal to the Planning Commission, or the function shall be limited to available parking on-site. b. Any functions beyond those mentioned shall not exceed available on site parking. request Page 2, Item 6. to read: 6. The hours of full occupancy church services shall be limited to Weekday Evenings after 5:00 P.M. and Week- ends. a. Any modification or addition to the hours of full occupancy church services shall require prior approval by the Planning Director with appeal to the Planning Commission. Page 2, Item 8. now reads: 6. The door on Borden Street and the proposed rear exit doors shall not be used as general access doors but for emergency purposes only. Panic hardware for said doors shall be provided. An alarm bell shall be installed on the emergancy exit doors. We request Page 2, Item 8. to read: 8. The door on Borden Street and the proposed Southeast rear exit door shall not be used as general access doors but for emergency purposes only. Panic hardware for said door shal 1 be provided. ` C C RE: Resolution F.C. 86-53 Variance Resolution P.C. Project: Hope Chapel - Foursquare Church 2420 Pacific Coast Highway Hermosa Beach, CA X30254 Continued: Arguments in favor: To item 6:: The parking study submitted reveals that our worst case park- ing condition occurs on the Friday evening, 7:00 F.M.. ser- vice. This condition provides us with 92% of the total 254 parking spaces legally available, 234 spaces. lysing the 234 spaces actually available gives us a maximum occupancy of attendance limited to 1130 people. This request will allow us to use our facility to it's maximum occupancy, on occasion, for uses other than the regularly scheduled events. We to share the concern of the Commission that our events be lim- ited to the available parking but we request that'it be lim- ited to that which is actually available in the worst case, 234 spaces. This flexibility is extremely important to the congregation and the community. To Item 8.: We have no objection to securing the Southeast rear exit door proposed, our request is only that the Northeast rear exit door be allowed to remain open when the facility is in use. This door opens directly onto our property and is well screened to adjacent residential properties by surrounding concrete block walls and/or Landscaping. Our request .is to allow a separate access for the children to the Sunday School so that they will not have to be taken through the Main Audi- torium, interrupting services. We respectfully submit this request for your consideration. If you have any questions or a need of further- information please -feel free to call. Thankjs'o,Lr. • i Si nzarel y, Dan L. Goodrich - Project Architect DLG/psw cc: Hope Chapel Council members File A HOPE CHAPEL PARKING STUDY (Revised: 10-27-86) PREPARED FOR THE STAFF AND PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PREPARED BY DR. DONALD G. STEWART ASSOCIATE PASTOR, HOPE CHAPEL OCT 2 81986 HOPE CHAPEL PARKING STUDY Background At the request of the Hermosa Beach staff, a parking study was conducted. The purpose of this study was to determine if adequate parking is actually available to Hope Chapel at the time it is needed. Methodology Parking available to Hope Chapel was divided into two catagories: (1) parking deeded to Hope Chapel (both on and off-site) , and (2) other off-street parking available to Hope Chapel within one block walking distance. In the latter case, Hope Chapel has been given verbal permission to use the number of spaces counted. There are also a significant number of on -street parking places within easy walking distance of Hope which were not included in this study. On July 25, 26, and 27, 1986, the number of parking spaces available in each of the individual parking areas surveyed were counted one-half hour before and again one-half hour after the start of each Hope Chapel service. (see map for location of parking places surveyed). The difference between these numbers represent, to a high degree, the amount of parking used by Hope Chapel. To convey a maximum of information, both the actual number of spaces available and what those spaces represent as a percentage of the total number of parking spaces available are included in this report. Summary of Results 1. During peak -use (Friday and Sunday evening) periods: a. 92% of all the deeded parking is available for Hope Chapel use. b. Hope Chapel uses 83% of their total deeded parking. c. 91% of the off-site deeded parking (parking not under Hope's building) is available for Hope's use. d. Hope Chapel uses 77% of the off-site deeded parking. 2. Regarding other off-street parking (non -deeded): a. Depending upon the service time, between 64% and 95% of the other off-street parking is available for Hope to use. b. Hope uses only between 1% and 27% of the non -deeded parking available. 3. When all off-street parking that is available to Hope Chapel is considered (both deeded and non -deeded): a. Depending upon the service time, between 64% and 95% of this parking is available for Hope to use. b. Hope uses between 26% and 58% of all available parking. Discussion of Results A. There is currently no maximum occupancy of the Hope Chapel building defined. The maximum occupancy of the Hope Chapel main auditorium is currently established at 850 people. Based on this parking study, the amount of deeded parking space actually available for Hope Chapel's use one-half hour before service starts is 234 parking places (92% of 264 spaces). The total number of parking spaces actually available to Hope Chapel within one block (both deeded and non -deeded) is 393 spaces (92% of 427 spaces). Based upon the Hermosa Beach parking ordinance, the total number of parking spaces needed to support the proposed S C ,• t expansion of Hope Chapel faoilitieg ig oithor tj. cutr°2' g.pklig depending upon how the space needed is calculatet. B. The proposed changes in the Hope Chapel facaTi.±tii,e:a, a-rw cifi" a➢ type that will not impact or increase the amouni. c khat,a411. p rfk rng; space needed. Relocation of the current Sunday ljaxtritfElmm+ has no affect on the number of cars the childrer'4 wavants3 t!.® bring them to church. Also, constructionof the axdhll3fi;iionael office facilities will not increase the total arrourut. .m' pamkkam;, space needed because the major uses of the offi sl arm szfteoRtled at times other than service times. Major uses oR-' tie: v�ac�t.ea�1 Sunday School areas are also scheduled at times uttimir than• service times and, therefore, will not increase Me ammunti oH'' parking needed. C. It could be argued that a larger Sunday Schaal. woual+d°' TI11:�xw more children (and therefore more parents) to be an; the bickpiaddmg.. We sincerely hope so! However, the growth in the:' numtia-rz ori' children and parents couldn't begin to use up the expre=ss; n&amb)eenr m - deeded parking spaces available. At a ratio of 1 scea tor e;a;h; 5; seats, (the code requirement for the auditorium vherea thei Q, •ze;rnits; would be) , the building occupancy could grow to no) pima.mlie a2:34 4 spaces available times 5) and still comply with trhe plargsiirai x!e requirements. • SUMMARY HOPE CHAPEL PARKING STUDY Conducted July 25 - 27, 1986 DEEDED SPACES: (254) Spaces avail. before services Spaces avail. after services % avail. before services % avail. after services % used by Hope Chapel % off-site avail. before sery % off-site avail. after serv. %off-site used by Hope FRIDAY 229 21 90% 8% 82% 90% 15% 7S% SAT. 218 106 86% 42% 44% 75% 53% 22% SUN. #1 235 120 93% 47% 46% 87% 12% 75% SUN. #2 1 SUN.P.M. 1541 1 20 61% 8% 53% 43% 10% 33% 240 26 94% 10% 84% 92% 14% 78% OTHER OFF-STREET PARKING(173) Spaces avail. before services Spaces avail. after services % avail before servives % avail. after services % used by Hope Chapel 136 96 79% 55% 24% 163 161 94% 93% 1% 161 114 93% 66% 27% 120 10S 64% 61% 3% 164 144 95% 83% 12% COMBINED DEEDED & OTHER (427) Total spaces avail. before 36S Total spaces avail. after 117 Avg. % available before 85% Avg. % available after 1 27% % total spaces used by Hope 1 58% 381 267 89% 63% 26% 396 234 93% SS% 38% 274 12S 64% 29% 35% 404 170 95%„ 40% 55% Notes: (1) The data from before the 10:15 A.M. service is skewed by the overlap in cars leaving from and coming to the morning services. HOPE CHAPEL PARKING STUDY RAW DATA SERVICE: Friday, 7 P.M., July 25, 1986 PARKING LOCATION (total spaces) DEEDED SPACES (254) Hope - Main (120) Lucky Market - Used by Hope (97) - Used by Lucky (64) Office Project (37) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: Parking Spaces Available 1/2 Hr. before Serv. 1/2 Hr. after Serv. No. Avail. % Avail. No. Avail. % Avail. 1091 882 24 32 229 91'% 91% 38% 86% 90% 1 0 44 20 21 1/ 0% 69% 54% 8% OTHER OFF-SITE PARKING(173) Loomis & Eick (31) Crocker Plaza (32) Liquor Barn - Used by Hope (80) - Used by Liquor Barn (58) Coast Federal (30) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: 20 21 74 53 21 136 65% 66% 93% 91% 70% 79% 3 0 72 54 21 96 10% 0% 90% 93% 70% 55% OVERALL TOTALS (427) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: I 36S 1 I 117 85% 27% Notes:(1) Includes an estimated 11 cars of those already in Hope. (2) Includes an estimated 15 cars of those already in Hope. ,f. HOPE CHAPEL PARKING STUDY RAW DATA SERVICE: Saturday, 7 P.M., July 26, 1986 PARKING LOCATION (total spaces) DEEDED SPACES (254) Hope - Main (120) Lucky Market - Used by Hope (97) - Used by Lucky (64) Office Project (37) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: Parking Spaces Available 1/2 Hr. before Serv. 1/2 Hr. after No. Avail. % Avail. No. Avail.I % 118.1 652 25 35 218 , 98% 67% 39% 9S% 86% 3S 39 28 32 106 Serv. Avail. 29% 40% 44% 86% 42% OTHER OFF-SITE PARKING(173) Loomis & Eick (31) Crocker Plaza (32) Liquor Barn - Used by Hope (80) - Used by Liquor Barn (58) Coast Federal (30) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: 29 29 75 58 30 163 94% 91% 94% 100% 100% 94% 25 30 76 58 30 161 81% 94% 95% 100% 100% 93% OVERALL TOTALS (427) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: 381 89% 267 63% Notes: (1) Includes an estimated 10 cars of those already in Hope. (2) Includes an estimated 10 cars of those already in Hope. HOPE CHAPEL PARKING STUDY RAW DATA SERVICE: Sunday, 8 A.M., July 27, 1986 PARKING LOCATION (total spaces) DEEDED SPACES (254) • Hope - Main (120) Lucky Market - Used by Hope (97) - Used by Lucky (64) Office Project (37) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: Parking Spaces Available 1/2 Hr. before Serv. 1/2 Hr. after Serv. No. Avail. % Avail. No. Avail. % Avail. 118 82 60 35 23S 98% 85% 94% 92% 93% 1041 0 40 16 120 87% 0% 63% 43% 47% OTHER OFF-SITE PARKING(173) Loomis & Eick (31) Crocker Plaza (32) Liquor Barn - Used by Hope (80) -Used by Liquor Barn (58) Coast Federal (30) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: 29 30 74 58 .28 161 94% 94% 93% 100% 93% 93% 1 13 72 58 28 114 3% 41% 90% 100% 93% 66% OVERALL TOTALS (427) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: 396 93% 234 55% Notes: (1) The area under Hope was roped off except for the visitor parking places. • HOPE CHAPEL PARKING STUDY RAW DATA SERVICE: Sunday, 10:15 A.M., July 27, 1986 PARKING LOCATION (total spaces) DEEDED SPACES (2S4) Hope - Main (120) Lucky Market - Used by Hope (97) - Used by Lucky (64) Office Project (37) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: Parking Spaces Available 1/2 Hr. before Serv. 1/2 Hr. after Serv. No. Avail. % Avail. No. Avail. % Avail. 97 361 32 21 154 81% 37% 50% 57% 61% 7 2 7 11 20 6% 2% 11% 30% 8% OTHER OFF-SITE PARKING(173) Loomis G. Eick (31) Crocker Plaza (32) Liquor Barn - Used by Hope (80) - Used by Liquor Barn (88) Coast Federal (30) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: 10 13 69 58 28 120 32% 41% 86% 100% 93% 69% 5 2 70 S8 28 105 16% 6% 88% 100% 93% 61% OVERALL TOTALS (427) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: 274 64% 125 29% Notes: (1) This count is approximate because first service people were leaving and second service people were arriving. HOPE CHAPEL PARKING STUDY RAW DATA SERVICE: Sunday, 7 P.M., July 27, 1986 PARKING LOCATION (total spaces) DEEDED SPACES (264) Hope - Main (120) •Lucky Market - Used by Hope (97) - Used by Lucky (64) Office Project (37) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: Parking Spaces Available 1/2 Hr. before Serv. 1/2 Hr. after Serv. No. Avail. % Avail. No. Avail. % Avail. 1 171 93 25 30 240 98% 96% 39% 81% 94% 7 3 9 16 26 6% 3% 14% 43% 10% OTHER OFF-SITE PARKING(173) Loomis 6 Eick (31) Crocker Plaza (32) Liquor Barn - Used by Hope (80) - Used by Liquor Barn (S8) Coast Federal (30) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: 25 31 79 S8 29 164 81% 97% 99% 100% 97% 9S% 4 32 79 58 29 144 13% 100% 99% 100% 97% 83% OVERALL TOTALS (427) TOTAL SPACES AVAILABLE: AVERAGE % AVAILABLE: 404 I 170 95% I 40% Notes: (1) Includes an estimated SO cars of those already in Hope for 6 P.M. meetings. N Pros dot`Ave. McDonald's Handicapped Parking (Busing available) Booen.Ave. pacific CoaS H�Owa *When parking on street level, please observe parking limitation signs. jzEV ISED 10/2'f/c HOPE CHAPEL PARKING • Item 41 Description NOTES: On site parking spaces, See plans - Sheet 3 Deeded off site parking, See Exhibit A. Lucky's Market Number of Spaces 120 97 Deeded off site parking, See Exhibit B. 37 Office project, 40 total deeded. Subtotal of deeded spaces 254 Reciprocating verbal Agreement 31 Loomis & Eick Leased off site parking, See Exhibit C 0 Released, parking not needed. Reciprocating verbal Agreement 80 Liquor Barn Reciprocating verbal Agreement 30 Coast Federal Bank Reciprocating verbal Agreement 32 Crocker Plaza Total available parking 427 This portion of the Lucky's parking lot, 64 spaces, is reflected in the Agreement (Exhibit A) as available for use but it is left open, out of courtesy, for market customers only. Hope Chapel provides attendants to assure that these spaces are not taken by those attending church. * Service times: Maximum Of 1130 occupants. Friday: 7:00 pm Saturday: 7:00 pm Sunday: 8:00 am, 10:15 am and 7:00 pm * Required parking: (1130 occupants / 5) + 8 service vehicles = 234 x See Parking Study for further information. * Revised 10/24/86 CHAPEL - FOURSQUARE CHU '1 .420 Pacific coast Highway( Hermosa Beach, California 90..:54 Building Summary Zone: C3/General Commercial Fire District: City of Hermosa Beach Primary Occupancies: Existing: A-2.1 New: B-2 Construction Type: Existing: New: Number of Stories: 3 Area Breakdown: Ground Level: Existing Lobby & Shop (excluding Exits) Main Level: Existing Auditorium, Assembly, Ancillary Changed Maintenance Changed General Use New Administration New Classrooms New Ancillary New Storage New Subtotal Upper Level: Existing Ancillary New Administration New Classroom New Storage New Ancillary New Subtotal • Existing Subtotals, sum of items marked Changed Subtotals New Subtotals III 1 Hr. -Fully Sprinkled III 1 Hr. -Fully Sprinkled * Gross Grand Total Parking Requirements: Required by existing C.U.P. PC 154-1098 Required by new or change in use New Administration 6828.00/250 New Classrooms 8566.00/250 New Storage 1497.00/1000+1 New Ancillary 7671.75/250 Reduction to Ex. Maint8341.00/1000+1 Change in General Use7614.00/250 Reduct. to Ex. Office2060.00/250 Reduct. to Ex. S.School 5554.00/250 Total Required Parking by area use OR:------- Total R:-----Total Required Parking by maximum use 1130 max.. occupants / 5 + 8 = Parking provided: On site Deeded off site Total Parking Provided Building Footprint: Site Coverage: Site Landscaping: 38040 S.F. 857. 898 S.F. = 27. -2/d- 1647.00 S.F.* 14348.25 S.F.* 2859.00 S.F. 7614.00 S.F.* 3499.50 S.F. 3973.00 S.F. 5626.25 S.F. 120.00 S.F. 13218.75 S.F. 2051.75 S.F. 3328.50 S.F. 4593.00 S.F. 1377.00 S.F. 2045.50 S.F. 11344.00 S.F. 25661.00 S.F. 2859.00 S.F. 24562.75 S.F. 53082.75 S.F. +110.0 Spaces + 27.3 Spaces + 34.3 Spaces + 2.5 Spaces + 30.7 Spaces - 9.3 Spaces + 30.5 Spaces - 8.2 Spaces - 22.2 Spaces 195.6 Spaces (196.0) 234 Spaces 120.0 Spaces 134.0 Spaces 254.0 Spaces revised 10/24/86 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Michael Schubach, Planning Director Correspondence regarding Hope Chapel at 2420 P.C.H. January 22, 1987 Attached is a form letter received from Valerie Pierce, ad- dressed to City Council, expressing agreement, except for two conditions of approval, with the Planning Commission's approval of an amended Conditional Use Permit and Parking Plan for 2420 P.C.H., Hope Chapel. As of this date, 104 of these same letters, except for address and name of per- son, have been received. Rather than include copies of each of these letters, I have attached a list of the names of these correspondents. To: City Council Members Tony De Bellis, Mayor; John Cioffi; Jim Rosenberger; Etta Simpson; and June. Williams C/O: City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Dear Council Members, I am a resident of Hermosa Beach. My address is /O L( t�Lt,u < I am writing to ask yol. to uphold the decision of the Planning Commission in approving Resolution P.C. 86-53 with the exception of the two changes requested by Hope Chapel. Hope Chapel is serving our community in a way that only a large church like Hope could do. I believe that city officials of Hermosa Beach, like yourself, should do all they can to help Hope Chapel continue this outstanding community service. Considering the way Hope is using the property, the impact of the variance requested would be negligible on the property and improvements near Hope Chapel. The parking plan, variance, and conditional use:permit already approved by the Planning Commission will actually enhance public welfare by providing desperately needed space inside the building for church -related activities that help the residents of our community. Sincerely your da(.1 Jt( e_<_ ' P.S. I'm planning to be at the City Council meeting to thank you personally for your support. List of Names - (Addresses as Sheila Filson 860 1st Street Hermosa Beach William J. Strass 867 Aubrey Court, #4 Hermosa Beach S. White 200 - 31st St. Hermosa Beach Ronald Jones 1204 - 19th St. Hermosa Beach James D. Dixon 1821 P.C.H. Hermosa Beach Mark L. Murray 1113 Cypress Ave. Hermosa Beach Tracy Sueeman(?) 1142 Manhattan Ave., #2 Hermosa Beach Ruth Pina 1222 - 19th St. Hermosa Beach Tamara Summers 3201 Palm Drive Hermosa Beach Dennis Piccione 900 Loma Dr. Hermosa Beach Frank Fasullo 1204 - llth P1. Hermosa Beach Jennifer C. Hughes Mr. & Mrs. K. Koehr 2147 Monterey Blvd. Hermosa Beach Christine Kelsy 344 - 33rd St. Hermosa Beach Denise Ling 519 - 25th St. Hermosa Beach written, Names as deciphered) Pat G. Cannick 1834 P.C.H. Hermosa Beach Cecile Gelinas 828 Prospect Ave. Hermosa Beach Darlee Bratcher 1283 - 7th St. Hermosa Beach Robert &Janet Thornton 1034 - 5th Street Mr. & Mrs. Daniels 701 Monterey Blvd., #10 Hermosa Beach Sherry L. Zauner 902 Manhattan Ave., #F Frank Toledo 725 - 9th St. Hermosa Beach Susan King 85 - 18th St. Gary L. Marshall 830 - 15th St. Hermosa Beach 635 Loma Dr. Hermosa Beach Audrey & Don Looth 25 - 18th St. Hermosa Beach Christy Robinson 1270 - 8th St. Hermosa Beach Sam Hugh Paul Chliboraz 636 - 1st P1. ,#C Hermosa Beach Rosalie D. Nelson 2040 Hillcrest Dr. Hermosa Beach -2/3 - Lee & Terrylou Gipnau 436 Gentry Street Hermosa Beach R. Novarro 133 - 30th Place Hermosa Beach John C. Worley 414 - 2nd St., #324 Hermosa Beach 725 - 9th St. Mark B. Rose 519 - 25th St. Hermosa Beach 1100 Monterey Blvd., #1 Jim & Sandie Hanck 1603 Monterey Blvd. Adreenie(?) Ling 619 - 25th St. Hermosa Beach Rhonda Ryan Asbenson 615 - 4th St. Hermosa Beach Dr. Karen Lalli, D.C. 644 Manhattan Blvd. ,#C Danny & Toni Dotter 657 - 7th St. Hermosa Beach Evan J. McMillin, D.D.S. 1228 - 17th St. Hermosa Beach Mr. &'Mrs. J. Stronach 1400 Campana St. Hermosa Beach Wm. & Sandra Hite 414 - 2nd St., #103 Hermosa Beach Cynthia S. Collins, D.C. 1801 Hillcrest Ave. Donna Hattermer 402 - 28th St. Micha'el Klubnihn 1305 Breeze Oceanside CA Patricia M. Mill(?) 236 Prospect Allen Kaufman 1250 Corona St. Hermosa Beach A. Wouk(?) 309 Monterey Blvd. Cindy & Diego Cust(?) 1851 Rhodes St. Hermosa Beach Douglas & Jamie Siebert 2457 Manhattan Ave. Craig Anderson 2306 Borden Ave. Hermosa Beach (?) Jaliragal(?) 1860 P.C.H. Hermosa Beach Ruth & Ron Salcido 144 Monterey Blvd. Hermosa Beach Mark Phill(?) 1824 Valley Park Ave. Joyce Sederwall 3502 The Strand Matthew D. Cruse 708 Marlita St. Hermosa Beach Craig L. Boyett 18 - 18th St. Hermosa Beach C. Kilchner 2054 Circle Drive J.K. Giesregen 402 - 28th Str. Hermosa Beach Kamdra & Joseph Inge 415 Herondo, #214 Hermosa Beach Avilla Nunz(?) 1006 - 3rd St. Alice Dutch 414 - 2nd St., #314 Hermosa Beach Wm. D. Weaver 737 - 3rd St. P.O. Box 101 Mrs. Jean Drale 1906 P.C.H. Hermosa Beach Susan M. Duncam 812 Monterey Blvd., #3 Hermosa Beach C. Thurlene Anderson 2306 Borden Ave. Hermosa Beach C. Lynn Thomas 627 - 2nd St., #2 Hermosa Beach Rosemary Kell 2411 Prospect Ave., #204 Hermosa Beach Phillip J. Gillboy 110 Hermosa Ave., #A Susan A. Atwell 38 - 16th St. Hermosa Beach C.M. Braden 548 - 8th St. M. Ellis May 1701 Monterey Blvd. Betty A. Bertler P.O. Box 95 Hermosa Beach Tony Carson 110 - 6th St. Hermosa Beach Maxime Giff 304 Manhattan Ave. Hermosa Beach Anne -Marie Jackance(?) 347 - 30th P1. Hermosa Beach Dr. & Mrs. Richard Collis 645 Gould Terrace Hermosa Beach 1600 Ardmore Ave., #222 Terese Summer 1202 1/2 - 2nd St. 944 Monterey Blvd., #8 832 - 15th Place Tom O'Connor 724 - 21st St., #2 Greg & Erika Sabosky 1602 1/2 The Strand Mike Robettoto(?) 77 - 15th St., #8 Hermosa Beach Linda M. Lutz(?) 721 1/2 Manhattan Ave.,#A Hermosa Beach John M. Braden 548 - 8th St. Richard D. Bertler P.O. Box 95 Hermosa Beach Christine 0. Holbrook 117 Prospect Ave. ri Angleri 0 - 6th St. ,:rmosa Beach ?) 245 -30th St. Sharon Walker 1803 P.C.H., #21 Hermosa Beach (?) 3216 Manhattan Ave. Hermosa Beach (?) Ann May 1701 Monterey Blvd. Hermosa Beach Diana C. Brown(?) Lorie Fogel 1129 -7th P1. Hermosa Beach Kerry Reid 1821 P.C.H., #12 1302 Bonnie Brae Hermosa Beach Gary Lang 36 The Strand, #2 Hermosa Beach Mr. & Mrs. J.C. Agajamian 2802 Tennyson P1. Hermosa Beach Edith (?) 1222 Bayview Dr. Hermosa Beach R.W. Wilder 43 - 18th Court Kathy Bennett 1720 Manhattan Ave. 2017 Marshall Field Lane Redondo Beach, CA 90278 January 20, 1987 To: c/o: City Council Members Tony De Bellis, Mayor; John Cioffi; Jim Rosenberger; Etta Simpson; and June Williams City of Hermosa Beach • 1315 Valley Drive . Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Dear Council Members: 'ELAN 2-1 19871. We will soon be residents of Hermosa Beach as we currently hold a home at 1118 Seventh Street in escrow, to close before February 15, 1987. We are writing to ask you to uphold the decision of the Planning Commission in approving Resolution P.C. 86-53 with the exception of the two changes requested by Hope Chapel. Hope Chapel is serving our community in a way that only a large church like Hope could do. I believe that city officials of Hermosa Beach, like yourself, should do all they can to help Hope Chapel continue this outstanding community service. Considering the way Hope is using the property, the impact of the variance requested would be negligible on the property and improvements near Hope Chapel. The parking plan, variance, and conditional use permit already approved will actually enhance public welfare by providing desperately needed space inside the building for church -related activities that help the residents of our community. Sincerely, i -e otrai Gene and Valerie Gardino P.S. I'm planning to be at the City Council meeting to thank you personally for your support. cit _1 /44-71-4-Z41-LA.t i&&0 viLL,i9/iir //0----7/P -JAN 7 97 Y/C-(_,/ ilet7 1/1/ • ,� Dv v J -Yeti) 2,11-e4_44 • ;v e.�L b• 4 /.;Y- 114.41.644-1 5 • •J 11/ �/L1 f4.4.44..,,zi 4p fehz S\ _ J 6/E.‹ UI �� v (1(1 1)-7' Ur W !� 4L e/Z /e1,7,1-4-eL• SS_ci11,•-7lam- —Li PURCELL 912 24TH ST. HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 Zi) No,/ / L�G1 gli4-&Ld' /a / ��: . r� 61514444tex, -xht VS IA../ W -41 - tz-x-v,e /vbe� ylue z,z4L-1 Y -ea_ fJ." 14-e.c.,W,6 JAN 21 1987 ‘70!1- e,a. t Lqa. vier E47 -26,t) /,v(( JAN 161987 WL -c. O ca,c. J/ J �� LCL ).77z hAt v L c C14- /cC/L-c 6-1414 --V6 e4L /)cL, Z(z-ttiz Z u u� z 6)1--/e d -YL) 5 a )/(__k ....- .y a L� _ Wt_e_ Vk(_ A"; Lc i4_4C 114. ryU-- �S �D ("('26 9 l -WA" -x�-rwY�c�an k C. y =�-�- \ 1__ a __ s/-ryt_ /)e/ a 1 674{-44-/ ill L /1 z '&,./,,e( z - Lio ,;(.& 7141 vin/L4-d-- 3(4711:e - -z-6L \-k:x) _`5k he,k- V-ZA1 Vo Wt(t- (54/s 7 -1 s sI __ILO Z-6' Y1_44-41- o'Zi/L- /-o V 1-7A- sv—e - 71/74 1t.t J S6 - - 5tAlLex__ _Wea— tiot f y -aa) kLey&tto )72. J.A__e = rig _L6uc., Q-Zi-j-*//1-4e.,tiA--60 )1 -IP W J - -1-1/tva,e gritee-e6/L, fc71,,,Le Li ---/Le., _ r( 3 Orz11-e -517- vL, • ,, Wte/(_e' -)/L-ze 4-6e-7/4_ _ to Ate n. -0-&r_4_ /0 -(-&tie —Luck - -gyp ------445 �u --- 1 174 _ V/L-ft_ I -- _ �v�b // • l 074 /1 • &' datqzt 2 4,E 2=( / W-2 fr vyL.J2i L/e, c/ -d cz--/ -6o - 2- -474 (_4A -A., v rYw Y. -� Qt y j b OL1%. _ )1/(-C-1-1,L-lut-t/P _ W ' .61-147-. 7,"7,{_:LL 6(ii}1 6(&771._<J '' Q.1, ,, / (41,/,7[ __;// 0(// -1-4-- - t (-2-L V 4.4l 62467;41- zix±" I es a-7/41 (10 _ 2 /7 /5— `rte �u � lv�G�i�✓ .Z2e 17-7212-/-) a 7- Cti d e74 -e ,054 (P-- - Za _ W,xt e-�'-a__.e-/ / LZ 7 _W - cwr r� (U%ci -yd vim 42-h, d6 _-, 2- -t 4 V7-,-( �d &(2 a ff fy• WLL, P," — /itt4A eL-13/t__ (74.4.}2 7) t, O 6 cativ,4121t(t, of e �v� 7ig 1, y��v//3DB --c 1-24 /c,AIJA/.4 z-.wf/4-a-} e Lt/t-oiL, (uf- 7:00 in/L aJL 1/ wit., (a/di,/ /L, /c)-- '' U JO / �� / 7 Y-Vd (6-6t e d (4 . j ' — 1ti //a47 42/1 41-4- 4 4 14d- ot-dY --/ (iale • yi-ezcf Let,. �-a-� k. 112 L uL Se (kL—iet. V�z}lJ aV i� o� /67,,ae 24/.& VZ//t e e )/( Z;& r (/i ) 222t �-?71/I217u ,_,1 Lr J C it <e_d, 7: D D / 6--7-L-k, , c ia ki--a (e.-- y.. d 44M i/2 --)A--7? /4 -� d-t--I-� /1 '� D ()2 L/ke e t(9\ . ) 7/41-74 n'L / (71_ -d - Dom' )— - -< _t a_ (/61-(:i& z&-14-7/7 -2-(4(44 QJ /0 -cam in2 ‘rD 1—/-e le;Lt-(26 /t/L-e44-11._ kL i/1,27,A, a dzAiLd} Q�� We RM o S ct-T Cdu � c ( To tr � C> e c3c(.c t. S JoWra Ct oFF► %11M Ro.S� S al PS -.1L`N e; INt (-Le A -AA. S C/0 C c.7€ N-G-,r&rvt. o CA C“.. -Act -1 vg, 15 v kt.t, G -..I Da-LI/6 146,--'t1'Vlo(.4) cA. Roa5cf Slkrc v,q-2,1 I LF � I 113 7 fla-P-iL Coy c t c, 1vl C vt C -,42-S — AWL. A R- E -S (0 C -7.t o F t-4-6 t'z t, o S p. • Z ASe� -CWA-r `�o L► vQ f -En �� Tt n c --e t. S t o,. j of htG CohnwttS StoL.1 to oV (t•iV CZ.CSol-LfrloN P. C. filo - 5 wt—rwv-rt4 c. c c-:-- r t 01-3 of -T t- -r o C t+Rav4 E S t'Z E CP,J S v 6 y 1A-0 P L Cf -1-1-1/4)0 �(_ . (moo PC: e I -i � E -C.. 1S. S C r2 -v t ry G c i (--611,1_67,37. o -G117.E-, - o r D Co trrii I ,.t A AI --r -T O1• -i c ti A (--A-(2-GE C -L' rcc. lk t -t k -E 140 (E C, ., , X a et- t, &v E D tT7 o c f� vS 0 I-i-C-rtrrvt, is S 4 136--- ve N, [- I k-6 o t� t�5 C--iI` S t.lov Do A-- (4-E `i C A- J Tn 1-4-C-1.--11 (4-o L-' E- Co N -Cc NA/ OU"�S2M.ro I N G Co to. vr~L'� SCz\I C o tirs t o Ey-t ,.r(; -"Cite Y1rr art Cert, 1r4 PE V SES —t l� e.2) (' C,2�z'� 7N £ 1114 t' Act, 7 U E t &FE 1/4i-prizt r� - cF 1r 0 v G to ( E I.i E 61.-t C ! e LE . Z M -S A -s ZG D f r2 -C-- G -s l 7 (+E.- A G U rA &( 71-4 A- (T se -T S p 2E.- c C—t7 C LC Fo rt_ CL v s t tv ES S ES c>) PP C f F t G co tP Z' tr(t G I-1(,., SPE CC�fI��( tS (GCA e t.tC-SS. 7 7Ajc L AS Pia -eve -1-14--"--r FAC -7- A�'r�4 .�v At w 0 V G o tvo C fissfY-‹-c ^r' 130 S (tom E S S / p q(-cer cv ,-04i-T,!L yai 1�f ( e-7,3 1111 CAI bore E S S fkv C-7`ry C (—' t-1 CA c1 F. ?�. thy\ P1,3(vt 1.16 7o Be / r 7(.E C( --c y C o v ry c t,c_ 7J Pe -a-% o1-1 P1/40-(1 Fort_ yo v ►2 S v t" Pc t2'7". - 7D- If 22 Th, -64A2 ,a1Ji 1 e. .� -ter �-eJ 13/s— ke/I 74). )77tv LLL /464-7,:ata » 7)4eAs NAy,„ „oue:L, 42- "aed, _ 62)11.2 --9Z7 ..Z..... . 4 -4.2,,t, ..:7._-_,...;-;,...z....540,..etk a• '..-..: •-•-da arc:Slue 0 ..w. .,,,....,..2,cr......., .ate /�-- e41)14--,,;14± Lai • /9/ -t ,. t `--CL - --- VA44/L- -4--z/zza- yt6„,)--- ,,c..pLe. ,0?z -��Y�J f i e?/ 19(1 Mg7 _93_ •Ly a._�.a )(4,2 6 -al 3 PL- z/e-/ 7--t )__ e,49, Mey OFFICE OF THE CITY 1315 Va!::v 144wriC33 Bet:Ch, ••• — 7 q sq,,41;,to C �C Mona V. Clark 1866 Rhodes Street Hermosa Beach, California 90254 December 12, 1986 Editor The Easy Reader P. 0. Box 726 Hermosa Beach, California 90254-0726 Dear Sir: DEC 1 1986 I have heard that Hope Chapel does many good things; however, their desire for an enormous parking structure, and their methods of trying to obtain the remaining needed land, is not one of them. I have lived in Hermosa for 38 years; 25 in the same location -- two blocks south of the site in question. 21st Street has been a congested nightmare since the construction of Pacific Plaza and Jeanette's Restaurant. I can't imagine how anyone who has actually seen the conditions in question could sincerely believe that this narrow two lane street could, in addition, serve a four level 400+ car parking structure. The fact that Hope Chapel's proposed plans required a special variance of the law from the Planning Commission, and was received, is even more difficult to understand. • It seems that Hope Chapel is much more concerned with its own growth than with the lives of its neighbors. Must the people who live on 24th Street have a parking structure which touches their property line and obstructs the view they paid for? (Many of these homeowners made sure the property between Borden, Rhodes, and 21st was zoned R1 before buying.) Should the residents of 24th Street, 21st Street, Rhodes and Hillcrest have to contend with this additional increase in automobile and pedestrian traffic? Should the -residents have to breathe the fumes from this giant parking structure which will blow toward them on previously clean ocean breezes? Should we all have to accept lowered property values because Hope Chapel will not consider an alternative? Should we approve the precedence which this variance will set? And, most importantly, does it make sense to you that a church is so set on getting its way that it considers it right and just and apparently Christian to attempt to coerce our long-time and very valued neighbors, Rev. and Mrs. Parker, to leave their home just so this garage can be built? 12/09/86 ATTN: CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE AGAINST THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE TO HOPE CHAPEL ON DEC. 2ND AND ARE SUPPORTING THE APPEAL OF THIS DECISION. WE FEEL THE FINDINGS ARE NOT SUBSTANTIAL ENOUGH TO ALLOW THIS PRECEDENCE TO BE SET. • x(16 ✓i'}'t- fi Azi-L L Il4�-\J e_t_a1-1-"LfL_ck_ cti‘ 16)j€q (274 X=,rY-Y---7 (1 t '1)1)4 7Z / r6Vt ,11761•7i zc327 1 Z(1'33 / 4 � ialt, t6RAGL S f- gvQ4 ThLL' Sf. ) ! -' % )C./-1 e S3( 2..0"'t - loo c h, s+- it c 8-17(CY(S 1 I qo 1 /( res -16 p Igo ( 14 /(cre-st Sr 4 Ze, 5;. itBs • &41 27,ozE 577 - q�_ 12/ 09/86 ATTN: CITY COUNCIL OF 4:RMOSA BEACH 12/09/86 WE THE UNDERSIGNED ARE AGAINST THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE TO HOPE CHAPEL ON DEC. 2ND AND ARE SUPPORTING THE APPEAL OF THIS DECISION. WE FEEL THE FINDINGS ARE NOT SUBSTANTIAL ENOUGH TO ALLOW THIS PRECEDENCE TO BE SET.7/1't �� r�-�N 1}1? ///7 S/ o 6 ).?6,s /7/./3. 37 9- i y �r / X9-5- /—' ./ 02 d 5C0 Lt0 Ai 3 7 9— /z z-1 pig - 191:4--51:) 2 �- X3 i6_35.6 C� ay.QCt S� "3 7 c 'l _ cr" c uZ� / 5 6 b y f�r 5 / //`. 3-7 g v e /'1&Iiij 37 3 i 1 ;�.�►.�-9, I kl ..ccs H C3 - a 2 , 133 / 8 371.- / 7 - d-VYI(S} //7Y3 • 9-2CD 2c -L -j-,_ D1- ir)\ (OAC34 CL to JATA,e,_, a--__ o L1/4_ -A) q 0 t (--(/-.. f- cnL.,_.-t-- 1 \\--J- 5-Lk_c_K...) [r) L.,) Ca_t-L) pt- ) _ 1 --__accz‘ et.a..,4---(_ a-eyt_Ln,-5 t- koLue ) -42 H1ctrv,), 'LC co _Kat _ec c -c -O _1 A_&ai-Lcr c Dc& C�_ et-et5)-k- _ ckfv\o-t- DA- r - oyuy 1\-0 t, Lk_Ed__2 {Th rl\-- 1\-t (,c -o to L4 (3 ��+:ti '.t, `�'.C14'k1j.,r,;:Lti�rr+''.lik:h.'a'-..5"?i-+i"�sC9S .'si:' aa?5!�?esi:x.#!+iir}' +r,`'_'' *: J it •n:. -r• ie(4 S 32S— • !,a. -,fie ,�- 114( ke �l t/-6 WA_ Gc-7-1&a,o ent Df -c- )184, L -t4 „„„ Lid 49g- Fl/rsLxt__ �e-• �a� Aiazi,x/eL) Lzcittya S�- Az4Ltz_vau<_," GeLe_ ger2-171-i_ ' v/01 "Lora 11',- j a 5et,c_ tz, ifs(e st, _ ____ _ __•FaW��i�+vrlf/i/iilit.4.aS�M"'}�.4-rY- _ _ _ r�fri�•"%}'sem- -K�-• ejc-%3 it4 , Z.LJ 0V jJtatQc.r f H-73 0 t v--- PAQcke,4_ /z401. FX7 11 119 1:r • a 1. c_,�r,1e(") L. — VJ 'try, • �Jt f`id tCir u _ i r 3 ,.'4r r y n aa�4.,itYfltat6 w �.� . ,:t„„c ,'6:�?5` 'Y i 14 41, C-3 8- !d .008 .(e.h. • 20t-.114'1 OD 2- v-Lxiic/r71.1 .'� ., f • .... •kK, : c�hK-5VW*:,4VV!l346 P ii;X41@ t4q ! : -Fi.?: .4ht f,'I4IOa;; ' 011,0a 1' L 'L �' f �_ G e2 -o-33 1k-A\ca- c4. 8- id. .11Qz.- - O 8 e k,, c42 a- r •P • 14 r. 17 tl •S / — , s-7`.. i. B l 2 ..,?;z , is y. rf. ;o S - 20. S I e /-,(‘ zoic 444 c vre.% U ..r .. �.trTr/��-_. .�'i°�r'yst:�',a1s{.tai..`✓.ar;'wr.`'%..Y¢-as.=^C�'.:y..t—�;.-+.3,,.,CL'`=JY.affSt. r atf- z-/& ter. Zde d4 -c 2he-et Wcz- :010;42107-x_—A./_,A214,60L, q'LLths, takhe V v Ace- ld. zoo8 K(1. -trick (6W, -727 iildri4 11 11.44/4-- 1P c61--74 Fr -- 1 : S 44, • 817- zap sT-` t< -(f nom, et-. 20 is 1. (t°►moi 11ra • reilf-tt „S' AeA_ )7k - lir S7(5/ • ge FGnM Acr-tol?t g_, zlicintjtj (7--b—. &/1-e_-eci--a.-0-e---) 4ziX3----hi3-- a- dii-( it 41 of -t 14,6_,/_,� au�io i ' r, LA i U Aze,71.141-titletik-trYL) 2F -R 1�..b'G . 1 C (-41a4 7;.rm�' L74-1 11-7(A-. �Z"),(t z, �9r3 1.4,4c -d- LIA .4-1-c j-l---ae-A , 6)--e i&t,,-- fig C%`hh _ 96_ @v t/ H. of- 2_ k 0 kea Sji () V• -5 --GL.., ev,x-94 P-vkactea,Q4; flg I( 9/ Yx4. )/,k,t c„? id? 944-2'US S's-0Let 9/14-1' YS - l Wwu 1L4M44t;,u ;tf-trttCdt_ )/(: t41_,(_.:Le:§y0 t'""1"44 -t- c 7/19,-.6 ee; 702/ izz.zyo LI -Lu EAT,. ki144-E. lAnii jp),4:44a ILA-leA41,,,dev z-;47L'_�.e4--ems( /-4e) 61461/L reoi. cgt_ daY)--d'(-t-1'4&) 1"-e(A/ 40-6 GIJ-eze /-)e- Pfh-e-/ /5 zfr-o (1-7LiC LiAa -9a- J-1--. 13e1Lch, [ a (yr 2033 i4-0140.4 -e/L4 (3 c' — (1)2,U)( 2033 /41 -640 g---1t A -44'L il(-76-04-41q4 c —�� 1--1 za°' t hn r:4:, 14-E . 2024- facl- Arv)do-,-/ !`1a S/._ 0a1Q9 727 A/41-e-ce- /3•4'4-"& ,0"6" fre ze) 79_6_ Jr !fir 19 Y 4 :oiv /��Gtt. / J QA , 49 o qD /lc be ,5f PA !413 £za'J2C Ho/ 4'/14-r4 ,dr ¢//5 7�c / ,0.- &5 5.M0 ,511.161----5v:) or d9 0.7016 , viva 0 ( ,►. mac -Te -v-64- /eic,4/ S3.2- 2J -q3- ..:..:......• .. /9a •ei(!o, ekez-a-e-L 1,41-z-oth-(40. CfrAi're-e-4441% Grwt.t Gu -a -ez-t7pE Zg(ead.hz• ditt/Wu— iLd-yiz- W? 11-a,aio dite, dtie& Wz, ihY 90 -e -c. i . Azto t -e, o7, /9 Atu:gd, 7/-6/1 is- 0 �n C 4. asp- SilLiet 4/-14-01-4aeL 40s,/ )"" rb6c- - g ee f.4ati L/./ ses- Yzy Ay-& 1 V% 10 zi6a-/2-L y.(z4t V4t 4i,4Fr4e,/t-/. oL7,t_W vA, ii%rz* (" U 75 D / ��0� Z 0 c� e % to oQC f ,i4 H ? ��? /ewa ?_.cls