Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/11/91May 30, 1991 City Council Meeting June 11, 1991 Mayor and Members of the City Council APPOINTMENT OF MAYOR AND MAYOR PRO TEM AND CITY COUNCIL REORGANIZATION - JUNE 1991 Consistent with the City Council policy of a nine-month rotation of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore, the following appointments should be made: 1. Mayor for a term ending April 14, 1992. 2. Mayor Pro Tempore for a term ending April 14, 1992. Recommendations after appointment of Mayor and Mayor Pro Tempore, consistent with policy of maintaining permanent representatives whenever possible, are: 1. To appoint the Mayor to the Los Angeles County - City Selection Committee. (Authority in Government Code Section 50270. The committee shall consist of the mayor of each city within the county. Other councilmembers may be designated delegates for meetings the mayor is unable to attend, but requires Council action for each meeting that a delegate is designated other than the mayor.) 2. To appoint the Mayor to the South Bay Cities Sanitation District Board of Directors, and alternate director. (Authority in Health and Safety Code Section 4730. The presiding officer of the governing body is automatically on the Board of Directors, and an alternate director is appointed to act as a member of the district board in place of the presiding officer ... during such person's absence, inability, or refusal to act. Therefore, the alternate could attend the meetings in the Mayor's place without requiring Council action each time.) 3. To appoint the Mayor as delegate and as alternate to the Inglewood Fire Training Authority. (This meeting immediately follows the Sanitation District meeting.) Enclosed for your information are current committee assignments as of September 12, 1990. The remainder of the assignments may be made at the City Council meeting of June 25, 1991. 1 1 Following all appointments and/or reappointments, letters will be sent to the appropriate boards and committees, and the list of newly appointed delegates and alternates will be forwarded to Council. Elaine Doerfling, city clerk CONCUR: ),P`/ Kevin B. Northc; ft, City Manager CITY COUNCIL REORGANIZATION OF DELEGATES, ALTERNATE APPOINTMENTS AND/OR RE -APPOINTMENT Beach Cities Coalition for Drug Free Youth Delegate Essertier Beach Cities Committee Delegate Sheldon Delegate Midstokke Commuter Transportation Implementation Plan Steering Committee Delegate Creighton Alternate Essertier Coordinating Council Delegate Sheldon Independent Cities Association Delegate Midstokke Alternate Wiemans Independent Cities Lease Finance Authority Delegate Midstokke Resolution No. 89-5336 Alternate Copeland Independent Cities Risk Management Association Delegate Sheldon Resolution No. 87-5095 Alternate Blackwood Inglewood Fire Training Authority Commission (same as South Bay Sanitation District) Delegate Sheldon Alternate Midstokke League of California Cities - Board of Directors Delegate Sheldon Alternate Essertier Page 1 Appointments 09-12-90 Los Angeles County/City Selection Committee (must appoint alter- nate separately each time when unable to attend called meeting) Mayor Sheldon Sister City Association, Inc. Delegate Essertier Alternate Creighton South Bay Cities Association Delegate Essertier Alternate Wiemans South Bay Cities Sanitation District (County Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles) (Same as Inglewood Fire Training Authority) Delegate Sheldon Alternate Midstokke South Bay Corridor Study Steering Committee Delegate Essertier Alternate Wiemans South Bay Juvenile Diversion Project Delegate Sheldon Alternate Creighton Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Delegate Midstokke Alternate Sheldon Southern California Rapid Transit District Delegate Creighton Resolution No. 90-5410 Alternate Sheldon West Basin Water Association Delegate Wiemans Page 2 Appointments 09-12-90 SUB -COMMITTEES City/School Relations Sub -Committee (Temporary) Councilmember Creighton Councilmember Sheldon Oil Sub -Committee (Temporary) Councilmember Essertier Councilmember Wiemans City Manager Compensation Sub -Committee (Temporary) Councilmember Sheldon Councilmember Wiemans City Manager Review System Sub -Committee (Temporary) Councilmember Midstokke Councilmember Essertier Data Processing Sub -Committee (Temporary) Councilmember Sheldon Councilmember Essertier Page 3 Appointments 09-12-90 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Tuesday, June 11, 1991, at the hour of 7:35P.M. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - ROLL CALL Present: Absent: APPOINTMENT OF MAYOR AND MAYOR PRO TEM Outgoing Mayor Sheldon thanked A. Designate Mayor for a term ending April 14, 1992 B. Designate Mayor Pro Tempore for a term ending April 14, 1992 Action: To designate Kathleen Midstokke as Mayor for a nine month term ending April 14, 1992; and to designate Robert Essertier as Mayor Pro Tempore for a nine month term ending April 14, 1992. Motion C , second t,J. So ordered. Newly designated Mayor Midstokke presented a plaque of appreciation to outgoing Mayor Sheldon, and expressed the City's gratitude for his service. C. Intergovernmental agencies requiring appointment of Mayor as delegate. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated May 30, 1991. Action: To: 1) appoint Mayor Midstokke as the delegate to the j� Los Angeles County - City Selection committee; 2) appoint Mayor Midstokke as the delegate, and /g as the alternate, to the South Bay Cities Sanitation District Board of Directors; and, appoint Mayor Midstokke as delegate, and -Mayor 147 C as the alternate, to the Inglewood Fire Training Authority. Motion , second . So ordered. Mayor Midstokke thanked City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 1 The meeting recessed at 7:y% P.M. The meeting reconvened at 7:O! P.M. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION -,(4A rzivir Li / Members of the Public wishing to address the City Council on any items within the Council's jurisdiction may do so at this time. (Exception: Comments on public hearing items must be heard during the public hearings.) Please limit comments to one minute. Citizens also may speak: 1) during Consent Calendar consideration or Public Hearings, 2) with the Mayor's consent, during discussion of items appearing under Municipal Matters, and 3) before the close of the meeting during "Citizen Comments". Coming forward to address the Council at this time were: �-P 1. Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place, Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street, June Williams - 2065 Manhattan Avenue, Dave Reimer - 802 Monterey Blvd., Jerry Compton - 832 Seventh Street, Shirley Cassell - 611 Monterey Blvd., 6i)Parker Herriot - 224 Twenty-fourth Street, Jim Lissner - 2715 El Oeste Drive, Jim Rosenberger - 1121 Bayview Drive, CONSENT CALENDAR: The following more routine matters will be acted upon by one vote to approve with the majority consent 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. * Councilmember requests to remove items from the Consent Calendar. (Items removed will be considered City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 2 under Agenda Item 3.) * Public comments on the Consent Calendar. - w 1. CONSENT CALENDAR Action: To approve the Consent Calendar recommendations (a) through (o), with the exception of the following items which were pulled for discussion in item 3 but are listed in order for clarity: (a) Mayor Midstokke, (e) Wiemans, and ( ) Essertier; in addition, items ( ) and were continued to the next regular meeting of June 25, 1991, at the request of the City Manager; and, Council - member Wiemans registered a "no" vote on item ( ). Motion second £. -• Coming forward to address the Council on Consent Calendar items not pulled by the Council was: (a) Recommendation to approve minutes of regular meeting of the City Council held on May 28, 1991. This item was removed from the Consent Calendar by Mayor Midstokke for separate discussion later in the meeting. Action: To approve the minutes of May 28, 1991, as Motion , second So ordered. (b) Recommendation to approve Demands and Warrants Nos. through inclusive. Action: To approve the demands and warrants as presented. (c) Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. Action: To receive and file the tentative future agenda items. City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 3 • (d) (e) (f) (g) Recommendation to receive and file the May, 1991 invest- ment report. Memorandum from City Treasurer Gary Brutsch dated May 30, 1991. Action: To receive and file the May, 1991 investment report. Recommendation to approve ease agreement; greement between the City of Hermosa Beach and the Los Angel s County Bar Association Dispute Resolution Services, Inc. for space in the Community Center. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated June 4, 1991. This item was removed from the Consent Calendar by Coun- cilmember Wiemans for separate discussion later in the meeting. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to approve the lease agreement between the City of Hermosa Beach and the Los Angeles County Bar Association Dispute Resolution Services for Room 6B in the Community Center (200 square feet X .80 per square foot = $160 per month) for a period of one year (July 1, 1991 through June 30, 1992); and to authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement. Motion , second . The motion carried unanimously. Recommendation to approve (ease agreement between the City of Hermosa Beach and oject Touch to lease Room 11 in the Community Center. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated June 4, 1991. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to approve the lease agreement between the City of Hermosa Beach and Project Touch to lease Room 11 in the Community Cen- ter (400 square feet X .80 = $320 per month) for a peri- od of one year (July 1, 1991 through June 30, 1992); and to authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement. Recommendation to approve revised class specification for Public Works Superintendent. Memorandum from Per- sonnel Director Robert Blackwood dated June 3, 1991. City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 4 • (h) (i) Action: To approve the revised class specification for Public Works Superintendent, as approved by the Civil Service Board on May 29, 1991. Recommendation to receive and file status report on Rule XV - Trip Reduction Plan. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated June 3, 1991. Action: To receive and file the status report on Rule XV - Trip Reduction Plan. Recommendation to receive and file report on staff follow-up procedures to City Council actions. Memoran- dum from City Manager Kevin B. Northcraft dated June 3, 1991. Action: To receive and file the report on staff follow- up procedures to City Council actions. Recommendation to use reserved County -Aid -to -Cities Fund for County -wide traffic signal synchronization program. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated June 4, 1991. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to au- thorize the City Manager to have the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works prepare the necessary paper- work for use of the City's reserved County -Aid -to - Cities -Fund in the amount of $15,000 (the County paying one half the total cost of $30,000) to finance the syn- chronization of traffic signals on Aviation Boulevard and Prospect Avenue. City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 5 • (k) (1) Recommendation to accept basketball courts as complete, CIP 89-512. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated June 4, 1991. This item was removed from the Consent Calendar by Coun- cilmember Creighton for separate discussion later in the meeting. Action: To: 1) accept as complete the Basketball Courts at Clark Field constructed by Hines Construction Company at a cost of $91,020; 2) authorize the Mayor to sign the Notice of Com- pletion; and, 3) authorize staff to: a) release the retention payment to Hines Construction Company; and, b) release Hines Construction Company from the Faithful Performance Bond and the Labor and Materials Bond. Motion , second . The motion carried unanimously. Recommendation to accept report regarding investigation into telephone access to City offices and approve in concept the purchase of new telephone switching equip- ment. Memorandum from General Services Department dated May 29, 1991. This item was removed from the Consent Calendar by Coun- cilmember Essertier for separate discussion later in the meeting. Action: To: 1) accept the report regarding telephone access to City offices; and, 2) approve the concept of purchasing/lease of new telephone switching equipment, including Voice Mail and Automated Attendant. City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 6 (m) (n) c7) (o) Motion , second . The motion carried with Recommendation to receive and file Administrative Memo- randum on Professional Services. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated June 5, 1991. Action: To Recommendation to receive and file report on street sweeping service level. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated May 21, 1991. Action: To receive and file the report on street sweep- ing service level. Recommendation to authorize staff to solicit requests for proposals to conduct a grant funded High Accident Identification and Surveillance Study and a Neighborhood Intrusion Study. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated May 31, 1991. Action: To: 1) authorize the staff to solicit requests for proposals to conduct a High Accident Iden- tification and Surveillance Study and a Neigh- borhood Intrusion Study; and, 2) authorize staff to issue addenda as necessary. City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 7 2. CONSENT ORDINANCES (a) ORDINANCE NO. 91-1054 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HER- MOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING MOBILE SOURCE AIR POLLUTION REDUCTION ORDINANCE. For adoption. CL Action: To approve Ordinance No. 91-1054. Motion e-, secondd. The motion carried with /'Yl 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. * Public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar. Items ( ), ( ), and ( ) were heard at this time, however, they are listed in order for clarity. * Public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar are listed under the appropriate item. A 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS. (a) Letter from Jim Rosenberger dated June 3, 1991 regarding reimbursement to City for agenda packets. Action: To Motion , second . So ordered. PUBLIC HEARINGS - TO COMMENCE AT 8:00 P.M. �! ' — 9 %'Z �'• 5. PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND TEXT AMENDMENT ON BILTMORE SITE, with resolution for adoption, and or- dinance for introduction. Memorandum from Planning Di- rector Michael Schubach dated June 3, 1991. t Director Schubach presented the staff report and re- sponded to Council questions. City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 8 • The public hearing was opened at 8:3 , P.M. Coming forward to address the Council on this matter were: titer -`d‘• ) /61-67. ,5i6 IA) A-51-(-4-.7-.-0-•.--> .90401-$A- 7-1" apc„ 6-7 The public hearing was closed at 8:5%P.M. 1/4,,v Z -iv) ID! 6fin o� Action: To a adopt solutio THE CITY COUNCIL NIA, AMENDING THE THE SOUTHERLY PORT DENSITY RESIDENTIAL CONCUR WITH THE AMEN COMMISSION CERTIFIED WITH THE DECISION OF TH TO THE USE OF THE BILTMOR VIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DE Ordinance No. 91-10k11 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, ORDINANCE TEXT FOR T BILTMORE SITE TO C RESIDENTIAL TO AL AREA FOR RESIDEN rove the �ff recomme No. 91-5 entitle OF THE CITY OF HE LAND USE MAP OF N OF THE "BIL TO COMMERC ENT TO D USE dation No.1: to , "A RESOLUTION OF SA BEACH, CALIFOR- HE GENERAL PLAN FOR ORE SITE" FROM MEDIUM AL/RECREATION, AND TO HE TEXT OF THE COASTAL LAN, ALL TO BE CONSISTENT TAL COMMISSION, IN REGARDS ITE, AND ADOPTION OF AN EN - TION.", and to introduce nti CALIFO SPECIFIC GE THE PE W A MAXIMUM OF IAL PURPOSES AND ed, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE IA, TO AMEND THE ZONING LAN AREA NO, 1 FOR THE TTED USES FROM SOLELY % OF THE TOTAL FLOOR EQUIRE A MINIMUM OF -)1/t/1/7/ ✓'� // City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 9 • 30% TO BE FOR COMMER L/RREATION PURPOSES TO BE CON- SISTENT WITH THE COASTACOMMISSION APPROVED MODIFICA- TION TO THE CERTIFIED D -E PLAN, AND THE REMAINING TO BE DEVELOPED FOR COERCIAL PURPOSES, AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGA''VE DECLARATION." Motion second . The motion carried with dissenting. Further Action: No. 91-105 . Motion , second Ayes: Noes: Final Action: To direct wording of) this issue as tiative on the November ba Motion , second . The further reading of Ordinance staff to (place) (prepare the a City Council sponsored ini- llot. motion carried 6. PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL ZONING STANDARDS BALLOT MEASURES. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated June 5, 1991. Supplemental letter from John and Jan McHugh, dated June 10, 1991. Supplemental draft minutes from the Planning Commisson meeting of June 4, 1991. Director Schubach presented the staff report and re- sponded to Council questions. The public hearing was opened at 9:. ' P.M. Coming forward to address the Council on this matter were: ;,00 iJ l'20) 1/ .ry v tom'%eit/t41 4.a7 le31‘;°"'VeA-4VL 1%0 - 'ott-2? City Council M'n tes 06-11-91 Page 10 74r-e26 -c Og c''`'.- tca /0 i /a The public hearing was closed at Al P.M. Action: et a HA 4Pt/f Sf=75) 7( .4-e9 ( APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DAN'S LIQUORS, 3232 MANHATTAN AVENUE. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated June 5, 1991. Supplemental FAX transmission from Rutan and Tucker, representing the applicant, dated June 11, 1991. Supplemental draft minutes from the Planning com- mission meeting of June 4, 1991. (Continued from May 14, 1991 meeting.) Director Schubach presented the staff report and re- sponded to Council questions. ( r ,,P The public 4. address the V 1 di V r. e ii197 4,0 „ e ,iv hearing Council was opened at JI: :Z/ P.M. Coming forward to on this matter were: Lt City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 11 f; // r • X1-7' -69, ; 71, a • 1/4--e 9 7, ,„--> The public hearing was closed at//:2 P.M. G6, or' 2/3 Action: To deny theappeal, uphold the Plannin Commis- sion approval andadopt �dopt Resolution No. 91-5451, enti- tled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TH CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUSTAINING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW OFF -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL, IN CONJUNCTION WITH A DELI & MINI -MARKET, AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRON- MENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR 3232 MANHATTAN AVENUE, "DAN'S LIQUOR", LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT TWO, AND LOT FOUR, SHAKESPEARE TRACT." Motion , second . The motion carried unanimously. 8. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR BOCCATO'S GROCERIES, 3127 MANHATTAN AVENUE. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated June 5, 1991. Supplemental letter from Frank Boccato, dated June 10, 1991. Supplemental draft minutes from the Planning Commission meeting of June 11, 1991. (Continued from May 14, 1991 meeting.) Director Schubach presented the staff report and re- sponded to Council questions. The public hearing was opened at/V:35P.M. Coming forward to address the Council on this matter) were: „p. y- c�s�-> FiJ /,' v °--J• /' /`-B/�'^ ,n -�`'' ` 445 City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 12 • The public hearing was closed at //:XD P.M. Action: To deny the appeal, sustain the Planning Com- mission decision, and to adopt Resolution No. 91-545A, entitled,"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUSTAINING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW OFF -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR 3127 MANHATTAN AVENUE, "BOCCATO'S GROCERIES", AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE EASTERLY 20.15 FEET OF LOT 12 AND LOT 14, BLOCK 104, SHAKESPEARE TRACT." Motion , second . The motion carried unanimously. 9. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 3 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION AT 23 BARNEY COURT/18-20 MEYER COURT. Memorandum from Planning Di- rector Michael Schubach dated May 6, 1991. Supplemental letter from applicants, Jim Moss, Dennis Cleland, and Steve Harris dated May 28, 1991. Supplemental letter from David R. Suess, 1246 First Street, dated June 10, 1991. (Continued from May 14, 1991 meeting.) Director Schubach presented the staff report and re- sponded to Council questions. The public hearing was opened at P.M. Coming forward to address the Council on this matter were: cit -A-0( City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 13 • the public hearing was closed at P.M. 10. Action: To deny the appeal, sustain the Planning Com- mission decision, and adopt Resolution No. 91-545 , en- titled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUSTAINING THE PLANNING COM- MISSION'S DECISION TO DENY A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #20822, FOR A 3 - UNIT CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION PROJECT AT 23 BARNEY COURT, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 24, TRAFTON HEIGHTS TRACT." Motion , second . So ordered. Action: To grant the appeal, overturn the Planning Com- mission decision, and adopt Resolution No. 91-545 , "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #20822, FOR A 3 -UNIT CONDOMINI- UM CONVERSION PROJECT AT 23 BARNEY COURT, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT 24, TRAFTON HEIGHTS TRACT." Motion , second . So ordered. PROPOSED ADOPTION OF THE NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE, 1990 EDITION, with ordinance for waiver of full reading and introduction. Memorandum from Building and Safety Di- rector William Grove dated June 3, 1991. Director Grove presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. The public hearing was opened at P.M. There was no one com- ing forward to address the Council on this matter. The public hearing was closed at P.M. City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 14 • Action: To introduce Ordinance No. 91-1055, entitled, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AMENDING CHAPTER 11 OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO ELECTRIC REGULA- TIONS AND ADOPTING WITH CERTAIN ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND AMENDMENTS, WHICH ARE SET FORTH HEREIN, THE RULES, REG- ULATIONS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THAT CODE ENTITLED "NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE,- 1990 EDITION" PROMULGATED AND PUBLISHED BY THE NATIONAL FIRE PROTEC- TION ASSOCIATION." \ Motion ., second WJ• The motion carried unanimously. Final Action: To waive further reading of Ordinance No. 91-1055. Motion 6, second ‘l„.. AYES: 44 NOES: MUNICIPAL MATTERS 11. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION TO ADOPT A MEMORANDUM OF UNDER- STANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OF- FICERS' ASSOCIATION, OFFICERS' AND SERGEANTS' BARGAINING UNIT. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Black- wood dated June 3, 1991. Director Blackwood presented the staff report and re- sponded to Council questions. (vS4;--) Action: To adopt Resolution No. 91-545 entitled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO ADOPT A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTAND- ING WITH THE HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION AND SERGEANTS' BARGAINING UNIT." Motion , se and . The motion carried unanimously. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION TO ADOPT A MEMORANDUM OF UNDER- STANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AND THE HER- MOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION, COMMANDERS' BARGAINING UNIT. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated June 3, 1991. City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 15 Director Blackwood presented the staff report and re- sponded to Council questions. 224) (14::4);-4s) Action: To adopt Resolution No. 91-545 ntitled,"A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO ADOPT A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTAND- ING WITH THE HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION COMMANDERS' BARGAINING UNIT." Motion , second . The motion carried unanimously. 13. STRAND SAFETY SUB -COMMITTEE REPORT. Memorandum from Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski dated June 11, 1991. This item -was withdrawn prior to the meeting 14. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER City Manager Northcraft reported: 15. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL (y Aderli .71 """--24:61. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL ,f Requests from Councilmembers for possible future agenda items: Recommended Action: 1) Vote by Council whether to discuss this item; 2) refer to staff for a report back on a future agenda; or 3) resolution of matter by/Coun- cil yeCoun-cil action tonight. i 0 k,/ r° ----ii., /7c--,' A eivc--(79, v 1 I E ),Y ,„--t,,,,,. ,IA- (1 , f 41 ^ , ir(i\ifJ 7 ) (-1, ?) Ill �' I.P.,.: 0/ . {{1 Q f(0 A ti i I (( '�C6ity Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 16 614 '6 # ( P 0 CITIZEN COMMENTS 1 Citizens wishing to address the Council on items within the Council's jurisdiction may do so at this time. Please limit comments to three minutes. Coming forward to address the Council at this time were: 9oward Longacre - 1221 Sevent Place,Q Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street, v _r.`l June Williams - 2065 Manhattan Avenue, 1__ c2r9 Dave Reimer - 802 Monterey Blvd., Jerry Compton - 832 Seventh Street, Shirley Cassell - 611 Monterey Blvd., Parker Herriott - 224 Twenty-fourth Street, Jim Lissner - 2715 El Oeste Drive, Jim Rosenberger - 1121 Bayview Drive, ADJOURNMENT The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, adjourned on Wednesday June 12, 1991, at the hour of 12:/ q A.M., to a closed session. The closed session convened at •A.M. for the purpose of con- sidering matters of potential litigation: pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b); and, Real Property Negotiation: pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8, regarding the South School site with the Hermosa Beach City School district. The closed session was adjourned at •A.M. to a Regular Meeting to be held on Tuesday, June 25, 1991, at the hour of 7:30 P.M. S Deputy City Clerk City Council Minutes 06-11-91 Page 17 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. Meetings are televised live on Multivision Cable Channel 3 and replayed the next day (Wesdnesday) at noon. Agendas for meetings are shown on Channel 3 the weekend before the meetings. Opportunities for Public Comments Citizens may provide input to their elected Councilmembers in writing or oral- ly. Letters on agenda matters should be sent or delivered to the City Clerk's or City Manager's Office. If sent one week in advance, they will be included in the Council's agenda packet with the item. If received after packet com- pilation, they will be distributed prior to the Council meeting. Oral communications with Councilmembers may be accomplished on an individual basis in person or by telephone, or at the Council meeting. Please see the notice under "Public Participation" for opportunities to speak before the Council. It is the policy of the City Council that no discussion of new items will be- gin after 11:30 p.m., unless this rule is waived by the Council. The agendas are developed with the intent to have all matters covered within the time allowed. 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: City offices are open 7 A.M. to 6 P.M., Mon. - Thurs.; Closed Fridays. There is no smoking allowed in the Council Chambers. (over) THE HERMOSA BEACH FORM OF GOVERNMENT Hermosa Beach has the Council -Manager form of government, with a City Manager appointed 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 considered 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 agendas for meetings of the Hermosa Beach City Council. Consent Items ... A compilation of all routine matters to be acted upon by one vote; approval requires a majority affirmative vote. Any Councilmember may remove an item from this listing, thereby causing that matter to be considered .under the category Consent Calendar items Removed For Separate Discussion. Public Hearings ... Public Hearings are held on certain matters as required by law or by direction of Council. The Hearings afford the public the opportuni- ty 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. 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 5 days later Council may adopt, reject or hold over the ordinance to a subsequent meeting. Most or- dinances 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 Noon the Tuesday preceding the Regular City Council meeting and request they be placed on the Council agenda. Municipal Matters ... Non-public Hearing items predicted to warrant discussion by the City Council are placed here. Miscellaneous Items and Reports - City Manager ... The City Manager coordi- nates 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. ,/- 5 5X vZ "Spring is nature's way of saying 'Let's party!' -Robin Williams AGENDA REGULAR MEETING HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, June 11, 1991 - Council Chambers, City Hall MAYOR Kathleen Midstokke MAYOR PRO TEM Robert Essertier COUNCILMEMBERS Roger Creighton Charles Sheldon Albert Wiemans Regular Session - 7:30 p.m. CITY CLERK Elaine Doerfling CITY TREASURER Gary L. Brutsch CITY MANAGER Kevin B. Northcraft CITY ATTORNEY Charles S. Vose All Council meetings are open to the public. PLEASE ATTEND. The Council receives a packet with detailed information and recommendations on nearly every agenda item. Complete agenda packets are available for public inspection in the Police Depart- ment, Public Library and the Office of the City Clerk. During the meeting a packet also is available in the Council foyer. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: APPOINTMENT OF MAYOR AND MAYOR PRO TEM: A. Designate Mayor for a term ending April 14, 1992 B. Designate Mayor Pro Tempore for a term ending April 14, 1992 C. Intergovernmental agencies requiring appointment of Mayor as delegate. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated May 30, 1991. RECESS PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Members of the Public wishing to address the City Council on any items within the Council's jurisdiction may do so at this time. (Exception: Comments on public hearing items must be heard during the public hearings.) Please limit comments to one minute. Citizens also may speak: 1) during Consent Calendar consideration or Public Hearings, 2) with the Mayor's consent, during discussion of items appearing under Municipal Matters, and 3) before the close of the meeting during "Citizen Comments". 1. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following more routine matters will be acted upon by one vote to approve with the majority consent 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. * Councilmember requests to remove items from the Consent Calendar. (Items removed will be considered under Agenda Item 3.) * Public comments on the Consent Calendar. (a) Recommendation to approve minutes of regular meeting of the City Council held on May 28, 1991. (b) Recommendation to approve Demands and Warrants • Nos. through inclusive. (c) Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. (d) Recommendation to receive and file the May, 1991 invest- ment report. Memorandum from City Treasurer Gary Brutsch dated May 30, 1991. (e) Recommendation to approve lease agreement between the City of Hermosa Beach and the Los Angeles County Bar Association Dispute Resolution Services, Inc. for space in the Community Center. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated June 4, 1991. (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) Recommendation to approve lease agreement between the City of Hermosa Beach and Project Touch to lease Room 11 in the Community Center. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated June 4, 1991. Recommendation to approve revised class specification for Public Works Superintendent. Memorandum from Per- sonnel Director Robert Blackwood dated June 3, 1991. Recommendation to receive and file status report on Rule XV - Trip Reduction Plan. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated June 3, 1991. Recommendation to receive and file report on staff follow-up procedures to City Council actions. Memoran- dum from City Manager Kevin B. Northcraft dated June 3, 1991. Recommendation to use reserved County -Aid -to -Cities Fund for County -wide traffic signal synchronization program. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated June 4, 1991. Recommendation to accept basketball courts as complete, CIP 89-512. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated June 4, 1991. (1) (m) (n) (o) Recommendation to accept report regarding investigation into telephone access to City offices and approve in concept the purchase of new telephone switching equip- ment. Memorandum from General Services Department dated May 29, 1991. Recommendation to receive and file Administrative Memo- randum on Professional Services. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated June 5, 1991. Recommendation to receive and file report on street sweeping service level. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated May 21, 1991. Recommendation to authorize staff to solicit requests for proposals to conduct a grant funded High Accident Identification and Surveillance Study and a Neighborhood Intrusion Study. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated May 31, 1991. 2. CONSENT ORDINANCES. (a) ORDINANCE NO. 91-1054 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HER- MOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING MOBILE SOURCE AIR POLLUTION REDUCTION ORDINANCE. For adoption. 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. * Public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS. (a) Letter from Jim Rosenberger dated June 3, 1991 regarding reimbursement to City for agenda packets. PUBLIC HEARINGS - TO COMMENCE AT 8:00 P.M. 5. PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND TEXT AMENDMENT ON BILTMORE SITE, with resolution for adoption, and or- dinance for introduction. Memorandum from Planning Di- rector Michael Schubach dated June 3, 1991. 6. PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL ZONING STANDARDS BALLOT MEASURES. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated June 5, 1991. 7. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DAN'S LIQUORS, 3232 MANHATTAN AVENUE. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated June 5, 1991. (Continued from May 14, 1991 meeting.) 8. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR BOCCATO'S GROCERIES, 3127 MANHATTAN - 3 - AVENUE. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated June 5, 1991. (Continued from May 14, 1991 meeting.) 9. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 3 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION AT 23 BARNEY COURT/18-20 MEYER COURT. Memorandum from Planning Di- rector Michael Schubach dated May 6, 1991. (Continued from May 14, 1991 meeting.) 10. PROPOSED ADOPTION OF THE NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE, 1990 EDITION, with ordinance for waiver of full reading and introduction. Memorandum from Building and Safety Di- rector William Grove dated June 3, 1991. MUNICIPAL MATTERS 11. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION TO ADOPT A MEMORANDUM OF UNDER- STANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OF- FICERS' ASSOCIATION, OFFICERS' AND SERGEANTS' BARGAINING UNIT. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Black- wood dated June 3, 1991. 12. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION TO ADOPT A MEMORANDUM OF UNDER- STANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AND THE HER- MOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION, COMMANDERS' BARGAINING UNIT. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated June 3, 1991. 13. STRAND SAFETY SUB -COMMITTEE REPORT. Memorandum from Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski dated June 11, 1991. 14. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER 15. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL 16. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL Requests from Councilmembers for possible future agenda items: Recommended Action: 1) Vote by Council whether to discuss this item; 2) refer to staff for a report back on a future agenda; or 3) resolution of matter by Coun- cil action tonight. CITIZEN COMMENTS Citizens wishing to address the Council on items within the Council's jurisdiction may do so at this time. Please limit comments to three minutes. RECESS FOR THE PURPOSE OF A CLOSED SESSION. ADJOURNMENT Torrance broke aAtsars,,: ai�9/ meetings 1awe93 City lawyer admits oversight By Jim Radcliffe STAFF WRITER The Torrance City Council apparently broke a state law by failing to announce a decision reached in closed session this week, an attorney for the city acknowledged Friday. At its weekly meeting Tues- day night, five of the seven council members discussed a lawsuit against El Camino Col- lege for approving a plan to charge students a parking fee, beginning in the fall semester. Later admission Although the actual vote has never been revealed publicly, three members later acknowl- edged a majority approved fil- ing the suit. The discussion and initial vote were conducted in a back room out of public view. This is allowed by the 37 -year-old Ralph M. Brown Act — Califor- nia's open -meeting law — so governments can discuss strate- gy without tipping off their le- gal opponents. But after such closed ses- sions, which usually follow the public segment of the meetings, the council members return to their seats in the chamber: Then, if there is a decision, it is announced or a public vote is taken without comment. No action taken At this point in the Tuesday meeting, Mayor Katy Geissert asked Ron Pohl, an assistant city attorney, whether any council action needed to be tak- en. He said no and the meeting was adjourned. Only five council members were in the meeting during the lawsuit discussion. Councilman Bill Applegate was absent; while Councilman Dan Walker abstained. "There should have been a. vote in public," said William; Quale, another assistant city at- torney. "It was an oversight." City Attorney Kenneth Nel- son could not be reached for comment. Geissert referred INSEUMMT questions to Quale. The day after the vote, the city filed the suit in Torrance Superior Court, where the case instantly becomes accessible to the media and the public. To square the city with the state law, Quale said he will suggest that the council mem- bers discuss the lawsuit again in closed session Tuesday and an- nounce a decision afterward. . Councilman Timothy Mock said the snafu will not damage the lawsuit. Torrance officials said they filed the suit because they fear that the college, by imposinga parking fee, will unjustly en\ courage students to burden nearby residential streets with parked cars. Quale said mistakenly not re- vealing such decisions in public is rare. "We are all aware of the Brown Act, and we work damn hard to follow it," Quale said. SCRIPT FOR ROTATION OF MAYOR 1. OUTGOING MAYOR SHELDON'S COMMENTS 2. MOTIONS TO APPOINT KATHLEEN MIDSTOKKE AS MAYOR AND ROBERT ESSERTIER AS MAYOR PRO TEMPORE FOR TERMS ENDING APRIL 14, 1992. 3. SWAP SEATS AND NAMEPLATES: Current: AW RC CS KM RE New: RC CS KM RE AW 4. PRESENTATION OF PLAQUE TO OUTGOING MAYOR SHELDON BY NEW MAYOR MIDSTOKKE. 5. MOTIONS TO...(SEE 3 ACTIONS RECOMMENDED IN CITY CLERK'S MEMO) 6. INCOMING MAYOR MIDSTOKKE'S COMMENTS 7. BREAK - COFFEE AND COOKIES 8. REFER TO AGENDA - CONSENT CALENDAR HERMOSA BEACH CITY. COUNCIL PRESENTATION JUNE 11, 1991 BY RICHARD J. KENNY TO: HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL SUBJECT: GREENBELT BIKEPATH GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS DICK KENNY, I AM A RESIDENT OF REDONDO BEACH. THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT MY FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CITY REGARDING THE STRAND BIKEPATH SAFETY PROBLEM. DURING THE LAST FEW WEEKS, I HAVE CONCENTRATED ON THE SPECIFIC CONCERNS EXPRESSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING AN ALTERNATE BIKEPATH ROUTE AND THE GREENBELT BIKEPATH, PROPOSAL IN PARTICULAR. IN MY ATTEMPT TO GET ALL VIEWS ON THE PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF THIS PLAN, I CONTACTED THE HERMOSA BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, THE SCHOOL BOARD, THE SANTA FE RAILROAD AND THE OPEN SPACE PEOPLES ACTION COMMITTEE-OSPAC, IN ADDITION TO MANY RESIDENTS AND THE CITY STAFF. ALL SEEM TO SUPPORT THE IDEA EXCEPT FOR OSPAC, THE ACTION GROUP THAT CAUSED THE. PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY AND THE SANTA FE RAILROAD, THE SELLER.". (I HAVE ATTACHED THE LETTERS FOR THE RECORD). ALTHOUGH ADMITTEDLY ONLY AN OPINION WAS EXPRESSED BY OSPAC, THE LACK OF PUBLIC INTEREST CLAIMED IS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE MANY RESIDENTS LETTERS TO THE CITY, VARIOUS EXPERT STUDIES AND MY OWN DOCUMENTED SURVEY OF 107 RESIDENTS IN APRIL WHICH INDICATED THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE RESIDENTS WANT A SAFE PLACE TO RIDE THEIR BICYLES. I ESTIMATE THAT MORE THAN 80% OF THE FAMILIES IN HERMOSA BEACH OWN ONE OR MORE BICYLES,. PUBLIC SENTIMENT IS BEING MISINTERPRETED. THIS RECREATION ORIENTED COMMUNITY WANTS THE STRAND SAFETY PROBLEM SOLVED, BUT NOT BY TAKING AWAY. THEIR FREEDOM TO RIDE A BICYCLE. I ALSO DISAGREE WITH OSPAC'S STATEMENT THAT THE COST AND WHO PAYS FOR THE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT IS MOOT. I RECOGNIZE THAT I CAN ONLY OFFER MY RECOMMENDATION SINCE I AM NOT A RESIDENT OF HERMOSA BEACH. HOWEVER, WHEN I BEGAN MY STUDY OF THE STRAND BIKEPATH SAFETY PROBLEM SOME NINE MONTHS AGO, I BELIEVED THAT AN OBJECTIVEANALYSISBY AN OUTSIDER MIGHT PROVIDE SOME FOCUS AND DIRECTION TO THE SOLUTI..ON OF THIS #1 PRIORITY PROBLEM IN THE CITY. WHAT I HAVE ESTABLISHED IS THAT 90%' OF THE HERMOSA BEACH RESIDENTS WANT A GREENBELT BIKEPATH TO ALLOW SAFE USE BY WALKERS, JOGGERS AND BICYCLES AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE STRAND. I HAVE DETAILED THE SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF THIS PROPOSAL IN MY NUM.EROUS LETTERS TO THE CITY COUNCIL SUMMARIZED IN MY. LAST LETTER DATED MAY 14, 1991.. A DETAILED STUDY AND THE MOST CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THIS EVIDENCE WILL INDICATE THAT THIS PROPOSAL SATISFIES ALL THE STATED OBJECTIVES. EARLIER, I HAD URGED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PLACE THIS MATTER ON THE NOVEMBER BALLOT AS A PUBLIC INITIATIVE. HOWEVER, I HAVE NOW LEARNED THAT THE STATE FUNDS AVAILABLE FOR THIS PROJECT WILL BE DISTRIBUTED WELL BEFORE THIS NEXT ELECTION. PROPOSALS FOR ,PROPOSITION 116 FUNDS WILL NEED TO BE SUBMITTED WITHIN THE NEXT FEW 'WEEKS. I. AM URGING YOU TO TAKE THE FIRST STEP THIS EVENING BY DIRECTING STAFF TO RESPOND APPROPRIATELY TO SEEK THE AVAILABLE FUNDING TO PROVIDE A SAFE AND SCENIC GREENBELT BIKEPATH FOR ALL RECREATIONAL ENTHUSIASTS TO ENJOY. THANK YOU. I WILL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS TIME. RICHARD J. KENNY HERMOSA BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 323 PIER AVENUE/P.O. BOX 404 HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254 (213) 376-0951 Dick Kenny Air Resources Board 9528 Telstar Avenue El Monte, CA 91731-2900 May 23, 1991 Dear Dick: The Executive Committee•of the Chamber met last night and I described your proposal for an initiative on the Greenbelt Bikepath. It appears you have done considerable research on this idea and I do not see any obvious reasons why it couldn't be an item on the ballot.` This kind of an issue -though is not one that the Chamber would want to play any kind of a leadership role in. Rather it is more suited for a group whose. primary focus is in the area of jogging or biking. I don't know of any particular group that is oriented toward that agenda, at least not in our city. Perhaps an appearance at a City Council meeting and the accompanying T.V. exposure would stir up"some active support for the bikepath proposal. Thanks for the information you sent. I'll hold on to it and see what happens. Cor•ially, , wasley- . Bush-- - Execute Director MUM __ T. r mom Open Space People's Action Committee - OSPAC 610 Sixth Street, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 (213) 379-5698 May 22, 1991 ecevv Mr. Richard J. Kenny 520 Paseo de los Reyes Redondo Beach, CA 90277 Dear Dick: "No matter where you live in Hermosa Beach the Greenbelt depends on you." I normally would be the last person to attempt to discourage someone from an undertaking in which he deeply believes, but my experience tells me that if a cause does not arouse any passion among the citizenry, there is faint hope of making much progress with it, however well-intentioned. I would not venture to predict what endorsement might eventually be acceptable to a majority of Hermosa Beach citizens, but a bicycle path, per se, will in all likelihood never gain significant support in this community. In re financial considerations, I would surmise that if a project is unacceptable, who or what entity pays for it is moot. If OSPAC members were obliged to take.a stand today, I would predict that the position would be to preserve the Greenbelt exclusively for pedestrians and joggers, with future improvements made to achieve a serene and rural effect rather than an urban park which might include a bike path, signage, fountains, paved walkways, lighting, established flower bed, areas, ad infinitum. I assure you that there is weak, if any, interest in the various scenarios you have described, and believe that you may make more progress in improving the cycle traffic situation on the Strand path. In any event, I think it's great that you have taken an interest in this aspect of our city (it's too bad you don't vote here) and I wish you luck in your future endeavors. Sincerely, Rosamond Fogg copy: K. Midstokke The Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company PUBLIC RELATIONS 740 E. Carnegie Drive San Bernardino, CA 92408-3571 (714) 386-4484 FAX: (714) 386-4485 Mr. Richard J. Kenny 520 Paseo de los Reyes Redondo Beach, CA. 90277 Dear Mr. Kenny: May 31, 1991 File: Donations - Hermosa Beach I am replying to your letter of May 17, addressed to Tom Shalin, and requesting a donation of materials to be used along a bike path in Hermosa Beach that was once Santa Fe right-of-way. I am sorry to say that the kinds of materials you have requested are not available for donation. When railroad ties are replaced the used ties are sold to sal- vage companies that bundle them and remove them from Santa Fe prop- erty. Rails are either sold for scrap value or reconditioned for use in other locations. Other railroad -related memorabilia -type items are no longer owned by Santa Fe, and what did exist was sold in an auction at Topeka, Kansas several years ago. I regret that we will not be able to assist you in your effort to establish a bicycle path in Hermosa Beach. Sinc Mic ael A. Martin Manager- Public Affairs cc: Mr. T. H. Shalin - San Bernardino MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Tuesday, May 28, 1991, at the hour of 7:42 P.M. CLOSED SESSION - The closed session was held at 6:07 P.M. regard- ing matters of Personnel; matters of potential litigation: pur- suant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b); and, matters of Em- ployee Meet and Confer. The session was recessed at 7:35 P.M. to the regular scheduled public meeting. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Charles Sheldon, Mayor ROLL CALL Present: Creighton, Essertier, Midstokke, Wiemans, Mayor Sheldon Absent: None ANNOUNCEMENTS - Mayor Sheldon congratulated the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce on a successful and well attended "Fiesta de las Artes" over the Memorial Day week -end. PRESENTATION BY BEACH CITIES CYCLE SHOP OF TWO MOUNTAIN BIKES FOR USE BY THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S BEACH PATROL - Public Safety Di- rector, Steve Wisniewski, expressed the City's gratitude to Carl Pedersen and Jay Podgurski of Beach Cities Cycle and accepted the use of the two mountain bikes for the summer months by the Police Department's "Beach Patrol". He explained that the program had begun three years ago when Sergeant Steve Endom had worked with the owners of the shop to provide the bicycles for the summer months. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Coming forward to address the Council at this time were: June Williams - 2065 Manhattan Avenue, congratu- lated the Finance Department and its Director, Vicki Copeland, for the National Award for Financial Records, that it had received for accounting excellence; and, Jim Lissner - 2715 El Oeste Drive, submitted a newspaper article regarding a new chicken res- taurant scheduled to go in where Pioneer Chicken had been at the corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Artesia, and expressed concern about possible odor and smoke that might arise from the business. 1. CONSENT CALENDAR Action: To approve the Consent Calendar recommendations (a) through (p), with the exception of the following items which were pulled for discussion in item 3 but are listed in order for clarity: (f) Midstokke, (o) Mid- stokke, and (p) Mayor Sheldon; in addition, items (1) City Council Minutes 05-28-91 Page 7460 la t _ and (m) were continued to the next regular meeting of June 11, 1991, at the request of the City Manager; and, Councilmember Wiemans registered a "no" vote on item (n) . Motion Essertier, second Midstokke. The motion carried unanimously. Coming forward to address the Council on Consent Calendar items not pulled by the Council was: Betty Martin - 257 Twenty-seventh Street, regarding item (n), expressed a recommendation to_ keep the General Services Department intact. Councilmember Essertier clarified that the Council intended to keep the Department intact, for the time being, under an interim supervisor, with only the data processing areas removed to the Administration Department. (a) Recommendation to approve minutes of regular meeting of the City Council held on May 14, 1991. (b) (c) (d) (e) Action: To approve the minutes of May 14, 1991 as presented. Recommendation to approve Demands and Warrants Nos. 36942 through 37015 inclusive, noting voided war- rants Nos. 36946, 36947, 36967, and 36971. Action: To approve the demands and warrants as presented. Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. Action: To receive and file the tentative future agenda items. Recommendation to receive and file the April, 1991 financial reports: 1) Revenue and expenditure report; 2) City Treasurer's report. Action: To receive and file the April, 1991 financial reports. Recommendation to approve request for 30 -day extension of two General Service Officers and the Deputy City Clerk. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Black- wood dated May 15, 1991. Action: To approve the staff recommendation. (f) Recommendation to approve a pass through of the Olympic Festival Torch Run on July 1, and that all applicable City Council Minutes 05-28-91 Page 7461 fees and insurance requirements for the event be waived. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated May 21, 1991. This item was removed from the Consent Calendar by Coun- cilmember Midstokke for separate discussion later in the meeting due to concern regarding the waiver of insurance requirements. Community Resources Director Rooney responded to Council questions by saying that there would be only one runner with a Hermosa Beach Police Department escort. Action: To send the matter back to staff for investiga- tion regarding the insurance requirements of other cit- ies; if the necessary certificate of insurance could be provided by the Olympic Festival, approval, including the waiver of the fee, was granted. Motion Creighton, second Essertier. The motion carried with Midstokke dissenting. Further Action: To direct staff to return with informa- tion regarding the deletion of the fee requirement for non-profit pass through events. Motion Creighton, second Mayor Sheldon. The motion car- ried unanimously. Recommendation to approve award of bids for purchase of vehicles for narcotics and patrol. Memorandum from Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski dated May 21, 1991. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to: 1) award the bid for purchase of four (4) nar- cotics vehicles to Colleto Ford for a total cost of $61,408.37; 2) authorize the purchase of two (2) patrol vehi- cles through the Cooperative Purchase Provi- sions of the Los Angeles County vehicle con- tract bid #5-146 for a total cost of $25,742.06; 3) authorize a three (3) year lease/purchase agreement with Banc One Leasing Corp. for the purchase of the vehicles; 4) authorize the Mayor to sign and execute all necessary documents to initiate and acquire the lease agreement; 5) authorize the sale of the two (2) Mustangs used by WESTNET and purchased with forfeiture funds; and, 6) approve the use of Nationwide Auction Systems for the sale of the vehicles and instruct that the proceeds be deposited into the forfeiture fund. City Council Minutes 05-28-91 Page 7462 (h) (i) (j) (k) (1) Recommendation to approve appropriation of funds from Asset Seizure/Forfeiture Fund for purchase and installa- tion of equipment in new narcotics vehicles. Memorandum from Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski dated May 21, 1991. Action: To approve the appropriation of $15,000 from the Asset Seizure/Forfeiture Fund to the 1990/91 Special Investigations equipment account to cover the cost of purchase and installation of communications and emergen- cy vehicle equipment in the new vehicles. Recommendation to approve emergency ambulance service agreement with Los Angeles County. Memorandum from Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski dated May 21, 1991. Action: To approve, adopt, and authorize the Mayor to sign the "EMERGENCY AMBULANCE SERVICE AGREEMENT" with the County of Los Angeles. Recommendation to 1) adopt resolution amending the 1990- 91 annual appropriation limit, and 2) adopt resolution approving the 1991-92 annual appropriation limit. Memo- randum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated May 21, 1991. Action: To: 1) adopt Resolution No. 91-5448, entitled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HER- MOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ANNUAL AP- PROPRIATIONS LIMIT SET BY RESOLUTION 90 -5377 -FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1990-91.", and 2) adopt Resolution No. 91-5449, entitled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HER- MOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE ANNUAL APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1991-92." Recommendation to call for bids - downtown maintenance contract. Memorandum from Public rector Anthony Antich dated May 20, 1991. Action: To authorize staff to call for bids addenda as necessary. and pier Works Di - and issue Recommendation to adopt resolutions approving report on Street Lighting Assessment District and setting for public hearing. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated May 21, 1991. Action: To continue this item to the meeting of June 11, 1991. City Council Minutes 05-28-91 Page 7463 (in) (n) (o) (p) Recommendation to adopt resolutions approving report on Crossing Guard Assessment District and setting for public hearing. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated May 21, 1991. Action: To continue this item to the meeting of June 11, 1991. Recommendation to approve plan for General Services Department reorganization. Memorandum from City Manager Kevin B. Northcraft dated May 22, 1991. Councilman Wiemans registered a no vote on this item. Action: To formally approve the reorganization of the General Services Department by separating the data pro- cessing division and placing it directly under the City Manager's office, and keeping the remainder of the department as it is currently constituted, per Council direction at the April 23, 1991 meeting. Recommendation to continue to June 25 the review on South Bay Cycles, 638-640 Pacific Coast Highway for compliance with conditional use permit. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 20, 1991. This item was removed from the Consent Calendar by Coun- cilmember Midstokke for separate discussion later in the meeting, due to concern with the traffic study. Directors Schubach and Antich responded to Council questions. Action: To: 1) continue the matter to allow compliance with the remaining three items that are currently in the process of being implemented, changing the date to the meeting of July 9, 1991; and, 2) direct that an independent traffic consultant do the traffic study to meet condition #23 of the C.U.P., and that the cost of the study plus the cost of the report by the City Engineer be borne by the "South Bay Cycle" owners. Motion Midstokke, second Essertier. The motion carried with Mayor Sheldon dissenting. Recommendation on continuing with hand held ticket writers. Memorandum from General Services Department dated May 22, 1991. This item was removed from the Consent Calendar by Mayor Sheldon for separate discussion later in the meeting in order to question lease costs versus outright purchase. City Council Minutes 05-28-91 Page 7464 City Manager Northcraft responded to Council questions by explaining that it was a lease/purchase option and the City would consider purchase after new models came out. Coming forward to address the Council on this matter was: Mary Houghton - Vice President of Marketing for Phoenix Group, who said that new models were included with the lease option. Action: To approve the staff recommendations to: 1) approve the purchase of continuous form cita- tions at a cost of 38 cents per citation, totaling $11,400 for 30,000 citations, for the next four month period, and 3 tines a year thereafter. This would coincide with the up- coming upgrades from the Clancy System. The Clancy Citation Writing System will be provided with the purchase of the continuous form cita- tions; and, 2) authorize the signing of an agreement with Clancy Citation Writing Systems for three years with a 60 day written notice to cancel the agreement. Motion Mayor Sheldon, second Creighton. The motion car- ried unanimously. 2. CONSENT ORDINANCES - None. 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. Items (f), (o), and (p) were heard at this time, however, they are listed in order for clarity. * Public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar are listed under the appropriate item. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS. (a) Letter from Brian McInerney, Freetime Distributing, Inc., 819 E. Thompson Blvd., Ventura, dated May 7, 1991, regarding Section 5-25.5 Wheeled vehicles on strand walkway, with letter of response from Public Safety Di- rector Steve Wisniewski dated May 14, 1991. Action: To receive and file. Motion Midstokke, second Creighton. The motion carried with Councilmember Wiemans dissenting. PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. RECONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THE LIGHTHOUSE, 30 PIER City Council Minutes 05-28-91 Page 7465 AVENUE. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 21, 1991. Supplemental letters from Paul Hennessey, dated May 22, 1991, and from Richard Sullivan, dated May 26, 1991. (Recommended to be res- cheduled to July 9, 1991) Director Schubach responded to Council questions. The public hearing was opened at 8:26 P.M. The public hearing was continued at 8:27 P.M. Action: To continue this hearing to the meeting of July 9, 1991, with the understanding that there could be no more continuances, and the date would be renoticed at the applicant's expense. Motion Midstokke, second Creighton. The motion carried unanimously. Further Action: To establish a policy that when a con- tinuance is requested by the applicant, the cost of the renoticing must be submitted with the request; and, to direct staff to return with a Resolution to formalize this policy. Motion Creighton, second Midstokke. The motion carried unanimously. 6. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND PARKING PLAN AMENDMENT FOR ON -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL IN CONJUNCTION WITH BILLIARDS, FOOD SERVICE, AND RETAIL SALES AT 1605 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 20, 1991. Supplemental information from the applicant, Sal Gagliano, of "On the Break"; and, letter from Edie Web- ber, .dated May 28, 1991. Director Schubach presented the staff report and re- sponded to Council questions. The public hearing was opened at 8:47 P.M. Coming forward to address the Council on this matter and speak in favor of the ap- peal were: Jack Wood - 200 Pier Avenue, #38, speaking for the applicant, Sal Gagliano, urged the Council to approve the appeal, with whatever conditions deemed necessary, and give the business a chance to prove itself; Richard Sullivan - Hermosa Beach, no address given, in favor of the appeal; Jett Mora - managing partner of the Pavilion, urged the Council to approve the appeal; Bill MacAlpin - publisher of the Hermosa Beach "Sun", urged approval of the appeal; Jerry Newton - 2041 Circle Drive, in favor of the City Council Minutes 05-28-91 Page 7466 appeal; Steve Kahn - 1138 Sunset, in favor of the appeal; David Lee - of "Mrs. Gracias", urged the Council to approve the appeal and thereby support the businesses at the Pavilion; Randy Dillon - Of "Picasso's", urged approval of the appeal; Norman C. Metzger - 519 Beach Drive, stated that noise emanating from the Pavilion would go in the direction of the Highway and not to the sides of the building; Edward Floyd - in charge of security at the Pavilion, felt there would not be a problem with security or loitering; Wesley Bush - Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce, urged approval of the appeal in order to in- crease the City tax revenue. Coming forward to speak in opposition of the appeal were: Kim Dax - 1600 Ardmore Avenue, #202, of the "Commo- dore Homeowners Association", urged denial of the appeal; Gordon Gray - 1707 Pacific Coast Hwy., #126, op- posed to the appeal; Sam Edgerton - 1118 Second Street, opposed to the appeal; Kenneth Clayton - 1707 Pacific Coast Hwy., opposed to the appeal; Robert Allen - 1600 Ardmore Avenue, #231, opposed to the appeal; Victor Pinsker - 1600 Ardmore Avenue, #128, opposed to the appeal; Charles Stevens - 1701 Pacific Coast Highway, op- posed to the appeal; Cynthia Fleischer - 1600 Ardmore Avenue, #419, op- posed to the appeal; Shirley Cassell - 600 Monterey Blvd., opposed to the appeal; Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street, cited possible problems with parking, security and hours for opposition to the appeal; Jim Lissner - 2715 El Oeste Drive, submitted a newspaper article; opposed to the appeal. The public hearing was closed at 9:58 P.M. Action: To deny the appeal, uphold the decision of the Planning Commission, and adopt Resolution No. 91-5450, entitled, 'IA RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUSTAINING THE PLANNING COMMISSIONS DECISION TO DENY A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND PARKING PLAN AMENDMENT FOR ON -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL IN CONJUNCTION WITH BILLIARDS, FOOD SERVICE, AND RETAIL SALES AT 1605 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, SUITES 116 THROUGH City Council Minutes 05-28-91 Page 7467 119, AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS PORTIONS OF LOTS 13 AND 14, BLOCK 81, SECOND ADDITION TO HERMOSA BEACH TRACT." Motion Wiemans, second Midstokke. The motion carried with Mayor Sheldon dissenting. The meeting recessed at 10:07 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 10:22 P.M. MUNICIPAL MATTERS 7. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY P.M. PARKING REMOVAL LANGUAGE CLARIFICATION OF RESOLUTION 91-5434. Memorandum from Public Works Director Anthony Antich dated May 20, 1991. Director Antich presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Action: To receive and file, with the understanding that the benchmarks are still in force and can be re- turned to CalTrans in the previous Resolution. Motion Midstokke, second Essertier. The motion carried with Wiemans and Mayor Sheldon dissenting. Further Action: To send the previous Resolution No. 91- 5434, including benchmarks, to CalTrans for signature, making minor revisions of a non substantive nature, to use "No Stopping" in place of "No Parking", and includ- ing "Sepulveda" for those portions of Pacific Coast Highway that also face on Manhattan Beach, wherever necessary. Motion Mayor Sheldon, second Creighton. The motion car- ried with Midstokke and Essertier dissenting. 8. AWARD OF AGREEMENT TO KPMG PEAT MARWICK FOR COMPUTER CONSULTANT SERVICES. Memorandum from General Services Department dated May 16, 1991. City Manager Northcraft presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Coming forward to address the Council on this matter was: Kenneth Benson - representing KPMG Peat Marwick, who responded to Council questions. Action: To receive and file. Motion Essertier, second Midstokke. The motion carried with Mayor Sheldon dissenting. 9. RECOMMENDATION TO SUPPORT A SENIOR HOUSING COMPONENT ON SOUTH BAY HOSPITAL DISTRICT ST. MICHAEL'S PROPERTY. Memorandum from City Manager Kevin B. Northcraft dated May 22, 1991. City Council Minutes 05-28-91 Page 7468 City Manager Northcraft presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Coming forward to address the Council on this matter was: Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street, opposed to Coun- cil support of this matter. Action: To receive and file. Motion Wiemans, second Essertier. The motion carried with Mayor Sheldon dissenting. 10. REPORT ON 1991-92 BUDGET REVISIONS AND TIMETABLE. Memo- randum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated May 20, 1991. 11. Director Copeland presented the staff report and re- sponded to Council questions. Action: To receive and file. Motion Essertier, second Creighton. The motion carried unanimously. MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE ASSESSMENT TATION/AIR QUALITY RELATED ACTIVITIES OF MENT (ASSEMBLY BILL 2766), with Ordinance tion. Memorandum from Planning Schubach dated May 21, 1991. FOR TRANSPOR- LOCAL GOVERN - for introduc- Director Michael Director Schubach presented the staff report and sponded to Council questions. Action: To introduce Ordinance No. 91-1054. Motion Essertier, second Creighton. The motion with Midstokke and Wiemans dissenting. Final Action: To waive full reading of Ordinance No. 91-1054, entitled, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING MOBILE SOURCE AIR POLLUTION REDUCTION ORDINANCE." Motion Creighton, second Mayor Sheldon. re - carried AYES: Creighton, Essertier, Midstokke, Wiemans, and Mayor Sheldon NOES: None 12. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER City Manager Northcraft reported: 1) the award for excellence for the Finance Department should arrive soon; 2) recycling will begin June 3, 1991; 3) employee's picnic will be this Saturday, June 1, at 11:00 A.M. in Valley Park; City Council Minutes 05-28-91 Page 7469 4) June 6, 1991, at 6:00 P.M. there will be a rib- bon cutting ceremony for the new basketball courts at Clark Stadium; and, 5) a tentative accord had been reached with the Police Officer's Association which will be presented at the meeting of June 11, 1991. 14. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL (a) 1 Proposed agenda topics for June 6, 1991 joint meeting between City Council and Planning Commission. Memoran- dum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 22, 1991. Director Schubach listed the topics to be placed on the meeting agenda as: 1) RUDAT; 2) Greenbelt Parking; 3) Downtown business parking; 4) Pacific Coast Highway parking; 5) Nonconforming Ordinance; 6) "Liveability Ordinance": to be defined prior to the joint meeting. Action: To add the topic of planning versus policy: a definition of the role of the Council and of the Plan- ning Commission. Motion Midstokke, second Wiemans. The motion carried with Mayor Sheldon dissenting. (b) Vacancy - Board of Appeals - One vacancy Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated May 21, 1991, with attached recommendation from Building and Safety Director William Grove dated May 20, 1991. Proposed Action: To appoint Peter Van Wickler. Motion Wiemans. The motion died due to the lack of a second. Action: To appoint Larry Peha to the Board of Appeals. Motion Midstokke, second Mayor Sheldon. The motion car- ried unanimously. (c) Vacancies - Other Boards and Commissions Board of Parking Place Commissioners - one term ending July 27, 1991. Civil Service Board - two terms ending July 15, 1991. Parks, Recreation & Community Resources Advisory Commission - two terms ending June 30, 1991. City Council Minutes 05-28-91 Page 7470 Planning Commission - two terms ending June 30, 1991. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated May 22, 1991. Action: To direct the City Clerk to advertise for ap- plicants for the Board of Parking Place Commissioners; the Civil Service Board; and the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Commission; with the applications coming back to the Council for appointment. And, to advertise for applicants for the Planning Commission and set a time for the Council to interview the applicants. Motion Mayor Sheldon, second Creighton. The motion car- ried unanimously. Further Action: To direct staff to return with an Or- dinance to clarify the ambiguity over consecutive term limits by defining the amount of time, of an unexpired term, that should count as a whole term (as defined for the Presidency), and the length of time that must elapse before a former Commissioner becomes eligible for reap- pointment. So directed by Mayor Sheldon with the con- currance of the Council. Coming forward at this time to address the Council was: Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place, stated that Commissioner Peirce should be replaced as he was over the eight year limit and that the word "con- secutive" was not in the Ordinance. 15. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL - None. CITIZEN COMMENTS Coming forward to address the Council at this time were: Shirley Cassell - 611 Monterey Blvd., again questioned the signage on the public pass through at Loreto Plaza and the tax consequence of membership payments for employees by the City; and, Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place, expressed concerns regarding any agreement with CalTrans; the permit for the proposed Strand Hotel; the public hearing before the Planning Commission for the proposed ballot measures; and who had decided on "sand" as a color condition for the Strand Hotel. Wilma Goin - 2001 Pacific Coast Highway, thanked Councilmembers for "standing up to CalTrans" and asked the City to purchase the St. Michael's property for parking. City Council Minutes 05-28-91 Page 7471 ADJOURNMENT TO JOINT MEETING WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AT 7:00 P.M., JUNE 6, 1991. The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, adjourned on Wednesday May 29, 1991, at the hour of 12:09 A.M., to a Joint Meeting with the Planning Commis- sion to be held on Thursday, June 06, 1991, at the hour of 7:00 P.M. i Deputy City Clerk City Council Minutes 05-28-91 Page 7472 N CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ..'-----FiNANCEL-SF040 DEMAND LIST PAGE 0061-1) '5 TIME 10:07:04 FOR 05/30/91 DATE 05/30/91 '',I j PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHR # 1 ! - , , 1 1 DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 1:1 L ,..... 1 • R A & E TROPHIES 02744 001-400-4601-4308 00525 $83.46 9955 00052 37018 r4. MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 995505/22/91 COMM RESOURCES /PROGRAM MATERIALS $0.00 _. 05/29/91 • r'‘) , • *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $83.46 B ACCOUNTANTS OVERLOAD / 04045 001-400-1202-4201 00260 $1,114.35 • 329124/25/605 01181 37019 ACCOUNTING SERV/VACANCY 5/605 05/28/91 FINANCE ADMIN /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/30/91 _ _ .... *** VENDOR TOTAL $1. 114. 35 R ACTION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS 0404B 001-400-2101-4313 00348 $104.00 01294 37020 TUITION/J. CARUSO • 05/22/91 t POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE, STC $0.00 05/29/91 *** VENDOR TOTAL. ******************************************************************** $104. 00 1:3! 13t -I t..... R ADVANCE ELEVATOR 00003 001-400-4204-4201 00443 $80:00 26758 00003 37021 ELEVATOR MAINT/MAY 91 26758 05/01/91 BLDG MAINT /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/29/91 - ..._ 41. *** VENDOR TOTAL $80. 00 AMERICAN INSURANCE SERV GROUP 03409 705-400-1209-4201 00195 $500.00 61991167 01367 37022 AD RENEW SUBSCRIPTION 91167 05/07/91 LIABILITY INS /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/29/91 *** VENDOR TOTAL $500. 00 R AMERICAN STYLE FOODS 00857 001-400-2101-4306 00983 $130.50 00056 37023 MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 05/28/91 POLICE _ /PRISONER MAINTENANCE $0.00 05/29/91 *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $130.50 j R APOLLO LEASING COMPANY LTD 02558 001-400-3104-6900 00069 $841.29 00066 37024 LEASE PAYMENT/JUNE 91 05/29/91 TRAFFIC SAFETY /LEASE PAYMENTS $0.00 05/29/91 1 , . . ..!.; *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $641.29 ,R AT I T 03423 001-400-2101-4304 00805 $5.34 00056 37025 MOBILE PHONE L/D-MAY 91 05/28/91 POLICE • /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/29/91 . . led 0 ! - FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 10:07:04 7,Y VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 05/30/91 VND 4 - ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # - AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION INV/REF *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $5. 34 * * * *** 6R BUSINESS SYSTEMS SUPPLY 00034 001-400-1208-4305 00910 *106.72 FAX PAPER 75161 05/06/91 GEN APPROP /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES R DERIAN PRINTING SERVICE, INSP/CORRECTION FORMS BERIAN PRINTING SERVICE, BUS CARDS/CONKLIN/ANTICH INC. 2080 02664 001-400-4201-4305 00664 $186.18 05/02/91 BUILDING /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES . _ INC. 02664 001-400-4202-4305 00582 2093-.05/06/91 PUB WKS ADMIN /OFFICE _. VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** BLICKMAN, INC. THEATRE TECH/5-14 TO 15 $85. 60 OPER SUPPLIES $271.78 ) PAGE 0002 [\, DATE 05/30/91 j • PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP ) 1-; • ! 2080 00688 37026 $186. 18 05/29/91 • ... • 03092 001-400-4601-4201 00845 $126.00 05/16/91_ COMM RESOURCES /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT . . _ .. . 2093 02037 37026 $127.80' ' 05/29/91 , J J 01885 37027 ! J $0.00 05/29/91 r kd THEATRE TECH/5-17 TO 18 05/21/91 COMM RESOURCES /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/29/91 1,1 BUCK1AN, INC. 03092 001-400-4601-4201 00846 $196.00 01888 37027 VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $322.00 L) _ R. BEN SPORTS , 03999 001-400-6101-4309 01069 $733.59 0039532 02082 37028 ! LI: 0; . VOLLEYBALL NETS/P.W. 39532 05/02/91 PARKS /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $733.59 05/29/91 VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $733. 59 • I f 1 1 !.•,1 'I *** VENDOR TOTAL *************************4****************************************** $106. 72 9 175161 09045 37029 V $106. 72 '05/29/91 • JEANNE*CARUSO 03293 001-400-2101-4313 00349 $244.25 01293 37030 '; 4 MEALS/HOTEL/POST CLASS 05/22/91 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE, STC $0.00 05/29/91 *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** • CENTER FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE TUITION/W. MOORE $244. 25 ' I • i 02000 001-400-2101-4312 01712 $303.00 01292 37031 J (:)5/22/91 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE POST $0.00 05/29/91 *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** • CENTINELA SO. SAY VISA APRIL CHGS/BLACKWOOD $303,00 J • 03353 705-400-1209-4324 00179 $2.13 01366 37032 0 04/30/91 LIABILITY INS /CLAIMS/SETTLEMENTS $0.00 05/29/91 I • 1 FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 10:07:04 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 05/30/91 VENUOR NAME-- - VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN 4 ----AMOUNT, DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PRO,/ It ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION • CENTINELA SO. BAY VISA APRIL CHGS/BLACKWOOD VENDOR TOTAL INV/REF. AMOUNT • .._ . ... 03353 705-400-1217-4201 00106 $26.18 04/30/91 WORKERS COMP /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $28. 31 R COAST GLASS COMPANY 00325 001-400-4204-4309 01992 $56.92 MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 7786 05/28/91 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** vEN1)0R TOTAL ******************************************************************** R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-2101-4304 LONG DIST POLICE/MAY 91 77379 05/17/91 POLICE $56. 92 00804 $5. 55 /TELEPHONE *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** R CONNECTING POINT LEASING 03617 MACINTOSH PMT/MAY 91 90220 05/07/91 • CONNECTING POINT LEASING 03617 MACINTOSH PMT/MAY 91 90220 05/07/91 - • • CONNECTING POINT LEASING MACINTOSH PMT/MAY 91 90220 _ . $5. 55 7786 PAGE doo...j DATE 05/30/91 CHK # PO 9 UNENC DATE EXP 01368 ' 37032 $0. 00 05/29/91 00515 37.633 $0. 00 05/29/91 477379 00517 37034 $0. 00 05/29/91 00051 37035 $0.00 05/30/91 001-400-2101-4201 00784 $483.93 2890220 POLICE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT . _ 001-400-2201-4201 00220 $157.55 2890220 FIRE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT 03617 001-400-2701-4201 00021 $326.36 2890220 05/07/91 CIVIL DEFENSE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT R CONNECTING POINT LEASING 03617 MACINTOSH PMT/MAY 91 90220 05/07/91 *** VENDOR TOTAL • • OA 1 - , dt, • 00051 37035 OA $0.00 05/30/91 00051 37035 411P/ $0.00 05/30/91 170-400--2103-4201 00087 $157.55 2890220 00051 37035 SPEC INVESTGTNS /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/30/91 , ******************************************************************** $1, 125. 39 R DANIEL FREEMAN LAX MED. CLINIC I 02390I, 001-400-1203-4320 00368 $441.00 01369 37036 EMPLOYMENT PHYSICALS/MAR 03/31/91 PERSONNEL /PRE-EMPLOYMENT EXAMS $0.00 05/29/91 . ...i. R DANIEL FREEMAN LAX MED. CLINIC 02390 001-400-1203-4320 00369 $923.00 001291-00 01365 37036 EMPLOYMENT EXAMS/APR 91 91-00 05/07/91 PERSONNEL /PRE-EMPLOYMENT EXAMS $0.00 05/29/91 • ..i, *** VENDOR TOTAL *********************************************-*********************** R DATA SAFE TAPE STORAGE/5/12-6/11 55773 00156 05/15/91 $1,364.00 001-400-1206-4201 00845 . $156.67 55773 00015 37037 1; r -• DATA PROCESSING_ /CONTRACT. SERVICE/PRIVAT M0.00 05/29/91' !, •?: • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Fzm«mns-orAo«u ----'---'-------------'-- DEMAND LIST --- ------ -----'-- —- PAGE — uoo^—i� : TIME 10:07`04 FOR 05/30/91 DATE 05/30/91J VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN 8 - Anouwr- INV/REF PO v CHK # i DESCRIPTION DATE INVC pRoJ w ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP k.|i °°° vswon* rorw- °°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°° $156.67 ^ | .0 | '1 � R DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL CARE u 00154 001-400-2401-4251 00157 *426.66 uoo�� o�000 |,,|v SHELTER COSTS/APRIL 91 05/10/91 ANIMAL CONTROL /CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT *o.00 05/29/91 .'/ ---'------- --'' R DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION 00269 001-400-2101-4201 00783 $806.40 268627591 00006 37039 J COMP EQUIP 91 91 91 CT ---' ------' ------ ----' - -' - -- - '-- R DIGITAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION 00269 001-400-2201-4201 00219 *537.60 26e627591 00269 37039 CORP EQUIP m^znr/mAv 91 2759/ . 05/13/9/ FIRE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/29/91 *°* VENDOR TOTAL **********-g-********************************************************* *1.344.00 / |,1 [|/ .,. R EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY 02840 001-400-1208-4201 00760 *197:86 006M56680 00426 3704n 'I). IBM METER USE/MAR 91 56480 05/05/91 GEN APPROP /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00- 05/29r91 .� . R EASTMAN KODAK COMPANY 02840 001-400-1208-4201 00761 $269. 00 006m566e0 00426 37040 / 410 IBM COPIER MAINT/APR 91 56680 05/05/91 GEN APPROP /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *o.00 05/29/91 ' , v v** VENDOR TOTAL °***°***°***************°*°*°*°*****°°**°°*°°*°°°*°°°*************** V '• �.-. $466.86 0 R vIpGIwIA*sLLEnos 03797 001-400-2101-4316 00749 $31.20 TR375 0e416 37041 .' 0 MILEAGE/TRAINING CONF. rn375 05/16/91 POLICE /TRAINING $0.00 05/29/91 '� °°° vswoon TOTAL *°°***°*°°*°*****°****°**°°*°*°*°*°°°°°°**°°°°°**°*°°°°°°*°°°*°°°°°* *nx.uo ,?, : 1 R EX INDIGO 0*050 001-300-0000-3406 00376 *391.00 1e833 01e81 37042 ..''� REFUND THEATRE RENTAL 1e�oo 05/14/91 /COMM CTR THEATRE *o.no 05/29/91 ---- ---_-_- ` °°° vcwonn roIAL *opx.ou e EXECUTIVE -SUITE SERVICES Imo.01294 001-400-4204-4201 00442 *1.00��no 1178-060/91-54 000�p nrn�� JANITOR SERVICE/APR 91 91-54 .%04/30/91 BLDG MAINT /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/29/91 **° vsNoon rorAL °°°° °°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°° 81,325.00 -'.1•• C.; n GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-1101-4304 00369 *8.02 00531 37045 (..� TELE o*oa/nAvp1__�______________ 05*0/91 ____ CITY COUNCIL /TELEPHONE *o.o»__ 05,29/91 {'1 '0 , . 1' FINANCE-SFA140 ----- TIME 10:07:04 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION • GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELE CHGS/MAY 91 • GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELE CHGS/MAY 91 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELE CHGS/MAY 91 • GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELE CHGS/MAY 91 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELE CHGS/MAY 91 • GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELE CHGS/MAY 91 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 05/30/91 VND4- ---ACCOUNTNUMBER TRN -.AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ it ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION INV/REF • 0001 5 001-400-1121-4304 00393 05/30/91 CITY CLERK 00015 001-400-1131-4304 00293 05/30/91 CITY ATTORNEY 00015 001-400-1141-4304 00417 05/30/91 CITY TREASURER 00015 001-400-1201-4304 00443 05/30/91 CITY MANAGER 00015 001-400-1202-4304 00455 05/30/91 FINANCE ADMIN.._ 00015 001-400-1203-4304 00459 05/30/91 PERSONNEL • GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELE CHGS/MAY 91 • GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELE CHGS/MAY 91 • GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELE CHGS/MAY 91 • GTE 'TELE R GTE TELE 00015 001-400-1206-4304 00342 05/30/91 DATA PROCESSING 00015 001-400-1207-4304 00277 05/30/91 BUS LICENSE 00015 001-400-1208-4304 00129 05/30/91 GEN APPROP CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-2101-4304 00803 CHGS/MAY 91 05/30/91 POLICE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED CHGS/MAY 91 • GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELE CHGS/MAY 91 R GTE TELE • GTE TELE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED CHGS/MAY 91 CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED CHGS/MAY 91 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELE CHGS/MAY 91 • 00015 001-400-2201-4304 05/30/91 FIRE 00015 001-400-2401-4304 05/30/91 ANIMAL 00338 00371 CONTROL 00015 001-400-4101-4304 00458 05/30/91 PLANNING 00015 001-400-4201-4304 00418 05/30/91 BUILDING 00015 001-400-4202-4304 00470 05/30/91 PUB WKS ADMIN $22. 14 /TELEPHONE $11. 46 /TELEPHONE $29. 21 /TELEPHONE $19. 42 /TELEPHONE . $74. 99 /TELEPHONE $40. 96 /TELEPHONE $165. 05 /TELEPHONE $26. 38 /TELEPHONE $12. 53 /TELEPHONE $660. 61 /TELEPHONE $11.46 /TELEPHONE $17. 82 /TELEPHONE $77. 69 /TELEPHONE $119.08 /TELEPHONE $269. 22 /TELEPHONE - • - _ • _ PO AMOUNT UNENC PAGE boob - DATE 05/30/91 J, I.; if CHK 4 DATE EXP 00531 37045 $0.00 05/29/91 00531 37045 $0.00 05/29/91 00531 37,045 $0.09 05/29/91 I. I •-1 00531 37040 $0.00 05/29/91 - 1 t: 00531 37045 j.•' $0. 00 00/29/91 1 , r; J, „1" 00531 37045 1 $0.00 05/29/91 00531 37045 05/29/.91 $0.00 00531 37045 $0.00 05/21/91 00531 37045 $0.00 05/29/91 00531 37045 $0. 00 05/29/91 00531 37045 $0.00 05/29/91 0 00531 37045 $0. 00 05/29/91 I- I ,P 00531 37045 !' $0.00 05/29/91 • 00531 37045 $0.00 05/29/91 00531 37045 $0. 00 05/29/91 H • 9, t • FINANCE-SF340 TIME 10:07:04 7f,,Y VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION • GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELE CHGS/MAY 91 GTE TELE H GTE TELE rt CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED CHCS/MAY 91 CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED CHOS/MAY 91 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMANDLIST FOR 05/30/91 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER ' TRN 4 ------ 'AMOUNT DATE INVC PRO.) # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 00015 001-400--4601-4304 00539 05/30/91 COMM RESOURCES 00015 05/30/91 00015 05/30/91 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 TELE CHGS/MAY 91 05/30/91 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELE CHGS/MAY 91 00015 05/30/91 001-400-6101-4304 00328 PARKS 109-400-3301-4304 00021 VEH PKG DIST 110-400-3302-4304 00455 PARKING ENF 145-400-3401-4304 00088 DIAL A RIDE $94. 15 /TELEPHONE $11.46 /TELEPHONE $10. 00 /TELEPHONE $205. 46 /TELEPHONE $4. 16 /TELEPHONE PAGE ---- 0006 DATE 05/30/91 11, 1.• • 00531 37045 INV/REF PO # CHK AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP **4 VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $1, 891. 27 HARBOR CITY ENTERPRISES, INC. MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 24923 03571 001-400-2101-4311 03/19/91 POLICE 01155 $299.56 /AUTO MAINTENANCE • VENDOR 101 AL. ******************************************************************** • HERMOSA ANIMAL HOSPITAL MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 22-00 00322 001-400-2401-4201 00290 05/28/91 ANIMAL CONTROL $299. 56 • $0.00 05/29/91 00531 37045 $0.00 05/29/91 00531 $0. Cd A 37,b45 05/29/91 00531 37045 $0. 00 05/29/91 00531 37045 $0.00 05/29/91 24923 00576 37046 $0. 00 05/29/91 $70. 00 5322-00 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** • HERMOSA CAR WASH MISC. CHARGES/APRIL 91 R HERMOSA CAR WASH MISC. CHARGES/APRIL 91 R HERMOSA CAR WASH MISC. CHARGES/APRIL 91 • HERMOSA CAR WASH MISC. CHARGES/APRIL 91 R HERMOSA CAR WASH MISC. CHARGES/APRIL 91 00065 001-400-1207-4311 00052 1043 04/30/91 ' BUS LICENSE 00065 001-400-2101-4311 01156 1043 04/30/91 POLICE 00065 001-400-4201-4311 00241 1043 04/30/91 BUILDING _ . 00065 001-400-4202-4311 00174 1043 04/30/91 PUB WKS ADMIN 00065 110-400-3302-4311 00696 1043 04/30/91 PARKING ENF • • • . •^ - • . $70. 00 $4. 00 /AUTO MAINTENANCE $104. 00 /AUTO MAINTENANCE _ ..... . _ J 00535 37047 $0.00 05/29/91 , 1043 00436 37048 10.00 05/29/91 1043 00436 37048 $0.00 05/29/91 $12.00 /AUTO MAINTENANCE $8. 00 /AUTO MAINTENANCE $4. 00 /AUTO MAINTENANCE 1043 00436 37048 $0.00 05/29/91 1043 00436 37048 $0.00 05/29/91 • J 'J, 1043 00436 37048 *0. 00 05/29/91 • i 111 "2; • 1 • 8- ! • I ; he; *888i,' I. PINANCE-SFA340 I I ME 10. OT: 04 VE,NUOR NAME DESCRIPTION J' CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FOR 03/30/91 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN 4 - —AMOUNT' DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** INV/REF PO $132. 00 KATHLEEN*LEACHMAN 01409 001-400-4601-4302 00149 $080.00 TYPESET SUMMER BROCHURE 05/15/91 COMM RESOURCES /ADVERTISING -!** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $580. 00 LIEDERT, CASSIDY & FRIERSON 02175 001-400-1203-4201 00766 $4,321.00 LEGAL SERV/MAR 91 04/24/91 PERSONNEL /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VEN81OR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $4,321.00 PAGE 0007 DATE 05/30/91 ft CHKft AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 01813 $617. 70 37049 05/29/91 01363 37050 $0.00 05/29/91 R MANGUETTE LEASE SERVICES, INC. 02272 001-400-2101-6900 00569 $1,072.55 00059 LEAIM PMT/JUNE 91 05/28/91 POLICE /LEASE PAYMENTS $0.00 - ,-. *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** * $1,072.55 R UALLACE*MOORF MEALS/P.O.S.T. CLASS 00516 001-400-2101-4312 05/22/91 POLICE J 0 '..• j 37051 J 05/29/91 I.., 01713 $24.00 01291 37052 ; , • /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST $0.00 05/29/91 *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $24. 00 HT; , I • MORTON INTERNATIONAL, INC. 00251 001-400-3104-4309 00680 $1,802.95 51458/51649 02071 37053 STREET PAINT 51649 05/14/91 TRAFFIC SAFETY /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $1,802.95 05/29/91 1,-! *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** 8"? PENMAR ENTERPRISES DISCOUNT OFFERED 20353 $1, 802. 95 01768 001-202-0000-2021 00008 $7.70 20353 02507 37054 05/22/91 DISCOUNTS OFFERED $0.00 05/29/91 PENMAR ENTERPRISES 01768 DISCOUNT TAKEN 20353 05/22/91 . _ . . • PENMAR ENTERPRISES 01768 TRASH LINERS/PARK TRASH 20353 % 05/22/91 *** VENDOR 001-202-0000-2022 00008 $7.70CR /DISCOUNTS TAKEN 001-400-6101-4309 PARKS 20353 02507 37054 $0.00 05/29/91 01070 $762.70 20353 02507 /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $770 40 TOTAL ******************************************************************** • RADIO SHACK 6'1 MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 101 $762. 70 01429 0011400-1206-4309 00164 $15.87 00555 05/28/91 DATA PROCESSING /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 37054 05/29/91 I -I (11 • I 37055 05/29/91 . _ _ r. . R CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE,-SFA340 DEMAND -LIST TIME 10:07:04 FAY VENDOR NAME -" DESCRIPTION FOR 05/30/91 0 VND`# ..-. ACCOUNT NUMBER -TRN # - -.._-AMOUNT . INV/REF DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION • P, RADIO SHACK MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 R RADIO SHACK MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 R RADIO SHACK MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 R R RADIO SHACK • MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 R RADIO SHACK MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 01429 05/28/91 001-400-2101-4305 POLICE 01522 $30.71 /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 01429 001-400-2101-4311 01154 $5.72 05/28/91 POLICE /AUTO MAINTENANCE 01429 001-400-2201-4309 01085 $6.28 05/28/91 FIRE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 01429 05/28/91 J PAGE 0008 T'1 DATE 05/30/91 PO # CHK #- - AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 00555 37055 $0.00 05/29/91 00555 37055 $0.00 05/29/91 00555 37'055 $0.00 05%29/91 001-400-4204-4309 01993 $9.46 00555 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 V 4, .9 4�t RADIO SHACK MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 01429 001-400-4204-4311 00186 $21.21 05/28/91 BLDG MAINT /AUTO MAINTENANCE 01429 05/28/91 001-400-4205-4309 00561 $65.09 EQUIP SERVICE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS RADIO SHACK MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 01429 105-400-2601-4309 00713 $31.20CR 05/28/91 STREET LIGHTING /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL*******************************u****************•*tat************u**** $123. 14 R CITY OF*REDONDO BEACH FAREBOX RECOVERY/JAN-MAR 01763 145-300-0000-3854 00056 $2,372.54CR 05/16/91 /FARES, DIAL A RIDE R CITY OF*REDONDO.DEACH 01763 145-400-3401-4201 00192 $37,964.84 WAVE SERVICES/JAN-MAR 91 05/16/91 SHUTTLE/DIAL /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL********************at***********at*****atit********at*************frit**** JANET M. *ROBB PARKING PERMIT REFUND 10700 *** VENDOR TOTAL *35,592.30 04051 110-300-0000-3843 13337 $25.00 05/06/91 P, SO CALIF RAPID TRANSIT DISTR. BUS PASS SALES/APR 91 /PARKING PERMITS:ANNUAL $25.00 00843 145-400-3403-4251 00100 $1,432.00 55328 ', 05/14/91 BUS PASS SUBSDY /CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R SOUTH BAY NOTICING AND NOTICE SERV/THRU 5-17-91 51691 *1,432.00 37055 05/29/91 00555 37055 $0. 00 05/29/91 • 00555 37055 $0.00 05/29/91 I„ 00555 37055 ;; J $0.00 05/29/91 11'",! d 01917 37056 $0.00 05/29/91 i:,! 01917 37056 $0. 00 05/29/91 1710700 01658 37057 03882 • 001-400-4101-4201 00090 $115.00 05/16/91 PLANNING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT •J $0.00 $0.00 05/29/91 ! `I -J 55328 01653 37058 4c. ✓J $0.00 05/29/91 1 051691 00578 37059 '' f1 ;,1 $0.00 05/30/91 0 . \ . *** vEwoon TOTAL °°°°°°°°°°°*°°°°°°°°°°°*°°°°°*°°°*°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°° PAY VENDOR NAME osacnzprIow CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 05/30/91 � PAGE 0009 I' DATE 05r30/91 |� vwol1- ACCOUNT NUMBER rRN 4—'— —INV/REF. -PO fit DATE INVC PROJ ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC *** VENDOR TOTAL °* � SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL CO. 03997 001-141-0000-1401 UNLEADED GAS/CITY YARD 42941 05/10/91 ----_'_--_-_- n SOUTHERN COUNTIES OIL'CO. 03997 00/-141-0000-1401 REGULAR/DIESEL/CITY YARD 42942 ' 05/10/91 00133 $3,064 .02 142941 02099 /GASOLINE INVENTORY *o.00 00134 $2,042.m /GASOLINE INVENTORY CHK # e DATE EXP r i� w» ... ., 37060 �� 05/29/91 |� 1429*2 0e100 31060 *o.00 05/30/91 ./ ~^ '. 1:;:n .� n STATE OF CALIFORNIA 00364 001-400-2101-4251 00372 *162.00 893854 00023 37061 [| . '^'~ FINGERPRINT �GS/APR9193a54_--_-_»5/10/91-_--- ---_.POLICE /CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT �pn.»o o�/z�!�z �� /-/ '^ TODD PIPE & SUPPLY DISCOUNT OFFERED TODD PIPE & SUPPLY oIsoouwr TAKEN 00124 001 -202-0000-2021 00007 $6.23 05/28/91 DISCOUNTS OFFERED 00124 001-202-0000-2022 00007 *6.23cn 05/e8/91 /DISCOUNTS TAKEN TODD PIPE & SUPPLY 0012* . 001-400-3103-4309 01166 MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 05/28/91 ST MAINTENANCE ,",° PIPE & ,P"., ' '~~~ ~~'^' �. MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91, '--- UNI-COM SUPPLY WIRE/COMM CTR ALARM onar 6868 -!~ $87.45 /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 00124 001-400-6101-4309 0106e *217.46 05/28/91 PARKS /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS °°° VENDOR TOTAL °°°°°°°°*°°*°*°°°°°°°*°°°°°°°°°*°*°°°°°°°°°°°°°°*°*°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°° *oo4.91 � 00568 37062 /=„A, *n,no 05/29/91._. II/ n/2p/p1./ 0056 37062 *o.00 05/29,91 |~ 00568 37062 $0.00 05/29/91 '.. 00568 37062 is,' ` . .� ° -,. , 03861 305-400-8615-4309 00010 *93.82 6868 02096 370e 05/09/91 CIP 89-615 /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS �pa.8a 05/29/91 _ °°* VENDOR TOTAL *°°********°°**°******°******°****°*°°°*°°°***°*°°°°**°°°°°°°°°°°°°° PLAN CHECK FEE REFUND 393.82 04049 001 -300-0000-3813 01108 *1.312.84 18792 `` 05r16/91 /PLAN CHECK FEES *°° VENDOR TOTAL *°***************°********°°°*****°*°°°°°°**°*°°°*°°°***°*°°***°*°°° = XEROX CORPORATION ••• COPIER INT—91 - cm1oo 0011400-1208-4201 00762 34246 05/06/91 GEN APPROP *1.o1u.n« —'- 18792 0220 37064 � �o.00 05/29/91 k:---_---._' _ _'_--___'. ----~—'- -'-- $o67.a2 028834246 00007 37065 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/29/91 � �| • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND -LIST LIME 10:07:04 FOR 05/30/91 11 PAY VENDOR NAME VND ACCOUNTNUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION •• R R INV/REF XEROX CORPORATION MAINT/FEB-APRIL 91 79548 00135 001-400-2401-4201 05/03/91 ANIMAL . . XEROX CORPORATION 00135 MAINT/FEB-APRIL 91 79549 05/03/91 XEROX CORPORATION . 00135 MAINT/FEB-APRIL 91 79548 05/03/91 00291 CONTROL 001-400-4601-4201 00847 • COMM RESOURCES 110-400-3302-4201 00277 PARKING ENF AMOUNT 384.15 028779548 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT _ PAGE 00107 DATE 05/30/91 PO# CHK # UNENC DATE EXP 00024 37065 30.00 05/29/91 3255.00 028779549 00025 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT 30.00 3170.85 028779548 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** *** PAY CODE TOTAL ****************************************************************** *** TuTAL WARRANTS ****************************************************************** *877. 62 367,662.59 367,662.59 00024, , 30.00 7 • !,, • 37065 I 05/29/91 37065 05/29/91_ k , I I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE DEMANDS OR CLAIMS COVERED BY • THE WARRANTS LISTED ON PAGES T01_ INCLUSIVE, OF THE '!71 1„ WARRANT REGISTER FOR ARE ACCURATE, 4r FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE FOR PAYI:11ENT, AND ARE IN CONFORMANCE 110 TO T :UDGET. • 41 8Y FI ANCE DIRECTO DATE `6139/9 I I. 4 CI 4 FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 09: 57:10 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 06/06/91 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION PAGE 0001 DATE 06/06/91 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # . AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP R B.D. WHITE TOPSOIL CO. 04000 001-202-0000-2021 DISCOUNT OFFERED"--------" 379I0--_"-05/31791 R B.D. WHITE TOPSOIL CO. DISCOUNT TAKEN ' ' .'. -37910.- B.D. """37910.-.._B.D. WHITE TOPSOIL CO. 04000 001-400-6101-4309 01075 - TOPSOIL/VALLEY PARK ---37910--------05/31/91--- -. - ' --- PARKS 04000 05/31/91- 00014 $32.27 37910 02052 37071 uISCOUNTS-OFFERED $0.00 06/05/91 001-202-0000-2022 00014 332.27CR 37910 02052 �---------�. /DISCOUNTS -TAKEN----.---- • .. $0.00 .. 37071 06/03/91- $1,581.29 6/05/91 $1,581.29 37910 02052 37071 /MAINTENANCE -MATERIALS--- -- $1.613.56-- 06/05/91-- i+ 19 J *** VENDOR TOTAL*******************•**************•*********************************** $1.581.29 ' R BEACH FRONT PRINTING 04046 001-400-4202-4305 00586 $99.20 WORK ORDER'FORMS - -"554--- --05/15/91- - - - "PUB WKS-ADMIN-70FFICE-DPER"SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R JOHN*BENKERT ----ANIMAL-TRAP-REFUND • 13599 04058 001-210-0000-2110 -05130791-- $99.20 0573079 $99.20 21 zz 554 02504 37072 $99. 20 --- 06/05/91-- 27 04274 $50.00 13599 02322 37073 -7DEPOSITS/W0RK-DUARANTEE- --$0.00-06/05/91- *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $50.00 R . BISHOP MONTGOMERY HIGH SCHOOL' - - DAMAGE-DEPOSIT--REFUND-----14749: R BISHOP MONTGOMERY HIGH • DAMAGE DEPOSIT REFUND - 01988 001-210-0000-2110 05/3079i- 04272 $500.00 14749 02319 37074 /DEPOSITS/WORK-GUARANTEE- -,- $0 0006/05/91 SCHOOL ` 01988 001-210-0000-2110 04273 --16546------05/30/91- 30 35 32 33 34 15 35 37 373 41 4? 43 $500.00 16346 02320 37074 44 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE $0.00_06/05/91 46 4l 4e 4') ,-0 5, fz 5.1 Si 56 sr A 00055 37076 $0. 00- --06/05/91- *** 06/05/91- *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1. 000. 00 R BLICKMAN. INC. 03092 001-400-4601-4201 00857 $119.00 01887 37075 THEATRE TECH/5-18-91 - 05/21/91 -COMM RESOURCES`7CONTRACT-SERVICE1PRIVAT-.._---._-...., $0:00-- 06/05/91 -- *** 6/05/91 -. *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA -- CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91---- BLUE 1-.- BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA CITY HEALTH -INV -JUNE 91 $119.00 01308 001-400-1212-4188 02075 $66.19 06/03/91___ EMP DENEFITS----7EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 01308 06/03/91 109-400-3301-4188 00130 VEH PKG-DIST $2.77 /EMPLOYEE -BENEFITS 00055 37076 $0.00 06/05791 .r f J 1 • 1 FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 09:57:10 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R BLUE SHIELD CITY HEALTH I R BLUE SHIELD CITY HEALTH I BLUE SHIELD --CITY HEALTH I R BLUE SHIELD -CITY HEALTH I R BLUE SHIELD CITY HEALTH I CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 06/06/91 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION INV/REF OF CALIFORNIA 01308 110-400-3302-4188 01360 $4.16 NS/JUNE 91 "-- 06/03/91 PARKING ENF %EMPLOYEE DENEFITS .... OF CALIFORNIA NS/JUNE 91 OF CALIFORNIA NS/JUNE 91 OF CALIFORNIA 01308 145-400-3401-4188 01109 $0.69 06/03/91 DIAL A RIDE -------/EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 01308 145-400-3402-4188 01113 $0.28 — 06/03/91 ESEA /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 01308 NS/JUNE 91_ - 06/03/91 OF CALIFORNIA_ _ 01308 NS/JUNE 91 .. 06/03/91 155-400-2102-4188 00656 • $0.69 CROSSING—GUARD---/EMPLOYEE BENEFITS -- 160-400-3102-4198 SEWER/ST 01086 $1.07 DRAIN /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R BLUE SHIELD PREFERRED CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 BLUE SHIELD PREFERRED CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 -- R 1— - R BLUE SHIELD PREFERRED CITY HEALTH INS%JUNE 91 BLUE SHIELD PREFERRED CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R BLUE SHIELD PREFERRED CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 01293 06/03/91 01293 06/03/91 $75. 85 PAGE 0002 DATE 06/06/91 PO # CHK # '\ AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 4 001-400-1212-4188 02083 EMP BENEFITS 1.1.0-400-3302-4188 0136.4 PARKING ENF • 01293 145-400-3403-4188 00366 06/03/91 BUS PASS SUBSDY $14,552.46 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $916. 66 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $13. 18 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 01293 170-400-2103-4188 00132 $221.55 06/03/91 SPEC INVESTGTNS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 01293 705-4.00-1217-4188 00451 $118.37 06/03/91 WORKERS COMP /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $15,822.22 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER ----REIMS PETTY CASH/TO 5/30 1 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY REIMS PETTY CASH/TO 02016 001-400-1201-4305 00199 $6.38 05/30/91 CITY MANAGER /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES TREASURER 02016 0.01-400-1202-4316 00366 $22.00 _ 5/30 05/30/91 FINANCE ADMIN /TRAINING R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-1203-4305 00316 REIMS PETTY CASH/TO 5/30 05/30/91 PERSONNEL $1. 83 /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 00055 37076 n $0.00 06/05/91— 7,- 1.3 00055 37076 12 12 $0.00 06/05/91 .i w 00055 37076 $0.00 06/65/91" it iaw 00055 37076 $0.00-- . 06/05/91 iT za 00055 37076 _ j, $0.00 06/05/91 - 00056 37077 $0.00 06/05/91 47 za 3.3 31 34 00056 37077 i5 $0.00 06/05/91_ 37 so 00056 37077 4,3 $0.00 06/05/91 4, 42 00056 37077 s4 $0.00 06/05/91 45 00056 37077 $0.00 06/05/91 01594 37079 $0.00 06/05/91 47 4q 01594 37079 $0.00 06/05/91- 0159437079 37079 $0.00---06T00/—/i. 51 54 56 $7" S,z 463 64 u; 57 77 71 I 75 y J FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 09:57:10 CITY OF HERMOSA DEMAND LIST FOR 06/06/91 BEACH PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER REIMS PETTY CASH/T0'5/30' R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER REIMS PETTY CASH/TO 5/30 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER REIMB PETTY CASH/TO 5/30 GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER REIMS PETTY CASH/TO 5/30 GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER REIMS PETTY-CASH/TO-5/30 _"--."_ VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 02016 001-400-2101-4311 05/30/92-" "" """" - POLICE PAGE 0003 DATE 06/06/91 INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 01162 $3.88 • /AUTO -MAINTENANCE 02016 001-400-2201-4316 00297 $5.00 05/30/91"___" FIRE____"_"___.."_"____-7TRAINING"""_."__ 02016 001-400-2401-4310 00092 $11.34 ----- 05/30/91-- _ _ ANIMAL-CONTROL-7MOTOR` FUELS AND "LUBES' ---- R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER • REIMS PETTY CASH/TO 5/30 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER PETTY-CASH/TO--5/30 R GARY#BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER REIMS PETTY CASH/TO 5/30 -"' R . GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-3103-4309 01168 $27.10 05/30/91 "" ST MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 02016 001-400-3103-4311 00665 $26.75 ST-MAINTENANCE7AUTO-MAINTENANCE 02016 001-400-4201-4305 00667' $0.68 05/30/91 BUILDING"-"--._"-_---7OFFICE-OPER-SUPPLIES 02016 001-400-4202-4305 00587 $2.51 05/30791 PUB WKS -ADMIN /OFFICE -OPER -SUPPLIES 4 6 01594 37079 ; -- $0. $0. 00"" -06/05/91 "7- ,.3 ,4 iG TT y :✓ 01594 37079 $0.00 06/05/91-- 01594 37079 06/05/91-- 01594' 6/05/91-- 01594' 37079 $0.00 _" 06/O5/91 20 01594 37079 :4 $0. 00 _"" 06/05/91"-"" 2.i 01594 37079 `B $0. 00 ' 06/05/91-5- 31 6/05/91"-_-31 `� 01594 37079 02016 001-400-4204-4309 01999 $10.27 05/30/91 - BLDG_ MAINT_-'" 7MAINTENANCE MATERIALS"_""" 02016 109-400-3301-4305 00013 $20.16 REIMS PETTY-"CASHTTO"-5/30 _-- _` '--05/30791 R GARY#BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER REIMS PETTY CASH/TO 5/30 _ R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 'PETTY-CASH/TO-5/30'-" R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER REIMS PETTY CASH/TO 5/30 _VEH PKGDIST-- /DFFTCE-OPER" SUPPLIES 3.2 $0.00- '06/05/91 33 34 01594 37079 35 c.-1036 ------ $0. $0. 00 ____06/05/91 16 02016 110-400-3302-4305 00800 $22.94 ------05/30/91--- "" PARKING-ENF---^-70FFICE OPER SUPPLIES --------- 02016 110-400-3302-4310 00146 $6.22 05/30/9r- ----- PARKING "ENF--7MOTOR FUELS AND- LUBES 02016 110-400-3302-4316 00212 $55.70 05/30/91- _." - "" PARKING ENF �7TRAINING " " *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $222. 76 01594 37079 ;o $0. 00"-06/05/91- 4r 42 43 4, .t6 01594 37079 41 01594 37079 $0.00-06/05/91- $0.00---06/05/91---,U 0.00" .__ 06/05/91._ 3 $0. 00-- 06/05/91-4U A 1 J 01594 37079 $0.00 -06/05/9r- R CA MUNICIPAL BUS TAX ASSN INC. 00382 001-400-1207-4316 00076 $20.00 --SEMINAR SEMINAR REG/M: "FEHSKENS - 05/28/91-- ---. -BUS LICENSE "-7TRAINING-"- *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $20. 00 11074 37080 $0. O0 -06/05/91 R CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE WATER BILLINGS/MAY-91 -------- 00016 001-400-3101-4303 00147 $735.67 -05/30/91- MEDIANS 00510 37081 _.. $0.00 "-"06/05/9I 5.3 58 59 Li 62 (.3 f.4 55 r.3 70 72 73 74 :5 ry J I FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 09:57:10 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 06/06/91 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE WATER BILLINGS/MAY 91 R CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE WATER BILLINGS/MAY 91 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 00016 001-400-4204-4303 00461 05/30/91 BLDG MAINT 00016 001-400-6101-4303 0035.6_ 05/30/9f PARKS $325.12 /UTILITIES - $1, 616. 06_ /UTILITIES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************.************************************************* R CANADA LIFE CITY HEALTH INS%.JUNE-91 R CANADA LIFE CITY HEALTH INS/.JUNE 91 00046 001-400-1212-4188 02078 06/03/91 - EMP BENEFITS PAGE 0004 DATE 06/06/91 INV/REF PO # CHK AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 4 $2,676.85 $696.60 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00046 170-400 -2.103-418.8 00130 $77.40 06/03/91 SPEC INVESTGTNS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS * ** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R " CRAIG*CASNER 00332 WORK GUARANTEE REFUND 95563 05/30/91 001-210-0000-2110 $774.00 00510 37081 $0.00 06/05/91- 00510 37081 $0.00 06/05/91 00008 37082 $0.00 06/05/91 , 0 • 12 14 15 00008 37082 24 $0.00 06/05/91_.. .:6 27 30 31 1] 34 43 35 36 37 30 39 40 41 43 _44 04275 $75.00 95563 02323 37083 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE $0.00 06/05/91 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R CHAMPION CHEVROLET MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 R CHAMPION CHEVROLET MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 00014 001-400-4204-4311 00188 05/30/91 BLDG MAINT $75.00 $121.83 /AUTO MAINTENANCE 00014_ _ 110-400-3302-4311 00698 3136.49 05/30/91 PARKING ENF /AUTO MAINTENANCE * ** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R CHANDLER'S PV READY MIX DISCOUNT OFFERED R CHANDLER'S PV READY MIX DISCOUNT TAKEN $258.32 00512 37084 $0.00 06/05/91 00512 37084 $0.00 06/05/91 k 47 413 00009 001-202-0000-2021 00013 05/30/91 $11.00 DISCOUNTS OFFERED 00009 001-202-0000-2022 00013 $11.000R 05/30/91 /DISCOUNTS TAKEN 00513 37085 $0.00 06/05/91 00513 37085 $0.00 06/05/91-- CHANDLER'S 6/05/91 CHANDLER'S PV READY MIX 00009 305-40.0-8.148-4309 00014 $724.41 00513 MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 05/30/91 CIP 89-148 /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $724.41 37085 06/05/91 CHARLIE CHAN, INC. SUMMER 91 BROCHURE - --- 10672.- 03634001-400-4601-4302 0_01_-400-4601-4302 00151 $2,525.00 -------- _ _ _ 05/16/91 , COMM RESOURCES ADVERTISING 10.672 01809 37086 $2,525.00 06/05/91 61+ 54 56 60 :3 60 62 63 64 6z 66 67 60 n 1' ,3 75 1. • 0 . 111 • • • • • • • • .I • FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 09:57:10 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST PAGE 0005 FOR 06/06/91 DATE 06/06/91 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP *** VENDOR TOTAL *•*•u*************•r*****•r*•a***************•n*•n************gra********** $2.525.00 R COAST COMPUTER PRODUCTS 04003 001-400-1206-4305 00503 $428.27 123701 09571 37087 COMPUTER PRINTER RIBBONS 23701 '-" 05/30/91- - DATA PROCESSING'%OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES'"`.... $0.00 06/05/91- .i 14 4 7 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** *428. 27 R CPRS DISTRICT IX 02784 " 001-400-4601-4316 00166 $30.00 01889 37088 REG/A. NICOL/R:' MONTAVON ._" " '" 06/03/91----' ' COMM RESOURCES-7TRAINING- "-""-'--"`-""—'"-"-----""' $0.00 06/05/91 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R DAPPER TIRE CO. $30.00 01390 001-400-2101-4311 01161 $592.22 00520 37089 75 MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 05/30/91-- - POLICE /AUTO MAINTENANCE" - *0.00 06/05/91-2:7 3r *** VENDOR TOTAL***********************•********************************************* $592.22 91 19 5 73 74 25 29 27 R DIVERSIFIED DATA SERVICE 03994 001-400-4204-4309 01997 $381.70 TM015A 02090 37090 33 74 IS 75 BATTERIES/FOG HORN --' �" M015A '--"- 05/15/9F '-'-" - BLDG 'MAINT-"�-%MAINTENANCE' MATER IALS.`•`" $381.70' 06/05/91 37 35 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $381.70 a 41 42 R EASTMAN, INC. 02514 001-400-1208-4305 00913 $1,031.37 00525 37091 w t7 MISC. CHARGES/MAY-91-- - - - -.05/30191 ... .. GEN APPROP '- ' 7OFFICE' OPER SUPPLIES -- - *0.0006/05/91i 45 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1.031.37 47 45 R ELGIN SWEEPER COMPANY 02354 001-400-3103-6900 00079 $1,736.78 1193 00043 37092 05/16/91 'ST"MAINTENANCE/LEASE- PAYMENTS $0.00_ -06/05/91 - LEASE PMT/JUNE 91 . __._...__ -1193 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1,736.78 43 50 51 54 55 A R FORES MANUFACTURING CORP. 03945 001-400-1101-5402 00003 $2.935.34 252343 09360 37093 57 ELEC VOTING MACHINE '-'52343 .. ' 03/29/91- - CITY COUNCIL ._._-/EGUIP=MORE THAN"$500----"_._ $2.944.49----06/05/91-" ' *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $21935.34 Fi 63 R GATES, MCDONALD & COMPANY 02538 705-400-1217-4201 00108 $2.000.00 137330000402 00044 37094 WORK COMP ADMIN/JUNE 91 -00402-- --WORKERS-COMP- -!CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT --------$0.00 —06/05/91- 4'. 55 57 7,5 7.7 71 72 74 75 :7, 4. 4. 414. e 0 0 0 0 0 411. 41. 0' 1 FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 09:57:10 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 06/06/91 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION PAGE 0006 DATE 06/06/91 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R J. *GOFFEAU $2, 000. 00 03366 001-210-0000-2110 04276 $50.00 ANIMAL TRAP REFUND 18616 05/30/91 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $50.00 18616 02321 37095 $0.00 06/05/91' R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-1101-4304 00371 $6.63 DIRECT DIAL CHCS/APR 91 -0200 04/01/91 CITY COUNCIL 7TELEPHONE R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED `-FAX BILLING/MAY 9i -6186 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED DIRECT DIAL CHGS/APR 91 -0200 R * GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED DIRECT DIAL CHGS7APR 91 -0200 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED DIRECT DIAL CHGS/APR 91 -0200 • I 00015 05/30791 00015 04/01/91 00015 04/01/91 00015 04/01/91 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 FAX BILLING/MAY 91 -6186. 05/30/91 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED DIRECT DIAL CI-ICS/APR 91 -0200 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED FAX BILLING/MAY 91 -6186 001-400-1121-4304 00395 $0.87 CITY CLERK /TELEPHONE 001-400-1121-4304 00396 $18.00 CITY CLERK /TELEPHONE 001-400-1131-4304 00295 $9.47 CITY ATTORNEY /TELEPHONE 001-400-1.141-430.4 00419 $18__.00_ CITY TREASURER /TELEPHONE 001-400-1201-4304 00445 318-0200 00432 37098 $0.00 06/05/91 2 .41. 6 8 410 11 12 13 0, 15 16 m + ai JJ 372-6186 00533 37098 24 $0.00 06/05/91 26 .40 d7 318-0200 00432 37098 $0.00 06/05/91 30 318-0200 00432 31 37098 32 $0.00 06/05/91 3J 34 J 35 318-0200 00432 37098 $0.00 06/05/91 $5.89 372-6186 00533 37098 CITY MANAGER /TELEPHONE 00015 001-400-1201-4304 00446 $15.16 04/01/91 00015 05/30/91 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 DIRECT DIAL CHGS/APR 91 -0200-- .. 04/0191 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED FAX BILLING/MAY 91 -6186 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED DIRECT DIAL CHGS%APR 91 -0200_ 00015 05/30/91 00015 04/01/91 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED '• 00015 FAX BILLING/MAY 91 -6186 05/30/91 • CITY MANAGER /TELEPHONE 001-400-1202-4304 00457 $9.13 FINANCE ADMIN /TELEPHONE 001-400-1202-4304 00458 $54.95 FINANCE ADMIN /TELEPHONE 001-400-1203-4304 00461 $5.85 PERSONNEL /TELEPHONE $0.00 06/05/91 318-0200 00432 37098 $0.00 06/05/91 372-6186 00533 37098 $0.00 06/05/91 318-0200 00432 $0.00 37098 06/05/91 372-6186 00533 37098 $0.00-06/05/91-- 0.01-400_-1203-4304 00462. $22.75 318-0200 00432 PERSONNEL /TELEPHONE $0.00 001-400-1206-4304 00344 $1.15 DATA PROCESSING /TELEPHONE 37098 06/05/91 3; 33 4C 41 4: a 43 44 46 - 4r 46 1.1 1.4 J ;;7' L3 J 372-6186 00533 37098 !4 $0.00 06/05/91 0 - H: t' 57 I_ CU 71 72 74 •, • FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 09:57:10 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 06/06/91 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 'TELEPHONE 'CHARGES/MAY 91 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED DIRECT DIAL CHGS/APR 91 -0200 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED --FAX BILLING/MAY"91 - -6186 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED DIRECT DIAL CHGS/APR 91 -0200 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED - '"`"' '"---"FAX BILLING/MAY--91'"-" -----6186- GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED DIRECT DIAL CHGS/APR 91 .-0200-- ; ".I R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED FAX-BILLING7MAY-91- ` -6186 1. M1 . raj R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED I.� R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED "/.." -`-- --DIRECT-DIAL-CMS/APR 91_ 0200- R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED - TELEPHONE TELEPHONE CHARGES/MAY 91 -._ _.._-.`-_."-- R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED • -------- "DIRECT-DIAL-CHGS7APR 91"" 0200. R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELEPHONE CHARGES/MAY 91 "... ------- GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED -" DIRECT DIAL-CHGS7APR 91 - -0200 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED -TELEPHONE CHARGES/MAY 91 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 00015 001-400-1206-4304 00345 05/30791'DATA-PROCESSIN $63.06 /1tLEPHONE PAGE 0007 DATE 06/06/91 INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 00015 001-400-1206-4304 00346 $27.48 318-0200 04/01/91-- ----DATA -DATA PROCESSING 7TELEPHONE---_""...-___-----.... . _ 00015 001-400-1207-4304 00279 $0.21 372-6186 05/30/91- ..-- ... BUS LICENSE ---TELEPHONE" --- 00015 001-400-1207-4304 00280 $18.00 04/01/91 BUS LICENSE -TELEPHONE 00015 001-400-1208-4304 00131 05/30/91--GEN._APPROP 00531 37098 $0.00'" 06/05/91 is 00432 37098 $0.00 06/05/91 is 00533 37098 ;5 $0.00 06/05/91--- 17 318-0200 00432 37098 $0.00 -06/05/9r--57 z, $1.02 372-6186 00533 37098 - 7TELEPHONE 00015 001-400-1208-4304 00132 04/01/91 GEN APPROP 00015 001-400-2101-4304 00811 05/30791 POLICE 00015 001-400-2101-4304 00812 05/30/91-------- ---- .".."-.. POLICE 00015 001-400-2101-4304 00813 04/01/93- POLICE 00015 001-400-2201-4304 00340 05/30/91 FIRE 00015 001-400-2201-4304 00341 04/01791` FIRE $9.47 318-0200 /TELEPHONE - _....._._._.. $1.27 /lECEPHONE $337.47 /TELEPHONE $355.29 /TELEPHONE $13.17 -7TELEPHONE $9.47 /TELEPHONE 00015 001-400-2401-4304 00373 $6.51 -05/30/91 ANIMAL CONTROL `7TELEPHONE 00015 001-400-2401-4304 00374 $13.26 --- ..---DIRECT-DIAL CHGS/APR 91.. 0200- -04/0179f - - - ANIMAL -CONTROL ITELEPHONE- FAX BILLING/MAY 91 -6186- I. 1.i 00015 001-400-4101-4304 $0.00 -06/05/91-.7; 00015 37098 $0.00." 06/05/91- z6 30 372-6186 00533 37098 71 $0.00---06/05/9f--W 00531 37098 $0.00---06/05/91- 318-0200 06/05/91- 318-0200 00432 37098 .4 35 37 ag 35 $0:`0006/05791- a+ 42 43 44 00531 37098 $0.00 -06/05/91- 318-0200 00432 37098 $0:00 .15 a7 ae 00531 37098 52 $0. 00 06/05/91- 6 318-0200 00432 37098 00460 $2.48 372-6186 05/30/91 PLANNING --------/TELEPHONE 00015 001-400-4101-4304 00461 04/01791 - --- PLANNING - $45.48 /1LLtPHONE $0.00---06/05/91 .43 00533 37098 „,3 $0.00-- 06/05/91 318-0200 00432 37098 $0.00 -06/05/91 C.3 ea r1 ._, 70 7, /l 74 75 1 1.1 i FINANCE-SFA340 TIME_ 09:57:10 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST PAGE 0008 FOR 06/06/91 DATE 06/06/91 PAY VENDOR NAME VND ft ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN 4* AMOUNT INV/REF PO to CHK tl DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-4201-4304 00420 $4.19 372-6186 00533 37098 FAX BILLING/MAY.91- -6186 05/30/91 BUILDING %TELEPHONE - $0.0006/05/91' R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-4201-4304 00421 $72.95 318-0200 00432 37098 DIRECT DIAL CHGS/APR 91 -0200 04/01/91 BUILDING /TELEPHONE $0.00 06/05/91 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-4202-4304 00472 $10.98 372-6186 00533 37098 FAX BILLING/MAY 91 6186-- _ - 05/30/91 PUB WKS -ADMIN' ----7TELEPHONE - .. $0.00 06/05/91 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-4202-4304 00473 $45.86 00531 37098 TELEPHONE CHARGES/MAY 91 05/30/91 PUB WKS ADMIN /TELEPHONE $0.00 06/05/91 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-4202-4304 00474 $100.43 318-0200 00432 37098 06/05/91 DIRECT DIAL CHCS/APR-91 -0200 04/01/91 PUB WKS ADMIN /TELEPHONE R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-4204-4321 00.574 $17.65 00531 37098 TELEPHONE CHARGES/MAY 91 05/30/91 BLDG MAINT /BUILDING SAFETY/SECURIT- $0.00 06/05/91 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-40.0-4601-4304 00541 $5.08 372-6186 00533 37098 ---FAX BILLING/MAY 91 -6186 05%30%91 COMM RESOURCES /TELEPHONE $0.00 -06/05/91 -- GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED DIRECT DIAL CHGS/APR 91 -0200.-- 00015 04/01/91 001-400-4601-4304 00542 .. $27.48 COMM RESOURCES---/TELEPHONE-- 318-0200 ESOURCES TELEPHONE 318-0200 00432 -- - $0.00 37098 06/05/91 R . GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 00.1-400-61.0.1-4304 00330 $1.21 372-6186 00533 37098 BILLING/MAY 91 -6186; 05/30/91 PARKS /TELEPHONE $0.00- 06/05/91-- R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED -----04/01/91--- 00015 001-400-6101-4304 00331 $9.4__7 318-020.0 00432 37098 DIRECT DIAL CHGS/APR 91 -0200 ' 04/01%91"_ _ - � PARKS /TELEPHONE $0.00 06/05/91 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED - FAX BILLING7MAY 91 -6186 00015 05/30/91 110-400-3302-4304 00457 $1.07 PARKING ENF /TELEPHONE 372-6186 00533 37098 $0.00 06/05/91 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED_ __ 00015 110-400-3302-4304 00458 $6.51 00531 37098 TELEPHONE CHARGES/MAY 91 05/30/91 PARKING ENF /TELEPHONE R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED $0.00 06/05/91 00015 1.10-400-3.3.02-4304 004.59 $113.70 318-0200 00432 37098 DIRECT DIAL CHGS/APR 91 -0200 04/01/91 PARKING ENF /TELEPHONE $0.00 06/05/91 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED DIRECT DIAL CHGS/APR 91 -0200 00015 04/01/91 305-400-8615-4201 00013 $122.29 318-0200 00432 CIP 89-615 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1,610.36 37098 06/05/91 4 1.7 6 a :3 '3 .T 3:. 31 34 .11 30 13 .;3 .30 47 .11 St sz NIP r • • r i rr. v v v, GTEL 01340 001-400-2101-4304 00809_ $100.0.0 1717142 01667 37099 n INSTALL JACK/POLICE FAX 17142 05/2891- POLICE.__ -/TELEPHONE *0.00 06/05/91 '`,1 ]7 e 3./ 4J eho • FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 09:57:10 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 06/06/91 PAGE 0009 DATE 06/06/91 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION R GTEL . 01340 001-400-2101-4304 EQUIP RENT/MAY-=JUN-9T--48075 ---05/22791-- POLICE 00810 $103.12 1I LtIHON. *** VENDOR TOTAL*-******************************************************************* R GUARDIAN DENTAL "CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91-.._""--...'—""----"'"- R GUARDIAN DENTAL CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R GUARDIAN DENTAL C ITY HEALTH -INS/JUNE-9I------------"" R GUARDIAN DENTAL 'CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 9F R ' GUARDIAN DENTAL "INS7JUNE-91 R GUARDIAN DENTAL -CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R GUARDIAN DENTAL •--CITY HEALTH--INS/JUNE-91- GUARDIAN DENTAL -CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91-------..----`---.--- R GUARDIAN DENTAL ITY HEALTH'INSTJUNE-91 GUARDIAN DENTAL - CITY'HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 *** VENDOR TOTAL *************************** , RADIATOR RECORE/BLDG VEH 90323-- - 05/23/91 BUILDING- 7AUTO-MAINTENANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL*************************#****************************************** INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP $203.12 02623 001-400-1212-4188 02073 $2,351.12 06/03/91"- EMP BENEFITS-7EMPLOYEE''-BENEFITS" 02623 105-400-2601-4188 01132 $23.52 06/03/91 - STREET LIGHTING-7EMPLOYEE BENEFITS - 02623 06/0379I- 110-400-3302-4188 01358 $92.67 PARKING ENF /EMPLOYEE -BENEFITS 1748075 00534 37099 $0:00-06/05/91-- 00001 37100 -------- $0.00 --06/05/91-- '' --06/05/91-- ' 00001 ' 37100 02623 145-400-3401-4188 01107 $2.99 06/03/91---" -_. DIAL A -RIDE --- —7EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 02623 145-400-3402-4188 01111 $1.20 06/03791— ESEA /EMPLOYEE-BENEFITS 2 4 s 6 t 14 ,71 ,9 $0.00---06/05/91 2.7 00001 37100 ;,; $0.00 -- 06/05/91----= 00001 37100 ;; $0:00---06/05/91-- 14 r 37 30 19 v 00001 37100 $0.00- 06/05/91- 02623 6/05/91- 02623 145-400-3403-4188 00365 $1.41 00001 06/03/91 BUS PASS SUBSDY-7EMPLOYEE BENEFITS -v - - -�'`'" $0.00 02623 160-400-3102-4188 01084 $22.01 06/03791-- SEWER7ST-DRAIN 7EMPLOYEE--BENEFITS 02623 170-400-2103-4188 00127 $23.52 06/03/91- SPEC INVESTGTNS %EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 02623 705-400-1209-4188 00425 $29.92 06/03/91-- LIABILITY -TNS EMPLOYEE --BENEFITS 37100 ---06/05/91-- 00001 37100 $0:00---06/05/91-- 00001 37100 $0.00-06/05/91- 00001 0.00--06/05/91- 00001 37100 02623 705-400-1217-4188 00446 $44.88 06/03/91 WORKERS COMP- ---7EMPLOYEE-BENEF/TS ---`---- ****#####*#*****#*#*#####*#*#*#**##*#*#*# R HOZIES RADIATOR SERVICE 00277 $2,593.24 •n h 47 49 $0.00---06/05/91--43 51 00001 37100 - $0.00 -..06/05/91- -7 001-400-4201-4311 00243 $127.60 I R INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE ELECTRIC DISCOUNT OFFERED *127.60 90323 02204 37101 $127.60-- 06/05/91- :$ 6/05/91- . E? 54 0245B 001-202-0000-2021 00012 $3.98 00574 05/30/91 DISCOUNTS OFFERED - --`" -- --- $0.00- 37102 06/05/91! • 4, r,7 '.9 70 71 3 74 75 797 J• 4 4- 41, 4- 4. 4 4. v � Ago 46, 4. 4- f 4- r ( .1 FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 09:57:10 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE ELECTRIC DISCOUNT TAKEN' CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 06/06/91 PAGE 0010 DATE 06/06/91 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN * AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 4 6 7 02458 001-202-0000-2022 00012 $3.98CR 00574 37102 a 05/30/91 /DISCOUNTS TAKEN $0.00 06/05/91—"; R INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE ELECTRIC 02458 001-400-4204-4309 01996 $195.04 MISC. CHARGES/MAY 91 —- 05/30/91 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL ********************************************************************- R JET DELIVERY, INC. DELIVERY SERV/VPD BIDS' —73563 00281 109-400-3301-4201 05/16/91---- VEH PKG 00574 37102 $0.00 06/05/91 IS $195.04 , A IS ? 13 00045 . $337.64 73563 01656 ..' 37103 DIST —,CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT. - $0.00 06/05/91 *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $337:64 R DENNIS*LINDSEY 03708 001-400-4601-4201 00856 $1,170.00 UMPIRE/FIELD PREP FEES ------------- 06/03/91 COMM RESOURCES /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $1. 170. 00 .12 $3 "jJ • 3:6 d 01886 37104 _ 2,3 $0. 00 -- -06/05/91. 31 12 R LOS ANGELES CO MARSHALLS SMALL CLAIMS FILING FEES ' OFF. 03849 001-400-2101-4305 05/29/91 POLICE R LOS ANGELES CO MARSHALLS' OFF. SMALL CLAIMS FILING FEES 03849 001-400-4202-4305 • 05/29/91 PUB WKS /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 01523 $60.00 00585 $20.00 ADMIN /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $80.00 R COUNTY OF*LOS ANGELES RECERT/CLAWSON/WILLIAMS P2993 *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $200.00 01896 001-400-2201-4316 04/05/91 FIRE 00296 $200.00 11073 37105 $0.00 06/05/9.1. 11073 37105 $0.00 06/05/91 /TRAINING R 1 COUNTY OF*LOS ANGELES ITION/11 OFFICERS *** VENDOR -1 30 33 43 91 4$ .3' 47 P4068/P2993 11277 37106 $0.00 06/05/91—',, 53 S-1 E5 03648 001-400-2101-4312 01716 $1,034.00 82329/82321 01295 37107 82321 05/16/91 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST ---- -------$0.06 06/05/91.--;, 54 TOTAL ******************************************************************** $1.034.00 -9 R LOUIS THE TAILOR, INC. -------------MISC—CHARGES/MAY 91 17-18 .00079 001-400-2101-4187 05/30/91 POLICE 00427 $142.80 404717-18 00541 /UNIFORM ALLOWANCE $0.00 62' 69 37108 06/05/91 167 70 71 7? 1 79 75 7y LI f/ 9 • FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 09:57:10 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 06/06/91 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R LOUIS THE TAILOR. INC. MISC. 'CHARGES/MAY-91 0474/ VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 00079 110-400-3302-4187 00291 $164.78 05/30/91- PARKING -'EN,- /CINIFORM-ALLOWANC. *** VENDOR TOTAL****************-*************************************************** R MAIN ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. DISCOUNT OFFERED--- MAIN FFERED.- MAIN ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. DISCOUNT TAKEN - 441-P 00426 05/10/91 INV/REF PO AMOUNT UNENC $307. 58 Z/ PAGE 0011 IJ DATE 06/06/91 CHK # DATE EXP 404747 00541 37108 $0.00- "'""06/05/91 001-202-0000-2021 00011 $1.65 07441-P 00542 37109 DISCOUNTS -OFFERED "" $0.00- 06/95/91 Y 00426 001-202-0000-2022 00011 • $1.65CR 07441-P 00542' 37109 05/10/91 - - ................$0.00 ._ _..__.._.. $0.00 .. 06/05/91-. R MAIN ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO. 00426 001-400-1206-4309 00166 $80.74 07441-P 00542 MISC. CHARGES/MAY-91- 441.-P- -441.-P--- 05/10791 - DATA-PROCESSING-7MAINTENANCE--MATERIALS-- "$0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $80.74 R MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK -' - '� CITY HEALTH"INSTJUNE 91- R MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK -'CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK "-.-"CITY HEALTH--INSTJUNE 91 R MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK 01859 001-400-1212-4188 02072 $913.95 06/03/91 EMP BENEFITS!EMPLDYEE-BENEFITS 01859 105-400-2601-4188 01131 $21.65 06/03/91-.--" .- .. -_. STREET LIGHTING -/EMPLOYEE BENEFITS- --� 01859 109-400-3301-4188 00128 $2.65 • 06/03791-- - VEH PKC-DIST/EMPCOYEE`BENEFITS 01859 --'CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91-------------06/03/91 R MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK ----CITY-HEALTH-INS/JUNE-91 '-"-CITY"HEALTH -INS/JUNE-9f MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK --"-CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK - CITY HEALTHINS/JUNE-91 • 110-400-3302-4188 01357 PARKIN0'ENF 01859 145-400-3401-4188 01106 06/03791— ---DIAL'A-RIDE 01859 06/03/91 01859 06/03/9r- 01839 06/03/91- ', 01859 06/03791' $150.71 /EMPLDYEE BENEFITS $1. 06 /EMPLOYEE- "BENEFITS 145-400-3402-4188 01110 $0.36 ESEA `- -/EMPLOYEE'BENEFITS 145-400-3403-4188 00364 $0.53 - BUS PASS-SUBSDY`7EMPEOYEE BENEFITS 155-400-2102-4188 00654 $2.21 CROSSING GUARD-/EMPLOYEE'BENEFITS 160-400-3102-4188 01083 $24.31 SEWER/ST-DRAIN7EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 37109 06/05/91 4 4 a ,0 11 13 14 7 1, 22 2.3 24 2,3 00041 37110 '' 32 $0.00-06/05/91--3T 00041 37110 $0.00- 06/05/91- 00041 37110 $0.00 -06/05/91 00041 37110 '34 35 36 30 39 41 42 43 44 $0. 00 __...06/05/91 - AG 00041 37110 41 4f1 $0:06- 06/05/91 00041 37110 51 $0. 00 --06/05/91--- 00041 ---06/05/91 00041 37110 55 $0.00-`06/05/91 >> 59 00041 37110 $0.00.- - 06/05/91 62 37110 .4 $0.00'--06/05/9T-% 00041 16G1 71 72 3 7574 9 1.J 4) 1J 1./ L 11 V V d.I eV FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 09:57:10 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST PAGE 0012 FOR 06/06/91 DATE 06/06/91 PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP R MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK 01859 170-400-2103-418.8 00126 $2.32 00041 37110 CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 06/0391 SPEC INVESTGTNS //EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.00 06/05/91_ R MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK 01859 7.05-400-1209-4188 00424 $4.42 00041 37110 CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91-- ........06/03/91 LIABILITY INS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.00 06/05/91 R MANAGED HEALTH NETWORK 01859 705-400-1217-4188 00445 $6.63 00041 37110 -CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 06/03/91 WORKERS COMP -/EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.00 06/05/91' *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1, 130.80 8 11 14 14 15 :n 22 :.i R MANERI SIGN CO., INC. 01255 001-400-4204-4309 01998 $26.75 0000739 -IN 02088 37111 :4 CITY HALL RESTROOM SIGNS 39 -IN 05/14/91 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $26.75 06/05/91 -77 27 .71 x; 31 R • MANHATTAN FORD 00605 001-400-210.1-4311 01160 $3.66 113475 00544 37112 ,2 11ISC. CHARGES/MAY-91 13475 05/3091POLICE $0.00 06/05/91 34 3s R MANHATTAN FORD 00605 _001-4_00-410. 1-4311 0.0136 $7.85 113323 00544 37112 3r, -37 . MISCCHARGES/MAY-91-----13323---- 05/30%91 PLANNING /AUTO MAINTENANCE $0.00' 06/05/91 3,3 41 45 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $26.75 /AUTO MAINTENANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $11. 51 R MC MASTER -CARR SUPPLY CO. 00728 160-400-3102-5403 00012 $411.47 10184.90 02503 37113 -CRAWLER TRAILER COUPLING 18490-----.05/15/91 SEWER/ST DRAIN /VEHICLES $405.74 06/05/91 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $411.47 44 4, 471 R MYERS STEVENS & COMPANY 00091 001-400-1212-4188_ 02082 5772.20 00013 37114 CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 06/03/91 - • EMP BENEFITS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.00 06/05/91 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R NACUBO PUBLICATIONS/FINANCE $772. 20 si 5.1 5.4 33 04035 0.01-400-1202-4316 00365 $25.00 248-1 05/22/91 FINANCE ADMIN' /TRAINING *** VENDOR TOTAL*************************4****************************************** $25. 00 02.9248-1 01175 $37. 00 A 59 37115 w 06/05/91 (.2 57 ba R NATIONAL HOME LIFE 03465 001-400-1212-4188 02080 $80.00 00065 37116 CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 06/03/91_ EMP BENEFITS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS--------------- $0.00 06/05/91 es cc GI CA 7'5 71 72 /J '4 75 Jr • r J J J 4 4• 4 i . L) V FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 09:57: 10 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 06/06/91 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R OLIVER, STOEVER, BARR & VOSE LEGAL SERV/APRIL 91 R OLIVER, STOEVER. BARR & VOSE PAGE 0013 DATE 06/06/91 INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP $80. 00 02892 001-400-1131-4201 00650 $1.587.50 02108 05/29/91 420001 CITY ATTORNEY - !CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT-._ $0.00 02892 001-400-1131-4201 00651 $14,524.00 LEGAL SERV/APRIL-91' 05/29/91"---- -- ._ .-"'-CITYATTORNEY-CONTRACT"SERVICE/PRIVAT- R OLIVER, STOEVER, BARR & VOSE 02892 705-400-1209-4201 00197 $137.50 LEGAL SERV/APRIL-91 - " "" 05/29/91`" LIABILITY TNS--7CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT-"--- *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R R R R R R R R R ORAL HEALTH SERVICES CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 -- ORAL HEALTH SERVICES --CITY HEALTH-INSTJUNE-9I- ORAL HEALTH SERVICES CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 ORAL HEALTH SERVICES CITY HEALTH-INS%JUNE 91 $16.249.00 00235 001-400-1212-4188 02077 $1,350.73 06/03/91 EMP BENEFITS----7EMPLOYEE BENEFITS ----- 00235 105-400-2601-4188 01135 $47.45 06/03/91 STREET-EIGRTING-7EMPLOYEE-BENEFIT5 00235 109-400-3301-4188 00132 $7.19 02108 $0.00- LEGAL 0.00- 02108 ' - $0.00 06/03/91 " _. VEH PKG- DIST -----%EMPLOYEEBENEFITS---_-"--'-..-... 00235 110-400-3302-4188 01362 $264.74 06/03791 - - - -"PARKING-ENF-EMPLOYEE-BENEFITS ORAL HEALTH SERVICES 00235 145-400-3401-4188 01111 $1.29 CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91--- -_.."--._.-..-06/03/91 DIAL A RIDE - /EMPLOYEE'BENEFITS`--__.--'"--_._ ORAL HEALTH SERVICES 00235 145-400-3402-4188 01115 $0.31 CITY"'HEALTH-INS/JUNE 91--` --" 06/03/91"' -ESEA -- 7EMPLOYEE-BENEFITS' ORAL HEALTH SERVICES CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 ' 5 8 �0 37117 06/05/91- 37117 06/05/91 M1 37117 06/05/91' z 21 ,4 00019 37118 , $0.00-- 06/05/91- :, 3C 3, 34 .1, 00019 37118 $0.00-06/05/91.-- 00235 0.00-.._06/05/91-" 00019 37118 $0. 00 "- 06/05/9r- 00019 37118 $0.00-06/05/91 143 39 4Z 00019 37118 ;, -. $0.00 - 06105/91--, 00019 &/05/91-- 00019 37118 $0. 00 - 06/05/91 .M •01 00235 155-400-2102-4188 00658 $7.04 00019 37118 06/03/91 CROSSING GUARD ----/EMPLOYEE. BENEFITS - $0. 00 -06/05/91-6- ORAL 06/05/91 -. ORAL HEALTH SERVICES 00235 160-400-3102-4188 01088 $42.39 CITY HEALTH-/NS/JUNE 91 06/03/91- SEWER/ST-DRAIN /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS ORAL HEALTH SERVICES CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91- 00235 170-400-2103-4188 00129 $61.17 06/03/91 SPEC INVESTGTNS -/EMPLOYEE BENEFITS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R PACIFICARE $1.782.31 005 6/05/91- 00575 001-400-1212-4188 02076 $19.657.42 CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 06/03/91 EMP BENEFITS-7EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00019 37118 $0.00 -06/05/91 00019 37118 $0.00 -06/05/91- F 06!05/91- r:• r3 00016 37119 1, -------------- $0. 00 -.06/05/91--1 t 10 / 74 ;Se �; J/ S 1 • ••i •I f _ '.i ,1 ISI II FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 09:57:10 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R PACIFICARE --CITY HEALTH-INS/JUNE 91 R PACIFICARE CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R PACIFICARE --CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R PACIFICARE - CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R PACIFICARE -CITY-HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R PACIFICARE CITY HEALTH CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 06/06/91 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 00575 105-400-2601-4188 01134 $535.57 06/03/9i STREET LIGHTING /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00575 109-400-3301-4188 00131 _ $88.28 06/03/91 VEH PKG DIST_%EMPLOYEE BENEFITS INV/REF 00575 110-400-3302-4188 01361 $2,630.63 -06/03/91 PARKING-ENF - 7EMPL0YEE BENEFITS 00575 145-400-3401-4188 01110 $31.99 06/03/91 DIAL A RIDE /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00575 145-400-3402-4188 01114 $10.16 06/0379- ESEA PO AMOUNT UNENC /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00575 155-400-2102-4188 00657 $71.59 INS/JUNE 91 06/03/91 CROSSING GUARD /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS R PACIFICARE ..CITY HEALTH-INS/JUNE-11 PACIFICARE CITY HEALTH-INS/JUNE 91-- -- R PACIFICARE ------ CITY HEALTH INS7JUNE 91 PACIFICARE CITY HEALTH-INS/JUNE 91- 00575 160-400-3102-4188 01087 $555.67 06/03/91 SEWER/ST DRAIN /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00575 170-400-2103-4188 00128 $668.03 06/03/91- SPEC INVESTGTNS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00575 705-400-1209-4188 00427 $159.80 06/03/91 LIABILITY INS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00575 705- 400- 1217-4188 00448._ $159.80 _ 06/03/91 WORKERS COMP /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS-- _ *** VENDOR TOTAL****************************•**•************************************** R PACTEL CELLULAR - LA _ MOBILE PHONE CHGS/MAY 91 $247588.94 PAGE 0014 JJ DATE 06/06/91 CHK # DATE EXP 1 6 00016 37119 9 $0. 00 06/05/91 00016 $0. 00 00016 37119 06/05/91 37119 $0.00 - 06/Q5/91 37119 $0. 00 06/05/91 00016 00016 37119 $0.00 06/05/91 00016 • 13 :3 :4 zr 37119 $0.00 0• 6/05/91 =9 00016 37119 $0.00 06/05/91 00016 37119 $0.00 0• 6/05/91-- 00016 37119 $0.00 06/05/91 00016 37119 $0.00 0• 6/05/91- 3 , 6/05/91 3, 37 ,3 34 36 35 4i .33 49 03209 170-400-2103-4304 00007 $1,032.40 05/30/91 --- SPEC INVESTGTNS /TELEPHONE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** PCC SEMINAR REG/W.-GROVE $1, 032.40 00550 37120 $0.00' 06/05/91 04060 001-4.00-4201-4316 00243 $295.00 05/30/91 BUILDING %TRAINING *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** TROY*PLUNKETT - WORK GUARANTEE REFUND -.16617 $295. 00 02215 37121 $0.00 06/05/91 04056 00 1-210-0000-2110 04277 $575.00 16617.. 02325 _% 05/30/91 ' DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE$0.00 1 37122 06/05/91 G: (3 t-1 w 57 113 • I I • r_• n 72 y • • JJ Gj I • 0 0 !J yJ U' 4, 4 • FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 09:57:10 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST PAGE 0015 FOR 06/06/91 DATE 06/06/91 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROS) # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP $575. 00 R POSTMASTER 00398 110-400-3302-4305 00799 $2,000.00 PERMIT460 01665 CITATION NOTICE POSTAGE /T460 --- '06/03/91. - - PARKING ENF------/OFFICE-OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $2, 000. 00 R RADIO SHACK 01429 109-400-3301-5401 00002 $74.85 54473 01664 RECORDER/VPD MEETINGS 54473- 05/29/91 'VEH PKG DIST ---7EGUIPMENT-LESS THAN $50- $74.85 *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $74,85 R SYLVIA*ROOT 04061 001-400-4102-4201 00306 $157.50 214 0191B SEC SERV/MAY 21;91 - 214 06/03/91-- - - PLANNING-COMM---7CONTRACT-SERVICE/PRIVAT. *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $157. 50 $0. 00 37123 06/05/91 - 3 I 4 5 7 0 'I ;.i 15 IJ 1,) 37124 06/05/91' 37125 ;r1 06 /05/91 31 37 11 34 .35 '.3 35 27 R RICHARD*SALFELDER 04054 DAMAGE DEPOSIT REFUND 18807 ---- -05/30/91 001-210-0000-2110 04279 $100.00 18807 02317 37126 $0.00. 06/05/91 - *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $100. 00 5.7 33 a, 41 47 NUTRITION43 R SAMRA 04055 001-210-0000-2110 04278 $500.00 18824 DAMAGE DEPOSIT REFUND ---18824------05/30/91-- - --7DEPOSITS/WORKGUARANTEE---- $0.00--- R SAMRA NUTRITION 04055 001-300-0000-3406 00381 $80.00 THEATRE'RENTAL-REFUND. .06/05/91 /COMM -CTR -THEATRE *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** ,R GERALD*SKIKO REFUND TOWING -FEES 1.1 3) 3..13 1 J. I. I 04057 001-300-0000-3841 00334 05/29/91- GERALD*SKIKO 04037 110-400-3302-4201 REFUND TOWING -FEES-------- 05/29/91-- - PARKING 37127 .4 06/05/91—Z- 47 Ilk' 01892 37127 $580. 00 $35. 00 /POLICE -TOWING $0100 06/05/91 02419 37128 $0.00---06/05/91-- c kJ ` 00279 $68.00 02419 37128 ENF ---7CONTRACT-SERVICE/PRIVAT--- ----- $0.00 06/05/91.-c, *** VENDOR TOTAL *************************i4****************************************** $103. 00 172 134 5,3 R SOUTH BAY MUNICIPAL COURT 00400 110-300-0000-3302 40247 $330.00 01669 37129 CITATION COURT BAIL 05/30/91 7COURT-FINE5/PARKING----- $0.00 --- 06/05/91- 70 13 12 74 75 11. 79/ .41 -• FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 09: 57: 10 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 06/06/91 PAGE 0016 DATE 06/06/91 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** • • _ R TRANSAMERICA OCCIDENTAL 00240 CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 06/03/91 R TRANSAMERICA OCCIDENTAL 00240 --CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE* ---- -06/03/91 R TRANSAMERICA OCCIDENTAL 00240 CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 06/03/91 R TRANSAMERICA OCCIDENTAL CITY HEALTH'INS/JUNE 91 R TRANSAMERICA OCCIDENTAL CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R TRANSAMERICA OCCIDENTAL ----- ----CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 $330. 00 001-400-1212-4188 02079 $313.60 EMP BENEFITS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 10.5-400-2601-4188 01136 $1.52 --- STREET LIGHTINO-7EMPLOYEE BENEFITS - 145-400-3401-4188 01112 $0.94 DIAL A RIDE /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00029 37130 $0.00 06/05/91 4 ".) 11 00029 $0. 00 00029 $0. 00 37130 • 06405/9f;i 37130 06/05/91 00240 145-400-3402-4188 01116 $0.38 00029 37130 ?a 06/03/91 ESEA /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.00 06/05/91 27 00240 160-400-3102-4188 01089 $3.04 00029 37130 06/03/91 SEWER/ST DRAIN /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.00 06/05/91 3C 31 00240 705-400-1209-4188 00428 $3.17 00029 37130 06/03/91 LIABILITY INS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.00 06/05/91 -14 705-400-1217-4188 00449 00029 37130 WORKERS COMP 11 .3 R TRANSAMERICA OCCIDENTAL 00240 CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 --- 06/03/91-- $3.17 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS - --- $0.00 06/05/91;7 36 .$325.82 49 41 *** VENDOR TOTAL *********************4********************************************** R THE*UNION CENTRAL LIFE CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 INS CO. 02355 001-400-1212-4188 02081 06/03/91 EMP BENEFITS - R THE*UNION CENTRAL LIFE INS CO. 02355 --------tITYHEALTH-INS/jUNE 91 06/03/91 R THE*UNION CENTRAL LIFE CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 105-400-2601-4188 01137 STREET LIGHTIN- INS CO. 02355 109-400-3301-4188 00133 . • ___ R THE*UNION CENTRAL LIFE INS CO. CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R THE*UNION CENTRAL LIFE 1 1,,11R THE*UNION CENTRAL LIFE INS CO. CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 06/03/91 VEH PKG DIST 02355 110-400-3302-4188 01363 06/03/91 PARKING ENF $659. 78 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $17. 15 d-7EMPLOYEE BENEFITS INS CO. 02355 145-400-3401-4188 01113 _ . _ 06/03i91--- DIAL A RIDE 02355 145-400-3402-4188 01117 CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 06/03/91 ESEA $1.54 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $119.35 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0. 84 itHOLoYtk BENEFITS $0. 22 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS • .72 00028 37131 .71 $0.00 06/05/91-': 00028 37131 47 43 $0.00*-- 06/05/91-35 00028 37131 06/05/91 U •:4 00028 37131 $0.00 06/05/91 $0. 00 00028 37131 $0.00 06/05/91 00028 37131 $0.00 06/05/91 67 ,(1 72 74 75 41, .7%.% tr• W./ 4 FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 09:57:10 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 06/06/91 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R THE*UNION CENTRAL LIFE INS CO. CITY HEALTH"INS/JUNE"9I" R THE*UNION CENTRAL LIFE INS CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R THE*UNION CENTRAL LIFE INS CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91"" -' R THE*UNION CENTRAL LIFE INS CITY HEALTH "INS/JUNE 91 - _._ VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION PAGE 0017 DATE 06/06/91 INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 00028 37131 $0.00 06/05/91" 00028 37131 $0.00 06/05/91"" ie 14 1s $0. 00 " " 06/05/91"-_ 02355 155-400-2102-4188 00659 $1.61 -06/0319I-- CROSSING"GUARD /EMPLOYEE -BENEFITS. CO. 02355 160-400-3102-4188 01090 $18.69 06/03/91 -SEWER/ST-DRAIN--/EMPLOYEE BENEFITS CO. 02355 170-400-2103-4188 00131 $26.25 ---------06/03/91--- "---- -- --SPEC- INVESTGTNS-./EMPLOYEE-BENEFITS CO. 02355 705-400-1209-4188 00429 $2.80 R THE*UNION CENTRAL LIFE INS CO. CITY HEALTH-INS/JUNE 91" -- - ---"- ""-- --" "-"-- "LIABILITY -INS ---7EMPLDYEE "BENEFITS 02355 705-400-1217-4188 00450 $2.80 06/03/91 _ WORKERS-COMP-----/EMPLOYEE-BENEFITS------------- *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R • UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. --"-" ""'-CITY HEALTH TNSTJUNE 91--"- "" R UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS • "CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS.' 'CITY HEALTH-INS/JUNE 91 - UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE $851.03 03790 001-400-1212-4188 02074 $2,027.78 06/03/91 �'-""EMP BENEFITS'/EMPLOYEE-BENEFITS 03790 105-400-2601-4188 01133 $53.34 06/03/91 STREET LIGHTING /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 03790 109-400-3301-4188 00129 $11.34 06/03/91-- VEHUPKG-DIST (EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 03790 110-400-3302-4188 01359 $406.95 91 -""--....06/03/91'".. PARKING-ENF- ./EMPLOYEE BENEFITS R UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. CITY HEALTH-INS/JUNE"9i" R UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. -- CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 - -- R UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS --CITY-HEALTH-/NS/JUNE 91------ 03790 1"-"------ 03790 145-400-3401-4188 01108 $4.23 06/03/91 DIAL -A -RIDE /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 3 5 a 11 z 00028 37131 00028'' $0. 00..." ..3 37131 06/05/91,--2 22 00028 37131 $0.00 06/05/91--,, 00022 37132 $0. 00— 06 /05 / 9 r -Ti 1 00022 37132 $0.00 " 06/05/91'' Vi 3a 00022 37132 39 $0:00--06/05/9 00022 37132 $0.00'" "06/05/91.... 45 47 4.3 $0:00— 06/05/91 31 00022 37132 03790 145-400-3402-4188 01112 $1.43 -06/03/91---- .- -- ESEA " " 03790 155-400-2102-4188 00655 $9.79 '—.-_-06/03/91 - -CROSSING-GUARD /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS R UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 R UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. CITY HEALTH-INS/JUNE91 03790 160-400-3102-4188 01085 $69.72 06/03/9 1 00022 37132 06/05/91- 00022 37132 SEWER/ST DRAIN '/EMPLOYEE 03790 705-400-1209-4188 00426 $16.63 06/03/91 LIABILITY -INS -EMPLOYEE BENEFITS ;o 51 54 $0. 00---06/05/91--W 06/05/9T -;l 00022 37132 s, $0.00 06/05/91' 62 00022 37132 $0.0006/05/91 t .77 54 7] 71 7] 74 75 7yl A 4) .i NIL • 1 • FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 09:57:10 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST PAGE 0018 1, FOR 06/06/91 DATE 06/06/91 PAY VENDOR NAME VND * ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN $ AMOUNT INV/REF PO $ CHK $ 3 DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ $ ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 4 6 7 R UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. 03790 705-400-1217-418B 00447 $21.6700022 37132 a CITY HEALTH INS/JUNE 91 06/03/91 WORKERS COMP /EMPLOYEE DENEFITS $0.00 06/05/91 ,0 it 1z u 14 R XEROX CORPORATION 00135 001-400-1208-4305 00914 4*355.41 1440359.44 01168 37133 ,5 � COPIER SUPPLIES 35944 05/15ilGEN APPROP /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 06/05/91_ '— :r ,a I3 *** VENDOR TOTAL *******a******************»**•r•#**•s•n*x•********•m*********•Ir******ar****x• $2,622.88 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $355.41 R MARY*YOUNG 04059 001-210-0000-2110 04271 WORK GUARANTEE REFUND 9296 05/30/91 $1, 600. 00 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1,600.00 *** PAY CODE TOTAL****************************************************************** $99.229.77 *** TOTAL WARRANTS****************************************************************** $99.229.77 • 22 23 9296 6 0.2324 37134 $0.00 1-06/05/91 27 29 7.0 30 31 32 33 34 35 46 a6 39 40 3 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE DEMANDS OR CLAIM‘ S COVERED By THE WARRANTS LISTED ON PAGES / TO dA INCLUSIVE, OF THE WARRANT REGISTER-FORZl-/,__ ARE ACCURATE, FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE FOR PAYMENT, AND ARE IN CONFORMANCE TO THE BUDGE BY FINANC D RECTOR DAT 6,�Q 41 43 45 47 .91 4'l 61 t4 6 z, so 110 lit l 61 64 tii 67 0 70 71 rz •3 74 75Ty f a) 1 1 .G, e/I 1i June 6, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the City Council - of June 11, 1991 TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS June 25, 1991 Torch Run Proclamation Resolution adopting regulations for candidates for elective office per- taining to candidates statements submitted to voters at November, 1991 election City Clerk City Mgr. 7/24 3 -hr. vs. 2 -hr. parking meter limit in the downtown (refer to VPD) General Services Director Dept. 5/20 Greenbelt forestation project Community Resources Greenbelt parking designs Selection of Records Management Consultant City Mgr. 3/26 Revised funding for canine program Development of newly acquired lots at Edith Rodaway Friendship Park Status of fire flow improvements Parking permit ordinance 1991-92 budget amendments Council 5/14 - Strand Hotel Settlement potential contingency procedure Resolutions approving report on Street Lighting Assessment District and setting for public hearing Resolutions approving report on Crossing Guard Assessment District and setting for public hearing Public Works Director City Clerk Public Safety Director Community Resources Dir. Public Safety Director General Services Finance Director Public Works Director Public Works Director Public Works Director Coastal Conservancy Pier grant Community Resources Dir. - 1 - -9/ 1 C July 9, 1991 Funding of Social Service agencies Hearing to review delinquent refuse charges for consideration of placing said charges on the tax rolls as a special assessment Public Hearing Reconsideration of P.C. approval of CUP for Lighthouse, 30 Pier Avenue Community Resources Dir. Building Director Planning Director July 18, 1991 (7:30 a.m.) Joint meeting with Chamber of Commerce Council 2/12 Fiesta cost/benefit study Finance Director July 23, 1991 Resolutions necessary for November 5 election Public Hearings Public Hearing - Street Lighting Public Hearing - Crossing Guards August 27, 1991 Approval of agreements between the City and local non-profit agencies September 24, 1991 CIP 89-406, Accept sewer project as complete October 22, 1991 RFP for Traffic Engineer December, 1991 Statistical survey - requested at 4/23/91 meeting January, 1992 Appeal of P.C. denial of request to allow a 2nd story office addition 2 City Clerk Public Works Director Public Works Director Community Resources Dir. Public Works Director Public Works Director providing less than required off- street parking at 415 Pier Ave. Planning Director ***************************************************************** Upcoming Items Not Yet Calendared Caltrans utility maintenance agrmt. Public Works Director Historic Preservation Ordinance (with Land Use Element) Planning Director ***************************************************************** Initiated by Party Date Council 5/8 Discuss financial arrangements on oil project City Manager Council 5/8 Re. oil project CUP - define "temporary" as relates to height of project Planning Director Goal 4 5/16 Options to computerize per- sonnel as part of payroll function Finance Director Council 8/14 Review of standard CUP conditions Planning Dir. Council 10/9 Map and time schedule for street sweeping Public Wks. Dir. Ordinance for new Chapter 19 of HBMC entitled "Motor Vehicles and Traffic" Public Works Dir. City Mgr. 12/17 Photocopiers Public Safety. Director Council 1/22 Research parking cut off in lot at 3rd St. Pub.Wks./Bldg./City Mgr. City Mgr. 2/21 RFP for computer system General Svcs. Director Council 2/20 Follow-up procedures to Council items City Manager Conceptual approval of Greenbelt steps Public Works Director Council 3/12 South School Conceptual design Community Resources Dept. 3/27 CIP 89-176 - Call for bids, traffic signal pre-emption City Mgr. 3/25 Amendment of ordinance regulating real estate signs Council Bid spec. for office systems (furniture) Council 3/26 Selection of insurance broker VPD recommendation on sidewalk scrubber Award of bid for purchase of computer equipment for Police Dept. Council 5/14 Non -conforming building rights after disaster City Attorney Council 8/14 Review parking on ped- estrian sts./review ways to enforce no parking in front yards Public Works Dir. Public Works Director Building Director Finance Director Personnel General Services Director Public Safety Director Award of bid - landscape maintenance, including consideration of Valley & Hermosa View School agreements Council 5/28 Consider elimination of non-profit event fee Council 5/28 Council 5/28 Commission term limits Set formal policy for continuances of public hearings City Mgr. 6/5 Accept donations from SBHD for D.A.R.E. Public Works/Comm. Res. Community Resources City Clerk City Mgr./City Clerk Public Safety Director Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council May 30, 1991 City Council Meeting of June 11, 1991 MONTHLY STATUS REPORT OF INACTIVE PUBLIC DEPOSITS FOR HERMOSA BEACH Attached is a report of all Inactive Public Deposits for the month of May 1991. Respectfully submitted, Gary Brut ch City Treasurer NOTED: Kevin Northcra City Manager 1d INSTITUTION TOTAL INVESTMENT REPORT - MAY 1991 DATE OF INVESTMENT DATE OF MATURITY INTEREST LAIF BALANCE 05/01/91 Maturity Investment BALANCE 05/31/91 LACPIF Railroad Right -of -Way BALANCE 05/01/91 Investment BALANCE 05/31/91 CORPORATE NOTES: Ford Motor Credit Co. Investment U.S. TREASURY BOND: Investment Investment Investment Investment Investment Investment $7,427,000.00 <4,000,000.00> 5,000,000.00 $7,527,000.00 Account $ 667,116.73 157,587.17 824,703.90 $ 500,000.00 $ 499,326.42 $1,001,542.12 $ 500,845.79 $ 999,492.83 $1,019,779.01 $1,023,029.89 5/30/91 5/8/91 5/19/88 1/03/90 3/06/90 3/08/90 4/20/90 5/14/90 9/14/90 5/8/91 5/20/93 12/31/91 2/29/92 2/29/92 3/31/92 2/15/93 6/30/94 7.666% 6.25% 9.10% 7.71% 8.50% 8.50% 8.763% 8.49% 8.50% FHLMC: Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. Investment $ 248,733.64 3/26/87 3/1/17 8.0% INVESTMENT TOTAL $14,144,453.60 SEATTLE 1ST NATL. BANK TRUST BALANCE 04/01/91 BALANCE 04/30/91 TICOR TITLE INSURANCE CO. $ 527,996.32 BALANCE 3/25/91 BALANCE 3/25/91 TRUSTEE TOTAL GRAND TOTAL 527,996.32 8.625% $ 11,250.83 11,250.83 $ 539,247.15 $14,683,700.75 Respectfully Submitted, Gary Brut ch City Treasurer 7.5% • June 4, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the City Council of June 11, 1991 TO APPROVE LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AND THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION DISPUTE RESOLUTION SERVICES, INC. FOR SPACE IN THE COMMUNITY CENTER RECOMMENDATION The Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Commission and Staff recommend that Council approve the attached lease agreement between the City of Hermosa Beach and the Los Angeles County Bar Association Dispute Resolution Services to lease Room 6B in the Community Center and authorize Mayor to sign the agreement. BACKGROUND Dispute Resolution Services has leased Room 6B in the Community Center since October, 1988. Their current lease which conforms to the present square footage lease for Community Center rooms will expire on June 30, 1991. ANALYSIS The recommended lease is for a period of one year (July 1 through June 30, 1992). The rate for FY 1991-92 will be $.80 per square foot, making the monthly lease payment $160. DRS has proven to be dependable and cooperative tenants and have made all lease payments as requested. DRS provides a service whose goal is to resolve local disputes in order to improve community and neighborhood relations and to circumvent potentially escalating conflicts. Concur: Mary Dept ney, Director Community Resources Respectfully, subm ted, Marsha Ernst Administrative Aide Dept. of Community Resources Noted for Fiscal Impact: Kevin B. Northcraft Viki Copeland, Director Finance Department City Manager 1 -9/ HERMOSA BEACH COMMUNITY CENTER LEASE AGREEMENT This Leasing Agreement is made and entered into on this, the 11th day of June 1991 , by and between_the City of Hermosa Beach, a Municipal Corporation (City) and Los Angeles County Bar Assoc. Dispute Resolution Services, Inc. (DRS) (Lessee). A. RECITALS: 1. The City is the owner of a recreational/civic service facility generally referred to as the Hermosa Beach Com- munity Center (referred to herein as the "facility"). 2. The facility is subject to certain agreements and deed restrictions entered into on the 28th day of February 1978, between the City and the Hermosa Beach City School District and is further subject to certain provisions imposed by the Department of Housing and Urban Develop- ment as set forth in a document entitled Agreement for Sale and Purchase of Real Property and dated the 28th day of February 1978. These documents are on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City and are public documents and by reference are incorporated into this leasing agreement and are referred to herein as the HUD and SCHOOL DISTRICT AGREEMENTS. 3. The Lessee desires to use a portion of the facility on the terms and conditions set out herein. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. TERM. The term of this lease shall be for a period of 1 year commencing on the 1st day of July ,1991 , and ending, on the 30th day of ,-June ,1992 2. DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES. The Lessee is leasing from the City that portion of the facility described as: Room 6B, 200 Sq. Ft. 3. RENT. Lessee agrees to pay to the City rent ac- cording to the following schedule: $160/mo. ($.80 per sq. ft.) Payable on the first day of the month. If this lease commences on a day other than the first day of the month, then the Lessee shall pay upon the commencement of the lease the rental on a pro rata basis for the remainder of that month and commence a full rental pay- ment on the first day of the following month. 3A. OTHER CONDITIONS. The following additional condi- tions are agreed to by the Lessee: 1. Lessee shall not mark, drill or deface any walls, ceilings, floors, wood or iron work without Lessor's written consent. 2. No signs or awning shall be erected or maintained upon or attached to the outside of the premises except such signs showing the business of the Lessee. All such signs shall be in accordance with the policy established by the Lessor. 3. Room 6B is to be occupied by lessee Monday/ Wednesday/Friday from 12:00 noon to 5:00 p.m. and Tuesday/Thursday from 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. 4. USE. The Lessee agrees to use the premises only for the following purpose or purposes: Mediation Program And for no other purpose without the express written consent of the City. Lessee also agrees the premises shall not be used in violation of the Depratment of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) or School District Agreements as those agreements are interpreted by either the City or the Hermosa Beach City School District or the Department of Housing and Urban Development. 5. INSURANCE LIABILITY. Lessee shall obtain and maintain at all times during the term of this agreement Comprehensive General and Automobile Liability insurance protecting Lessee in amounts not less than $1,000,000 for personal injury to any one person, $1,000,000 for injuries arising out of any one occurrence, and $1,000,000 for property damage or a com- bined single limit of $1,000,000. Such insurance shall name City of Hermosa Beach and their officers, employees, elected officials and members of Boards or Commissions as additional insured parties. Coverage shall be in accordance with the sample certificates and endorsements attached hereto and must include the coverage and provisions indicated. Lessee shall file and maintain the required certificate(s) of insurance with the other party to this agreement at all times during the term of this agreement. The certificate(s) is to be filed prior to the commencement of the work or event and should state clearly: (1) The additional insured requested; (2) Thirty day prior notice of change or cancellation to the City of Hermosa Beach; (3) Insurance is primary to that of the Additional Insured; (4) Coverage included; (5)- Cross -liability clause. WORKER'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE. Lessee shall obtain and maintain at all times during the term of this agreement Work- er's Compensation and Employers Liability insurance and fur- nish the City (or Agency) with a certificate showing proof of such coverage. Such insurance shall not be cancelled or materially changed without a thirty (30) day prior written notice to: City Manager, City of Hermosa Beach. INSURANCE COMPANIES. Insurance companies must be rated (B:XIII) or better in Best's Insurance Rating Guide. 6. CONDITION OF THE PREMISES UPON TERMINATION OF THE LEASE. Lessee agrees to keep and maintain the premises in good con- dition and repair and to return to the City the premises upon termination of this lease in the same condition as when Les- see took possession of the premises excepting any repairs or alterations which were approved by the City, reasonable wear and tear excepted, and does promise to pay the City upon de- mand the reasonable sums to repair the premises in the event of a violation of this provision. 7. CONSTRUCTION. Lessee is prohibited from making any al- terations or performing any construction whatsoever on the premises without the expressed written approval of the City. Any such approval shall include provisions to protect the City from potential liens of labor and material persons. 8. DESTRUCTION, PARTIAL DESTRUCTION OR NECESSITY TO REPAIR BECAUSE OF CONDITIONS CAUSED BY OTHER THAN LESSEE. The City has no duty or obligation to reconstruct the premises in the event of destruction or partial destruction of the premises. The City at its option may reconstruct or repair the prem- ises, whereupon this lease shall remain in full force and effect except that no rent will be owing to the City during said period of reconstruction or repair if such reconstruc- tion or repair interferes with the tenancy created herein to the extent that the premises cannot be used for the purposes intended. In the event the City at its sole discretion determines not to reconstruct or repair the premises then either party at its option may cause this lease to be termi- nated and neither party shall have any liability each to each other. 9. HOLD HARMLESS. Lessee shall hold harmless and indemnify the City, its officers, agents and employees from every claim or demand which may be made by reason of any injury and/or death to persons and/or injury to property caused by any di- rect or indirect act or any omission of the lessee, its of- ficers, agents and employees arising out of the lessee's use of said premises. The lessee, at its own cost, expense and risk shall defend any and all actions, suits or other pro- ceedings that may be brought or instituted against the City on any such claim or demand, and pay or satisfy any judgment that may be rendered against the Lessor on any such action, suit, or legal proceedings as a result hereof.• 10. RULES, REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES. The Lessee agrees to comply strictly with all applicable laws and any uniform Com- munity Center rules and regulations adopted by the City Council. 11. TAXES AND CHARGES. Lessee agrees to pay when due any and all taxes, assessments or charges levied by any governmental agency on or to the lease -hold premises. 12. DEFAULT. Should Lessee fail to pay any monies due pur- suant to this lease within three days after written notice from the City or to perform any other obligation required pursuant to the terms of this lease within thirty days after notice from the City, City may immediately cause this lease to be terminated and thereafter take any action and pursue all remedies available under the laws then existent in the State of California. 13. NOTICE. Any notice required to be made or given pur- suant to the provisions of this lease may be either personal- ly served upon the party or deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, LESSOR: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH CITY HALL 1315 VALLEY DRIVE HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254 LESSEE: Los Angeles County Bar Assoc. Dispute REsolution Services 2830 Pico Blvd. Santa MOnica, CA 90405 Any notices so given pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph will be deemed served twenty-four hours after the deposit thereof in the United States mail. 14. ATTORNEYS FEES. The parties agree that in the event any action is instituted concerning any of the provisions of this lease agreement, the prevailing party may in the discretion of the court be granted as an additional item of damages its attorneys fees. 15. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING. Lessee may not assign or sublease all or any portion of the premises without the writ- ten consent of the City, which consent may be granted or de- nied at the exclusive and total discretion of the City. 16. SUCCESSORS. Subject to prior provisions, this lease is binding upon the heirs, assigns and successors of interest of the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Hermosa Beach Community Center Lease Agreement at Hermosa Beach on the day first hereinabove set forth. ATTEST: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, a Municipal Corporation, Lessor By CITY CLERK APPRI •1 AS 0 ?ORM: AI lairit! _II CITY ATTORNEY -...- DATE: LESSEE: MM:OORIO. CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCEISSUEDAAT PRODUCER SEABERRY - SMITH 1255 23rd Street NW Washington, DC 20037 Tel: (202) 296-8030 CODE SUB-CODE - (MM/DDD/YY) c: : *,:.. • ,.e 4 I10/4/90 i THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW 4.-•+ CONFERS AMEND, COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE COMPANY A LETTER THE PHOENIX INSURANCE COMPANY COMPANY LETTER B THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY • INSURED LOS ANGELES COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION 617 S. Olive Street Los Angeles, CA 90014 COMPANY LETTER C COMPANY D LETTER COMPANY E LETTER B-258 (revised) COVERAGES •i .. �, .. �-Y .. � � Li.w�la��"• A' SL.ii..r'w..4.JYiiiYi21 w(1O./.._..47:• THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. . .. �u.- • ip..ft, POLICY PERIOD TO WHICH THIS ALL THE TERMS, CO TYPE OF INSURANCE f POLICY NUMBER LTRI • POLICY EFFECTIVE' POLICY EXPIRATION DATE (MM/DD/YY) I DATE (MM/DD/YY) ' 3 ALL LIMITS IN THOUSANDS A4, GENERAL LIABILITY X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY --�; CLAIMS MADE -X; OCCUR. OWNER'S & CONTRACTOR'S PROT. YVN-650-880J538-8-PHX-90 I I 9-1-90 #(( 9-1-91 GENERAL AGGREGATE is AGGREGATE' $ 1,600, -1— ,000, 1,000, PRODUCTS-COMP/OPS PERSONAL & ADVERTISING INJURY $ EACH OCCURRENCE i& 1,00677 I FIRE DAMAGE (Any one fire) 50, IS person), $ 5, MEDICAL EXPENSE (Any one A AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY —± i 1 ANY AUTO tTr { ALL OWNED AUTOS lYVN-650-880J538-8-PHX-90 ; � i I 9 -1- 90 1 ' ' 9 -1- 91 COMBINED LIM TLE $ 1,000, A ,c , BODILY INJURY $ (Per person) SCHEDULED AUTOS XX HIRED AUTOS ,----.:.--1 NON-OWNED AUTOS i - BODILY INJURY $ (Per accident) GARAGE LIABILITY 'PROPERTY DAMAGE $ I EXCESS LIABILITY �__{ B? X1 •OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM 1 ! YSF-CUP-880J539A-90 I EACH I I OCCURRENCE 9-1-90 ? 9-1-91 ) $ 5,000, f - j AGGREGATE $ 5,000, WORKER'S COMPENSATION - AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY •l ; ; i STATUTORY i i , , $ (EACH ACCIDENT) $ (DISEASE-POLICY LIMIT) $ ; (DISEASE-EACH EMPLOYEE A DESCRIPTION The Named Location: OTHER Crime OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONS/VEHICLES/RESTRICTIONS/SPECIAL Certificate Holder is designated Insured's Officers, Agents, Room 6B, 710 Pier YVN-650-880J538-8-PHX-90 ITEMS Additional Insured (by and/or Employees in connection Ave., Hermosa Beach, 9-1-90 9-1-91 1 Employee Dishonesty $486,969 Per Loss an endorsement to be issued), but only as respects acts of the with the designated event. "Mediation Program" Ca Dates(s): 9/1/90 to 6/30/91 (Mon. to Fr; R•nn a m to 5.00 p.m.) CERTIFICATE City employees, of 1315 Hermosa ACORD HOLDER CANCELLATION t a -, :.. - .,_----• ... . - ,.: . of Hermosa Beach, their Officers elected officials and members Boards or Commissions Valley Drive Beach, Ca 90254-3885 SHOULD EXPIRATION MAIL LEFT LIABILITY . ...aa ANY OF THE DATE 30DAYS • ABOVE DESCRIBED THEREOF, THE • ' TEN NOTICE TO ISSUING THE ...,11...».__..::3.::.,.e.....,., POLICIES BE CANCELLED COMPANY WIL':\ENOE91LORI� CERTIFICATE HOLDER BEFORE THE NAMED TO THE (BIT- • R i. Alt-SUCH-N{OTLCE- ' •L-- IMPe E..NO=OBL1 ellirs, --CR OF AN a UPON THE,CON ITS AGENTS OR REPFTESENTATIVES:� AUTHORIZE EPRESE 1 - 44.4, ©ACORD CORPORATION 1988 25-S'(3/88) . •• - , FROM L A COUNTY EAR ASSOC L Ticia-E2 P.O. BOX 807. IAN FMANCISCO, CA 94101.0807 I NriuutAryeig PUN D CERTIFICATE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION INSURANCE OCTnBER 18, 1990 6. 6.1991 13:39 POLICY auMeeR? CEATIPICATE CXPlrtc3: r DISPUTE RESocuTION SERvICES INC. 2830 PILO EIL SANTA MONICA CA 90405 L 0473051 - 90 10-1-9) This 1s to certify that we have issued a valid Workers' Compensation insurance polity in a form approved by the California InturanCt CAmmillianer to the employer named below for the policy period indicated. This policy is not subject to cancellation by the Fund except upon ten days' whence written notice to the employer. We will auto give you TEN days' advanp notice mould this policy be cancelled prior to its normal expiration. Thie cenlflcst• of insurance a not an insurance policy and does not amend, extend or atter tht coverage afforded by the policies listed herein. Notwltnstanding any requirement. term, or condition of any contract or other document with respect to which this certificate of insurance may be issued or may pertain, the insurance afforded by the policies oeteribed herein is subject to sli the terms, exclusions and conditions of such policies. r L. SMPLOYER LOS ANGELES COUNTY BAR ASSN. 617 9. OLIVE ST f200 LOS ANGZLES CA 90014 4 lP lo3e2 (RItV.aa-eel PREsuseNT OLD ieaA P. 4 r Juhe 4, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the City Council of June 11, 1991 PROJECT TOUCH LEASE AGREEMENT (ROOM 11) RECOMMENDATION The Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Commission and Staff recommend that Council approve the attached agreement between the City of Hermosa Beach and Project Touch to lease Room 11 in the Community Center and authorize Mayor to sign agreement. BACKGROUND Project Touch presently leases Room C, Room 11 and 3 in the Community Center. They have been tenants in the Center since October, 1979. They have presented programs that help teens and preteens participate positively in their homes, schools and community in the South Bay area for 12 years. ANALYSIS The lease space for Room 11 is 400 sq. ft. with a monthly rental of $308 ($.77 sq. ft.). This rate will be in effect until July 1, 1991 and then will increase to $.80 sq. ft. or $320 per month. The attached lease conforms to the present square footage rental policy (approved by the Commission January 24, 1990 and by City Council on March 13, 1990) with all other conditions of the former lease remaining the same. Their residency in the Community Center has been of great value in addressing a vital social service function for Hermosa Beach. Concur: Mary ooney, Director Dept of Com unity. esources 'Kevin B. NorthF/raft City Manager 1 Respectfully, sum fitted, ✓ /�►—t 2 -• Marsha Ernst Administrative Aide Dept. of Community Resources Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Director Finance Department lf HERMOSA BEACH COMMUNITY CENTER LEASE AGREEMENT This Leasing Agreement is made and entered into on this, the 11th day of June 1991 , by and between the City of Hermosa Beach, a Municipal Corporation (City) and Project Touch (Lessee). A. RECITALS: 1. The City is the owner of a recreational/civic service facility generally referred to as the Hermosa Beach Com- munity Center (referred to herein as the "facility"). 2. The facility is subject to certain agreements and deed restrictions entered into on the 28th day of February 1978, between the City and the Hermosa Beach City School District and is further subject to certain provisions imposed by the Department of Housing and Urban Develop- ment as set forth in a document entitled Agreement for Sale and Purchase of Real Property and dated the 28th day of February 1978. These documents are on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City and are public documents and by reference are incorporated into this leasing agreement and are referred to herein as the HUD and SCHOOL DISTRICT AGREEMENTS. 3. The Lessee desires to use a portion of the facility, on the terms and conditions set out herein. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. TERM. The term of this lease shall be for a period of one (1) year commencing on the 1st day of July ,1991 , and ending on the 30th day of June ,1992 2. DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES. The Lessee is leasing from the City that portion of the facility described as: Room 11 400 sq. ft. 3. RENT. Lessee agrees to pay to the City rent ac- cording to the following schedule: July 1, 1991, to June 30, 1992: $320/mo. $.80 sq. ft Payable on the first day of the month. If this lease commences on a day other than the first day of the month, then the Lessee shall pay upon the commencement of the lease the rental on a pro rata basis for the remainder of that month and commence a full rental pay- ment on the first day of the following month. 1 3A. OTHER CONDITIONS. The following additional condi- tions are agreed to by the Lessee: 1. Lessee shall not mark, drill or deface any walls, ceilings, floors, wood or iron work without Lessor's written consent. 2. No signs or awning shall be erected or maintained upon or attached to the outside of the premises except such signs showing the business of the Lessee. All such signs shall be in accordance with the policy established by the Lessor. 4. USE. The Lessee agrees to use the premises only for the following purpose or purposes: Counseling services And for no other purpose without the express written consent of the City. Lessee also agrees the premises shall not be used in violation of the Depratment of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) or School District Agreements as those agreements are interpreted by either the City or the Hermosa Beach City School District or the Department of Housing and Urban Development. 5. INSURANCE LIABILITY. Lessee shall obtain and maintain at all times during the term of this agreement Comprehensive General and Automobile Liability insurance protecting Lessee in amounts not less than $1,000,000 for personal injury to any one person, $1,000,000 for injuries arising out of any one occurrence, and $1,000,000 for property damage or a com- bined single limit of $1,000,000. Such insurance shall name City of Hermosa Beach and their officers., employees, elected officials and members of Boards or Commissions as additional insured parties. Coverage shall be in accordance with the sample certificates and endorsements attached hereto and must include the coverage and provisions indicated. Lessee shall file and maintain the required certificate(s) of insurance with the other party to this agreement at all times during the term of this agreement. The certificate(s) is to be filed prior to the commencement of the work or event and should state clearly: (1) The additional insured requested; (2) Thirty day prior notice of change or cancellation to the City of Hermosa Beach; (3) Insurance is primary to that of the Additional Insured; (4) Coverage included; (5) Cross -liability clause. 2 WORKER'S COMPENSATION INSURANCE. Lessee shall obtain and maintain at all times during the term of this agreement Work- er's Compensation and Employers Liability insurance and fur- nish the City (or Agency) with a certificate showing proof of such coverage. Such insurance shall not be cancelled or materially changed without a thirty (30) day prior written notice to: City Manager, City of Hermosa Beach. INSURANCE COMPANIES. Insurance companies must be rated (B:XIII) or better in Best's Insurance Rating Guide. 6. CONDITION OF THE PREMISES UPON TERMINATION OF THE LEASE. Lessee agrees to keep and maintain the premises in good con- dition and repair and to return to the City the premises upon termination of this lease in the same condition as when Les- see took possession of the premises excepting any repairs or alterations which were approved by the City, reasonable wear and tear excepted, and does promise to pay the City upon de- mand the reasonable sums to repair the premises in the event of a violation of this provision. 7. CONSTRUCTION. Lessee is prohibited from making any al- terations or performing any construction whatsoever on the premises without the expressed written approval of the City. Any such approval shall include provisions to protect the City from potential liens of labor and material persons. 8. DESTRUCTION, PARTIAL DESTRUCTION OR NECESSITY TO REPAIR BECAUSE OF CONDITIONS CAUSED BY OTHER THAN LESSEE. The City has no duty or obligation to reconstruct the premises in the event of destruction or partial destruction of the premises. The City at its option may reconstruct or repair the prem- ises, whereupon this lease shall remain in full force and effect except that no rent will be owing to the City during said period of reconstruction or repair if such reconstruc- tion or repair interferes with the tenancy created herein to the extent that the premises cannot be used for the purposes intended. In the event the City at its sole discretion determines not to reconstruct or repair the premises then either party at its option may cause this lease to be termi- nated and neither party shall have any liability each to each other. 9. HOLD HARMLESS. Lessee shall hold harmless and indemnify the City, its officers, agents and employees from every claim or demand which may be made by reason of any injury and/or death to persons and/or injury to property caused by any di- rect or indirect act or any omission of the Lessee, its of- ficers, agents and employees arising out of the lessee's use of said premises. The lessee, at its own cost, expense and risk shall defend any and all actions, suits or other pro- ceedings that may be brought or instituted against the City on any such claim or demand and pay or satisfy any judgment that may be rendered against the Lessor on any such action, suit, or legal proceedings as a result hereof. 10. RULES, REGULATIONS AND ORDINANCES. The Lessee agrees to comply strictly with all applicable laws and any uniform Com- munity Center rules and regulations adopted by the City Council. 11. TAXES AND CHARGES. Lessee agrees to pay when due any and all taxes, assessments or charges levied by any governmental agency on or to the lease -hold premises. 12. DEFAULT. Should Lessee fail to pay any monies due pur- suant to this lease within three days after written notice from the City or to perform any other obligation required pursuant to the terms of this lease within thirty days after notice from the City, City may immediately cause this lease to be terminated and thereafter take any action and pursue all remedies available under the laws then existent in the State of California. 13. NOTICE. Any notice required to be made or given pur- suant to the provisions of this lease may be either personal- ly served upon the party or deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, LESSOR: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH CITY HALL 1315 VALLEY DRIVE HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254 LESSEE: Project Touch 710 Pier Avenue Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Attn: Julie Dorr Feys Any notices so given pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph will be deemed served twenty-four hours after the deposit thereof in the United States mail. 14. ATTORNEYS FEES. The parties agree that in the event any action is instituted concerning any of the provisions of this lease agreement, the prevailing party may in the discretion of the court be granted as an additional item of damages its attorneys fees. 15. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING. Lessee may not assign or sublease all or any portion of the premises without the writ- ten consent of the City, which consent may be granted or de- nied at the exclusive and total discretion of the City. 16. SUCCESSORS. Subject to prior provisions, this lease is binding upon the heirs, assigns and successors of interest of the parties. 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Hermosa Beach Community Center Lease Agreement at Hermosa Beach on the day first hereinabove set forth. ATTEST: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, a Municipal Corporation, Lessor By CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY DATE: LESSEE: 5 PRODUCER Chapman & Associates Inc 261 N. San Gabriel Blvd. (813) 405-8031 Pasadena, CA 91107 INSURED Project Touch 710 Pier Avenue Hermosa Beach, CA 90254-0001 • .;E DATE (MM/DD/YY)::.. j 07/12/90 5 CERTIFICATE IS ISSUE' ':,ATTER Cr INFORM!, '1'J ONLY AND CONFERS : RIGHTS UPON Ti IE• c HOLDER. THIS CEFI 'Th.:ATE DOES NOT AMEND, F.XTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. ,-'ANY A LETTER COMPANY B LETTER COMPANIES AFFORD 1 "OVEERAGE Great American Fidelity & Deposit COMPANY L• LETTER COMPANY D LETTER COMPANY E LETTER COVtRAGBS s >: THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANLE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. CO LTR TYPE OF INSURANCE POUCY NUMBER POLICY EFFECTIVE DATE (MM/DO YY) POLICY EXPIRATION DATE (MM/DD/YY) ALL UWRB IN 1HOUSANO GENERAL LIABILITY X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS MADE X OCCUR. OWNER'S 8 CONTRACTOR'S PROT X Personal Injury PAC2798631 07/22/90 07/22/91 GENERAL AGGREGATE f 2.000 PRODUCTS.COMP/OPS AGGREGATE f 1,000 PERSONAL I ADVERTISING INJURY $ 1,000 EACH OCCURRENCE f 1,000 FIRE DAMAGE (Any one Ire) $ 50 MEDICAL EXPENSE (My one person) s A AUTOMOBILE UABIUTY X X ANY AUTO ALL OWNED AUTOS SCHEDULED AUTOS HIRED AUTOS NON -OWNED AUTOS GARAGE LIABILITY PAC2798631 07/22/90 07/22/91 COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT 1,000 BODILY INJURY (Per perbn) BODILY INJURY (Per acddent) PROPERTY DAMAGE EXCESS LIABILITY OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM EACH OCCURRENCE f AGGREGATE WORKER'S COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS'UABIUTY STATUTORY f (EACH ACCIDENT) $ (DISEASE—POLICY LIMIT) B OTHER Crime Fidelity Bond 9569130 07/01/90 07/01/91 $50, (DISEASE—EACH EMPLOYEE) DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONSNEHCLESSPECIAL ITEMS certificate holder included as additional insured as respects liability CERTIFICATEHOLDER<> City of Hermosa Beach Civic Center Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 A60 25.3;1-1 84�`, l~i4NCEti AT10N SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL RxxTQ MAIL 30 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, .•.. • • ••..' ,.• ,.., ., : ,h./ , •1• ••/.1. •. •./. II. • ' •.1,' . S $. .1 • • : • •ti • • •%1 1•• I'.• 1•i• • � - •• •1.11. • •• L -•i• •.► •..' .. • AUTHORIZED REPRESEIl/ATIVE Asa?>". INSURANCE FUND IT IS ACjHEEU THAT THE CLASSIFICATIONS AND RATES PER S100 OF REMUNERATION APPEARING IN THE CONTINUOUS POLICY ISSUED TO THIS EMPLOYER ARE AMENDED AS SHOWN BELOW. HERE ARE YOUR NEW RATES FOR THE PERIOD INDICATED. IF YOUR NAME OR ADDRESS SHOULD BE CORRECTED OR IF INSURANCE IS NOT NEEDED FOR NEXT YEAR, PLEASE TELL US. CONTINUOUS POLICY 536492-90 IMPORTANT THIS IS NOT A BILL SEND NO MONEY UNLESS STATEMENT IS ENCLOSED THE RATING PERIOD BEGINS AND ENDS AT 12:01AM PACIFIC STANDARD TIME PROJECT TOUCH 710 PIER AVE. HERMOSA BEACH, CALIF 90254 RATING PERIOD 7-26-90 TO 7-26-91 . DEPOSIT PREMIUM $250.00 MINIMUM PREMIUM $105.00 PREMIUM ADJUSTMENT PERIOD ANNUALLY RSV NAME OF EMPLOYER- PROJECT TOUCH CORPORATION A NON-PROFIT TAX EXEMPT CORP CODE NO. PRINCIPAL WORK AND RATES EFFECTIVE TO 07-26-91 8810 CLERICAL OFFICE EMPLOYEES--N.O.C. 8868 COLLEGES OR SCHOOLS --PRIVATE TOTAL ESTIMATED ANNUAL PREMIUM $105 .91 2.16 COUNTERSIGNED AND ISSUED AT SAN FRANCISCO MAY 1, 1990 POLICY FORM K 1L (OVER PLEASE) SC1F FORM 10242 (REV_ 7-a4I Nothing herein contained shall be held to vary, alter, waive or extend any of the terms, conditions agreement„ or limitations of the Policy other than as herein stated. When countersigned by a duly authorized officer or representative of the State Compensation Insurance Fund, these declarations shall be valid and form part of the Policy. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE Wag - PRESIDENT If you have any questions, please contact your local State Fund Office below: West Los Angeles District Office 5700 Wilshire Blvd Los Angeles, CA 90036 Telephone No. (213) 965-2100 June 3, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council June 11, 1991 REQUEST TO APPROVE REVISED CLASS SPECIFICATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached revised class specification for Public Works Superintendent. Background: The existing class specification for Public Works Superintendent was developed in 1980. As part of the on-going review of all the City's class specifications, this specification has now been reviewed and revised. The proposed class specification was prepared following a review of similar class specifications from other cities, interviews with the current Public Works Superintendent, the Public Works Director and Public Works Leadpersons. The Union was also consulted. This revised class specification was approved by the Civil Service Board on May 29, 1991. Analysis: The revisions are extensive as a result of updating the specifications to reflect current duties and responsibilities which have significantly changed over the past eleven (11) years. Attached is a copy of the current class specification dated 1980 and a copy of the proposed revised class specification dated May 1991. Respectfully submitted: Robert A. Blackwood Personnel Director peradmin/sup - 1 - Concur: evin B. Northcraft Ci Manager A t onj Antich Public Works Di ector lW3 Michael Flaherty Chief Union Stewar Teamster Union, Local 911 ig • PARKS AND PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT Definition Under direction, to assist in directing the maintenance and repair of municipal public works, public buildings, public parks and right-of-way, and allied facilities by assigning and supervising the day-to-day activities of the several crews and units; and to do related work as required. Typical Tasks Confers with Director of Public Works on work planning and scheduling; makes detailed job assignments to crew leaders and maintenance personnel working• individually; inspects jobs in progress aid upon completion for workmanship and compliance with standards; inspects new jobs and determines work needed; advises subordinate personnel on proper work methods and safety practices; sees that needed supplies and equipment are on hand for scheduled work; orders supplies, materials and tools; investigates and reports on complaints; prepares time and materials reports and reports of work accomplished; acts for Director of Public Works in his absence. Employment Standards Any combination of education and experience equivalent to graduation from high school and two years of supervisory ex- perience in public works maintenance activities. Knowledge of the materials, equipment and practices used in the patching and resurfacing of asphalt streets and the installation and repair of curbs, sidewalks and other concrete structures; knowledge of pipe laying and sewer maintenance operations, knowledge of the maintenance and operating require- ments of medium and light maintenance and construction equip- ment; knowledge of building maintenance methods and equipment; ability to estimate repair and maintenance work; ability to read engineering drawings; supervisory ability; ability to keep records and make reports. Ability to plan, organize, assign, train and supervise the work of parks landscape main- tenance personnel. 5/80 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH City of Hermosa Beach Class Specification PUBLIC WORKS SUPERINTENDENT DEFINITION: Under the general direction of the Director of Public Works, to have responsible charge of maintenance work for the following divisions in the Public Works Department: Parks and Medians Landscaping, Street Maintenance, Sanitary Sewers and Storm Drains Maintenance, Traffic Safety Maintenance, Street Lighting Maintenance, Building Maintenance and Equipment Service; to provide highly responsible and technical staff assistance; and to do related work as required. EXAMPLES OF RESPONSIBILITIES: Administration: Develop short and long-range goals, objectives, policies, and priorities. Plan and schedule work. Respond to citizen and general public complaints and inquiries by investigation and discussion with property owners and residents. Prepare reports to City Council with approval of the Director of Public Works. Make analyses and write reports and/or letters. Formulate, prepare and recommend for approval: policies, procedures, studies and reports. Serve on various departmental committees. Assume lead responsibility for special departmental programs such as safety, training, and emergency planning. Represent the City in the community and at professional meetings as required. Supervise department safety programs. Requisition supplies, materials and tools. Assist in budget preparation; oversee payroll report; prepare cost estimates; prepare, administer and implement the departmental budget for the various divisions. Prepare labor, equipment and material reports. Train and evaluate subordinates on proper work methods and safety practices. Give advice and assistance to supervisors. Select, supervise, train and evaluate staff. Resolve operational and personnel problems which cannot be handled by lower level supervisors. May be required to serve as Director of Public Works in the Director's absence. Public Works Maintenance: Plan, direct, supervise and coordinate the activities of the Public Works Department field maintenance operations in their efforts to provide services to the community. Assign workers among the various crews depending on workload; transmit and interpret orders/work orders and reports on progress. Prepare annual work plan. Coordinate the work of several crews; make inspections during the progress of repair or maintenance on public works projects and programs to insure compliance with plans and specifications. Conduct review of activities for purposes of detecting problem areas and improving efficiency and productivity. May be required to respond to emergency situations. QUALIFICATIONS: Knowledge of: materials, methods, practices and equipment used in street cleaning; street, sewer or storm drain system repair; maintenance or construction activities; park landscape maintenance; traffic safety and street lighting; principles of administration, supervision, training, public works maintenance practice, safety practices, budgeting and project record keeping; hazards and safety precautions. Knowledge of: methods of repairing and maintaining asphalt and concrete streets, sanitary sewers and sewer laterals, catch basins, and other appurtenant structures. Knowledge of: trenches, graders, rollers, concrete mixers, compressors, and street maintenance equipment. Knowledge of and practice in welding is desirable. Ability to: read simple engineering plans; to prepare written reports; to organize, train, supervise and evaluate a group of employees engaged in varied activities; assist in preparing contract documents and division budgets and to operate within an - 2 - approved budget; work and deal courteously and effectively with the general public as well as co-workers; establish and maintain effective relationships with City personnel and the public. Ability to: set up and maintain record-keeping systems; communicate clearly and concisely, orally and in writing. Ability to effectively communicate in writing is mandatory. Ability to properly interpret and make decisions in accordance with laws, regulations and policies. Must be able to successfully demonstrate computer proficiency on applicable programs (i.e., time sheets, work order and equipment maintenance) within one year probationary period. Training to be provided by the City. Training and Experience: In order to qualify for this position the applicant must show any combination of training and experience which provides the required knowledge and abilities. A typical way to obtain the knowledge and abilities would be: Six (6) years progressively responsible Public Works field maintenance activities, plus three (3) years in a supervisory capacity, for a total of nine (9) years experience as a minimum. Education: Graduation from high school (or a G.E.D. Certificate) and two years full time college level training (60 semester units) in public works, public administration, engineering or related field. In lieu of two years full time college, demonstrated participation in budgeting; personnel management; administrative functions; engineering; supervisory training or other related experiences may be evaluated by the City for substitution. License: A valid California driver's license at the time of appointment and to be maintained as valid during course of employment. Approved by Civil Service Board: 05/29/91 Approved by City Council peradmin/pwsup 05/29/91 June 3, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council June 11, 1991 STATUS REPORT AQMD REGULATION XV -TRIP REDUCTION PLAN Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council receive and file this report. Background: On July 24, 1990 the Council approved the City's Trip Reduction Plan which was prepared in accordance with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) Regulation XV. This plan was subsequently approved by the AQMD in November 1990. At the February 12, 1991 meeting Council received and filed the first status report on the City's AQMD Regulation XV -Trip Reduction Plan. Analysis: A survey of employees was distributed in January 1991 to ascertain participation in alternative modes of transportation. Listed below are the results of that January survey and current participation in the Commuter Club. # Participating # Participating Jan 1991 June 1991 2 person carpool 3 2 Walk or bike 4 11 Public Transit 0 0 TOTAL: 7 13 There are thirteen employees who are registered in the "Commuter Club". Incentives ranging from $10/month (for carpooling) to $15/month (walking or bicycling) are paid to those members of the Commuter Club who participate in alternative transportation an average of three times per week. At this point, the increase in participation over the January numbers appears to be a combination of both increased employee awareness of the incentive program and the onset of warmer weather (this increases the employee's motivation to walk or ride their bike as opposed to those cold winter mornings and evenings). The City is required to submit an annual update in November 1991. Prior to submitting this update, an eight (8) hours training - 1 - 111 course is required which is being scheduled. Also, Computer Transportation Services (aka Commuter Computer) will calculate the City's Average Vehicle Ridership (AVR) which is a required component of the Regulation XV plan update. Employee surveys used to calculate the AVR will be circulated in August. Summary: Staff continues to encourage participation in alternative transportation through notices in the employee newsletter, distribution of posters to city departments, and distribution of rideshare match -lists provided by Commuter Computer, as well as word-of-mouth promotion. Also, staff will be promoting "Rideshare Week" scheduled for September 23 - 27, 1991 and the "1991 Keep California Moving Day" on September 24, 1991 by attempting to get employees to "pledge" to use an alternative to driving alone during that week or, at a minimum, on Sept. 24th. Respectfully su Robert A. Blackwood Personnel Director Concur: 'Kevin B. Northcraft City Manager June 3, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council of June 11, 1991 STAFF FOLLOW-UP PROCEDURES TO COUNCIL ACTIONS Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council receive and file this report. Background: At the February 20, 1991 goals setting meeting of the City Coun- cil, Council expressed lack of knowledge about the staff's pro- cedure for following up Council actions. This report is intended to supply that information. Analysis: Actions of the City Council are typed up by the Council secretary the day after a Council meeting, reviewed and edited by the City Manager, and distributed to all departments via the annotated agenda called the "Action Sheet". This document describes the action of the City Council, and assigns necessary implementation to the appropriate department. When more than one department is involved, it delegates the responsibility to implement the action to a primary and secondary department. If the action of the Council will require a future Council item to implement, that item is then put on the City's Tentative Fu- ture Agenda. That document is updated weekly for staff use, and also is included for Council and public information on every Council regular meeting agenda. Further, if the follow-up implementation by)staff is of a non- routine nature, the action occasionally is also put on the City Manager's computerized Assignment Log. This log is distributed twice a month to the departments, to insure that no inquiries or routine follow-ups of requests and direction are missed. Finally, the action sheets are reviewed as part of the department head Quarterly Evaluation Process to insure that all follow-up actions have been appropriately handled. Kevin B. � No`rth9taft City Manager KBN/ld 1i crrgyia- June 4, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council June 11, 1991 ACCEPT WORK AS COMPLETE FOR BASKETBALL COURTS AT CLARK FIELD CIP 89-512 Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Accept as complete the Basketball Courts at Clark Field constructed by Hines Construction Company at a cost of $91,020. 2. Authorize the Mayor to sign to sign the Notice of Completion. 3. Authorize staff to: a) Release the retention payment to Hines Construction Company b) Release Hines Construction Company from the Faithful Performance Bond and the Labor and Materials Bond. Background: On November 13, 1990, the City Council awarded a contract in the amount not to exceed of $94,750 to Hines Construction Company for the construction of two full-size basketball courts at Clark Field. Analysis: This section is divided as follows: 1. Construction A. Project Constructed According to Plans and Specifications B. Time Schedule C. Notice of Completion D. Release of Bonds E. Construction Costs 2. Inspection 3. Fiscal Impact and project Accounting - 1 - lk 1. Construction A. Project Constructed According to Plans and Specifications The staff recommends acceptance of the work as complete. The project was constructed according to the plans and specifications prepared by the consultant, Harris and Associates. B. Time Schedule Below is a summary of the project time Start Date Original contract time Original completion date Days added by Change Orders* Adjusted Contract Completion Date Date of Substantial Completion *Due to Southern California Edison voltage line. schedule: January 30, 1991 60 calendar days March 30, 1991 65 calendar days May 15, 1991 May 15, 1991 relocation of high The project was substantially completed within the adjusted contract time. Staff recommends not to assess liquidated damages. The contractor made reasonable progress in performing cleanup and removal of his equipment. C. Notice of Completion Staff recommends City Council authorize the Mayor to sign a Notice of Completion. The signed Notice of Completion will be recorded with the County Recorder's Office. D. Release of Bonds Pending City Council authorization, after the Notice of Completion is recorded, staff will release Hines Construction Company from the obligation of the following bonds: Faithful Performance bond Bonding Company Original Bond Amount Amount to be Released Bond No. Labor and Materials Bond Bonding Company Original Bond Amount Amount to be Released Bond No. CBIC Bonding and Insurance Co. $86,137 $86,137 CA2501 CBIC Bonding and Insurance Co. $86,137 $86,137 CA2501 Also pending City Council approval, the retention payment in the amount of $9,101.99 will be released to Hines Construction Company thirty-five (35) days after recordation of the Notice of Completion (provided no stop notices or mechanics liens are received within that time period). E. Construction Costs Original Contract Amount Quantity Adjustments $86,137.00 < 3,636.11> $82,500.89 Change Orders C.O. No. 1 - Add trench drain $ 6,300.00 C.O. No. 2 - Add vehicle gate 635.00 C.O. No. 3 - Add contract time -0- C.O. No. 4 - Electrical Changes 809.00 C.O. No. 5 - Screening Changes 775.00 Adjusted Contract Amount $91,019.89 Contract Amount not to Exceed $94,750.00 Amount Under budget $ 3,730.11 2. Inspection All inspection on this project was performed in-house utilizing City engineering staff. 3. Fiscal Impact and Project Accounting Shown below are project expenditures and funding sources by FY. Expenditures Plans, Specs and Estimates Construction Inspection* Other Costs * Performed in-house, expenditures FY 89-90 $6,744 -0- - 0- - 0- $6,744 FY 90-91 $ 68 91,020 -0- 3,188 $94,276 not recorded. Funding Sources FY 89-90 125 Park Fac. Rec. Tax Fund 150 Grant Fund Per Capita Grant No. 88-1-19025 R -Z -H Grant No. BB -19-384 1986 Parklands Grant No. 86-1-19095 - 0- $6,744 - 0- - 0- $6,744 FY 90-91 $31,711 51,256 7,181 4,128 $94,276 Total $ 6,812 91,020 -0- 3,188 $101,020 Total $ 31,711 58,000 7,181 4,128 $101,020 Alternatives: Other alternatives considered by staff and available to City Council are: 1. Do not accept construction as complete. Respectfully submitted, AZ44,W 44 Brian Gengle4 Assistant Engineer Noted For Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Director of Finance pworks/ccstbbct Concur: Lynn A. Terry Deputy City Engineer ;JAIV z Anthony Antich Director of Public Works /4.-/7!/7-/`; : Kevin B. Northcraft City Manager J° ,6-// - 9l May 31, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council June 11, 1991 CIP 90-151 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING PROGRAM REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL TO CONDUCT A HIGH ACCIDENT IDENTIFICATION, SURVEILLANCE AND NEIGHBORHOOD INTRUSION STUDY Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Authorize the staff to solicit requests for proposals to conduct a High Accident Identification and Surveillance Study and a Neighborhood Intrusion Study. 2. Authorize staff to issue addenda as necessary. Background: During 1989, the Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) conducted an evaluation of the Traffic Safety and Enforcement operations in the City. The City requested grant funding for a project to accomplish the objectives stated by the OTS review team in 1989. However, the City did not qualify for funding at that time. On April 24, 1990, the City Council approved another memorandum proposal to OTS in order to obtain grant funding for a project to identify high accident locations and to study neighborhood traffic intrusion. On June 26, 1990 the City Council considered and approved the FY 1990-92 budget and five year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project number CIP 90-151, titled Traffic Engineering Program which was included in the CIP and was to be funded by a grant from the Office of Traffic Safety. On January 31, 1991, the City received a letter from OTS informing the City that its grant request for a high accident location had been approved. On March 12, 1991, the City Council authorized the City Manager to sign an agreement with the Office of Traffic Safety and authorized staff to issue addenda as necessary. The grant amount is $40,000 and is for the following: Develop a high accident location and identification program which would include frequency of occurrence, severity and rate of occurrence as its main components, and recommend practical improvements. - 1 - - Provide traffic engineering services to assist and instruct City staff in the basic traffic engineering concepts to maintain the program, and specific mitigations to improve safety. - Conduct studies of two representative neighborhoods within Hermosa Beach where they are experiencing traffic intrusion due to the high traffic volumes from the major arterials, such as Pacific Coast Highway. This study was directed by City Council as part of the circulation element implementation plan. Due to the City's limited manpower, it was determined by the State and City that the study should be conducted using outside consultants. A request for proposals has been prepared to advertise for qualified consultants to perform the study and is available for review in the Office of the City Clerk. Analysis: The analysis is divided as follows: 1. The Request For Proposals 2. Consistency With City Goals 3. Funding Sources 1. The Request For Proposals Two distinct areas of study have been identified by both the City and OTS. - The need to continue to improve the present "high accident identification and surveillance program". - The need to study neighborhood circulation and traffic intrusion to avoid increased accidents on residential streets that are being forced to carry diverted commuter traffic. Both studies have elements not only common to each other, but in concert with the overall goals and objectives of the City's traffic engineering program. Any study of high accident identification must include accident rates. This requires traffic volume data. Likewise, the proper signing, marking and regulation of access in a neighborhood (determined from a traffic study) can lead to a reduction in certain types of accidents that normally occur when neighborhood intrusion is high. Area wide problems such as increasing traffic due to commercial developments, heavily congested morning and evening peak period commuter traffic and bumper to bumper beach oriented traffic continue to make it extremely difficult for many streets to handle the traffic volumes. Neighborhood intrusion is on the increase and the sideswipe, right angle and parked vehicle accidents are increasing. The purpose ofthis study is to provide adequate information for the City Council to make a decision based on the alternative strategies to reduce accidents and reduce neighborhood intrusion. 2. Consistency With City Goals On March 12, 1991 the City Council approved goals for the City. This report and its recommendation are consistent with the goals: Goal 1 Improve City financial picture. Goal 2 Improve efficiency/effectiveness of operations. Objective: Increase service level of employees without increasing staff. Goal 11C Maintain and implement long range plans. Objective: Implement Capital Improvement Program. 3. Funding Sources No City funds will be expended. Only the State OTS Grant funds will be used. The OTS grant is estimated at $40,000. The City will contribute all personnel services necessary for coordination, supervision and evaluation of the project. Alternatives: Other alternatives available to the City Council and considered by staff are: 1. Attempt to do the study in house with available staff. This is not recommended by the Director of Public Works or the State Office of Traffic Safety Staff. Respectfully submitted, Edward Ruz3 City Traffic En neer Noted For Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Director pworks/ccsrid Concur: k An y Antich Director of Publ Works Steve Wisniewski Public Safety Director evin B. North City Manager PROJECT NAME: C.I.P. Project No. 90-151 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING PROGRAM. Request for Proposals to prepare a high accident identification and surveillance study and program, and a neighborhood intrusion study and program. Tentative Schedule ---- Actual Schedule \\\\\\\\\ SCHEDULE TASKS JUNE JULY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG -I ----I- -I--I----I---"I- -I- -- I--I----I- I- --I- --I-- -I- -I Prepare request for proposals Advertise for proposals Consultant selection procedure Award contract Sign contract Issue "Notice to Proceed" Study period Monitor and review consultant Final Council approv. before constr. advert. I---I----I--I----I- ---I -- -I- -I----I----I- --I- --I----I- -I- I- --I ----I----I- ---I- - -I----I----I----I- ---I---I----I----I----I----I----I- ---I I- I- -I- -I-- -I----I- --I--I----I- -I- -I- --I ---I- -I- -I -I I- I- -I----I----I- ---I- --I- --I- -I- --I- --I- -I -I-- -I-- -I- -I ----I----I- ---I- - I----I----I----I----I- ---I- -I-- -I- --I--I----I- --I I-- - I----I----I- -- I - ---I- ---I- -I- --I- --I- I- -I- -I---I----I----I I- I-- -I- -I-- -I----I---I----I-- -I- -I- --I---I----I- --I- -I- -I I- --I--I----I-- I--I--I- I ----I- -I- --I----I----I- -I- --I- -I -- -I-- -I- -I- --I-- -I- -I- --I- --I- -I- -I- -I- -I- I- --I- -I ----I -I- --I- I-- -I- -I- -I-- -I- -I- I---I----I---I----I- -I ----I----I---I----I----I- ---I- - I ----I- -I- I- --I----I--- I - ---I- ---I ,Q #-34470'74" 91 June 3, 1991 City Council Meeting June 11, 1991 Mayor and Members of the City Council ORDINANCE NO. 91-1054- "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING MOBILE SOURCE AIR POLLUTION REDUCTION ORDINANCE." "Submitted for adoption is Ordinance No. 91-1054, relating to the above subject." At the meeting of May 28, 1991, this ordinance was introduced by the following vote: AYES: Creighton, Essertier, Mayor Sheldon NOES: Midstokke, Wiemans ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Concur: Respectfully submitted, evin B. ort Cr. t, City Manager 2 a 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 ORDINANCE NO. 91 - 1054 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING MOBILE SOURCE AIR POLLUTION REDUCTION ORDINANCE Whereas, the City Council held a meeting on May 28, 1991 and made the following findings; A. The City is committed to improving the public health, safety and welfare, including air quality; B. Mobile sources are a major contributor to air pollution in the South Coast Air Basin; C. Air quality goals for the region established by state law cannot be met without reducing air pollution from mobile sources; D. The South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) calls upon cities and counties to reduce emissions from motor vehicles consistent with the requirements of the California Clean Air Act of 1988 by developing and implementing mobile source air pollution reduction programs; E. Such programs place demands upon the City's funds, those programs should be financed by shifting the responsibility for financing from the general fund to the motor vehicles creating the demand, to the greatest extent possible; F. Section 44223, added to the Health and Safety Code by action of the California Legislature on September 30, 1990 (Chapter 90-1705), authorizes the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) to impose an additional motor vehicle registration fee of two dollars ($2), commencing on April 1, 1991, increasing to four dollars ($4), commencing on April 1, 1992, to finance the implementation of transportation 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 r measures embodied in the AQMP and provisions of the California Clean Air Act; G. Forty cents of every dollar collected under Section 44223 of the Health and Safety Code shall be distributed to cities and counties located in the South Coast Air Quality Management District that comply with Section 44243 of the code, based on the jurisdictions' prorated share of population as defined by the State Department of Finance; H. The City is located within the South Coast Air Quality Management District and is eligible to receive a portion of the revenues from the additional motor vehicle registration fees contingent upon adoption of this ordinance; I. The prorated share of the fee revenues for cities that fail to adopt an ordinance pursuant to Section 44243(b)(3) of the Health and Safety Code shall be distributed instead to the jurisdictions within the District that have adopted an ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Hermosa Beach, California, does hereby ordain amending the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code by adding the following: SECTION 1. Chapter 2 Article XII. Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Program and Fund. Sec. 2-140 Intent. This ordinance is intended to support the SCAQMD's imposition of the vehicle registration fee and to bring the City into compliance with the requirements set forth in section 44243 of the Health and Safety Code in order to receive fee revenues for the purpose of implementing programs to reduce air pollution from motor vehicles. Sec. 2-141 Definitions. As applied in this ordinance, the following words and terms shall be defined as follows: 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 (1) "City" shall mean the City of Hermosa Beach. (2) "Mobile source air pollution reduction programs" shall mean any program or project implemented by the City to reduce air pollution from motor vehicles which it determines will be consistent with the California Clean Air Act of 1988 or the plan proposed pursuant to Article 5 (commencing with Section 40460) of Chapter 5.5 of Part 3 of the California Health and Safety Code. (3)"Fee Administrator" shall mean the Finance Director of the City or his designee. Sec. 2-142 Administration of Vehicle Registration Fee (1) Receipt of Fee: The additional vehicle registration fees disbursed by the SCAQMD and remitted to the City, pursuant to this ordinance, shall be accepted by the Fee Administrator. (2) Establishment of Air Quality Improvement Trust Fund: The Fee Administrator shall establish a separate interest-bearing trust fund account in a financial institution authorized to receive deposits of City funds. (3) Transfer of Funds: Upon receipt of vehicle registration fees, the Fee Administrator shall deposit such funds into the separate- account established pursuant to Subsection (2) above. All interest earned by the Trust Fund Account shall be credited only to that account. (4) Expenditure of Air Quality Trust Fund Revenues. All revenues received from the SCAQMD and deposited in the Trust Fund Account shall be exclusively expended on mobile source emission reduction programs as defined in Subsection 2-141(2) above. Such revenues and any interest earned on the revenues shall be expended within one (1) year of the completion of the programs. (5) Audits: The City consents to an audit of all programs and projects funded by vehicle registration fee revenues received from the SCAQMD pursuant to Section 44223 of the Health and Safety code. The audit shall be conducted by an independent auditor selected by the SCAQMD as provided in Sections 44244 and 44244.1(a) of the Health and Safety Code. 3 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 Sec. 2-143 Legal Construction. The provisions of this ordinance shall be construed as necessary to effectively carry out its purposes, which are hereby found:: and declared to be in furtherance of the public health, safety, welfare and convenience. Sec. 2-144 Severability. Should any sentence, section, clause, part or provision of this ordinance be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the ordinance as a whole, or any part thereof, other than the part declared to be invalid. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days of its final passage and adoption. SECTION 3. The City Council shall designate the City Attorney to prepare a summary of this ordinance to be published pursuant to Government Code Section 36933(c) (1) in lieu of the full text of said ordinance. Prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days after the date of its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause the summary to be published in the Easy Reader, a weekly newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Hermosa Beach. SECTION 4. 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, and 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 this day of 1991, by following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: (XdALL 1/C4A-4? CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY c/ccoraqmd Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 21, 1991 Regular Meeting of May 28, 1991 SUBJECT: MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE ASSESSMENT FOR TRANSPORTATION/AIR QUALITY RELATED ACTIVITIES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ASSEMBLY BILL 2766) INITIATED BY STAFF Purpose Adoption of required ordinance in order to receive funds for air pollution reduction programs initiated by the City. Recommendation Waive reading and introduce attached ordinance making the City eligible for state funds, and direct staff to establish an account for deposit of funds received. Background In September, 1990 the state legislature passed AB 2766 which authorizes a $2 annual vehicle registration fee for Air Quality Management Plans, and provisions of the California Clean Air act and other air pollution reduction programs. Analysis The City may receive a percentage of the funds which will be collected annually by the state via vehicle registration fees. To receive a portion of these funds, the attached ordinance must be adopted and a trust fund established for deposit of funds. These funds could be used for a variety of programs, e.g. converting City vehicles to Methanol, or other alternate fuel sources, enforcing air pollution control laws, etc. The estimated funds the City will receive annually is $14,282. For more detailed information concerning this matter, see attached data. Concur: et!' Kevin B. Northcr City Manager 1 Rdspectfully iibmtted s'��.;;%'Jif ' �•. Michael Schubach Planning Director p/ccsraqmd 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 ORDINANCE NO. 91 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING MOBILE SOURCE AIR POLLUTION REDUCTION ORDINANCE Whereas, the City Council held a meeting on May 28, 1991 and made the following findings; A. The City is committed to improving the public health, safety and welfare, including air quality; B. Mobile sources are a major contributor to air pollution in the South Coast Air Basin; C. Air quality goals for the region established by state law cannot be met without reducing air pollution from mobile sources; D. The South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) calls upon cities and counties to reduce emissions from motor vehicles consistent with the requirements of the California Clean Air Act of 1988 by developing and implementing mobile source air pollution reduction programs; E. Such programs place demands upon the City's funds, those programs should be financed by shifting the responsibility • for financing from the general fund to the motor vehicles creating the demand, to the greatest extent possible; F. Section 44223, added to the Health and Safety Code by action of the California Legislature on September 30, 1990 (Chapter 90-1705), authorizes the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) to impose an additional motor vehicle registration fee of two dollars ($2), commencing on April 1, 1991, increasing to four dollars ($4), commencing on April 1, 1992, to finance the implementation of transportation 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 measures embodied in the AQMP and provisions of the California Clean Air Act; G. Forty cents of every dollar collected under Section 44223 of the Health and Safety Code shall be distributed to cities and counties located in the South Coast Air Quality Management District that comply with Section 44243 of the code, based on the jurisdictions' prorated share of population as defined by the State Department of Finance; H. The City is located within the South Coast Air Quality Management District and is eligible to receive a portion of the revenues from the additional motor vehicle registration fees contingent upon adoption of this ordinance; I. The prorated share of the fee revenues for cities that fail to adopt an ordinance pursuant to Section 44243(b)(3) of the Health and Safety Code shall be distributed instead to the jurisdictions within the District that have adopted an ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Hermosa Beach, California, does hereby ordain amending the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code by adding the following: SECTION 1. Chapter 2 Article XII. Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Program and Fund. Sec. 2-140 Intent. This ordinance is intended to support the SCAQMD's imposition of the vehicle registration fee and to bring the City into compliance with the requirements set forth in section 44243 of the Health and Safety Code in order to receive fee revenues for the purpose of implementing programs to reduce air pollution from motor vehicles. Sec. 2-141 Definitions. As applied in this ordinance, the following words and terms shall be defined as follows: 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 (1) "City" shall mean the City of Hermosa Beach. (2) "Mobile source air pollution reduction programs" shall mean any program or project implemented by the City to reduce air pollution from motor vehicles which it determines will be consistent with the California Clean Air Act of 1988 or the plan proposed pursuant to Article 5 (commencing with Section 40460) of Chapter 5.5 of Part 3 of the California Health and Safety Code. (3) "Fee Administrator" shall mean the Finance Director of the City or his designee. Sec. 2-142 Administration of Vehicle Registration Fee (1) Receipt of Fee: The additional vehicle registration fees disbursed by the SCAQMD and remitted to the City, pursuant to this ordinance, shall be accepted by the Fee Administrator. (2) Establishment of Air Quality Improvement Trust Fund: The Fee Administrator shall establish a separate interest-bearing trust fund account in a financial institution authorized to receive deposits of City funds. (3) Transfer of Funds: Upon receipt of vehicle registration fees, the Fee Administrator shall deposit such funds into the separate account established pursuant to Subsection (2) above. All interest earned by the Trust Fund Account shall be credited only to that account. (4) Expenditure of Air Quality Trust Fund Revenues. All revenues received from the SCAQMD and deposited in the Trust Fund Account shall be exclusively expended on mobile source emission reduction programs as defined in Subsection 2-141(2) above. Such revenues and any interest earned on the revenues shall be expended within one (1) year of the completion of the programs. (5) Audits: The City consents to an audit of all programs and projects funded by vehicle registration fee revenues received from the SCAQMD pursuant to Section 44223 of the Health and Safety code. The audit shall be conducted by an independent auditor selected by the SCAQMD as provided in Sections 44244 and 44244.1(a) of the Health and Safety Code. (-\ 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 Sec. 2-143 Legal Construction. The provisions of this ordinance shall be construed as necessary to effectively carry out its purposes, which are hereby found and declared to be in furtherance of the public health, safety, welfare and convenience. Sec. 2-144 Severability. Should any sentence, section, clause, part or provision of this ordinance be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of the ordinance as a whole, or any part thereof, other than the part declared to be invalid. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days of its final passage and adoption. SECTION 3. The City Council shall designate the City Attorney to prepare a summary of this ordinance to be published pursuant to Government Code Section 36933(c) (1) in lieu of the full text of said ordinance. Prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days after the date of its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause the summary to be published in the Easy Reader, a weekly newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Hermosa Beach. SECTION 4. 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, and 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 this day of 1991, by following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK 5 (ITAAALV 7,1_(? CITY ATTORNEY c/ccoraqmd MERNA MARSHALL 360 - 33rd Place Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 (213) 372-1740 June 11, 1991 Mayor Midstokke and Members of the City Council 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: BILTMORE SITE Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: I write this letter with mixed feelings, basically because I know that the majority of the City Council has already made up their mind regarding the fate of the Biltmore Site. You have already decided that the Biltmore Site will be developed --and now with 70% residential and 30% commercial and approved by the Coastal Commission. This approval by the Coastal Commission was not "mandated" by the Coastal Commission but, rather it was their attempt to give the City Council what they wanted without violating the letter of the law with regard to coastal properties and their allowed uses. As we all know, an initiative petition has been circulated and qualified for the November 5 1991 ballot --and I was one of the people who circulated the petition --to place a 100% Open Space Park Initiative before the people to give them a chance to vote for open space on this site. Never before has the city council allowed an open space petition to be placed on the ballot as a "stand alone" measure -- that is, without other competing measures on the same ballot --and it looks like you're not going to allow it this time either. Instead, you're planning to place other measures on the ballot --at least one, for sure --to "dilute" the vote and cause nothing to get approved by the voters. In the meantime, you plan to change the land use designation of the Biltmore Site and, regardless of whether or not your initiative gets the votes, the land use designation will be changed and you win without winning the votes. This is simply not fair, and is a misuse of the ballot box. If you are going to change the zoning and land use designation of the Biltmore Site, then there's simply no need to place it on the ballot. If the Open Space Initiative loses, then you win by default. But you are insisting on placing your measure on the ballot to ENSURE that the open space initiative loses --and regardless of whether or not your ballot measures wins, you win because the zoning will have already been changed and I'm sure the wording of the ballot measure will ensure that you don't lose. Why doesn't the City Council zone the property as was recommended by the Biltmore Site Blue Ribbon Committee --for open space and commercial --and give the community what it wants (open space) while preserving a good portion of the property for sale and commercial development. There are a number of people, I'm sure, who are poised to vote for the 100% Open Space Park Initiative simply because they don't want residential on the site but who would vote against it if they were guaranteed that the site would be developed as a park and commercial mix. Also, this would guarantee that the park could be designed in a way to benefit the commercial, visitor and residential users alike --and not simply grass, flowers and trees as required in the 100% Open Space Park Initiative. My last point is that any initiative that is approved by a vote of the people can only be changed by a vote of the people. If the Council refuses to compromise, there will be a lot of people working very hard to get the 100% Open Space Park approved --including myself. If it passes, we will probably see hell freeze over before it gets changed. However, if the Council were to approve the park/commercial mix --and for some unforseen reason many years down the road it were determined that the open space were needed for another reason --then it could be changed again by a vote of the Council. Compromise. That's what this country is,built on. I hope this City Council will make the decision to compromise and avoid the unnecessary battle with regard to this very important piece of property in our city. Sincerely, �Q Merna Marshall 6--1/ - 9./ PARKER R. HERRIOTT 224 - 24th Street Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 (213) 379-7196 June 11, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Mr. Charles Vose, City Attorney 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Re: Biltmore Site General Plan Amendment Dear Mayor, Members of the City Council, and City Attorney Vose: There shouldn't be anything done with this property until the voters have an opportunity to vote on the 100% Open Space Park Initiative Petition which qualified for the ballot and with approximately 1800 people signing the petition for the adoption of the 100% Open Space Park Initiative Ordinance. To continue on with, apparently, your plan to change the Biltmore Site at this time is just unfair to the voters, for it will be confusing to the voters and all you're trying to do is allow yourselves an advantage in the upcoming November 5, 1991, election. If you go forward with your proposed Land Use Plan Amendment and the voters happen to reject the 100% Open Space Park Initiative, then your rezoning of the land would be the law. If you happen to place on the ballot an initiative like the City Council did last time there was an election regarding the Biltmore Site, then your initiative --if it is not successful with a majority vote --would still allow your plan use amendment ordinance to remain in effect. It's just not fair. The voters would not have the power, if they just happen to defeat your initiative, to take the land use plan amendment off the books. Therefore, if you plan to go forward with this land use plan amendment at this time prior to the November 5, 1991, election, others and myself will be forced once again to circulate a referendum petition whereby if the referendum petition qualifies for the ballot --and if it receives a majority vote from the voters --we will be able to succeed in repealing your land use plan amendment. In case you decide to go forward with a land use plan amendment at this time, I will once again state that I believe an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared regarding the possible future development of the Biltmore Site, as I mentioned during the staff review committee meeting, and at the Planning Commission meeting. I also want to mention, once again, that pursuant to the Government Code, oceanfront property like the Biltmore Site can not be sold Mayor, City Council, & City Attorney page 2 June 11, 1991 unless there can be a four-fifths finding by the City Council that the Biltmore Site is not suitable for a park --and, of course, we know that the City Council can not make that finding especially since in 1989 the City Council even wanted to have the portion where the old Biltmore Hotel used to stand made into a park. The City Manager stated, in his comment section on the Biltmore Site dated April 2, 1991, "The main disadvantage of a council -sponsored ballot measure is the likelihood that neither issue would pass, based on the ten previous ballot measures." My only comment to that is that it would be a good idea if at this time the City Council would refrain from going forward with the land use plan amendment and, in the future, refrain from placing another competing measure on the ballot which would dilute the vote and make it possibly where neither measure would pass. It is time to settle the Biltmore Site issue, and I hope that the City Council does not obstruct the wishes of the initiative petition signers just so certain Council members could have something that they wanted. Sincerely, Parker R. Herriott Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 91-1 TEXT AMENDMENT 91-1 LOCATION: THE BILTMORE SITE June 3, 1991 Regular Meeting of June 11, 1991 PURPOSE: TO CREATE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND REGULATIONS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BILTMORE SITE CONSISTENT WITH THE DECISION OF THE COASTAL COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: 1. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL FOR A PORTION OF THE SITE 2. TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA REGULATIONS FOR THE SITE TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL USES AND RESIDENTIAL USES, TO REQUIRE A MINIMUM OF 30% OF THE TOTAL FLOOR AREA DEVELOPED ON THE SITE TO BE FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES, AND TO INCLUDE PROVISIONS FOR A "PUBLIC OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY" INITIATED BY CITY COUNCIL Planning Commission Recommendation APP To designate the Biltmore Site for .a combination of commercial and open space land uses with no' residential; to reject the decision of the Coastal Commission; and to strongly consider leasing rather than selling the property. Staff Recommendation 1. Adopt the attached resolutions to amend the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance text to be consistent with the Coastal Commission decision, and adoption of an environmental negative declaration. 2. Direct staff whether to place this issue as a City Council sponsored initiative on the November ballot. Background At their meeting of April 9, 1991, the City Council directed staff to begin procedural steps to amend the General Plan and zoning to be consistent with the Coastal Commission's decision. At their meeting of May 21, 1991, the Planning Commission voted to recommend that the Council reconsider their decision to use the Biltmore Site for residential purposes and to instead 1 designate the property for a combination of commercial space land uses, and that the property be leased long-term rather than sold. For further background please refer to the attached Commission staff report. and open for the Planning Analysis Please refer to the attached Planning Commission staff report for staff's analysis of the development potential with with the Coastal Commission's 30% commercial requirement, including an analysis of the designations and regulations needed to implement such a project. Further, the report includes the alternative of requesting the Coastal Commission revise their condition in terms of 40% land area for commercial rather than 30% floor area. Staff's recommendations are further summarized as follows: A. Split the Biltmore site into two portions. One to be maintained as Medium Density Residential and the remaining to be designated Commercial/Recreation. Staff's recommended division is shown on the map in attachment A. This would result in approximately 40 of the land area of the Biltmore Site as a commercial designation. B. Amend the Specific Plan Area to allow for commercial development in the specific locations identified as commercial/recreation on the General Plan. Permitted uses would be limited to visitor -oriented commercial, and standards for development for the commercial uses would ensure that it is buffered from nearby residential uses, -and to ensure that the 30% of total floor area is reached. Further, a Precise Development Plan review will be required. C. Amend the Specific Plan text for the residential portion to limit the floor area to ensure that a maximum of 70% of floor area would be for residential (maximum 2.33 times the floor area of the commercial), in addition to the existing standards limiting lot coverage to 50%, l0 -foot setbacks, and 30 -foot height limits. Given that seven lots would be remaining, limit the density to 7 single-family units on the individual lots. If the lots and vacated area are combined for condominiums, allow a maximum of 9 units (this may provide some incentive for the entire property to be purchased by one developer). Additional Analysis/Clarification PARKING LOT "C" The Coastal Commission action in regards to Parking Lot "C" stated as a condition that "Public Beach Parking shall be parking open to the general public on a first come first serve basis." Given that the site is already used for public parking in a slightly different manner, staff is seeking clarification of this issue. From discussions with Coastal Commission staff, however, it is our understanding that the continued operation of Parking Lot "C" in the current manner as a public parking lot, with limited reserved parking on a first come first serve basis for employees of nearby businesses, satisfies this condition. Official written confirmation from the Coastal Commission has not yet been received regarding this condition. Attached is a copy of the letter sent to the Coastal Commission to request such confirmation. FUNDING IMPROVEMENTS ON EXISTING OPEN SPACE Another clarification that was necessary in regards to the Coastal Commission action was whether or not the funds from the sale of the site could be used to pay for improvements of existing open space in addition to the Coastal Commission specified purchase and improvement of new open space. Attached is a letter from the Coastal Commission, dated May 21, confirming that the City could indeed use the funds for improvement of existing open space areas if surplus funds were available after purchasing the required amount of new open space within the coastal zone. However, more clarification is being requested since the reference to city staff's statement is not accurate in the letter, although the Coastal Commission staff's interpretation would still satisfy our needs. POTENTIAL REVENUE FROM THE SALE OF PROPERTY Previously, when the Council was considering designating the site for exclusively residential purposes, the City obtained estimates from a broker as to the value of the property . With the commercial component, as required by the modification of the Coastal Commission, the value will obviously change. As such, staff has requested a report from a broker to again approximate the potential amount should the property be sold. A copy of the report is attached. LEASE OR SALE? The Planning Commission in making their recommendation against residential use, strongly supported the idea of leasing the property in the form of a long-term land -lease for commercial uses, a practice which is commonly used by other cities. This would obviously not generate the lump sum that would be gained from the outright sale of the property, however, in the longer term, the City would receive revenue from the lease, sales tax, and the tax on the improvements, while not giving up its land asset. Conversely, the long-term revenue from an outright sale of the property would be limited to only property tax revenues. 3 If the Council sees merit in the land -lease option for the Biltmore Site or any portion thereof, it should be researched more thoroughly for any commercial uses. The proposed S.P.A. would not preclude such a lease idea. However it would be limited to the commercial portion of the property. Also, to be consistent with the Coastal Commission's decision the revenue generated from a lease would probably have to be specifically dedicated for open space acquisition and improvement. BALLOT MEASURE? The Council needs to determine, given the controversial history of the Biltmore Site, if the final decision regarding the general plan amendment and text amendment should be made by a vote of the people. CONCUR: Re pect u ly submitted, en Ro Associa Mic ael ScWubach Planning Director PLEASE SEE ATTACHED COMMENTS Kevin B. Northcraft City Manager Attachments 1. Maps 2. Proposed Resolutions 3. Planning Commission staff report 5/21/91 4. P.C. Minutes 5/21/91 5. Broker's Report (under separate cover) 6. Staff letter to Coastal Commission 7. Coastal Commission letters to City 8. City Council Minutes/Staff Report 4/9/91 9. Coastal Commission Staff Report on City's LUP p/ccsrbilt 4 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: 1) Regarding multi -family residential use of the property, my recommendation would be to remove from the zoning this op- tion. Keeping the density low is consistent with Council policy and does not in all likelihood affect the proceeds to be re -invested in the community. 2) Regarding the question of a ballot measure, my comments on the April 2, 1991 memo (attached) still apply. The clearest way to offer the voters a choice is to have two alternatives before them. This also supports the intent of the flawed referendum petition. The lone disadvantage to a ballot measure is the chance that no issue passes. However, the voters have not had a pre - Coastal Commission approved Biltmore proposal that meets commercial, residential and especially open space interests to this extent. The Coastal Commission conditions assure that proceeds will be re -invested in our community for open space in locations at much benefit to our citizens. Acoordinated effort of supporters of these interests to work toward this permanent solution could well be success- ful, as long as resolving this perennial issue while meeting some of everyone's concerns are the primary interests. For all these reasons, my recommendation is to approve the attached General Plan and Zoning Ordinance language and di- rect that the matter be placed before the voters in Novem- ber, 1991. - S- x 1-1-1r3 I—r (icwg.t4pmEtor To CA-ry )5 A," 1. 1D use 1-4Ap COTE 4340 eiEN,F.R.r t- PLAN AMe-NP I FRoM MD 'co GEZ (MMDtuM DE st-r7 REStD�Nr�p`L 40 (f.DMM'E(LU PSL/ CLE1-17€AT sort) MD \AD AD 1 GENE.L PLAN AMENDMENT &,,NE CHANGE AREAS BILTMORE SITE (PUBLICLY OWNED PORTION) OS: OPEN SPACE HD: HIGH DENSITY MD: MEDIUM DENSITY GC: GENERAL COMMERCIAL CR: COMMERCIAL RECREATION /O' GC GC 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, AMENDING THE LAND USE MAP OF THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE SOUTHERLY PORTION OF THE "BILTMORE SITE" FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMrMERCIAL/RECREATION, AND TO CONCUR WITH THE AMENDMENT TO THE TEXT OF THE COASTAL COMMISSION CERTIFIED LAND USE PLAN ALL TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE DECISION OF THE COASTAL COMMISSION, IN REGARDS TO THE USE OF THE BILTMORE SITE, AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on June 11 to receive oral and written testimony on said amendment and made the following findings; A. The proposed"amendment is necessary to be consistent with_the Coastal Commission decision regarding a proposed Land Use Plan amendment in regards to development of the Biltmore Site; B. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant impact on the environment as it involves a change in the allowed mix of uses on the Biltmore Site which will result in a less than significant impact to the environment; C. Residential use of the northerly portion of the Biltmore Site is consistent with adjacent and surrounding land uses which to the north and east are predominantly \muf n silyv residential uses and commercial use of the southerly portion is consistent with land uses to the south and southeast which are predominantly commercial; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, does hereby amend the Land Use Map of the General Plan and concurs with the Coastal Commission amendment the Certified Land Use Plan text, as shown on the attached map and described as follows: 1 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 6,/o /1/'`%' SECTION 1. Amend theAdesignation for the southerly portion of the property commonly known as the "Biltmore Site" from Medium Density Residential to Commercial Recreation, legally described as follows: - Lots 1, 2, 19, 20 and 32: inclusive Block 15, Hermosa Beach Tract; and including the vacated portion of Beach Drive extending 60 feet northerly from 14th Street. SECTION 2. Accept the Coastal Commission's amendment of the text of Coastal Commission Certified Land Use Plan as follows: 1. Amend the designation for the property known as the "Biltmore Site" from Specific Plan Area for a Hotel to Medium Density Mixed Residential/Commercial (Public Open Space Acquisition overlay,) legally described as follows: Lots 1 through 9 inclusive, and lots 19, 20 and 32Block 15, Hermosa Beach Tract; and including the vacated portion of Beach Drive between 14th and 15th Streets and including the vacated portion of 15th Court extending 60 feet eastward from Beach Drive. 2. Amend the designation for the property commonly known as "Parking Lot C" from Specific Plan Area to General Commercial/Public Beach Parking 3. Amend page 11, the second paragraph, by eliminating the exception to the height limits of the zoning ordinance for the hotel site between Thirteenth and Fifteenth Streets. 4. Insert the following definitions: a. Mixed Residential/Commercial shall provide low rise development with no less than 307 leasable floor area, not including parking, devoted to C-1 commercial, restaurant or beach support recreation use. b. Public Open Space Acquisition Overlay shall provide for the acquisition of public open space primarily within the coastal zone of the City of Hermosa Beach. The overlay shall provide that no sale of the property shall take place until a trust fund has been established for the sole purpose of acquiring and improving such new public open space. The form and content of the trust fund shall specify the following provisions and shall be submitted to the Executive Director of the California Coastal Commission for his/her review and approval as to inclusion of the following provisions. Zoning adopted to implement the Public Open Space Acquisition Overlay shall provide that the funds received by the City in the sale of the subject 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 property for residential/commercial mixed uses at least 80% of an amount up to the maximum of $8,000,000 received from the sale of the property shall be used for the acquisition and improvement of new open space property of which at least 70% of said new open space property shall be located within the Coastal zone. The minimum area to be acquired in the Coastal Zone is 4.0 acres. The ordinance shall also provide that no building permits for construction shall be issued until either 1) the new open space property has been acquired, or, 2) the funding necessary to comply with this policy has been dedicated to the purchase of said open space and a binding contract has been signed guaranteeing such a purchase, of no less than 90% of the required new minimum of 4.0 acres of open space property c. Public Beach Parking shall—bei-pa-r-i"t open to the general public on a firstcome-first tsserve basis. 5. Amend the seventh policy ander--Yof m 2 on page 12, by adding the underlined text to read as follows: The Policy: The Biltmore Site is a vital asset of the people of Hermosa Beach which will play a substantial role in maintaining the City as a financially feasible entity i' The City has concurred that the most beneficial public recreational„.4conomic and environmental use for this coastal_site is a combination of residential/beach serving low intensity commercial, and beach public parking. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1991, by: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: p/ccrsgpab CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY 10 . l AM 1DMf 4T TO : CoAsTAL. Comt-its.sio0 c ttFie LARD use P�P.N go. CHP NC E.. To ‘‘, MSD "J !s1P1 - c.oMt-1E iAL (PUS --►L cPEN SPALL Acbv‘stTloK1 NAP 1 M P P -O V ENI E.N 1- oV E LAI() 11 // ORDINANCE 91 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT FOR THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA NO. 1 FOR THE BILTMORE SITE TO CHANGE THE PERMITTED USES FROM SOLELY RESIDENTIAL TO ALLOW A MAXIMUM OF 707 OF THE TOTAL FLOOR AREA FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES AND REQUIRE A MINIMUM OF 30°7 TO BE FOR COMMERCIAL/RECREATION PURPOSES TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COASTAL COMMISSION APPROVED MODIFICATION TO THE CERTIFIED LAND USE PLAN, AND THE REMAINING TO BE DEVELOPED FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES, AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on a Text Amendment to the specific plan area for the Biltmore site on June 11, 1991, to receive oral and written testimony, and made the following Findings: B. The proposed text amendment will not cause a significant impact on the environment as it does not involve a significant change in the intensity of the development allowed on the Biltmore Site; A combination of commercial Biltmore Site is consistent and residential uses on the with adjacent and surrounding land uses which to the north and east are predominantly multi -family residential uses, while to the 'south it is predominately commercial uses; . The amendment will continue to allow a density consistent with the Medium Density General Plan designation for the residential portion and intensity consistent with the Commercial Recreation designation for the commercial portion D. The provisions of the Specific Plan Area will ensure that the development of the site is consistent with the character of 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 surrounding uses and of an appropriate density given the existing congestion of the area; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, does hereby ordain that the zoning ordinance text be amended as follows: SECTION 1. Amend Article 9.6, Chapter 1 as follows (underlined text is to be added, deleted text is overstriked): Article 9.6, Chapter 1, Specific Plan Area No. 1 Section 9.61-1. Authority. This Specific Plan Area is an instrument for implementing the General plan pursuant to Article 8, Chapter 3, of the State of California Planning and Zoning Law (California Government Code Section 65450 et. Seq.) Section 9.61-2 Location and Description. The subject area is located on the east side of the Strand generally between 14th Street and 15th Street, and extending to approximately 190 feet east of the Strand. Section 9.61-3 Purpose. The purpose of the Specific Plan Area is to set forth the development requirements, standards and permitted uses for development of the subject property consistent with the City of Hermosa Beach General Plan and consistent with the Coastal Commission certified Land Use Plan which requires a minimum of thirty (30) percent of the developed floor area to be utilized for commercial purposes. Furthermore, the Specific Plan Area shall set forth the method to ensure that the funds generated from initial sale of the subject property will provide for the acquisition of open space at other locations within the City of Hermosa Beach, principally within the coastal zone. Section 9.61-4 Permitted Residential Uses and Residential Density. A. Residential uses are only permitted on the portion of the site designated Medium Density Residential on the General Plan Map B. Any use permitted in the R-1 Residential Zone to a maximum of seven (7) (12) dwelling units. nfni iut d;ev- to th`e Con•omin' qoh o a maximum of .m=nts m erg c.nsi -t n 'na e o ne (` h Ci lli f nit ns sa Section_9.61-5 Residential Development Standards A. A minimum of three (3) off-street parking spaces shall be provided for each dwelling unit. B. Lot coverage shall not exceed 5O7 of the area designated for Medium Density Residential development on the General Plan map. (cntirc Spccific Plan Arca) C. A minimum setback of 10 feet shall be provided from the Strand. The maximum floor area for any individual dwelling unit shall not exceed 3,000 square feet. The total floor area of the residential uses as compared to the total floor area developed on the entire site shall not exceed seventy (70) percent. Development standards shall be as set forth in ARTICLE 5. R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE, except pertaining to lot coverage and setbacks as stated in Section 9.61-5(B) and 5(C). All other standards shall be as set forth in the City of Hermosa Beach Zoning Ordinance, except pertaining to required parking spaces as stated in Section 9.61-5A. .Section 9.61-6 Permitted Commercial Uses A. Commercial uses are only permitted on the portion of the site identified as Commercial/Recreation on the General Plan Map B. Visitor -serving Commercial Uses including, but not limited to, the following: Beach recreation equipment sales and rentals; Visitor or tourist oriented gift shop or retail sales; Snack Bar/Snack Shop; conditional use permit subject to Article 10, Section 10-7; Hotels, Motels Restaurant/Cafe; beer, ,wine, or general alcohol in conjunction with, conditional use permit required subject of article 10 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. Any other commercial uses not listed which may be considered visitor -serving shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Commission Section 9.61-7 Commercial Development Standards A. The maximum height shall be thirty (30) Feet. Exceptions for height of roof structures shall be in accordance with Article 12, Section 1201, of the zoning ordinance. B. The gross square footage of the commercial floor areas, including any areas for outside dining, and/or recreational use shall be a minimum of 30%/a of the total floor area of the combination of the commercial and residential uses on the entire site designated Specific Plan Area. C. A Precise Development Plan shall be required for any commercial development in accordance with Article 14, Division 3 (Section 1430 et. seq.) D. All other standards shall be governed by the City of Hermosa Beach Zoning Ordinance, including, but not limited to, Section 8-5, and Article 11.5, Off -Street Parking. Section 9.61-8 Public Open Space Acquisition A. The purpose of this section is to require that funds from the initial sale of the property from the City of Hermosa Beach shall provide for the acquisition of public open space principally within the Coastal -Zone of the City of Hermosa Beach as follow: 1. No sale of the property shall take place until a trust fund is established, by the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, for the sole purpose of acquiring and improving open space; 2. Eighty percent (80%) of an amount up to the maximum of eight million dollars ($8,000,000) received from the sale of the property shall be used for the acquisition and improvement of open space property not currently owned by the City of Hermosa Beach, of which at least seventy percent (70%) shall be be located within the Coastal Zone; 3. The minimum area to be acquired shall be four (4) acres; 4. No building permits for construction within this Specific Plan Area zone shall be issued until either of the following has occurred: a. A minimum of four (4) acres of open space property has been acquired; or, b. The funding necessary to comply with this section, in terms of acquiring and improving open space, has been dedicated to the purchase of the open space and a binding contract has been executed guaranteeing the purchase of no less than 90/0 of the minimum of four (4) acres of open space property 5. For the purposes of this section, open space property shall be defined as any property designated Open Space on the City of Hermosa Beach General Plan, and/or designated as Open Space on the zoning map. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days of its final passage and adoption. SECTION 3. 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 4. 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, and 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 this "" day of , 1991, by following vote: ATTEST: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY A 7D A " TO •FORM: P/ccordblt 84CHOROOND 4 M TERh4L Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 91-1 TEXT AMENDMENT 91-1 LOCATION: THE BILTMORE SITE May 13, 1991 Regular Meeting of May 21, 1991 PURPOSE: TO CREATE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS AND REGULATIONS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE BILTMORE SITE CONSISTENT WITH THE DECISION OF THE COASTAL COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: 1. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL FOR A PORTION OF THE SITE 2. TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA REGULATIONS FOR THE SITE TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL USES AND RESIDENTIAL USES, TO REQUIRE A MINIMUM OF 30% OF THE TOTAL FLOOR AREA DEVELOPED ON THE SITE TO BE FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES, AND TO INCLUDE PROVISIONS FOR A "PUBLIC OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENT OVERLAY" INITIATED BY CITY COUNCIL Recommendation Adopt the attached resolutions recommending that the City Council amend the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance text to be consistent with the Coastal Commission decision, and adoption of an environmental negative declaration. Background At their meeting of August 14, 1990, the City Council adopted a resolution and ordinance by a vote of 3:2 changing the Biltmore Site to Medium Density Residential on the General Plan, and amending the Specific Plan Area regulations to allow only residential development on the property. Further, Parking Lot C was redesignated from S.P.A. to General Commercial. Subsequently, the City requested an amendment to the Coastal Commission certified Land Use Plan as it pertained to the Biltmore Site and Parking Lot C, based on arguments that the sale of the site for residential purposes would provide the funding for purchase and improvement of other open space areas within the coastal zone. The Coastal Commission, however, at the public hearing of March 13, 1991, approved a modified version of the City's request, requiring that 30% of the floor area of the proposed development of the Biltmore Site be for neighborhood commercial, restaurant, or beach supporting recreational purposes. Further, the Commission required that a "Public Open Space Acquisition Overlay" be provided to ensure that funds from the sale of the site be used for the purchase and improvement of other open space. The Commission based their decision on the recommendation of their staff, which cited inconsistencies of the City's proposal with the the Coastal Act particularly Section 30222, which gives a higher priority to "visitor -serving commercial uses" over private residential development, and Section 30221, which states that ocean front land suitable for recreational uses and development shall be protected. At their meeting of April 9, 1991, the City Council directed staff to begin procedural steps to amend the General Plan and zoning to be consistent with the Coastal Commission's decision. On ,April 18, 1991, the Staff Environmental Review Committee recommended an environmental negative declaration, because of the lower intensity of the proposed designation as compared with the designation of S.P.A. for a large hotel project. Section 1515(c) of C.E.Q.A. allows the use of an EIR for a previous project to document that a project would have a less than significant impact. Further, any specific development project proposed in the future for the site will be subject to an environmental assessment. The submittal of a more specific proposal would be the appropriate time to evaluate potential environmental impacts. Analysis The City has six months to reject the Coastal Commission's decision under state law. If rejected, the Biltmore Site will revert back to the Hotel Specific Plan Area and the City's current General Plan and zoning would be inconsistent. If the Coastal Commission decision is accepted, specific designations and regulations must be developed to carry out the decision. Otherwise the City would have to request reconsideration or amendment of the Commission's decision. DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL WITH 30% COMMERCIAL LIMITATION Staff has considered various scenarios for developing the site consistent with the Coastal Commission's actions. Generally the alternatives considered were as follows: A: Use the southerly most lots as commercial consistent with the commercial uses which front on 14th Street, allowing about 60 feet of frontage on the Strand. B. Mixed use, with residential condominiums above ground level commercial, using the Strand frontage for the commercial C. Commercial uses on the Strand frontage with residential behind, or D. Commercial uses with frontage only on 14th Street, and using the Strand and 15th Street frontage for residential. Several criteria were considered to determine the most appropriate solution, such as; compatibility with existing commercial and residential development; compatibility between the proposed commercial and residential uses; the feasibility of developing the commercial portion to meet the 30% minimum and providing adequate parking; and, the minimizing of commercial/ residential conflicts. In staff's judgement, option A is clearly superior to the other options, as it maintains compatibility with the primarily commercial use of the 14th Street corridor, allows for some commercial frontage on the Strand, and still allows for substantial residential development. Further in considering the types of commercial that would be appropriate, staff believes that beach -oriented retail and restaurant would be appropriate. Staff has prepared a conceptual plan to demonstrate at least one potential design for alternative A, and to make certain that adequate parking could be provided for the required 30 commercial/recreation floor area. (See attached plans) Assuming that the most feasible use would be restaurant, staff attempted to maximize the square footage given site constraints consistent with the Council approved S.P.A. for residential (particularly the 30 -foot height limit) and using only the five lots closest to 14th Street. Further, basic zoning requirements to buffer the use from residential uses and to provide required parking were considered. As you can see, about 6600 square feet of restaurant space with 66 parking spaces could be constructed on 407 of the land area. This was accomplished by using a two-level parking structure and one level of restaurant space. Staff's sketch also shows that a portion of the commercial site could be used for improved open space. This covers about 3,000 square feet of area, this qualifies as commercial/recreation area as well. As such, the residential floor area allowed would be 22,400 square feet, or up to 3200 square feet per residential unit (for seven units). It should be further noted that existing utility lines run underneath the property along Beach Drive. This may further limit the potential for full use of the five lots for commercial, or would result in additional costs to relocate along the Strand between 14th and 15th Street (See conceptual plan). Proposed provisions to amend the S.P.A., however, were drafted to allow more variation from staff's conceptual plan, as long as certain criteria are met. In sum staff's recommendations are as follows: A. Split the Biltmore site into two portions. One to be maintained as Medium Density Residential and the remaining to be designated Commercial/Recreation. Staff recommended division is shown on the map in attachment A. This would result in approximately 40% of the land area of the Biltmore Site as a commercial designation. B. Amend the Specific Plan Area to allow for commercial development in the specific locations identified as commercial/recreation on the General Plan. Permitted uses would be limited to visitor -oriented commercial, and standards for development for the commercial uses would ensure that it is buffered from nearby residential uses, and to ensure that the 30% of total floor area is reached. Further, a Precise Development Plan review will be required. C. Amend the Specific Plan text for the residential portion to limit the floor area to ensure that a maximum of 70% of floor area would be for residential (maximum 2.33 times the floor area of the commercial), in addition to the existing standards limiting lot coverage to 50%, 10 -foot setbacks, and 30 -foot height limits. Given that seven lots would be remaining, limit the density to 7 single-family units on the individual lots. If the lots and vacated area are combined for condominiums, allow a maximum of 9 units (this may provide some incentive for the Y' entire property to be purchased by one developer). ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS Further conditions of the Coastal Commission approval regarding the sale of the property were as follows, which have been included in the S.P.A. text: - The sale of the property shall not take place until a trust fund has been established for the sole purpose of acquiring and improving public open space. - The zoning provisions should specifically ensure that 8O% of the funds received from the sale be used for acquisition and improvement of open space - At least 70 of the open space purchased shall be located within the Coastal Zone. - The minimum area to be acquired is 4.0 acres. - No building permits for construction shall be issued until the minimum open space is acquired, or, the funding has been -2D- dedicated to this purpose with a binding contract guaranteeing the purchase of no less than 90% of the minimum of 4.0 acres IMPLEMENTATION SCENARIOS Although a development scenario consistent with the Coastal Commission decision has been shown to be possible, the question of how the property is to be sold and developed consistent with these further conditions needs to be addressed. The following represent different implementation scenarios: 1. Sell the entire property to one private developer, who would then carry out the details of the project consistent with the S.P.A., and the Coastal Commission. 2. Sell the residential and commercial portions separately 3. Sell individual residential lots separately to perhaps command a higher price, with the larger commercial portion sold to a commercial/restaurant developer. 4. Keep the commercial portion and to lease it for commercial development and use. At this time, it seems that all these scenarios should be kept available, and therefore, the S.P.A. provisions are written so as not to preclude any of them, while ensuring that the Coastal Commission conditions are satisfied. Alternative Request the Coastal Commission to reconsider their conditional approval by changing the 30% commercial floor area requirement to a 40% land area requirement, thereby making the residential and commercial components independent of each other. ALTERNATIVE - 40% LAND AREA COMMERCIAL In considering ways to divide the property to meet the conditions of the Coastal Commission it became apparent that significantly more than 307 of the land area needs to be devoted for commercial purposes to reach the 30% floor area requirement. This is because commercial uses are much more parking intensive and, as such, more land area or structures must be set aside for parking purposes. A problem with the Coastal Commission conditions is that the amount and size of residential development is dependent on the amount of commercial floor area to be developed. This interdependence relating to floor areas limits the City's and/or a private developers options and restricts floor area of the residential to an undesirable level which reduces economic value. Also, it is not necessarily a good measure of visitor -commercial activity. If the Commission would accept a proposition that at least 40 of the land area be for commercial purposes, a developer would have more options, and the residential and commercial components could be developed independent of each other. To request a change to the Coastal Commission's decision would mean opting not to place this matter on the ballot since there would not be adequate time. CONCUR: / a)! . 'cr r_ - William Grove Di -stor, Building •nd Safety To • •ntiZh, Public Works Di ector ic� ctvCAA (.'�0s-CL ?cv Kevin B. Northcraft City Manager Attachments 1. Proposed Resolutions 2. City Council Minutes/Staff Report 4/9/91 3. Coastal Commission Staff Report on City's LUP 4. Staff Review Minutes Respectfully submitted, en Robertson Associate Planner Mictrael Schubach Planning Director n c'.,.tick�,.� p/ccsrbilt Rue asked the "painting" be deleted from CUP 91-8 since none site, which. Mr. Coon agreed. Public Hearing •sed by Chmn. Ketz at 7:54 P.M. one on MOTION by Comm. Rue, s= ded by Comm. Di Mo. , to approve Resolution P.C. 91-34 with the following ame=.ents: Item .: , Painting, be deleted, Item #6, "...on the premises shall be pro ....ited =xcept registered vehicles waiting for repair or pick up may be stored," I•: #9, "hours of 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. week days and 9:00 A.M. to P.M. on Sat _ s and Sundays." Chmn. Ketz commende• . Coon for being the fi' to come in under this moratorium and n. aiting the two years. AYES: Comms. Di Monda, Marks, Rue, Peirce, Chmn. Ketz NOES: None IN: None SENT: None SECOND QUARTER GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GP 91-1/TEXT 91-1 -- GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE BILTMORE SITE FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL/RECREATION, AND TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA FOR THE BILTMORE SITE TO ALLOW 30% OF THE MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA TO BE USED FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES CONSISTENT WITH THE COASTAL COMMISSION'S DETERMINATION, AND ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION. Recommended Action: Amending the General Plan and Zoning Text to be consistent with the Coastal Commission's determination and adoption of the Negative Declaration. (A break was taken from 7:55 P.M. to 8:06 P.M.) Public Hearing was continued by Chmn. Ketz at 8:06 P.M. Mr. Schubach displayed two maps showing the coastal zone boundaries and open -space areas within the Coastal Zone. The Coastal Commission recommended the General Plan Amendment from medium density residential to general commercial be implemented for a portion of the site, which is to be implemented through a Text Amendment to the specific plan area, and require that a minimum of 30% floor area or more be developed on site for commercial. Mr. Schubach discussed the adoption by Council of Resolution Ordinance at the meeting of August 14, 1990 and the Amendment requested by the city of Hermosa Beach. The Coastal Commission approved a modified version of the City's request on March 13, 1991. The Environmental Review Committee recommended a negative declaration. If the coastal Commission's recommendation is accepted, specific designations and regulations must be developed to carry out the decision, otherwise the City of Hermosa Beach needs to request amendment or reconsideration of that decision. The alternatives considered are: (1) Use of the south lots as commercial consistent with the commercial uses which front on 14th Street; (2) Mixed use, with residential condominium above ground level commercial, using the Strand frontage for commercial; (3) Commercial uses on the Strand frontage with residential behind, or (4) Commercial uses with frontage only on 14th Street, P.C.Minutes 5/21/91 using 15th Street frontage and Strand for residential. In Staff's judgment, option (1) is -clearly superior. Conceptual plan blue lines for option (1) were distributed to Commissioners for review with an explanation given by Mr. Schubach. Provisions to amend were drafted to allow variation from the Staff's conceptual plan as long as criteria are met. The Staff's recommendations are as follows: (A) Split Biltmore site into two portions, one maintained at medium density and one designated as Commercial/Recreation. Proposed division is shown on map, Attachment A. Amendment of the specific plan is required. Mr. Schubach explained in detail the amendment required and presented some implementation scenarios. Although the development scenario is consistent with the Coastal Commission's decision, possible problems and decisions pertaining to how the land is sold and developed were presented. (B) Requesting the Coastal Commission to reconsider its conditional approval by changing the 30% commercial floor area to a 40% land area requirement, making the residential and commercial requirements independent, is an alternative, since the current proposal limits the City's and developer's options and restricts residential floor area. Request to change the Coastal Commission recommendation would result in this matter not being placed on the ballot. Commissioners were asked to consider if this matter should be adopted or put on the ballot, as well as adopted. Mr Schubach presented a map, and synopsis on property acquisition and improvement status, also explaining that one land strip ownership was in question between the Railroad and previous owners. Chinn. Ketz asked if the railroad property would be acquired with the rest of the right-of-way when the property ownership decision was made, to which Mr. Schubach replied yes, but the City of Hermosa Beach currently has no claim to it and is not eligible for purchase under the Utility Tax. Chmn. Ketz noted the modification in the Text of 4 acres from 4 1/2 acres, which Mr. Schubach affirmed. Comm. Di Monda questioned the feasibility of commercial -use leases as opposed to selling City -owned coastal property necessary to generate enough income to buy other property and asked if a study had been conducted, to which Mr. Schubach responded that due to time restraints, studies had not been conducted, but options have been left open for future study. Mr. Schubach stated that a decision by July needs to be made by Commissioners as to adopt and decide to put on the November ballot. Comm. Marks expressed his understanding that the land will revert back to a hotel site if no action is taken, which was confirmed. Public Hearing opened by chmn. Ketz at 8:30 P.M. P.C.Minutes 5/21/91 Mr. Parker Harriet, (213) 379-7196, stated the City of Hermosa Beach is asking for a land -use amendment to a specific -plan area hotel. Prior to an approval for a land -use hotel south of the Biltmore site by the Coastal Commission, a, land -use plan amendment was not done, nor repealed the specific plan -area hotel. There is an inconsistency. Mr. Harriet stated a petition for a 100% open -space park has qualified for the ballot and will be voted upon in November 5, 1991. The Initiative Ordinance was read for the record by Mr. Harriett, who also stated the Initiative is not binding on the City of Hermosa Beach, and if the wishes of residents are followed, a park would be established. Mr. Harriet said he has filed two Writs of Mandate against the City of Hermosa Beach and requested they be part of the record, stating the following reasons why the property should not be developed: (1) A Government Code states ocean -front property cannot be sold or leased unless found not suitable for a park or beach, and (2) An EIR should be done due to the fact that the 1984 EIR cannot be used as a substitute. Mr. Harriet questioned the propriety of land purchases of the South School site, portions of Valley Park and the "green belt". Public Hearing closed by Chmn. Ketz at 8:40 P.M. Comm. Peirce noted the 40% land area is a good compromise, giving the ability to persue each project on a separate basis and seems ideal for mixed-use. Staff has stated mixed-use projects are difficult to finance. Comm. Di Monda discussed the possibility of selling or leasing the 40% commercial and selling 60% residential in order to buy four acres of open space. Mr. Schubach responded that a study had been completed in 1989. Based upon the 40% / 60% land ratio, there would be $5-8,000,000 available for residential/commercial. Staff is in contact with a commercial broker, who will give more specific figures as to the value. Staff's evaluation is based not only on the economic, but the quality of life. Comm. Rue referred to the Resolution Report, Section 9.6.1-4 (b)(c) and questioned the original 12 and 14 units being changed to 7 and 9 units, respectively, which was confirmed. Comm. Rue felt the plans were more marketable with the open options being maintained while giving the City of Hermosa Beach more control in project development. Comm. Di Monda ascertained that the decision to sell or lease the property is determined by the City Council and requested an explanation as to the mechanics of the residential/commercial land split. Mr. Schubach responded the Coastal Commission requires any amount between 30% to 100%. The Staff's evaluation concluded that actually 40% of the land would be required to meet the 30% requirement. Comm. Di Monda stated he did not believe selling the land would be beneficial for the City of Hermosa Beach and felt a 99 -year lease would be a better alternative. Chmn. Ketz commented she did not believe residential use to be appropriate for this site. Comm. Marks stated his belief this area is key property to the City of Hermosa and property usage should be considered. P.C.Minutes 5/21/91 Comm. Rue asked Mr. Lee the amount of acreage covered by the 60% residential. Mr. Lee responded that 2/3 acre or 20,000 sq. ft. Mr. Lee separated the issues before the Planning Commissions: (1) What is the appropriate use, should the Coastal Commission's recommendation be conformed to, and (2) What type of transaction is required in order to implement the use of the land. Mr. Lee felt it appropriate for the Commission to not only make a recommendation to the types of uses but also in terms of the type of transaction for the Council to consider. Comm. Peirce stated the Commission's vote regarding property percentage is null since it is required that the General Plan be consistent with the Coastal Commission's decision. Mr. Schubach stated the Commission's recommendation would be considered by the Coastal Commission. Mr. Lee commented that the appropriateness of land leasing residential property is dependent upon the type of development and whether a developer would accept a land lease. An alternative would be to strongly recommend, with respect to residential property, that the City of Hermosa Beach consider a land lease as the property -conveyance method and allow the Council or City Manager to structure a transaction to accomplish a land lease, if appropriate economically. Mr. Lee stated land leasing was not an unusual method for cities to structure transactions. Comm. Di Monda asked the effect of a denial by the Commissioners, Mr. Schubach responded that GP 91-1/TEXT 91-1 would be sent to the City Council with a recommendation that the Coastal Commission's decision is not acceptable. Comm. Di Monda stated the basic goal is keep City of Hermosa Beach property control, obtain a cash flow with a use compatible with the beach and local businesses, maintain a small open space area, purchase other open space from the•,monies obtained. The land would revert back to the City at the end of the lease period. MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, seconded by comm Peirce, the City Council receive the Commission's rejection of the Coastal Commission's recommendation; proposal a combination of commercial and open -space land use, with an option for land leasing. Staff, at a later point, would conduct a study to determine the land -division percentages. Also, use funds to buy open space. AYES: Comms. Di Monda, Marks, Rue, Peirce, Chmn. Ketz NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None HEARINGS VEHICLE PARKING ON PEDESTRIAN W Recommended Actio •nt . o June 4, 1991 meeting. Chmn. Ketz ste.s . down because . flict of interest. Comm. Peirce assumed the cha' P.C.Minutes 5/21/91 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 P.C. RESOLUTION 91-36 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, REGARDING THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE MAP OF THE GENERAL PLAN FOR A PORTION OF THE "BILTMORE SITE" FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL/RECREATION AND THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA TO ALLOW 30 COMMERCIAL USES CONSISTENT WITH THE COASTAL COMMISSION DECISION, TO INSTEAD RECOMMEND THAT THE ENTIRE "BILTMORE SITE" BE DESIGNATED FOR A COMBINATION OF COMMERCIAL USES AND OPEN SPACE; THAT THE COASTAL COMMISSION DECISION NOT BE ACCEPTED; AND THAT THE PROPERTY BE CONSIDERED FOR A LAND -LEASE RATHER THAN FOR SALE TO GENERATE REVENUE FOR PURCHASE OF OPEN SPACE AND TO KEEP THE LAND IN THE CITY'S POSSESSION FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 21, 1991 to receive oral and written testimony on said amendment and made the following findings; A. Residential use of the site is not appropriate given its key location adjacent to the beach and within the commercial "downtown" area; B. The site should be considered for a combination of commercial and open -space land uses with no residential use; C. Since the property is owned by the City, it should not be sold for private development without serious consideration of options for leasing the property; NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, recommends that the City Council designate the Biltmore Site for a combination of commercial and open space land uses; not accept the Coastal Commission decision; and that the site be considered for leasing rather than for sale to generate revenue for the purchase of open space elsewhere in the City and to keep the land in the City's possession for future generations. 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: AYES: Comms. DiMonda,Marks,Rue,Peirce,Chmn.Ketz NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution P.C. 91-36 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 May 21, 1991. Christine Ketz, Chirperson Michael Schubach; Secretary 4-41-9/ Date p/persblt City ofHermosa Teach .. Al% • Civic Center, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, California 90254-3885 June 3, 1991 Ms. Teresa Henry Assistant District Director California Coastal Commission South Coast Area 245 West Broadway, Suite 380 Long Beach, CA 90802 Dear Ms. Henry: Thank you for your letter of May 21, 1991. It helped clarify for what the funds, gained by the sale of the Biltmore Site, could be used to acquire and improve, but additional clarification is needed and is discussed below. Further, several other issues which I have received oral confirmation from Jim Ryan also need to be confirmed in writing. Therefore, I am preparing this letter with the City's understanding of how each of the conditions can be interpreted, and I am requesting that a written confirmation be provided: Condition 4.a This condition requires that at least 30% of the total floor area be leasable commercial area. This condition does not prohibit separate sale of the land area designated for commercial from the designated residential portion. In other words there is no implication that the land must be sold, or designed in any certain way. Condition 4.b This condition, which was discussed in your May 21st letter, concerns acquisition of open space. With the funds required to be spent on the acquisition of open space within the Coastal Zone, the City would like to acquire all open space within the Coastal Zone and improve that space. Once this open space is acquired and improved, the City would continue to use these funds to improve the already owned open space within the Coastal Zone, such as Clark Stadium. The City would ultimately pursue buying open space outside the Coastal Zone. However, the City may want to improve the railroad greenbelt prior to buying north school which may not be for sale in the immediate future. I realize this idea was not discussed previously, but if adequate funds were retained in trust to buy north school, would it be possible? J4 - Page 2 Ms. Teresa Henry June 3, 1991 As stated in your May 21, 1991 letter, "The restriction in the language was to prevent spending the money on existing open space as an alternative to acquiring and improving open space within the Coastal Zone". Condition 4.c This condition requires that Parking Lot C must be maintained for the public on a first come first serve basis. As discussed with Jim Ryan there is no implication prohibiting employees of the businesses from reserving a portion of this parking daily on a first come first serve basis, or from time to time, e.g., the annual fiestas, reserving this parking for a temporary time for the fiesta participants, or other special events. By having the employees parking in this lot, it "free -ups" the parking in public parking lots "A" and "B" which are also adjacent to the beach. Obviously, the employees must park somewhere, and one way or another they will occupy parking spaces. Sincerely yours, Michael Schubach Planning Director MAS:yyt c.c.: Kevin B. Northcraft, City Manager Charles Vose, City Attorney STATE OF CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SOUTH COAST AREA 245 W. BROADWAY, STE. 380 P.O. BOX 1450 LONG BEACH, CA 90802-4416 (213) 590-5071 May 21, 1991 Michael Schubach Director of Planning City of Hermosa Beach Civic Center 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach,CA 90254 Dear Mr. Schubach, Thank you for your letter of May 1, 1991, requesting clarification of the Commission's intent regarding suggested modification 4(b) to the City's recent Land Use Plan amendment, HB 90-1. The suggested modification requires that the funds that the City receives from the sale of the redesignated property on the Strand (the Biltmore site) be allocated to the purchase of other recreation lands in the Coastal Zone. Specifically, it states: ...at least 80% of an amount up to the maximum of $ 8,000,000 - received from the sale of the property shall be used for the acquisition and improvement of new open space property not currently owned by the City of which at least 70% of said new open space property shall be located within the Coastal Zone. ... You suggested that the purchase and improvement of the land in the Coastal Zone might not take the full 80% of the sale price anticipated in the suggessted modifications. You asked whether after the City had purchased all the remaining open space within the City, including open space within the Coastal Zone, the language of the adopted modification could be interpreted to allow the City to spend some of the funds from the sale to improve open space it now holds that is located in the Coastal Zone. You stated that the Railroad Right-of-way, which forms a link of all public open space in the zone, and Clark Stadium were two facilities that the City would like to improve with some of the sale funds. We understood from our conversations with you that the City would make these improvements after improvements on the school site and other new property were carried out. The Commission's intent in adopting the modification was that recreational land be increased in the Coastal Zone, and that money derived from sale of the beach front property be used to replace this property and make the newly acquired property functional as public open space. After the City has Michael Schubach page 2 improved this new open space so that it is open and usable, it would be consistent with the Commission's intent to use any surplus funds, as you indicate, on improving other public recreational open space within the Coastal Zone. As you noted, the language does not anticipate the problem of a surplus, and could have included this option if more time had been available to polish the language. It was not the Commission's intent to preclude spending of that surplus on other recreation land, such as the Railroad Right-of-way, a coastal related trail that serves the subregion. The restriction in the language was to prevent spending the money on existing open space as an alternative to acquiring and improving open space within the Coastal Zone. If after acquisition and improvement of the property as required by the modification, the City improves property that is presently owned with the surplus money, we see no problem of consistency with the Commission's action. Our concern, as reflected in the findings, was that the money could be redirected outside the Coastal Zone, or that money from sale of the land would be spent on capital improvements instead of replacing the open space land. The intent of the modification was to tie the funds to additional public open space so that the change in the use of land would remain consistent with recreation and access policies of the Coastal Act. I hope this will assist you in accepting the modifications to the Land Use Plan amendment. If you need any further assistance, plase contact Jim Ryan or Pam Emerson at the above address or phone number. Sincerely, Charles Damm District Director 0697E VAST CO CAIIFORK:A-4HE RESOUiices ANY CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION s.."0•01 COAPT AREA 2 WM! BROADWAY, SUM 310 LONG SEAN, CA caw a i a) S40Tt March 11, 1991 f• • APR 2 5 1991 To: Commissioners From: South Coast Staff RE: City of Hermosa Beach Land Use Plan Amendment 90-1 Staff recently recieved (attached) the City's response to some of the ,suggested modifications. Staff essentially concurs with the City and has incorporated those changes. The revised suggested modifications should read as follows: 4.b (Public Open Space Acquisition overlay) shall provide for the acquisition of public open space principally within the coastal zone of the City of Hermosa Beach. The overlay shall provide that no sale of the property shall take place until.a trust fund has been established for the sole purpose of acquiring and improving such new public open space. The form and content Of the trust fund shall specify the following provisions and nen be submitted to the Executive Director of the California Coastal Commission for his/her review and approval es to inclusion of the following provisions. Zoning.adopted to implement the Public Open Space Acquisition overlay shall provide that of the funds received by the City in the sale of the subject property for residential/Corrmercia mixed uses et least 8O% of en amount uo_tp the maximum of 8,000.000 received from the sple of the erty shall hp used for the acquisition and improvement o new open space 'not currently owned by the City, of which at least 70% said new open spate property shall be located within the Coasoll zone. The minimum area to be acquired in the Coastal Zone is 44.5--a-: 4.0 :res. F ie ordinance shall also provide that no building permit= for construction on the subject property shall be issued until either 1 the new open space property has been acquired. . Page 2 8676b/1m or (2) the funding necessary to comply with this policy has been dedicated to the purchase of said open space and a binding contract has been signed guaranteeing such a purchase, of no less than 90% of the required new minimum open space property. 4.c Public Beach Parking shall be parking open to the jeneral public on a fVsticome-first serve basis. dpellgtct' re , Iyer not less, fir sw . at 4.es not t#as a d at y beat-#- let -e within tet Ange4oe eey. . Jay Habash - 683 Fifth Street, business applicant, said he thought he had applied for a •usiness license in December; questioned if a •usiness License and a C.U.P. were the same; - ated that he had no business at this time, worked only for family and friends; would re •ve sign or do anything else necessary to star, business; Jim Weber - 730 and 722 Eighth Place, owner of neighboring property, fav• ed granting the C.U.P., but asked that the fence separating the properties be repaired a . maintained; and, Jay Habash - 683 Fifth reet, asked that the process be explaine• better as he had not understood what was eeded. The public hearing was closed at 8. 0 P.M. Action: To overturn e Planning Commission decision; deny the Conditional .se Permit on reconsideration; and, adopt Resolution No 91-5445, entitled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL O•` THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFOR- NIA, TO DENY A •NDITIONAL USE PERMIT, ON RECONSIDERA- TION, FOR AN AUTO DETAILING SHOP IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN - AUTO SALES ESTABLISHMENT FOR 825 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LOT 1, AND LOTS 3, 5 AND 7, BLOC B, REDONDO HERMOSA TRACT.", on the grounds that they- was insufficient parking to allow two busi- nesses o this property. Motion idstokke, second Creighton. AYES Midstokke, Creighton, Essertier. NOE : Wiemans, Mayor Sheldon Item 3 w9is taken up at this time, but is listed in order for clarity./ The meeting recessed at 8:45 P.M. The,ineeting reconvened at 8:53 P.M. ,-----MtJNICIPAL MATTERS 6. RECOMMENDATION ON BILTMORE SITE ACTION PLAN FOLLOWING RECENT COASTAL COMMISSION ACTION. Memorandum from Plan- ning Director Michael Schubach dated April 2, 1991. Mayor Sheldon explained for the public that the City's request for 100% residential on the Biltmore site had been denied by the Coastal Commission, but Coastal Com- mission staff had recommended 70% residential and 30% commercial. Coming forward to address the Council on this matter was: June Williams - 2065 Manhattan Avenue, concerned regarding the people's Initiative for a desig- nation of open space for this property and City Council Minutes 04-09-91 Page 7432 7. asked that no other measures be placed on the November ballot for the Biltmore site as it would create confusion. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to direct staff to begin procedural steps to amend the General Plan and zoning to be consistent with the Coastal Com- mission's decision on the City -owned Biltmore Site and Lot C by: 1) amend the General Plan in annual 2nd quarter General Plan amendment to designate the Bilt- more Site for mixed commercial/residential use accordingly; 2nd quarter Land Use amendments are scheduled to commence on April 18th, and will be submitted to the City Council on June 25th for adoption; 2) amend zoning ordinance Specific Plan Area to be consistent with the General Plan and amended Certified Land Use Plan; and, 3) notify the Costal Commission of acceptance of their decision after public hearing. If the decision to place on the ballot is made and the measure fails, then, the City will need to adopt a new amendment and propose it to the Coastal Commission. Motion Essertier, second Creighton. So ordered. RECOMMENDATION OF STRAND SAFETY SUB -COMMITTEE TO INSTALL BICYCLE DISMOUNT STRUCTURES. Memorandum from Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski dated March 19/1991. Supplemental poll of 107 people (giving an opinion on a proposecd'--„,bike path on the Greenbelt) p ented by Richard Keriny; and petition containing 46 ames all op- posed to dismoti- t barricades on the Stra.., both submit- ted April 9, 1991 Director Wisniewski p = ented th staff report and re- sponded to Council questa• s. Director Antich presented design concepts and respondees to Council questions. It was noted that the cilmember Creighton a -comma ee members were Coun- Mayor Shel••n. Coming forward to address t -e Council on this ma ter were: Garrison Frost - 2900 Tennyson, oppo ed to dismount barri•.des, feels the way to sole- the problem of . gh speed cyclists on the Stran is a pro - g m of high penalties for speeding; Reed/Kirby - Hermosa Cycles, opposed to di mount barricades, in favor of greater enforcemen and higher fines for speeding; Glenn Tanner - 170 Manhattan Avenue, opposed to dismount barricades, in favor of greater en- / forcement and higher fines for speeding; Jeff Pendleton - Jeffer's, opposed to dismount bar - City Council Minutes 04-09-91 Page 7433 — 3b - April 2, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council April 9, 1991 SUBJECT: BILTMORE ACTION PLAN INITIATED BY STAFF PURPOSE: TO DETERMINE THE STEPS TO BE TAKEN FOR FINAL RESOLUTION OF THE BILTMORE SITE Recommendation Direct staff to begin procedural steps to amend the General Plan and zoning to be consistent with the Coastal Commission's decision on the City -owned Biltmore Site and Lot C. Background On August 14, 1990, the City Council adopted a resolution and ordinance changing the Biltmore Site to medium density residential, SPA zoning and Parking Lot C to General Commercial, C-2 zoning. At the March 13, 1991 public hearing, the Coastal Commission approved a modified version of the City's request ultimately to develop the Biltmore Site consisting of 12 existing lots and vacated right-of-way as residential. At this time, the Coastal Commission staff has not completed preparing the minutes and cannot provide in writing, or orally, the official final decision in detail. However, the City staff is confident that it understands the Coastal Commission's decision adequately to proceed since time is of the essence if there is any thought to placing the final resolution on the November Ballot. The following is staff's understanding of the Coastal Commission's decision; the only uncertainty is the condition regarding Public Parking Lot C, the area between Hermosa Avenue on th east, Beach Drive on the west, 14th Street on the south and 15th Court on the north, item 3 below: 1. Mixed Residential/Commercial shall provide low rise development with no less than 30% leasable floor area, not including parking devoted to C-1 Commercial, restaurant or beach support recreation use. 2. (Public Open Space Acquisition overlay) shall provide for the acquisition of public open space principally within the coastal zone of the City of Hermosa Beach, The overlay shall - 6 provide that no sale of the property shall take place until a trust fund has been established for the sole purpose of acquiring and improving such new public open space. The form and content of the trust fund shall specify the following provisions and shall be submitted to the Executive Director of the California Coastal Commission for his/her review and approval as to inclusion of the following provisions. Zoning adopted to implement the (Public Open Space Acquisition overlay) shall provide that of the funds received by the City in the sale of the subject property for residential/Commercial mixed uses at least 80% of an amount up to the maximum of $8,000,000 received from the sale of the property shall be used for the acquisition and improvement of new open space property (not currently owned by the City), of which at least 70% of said new open space property shall be located within the Coastal Zone. The minimum area to be acquired in the Coastal Zone is 4 acres. The ordinance shall also provide that no building permits for construction on the subject property shall be issued until either 1) the new minimum 4 acres of open space property has been acquired, or 2) the funding necessary to comply with this policy has been dedicated to the purchase of said open space and a binding contract has been signed guaranteeing such a purchase, of no less than 80% of the required new open space property. 3. Parking Lot C shall be restricted to public parking use. Note: A Biltmore Site open space initiative has already been scheduled to be on the November, 1991 ballot. Analysis The City has six months to reject the Coastal Commission's decision under state law. If rejected, the Biltmore Site will revert back to the Hotel Specific Plan Area and the City's current General Plan and zoning will be inconsistent. Staff believes that the Coastal Commission decision should be accepted and the City should proceed with implementation as noted in the recommendation. Going through the public hearing process will maximize input on how best to implement the Coastal Commission decision. Also, it hopefully will build consensus at the Planning Commission and Council level, as well as in the community. If the City Council opts to place its decision on the November Ballot, it is important that the necessary changes are adopted as soon as possible. The following process needs to take place: 1. Amend general Plan in annual 2nd quarter General Plan amendment to designate Biltmore Site for mixed commercial / residential use accordingly; 2nd quarter Land Use amendments _38_ are scheduled commence on April 18th, and will be submitted to the City Council on June 25th for adoption. 2. Amend zoning ordinance Specific Plan Area to be consistent with general Plan and amended Certified Land Use Plan. 3. Notify Coastal Commission of acceptance of their decision after public hearing. If the decision to place on the ballot is made and the measure fails, then, the City will need to adopt a new amendment and propose it to the Coastal Commission. Once the above process is complete, then, the whole matter could be placed on the ballot; the Council can decide the ballot question as part of the above process. Future decisions will need to be made regarding the sale of the property. According to the Coastal Commission the property could be sold as a package, or divided into residential and commercial portions, and sold separately. If ultimately the Coastal Commission's decision is found to differ significantly from the City staff's understanding, staff will report these differences immediately to the CounGfl. CONCUR: Micha-el, Schubach Planning Director evin B. Nort , raft City Manager City Manager Comment Because there are several ways to design the Coastal Commission's 707 residential/30% commercial alternative, the public hearing process is the recommended way to develop the best option. The voters in November, 1991 then will know the specifics of the alternative to a park, whether there is one or two Biltmore measures on the ballot. Council need not decide now whether to place the Coastal Commission option on the ballot; however, if you choose to decide this issue now, these points are relevant. Favoring a Council -sponsored ballot measure is the Council's prior vote to place residential on the ballot as a result of the flawed referendum petition. The Coastal Commission did not approve this option, but the current option is still 70% residential. Second, the voters would have a better understanding of the two options if both were on the ballot. The main disadvantage of a Council -sponsored ballot measure is the likelihood that neither issue would pass, based on the ten previous ballot measures. -3y - p/ccsrspa STATE Os CALIFORNIA—THE RESOURCES AGENCY CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SOJTH COAST AREA 245 WEST BROADWAY, SUITE 380 LONG BEACH, CA 90802 (213) 590-5071 February 28, 1991 TO: Commissioners and Interested Persons FROM: Peter Douglas, Executive Director Charles Damm, South Coast District Director Jim Ryan, Coastal Program Analyst P_rrr w r *? ;ti AR SUBJECT: City of Hermosa Beach Land Use Plan Amendment 90-1 (For public hearing and Commission action at the meeting of March 12-15, 1991) SYNOPSIS Public hearing and action on request by the City of Hermosa Beach to amend the Certified Land Use Plan to redesignate/rezone a portion of the Specific Plan Area from Hotel use to Residential use and to redesignate a second parcel to General Commercial (for public parking purposes), on east side of The Strand between 14th and 15th Streets. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff is recommending denial of the Land Use Plan amendment as submitted (RESOLUTION PAGE 2) and approval with suggested modifications (RESOLUTION PAGE 11) . The suggested modifications address the protection of opportunities for commercial support uses, public recreation, and public beach access parking ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Copies of the staff report are available at the South Coast District Office located in the State Veterans Building, 245 West Broadway, Suite 380, Long Beach, 90802. To obtain copies of the staff report by mail, or for additional information call the Long Beach Office at (213) 590-5071. Hermosa Beach LUP Amendment 90-1 Page 2 STANDARD OF REVIEW For the proposed LUP Amendment, the standard of review, pursuant to section 30512 (c) of the Coastal Act, is that the plan or any amendments thereto meets the requirements of, and is in conformity with, the policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. I. RESOLUTION FOR DENIAL OF THE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT Staff recommends that the Commission adopt the following resolution and findings for certification. MOTION "I move that the Commission certify Amendment 90-1 to the City of Hermosa Beach Land Use Plan, as submitted." Staff recommends a NO vote and the adoption of the following resolution and findings. An affirmative vote by a majority of the appointed Commissioners is needed to pass the motion. RESOLUTION TO DENY CERTIFICATION: The Commission hereby denies certification of Amendment 90-1 of the City of Hermosa Beach's Land Use Plan for the reasons discussed below and that the amendment fails to meet the requirements of and does not conform to the policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act to the extent necessary to achieve the basic state goals specified in Section 30001.5 of the Coastal Act, does not contain a specific public access component as required by Section 30500(a) of the Coastal Act, and is not consistent with applicable decisions of the Commission which shall guide the local government in their future actions under Section 30625(c) of the Coastal Act. II. FINDINGS FOR DENIAL The Commission hereby finds and declares as follows: A. Background and Amendment Description: The proposed Land Use Plan (LUP) amendment will redesignate/rezone a portion (0.8 acres) of the Specific Plan Area form Hotel use to Residential use and to redesignate a second parcel to General Commercial (for public parking purposes), on east side of The Strand between 14th and 15th Streets (See Exhibit B). Following is a more detailed description of the proposed LUP amendment as submitted by the City: 1. Amend the designation for the property commonly known as the "Biltmore Site" from Specific Plan Area for a Hotel to Medium Density Residential, legally described as follows: Lots 1 through 9, inclusive, and lots 19 and 20, Hermosa Beach Tract; and including the vacated portion of Beach Drive between 14the and 15the street and the vacated portion of the 15the court. extending 60 feeteastward of Beach Drive. Hermosa Beach LUP Amendment 90-1 Page 3 2. Amend the designation for the property commonly known as Parking Lot "C" from Specific Plan Area to General Commercial, legally described as follows Lots 19 through 29, inclusive and lots 32 and 33, Hermosa Beach Tract 3. Amend page 11, the second paragraph, by eliminating the exception to the height limits of the zoning ordinance for the hotel site between Thirteenth and Fifteenth Streets. Upon Commission concurrence to rezone the subject parcel to residential use, the City intends to sell the "Biltmore" site "using the monies to acquire excess available properties for Open Space Parkland uses and any remainder to pay off the railroad right-of-way". Following is a more detailed description of the future sale of the property as submitted by the City: The funds made available through the sale of the subject property for residential development are intended for the purchase of open space. -- Various surplus school sites which are currently zoned for open space purposes are available from the school district at this time, but may not be available in the future. The City needs funds to purchase the property. The benefit of selling the subject property for the purchase of other sites is the immense difference in value. The beach front residential property has an extimated appraisal value of between $218 and $257 per sq. ,ft. Whereas the school open space zoned property is estimated -to be worht -$12.00 to $14.56 per sq. ft. Consequently the sale of the subject property will result in a potential opportunity to acquire property 15 times the size of the subject property. Valley Park which is within the coastal zone, and approximately two blocks from the sand beach is of regional significance. The Community Resoureces Department estimated that 50% of the visitors to this park are from surrounding cities. A large portion of this park is actually surplus school property (2.82 acres) which could be acquired if the City had funds to purchase it (refer to Appendix II for school and park property). Other school property which is zoned open space is the South School Site (4.43 acres) which is also within the Coastal zone (Appendix II). This site is adequate in size for a baseball and soccer field and at one time was used for regional purposes (baseball, and soccer), but is no longer available under school district ownership. Outside of the coastal zone is Hermosa View School (2.42 acres). This site is in the northeast quadrant of the City where open space parkland is clearly deficient. One additional open space area of regional significance which connects the beach cities via a jogger's path could also be acquired without the current added tax burden which voters approved to purchase the property Hermosa Beach LUP Amendment 90-1 Page 4 from the railroad. This area runs the entire length of the City and is approximately 19 acres. In conclusion, the sale of the subject property could not only pay for the 3 above noted school sites and a portion of the previous railroad right-of-way, it could also more equally distribute parkland throughout the City. Currently, the westerly portion of the City has the immediate benefit of the sand beach within walking distance. Whereas the easterly portion of the City is clearly deficient in open space within walking distance. This site (0.8 acres) was once a portion of a larger site of approx. 2.9 acres that was approved by the Commission in October of 1984 for a 5 -story, 260 room hotel, commercial and conference center complex (CDP -5-84-625). This site is commonly known as the Biltmore site, where a hotel known as the Biltmore Hotel was demolished in 1969. The hotel complex was ultimately rejected by the voters. Subsequently, in March 1990, the Commission approved a smaller 172 room hotel on a 0.71 acre parcel located on the southerly portion of the orginal 2.9 acre hotel complex. The City has attempted since 1972 to develop the subject property. Ten ballot measure proposals have failed to be approved by the voters. Attached as Exhibit C is a summary 'of those proposals which varied from residential, commercial, open space and hotel uses. Just recently, yet another voter initiative petition was submitted to the City to designate the Biltmore site as Open Space. Following is a more detailed description of the status of that measure: An initiative petition was submitted February 7, 1991, by Parker Herriott concerning a proposed measure to create and designate the Biltmore site as Open Space 0-S-2 for its preservation and use as a public park. The petition was submitted within the 180 -day time period. The Clerk's office completed its review of the petition February 11, 1991, and has accepted the petition for filing, since it was determined that the number of signatures (1,822), prima facie, exceeds the minimum number of signatures required (1,199 = 10 percent for regular election; 1,798 = 15 percent for special election). The petition has been hand -delivered to the Los Angeles County Registar-Recorder's Office, with a request for signature verification within the permitted 30 -day time period, to be completed by March 12, 1991. If the petition is found to be sufficient, it will be presented to City Council at its next regular meeting after the verification is complete. B. Vistor Serving Facilities Sections 30221 and 30222 of the Coastal Act encourage the use of oceanfront lands suitable for vistor-serving uses over other non-priority uses. Specifically, those Sections State: Hermosa Beach LUP Amendment 90-1 Page 5 Section 30221. Oceanfront land suitable for recreational use shall be protected for recreational use and development unless present and forseeable future demand for public or commercial recreational activities that could be accommodated on the property is already adequately provided for in the area. Section 30222. The use of private lands suitable for visitor -serving commercial recreational facilities designed to enhance public opportunities for coastal recreation shall have priority over private residential, general industrial, or general commercial development, but not over agriculture or coastal -dependent industry. The subject site is located within the downtown business district of Hermosa Beach, approximately two blocks north of the Municipal Pier (See Exhibit B). A portion of the site is adjacent to The Strand, a public walkway that parallels the beach. The area surrounding the site is a mix of older commercial and residential uses. In 1984, when the Commission approved the 260 -room hotel complex on the site, the Commission found that the subject site had the potential to set a tone and become a focal point for revitalizing the downtown/commercial area. The Commission further found that the visitor -serving hotel/convention complex would be a compatible use with nearby existing beachfront recreational activities. However, as previously, mentioned, thathotel proposal was rejected by the voters. Although, the City has in the pastconsidered visitor -serving uses on this site, the -City, found when approving the proposed LUP amendment request that the "citizens of the City of Hermosa Beach have expressed their general opposition to non-residential use of the site by voting against proposals to use the Biltmore Site for visitor oriented commercial purposes such as a hotel or retail commercial uses:" Coastal Act policies encourage use of oceanfront land for visitor -serving uses that will maintain and enchance public opportunities for coastal recreation. In fact, the City's certified Land Use Plan is consistent with those policies of the Coastal Act. Following are the pertinent policies excerpted from the City's certified LUP: Policy: That the City should promote beach and recreation facilities related commercial development by refining the commercial (C-2) zone to encourage commercial -recreational uses. Policy: That the City encourage coastal related commercial land uses within the downtown area. The downtown pier area currently serves as a major visitor -destination point for recreational purposes. Given this existing resource, it is important that future development be carefully evaluated to protect, preserve and enhance its public recreational opportunities. The proposed residential use of the "Biltmore " site does not enhance or protect nearby existing beach front activities. The proposed residential use is contrary to the provisions of the City's certified LUP "to encourage commercial -recreational uses". Hermosa Beach LUP Amendment 90-1 Page 6 The Commission has consistently found that private residential use is the lowest priority use of beach front land. This property is located immediately adjacent to the Strand, a paved ocean -front walkway, whick is heavily used by beach goers. Conversion of the entire area of the Strand to private residential uses will exacerbate resident visiotr conflicts and leave no beach support facilities such as restaurarnts and beach rental locations which could serve day use visitors, and which could buffer residents from the demands of beach visitors, accommodating telephones and refreshements. Conversion from a hotel use will lessen opportunities for out -of town residents to use the beach. Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed LUP amendment is inconsistent with Section 30240 (b) of the Coastal Act, which requires that development not be permitted to degrade the quality of a significant public recreation area and Section 30253 (5) which requires that new development protect popular visitor destinations areas for recreational uses and Section 30221 which requires that oceanfront land suitable for recreational use be protected and Section 30222 which provides that visitor -serving commercial recreational uses have priority over residential development. C. Public Access One of the strongest goals of the Coastal Act is to protect, provide and enhance public access to and along the coast several Coastal Act policies require the Commission to protect beach access: Section 30210 of the Coastal Act states: In carrying out the requirement of Section 4 of Article X of the California Constitution, maximum access, which shall be conspicuously posted, and recreational opportunities shall be provided for all the people consistent with public safety needs and the need to protect public rights, rights of private property owners, and natural resource areas from overuse. Section 30211 of the Coastal Act states: Development shall not interfere with the public's right of access to the sea where acquired through use or legislative authorization, including, but not limited to, the use of dry sand and rocky coastal beaches to the first line of terrestrial vegetation. Section 30212.5 of the Coastal Act states: Wherever appropriate and feasible, public facilities, including parking areas of facilities, shall be distributed throughout an area so as to mitigate against the impacts, social and otherwise, or overcroding or overuse by the public of any single area. Section 30214 of the Coastal Act states: (a) The public access policies of this article shall be implemented in a manner that takes into account the need to regulate the time, place, and manner of public access depending on the facts and circumstances in each case including, butnotlimited to, the following: Hermosa Beach LUP Amendment 90-1 Page 7 (1) Topographic and geologic site characteristics. (2) The capacity of the site to sustain use and at what level of intensity. (3) The appropriateness of limiting public access to the right to pass and repass depending on such factors as the fragility of the natural resources in the area and the proximity of the access area to adjacent residential uses. (4) The need to provide for the management of access areas so as to protect the privacy of adjacent property owners and to protect the aesthetic values of the area by providing for the collection of litter. (b) It is the intent of the Legislature that the public access policies of this article be carried out in a reasonable manner that considers the equities and that balances the rights of the individual property owner with the public's constitutional right of access pursuant to Section 4 of .Article X of the California Constitution. Nothing in this section or any amendment thereto shall be construed as a limitation on the rights guaranteed to the public under Section 4 of Article X of the California Constitution. (c) In carrying out the public access policies of this article, the commission, regional commissions, and any other responsible public agency shall consider and encourage the utilization of innovative access management techniques, including, but not limited to, agreements with private organizations which would minimize management costs and encourage the use of volunteer programs. Part of the City's proposed LUP amendment includes rezoning a parcel of land adjacent to the Biltmore site from Specific Plan Area (S.P.A.) to General Commercial for public parking purposes. Following is a more detailed description as submitted by the City: Parking Lot "C": As noted above this parking area was originally part of the hotel S.P.A. and would have had a significantly reduced capacity for beach visitors with hotel/beach visitor shared parking status. A total of 134 spaces under the current proposal will be maintained for general public use. Therefore, even though a much smaller parking lot (lot F) with 20 spaces will be eliminated under this proposed amendment, the overall amount of parking spaces will exceed the Hotel S.P.A. arrangement by 87 assuming a conservative estimate that 50% of the shared hotel/beach visitor parking would be occupied by beach visitors and considering the fact that Lot F was also eliminated under the Hotel S.P A Analysis Parking lot. "C" was originally a part of the specific plan area for the defeated hotel project, and therefore retains that general plan and zoning Hermosa Beach LUP Amendment 90-1 Page 8 classification. The proposed general plan amendment and zone change would return it to its previous GC C-2 designations. This would be consistent with its current use as a commercial parking area, and consistent with the designation of the other downtown parking lot. Most of the urbanized coastline in Los Angeles and Orange Counties is within small cities. In many, like Hermosa Beach, the beach is publicly owned and access is limited by the transportation system, which for people in the Los Angeles basin means the automobile. Many of these small cities, including Hermosa Beach, were subdivided in the time of the street railways and have inadequate provisions for cars. The inadequate provisions for cars includes narrow streets and very little off-street parking. The existing parcel of land is currently providing 134 public parking spaces for both commercial users and beachgoers. A major concern of staff is that the proposed General -Commercial C-2 zoning designation does not assure the continued use of the subject parcel as a public parking lot. Section 30252(4) of the Coastal Act states: "The location and amount of new development should maintain and enhance public access to the coast by. . . . (4) providing adequate parking facilities or providing substitute means of serving the development with public transportation. . ." The City of Hermosa Beach has historically experienced a shortage of parking due to competing parking demands of beach -goers, customers of commercial establishments, and the surrounding residential uses which range from low to high density. On May 18, 1982, the Commission conditionally approved a permit for the implementation of a preferential parking and remote beach parking program for the City of Hermosa Beach. According to the City, the program had been "designed to reduce traffic and parking impacts by reallocating the beach visitor demand to an area of the City that can better meet the need. This is done through a permit pricing system and the providing of the alternative of free remote parking and a beach shuttle to transport these visitors to the beach. If the visitor does not want to take advantage of this remote parking, a daily parking permit may be purchased enabling the visitor to park in the impacted area for a certain fee." In a subsequent permit amendment, the Commission deleted the beach shuttle aspect of the program. The Commission must find that the proposed LUP amendment does not reduce beach access, and that it will not have significant adverse impacts, either individually or cumulatively on coastal resoures. The coastal resource here is off-street public parking facilities. If "Parking Lot C" is not retained for public parking lot purposes, existing beachfront parking conflicts will be further exacerbated. The City's certified Land Use Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the Coastal Act. Following are those pertinent provisions excerpted from the City's certified LUP: A. Statement of Philosophy To preserve and increase, where feasible, residential, commercial, and general public parking within the Coastal Zone. Hermosa Beach LUP Amendment 90-1 Page 9 B. Goals and Objectives 1. To provide adequate residential parking. 2. To maintain adequate parking space for both visitor and shoppers. 3. To provide easy access to work—related parking for merchants. 4. To maximize the safety and accessiblility of parking while minimizing noise, traffic congestion and negative visual impacts. 5. To provide an equitable distribution and allocation of parking resources. . . . C. Policies and Programs 1.. Existing Policies and Programs Policy: That the City should not allow the elimination of existing on—street parking or off—street parking spaces within the coastal zone. Future residential and commercial construction should provide the actual parking necessary to meet the demand generated. The proposed Parking Lot C General Commercial zoning designation does not assure the continued future use of this public parking lot for both beachgoers and shoppers, which is inconsistent with the goals and policies of the City's certified LUP, which was found consistent with Chapter #. Only if -the lot continues to be usable for bach parking could the conversion to commercial use be found consistent with prior permit actions by the Commission and with chapter three policies relating to beach access. Secondly, by converting the use of the Biltmore site from its current parking area (Lot F) and undeveloped use, and from its potential public serving use, the hotel, to residential use, the the amendment locks up beeach fronting land to a use that by its nature excludes the public. The City proposes to use funds from sale of these properties to plurchase a netweork of public sering open space. The Commission agrees thatopen space is also public serving, however, it cannot find that, as proposed by the City, that open space purchased at some indefinite time in the futere, or outside the Coastal Zone can be found to provide plublic access to the Coastline, support coastal recreation and accommodate beach visitors. The City proposes to purchase open space land on the back dune that parallels the coastaline, about six blocks inland. However, the LUP amendment , as submitted for certification, does not show this intention nor does the language guarantee that the change from visitor serving to public open space will be carried out. As proposed then the amendment denies the public use of land and does not provide a coastally related alternative that can be found to provide coastal access. Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed LUP amendment will restrict beach access for non—residents and does not conform to Sections 300210 ("Maximum access which shall be conspicuously posted, and recreational opportunities which shall be provided for all the people"); 30211 ("Development shall not interfere with. . . access to the sea. . ."); 30212 Hermosa Beach LUP Amendment 90-1 Page 10 ("public facilities shall be distributed throughout an area"), 30213, 30221, 30223, 30250 and 30252 (" providing adquate parking facilities or providing substitute means of serving the development with public transportation") of the Coastal Act of 1976. D. Coastal Recreation Section 30252(6) of the Coastal Act states: The location and amount of new development should maintain and enhance public access to the coast by. . . (6) assuring that the recreational needs of new residents will not overload nearby coastal recreation areas by correlating the amount of development with local park acquistion. . . . As previously discussed, the City intends to use the proceeds from the sale of the "Biltmore" site to acquire additional open space potentially located both within the coastal zone and outside the zone. According to the City a "conservative estimate is that 15 times the land area would be available by purchasing surplus school sites in all four quadrants of the City through the proceeds of the sale of the Biltmore site". Attached as Exhibit D is a resolution of the City's intent to acquire additional parkland. Following is a partial quote from that resolution: WHEREAS, The City Council intends, after the rezoning, to sell the - site and use the proceeds to pay off the financing of the Railroad right-of-way, therefore eliminating the 4% Utility User's Tax; and also acquire available excess School properties for Open Space Parkland purposes; and WHEREAS, the City Council intends to present this as a "package' to the Coastal Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City Council requests the Planning Commission to study rezoning the biltmore Site to Residential and amending the general Plan appropriately. They are to study this issue as a "package', using the monies to acquire excess available properties for Open Space Parkland uses and any remainder to pay off the railroad righ-of-way. The City's proposal is a significant mitigation measure to approve the beachfront Biltmore site for residential porposes rather than visitor -serving uses. However, the City's proposed LUP amendment does not assure that in fact the proceeds will be used for future park acquisition purposes. Furthermore, it is not clear how much parkland, if any, will be purchased within the Coastal zone limits. Staff has had discussions with the City to try and resolve these concerns. Attached as Exhibit E is a letter from the City attorney addressing this issue. At this point in time, the proposed LUP amendment, as presently submitted by the City, does not assure future park acquisition. Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed amendment will not assure that development is correlated with local park acquisition, consistent with Section 30252 (6) of the Coastal Act. Hermosa Beach LUP Amendment 90-1 Page 11 III. MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION OF AMENDMENT IF MODIFIED I move that the Commission certify the amendment of the Hermosa Use Plan 90-1 if modified in conformity with the suggestions set out in the staff report. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends a YES vote, and the adoption of the following resolution and finds. An affirmative vote by a majority of the appointed Commissioners is needed to pass the motion. RESOLUTION TO CERTIFY AMENDMENT OF LUP IF MODIFIED: The Commission hereby certifies the Land Use Plan Amendment subject to the following modifications and adopts the findings stated below on the grounds that, if modified as suggested below, the Amendment to the Land Use Plan will meet the requirements of and conform with the policies of Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 30200) of the California Coastal Act to the extent necessary to achieve the basic state goals specified in Section 30001.5 of the Coastal Act; the Land Use Plan will contain a specific access component as required by Section 30500 (a) of the Coastal Act; the Land Use Plan will be consistent with applicable decisions of the Commission that shall guide local government actions pursuant to Section 30625 (c); and certification of the Land Use Plan amendment will meet the requirements of Section 21080.5 (d) (2)(i) of the Environmental Quality Act., as there would be no further feasible mitigation measures or feasible alternatives which could substantially lessen significant adverse impact on the environment. The suggested modifications to the submittal are necessary to achieve the basic state goals set forth in Section 30001.5 of the Coastal Act. The Commission further finds that if local government adopts and transmits its revision to the Amendment to the Land Use Plan in conformity with the suggested modifications, then the Executive Director shall so notify the Commission. IV. SUGGESTED MODIFICATIONS: Where language is being added to the City's proposed LUP Amendment policies it is underlined; where language is being deleted it is cross -hatched. 1. Amend the designation for the property commonly known as the "Biltmore Site" from Specific Plan Area for a Hotel to Medium Density Mixed Residential/Commercial (Public Open Space Acquisition overlay), legally described as follows: Lots 1 through 9, inclusive, and lots 19 and 20, Hermosa Beach Tract; and including the vacated portion of Beach Drive between 14th and 15th streets and including the vacated portion of the 15th Court extending 60 feet eastward of Beach Drive. 2. Amend the designation for the property commonly known as Parking Lot "C" from Specific Plan Area to General Commercial/Public Beach Parking, legally described as follows: Hermosa Beach LUP Amendment 90-1 Page 12 Lots 19 through 29, inclusive and lots 32 and 33, Hermosa Beach Tract 3 Amend page 11, the second paragraph, by eliminating the exception to the height limits of the zoning ordinance for the hotel site between Thirteenth and Fifteenth Streets. 4. Insert the following Definitions: 4.a Mixed Residential/Commercial shall provide low rise development with no less than 30% leasable floor area, not including parking.` devoted to C-1 Commercial, restaurant or beach support recreation use. 4.b (Public Open Space Acquisition overlay) shall provide for the acquisition of public open space principally within the coastal zone of the City of Hermosa Beach. The overlay shall provide that no sale of the property shall take place until a trust fund has been established for the sole purpose of acquiring and improving such new public open space. The form and content -of the trust fund shall specify the following provisions and shall be submitted to the Executive Director of the California Coastal Commission for his/her review and approval as to inclusion of the following provisions. 91 43—vi 0—IA.WA-T Uf vs& .)C AUMt8tcoo,000 'CCUa vc d w.A sckle. c� P �a t e 4y ning adopted to lement the (Public Open Space Acquisition overlay) shall provi that of the funds received by the City in the sale of the subject property for residential/Commercial mixed uses at least 80% shall be used for the acquisition and improvement of new openAspace property (not currently owned by the City), of which at least 70% of said new open space property shall be located within the Coastal zone. The minimum area to be acquired in the Coastal Zone is -4--5, Cres. The ordinance shall also provide that no building permits for construction on the subject property shall be issued until either 1) the new open space property has been acquired, or 2) the funding necessary to comply with this policy has been dedicated to the purchase of said open space and a binding contract has been signed guaranteeing such a purchase, of no less than 90% of the required newlopen space property. MthiHlv.v% c, 4_kuto 4 c Public Beach Parking shall be parking open to the general public on a first/come-first serve basis. • 5. Amend the seventh policy under Item 2 on page 12 to read as follows: The policy: The Biltmore Site is a vital asset of the people of Hermosa Beach which will play a substantial role in maintaining the City as a financially feasible entity. Hermosa Beach LUP Amendment 90-1 Page 13 The City has determined that the most beneficial public recreational, economic and environmental use for this coastal site is a combination of residential/beach serving low intensity commercial and beach public parking. V. FINDINGS FOR CERTIFICATION IF MODIFIED The Commission hereby finds and declares as follows: (a) Visitors—Serving Uses As noted in the Findings for Denial of the proposed LUP amendment, the Downtown/Pier area serves as a major regional visitor destination point for recreational purposes. Given this resource, it is important that new development protect, preserve and enhance nearby water related recreational opportunities. The proposed residential designation is not the most compatible land use of the subject beachfront property. Staff has suggested a modification that the zoning designation be a Mixed Residential/Commercial land use to provide low rise development with no less than 30% leasable Floor areatto be devoted to C-1 commercial, restaurant or beach support recreation use. Only as modified, can the Commission find that the proposed LUP amendment will provide a mix and diversity of uses that will not overload nearby coastal recreational facilities consistent with the certified LUP, and that some portion of this land will continue to provide visitor accommodations. As noted below, in the section on mitigating open space, this conversion is only acceptable if itsubstitutes usable public open space in the _coastal zone in addition to providing some directly beach related public serving development. The Commission finds that the combination of beach related day use commercial and public recreation is an acceptable alternative to a hotel, but only if combined so that some public use remains on the beach front, and public land is actually acquired. Finally, the Commission finds that this modification is necessary to assure that new development not be permitted to degrade the quality of a significant public recreation area, as required in Section 30240 (b) of the Coastal Act; will protect special communities which, because of their unique characteristics, are popular visitor destination points for recreational use, as required in Section 30253 (5); will assure that development shall be compatible with the character of surrounding areas, consistent with Section 30251; will assure that oceanfront land suitable for recreational use shall be protected for recreational use as required under Section 30221; and will enable the LUP amendment to comply with Section 30220 which states that coastal areas suited for water—oriented recreational activities shall be protected for such uses. (B) Public Access As discussed in the Findings for Denial, the City of Hermosa Beach has historically experienced parking conflicts between beachgoers, commercial establishments and residents. The proposed Parking Lot C Zone change to commercial use does not assure the tontinued use of that parcel for public parking purposes. Staff has suggested a modification that the proposed General Commercial C-2 designation be changed to General Commercial/Public Hermosa Beach LUP Amendment 90-1 Page 14 Beach Parking. Only as modified can the Commission find that the proposed LUP amendment is consistent with Section 30210 to provide "maximum access, which shall be conspicuously posted, and recreational opportunities shall be provided for all the people consistent with public safety needs and the need to protect public rights, rights of private property owners, and natural resource areas from overuse." The Commission further finds that the suggested modification will enhance public access to the coast, consistent with Section 30252 of the Coastal Act. (C.) Mitigation As discussed in the Findings for Denial, the Citys proposed LUP amendment does not assure thatproceeds from the sale of the Biltmore Site will, in fact, be used for acquisition of future parkland which can be found to support coastally related recreation. Public land on the back dune, within walking distance of the beach can conform to this condition, if there is a guarantee that it will be within the coastal zone, which is six blocks wide in Hermosa Beach, and if it is actually purchased at the same time as the development of the ocean frontland for private residential and commercial use takes place. Staff has suggested a modification to establish a trust fund that will assure that 80% of the monies received from the sale of the property shall be used for the acquisition and improvementof new open space of which at least 70% of said open space will be located within the coastal zone, or no less than 4.5 acres. The Commission finds that the increased land area will partially compensate for the loss of some land to private uses directly on the Strand. Only as modified can the Commission find that the proposed LUP amendment will assure that development be correlated with local park acquisition, consistent with Section 30252(6) of the Coastal Act. 8586D RESOLUTION 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, AMENDING THE LAND USE MAP OF THE GENERAL PLAN FOR THE SOUTHERLY PORTION OF THE "BILTMORE SITE" FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL/RECREATION, AND TO CONCUR WITH THE AMENDMENT TO THE TEXT OF THE COASTAL COMMISSION CERTIFIED LAND USE PLAN ALL TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE DECISION OF THE COASTAL COMMISSION, IN REGARDS TO THE USE OF THE BILTMORE SITE, AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on June 11 to receive oral and written testimony on said amendment and made the following findings; A. The proposed amendment is necessary to be consistent with the Coastal Commission decision regarding a proposed Land Use Plan amendment in regards to development of the Biltmore Site; B. The proposed amendment will not result in a significant impact on the environment as it involves a change in the allowed mix of uses on the Biltmore Site which will result in a less than significant impact to the environment; C. Residential use of the northerly portion of the Biltmore Site is consistent with adjacent and surrounding land uses which to the north and east are predominantly multi -family residential uses and commercial use of the southerly portion is consistent with land uses to the south and southeast which are predominantly commercial; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, does hereby amend the Land Use Map of the General Plan and concurs with the Coastal Commission amendment the Certified Land Use Plan text, as shown on the attached map and described as follows: r� J�E$O . J© RI -6-115 o6 -►I -91 i DoT • j •i•: .1..,1 J GAJ •1J_ _ t! f .-)b in 0_ • + SECTION 1. Amend the designation for the southerly portion of the property commonly known as the "Biltmore Site" from Medium Density Residential to Commercial Recreation, legally described as follows: Lots 1, 2, 19, 20 and 32, inclusive Block 15, Hermosa Beach Tract; and including the vacated portion of Beach Drive extending 60 feet northerly from 14th Street. SECTION 2. Accept the Coastal Commission's amendment of the text of Coastal Commission Certified Land Use Plan as follows: 1. Amend the designation for the property known as the "Biltmore Site" from Specific Plan Area for a Hotel to Medium Density Mixed Residential/Commercial (Public Open Space Acquisition overlay,) legally described as follows: Lots 1 through 9 inclusive, and lots 19, 20 and 32Block 15, Hermosa Beach Tract; and including the vacated portion of Beach Drive between 14th and 15th Streets and including the vacated portion of 15th Court extending 60 feet eastward from Beach Drive. 2. Amend the designation for the property commonly known as "Parking Lot C" from Specific Plan Area to General Commercial/Public Beach Parking 3. Amend page 11, the second paragraph, by eliminating the exception to the height limits of the zoning ordinance for the hotel site between Thirteenth and Fifteenth Streets. 4. Insert the following definitions: a. Mixed Residential/Commercial shall provide low rise development with no less than 3070 leasable floor area, not including parking, devoted to C-1 commercial, restaurant or beach support recreation use. b. Public Open Space Acquisition Overlay shall provide for the acquisition of public open space primarily within the coastal zone of the City of Hermosa Beach. The overlay shall provide that no sale of the property shall take place until a trust fund has been established for the sole purpose of acquiring and improving such new public open space. The form and content of the trust fund shall specify the following provisions and shall be submitted to the Executive Director of the California Coastal Commission for his/her review and approval as to inclusion of the following provisions. Zoning adopted to implement the Public Open Space Acquisition Overlay shall provide that the funds received by the City in the sale of the subject property for residential/commercial mixed uses at least 80% of an amount up to the maximum of $8,000,000 received from the sale of the property shall be used for the acquisition and improvement of new open space property of which at least 707 of said new open space property shall be located within the Coastal zone. The minimum area to be acquired in the Coastal Zone is 4.0 acres. The ordinance shall also provide that no building permits for construction shall be issued until either 1) the new open space property has been acquired, or, 2) the funding necessary to comply with this policy has been dedicated to the purchase of said open space and a binding contract has been signed guaranteeing such a purchase, of no less than 90% of the required new minimum of 4.0 acres of open space property c. Public Beach Parking shall be parking open to the general public on a first come -first serve basis. 5. Amend the seventh policy under Item 2 on page 12, by adding the underlined text to read as follows: The Policy: The Biltmore Site is a vital asset of the people of Hermosa Beach which will play a substantial role in maintaining the City as a financially feasible entity The City has concurred that the most beneficial public recreational, economic and environmental use for this coastal site is a combination of residential/beach serving low intensity commercial, and beach public parking. ATTEST: PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1991, by: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY AP p/ccrsgpab 3 ANIE-ADMET To : CoAksTML. CcIMI4stotJ CERTIPIet LARD US ?SAN MIXED USE.RESIDV-NTIALVGot,ll-tFpLiAL (Pu tc OPENI SPALE_. ACvtstTot. NAP t M P P_o/ ENtE.N r oV ER -LA'() u ORDINANCE 91 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT FOR THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA NO. 1 FOR THE BILTMORE SITE TO CHANGE THE PERMITTED USES FROM SOLELY RESIDENTIAL TO ALLOW A MAXIMUM OF 70% OF THE TOTAL FLOOR AREA FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES AND REQUIRE A MINIMUM OF 30% TO BE FOR COMMERCIAL/RECREATION PURPOSES TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COASTAL COMMISSION APPROVED MODIFICATION TO THE CERTIFIED LAND USE PLAN, AND THE REMAINING TO BE DEVELOPED FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES, AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on a Text Amendment to the specific plan area for the Biltmore site on June 11, 1991, to receive oral and written testimony, and made the -following Findings: A. The proposed text amendment will not cause a significant impact on the environment as it does not involve a significant change in the intensity of the development allowed on the Biltmore Site; A combination of commercial Biltmore Site is consistent B. land uses which to the multi -family residential and residential uses on the with adjacent and surrounding north and east are uses, while predominantly to the south it is predominately commercial uses; C. The amendment will continue to allow a density consistent with the Medium Density General Plan designation for the residential portion and and intensity consistent with the Commercial Recreation designation for the commercial portion D. The provisions of the Specific Plan Area will ensure that the development of the site is consistent with the character of J4' No /27/ Yd -72;Av / /T (OA N Es O 111 surrounding uses and of an appropriate density given the existing congestion of the area; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, does hereby ordain that the zoning ordinance text be amended as follows: SECTION 1. Amend Article 9.6, Chapter 1 as follows (underlined text is to be added, deleted text is overstriked): Article 9.6, Chapter 1, Specific Plan Area No. 1 Section 9.61-1. Authority. This Specific Plan Area is an instrument for implementing the General plan pursuant to Article 8, Chapter 3, of the State of California Planning and Zoning Law (California Government Code Section 65450 et. Seq.) Section 9.61-2 Location and Description. The subject area is located on the east side of the Strand generally between 14th Street and 15th Street, and extending to approximately 190 feet east of the Strand. Section 9.61-3 Purpose. The purpose of the Specific Plan Area is to set forth the development requirements, standards and permitted uses for development of the subject property consistent with the City of Hermosa Beach General Plan and consistent with the Coastal Commission certified Land Use Plan which requires a minimum of thirty (30) percent of the developed floor area to be utilized for commercial purposes. Furthermore, the Specific Plan Area shall set forth the method to ensure that the funds generated from initial sale of the subject property will provide for the acquisition of open space at other locations within the City of Hermosa Beach, principally within the coastal zone. Section 9.61-4 Permitted Residential Uses and Residential Density. A. Residential uses are only permitted on the portion of the site designated Medium Density Residential on the General Plan Map B. Any use permitted in the R-1 Residential Zone to a maximum of seven (7) (12) dwelling units. 2 C. Condominium developments consistent with the provisions of the Condominium Ordinance of the City of Hermosa Beach to a maximum of nine (9) (14) dwelling units. Section 9.61-5 Residential Development Standards A. A minimum of three (3) off-street parking spaces shall be provided for each dwelling unit. B. Lot coverage shall not exceed 50% of the area designated for Medium Density Residential development on the General Plan map. (cntirc Spccific Plan Arca) C. A minimum setback of 10 feet shall be provided from the Strand. D. The development of condominiums shall require the merging of the existing lots and vacated right-of-ways into one parcel. E. The maximum floor area for any individual dwelling unit shall not exceed 3,000 square feet. The total floor area of the residential uses as compared to the total floor area developed on the entire site shall not exceed seventy (70) percent. F. Development standards shall be as set forth in ARTICLE 5. R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONE, except pertaining to lot coverage and setbacks as stated in Section 9.61-5(B) and 5(C). G. All other standards shall be as set forth in the City of Hermosa Beach Zoning Ordinance, except pertaining to required parking spaces as stated in Section 9.61-5A. Section 9.61-6 Permitted Commercial Uses A. Commercial uses are only permitted on the portion of the site identified as Commercial/Recreation on the General Plan Map B. Visitor -serving Commercial Uses including, but not limited to, the following: Beach recreation equipment sales and rentals; Visitor or tourist oriented gift shop or retail sales; Snack Bar/Snack Shop; conditional use permit subject to Article 10, Section 10-7; Hotels, Motels Restaurant/Cafe; beer, wine, or general alcohol in conjunction with, conditional use permit required subject of article 10 3 C. Any other commercial uses not listed which may be considered visitor -serving shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Commission Section 9.61-7 Commercial Development Standards A. The maximum height shall be thirty (30) Feet. Exceptions for height of roof structures shall be in accordance with Article 12, Section 1201, of the zoning ordinance. B. The gross square footage of the commercial floor areas, including any areas for outside dining, and/or recreational use shall be a minimum of 307 of the total floor area of the combination of the commercial and residential uses on the entire site designated Specific Plan Area. C. A Precise Development Plan shall be required for any commercial development in accordance with Article 14, Division 3 (Section 1430 et. seq.) D. All other standards shall be governed by the City of Hermosa Beach Zoning Ordinance, including, but not limited to, Section 8-5, and Article 11.5, Off -Street Parking. Section 9.61-8 Public Open Space Acquisition A. The purpose of this section is to require that funds from the initial sale of the property from the City of Hermosa Beach shall provide for the acquisition of public open space principally within the Coastal Zone of the City of Hermosa Beach as follow: 1. No sale of the property shall take place until a trust fund is established, by the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, for the sole purpose of acquiring and improving open space; 2. Eighty percent (807) of an amount up to the maximum of eight million dollars ($8,000,000) received from the sale of the property shall be used for the acquisition and improvement of open space property not currently owned by the City of Hermosa Beach, of which at least seventy percent (707) shall be be located within the Coastal Zone; 3. The minimum area to be acquired shall be four (4) acres: 4. No building permits for construction within this Specific Plan Area zone shall be issued until either of the following has occurred: a. A minimum of four (4) acres of open space property has been acquired; or, b. The funding necessary to comply with this section, in terms of acquiring and improving open space, has been dedicated to the purchase of the open space and a binding contract has been executed guaranteeing the purchase of no less than 90% o the minimum of four (4) acres of open space property 5. For the purposes of this section, open space property shall be defined as any property designated Open Space on the City of Hermosa Beach General Plan, and/or designated as Open Space on the zoning map. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days of its final passage and adoption. SECTION 3. 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 4. 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, and 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 this day of , 1991, by following vote: ATTEST: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY "!' $V*D A`11 TO( 7`�I r1,1 P/ccordblt ACTIVITY IIMU\ITlr'leA'1'IUN Between 14th Street and 15th Street on the east of the . Location Strand & approximately 350' west of Hermosa Avenue; commonly a. Address:JulQwn as t e_ Riltmnrp site Lots 1 - 9 inclusive, Lots 19, 20 & 32, Black 15, • b. Legal: Hermosa Beach Tract 2. Description General Plan amendment from MD to MD and GC, and text amendment to Zoning Ordinance re: the sppc-i fi_c Plan Area for the Biltmore Site to allow 10% to be used for commercial purposes consistent with the Coastal Commission 3. Sponsor determination a. Name: City of Hermosa RParh b. Mailing Address: 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Phone: (213) 318-0242 NEGATIVE DECLARATION In accordance with Resolution 89-5229 of the City of Hermosa beach, which im- plements the California Environmental quality Act of 1970 in Hermosa Beach, the Environmental Review Committee must make an environmental review of all private projects proposed to be undertaken within the City, and the Planning Commission must make an environmental review of all public projects proposed to be undertaken within the City, which are subject to the Environmental quality Act. This declaration is documentation of the review and, if it be- comes final, no comprehensive Enviromnental Impact Report is required -for this project. FINDING OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE .We have undertaken and completed an Environmental Impact Review of this pro- posed project in accordance with Resolution 89-5229 of the City Council of Hermosa Beach, and find that this project does not require a comprehensive Environmental Impact Report because, provided the attached mitigation meas- ures are included in the project, it would not have a significant effect on the environment. Documentation/ sup•o ti g this finding is on file in the Planning Department. 4-18•-91 Date of Finding 'Chairman, Environmental Review Committee FINDING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION We have undertaken and completed an Environmental Impact Review of this pro- ject in accordance with Resolution 89-5229 of the City Council of Hermosa Beach, and find that this project does not require a comprehensive Environ- mental Impact Report because, provided the attached mitigation measures are included in the project, it would not have a significant effect on the en- vironment. Documentation supporting this finding is on file in the Plann- ing Department. Date of Finding Chairman, Planning Commission FINDING OF THE CITY COUNCIL We have undertaken and completed an environmental Impact Review of this pro- posed project in accordance with Resolution 89-5229 of the City Council of Hermosa Beach, and find this project does not require a comprehensive En- vironmental Impact Report because, provided the attached mitigation meas- ures are included in the project, it would not have a significant effect on . the environment. Documentation supporting this finding is on file in the Planning Department. -Date of Finding Mayor, Hermosa Beach City Council �5 �wM MITIGATION MEASURE Residential Uses subject to restrictions in terms of density / standards equivalent to those standards adopted for SPA No. 1 -- Also,- commercial uses shall be subject to same height restrictions. ESTIMATE OF VALUE FOR THE BILTMORE SITE AND ANALYSIS OF COMPARABLE SALES DATA Prepared By: Jonathan Coleman Real Estate West 905 Manhattan Beach Blvd. Manhattan Beach, Calif. 90266 (213) 546-3441 (213) 379-2220 Due to the uniqueness of The Strand Market, I feel that in order to properly understand the comparable sales information it is necessary to supply a narrative of market trends as well as a description of each property. The limited number of sales at a given time and the inherently high land values, create a market that is inconsistent with the comparable sales data over a twelve month period of time. Over the past seven years I have been involved in approximately forty three listing and sales transactions on The Strand. I have observed several trends or general rules which affect the values of these properties. There are of course exceptions, however these rules generally apply. South Hermosa Is Less Expensive Than North Hermosa:' R-3 Southern Hermosa border North to Pier Avenue. 35 Ft. height limit. The history of past zoning has influenced the composition of each zoning area. The R-3 lots South of Pier Avenue have allowed many multiple units, including 2-4 unit buildings, larger apartments and hotels. This area has greater density and many renters. Consequently there are many non -owner occupied properties. The properties South of 2nd Street have a limited Southern view which is blocked by the five -story Cove Apartments extending to the shoreline, The Redondo Beach Marina and The Southern California Edison Company Plant. Hermosa Avenue backs up to the fifteen most Southern properties and this area is heavily trafficed due to public access. The properties North of 9th Street to Pier Avenue are primarily large apartment buildings,a hotel and commercial structures. This area in proximity to Pier Avenue is also heavily trafficed. There has been more construction of new residences in the R-3 area of The Strand than any other.. This is probably due to the lower price structure. As more new properties are constructed or remodeled, the rental population is being displaced. The composition of this neighborhood is changing, and I suspect that over the next 5-7 years it will be entirely composed of single-family residences. The R-3 zoning allows a 35 Ft. height limit, facilitating the construction of larger 3 -story homes. R-2 Pier Avenue North to 22nd Street. 30 Ft. height limit. The R-2 zoning has allowed multiple -unit buildings, but to a lesser extent of development than the R-3 zoned area. This area consists of Single-family residences with a few duplexes, one 4 -unit building and one 9 -unit building. The Southern portion approaching Pier Avenue is heavily trafficed with commercial development and several large apartment complexes in close proximity. The Northern border at 22nd Street is also more heavily trafficed due to commercial development on 22nd Street and Hermosa Avenue. This is also an area of public access. The majority of the new development in this area is major remodeling of existing structures to the 30 Ft. height limit. R-1 22nd Street to the Northern Hermosa border. 25 Ft. height limit. With few exceptions, this area is all single-family residences which are owner -occupied. This area shows pride of ownership with major improvements such as remodeling and several new residences. The lots in this area are in many cases over standard size, being 11 to 2 lots in width. Between 24th Street and 32nd Street the lots are greater than standard depth, being up to 130 ft. deep. However, as the lots approach the Northern border of Hermosa Beach, they decrease in depth to a minimum of 50 ft. at the far North end. Although the height is limited to 25 ft., the geography of the area is such, that the lots rise and slope up at the rear. Consequently, the median point of the elevations of these lots allows for approximately 5 ft. of additional height at the front facing the ocean. Corner Vs. Interior Lots: Corner lots have always had a greater value than interior lots (those not situated on a corner). This is due to several factors. With few exceptions, the corner lots have an additional 20 ft. sideyard. The sideyards are actually city owned property, as are the front yards of most of the walkstreet properties. The sideyards can be used for parking, deck area or yard area, so long as no permanent structures are built on them. They can also be walled or fenced in from the public walkways. This has great utility to the corner lot owners, in that they supply additional parking for up to 8 cars and also offer additional yard area without the expense of having to purchase or pay taxes on the additional square footage of lot area. The corner lots are bordered by walkstreets which protect the Northern or Southern views from being blocked, to the extent that an adjacent house would limit an interior lots views. The corner lots offer much more exposure to sunlight, with the Northern corners being more desirable than the Southern corners. Corner lots also have the advantage of creating more lot line front footage. This allows the entry and the front of homes to be orientated along the sideyards, allowing greater exposure to light and more dramatic architectural freedom. The purchase of 3000 The Strand Manhattan Beach, which was purchased as a lot value approximately 21 years ago set a new high for Manhattan Beach oceanfront properties. Previous to this sale, corner lots were selling in the $1,200,000 - $1,500,000 range. After the sale of 3000 The Strand for $2,198,000 the properties at 400 The Strand and 500 The Strand sold for $2,200,000 and $2,175,000 respectively in 1989. Prior to 1989 interior lots were selling in the $800,000- $1,000,000 range. After the sale of 3000 The Strand, interior lots were selling $1,600, 000 - $1,700,000 range. 3416 The Strand sold for $1,700,000 and 1308 The Strand sold for $1,650,000. These sales set new highs for interior lot purchases. During this time properties throughout the South Bay area were declining in value. I estimate that the real estate market dropped approximately 20%. However up until the Summer of 1990, The Strand market did not experience any drop in value. Properties were placed on the market at increasingly high list prices. The corner lot property at 122 The Strand was listed at $2,250,000. The interior lot property at 1916 The Strand was listed at $2,700,000. The Interior lot property at 3316 The Strand was listed at $3,400,000 and the Corner lot property at 3220 The Strand was listed at $3,200,000. In the begin- ning of 1990 the property at 3220 The Strand was placed in escrow at approximately $2,400,000 subject to the buyers selling their home at 2904 The Strand. The property at 2904 The Strand did not sell and is in fact still on the market. The escrow for 3220 The Strand was even- tually cancelled and that property is still on the market. At the beginning of Summer 1990 and shortly after the sale of 3416 The Strand at $1,700,000 The interior lot property at 404 The Strand sold for $1,300,000. This salt was followed by the corner lot sale at 122 The Strand for $1,900,000. In September of 1990 the interior lot property at 3408 The Strand sold for $1,600,000. This was $100,000 less than the sale price of 3416 The Strand two doors to the North. Both of these properties were sold as lot values within a few months of each other and were similar in location and size. These sales marked the beginning of the drop in Strand property value, which has continued to the pre- sent. After the beginning of 1991 the interior lot property at 509 The Strand sold for $1,300,000 and the interior lot property at 1212 The Strand sold for $1,150,000. The corner lot property at 1148 The Strand one block North of the Manhattan pier sold for $1,500,000. The 3 year old interior lot home at 1916 The Strand sold for $1,800,000. It started out at $2,700,000 and was on the market for 18 months. With the improv- ment value at $90/Sq.Ft. the lot value was $1,450,000. The interior lot home at 3316 The Strand sold for $2,250,000. It was an extremely unique very high quality home which was initially priced at $3,400,000 and was on the market for 2 years. It sold with all of the furnishings and works of art. With the improvement value at $150/Sq.Ft. the lot value was $1,500,000. The following properties are currently being marketed on The Strand in Manhattan Beach. 1140 The Strand is a 3 -unit building adjacent to the. North side of the pier parking lot. It has been on the market for nine months and is priced at $1,495,000. 2904 The Strand is a smaller house at the rear of an interior lot. It has been on the market for 2 years and has been reduced over $200,000. 2920 The Strand is a newer corner lot property on one and a third lots. It was just listed at $5,660,000. I feel that this property is at least $1,000,000 over the market. 3220 The Strand is a corner lot property with a large improvement which is functionally obsolete and needs major remodeling or is a building site. It has been on the market for 2 years with price reductions of $1,200,000 and it still hasn't sold at $1,980,000. The interior lot property at 3712 The Strand is a 4 -unit building priced at $1,850,000. To my know- ledge it has not had any offers to date. The majority of the sales activity on the Hermosa Strand has been South of the pier. A property which I sold at 324 The Strand was an interior lot teardown. It set a new high for South Hermosa Strand lots, selling at $839,000. 414 The Strand is in escrow at $935,000. It is an interior lot property with a livable 4 bedroom 3 bath house. Thirteen months ago the owner was offered $1,025,000 for the property. 12 The Strand, which is three doors from the South end of the Hermosa Strand is in escrow. It is a three year old home on a short lot with three bedrooms and four bathrooms. The corner lot site at 542 The Strand was on the market for two years and sold for $1.025,000. The highest sale is a 55'X105" corner lot at 2541 The Strand. It sold as a lot value for $1,850,000. When analyzed by it dollars per square foot land value it is actually less per square foot than any of the other sales. The three Hermosa Beach Strand properties currently on the market are North of the pier. 1522 The Strand is an interior lot teardown priced at $995,000. The listing agent informed me that no offers have been submitted on the property. 2515 The Strand and 2510 The Strand are both over -sized interior lots with large homes on them. They have been on the market seven months and one year respectively. I do not believe that either property have had offers submitted. I feel that the sales trends in Hermosa Beach have followed Manhattan Beach as the market has risen and declined. The lower valued properties have had activity and offers. I feel that this is because they are the most affordable to'the much larger majority of buyers who are in the $1,000,000 and under price range. Since the beginning of 1991 the real estate market activity has increased dramatically in the $1,000,000 and under range. This is the busiest I have been in three years. However I do not see this increased sales activity on the Manhattan Beach Strand or in other higher priced areas such as the Hill Section. It is difficult to estimate how the increase in activity has affected prices. My perception is that the market has not gone up yet. It has bottomed out and now buyers are just beginning to respond. Now buyers are writing offers, whereas last year no matter how well a property was priced, offers were not coming in. I feel that it is concieveable the Strand market will soon start to appreciate. One or two key sales can turn the market around quickly. The corner lot at 3220 The Strand is under $2,000,000 and I feel that until this property sells it will influence the rest of the market values. The following two pages are descriptions of the comparable properties which are used to analyze the value of the subject lots located on the oceanfront and the lots located East of Ocean Drive. The address, bedrooms, baths, square footage, age, lot size, list price, sale price, days on the market, sale date and average figures are listed. x 7 ADDRESS BR Ba Sq.Ft. Age Lot Sz. 12 Strand 3 3.5 2,693 3 30 X 72 324 Strand 3 2 930 63 30 X 80 414 Strand 4 3 2,060 44 30 X 80 542 Strand 2 2 832 80 30 X 80 corner 802 Strand 7 5 3,192 38 3O -Xe 80 cdr1522 Strand 2 1 948 84 30 X 80 2510 Strand 3 4.5 4,574 9 30 X 114 2515 Strand 4 4 3,450 53 45 X 111 AVERAGE 3.5 3 2,335 47 30 X 94 L.Price 1,195,000 875,000 965,000 1,150,000 1,469,000 995,000 1,950,000 1,899,000 S.Price DOM S.Date 1,140,000 203 5/91 839,000 124 12/90 935,000 103 5/91 1,025,000 250 1/91 Listed 20 Listed 133 1,800,000 376 Listed 241 1,312,250 182 ADDRESS BR Ba Sq.Ft. Age Lot Sz. L.Price S.Price DOM S.Date 31 8th St. 2 2 1,225 69 30 X 95 645,000 628,000 86 11/90 121 33rd St. 3 2 1,448 72 30 X 75 519,000 519,000 58 5/90 25-27 6th St. 8 3 3,150 66 30 X 95 740,000 720,000 224 4/90 124-26 35th St. 7 6 3,243 2 30 X 82 935,000 864,250 133 1/91 133 29th St. 3 2 1,093 68 30 X 80 485,000 Listed 127 53 9th St. 2 1.5 800 71 30 X 95 549,000 Listed 244 25 9th St. 3 2 1,937 74 30 X 95 699,000 Listed 114 9/90 68 14th St. 2 1.5 1,164 70 30 X 95 499,000 Expired 146 121 28th St. 2 1 844 68 30 X 83 489,000 Listed 255 AVERAGE 3.5 2.5 1,658 62 30 X 88 617,000 154 The following two pages are an analysis of the dollars per square value of the comparable properties for the lots located on the ocean- front and the lots East of Ocean Dr. The calculations are as follows: The estimated dollars per square foot replacement cost of the improve- ment is multiplied by the square footage of the improvement. This gives the value of the improvement. The value of the improvement is subtracted from the sale or list price of the comparable property. This gives the value of the land without the improvement value. The value for the land is then divided by the square footage of the lot. This gives the dollars per square foot value of the comparable lot It should be noted that the corner lot properties at 542 The Strand and 802 The Strand have been adjusted downwards by $200,000 to adjust for the additional value of corner lots versus interior lots. The dollars per square foot values have been averaged for each of the lists of comparables. The average figure for the Strand properties is $368.4 per foot and for the comparables East of Ocean Dr. the average figure is $200.3 per foot. ADDRESS $/S.F.IMP. X S.F.IMP. = IMP.VAL. TOTAL= LOT VALUE / LOT _ $/SQ.FT. VALUE SZ. LOT VAL. 12 Strand $120X2693 = $323,160 - $1,140,000 = $816,840 / 30X72 = $378.2 324 Strand $0X930 = $0 - $839,000 = $839,000 / 30X80 = $349.6 414 Strand $50X2060 = $103,000 - $935,000 = $832,000 / 30X80 = $346.6 524 Strand0X832 = $1,025,000 _ = $ $0 - -$200,000 $825,000 / 30X80$343.7 802 Strand $110X3192 = $351,120 - $1,469,000 = $917,880 / 301/2X80 = $376.2 -$200,000 1522 Strand $0X948 = $0 - $995,000 = $995,000 / 30X80 = $414.6 2510 Strand $100X4574 = $457,400 - $1,800,000 = $1,324,600 / 30X114 = $392.6 2515 Strand $50X3450 = $172,500 - $1,899,000 = $1,726,500 / 45X111 = $345.6 AVERAGE $368.4 ADDRESS $/S.F.IMP. = IMP.VAL. - TOTAL = LOT VAL. / LOT - $/SQ•FT. X S.F.IMP. VALUE SZ. LOT VAL. 31 8th St. $50X1225 = $61,250 - $628,000 = $566,750 / 30X95 = $198.8 121 33rd St. $30X1448 = $43,440 - $519,000 = $475,560 / 30X75 = $211.4 25-27 6th St. $40X3150 = $126,000 - $720,000 = $594,000 / 30X95 = $208.4 124-26 35th St. $110X3243 = $356,730 - $864,250 = $507,520 / 30X82 = $206.3 133 29th St. $0X1093 = $0 - $485,000 = $485,000 / 30X80 = $202.1 53 9th St. $0X800 = $0 - $549,000 = $549,000 / 30X95 = $192.6 25 9th St. $50X1937 = $96,850 - $699,000 = $602,150 / 30X95 = $211.3 68 14th St. $0X1164 = $0 - $499,900 = $499,900 / 30X95 = $175.1 121 28th St. $0X844 = $0 - $489,000 = $489,000 / 30X83 = $196.4 AVERAGE $200.3 The following pages are copies of the comparable listings from the South Bay Board of Realtors Multiple Listing Service. 06/05/91 13:00:03 C« L-$1,195,000 S-$1,140,000 SOLD LD -10/01/90 LDE:-10/04/90 TYP: 1 OMD: 05/17/91 MT' : 203 MD : 04/22/9 AD: 12 STRAND BR:3 BATHS: FBA:3 HBA:1 AGE:3 AF'N: 4188227 C:OM: HERMLISA SAND ASF:2693 SSF:TXRCRD HORSE:NO DIN: AR, AR* FAM:Y RF :CP SH LDY:RM DEN: PTO:D,B HT :CFAG CTS: AIF:: NONE POL: FND:SLAB SPA: FLS:SLAB SOL: FLC: WWC:, T SEW:Y SPC:HOME PRO F'OL GAR:2 FF'L: 2 ALLEY:N C:RB/WK: C:W ENOL YRD:Y ?>i LT:HB SA:48 TL:ER L# 046598 POS: C:OE LVL:3 TG: 67C:' ASSOC$:0 / 0 PUD:N ZN:R3 LSZ: LDM:30X7:: R/O:G VU:WHTWTR',OCEAN,CUAST,* MIC:: TRM: CTNL, CTEL, I: ASH DSP:Y 1ST: 71 500 IN:() TCP: PMT : 0 TYF': CNV DSW:Y ADD L FIN 0:0 WCV:Y SCHOOL: EL: TV: C 1M: HS: FABULOUS CONTEMPORARY STRAND HOME. JACUZZI TUN UN 3RD LEVEL BALCONY OVERLOOK I NG SAND °< SURF' SPIRAL ST A I PCASE, ROMANTIC FIREPLACE, GOURMET KITCHEN! YOU MUST SEE THIS HOME TO BELIEVE THE MODERN ELEGANCE! CO -LISTED W/LINDA CASTLE Al REALTY EXECS 374-4200 EXT 118. LOCKBOX NOW ON F'RUPERTY. PLEASE CALL FIRST BEFORE SHOWING. SELLER MAY ASSIST FINANCING!!! OCC: 0/CRAIG F'H: 37 - 000 SN:Y LSX: G Sh VRL:: LA: FREEMAN, DAVID PH/ X F :318-3853 L_ LSA: 3 i_ SA: '2 LO: 525 RE/MAX )_EACH LI TIES Fr'E hH:376- n SHU: A/ LU (:i6 /o5/ 1 13:09:48 L-$875,000 S-$339,000 TYF': 1 OMD: 12/04/90 AD: 324 1HE STRAND BR:3 BATHS: FUA: HDA:U AF'N : 4188006004 i_ UM : ASF: 930 SSF: TXRCRD DIN:NONE FAM: LDY:NONE DEN: HT :F/FUR CTS: AIR: NONE F'OL: F ND: RAISD SRA: FLS: WOOD SOL: FLC::HW,W* SEW:Y SF'C::TERMITE CERT CLASSIC: BEACH HOUSE. SOLD FROM SELLER. SELLER WILL SOLD LD -07/03/0 LLF:-0//0U/' 0 MI 1 4 MU : 11/042'0) AbE: 63 HORSE: NU RF : i_ F' SH F'TU: U, D GAP: 2, D FF'L: 1 ALLEY:`( C:F:B/WFC:.: C:/W ENL:L YRD: Y L1 : HN SA:48 I L: ER L1 011845 PUS:CUE LVL:1 11D:0/L: ASSUC$: 0 / 0 F -U!: N :f•.I: h'-3 LSZ: LLiM: 3i)X`i) P/O: rn VU: WHTWIR, ULE.AI•-I, FW AMI.C: M1C: 1RM: :I NL DSR: 1ST: 6.5:000 I N : FL:F': PMT: rYF:AT-M DSW: ADD L FIN N:0 WC:V : N SC:HUOL : EL: TV: L 1M: HS: LUT,F-'F_N1 CONDITION IN W I FHUU 1 WARREN T Y NOT PAY FOR ANY WORT,. REMODEL. STARTED BUT NUT COMPLETED. FIX -UF LSF., IEAR DOWN AND BUILD. PLANS INCLUDED IN SALES PRICE FOP NEW 42.00 EL'. F T . HUME . X LN F LOC. PANORAMIC WH I TE:WA TER VIEWS F ROM F-'. V . -MAL I. bU . HUMP W / UUES T QUARTERS. CALL L.A. REGARDING E XC:LUS I ON.ft ANL) NUN-CUNiFURM I T Y OCC V/VACANT PH: SN: Y LBX: G51j VRL: LA: COLEMAN, JONATHAN F'H/XT: 13-3/92<'_ 0 CSA::2-5 LO: 5 :43 REAL. ESTATE WEST PH: 540--3441 SHIT: L:L_O, FLU, PMK:S /aaa 2G'3 323,60 cf-i6sro 3 ?, 2 304 06/05/91 ' 12:59: 57 <<<_L-$965,000 S-$935 TYP: 1 OMD: 05/12/91 000 ' SOLD ,LD -01/04/91 LDP. -01/06/91. MT : 103 MD : 04/17/91 AD: 414 THE STRAND BR:4 BATHS: FBA:3 HBA:0 APN: COM: ASF:2060 SSF:TXRC:RD DIN: AR, DI* FAM: LDY:A DEN: HT :OTHR AIR: NONE FND: SLAB FLS: SLAB,* CTS: POL: SPA: SOL: FLC:WWC,V SEW:Y AGE: 44 HORSE: NO RF :OTHER PTO:U,D GAR: 2 FPL:1 ALLEY:Y CRB/Wk: Y ENCL YRD:Y CT:H. SA:48 TL:ER L# 027684 POS: NEGO LVL:2 T(.3: 6701 ASSOC'S: / PUD:N ZN:R3 LSZ: LDM:30X80 R/O: G VU: WHTWTR, OCEAN, MARINA* MIC: TRM:CTNL DSP:Y 1ST: IN: TCP: PMT: TYF':OTHR DSW:Y ADD L FIN N: WCV:O SCHOOL: EL: TV: IM: SF'C: TERMITE CERT, HOME PRO POL, LOG TRANS* HS: SUBJECT TO SELLER COMPLETING A 1031 TAX DEFERRED EXCHANGE SELLER WILL LOOF:: AAT ALL OFFERS. OUICk; ESCROW REG?UESTED. GREAT 1940'S HOME, ON A R-3, 30X80 LOT. EASY TO SHOW THROUGH LISTING AGENT. BEST BUY ON THE STRAND! SELLER MOVING OUT OF AREA. OC:C: T/SEE LISTING AGENT PH:546-7561 SN:Y LBX:NO VRC: LA:WRIGHT,HENR1ETTA F'H/XT:420 CBA:3 CSA:3 LO:5277 SHOREWOOD REALTORS PH:54a-7561 SHO:A/LO 06/05/91 13:05:04C� ea « L-$1, 150,000 S--5,04// - / LD -o6/19/90 LDR-06/22/90 TYP: 1 OMD: 08/19/90 ' MT : 63 MD : 08/1'3/90 AD: 542 THE STRAND BR:4 BATHS: FBA:4 HNA:1 APN: F12 COM:RES ASF: SSF:PLANS DIN:FML,* FAM:Y LDY: RM, GR DEN: Y HT : CFAt3 CTS: AIR: NONE POL: FND:SLAE► SPA:Y FLS:SLAB* SOL: FLC:: HW, W* SEW:Y CT HE SA:4S TL:EP AGE: 00 F'OS: L=0E+ LVL: 4+ ASSOC$:NA HORSE: NU RF :OTHER PTO: E, D, B GAR: FPL:3 ALLEY:Y C:RB/WK: CW ENCL YF:D: Y '0 u2o(.0 /03 v ac& L# 013400 TC,: 6,701 / NA PUD:N LN:R-3 LSZ: LDM:30X80 R/O: G VU: WHIWTR, OCEAN. MAF''1NA* MJ : Y TPM: UMC:2, ASM1 DSP:Y 1ST:4 5,000 is TCF': Y PMT: 3970 TYF: ARM DSW:Y ADD L FIN Y:17::. WCV:N SCHOOL: EL: TV: C IM: SPC: NONE HS: DESCRIPTION OF FLANS ONLY (:APPROVED ' CURRENT EXISTING 2 BEDROOMS `'1.75 LATH HOUSE CORNER LOT + ADDITIONAL 22 x bbo F OU T i_ I TY EASEMENT 1 M_ LUDED THIS CORNER LOT ON BEACH FAi: 1 NU NORTH PARKING FOR EIGHT CARS FLANS 1Ni_LUDED OCC : T/ PH:37b-4504 SN:Y LE(X:NONE VPC: LA: GOKC:EN, ALTAN PH/XT : 2/6-45(_)4 L:BA:' LSA: LO: 427:3 RE/MAX PALOS VERLES PE PH:213:J44-1001 SHO: CLU &/05/91 21:01:07 <<< L-$1,:469,000 -. 9- TYP: 6 OMD: LD -05/20/91 LDR-05/21/91 >}> MT : 17 MD : 05/21/91 AD:- 802 THE STRAND CT:HB SA:48 TL:ER L# 040216 APN: ZN:R3 LSZ:2440 LDM:30.5X80 TG:67C1 ASF:3192 SOURCE:TXRCRD AGE:38 STYS:2 #TU:4 4BLDS:1 PUD:N 1ST:8500000 INTEPEST:9.5 X PMT: LENDER: LN#: TYP: C:NV ADD L FIN: N $ TRM:CTNL #UN BR BATH RO DW GD C/D METER PK RENT ANNUAL EXP ANN/ANALYSIS 1 3 2 4 2200 TAX:13680 GSI: 1 2 1 - 2 1500 INS:1260 VAC: 1 1 1 1 1000 UTL: EXP: 1 1 1 1 800 WTR: 720 NOI: TRS:1164 D/S: MGT: C/F: ADD L ANN INCOME: TOT M/RENT:5500 OTH: GR MULT: AMN: C:TV TOT: 16824 EXCHANGE: YES SPC:: TERMITE CERT,BLDG REPORT RENTS ARE LOW,OWN UNIT 100% REMODELED W/MSTR BDRM,PVT BA SPIRAL STAIRS W/WETBAR,ROOFTOP DECK,NEW CARPET/PAINT.CORNER LOT DON'T DIST. TENANTS. CO -LST W/FARA ALLEN, REMAX BCH CTY, 376'2225X426 OWN: CALL AGNT PH: 546-761 1 SN:N LBX: NO VER: Y LA:ALLEN,KURT F'H/XT:X384 CBA:3.0 CSA:3.0 LO:5267 SOUTH BAY BROKERS, INC: PH:546-7611 SHO:C_LO,STI 06/05/91 12:53:16 <S4 L-$995, 000 8- TYP: 1 OMD: LD -01/24/'1 LDR-01/24/91 MT : 133 M1) : 01/24/91 ' AD: 1522 THE STRAND CT:HB 5A:48 IL:ER L# 022089 BR:2 BATHS: FBA:1 HBA:0 AGE:99 PUS:COE LVL:1 TG:6781 APN: 4183005003 COM:STRAND ASBUC$: / F'UD: N LN:F2 ASF: 948 SSF: TXRCRD HORSE: NO LSZ: LDM:3OXS0 DIN:AR FAM: RF :WD SH R/O:G VU:WHIWTP,OLEAN,LOAST,* LDY: OTHR DEN: F'TO: U MIC: TF:M: C:: 1 NL HT :WALL CTS: GAR:1 DSP: 1ST: 1N: "/. AIR: NONE F'OL: FF'L: 0 'TCF': F'MT: TYP: C:NV FND:RAISD SPA: ALLEY: N DSW: Y ADD L F 1N . FLS:WOOD SOL: C:RB/WK:W WCV:kSCHOOL: EL: FLC:WWC: SEW:Y ENOL YRD: TV: 1M: SPC:NONE HS: SOLD AS LAND VALUE. FOP SALE "AS 15". HOUSE WOULD bE HA811ABLL IF INVESTMENT MADE INTO F'RUF'ER'T Y . NEWLY C_:UMF'LE I Eli F'R'UF'ERT Y WOULD HAVE A VALUE OF 1.b 1 0 1.b MILLION $ ' STRAND PF�OF'ER1 Y DOES NOT GET CHEAPER OVER TIME' DON' r MIS5 THIS RARE OF'FORTUN I TY TO BUY BEACH FRONT LAND. HOT TUE DUES NOT WUPF:.. OCC: V/VACANT PH: VACANT SN: Y L.BX: GSB VPC_:: LA: VAN ZANTEN,JAMES PH/XT: 336/546-6'27 C_:EA: 2. 5 C:SA: 2. U LO: 5267 SOUTH BAY BROFERS, INC PH: 546-761 1 SHO: RMKS V6/05/91 13:04:57 TYP: 1 OMD: 05/15/91 AD: 510 STRAND APN: COM:HERMOSA ASSOC$: ASF:4574 SSF:TXRCRD HORSE:NO LSZ: DIN:FML,A* FAM: RF :CP SH* R/O:G LDY:RM,GS DEN:Y PTO:E,D,B MIC:Y MT : 376 MD : 05/15/91 - CT:HB SA:48 TL:ER L# 009944 LVL:3 TG:62B5 / PUD:N ZN:R-1 LDM:30X114 VU:WHTWTR,OCEAN,COAST,* TRM:CTNL HT :CFAG,* CTS: GAR:3+ DSP:Y 1ST: IN: ` % AIR:NONE POL: FPL:3+ TCP:Y PMT: TYP:CNV FND:SLAB SPA:Y ALLEY:N DSW:Y ADD L FIN FLS:SLAB,* SOL: CRByWK:Y WCV:N SCHOOL: EL: FLC:HW,WW* SEW:YENCL YRD:Y TV: C IM: SPC:TERMITE CERT,BLDG REPORT HS: BEAUTIFUL STRAND HOME -TOP QUALITY CONSTRUCTION -MANY EXTRAS WET BAR, SPA, SAUNA, SEC SYSTEM FORMAL DINING RM. SHOW TO QUALIFIED BUYER RS ONLY. TO SHOW MAKE APPOINTMENT WITH LISTING AGENT DOUG 376-1112 OCC 0/NANCY PH: SN:N LBX:NU VRC: LA:NELSON,DOUGLAS C. PH/XT:376-1112 CBA:2.b CSA:2.5 LO:5211 PIERSIDE REALTY PH:376-1112 SHO:A/LO 06/05/91 12:53:30 <{< L -$1r899,000 STYP: 1 OMD: - 2515 STRAND AD: CT:HB SA:48 TL:ER L#0224 88 BR:4 BATHS: FBA:4 HBA:0 AGE:53 POS:COE+ N* LVL:2 TB5 APN:4182c]02009 COM:HERmOSA BEACH ASSOC$ ' ����� : / PUD:N ZN:R1 ASF:3450 SSF:TXRCR* HORSE:NO LSZ: DIN:FML , FAM:Y RF :CP SH R/O:E: VU W*/W|R'OCEAN'CATALI* LDM:45X11l LDY:RM DEN:Y pTO:U'O MIC: TR HT :CFAG,* CTS: GAR:2:'D' O* DSP:Y 151:579342n:c|NL'CTEL,CASH AIR:NONE POL: FpL 1IN:10.9 FND:RAISD SPA: ALLEY:N TCP:Y PMT:5636 TYP:CNV* DSW:Y ADD L FIN N: FLS:WOOD SOL: CRB/WK:Y WCV:Y SCHOOL: EL: FLC:HW,WW* SEW:Y ENCL YRD:Y TV: C IM: SPC:TERMITE CERT,CITY TRAN TX,OTHER TAX* HS: FABULOUS OVERSIZED BEACH FRONT STRAND PROPERTY 1 1/2 LOTS WIDE BY 111 FT DEEP!4 LARGE BEDRMS+ DEN & 4 FULL BATHS INCL MAIDS RM&BATH.MUTSCHLER KITCHEN,CLEAR LEADED &BEVELED LASS LOOPS & wImDuwb.LI6HT,BRIGHT,AIRY.LARGE,SUNNY PROTECTED ENlRY PLUS AMPLE STRAND PATIO,BEACH SHOWER& STORAImE ROOM UN SSIDE OF HOME AGENTS PLEASE CLOSE ALL GATES! DO NOT LET DO' ESCAPE'' OCC 0/MILE HAYNES PH:379-1922 SN:Y LBX:GSB LA:STROYKE,VIVA J. PH/XT:340X37y_1406 CBA: - .5 CSA �VHC: LO:5267 SOUTH BAY BROKERS, lNc PH:546-7L11 S^O:CF CSA:.b LD -10/08/90 LDR-10/22/ >>> MT: 241 MD : 10/22/9' . / 06/05/91 14:58:39 fR< L-$645,000 S-$628,0 TYP: 1 OMD:11/16/90 00 '. ;SOLD ,LD -05/01/90 LDP -05/04/90 MT 86 MD : 07/26/90 AD: 31 8TH ST CT:HB SA:48 TL:EA L# BR:2 BATHS: FBA:2 HBA:0 AGE:99 POS:COE LVL:':_ APN:4187002016 COM: ASSOC$: / PUD:N ASF:1225 SSF:TXRCRD LSZ: LDM:30X95 DIN: AR FAM: R/O:G LDY:GR,GS DEN: MIC: HT :CFAG CTS: DSP:Y AIR: NONE POL: TC:P: FND:RAISD SPA: DSW:Y FLS:WOOD SOL: CPB/WK:YES WCV:Y SCHOOL: EL: FLC: HW, W* SEW:Y ENCL YRD:Y TV: C IM: SPC:TERMITE CERT, ASSESS/LIENS, CITY TF.'AN HS: A MUST SEE TYPE OF HOME LOTS OF WOOD/LEADED STAIN ULASS LOT 30X95-160FT TO STRAND W/SOME VIEW HOME HAS MANY UPGRADES KITCHEN/BATHROOMS 2FP DBL CAR PAPEING + ADD'L SPACE YARD PROFESSIONAL LANDSCAPED WITH DECK AEtEA * MCFARLANE CONTACT FRANK FOR ENTRY IF SELLER NOT HOME OCC O/JOHN/SUSAN * PH: 213 376 7205 SN:Y LBX:NONE VPC: LA: DE CANIO, FRANK F. PH/XT:213 541 9095 CEIA:2. CSA: 2. 5 LO: 5161 MOORE & ASSOC:IATES PH: 318-9386 SHG: CF HOPSE:NO RF :WD SH PTO: U, D GAR:2,OT* FPL:1 ALLEY:Y VU: WHTWTR TRM:CTNL 1 ST: 240000 PMT: ADD L FIN 017338 TG:67C1 ZN: HBR3 1N:10 TYP: CNV 06/05/91 15:00:09 L-$519,000 S-$519,000 TYP: 6 OMD: 05/15/900 AD: APN: ASF:1448 1ST : 290000 LN#: 63(357 #UN SOLD LD -01/03/90 LDP-01/0b/90 MT : 58 MD : 03/041/90 121 33PD ST CT:HB SA:48 IL:ER L# 'J83013 ZN: BR344 LSZ: LDM: 30X75 Tb: 5 85 SOURCE: OTHEF: AGE:99 STYS:2 #TU: 2 #BLDS: C)1 PUD:N INTEREST: 1 0 % PMT: ,55 1 LENDER: HOME S&L TYP:CNV ADD L FIN:N $ 0 TRM: i_TNL, EXCH BP BATH PO DW GD C/D METER PK. :: PENT ANNUAL EXP 2 1 Y 1 1 Y 1 1 Y Y E/G 1 1250 N N E/G 1 651 TAX: 2904 INS:700 UTL:0 WTF:: � 1 b TRS:180 MbT:O ADD L ANN INC=OME: TOT M/PENT: 19 )0 01H:0 AMN:NONE SF'C:TERMITE C:ERT,.BLDG REPORT DO NOT DISTURB TENANTS. BEST LOC:AT I ON-OCN VUJ-V 1 C T OR I AN HM ?< RENTAL. JUST A STONES THROW TO BCH. 2 HOUSE3 TO SAND -J . FAC I NUJ FULL CORNER LUT, ST. ON 3 SIDES. R3 LOT. LEGAL TO LLD NEW SFR 35' HT OWN: ZWIF:N F•':LINE ETAL PH:376-63D76 SN:Y Li x: NONE VRA_: LA: STPOYKE, VIVA J. PH/XT: X340/37'J1406 i_BA:2.75 i_:EA:'2.75 LO: 5'267 SOUTH BAY BROKERS, INC PH: 546-761 1. SHO:STI TUT: 41)00 UP ANN/ANALYSIS I iS I : 2800 VAI _:: (3 EXP: 40 00 NO I : 18800 D/5: C/F: MULT: EXCHANL;e:: YES f/•i )42( -)S - , YY �/ L' L (/75,5e' z//,3 06/05/91 15:00:00 C« L-$740,000 S--$720; 000 TYP: 6 .OMD: 04/08/91 AD: 25&27 6TH ST APN: ZN: ASF:3150 SOURCE:OWNER 1ST: INTEREST: LN#: TYP:CLR #UN 1 1 1 BR 3 3 2 BATH 1 1 1 SOLD LD -07/03/90 LDR-07/05/90 >>> MT 224 MD : 02/12/91` CT:HB SA:48 LSZ: LDM:95 X 30 AGE:66 STYS:02 #TU:3 7. PMT: ADD L FIN: RO DW GD C/D METER PK 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 E -G E -G E -G TL:ER L# 030150 TG:67C1 #BLDS: 02 PUD:N LENDER: TRM:CTNL RENT ANNUAL EXP ANN/ANALYSIS 1 1050 1 990 1 850 ADD L ANN INCOME:4260 TOT M/RENT:2890 AMN:CTV SPC:BLDG REPORT, C I TY REPORT PROPERTY IS AT LOT VALUE & POTENTIAL FOR REMODELING TO INCREASE INCOME & PROVIDE OWNER'S UNIT. 2 DOORS TO SAND ON WALE:: STREET. SURROUNDING PROPERTIES UPGRADED - 1031 EX OWN: ADAMS AGENT PH:378-0723 SN: Y LBX:NONE VRA:: LA:ADAMS,CAROL E:: PH/XT:786-0149 CBA:2.5 CSA:2.5 LO: 60'35 RE/MAX PV REALTY PH:213-378-'3494 SHO: C:LO, ST 1 TAX: INS:500 UTL: WTR: '00 TRS: 400 MGT: ._ i 36 OTH: TOT:3436 GSI :38940 VAC: NONE XP: NOI: D/S: C/F: 13R. MULT : NA EXCHANUE: Y 06/05/91 14:59:53 C <; L-$935,000 S-$864,250 TYP: 6 OMD: 01/31/91 SOLD LD -09/19/'30 LDR-09/'7/90 MT : 133 MD : 01 /3��/91 AD: 1' 4-26 35TH STREET CT:HB SA: 48 7'L: ER: L# 017017 APN:4181033023 ZN: R:2 LSZ: LDM: 30X8 fG: b.:_b5 ASF:3243 SOURCE:OTHER AGE STYS:3 #TU:4 #BLDS: F'U1):N 1 ST: 61'2, 685 INTEREST : '3.87 `/. PMT : 5 362. LENDER:: AMER I C:AN LN#: TYP:APM ADD L FIN:N $ 1RM:CTNL,C:TEL,LAN* BATH PD DW GD C/D METER PK RENT ANNUAL EXP ANN/ANALYSIS #UN 124 126 BR 4 3 5-1 Y Y 3 Y Y ADD L ANN INC:OME: AMN: NONE SF' : BLDG REPORT EG EG 2 2400 2 2150 TOT M/PENT: TAX: 80i 0i INS: UTL: WTR: TRS: MGT: O1 H: TOT: GSI : 54, 600 VAi:: EXP: NOI: D/S: C/F: GI- MULT: EXCHANGE: PANORAMIC WHITE WATER VIEWS! TWNHSE STYLE 1/..2 BLOCK l0 S1R ND TOTALLY UNIQUE PROPERTY. F I REF'LAC:E S, DECES, JAC:UZ Z I ,AGENT WILL MEEF YOU ANYT I ME. KEYS IN LISTING OFFICE. AGENT WILL ARRANGE MEET 1 NG . OWN: P. ADKINS PH: 833-5961 SN: Y LLB:NONE VRC: LA: GIAMBF:ONE, KAREN PH/XT:X145 CNA: 5i LSA: -.5% LO:5691 REALTY EXECUTIVES PH:374-4200 SHO:KLO,A/GC,i_F,* C.)6/05/91 14:54:54 <<<'L-$485,000 S- TYP: 1 OMD:.. AD: 133 29TH STREET BR:3 BATHS: FBA:2 HBA:0 APN:41812811 COM: ASF: 1093 SSF: TXRC:RD DIN:NONE LDY : OTHR HT :WALL,* AIR:NONE FND:SLAB,* FLS:SLAB,* PLC:WWC,T PAM: DEN: CTS: POL: SPA: SOL: SEW: LD -01/30/91 LDP -01/31/91 >:>> , MT`: 127 MD : 01/31/91 CT:HB SA:48 TL:ER L# 022601 AGE:99 POS:C:OE LVL:1 TG:62B5 ASSOC$: / PUD: NZN: F.'3 LSZ:2413 LDM:30X80 HORSE: RP :CP SH PTO:0 GGAP:OTHR FPL: ALLEY:Y CRB/WK: Y ENCL YRD: P/O: MIC_:: DSP: TCP: DSW: WCV:N TV: C: VU: OCEAN TRM:CTNL,EXCH UP,EXCH * 1ST: IN: PMT: TYF': OTHR ADD L FIN SCHOOL: EL: HEF'MOSA IM: HERMOSA SPC: BLDG REPORT HS : F'EDONDO UNION TENANTS UNAWARE PROP. FOR SALE—DO NOT WALK: PROP.—RLS BE DISCREET—ALL OFFERS SUBJ.TU INSP.—SELLERS SERVICES—BUYER TO CO—OP IN EXCH. OCC T/ PH:374-1414 SN:N LBX:NU VPC: LA: DUNC:AN, F'AY F'H/XT: 3741414X 1' 1 CBA: ;:3 CSA:3 LO:5621 REALTY EXECUTIVES PH:374-4200 SHU: STI 06/05/91 14:55:14 ‹.e< L—$549, 000 S— LD -10/05/90 LDP -10/15/90 TYP: 1 OMD: 1 MT : 244 MD : C)4/05/91 AD: 53 9TH ST CT:HB SA:48 TL:ER L# 047922 BR:2 BATHS: FBA:1 HBA:1 AGE:99 F'OS:NEGO LVL:1 TG:67C_:1 APN:4187003026 6 C_:OM: ASSOC:$: / F'UD: N ZN:P2 ASF: 800 SSF: TXR'C:F'D HORSE: LSZ: LDM:30X95 DIN: AP FAM: PF :CP SH P/U: 13 VU: RMKS LDY:OTHR DEN: PTO:U MIG: TRM:CTNL HT :F/FUR CTS: GAF': 2 DSP: 1ST: CLF' 1N: AIR: NONE F'OL: FF'L: 1 TCP: PMT: TYP: CLF:' FND:SLAB SRA: ALLEY: Y DSW:Y ADD L FIN N: FLS: WOOD SOL: C_:RB/WK: CWF:: WC:V: Y SCHOOL: EL: FLC: 0 SEW:Y ENCL YRD: Y TV: 1M: SPC:: BLDG REPORT HS: RAPE WALK STREET SGRAPEP. 4 HOUSES FROM OCEAN' SPECTACULAR POTENTIAL VIEW FOP NEW CONSTRUCTION. SUBJECT TO INSPECTION— DO NOT DISTURB I ENANTS FOR INFO CALL 318-5739 OC:C T/ PH: SN:Y LBX: NO VPC: LA:WILSON,LINDA M. PH/XT:518--5739 CNA:3. CSA:3. LO:5276 SHOREWOUD REALTORS PH:„ -,76 5871 SHU:STI ^ 06/ 46 <<< L-$699,000 S+ 7[YP:`6 OMD: AD: 25 9TH ST/24 10TH CT APM:4187003022 ZN:R3 LSZ: ABF:1937 SOURCE:TXRCRD AGE:74 STYS: 1ST:177173 INTEREST:9.52 % PMT:1642 LN#:06-120430 TYP:ARM ADD L FIN:N $ *UN BR BATH RO DW GD C/D METER PK RENT 25 2 1 Y Y Y EG 2 1700 24 1 1 Y Y EG OWNR ` LD -02/12/91 LDR-02/12.4 MT : 114` `� ' ` MD:, 02/9V��� LDM:30 X 95 TG:67C1 #TU:2 #BLDS:2 PUD:N LENDER:IMPERIAL TRM:CTNL ANNUAL EXP ANN/ANALYSIS TAX:3201 GSI:20400 lNS:720 VAC: UTL: WTR:213 TRS:192 MGT: ADD L ANN INCOME: TOT M/RENT: OTH: GR MULT: AMN:CTV,BBQ'S,FENCED TOT: EXCHANGE:NO SPC:TERMITE CERT,LOC TRANS TX,CITY TRAN TX,BLDG REPORT CHARMING SPACIOUS WALK STREET HOME+INCOME-2 HOUSES TO OCEAN.GOURMET KIT,FRML DR W/NEW HRDWD FLRS.MAKE AFPT TO SHOW CARL/DOROTHY 318-0198 MIKE/PAT 379-7819 SEE MLS#23229! OWN:MIKE/PAT (REAR) PH:379-7819 SN:Y LBX:GSB VRC: LA:CROSSMAN,SUSAN K. PH/XT:148/372-0539 CBA:3 CSA:3 LO:5225 RE/MAX BEACH CITIES RE PH:376-2225 SHO:A/OC EXP: NOI: D/S: C/F: 06/05/91 14:57:44 ' <<< L-$499,900 S- TYP: 1 OMD: 09/30/90 EXPD LD -05/O9/.7,10 LDR-05/11/90 >>> MT : 146 MD : 09/30/90 AD: 68 14TH CT:HB SA:48 TL:ER L# 01.866 BR:2 BATHS: FBA:1 HBA:1 AGE:70 POS:COE LVL:2 TG:67C1 APN:4183003011 COM:HERMOSA SAND ASSOC$: / PUD:N ZN:C2YY ASF:1164 SSF:TXRCRD DIN:DIN L FAM: LDY:RM,GS DEN: HT :WALL CTS: AIR:NONE POL: FND:RAISD SPA:Y FLS:WOOD SOL: FLC:WWC,T SEW:Y HORSE: LSZ: LDM:30X95 RF :CP SH R/O:G VU:WHTWTR,OCEAN MIC: TRM:CTNL,OMC2 PTO:C,D GAR:C FPL:1 ALLEY:Y CRB/WK:Y ENCL YRD:Y DSP:Y TCP:Y DSW:Y WCV:Y TV: C 1ST:210000 PMT:2000 ADD L FIN N: SCHOOL: EL: IM: IN:10.5 % TYP:ARM SPC:TERMITE CERT HS: FABULOUS BEACH PROPERTY 2 LG BD W/UCEAN VIEW SPA W/REDWOOD DEOk BBQ PIT FRESHLY PAINTED IN/OUT GUEST HOUSE W/1BD 3/4 BA CElLlNLI FAN STEPS TO OCEAN BUILT-IN ENTERTAINMENT CENTER IN LIVING ROOM CALL TENANTS 1ST THEN 8O, SELLER ANXIOUS BRING IN OFFERS OCC T/GARY/ANTHONY PH:318 1165 SN:Y L8X:GSB VRC: LA:MOORE,LEAH PH/XT:37y 9677 C8A:2.5 CSA:2.5 LO:5049 C-21 COAST PROPERTIES, PH:376-1663 SHO:CF ' �� /�r� ,/ ===-=------ .... -• 06/05/91 ===---- 06/,05/91 14:55:00 <<< L-$489,000 S— TYP:1 OMD: LD -09/24/90 LDR-09/24/90 MT : 255 MD : 09/24/90 AD: 121 28TH ST. CT:HB SA:48 TL:ER`L# 016873 BR:2 BATHS: FBA:1 HBA:O AGE:68 POS:COE LVL:1 TG:62A3 APN: COM:HB ASSOC:S: / PUD:N ZN: ASF:844. SSF:TXRCRD HORSE:NO LSZ: LDM:30X83 DIN:LR/FR FAM: LDY:NONE DEN: HT :F/FUR CTS: AIR:NONE POL: FND:RAISD SPA: FLS:WOOD SOL: FLC:HW,W* SEW:Y RF :CP SH PTO:U GAR: 1, D FPL: ALLEY:Y C:RB/WK: Y ENCL YPD:Y R/O: VU:NONE MIC: TRM:CTNL DSP: 1ST:360,000 IN:10.5 TCP:Y PMT: 3300 TYP: cNV DSW: ADD L FIN . WCV:Y SCHOOL: EL: TV: IM: SPC:TERMITE CERT,SELLRS RE LC,HOME PRO F' HS: EXCELLENT N. HERMOSA LOCATION TWO HOUSES TO THE NEA&:H. CUTE BEACH COTTAGE WITH TONS OF POTENTIAL FOR REMODEL OR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT PEEK—A—BOO OCEAN VIEW. TERMITE WORK LIMITED TO $1,000 & NO. 100 CALL FIRST THEN GO OCC T/HOLLY & MICHELLE PH: 379—'787 SN:Y LFX: GSE+ VRA_: LA:HERMAN,WILLIAM H. PH/XT:376-1112 CFA:3.0 CSA:3.0 LO: 5211 PIERSIDE REALTY PH: 376-1 11 SHO: C=F The following pages are three different subdivisions of the subject property with the estimated value given for each lot as well as a value for the subject property in total. The first page shows the subject property as it is presently subdivided with the lots given R-2 Zoning allowing a 30 foot. height. The second page shows the property subdivided with a park located on the two Southwest lots and a commercial zoning on the three Southeast lots. The last page shows the property subdivided with the residential lots being 4,000 square feet minimum size, the park located on the Southwest corner and the lots to the Southeast zoned commercial. This last subdivision will allow condominiums to be built on the three residential lots facing the ocean as well as on the lot to the Northeast. A:3_9ox- sz; . _ . ' • 7 9S. 30 a;?6,5"- • Ao-G2 3' 30 2-A -30 • i-- ----4- -4-- i i; 1- ; I . 1 • •1515- ' 1 ! , • - 1 -1- .t. • t ---- 1 I ! j 1 1 . . I 4. _i_ - . . I 1 1 1 [ 4 - r !t- - -I-- -f - -i--- - -4---.--j1—__I______,.......... 4 i ! 1 30 : . ;0 30 .78(.0-"' • 3d 3.0 .4 1, 30 „ „ 30 . . . , . .. . . . . . . . . P-2 ,e -d E -G7 ' .2,V6,0' -c2,760" aSioc.' o2cioo" .2ciew" 07/40. .2C00 . . .. . . . . . • . . _ . __ . . , _ . . 30 ,, ,, . 70 1 ,, . , „ . 30: , • 4- 4..4 ; I • , ; ; --;.--4 i 1...... -. -.1_,..._4 ..._ . ; ._; • 4 • .4. ; • . . I ; I , i ; - • 4- 4 t Pet...5737f' J ! ! - ; 1 I 1 I ! i ! 4 ! 14- --t ----!-- `f -- --f- -i--- --.- ---4 — , 1 ! ; 1 f0 , ,Y96 -k '517S-/ 1,fz—k ./125< '95-04 .1 • - ;- 1.! 4 I -!- r ; 1 -- --I- It— ; t-- , 1 I ! ; ; . i -4 ! I i --t.. i --4- - - • • I •1 t r- i -- I 4 t 4 1 1 ...1 . ; ! t ! t 1 ; i ..; 1 1 ! ; ! I 1 i 1 1 I ; ! ; , 1 ; i ! ....I ......i.-. . ,10 670 k 30 30 30 • 5'U 30 .241.20' :30 , 9s s -.21100'.... /• 30 30 30 12-2 eco' ol qz.f e -Zoe 8953;... 9s. .5- 30 /z-2 ay�o 30 60 1400' G0 - `996-4; ,e8/3-4 8,754 ,$t 3 -4 . .9415,_ gU. 7?1 0 -C -4)/s , `7 �.�sc�0 so ,5 730' . '1:S - S -0 5) so 60 &) ,P -a P-2 .P -a fidr-k :To SU ,5t 60 ¢/is goao A's/ ,.?ao cxo so a / z -C Lo 715 Strand Sales 1983-1990 12 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED SOLD 1983 1600 THE STRAND M.B. LISTED 1983 2024 THE STRAND H.B. SOLD 1983 132 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1984 3323 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1984 432-436 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1984 1530 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED SOLD 1985 2040 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1985 218 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1985 708 THE STRAND M.B. LISTED SOLD 1985 12 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1986 3035 THE STRAND H B. LISTED 1986 412 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1986 2918 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED SOLD 1986 720 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1987 318 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1987 1734 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1987 4 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1987 414 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1987 2100 THE STRAND H.B. SOLD 1988 1540 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1988 324 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED SOLD 1989 442 THE STRAND H.B. SOLD 1989 1823 THE STRAND M.B. SOLD 1990 1530 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1990 3416 THE STRAND M.B. LISTED 1990 324 THE STRAND H.B. LISTED 1990 1823 THE STRAND M.B. LISTED AVAIL 1990 The above listed addresses are properties on The Strand which I have either listed for sale or have sold. In several cases I have listed and sold the same property myself, representing both the buyer and the seller. All of the properties which I have listed for sale, have sold either by myself or by other agents, with the exception of the properties located at 132, 2040, 218 and 1530 The Strand. These listings either expired or were taken off the market. HEAL ESTATE WEST I have been a Real Estate Salesperson licensed by the State of California since March 6, 1981 and have worked in the profession full time in the South Bay beach area. For four years I was employed by Betty Miller Realtors and for the past five years my license has been at Real Estate West in Manhattan -Beach. For the past seven years I have specialized in the marketing and sales of property on the oceanfront in Hermosa and Manhattan Beach. As a result of my experience in the area, I am regularly contacted by licensed appraisers and lenders requesting comparable sales information for properties on and near the oceanfront. I have also done consultation work for the City of Hermosa Beach, with regards to property values in the area. If you so request, I will be happy to supply you with a list of references for -your examination. 905 MANHATTAN BEACH BOULEVARD / MANHATTAN BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90266 / 213 546.3441 IDENTIFICATION NUMBER C0808758 TYPE SALESPERSON STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF REAL ESTATE LICENSEE NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS COLEMAN' JONATHAN 1919 HILLCREST OR HERMOSA BEACH ISSUANCE DATE EXPIRATION DATE 03/0/89 03/05/43 LICENSE. CERTIFICATE CA 90254 ENTER BRCKER NAME & ADDRESS BELOW: air r 89075-0255 ; T-4 -- BALLOT MEASURES REGARDING HEIGHT AND HOUSING STANDARDS. it Recommended Action: To direct staff as deemed appropriate. Mr. Schubach gave the staff report pertaining to the examination of lowering allowable height in C-2, C-3, R-2, R -2B, R-3 and R -P zones, the grandfather clause, and determine if proposed ballot measures regarding house standards should actually be on the ballot. Staff's recommendation to City Council is to lower height as noted in attached resolutions. Also recommended are two methods applying to the grandfather clause: recommend a moratorium and/or request/recommendation that at the time the ballot measure passes in November 1991 that a grandfather clause be included. Mr. Schubach stated a history of actions taken pertaining to these subjects during the past 10 years, listing beneficial and detrimental architectural effects within the particular zones. The staff reviewed Redondo Beach and Manhattan Beach height requirements with height restrictions in both residential and commercial zones lower than what the City of Hermosa Beach allows. Both cities use a different measurement method than Hermosa Beach, explained by Mr. schubach. Approximately 60% of commercial properties would be effected by the ballot measure, an additional 36.8% will be effected if the specific plan area along Pacific Coast Highway is included. Height would be restricted to 35 feet with a few exceptions. A maximum of 40 ft. is allowed in a few special cases to be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Mr. Schubach stated the Planning Staff agrees with the wording noted in the 4 P.C. Minutet,(f KEMENTAL INFORMATION City Manager's Report as far as the advisory measures are concerned and if the measures are to be placed on the ballot, and agrees that housing measures need review. If the mandated ballot measure are placed on the ballot and passed, the measures are effective immediately, and already approved plans are not grandfathered. A moratorium with a grandfather clause may be prudent at this time. View blockage potential was discussed by Mr. schubach. Public Hearing opened by Vice-Chmn. Peirce at 8:37 P.M. Vice-Chmn. Peirce stated the subjects for discussion should be (1) the City Councils process, and (2) comments on the height changes and standards, with the purpose of guiding the Commission in its decision. Comm. Rue asked if the ordinances as drafted by the City Attorney will go to the City Council as recommended, and if so, will the Council change them to which Mr. Schubach responded the Council will receive the ordinances which are open to consideration. Comm. Rue stated these are not advisory, but rather an amendment to the zoning code. Mr. schubach said there are a total of six ballot measures; four mandated, two advisory only, which have gone to the City Council and referred back for study, public hearings and input prior to making final judgment. Management -level staff felt this issue should be brought before the Planning Commission for input. Comm. Rue commented on the lack of backup information to enable a decision by the Planning Commission. Comm. Marks asked what stimulated and who created the ballot measure, to which Mr. Schubach responded the Council felt the constituents were interested and was voted on by the Council. Comm. Rue commented the Planning Commission has scheduled to conduct a study on an ongoing basis as the City changes. Comm. Di Monda noted the new language in the revision on the housing standards revisory measures is more restrictive to bulk and parking and asked if approval is granted would the Planning Commission's hands be tied or can exceptions be made. Mr. schubach responded if language was added to indicate an exception rule, but any exception measures must be added at this time. Mr. Jack Brantley, 74 18th Street, bought his 1908 home with the plan to build a home utilizing the existing height limitations. If the height limitations are decreased, this will defeat his original purpose in buying his property. Smaller, older, high density homes will be perpetualized with adoption of the new limitations. Mr. Raymond Quigley, 442 Strand, stated his neighbors have built larger houses than his own. He and others with smaller homes will not have the option to increase living space as has been done in the past, therefore decreasing the value of his property. Vice-chmn. stated the Planning commission has been requested to make a recommendation to City Council, who has put the measures on the ballot. Public Hearing was closed by Vice-Chmn. Peirce at 8:59 P.M. Comm. Di Monda read that the density problem appeared to have been resolved by past Council action; the issue of height was the most significant zoning concern and asked if this statement was in the view of the council. Mr. Schubach responded that previously the Council wished more density reduction. After Staff study, density was determined to be low. Council then determined height, bulk problems should be addressed. 5 P.C. Minutes 6-4-91 Vice-Chmn. stated height -determination past practice was to assure architectural diversity. Current building practices do not address this diversity goal. In order to modify the zoning code, the process must be followed. However, the verbiage on the ballot is difficult to understand due to the brevity. Therefore, an advisory ballot must be crisp and concise in order to not create additional implementation misunderstandings. Vice-chmn. Peirce recommended that rather than fine-tune the particular measures, a summary letter be sent to the City Council, to which Comm. Rue agreed, stating a letter, Planning Commission Meeting Minutes or a resolution be sent to the City stating the Planning Commission does not support the advisory or ordinances because they are simplifications not using the correct process. Comm. Di Monda also agreed, stating that if the City Council is looking to reduce the effect of building and obtain more light/air, bulk should be focused upon. Vice-Chmn. Peirce stated not enough information had been supplied to the Planning Commission to enable the Commission to make an informed decision at this time and suggested a 10 -item questionnaire be placed on the ballot or a sample survey be performed to obtain the information the City Council is seeking, to which Comm. Di Monda agreed if either option were worded in such a way as to obtain pertinent information. Comm. Marks stated he was adamantly opposed to reducing height requirements without very serious reasons and consideration. MOTION by Comm. Rue, Seconded by Vice-Chmn. Peirce, to approve the resolution the Planning Commission strongly disagrees with ballot measures, planning is too intricate to place on a ballot, advisory measures are not specific enough and should be single -issue items, the planning process should be utilized. AYES: Comms. Di Monday, Rue, Vice-Chmn. Peirce NOES: Comm. Marks ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Chmn. Ketz Recess taken from 9:20 P.M. to 9:29 P.M. 6 P.C. Minutes 6-4-91 ,40 PLEASE PLACE THIS ON THE AGENDA RECEIVED JUN 0 1991 DEAR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, -•..,. RE:AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 5 -SECTION 501-A AGAIN, IT SEEMS THE CITY OFFICIALS HAVE ONCE AGAIN DECIDED TO SHARPEN IT'S AX AND TAKE AWAY MORE PROPERTY VALUES FOR THOSE PERSONS WHO COULD NOT, AT THE TIME, AFFORD TO BUILD THEIR DREAM HOUSE. THROUGH THE YEARS, WE HAVE GATHERED 3 CONTIGUOUS PROPER- TIES, WHICH WE ARE FINALLY ABLE TO DEVELOP, ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, OUR PROPERTIES WERE ZONED R-3 WITH 35 FOOT HEIGHT LIMITS NOW WE ARE R-2 WITH 30 FOOT HEIGHT LIMITS, NOW IF THIS PASSES, WE WILL SUFFER AGAIN, LOSING A TOTAL OF 10 FEET. WE ARE LOCATED AT THE TOP OF THE HILL, IF THIS MEASURE PASSES, IT WOULD NOT CONFORM WITH THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IT WOULD LOOK RIDICULOUS, TALLER AT THE BOTTOM AND SHORTER AT THE TOP. THIS ISSUE SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED ON A BROAD BASIS. IF HEIGHT REDUCTIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED, IT SHOULD BE DONE IN CONFORMANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BY THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE STREETS. WE ALSO FEEL THIS ISSUE SHOULD NOT BE ON THE BALLOT, BECAUSE, OWNERS WHO ARE NOT OCCUPPYING THESE PROPERTIES, ARE NOT ALLOWED TO VOTE ON THE FUTURE ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY, HOW IN THE WORLD IS THIS FAIR TO THEM? WE DO NOT WANT TO LOOSE 10 FEET OF PRECIOUS OCTAN VIEWS. WE ARE AGAINST THIS MEASURE. SINCERELY, JOHN & JAN MC HUGH SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION )44A4%10014:ZZLIOC At› 6-//- 9/ 3 June 1991 Planning Commission City Hall Hermosa Beach CA 90254 To whom it may concern: I must strongly protest the suggestion by certain members of City Council that more downzoning be considered by the City. I was downzoned myself three years ago from R-2 to a more restrictive R2 -B. Now some suggest that what is a right to build to 30', 5 feet less than my neighbors have recently done, may soon be 25'. I consider this new action, combined with the effect of the previous downzoning and reduced lot coverage requrements, a confiscation of a substantial portion of my property. Like many Hermosans, everything my partner and I own is tied up in our two existing houses on one lot. When the property was purchased, the purchase price reflected the current zoning of R-2, allowing four nice units at 35 feet tall. The lots beside me are exactly that. In a few years, when our houses became delapidated beyond repair, I had intended to live in one unit, while my partner would live in another, financed from sale or rental of the other two units. Shortly thereafter, the City kindly suggested to me that now that my neighbors had what they wanted, my two existing houses on a lot were excessive and one 25' tall house would be fine for my 7000 square foot lot! If one of the two existing houses burned or was destroyed for any reason, I couldn't rebuild it! After wasting a great deal of time and many grey hairs later, I managed to keep the right to both of my houses and scraped by with an R2 -B zone. Now they want to do it again. If a city is going to use what is essentially eminent domain to take away property rights from a few certain selected citizens so that their near neighbors' property rises in relative value, then those citizens should be fairly compensated, in cash, by the city or entity who ordered such action. Is this not one of the very same rights our founding fathers, and everyone since, have been fighting for? I do not concede the City's right to take the rights of my property without compensation. Even if I did, the last way to do it is such as council is suggesting... an election. People who do not own property that might be affected by downzoning, or those selected property owners who reap financial gain as a result of this purely artificial govern- ment action will be attracted without pain to this measure. Judging by prior elections, the example of mob rule will prevail. Allowing City Council to make these decisions is a better solution, but how many members of the current council would be affected negatively by downzoning? How many would gain? The downzoning frenzy has harmed many people in this town. None of them deserved it. Isn't it time to stop? spectfully, (1),,,,z, -r - Dana Shaw 913 5th Street Hermosa Beach 71 c.. —vA.A.C-�j C-3 `)Jo-u 5 L-4 b,44, 4i4,4Ada ,W-4./a4A-4-464r41414,4,u3o June 5, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of June 11, 1991 SUBJECT: BALLOT MEASURES INITIATED BY CITY COUNCIL Purpose To examine lowering allowable height in the C-2, C-3, R-2, R -2B, R-3, and R -P zones, and to examine proposed advisory ballot measures regarding housing standards. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommends that the existing public hearing process be utilized to examine height and that this matter not be put on the ballot, and further the advisory measures be more specific and be only one measure on the ballot (refer to attached resolution). Staff Recommendation 1. To amend the zoning ordinance to lower height as noted in the attached resolutions, and to not include the Commercial SPA's along Pacific Coast Highway. 2. To approve the following general wording for the advisory ballot measures: a. "Should the City of Hermosa Beach consider _more restrictive housing development standards related to bulk.and parking." b. "Should the City of Hermosa Beach consider requiring greater front yard setbacks for new construction based on the average of the current buildings on the block (the string line method)?" 3. a. If mandated measures are recommended to be placed on the ballot, then, a "Grandfather" clause is recommended to be added. or b. A moratorium with an exemption should be adopted for current projects which are in the process of obtaining building permits (see Exhibit A). Background In 1987, the public approved a ballot measure limiting the height in the C-2 and C-3 zones to 35 feet and 45 feet respectively. At the February 26, 1991 meeting, the City Council motioned to table the selection of Housing Improvement Program (HIP) task force members until after the November election when some, yet to be decided, land use measures would be placed on the ballot. 1 —/J— �/ At the March 26, 1991 meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare'precise wording regarding four mandatory ballot measures, -and two advisory measures. At the April 23, 1991 meeting, the City Council requested a staff report on the proposed ballot measures, and to hold a public hearing. At the Planning Commission public hearing of June 4, 1991, the Planning Commission adopted the attached resolution which generally recommends not placing measures on the ballot, and instead to conduct additional studies. Summary Height Reduction Staff believes that for the following reasons the height limits should be amended: 1. Light, air, and ventilation may improve. 2. Height is a contributor to bulk. 3. Only 4% (approximately) of the residential developments in the City are built to the current maximum height, and therefore new development will only be impacted in a few instances in regard to view. 4. Impact to commercial development is probably negligible. 5. Adjacent beach cities' height limits are lower. 6. The intent of allowing two stories and 30 feet, or 3 stories and 35 feet was to allow architectural diversity, and in the last seven years, approximately, these currently allowed heights have been used to increase floor area via lofts,_ and to build roof top decks. Analysis of the above is found in the attached Planning Commission staff report. Moratorium / Grandfather Clause In the past, moratoriums and/or "grandfather" clauses have been used in conjunction with zoning ordinance changes of these types. Attached Exhibit A is the "grandfather" clause which has been used in the past. Refer to attached Planning Commission staff report for analysis concerning advisory measures, moratoriums, and placing items on the ballot. City Manager p/ccsrbm 2 b Respectfully subnijtte , —,___— Michael Schubach Planning Director EXHIBIT A "This ordinance shall not apply to any projects that have a completed building permit package on file with the City prior to ------>(date). Said package must include a completed building permit application form, completed conceptual plans (plot plan, floor plan, elevation plan and similar plans), and a lot survey. Projects that have submitted a completed building permit package must pursue their application in a diligent manner and must be issued a building permit within six months of the effective date of this ordinance." p/ccsrbm 3 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. 91-40 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE HEIGHT IN THE R-3, R -P, R-2, R -2B, C-2, AND C-3 ZONES BE STUDIED AND CONSIDERED FOR CHANGE THROUGH THE CURRENT PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS, AND NOT BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT, AND FURTHER THE ADVISORY MEASURES SHOULD BE COMBINED INTO ONE MEASURE WITH MORE PRECISE WORDING. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 4, 1991 and made the following Findings: A. Planning issues are too intricate to place on the ballot; B. Placing issue on the ballot results in a lack of public input, no staff analysis, and no moderation since the voter can only vote either yes or no for each measure; C. The advisory measures are unclear and confusing because of the lack of precise language, and being separated into two issues; NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, does hereby resolve that the current public hearing process should be the method utilized to change maximum height limitations found within the zoning ordinance, and therefore should not be placed on the ballot, and further, the advisory measures should be combined into one measure with more precise wording. VOTE: AYES: Comms. Di Monda,Marks,Rue,Peirce, NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Chmn.Ketz CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution P.C. 91-40 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 June 4, 1991. James Peirce, Vice Chairman Michael Schubach, Secretary Date p/persbm May 13, 1991 Honorable Chairman and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission June 4, 1991 SUBJECT: BALLOT MEASURES INITIATED BY CITY COUNCIL Purpose To examine lowering allowable height in the C-2, C-3, R-2, R -2B, R-3, and R -P zones, and to examine proposed advisory ballot measures regarding housing standards. Recommendation 1. Recommend to the City Council to amend the zoning ordinance to lower height as noted in the attached resolution. 2. Determine whether height limitation should be placed on the ballot, and whether the commercial Specific Plan Areas (SPA's) along Pacific Coast Highway should be included. 3. Determine whether advisory measures should be placed on the ballot. 4. If mandated measures are recommended to be placed on the ballot, then, a "Grandfather" clause should be added or a moratorium with an exemption should be adopted for current projects. Background In 198J, the public approved a ballot measure limiting the height in the'C-2 and C-3 zones to 35 feet and 45 feet respectively. At the February 26, 1991 meeting, the City Council motioned to table the selection of Housing Improvement Program (HIP) task force members until after the November election when some, yet to be decided, land use measures would be placed on the ballot. At the March 26, 1991 meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare precise wording regarding four mandatory ballot measures, and two advisory measures. At the April 23, 1991 meeting, the City Council requested a staff report on the proposed ballot measures, and to hold a public hearing. Analysis Reduced Height in the R-2, R -2B, R-3 and R -P Zones The height of structures is a significant factor in the overall bulk of buildings. Height can cause a dwarfing effect to adjacent dwellings and canyonize the space between structures resulting in little, or no sun light air, and/or ventilation to adjacent structures. It also limits growth of any possible landscaping. s C The unique low profile character of Hermosa Beach and the quality of life can be affected by excessive height. Architecturally, height can provide for pitched roofs which are generally considered aesthetically pleasing, but in the recent past, the allowable height has only resulted in lofts (maximizing floor area) and/or roof -top decks. Some cities have resorted to restricting height of flat roofs and allowing a higher height for pitched roofs. The cumulative effect of tall structures could ultimately take its toll on a neighborhood economically. A few tall structures may not have an impact, but once an entire area is built to excessive heights, it can have a negative effect, particularly where structures are too large for the site, and setbacks are minimal. In regard to views, raising or lowering the height can have either be beneficial, or detrimental. A structure on the view side of another structure with a lower height could have a beneficial impact and vice versa. Height Survey Staff has examined the height of existing structures. Since it has only been generally in the last seven years that developments have been constructed to the maximum allowable height of 35' in the R-3 zone, and 30' in the R-2 and R -2B zones, a block by block "windshield" survey was performed to determine what benefit, or detriment would occur by lowering the height in various neighborhoods throughout the City. The result were as follows: _ 1. 210 developments have been constructed to the maximum height (approximately) or 47 of all residential developments in the City. 2. The majority of these maximum height developments occur in the southwest quadrant of the City bordered on the east by Pacific Coast Highway, and on the north by Pier Avenue. Approximately 148 developments (11.9%) in this area are built to the maximum height. 3. Approximately 50% of the "maximum height" developments were built to the east, or east side of the street and generally did not have a maximum height development built to the west, or in other words to their view side. In these cases, lowering the height of future development would benefit since it would more or less guarantee that view blockage would not occur to these existing developments when new developments were constructed to the west, the view side.. 4. The other half which are to the west of future developments would probably cause view blockage to new developments if new developments were required to be built to the proposed lower height, but, of course, if the grade did not rise, then, for 6- example a 35' building at the same grade across from another 35' building would not have a view either. 5. In the northwest, northeast and southeast only a few blocks were found to have one or two developments built to the current maximum height; of these, the number of existing, or future developments that appear to benefit, or be hindered by the lower height were minimal particularly on the streets running east/west. 6. Overall, only a small portion of new developments would be impacted by lowering the height. There are some tall structure which were built prior to the last 7 years as the "windshield" survey indicated. All the developments built to the current maximum height would become nonconforming; however, the current City Ordinance allows expansion and remodeling of nonconforming structures. Reduced Height In C Zones The reduced height in the C-3 zone from 45 feet to 35 feet could significantly reduce the intensity of development within the zone since the difference of 10' could reduce the number of floors from 5_ to 4 or 4 to 3 in many instances. However, with special construction techniques 4 stories could still be built, but over three story construction requires other than wood framing which becomes generally much more costly and therefore would not be proposed in most cases. Consequently the impact to intensity is not certain. If intensity is reduced by limiting floors, the impact of more intense development will be minimized. The height reduction, however, would reduce the appearance of bulk since as noted it is an important factor contributing to bulk. Potential view blockage may be reduced with the lower height, but it is difficult to determine because of the small difference of 5 feet and the location of commercially zoned property in relation to residentially zoned property. Little change would occur in regard to intensity of development in the C-2 zone since thirty feet is still adequate to build a three story building in most cases. In both the C-2 and C-3 zone, there will be limitations architecturally since a lower height will limit design features; and more flat roofs will occur. In regard to existing nonconforming development as a result of height reduction, any existing commercial structure would not be allowed to expand. Currently, there are several structures in both the C-3 zone, and C-2 zone which would be affected. The new Hermosa Hotel and the office on the northwest corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Gould Avenue are above 35 feet. In the C-2 zone, the Citicorp Bank, Bijou Theater and hotel above the End Zone appear to exceed 30 feet. These structures, however, have little, or no room at this time to expand. Also, the Pavilion, Hope Chapel, and office buildings at the corner of Pacific Coast Highway and 21st Street are above 35 feet, but these structures are in the Specific Plan Area 8 (SPA 8) zone, and are already nonconforming. Other Cities Maximum heights in adjacent beach cities are as follows: C-2 C-3 R-2 R-3 Redondo Beach 30 30 30 30 Manhattan Beach 26 & 30* 26 & 30* 26 & 30* 26 & 30* *Depending on district These cities heights differ with Hermosa Beach somewhat, and also differ in method of measurement. The "averaging" method is used which results in a higher height at the lower grade, and a lower height at the higher grade. Whereas, this City's method results in the same height at all grades of a given lot since structures are not allowed to be higher at any point on the property over the maximum. The averaging method, which was used in Hermosa Beach until 1972, demonstrably reduces view blockage. Commercial Survey The following is a survey of commercial property within the City: Zoning Code Square Feet Acreage Percentage C-1 127,080 2.92 3.67 C-2 801,756 18.41 22.87 C-3 1,292,136 29.66 36.8% _ SPA -7 699,188 16.05 19.97 SPA -8 591,843 13.59 16.97 From the survey, approximately 59.67 of the commercial property will be affected by the ballot measures. An additional 36.87 will be affected if the City includes the commercial SPA's along Pacific Coast Highway. The SPA's already restrict theheight to 35 feet, except in limited areas where view blockage would not occur, and when there is review and approval by the Planning Commission; a maximum of 40 feet could be allowed unless the SPA's are included in the ballot measure. The commercial SPA's 7 and 8 were carefully examined for height, and only in the southwest area between south City boundary and 8th Street and the northwest between Pier Ave. and 24th Street was the height of 40' allowed, which was based on 40 feet not causing view blockage. Advisory Measures The Planning Staff would agree with the wording noted in the City Manager's report of April 23, 1991 if the measures are to be placed on the ballot (see attached). As to whether these ballot measures are necessary, the Planning Staff has no comment, but would agree that all housing standards do need review in light of the types of developments constructed in the last 7 years which have generally been built to all the maximum. Projects in Progress/Moratorium If the mandated ballot measures are placed on the ballot, and the measures pass, the measures are effective immediately. In the past when text amendments have been adopted, a "Grandfather" clause has been added for those projects that have already been approved, but may be at the stage of Building Department plan check. Time should be given to allow these projects to obtain Building Permits and start construction. However, once the public is aware a change may be made, it becomes a stimulus to submit plans for approval. Therefore, a moratorium with a "Grandfather" clause for the near future may be prudent, particularly, since the election is not until November. Overview Lowering height is possible without adversely affecting many existing and/or new developments, but there will definitely be individual situations which cannot be ascertained at this time that will impact someone's view. This possible view blockage probably could not be remedied with a variance since strict criteria for granting a variance could not be met. However, the City at this time has no view ordinance, and many times views are blocked under the current height ordinances. In regard to placing this matter on the ballot, it is a matter of City Council choice as elected representatives of the public, and the Planning Commission functions as an advisory body to the City Council. The advantages and disadvantages are one in the same, i.e., it makes it more difficult for future City Council's to change, and if no "exception" rule is allowed, everyone must abide making it rigid, and on the other hand eliminating potential abuse of the "exception" rule. CONCUR: Not available for signature William Grove Building Director B.aspec, fully srabmit ed, Michael Schubach Planning Director p/ccsrsm SPA C-1 R-1 •acrn, SPA8 Qum R-1 • 7 $k.11-1 • .2 Po R-1 RI R-2 co• sr R -I S — I I.! R -I - • Ye R -i -3 P-1 a.2,11 o 10 R-ze, DA8 R-3 to0 OS r • ir& PAS Os CIVIC CENTER C-3 , R -I i•I • 4, 0 R-1 R-, R-, R-1 sk C-3 C-3 R-2 is OS R-, R-, a-, Os I" .41 ii " =kw s A SPA 7 sp.4isr.Hozar II SPA 7, coast SP SPA sA 7 10-1 S PA -71 S 7 PA C7. SPAT Ceiv• 11•P SPA/ R -I R -2 •10 ,,,,,, •••• /111 $11 ‘:111111 R-2 R - R-4 EA R-3 10 A 3 • itwaft", 111111111 I/EEM•E.--- MgnGfj/. 3 4 Man.3 111111314i4 "Oft 7 1111111ft Eft smil Ent linzi ,00:11 " ••10 ii R-1 • R-2 Mame liagas •Ovl•W • 11111112ft ••,11,1, )l.3 a.3 11.3 3 R-3 s a.3 R-3 a-3 ft:ft ft:ft 4.3 R-3 Ltd War NUR C -I PA7 ••••.• row. I wow • • 84c1(OROOND A?/ITER/4L April 17, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council of April 23, 1991 RECOMMENDATION REGARDING ZONING RELATED BALLOT MEASURES FOR THE NOVEMBER, 1991 BALLOT Recommendation: That the City Council 1) review the proposed ballot measure lan- guage provided below, 2) request a staff report on the likely impacts of these ballot measures, and 3) set a public hearing for further citizen input prior to final action to place these mea- sures before the voters. Background: On March 26, the City Council directed staff to place six ballot measures on the November, 1991 ballot. Four of those measures are to amend the City's zoning related to height (two regarding residential heights and two regarding commercial heights), and two would be advisory measures regarding zoning standards. The Council action reflected a view that, since the concern for den- sity appears to have been resolved by past Council actions, the issue of height is the most significant remaining zoning concern in the community. Accordingly, the ballot measures are a clean and straight forward way to resolve those height concerns. (See attached Council memo dated March 20, 1991 for additional background.) Analysis: Attached are four draft ordinances to place before the voters regarding height limits, per the Council's direction of March 26. Regarding the two proposed advisory measures, staff is proposing a revision of the language for better clarity and direction. The first advisory measure relates to housing standards and suggests a process such as utilized in Manhattan Beach. It deals with two subjects; 1) whether or not we should pursue a revision of our housing standards, and 2) whether or not we should use a process such as used in Manhattan Beach. Staff feels that the appropri- ateness of asking input on the substantive issue of whether or not our housing standards are in need of review and revision is an appropriate ballot advisory measure. The process to be used seems far too specific for broad policy direction from the voters. It is more appropriate for the elected representatives to determine procedural matters. For these reasons, staff pro- poses that the issue be rephrased as follows: "Should the City of Hermosa Beach consider more restrictive hous- ing development standards related to bulk and parking?" Similarly, staff proposes clarifying the second advisory ballot measure proposed - which is related to setbacks - by stating it in this way: "Should the City of Hermosa Beach consider requiring greater front yard setbacks for new construction based on the average of current buildings on the block (the string line method)?" We are also proposing that the staff be authorized to do a study to provide additional information to the Council prior to their final action to place these matters before the public. This re- port would respond to these initial questions, as well as others that may arise: 1) Is this method of amending the City's zoning standards legal under recent court cases? 2) To what extent will individual neighborhoods and streets be affected by the mandatory issues? 3) What percent of commercial properties would be affected that are not already under zoning restrictions that would likely limit the heights to comparable levels? 4) What is the cost of these measures to the City? (Our ball park guess is $4,000 to $5,000 each at this time.) Staff is also recommending that the City hold a public hearing to allow full public input on the wording and the impacts of these ballot measures so that the benefit the community receives from asking these questions of our voters is maximized. Kevin B. Northcroft City Manager Michael Schubach Planning Director William Grove Building and Safety Director -/2- ORDINANCE NO. 91 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO LIMIT MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN THE R-2 AND R -2B ZONES WHEREAS, the Citizens of Hermosa Beach desire to protect the low profile character of Hermosa Beach, and WHEREAS, the Citizens desire to protect wherever possible both public and private scenic views, and WHEREAS, the Citizens desire to limit the intensity of development within the City; NOW THEREFORE, the people of the City of Hermosa Beach do hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Amend Article 5, R-2 Two -Family Residential Zone, Section 501(a) Building Height (first sentence) as follows: .. shall not exceed in any case a maximum of twenty five (25) feet in height." SECTION 2. Amend Article 5.5 R -2B Limited Multiple -Family Residence Zone, Section 551(a) Building Height (first sentence) as follows: "... shall not exceed in any case a maximum of twenty five (25) feet in height." SECTION 3. If any section or subsection of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, such holding shall not affect, in any respect, the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance or any such part thereof. SECTION 4. There shall be no modification, amendment or repeal of any provision of this ordinance without a vote of the people. SECTION 5. Any ordinance which is adopted concurrently with this ordinance which receives less votes and is in conflict with any provision herein, shall be repealed in its entirety and of no force and effect. SECTION 6. This ordinance shall take effect in the manner prescribed by law. 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 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1991, by following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNE P/ccorr2ht ORDINANCE NO. 91 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO LIMIT MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN THE R-3 AND R -P ZONES WHEREAS, the Citizens of Hermosa Beach desire to protect the low profile character of Hermosa Beach, and WHEREAS, the Citizens desire to protect wherever possible both public and private scenic views, and WHEREAS, the Citizens desire to limit the intensity of development within the City; NOW THEREFORE, the people of the City of Hermosa Beach do hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Amend Article 6. R-3 Multiple -Family Residential Zone,Section 601. Height (first sentence) as follows: "No building shall exceed thirty (30) feet in height." SECTION 2. Amend Article 7, R -P Residential Professional Zone, Section 701 Height (first sentence) as follows: "No building shall exceed a maximum height of thirty (30) feet." SECTION 3. If any section or subsection of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, such holding shall not affect, in any -respect, the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance or any such part thereof. SECTION 4. There shall be no modification, .amendment or repeal of any provision of this ordinance without a vote of the people. SECTION 5. Any ordinance which is adopted concurrently with this ordinance which receives less votes and is in conflict with any provision herein, shall be repealed in its entirety and of no force and effect. SECTION 6. This ordinance shall take effect in the manner prescribed by law. // 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 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1991, by following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: OCt_et„.6._ p/ccorr3ht CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY • ORDINANCE NO. 91- AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO LIMIT MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN THE C-2 ZONE WHEREAS, the Citizens of Hermosa Beach desire to protect the low profile character of Hermosa Beach, and WHEREAS, the Citizens desire to protect wherever possible both public and private scenic views, and WHEREAS, the Citizens desire to limit the intensity of development within the City; NOW THEREFORE, the people of the City of Hermosa Beach do hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Amend Article 8, Commercial Zones, Section 8-5, Standards and Limitations (6) Building Height as follows: "b. In the C-2 zone, no building shall exceed a maximum height of thirty (30) feet." SECTION 2. If any section or subsection of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, such holding shall not affect, in any respect, the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance or any such part thereof. SECTION 3. There shall be no modification, amendment or repeal of any provision of this ordinance without a vote of the people. SECTION 4. Any ordinance which is adopted concurrently with this ordinance which receives less votes and is in conflict with any provision herein, shall be repealed in its entirety and of no force and effect. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall take effect in the manner prescribed by law. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1991, by following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK ( L Jb CITY ATTORNEY Y vim' ORDINANCE NO. 91- AN ORDINANCE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY/OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDI NCE Tb LIMIT MAXIMUM HEIGHT 1 IN THE C-3 ZONE �„ 'p 2 WHEREAS, the Citizens of Hermosa Beach desire to protect the 3 low profile character of Hermosa Beach, and 4 WHEREAS, the Citizens desire to protect wherever possible 5 both public and private scenic views, and 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREAS, the Citizens desire to limit the intensity of development within the City; NOW THEREFORE, the people of the City of Hermosa Beach do hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1. Amend Article 8, Commercial -Zones, Section 8-5, Standards and Limitations (6) `Building Height as follows: "c. In C-3 zone, no building shall exceed a maximum height of thirty (35) feet." SECTION 2. If any section or subsection of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unenforceable, such holding shall not affect, in any respect, the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance or any such part thereof. SECTION 3. There shall be no modification, amendment or repeal of any provision of this ordinance without a vote of the people. SECTION 4. Any ordinance which is adopted concurrently with this ordinance which receives less votes and is in conflict with any provision herein, shall be repealed in its entirety and of no force and effect. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall take effect in the manner prescribed by law. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1991, by following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: 4 CITY CLERK —f -CI ORNEY appropriate an additional $1,956 from Prospec, tive Expenditures to the General Appropriatigris - Equipment More Than $500. $5,200 wasini- tially budgeted for this equipment. 2. CONSENT O?.DINANCES - None 3. ITEMS REMOVEFROM THE CONSENT CALENDAIF FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. Item (a), (e), and f) were heard,a this time, however, they are listed in o 'er for clarity. 7 * Public comments on i ems removed from the Consent Calendar are listed und•= the appropriate item. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS'- None PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIbNS ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: FOR DAN'S LIQUORS, 3232 MR HATTAN AVENUE. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael chubach dated April 16, 1991. Action: To continue this matter to the meetin of May 714, 1991, renoticing the legal advertisement wi the / other public hearings. So ordered by Mayor Sheldon ith 7' the consensus of the Council MUNICIPAL MATTERS 6. RECOMMENDATION REGARDING ZONING RELATED BALLOT MEASURES FOR THE NOVEMBER, 1991 BALLOT. Memorandum from City Manager Kevin B. Northcraft dated April 17, 1991. City Manager Northcraft presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Coming forward to address the Council on this matter were: Jim Rosenberger - 1121 Bayview, concerned with lack of public input before the measures go on the ballot; Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place, supports placing height measures on the ballot; Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street, does not like advisory measures and objects to the use of initials or words such as "stringline"; and, Jerry Compton - 832 Seventh Street, objects to planning by ballot box. Action: To approve the staff recommendation Number 3, to set a public hearing for further citizen input prior to final action to place these measures before the voters, and to request a full staff report for the City Council Minutes 04-23-91 Page 74-40 public hearing. Motion Midstokke, second Creighton. So ordered. Councilmember Midstokke requested that specific wording, giving details of the proposed measures, be included in the legal advertising for the public hearing. RECOMMENDATION REGARDING STATISTICALLY VALID COMMUNI SURVEY. Memorandum from City Manager Kevin B. Nor•h- craft dated April 18, 1991. Supplemental letter . rom Gordon H. Kubota, Ph.D., of CIC Research, dated •pril 22, 1991. C'.ty Manager Northcraft presented the staff r=.ort and re •onded to Council questions. Coming forward o address the Council on this matter as: Wi'.ma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street, -quested that the ost of any service or improvem'nt included in a sur ey be stated in the question. Action: To •'rect staff to continue •reparation of this item for a dec ion by the next Council. Motion Creighton Second Wiemans. :o ordered. The meeting recessed at 8:4. P.M. The meeting reconvened at 8:5. P.M. 8. GENERAL SERVICES REORG•. IZAT ON PLAN. Memorandum from City Manager Kevin B. No ' aft dated April 18, 1991. City Manager Northcraft .-k-•d the Council for direction regarding the matter as t h.. not been fully discussed in closed session. Coming forward to address th Mike Flaherty ployees in t Supervisory to make a on as th geted i ployee them that is Council on t - Teamster re e Miscellaneous, argaining Unit; who ecision and not allow e matter was: esentative for dministrative, and urged the Council onditions to go have, with positions unfilled and bud - ems not purchased, but to to better serve the citizens e adequate working space and th needed. s em - low the em - providing direction Action: To resume the discussion of this mattes` in a close • session at the conclusion of the regular mee' ing, and ontinue to the meeting of May 14, 1991. Moti,on Creighton, second Wiemans. So ordered, noting the objection of Councilmember Midstokke, who wanted a decision tonight. City Council Minutes 04-23-91 Page 7441 —20-- 3 June 1991 • Planning Commission City Hall Hermosa Beach CA 90254 JUN 4 Vni To whom it may concern: I must strongly protest the suggestion by certain members of City Council that more downzoning be considered by the City. I was downzoned myself three years ago from R-2 to a more restrictive R2 -B. Now some suggest that what is a right to build to 30', 5 feet less than my neighbors have recently done, may soon be 25'. I consider this new action, combined with the effect of the previous downzoning and reduced lot coverage requrements, a confiscation of a substantial portion of my property. Like many Hermosans, everything my partner and I own is tied up in our two existing houses on one lot. When the property was purchased, the purchase price reflected the current zoning of R-2, allowing four nice units at 35 feet tall. The lots beside me are exactly that. In a few years, when our houses became delapidated beyond repair, I had intended to live in one unit, while my partner would live in another, financed from sale or rental of the other two units. Shortly thereafter, the City kindly suggested to me that now that my neighbors had what they wanted, my two existing houses on a lot were excessive and one 25' tall house would be fine for my 7000 square foot lot! If one of the two existing houses burned or was destroyed for any reason, I couldn't rebuild it! After wasting a great deal of time and many grey hairs later, I managed to keep the right to both of my houses and scraped by with an R2 -B zone. Now they want to do it again. If a city is going to use what is essentially eminent domain to take away property rights from a few certain selected citizens so that their near neighbors' property rises in relative value, then those citizens should be fairly compensated, in cash, by the city or entity who ordered such action. Is this not one of the very same rights our founding fathers, and everyone since, have been fighting for? I do not concede the City's right to take the rights of my property without compensation. Even if I did, the last way to do it is such as council is suggesting.., an election. People who do not own property that might be affected by downzoning, or those selected property owners who reap financial gain as a result of this purely artificial govern- ment action will be attracted without pain to this measure. Judging by prior elections, the example of mob rule will prevail. Allowing City Council to make these decisions is a better solution, but how many members of the current council would be affected negatively by downzoning? How many would gain? 2/— SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 1 The downzoning frenzy has harmed many people in this town. None of them deserved it. Isn't it time to stop? espectfully, AW,777—Ar:,,_ Dana Shaw 913 5th Street Hermosa Beach PLEASE PLACE THIS ON THE AGENDA `) JUN C 1991 DEAR MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL, RE:AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 5 -SECTION 501-A AGAIN, IT SEEMS THE CITY OFFICIALS HAVE ONCE AGAIN DECIDED TO SHARPEN IT'S AX AND TAKE AWAY MORE PROPERTY VALUES FOR THOSE PERSONS WHO COULD NOT, AT THE TIME, AFFORD TO BUILD THEIR DREAM HOUSE. THROUGH THE YEARS, WE HAVE GATHERED 3 CONTIGUOUS PROPER- TIES, WHICH WE ARE FINALLY ABLE TO DEVELOP, ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, OUR PROPERTIES WERE ZONED R-3 WITH 35 FOOT HEIGHT LIMITS NOW WE ARE R-2 WITH 30 FOOT HEIGHT LIMITS, NOW IF THIS PASSES, WE WILL SUFFER AGAIN, LOSING A TOTAL OF 10 FEET. WE ARE LOCATED AT THE TOP OF THE HILL, IF THIS MEASURE PASSES, IT WOULD NOT CONFORM WITH THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IT WOULD LOOK RIDICULOUS, TALLER AT THE BOTTOM AND SHORTER AT THE TOP. THIS ISSUE SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED ON A BROAD BASIS. IF HEIGHT REDUCTIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED, IT SHOULD BE DONE IN CONFORMANCE TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BY THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE STREETS. WE ALSO FEEL THIS ISSUE SHOULD NOT BE ON THE BALLOT, BECAUSE, OWNERS WHO ARE NOT OCCUFPYING THESE PROPERTIES, ARE NOT ALLOWED TO VOTE ON THE FUTURE ON THEIR OWN PROPERTY, HOW IN THE WORLD IS THIS FAIR TO THEM? WE DO NOT WANT TO LOOSE 10 FEET OF PRECIOUS OCEAN VIEWS. WE ARE AGAINST THIS MEASURE. SINCERELY, JOHN & JAN MC HUGH 23- 3 1991 SUPPEffiENTAL INFORMATION 1 C 2't- / 19 / "l2Q 4,c,- Erni! 6 G,` -urz ;,(4c, 116vin 6 .a_ ��2GL9/�. C� %(� p • \P./ rid ivLL• <LAA,tz •. gym e, 4,i.',E i01:. -46e,n.. i 0 /ni;l,(,r-alCk-r✓Li.1. �'T''L%i G 4 t;i(.t.t SCC •CLQ / :Lmi/r,6tio1/ ,h(?•/L tcJLcit , C z k c-Z,nff. CLI.E,c;.ti Cm( -4, ,/T,i.:2-A- =2. nn sla PLC 1_ >-y vJ {°/i a /LG%YcC. Gyri // , '.(-a,'� .iii' (T ,L(-"C.l�. V ✓ �r �f fi-� 7 �CcG , ct k 2�j/�� _,tet,., - . L(771- �' Z , Lta, .P- ilz 4.6--c i ti y.l,�.y (1 G�j ,�C%2L <<C �C C� Cts a/h oi- Yi.,c q `tehiAz.i<i- ,t6- Airtz ltOzt/L y iza., ...ac,,,e_ 4.7..1,--- 3 - Kit'itc. -4 ,--rn_eQ. . j , J y -A;(0-0-C- ei ,Gt/.e, , ,'t tiL �/ri2Gi,C•% /1r2eL 2Vii. ` �6rn. , - ii,)J2 A lct,az la/ft, 3 -,Qt-- -b- n..ev. / 2ezf3 'x- e.ii,L .4,601 t (`Gk,,nl C'�YlAZ11/Yc , ii f ,, �Q ) �Q y ,��i < It G �v� 1 [[ K. C .Ct, tC . !•L 2t J is eC, .. , :wQ. -- v -u G J1,,j ,i�, .. ,,fcp ainA.f,C ., _,12u t _/z., _, .. - .. JY .,(;te ' 'U e . " /- `/ % �/ i L !L .Gi •Ji :'L(,/L Lk TT IC c �ii.� (�.5 s-kt.cyla,c` A -c . raiLi en &,:t.: 1 .,..tt ,,e,cK, elZ. :Cat -6V -iAli/� o � � ELU'L �i,L�y, 6'�� tat. r, � �4ti /l�'G�c;'L 0/1 .)( CYL� C�Cn i.ie GA; -,-L, 4‹.-t- c a,h ' _1': it /l G vY✓t.lti.(1-GZLt'.G4)Z eiCG{Ln C'iCLC Jt (.14-riefce.' r 4zrip cca cze..4-e. ,t1t:ey 3 et, /tYtaitCh.' • .exiffttitta:y_ Q ;yr on et 0 Via_ -Stta net_ /161 rn ee a c , . '71 § 9.67-6 HERMOSA BEACH CITY CODE g e to its impact on residential projects, environmental impacts, culation, and appearance. (b) Standards. Two (2) sets of standards apply in this plan area, first tier and second tier. Compliance with first standards allows the project to proceed with a building permit. a project goes beyond any of the first tier standards the p • �<< for submittal and approval of a precise development plan shall followed. Developments must be in compliance with second standards at all times. Project sponsors are encouraged to discuss preliminary plans proposed projects with the planning department before any formal applications for building permits or precise d ment plans. 4 9.67-7 (1) (2) Maximum height: East of P.C.H. West of P.C.H. Bulk: *Gross tures). First Tier Maximum/ Minimum Requirements 30 feet 30 feet Second Tier.. Maximum/ Minim Requirements 35 feet .3frn Max. 1.0 FAR.* none floor area/lot area ratio (excludes parking' • .-ft‘ none (3) Maximum size: (4) Minimum land- scape coverage: (The required landscape buffer between comm residential zones shall not be included in this cal (c) Requirements. The following requirements apply to ill posed projects. (1) Landscaping Specifications 10,000 sq. ft. gross floor area 5% of lot area APPENDIX A—ZO2' three-foot wide planter strip shall be provided along stre shrub shall be provided for feet. b. Landscaping buffer from resi A minimum five-foot wide pla a minimum of one (1) twenty - size specimen tree provided length. c. Six-inch high raised concrete along the perimeter of all lar the side abutting building wz All landscaped areas shall in gation system. The landscape plan and irrigg viewed and approved by the r d. e. • (2) The development, including the la/ property grounds, shall be maintai manner. `O Setback from residentially zoned p A minimum of eight (8) feet plus t ditional story. )' All other development standards sl F City of Hermosa Beach Zoning Or( not limited to Article 8, Commerc 11.5, Off -Street Parking; with the e `, Division 3, Precise Development P1 Ni. § 2, 4-10-90) a • 9.67-7. Precise development plan. (.i Purpose. The purpose of this section %res and guidelines for review of precis a are required when a proposed proje t tier standards. .6 2% of lot a. A minimum three-foot wide player strip with six-inch curbing, or an area equivalent in Supp. No. 6-90 512.8.2 o. 6.90 512.8.3 § 9.68-6 HERMOSA BEACH CITY CODE (1) Maximum height: East of P.C.H. West of P.C.H. (2) Bulk: II9 First Tier Second Tier Maximum/ Maximum/ - Minimum Minimum Requirements Requirements ;» 25 feet 30 feet Maximum F.A.R.* *Gross floor area/lot area ratio (excludes parking strut. - tures). 35 feet -3 5-40, feet 1 . none (3) Maximum size: 10,000 sq. ft. gross none floor area (4) Minimum land- 5% of lot area 2% of lot area scape coverage: ,R (The required landscape buffer between commercial and,. residential zones shall not be included in this calculation.) (c) Requirements. The following requirements apply to all pro:, posed projects: (1) Landscaping specifications. a. A minimum three-foot wide planter strip with raised six-inch curbing, or an area equivalent in size to a three-foot wide planter strip along the front of the shall be provided along street frontage. A five -gallon shrub shall be provided for each twenty (20) square feet. b. Landscaping buffer from residentially zoned property:; A minimum five-foot wide planter strip landscaped with a .. minimum of one (1) twenty -four -inch or fifteen -gallon size -4 specimen tree provided for every ten (10) feet of length. c. Six-inch high raised concrete curbing shall be provided along the perimeter of all landscaped areas except on the side abutting building walls, or fences. d. All landscaped areas shall include an automatic irri- gation system. Supp. No. 6-90 512.8.10 § 9.68-7 APPENDIX A-2 e. The landscape plan and is viewed and approved by t (2) The development, including th property grounds, shall be ma manner. (3) Setback from residentially zon A minimum of eight (8) feet p. ditional story. (4) All other development standar City of Hermosa Beach Zoning not limited to Article 8, Com! 11.5, Off -Street Parking; with t Division 3, Precise Developmen § 2, 5-22-90) Sec. 9.68-7. Precise development p (a) Purpose. The purpose of this sect cedures and guidelines for review of p which are required when a proposed 1 the first tier standards. (b) Guidelines for planning commiss (1) General guidelines: To allow pro the first tier standards, the ove design should be of a superior qu surrounding properties, and be d community. The planning comm following in making this determi a. The building should be desif chitectural features and m, overall project. A three -dimer emphasized by the use of ste tures to avoid massive flat bl tention should be given to building from the street. b. Landscaping should be utilize a manner which enhances the Supp. No. 6.90 512.8.11 �.J 9;41----.5- y51 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Michael Schubach, P1anlwin Ie ec for SUBJECT: Appeal of C.U.P for 3232 Manhattan Avenue - Dan's Liquor (CONTINUED FROM MAY 14, 1991) DATE: June 5, 1991 Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit subject to the conditions in the attached resolution as recommended by the Planning Commission. The Council continued the appeal from the meeting of May 14, 1991, for referral back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration of the staff recommended modified conditions. The Planning Commission, at their meeting of June 4, 1991, recommended approval of the C.U.P. and recommended further modification of the conditions, which did not substantively change the conditions, as follows: 1. Consolidate conditions number 3 & 7 regarding warning signs of the illegality of drinking alcohol on the premises or on public property and to prohibit loitering on the premises into one condition. This would allow the use of one standard sign containing all the necessary warnings. 2. Modify condition 4 pertaining to exterior signs as follows: Exterior signs in disrepair (i.e. fading or peeling paint and/or rusteT shall be repaired and repainted and shall be maintained in good condition without damage of any sort, or, alternatively they shall be removed. Any new or replacement signs would be subject to the provisions of the sign ordinance. 3. Rewrite condition 11 (previously #12) pertainingSUoP��1�r conformance with floor plans as follows: �iENT The floor plans shall be as shown on submitted plans d dO any changes to the interior for the purpose of which substantially alterings the primary use permitted under the conditional use permit from a market to a different 4s -e shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Director. Minor modification to the floor plans, including re -arrangement of shelving, displays, counters, or similar items within the market do not need review from the Planning Director. Staff has also prepared a conceptual plan of the parking lot area to show the applicant that providing landscaping and realigning the stalls is possible, and to graphically depict the intent of the landscaping and realigning conditions. The condition regarding realignment of the stalls was originated by staff to correct the problem of the angled stalls in terms of overhanging into the right-of-way and creating unsafe backing movements into the street. The landscaping condition was originated by the Planning Commission (see attached site plan). p/memo3 2 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUSTAINING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW OFF -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL, IN CONJUNCTION WITH A DELI & MINI -MARKET, AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR 3232 MANHATTAN AVENUE, "DAN'S LIQUOR", LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT TWO, AND LOT FOUR, SHAKESPEARE TRACT. WHEREAS, the City Council held public hearings on May 14, and June 11, 1991, to receive oral and written testimony regarding an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to approve a Conditional Use Permit request, subject to conditions, to authorize the sale of general alcohol and made the following findings: A. The sale of general alcoholic beverages is being conducted in an existing establishment already licensed by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control as well as a mini -market & deli; B,. The existing use is compatible with surrounding uses C. Strict compliance with the conditions of approval will mitigate any negative impact resulting from the issuance of the conditional use permit and will protect the public health, safety and welfare; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California does hereby sustain the Planning Commission's decision to approve a Conditional Use Permit, to authorize the sale of general alcohol, at 3232 Manhattan Avenue, subject to the following: SECTION I Conditions of Approval: 1. The hours of operation shall be limited to between 6:00 A.M. to 2:00 A.M. daily. 2. The business shall provide adequate management and supervisory techniques to prevent loitering, unruliness, and boisterous activities of the patrons on the premises. 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 3. A sign shall be posted conspicuously and prominently at each exitprohibiting loitering, littering, and consumption of alcohol on the premises and warning patrons who purchase any and all types of alcoholic beverages that "possession and/or consumption of alcoholic beverages in any public sidewalk, parking lot, beach, and/or any public place is prohibited by law and subject to citation and fine. The City of Hermosa Beach vigorously enforces its liquor laws" Said signs shall be at least 12" X 14", shall be printed in a large type, permanently maintained, and shall be posted in visible locations. 4. Exterior signs in disrepair (i.e. fading or peeling paint and/or rusted) shall be repaired and/or repainted and shall be maintained in good condition without damage of any sort, or, alternatively they shall be removed. Any new or replacement signs would be subject to the provisions of the sign ordinance. 5. An employee who is aware of the conditions of this conditional use permit shall be on the premises during business hours. a. The conditional use permit conditions shall be placed --on the property in a location where employees can easily read the conditions. 6. A landscape plan, depicting thetypes and quantity of materials to be used on the site , shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director, -•1 -- 7. Individual containers of beer and wine, 16 ounces or less in size, shall be packaged in clear bags or containers to make the contents of the container visible. 8. The exterior of the premises including parking areas shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner. 9. The trash container shall be enclosed by a 5' by 7' masonry enclosure with a view obstructing front gate. The location and design of the enclosure shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Other types of materials may be used if necessary where there is a lack of space. 10. The parking spaces must meet the minimum dimension parking requirements of the zoning ordinance and shall be designed to not result in vehicles overhanging into the public right-of- way. A site plan depicting a revised parking layout shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director. The parking stalls shall be striped consistent with the approved site plan. 11. The floor plans shall be as shown on submitted plans and any changes to the interior which substantially alters the primary use permitted under the conditional use permit shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Director. Minor modification to the floor plans, including re -arrangement of shelving, displays, counters, or similar items within the market do not need review from the Planning Director. 12. Prior to the conditional use permit being in effect, the applicant shall submit to the planning department, a signed andmenotarized "Acceptance of Conditions" form. 134 conditional use permit shall be recorded and proof of recordation shall be submitted to the Planning Department. SECTION II Each of the above conditions is separately enforced, and if any of the conditions of approval is found to be invalid by a court of law, all the other conditions shall remain valid and enforceable. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1991. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK 5 - CITY ATTORNEY p/ccrs3232 May 30, 1991 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach Planning Commission June 4, 1991 (APPEALED AND REFERRED BACK FROM THE CITY COUNCIL) SUBJECT: APPEAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 90-02 LOCATION: 3232 MANHATTAN AVENUE APPELLANT RONALD R. DUFFAUT 3772 KATELLA AVENUE, SUITE 107 LOS ALAMITOS, CA 90720 PURPOSE: TO REVIEW THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PREVIOUSLY GRANTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution recommending approval of the C.U.P. subject to conditions, as modified. Background The Planning Commission, at their meeting of March 19, 1991, approved a conditional use permit at the subject location subject to the conditions as recommended by staff, except that all references to adult videos was deleted at the request of the applicant who stated that selling or renting adult videos was no longer desired. Subsequently, the applicant filed an appeal of the Planning Commission decision based on concerns about some of the conditions. At their meeting of May 14, the City Council considered the appeal of the applicant. Prior to the meeting the applicant and the City had met to address the applicant's concerns, and as a result the conditions were modified. Therefore, the Council referred the C.U.P. back to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation. Analysis Prior to the Council meeting staff met with the owner of the property to attempt to resolve some of his concerns. The meeting resulted in the proposed modified resolution, which is somewhat of a departure from the conditions as originally approved by the Planning Commission. 6 t. C The changes do not compromise the the intent of the C.U.P. process, but instead fine tune the conditions to appropriately fit the existing business. In regards to the parking layout, staff is continuing to recommend a condition that the stalls be restriped consistent with the standards of the zoning ordinance since the current diagonal confifuration results in tandem parking and cars which overhand into the right-of-way. The most obvious solution would be to orient the stalls perpendicular to the street. NCUR: Michael Schubach Planning Director Attachments 1. Proposed Resolution 2. P.C. Resolution 91-13 p/pcsr3232 obertson Associate Planner P.C. RESOLUTION 91-39 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW OFF -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL, IN CONJUNCTION WITH A DELI & MINI -MARKET, AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR 3232 MANHATTAN AVENUE, "DAN'S LIQUOR", LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOT TWO, AND LOT FOUR, SHAKESPEARE TRACT. WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on May 14, 1991, regarding an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to approve a Conditional Use Permit request, subject to conditions, to authorize the sale of general alcohol and decided to refer the matter back to the Planning Commission to consider modified conditions of approval; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a hearing on June 4, 1991 to review said modifications and made the following findings; A. The sale of general alcoholic beverages is being conducted in an existing establishment already licensed by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control as well as a mini -market & deli; B. The existing use is compatible with surrounding uses; C. Strict compliance with the conditions of approval, as modified, will mitigate any negative impact resulting from the issuance of the conditional use permit and will protect the public health, safety and welfare; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVE that the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California does hereby recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit, to authorize the sale of general alcohol, at 3232 Manhattan Avenue, subject to the following conditions of approval: SECTION I Conditions of Approval: 1. The hours of operation shall be limited to between 6:00 A.M. to 2:00 A.M. daily. r 2. The business shall provide adequate management and supervisory techniques to prevent loitering, unruliness, and boisterous activities of the patrons on the premises. 3. A sign shall be posted conspicuously and prominently at each exit warning patrons who purchase any and all types of alcoholic beverages that "possession and/or consumption of alcoholic beverages in any public sidewalk, parking lot, beach, and/or any public place is prohibited by law and subject to citation and fine. The City of Hermosa Beach vigorously enforces its liquor laws" Said signs shall be at least 12" X 14", shall be printed in a large type, permanently maintained, and shall be posted in visible locations. 4. The existing signs are faded with peeling paint and have been damaged by rust. All such signs shall be repaired and repainted and shall be maintained in good condition without damage of any sort, or, alternatively they shall be removed. Any new or replacement signs would be subject to the provisions of the sign ordinance. 5. An employee who is aware of the conditions of this conditional use permit shall be on the premises during business hours. _ a. The conditional use permit conditions shall be placed on the property in a location where employees can easily read the conditions. 6. A landscape plan, depicting the types and quantity of materials to be used on the site, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director for the purpose of landscaping around the perimeter of the parking area. 7. Clearly visible signs prohibiting loitering, littering, consumption of alcohol on the premises shall be posted in conspicuous locations. 8. Individual containers of beer and wine, 16 ounces or less in size, shall be packaged in clear bags or containers to make the contents of the container visible. 9. The exterior of the premises including parking areas shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner. 10. The trash container shall be enclosed by a 5' by 7' masonry enclosure with a view obstructing front gate. The location and design of the enclosure shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Other types of materials may be used if necessary where there is a lack of space. 11. The parking spaces must meet the minimum dimension parking requirements of the zoning ordinance and shall be designed to not result in vehicles overhanging into the public right-of- way. A site plan depicting a revised parking layout shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director. The parking stalls shall be striped consistent with the approved site plan. -q- 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 12. The floor plans shall be as shown on submitted plans and any changes to the interior for the purpose of altering the primary use from a market to a different use shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Director. Minor modification to the floor plans, including re -arrangement of shelving, displays, counters, or similar items within the market do not need review from the Planning Director. 13. Prior to the conditional use permit being in effect, the applicant shall submit to the planning department, a signed and notarized "Acceptance of Conditions" form. 14. A conditional use permit shall be recorded with the deed, and proof of recordation shall be submitted to the Planning Department. SECTION II Each of the above conditions is separately enforced, and if any of the conditions of approval is found to be invalid by a court of law, all the other conditions shall remain valid and enforceable. VOTE: AYES: NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution P.C. 91-39 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 May 21, 1991. Christine Ketz, Chairperson Michael Schubach, Secretary Date p/per3232 -/0 jected to the contract and wanted a publi hearing on the proposed Strand Hotel; and, Howa±d Lon acre - 1221 Seventh Place, w. ted no ification for surrounding owners; f t it was •remature to hire a consultant w' hout a publi hearing. Action: To app thorize the Mayor fessional Services Associates, Inc. to gram for Settlement An for the City of Hermosa ect site, contingent upo the developer. Motion Creighton, second noting the objections of M ove the staff recommend o sign the agreement, reement", to us onduct the sury ysis based each, at rece he t of ion to au- ntitled, "Pro - Carl Chapman & y monitoring pro - field survey data, Strand Hotel Proj- a cash deposit by or Sheldon. So ordered, kke and Wiemans. Councilmember Creighton reques -d a reps t of the sequence of events, and acts taken by th City and t - developer, when the subsidence is found to exc- - d 1/8 of an in• per foot. So di- rected by Mayor Sheldon. 2. CONSENT ORDINCES - None 3. ITEMS REM ED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSS Item (e), (f), (g),, (h), and (o) were hear• at this ti e, however, they are listed in order for clar ty. /* Public comments on items removed from the Co Calendar are listed under the appropriate item. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS - None sent PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS ON CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR DAN'S LIQUORS, 3232 MANHATTAN AVENUE. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated April 16, 1991, with supplemental information dated May 6, 1991. Supplemental memorandum from Planning director Schubach, dated May 13, 1991. Supplemental letter from Jeffrey Oderman, of Rutan and Tucker, Attorneys at Law, dated May 5, 1991, with an attachment. (Continued from April 23, 1991.) Director Schubach responded to Council questions, and requested that the Council continue this item to the meeting of June 11, 1991, as staff had not finalized some of the conditions with the property owner; and, since there were revisions, it should return to the Planning Commission for review and comment. City Council Minutes 05-14-91 Page 7453 1 The public hearing was opened at 8:05. Coming forward to address the Council on this matter was: Philip Freeland - 315 South Beverly Drive, Beverly Hills, representing Dan's Liquor, expressed concern that the letter from Jeffrey Oderman, of Rutan and Tucker, Attorneys at Law, be noted in the record. He explained their concerns with the conditions relating to landscaping and the possible loss of parking space; the re- quirement of clear packaging for single con- tainers of beer and wine; the Planning Direc- tor's approval of any modification of the store; the wording of the recordation of the C.U.P.; and, the prerogative of the Planning Commission to make changes or add conditions to the C.U.P. The public hearing was continued at 8:15 P.M. Action: To continue the Public Hearing to the regular meeting of June 11, 1991, and to refer the matter back to the Planning Commission for review and comment. Motion Mayor Sheldon, second Creighton. The motion car- ried unanimously. 6. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS OF A CONDITIO AL USE PERMIT FOR BOCCATO'S GROCERIES, 3127 MANHA AN VENUE. Memorandum from Planning Director M• hael S 'ubach dated May 6, 1991. Supplemental lett from Fran Boccato, 3127 Manhattan Avenue, Hermo . Beach, dated .y 8, 1991, with attachment from John Murdock, Attorney .t Law. Supplemental memorandum rom Planning Director S ubach, dated May 14, 1991. Director Schubh presented the st.'f report and re- sponded to Counci questions. The public hearing was opene• at 8:23 '.M., coming forward to address the Council on this matte was. Philip Freeland - 31 south Beverly Drive, Beverly Hills, represent g :occato's Groceries, stated that they cons'dered . e negotiations on-going rather than .'inalized a • would prefer a con- tinuance u. it the conditirns are finalized as a Condit..nal Use Permit run with the land and thus c..ld impinge on Mr. Boc to's ability to sell he business or the prope y. Further, th see no reason for the C.U.P. the prop - e y is zoned C-1 and a grocery store s a per- itted use in this zone. Stra Vote: To approve in concept the continuation of th- public hearing and return the matter to the Plannin pommission for review. City Council Minutes 05-14-91 Page 7454 A _L__92.2:;___ANILATI-,4--0 CI-DANIS LI CP LI 0 1 r ot rot__ I I. 7 • ; to' _J 0' (\.1 • I L) <— 41e • Pat 14AI A (ERA „0- 0 0 2 I .:!!1"7..,3c3 TLV1 CD- • JI -c' /11/1(4-/v,DEos J r S,0 0 Cl n NOci icJ HAti0 - 0 QR/Ls Pr" r Oon sr£Ps Sr os 0 n a ro M9 V1 In !4 _ 70 PA 0 A G\ 1/1 M - A) (v1 r O'e \ (�► N- 7v7 V n 0 7, 0 '°°''^ no,oG VM -!,110700 0 1 )N-aM00 x)0 "--P'M(No�C) ix �zp �M.-�bzr� IAN--aN►nO�0 My�6\ (�► N- 7v7 V n 0 7, 0 nC� 0 c�ON b—d( rnr001) 7arhrDC1n rte M1'oe� Ns PAPzs 10 "1' • t x^) / , / v Q 1-3'9 / /0 / C4 prlUn7 i $ 'v s N 0 0 n n r -o F )_. L s 6 ti S L t s 1 A,2. 1< cr Lai— • . LI 4 K F" CUP 90-2 -- RECONSIDERATION OF THE CONDITIONS IN THE CUP FOR OFF -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL AT AN EXISTING ESTABLISHMENT ALREADY LICENSED BY A.B.C. AT 3232 MANHATTAN AVENUE, DAN'S LIQUOR. Recommended Action: To recommend approval subject to conditions. Mr. Schubach gave staff report. This matter was presented to Council and referred back to commission for comment. Staff feels the conditions were revised appropriately, adhering to the intent of the CUP or amortization process. Staff recommends the Commission agree the rewritten conditions are acceptable to enable resubmittal to City Council for approval or denial. Mr. Schubach distributed to Commission a new parking lot design, landscaping and trash dumpster location plan. Vice-Chmn. Peirce established that the Commission was not to vote on this CUP, but was only to make, recommendation as to acceptability of the original or the amended document. 7 P.C. Minute,E�n� MENT`1L INFORMATION Mr. schubach defined the eliminations from the original document as word changes for clarity purposes, deleted items already part of the Code. Comm. Rue offered the basic change listing as follows: (1) Front portion of business which faces west onto Manhattan Avenue is boarded with wood. owner shall paint/restain this area to make it acceptable. (2) Language regarding the signs has been reworded but the intent is basically the same. (3) Employee signature of receipt of CUP changed to CUP posting only. (4) No sale of sexually -explicit X -Rated videos unless CUP is obtained has been deleted. (5) Measures shall be taken to control loitering on the public sidewalk at all times has been deleted. (6) Participation in the EZ Program has been deleted (at the City Attorney's request). (7) The floor area design has been changed. (8) The Planning Commission may review the CUP and may amend the subject_ conditions has been deleted (which is already part of the Code). Vice -Churn. Peirce asked about the appearance of the front portion of the building to which Mr. Schubach responded it is an aged, rustic appearance. Comm. Di Monda requested the a definition of differences between business hours and operations between this and the Marina Liquor stores to which Mr. schubach responded that different operating hours at originally been requested by these businesses. In the future, the Staff will assure that requested hours are adequate. Comm. Di Monda discussed the need for continuity between same or similar businesses, to which Mr. schubach explained that due to differences at each location (i.e. mixed-use vs. single -use buildings), each must be reviewed based upon that particular location's requirements and requests. Public Hearing was opened by Vice-Chmn. Peirce at 9:53 P.M. Mr. Phil Freeland, Freeland Development Consultants, 315 south Beverly Drive, Beverly Hills, representing Mr. Duffaut, property owner asked two procedural questions: (1) at the 14th City Council Meeting, an issue was raised regarding and the legality of two Commissioners' presence and length of service on the Commission was questioned, and (2) at the 14th City Council Meeting, the Mayor and Council both directed that further response by Mr. Duffaut or his representative was acceptable. Mr. Freeland asked for a definition as to the feasibility of his continued presentation of the Commission Meeting. Mr. Schubach responded that the Commission has the ability to make changes, although the Staff is not recommending it at this time. Vice-Chmn. Peirce stated the Commission would not vote on the CUP during this meeting, but would recommend to City Council regarding the correctness or 8 P.C. Minutes 6-4-91 modification of changes made by staff. The first procedural question asked by Mr. Freeland was ruled out of order by Vice-Chmn. Peirce. Mr. Freeland requested the following: (1) Deletion of Condition #2 regarding adequate property management due to the Staff recommendation wording using the term "adequate management and supervisory techniques" being ambiguous and provides no enforcement measure and an inappropriate requirement in North Hermosa Beach. Comm. Rue asked for alternate suggestions, to which Mr. Freeland responded with a request that this requirement simply be deleted. Comm. Marks asked if the store owner was generally on the premises, to which Mr. Freeland responded, "No, a lessee's employee is on site". Comm. Marks commented that an employee only was a weak link. The sign plurals be removed to exclude any ambiguity. There is no current problem with "sign" but is with "signs". Modification of Condition #4 by removing the statement relative to a problem with the signs and include the requirement for sign maintenance or repair, since he and Mr. Duffaut do not feel that anything is currently wrong with the signs. Comm. Di Monda requested substantiation by pictures to be furnished by the applicant at City Council meeting to which Mr. Freeland stated that was possible. (4) Modification of Condition #5 since the lessee's tenant is not controlled by the property owner. A copy of the CUP may be placed on the premises so that it may be read and understood. (5) Vice-Chmn. Peirce asked how it would be determined and monitored that the store operator would understand the conditions, and what the objections to Condition #5 were, to which Mr. Freeland responded the CUP would be posted for the employee(s) to read, but the owner has no control over the lessee's employee(s). Deletion of Condition #5 since landscaping which would impact the property appearance is not appropriate on this site. Comm. Marks discussed the adjusted plan by the Staff with Mr. Freeland, stating the landscape requirements are minimal and can be achieved by pots. Mr. Freeland stated the owner could place potted trees on the sidewalk. Mr. Schubach stated the landscape shown on the plans are exactly as originally proposed, based upon the on -file plans. Mr. Freeland disagreed. (6) Deletion of condition #7 since it is covered by Condition #3. (7) Requested current parking be maintained, since the suggested parking would result in lose of parking spaces and create a visibility problems. Mr. Schubach explained the differences between the plan and the actual site to the Commission which included parking and landscaping, stating that he, the City Attorney, Mr. Duffaut and his 9 P.C. Minutes 6-4-91 attorney previously reviewed the tandem parking plan, which is not acceptable. (8) Deletion of Condition #12, which puts undue restrictions on the property owner as a result of the CUP, which should not be the purpose of the Planning Commission. (9) Condition #14, which requires the CUP be recorded and proof submitted to Planning Department, be modified or deleted. Mr. Freeland stated Mr. Duffaut has owned his property for almost 20 years and continues to be intent upon operating a well-run business. Vice-Chmn. asked Mr. Freeland if Conditions 8, 9 and 10 were intentionally deleted from discussion, of which Mr. Freeland stated there was no problem with 9 and 10, but continue to have problems with #8, asking that the requirement for single, clear -wrapped packages be removed. Mr. Freeland stated that no city has the right to determine the packaging of products and cited inconsistency. Comm. Di Monda asked in Mr. Freeland suggests combining Items 3 and 7, which Mr. Freeland affirmed. Comm. Di Monda questioned the parking plans and offered suggestions for on-site landscaping, while also explaining the building permit requirements and procedures. Comm. Di Monda and Messrs. Schubach and Freeland discussed options and procedural requirements to change the building use. Mr. Ronald Duffaut, property owner, stated he and Mr. Schubach previously discussed the parking problems/requirements with Mr. Schubach to provide him with a suggested parking plan, of which he has not seen to date. Mr. Schubach responded that previous discussions had been conducted pertaining to this subject. Mr. Duffaut stated he has had previous meetings with his attorney and Mr. Freeland, but the parking situation had not yet been addressed. Public Hearing closed by Vice-Chmn. Peirce at 10:21 P.M. Mr. Lee suggested Condition #12 read, "The floor plan shall be shown on submitted plans, any changes to the interior which substantially alter the primary use permitted under this CUP shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director". Comm. Rue noted that if the A.B.C. license or CUP is abandoned, the property owner can make permitted changes without Commission approval, which was confirmed by Mr. Lee, with stipulations. Vice -Chetan. felt that nothing should be changed on the recommended CUP or than Mr. Lee's suggestion regarding Condition #12. Comms. Rue, Marks and Mr. Schubach discussed the merits of the parking plan submitted by the staff and Condition #14 recording requirements. MOTION by Vice-Chmn. Peirce, seconded by Comm. Rue, to recommend to the City Council that except for the modification to Condition #12 and combining of Conditions #3 and 7, removal of the statement from Condition #4 after substantiation of current good sign condition, this version of the CUP be accepted as written. 10 P.C. Minutes 6-4-91 j ). P\ FI'l i'�. ti -Y.% AYES: Comms. Di Monda, Marks, Rue, Vice-Chmn. Peirce NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Chmn. Ketz 11 P.C. Minutes 6-4-91 r •••VIM I lNAL.t.1at••11• .,•MLI • .0001.* PAJL •otS5•,C Y.I4• W•Ll•4M • •.S O CN••5 • C • LC0w••0 •. N•MSIh JONte 5 •.S ,?. rK. MICNAI. w rM1164. MIS►ISS w SAM_. 40 T1, I WALLACL, J. 5 •A,10IC4 •*0.WOTO4• 4•41.AlD • IMI LL N PIA•LMAN• . 511[•7 C OMAN.* •00c. • OPA•LC. SSWAbO • ••51.16. VP• T11ONA3 10•..•.011/• • PPC., W •.5110,$ DAVIS C ••051.1• CL. L /•1C3(* 4ICNA111. O aU•IN [.A 5 01.5.0 MAN• / SSS, O CAISut1. Nate wet•••• • 00I" I IOWAN / Ar.5 • •LtIW1•t M••C • • IO•I .. wlL\ •Y Y V8•T,C01C4• _•YL5 L rO.ww5 •NMC ICL/ON LAN•NA. W_L•AY - CAPLAN Y CN•C. f •O..A1 .AM CL L C(LO•.1 11.0.1.,• 0. 4011 _Ot_ o..u•t.ac•• I`LVCN • N•CNOU •Mery o .1140.1.4 41,64 w•LL'•N w ••0.010 IvI.PI• w,C..1 PALL•• ••MSALL r /•11•15*. 145. r. *5104 •N,..• M •*,NCC TR0r•5 r C*A4C JON. L. •(..5w$ .1 ✓ -•.' S 1•At.f• •• • 4555 w W •••N110•M( RUTAN & TUCKER ATTORNEY: AT LAW A PARTNCRSM1► INCLVOINC PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS SANK OP THE WEST, S, -/ITC 1400 01, ANION BOULEVARD COTTA MLS*. CALIIORNIA 91616 OIREOT ALL MA TO ►. 0 50X I9.O COSTA MESA, CA.IIORNIA •262$-1$SO TELEPHONE 17141 $41-5100 (2,31 $25.755$ T'ELECOPIER (7141 54$-5033 A, w. 0.001 1151-ITI1 J•.IS • •.0 II. 55. 1.404-,010, .0010 * *•N.. 0/ 11041-10151 N 010.110 NIWtLL 1102/..0131 June 11, 1991 VIA FACSIMILE Honorable Mayor Sheldon and Members of the City Council City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 IL, L DIV D . NOCNNC. .VII I w1L+1.06111" *CO„ 5 r.*tONt MOCK s 11005 1,4.6800 0 rete Rr•Of0 .•45 *r,•. ..•11 0•96.01 9r .1•.115 r I t/teff, w •,•{,t.' 5V• / •10141.0 *ATN. .555•,. 15 580.5 0 CSSSS0va \51 r ••5•y5 A.Y O VAC YPSON ?AVIA, IUCD RANI VII 1.I0•11. NA-TNCW I 0011 ITCP1.tN • CU.!! 1..5•.. 45.01•••• wt5►N•,r115 .1▪ ICNAIL 5 T . DSC.T 0 OWEN ADAM N VD.AC.• SA141050 !MATT OOO000N ■, DTTO I •11.11 15.2:1. •A r.01I/001MAL C0P AAT10N .A•Nt • MCLJC. . 54, NAl•IION !0817 r a1.• Ilea', N SCrOt5W.3 SINS C•tvtr w 51111.1• (0081. ANL.•• DAN 5\0:t0 •AMCLA J ! JAM51 5 «1.12 VAM(I • 0065E OAVIC T *850 0*•w.1 ~,401.05♦ C•50• • 011...[5 oarru11• . 105(0. S TCWA•T PUIISN•r 5.71111 O r.5ALL• 511.8.50 R •DWCL_ A •A•l:C8 00N01 51.1,... 5 •825.1 RUT. •N. 15.1.8.. CAI* • I•.tSSIT 505101 5, ♦S*41 OANlt'. J *Moat* 1581.5 W. •••••• 44 [Annie L. N AVIN I. • J0515* A 10011•Tr /AVID •. 04.I0•1.01, 111 OP CO'NVCL Re: Agenda Item No. 7 Conditional Use Permit 90-02 (Dan's Liquor) Dear Mayor Sheldon and Members of the City Council: This letter is being submitted on behalf of Ronald R. Duffaut, owner of the property looatod at 3332 Manhattan Avenue (Dan's Liquor). Since your May 14, 1991, meeting, considerable progress has been made in refining and clarifying conditions on the proposed CUP. We appreciate the efforts the City has made in this regard. There are still a handful of objectionable conditions remaining, however. Without intending to waive Mr. Duffaut's position that the entire CUP process is a violation of Mr. Duffaut's vested legal rights, we are requesting that the following additional changes be made to the CUP conditions: 1. Delete Condition 4 entirely. This condition is unnecessary since the existing signs on the property are in good condition. As I believe your City Attorney will confirm, any requirement for uncompensated removal of the existing signs on the premises would violate the property owner's vested rights under Business & Professions Code ; 5491. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 1' RUTAN b TUCKER ATTORNEYS AT LAW . N.f11(Rl.. IC..O 0..L C0.0..• 6.d Honorable Mayor Sheldon and Members of the City Council City of Hermosa Beach June 11, 1991 Page 2 2. Delete Condition 6 entirely. The building has been in place for over 20 years, was never designed with landscaping, and has never had landscaping. The landscape "plan" shown to Mr. Duffaut would require him to jackhammer the public sidewalk in front of his store to install landscaping, something that could not legally be done. There is no way to provide automatic irrigation to the landscaping. Even landscaping along the side of the building is likely to be extremely marginal and unattractive. There is no justification for retroactively requiring improvements of this sort on a property that has been occupied for so many years. 3. Delete Condition 8 entirely. The City's attempt to regulate the packaging of beer and wine is a clear intrusion into an area exclusively regulated by the State, and a violation of Business & Professions Code S 23790 and Article XX, Section 22 of the California Constitution. 4. Delete Condition 11 entirely. The existing parking layout is the safest, most convenient, and most efficient. Once again, the existing parking layout has been in place for many years without any complaints or problems known to the property owner. 5. Delete Condition 14 entirely. A conditional use permit "runs with the land" automatically, and need not be recorded against the property to constitute constructive notice of its terms to subsequent owners. County of Imperial v. McDougal (1977) 19 Ca1.3d 505, 510-511. Besides being unnecessary, recordation is not Authorized under Government Code S 27280 et beg. and can constitute a confusing encumbrance on the property, particularly if the use of the property is later changed. `RUTAN S. TUCKER Ar!o N c"S AT LAW • M11`. •.011611.O•04 c0110OrAr004 Honorable Mayor Sheldon and Members of the City Council City of Hermosa Beach June 11, 1991 Page 3 Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, RUTAN & TUCKER n jv J f y M. Oderman JMO:jd cc: Mr. Ronald R. Duffaut Charles S. Vose, Esq. 9/112/014317.0001/004 TO: CITY OF OF HERMOSA BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM ) a I 60€A-...) Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Michael Schubach, Planniri ' Tj 6sreor SUBJECT: Appeal of C.U.P. for 3127 Manhattan Avenue - Boccato's Market (CONTINUED FROM MAY 14, 1991) DATE: June 5, 1991 Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit subject to the conditions in the attached resolution as recommended by the Planning Commission. The Council continued the appeal from the meeting of May 14, 1991, for referral back to the Planning Commission for reconsideration of the staff recommended modified conditions. The Planning Commission, at their meeting of June 4, 1991, recommended approval of the C.U.P. and recommended further modification of the conditions, which did not substantially change the conditions, as follows: 1. Consolidate conditions number 4 & 9 into condition 4 regarding warning signs of the illegality of drinking alcohol on the premises or on public property and to prohibit loitering on the premises into one condition. This would allow the use of one standard sign containing all the necessary warnings. 2. Rewrite condition 7 pertaining to conformance with floor plans as follows: The floor plans shall be as shown on submitted plans and any changes to the interior for the purposc of which substantially altersi. the primary use permitted under the conditional use permit - -- -t+s,e- shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Director. Minor modification to the floor plans, including re -arrangement of shelving, displays, counters, or similar items within the market do not need review from the Planning Director. Attachments p/memo4 SUPPLEMENTA INFORMATION s RESOLUTION 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUSTAINING THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW OFF -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR 3127 MANHATTAN AVENUE, BOCCATO'S GROCERIES, AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE EASTERLY 20.15 FEET OF LOT 12 AND LOT 14, BLOCK 104, SHAKESPEARE TRACT. WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on May 14, 1991, and June 11, 1991, to receive oral and written testimony regarding an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to grant a Conditional Use Permit request to authorize the sale of general alcohol, subject to conditions, and made the following findings: A. The sale of alcohol is being conducted in an existing establishment already licensed by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control; B. The proposed alcohol use is compatible with surrounding commercial uses and with surrounding residential uses; C. Strict compliance with the conditions of approval will mitigate any negative impact resulting from the issuance of the conditional use permit and will protect the public health, safety, and welfare; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, does hereby sustain the Planning Commission's decision to approve a Conditional Use Permit, to authorize the off -sale of general alcohol at 3127 Manhattan Avenue subject to the following: SECTION I Conditions of Approval: 1. The hours of operation shall be limited to between 6:00 A.M. and 2:00 A.M. daily. 2 2. a •e nc-1 trash enclosureshall sound condition. the installed be maintained in 3. The business shall provide adequate management and supervisory techniques to prevent loitering, unruliness, and boisterous activities of the patrons outside the business on the subject property. 4. A sign shall be posted conspicuously and prominently at all exits prohibiting loitering, littering and consumption of alcohol on the premises and warning patrons who purchase any and all types of alcoholic beverages that "possession and/or consumption of alcoholic beverages in any public sidewalk, parking lot, beach, and/or any public place is prohibited by law and subject to citation and fine. The City of Hermosa Beach vigorously enforces its liquor laws" Said signs shall be at least 12" X 14", shall be printed in a large type, permanently maintained, and shall be posted in visible locations. 5=. An employee who is aware of the conditions of this conditional use permit shall be on the premises during business hours. a. The conditional use permit conditions shall be placed on the property in a location where employees can easily read the conditions. 6. The floor plans shall be as shown on submitted plans and any changes to the interior which substantially alters the primary use permitted under the conditional use permit shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Director. Minor modification to the floor plans, including re -arrangement of shelving, displays, counters, or similar items within the market do not need review from the Planning Director. 7. The exterior of the premises shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner. 8. Individual containers of beer and wine, 16 ounces or less in size shall be packaged in clear bags or containers to make the contents of the container visible. 9. Prior to the conditional use permit being in effect, the applicant shall submit to the planning department, a signed and notarized "Acceptance of Conditions" form. 3 10. A conditional use permit shall be recorded and proof of recordation shall be submitted with the planning department. SECTION II Each of the above conditions is separately enforced, and if any of the conditions of approval is found to be invalid by a court of law, all the other conditions shall remain valid and enforceable. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1991, by: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission May 30, 1991 Regular Meeting of June 4, 1991 (APPEALED AND REFERRED BACK FROM THE CITY COUNCIL) SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 91-1 LOCATION: 3127 MANHATTAN AVENUE APPELLANT: FRANK BOCCATO BOCCATO'S GROCERIES 3127 MANHATTAN AVENUE HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 PURPOSE: TO REVIEW MODIFICATIONS TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PREVIOUSLY GRANTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution recommending approval of the C.U.P. subject to the conditions, as modified. Background At their meeting of April 2, 1991, the Planning Commission approved a conditional use permit at the subject location subject to the conditions as recommended by staff. The applicant filed an appeal of the Planning Commission action on April 9, 1991, contending that the action was illegal. At their meeting of May 14, 1991, the City Council considered the appeal of the applicant. Prior to the meeting the applicant and the City had met to address the applicant's concerns, and as a result the conditions were modified. Therefore, the Council referred the C.U.P. back to the Planning Commission for review and comment. Analysis Prior to the Council meeting staff met with Mr. Boccato to discuss the conditions to attempt to resolve some of his concerns. Mr. Boccato responded with a specific set of changes that would be acceptable to him. Staff has evaluated his proposal and in the spirit of cooperation modified some of the conditions in response to his suggestions, but not all of his suggestions are acceptable to staff (see attached letter and staff memorandum). The changes do not compromise the intent of the C.U.P. process, but instead fine tunes the conditions to appropriately fit the existing use. Mr. Boccato has sent another letter, dated May 24, commenting on the revised conditions, where he still contests several of the conditions. He notes that he has constructed a trash enclosure and re -paved the parking lot. As such staff is recommending that the condition regarding the paving be removed, however, the trash enclosure, although an improvement, does not include a gate. As such staff has further modified that condition to require a gate. In regards to the remaining comments in Mr. Boccato's letter of May 24, staff believes most of these issues have been adequately discussed and our reasons have been stated for keeping the language of the remaining conditions. Therefore, no further modifications are recommended in response to this letter. However in response to some of Mr. Boccato's comments staff would like to note the following: (paragraph on bottom of page 2 top of page 3 regarding condition #7) This condition, now condition #6, regarding changes to the interior floor plan was previously modified and made less restrictive to appease Mr. Boccato's concerns about Planning review of changes to his shelves etc. The reason for including the statement about altering the market to a different use is to retain some control over potential changes to more intensive uses. If it changes to other permitted C-1 uses, there would be no problem, and it would not be prevented. (2nd paragraph, page 3, re: condition #9, now condition #8) This condition requires packaging of individual containers in see-through bags. This has been placed on all other similar business located near the beach. The stores noted by Mr. Boccato are all a much greater distance from the impacted area. (Last paragraph page 2, re: condition #12, now condition #11) Recordation is not a difficult or costly process, and recording any changes is not any more difficult. (cost is $5 per page plus $2 for each additional page, and it can be done through the mail) Although the modifications result in a further departure from the standard conditions as required by the Article 10 of the zoning ordinance, staff believes it is appropriate since this is an amortization of existing business, and the standards in the code are more directly applicable to new establishments. 6 Since the proposed conditions have been modified since the Commission approval, the new set of conditions must be referred back to the Commission for comment prior to .-final approval,. CONCU$,: MichaelSchubach Planning Director Attachments 1. Proposed Resolution recommending approval 2. P.C. Resolution 91-19 3. Boccato letter, 5/24/91 4. P.C. Minutes 4/2/91 5. Staff memorandum 5/7/91 and Boccato letter 5/6/91 6. Photograph 5/30 Ke/t/ Obertson Associate Planner a/pcsr3127 7 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 P.C. RESOLUTION 91-38 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW OFF -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR 3127 MANHATTAN AVENUE, BOCCATO'S GROCERIES, AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE EASTERLY 20.15 FEET OF LOT 12 AND LOT 14, BLOCK 104, SHAKESPEARE TRACT. WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on May 14, 1991, regarding an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to grant a Conditional Use Permit to authorize the sale of general alcohol, subject to conditions, and decided to refer the matter back to the Planning Commission to consider modified conditions of approval; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a hearing on June 4, 1991 to review said modifications and made the following findings: A. The sale of alcohol is being conducted in an existing establishment already licensed by the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control; B. The proposed alcohol use is compatible with surrounding commercial uses and with surrounding residential uses; C. Strict compliance with the conditions of approval, as modified will mitigate any negative impact resulting from the issuance of the conditional use permit and will protect the public health, safety, and welfare; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, does hereby recommend approval a Conditional Use Permit, to authorize the off -sale of 8 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 general alcohol at 3127 Manhattan Avenue subject to the following conditions of approval: SECTION I Conditions of Approval: 1. The hours of operation shall be limited to between 6:00 A.M. and 2:00 A.M. daily. 2. A gate shall be provided in conjunction with the installed trash enclosure, and said enclosure shall be maintained in sound condition. 3. The business shall provide adequate management and supervisory techniques to prevent loitering, unruliness, and boisterous activities of the patrons outside the business on the subject property. 4. Signs shall be posted conspicuously and prominently at all exits and all check-out stands warning patrons who purchase any and all types of alcoholic beverages that "possession and/or consumption of alcoholic beverages in any public sidewalk, parking lot, beach, and/or any public place is prohibited by law and subject to citation and fine. The City of Hermosa Beach vigorously enforces its liquor laws" Said signs shall be at least 12" X 14", shall be printed in a large type, permanently maintained, and shall be posted in visible locations. 5. An employee who is aware of the conditions of this conditional use permit shall be on the premises during business hours. a. The conditional use permit conditions shall be placed on the property in a location where employees can easily read the conditions. 6. The floor plans shall be as shown on submitted plans and any changes to the interior for the purpose of altering the primary use from a market to a different use shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Director. Minor modification to the floor plans, including re -arrangement of shelving, displays, counters, or similar items within the market do not need review from the Planning Director. 7. The exterior of the premises shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner. 8. Individual containers of beer and wine, 16 ounces or less in size shall be packaged in clear bags or containers to make the contents of the container visible. q 9. Clearly visible signs prohibiting loitering, littering, consumption of alcohol on the premises shall be posted in conspicuous locations. 10. Prior to the conditional use permit being in effect, the applicant shall submit to the planning department, a signed and notarized "Acceptance of Conditions" form. 11. A conditional use permit shall be recorded with the deed, and proof of recordation shall be submitted with the planning department. SECTION II Each of the above conditions is separately enforced, and if any of the conditions of approval is found to be invalid by a court of law, all the other conditions shall remain valid and enforceable. VOTE: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution P.C. 91-38 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 June 4, 1991. Christine Ketz, Chairperson Michael Schubach, Secretary Date he public hearing was opened at 8:05. Coming forward to addre th . Council bn .this matter was: Philip Freeland - 315 South Beverly Drive, B- erly Hills, representing Dan's Liquor, •pressed concern that the letter from Jeffr Oderman, of Rutan and Tucker, Attorneys at aw, be noted in the record. He explained heir concerns th the conditions relating -o landscaping and th- •ossible loss of parng space; the re- quire nt of clear pac ging for single con- tainers beer and .ne; the Planning Direc- tor's app oval of any modification of the store; the w._d -• of the recordation of the C.U.P.; and, prerogative of the Planning Commission - make anges or add conditions to the C.U.P The public hearing was -ontinued at 8:15 P.M. Action: o continue the Public Hearing .o the regular meetin• of June 11, 1991, and to refer the 'atter back to e Planning Commission for review and comm-gt. M ion Mayor Sheldon, second Creighton. The moti•. car- ied unanimously. 6. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS OF A CONDITION- AL USE PERMIT FOR BOCCATO'S GROCERIES, 3127 MANHATTAN AVENUE. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 6, 1991. Supplemental letter from Frank Boccato, 3127 Manhattan Avenue, Hermosa Beach, dated May 8, 1991, with attachment from John B. Murdock, Attorney at Law. Supplemental memorandum from Planning Director Schubach, dated May 14, 1991. Director Schubach presented the staff report and re- sponded to Council questions. The public hearing was opened at 8:23 P.M., coming forward to address the Council on this matter was: Philip Freeland - 315 South Beverly Drive, Beverly Hills, representing Boccato's Groceries, stated that they considered the negotiations on-going rather than finalized and would prefer a con- tinuance until the conditions are finalized as a Conditional Use Permit runs with the land and thus could impinge on Mr. Boccato's ability to sell the business or the property. Further, they see no reason for the C.U.P. as the prop- erty is zoned C-1 and a grocery store is a per- mitted use in this zone. Straw Vote: To approve in concept the continuation of the public hearing and return the matter to the Planning Commission for review. City Council Minutes 05-14-91 Page 7454 The Motion Creighton, second Mayor Sheldon. There were no objections. public hearing was continued at 8:30 P.M. Action: To continue the public hearing to the regular meeting of June 11, 1991, and return the matter to the Planning Commission for review and comment. Motion Creighton, second Essertier. The motion carried unanimously. 7. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF A CONDITION L USE PERMIT FOR A 3 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION AT /23 BARNEY COURT/18 & 20 MEYER COURT. Memorandum from P an- ning Director Michael Schubach dated May 6, 1991. Sup- lemental letter from David R. Suess, 1246 First reet, rmosa Beach, dated May 8, 1991. Supplemental equest fo a continuance from Dennis G. Cleland, 865 anhattan Bea . Blvd., Manhattan Beach, appellant, date: May 14, 1991. The The public hearin was opened at 8:33 P.M. public hearing .s continued at 8:34 P.M. Action: To meeting of June lant's expense. Motion Essertier, with Councilmember property within the project. c ntinue the public heari 11, 1991, and re-adve g to the regular tise at the appel- second Wiemans. The motion carried, Creighton abs aining due to owning 0 foot rad'.s noticing area of the The meeting recessed at 8:35 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 8:47 P. taken up at this time but is shown i• order for clarity. MUNICIPAL MATTERS The Consent Calendar was 8. GENERAL SERVICES REORG NIZATION City Manager Kevin B Northcraft with a supplementmemorandum specification for F'nance Supervisor rector Robert Blackwood dated May 8, from April 23, 192/1 meeting.) City Manager No/rthcraft presented the sta report and responded to C61ncil questions. Coming forward to addfess the Council on this matter wer_: Patrick Chaplin — representing the Teamster Local 211, opposed to contracting out City ser ices; /opposed to breaking up the General Ser ces / Department; urged the Council to hire a manager for the Department; and urged the Council n LAN. Memorandum from ated April 18, 1991, to approve class rom Personnel Di - 991. (Continued City Council Minutes 05-14-91 Page 7455 • • o•.•••.. CUP 91-1 - RECONSIDERATION OF THE CONDITIONS IN THE CUP FOR OFF -SALE GENERAL ALCOHOL IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE EXISTING MARKET ALREADY LICENSED BY A.B.C. AT 3127 MANHATTAN AVE., BOCCATO'S GROCERIES. Recommended Action: To recommend approval subject to conditions. Mr. Schubach gave staff report, noted the similarities with CUP 90-2 and stated he has received a letter from Mr. Boccato contesting several of the conditions. Mr. Boccato has paved parking lot, constructed trash container area and requests these conditions be removed. Additional changes/additions in the trash container area are required. Staff believes modification and condition language should remain as is; this has been discussed with Mr. Boccato. Responding to Mr. Boccato's letter, Staff notes regarding (1) Condition #7 which has been changed to Condition #6 and is less restrictive but still maintains some control over potential changes to more intensive uses, (2) Condition #9, changed to Condition #8, requires packaging in see-through bags of individual containers, a requirement of similar business located near the beach, and (3) Condition #12, changed to Condition #11, recordation is not difficult nor costly. The City Attorney has suggested the language in Condition #6 be slightly changed regarding modifying the store interior without approval. Comm. Di Monda asked what Code states height in trash enclosures, to which Mr. Schubach responded it is found in the Municipal Code, enforced through the Building Dept. The Staff prefers trash enclosures be gated. Public Hearing opened by Vice-Chmn. Peirce at 10:33 P.M. Mr. Phil Freeland, Freeland Development Consultants, representing Mr. Boccato, continues to object to the CUP process for an existing business with a legal A.B.C. license. Mr. Boccato has owned the business for 22 years with no problems and feels this action is illegal. The May 14, 1991 City Council Meeting requested Messrs. Freeland and Boccato negotiate with the Planning commission and Staff. A trash enclosure gate has been installed. Mr. Freeland requested that Condition be removed from the CUP, Condition #3 be deleted as being ambiguous, Condition #5 be modified to posting of CUP only, Condition #6 be deleted, Condition #9 should be included as part of Condition #4, no objection to condition #10 as long as an overall agreement is reached. Mr. Freeland requested the CUP wording be changed to allow CUP recording only. Mr. Lee responded the purpose of the language change to Condition #6, Planning Dept. approval would not be required if all permitted use allowed within C-1 Zone requirements were met. Mr. Robert Benz, 2901 Manhattan Ave., stated the original CUP should be followed and questioned the CUP process for the different business, stating the exhibited controls are unnecessary. Public Hearing closed by Vice-Chmn. Peirce at 10:44 P.M. 11 P.C. Minutes 6-411 SUPPLMENTqL INFORMATION Vice -Chinn. Peirce stated no modifications are required. Comm. Di Monda commented that uniform, standard conditions addressing City of Hermosa Beach concerns and regulation of problems would be beneficial to all. Mr. Lee responded CUPS are on a case-by-case basis, the type of conditions should be different due to the unique situations which require appropriate conditions to mitigate the specific -use impact. Comm. Di Monda requested an explanation of the clear, plastic bag requirement. Vice -Chinn. Peirce responded markets using clear, plastic bags for liquor sales enable better enforcement of the liquor laws by making the product visible. Comm. Rue stated he felt the trash enclosure and gate was handled in a very innovative manner. MOTION by Vice -Chinn. Peirce, seconded by Comm. Rue, to recommend approval as submitted, changing Condition #6 to correspond with CUP 90-2 Condition #12 as amended and collapse Conditions #4 and 9 together. AYES: Comms. Di Monda, Marks, Rue, Vice-Chmn. Peirce NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Chinn. Retz Mr. Schubach stated the CuP would be presented to city council Tuesday, June 11, 1991. Vice -Churn. Peirce announced a meeting between City Council and Planning Commission Thursday, June 6, 1991, 7:00 P.M. to discuss various issues to include Ruedat, Greenbelt parking, downtown business parking, Pacific Coast Highway parking, nonconforming ordinance, livability ordinance and planning issues vs. policy issues. 12 P.C. Minutes 6-4-91 BOCCATO'S GROCERIES June 10, 1991 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Hermosa Beach City Hall Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Dear Mayor Sheldon and Councilmembers: «� JUN 1 p 1991. ChY clerk City o/ }4e,mo� C) amen At the City Council meeting on May 14th, the City Council directed that I go back to the staff and try and work out the remaining issues with the CUP conditions. I wrote a letter with my comments and objections and offered to discuss the remaining issues. However, the staff proceeded without discussion with me and basically recommended the same conditions that were before you on May 14th. With only minor changes, the Planning Commission is recommending those same conditions. For the record, I continue to object to the CUP process for an existing business with a legal existing ABC license where there are no problems to warrant the CUP in the first place or the conditions being placed on it. With regard to the latest set of conditions accompanying your Planning Director's June 5, 1991 memo, I ask that you make the following modifications before taking any action on the CUP. I have completed construction of a trash enclosure. Since it is completed and the gate has been added per the Staff's earlier recommendation, I ask that Condition #2 be deleted. I ask that Condition #3 be deleted. The wording of the staff recommended condition using the terminology "adequate management and supervisory techniques" is ambiguous and provides no measure of evaluation for enforcement. I do not believe any wording can be found that is not ambiguous and I believe the condition is unnecessary as there is no problem with such activities, nor would it be expected in the future in the neighborhood. I ask that Condition #5 be modified to read: "The CUP conditions shall be placed on the property in a place where employees can easily read the conditions required by the City." I am not willing to accept a condition that could subject my employees to a test by the police or a code enforcement officer as to their knowledge and understanding of the conditions of the CUP. That is neither reasonable nor right. 3127 MANHATTAN AVENUE HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 (213) 376-0574 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION,• Page 2 Hermosa Beach City Council Boccato's CUP June 10, 1991 I ask that Condition #6 be modified by adding the statement: Permitted uses in the C-1 zone that meet all zoning standards shall not require prior approval of the Planning Director. I continue to object to Condition #8 regarding packaging of individual containers of beer and wine. Contrary to the Planning Staff's earlier report to the Planning Commission, other grocery stores including Von's, Alpha Beta and Lucky's are only a few blocks farther from the beach than Boccato's, not "a much greater distance". They are not required to have this condition on their CUP's. This is inconsistent conditioning of the CUP's and unfair to Boccato's. I ask that it be deleted. I have no objection to Condition #9, as long as I agree to the conditions being applied to the CUP. Obviously, I am unwilling to agree to agree to conditions that I do not accept. I ask that the wording of Condition #10 be changed to read: "A statement that a CUP exists on the property shall be recorded, and proof of recordation shall be submitted to the Planning Department." This wording is specific and should be an acceptable way to accomplish the City's goal of making sure any new property owner knows that there is a CUP on the Property. I believe that I have made an honest and professional attempt to work through this process, even though I don't believe what is being required is legally right. I ask that you accept my recommendations. It has never been my wish or intent to be recalcitrant or defy the City. However, I am not willing to have my rights compromised or my business opportunity jeopardized. I will do what is legally necessary to protect those rights and opportunities. In closing, I would like to point out that Boccato's is not part of the problem you are trying to address with this CUP process. I operate a well run grocery business that should be appreciated and kept in Hermosa Beach. Your cooperation in understanding my position and in being fair with me as a valued business in your community will be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much. Yours truly, BOCCATO'S GROCERIES June 3, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council June 11, 1991 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AND THE HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION,' OFFICERS' AND SERGEANTS' BARGAINING UNIT Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution. Background: The existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and the Hermosa Beach Police Officers' Association (HBPOA), Officers' and Sergeants' Bargaining Unit, expired February 28, 1991. The City and representatives of the Officers' and Sergeants Unit have met and conferred toward reaching agreement on a successor MOU. The members of the HBPOA met and ratified the negotiated MOU on May 23, 1991. The City Manager and HBPOA have mutually agreed to present the attached MOU to the Council for approval. The MOU is scheduled to be signed by both parties on Tuesday, June 11, 1991 (scheduling difficulties did not allow signing prior to delivery of this item). Analysis: The negotiated MOU contains the following changes from the previous one: Term of Agreement * One year term retroactive to March 1, 1991 through Februrary 28, 1992. Base Salary: * A 4% increase in base salary retroactive to March 1, 1991, and * An additional 4% increase in base salary effective Sept. 1, 1991. The cost impact of the 4% + 4% increase is the same as a 6% increase for the term of the contract. This increase represents an annual increase of $113,040 in salary and related benefits (i.e. PERS, premium pays, etc.) 1 1 Other: * Provides for a 6 month notice should the City contract for Police Services with another agency. (Article 35); * Increases Educational Incentive $25.00 per month for employees hired after May 2, 1984 who possess an AA Degree or Intermediate P.O.S.T. Certificate and $50.00 per month for a B.A. Degree or Advanced P.O.S.T. Certificate (Article 25); * Amends Section R18.04 of the Department Rules and Regulations regarding maximum penalties for Vehicle Accidents (Article 34); * Clarifies language for conversion of accruals to salary one year prior to retirement consistent with PERS policy. (Article 18); * Clarifies that sick leave may be used in the case of serious illness of family member. (Article 22) * Changes two designated holidays to be consistent with other bargaining units (i.e. Lincoln's Birthday changed to Martin Luther King Jr's Birthday; Washington's Birthday changed to President's day). Does not increase the number of holidays granted. (Article 21); * Includes language to complete an analysis of contracting with the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act (provided through PERS) for medical insurance coverage (Article 38). The increased annual cost to the City for the negotiated contract with the Officers' and Sergeants' Unit is $116,640 (includes salary, benefits, and educational incentive) which represents a 6.19% increase in total compensation. Respectfully Submitted: Robert A. Blackwood, Personnel Director Noted for fiscal impact: Viki Copeland Finance Director Concur: Kevin B. Northcraft City Manager Steve Wisniewski Public Safety Director 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 NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO ADOPT A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION AND SERGEANTS' BARGAINING UNIT. WHEREAS, the Hermosa Beach Police Officers and Sergeants have elected to meet and confer with the City of Hermosa Beach on matters concerning wages, hours, and working conditions; and WHEREAS, the above personnel have selected certain individuals to represent them; and WHEREAS, Employee and Management representatives have jointly negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding which has been ratified by a majority vote of the members of the Police Officers' and Sergeants' Bargaining Unit. Said Memorandum of Understanding is attached hereto as "Exhibit A"; and, WHEREAS, the Employee Representatives and the City Manager have mutually agreed to recommend that the City Council adopt this Memorandum of Understanding. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH RESOLVES to enter into said Memorandum of Understanding to be dated June 11, 1991, and to be effective for the period March 1, 1991 through and including February 29, 1992. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution; shall cause the same to be entered among the original resolutions of said City; and shall make a minute of the passage and 1 2 3 4 5 6 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this llth day of June, 1991. 7 8 adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council of said City in the minUtes of the meeting at which time same is passed and adopted. 9 10 11 12 13 PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California , City Clerk , City Attorney ATTEST: 14 APPROVE,P) AS TO FORM: 15 )9j(J . i�� \J� 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MARCH 1, 1991 - FEBRUARY 29, 1992 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH A FORMAL MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING SETTING FORTH THE HOURS, WAGES, AND WORKING CONDITIONS FOR EMPLOYEES REPRESENTED BY THE HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION POLICE OFFICERS AND SERGEANTS BARGAINING UNIT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR THE HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS AND POLICE SERGEANTS BARGAINING GROUP 1. PARTIES TO THE MEMORANDUM This Memorandum of Understanding, hereinafter referred to as the "MOU" or the "Agreement," has been entered into, pursuant to the laws of the State of California and the City of Hermosa Beach, California, by and between the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, hereinafter referred to as the "City" or as "Management," and the HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, hereinafter referred to as the "Association." 2. RECOGNITION Pursuant to the provisions of the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, (Government Code 3500, et seq.), the City agrees to, and does, recognize the Hermosa Beach Police Officers Association as the exclusive representative of the full-time positions in the clas- sifications of POLICE OFFICER AND POLICE SERGEANT of the City of Hermosa Beach. 3. SCOPE & IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING This memorandum of understanding constitutes the joint recomnien- dation of Management and the Association. It shall not be bind- ing in whole or in part upon the parties unless and until the following conditions have been complied with: 1. The association shall notify the City Council in writing that it has formally approved the Memorandum of Understanding in its entirety. 2. The City Council shall approve this Memorandum of Understanding. 3. This MOU has been reached following good -faith negotiations, by the authorized Management representative of the City Coun- cil and the authorized representative for the Hermosa Beach Police Officers Association. 4. MONTHLY MEETINGS In the interest of fostering and continuing a spirit and atmo- sphere of harmonious employer-employee relationships, it is agreed that the Association Board of Directors shall meet once a month at a designated time and place with administrative officers of the Department. There shall be no less than two (2) Board members present for each such meeting. - 1 - It is further -agreed that the Association and the City Manager shall meet when requested by the Association to best effect im- plementation of this document. 5. JOB ACTION The Association and its members agree that during the term of this MOU there shall be no strike. In the event of an unauthorized strike, the City agrees that there will be no liability on the part of the Association pro- vided the Association promptly and publicly disavows such unau- thorized action; orders the employees to return to work and at- tempts to bring about a prompt resumption of normal operations; and provided further, that the Association notifies the City in writing, within 48 hours after the commencement of such strike, what measures it has taken to comply with the provisions of this strike. In the event such strike by the Association has not affected resumption of normal work practices, the City shall have the right to take appropriate disciplinary action. 6. NON-DISCRIMINATION The City shall not discriminate against any employee because of race, color, age, creed, national origin, sex, handicap, medical condition, marital status, or union activities in any matter. 7. MANAGEMENT RIGHTS 1. Manage the City. 2. Schedule working hours. 3. Establish, modify or change work schedules or standards. 4. Institute changes in procedures. 5. Direct the work force, including the right to hire, promote, demote, transfer, suspend, discipline or discharge any employee. 6. Determine the location of any new facilities, building, departments, divisions, or subdivisions thereof, and the relocation, sale, leasing or closing of facilities, depart- ments, divisions, or subdivisions thereof. 7. Determine services to be rendered. 8. Determine the layout of buildings and equipment and materials to be used herein. 9. Determine processes, techniques, methods and means of per- forming work. 10. Determine the size, character and use of inventories. 11. Determine the financial policy including accounting procedures 12. Determine the administrative organization of the system. 13. Determine selection, promotion, or transfer of employees. 14. Determine the size and characteristics of the work force. 15. Determine the allocation and assignment of work to employees. 16. Determine policy affecting the selection of new employees. 17. Determine the establishment of quality and quantity standards - 2 - and the judgment of quality and quantity of work required. 18. Determine administration of discipline. 19. Determine control and use of City property, materials and equipment. 20. Schedule work periods and determine the number and duration of work periods. 21. Establish, modify, eliminate or enforce rules and regulations. 22. Place work with outside firms. 23. Determine the kinds and numbers of personnel necessary. 24. Determine the methods and means by which such operations are to be conducted. 25. Require employees, where necessary, to take in-service train- ing courses during working hours. 26. Determine duties to be included in any job classifications. 27. Determine the necessity of overtime and the amount of over- time required. 28. Take any necessary action to carry out the mission of the City in cases of an emergency. The exercise of the foregoing powers, rights authority, duties and responsibilities by the City, the adoption of policies, rules, regulations and practices in furtherance thereof, and the use of judgment and the discretion in connection therewith, shall be limited only by the specific and express terms of this Memo- randum of Understanding, City Personnel Ordinance and Personnel Rules and Regulations, the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights, and other statutory law. Except in emergencies, or where the City is required to make changes in its operations because of the requirements of law, whenever the exercise of management's rights shall impact on em- ployees of the bargaining unit, the City agrees to meet and con- fer with representatives of the Association, upon request by the Association, regarding the impact of the exercise of such rights unless the matter of the exercise of such rights is provided for in this Memorandum of Understanding. 8. PROVISIONS OF LAW - INSEPARABILITY It is mutually understood that this MOU is, and shall be, subject to all current and future applicable state, federal and local laws. If any article, part, provision or segment of this MOU is, or shall be, in conflict with or inconsistent with such ap- plicable provisions of federal, state or local law, or is other- wise held to be invalid, or unenforceable by any court of compe- tent jurisdiction by final decree, such article, part or provi- sion thereof shall be superseded by such applicable law and the remainder of this MOU shall in no way be affected thereby. 9. FULL UNDERSTANDING, MODIFICATION, WAIVER It is intended that this Agreement sets forth the full and entire understanding of the parties regarding the matters set forth herein, and any other prior or existing understanding or agree- ments by the parties whether formal or informal, regarding any - 3 - such matters are hereby superseded or terminated in their entirety. Except as specifically provided herein, it is agreed and under- stood that each party hereto voluntarily and unqualifiedly waives its right, and agrees that the other shall not be required to negotiate with respect to any subject or matter covered herein during the term of this agreement. Any agreement, alteration, understanding, variation, waiver, or modification of any of the terms or provisions contained herein shall not be binding upon the parties hereto unless made and exe- cuted in writing by all parties hereto, and if required, approved and implemented by the City Council. The waiver of any breach, term or condition of this Agreement by either party shall not constitute a precedent in the future en- forcement of all its terms and provisions. 10. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE The Grievance Procedure is attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. 11. WORK SCHEDULE The City agrees to continue the utilization of the 3/12 plan for officers and sergeants assigned to patrol. and the 4/10 plan for officers and sergeants assigned to investigation. The City may cancel this scheduling plan, without cause, at any time during the term of this Memorandum of Understanding by giving the Association three (3) months written notice. Upon such notice, the City shall, at the request of the Association, meet and confer on a new scheduling plan. Absent mutual agree- ment, the City shall revert to the 5/8 plan in effect prior to the experimental work plan. In the event of an emergency situation, the City may cancel, al- ter or amend the work schedule as necessary, immediately. 12. COMPENSATION - METHODS OF COMPENSATION A. Methods of compensation: 1. Compensation shall be determined on an hourly basis. 2. Payments due shall be paid on a bimonthly basis unless other- wise mutually agreed. By mutual consent early payments and other modifications can be made. 3. Base hourly salary shall be considered the rate of pay for a particular classification without consideration of any other form of compensation. B. Salary Advancements Within Base Pay Range: 1. Step advancement: a. All salary advances shall be based on merit and fitness. All increases shall be recommended by the Department Head and approved by the Personnel Officer/City Manager. Merit increases shall be effective at the beginning of the next pay period (1ST or 16TH of the month). b. Upon the successful and satisfactory completion of twelve (12) months service (exclusive of police recruit status), employees shall be advanced one step within their range and yearly thereafter until the maximum within the range achieved. 2. Promotion An employee who is promoted to a position in a class with a high- er salary rate shall be entitled to the lowest step in the higher range which exceeds the present rate of pay with the intent of increasing the base salary rate by at least 5%. C. Compensatory Time: Employees may accrue up to 175 hours of compensatory time and may cash out all or part of such accrued time at any time, subject to the budgetary constraints of the department. 13. BASE SALARY Effective March 1, 1991, the base salary range for the clas- sification in the bargaining unit shall be increased by 4% com- puted on the salary range in effect February 28, 1991. Effective September 1, 1991, the base salary range for the clas- sifications in the bargaining unit shall be increased an addi- tional 4% computed on the salary range in effect February 28, 1991 and added to the range effective March 1, 1991. Step: A B C D Commencing March 1, 1991: POLICE OFFICER: 2888 3032 3184 3343 POLICE SERGEANT: 3378 3547 3725 3911 Commencing Sept. 1, 1991 POLICE OFFICER: 2999 3149 3307 3472 POLICE SERGEANT: 3508 3683 3868 4061 14. OVERTIME PRACTICES A. 7K Exemption - The City of Hermosa Beach has exercised its ability to take a statutory "7K" exemption for sworn police personnel. The work period for such employees shall be 28 days in length commencing on Sunday, May 22, 1988., at 12:01 A.M. B. F.L.S.A. Overtime - All employees required to perform in ex- cess of the standard work shift, or at times other than their regularly scheduled work shift, shall receive compensation at the rate of time and one-half their regular rate of pay. The regular rate of pay shall include the following components in addition to base salary. 1. Educational incentive. 2. Assignment Pay. 3. Longevity Pay. C. Paid Leave Exclusions - In determining an employee's eligibility for overtime compensation in a work day, paid leaves of absence and unpaid leaves of absence shall be ex- cluded from the total hours worked. For this purpose, paid leaves of absences include, but are not limited to the following: 1. Vacation 2. Holiday Leave 3. Sick Leave 4. Compensatory Leave 5. 4850 Time 6. Jury Duty 7. Military Leave D. Compensatory Time In lieu of receiving cash payment for overtime hours, an em- ployee may elect the option of taking compensatory time off. Compensatory time shall be earned at the time and one-half rate for each hour worked. An employee may accrue up to a maximum of 175 hours (after conversion at time and one-half) compensatory time. This maximum accumulation also includes holiday compensatory time. E. Overtime Authorization All overtime requests must have prior written authorization of a supervisor prior to the commencement of such overtime work. Where prior written authorization is not feasible, explicit verbal authorization must be obtained. Where verbal authorization is obtained, written authorization must be ob- tained as soon thereafter as practicable. Dispatched calls beyond the end of duty time are considered as authorized. An employee's failure to obtain prior written approval, or ex- plicit verbal authorization followed by written authoriza- tion, will result in the denial of the overtime request. - 6 - F. Shift Trades The practice of shift trading shall be voluntary on behalf of each employee involved in the trade. The trade must be due to the employee's desire or need to attend to a personal mat- ter and not due to the department's operations. The employee providing the trade shall not have his/her compensable hours increased as a result of the trade; nor shall the employee receiving the trade have their compensable hours decreased as a result of the trade. Any premium pay or other extra com- pensation shall continue to accrue only to the person originally entitled to the premium pay or extra compensation. Any hours worked beyond the normal work day will be credited to the individual actually doing work. "Paybacks" of shift trade are the obligation of the two employees involved in the trade. Paybacks are to be completed within one (1) calendar year of the date of the initial shift trade. Any dispute as to the paybacks is to be resolved by the involved employees, and under no circumstances will the department be obligated for any further compensation whatsoever to any of the in- volved employees. The department is not responsible in any manner for hours owed to employees by other employees that leave the employment of the City or are assigned other duties. A record of all initial shift trades and "paybacks" shall be maintained by the involved employees on forms pro- vided by the department ("shift trade log.") If one individual fails to appear for the other (regardless of the reason), the person who was scheduled as a result of the shift trade will be listed as absent without leave and may be subject to disciplinary action. G. Early Relief Policy The practice of early shift release shall be voluntary on behalf of each employee involved in the relief. The employee providing the early relief shall not have his/her compensable hours increased as a result of the early relief, nor shall the employee relieved early have their compensable hours de- creased as a result of the early relief. "Paybacks" of early relief hours are the sole obligation of the two employees involved in the early relief. Any dispute is to be resolved by the involved employees, and under no circumstances will the department be obligated for any further compensation whatsoever to any of the involved employees. The department is not responsible in any manner for hours owed to employees by other employees that leave the employment of the City or are assigned other duties. H. Training Time Attendance at training school/facilities (including the academy) which improves the performance of regular tasks and/ or prepares for job advancement are not compensable for hours in excess of the employee's normal work shift. Any time spent in excess of the normal work shift will not be counted as working time and is not compensable in any manner whatsoever. Time spent in studying and other personal pursuits is not compensable hours of work. I. City Vehicle Use Except as otherwise herein provided, employees who are pro- vided with a City vehicle to travel to and from work shall not be compensated in any manner whatsoever for travel time to and from work. This provision also applies in those situations where the radio must be left on and monitored. J. City Motorcycle Use Employees assigned to motor duty may, with the approval of the Director of Public Safety, use the city assigned motorcy- cle to travel to and from work. Such travel time will not be compensated in any manner whatsoever (even when the employee is required to leave the radio on and monitor the radio.) Any work the employee performs on the motorcycle while away from the police facility will not be considered hours worked and will not be compensated in any manner whatsoever. K. Clothes .Changing Employees are not authorized to wear their uniforms or any part thereof that is distinguishable as such unless on duty. Each employee is provided with a locker for their personal convenience. Any employee may or may not utilize the locker for storage and changing purposes at their own discretion. Nothing herein prevents an employee from wearing their uni- form to and/or from their residence to work as long as the badge and insignia are covered in a non -police issued garment such as a windbreaker. Employees choosing to wear their uni- forms covered to and/or from work should not wear their "Sam - Browne" belt. Time spent in changing clothes before or after shift, is not considered hours worked and is not compensable in any manner whatsoever. L. Call Backs Call Back duty occurs when an employee is ordered to return to duty on a non -regularly scheduled work shift. Call back does not occur when an employee is held over from their prior shift or is working prior to their regularly scheduled shift. An employee called back to duty shall be credited with a minimum of two hours work commencing when the employee reports to work. Any hours worked in excess of two hours shall be credited on an hour -for -hour basis for actual time worked. This provision is to be distinguished from Court pay which is to be used when an employee is called back to court. M. Court Time When an officer is physically called to court, they shall be credited on an hour -for -hour basis for the time actually - 8 - spent in court. They shall receive a minimum three (3) hours for a morning appearance with a minimum three (3) hours for an afternoon appearance. Travel time shall be included for any subpoenaed appearance other than to the Torrance Courthouse. N. Standby Court Time An employee who while off duty is on court standby status may leave a telephone number where they may be reached while on court standby. Such time is not considered hours worked under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The employee will receive straight time pay, up to a maximum of 8.5 hours per day, for standby during the pendency of the case. 15. INSURANCE COVERAGE A. LIFE City shall provide a life insurance policy for each employee, payable in the amount of $40,000 upon such employee's death. B. MENTAL HEALTH City shall make such a plan available to city employees; the full cost to be paid by the employee. C. VISION City shall make such a plan available to city employees; the full cost to be paid by the employee. D. HEALTH City shall provide for Association members a health insurance plan to include a choice of an indemnity plan with $250.00 deductible or an HMO plan; both plans to include maternity care and prescription benefits. Current health, or.their equivalent, to remain in force during the term of this MOU. City shall meet and consult should there be a change in providers. City agrees to indemnify the employee for co -pay amounts in- curred in excess of the level of benefit in effect on Novem- ber 30, 1990 for the HMO and Indemnity medical plans. City to pay employee costs and current dependent rate with any future increased dependent costs to be borne 80% City and 20% employee. E. DENTAL City shall provide for Association members a dental insurance plan to include a choice of an annuity plan or an HMO plan. City to pay employee cost and current dependent rate with any future increased dependent costs to be borne 80% City and 2-0% employee. 16. DEFERRED COMPENSATION City agrees to make available to all employees in the Unit the citywide Deferred Compensation Plan. All participants being then eligible to vote on decisions of the Deferred Compensation Com- mittee. Members of the Association may participate in either of the Deferred Compensation plans provided for City employees. 17. SALARY CONTINUATION PLAN Management agrees to contribute for each member of the Unit, the sum of Fourteen and 40/100 dollars ($14.40) per month per person toward the purchase of a Long Term Disability plan through the Association. Any cost in excess of this shall be borne by the Association. 18. RETIREMENT A. The City shall maintain the 2% @ 50/PERS contract with "ONE YEAR FINAL COMPENSATION" in effect at the time of this contract. B. The City will pay the FULL employee's 9% contribution to the PERS retirement system credited to the employee's portion. C. Retirement Conversion of Accruals: 1. Upon service retirement from the City, an employee may_ elect to receive the cash value of their monthly accrual for vacation, sick, and holiday comp. included as part of their base monthly salary in lieu of receiving any further accrual during their final twelve (12) months of service. No conver- sion of accruals which were accrued prior to the conversion period shall be allowed. 2. In addition to "1" above, the employee may elect to receive the employee's 9% contribution to PERS credited to base salary. Upon such election, the employee shall commence payment of the 9% PERS contribution from their salary. 3. In order to be eligible for conversion of monthly ac- cruals and the PERS 9% provision, the employee must announce their service retirement twelve (12) months in advance. 4. The value of the converted leave (sick, vacation, holiday comp.) shall be calculated at the employees regular rate of pay. 5. At no time shall this additional compensation so received act in any way to increase any other premium pays (e.g. as- signment pay, longevity pay, etc.) which are computed as a percentage of base pay, nor shall the cash value of the ac- crual conversion be included in the computation of the value of any accrual cash -outs. 6. All compensation currently calculated for retirement pur- poses shall be included in the final year conversion formula. 7. Should PERS change or otherwise amend the stated policy of not allowing the retrospective application of benefits to salary, the language of Article 22 of the March 1, 1988 MOU shall be reinstated regarding the conversion of all unused sick leave. 8. The intent of this article is to increase the employee's final year compensation for the calculation of service re- tirement benefits under the PERS. 19. LEAVE OF ABSENCE Management agrees to allow all employees covered by this MOU to take a leave of absence without pay, not to exceed 60 days, in conjunction with, or in addition to, their regular vacation time. This leave will only be allowed every other year. Timing and duration of leave subject to approval of the Public Safety Direc- tor and subject to the needs of the department. Any request for such leave must be delivered to the Director a minimum of 30 days in advance. This provision shall not reduce any leave entitle- ment an employee may have under the Military and Veterans Code. 20. VACATION Vacation accrual rates shall be as follows: A. For employees initially hired before May 2, 1984. 1. Upon hire, 2. Commencing 3. Commencing 4. Commencing 5. Commencing 6. Commencing B. 1. at the rate of 96 hours/year. with the 7th year, at the rate of 112 hours/year. with the 8th year, at the rate of 136 hours/year. with the 15th year, at the rate of 160 hours/year. with the 16th year, at the rate of 168 hours/year. with the 17th year, at the rate of 176 hours/year. For employees hired after May 1, 1984. No accrual during time served as a Police Recruit. 2. Upon graduation from the Academy, or upon hire as a Lateral Entry, at the rate of 96 hours/yr. 3. At the rate of 112 after (2) above. 4. At the rate of 128 after (2) above. hours/year commencing with the 7th year hours/year commencing with the 10th year 5. At the rate of eight additional hours/year commencing with the 11th year after (2) above to a maximum of 160 hours/year. C. Each member of the bargaining unit will be required to use the number of hours accumulated for vacation purposes during each fiscal year. During the fiscal year, if within ninety (90) days following completion of the fiscal year the indi- vidual has not utilized these vacation hours off, they shall then be paid for them. An individual may accumulate and hold as unused vacation hours an amount equal to the total number of hours that can be accrued in an 18 -month period. 21. HOLIDAYS The following holidays shall be considered as paid: New Year's Day; Martin Luther King, Jr's. Birthday; Presidents Day; Memorial Day; Independence Day; Labor Day; Admissions Day; Veteran's Day; Thanksgiving Day; Day after Thanksgiving; Christmas Day; Birthday. Additionally, each employee shall be credited 1.33 hours per month additional compensatory time. Said time off not to conflict with departmental scheduling. 22. SICK LEAVE Sick leave accrual shall be as follows: 1. For all employees initially hired before May 2, 1984: A. Those employees having less than 176 accrued hours of sick leave shall accrue sick leave at the rate of 6 hours per month until their accrual accumulates to 176 hours at which time their accrual shall be 8 hours per month. B. A once a year cash -in can be up to 100% of the unused sick leave as long as at least 176 accrued hours remains on hand. An employee may accrue a maximum of three hun- dred and fifty hours (350); thereafter any excess shall be cashed out. Employees who have more than 350 hours of sick time on the books as of March 1, 1991 shall be frozen at that accumulation; any earned sick time in ex- cess of that amount shall be cashed out. 2. For employees hired after May 1, 1984: A. Zero during academy. B. Upon graduation from the Academy or upon hire as a lateral entry, 4 hours per month for the initial 12 months. C. 5 hours per month for the next 12 months. D. 6 hours per month thereafter and subject to all of (1) above. 3. In the case of serious illness of a member of the immediate family, the employee may utilize sick leave. Immediate fami- ly for the purpose of this section shall be defined as: father; mother; father-in-law; mother-in-law; brother; sister; spouse; or legal dependent. Employees may predesig- nate and substitute other members for those members defined as "immediate family." The intent of this provision is not to expand the number of persons included in the definition of "immediate family" or to increase paid leave opportunities, but, rather to recognize variation in family structure (e.g. stepmother for mother). 4. Upon termination from City employment, sick leave will be paid at the current hourly pay rate, on the following conditions: 1. One-quarter pay from 5 to 10 years of continuous service. 2. One-half pay from 10 years until termination. 23. BEREAVEMENT LEAVE Each employee shall receive a maximum of three shifts per calen- dar year to be utilized for bereavement leave because of a death in their immediate family. Immediate family shall be defined as in Article 22 - SICK LEAVE. Said time will not be cumulative from one twelve month period to another nor will pay in lieu of unused leave for bereavement be provided. The Director may grant one (1) additional shift in the event of an out-of-state death. 24. LONGEVITY PAY Effective July 1, 1976, all police officers hired after July 1, 1976, will not be entitled to any longevity pay. 25. EDUCATIONAL INCENTIVE COMPENSATION & MAINTENANCE OF BENEFITS In recognition of formal professional training, obtained from either an accredited educational institution or through P.O.S.T. sanctioned training, City agrees to a concept of pay as an ad- junct to base monthly salary as follows: 1. For employees hired before May 2, 1984: A. Payable at the rate of 5% above base salary for an Inter- mediate P.O.S.T. Certificate or A.A. Degree; B. Payable at the rate of 10% above base salary for an Advanced P.O.S.T. Certificate or a B.A. or B.S. degree; C. Payable at the rate of 5% above base salary for employees who were employed after July 1, 1976 and are employed for 7 years as a sworn peace officer in Hermosa Beach and who obtain an A.A. degree; D. Payable at the rate of 10% above base salary for em- ployees who were employed after July 1, 1976 and are em- ployed for 14 years as a sworn peace officer in Hermosa Beach and who obtain a B.A. or B.S. degree. 2. For employees hired after May 2, 1984: A. Payable at the rate of $150/month for an A.A. degree or Intermediate P.O.S.T. Certificate. B. Payable at the rate of $300/month for a B.A. or B.S. degree or Advanced P.O.S.T. Certificate. C. Such compensation shall not exceed $300/month. Employees receiving such compensation are obligated to main- tain the educational level required for P.O.S.T. Certifica- tion, at the city's expense and at the direction of the Police Department. 26. UNIFORM ALLOWANCE Said allowance for Officers and Sergeants to be $700/year, pay- able through the regular payroll schedule. An absence due to sick leave, injury on duty, or leave of absence without pay, exceeding sixty days (60) days shall result in a pro -rata reduction in uniform allowance for the time of the absence. 27. AMMUNITION REPLACEMENT In addition to the quarterly qualification ammunition, each of- ficer will be allowed to utilize fifty (50) rounds of ammunition for their primary duty weapon, at City expense, each month at the firing range used by the Department. The City will also pay for the expense of using the range. The ammunition will be used to practice on an approved course of fire so that officers will be- come more proficient with their service weapons. The City will not compensate officers for the time spent to uti- lize this ammunition. Officers must use the allotted ammunition each month, it does not accumulate. 28. ASSIGNMENT PAY A. The City shall pay as Detective compensation two hundred and twenty dollars ($220.00) per month to each officer assigned to a detective position. That compensation shall be for the additional time detectives are "on-call." This sum shall be included in total compensation calculations for retirement purposes. B. The City agrees to pay the officer assigned as Crime Preven- tion Officer the sum of two hundred and twenty dollars ($220.00) per month as special duty pay, that sum shall be included in total compensation calculations for retirement purposes. C. The City agrees to pay to each officer assigned to field training or acting watch commander duties the sum of one dol- lar eighty eight cents ($1.88) per hour as special duty pay. That sum shall be included in total compensation calculations for retirement purposes. D. The City agrees to pay each officer assigned to Motorcycle Duty the sum of two hundred and eighty dollars ($280.00) per - month. This sum shall be payable when on duty, during haz- ardous duty disability leaves, and during absences from work of less than one month. This sum shall be included in total compensation calculations for retirement purposes. E. It is the intent of these provisions that such assignments will be for career development, and generally will be limited to an assignment of twenty-four (24) months. The right to assign and reassign shall be vested solely with the Director of Public Safety. The parties understand and agree that all assignments to ex- tra -pay positions are temporary assignments, and that of- ficers will be rotated into and out of these assignments as part of the department's job enrichment and career develop- ment program. In conformity with this understanding, each officer who ac- cepts an assignment shall sign a statement indicating that they understand the temporary nature of the assignment. Nothing herein shall abrogate an employee's appeal rights as set forth in Government Code Section 3304. F. The City agrees to pay each Officer assigned to the Police Service Dog Program as a Police Service Dog handler the sum of two -hundred and twenty dollars ($220.00) per month. This amount shall be considered as full compensation for the addi- tional incidental hours required for the animal's veterinary care; routine care for the K -9's physical health, welfare and grooming; daily and routine maintenance to the K-9 patrol vehicle and field equipment. This sum shall be included in total compensation calculations for retirement purposes. Time spent "on-call" shall not be considered hours worked for FLSA purposes and is not compensated in any manner. Employees assigned full time to the Department's Police Ser- vice Dog Program are subject to schedule changes contingent on meeting Police Dog Program priorities and Department needs. 29. YEARLY SHIFT CHANGES Shift changes will be made three (3) times yearly, and patrol officers and sergeants shall be eligible to bid on all shifts throughout the year. Bidding for shifts and days off will con- tinue to be made on a seniority basis. An officer will not work the same shift three consecutive changes without management's approval. Management shall be permitted to schedule all new hire officers for a two (2) year period without regard to seniority. If exceptional circumstances arise regarding a particular officer who may be a problem, management may change their schedule and/or shift preference. For the term of this MOU, the Agreement regarding interpretation and/or implementation of this Article 29 dated June 21, 1990 (at- tached hereto as "Exhibit C") shall be maintained subject to all mutual protections stated therein. 30. EXTRA JOB SIGN-UPS Regular officers of the Hermosa Beach Police Department will be given priority over reserve officers in the assignment of extra jobs. No restrictions on the number of regular officers who can sign up for extra jobs shall be imposed. Regular officers will be compensated for all hours worked on extra jobs at their regu- lar rate of pay. To be eligible for an extra job, an officer must have completed their probationary period. The officer must have signed up for the job at least five (5) days prior to the date listed on the job posting. If no regular officer has signed up for the job five (5) days prior to the listed date, the job may be assigned to a reserve officer. Available extra jobs will be posted on the bulletin board at least ten (10) days in advance of the job date. In the matter of foot patrol and beach patrol jobs, a monthly schedule will be posted, when possible, at least five (5) days prior to the first day of the month. A sign-up list for foot patrol and beach patrol extra jobs will be posted at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the job for the following month. Failure to work a job assignment after having been selected to do so will be deemed to be a violation of general orders. For emer- gency reasons, an officer may provide a replacement for the extra job from one of the other regular officers to cover the assigned job. For the same reasons, and with the permission of the Divi- sion Commander, a reserve officer may be used as a replacement in an emergency situation. Nothing herein shall prohibit the City from hiring temporary civilian employees to perform police related duties in the en- forcement of Municipal Code provisions relating to bicycles and skateboards. Any additional assignments of temporary civilian employees shall be subject to the meet and confer process. - 16 - 31. SHIFT COVERAGE If for any reason the Police Department cannot meet a minimum three-person staffing standard requirement, the Department shall have the right to fill positions with qualified reserve officers. This may be done only when all regular officers have been con- tacted to determine their availability to cover the shift or a portion of the shift which will be understaffed. 32. WATCH COMMANDER SELECTION The Director of Public Safety shall have the right to establish criteria for selection of officers to be placed on the Watch Commander's list. The Director shall select any number to be placed on the list and may remove officers or add officers to the list at any time. 33. PERFORMANCE REVIEW Upon completion of probation, each employee shall -thereafter be reviewed annually; said review to be constructive in nature and designated to point out areas of strengths, weakness, methods for improvement, etc. 34. DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS For the purpose of defining disciplinary actions, the following definitions shall be applicable: 1. Disciplinary actions are defined as: a. Dismissal. b. Demotion. c. Suspension. d. Reductions in pay. e. Reprimand (written) 2. Reductions in pay are governed by the "Blue Section" of the Police Manual. 3. Appeals from the disciplinary actions shall only be sub- ject to the "Blue" section of the Police Manual entitled "Rules and Regulations." 4. Prior to the commencement of any internal investigation which is likely to subject the officer to disciplinary action, the officer shall be advised of their rights pur- suant to Section 3300, et.seq., of the California Govern- ment Code as amended. All rights contained therein shall be applicable to the disciplinary actions and shall be used as a minimum guideline only. 5. Any reprimand record or other writing containing negative comments (with the exception of Performance Evaluations) included in the employee's personnel package is a written reprimand. 6. Inclusionary periods as currently set forth in the Police Department Rules and Regulations shall remain in effect during this M.O.U. The specific changes to Section R18.04 as agreed to during negotiations and attached hereto as Exhibit "B" are hereby incorporated into the Department Rules and Regulations (Blue Section). 7. Any officer receiving time off dispensed as a result of disciplinary action can use either accumulated compensa- tory time or vacation time at their discretion. However, when exceptional circumstances arise and the City feels that it is in the best interest to keep an officer off duty for a limited period of time (not to exceed five (5) working days), the City may exercise this right. 35. LAYOFF Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Section 2-42, as currently enacted, is the governing provision regarding layoff. However, City fur- ther agrees that, prior to implementation of any such layoff, discussions shall be held to explore other alternatives, mitiga- tion, etc. It is further agreed that in the event the City should contract with another agency for provision of police services, the As= sociation shall receive six (6) months advance written notice prior to the effective date of any such change. 36. NO SMOKING The parties agree that the City shall amend its class specifica- tions for unit positions to provide that employees who become unit employees after the date this MOU goes into effect shall, as a condition of their continued employment, refrain from smoking tobacco or any other non -tobacco substance at any time on or off duty. Violation of this condition of employment shall be deemed good cause for dismissal. 37. ASSOCIATION DIRECTORS TIME A maximum of two Board members shall be allowed to attend out of town meetings on City time up to and including a cumulative total of five (5) working days per calendar year provided such out of town meetings are for purposes of Association business. With the permission of the Director of Public Safety additional days may be granted. 38. FURTHER STUDIES The City and Association, jointly recognize that some matters need further study and negotiation during the term of the MOU. It is therefore agreed that the following items will be addressed: 1. Contracting for participation in the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act. Said study will be jointly conducted and completed by September 1, 1991. 39. DURATION OF CONTRACT This MOU is effective March 1, 1991 and shall remain in full force and effect for 12 months thereafter, ending February 29, 1992. In witness whereof, the parties hereto have caused their duly authorized representatives to execute this Memorandum of Under- standing this day of , 1991. HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Bruce K. Phillips Kevin B. Northcraft President, HBPOA City Manager Thomas E. Cray Robert A. Blackwood Vice President, HBPOA Personnel Director Wallace C. Moore Steve Wisniewski Secretary, HBPOA Public Safety Director Thomas P. Thompson Treasurer, HBPOA John C. Koebsell Member At Large, HBPOA GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES FOR HERMOSA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT AIIAC r "A" I.. Purpose of Grievance Procedures a. To promote improved employee -employer relations by establishing grievance a procedures on matters. b. To provide that grievances shall be heard and settled as informally as possible. c. To enable grievances to be settled promptly and/or as near to the point of origin as possible. II. Definition A grievance is defined as any dispute concerning the interpretation, intent or application of the written Memorandum of Understanding or departmental rules and regulations governing personnel practices or working conditions applicable to 'employees covered by the Memorandum of Understanding. An impasse in meeting and conferring upon the terms of a proposed Memorandum of Understanding is not a grievance. III. Conduct of Grievance Procedure a. An employee may request the assistance of another person of his own choosing in preparing and prese:-:tii his grievance at any level of review, or may be represented by a recognized employee organization,• or may represent himself. i III. b. Tho employee and his representative, if any, may use a reasonable amount of work time, as determined by the appropriate Division Commander, and a Police Association Board Representative, in conferring about and presenting a grievance. c. Any grievance relating to the retroactive status of monetary or fiscal matters shall be limited to the date of filing of the grievance in writing, except in such cases where it would be impossible for the employee to have prior knowledge of an accounting error, or where the error is departmentally or City caused. d. The time limits specified may be extended to a definite date by mutual agreement of the employee and the reviewer concerned. e. Employees shall be free from reprisal for using the grievance procedure. -2- IV, Matters Subject to Grievance Procedure Pull -time employees having probationary or permanent status may process a personal grievance on one, or more than one, of the following grounds. a. Improper application of rules, regulations and procedures. b. Unfair treatment, including coercion, restraint, or reprisal. c. Reduction in force action - layoffs. d. Promotion procedures implemented unfairly. e. Classification of position. f. Non -selection for training opportunities. g. Discrimination because of race, religion, color creed, or national origin. h. Any matter affecting an employee's work schedule, fringe benefits, holidays, vacation, sick leave, retirement, performance, rating, a change in classification, salary, work assignment, or any other matter affecting wages, hours or working conditions. i. Discharge, demotion, or suspension. j. Individual disputes over the intents or application: of the provisions of the most recent officiary signed agreement between the City and their recognized employee representatives. Probationary employees may file grievances under all of the above, but not as applied to their performance ratir. or dismissal. V. Grievance Procedure a. Step One - Informal Process An employee must attempt first to resolve a grievance through discussion with his immediate supervisor with- out undue delay on an informal basis. If, after such discussion the employee does not believe the problem has been satisfactorily resolved, he shall have the right and obligation to discuss it with his supervisor'= immediate superior, if any, and his department head if necessary. Every effort shall be made to find an acceptable solution by these informal means at the most immediate level of supervision. At no time may the informal process go beyond the department head concerned. In order that this informal procedure may be responsive, all parties involved shall expedite this process. In no case may more than fifteen (15) calendar days elapse from the date of the alleged incident or action and the resolutions of the grievance or com- pletion of the informal process. Said grievance shall be. considered waived if not so presented to the im- mediate supervisor within fifteen (15) calendar days following the day during which the event upon which: the grievance is based occurred. Step Two - Formal Process - Management Supervisor If the grievance is not resolved through the informal process, the employee shall have the right within ten (10) working days from the decision or completion of the informal process to file the grievance in writing on a specified form and present it to his Division Commander. The Division Commander shall discuss the grievance with the employee and shall render a V. Grievance Procedure decision and comments in writing and return them to the employee within ten (10) working days after receiving the grievance. Failure of the grievant to serve such written notice ten (10) calendar days following the termination of the informal step shall constitute a waiver of the grievance. Step Three - Formal Process - Department IIead If the grievance procedure is not resolved at Step 2 and the employee is notified in writing, the employee may, within the next five (5) working days present the grievance in writing to the department head. In the event that no written response is given to the employee within ten (10) working days from the date of submission of the written grievance, the grievance will be as- sumed to have been valid and the employer will take steps to correct that problem. Failure of the em- ployee to take appropriate action within the -pres- cribed time periods will be deemed to constitute termination of the grievance. Failure of the em- ployer to respond within the time provided will be deemed to be an admission as to the validity of the grievance and will require affirmative action to correct the grievance. The department head shall render his decision and comments in writing within five (5) working days from the date of receipt of . the grievance and return them to the employee within that time. V. Grievance Procedure Step Four - Advisory Arbitration a. If the grievance is not resolved in Step 3 the employee may within five (5) working days, present the grievance in writing to the City Manager or his designate for processing. Failure of the employee to take this action within five (5) working days from the date of receipt of rejection of the grievance in Step 3 will be deemed to constitute a termination of the grievance. b. The scope of the advisory arbitration of grievance shall include all of the grievable matters as set forth in Section 4 of this procedure. An exception would be those matters that by Peoples Ordinance NS 211 must be adjudicated by the IIermosa Beach Civil Service Commis- sion. All other grievances shall bypass Step 4 of the grievance procedure and go to the Step 5 procedures. An employee who chooses advisory arbitration shall be deemed to have made a choice between the Civil Service Board of Review and arbitration and, therefore, may not seek two hearings on the same grievance. c. As soon as possible, and in any event not later than ten (10) work days after either party received written notice from the other of the desire to arbitrate, the parties shall agree upon an arbitrator unless externa. constraints prohibit compliance, whereupon the earliest date available shall apply. V. Grievance Procedure d. Arbitrator shall be selected from a list of seven (7) arbitrators from within two (2) working days. If a mutual agreement cannot be reached at a meeting of the two parties as to selection of an arbitrator, then each party shall strike off a name from the list on an alternating basis until one name remains, which person shall become the arbitrator. The City shall have the first opportunity to strike a name from the list of seven (7) arbitrators. The priorit of striking names shall alternate from one party to the other each time advisory arbitration is invoked by the same parties. e. Any arbitrator appointed must be familiar with em- ployee/management relations in public employment. f. The arbitrator shall hold such hearings and conduct such proceedings as may be necessary, but such hear- ings and proceedings shall be conducted in an ex- peditious and confidential manner with the involved parties only. Employees called as witnesses shall bo released from duty as needed. g. The rules of conduct of proceedings shall be ac- cording to those procedures utilized by the Ar- bitration Service. h. The findings of fact and the recommendations of t. arbitrator shall be transmitted to the involved parties and the City Administrator. V. Grievance Procedure i. The foes and expenses., including the making of the record of the arbitrator, shall be borne equally by the parties. Calling. of the witnesses by either party shall be done with a reasonable amount of restraint. An excessive use of witnesses will necessitate the cost of loss of work time to be paid by the party calling the witnesses. A decision of the arbitrator may be requested by either party as to whether there may have been an excessive use of witnesses. The arbitrator shall have no power to alter, amend, change, add to, or subtract from any of the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding. The decision of the arbitrator shall be based solely upon the evidence and arguments presented to him by the respective parties in the presence of each other. k. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final upon the parties to the dispute unless either party, within 60 days after the final written decision of the arbitrator is personally served upon the party, causes to be filed in a court of competent jur:- ediction a complaint to review all or any part of t proceeding, upon litigation, the entire matter sh 1_ be reviewed and a trial de novo held. • P9.111 . V. Step Five - Final Process - City Manager - - .'„s•-.•. ... �� Zf 'the trey,.• -f. r •+• .; • . _ .g ance" cannot be resolved Step 3, ;the • - - =+ir •employee may thereafter submit the matter to the: t • moi' .I `.I s-•.� r• ,—t•• '�.'t .: f.. ' .. .i• iQl•ti� .. ! :•..Y. �.L"J�. _ '� '. 21anager.%or .h`iis properly appointed' representative-ior �-- _ • . -; ,fid.-� . -- ^ s::•.. :� - " • ..'^•-.: �Y : �.t r . ..:: '� : _ - ,`r=: i.. . . � r=..�; • i. . . the purposes of obtaining his review and rsettlement-of the grievance. Thereafter the City Manager or. his designated representative shall, in all non: -arbitrable cases, review the matter and render a decision in writing to the parties within fifteen (15) calendar days from the date of receipt. R18.04 Police Department Vehicles - Accidents. Damage .1 Traffic accidents or damage involving Departmental Vehicles shall be reviewed by the Traffic Accident Review Board in accordance with the policy governing investigation of accidents and damage. The Review Board shall classify the accident or damage and present their findings to the Chief of Police. The Chief of Police shall take immediate action on the findings of the Board. Penalty - Minor Accidents First Offense: Oral Reprimand Second Offense: Written Reprimand Third Offense: One (1) Day Suspension Fourth Offense: Three (3) Days Suspension Inclusionary Period: One (1) Year Penalty - Moderate Accidents First Offense: One(1) Day Suspension Second Offense: Three(3) Days Suspension Third Offense: Five(5) Days Suspension Inclusionary Period: Two (2) Years Penalty - Major Accidents First Offense: Two(2) Days Suspension Second Offense: Five (5) Days Suspension Third Offense: Ten (10) Days Suspension Inclusionary Period: Three (3) Years b June 3, 1991 N --9J Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council June 11,. 1991 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH AND THE HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION, COMMANDERS' BARGAINING UNIT Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution. Background: The existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and the Police Officers' Association, Commanders' Bargaining Unit, expired February 28, 1991. The City and representatives of the Commanders' Unit have met and conferred toward reaching agreement on a successor MOU. The members of the HBPOA, Commanders' Unit, met and ratified the negotiated MOU on May 23, 1991. The City Manager and HBPOA have mutually agreed to present the attached MOU to the Council for approval. The MOU is scheduled to be signed by both parties on Tuesday, June 11, 1991 (scheduling difficulties did not allow signing prior to delivery of this item). Analysis: The negotiated MOU contains the following changes from the previous one: Term of Agreement * One year term retroactive to March 1, 1991 through Februrary 29, 1992. Base Salary: * A 4% increase in base salary retroactive to March 1, 1991, and * An additional 4% increase in base salary effective Sept. 1, 1991. The cost impact of the 4% + 4% increase is the same as a 6% increase for the term of the contract. This increase represents an annual increase of $20,172 in salary and related benefits (i.e. PERS, premium pays, etc.) 12 Other: * Provides for a 6 month notice should the City contract for Police Services with another agency. (Article 29); * Provides an annual/biennial physical examination. (Article 31); * Changes amount of maximum quarterly Merit Pay incentive from 7.5% to 5%; 2.5% built into salary effective March 1, 1991 (makes incentive same as for Management Group). (Article 27); * Clarifies language for conversion of accruals to salary one year prior to retirement consistent with PERS policy. (Article 17); * Clarifies that sick leave may be used in the case of serious illness of family member. (Article 21) * Changes two designated holidays to be consistent with other bargaining units (i.e. Lincoln's Birthday changed to Martin Luther King Jr's Birthday; Washington's Birthday changed to President's day). Does not increase the number of holidays granted. (Article 20); * Adds 10 hours per year for Management Leave. (Article 23). The increased annual cost to the City for the negotiated contract with the Commanders' Unit is $21,772 (includes salary, retirement, and annual physical) which represents a 6.48% increase in total compensation. Respectfully Submitted: lieka Robert A. Blackwood, Personnel Director Noted for'fiscal impact: Viki Copland Finance Director Concur: Kevin B. Nor hcraft City Manager Steve Wisniewski Public Safety Director 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 NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO ADOPT A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION COMMANDERS' BARGAINING UNIT. WHEREAS, the Hermosa Beach Police Commanders have elected to meet and confer with the City of Hermosa Beach on matters concerning wages, hours, and working conditions; and WHEREAS, the above personnel have selected certain individuals to represent them; and WHEREAS, Employee and Management representatives have jointly negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding which has been ratified by a majority vote of the members of the Police Commanders' Bargaining Unit. Said Memorandum of Understanding is attached hereto as "Exhibit A"; and, WHEREAS, the Employee Representatives and the City Manager have mutually agreed to recommend that the City - Council adopt this Memorandum of Understanding. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH RESOLVES to enter into said Memorandum of Understanding to be dated June 11, 1991, and to be effective for the period March 1, 1991 through and including February 29, 1992. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution; shall cause the same to be entered among the original resolutions of said City; and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the 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 City Council of said City in the minutes of the meeting at which time same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 11th day of June, 1991. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California , City Clerk , City Attorney ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FO MARCH 1, 1991 - FEBRUARY 29, 1992 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH A FORMAL MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING SETTING FORTH THE HOURS, WAGES, AND WORKING CONDITIONS FOR EMPLOYEES REPRESENTED BY THE HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION. POLICE COMMANDERS BARGAINING GROUP MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR THE POLICE COMMANDERS BARGAINING GROUP 1. PARTIES TO THE MEMORANDUM This Memorandum of Understanding, hereinafter referred to as the "MOU" or the "Agreement," has been entered into, pursuant to the laws of the State of California and the City of Hermosa Beach, California, by and between the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, hereinafter referred to as the "City" or as "Management," and the HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, hereinafter referred to as the "Association." 2. RECOGNITION 1. Effective March 1, 1988, the titles of Police Captain and Police Lieutenant are hereby abolished and replaced with the ti- tle, "Police Commander." 2. Current incumbents in the classification of Police Lieutenant and Police Captain shall be reclassified as Police Commander, a civil service designated position. Such reclassification shall not operate to divest incumbents of any vested property right in their jobs. The new job description is attached as Attachment "B." 3. For the purposes of comparison in all matters and issues -af- fecting the department's classification of Police Commander, in- cluding wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment, the classification of Hermosa Beach Police Commander shall be equated to and/or considered the same as that of a Police Captain in municipal agencies with similar duties and responsibilities. However, such comparison shall not mandate change or the matters, issues, wages, terms and conditions of employment. 4. Pursuant to the provisions of the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, (Government Code 3500, et seq.), the City agrees to, and does, recognize the Hermosa Beach Police Officers Association as the exclusive representative of the full-time positions in the clas- sification of Police Commander of the City of Hermosa Beach. 3. SCOPE & IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING This memorandum of understanding constitutes the joint recommen- dation of Management and the Association. It shall not be bind- ing in whole or in part upon the parties unless and until the following conditions have been complied with: 1. The association shall notify the City Council in writing that it has formally approved the Memorandum of Understanding in its entirety. - 2 - 2. The City Council shall approve this Memorandum of Understanding. 3. This MOU has been reached following good -faith negotiations, by the authorized Management representative of the City Coun- cil and the authorized representative for the Hermosa Beach Police Officers Association. 4. JOB ACTION The Association and its members agree that during the term of this MOU there shall be no strike. In the event of an unauthorized strike, the City agrees that there will be no liability on the part of the Association pro- vided the Association promptly and publicly disavows such unau- thorized action; orders the employees to return to work and at- tempts to bring about a prompt resumption of normal operations; and provided further, that the Association notifies the City in writing, within 48 hours after the commencement of such strike, what measures it has taken to comply with the provisions of this strike. In the event such strike by the Association has not affected resumption of normal work practices, the City shall have the right to take appropriate disciplinary action. 5. NON-DISCRIMINATION The City shall not discriminate against any employee because of race, color, age, creed, national origin, sex, handicap, medical condition, marital status, or union activities in any matter. 6. MANAGEMENT RIGHTS 1. Manage the City. 2. Schedule working hours. 3. Establish, modify or change work schedules or standards. 4. Institute changes in procedures. 5. Direct the work force, including the right to hire, promote, demote, transfer, suspend, discipline or discharge any employee. 6. Determine the location of any new facilities, building, departments, divisions, or subdivisions thereof, and the relocation, sale, leasing or closing of facilities, depart- ments, divisions, or subdivisions thereof. 7. Determine services to be rendered. 8. Determine the layout of buildings and equipment and materials to be used herein. 9. Determine processes, techniques, methods and means of per- forming work. 10. Determine the size, character and use of inventories. 11. Determine the financial policy including accounting procedures. 12. Determine the administrative organization of the system. 13. Determine the selection, promotion, or transfer of employees. - 3 - 14. Determine -the size and characteristics of the work force. 15. Determine the allocation and assignment of work to employees. 16. Determine policy affecting the selection of new employees. 17. Determine the establishment of quality and quantity standards and the judgment of quality and quantity of work required. 18. Determine administration of discipline. 19. Determine control and use of City property, materials and equipment. 20. Schedule work periods and determine the number and duration of work periods. 21. Establish, modify, eliminate or enforce rules and regulations. 22. Place work with outside firms. 23. Determine the kinds and numbers of personnel necessary. 24. Determine the methods and means by which such operations are to be conducted. 25. Require employees, where necessary, to take in-service train- ing courses during working hours. 26. Determine duties to be included in any job classifications. 27. Determine the necessity of overtime and the amount of over- time required. 28. Take any necessary action to carry out the mission of the City in cases of an emergency. The exercise of the foregoing powers, rights authority, duties and responsibilities by the City, the adoption of policies, rules, regulations and practices in furtherance thereof, and the use of judgment and the discretion in connection therewith, shall be limited only by the specific and express terms of this Memo- randum of Understanding, City Personnel Ordinance and Personnel Rules and Regulations, the Public Safety Officers Procedural_ Bill of Rights, and other statutory laws. Except in emergencies, or where the City is required to make changes in its operations because of the requirements of law, whenever the exercise of management's rights shall impact on em- ployees of the bargaining unit, the City agrees to meet and con- fer with representatives of the Association, upon request by the Association, regarding the impact of the exercise of such rights unless the matter of the exercise of such rights is provided for in this Memorandum of Understanding. 7. PROVISIONS OF LAW - INSEPARABILITY It is mutually understood that this MOU is, and shall be, subject to all current and future applicable state, federal and local laws. If any article, part, provision or segment of this MOU is, or shall be, in conflict with or inconsistent with such ap- plicable provisions of federal, state or local law, or is other- wise held to be invalid, or unenforceable by any court of compe- tent jurisdiction by final decree, such article, part or provi- sion thereof shall be superseded by such applicable law and the remainder of this MOU shall in no way be affected thereby. 8. -_FULL UNDERSTANDING, MODIFICATION, WAIVER It is intended that this Agreement sets forth the full and entire understanding of the parties regarding the matters set forth herein, and any other prior to existing understanding or agree- ments by the parties whether formal or informal, regarding any such matters are hereby superseded or terminated in their entirety. Except as specifically provided herein, it is agreed and under- stood that each party hereto voluntarily and unqualifiedly waives its right, and agrees that the other shall not be required to negotiate with respect to any subject or matter covered herein during the term of this agreement. Any agreement, alteration, understanding, variation, waiver, or modification of any of the terms or provisions contained herein shall not be binding upon the parties hereto unless made and exe- cuted in writing by all parties hereto, and if required, approved and implemented by the City Council. The waiver of any breach, term or condition of this Agreement by either party shall not constitute a precedent in the future en- forcement of all its terms and provisions. 9. GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE The Grievance Procedure is attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. 10. WORK SCHEDULE Police Commanders shall have the choice of working a ten (10) hour day, four (4) days per work week; or an eight (8) hour day, five (5) days per work week. The City may cancel this scheduling plan, without cause, at any time during the term of this Memorandum of Understanding by giving the Association three (3) months written notice. Upon such notice, the City shall, at the request of the Association, meet and confer on a new scheduling plan. Absent mutual agreement, the City shall revert to the 5/8 plan in effect prior to the ex- perimental work plan. In the event of an emergency situation, the City may cancel, al- ter or amend the work schedule as necessary immediately. 11. COMPENSATION - METHODS OF COMPENSATION A. Methods of compensation: 1. Compensation shall be determined on an hourly basis. 2. Payments due shall be paid on a bimonthly basis unless other- wise mutually agreed. By mutual consent early payments and other modifications can be made. 3. Base hourly salary shall be considered the rate of pay for a particular classification without consideration of any other form of compensation. B. Salary Advancements Within Base Pay Range: 1. Step Advancement: a. All salary advances shall be based on merit and fitness. All increases shall be recommended by the Department Head and approved by the Personnel Officer/City Manager. In the cases of exceptional merit, and upon the recommenda- tion of the Department Director, an employee may, with the approval of the City Manager, be advanced a step within the salary range at other than one year intervals. Such advancements shall establish a new anniversary date for future advancements. Merit increases shall be effec- tive at the beginning of the next pay period (1st or 16 of month). b. Upon the successful and satisfactory completion of twelve (12) months service, employees shall be advanced one step within their range and yearly thereafter until the maxi- mum within the range achieved. 3. Promotion An employee who is promoted to a position in a class with a high- er salary rate shall be entitled to the lowest step in the higher range which exceeds the present rate of pay with the intent of increasing the base salary rate by at least 5%. C. Compensatory Time Employees may accrue up to 175 hours of compensatory time and may cash out all or part of such accrued time at any time, subject to the budgetary constraints of the department. 12. BASE SALARY Effective March 1, 1991, the base salary range for the clas- sifications in the bargaining unit shall be increased by 4% com- puted on the salary range in effect February 28, 1991. Addition- ally, an increase of 2.5%, computed on the base rate in effect February 28, 1991, shall be added to the range for conversion of Merit Pay (see Article 27). Effective September 1, 1991, the base salary range for the clas- sifications in the bargaining unit shall be increased an addi- tional 4% computed on the salary range in effect February 28, 1991 and added to the range effective March 1, 1991. STEP: A B C D E Effective March 1, 1991 4782 5021 5272 5536 Effective Sept. 1, 1991 4962 5210 5470 5744 13. EXEMPT EMPLOYEES The Classification of Police Commander is designated as exempt under FSLA. 14. INSURANCE COVERAGE A. LIFE City shall provide a life insurance policy for each employee, payable in the amount of $50,000 upon such employee's death. B. MENTAL HEALTH City shall make such a plan available to city employees; the full cost to be paid by the employee. C. VISION City shall make such a plan available to city employees; the full cost to be paid by the employee. D. HEALTH City shall provide for Association members a health insurance plan to include a choice of an annuity plan with $250.00 -de- ductible or an HMO plan; both plans to include maternity care and prescription benefits. Current health, or their equiva- lent, to remain in force during the term of this MOU. City shall meet and consult should there be a change in providers. City agrees to indemnify the employee for co -pay amounts in curred in excess of the level of benefit in effect on Novem- ber 30, 1990 for the HMO and Indemnity medical plans. City to pay employee costs and current dependent rate with any future increased dependent costs to be borne 80% City and 20% employee. E. DENTAL City shall provide for Association members a dental insurance plan to include a choice of an annuity plan or an HMO plan. City to pay employee cost and current dependent rate with any future increased dependent costs to be borne 80% City and 20% employee. 15. DEFERRED COMPENSATION City agrees to make available to all employees in the Unit either of the citywide Deferred Compensation Plans. All participants being then eligible to vote on decisions of the Deferred Compen- sation Committee. 16. SALARY CONTINUATION PLAN Management agrees to contribute for each member of the Unit, the sum of Fourteen and 40/100 dollars ($14.40) per month per person, toward the purchase of a Long Term Disability plan through the Association. Any cost in excess of this shall be borne by the Association. 17. RETIREMENT A. The City shall maintain the 2% @ 50 PERS contract with "One Year Final Compensation" in effect at the time of this contract. B. The City will pay the employee's 9% contribution to the PERS retirement system credited to the employee's portion. C. Retirement Conversion of Accruals: 1. Upon service retirement from the City, an employee may elect to receive the cash value of their monthly accrual for vacation, sick, and holiday comp. included as part of their base monthly salary in lieu of receiving any further accrual during their final twelve (12) months of service. No conver- sion of accruals which were accrued prior to the conversion period shall be allowed. 2. In addition to "1" above, the employee may elect to receive the employee's 9% contribution to PERS credited to base salary. Upon such election, the employee shall commence payment of the 9% PERS contribution from their salary. 3. In order to be eligible for conversion of monthly ac- cruals and the PERS 9% provision, the employee must announce their service retirement twelve (12) months in advance of their retirement date. 4. The value of the converted leave (sick, vacation, holiday comp.) shall be calculated at the employee's regular rate of pay. 5. At no time shall this additional compensation so received act in any way to increase any other premium pays (e.g. as- signment pay, longevity pay, etc.) which are computed as a percentage of base pay, nor shall the cash value of the ac- crual conversation be included in the computation of the value of any accrual cash -outs. 6. All compensation currently calculated for retirement pur- poses shall be included in the final year conversion formula. 7. Should PERS change or otherwise amend the stated policy of not allowing the retrospective application of benefits to salary, the language of Article 21 of the March 1., 1988 MOU shall be reinstated regarding the conversion of all unused sick leave. 8. The intent of this article is to increase the employee's final year compensation for the calculation of service re- tirement benefits under the PERS. 18. LEAVE OF ABSENCE Management agrees to allow all employees covered by this MOU to take a leave of absence without pay, not to exceed 60 days, in conjunction with, or in addition to, their regular vacation time. This leave will only be allowed every other year. Timing and duration of leave is subject to approval of the Public Safety Director and subject to the needs of the department. This pro- vision shall not reduce any leave entitlement an employee may have under the Military and Veterans Code. 19. VACATION Vacation accrual rates shall be as follows: A. For employees initially hired before May 2, 1984. 1. Upon hire, 2. Commencing 3. Commencing 4. Commencing 5. Commencing 6. Commencing B. 1. at the rate of 96 hours/year. with the 7th year, at the rate of 112 hours/year. with the 8th year, at the rate of 136 hours/year. with the 15th year, at the rate of 160 hours/year. with the 16th year, at the rate of 168 hours/year. with the 17th year, at the rate of 176 hours/year. For employees hired after May 1, 1984. At the rate of 96 hours/year commencing with appointment. 2. At the rate of 112 hours/year commencing with the 7th year after (1) above. 5. At the rate of eight additional hours/year commencing with the 11th year after (1) above to a maximum of 20 days/year. 6. At the rate of eight additional hours/year commencing with the 11th year after (1) above to a maximum of 20 days/year. C. Each member of the bargaining unit will be required to use the number of hours accumulated for vacation purposes during each fiscal year. During the fiscal year, if within ninety (90) days following completion of the fiscal year the indi- vidual has not utilized these vacation hours off, they shall then be paid for them. An individual may accumulate and hold - 9 - as unused -vacation hours an amount equal to the total number of hours that can be accrued in an 18 -month period. 20. HOLIDAYS The following holidays shall be considered as paid: New Year's Day; Martin Luther King, Jr's Birthday; Presidents Day; Memorial Day; Independence Day; Labor Day; Veteran's Day; Thanksgiving Day; Day after Thanksgiving; Christmas Day 21. SICK LEAVE Sick leave accrual shall be as follows: 1. For all employees initially hired before May 2, 1984: A. Those employees having less than 176 accrued hours of sick leave shall accrue sick leave at the rate of 6 hours per month until their accrual accumulates to 176 hours at which time their accrual shall be 8 hours per month. B. A once a year cash -in can be up to 100% of the unused sick leave as long as at least 176 accrued hours remains on hand. An employee may accrue a maximum of three hun- dred and fifty hours (350); thereafter any excess shall be cashed out. Employees who have more than 350 hours of sick time on the books as of June 1, 1988 shall be frozen at that accumulation; any sick time in excess of that amount shall be cashed out. 2. For employees hired after May 1, 1984: A. Zero during academy. B. Upon graduation from the Academy or upon hire as a lateral entry, 4 hours per month for the initial 12 months. C. 5 hours per month for the next 12 months. D. 6 hours per month thereafter and subject to all of (1) above. 3. Upon termination from City employment, sick leave will be paid at the current hourly rate, on the following conditions: A. One-quarter pay from 5 to 10 years of continuous service. B. One-half pay from 10 years until termination. 4. In the case of serious illness of a member of the immediate family, the employee may utilize sick leave. Immediate fami- ly for the purpose of this section shall be defined as: father; mother; father-in-law; mother-in-law; brother; sister; spouse; or legal dependent. Employees may predesig- nate and substitute other members for those members defined as "immediate family." The intent of this provision is not to expand the number of persons included in the definition of "immediate family" or to increase paid leave opportunities, but, rather, to recognize variation in family structure (e.g. stepmother for mother). 22. BEREAVEMENT LEAVE Each employee shall receive a maximum of three shifts per calen- dar year to be utilized for bereavement leave because of a death in their immediate family. Immediate family shall be defined as in Article 21 - Sick Leave. Said time will not be cumulative from one twelve month period to another nor will pay in lieu of unused leave for bereavement be provided. The Director may grant one (1) additional shift in the event of an out-of-state death. 23. MANAGEMENT LEAVE Police Commanders shall be allowed 50 hours of additional leave each calendar year in addition to the fixed holidays and bereave- ment leave. Management leave does not accumulate or carry over, it must be used each year. The current practice of earning com- pensatory time (with exception of the regular monthly accrual) shall continue during the term of this Memorandum of Understand- ing. 24. EDUCATIONAL REIMBURSEMENT The City agrees that Police Commanders who desire to enroll in training and academic courses that may provide the employee with general or specific skills and/or knowledge that contributes to their ability to perform their current position or enhances pro- motional opportunities, shall have their course fees (up to CSU rate), books, materials, and tuition (CSU rate) paid by the City, in advance, subject to the approval of the City Manager. The employee will reimburse the City for all expenses if the employee fails or does not complete the courses. 25. UNIFORM ALLOWANCE Said allowance for Police Commanders to be $600 per year, payable through the regular payroll schedule. An absence due to sick leave, injury on duty, or leave of absence without pay, exceeding sixty (60) days shall result in a pro -rata reduction in uniform allowance for the time of the absence. 26. AMMUNITION REPLACEMENT In addition to the quarterly qualification ammunition, each of- ficer will be allowed to utilize fifty (50) rounds of ammunition for their primary duty weapon, at City expense, each month at the firing range used by the Department. The City will also pay for the expense of using the range. The ammunition will be used to practice on an approved course of fire so that officers will be- come more proficient with their service weapons. - The City will not compensate officers for the time spent to uti- lize this ammunition. Officers must use the allotted ammunition each month, it does not accumulate. 27. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AND MERIT PAY A. Effective March 1, 1991, +2.5% of the existing +7.5% merit pay shall be converted to base salary. B. Effective March 1, 1991, merit pay shall be in the amount of 0% to +5% of monthly salary, payable bi-annually, in January and July. C. Police Commanders will be eligible to receive merit pay based upon performance. Participation in the merit pay program shall be voluntary. D. Police Commanders who wish to participate in the program shall meet with the Director of Public Safety in a timely fashion, and in no event later than ten (10) working days prior to the beginning of a merit period, to discuss and agree upon a set of goals and objectives. It is intended that these goals and/or objectives be other than the regular duties and responsibilities of the employee's regular assignment. E. To be eligible for payment of merit pay, the participating Commander must submit a final summary report regarding the accomplishment of the agreed upon goals and/or objectives no later than ten (10) working days prior to the completion of the merit evaluation period. F. A merit pay performance evaluation and personnel action shall be completed and presented to the employee no later than ten (10) working days following receipt of the summary report. In the event that this is not accomplished within the es- tablished time frame, the employee shall be entitled to receive the full 5% merit pay. G. Prior to the implementation of this Article, the Director of Public Safety shall meet with the members of the Police Commanders Bargaining Unit for the purpose of agreeing upon the format for the merit evaluation and the factors to be considered by the Director in the evaluation of goals and/or objectives for the purposes of awarding merit pay. H. This provision is not subject to the grievance process, the discipline process, or any other type of appeal process. However, violation of any of the above procedures is subject to the grievance process. 28. DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS For the purpose of defining disciplinary actions, the following definitions shall be applicable: 1. Disciplinary actions are defined as: a. Dismissal. b. Demotion. c. Suspension. d. Reductions in pay. e. Reprimand (written) 2. Reductions in pay are governed by the "Blue Section" of the Police Manual. 3. Appeals from the disciplinary actions shall only be sub- ject to the "Blue" section of the Police Manual entitled "Rules and Regulations." 4. Prior to the commencement of any internal investigation which is likely to subject the officer to disciplinary action, the officer shall be advised of their rights pur- suant to Section 3300, et. seq., of the California Government Code as amended. All rights contained therein shall be applicable to the disciplinary actions and shall be used as a minimum guideline only. 5. Any reprimand record or other writing containing negative comments (with the exception of Performance Evaluations) included in the employees personnel package is a written reprimand. 6. Inclusionary periods as currently set forth in the Police Department Rules and Regulations shall remain in effect during this M.O.U. The specific changes to Section R18.04 as agreed to during negotiations and attached hereto as Exhibit "C" are hereby incorporated into the Department Rules and Regulations (Blue Section). 7. Any officer receiving time off dispensed as a result of disciplinary action can use either accumulated compensa- tory time or vacation time at their discretion. However, when exceptional circumstances arise and the City feels that it is in the best interest to keep an officer off duty for a limited period of time (not to exceed five (5) working days), the City may exercise this right. 29. LAYOFF Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Section 2-42 as currently enacted, is the governing provision regarding layoff. However, City fur- ther agrees that prior to implementation of any such layoff, dis- cussions shall be held to explore other alternatives, mitigation, etc. It is further agreed that in the event the City should contract with another agency for provision of police services, the As- sociation shall receive six (6) months advance notice prior to the effective date of any such change. 30. NO SMOKING The parties agree that the City shall amend its class specifica- tions for unit positions to provide that employees who become unit employees after March 1, 1988 shall, as a condition of their continued employment, refrain from smoking tobacco or any other non -tobacco substance at any time on or off duty. Violation of this condition of employment shall be deemed good cause for dismissal. 31. ANNUAL PHYSICAL A. Effective March 1, 1991, all employees covered by this agreement shall be provided with a complete physical examination (participation is voluntary) according to the following schedule: 1. Every two (2) years up to and including age 38; 2. Annually at age 39 and thereafter. B. Said physical to be at a location of the City's choice and at the City's expense. C. The physical exam is to include at least the following: Review of medical history, physical examination; Uninalysis; VDRL; X -Rays (Chest PA, Lumbar Spine and Cervical) only if indicated; Blood groupings, CBC, Chem Panel 17; EKG and Treadmill; Lipid Analysis; Pulmonary Function Test; Hearing test; Strength and Flexibility testing. D. The employee shall sign a medical release form authorizing the medical facility to forward results of the physical to the Personnel Director to be eligible for this benefit. 32. FURTHER STUDIES The City and Association, jointly recognize that some matters need further study and negotiation during the term of the MOU. It is therefore agreed that the following items will be addressed: 1. Contracting for participation in the Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act. Said study will be jointly conducted and completed by September 1, 1991. 33. DURATION OF CONTRACT This MOU is effective March 1, 1991 and shall remain in full force and effect for 12 months thereafter, ending February 29, 1992. In witness whereof, the parties hereto have caused their duly authorized representatives to execute this Memorandum of Under- standing this day of , 1991. HERMOSA BEACH POLICE OFFICERS' ASSOCIATION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Anthony J. Altfeld Kevin B. Northcraft Commander City Manager Valentine P. Straser Robert A. Blackwood Commander Personnel Director John J. Mebius Commander Michael J. Lavin Commander Steve Wisniewski Public Safety Director GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES FOR HERMOSA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT ATT, 1. ENT "A" I. Purpose of Grievance Procedures a. To promote improved employee -employer relations by establishing grievance a procedures on matters. b. To provide that grievances shall be heard and settled as informally as possible. c. To enable grievances to be settled promptly and/or as near to the point of origin as possible. II. Definition A grievance is defined as any dispute concerning the interpretation, intent or application of the written Memorandum of Understanding or departmental rules and regulations governing personnel practices or working conditions applicable to 'employees covered by the :•Iemorandum of Understanding. An impasse in meeting and conferring upon the terms of a proposed Memorandum of Understanding is not a grievance. III. Conduct of Grievance Procedure a. An employee may request the assistance of another person of his own choosing in preparing and prese:•:tii his grievance at any level of review, or may be represented by a recognized employee organization,• or may represent himself. T III. b. Tho employee and his representative, if any, may use a reasonable amount of work time, as determined by the appropriate Division Commander, and a Police Association Board Representative, in conferring about and presenting a grievance. c. Any grievance relating to the retroactive status of monetary or fiscal matters shall be limited to the date of filing of the grievance in writing, except in such cases where it would be impossible for the employee to have prior knowledge of an accounting error, or where the error is departmentally or City caused. d. The time limits specified may be extended to -a definite date by mutual agreement of the employee and the reviewer concerned. e. Employees shall be free from reprisal for using the grievance procedure. -2- IV. Hatters Subject to Grievance Procedure Full-time employees having probationary or permanent status may process a personal grievance on one, or more than one, of the following grounds. a. Improper application of rules, regulations and procedures. b. Unfair treatment, including coercion, restraint, or reprisal. c. Reduction in force action - layoffs. d. Promotion procedures implemented unfairly. e. Classification of position. f. Non -selection for training opportunities. g. Discrimination because of race, religion, color creed, or national origin. h. Any matter affecting an employee's work schedule, fringe benefits, holidays, vacation, sick leave, retirement, performance, rating, a change in classification, salary, work assignment, or any other matter affecting wages, hours or working conditions. i. Discharge, demotion, or suspension. j. Individual disputes over the intents or applicitixn: of the provisions of the most recent -officially signed agreement between the City and their recognized employee representatives. Probationary employees may file grievances under all of the above, but not as applied to their performance ratir. or dismissal. V. Grievance Procedure a. Step One - Informal Process An employee must attempt first to resolve a grievance through discussion with his immediate supervisor with- out undue delay on an informal basis. If, after such discussion the employee does not believe the problem has been satisfactorily resolved, he shall have the right and obligation to discuss it with his supervisor': immediate superior, if any, and his department head if necessary. Every effort shall be made to find an acceptable solution by these informal means at the most immediate level of supervision. At no time may the informal process go beyond the department head concerned. In order that this informal procedure may be responsive, all parties involved shall expedite this process. In no case may more than fifteen (15) calenda. days elapse from the date of the alleged incident or action and the resolutions of the grievance or com- pletion of the informal process. Said grievance shall be. considered waived if not so presented to the im- mediate supervisor within fifteen (15) calendar days following the day during which the event upon which the grievance is based occurred. Step Two - Formal Process - Management Supervisor If the grievance is not resolved through the informal process, the employee shall have the right within ten (10) working days from the decision or completion of the informal process to file the grievance in writing on a specified form and present it to his Division Commander. The Division Commander shall discuss the grievance with the employee and shall render a V. Grievance Proccoure decision and comments in writing and return them to the employee within ten (10) working days after receiving the grievance. Failure of the grievant to serve such written notice ten (10) calendar days following the termination of the informal step shall constitute a waiver of the grievance. Step Three - Formal Process - Department Head If the grievance procedure is not resolved at Step 2 and the employee is notified in writing, the employee may, within the next five (5) working days present the grievance in writing to the department head. In the event that no written response is given to the employee within ten (10) working days from the date of submissioi of the written grievance, the grievance will be as- sumed to have been valid and the employer will take steps to correct that problem. Failure of the em- ployee to take appropriate action within the pres- cribed time periods will be deemed to constitute termination of the grievance. Failure of the em- ployer to respond within the time provided will be deemed to be an admission as to the validity of the grievance and will require affirmative action to correct the grievance. The department head shall render his decision and comments in writing within five (5) working days from the date of receipt of . the grievance and return them to the employee within that time. V. Grievance Procedure Step Four - Advisory Arbitration a. If the grievance is not resolved in Step 3 the employee may within five (5) working days, present the grievance in writing to the City Manager or his designate for processing. Failure of the employee to take this action within five (5) working days from the date of receipt of rejection of the grievance in Step 3 will be deemed to constitute a termination of the grievance. b. The scope of the advisory arbitration of grievance shall include all of the grievable matters as set forth in Section 4 of this procedure. An exception would be those matters that by Peoples Ordinance NS 211 must be adjudicated by the Hermosa Beach Civil Service Commis- sion. All other grievances shall bypass Step 4 of the grievance procedure and go to the Step 5 procedures. An employee who chooses advisory arbitration shall be deemed to have made a choice between the Civil Service Board of Review and arbitration and, therefore, may not seek two hearings on the same grievance. c. As soon as possible, and in any event not later than ten (10) work days after either party received written notice from the other of the desire to arbitrate, the parties shall agree upon an arbitrator unless externa. constraints prohibit compliance, whereupon the earliest date available shall apply. V. Grievance Procedure d. Arbitrator shall be selected from a list of seven (7) arbitrators from within two (2) working days. If a mutual agreement cannot be reached at a meeting of the two parties as to selection of an arbitrator, then each party shall strike off a name from the list on an alternating basis until one name remains, which person shall become the arbitrator. The City shall have the first opportunity to strike a name from the list of seven (7) arbitrators. The priorit of striking names shall alternate from one party to the other each time advisory arbitration is invoked by the same parties. • e. Any arbitrator appointed must be familiar with em- ployee/management relations in public employment. f. The arbitrator shall hold such hearings and conduct such proceedings as may be necessary, but such hear- ings and proceedings shall be conducted in an ex- peditious and confidential manner with the involved parties only. Employees called as witnesses shall be released from duty as needed. g. The rules of conduct of proceedings shall be ac- cording to those procedures utilized by the Ar- bitration Service. h. The findings of fact and the recommendations of t. • arbitrator shall be transmitted to the involved parties and the City Administrator. V. Grievance Procedure i. The fees and expenses, including the making of the record of the arbitrator, shall be borne equally by the parties. Calling -of the witnesses by either party shall be done with a reasonable amount of restraint. An excessive use of witnesses will necessitate the cost of loss of work time to be paid by the party calling the witnesses. A decision of the arbitrator may be requested by either party as to whether there may have been an excessive use of witnesses. j. The arbitrator shall have no power to alter, amend, change, add to, or subtract from any of the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding. The decision of the arbitrator shall be based solely upon the evidence and arguments presented to him by the respective parties in the presence of each other. k. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final upon the parties to the dispute unless either party, within 60 days after the final written decision of the arbitrator is personally served upon the party, causes to be filed in a court of competent juri- sdiction a complaint to review all or any part of t proceeding, upon litigation, the entire matter sh 1_ be reviewed and a trial de novo held. • r,- . P9.111 V. • a • C • Step Five - Final Process - City Manager '` : • If . -the grievance"cannot be resolved at Step ••••••. riployee may thereafter submit the matter to the 4Ci�- .r•I �G �C.v •. .'1'. .� `J ••,i .'. ` s�••.11�3C'•• �Irf¢y �1, `.2 -tanager. or his properly • appointed' representative -for the purposesof obtaining his review =and settlement of the grievance. Thereafter the City Manager or. hi:s • designated representative shall, in all non=arbitrabl€ cases, review the matter and render a decision in writing to the parties within fifteen (15) calendar days from the date • of receipt. • ATTAC IE T "8" POLICE COMMANDER DEFINITION Under general direction of the Director of Public Safety,plans and directs the activities of a major division of the Police Department; participates as a member of the police management team in the consideration of departmental problems and issues; and performs related duties as required. REPRESENTATIVE DUTIES Assigns, directs, reviews, supervises, manages, coordinates, and evaluates the work of police personnel in a major division of the department (Patrol, Support Services, Staff Services, or Administration). Duties vary dependent upon departmental division assigned, but may include such duties as: oversees the community crime prevention/education program; manages and directs jail opera- tions; manages and directs the operation of data processing and communications; directs and reviews all work of subordinates; acts as staff liaison to city com- missions and boards; participates as a member of police management team in the formation of departmental policy, procedures, rules and regulations; provides information to the public on police activities and handles citizen complaints; makes recommendation for purchase and/or procurement of department equipment and supplies; conducts administrative investigations as directed by the Director of Public Safety; manages and coordinates all training activities for department personnel; performs a variety of administrative duties including budget prepara- tion, staff reports, grant management and staff reviews; manages and directs the control and custody of evidence and property; directs preparation of criminal cases for presentation to the district attorney for appropriate disposition; manages and directs patrol shifts; manages and directs the work of part-time and volunteer personnel; manages and directs the activities of special units such as traffic enforcement and beach patrol; assists in selection, hiring, development, evaluation, and disciplining of personnel; maintains liaison with community groups and agencies; and provides general administrative assistance to the Director of Public Safety. REQUIREMENTS Completion of two years of college, advanced POST certificate and three years of supervisory experience at the sergeant level or two years supervisory experience at the Lieutenant level, plus four years experience as a police officer in a municipal police department. R18.04 Police Department Vehicles - Accidents. Damage .1 Traffic accidents or damage involving Departmental Vehicles shall be reviewed by the Traffic Accident Review Board in accordance with the policy governing investigation of accidents and damage. The Review Board shall classify the accident or damage and present their findings to the Chief of Police. The Chief of Police shall take immediate action on the findings of the Board. Penalty - Minor Accidents First Offense: Oral Reprimand Second Offense: Written Reprimand Third Offense: One (1) Day Suspension Fourth Offense: Three (3) Days Suspension Inclusionary Period: One (1) Year Penalty - Moderate Accidents First Offense: One(1) Day Suspension Second Offense: Three(3) Days Suspension Third Offense: Five(5) Days Suspension Inclusionary Period: Two (2) Years Penalty - Major Accidents First Offense: Two(2) Days Suspension Second Offense: Five (5) Days Suspension Third Offense: Ten (10) Days Suspension Inclusionary Period: Three (3) Years —r— • ama a MO BEACH DRIVE THE STRAND a OM {��, LOWER LEVEL PARKING PLAN 2, u 1 les r 1 i.jArita, g3 et. kl L_oc,tcr lc, r S. JUN 6 1991 cv r --,C rJ- _ie_• 15TH STREET It t i 15TH PL \4 J f. - 14,TH STREET w CCW 1- 2 F T 12 .it{cX1_., • tr.t_i ci t_T/Lem i 1# -Cf ? = 2i ,or... 7 r- r_i'('., s r/ .F.l� w kr �.�.1'. `_7L. €�.d �... P'" ��C a. " (c.(47 ' ... - . ..i ! : !; pA.w k-�f /L ic...iit ) 3000 ".7 4:07. %,,.> i.' crict:o(,CIF rt BEACH DRIVE': THE STRAND :r a t— to r - i ga--;L-C v.! to RESTAURANT LEVEL PLAN • t7 L.c'I4 ate-. BUILDING SECTION CONCEPTUAL ELEVATION 141'1 copze.,9- Cc)1.. is L: -..