The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02/11/923FED: O.»I- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Tuesday, February 11, 1992, at the hour of 7:/oP.M. CLOSED SESSION - The closed session was held at 7: P.M. regard- ing matters of Personnel and matters of potential litigation: pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b). The closed ses- sion was recessed at 7: P.M. to the regular scheduled public meeting. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - ROLL CALL Present: Benz, Absent: None EMPLOYEE OF THE 01(1)‘..A.4.4 ) ` '4 Edgerton, Essertier, Wiemans, Mayor Midstokke QUARTER: Laurice Duke, Secretary to City Manager/City Council Personnel Director Robert Blackwood presented a plaque to Laurie Duke, Secretary to the City Manager and City Council, to commemo- rate her selection as "Employee of the Quarter". Laurie has been a City employee since 1971, starting in the Building Department, and became the Secretary to the City Manager and Council in 1983. Laurie was honored for her consistently sustained high level of performance, the quality of her work and attendance, and for al- ways being available to meet the needs of staff and the public. ANNOUNCEMENTS - Mayor Midstokke announced PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Coming forward to address the Council at this time were: Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place, Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street, June Williams - 2065 Manhattan Avenue, Dave Reimer - 802 Monterey Blvd., )1-/ 17P/,r �j -/t--1434 ��/e Gj City Council Minutes 02-11-92 Page 1 3 • Jerry Compton - 832 Seventh Street, Shirley Cassell - 611 Monterey Blvd., 5�985� T Qd ) A 1 b ,da�w Z^ H C.:/ ( -- l Parker Herriott - 224/Twenty-fourth Street, v, / /S" ,At )1/574) ��) .� /"/ 2- y,• / q_/ Jim Rosenberger - 1121 Bayview Drive, ,iti.-)Jtvt Jim Lissner - 2715 El Oeste Drive, Tom Morley - 516 Loma Drive, Richard Sullivan - 824 Third Street, Edie Webber - 1210 Gene Dreher - 1222 CONSENT CALENDAR Action: To approve the Consent Calendar recommendations (a) through (h), with the exception of the following items which were removed for discussion in item 3 but are listed in order for clarity: (a) , (b) (c) , (d) , (e)l , (f) , (g) , and (h) Motion ,2 , second IN . So ordered. Eleventh Street, y)Sr'�� Seventh Place, Coming forward to address the Council on items not removed from the consent calendar were: No one came forward to address the Council on items not removed from the consent calendar. (a) Recommendation to approve the following minutes: 1) Special meeting of the City Council held on January 25, 1992; 2) Regular meeting of the City Council held on January 28, 1991. 3) Special meeting of the City Council held on February 1, 1992. City Council Minutes 02-11-92 Page 2 • (c) (d) This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Benz for separate discussion later in the meeting. Action: To approve Motion , second . So ordered. Recommendation to ratify Demands and Warrants Nos. 39762 through 39820 inclusive and Nos. 39822 through 39826 inclusive, noting voided warrants Nos. 39762, 39763, 39786, 39823, 39824, 39825, and 39826. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Benz for separate discussion later in the meeting. /'A) re Action: To 4/2:4( Motion , second . So ordered. Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Edgerton for separate discussion later in the meeting. Action: To receive and file the tentative future agenda items. Motion , second . So ordered. Recommendation to receive and file the January, 1992 investment report. Memorandum from City Treasurer Gary L. Brutsch dated February 4, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Essertier for separate discussion later in the meeting. Action: To receive and file the January, 1992 invest- ment report. Motion , second . So ordered. City Council Minutes 02-11-92 Page 3 • (e) Recommendation to increase rental fees for Clark Build- ing for private parties and receptions. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated January 28, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Benz for separate discussion later in the meeting. Action: To approve the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Commission and staff recommendation to in- crease the fees for renting Clark Building for private parties and receptions to: 1) Fee per hour for private parties $ 30; 2) Cleanup/Damage deposit 250; and, 3) Booking Fee (non refundable) 100; and change the format by changing the title of the non refundable fee from maintenance fee to booking fee, in order to decrease confusion with the refundable cleaning/maintenance fee. Motion , second . The motion carried, noting the dissenting votes of Recommendation to approve the request and o;rtr-aW for the 1992 Women's Pro Volleyball Tournament to be held on the Pier Courts June 13 and 14, 1992. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated January 29, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Mayor Midstokke for separate discussion later in the meeting. id/4 5 Action: To approve the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission and staff recommendation to: 1) "71v a' 2) 4001 approve the request for a professional beach vol- leyball tournament to be held June 13 and 14, 1992, on the Pier Courts; and, authorize the Mayor to sign the contract with the Women's Professional Volleyball Association (WPVA) %�� ` City Council Minutes 02-11-92 Page 4 • (g) (h) to include City fees of $1,570 per day ($3140 to- tal) and a $2,000,000 event liability certificate. Motion , second . The motion carried, noting the dissenting votes of Recommendation to approve request for 30 day extension of temporary appointment for the Acting General Services Director and one General Services Officer. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated February 5, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Benz for separate discussion later in the meeting. Action: To approve the staff recommendation. Motion , second . So ordered. Recommendation regarding ',pilot project" for City Hall PC based Local Area Network Computer System. Memorandum from Interim City Manager Steve Wisniewski dated February 6, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Essertier for separate discussion later in the meeting • o goc ,..46/EA f :47 /- "3" '")) ,/ ki Action: To approve the staff recommendation to: 1) place the "pilot program" on hold pending comple- j� C-6tion of the midyear budget reviews; and, 2) authorize the purchase of peripheral components v 0 / (printers) as necessary, at an estimated cost not to exceed $5,000, to replace faulty equipment or to add equipment in order to facilitate City operations. 2. CONSENT ORDINANCES (a) ORDINANCE NO. 92-1064 - AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT TO ALLOW DAY NURSERIES, PRESCHOOLS, AND City Council Minutes 02-11-92 Page 5 • AFTER SCHOOL CHILD CARE FACILITIES WITH THIRTEEN (13) OR MORE CHILDREN AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE IN THE R-1 ZONE, AND AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 10, OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR GRANTING CONDITION- AL USE PERMITS FOR SUCH FACILITIES AND ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION. For adoption. Action: To a "d`o-pt"'Or-dinancerNo:=4064. Motion /l% , �'�`second-ea!"'The o ion carried noting the dissenting vote of A.)4.42( 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. Items 1(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), and (h) were heard at this time, but are shown in order for clarity. * Public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar are shown under the appropriate item. The following item was pulled from the Consent Calendar of the January 14, 1992 meeting and continued from the January 28, 1992 meeting for discussion when all councilmembers present. (o) Recommendation to approve reactivation of the Housing Improvement Program (HIP). Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 6, 1992. This item had been removed from the consent calendar of the January 14, 1992, meeting by Mayor Midstokke and was subsequently continued. Action: To 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS City Council Minutes 02-11-92 Page 6 (a) Letter from Wilma Burt, 1152 - 7th February 6, 1992, regarding People's 211. Recommendation: to direct staff -7.5) 71) BD )19 ♦ Action: To v ov..a U Motion , second . The motion carried, noting the 70106-)P1- dissenting votes of AI t Street, received Initiative N. S. as appropriate. ( 7 773 .211 PUBLIC HEARIN B ' ��--P .tea^ -� 2 -ac .� -� 5. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO DENY THE REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE TWO LOTS INTO THREE LOTS FOR PROP- ERTY LOCATED AT 206 - 212 PROSPECT AVENUE. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated Februar 3, 1992, with Resol5Y io'r for adoption. Planning Director Schubach presented the staff report and res•onded to Council questions. AiS -may! e public hearing was opened at 8:61 P.M. Coming (ard to address the Counci on this item were: tr( .2) /5/41„,.)6.e_r- "--/01-- b-ot ,66 ,. ,�,�,,:...� may ,� .� = �-✓� � r /2"- /4-'3/7( s*- tzd --v ' Coufrtil Minutes 02-11-92 ice,, .� •4 ( The public hearing was closed at ;Q:57 P.M. 9"'"7 4d / /vim 42.6sfee,. - 01) ( &,/ n /7// ,/r7•2 ,e • jos 9- `moi B Action: To deny the appeal, sustain the Planning com- mission decision, and adopt R2esolution"No: 92-55 1; en- titled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUSTAINING THE PLANNING COM- MISSION DECISION TO DENY VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 23246 FOR THE DIVISION OF TWO EXISTING LOTS INTO THREE LOTS AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PROSPECT AVENUE AND REYNOLDS LANE AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 41 AND 42 AND THE EASTERLY 71 OF LOT 43, HERMOSA HEIGHTS TRACT.” Motion , second . The motion carried, noting the dissenting votes of Action: To grant the appeal, overturn the Plannin Com- mission decision, and adopt Resoluti'on's o 9'2-55/9 , en- titled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO OVERTURN THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEREBY APPROVE VESTING TEN- TATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 23246 FOR THE DIVISION OF TWO EX- ISTING LOTS INTO THREE LOTS AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PROSPECT AVENUE AND REYNOLDS LANE AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 41 AND 42 AND THE EASTERLY 71 OF LOT 43, HERMOSA HEIGHTS TRACT.11 Motion &•; second &I. The motion carried,-net4ng e HEARING 6. APPROVAL OF STRAND BIKEWAY AND PEDESTRIAN PATH PLANS, INCLUDING THE REPAIR OF STRAND BIKEWAY ON THE WEST SIDE OF HERMOSA AVENUE BETWEEN 24TH STREET AND THE NORTH CITY LIMIT; A NEW ALIGNMENT AT 35TH STREET;, WIDENING OF 24TH STREET BETWEEN THE STRAND AND HERMOSA AVENUE; AND AN ASPHALT OVERLAY OF THE BIKEWAY BETWEEN 24TH STREET AND 35TH STREET. (Continued from January 28,'1992 meeting.) Memorandum from Interim Public Works Director William Glickman dated February 6, 1992. Interim Public Works Director Glickman presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. The hearing opened at 9 :* P.M. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: e /✓ �r , 044.1-.400„eAo. 47/5 ge City Council Minutes 02-11-92 Page 8 ;- Z kir c "» y . 1 .Y ., III ikAA-i ,c- e.---;-2---3 ,-,--, '-'3 N-- /4 -.-Pd AP1' fr, )4—A2'), fr?'-i-- er- -'..'r)-7Pittz-a64' -,7-i9--?-•-•,-2-0' ,/.c7.,-,,,,,-,0, ....0-2„/--A-441-6-1--6 , ,,,, d" c -4-4-#2.---r& 4 ( )___. 66,_, _, rT The hearing was closed at /d:TJ6 P.M. t&i-÷-•• JAILAA), f7a-5-ex, )-0( . 4.— — '4 —� y �� (,, - 7 L-4,9_ ;k". Action: To( direct staff to revise the plans and specifications to include Ct9 aMUNI ",427 /47/// ;et Action: To approve the staff recommendation to return the item back to the Planning Commission for further and to return the plans and specifications for approval for the regular meeting of Motion , second . The motion carried, dissenting votes of /� 4i F.�C % /Y to Council noting the ,) d",.2. 0 )) CIPAL MATTERS F „e7 7. VEHICLE PARKING ON UNIMPROVED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY IN- CLUDING PEDESTRIAN WALK STREETS. Memorandum from Inter- im Public Works Director William Glickman dated February 5, 1992. Interim Public Works Director Glickman presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. 4e/9 >7 l„)--tv City Council Minutes 02-11-92 Page 9 ,1 i �` &,/ study of each individual streets within the City: Total # Parcels 206 325 328 197 vehicular 1) Prospect 2) Monterey 3) Manhattan 4) Beach Drive as the issue of area, consisting of four main #Parcels with Illegal Parking 25 43 18 37 parking may be different streets or areas. Motion , second . The motion dissenting votes of .aryit) — Action: To &(/ /4-1' ecil # Spaces of Illegal use 32; 54; 21; 130; different on carried, noting the �, ter' y`� ✓` �) a --7 8. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER Interim City Manager Wisniewski reported 9. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL (a) Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated February 5, 1992, regarding 1) the joint workshop meet- ing between the City Council, Planning Commission and School Board; and 2) the joint meeting of the City Coun- cil, Planning Commission and Chamber of Commerce. Planning Director Schubach presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Action: To approve the date of March 26, 1992 for a special joint workshop meeting with the Hermosa Beach City Council Minutes 02-11-92 Page 10 /9frav7t, p7iff,x- _ 10. Requests from Councilmembers for possible future agenda items: (a) 9 2'19 School Board and the Planning Commission, with the agen- da to include: 1) use of the Greenbelt as garden or nature study area; 2) traffic circulation adjacent to schools; 3) South School site; Motion second . The motion' carried, noting the dissenting otes of Action: To approve the date of May 14, 1992 for the special joint workshop meeting with the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce and the Planning Commission, with the agenda to include: 1) downtown parking; 2) ventilation of the City Council Chambers (for exam- ple, consideration of windows); Motion ,\ second dissenting tes of the motioncarried, noting the OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL Request by Councilmember Edgerton to have staff provide 14/, a short history of subdivision of Biltmore site and re- cent lot merger actions city-wide. (Continued from 1,.� January 28, 1992 meeting.) Action: To v ✓ (b) Request by Councilmember Edgerton to direct staff to prepare an agenda item regarding business license fees and tax penalties. (Continued from January 28, 1992 m1ing. ) �y ' ad - a. /27//i z/ ,n City Council Minutes Minutes 02-11-92 Page 11 Action: To CITIZEN COMMENTS Coming forward to address the Council at this time were:,/� dx-i----A-1-76,------e-a '''"P die:P 1;!P ---- -g!').C-P'. 616..cv .----1......-L ,9,4'14"'L' AL) Lae4-41-...L.) 9-7/ n ...--0-' .a4'.-- --A'P-- 4,r- 5)et's--1 z°--a-::.*--/I;*'''''---erli --?`'.--- ----# ()--4 )4d3-e---/-37-L-o----7s•t----c-14 oet----/-(6 94---------) — -sv----'d--ei ...2,--e g-- %.,.. ADJOURNMENT - The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, adjourned on Wednesday, February 12, 1992, at the hour of //:500M. to the Regular Meeting to be held on Tuesday, February 25, 1992 at the hour of 7:30 P.M. Deputy City Clerk City Council Minutes 02-11-92 Page 12 ACTION SHEET ACTION SHEET REGULAR MEETING HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, February 11, 1992 - Council Chambers, City Hall Closed Session - 7.00 p.m. Regular Session - 7:30 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED BY GENE DREHER ROLL CALL: ALL PRESENT EMPLOYEE OF THE QUARTER: Laurice Duke, Secretary to City Manager/City Council ANNOUNCEMENTS: Mayor announced that Parks, Recreation & Communi- ty Resources Commission will hold a special meeting Wednesday, February 19, 1992 at 7:30 p.m. in Room 12 at the Community Center regarding South School site. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PARKER HERRIOTT - SPOKE ABOUT HIS PETITION ON BILTMORE SITE. SAYS HE HAS 1500 SIGNATURES. TERRY WARD - 1719 CARVER LANE, R.B. - REDONDO BEACH COUNCILMAN FOR DISTRICT 4, READ LETTER INTO RECORD RE. AVIATION & P.C.H. HAZARDOUS CONDITION OF MOVING TWO LANES OF TRAFFIC INTO ONE TO PROVIDE THE LEFT TURN POCKET ON AVIATION. MAYOR REFERRED THIS LETTER AND OTHERS RECEIVED FOR REVIEW OF TRAFFIC COMM. SHIRLEY CASSELL - QUESTIONED WARRANT FOR D.A.R.E. FOR T-SHIRTS. ALSO QUESTIONED WARRANT FOR MEMBERSHIP INTO KIWANIS FOR MIKE SCHUBACH. DAVE REIMER - RE. GUEST PARKING PERMITS COST. SAYS H.B. HAS MOST EXPENSIVE PREFERENTIAL PARKING IN ENTIRE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. SUSAN MACFARLANE - READ LETTER SUBMITTED FOR ITEM #7 RE. BEACH DRIVE PARKING. JOHN MACFARLANE - SAME ISSUE, SUBMITTED LETTER WITH COUNT OF HOW MANY VEHICLES INVOLVED BASED ON HIS OWN SURVEY. JOHN RYAN - SUBMITTED LETTER RE. HIRING OF P.W. DIRECTOR, WOULD LIKE TO HAVE WRITTEN ANSWER. GENE DREHER - LAST COUNCIL MEETING. COMPLAINED ABOUT DECISION NOT TO HAVE A POLICE COMMISSION, AND ALSO BENZ DISCUSSION OF P.W. DIRECTOR BEING SUPPRESSED. TOM FOWLER - THINKS INADVISABLE TO HIRE CONSULTANTS. SAID PEOPLE ELECT CITY COUNCIL TO DO THE JOB. SHEILA MILLER - RE. PARKING ON UNIMPROVED R -O -W. IS CITY ALSO GOING TO MAKE PEOPLE REMOVE THEIR TABLES, CHAIRS, BARBEQUES, ETC. FROM CITY PROPERTY IN THERE FRONT YARDS. JIM LISSNER - WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE PARKS & REC. COMMISSION MEET- INGS TELEVISED, AS THEY DEAL WITH MANY IMPORTANT THINGS CITIZENS ARE INTERESTED IN. 1. CONSENT CALENDAR: (a) Recommendation to approve the following minutes: 1) Special meeting of the City Council held on January 25, 1992; 2) Regular meeting of the City Council held on January 28, 1991. 3) Special meeting of the City Council held on February 1, 1992. (b) Recommendation to ratify Demands and Warrants Nos. through inclusive. PULLED BY RB - QUESTIONED $5,000 FOR D.A.R.E. PROGRAM. C.M. SAID IT WAS GRANT MONEY AND WAS USED TO BUY D.A.R.E. T-SHIRTS FOR REDONDO, HERMOSA, MANHATTAN STUDENTS WHO COMPLETE THE PROGRAM. QUESTIONED FLASH MONEY. WOULD LIKE TO SEE WRITTEN ACCOUNTING. MOTION RB/SE TO RATIFY DEMANDS AND WARRANTS. SO ORDERED. (c) Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. (d) Recommendation to receive and file the January, 1992 investment report. Memorandum from City Treasurer Gary L. Brutsch dated February 4, 1992. (e) (f) Recommendation to increase rental fees for Clark Build- ing for private parties and receptions. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated January 28, 1992. Recommendation to approve the request and contract for the 1992 Women's Pro Volleyball Tournament to be held on the Pier Courts June 13 and 14, 1992. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated January 29, 1992. PULLED BY AW - FEELS WE HAVE TOO MANY TOURNAMENTS. MAYBE COUNCIL SHOULD REACH AGREEMENT ON HOW MANY EVENTS CAN BE HELD EACH YEAR. MOTION AW/KM TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. SHIRLEY CASSELL - SPOKE AGAINST IT. SHEILA MILLER - SPOKE AGAINST IT. WILMA BURT - SPOKE AGAINST IT. VOTE ON MOTION: OK 5-0. (g) (h) Recommendation to approve request for 30 day extension of temporary appointment for the Acting General Services Director and one General Services Officer. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated February 5, 1992. Recommendation regarding "pilot project" for City Hall PC based Local Area Network Computer System. Memorandum from Interim City Manager Steve Wisniewski dated February 6, 1992. PULLED BY RB - MOTION RB/SE - NOT AUTHORIZE PURCHASE OF COMPONENTS UNLESS WE SEE WHAT EQUIPMENT IS BEFORE IT IS DONE. FAILS 2-3.(RE/KM/AW) MOTION KM/AW TO APPROVE SECOND STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO AUTHORIZE PURCHASE OF PRINTERS AS NECESSARY TO REPLACE FAULTY EQUIPMENT OR ADD EQUIPMENT TO FACILITATE CITY OPERATION. OK 3-2 (RB/RE) MOTION KM/AW TO APPROVE REMAINDER OF CONSENT CALENDAR. SO ORDERED. 2. CONSENT ORDINANCES. (a) ORDINANCE NO. 92-1064 - AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT TO ALLOW DAY NURSERIES, PRESCHOOLS, AND AFTER SCHOOL CHILD CARE FACILITIES WITH THIRTEEN (13) OR MORE CHILDREN AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE IN THE R-1 ZONE, AND AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 10, OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR GRANTING CONDITION- AL USE PERMITS FOR SUCH FACILITIES AND ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION. For adoption. MOTION KM/RE TO ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 92-1064. OK 3-2 (AW/SE-NO) 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. The following item was pulled from the Consent Calendar of the January 14, 1992 meeting and continued from the January 28, 1992 meeting for discussion when all councilmembers present. (o) Recommendation to approve reactivation of the Housing Improvement Program (HIP). Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 6, 1992. (Pulled by Mayor Midstokke). MOTION RB/SE TO RECEIVE AND FILE. OK 4-1 (RE -NO). 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS. (a) Letter from Wilma Burt, 1152 - 7th Street, received February 6, 1992, regarding People's Initiative N. S. 211. Recommendation: to direct staff as appropriate. MOTION SE/AW - STAFF PREPARE A REPORT ON HOW WE ARE HANDLING MAN- AGEMENT AND NON -MANAGEMENT HIRING. IS N.S. 211 BEING FOLLOWED, COUNCIL TO REVIEW PROCEDURES AT NEXT MEETING AND WILL SET POLICY. ALSO INCLUDE RECOMMENDATION OF CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION. OK 3-2 (KM/RE-NO). MOTION RB/SE - THAT ALL POSITIONS NOT ASSIGNED BE PUT ON HOLD UNTIL ALL N.S. 211 RULES AND REGULATIONS HAVE BEEN FOLLOWED. FAILS 4-1 (RB). MOTION SE/RB - PUT ON HOLD ALL FUTURE HIRES UNTIL WE DETERMINE THE POLICY. FAILS 2-3 (KM/RE/AW). MOTION RB/SE - GET A WRITTEN LEGAL OPINION RE. ORAL INTERVIEWS VS. WRITTEN EXAMINATIONS (I.E., THAT EXAMINATIONS MEANS WRITTEN UNDER N.S. 211) AND IF WE HIRE OR HAVE HIRED PEOPLE WITHOUT WRIT- TEN EXAMINATION, ARE WE LIABLE. FAILS (KM/RE/AW-NO). MOTION KM/AW - TO CLOSE DISCUSSION ON THIS ITEM. OBJECT RB. PUBLIC HEARINGS - TO COMMENCE AT 8:00 P.M. 5. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO DENY THE REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE TWO LOTS INTO THREE LOTS FOR PROP- ERTY LOCATED AT 206 - 212 PROSPECT AVENUE. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated February 3, 1992. MOTION RE/SE - TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 92-5519 APPROVING THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION AND OVERTURNING P.C. DECISION. VOTE: OK 5-0. HEARING 6. APPROVAL OF STRAND BIKEWAY AND PEDESTRIAN PATH PLANS, INCLUDING THE REPAIR OF STRAND BIKEWAY ON THE WEST SIDE OF HERMOSA AVENUE BETWEEN 24TH STREET AND THE NORTH CITY LIMIT; A NEW ALIGNMENT AT 35TH STREET; WIDENING OF 24TH STREET BETWEEN THE STRAND AND HERMOSA AVENUE; AND AN ASPHALT OVERLAY OF THE BIKEWAY BETWEEN 24TH STREET AND 35TH STREET. (Continued from January 28, 1992 meeting.) Memorandum from Interim Public Works Director William Glickman dated February 6, 1992. JIM LISSNER - ASKED IF THERE HAD BEEN A SURVEY RE. "NO SITTING ON THE WALL". JERRY COMPTON --TALKED ABOUT DESIGN OF STRAND WALL, POSSIBLY HAVING INDENTATIONS FOR TRASH BARRELS AND LIGHT POLES AND THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME PLACE COMFORTABLE TO SIT. JOHN RYAN - SPOKE TO ASKING FOR GRANT EXTENSION. JOE DIMONDA - CONCURS WITH COMPTON. JAMES SPENSER - 142 MONTEREY - HEAVY EQUIPMENT CONTRACTOR. LEAVES TOO MUCH FOR IMAGINATION, TOO MUCH ELASTICITY IN THE PLANS, NOT SPECIFIC ENOUGH, DIMENSIONS NONEXISTENT, NO LINEAL - 4 - FOOTAGE, NOT READY TO BID. WOULD TAKE PLANS WITH HIM AND BRING BACK A LIST OF THINGS THAT NEED TO BE DETAILED. (WM. GLICKMAN GAVE HIM A SET TO TAKE.) JUNE WILLIAMS - SAID SHE THINKS P.W. STAFF IS VERY GOOD, AND LAUGHING AT STAFF IS RUDE. GENE DREHER AND DANA SHAW MADE DEROGATORY REMARKS. DAVE REIMER - REGARDING PRIVATE FENCES ON STRAND PROPERTY - THE PEOPLE WHO OWN THE FENCES SHOULD HAVE TO PAY TO REBUILD THEM PROPERLY - NOT THE CITY. MOTION KM/SE - TO APPROVE OPTION NO. 2 TO GO BEFORE LACTC AND REQUEST A TIME EXTENSION FOR THE GRANT. PLANS NOT ADEQUATE. SO ORDERED. RE - IMPRESSIONS OF THIS DRAWING; DO WE WANT TO CONTINUE THE STRAND; WHAT KIND OF LOAD IS PLANNED; DO WE LIKE THE PLAN WITH INDENTATIONS. KM WANTS TO HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS. MOTION RB/SE TO SEND TO PLANNING COMMISSION TO MAKE A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO REDESIGNATE BIKE PATH SO WHOLE STRAND NORTH OF 24TH ST. BE PART OF PATH. VOTE: OK 3-2 (KM/AW-NO) IF RESO. OF INTENT REQUIRED, WILL BRING BACK ON CONSENT CALENDAR NEXT MTG. MUNICIPAL MATTERS 7. VEHICLE PARKING ON UNIMPROVED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY IN- CLUDING PEDESTRIAN WALK STREETS. Memorandum from Inter- im Public Works Director William Glickman dated February 5, 1992. MOTION KM/RE TO DIRECT STAFF TO START PROCEDURE TO VACATE CERTAIN AREAS. FIRST AREA WOULD BE PROSPECT AVENUE. OK 3-2 (AW/SE-NO). MOTION RE/TO ENFORCE ALL THE PARKING LAWS IN HERMOSA BEACH. SECOND AW. FAILS (SE/RB/KM-NO) MOTION SE/RE TO HAVE C.M. PREPARE A REPORT ON OUR CURRENT PARKING POLICY. 8. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER 9. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL (a) Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated February 5, 1992, regarding 1) the joint workshop meet- ing between the City Council, Planning Commission and School Board; and 2) the joint meeting of the City Coun- cil, Planning Commission and Chamber of Commerce. KM - SAID TO HOLD THE CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION/SCHOOL BOARD MEETING ON MARCH 26 AND ALSO INVITE THE PARKS & REC. COM- MISSION TO ATTEND AS THEY HAVE AN INTEREST IN THE SUBJECTS SUG- GESTED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. KM - ALSO HOLD COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION/CHAMBER MEETING MAY 14 WITH CHAMBER TO LET CITY KNOW WHAT SUBJECTS THEY WANT TO DISCUSS IN TIME FOR THE NOTICING. 10. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL Requests from Councilmembers for possible future agenda items: Recommended Action: 1) Vote by Council whether to discuss the item; 2) refer to staff for a report back on a future agenda; or 3) resolution of matter by Council action tonight. (a) Request by Councilmember Edgerton to have staff provide a short history of subdivision of Biltmore site and re- cent lot merger actions city-wide. (Continued from January 28, 1992 meeting.) MOTION SE/KM TO DISCUSS. NO OBJECTIONS. MOTION SE/KM TO HAVE REPORT ON CONSISTENCY OF LOT SIZES TO IN- CLUDE HISTORY OF SUBDIVISION OF SITE, ETC. NEXT TIME BILTMORE SITE COMES TO COUNCIL, AS WELL AS A BACKGROUND ON LOT MERGER AC- TIONS BY CITY. OK 5-0 (b) Request by Councilmember Edgerton to direct staff to prepare an agenda item regarding business license fees and tax penalties. (Continued from January 28, 1992 meeting.) MOTION SE/RE TO DISCUSS. OK 5-0. SE THINKS PENALTY FEES TOO HIGH. MOTION SE/KM TO DIRECT STAFF TO BRING ORDINANCE BACK FOR AMEND- MENT AND SUSPEND ENFORCEMENT WHILE COUNCIL REVIEWING. SO ORDERED. 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. SHIRLEY CASSELL - SUGGESTED SELLING BACK CITY PROPERTY TO PRIVATE OWNERS. ALSO COMPLAINED ABOUT BANNERS ON HERMOSA HOTEL. JUNE WILLIAMS - SPOKE ABOUT PRIVILEGE OF HAVING PARKING PERMITS. GENE DREHER - DAVE REIMER - RE. PARKIHNG PERMITS. SHOULD BE LOWER. JERRY COMPTON - CONCERNED ABOUT VACATIONS OF STREETS. WONDERS ABOUT NEED TO HAVE PLANNING INVOLVED AS WELL AS PUBLIC WORKS. JIM LISSNER - SPOKE ABOUT VACATION OF RIGHT OF WAYS AND TAX AS- SESSMENT INCREASES. ADJOURNMENT AT 11:55 P.M. 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 (Wednesday) 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. 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. L71 -L')"- 20 `%-f �'�-o� # q-� —766-5 "The reward for work well done is the opportunity to do more." -Jonas Salk, M.D. AGENDA REGULAR MEETING HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, February 11, 1992 - Council Chambers, City Hall MAYOR Kathleen Midstokke MAYOR PRO TEM Robert Essertier COUNCILMEMBERS Robert Benz Sam Y. Edgerton Albert Wiemans Closed Session - 7.00 p.m. Regular Session - 7:30 p.m. CITY CLERK Elaine Doerfling CITY TREASURER Gary L. Brutsch INTERIM CITY MANAGER Steve Wisniewski 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, the Office of the City Clerk, and the Cham- ber of Commerce. During the meeting a packet also is available in the Council foyer. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: EMPLOYEE OF THE QUARTER: Laurice Duke, Secretary to City Manager/City Council 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 1 (a) shown by a member prior to the roll call vote. * Couricilmember requests to remove items from the Consent Calendar. (Items removed will be considered under Agenda Item 3.) * Public comments on the Consent Calendar. Recommendation to approve the following minutes: 1) Special meeting of the City Council held on January 25, 1992; 2) Regular meeting of the City Council held on January 28, 1991. 3) Special meeting of the City Council held on February 1, 1992. (b) Recommendation to ratify Demands and Warrants Nos. through inclusive. (c) Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. (d) Recommendation to receive and file the January, 1992 investment report. Memorandum from City Treasurer Gary L. Brutsch dated February 4, 1992. (e) (f) (g) (h) Recommendation to increase rental fees for Clark Build- ing for private parties and receptions. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated January 28, 1992. Recommendation to approve the request and contract for the 1992 Women's Pro Volleyball Tournament to be held on the Pier Courts June 13 and 14, 1992. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated January 29, 1992. Recommendation to approve request for 30 day extension of temporary appointment for the Acting General Services Director and one General Services Officer. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated February 5, 1992. Recommendation regarding "pilot project" for City Hall PC based Local Area Network Computer System. Memorandum from Interim City Manager Steve Wisniewski dated February 6, 1992. 2. CONSENT ORDINANCES. (a) ORDINANCE NO. 92-1064 - AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT TO ALLOW DAY NURSERIES, PRESCHOOLS, AND AFTER SCHOOL CHILD CARE FACILITIES WITH THIRTEEN (13) OR MORE CHILDREN AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE IN THE R-1 ZONE, AND AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 10, OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR GRANTING CONDITION- AL USE PERMITS FOR SUCH FACILITIES AND ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION. For adoption. - 2 - 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. The following item was pulled from the Consent Calendar of the January 14, 1992 meeting and continued from the January 28, 1992 meeting for discussion when all councilmembers present. (o) Recommendation to approve reactivation of the Housing Improvement Program (HIP). Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 6, 1992. (Pulled by Mayor Midstokke). 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS. (a) Letter from Wilma Burt, 1152 - 7th Street, received February 6, 1992, regarding People's Initiative N. S. 211. Recommendation: to direct staff as appropriate. PUBLIC HEARINGS - TO COMMENCE AT 8:00 P.M. 5. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO DENY THE REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE TWO LOTS INTO THREE LOTS FOR PROP- ERTY LOCATED AT 206 - 212 PROSPECT AVENUE. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated February 3, 1992. HEARING 6. APPROVAL OF STRAND BIKEWAY AND PEDESTRIAN PATH PLANS, INCLUDING THE REPAIR OF STRAND BIKEWAY ON THE WEST SIDE OF HERMOSA AVENUE BETWEEN 24TH STREET AND THE NORTH CITY LIMIT; A NEW ALIGNMENT AT 35TH STREET; WIDENING OF 24TH STREET BETWEEN THE STRAND AND HERMOSA AVENUE; AND AN ASPHALT OVERLAY OF THE BIKEWAY BETWEEN 24TH STREET AND 35TH STREET. (Continued from January 28, 1992 meeting.) Memorandum from Interim Public Works Director William Glickman dated February 6, 1992. MUNICIPAL MATTERS 7. VEHICLE PARKING ON UNIMPROVED STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY IN- CLUDING PEDESTRIAN WALK STREETS. Memorandum from Inter- im Public Works Director William Glickman dated February 5, 1992. 8. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER 9. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL (a) Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated February 5, 1992, regarding 1) the joint workshop meet- ing between the City Council, Planning Commission and School Board; and 2) the joint meeting of the City Coun- cil, Planning Commission and Chamber of Commerce. 10. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL - 3 - Requests from Councilmembers for possible future agenda items: Recommended Action: 1) Vote by Council whether to discuss the item; 2) refer to staff for a report back on a future agenda; or 3) resolution of matter by Council action tonight. (a) (b) Request by Councilmember Edgerton to have staff provide a short history of subdivision of Biltmore site and re- cent lot merger actions city-wide. (Continued from January 28, 1992 meeting.) Request by Councilmember Edgerton to direct staff to prepare an agenda item regarding business license fees and tax penalties. (Continued from January 28, 1992 meeting.) 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. ADJOURNMENT COUNCILMEMBER TERRY WARD DISTRICT 4 o L .1y>,I4� COQ Rmismvo /m1 February 11, 1992 Mayor and City Council City of Hermosa Beach 415 DIAMOND STREET POST OFFICE BOX 270 REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90277-0270 Honorable Mayor and Council Members: TELEPHONE (213) 372-1171 It's an horior and a pleasure to address you this evening. I wish to discuss a concern for the citizens of both your city and mine. I represent Redondo Beach, District 4. Specifically the District just east of Hermosa Beach. Aviation Boulevard is the major arterial through Hermosa Beach to North Redondo. Three or four years ago you and/or your predecessors greatly improved a very hazardous condition on Aviation Boulevard where it meets Pacific Coast Highway. By re -stripping the east bound access you created two lanes. One for southbound traffic turning east and one for northbound traffic turning east. Each had it's own lane. Now you have re -stripped again. Reverting back to two lanes merging into one. This hazard is compounded by a left turn pocket diverting cars into unrestricted oncoming traffic. I am usually in favor of anything that will improve business. Helping the shopping center at the expense of citizen safety does not equate. I am seldom in favor of creating bureaucracy, but if there was ever an argument for an Environmental Impact Report, this is it. The residents of North Redondo ask you to please reconsider your actions at this intersection, not as meddling, but as friendly concerned neighbors. Respectfully, Terry Ward Mayor and City Councilmembers ' ACHY Et1<& y �,� TO: Ma FROM: John Ryan 61 FEB 111992 © 3; /`. city clerk --i DATE: February 11, 1992 \ ,Z 2;\:)\/Ncity o1 Hermosa Beach SUBJECT: Hiring of Public Works Director and Related Mattes .\--4 Following are questions which I had concerning the referenced subject and to which I would like a response in writing. I will address question nos. () in the initial "Public Participation" and request that the remainder of answers be supplied in writing by the City. Questions Concerning Procedure for Hiring Public Works Director 1. Is there a Position Classification Plan in force, and if so, where can it be located? 2. Is there a Compensation Plan for the position of Public Works Director in force, and if so, where can it be located? 3. Is there an "Eligible List" certified by the Civil Service Board listing persons qualified for the position of Public Works Director, and if so, when was it created and when was it last amended, and where is it located? 4. Were official bulletins distributed announcing the position of Public Works Director as available and giving the date of the examination? Where were these bulletins distributed and when? 5. Were there any advertisements for applicants to the position? 6. Were examinations given? When? How many successful candidates? 7. Is there a procedures list concerning conduct of the examination? Is it available in the City Manager's Office? 8. What is a passing grade on the examination? 9. Were any protests to the examination or its grading filed by persons taking the examination? 10. What was the ranking of Mr. Malone on the Eligible List? 11. In a report of the Easy Reader on 1-23-92 there is stated: "Wisniewski said his decision to hire Las Vegas civil engineer Carl Malone for the public works post was based on a September city -council directive, and on consultations with Mayor Kathy Midstokke and Councilman Albert Wiemans." Is the report true, and if so, why did Wisniewski deem it unnecessary to consult the remaining councilmembers, or indeed, the council as a body? 12. In the same article of the Easy Reader, Mayor Midstokke was quoted as stating: - "The previous council voted months ago not to hold the position open, but to fill it according to regular civil service procedures," and the Mayor is reported to say that she wanted service procedures followed" in filling the post. Have "normal" or "regular civil service procedures" in the hiring of the Public Works Director? Was Mr. as a permanent or a temporary employee? 13. In the same article of the Easy Reader, Mayor Midstokke was reported as stating that: "she preferred that Wisniewski hire the new public works director because it would impede any effort at empire building by the new city manager." Did the Mayor make the statement, and if so, what did she mean by it? Is she concerned that the new City Manager will be "empire building" in this city? 14. In the same article of the Easy Reader, it is reported that Mayor Midstokke said that: "normal civil been followed Malone hired "Benz called Wisniewski last week and said he had a friend he wanted Wisniewski to interview for the public works position. Wisniewski said he told Benz that the application period had been closed for over a month." Did the Mayor so state to the newspaper?. Did Councilmember Benz make the attributed statement to Wisniewski? What procedure was used to closed the application period and what was the date of closure? How was this an example of Benz "not. 'following procedures"? 15. Has the Council and City Attorney read the letter of Tom Fowler printed in the Beach Reporter on January 9? The letter attacked the procedure for selecting the City Manager. Does anyone wish to make a response to that letter? Respectfully submitted, Ryan Easy Reader/Redondo Beach News, January 23, 1992 Public works director hired despite objections from new councilmen by Kevin Cody Despite requests that he not do so from two newly elected city council members, acting Hermosa Beach City Manger Steve Wisniewski selected a new public works director last week, Councilman Sam Edgerton, who was elected in November, said he went "ballistic" when he learned of Wisniewski's action Saturday afternoon. Edgerton said he and Councilman Robert Benz, who was also elected in November, had asked Wisniewski to leave the selection of a new public works director up to the new city manager. The council is expected to select a new city manager next month. Wisniewski said his decision to hire Las Vegas civil engineer Carl Malone for the public works post was based on a September city council directive, and on consultations with Mayor Kathy Midstokke and Councilman Albert Wiemans. The newer city council members appear to think that the staff is trying to circumvent them. That's far from the truth. We're just trying to do what the council directs us to do. If it changes direction we have no problem with that," Wisniewski said Wednesday. Mayor Kathy Midstokke defended Wisniewski's action. "The previous council voted months ago not to hold the position open, but to fill it according to regular civil service procedures," Midstokke said Monday. The dispute over who should select the new public works di- rector began last month with a memo to the council from Benz. In the memo Benz wrote, "I think it prudent that the director of public works not be appointed until the new city manger is hired." Benz said that during a closed council session two weeks ago he reiterated his position to Wisniewski. Edgerton said he also asked Wisniewski that evening not to hire a new public works director. Wisniewski said he was aware of Benz's position, but that he did not realize that Edgerton shared that position, "The subject was discussed briefly during the Jan. 14 closed session. But no council action was taken on the matter," Wisniewski said. Benz said that on the day following the closed session Wisniewski promised to poll the other council members on the subject. Wisniewski subsequently sent each council person a memo stat- ing, "Barring any unforeseen difficulty, or new direction from council, I will be making a decision next Wednesday or Thursday. Edgerton and Benz said they understood the memo to mean, that Wisniewski would wait until the council met and discussed the subject before acting on the matter. Midstokke said she understood the memo to mean that Wisniewski would proceed unless a majority of the council contacted him on the subject individually. Edgerton said he wanted the new city manger to hire the new public works director so that the city manager could be held re- sponsible for the public works director's performance. Midstokke said she preferred that Wisniewski hire the new public works director because it would impede any effort at empire building by the new city manager. And more importantly, she said, she wanted "normal civil service procedures followed" in filling the post. "Both Benz and Edgerton have a tendency not to follow proce- dures," Midstokke said. As an example she cited the fact that Benz called Wisniewski last week and said he had a friend he wanted Wisniewski to interview for the public works position Wisniewski said lie told Benz that the application period had been closed for over a month. Midstokke also cited Edgerton's proposal that the council view 12 city manager applicants, rather than just the six recom- mended by the city's consultant. "On Saturday, after our consultant had arranged for us to HB City Manager .< 9 interview the top six applicants for city manager, Edgerton said he wanted to interview another six So next week we're going to inter- view six more candidates. We don't even have background checks on them," Midstokke said. Edgerton said Monday that he was favorably impressed with the six candidates selected by consultant Ed Krines. But after re- viewing all of the applicants' resumes he had found another half dozen applicants whom he also wanted to interview. His motion to interview the second group was supported by Benz and Councilman Bob Essertier. Malone, the public works director selected by Wisniewski, has tentatively accepted the $60,000 a -year position. Malone owns an engineering and construction company in Las Vegas. ER The City of Hermosa Beach should not hire a consultant to screen applications for the position of City Manager. Councilman Benz has been on track with his criticisms of abuses in purchasing procedures by the City. He offers a new and welcome voice in opposition to the neglect or corruption of the City, and only time will tell whether his exposes will be effective. Hermosa Beach, a general law city, is limited by statute and ordinance in its right to hire a private consultant as it did. A brief review of the Hermosa Code reveals the nature of the limitations. All services contracted are to be by bid procedure, except in emergencies. HB Code, Section 2-55. The bid procedure is not required in purchasing professional services (Section 2-62(b)); however, California Government Code Section 53060 regulates the purchase of these services, referred to as "special services". Cases applying GC Section 53060 require a findingthat the services are "special" and not available from public agencies. The right to contract without bidding procedure according to this section is not available where the services are to be performed, otherwise, by a designated public official, board or council. In other words, the "special service" must require such unique and special skills necessary to the selection of a City Manager, services which cannot be rendered by the members of the City Council. HB Code requires that the "City Manager shall be appointed by the city council wholly on the basis of his administrative and executive ability and qualifications and shall hold office for and during the pleasure of the city council." Section 2-7. The Code requires the City Council to appoint the City Manager and that the CM serve at the pleasure of the Council. Surely, the members of the Council must have the skill to hire and fire the CM. Councilmember Benz believes he can exercise the necessary skill. Why do Mayor Midstokke and City Attorney Vose oppose Benz? HB used a consultant to screen applications and then the Council hired Kevin Northcraft, who it is said they fired, although Northcraft "resigned" first. HB was shown to be disregarding its Code with respect to bidding procedures. The consultant services are not necessary. HB again fails to comply with its ordinances, and to waste the public's moneys. Tom Fowler Hermosa Beach •r January 27, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 11, 1992 PRESENTATION OF OUTSTANDING EMPLOYEE AWARD The City of Hermosa Beach Employee Performance Award honors City Employees who have displayed either sustained performance above expected levels or have performed a one-time action which exceeds expectations. Nominations for the award may be made by citizens, City Council Members, department heads and other employees. From the nomina- tions, the Management Team selects the award recipient(s). For the second quarter of Fiscal Year 91-92 (Oct/Nov/Dec) the Management Team, after consideration selected the following em- ployee for recognition: Laurice ""Laurie"" Duke, Secretary to the City Manager Laurie has been with the City since April 1971. Laurie started her career with the City in the Building Department as Steno - Clerk and quickly advanced (just short of two years) to Secretary/Central Records Supervisor and then on to Administra- tive Assistant and Zoning/Records Supervisor. In 1983 Laurie became the Secretary to the City Manager. Lauri has continually demonstrated her value to the City Manager and also as Secretary to the City Council. Additionally, Laurie is always available to meet the needs of the public. Her dedication is apparent in her quality of work and certainly in her attendance. Laurie is being honored here for her consistently sustained high level of performance. In 1988 Laurie was presented with a Resolution of Commendation by the Council for her dedication and extreme loyalty and now it is our pleasure to present Laurie with a plaque to commemorate her selection as Employee of the Quarter. Respectfully Submitted: Robert A. Blackwood Personnel Director pers/emp Concur: Steve S. Wisniewski Interim City Manager MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Saturday, January 25, 1992, at the hour of 8:30 A.M. ROLL CALL Present: Benz, Edgerton, Wiemans, Essertier, Mayor Midstokke Absent: None CLOSED SESSION - The purpose of the Special Meeting was to retire to closed session at 8:32 A.M. to interview additional applicants for the position of City Manager. The session recessed at 12:12 P.M. for lunch. The session reconvened at 1:35 P.M. The closed session was recessed at 5:17 P.M. to the Special Meeting. ADJOURNMENT - The Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, adjourned on Saturday, January 25, 1992, at the hour of 5:18 P.M. to the Regular Meeting to be held on Tuesday, January 28, 1992, at the hour of 7:30 P.M. d41_,Crig,C1L, Deputy City Clerk a City Council Minutes 01-25-92 Page 7679 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Tuesday, January 28, 1992, at the hour of 7:40 P.M. CLOSED SESSION - The closed session was held at 7:16 P.M. regard- ing matters of litigation: Juran vs City of Hermosa Beach; pur- suant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a). The closed session was recessed at 7:33 P.M. to the regular scheduled public meeting. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Jordan Kushins, Hermosa Valley School, Student of the Month ROLL CALL Present: Benz, Edgerton, Essertier, Mayor Midstokke Absent: Wiemans HERMOSA VALLEY SCHOOL STUDENT OF THE MONTH - Jordan Kushins Mayor Midstokke congratulated Jordan Kushins for being recognized as the Hermosa Valley School, "Student of the Month", for the month of January, 1992, and wished her success in her future endeavors. ANNOUNCEMENTS - Mayor Midstokke announced: 1) the Spring Recreation brochures had been mailed to all Hermosa Beach residences, and that Monday, February 11, 1992, was priority class registration for Hermosa Beach residents; 2) Wednesday, January 29, 1992, is a fund raiser for the R/ UDAT program to be held at the Lighthouse Cafe from 5:00 to 9:00 P.M. at $10.00 per person; and, 3) Councilmember Wiemans had requested that item 3(o) be continued to the next meeting. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Coming forward to address the Council at this time were: Parker Herriott - 224 Twenty-fourth Street, reported on the progress of the new initiative petition he is circulating for a 100% open space park on the Biltmore site, said he has 1,200 signatures and wants to get 600 more; Eleanor Lynn - 2432 Park Avenue, concerned about the West Basin District_ Resolution passed at the meeting of January 14, 1992, as it would entail a tax of $30.00 per parcel on the prop- erty tax bills for recycling drainage water for parkland and industry use; would like the Coun- cil to send a representative to the meetings; Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street, opposed to the proposed water fees; and, 1 a (z) City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7680 Gene Dreher - 1222 Seventh Place, thanked William Glickman and the Public Works staff for street repair on Seventh -Place. 1. CONSENT CALENDAR Action: To approve the Consent Calendar recommendations (a) through (1), with the exception of the following items which were removed for discussion in item 3 but are listed in order for clarity: (a) Benz, (b) Benz, (e) Essertier, (g) Mayor Midstokke, (h) Mayor Midstokke, (k) Mayor Midstokke, and (1) Mayor Midstokke. Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Essertier. So ordered. No one came forward to address the Council on items not removed from the consent calendar. (a) (b) Recommendation to approve the following minutes: 1) Regular meeting of the City Council held on January 14, 1992, with a supplemental letter from Howard Longacre, 1221 Seventh Place, dated January 28, 1992; and 2) Special meeting of the City Council held on January 18, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Benz for separate discussion later in the meeting. Action: To approve the minutes of January 14, 1992, as amended by Benz on page 7664, Item 1(g), third para- graph, to read, "....the projects had been inspected and approved by the City's full time Public Works inspector, and he stated that the work was satisfactorily complet- ed."; and, as amended by Howard Longacre on page 7675, second paragraph, to read, "....which could cost the City $20,000 (deleting) to remove the debris;"; to ap- prove the minutes of January 18, 1992 as presented. Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Benz. So ordered. Recommendation to ratify Demands and Warrants Nos. 39643 through 39760 inclusive, noting voided war- rants Nos. 39648, 39649, 39650, 39702, 39703, 39704, and 39730; and to cancel certain warrants as recommended by the City Treasurer. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Benz for separate discussion later in the meeting due to questions on certain warrants. Interim City Manager Wisniewski responded to Council questions regarding warrant #39646 and will bring back information on HP terminal maintenance. City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7681 Action: To ratify the demands and warrants as presented. Motion Benz, second Mayor Midstokke. So ordered. (c) Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. (d) (e) Action: To receive and file the tentative future agenda as presented. Recommendation to receive and file the December, 1991 financial reports: 1) Revenue and expenditure report; 2) City Treasurer's report. Action: To receive and file the December, 1991, finan- cial reports as presented. Recommendation to adopt proposed Resolution relative to the Annual Statement of Investment Policy for the City of Hermosa Beach. Memorandum from City Treasurer Gary Brutsch dated January 16, 1992. Supplemental memorandum and amended Resolution from City Treasurer Gary Brutsch dated January 28, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Essertier for separate discussion later in the meeting. City Treasurer Brutsch explained the changes from last year, contained in the amendment included in the Resolu- tion, and responded to Council questions. Coming forward to address the Council on this item was: June Williams - 2065 Manhattan Avenue, felt the amendment to the policy made it a good policy statement, but expressed concern because her understanding was that Merrill Lynch carried only $2,000,000 insurance for fraud or theft per account and suggested that the City not exceed that amount with an individual account, or have something in writing to insure the $5,500,00 now invested with a broker in San Diego. (f) Action: To adopt Resolution No. 92-5517, entitled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT AND FILING OF THE AN- NUAL STATEMENT OF INVESTMENT POLICY FOR THE YEAR 1992." Motion Essertier, second Edgerton. So ordered. Recommendation to receive and file 2nd Quarterly Report of Capital Improvement Program FY 1991-1992. Memorandum from Interim Public Works Director William Glickman dat- ed January 13, 1992. City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7682 Action: To receive and file the Second Quarterly report of Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 1991-1992 showing 27 projects totaling $5,776,343 in budgeted expenditures. Recommendation to accept cash deposit in lieu of exist- ing lien on property at 514 24th Street, and approve the Release of Lien Agreement for subject property. Memo- randum from Interim Public Works Director William Glick- man dated January 14, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Mayor Midstokke for separate discussion later in the meeting. Interim Public Works Director Glickman and City Attorney Vose responded to Council questions. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to: 1) accept the cash deposit provided to the City in lieu of the existing lien on the property at 514 24th Street; 2) approve the Release of Lien Agreement for the sub- ject property; 3) authorize the Mayor to sign the Release of Lien Agreement; and, 4) authorize the Release of Lien Agreement to be re- corded with the County Recorder. With the understanding that staff will look into whether or not these items have to come before the Council for approval or can be handled ministerially. Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Essertier. So ordered Recommendation to accept cash deposit in lieu of exist- ing lien on property at 636 24th Place, and approve the Release of Lien Agreement for subject property. Memo- randum from Interim Public Works Director William Glick- man dated January 21, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Mayor Midstokke for separate discussion later in the meeting. Interim Public Works Director Glickman and City Attorney Vose responded to Council questions. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to: 1) accept the cash deposit provided to the City in lieu of the existing lien on the property at 636 24th Place; 2) approve the Release of Lien Agreement for the sub- ject property; 3) authorize the Mayor to sign the Release of Lien Agreement; and, 4) authorize the Release of Lien Agreement to be re- corded with the County Recorder. With the understanding that staff will look into whether City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7683 or not these items have to come before the Council for approval or can be handled ministerially. Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Essertier. So ordered Items 1(g) and (h) were handled together, but are shown separate- ly for clarity. (i) (7) (k) Recommendation to create reserve account for potential retirement contributions, and application for refund, relating to Assembly Bill 702. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated January 22, 1992. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to: 1) create a reserve account for funds potentially owed to the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS) for the employer portion of retirement costs, pend- ing resolution of the lawsuit over AB 702; and, 2) apply for a refund of amounts paid to PERS this fiscal year for the employers portion of PERS, with the refund received to be deposited to the reserve account. Recommendation to approve funding for Traffic Control Pre-emption (Opticom) on Pacific Coast Highway from State Gas Tax Fund, approve plans and specifications, and to call for bids, CIP 86-176. Memorandum from Interim Public Works Director William Glickman dated January 13, 1992. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to: 1) approve additional funding for Traffic Control Pre- emption on Pacific Coast Highway from the State Gas Tax Fund in the amount of $35,000; 2) approve funding for the project from the Grant Fund in the amount of $35,000 (to allow emergency vehi- cles to control the traffic signals); 3) Approve plans and specifications for CIP 86-176, Traffic Control Pre-emption, and authorize staff to call for bids on this project; and, 4) authorize staff to issue addenda as necessary. Recommendation that City Council receive and file the staff report on the upgrade of the City Council Chambers video system. Memorandum from Community Resources Di- rector Mary Rooney dated January 21, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Mayor Midstokke for separate discussion later in the meeting, as she felt it was a high priority item to improve the City's video capabilities and Council Chamber lighting. Action: To hold the item over to the mid -year budget review to determine if there is the money to provide the upgrade of the City Council video system at a projected City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7684 (1) cost of $26,000. Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Essertier. So ordered. Recommendation to authorize Mayor to sign an amended agreement with the Hermosa Beach School District for the allocation of $11,500 from the City to the District for landscape maintenance services that would remove the requirement that the contractor be "state certified." Memorandum from Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated January 22, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Mayor Midstokke for separate discussion later in the meeting. Coming forward to address the Council on this item was: Cathy McCurdy - Hermosa Beach School Board Member, to respond to Council questions by stating that the gardener was insured through the School District and had a City Business license. Action: To approve the staff recommendation based on the City Attorney's opinion that the City is not exposed to any liability and to change the language on page six by deleting Section H. Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Edgerton. So ordered, noting the objection of Essertier. 2. CONSENT ORDINANCES - None 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. Items 1(a), (b), (e), (g), (h), (k), and (1) were heard at this time, but are shown in order for clarity. Of the above items, 1(e) was heard first. * Public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar are shown under the appropriate item. At 8:21 P.M. the order of the agenda was suspended in order that the public hearings, starting with item No. 5, could be heard. The following items were pulled from the Consent Calendar of the January 14, 1992 meeting: (f) Recommendation to authorize call for bids for removal of hazardous waste from storage shed located at Clark Field. Memorandum from Interim Public Works Director William Glickman dated November 25, 1991. This item had been removed from the consent calendar of the January 14, 1992, meeting by Councilmember Essertier and was subsequently continued. City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7685 Interim Public Works Director Glickman presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Inter- im City Manager Wisniewski responded to Council questions. Action: To send back to staff to determine which items are truly hazardous and which can be used by the City in the manner intended at the time of purchase, and direct staff to bring back another proposal. Motion Benz, second Essertier. The motion carried, noting the dissenting vote of Edgerton. Recommendation to approve reactivation of the Housing Improvement Program (HIP). Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 6, 1992. This item had been removed from the consent calendar of the January 14, 1992, meeting by Mayor Midstokke and was subsequently continued. Action: To continue this item to the meeting of February 11, 1992, in order to allow Councilmember Wie- mans to be present when it is discussed. Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Benz. So ordered. Recommendation to reject proposal for budgeted purchase of parking enforcement vehicles. Memorandum from Acting General Services Director Henry L. Staten dated December 5, 1991, with supplemental memorandum dated January 15, 1992. This item had been removed from the consent calendar of the January 14, 1992, meeting by Councilmember Benz and was subsequently continued. Acting General Services Director Staten presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Risk Manager Robert Blackwood addressed the Council on OSHA complaints and employee lost time injuries due to .the vehicle fumes. Proposed Action: To put the item on hold and not go out to rebid. Motion Benz, second Essertier. The motion failed due to the dissenting votes of Edgerton, Essertier, and Mayor Midstokke. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to: 1) reject the proposal from Frankson's for the pur- chase of four (4) or more "cushman" type parking enforcement vehicles at a cost of $57,956; and, 2) direct staff to consider alternative type vehicles for use by Parking Enforcement and rebid the purchase. City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7686 Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Essertier. The motion carried, noting the dissenting vote of Benz. Recommendation to authorize staff to close the driveway entrance to the Greenbelt Parking Lot at Valley Drive and llth Street and to post signs at the entrance to the lot north of llth Place restricting parking by prohibit- ing certain vehicles. Memorandum from Interim Public Works Director William Glickman dated January 8, 1992; with supplemental memorandum dated January 22, 1992. This item had been removed from the consent calendar of the January 14, 1992, meeting by Councilmember Essertier and was subsequently continued. Interim Public Works Director Glickman presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to close the driveway entrance to the Greenbelt Parking Lot at Valley Drive and 11th Street and to post signs at the entrance to the lot north of llth Place stating, "Re- stricted Parking, No Parking At Any Time 'Tow -Away_' Tractors, Trailers, Trucks In Excess of 2 Tons, Boats and Boat Trailers. H.B.M.C., Section 19-80.", and to approve the staff supplemental recommendations to: 1) (deleted); 2) add to the parking restrictions, "No Parking, 2:00 AM to 6:00 AM, ALL VEHICLES", as considered at the joint City Council/Planning Commission meeting held on December 12, 1991; and, 3) consider the permanent closure of the southerly driveway by construction of a concrete curb along Valley Drive rather than the use of telephone poles and/or railroad ties as previously recommended, because this entrance will probably not be needed in the future. Motion Essertier, second Mayor Midstokke. The motion carried unanimously. Recommendation to adopt resolution for plan checking and inspection fees for public improvements, and to approve the fees to be applied against funds on deposit and presently held by the City. Memorandum from Interim Public Works Director William Glickman dated December 19, 1991. This item had been removed from the consent calendar of the January 14, 1992 meeting by Councilmember Essertier and was subsequently continued. Interim Public Works Director Glickman presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7687 (u) Action:_ To receive and file the item. Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Benz. The motion car- ried, noting the dissenting vote of Edgerton. Recommendation to approve the purchase of sixty-one "tamper -proof" Duncan meters, at a cost not to exceed $10,000, to replace a portion of the POM meters current- ly in use. Memorandum from Acting General Services Di- rector Henry L. Staten dated December 12, 1992. This item had been removed from the consent calendar of the January 14, 1992 meeting by Councilmember Benz for separate discussion later in the meeting and was subse- quently continued. Acting General Services Director Staten presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Coming forward to address the Council on this item was: Jim Lissner - 2715 El Oeste Drive, suggested that one of the Councilmembers with engineering ex- perience might be able to devise a way of al- tering the present meters so they would be "tamper proof". Action: To deny the staff recommendation. Motion Benz, second Mayor Midstokke. The motion car- ried, noting the dissenting vote of Essertier 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS (a) Letter from Paul Hennessey, owner of Lighthouse Cafe, dated January 3, 1992, with supplemental letter received January 13, 1992, regarding installation of second door at rear of the Lighthouse. Recommendation: To continue the requirement for double doors at rear. (This item continued from January 14, 1992.) Action: To approve the staff recommendation t the requirement for double doors at the rear business. Motion Edgerton, second Essertier. The motion noting the dissenting vote of Benz. o impose of the PUBLIC HEARINGS carried, 5. APPEAL OF DENIAL BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY AND ZONE CHANGE FROM C-2 TO R-2 AT 64 TENTH STREET. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 21, 1992. Supplemental letters from Stephen P. Shoemaker, Jr., 123 International Boardwalk, Redondo Beach, dated January 26, 1992, and, Imogene James, 60 10th Street, dated January 25, 1992. City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7688 Planning Director Schubach presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. The public hearing was opened at 8:29 P.M. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: Kevin Healy - 64 Tenth Street, appellant, stated that the use of the property had always been residential, but, as it was zoned commercial, it is non -conforming and can not be remodeled or improved without a variance, therefore creating a hardship; also, there was no objec- tion from the neighboring property owners; Joseph Di Monda - 610 Ninth Street, Planning Commission, reported that the Planning Commis- sion had denied the request due to considering it spot zoning. The public hearing was closed at 8:52 P.M. Action: To adopt Resolution No. 92-5518, entitled, ',A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO SUSTAIN THE DECISION OF THE PLAN- NING COMMISSION TO DENY A REQUEST FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FROM GENERAL COMMERCIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND A ZONE CHANGE FROM C-2, RESTRICTED COM- MERCIAL TO R-2, TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, FOR THE PARCEL AT 64 10TH STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS THE NORTHERLY 57 FEET OF LOT 16, BLOCK 10, HERMOSA BEACH TRACT." Motion Benz, second Edgerton. The motion carried unanimously. 6. PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT TO ALLOW DAY CARE FACILITIES FOR 13 OR MORE CHILDREN AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE IN THE R-1 ZONE AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION, WITH ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION. Memoran- dum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 16, 1992. Planning Director Schubach presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. The public hearing was opened at 9:06 P.M. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: Bill Beck - OK Corral applicant, spoke in favor of the text amendment and the need for child care centers; Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street, spoke in opposition to the text amendment; Jeff Brooks - owner of property at Longfellow and Pacific Coast Highway, spoke in favor of the text amendment; Jim McDonald - Manhattan Beach, spoke in favor of the text amendment and the importance of child care facilities to young parents; Francis Parker - 521 1/2 Loma Drive, spoke in favor City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7689 _ of the text amendment and mentioned state re- quirements regarding square footage per child; Edie Webber - 1210 Eleventh Street, questioned if each applicant would be required to get a C.U.P.; Eric Simmon - Manhattan Beach, spoke in favor of the text amendment and mentioned that the state required 35 square feet per child; Leo Woods - 731 Longfellow avenue, opposed to the text amendment, submitted photographs of park- ing problems on Longfellow, and spoke of con- gestion when the site had been used for child care in the past; Connie Prout - Manhattan Beach, spoke in favor of the text amendment; Tom Greenwood - 736 Longfellow Avenue, spoke in opposition of the text amendment, citing traf- fic congestion and noise to residents; Ray Coran -- Redondo Beach, spoke in favor of the text amendment; Julie Beck - OK Corral applicant, spoke in favor of the text amendment; and, Rosemary Moser - Redondo Beach, spoke in favor of the text amendment. The public hearing was closed at 9:51 P.M. Action: To approve the Planning Commission and staff recommendation to introduce Ordinance No. 92-1064. Motion Benz, second Mayor Midstokke. The motion car- ried, noting the dissenting vote of Edgerton and the absence of Wiemans. Final Action: To waive further reading of Ordinance No. 92-1064, entitled, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT TO ALLOW DAY NURSERIES, PRE- SCHOOLS, AND AFTER SCHOOL CHILD CARE FACILITIES WITH THIRTEEN (13) OR MORE CHILDREN AS A CONDITIONALLY PER- MITTED USE IN THE R-1 ZONE, AND AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 10, OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR SUCH FACILITIES AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION." Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Essertier. AYES: Benz, Essertier, Mayor Midstokke. NOES: Edgerton ABSENT: Wiemans At this time it was explained that any negative vote would cause the Ordinance to be read aloud in its entirety. The vote was retaken. AYES: Benz, Edgerton, Essertier, Mayor Midstokke NOES: None City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7690 ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Wiemans The meeting recessed at 10:02 P.M. The meting reconvened at 10:20 P.M. HEARINGS 7. APPROVAL OF STRAND BIKEWAY AND PEDESTRIAN PATH PLANS/ SPECIFICATIONS AND APPROVAL TO GO TO BID. Memorandum from Interim Public Works Director William Glickman dat- ed January 21, 1992. Supplemental letter from Donna English, 2240 Strand, dated January 27, 1992. Interim Public Works Director Glickman presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: Joseph Di Monda - 610 Ninth Street, Planning Commission, concerned with color selection, cold joints, and design; James Bell - 3500 Strand, requested more public input; no name given - questioned if anti -graffiti material could be used; John Ryan - 229 Longfellow Avenue, concerned about a total design concept; Gene Dreher - 1222 Seventh Place, concerned about lighting and esthetics; Jim Lissner - 2715 El Oeste Drive, concerned with thin bicycle tires catching in the saw cuts and questioned if the cuts could be placed on a diagonal; Patricia Spears - 60 Eleventh Street, stated this was an opportunity to change the look of Hermo- sa; questioned if the Strand wall was neces- sary; questioned if the concrete from the old wall could be recycled; Jamie Lampkin - Strand, requested the bike path go to 35th Street, or place a barricade to slow bicycle traffic on Hermosa Avenue; and, Jerry Compton - 1200 Artesia Boulevard, questioned if the Strand wall could be lower and wider to allow people to sit on it, e.g. 24" high and 12" wide; questioned what would happen to the private walls on the east side of the Strand, as some of them were built on top of the Strand slab. Action: To continue this item to the meeting of February 11, 1992, for further review and to allow staff to contact the funding source to determine the exact time requirements for spending the grant and to see if an extension could be arranged if needed. City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7691 Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Benz. The motion carried unanimously. The meeting recessed at 12:08 A.M. The meeting reconvened at 12:17 A.M. and resumed the normal order of the agenda at item No. 3. MUNICIPAL MATTERS 8. RECOMMENDATION TO POSTPONE AN ADDITIONAL SIS MONTHS THE CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF A PARKING PLAN AT 415 PIER AVENUE, PER REQUEST OF LAWRENCE M. DAVID, M.D. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 22, 1992. Proposed Action: To receive and file. Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Edgerton. The motion was changed at the direction of the maker. Action: To approve the staff alternative recommendation to officially sustain the Planning Commission's decision to deny the request. Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Edgerton. The motion carried unanimously. 9. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER - None 10. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL (a) Setting of date for joint meeting of City Council, Cham- ber of Commerce and Planning Commission. Memorandum from Interim City Manager Steve Wisniewski dated January 9, 1992. (Continued from January 14, 1992 meeting.) Proposed Action: To set a date in March, 1992 for the joint meeting. Motion Edgerton. The motion died due to the lack of a second. Action: To set a joint meeting with the City Council, the Planning Commission, and the Chamber of Commerce for the second or third Thursday in May, 1992. (May 14 or 21, 1992.) Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Essertier. So ordered. 11. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL Requests from Councilmembers for possible future agenda items. Proposed Action: To continue items 11(a) through 11(g) to the meeting of February 11, 1992. Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Essertier. The motion failed due to the objections of Benz and Edgerton. City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7692 (a) Request by Councilmember Edgerton for review of the es- tablishment of a police commission as suggested by prior Council to assist in the budget cutting process. Action: To discuss item 11(a). Motion Benz, second Edgerton. So ordered. Proposed Action: To form a committee of one appointee of each Councilmember, one from the Police Officers As- sociation, one from the Public Safety Director, and one staff member. Motion Edgerton, second Benz. The motion failed due to the dissenting votes of Essertier and Mayor Midstokke. (b) Request by Councilmember Edgerton for discussion of a review of Boccato's conditional use permit. Action: To continue to the meeting of February 11, 1992, at the request of Edgerton. (c) Request by Councilmember Benz for discussion of his mem- os to Council dated December 29, 1991 and January 7, 1992. Interim City Manager Wisniewski responded to Council questions. Proposed Action: To discuss item 11(c). Motion Benz, second Edgerton. The motion failed due to the dissenting votes of Essertier and Mayor Midstokke. Proposed Action: To bring the meeting back.to order. Motion Essertier. The motion was not recognized. Proposed Action: To discuss item 11(c). Motion Benz, second Edgerton. No vote taken. Coming forward to address the Council on this item was: Jim Lissner - 2715 El Oeste Drive, requested a point of order from the floor, to state that it has been Council policy to have a majority vote before discussion of Councilmember requests. Councilmember Essertier left the Council Chambers at 1:40 A.M. Motion to adjourn was made by Mayor Midstokke, seconded by Benz. City Attorney Vose responded that the Public Comment section must be heard. (d) Request by Councilmember Edgerton for staff review and research whether the trailer park owners intend to apply for a zone change and propose safeguard measures for tenants as necessary if and when zone change is requested. City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7693 (e) (f) (g) No action taken. Request by Councilmember Edgerton to have staff provide a short history of subdivision of Biltmore site and re- cent lot merger actions city-wide. No action taken. Request by Councilmember Edgerton for review and discus- sion of prior City Council directive of 9/24/91 consent calendar Item 1(h) to receive and file staff recommenda- tion to recruit Public Works Director. No action taken. Request by Councilmember Edgerton to direct staff to prepare an agenda item regarding business license fees and tax penalties. No action taken. CITIZEN COMMENTS Coming forward to address the Council at this time were: Martin Moreno - 1326 Corona Street, requested a reconsideration by the Council on spending public money for a traffic study for the Park Pacific shopping center; and, Dave Reimer - 802 Monterey Blvd., expressed concern regarding the cost of parking permits in Hermo- sa Beach as opposed to the cost in other Cit- ies; questioned if this was actual cost borne by Hermosa. ADJOURNMENT - The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, adjourned on Wednesday, January 29, 1992, at the hour of 1:55 A.M. to the Special Meeting to be held on Saturday, February 1, 1992 at the hour of 8:30 A.M. for the purpose of conducting City Manager applicant interviews. Deputy City Clerk City Council Minutes 01-28-92 Page 7694 MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Saturday, February 01, 1992, at the hour of 8:31 A.M. ROLL CALL Present: Benz, Edgerton, Wiemans, Essertier, Mayor Midstokke Absent: None CLOSED SESSION - The purpose of the Special Meeting was to retire to closed session at 8:32 A.M. to interview applicants for the position of City Manager, and matters of litigation: Vujicich vs City of Hermosa Beach; pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a). The closed session was recessed at 2:37 P.M. to the Special Meeting. ADJOURNMENT - The Special Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, adjourned on Saturday, February 01, 1992, at the hour of 2:38 P.M. to the Regular Meeting to be held on Tuesday, February 11, 1992, at the hour of 7:30 P.M. Ca,0-74/11Gt- 71a1-612CS Deputy City Clerk a (3) City Council Minutes 02-01-92 Page 7695 I FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 13:56:32 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R BANC ONE LEASING 99 LEASE PAYMENT/FEB 92 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 01/30/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 02154 001-40.0-4205-6900 00104 $417.96 01/16/92 EQUIP SERVICE /LEASE PAYMENTS *** VENDOR TOTAL#**********#*******##*##***#***#*##**#**#*****##*##*#*****#**#*##*#* R BATTERY SPECIALTIES PORTABLE RADIO BATTERIES 04084 e *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** 03420 001-400-2101-4307 00308 01/09/92 POLICE INV/REF AMOUNT $417.46 $1,039.20 /RADIO MAINTENANCE BSI CONSULTANTS, INC. OVERTIME CHGS/SEWER INSP 0092B R BSI CONSULTANTS, INC. _ FINAL PMT/SEWER INSP 0092A 00630 305-400-8406-4201 00088 11/20/91 CIP 88-406 00630 _305-400-8406-4201' 00089 11/20/91 - CIP 88-406 $1,039.20 PAGE DATE 0001 01/30/92 PO # CHK # UNENC DATE EXP 00030 39764 $0.00 01/30/92 204084 03184 $1,039.20 $6,162.35 800928 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $1,102.44 80092A /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R CALIF. POLICE CHIEFS ASSOC. 01263 001-400-2101-4315 ANNUAL DUES/ALTFELD 07893 01/23/92 POLICE $7,264.79 00207 $65.00 /MEMBERSHIP 13 39765 01/30/92 03663 39766 $0.00 01/30/92 r 03664 39766 $0.00 01/30/92 M007893 04109 $0. 00 39767 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $65.00 R CENTINELA SO. BAY VISA _ ___ _ 03353 001-400-1203-4201 00863__ $115.05 03074 39768 DEC/JAN EXP/BLACKWOOD 01/23/92 PERSONNEL /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL*********************************#****#*#***#*#*#######*#*#*#*#*#*## R CERTIFIED OFFICE EQUIPMENT MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 4713 00389 01/02/92 $115.05 110-400-3302-4305 00876 _ $36.71 PARKING ENF /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES n** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $36.71 R CHAMPION CHEVROLET MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 R _ CHAMPION CHEVROLET MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 00014 001-400-2101-4311 01331 01/30/92 , POLICE 00014 01/30/92- $338.70 1/30/92 $338.70 /AUTO MAINTENANCE 001-400-4204-4311 00214 _ $24.58 BLDG MAINT /AUTO MAINTENANCE 4713 00112 $0. 00 39769 01/30/92 00113 39770 $0.00 01/30/92 00113 39770 $0. 00 01/30/92 1b 127 :4 cr i v U J t 0 I ql I.I FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 13:56:32 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 01/30/92 PAGE 0002 DATE 01/30/92 PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # I' DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION _ AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP *** VENDOR TOTAL **** ter***************************************at*******************at* $363.28 R CHARLIE CHAN, INC. 03634 001-400-4601-4302 00179 $2,897.05 21848 03572 39771 SPRING FLYER/COMM RES 21848 01/09/92 COMM RESOURCES /ADVERTISING $2,897.05 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $2,897.05 f f R COLICH L: SONS 02294 305-202-0000-2020 00033 $67,71.8.22 11131 02595 39772 RETENTION/FY 90-91 11131 01/30/92 /ACCOUNTS PAYABLE $0.00 01/30/92 R COLICH & SONS 02294 305-400-8406-4201 00087 $70,285.23 11.131 02294 39772 FINAL RETENTION/FY 91-92 11131 01/30/92 CIP 88-406 -/CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $138,003.45 COLLIN CREEK TRAVEL 04475 0.0.1-4.0.0-2101-4316 0.0.831 $112. 10 AIRFARE ADV/D. LOUGHIN TR395 01/30/92 POLICE /TRAINING *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $112. 10 TR395_ . 00395 39773 $0.00 01/30/92 CONT EDUCATION OF THE BAR 04497 001-400-2101-4305 01682 $115.25 04106 39774 BOOKS/CITY PROSECUTOR 01/22/92 POLICE /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $115.25 COOPERATIVE PERSONNEL SERVICES 03674 001-400-1203-4201 00864 $336.00 15338 03072 39775 TESTING MATL/EGUIP MECH 15338 01/16/92 PERSONNEL /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT" $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** THE *COPY SHOP PKG PERMIT INFO SHEETS $336. 00 00022 110-400-3302-4305 00878 $129.90 03348 39776 01/30/92 PARKING ENF /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES + $129.90 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** uo • FARED*DAHDAH DAMAGE DEPOSIT REFUND 30663 $129. 90 1c 17 If 14 10 zo :z 31 04495 001-210-0000-2110 04692 $100.00 30663 03834 39777 01/23/92 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE $0.00 01/30/92 • t) l FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 13:56:32 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # VND * ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # 1, ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST PAGE 0003 FOR 01/30/92 DATE 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL....****************•w**•n*******************************•n•n•n*•r•n******•n*•n** $100. 00 _ 5. R DIVERSIFIED DATA SERVICE 03994 001-400-4204-4309 02226 $90.00 FA263A 03651 39778 ,I THEATRE LITE REPAIRS A263A 11/25/91 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $97.43 01/30/92 " *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $90. 00 DYNAMED, 01498 001-400-2201-4309 01233 $69.50 635.83.681 00123 139779 01/09/92 MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92_ 83681 FIRE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $69.50 EASTMAN, INC. MISC OFFICE SUPP/JAN 92 68068- 02514 001-400-1208-4305 01020 $212.48 8368068 00124 39780 01/06/92 - GEN APPROP /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $212.48 — — THE*ECONOMICS PRESS, INC. 00704 001-400-1202-4316 00409_ _ $4.4_._2_0_______ 4875811-2 02786 39781 SUBSCRIPTION/V. COPELAND 811-2 -01/09/92 FINANCE ADMIN /TRAINING - - - $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** --------- - $44. 20 R ELGIN SWEEPER COMPANY 02354 001-400-3103-6900 00098 $1, 736.78 _ __ _ _ __ 2549._ _ _ 00043 LEASE PAYMENT/FEB 92 2549 01/16/92 _ ST MAINTENANCE /LEASE PAYMENTS $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL***********************************************8******************** VIRGINIA*ELLEDGE PER DIEM ADVANCE $1,736.78 39782 01/30/92 14 31 tt ---__0385800 TR396 00396 39783 001-400-2101-4316 00833 $111. TR396 01/30/92 --_. — —---------- POLICE /TRAINING `' `- — $0.00 01/30/92 ._ *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** __ JOSEPH*GAINES K-9 TRAINING SUPPLIES $111.00 i 02720001-400-2101-4316008.32 $110.63 03200 39784 , 01/30/92 210005 POLICE /TRAINING $0.00 01/30/92 " *** VENDOR TOTAL************************'******************************************** $110.63 GERBER AMBULANCE SERVICE 02897 001-400-2101-4201__ 00940___ $270.25 PRISONER EMERG SERVICES 01/23/92 POLICE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT --04112 39785 $0.00 01/30/92 • • • • • FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 13:56:32 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST PAGE 0004 FOR 01/30/92 DATE 01/30/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP **r VENDOR TOTAL ********i*********************************************************** R R R R R R R R R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED FAX BILLING/JAN 92 -6186 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED FAX BILLING/JAN 92 -6186 GTE CALIftORNIA, INCORPORATED FAX BILLING/JAN 92 -6186 00015 01/29/92 $270.25 001-400-1121-4304 00475 CITY CLERK /TELEPHONE 00015 001-400-1141-4304 00493 $1.77__ 01/29/92 CITY TREASURER /TELEPHONE 00015 001-400-1201-4304 00529 $1.56 01/29/92 CITY MANAGER TELEPHONE •• 372-6186 00132 39787 $0.00 01/30/92 372-6186_ 00132 39787 $0.00 01/30/92 I" 3 372-6186 00132 139787 $0.00 01/30/92 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-1202-4304 00543 $2.83 372-6186 00132 39787 FAX BILLING/JAN 92 -6186 01/29/92 FINANCE ADMIN /TELEPHONE $0.00 01/30/92 • GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-1203-4304 00547 $5.50 '372-6186 00132 39787 FAX BILLING/JAN 92 -6186 01/29/92 PERSONNEL /TELEPHONE $0.00 01/30/92 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 00174.00-.1206-4304 00444 $1_. 2.7 ___37__2-6186_ _ 00132 39787 FAX BILLING/JAN 92 -6186 01/29/92 DATA PROCESSING /TELEPHONE $0.00 01/30/92 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-1206-4304 00445 $49.97 00130 39787 TELE CHARGES/JAN 92 01/30/92 DATA PROCESSING /TELEPHONE GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED FAX BILLING/JAN 92 -6186 00015 001-400-1207-4304 00358 $0.56 01/29/92 BUS LICENSE /TELEPHONE $0.00 01/30/92 372-6186 00132 39787 $0.00 '01/30/92 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-2101-4304 00966 $317.96 00130 39787 TELE CHARGES/JAN 92 01/30/92 POLICE /TELEPHONE $0.00 01/30/92 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-2201-4304 00407 $17.89 00130 39787 $0.00 01/30/92 TELE CHARGES/JAN'92 01/30/92 FIRE /TELEPHONE GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-4101-4304 00547 $4.57 372-6186 00132 39787 (. FAX BILLING/JAN 92 -6186 01/29/92 PLANNING /TELEPHONE $0.00 01/30/92 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED__ 00015 001-400-4201-4304 00494 $2.89 372-6186 00132 39787 FAX BILLING/JAN 92 -6186 01/29/92 BUILDING /TELEPHONE --$0.00 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-4202-4304 00569 $3.48 FAX BILLING/JAN 92 -6186 01/29/92 PUB WKS ADMIN /TELEPHONE _ 01/30/92 372-6186 00132 39787 $0.00 01/30/92 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00019 001-400-4202-4304 00570 $50.14 00130 39787 TELE CHARGES/JAN 92 01/30/92 PUB WKS ADMIN ---/TELEPHONE $0.00- 01/30/92 0 •u J l J O Or !M FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 13:56:32 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R R R R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED TELE CHARGES/JAN 92 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED FAX BILLING/JAN 92 —6186 GTE CALIFORNIA, FAX BILLING/JAN GTE CALIFORNIA, FAX BILLING/JAN INCORPORATED 92 —6186 INCORPORATED 92 —6186 7 a• CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 01/30/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 00015 001-400-4204-4321 0062.5_ 01/30/92 BLDG MAINT 00015 001-400-4601-4304 00638 01/29/92 COMM RESOURCES 00015 001-400-6101-4304 01/29/92 PARKS PAGE 0005 DATE 01/30/92 INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP $40. 27 /BUILDING SAFETY/SECURIT $11.62 /TELEPHONE 00384 $4.41 /TELEPHONE 00015 110-400-3302-4304 00549 01/29/92 PARKING ENF $0. 84 /TELEPHONE *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************* R HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO. ST SWEEPER SUPPLIES 00731 001-400-3103-4311 00726 3093 01/30/92 ST MAINTENANCE $518. 59 $1,580.47 /AUTO MAINTENANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL*****4************************************************************** $1,580.47 R HALPRIN SUPPLY COMPANY_ 00946 001-400-2201-4187 _ 00302 _ $61.96 FIREFIGHTER BOOTS/KLEIN 75980 01/08/92 FIRE /UNIFORM ALLOWANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************n************* R HARBOR CITY ENTERPRISES, INC. MISC. CHARGES/DEC 91 25618 03571 001-400-2101-4311 01332 12/26/91 POLICE $61.96 $297. 49 /AUTO MAINTENANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL***********************************************#******************** $297.49 INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE ELECTRIC DISCOUNT OFFERED INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE ELECTRIC DISCOUNT TAKEN INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE ELECTRIC MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE ELECTRIC MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 02458 001-202-0000-2021____ J00139 $5. 66 01/30/92 DISCOUNTS OFFERED 02458 001-202-0000-2022 00139 01/30/92 02458 001-400-4204-4309 02225 01/30/92 BLDG MAINT 02458 01/30/92 305-400-8506-4309 00063_ CIP 86-506 $5. 66CR /DISCOUNTS TAKEN $97. 13 /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $180.62 /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS - 372 -6186 372-6186 00132 $0. 00 372-6186 00132 $0.00 V 00130 39767 e $0. 00 01/30/92 00132 39787 i� $0.00 01/30/92 39787 01/30/92 39787 01/30/92 u i f 3093 03647 39788 $1,380.27 01/30/92 3' J IA 75980 03427 39789 $59. 53 01/30/92;: 25618 01234 39790 $0.00 01/30/92 00137 39791 $0.00 01/30/92 00137 39791 $0.00 01/30/92 00137 _ 39791 $0.00 01/30/92 00137 39791 $0.00 01/30/92 „I 4 C FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 13:56:32 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 01/30/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION *** VENDOR TOTAL irir#ar*tt*rir*+rariri►*+r*ar*ir*******+rar*i►+Fir*ir*qtr******* rat+rit*#ar***aritat*ariratit+titiritar R KIWANIS CLUB OF HERMOSA BEACH AUG/NOV—JAN/M. SCHUBACH 00380 001-400-4101-4315 01/22/92 PLANNING INV/REF $277.75 00171 $160.00 /MEMBERSHIP *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R GEORGE*LANZ REISSUE LOST WARRANT 39410 04422 001-300-0000-3115 01/29/92 $160.00 PAGE 0006 DATE 01/30/92 PO # CHK # DATE EXP AMOUNT UNENC 01959 $0.00 7 39792 , 01/30/92 04401 $116.00 39410 02784 39793 /BUSINESS LICENSE $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R SHERRIA*LAWRENCE REIMBURSE TUITION/SPR 92 $116.00 03044 001-400-1207-4316 00093 $198.00 01/23/92 BUS LICENSE /TRAINING *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $198.00 R LONG BEACH UNIFORM CO. _ ENTRY VEST UTILITY BELT 88632 11098 39794 $0.00 01/30/92 01320 170-400-2103-4187 00047 $262.18 88632 03183 12/12/91 SPEC INVESTGTNS /UNIFORMS $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** JOE*LORENZEN ANIMAL TRAP REFUND • 04085 001-210-0000-2110 31653 01/23/92 $262.18 39795 01/30/92 04691 $50.00 31653 03832 39796 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $50.00 LOS ANGELES AIR CONDITIONING AIR COND REPAIR/COM CTR 13265 02764 001-400-4204-4201 00505 12/11/91 BLDG MAINT $225.00 13265 03658 39797 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 01/30/92 *0* VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $225.00 DIANNE*LOUGHIN TUITION REIMB/SPRING 92 DIANNE*LOUGHIN PER DIEM ADVANCE TR395 03628 001-400-2101-4316 00828 $29.0.00 01/14/92 POLICE /TRAINING 03628 001-400-2101-4316 00829 01/30/92 $111.00 POLICE /TRAINING 03199 39798 $0.00 - 01/30/92 TR395 00395 3979B $0.00 01/30/92 • V u. FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 13:56:32 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 01/30/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN it AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION _ *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** LOUIS THE TAILOR, INC. MISC. CHARGES/DEC 91 87505 00079 001-400-2101-4187 12/26/91 POLICE PAGE 0007 DATE 01/30/92 INV/REF PO # CHK # $401. 00 00468 $70. 36 /UNIFORM ALLOWANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R MANHATTAN REPRO "ANIMAL IMPOUND" FORMS 55940 $70. 36 04474 110-400-3302-4305 00877 $64.95 01/20/92 PARKING ENF /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $64.95 R MARC ACCOUNT SYSTEMS, INC. REISSUE LOST WARRANT 38079 04491 001-400-2101-4201 009.38 01/29/92 POLICE $131. 05 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** MARK IV CHARTER BUS CO.__ BUSES/D. A. R. E. TRIP 95453 00290 001-400-2101-4201, 00941 01/23/92 POLICE $131. 05 AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 887505 01242 39799 $0. 00 01/30/92 55940 03346 139800 $64.95 01/30/92 38879 02785 39801 $0.00 01/30/92 $589. 50 95453_04110 04110 39802 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** MARRIOTT HOTEL HOTEL ADVANCE/D. LOUGHIN TR395 03859 001-400-2101-4316 __00830 01/30/92 POLICE $589.50 $362. 12 /TRAINING *** VENDOR TOTAL***********************************************4************;******* $362.12 MARRIOTT HOTEL HOTEL ADV/V. ELLEDGE TR396 04496 001-400-2101-4316 01/30/92 POLICE 00834 $362..12 /TRAINING *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** MC CLONE INSURANCE SERVICES____ NOTARY STAMP/JOURNAL MC GLONE INSURANCE SERVICES NOTARY BOND/N. VALDES $362. 12 __ 04492 001-400-1121-4305 00192 $18.25 01/23/92 CITY CLERK /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 04492 705-400-1210-4201 00091 $35.00 03075 01/23/92 AUTO/PROP/BONDS /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 TR395 00395 39803 $0.00 01/30/92 1 :z :J TR396 00396 39804 1$0.00 01/30/92 03075 39805 $0. 00 01/30/92 j'' 39805 ,,-, 01/30/92 w FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 13:56:32 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST PAGE 0008 FOR 01/30/92 DATE 01/30/92 PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP *** VENDOR TOTAL*********************************************•*******•**************** $53.25 R MOBIL OIL CREDIT CORPORATION 00388 001-400-2201-4310 00153 $9.18 8839307850 01250 39806 MISC. CHARGES/DEC 91 07850 01/13/92 FIRE /MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 30.00 01/30/92 MOBIL OIL CREDIT CORPORATION 00388 110-400-3302-4310 00165 $4.35 8839307835 01250 39806 MISC. CHARGES/DEC 91 07835 01/13/92 PARKING ENF /MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL N******************************************************************* $13.53 R VALERIE*MOHLER 00956 001-400-1202-4316 00410 3104.68 02783 39807 , REIMBURSE BOOKS/SPR 92 01/29/92 FINANCE ADMIN /TRAINING $0.00 01/30/92 •- *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $104.68 R NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOC 00399 001-400-2201-4315 .00082 $75.0.0 A00.144000000 03430 39808 DUES/S. WISNIEWSKI 00000 01/21/92 FIRE /MEMBERSHIP $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** OLYMPIC AUTO CENTER MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 $75.00 00093 001-400-3103-4311 00725 $83.35 12642 00152 39809 12642 01/20/92 ST MAINTENANCE /AUTO MAINTENANCE $0.00 ° 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $B3.35 n it 1, R PACTEL CELLULAR - LA 03209 170-400-2103-4304 00036 $1,007.91 00153 39810 .,, I MOBILE PHONE CHGS/JAN 92 - 01/29/92 SPEC INVESTGTNS /TELEPHONE - . $0.00 01/30/92 (, I. *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** iR PEP BOYS $1,007.91 00608 001-400-2201-4311 00420 $13.79 15798 00156 39811 MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 15798 01/18/92 FIRE /AUTO MAINTENANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** DONALD*SELLERS ANIMAL TRAP REFUND V $13. 79 $0.00 01/30/92- 04494 001-21.0-0000-2110 04693_ 350.00 31710 03833 39812 31.710 01/23/92 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE $0.00 01/30/92 J • I air FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 13:56:32 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST PAGE 0009 FOR 01/30/92 DATE 01/30/92 PAY VENDOR NAME VND $ ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $50. 00 R SMART &. FINAL IRIS COMPANY 00114 001-400-2101-4306 01116 $86.91 147127-5 00162 39813 MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 127-5 01/30/92 POLICE /PRISONER MAINTENANCE $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $86.91 o R SOURISSESAU SUPPORT SERVICES_ 02075 001-400-2101-4201 00942 $227.50 2000 04108 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION 2000 01/22/92 POLICE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $227.50 8 O c;I v 113 i3 39814 01/30/92 R SOUTH BAY FIRE EXTINGUISHER 00113 001-400-2201-4309 01232 $18.40 15722 00163 39815 MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 15722 01/30/92 FIRE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $18.40 R SOUTH BAY HOSPITAL 00107 001-400-2101-4201 0093.9 $251.25 BLOOD ALCOHOL TESTING 01/23/92 POLICE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $251.25 R SOUTH BAY NOTICING AND 03882 001-400-1121-4323 00176 $115.00 MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 ERO1B 01/30/92 CITY CLERK /PUBLIC NOTICING 04113 _ 39816 $0.00 01/30/92 92HER018 00164 39617 $0.00 01/30/92 R SOUTH BAY NOTICING AND 03882 0.01-4.00-4101-4201 00.1.33 $460.00 92HERO1D 00164 39817 MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 ERO1D 01/30/92 PLANNING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 01/30/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $575.00 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS CO. MONTHLY GAS DILLS/JAN 92 00170 001-400-4204-4303 00517 $931.51 01/30/92 BLDG MAINT /UTILITIES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** TODD PIPE & SUPPLY DISCOUNT OFFERED $931.51 00167 $0.00 23 2, 31 ,3 34 IS 39818 01/30/92 I'' I•, 00124 001-202-0000-2021 00140 $4.11 00173 39819 01/30/92 DISCOUNTS OFFERED $0.00 01/30/92 ' :r /9 O FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 13:56:32 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION TODD PIPE & SUPPLY DISCOUNT TAKEN R TODD PIPE & SUPPLY MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 R TODD MISC. R TODD MISC. PIPE & SUPPLY CHARGES/JAN 92 PIPE & SUPPLY CHARGES/JAN 92 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 01/30/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 00124 001-202-0000-2022 00140_ $4.11CR 01/30/92 /DISCOUNTS TAKEN PAGE 0010 DATE 01/30/92 fi INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 00124 001-400-6101-4309 011.74 $98.32 01/30/92 PARKS /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 00124 105-400-2601-4309 00778 $50.27 01/30/92 STREET LIGHTING /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 00124 1.60-400-3102-4309 00673 $52.23 01/30/92 SEWER/ST-DRAIN /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL*******************************************+h******* **************** $200.82 GARLAND*TOMEY REIMBURSE TOW FEES GARLAND*TOMEY REIMBURSE TOW FEES *** VENDOR TOTAL *** PAY CODE TOTAL 04493 001-300-0000-3841 00390 $35.00 01/23/92 /POLICE TOWING 04493 110-400-3302-4201 00331 $88.00 01/23/92 PARKING ENF /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $123. 00 ****************************************************************** $163,187.02 *** TOTAL WARRANTS****************************************************************** $163,187.02 00173 $0. 00 00173 $0. 00 39819 01/30/92- 39819 01/30/92 00173 39819 $0.00 01/30/92 00173 39819 $0.00 01/30/92 „ ,5 ,fi 5 zc .77 22 23 zn 04111 39820 I; $0.00 01/30/92-7:7; 31 04111 39820 • $0.00 01 /30/9229 JS -- - is 37 29 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE DEMANDS OR CLAIMS COVE -RED BY THE WARRANTS LISTED ON PAGFST0'_/O_- INCLUSIVE, OF THE - - - - --- -- WARRANT REGISTER FOR .. -//...3i9.4_____-__, AHL ACCURATE, FUNOS RE AVAILABLE FOR PAYt.iEIR, ANO ARE IN CONFORMANCE THE RE C(. BY (IT Pin)) FINANCE DIRECTOR DATE //6i194 -- - J FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 15:00:12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION H STEVE*WISNIEWSKI SPEC INVESTIGATION FUNDS VND # DATE INVC 04156 02/04/92 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 ACCOUNT NUMBER PROJ # PAGE 0001 j DATE 02/06/92 TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHIA # I2 ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 170-400-2103-4322 00050 $20,000.00 SPEC INVESTGTNS /UNCLASSIFIED *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $20,000.00 *** PAY CODE_ TOTAL****************************************************************** $20,000.00 R ADVANCE ELEVATOR ELEVATOR MAINT/FEI3 92 00003 001-400-420.4-4201 00.507 28212 02/01/92 BLDG MAINT $90.00 28212 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R ADVANCED ELECTRONICS RADIO MAINT/FED 92 47437 R ADVANCED ELECTRONICS RADIO MAINT/FED 92 00935 001-400-1205-4201 00055 01/25/92 CABLE TV 00935 001-400-2101-4201 47437 01/25/92 POLICE ADVANCED ELECTRONICS 00935 RADIO MAINT/FED 92 47437 01/25/92 R ADVANCED ELECTRONICS 00935 RADIO MAINT/FEB 92 47310 02/01/92 $90.00 $164.00 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT 04116 39822 $0.00 02/06/92 G 7 Is i:: 111 [I2 00003 39827 $0.00 102/06/92 �+ 23 2.1 47437 0004839828 , $0.00 02/06/92. .:, 00048 39828 00.948 $1,427.50 47437 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT - 001-400-2201-4201 0028.2_ FIRE 110-400-3302-4307 00051 PARKING ENF $195.00 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT 5314. 00 /RADIO MAINTENANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** R AMERICAN STYLE FOODS 00857 MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 6795 01/28/92 001-400-2101-4306 POLICE $2,100.50 01119 $32.50 /PRISONER MAINTENANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $32.50 ARATEX/RED UTILITY RAG R ARATEX/RED UTILITY RAG V ARATEX/RED UTILITY RAG STAR INDUSTRIAL_ RENT/JAN 92 STAR INDUSTRIAL RENT/JAN 92 STAR INDUSTRIAL RENT/JAN 92 $0.00 02/06/92 47437 00048 39828 $0.00 02/06/92 1 ]S 47310 00058 39828 , $0.00 02/06/92- J 0 .J J V 6795 00015 39829 $0.00-02/06792- 00152 0.00---_02/06792- 00152 001-400-2201-4309 01236 $58.40 01/31/92 FIRE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 00152 001-400-3104-4309 00798 01/31/92 TRAFFIC SAFETY $54.20 /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 00017 39830 $0.00 -02/06/92 00017 39830 $0.00 02/06/92 a, 0 7.7 52 sa 55 s; 00152 001-400-4204-4309 02229 $198.97 00017 39830 01/31/92 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 02/06/92- E7 ro 12 J 41* 0 71,4 FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 15:00:12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R ARATEX/RED STAR INDUSTRIAL UTILITY RAG RENT/JAN 92 R ARATEX/RED STAR INDUSTRIAL UTILITY RAG RENT/JAN 92 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION PAGE_ 0002 DATE 02/06/92 INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 00152 001-400-4205-4309 00618 $62.60 01/31/92 EQUIP SERVICE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 00152 01/31/92 110-400-3302-4309 00818 PARKING ENF $7.60 /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL ***** ******************* ************* *****tr********************** R R R R R *** R AVIATION LOCK & KEY MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 AVIATION LOCK & KEY MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 AVIATION LOCK & KEY MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 AVIATION LOCK & KEY MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 AVIATION LOCK & KEY MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 $381.77 00407 001-400-4204-4309 02230 $147.38 01/31/92 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 00407 001-400-4204-4321 00627 $99.00 01/31/92 BLDG MAINT /BUILDING SAFETY/SECURIT 00407 001-400-4205-4309 00619 $18. 13 01/31/92 EQUIP SERVICE_ /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 00407 01/31/92 00407 01/31/92 001-400-4601-4305 01031 $8.93 COMM RESOURCES /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 160-400-3102-4309 00675 SEWER/ST DRAIN $2.71 /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** BEACH CITIES OFFICE SUPPLY_ MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 HB R BEACH CITIES OFFICE SUPPLY MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 HB $276.15 02509 001-400-1207-4305 00259 $19.91 01/31/92 BUS LICENSE /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 02509 001-400-2101-4305 01/31/92 POLICE 01687 $73.43 /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL**************************************:r*********.r*******-tr*********it* • ROBERT*BENZ LUNCH/CM INTERVIEWS $93.34 03136 001-400-1203-4201 00871 $67.14 01/31/92 PERSONNEL /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $67.14 ROBERT*BLACKWOOD 00366 001-400-1203-4201 00869 $48.60 MON EXP/FEB 92 02/03/92 PERSONNEL /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT 00017 39830 79 $0.00 02/06/92 00017 39830 i $0.00 02/06/92 1'' 00017 139831 $0.00 02/06/92 00017 $0.00 39831 02/06/92 00017 39831 $0.00 02/06/92 2 3 00017 39831 $0.00 02/06/92 " 00017 39831 $0.00 02/06/92 HB 00018 39832 _ $0.00 02/06/92 HB 00018 39832 $0.00 02/06/92 03087 39833 $0.00 02/06/92 03081 39834 $0.00 02/06/92.' 74 .J FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 15:00:12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R ROBERT*BLACKWOOD MON EXPENSE/JAN 92 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 00366 001-400-1203-4201 00870 01/31/92 PERSONNEL _ PAGE 0003 DATE 02/06/92 INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP $50.60 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA 01308 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 R BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA 01308 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 R BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA 01308 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA 01308 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA 01308 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 R BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 01308 02/04/92 001-400-1212-4188 0228B EMP BENEFITS 109-400-3301-4188 00228 VEH PKG DIST 110-400-3302-4188 01488 PARKING ENF 145-400-3401-4188 01238 DIAL A RIDE 145-400-3402-4188 01230 ESEA $99.20 $56.44 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $2.77 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $4. 16 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.69 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.28 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 155-400-2102-4188 00755 $0.69 CROSSING GUARD /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS R BLUE SHIELD OF CALIFORNIA 01308 160-400-3102-4188 01208 $1.07 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 SEWER/ST DRAIN /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $66.10 R BLUE SHIELD PREFERRED CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R BLUE SHIELD PREFERRED CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 13 BLUE SHIELD PREFERRED CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R BLUE SHIELD PREFERRED CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 01293 02/04/92 001-400-1212-4188 02297 EMP BENEFITS 01293 110-400-3302-4188 01493 02/04/92 PARKING ENF 01293 145-400-3403-4188 00429 02/04/92 BUS PASS SUBSDY 01293 02/04/92 705-400-1217-4188 00577 WORKERS COMP *** VENDOR TOTAL ************************»************************************** R BRAUN LINEN SERVICE 00163 PRISONER LAUNDRY/JAN 92-- 70664 - 01/31/92 $17,322.49 --/EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $916.66 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $13.18 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $118. 37 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS ***** $18,370.70 03076 39834 $0.00 02/06/92 00055 $0. 00 00055 $0. 00 00055 $0. 00 00055 $0. 00 00055 $0. 00 00055 $0. 00 39835 02/06/92 39835 b2/o6/92 39835 02/06/92 39835 02/06/92 39835 02/06/92 39835 02/06/92 11 ,l • • :o .2 21 an 00055 39835 $0.00 0 02/06/92- S2 <3 0005639836 $0. 00 —02/06/92- <:T. 00056 sc 39836 $0.00 02/06/92 --3 00056 39836 $0.00- 02/06/92- 00056 39836 $0.00 02/06/92 001-400-2101-4306 01120 $208.00 70664 POLICE /PRISONER MAINTENANCE •n 00110 39837 $0.00---.02/06/92--;:7 /5 FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 15:00:12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 PAGE 0004 DATE 02/06/92 l VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # ' DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP is *** VENDOR TOTAL************'******************************************************** R BROOKES ELECTRIC REPAIR THEATRE LITE SYS. 11697 00355 01/28/92 $208.00 001-400-4204-4309 02235 $165.00 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R BROWNING & FERRIS INDUSTRIES _ TRASH PICKUP/FEB 92 R BROWNING & FERRIS INDUSTRIES TRASH PICKUP/FEB 92 00155 001-400-1208-4201 00845 02/01/92 GEN APPROP 00155 02/01/92 109-400-3301-4201 00095 VEH PKG DIST $165.00 $578.37 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $516.63 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1,095.00 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-1121-4305 00194 $21.89 PETTY CASH/1-14 TO 1-30 01/30/92 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY.TREASURER 02016 PETTY CASH/1-14 TO 1-30 01/30/92 GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER PETTY CASH/1-14 TO -1-30- CITY CLERK /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 001-400-2101-4305 POLICE 02016 001-400-2101-4316 01/30/92 POLICE R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER__ 02016 PETTY CASH/1-14 TO 1-30 01/30/92 GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER PETTY CASH/1-14 TO 1-30 01688 $38.50 /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 0.0842 $23.40 /TRAINING 001-400-4201-4305 007.4.4 $2.29 BUILDING /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 02016 001-400-4202-4305 00668 $7.13 01/30/92 PUB WKS ADMIN /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 00.1-400-4.2.04-4321 00628 PETTY CASH/1-14 TO 1-30 01/30/92 BLDG MAINT GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER PETTY CASH/1-14 TO 1-30 11697 03654 39838 $300. 00 02/06/92 $25.00 /BUILDING SAFETY/SECURIT 02016 001-400-6101-4309 01177 $49.66 01/30/92 PARKS /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R CA HOUSING PARTNERSHIP CORP. 04508 PUBLICATIONS/PLANNING 01/13/92 001-400-4101-4305 _00598 PLANNING $167.87 $25.00 /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 00005 39839 $0.00 02/06/92 13 1.4 00005 39839 $0.00 02/06/92 '4 03841 39840 $0.00 02/06/92 03841 39840 $0.00 02/06/92 03841 $0.00 39840 02/06/92 03841 39840 $0.00 02/06/92 03841 39840 $0.00 02/06/92 03841 39840 $0.00 02/06/92 31 11 e 51 5-3 0384139840 $0.00 02/06/92 =' 01961 3?841 $0.00 02/06/92 193 71 79 • • • 911 VI • • • • FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 15:00:12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION *** VENDOR TOTAL ir•a•************•er**********ar*•n****arts*#*•nit•r•ir*at*•n****•p••n*****n•*******it**•x R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R CA PSYCHJLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 00238 001-400-1212-4188 02287 02/04/92 EMP BENEFITS 00238 105-400-2601-4188 01239 02/04/92 STREET LIGHTING 00238 109-400-3301-4188 00227 02/04/92 VEH PKG DIST 00238 110-400-3302-4188 01487 02/04/92 PARKING ENF 00238 145-400-3401-4188 01237 02/04/92 DIAL A RIDE 00238 145-400-3402-4188 01229 02/04/92 ESEA 00238 145-400-3403-4188 . 00426 02/04/92 BUS PASS SUBSDY 00238 145-400-3408-4188 00061 02/04/92 COMMUTER XPRESS CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN 00238 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 155-400-2102-4188 00754 CROSSING GUARD 00238 160-400-3102-4188 01207 02/04/92 SEWER/ST DRAIN R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN 00238 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 17.0-4.00-2103-4188 00223 SPEC INVESTGTNS 00238 705-400-1209-4188 00522 02/04/92 LIABILITY INS 00238 02/04/92 705-400-1.217-4188 00571 WORKERS COMP *** VENDOR TOTAL************************ir*******-rt****-n ************************** R CAM -MAR GROWERS PLANTS/CITY-WIDE PAGE 0005 DATE 02/06/92 INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP $25. 00 $856.97 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $29.61 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $2.65 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $126.40 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $4.25 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.44 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.53 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.26 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $1.77 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $22.54 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $3.48 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $4.42 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $16.63 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS **** $1,069.95 00041 39842 $0.00 02/06/92 00041 39842 $0.00 02/06/92 00041 39842 $0.00 02/06/92 9 14 19 2? za 00041 39842 34 $0.00 02/06/92 .< 00041 39842 $0.00 02/06/92-i.,5 00041 39 39842 32 $0.00 02/06/92 34 00041 39842 $0.00 02/06/92 30 00041 39842 $0.00 --. 02/06/92-- %T a. 00041 39842 $0.00 02/06/92 Z- 00041 39842 $0.00-02/06/92-- $3.48 0.00---02/06/92-- 00041 39842 $0.00 02/06/92 00041 39842 $0.00 02/06/92-- 00041 39842 $0.00 -02/06-/92- 03412 .-02/06%92- .13 SI 54 25 03412 001-400-3101-4309 00122 $1,493.86 13352/13915 03614 39843 13915 01/31/92 MEDIANS -MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $1,493.85 02/06/92 12 Y, r 1 1 tJ J J rIw^wcc-sra3*0 TIME 15:00:12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN w AMOUNT INV/REF °°° VENDOR TOTAL °°°°°°*°°°°*°°°°°°°°**°°°°*°°*°°°*°°*°°°��°��°°*°°°°*°°°**°*****°°___ __*1.«vo.a6 n CANADA LIFE n CANADA LIFE CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 00046 001 -*00-1212-4188 02e85 $657 .90 02/04/92 EMP BENEFITS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00046 170-400-2103-4188 00e24 *77.40 02/04/92 SPEC INVESTGTNS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS *** VENDOR TOTAL 4°°°°°°°°°°*°°°°*°°°*°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°***°°°°°°*°°°°°°°°°°°*°°° R CENTER FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE 02000 001-400-2101-431e o�a�� $547.00roIrIow/n. SALDANA 01/21r92 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE . POST VENDOR TOTAL **°*°**°°***°***°**************°**°*°°***°**°°***°**°**°*°*********° n CHAMPION CHEVROLET MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 00014 001-400-2101-4311 01337 $435.38 01/31/92 POLICE /AUTO MAINTENANCE n _ CHAMPION CHEVROLET 00014 001 -400-4204-4311 00216 $32. MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 01/31/92 BLDG MAINT /AUTO MAINTENANCE n CHEVRON USA, INC. MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 PAGE 0006 DATE 02/06/92 PO # CHK w ; AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP • 00008 " 35644 . 00008 35844 r ° 02692 39845 " 00113 39846 00113 *u.00 " 39846 ° 00634 170-400-2103-4310 00040 $477 .84 14/7284419 00115 39847 ,,, 84419 01/24/92 SPEC INVESTGTNS /MOTOR FUELS AND LUDES $0.00 02/06/92 ***yswDon TOTAL °°*°°°**°°°°°°°*°°°°°***°***°°°°**°°**°**°*°**°°°°°**°°°**°*°°*°*°** ° ~ .• n COAST GLASS COMPANY 00325 001-400-4204-4309 02231 *8.70 7920 00116 39848 MISC. o*AeGs6/jAw 92 7920 01/14/92 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 oo/oa/92'� , R oAww°000w -__— oo«ap 001_400-2101-4312 01848 $201.24 02693 mILsa/p.o.a.r. CLASS 01/28/92 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE . POST $0.00 n uA.n.E. .AMERICA 03530 001-400-2101-4305 D.A.R.E. T-SHIRTS 24964 01/14/92 210004 POLICE 39845 02/06/92 01689 $5,347.56 24964 03188 39850 /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $5,348.00 02/06/92 = Co C Ci ~ ° ° ' " " � S. • � ^ ^ ^ ° FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 15:00:12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION *** VENDOR TOTAL. ******************************************************************** R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 INV/REF $25. 00 PLAN 00238 001-400-1212-4188 02287 $856.97 02/04/92 EMP BENEFITS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN 00238 105-400-2601-4188 01239 $29.61 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 STREET LIGHTING /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 PLAN 00238 02/04/92 PLAN 00238 02/04/92 PLAN 00238 02/04/92 R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R ' CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN • CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 • • R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 109-400-3301-4188 00227 VEH PKG DIST 110-400-3302-4188 01487 PARKING ENF 145-400-3401-4188 01237 DIAL A RIDE 00238 145-400-3402-4188 01229 02/04/92 ESEA $2. 65 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $126. 40 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $4. 25 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0. 44 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS PAGE 0005 DATE 02/06/92 PO # CHR # 3 AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 4 a $$ CV00 0 1 39842 ,2 2/06/92 00041 39842 $0.00 02/06/92 14 1 C 00041 39842 :9 $0.00 !02/06/92 2. 2223 00041 39842 $0.00 02/06/92 00041 39842 $0.00 02/06/92 00041 39842 $0.00 02/06/92 00238 145-400-3403-4188 00426 $0.53 00041 02/04/92 BUS PASS SUBSDY /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.00 00238 145-400-3408-4188 00061 $0.26 02/04/92 COMMUTER XPRESS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 30 39842 36 02/06/92- 00041 39842 4. $0. 00---:- 02/06/92-Z.- 3 39842 : PLAN 00238 155-400-2102-4188 00754 $1.77 00041 02/04/92 CROSSING GUARD /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.00 CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 00238 160-400-3102-4188 01207 $22.54 02/04/92 SEWER/ST DRAIN /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 02/06/92 00041 39842 $0.00 -02/06/92 - PLAN 00238 170-400-2103-4188 00223 $3.48 00041 02/04/92 SPEC INVESTGTNS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.00 CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH PLAN CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R CA PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 *** VENDOR TOTAL *************** 00238 705-400-1209-41E38 00522 $4.42 02/04/92 LIABILITY INS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS PLAN 00238 705-400-1217-4188 00571 $16.63 02/04/92 WORKERS COMP /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS ***************************************************** $1,069.95 39842 02/06/92 00041 39842 $0.00 02/06/92 522 35 59 00041 39842 60 $0.00 02/06/92 c. 0.5 R CAM -MAR GROWERS 03412 001-400-3101-4309 00122 $1,493.86 13352/13915 03614 39843 - PLANTS/CITY-WIDE '13915 01/31/92 MEDIANS /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $1493.85---02/06/92-; 113„.$ 1 FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 15:00.12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 PAGE 0006 DATE 02/06/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DATE 1NVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP *** VENDOR TOTAL ************************firer+ ***firer******************fir**** ******fir**** r 31, 493. 86 R CANADA LIFE CITY HEALTH INS/FEB"92 R CANADA LIFE CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 00046 001-400-1212-4188 02289 $657.90 02/04/92 EMP BENEFITS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00046 170-400-2103-4188 00224 $77.40 02/04/92 SPEC INVESTGTNS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS *** VENDOR TOTAL************-******************************************************* R CENTER FOR CRIMINAL_JUSTICE TUITION/R. SALDANA $735.30 02000 001-400-2101-4312 01849 $547.00 01/21/92 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** CHAMPION CHEVROLET MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 CHAMPION CHEVROLET MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 00014 001-400-2101-4311 01/31/92 POLICE $547. 00 01337 $435.38 /AUTO MAINTENANCE 00014 _ 001-400-4204-4311 00.216 01/31/92 BLDG MAINT $32.48 /AUTO MAINTENANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** CHEVRON USA, INC. MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 $467.86 00008 39844 *0.00 02/06/92 00008 39844 $0.00 02/06/92 02692 30. 00 • 39845 02/06/92 �•- 00113 39846 _ $0.00 02/06/92 00113 _ 39846 $0.00 02/06/92 00634 170-400-2103-4310 00040 $477.84 1417284419 00115 84419 01/24/92 SPEC INVESTGTNS /MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $477.84 COAST GLASS COMPANY MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 7920 39847 K 02/06/92 00325 00.1-4.00-4204-4309 02231 $8.70 7920 00116 01/14/92 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** DAWN*COOR MILES/P. 0. S. T. CLASS $8.70 03489 001-400-2101-4312 01848 $201.24 01/28/92 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $201.24 D.A.R.E. AMERICA D. A. R. E. T—SHIRTS 24964 03530 001-400-2101-4305 01689 01/14/92 210004 POLICE 39848 02/06/92 02693 39649 L $0.00 02/06/92 $5,347.56 24964 03188 /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $5,348.00 39850 02/06/92 cI • • • I J .,! FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 15:00:12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION PAGE 0007 DATE 02/06/92 INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP I, *** VENDOR TOTAL ***************arty**** *******a********u***********trit****ir*********** $5,347.56 R DANIEL FREEMAN LAX MED. CLINIC WORK COMP SERV/JAN 92 91-29 02390 705-40.0-1217-4201 00132 $88.96 001291-29 03079 01/31/92 WORKERS COMP /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R EASTMAN,P INC. OFFICE SUPP/STOCK%JAN 92 22579 $88.96 02514 001-400-1208-4305 01025 $433.35 01/17/92 GEN APPROP /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDOR TOTAL***********************#******************************************** R FREDERICK R.*FERRIN $433.35 04503 001-400-1203-4201 00868 $240.33 REIMB CM INTERVIEWEE 02/03/92 PERSONNEL /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $240.33 PATRICIA*FLANIGAN BLDG REPORT REFUND 31867 8422579 00124 $0.00 39851 ., 02/06/92 14 39852 02/06/92 2, 03082 39853 $0.00 02/06/92 04509 001-300-0000-3801 02355 $40.00 31867 04201 39854 01/30/92 /RESIDENTIAL INSPECTION $0.00 02/06/92- *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $40.00 GANDALF DATA, INC. 01432 001-400-1206-4201 00943 $54.6.00 2912 00018 .. MODEM MAINT/JAN-MAR 92 2912 01/20/92 - DATA PROCESSING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R GROUP AMERICA LIFE INSURANCE_ CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 GROUP AMERICA LIFE INSURANCE CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R GROUP AMERICA LIFE INSURANCE_ CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 $546.00 04397 001-4.00-1212-4188 02292 $364.95 02/04/92 EMP BENEFITS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 04397 105-400-2601-4188 01242 $23.45 02/04/92 STREET LIGHTING --/EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 04397 109-400-3.301-4188 00230 02/04/92 VEH PKG DIST R GROUP AMERICA LIFE INSURANCE ' 04397 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 110-400-3302-4188 01491 PARKING ENF $2.10 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $107.10 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 39855 02/06/92 :5 27 21 3' iJ i5 '5 371 40 ,1 00028 39856 I,, $0.00 02106/92 00028 39856 96 -$0:00-02/06/92- 00028 $0:00-02/06/92- 00028 39856 $0.00 02/06/92 00028 39856 $0.00-- 02/06/92- ' 4, u1 70 7, FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 15:00:12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R GROUP AMERICA LIFE INSURANCE CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R GROUP AMERICA LIFE INSURANCE CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R GROUP AMERICA LIFE INSURANCE CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R GROUP AMERICA LIFE INSURANCE CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R GROUP AMERICA LIFE INSURANCE_ CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 GROUP AMERICA LIFE INSURANCE CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 GROUP AMERICA LIFE INSURANC E CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R GROUP AMERICA LIFE INSURANCE CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 04397 145-400-3401-4188 01241 02/04/92 DIAL A RIDE 04397 _145-400-3402-4188 01232 02/04/92 ESEA 04397 145-400-3408-4188 00063 02/04/92 04397 02/04/92 COMMUTER XPRESS 155-400-2102-4188 00757 CROSSING GUARD 04397 160-400-3102-4188 01211 02/04/92 SEWER/ST DRAIN 04397 170-400-2103-4188 00227 02/04/92 SPEC INVESTGTNS 04397 7.05-4.0.0-1.209-4188 00524 02/04/92 LIABILITY INS 04397 705-400-1217-4188 00574 02/04/92 WORKERS COMP $3. 36 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.22 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0. 14 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $1.40 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $18.69 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $26.25 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $2. 80 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $3. 50 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS INV/REF PO PAGE 0008 DATE 02/06/92 # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP Ia *** VENDOR TOTAL**********************************************arty**star***arts*********** $553. 96 • GUARDIAN DENTAL 02623 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 GUARDIAN DENTAL CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 GUARDIAN DENTAL CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 GUARDIAN DENTAL CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 GUARDIAN DENTAL CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 001-4.0.0-1212-4188 02290 EMP BENEFITS 02623 105-400-2601-4188 01240 02/04/92 STREET LIGHTING 02623 110-400-3302-4188 01489 02/04/92 PARKING ENF 02623 1.4.5-400-3401-4188 01239 02/04/92 DIAL A RIDE 02623 145-400-3403-4188 00427 02/04/92 GUARDIAN DENTAL _ • 02623 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 BUS PASS SUBSDY 160-400-3102-4188 01209 SEWER/ST DRAIN $37072.76 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $2. 35 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $92. 67 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $1.18 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $1. 41 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $17.31 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00028 39856 1 $0. 00 02/06/92 00028 39856 $0.00 02/06/92 00028 39856 $0.00 02/06/92 00028 39856 $0. 00 02/06/92 :, 22 23 00028 39856 $0. 00 02/06/922 00028 39856 $0. 00 02/06/92 31 00028 39856 32 $0.00 02/06/92 as 00028 39856 $0.00 02/06/92 °- 3J :3 00001 39857 7, $0.00 02/06/92 00001 39857 $0.00 02/06/92 00001 $0. 00 :C a8 39857 J — 02/06/92 00001 39857 $0.00 02/06/92 00001 _ $0.00 39857 02/06/92 0000I 39857 $0.00 02/06/92 yi cc r J 1 FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 15:00:12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R GUARDIAN DENTAL CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R GUARDIAN DENTAL CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R GUARDIAN DENTAL CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 02623 170-400-2103-4188 00225 $23.52 02/04/92 SPEC INVESTGTNS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 02623 705-400-1209-4188 00523 $29.92 02/04/92 LIABILITY INS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 02623 705-400-1217-4188 00572 $44.88 02/04/92 WORKERS COMP /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS PAGE 0009 DATE 02/06/92 INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP *** VENDOR TOTAL**************#•n*•n**********-n*********************-n***it*ire*trar•u•****-n* $3,286.00 R HEALTHNET CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R HEALTHNET CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R HEALTHNET CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 HEALTHNET CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 HEALTHNET CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 HEALTHNET CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 HEALTHNET CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R HEALTHNET CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 HEALTHNET CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 HEALTHNET CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 00241 001-400-1212-4188 02298 $16,634.53 02/04/92 EMP BENEFITS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00241 105-400-2601-4188 01244 $773.35 02/04%92 STREET LIGHTING EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00241 109-400-3301-4188 02/04/92 VEH PKG 00232 $66.12 DIST /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00241 110-400-3302-4188 01494 02/04/92 PARKING ENF 00241 145-400-3401-4188 02/04/92 DIAL A $2,232.98 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 012.44 $79.78 RIDE /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00241 145-400-3402-4188 01235 02/04/92 ESEA 00241 145-400-3408-4188 02/04/92 COMMUTER 00241 155-400-2102-4188 02/04/92 CROSSING 00241 1.6.0-400-3102-4188 02/04/92 SEWER/ST $11.28 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00065 $3.78 XPRESS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00759 $66.12 GUARD /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 01213 $529.12 DRAIN /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00241 170-400-2103-4188 00228 $688.03 02/04/92 R HEALTHNET 00241 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 SPEC INVESTGTNS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 705-400-1209-4188 00527 $159.80 LIABILITY INS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00001 39857 $0.00 02/06/92 00001 39857 $0.00 02/06/92 00001 39857 '0 11 $0.00 02/06/92 '3 '•o 00016 $0.00 zz z3 39858 . ,4 02/06/92 00016 39858 $0.00 02/06/92 ].3 is 30 31 3Z 33 34 00016 39858 $0.00 02/06/92- 00016 39858 $0.00 02/06/92 00016 39858 t, $0.00 02/06/92-- 00016 39858 41 $0.00 02/06/92- 1 4c 00016 39858 $0.00 02/06/92 39858 $0.00 02/06/92- 00016 00016 39858 $O. 00 02/06/92-,1 59 39858 $0.00' 02/06'/92.:, 00016 00016 39858 ,, $0.-00 02/06/92-". ,c >1 14 75 1, s . FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 15:00:12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION P. HEALTHNET CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 00241 705-400-1217-4188 0057.8 $186.22 02/04/92 WORKERS COMP --/EMPLOYEE BENEFITS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE ELECTRIC DISCOUNT OFFERED R INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE DISCOUNT TKEN R INGLEWOOD WHOLESALE MISC CHARGES/JAN 92 02458 001-202-0000-2020 01/31/92 ELECTRIC 02458 001-202-0000-2020 01/31/92 ELECTRIC 02458 001-400-4204-4309 01/31/92 BLDG MA INV/REF $21,431,11 01301 $0. 72 /ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 01302 $0. 72CR /ACCOUNTS PAYABLE 02232 $35.28 INT -MAINTENANCE MATERIALS-- *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** JOHN*KEARIN MEALS/P. O. S. T_ CLASS •JOHN*KEARIN MILES/P. 0. S. T. CLASS $35. 28 01032 001-400-2101-4312 018.4.6 $85.25 02/04/92 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST 01032 001-400-2101-4312 01/28/92 POLICE 01847 $68.12 PAGE 0010 DATE 02/06/92 PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 00016 39858 $0.00 02/06/92 00137 39859 $0.00 02/06/92 00137 39859 80. 00 02/06/92 00137 39859 $0.00 02/06/92- 02695 IL 17 10 15 22 23 1,7 1,5 3'3 31 39860 $0.00 02/06/92 34 02694 39860 _ 5 02/06/92 3, /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $153.37 EDWARD' S. *KREINS FINAL CONTRACT PAYMENT 04439 001-400-1203-4201 008.67 01/19/92 PERSONNEL $500.00 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** ASHLEY*LEWIS REIMBURSE TOWING FEES' ASHLEY*LEWIS REIMBURSE TOWING FEES 04501 001-300-0000-3841 00392 01/15/92 04501 0.01-4.00-21.01-4201 01/15/92 POLICE $500. 00 03077 $0. 00 35 39861 02/06/92 :3 $35. 00 /POLICE TOWING 00949 $92.00 /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT 3 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** JULIE*LOCKE • CITATION PAYMENT REFUND /9005 04505 110-300-0000-3302 01/28/92 $127. 00 04103 39862 _ $0.00 02/06/92 ' 04103 39862 $0.00 02/06/92 =' 43914 $72.00 968797/9005 0.2788 /COURT FINES/PARKING $0.00 se 39863 02/06/92 ' 1,1 7L 72 4 l5 tre FINANCE--SFA340 TIME 15:00:12 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST PAGE 0011 , FOR 02/06/92 DATE 02/06/92 PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION *** VENDOR TOTAL*****************************************************trim************ R LOJACK VEHICLE RECOVERY SYS. 04499 001-400-2101-4311 01340 TRANSFER EQUIP/NARCOTICS 34428 12/20/91 POLICE AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP $72.00__ $160.00 34428 03198 39864 /AUTO MAINTENANCE $160.00 02/06/92 +.1 3.0671 03835 39865 ,20 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE 40.00 02/06/92 r21 I2 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $160.00 R ELODIA*LOPEZ 04502 001-210-0000-2110 04697 $100.00 DAMAGE DEPOSIT REFUND 30671 01/30/92 1 7 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $100.00 R MANHATTAN CAR WASH 01146 001-400-2101-4311 013.36 $78.70 01245 39866 MISC. CHCS/DEC 91 02/05/92 POLICE /AUTO MAINTENANCE $0.00 02/06/92 R MANHATTAN CAR WASH 01146 001-400-4101-4311 00.153 $11.60 01245 39866 31 MISC. CHCS/DEC 91 02/05/92 PLANNING /AUTO MAINTENANCE $0.00 02/0692 3; 32 115 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $90.30 35 21 .4 25 25 27 13 NINETTE*MC CUISTION 04507 110-300-00.00-3.30.2 43913 $18.00 956645 02790 39867 ,. CITATION PAYMENT REFUND 56645 02/03/92 - - /COURT FINES/PARKING - 40.00 02/06792- *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $18.00 R MYERS STEVENS & COMPANY 00091 001-400-1212-4188 02295 $772.20 00013 39868 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 --! 02/04/92 EMP BENEFITS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** 4772.20 $0.00-- 02/06792- ,R NATIONAL HOME LIFE 03465 001-400-1212-4188 02293 $80.00 00065 39869 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 -- EMP BENEFITS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.00 ----02/06/92- *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $80.00 42 4.1 471 47 yl 4 57 773 59 R OFFICE CLUB 04142 001-400-1208-4305 01024 $774.20 1248542 02779 39870 COPIER PAPER/STOCK 48542 01/15/92 GEN APPROP %OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $834.27" 02/06/92- 71 77' !4 75 4.7 elk • FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 15:00:12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION PAGE 0012 DATE 02/06/92 INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP *** VENDOR TOTAL ************************************************* ****************** $774.20 R OLYMPIC AUTO CENTER MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 12643 00093 001-400-2101-4311 01/20/92 POLICE 0.1339 $154.74 /AUTO MAINTENANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R PAK WESII MISC CHARGES/JAN 92 00519 03705 01/31/92 001-400-4204-4309 02234 BLDG MAINT $154. 74 12643 00152 l'J I . 39871 14 $0.00 02/06/92 " $191.69 801301/803705 00154 /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $191.69 PROF COMMUNICATIONS INSTALLERS_ MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 11/12 39872 02/06/9 02526 001-400-2101-4311 0.1338 $425.00 708/_09/11/12 00157 39873 01/31/92 POLICE /AUTO MAINTENANCE $0.00 02/06/92 PROF COMMUNICATIONS INSTALLERS 02526 MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 11/12 01/31/92 10.5-4.0.0-2601-4311 00249 $387.39 708/09/11/12 00157 39873 STREET LIGHTING /AUTO MAINTENANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** RADIO SHACK MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 $812.39 $0. 00 02/06/92 01429 001-400-2101-4305 01686 $43.21 76687 0.0158 39874 76687 01/28/92 210004 POLICE /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 02/06/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** SYLVIA*ROOT SEC SERVICES/JAN 21, 92 $43. 21 1.1 111 41 ,e 43 44 04061 001-400-4102-4201 00343 $109.50 121 01960 39875 121 01/22/92 PLANNING COMM /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 02/06/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** R SAFEGUARD HEALTH PLANS CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 SAFEGUARD HEALTH PLANS CITY HEALTH INS/FE_B 92 $109. 50 04398 001-400-1212-4188 02291 $859.27 02/04/92 EMP BENEFITS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 04398 105-400-2601-4188 01241 $72.79 02/04/92 STREET LIGHTING /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS SAFEGUARD HEALTH PLANS '. 04398 109-400-3301-4188 00229 $7.19 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 VEH PKG DIST /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00019 39876 $0.00 02/06/92 00019 39876 $0.00 02/06/92 0.0019 39876 $0. 00 02/06/92 !1 7? • i • FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 15:00:12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R SAFEGUARD HEALTH PLANS CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R SAFEGUARD HEALTH PLANS CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R SAFEGUARD HEALTH PLANS CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R SAFEGUAFD HEALTH PLANS CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R SAFEGUARD HEALTH PLANS CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R SAFEGUARD HEALTH PLANS CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R SAFEGUARD HEALTH PLANS CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION 04398 110-400-3302-4188 01490 02/04/92 PARKING ENF 04398 145-400-3401-4188 01240 02/04/92 DIAL A RIDE 04398 145-400-3402-4188 01231 02/04/92 ESEA 04398 02/04/92 145-400-34.08-4188 00062 COMMUTER XPRESS 04398 155-400-2102-4188 00756 02/04/92 CROSSING GUARD 04398 160-400-3102-4188 01210 02/04/92 SEWER/ST DRAIN 04398 170-400-2103-4188 00226 02/04/92 SPEC INVESTGTNS PAGE 0013 DATE 02/06/92 INV/REF PO # CHK # 2 AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP , $250.17 /EMPLOYEE -BENEFITS - $6.89 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.33 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.33 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $5.63 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $41.39 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $61.17 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 00019 39876 $0.00 02/06/92 00019 39876 $0.00 02/06/92 00019 39876 $0.00 02/06/92 e 14 00019 39876 I„ $0.00 02/06/92 ' 00019 39876 ,,, $0.00 02/06/92 00019 39876 $0.00 02/06/92 00019 39876 $0.00 02/06/92 R SAFEGUARD HEALTH PLANS 04398 705-400-1217-4188 00573 $2.82 00019 39876 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 ............. .._- WORKERS COMP /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0.00 02/06/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1,307.98 R OFCR R. *SALDAN_ A MEALS/P. O. S. T. CLASS 02165 001-400-2101-4312 0.1.850 $141.00 01/21/92 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $141.00 R SUSAN*SAXE-CLIFFORD,PH D PSYCH SERV/PERSONNEL 222-4 02691 39877 $0.00 02/06/92 00839 001-400-1203-4320 00404 $125.00 1-1222-4 03083 39878 02/03/92 - PERSONNEL /PRE-EMPLOYMENT EXAMS $0.00 02/06/92 **tt VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $125.00 R MICHAEL*SCHUBACH MON EXPENSES/JAN 92 00536 001-400-4101-4316 0.02.4.8 $15.00 01962 01/30/92 PLANNING /TRAINING $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $15.00 R SEATTLE FIRST NATIONAL BANK LEASE PMT/RROW/FEB 15,92 03263 126-400-8514-6900 00027 $124,792.17 01/31/92 CIP 89-514 /LEASE PAYMENTS 30 31 3 17. .13 4.1 41. •:1 c.a 55 39879 :v 02/06/92 00064 39880 $0.00 02/06/92 Co; 72 44. 44. 416. 14, CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE—SFA340 DEMAND LIST PAGE 0014 TIME 15:00:12 FOR 02/06/92 DATE 02/06/92 PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # i; DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP I4 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $124,792.17 R SINCLAIR PAINT CO. _ 01399 001-400-4204-4309 02233 $108.03 25-45188 00161 39881 MISC CHARGES/JAN 92 45188 01/15/92 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 02/06/92 ' *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $108.03 RHONDA LEE*SMITH 04504 110-300-0000-3302 43915_ _ $18.00 925496 02787 39882 CITATION PAYMENT REFUND 25496 01/28/92 /COURT FINES/PARKING $0.00 !02/06/92 z *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $18.00 R SOUTH BAY FIRE EXTINGUISHER 00113 001-400-2201-4309 01237 __ $39.82 15769 00163 39883 MISC. CHARGES/JAN 92 15769 01/30/92 FIRE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 02/06/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $39.82 R SOUTH BAY MUNICIPAL COURT 00400 110-300-0000-3302 43916 $381.0003355 39884 CITATION COURT BAIL 02/03/92 /COURT FINES/PARKING - $0.00 02/06/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $381.00 R _ SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS CO. GAS BILLING/C CTR/JAN 92 00170 001-400-4204-4303 00519 $408.84 01/31/92 BLDG MAINT /UTILITIES *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** *408.84 00167 39885 $0.00 02/06/92 1:4 45 4] 48 R SWIFT LABORATORIES 02308 0.01-400-2101-4306 01121 $106.09 01539 03189 EXAM GLOVES/POLICE 01539 01/17/92 POLICE %PRISONER MAIPdTENANCE $106.09 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $106.09 TODD PIPE & SUPPLY DISCOUNT OFFERED TODD PIPE & SUPPLY__ DISCOUNT TAKEN 39886 _. 02/06/92' a 5, 00124 001-202-0000-2021 00143 $0.17 0.0174 39887 ,, 01/31/92 DISCOUNTS OFFERED $0.00 02/06/92 00124 001-202-0000-2022 00143 $0.17CR 00174 39887 01/31/92 /DISCOUNTS TAKEN $0.00 02/06/92 J • FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 15:00:12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION R TODD PIPE & SUPPLY MISC CHARGES/JAN 92 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION INV/REF PAGE 0015 DATE 02/06/92 PO # CHK # (' AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 39887 02/06/92 00124 001-4.00-6101-4309 01176 $8.48 24715H 00174 4715H 01/23/92 PARKS /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL ***********•»*********** *********•********************************** R TRANSAMERICA OCCIDENTAL CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R TRANSAMERICA OCCIDENTAL_ CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R TRANSAMERICA OCCIDENTAL CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R TRANSAMERICA OCCIDENTAL CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 TRANSAMERICA OCCIDENTAL_ CITY HEALTH INS/FE_B 92 00240 001-400-1212-4188 02296 02/04/92 EMP BENEFITS 00240 145-400-3401-4188 0124.3 02/04/92 DIAL A RIDE 00240 145-400-3402-4188 01234 02/04/92 ESEA 00240 705-400-1209-4188 00526 02/04/92 LIABILITY INS 00240 705-40.0-12.17-4188 00576 02/04/92 WORKERS COMP *** VENDOR TOTAL*************************************************************** UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. 03790 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 001-400-1212-4188 02294 EMP BENEFITS 03790 105-400-2601-4188 01243 02/04/92 STREET LIGHTING R _ UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. 03790 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 - 02/04/92 UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 IR UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. CITY HEALTH INS/FE_B 92 109-400-3301-4188 0023.1 VEH PKG DIST 03790 110-400-3302-4188 01492 02/04/92 PARKING ENF 03790 1.45-400-3401-4188 01242 02/04/92 DIAL A RIDE 03790 145-_4.00-3402-4188 01233 02/04/92 ESEA R UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. 03790 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 145-400-3403-4188 00428 BUS PASS SUBSDY $8. 48 $240. 68 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $0. 94 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS - $0.38 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $3.17 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $3.17 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS ***** $248.34 $2,056.65 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $77. 05 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $9. 00 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $385. 23 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $13. 29 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $1.66 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $1.37 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS I I 00029 39888 L $0.00 02/06/92 18 00029 39888 $0.00 02/06/92 $0.00 02/06/92 l4 00029 39888 ,9 $0. 00 02/06/92 00029 39888 31 $0.00 02/06/921-o 00029 39888 00022 39889 $0.00 _. 02/06/92 00022 39889 $0. 00 02/06/92 314 43 00022 39889 . - -$0.00 02/06/92 00022 39889 $0.00 02/06/92 00022 39889 $0.00-- 02/06/92- 50 2/06/92- 00022 39889 $0. 00 - 02/06/92 00022 39889 $0.00 02/06/92 )0 J FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 15: 00: 12 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 02/06/92 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. 03790 CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 02/04/92 R UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 R UNUM LOP'G TERM DISABILITY INS. CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 UNUM LONG TERM DISABILITY INS. CITY HEALTH INS/FEB 92 145-400-3408-4188 00064 $0.76 COMMUTER XPRESS /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 03790 155-400-2102-4188 00758 02/04/92 CROSSING GUARD 03790 160-400-3102-4188 01212 02/04/92 SEWER/ST DRAIN 03790 705-400-1209-4188 00525 02/04/92 LIABILITY INS 03790 705-400-1217-4188 00575 02/04/92 WORKERS COMP $6.00 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS *60.60 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $18.61 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS *26.41 /EMPLOYEE BENEFITS PAGE 0016 DATE 02/06/92 INV/REF PO # CHK # AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $2.656.63 VACATION INN HOTEL/J. KEARIN 03254 001-400-2101-4312 02/04/92 POLICE 0184.5 *192.93 /TRAVEL EXPENSE . POST *** VENDOR TOTAL *******************rira*********************************3r************ *192.93 BERNADETTE*VALENTINE CITATION PMT REFUND 00510 04506 110-300-0000-3302 01/29/92 00022 39889 *0.00 02/06/92 00022 39889 $0.00 02/06/92 00022 39889 $0.00 02/06/92 00022 39889 $0.00 02/06/92 00022 39889 $0.00 02/06/92 02696 $O. 00 43912 $20.00 31.0.0.510 02789 /COURT FINES/PARKING *0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $20.00 WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY PUBLICATIONS/CTY CLERK 00141 001-400-1131-420.1 00700 $38.7.43 0939.9 01/31/92 CITY ATTORNEY /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** *** PAY CODE TOTAL****************************************************************** *** TOTAL WARRANTS****************************************************************** $387.43 $195,357.91 $215,357.91 7 23 39890 3, 02/06/92 35 39891 02/06/92. ql 39892 _o 02/06/92 ;o 51 co )HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE DEMANDS OR CLAIMS COVERED BY ---• THE WARRANTS LISTED ON P4EF WARRANT REGISTER FOR /_ TO /6 INCLUSIVE, OF THE A._ ARE ACCURATE, r� FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE FOR PAYMENT, AND ARE IN CONFORMANCE TO TH E,ylUDGET BY FINANCE DIE, ECTOR DATE ---4:71/�/y ro !2 74 February 6, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the City Council of February 11, 1992 TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS February 25, 1992 Mid -Year Budget Review Removal of hazardous materials from building at Clark Field City Mgr./Fin. Dir. Public Works Director Council 10/9/90 Map and time schedule for street sweeping Public Wks. Dir. Coordination of street sweeping with trash pickup days Recommendation regarding telephone system replacement CIP 89-151 - Award contract for Office of Traffic Safety grant Award contract for janitorial services Award downtown maintenance agreement Public Works Dir. General Services Dir. Public Works Director Public Works Director Public Works Director Alternatives for parking solutions on PCH (GIP) Building Director Street lighting/Crossing Guards - resolutions ordering preparation of reports Public Works Director Identify misc. revenue, develop appropriate fee (GIP) Finance Director March 10, 1992 Council 8/13/91 Report on procedure for protecting survey monuments 16th to 19th sts. Public Works Dir. Cable T.V. Board appointment Community Resources Dir. March 12 or 19, 1992 Joint workshop meeting of Council with School District Board & Planning Commission - 1 - 1 c March 24, 1992 Greenbelt parking and improvements (from joint mtg. w/P.C.) Report on Management audits (GIP) City Mgr.3/25/91 Amendment of ordinance regulating real estate signs April 14, 1992 Rotation of Mayor CIP 85-137 - Valley Ardmore overlay accept as complete April 28, 1992 Proclamation declaring May Water Awareness Month 3rd Quarter CIP status report Quarterly update of Goals Implementation Program May 12, 1992 Proclamation Public Works Week May 18 to 22 Project Touch lease renewal (Rms. 3 & 11) May 14 or 21, 1992 Joint Council workshop meeting with Chamber of Commerce and Planning Commission May 26, 1992 Street lighting/Crossing Guard (a) resolution approving report (b) resolution setting public hearing for June 23 June 9, 1992 Approval of Land Use Element (GIP) Dispute Resolution Services lease renewal Public Works Director Finance Director Building Director Public Works Director Public Works Director City Manager Public Works Director Community Resources Dir. Public Works Director Planning Director Community Resources Dir. June 11 or 18, 1992 Joint meeting of Council with Planning Commission June 23, 1992 Report on civilian enforcement officers (GIP) Street lighting/Crossing Guard public hearing July 28, 1992 4th Quarter CIP status report Quarterly update of Goals Implementation Program August 11, 1992 Hope Chapel Lease renewal (Rms. 5, 6A) September 8, 1992 Association for Retarded Citizens lease renewal (Rm. 1, 2, 15) South Bay Hospital District lease renewal (Rm 9) Easter Seals lease renewal (Rms. 16, 17) December, 1992 Completion of HIP Program Project Touch lease renewal (Rm.C) Public Safety Director Public Works Director Public Works Director City Manager Community Resources Dir. Community Resources Dir. Community Resources Dir. Community Resources Dir. Planning Director Community Resources Dir. ***************************************************************** Upcoming Items Not Yet Calendared Caltrans utility maintenance agrmt. Historic Preservation Ordinance (with Land Use Element) Public Works Director Planning Director ***************************************************************** Initiated by Party Date Council 5/8/90 Goal 4 Re. oil project CUP - define "temporary" as relates to height of project Planning Director 5/16/90 Options to computerize per- sonnel as part of payroll function Finance Director Council 8/14/90 Review of standard CUP conditions Planning Dir. Ordinance for new Chapter 19 of HBMC entitled "Motor Vehicles and Traffic" City Mgr.2/21/91 RFP for computer system Council 3/12/91 South School Conceptual design Council Bid spec. for office systems (furniture) Award of bid for purchase of computer equipment for Police Dept. Council 6/6/91 Review Bldg/Zoning Code changes to improve liveability Staff 7/25/91 Adjustment of Park Tax Council 8/27 Revision of allowable uses in open space zone Council 9/24/91 Effect of nonconforming ordinance on damaged structures Report on productivity incentives for employees (GIP) Participate w/school civics program coordinator (GIP) Rental agreement for office copier Statistical survey - requested at 4/23/91 meeting Report on cost effectiveness of downtown enforcement (GIP) Report on increasing police foot patrol Public Works Dir. Data Processing Community Resources Finance Director Police Chief Planning Director Building Director Planning Planning Dept. Personnel Director Personnel Director Interim City Manager Police/Finance Police Chief Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council February 4, 1992 City Council Meeting of February 11, 1992 MONTHLY STATUS REPORT OF INACTIVE PUBLIC DEPOSITS FOR HERMOSA BEACH Attached is a report of all Inactive Public Deposits for the month of January 1992. Respectfully submitted, Gary Bruts City Treasurer NOTED: Steve Wisriiewski Interim City Manager ld INSTITUTION LAIF TOTAL INVESTMENT REPORT - JANUARY 1992 DATE OF INVESTMENT DATE OF MATURITY INTEREST BALANCE 1/01/92 Maturity BALANCE 1/31/92 LACPIF Railroad Right -of -Way BALANCE 1/01/92 Investment BALANCE 1/31/92 MERRILL LYNCH CORPORATE NOTES: Ford Motor Credit Co. Investment U.S. TREASURY BOND: Investment Investment Investment Investment $6,298,756.18 <1,300,000.00> $4,998,756.18 Account $ 852,130.36 189,871.60 1,042,001.96 $ 500,000.00 $1,000,156.25 $ 499,921.88 $ 995,312.50 $ 996,875.00 1/21/92 5/19/88 3/06/90 3/08/90 4/20/90 5/14/90 1/06/92 5/20/93 2/29/92 2/29/92 3/31/92 2/15/93 6.318% 6.20% 9.10% 8.50% 8.50% 8.763% 8.49% Investment $1,005,937.50 9/14/90 6/30/94 8.50% INVESTMENT TOTAL $11,038,961.27 SEATTLE 1ST NATL. BANK TRUST BALANCE 1/01/92 $ 531,032.22 BALANCE 1/31/92 TICOR TITLE INSURANCE CO. BALANCE 12/31/91 BALANCE 12/31/91 TRUSTEE TOTAL GRAND TOTAL 531,032.22 8.625% $ 11,717.01 11,717.01 $ 542,749.23 $11,581,710.50 Respectfully Submitted, Gary Brutsc City Treasurer 7.5% 3 January 28, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the City Council February 11, 1992 RAISING RENTAL FEES FOR CLARK BUILDING RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Commission and staff that Council approve the following fee increase and format change for renting Clark Building for private parties and receptions. Current Fee Proposed Fee Private parties (per hour) $ 30 $ 50 Cleanup/Damage Deposit $100 $250 Maintenance Fee Non Refundable $100 Change to "Booking Fee" $100 BACKGROUND The current fee and charge policy became effective July 1, 1987. Please see attached. Since that time the use of Clark for parties and receptions has increased substantially, making for a tremendous impact on facility wear and tear and City services. At the December 4, 1991 Commission meeting, staff indicated that they would be examining the rates for parties as they seem to be below the going rate for public facilities of this type. FY 91-92 projections are that we will bring in $26,000 for Clark Building rentals. An estimated 32 percent of that is from parties and receptions. ANALYSIS It has become apparent to staff (through researching neighboring cities and comparable facilities) that the current fees for parties and alike are below market levels. Please see the attached survey. Besides an increase in the hourly rate, it is also recommended that the name of the $100 maintenance fee be changed to a non-refundable reservation fee. Staff has had difficulty in obtaining users cooperation in cleaning up after their events (due to the fact that they think the $100 covers clean-up) and wishes for the term "maintenance" be changed to "booking" which will be paid at time of reservation to secure the date. The recommendation also suggests increasing the refundable cleanup/damage deposit from $100 to $250. It is intended that an 1 le increase in the cleanup/damage deposit will give renters a greater incentive to clean up after their party and will give staff more leverage when damage occurs. Please note that fees for non-profit organizations will remain the same. If approved, the change in policy would go into effect for reservations made after March 1, 1992. Other alternatives available to the Council include: 1. Wait until the beginning of FY 92-93 to implement change. 2. Do not increase fees. 3. Request more information. Concur: Mary Dept. mt 41011110, Steve Wisniewski Interim City Manager Noted for Fiscal Impact "4• -y, nity Resources erector Respectfully submitted, L. Carol Belser ,}'^ Recreation Specialist Dept. of Community Resources Viki Copeland, Director Finance Department (i) Pi 0 H 0 PL4 0 f74 SURVEY OF CHARGES FOR RECEPTION/PARTY FACILITIES RESTAURANTS Charlie Brown's(RB): * $100 non-refundable deposit reservation fee * $400 non-refundable wedding fee * Entree per person beginning at $13.95 each Orville & Wilburs (MB): * $250 non-refundable booking fee, goes toward rent. * Must use their food - $18.95 min. a meal per person with 18% added. HOTELS Radisson (MB): * $45 per person minimum, includes food, not alcohol. * Deposit of $1000 required; non-refundable but applied to total fee. * 18% added to bill for tax and gratuities. Barnabey's (MB): * $500 flat fee for garden terrace facility. * Food and drinks must be purchased there. FACILITY HALLS Hermosa Beach Rotary: * $200 party/non-specific time limit. * $200 refundable security deposit. * Renters are charged $20 per bag of trash left at site. Hermosa Beach Kiwanis: * $350 party/non-specific time limit. * $100 refundable security deposit. MUNICIPAL SITES City of Carson: * Refundable deposit of $250. * Evening rental 5:30 to Midnight - $300 + $40 insurance. * Rental of dance floor is $75.00 extra. * Must use caterer - $12.50 to $30.00 per person. * Alcohol is allowed. * 4 hours or less, rent is $200. City of El Segundo: No reception hall -facilities. City of Torrance: (Park buildings) * All renters pay $25 refundable key deposit.. * Nonprofit groups pay $25 refundable fee per season. * Commercial groups pay $75 refundable fee with no food or $100 refundable fee with food (plus key deposit). * No insurance is required from renters. * No alcohol is allowed. (Community Building) * Rental fee same an Park buildings. * Police supervision required. * Insurance certificate. City of Lawndale * Refundable deposit of $150. * Rental fee of $55/hour for facility with kitchen. * Rental fee of $45/hour w/o kitchen. * No alcohol is allowed. * Staff sometimes required to supervise. City of Manhattan Beach * 4 hour rental block is $212. * Kitchen rental $70. * Facilities close at 10 pm. * No alcohol is allowed. City of Redondo Beach * Facility use is $50 per/hour. * Refundable security deposit $100. January 29, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the City Council of February 11, 1992 1992 WOMEN'S PRO VOLLEYBALL TOURNAMENT RECOMMENDATION It is recommended by the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission and staff that Council approve the request and contract for a professional beach volleyball tournament to be held on the Pier Courts in the Summer, 1992: DATES: June 13 & 14 GROUP: Women's Professional Volleyball Association (WPVA) TOURNAMENT: Women's Professional SPONSOR: Coors Light FEES: $1,570 per day TOTAL: $3,140 (2 days) BACKGROUND The Community Resources Department received a special event permit application from the Women's Professional Volleyball Association (WPVA) for a June 13-14 tourney. At their January 22, 1992 meeting, the Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Commission recommended approval of the WPVA tournament. The WPVA is requesting approval for their 4th annual tournament in Hermosa Beach. In past years, this event was organized by Craig Elledge of C. E. Sports (this year C. E. Sports will organize the Four Man Pro Event in April). In 1991, the WPVA began to organize pro events themselves instead of hiring event marketing firms, therefore, this represents their first request to operate an event in Hermosa Beach. ANALYSIS The Women's professional tournament has a well established history of successful tournaments in the City without notable negative incidents. The event has been growing each year with attendance of approximately 5,000 per day. While the WPVA has not operated a tournament in the City yet, the City of Manhattan Beach reports they have done a very respectable job there. if As the Commission recommended (and Council approved) that the 4 -Man tournament organizers provide a $2 million event liability certificate, staff thought it would be prudent to require the same for this and other volleyball tournaments and therefore is addressed is the attached contract. Clearly this event represents the best of its kind and if approved will keep Hermosa Beach on the map as an elite venue for tournaments of this caliber. Other Alternatives available to Council: 1. Deny request 2. Request more information ATTACHMENTS 1. Women's Professional Volleyball Association Special Event Permit Application 2. Commercial Event Contract 3. Minutes from January 22, 1992, Commission meeting Respectfully submitted, Carol Belser Recreation Specialist Dept. of Community Resources Concur: Mar Dep oney, Director Co»m nity Resources Steve Wisniewski Interim City Manager City of Hermosa Beach Department of Community Resources 710 Pier Avenue, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 318-0280 SPECIAL EVENT PERMIT APPLICATION Organization's Name: u/mr/ij r40y6sfl %7'� Profit Non -Profit / Non-profit Number �5- Y'Z% 1 ��/ Organization's Address: adv. a/7 e?// Zip Code 9oTi�� Phone Number(s) : %/3) 02/5-2,'6, • Contact Person and Title: /COX47?/Fl 1%11, - Contact Person's Address: ; ;7f774 /%1QIti/.4 �%?7 2ZcL3 4 C C. Zip Code re)-5— Daytimeme Phone Number:.25J/6 Evening Phone Number: �cs0•Z/Z0 Brief Description of Event: c-' Miee%! Date(s) of Event: ,1 U,U� /3-/S1 b-7- e/P visai � J,�� //- / z) Location(s) of Event: Set-up Time: 6..00 4-771 J777-7277 )d Time Event is to Commence: 470 Number of Participants (Including volunteers): /t o Anticipated Number of Spectators: Number of Vehicles A Odd - t,000 Involved and How Used: 5-4; t/EA/G/s 1=a0AL, oAig S.5 -X;(1 Description of Set-up for this Event:_— eip of S� �tpe /5'/' - ids• . ,I. !# 0..4", /6/42 A I Additional Information or Special Requests: t e -s -r"' 7ih - - �-1Z art "to" ,'T' 7`� 5 CIDSoo / L...5P,V T/G4GIG "slit ad v //001-077 CT' / /0G /P/9-0,6.;7 K - . P . Fees, Charges and Other Requirements: Police Costs Fire Costs Business License Public Works Costs $ Processing Fee $ Other Costs $ Total Due $ Refundable Damage Deposit $ Damage Deposit is due: Balance of fees incurred are due: Insurance Required: Yes :////No Date Received Unless greater or lessor coverage is requested, applicant agrees to furnish the City of Hermosa beach evidence of $1 million comprehensive general liability insurance in the form of a certificate, covering the entire period of this permit, naming the City of Hermosa Beach and its employees as additional insured. Expiration Date Permittee waives claims against the City of Hermosa Beach, its officers, agents and employees, for fees or damages caused by, arising out of, or in any way connected with the exercise of this permit. APPLICANT AGREES TO COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE LAWS AND TO MAINTAIN IN GOOD CONDITION AND TO RETURN SAID PREMISES IN THE SAME CONDITION AS THEY WERE BEFORE SAID USE. I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS TRUE AND COMPLETE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. ALL FEES, CHARGES AND OTHER NECESSARY MATERIAL WILL BE PAID AND/OR FURNISHED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY RESOURCES AS MUTUALLY AGREED TO BY BOTH PARTIES. Company Represen ative Permit to be processed through City Council: Yes If YES, Council's decision: Application is invalid without the following signatures: Department of Community Date Resources Police Department Date Authorization Fire Department Date Authorization if Required Life Guard Authorization Date Needed on all Water Events T --r•• I1 I- BEACH AND WATER =l 1 I EJ I I A _LA -1-1 I I I 10'x10' SAMPLE BOOTIIES * * * * * # WPVA CONCESSIONS BOOTH 10!x20' BOARDWALK BOARDWALK BOARDWALK DIJYN HDS 3ZIs 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 71 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH COMMERCIAL BEACH EVENT(S) CONTRACT This contract is entered into on March 1, 1992, at Hermosa Beach, California by and between Women's Professional Volleyball Association (WPVA) a Sporting Events Promoter, and the CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH (CITY), with regard to the WOMEN'S PROFESSIONAL VOLLEYBALL TOURNAMENT ON JUNE 13 and 14, 1992. FEES Event fee shall be $3,140. The $500 deposit will be applied toward the $3,140 permit fee and will be refunded only if the permit request is denied hy the City. All predetermined costs fees shall be paid two weeks prior to the Tournament. All unanticipated costs incurred by the City on behalf of the event shall be paid within 15 days of receiving an invoice from the City. SECURITY The City of Hermosa Beach shall establish a command post in the immediate vicinity of the Tournament. The command post shall be staffed at all times with one representative of the Hermosa Beach Police Department and one representative of WPVA. WPVA shall provide no less than ten security officers. Said officers shall wear identifiable uniforms that indicate a separate identity from other Tournament staff. A representative of the security staff shall meet with the Hermosa Beach Police Department Watch Commander prior to the Tournament for a pre -event briefing. The private security staff shall be responsible primarily for informing spectators of the City's alcohol ordinance. The City of Hermosa Beach shall provide Officers for the event as follows for each day of Tournament, 10:00 AM - 6:00 PM: 1 Sergeant 2 Officers or as many officers as deemed necessary by Public Safety Director. Cost of officers shall be assumed by WPVA. CLEAN-UP WPVA shall provide a professional maintenance service to clean the following areas each day of the Tournament: . The Beach and Strand, from 8th Street to 15th Street. . Pier. Avenue, from Strand to Monterey Avenue. The maintenance service shall be responsible for hauling the trash collected outside the City each day of the Tournament. All maintenance work is to be concluded by 8:00 PM each evening. WPVA shall provide additional trash receptacles at the following locations: . Beach (impacted area) . Strand (impacted area) . Hermosa Valley Greenbelt (impacted area) or additional trash receptacles as needed. LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF BEACHES AND HARBORS SERVICES WPVA shall assume all costs for any additional lifeguards each day of Tournament if required by Los Angeles County Lifeguards. INSURANCE WPVA shall, not later than 30 days prior to the event, provide the City a Certificate of Insurance providing personal injury and property damage liability insurance naming the CITY, and County of Los Angeles their officers, employees and agents as additional insured with a minimum coverage of $2 million combined single limit coverage. Said insurance shall not be cancelled or altered without 30 day notice in writing to the City and County. WPVA insurers shall be primarily responsible for any and all liability resulting or arising from the performance of the contract and CITY and County and their insurers shall not be required to contribute. WPVA agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold the CITY and County of Los Angeles harmless from and against any and all liability and expense, including defense costs and legal fees, caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of the event promotion firm/sponsor its agents, officers and employees, including, but not limited to, personal injury, bodily injury, death and property damage. CO-SPONSORS A fee of $100 each shall be charged for all co-sponsors; with each co-sponsor permitted one display booth. All co-sponsors must meet with CITY approval prior to event. ADVERTISING Signage regarding the CITY'S alcohol ordinance shall be required by WPVA. City staff shall determine criteria for size, wording and locations for posting. City of Hermosa Beach shall permit two street banners to be posted for Tournament. Cost of installation shall be the responsibility of WPVA. CITY shall permit WPVA to display two large replicas of their product. City staff shall have final approval of said replicas and determine location. WPVA shall be required to make announcements informing spectators of the CITY'S alcoholic beverage ordinance as deemed necessary by Hermosa Beach Police. All sponsor signs, props, product facsimiles, etc. deemed necessary by WPVA to identify the event, shall be approved as to location and content by CITY. CITY will not unnecessarily deny said approval and will not curtail certain constitutional rights of event promotion firm/sponsor. PARKING WPVA shall be required to make announcements indicating 1) where there is free parking and 2) that the CITY will strictly enforce all traffic and parking regulations. SPECIAL EVENTS The CITY shall review all requests for any special events requested to be held as part of the Tournament. The CITY shall have the right to deny all requests. MISCELLANEOUS CITY RESPONSIBILITIES The CITY shall make any necessary contacts on behalf of the event with the Los Angeles County Department of Beaches and Harbors. If WPVA desires any County services, they must process their request through the CITY. Any costs for County services will be borne by WPVA. The CITY shall allow access to Tournament site for setup forty eight (48) hours prior to Tournament. The CITY shall reserve the end of Pier Avenue, Beach Drive to the Strand for Tournament staff and film equipment parking. At no time may event/promotion firm block emergency vehicle access. Parking privileges may be revoked at anytime by the CITY. City staff shall inspect grandstand construction and authorize public access. The CITY shall allow WPVA the opportunity to sell official concession items per certain conditions. No food or beverage concessions shall be permitted. All concession items must be approved by CITY prior to event. THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH RETAINS THE RIGHT TO AMEND, ADD OR DELETE ANY CONDITION(S) OF SAID CONTRACT. MISCELLANEOUS WPVA RESPONSIBILITIES WPVA shall provide as many portable port -a -johns as determined necessary by City staff. WPVA shall designate area for spectators to store alcoholic beverages. WPVA shall be responsible for all prize money, equipment, sound system and personnel necessary for conducting such a Tournament. Event shall be conducted in compliance with City of Hermosa Beach Noise Ordinances. Ordinances on file at the Department of Community Resources. WPVA shall take the necessary steps to encourage participants and require sponsors to utilize recycling bins for appropriate materials. WPVA shall make arrangements to provide such bins. F RMOSA ()C() C y Att•rney Date Mayor Date DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY RESOURCES Director Date Women's Professional Volleyball Association President Date Hermosa Beach City Clerk Date PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY RESOURCES ADVISORY COMMISSION MINUTES OF JANUARY 22, 1992, MEETING ROLL CALL Present: Chairperson Reviczky, Commissioners Blaco, Crecy, McCurdy, Peirce Staff: Belser, Rooney City Liaison: Bill Glickman, Interim Public Works Director Guests: Brian Mitchell - Resident landscape architect Marguerite Noetzli - South Bay Literacy Council Coordinator Frances Roberts - South Bay Literacy Council Vice -President APPROVAL OF MINUTES December 4, 1991 Motion: "To approve minutes as submitted." Peirce/Crecy All Ayes ELECTION OF OFFICERS TO SERVE FOR ONE YEAR Motion: "To nominate Dani Peirce for chairperson." Blaco/McCurdy All Ayes Motion: "To close chairperson nominations." McCurdy/Crecy All Ayes Motion: "To nominate Chairperson Reviczky for Vice -Chairperson." Crecy/Blaco All Ayes Motion: "To close Vice -chairperson nominations." McCurdy/Crecy All Ayes REQUEST FROM BERLITZ LANGUAGE CENTER TO WAIVE RENTAL FEES FOR ROOM 8 FOR REMAINDER OF SCHOOL YEAR Motion: "To approve staff recommendation and deny Berlitz Language Center's request for a waiver of fees." Crecy/Blaco All Ayes REQUEST FROM SOUTH BAY LITERACY COUNCIL INC. TO WAIVE RENTAL FEES FOR A MEETING ROOM IN THE COMMUNITY CENTER Motion: "To approve staff recommendation for a partial waiver of rental fees waiving the cleaning/damage deposit but not the hourly room rental rate charged for non-profit organizations." Peirce/Blaco All Ayes REQUEST FROM SOUTH BAY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT INDEPENDENT STUDIES TO WAIVE RENTAL AND CLEAN-UP FEES FOR THEIR JUNE 16 GRADUATION IN THE CIVIC THEATRE Motion: "To approve staff recommendation for a partial waiver of theatre rental and full waiver of damage deposit and cleaning fees." Blaco/Peirce All Ayes (Reviczky out of room when vote taken) PROFESSIONAL VOLLEYBALL TOURNAMENT Motion: "To approve and forward to City Council for final approval for Hermosa Beach to host the women's pro beach volleyball tournament organized by WPVA on June 13 and 14, 1992 plus the request that the professional men's tournament be tabled until the next Commission meeting where further information regarding an admission fee be presented by the event organizer." McCurdy/Peirce Ayes: McCurdy, Peirce, Blaco, Crecy Noes: Reviczky Note: Chairperson Reviczky objected to the inconsistency of permit fees required by the City for the pro volleyball events. Staff Note: Per Council's action on February 26, 1991, the event fee per day for the men's professional volleyball event was raised to $3,000. The women's professional tournament stayed the same at $1,500. Motion: "To accept application from AVP for the men's professional tournament with direction for AVP to present their plan to charge an admission fee which will -be approved by staff and the City Attorney before forwarded to Council for final approval." McCurdy/Peirce Ayes: McCurdy Noes: Blaco, Crecy, Reviczky, Peirce Note: Chairperson Reviczky requested that the Commission minutes be attached to the Council agenda item for 1992 pro volleyball events. CLARK RENTAL FEE CONSIDERATION Motion: "To approve staff's recommendation to increase Clark Building rental fees and format for parties and receptions but not to increase the fee for non-profit groups and request staff to bring before Council for final approval." Reviczky/Peirce All Ayes SOUTH SCHOOL ACQUISITION Motion: "To schedule a special meeting of the Commission for February 19th at 7:30 p.m. in Room 12 in the Community Center to discuss plans for the South School site." Reviczky/Crecy All Ayes Note: Staff is requested to bring a copy of the survey of the area including the boundaries and dimensions. STAFF REPORT Note: Staff is requested to bring back to the Commission the prioritized list from the Park Tour for discussion at the next regular meeting. OTHER MATTERS Note: Staff is requested to investigate the possibility of increasing the level of lighting in the gymnasium. Correspondence: Letter from Anna Taylor to be discussed at special Commission meeting on Feb. 19th. ADJOURNMENT 11:00 P.M. Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 5, 1992 Regular Meeting of February 11, 1992 REQUEST FOR 30 DAY EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT FOR THE ACTING GENERAL SERVICES DIRECTOR AND ONE GENERAL SERVICES OFFICER Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council extend for thirty (30) days the temporary appointment of the General Services Director and one (1) General Services Officer. Background: The Acting General Services Director was appointed on May 22, 1991. Filling of this position is being held pending review of the organizational structure of the Parking Enforcement Division. There is currently one vacant General Services Officer position which is being filled on a temporary basis pending completion of a review of department staffing levels. Analysis: Section 2-33 of the Hermosa Beach City Code precludes a temporary appointment of an individual to a permanent Civil Service position for more than six -months without approval from the City Council every thirty days. Respectfully submitted, Concur: Robert A. Blackwood Personnel Director rab/extend - 1 - Steve S. Wisniewski Interim City Manager lg February 6, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council of February 11, 1992 RECOMMENDATION REGARDING 'PILOT PROJECT' FOR CITY HALL PC BASED LOCAL AREA NETWORK COMPUTER SYSTEM Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Place the 'pilot project' on hold pending completion of the midyear budget reviews; and 2. Authorize the purchase of peripheral components (printers) as necessary to replace faulty equipment or to add equipment in order to facilitate City operations. Background: At the regular Council meeting of May 28, 1991, staff recommended that the City contract with a computer consultant to evaluate the current computer system and the future needs of the City and to recommend a solution. Council direction was to hold on this matter until after the midyear budget review was completed. At the regular Council meeting of June 25, 1991, staff returned to Council with the recommendation to contract with a computer consultant. Council direction was to receive and file the recommendation. Council further directed staff to investigate what other cities of similar size were using for their computer needs. Additionally, Councilmember Essertier was directed to provide written direction to staff that would specify Council direction. Councilmember Essertier presented written direction on July 2, 1991. This direction was approved by Council at the regular meeting of July 9, 1991. In addition, staff was given direction to plan for the establishment of a pilot program in order to evaluate and integrate a new computer system into the City. Analysis: In accordance with Council direction, staff began a search for cities of similar size that had a PC based local area network system in operation. The City of Hemet was identified as the only city in our area that had such a system. The Council Data Processing Sub -Committee consisting of Councilmembers Essertier and Creighton as well as city staff conducted on site visits to view the Hemet operation. Following those visits, a data processing advisory committee was formed and consisted of members of the various departments of the city that would be using the computers. Following numerous meetings, discussions, and software demonstrations the staff sub- committee formulated a plan for the pilot project consisting of PC workstations linked to a central server. -1- The attached drawing depicts the recommended pilot project and is designed to include all departments on at least a limited basis during the initial phase of implementation. In placing the equipment in the designated areas, staff believes that a textbook pilot program of the local area network system would be in place and functional, thus allowing staff the ability to evaluate the system, identify problem areas and modifying the system as necessary prior to expanding the pilot program. The costs associated with the pilot program are estimated to be approximately $58,487. This price includes the system hardware and operating software, wordprocessing and spreadsheet software, installation, training, and the cable necessary for the installation. At this price, it was assumed that city employees would pull the cable for the system. There have been concems expressed over any decision to have the cabeling installed by city employees. Staff obtained a quote for professional cable installation for the total system from GTE. They estimate the cost to be between $20,000 and $25,000. This professional wiring would carry both the data and the telephone service on the same wiring system. The estimated cost for the application software(finance, personnel, payroll, purchasing, etc) for the pilot program is $36,850. It should also be noted that the hardware and software pricing listed($58,487.) is directly from the City of Hemet's official bid. The vendor will honor the bid for any other municipality until the expiration, which is July 1, 1992. If we purchased the equipment from the Hemet bid there would be no requirement to develop specifications and call for bids from all vendors since this has already been done by the City of Hemet. If not, we would be required to complete the entire process. Although there is $135,000 budgeted for the computer equipment, there is a current budget shortfall. As such staff is recommending that acquisition of the equipment for the pilot project be placed on hold pending the completion of the midyear review. A freeze has been placed on all computer purchases since December 1989. This freeze has been interpreted to include any and all computer components, including printers. Since the printers can be used with any system we eventually go with, and since we have a severe need for printers in some areas of the city as well as replacing malfunctioning equipment that is more expensive to repair than to replace, staff is requesting authorization to proceed with the purchase of a minimal amount of equipment necessary to improve the operation of the City. It is estimated that the cost would not exceed $5,000. Respectfully u mitted, n ewski, Interim City Manager Noted for Fiscal Impact, Viki Copeland; Director of Finance 2 Noted: Marguerite Sturges, Computer System Manager SOFTWARE: (Network system)Novell v.3.11- Ethernet (Operating system) DOS 5.0 (Word processing) Word Perfect (Spreadsheet) Lotus 123 (Finance) EDEN (Personnel) EDEN 486/33 1.2 GB Hard Disk - 9MB Ram (duplexed) DAT Tape Back-up Concentrators (2 - 12 port) System Printer Cabling (twisted pair, 10 -base -T) Finance Workstations: 3 - new stations with 14" color monitors, one with disk drive. 1 - Existing HP Vectra Existing LaserJet with NetPort, shared with Pers, Fin, and City Clk 'KILL Existing Printronix printer with NetPort Planning -] Workstation: 1 - new station with 14" color monitor, w/o disk drive. Printer: 1 HP LaserJet (new) Wo dish City Clerk kstation: 1- new station drive and 14" color moi City Treasurer vith i or Workstation: 1- new station disk drive and 14" color moi with itor Existing LaserJet Printe's with NetPorts, shared with Personnel, Finance and City Clerk Personnel Workstations: 2 - new stations with 14" color monitors,one with disk dri, 1 - Existing HP Vectra CS Building and Safety Workstation: 1 - new station with 14" color monitor, w/o disk drives, Printer: 1 HP LaserJet (new) Public works Workstations: 2 Existing HP Vec Printers: Existing HP LaserJet and plotter as e. Data Processing Workstation: 1 - new station with 14" color monitor, with disk drive. Printer: 1 HP LaserJet (new) February 6, 1992 City Council Meeting February 11, 1992 Mayor and Members of the City Council ORDINANCE NO. 91-1064- "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT TO ALLOW DAY NURSERIES, PRESCHOOLS, AND AFTER SCHOOL CHILD CARE FACILITIES WITH THIRTEEN (13) OR MORE CHILDREN AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE IN THE R-1 ZONE, AND AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 10, OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR SUCH FACILITIES AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION." Submitted for adoption is Ordinance No. 91-1064 relating to the above subject. At the meeting of January 28, 1992, this ordinance was presented to Council for consideration and was introduced by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Concur: Benz, Essertier, Mayor Midstokke Edgerton Wiemans None Steve Wisniewski Interim City Manager Elaine Doerflin4', Citty Clerk 2 a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDINANCE 92-1064 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL. OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE TEXT TO ALLOW DAY NURSERIES, PRESCHOOLS, AND AFTER SCHOOL CHILD CARE FACILITIES WITH THIRTEEN (13) OR MORE CHILDREN AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE IN THE R-1 ZONE, AND AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 10, OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH STANDARDS FOR GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR SUCH FACILITIES AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on January 21, 1992, to consider the recommendation of the Planning Commission to amend the zoning ordinance and made the following Findings: A. B. Opportunities for opening child facilities of thirteen (13) or more to the commercial zones; In certain circumstances, there may be appropriate in residential zones for allowing such uses; C. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the General Plan; D. An environmental assessment has been conducted by the Staff Environmental Review Committee and it was determined that this text amendment qualifies for a negative declaration; day care or preschool children are limited only locations NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, does hereby ordain that the zoning ordinance text be amended to allow day nurseries, preschools, and after school child care for thirteen (13) or more children as a permitted use in the R-1 zone, as follows: SECTION 1. Amend Section 4-2. Permitted Uses, by adding the following subsection (10): "(10) Day Nursery, Preschool, and/or after school child care with thirteen (13) or more 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 children, -conditional use permit required subject to Section 10-9.1 SECTION 2. Add the following section: "Section 10-9.1 Day Nursery, Preschools, and After School Child Care with thirteen (13) or more children The following minimum conditions and standards, in addition to any other deemed necessary or appropriate to ensure compatibility with existing or future permitted uses in the vicinity, shall be required: (1) A minimum of one parking space for every seven (7) children (2) In residential zones, only property adjacent to commercially zoned property or property developed with a church or school facility shall be considered for a day nursery, preschool, or child care facility with thirteen (13) or more children (3) Adequate space for loading and unloading children shall be available or shall be provided on the site (4) Residential use of a day nursery, preschool, or child care facility with thirteen (13) or more children shall be prohibited (5) All day care centers shall comply with state statutes and shall be licensed by the state. SECTION 3. 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 4. 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 5. 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. 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 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1992 by following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: p/perskid CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY 3 1. Location a. Address: City wide b. Legal: N/A 2. Description Text amendment to allow day care facilities for more than 12 childern as a conditionally permitted use in all residential zones 3. Sponsor a. Name: City of Hermosa Beach b. Mailing Address: 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Phone: (310) 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 tobe 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 supporting this finding is on file in the Planning Department. 12-5-91 Date of Finding hairman, Enviionmental 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. Dat J 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 EA -c -/P6 4;i9) Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council SUBJECT: HOUSING IMPROVEMENT i January 6, 1992 //4a1)9.1., Regular Meeting of January 14, 1992 PROGRAM (HIP) INITIATED BY STAFF PURPOSE: TO RE -ACTIVATE THE HOUSING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Recommendation Direct staff to prepare a report as to how best to reactivate the Housing Improvement Program. Background At the February 26, 1991 City Council meeting, the Council tabled the Housing Improvement Program pending the outcome of land use issues to be submitted to the electorate on the November, '91 ballot. The electorate voted in favor of Proposition J on the November, '91 ballot. Although advisory in nature, the measure directly relates to the Housing Improvement Program. Analysis Essentially the Housing Improvement Program was initiated to implement the General Plan Revised Housing Element which sets forth general policy statements regarding such factors as residential setbacks, open space, parking, lot coverage, height, architectural features, and landscaping. Originally, a committee representing, as closely as possible, all geographical areas of the City was to be formed, and workshops were to be conducted. This approach could still be used, if HIP is reactivated. There are a total of 30 applicants at this time; however, these applicants, after approximately 11 months of waiting, may no longer be interested, and/or available to serve on the committee. Since there is now an advisory vote of the general public regarding "bulk" related issues, it may not be necessary to form a committee. Several public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council may be adequate. Steve Wisniewski Interim City Manager ej tfull sub Michael Planning ac Director p/ccsrhipl 10 10 FOOT FRONT SETBACK ON A 2 -UNIT CONDOMINIUM, TO IN- STEAD ALLOW A MINIMUM 6 FOOT FRONT SETBACK AT 619 TENTH • STREET, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS A PORTION OF LOT 4, BLOCK 78, SECOND ADDITION TO HERMOSA BEACH." Motion Creighton, second Wiemans. So ordered, noting the objection of Midstokke. 7. SELECTION OF TASK FORCE FOR HOUSING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated January 17, 1991. (Continued from 1/22/91 and 2/12/91 meetings.) Director Schubach presented the staff report and re- sponded to Council questions. City Attorney Vose stated that he saw no violation of the Brown Act with an initial preference/selection sheet. Action: To table the Housing Improvement Program (HIP) pending the outcome of some, yet to be decided, land use issues to be submitted to the electorate on the November 1991 ballot, and amended by Midstokke to include sepa rately commercial. Motion Wiemans, second Creighton. So ordered, noting the objections of Essertier and Mayor Sheldon. The meeting recessed at 10:30 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 10:38 P.M. Item number 11 was heard at this time, but is shown in order for clarity. 8. RECOMMENDATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE ANNUAL REPORT AND REVIEW OF CITY GOALS. Memorandum from City Manager Ke- vin B. Northcraft dated January 14, 1991. (Continued from 1/22/91 and 2/12/91 meetings.) City Manager Northcraft reviewed the progress that has been achieved on the 1990-1991 City Goals. Action: To receive and file. Motion Midstokke, second Essertier. So ordered. 9. STATUS REPORT ON CITY'S AQMD REGULATION XV - TRIP REDUC- TION PLAN. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated January 15, 1991. (Continued from 1/22/ 91 and 2/12/91 meetings.) Director Blackwood presented the staff report and re- sponded to Council questions. Director Blackwood was instructed to keep a record of the hours that were spent in complying with this program. Action: To receive and file. City Council Minutes 02-26-91 Page 7402 Cefr7/4,#°1-L74 LETTER TO: CITY MANAGER AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: WILMA BURT, CITIZEN Recent newspaper reports of supposed conflict between the Council members seems to be another problem of interpretation or suppression of discussion over employment and the idea of the real meaning of the People's Initiative known as N.S. 211. It seemed to proceed to the use or non-use of Robert's Rules of Order in controlling debate of the issues. I ask that this letter be agendized and included in the minutes of this session of the City Council. For many years there has been a constant attempt to interpret N. S. 211 in a personal way. Generally these attempts have been to immasculate the check -and -balance system between the elected council; the Council appointed manager; and the qualifying of hired personnel. In most cases, the appointed manager has wanted more power. In 1980, the citizens again voted by a large plurality to continue the department managers under the Civil Service Rules. Since 1972, the many attempts to circumvent N. S. 211 has built up anxiety in the employees and distrust within the citizens who need city services, discussions about the city budget or new city laws for the operation of the city. No one trusts anyone which is harmful to All! These conflicts were the original reason for the People's Initiative called N. S. 211. I, as an original worker for the Civil Service used in Hermosa Beach, ask the present City Council to have a meeting to change the City Code to specify specifically the meaning of the following words as now used in the initiative: open, competitive, qualified, test, examination, interview, gradable, positive, and accurate. A qualifying open competitive examination in 1960 meant to everyone in the L. A. County --a written open test given by the Los Angeles County Civil Service Board, given for a specific type of work or position from graded standard tests developed by accredited companies. I believe this is still the accepted rule in all government pamphlets or advertisements for application for a government job. If you settle this continuing problem in a real legal way, it could bring peace. The City could function smoother and other important issues could be completed. The bottom line would save working time and be more peaceful and economical for our City. %641,t,76 QE-ecel — S 51 ' ' 31272-"ti 14- ‘4.4'42-4--4-1)PL7 February 3, 1992 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach Planning Commission February 11, 1992 SUBJECT: SUBDIVISION 91-2, APPEAL VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #23246 LOCATION: 212 PROSPECT AND 206 PROSPECT (AKA 1265 VAN HORNE LANE) APPLICANT/: MARK LUEKER APPELLANT 1265 VAN HORNE LANE HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 REQUEST: TO SUBDIVIDE TWO LOTS INTO THREE LOTS Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission recommends denial of the requested subdivision by adopting the attached resolution sustaining the Commission's decision. Staff Recommendation If the Council approves the requested subdivision staff recommends adoption subject to conditions as set forth in the attached resolution of approval. Background The Planning Commission, at their meeting of December 3, 1991, denied the requested subdivision by a vote of 5:0, because of concern about creating a new lot which would front on a substandard 20 -foot wide street in Redondo Beach with access only from Redondo Beach, which would not be satisfactory for the service needs of the lot. For further background please refer to the Planning Commission staff report. Analysis Please refer to the Planning Commission staff report and attachments (especially the opinion from the City Attorney) for the analysis of the project. To summarize the report, the proposed subdivision clearly complies with all the requirements for approval of a lot division, except in regards to the issue of frontage on a 20 -foot wide street, which is much less clear. The City Attorney's opinion addresses the question if the subdivision can be approved since it creates a lot on a 20 -foot wide street in Redondo Beach despite Hermosa Beach's subdivision ordinance which specifically prohibits the creation of lots unless on a "street" of 21 feet or wider. The attorney's opinion states that since Redondo Beach classifies Reynold's Lane as a street, that the City may indeed grant approval. However, it remains the Planning Commission and/or City Council's discretion whether or not approval should - 1 - be granted because of the substandard street width and whether or not it is suitable for the creation of this additional lot. Since the denial by the Planning Commission, the applicant has resubmitted the proposed subdivision map with some slight modifications to address concerns related to the above issue, and as previously noted by Staff. The main change is that the map proposes a 1 -foot dedication along Reynolds Lane to increase it to a 21 foot right-of-way. Although this will slightly improve the proposal, it does not substantially change the situation. Additionally, the revised map more thoroughly shows existing utilities, and existing and proposed improvements (for example, the proposed curb realignment and road widening at the northwest corner of Reynolds and Van Horne Lane). These changes basically show the improvements requested by the Public Works Department as conditions of the subdivision if it is approved. Also, the applicant has provided additional comments on the proposal to further support his case, which includes specific responses to the Planning Commission staff report (see the attached letter). Overall, the applicant makes a very good case for the Council to overturn the Commission's decision, especially since the proposed lots will be substantially larger in size than prevailing lot sizes in the area, and since the corner of Van Horne Lane and Reynolds will be realigned for better safety as a result of the subdivision. The following are staff's responses to some of to the specific comments from the applicant: Para 1. The "uniqueness" noted in staff's report is based on the fact that the newly created lot would front on a 20 -foot wide street in Redondo Beach, not because it is a 20 -foot street. The creation of lot with frontage outside city limits is definitely a unique situation. Besides, if it were a 20 -foot right-of-way in Hermosa Beach the City would have no choice but to deny the request pursuant to Section 29.5-8 (b). The applicant's comparison of this situation to existing streets in Hermosa is valid, however, these are existing situations resulting from early subdivisions which clearly have in some cases resulted in congestion and density problems. In regards to the subdivision under consideration the situation is different since the current Council has a choice in the matter. Para 2. The applicant makes a good pointthatthe lot is easily accessible from points east, nonetheless, it is still arguable from the perspective of someone trying to access the lot from Hermosa Beach, that access is very awkward. Para 10. Staff agrees that the improvements and realignment that would result from this subdivision will incrementally improve the Van Horne/Reynolds intersection. The Commission finding to deny the subdivision was based on inconsistency with the Circulation Element more due to the location of the lot, a situation which cannot be - 2 - corrected or mitigated, rather than a lack of improvements. Finally, it should be noted that the City Council in two recent cases has considered lot divisions in the "Valley Park" area of the City. In both cases the Council denied the requests on appeal. Although the proposed lot sizes met minimum requirements and were similar to the proposed lots in subject case, the existing lot sizes in the surrounding area were much larger. As such, the proposed lots were clearly not consistent with the lower density character of the "Valley Park" area.,, CUR: =ter Michael Schubach Planning Director Steve Wisniewski Interim City Manager Attachments en Robe ttson Associate Planner 1. Alternative resolutions 2. Letters from applicant 3. P.C. Staff Report/Minutes/Resolution of denial 4. Memo from Asst. City Attorney 5. Area Map 6. Departmental Comments and Requirements 7. Correspondence from Redondo Beach 8. Signed petition prepared by applicant 9. Public Notice Affidavit A/pcsr206 3 RESOLUTION 92- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUSTAINING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO DENY VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 23246 FOR THE DIVISION OF TWO EXISTING LOTS INTO THREE LOTS AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PROSPECT AVENUE AND REYNOLDS LANE AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 41 AND 42 AND THE EASTERLY 7' OF LOT 43 HERMOSA HEIGHTS TRACT WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on February 11, 1992, to receive oral and written testimony regarding an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to deny a request to subdivide said property into 3 lots and made the following findings: A. The created lot will front on a one-way street with a width of only 20 feet, as such, the service needs for access and emergency access to this lot will not be adequate and, therefore, are inconsistent with the Circulation element of the General Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California does hereby sustain the decision of the Planning Commission to deny Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 23246 for a 3 -lot subdivision. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1992, by following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City --- of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPRV TO FORM . 7 CITY ATTORNEY p/persd206 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 92- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO OVERTURN THE DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEREBY APPROVE VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 23246 FOR THE DIVISION OF TWO EXISTING LOTS INTO THREE LOTS AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PROSPECT AVENUE AND REYNOLDS LANE AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 41 AND 42 AND THE EASTERLY 7' OF LOT 43 HERMOSA HEIGHTS TRACT WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on February 11, 1992, to receive oral and written testimony regarding an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to deny a request to subdivide said property into 3 lots and made the following findings: A. The three proposed lots will exceed 40 feet in width and exceed 4,000 square feet; B. The newly created lot will front on a public street in Redondo Beach; C. The proposed subdivision will not be detrimental to surrounding lot patterns or property values; D. The size of the lots is not smaller than the prevailing lot size in the area; E. The granting of the lot division will result in the creation of lots that would be of a size and configuration which would be applicable to the standards of development in the R-1 zone; F. The subdivision is consistent with the City of Hermosa Beach General Plan; G. The map complies with the requirements for approval set forth in the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California does hereby approve Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 23246 for a 3 -lot subdivision subject to to the following conditions: - 5- 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 The Final Nap shall be recorded prior to the issuance of building permits for construction of a residential unit on the newly created lot, unless the Directors of the Planning Department and the Building and Safety Department give prior approval. 2. The requirements of the Public Works Department as contained in the attached memorandum dated November 19, 1991, shall be met prior to approval of the final map. All required improvements shall be completed prior to the approval of the final map, or, alternatively, the applicant may provide surety in an amount determined by the Director of the Public Works Department to cover the cost of the improvements, to guarantee the completion of said improvements, in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney. 3. The requirements of the Fire Department, as contained in the the attached letter dated November 20, 1991 shall be met prior to the approval of the final map. The new fire hydrant is to paid for by the applicant and installed prior to approval of the final map, or, alternatively, the subdivider may provide surety in an amount determined by the Fire Department to cover the cost of the installation, in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney. 4. Improvements as required by the City of Redondo Beach shall be completed prior to approval of the final map. a. The applicant shall provide curb and gutter improvements for the 179 feet (street frontage) along Reynolds Lane, and a (west to east) cross gutter shall be provided to allow drainage across Reynolds Lane to Van Horne Lane, subject to City of Redondo Beach Engineering Department approval. 5. Approval of the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map shall become null and void twenty-four months from the date of approval unless the final map is recorded. The applicant may apply in writing to the Planning Commission for and extension of time prior to the date of expiration. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1992, by following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: TO FORT : CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY a/pers206 -6- 84 CK GR OUND MATER/AC January 29, 1992 TO: City of Hermosa Beach Planning Department SUBJECT: Staff comments concerning 1265 Van Horne/212 Prospect Parcel Map The Planning Department report dated 11/26/91 identified the subject project as meeting all city requirements for parcel creation(i.e. all zoning requirements, General Plan density requirements, parcel size requirements, and residential use). These findings are consistent with our conversations over the past two years and were of no surprise. However, new issues surfaced in the report which I was not aware of after all our discussions. I would like to present additional information to address the new issues raised. Para.1 - mention of unique situation with parcel fronting on 20 foot wide street. The existence of streets with 20 foot widths is not new to Hermosa beach. Although not as desirable as an 80 foot right-of-way, according to the Circulation element of the General Plan, 74 of Hermosas 278 street segments (as termed in the study) are 20 feet or LESS in width. (NOTE - alleys are not included in this count.) These figures indicate 277o of Hermosa Beach Streets are 20 feet or less. Of further benefit to the traffic flow is the fact that Reynolds is one-way. As we all know, traffic circulation and safety is of prime importance in the South Bay. Since Reynolds is a full 20 feet wide with no parking, and one-way, street traffic has a lane width of 20 feet. In terms of traffic flow and safety, this is equivalent to a 40 foot wide two-way street! According to the same Circulation element, 238 of Hermosas 278 street segments have a width less than 40 feet. In other words, when traffic circulation and safety are considered, Reynolds Lane provides better traffic flow than 86% of existing Hermosa Beach streets! Para. 5 - "lot access is described as rather awkward. One of the premier benefits to the new parcel will be the secluded, QUIET location. As a function of this location, the parcel is located at the end of a one-way street: Armour Lane. The access to the property will be the same access as found on any other neighborhood one-way street, such as 2nd or 3rd. As an example, both Armour and Spreckles, are one way streets with approximately 64 homes on the two streets. According to friends living there, none of the 64 families complains of access problems, and most prefer the quiet nature of the one way streets. In addition, the parcel is actually slightly MORE accessible when approaching from Grant Avenue, Inglewood Avenue, Hawthorne Blvd, Crenshaw Blvd, or the 405 FWY. Para. 6 - Indicates staff initially opposed to idea due to code provision requiring fronting on street not alley. - As a result of your comments in our past conversations, and the city attorneys findings, I assumed this issue had been resolved. However, to avoid any further discussion, I am willing to provide additional footage to allow Reynolds to meet the street requirements of both Hermosa and Redondo Beach. As indicated on the revised Parcel Map, I can dedicate 1 foot of land along Reynolds as a street in Hermosa Beach. This will allow Reynolds to grow to 21 feet in width. There are other precedents for city boundary splits within a street. As an example, the street just north of 34th in Hermosa is partially in Hermosa and partially in Manhatten. Para. 9 - reference to Reynolds as a narrow street, and singularly accessed on the block. As previously mentioned, the one-way traffic flow, no parking, and public works improvements enable the traffic circulation capacity of Reynolds to exceed 86% of existing Hermosa Beach streets. Combine this with the 17 foot garage setback and you have ingress/egress overkill for the low volume of traffic on Reynolds Lane. The fact that the site is the only parcel with direct access to Reynolds on the block is merely a function of prior development patterns. As indicated in the report, parcels on nearby blocks do have direct access off Reynolds Lane. Furthermore, as the parcels for the Our Lady of Guadelupe Church are currently laid out, approximately 10 additional houses on the block would have access off Reynolds if the existing church parking lot was developed as homes! Para. 10 - reference to the needs of the community and the Circulation element of the General Plan. The purpose of the Circulation element is to: "evaluate the transportation needs: of the City and present a comprehensive transportation plan to accommodate those needs". Objectives of the Circulation element are: "statements of accomplishments that the City will strive to achieve as part of the circulation planning process, while implementation policies are actions used to actually achieve the objectives". Objective 4.0 of the Circulation element was specifically mentioned. It states: "Develop and construct transportation improvements to provide the capacity and performance necessary to meet the service needs of the public while preserving open space and the special environmental quality of the city".---- When compared with the existing, degraded site infrastructure, the current project actually promotes and enhances the circulation objectives as defined in the following implementation policies: 4.2 "Improve sight distance and operating problems at other intersections which do not experience capacity problems but are shown to experience operational problems." --- The Reynolds Lane/Van Horne intersection is presently in terrible shape. Traffic views from Reynolds are hindered by a telephone pole on the corner, the physical street intersection is too sharp, which requires drivers to SQUEAL their wheels to make the turn, and Van Horne in Hermosa Beach is 18" narrower than Van Horn in Redondo Beach. My project will significantly improve this _intersection by 1) improving traffic views by moving the telephone pole, 2) eliminating tire squeal by regrading the intersection for ease of egress, and 3) widening Van Horne street in Hermosa by realigning with Redondo. 4.5 "Prohibit on -street parking in selected locations to increase roadway capacity for moving traffic.. "--- No parking is presently allowed on Reynolds, and any new house will have at least a 2 car garage with a 17 foot drive way for additional parking. 4.8 "Maintain paved surfaces on all public roadways throughout the City to a level which will assure safe and efficient traffic flow". --- The project will make significant improvements to Reynolds Lane and Van Horne which improve the safety of the area including adding curb and gutter, assuring 20 foot street width for fire vehicles, and eliminating the Reynolds/Van Horn safety hazards of obstructed view and street narrowing. These hazard mitigation measures were identified and defined by the Public Works Department. 4.9 "Require that vehicle access to new residential developments which front both street and ally be provided in the alley only...." --- Project access is off of Reynolds Lane, a 20 foot wide street. As stated in the Circulation Element, garage access and turning radiuses are recommended off of alleys in Hermosa Beach. The typical alley is approximately 10 feet wide, and presents a hazardous turn -in potential, whereas my project will have access off a 20 foot wide one-way street into a 17 foot driveway - 37 feet of ingress/egress space in all! These preceeding issues were never discussed (although somehow used as the basis for denial) in the Planning Commission meeting. However, there does appear to be a CURRENTLY EXISTING circulation problem that will be REDUCED by my project. With all the site improvements I am required to do, these Circulation Element Implementation Policies probably have greater support within my project than most other residential building proposals. In summary, this project presents a unique opportunity to upgrade the city public works and housing stock to reflect our image as an upscale community. At the same time it meets the requirements of both the city codes and public ballot mandates concerning density. My project is NOT CONDOS but rather, single family homes on large (4100-5200 sq. ft. parcels) with support from the City of Redondo Beach, and neighbors (15 of whom plan to speak on my behalf at the Council Meeting). In light of both the past comments and project enhancements to the city, your support in reviewing the revised Parcel Map and drafting the attendant Staff Comments is appreciated. Sincerel Mark Lueker 1265 Van Home Hermosa Beach 318 - 3683(H) 322 - 2010(W) February 3, 1992 TO: Mr. Micheal Schubach and Mr. Ken Robertson City of Hermosa Beach Planning Department SUBJECT: Benefits to the citizens of Hermosa and Redondo Beaches resulting from approval of the 1265 VanHorne/212 Prospect parcel map Although no project can realistically be expected to single handedly reconstruct the Hermosa Beach city infrastructure and solve the city budget worries, the subject project and resulting neighborhood improvements provides a proportionally greater benefit to the city than the typical condo projects routinely approved. The following paragraphs detail both the monetary and liability reduction benefits my project provides to the citizens of Hermosa and Redondo Beaches. The benefits to Redondo Beach should be weighted equally with Hermosa Beach, as the project borders Redondo Beach and utility services are enthusiastically provided by Redondo Beach in exchange for the benefits defined as follows: 1) The new homes will singularly represent .14% of the entire property tax base in the City of Hermosa Beach ($2.1M/1495M). YEARLY property tax revenues from the three new homes will be approximately $20,000 per year to the Hermosa Beach General Fund. This amount could be used to purchase the video equipment for the city council chambers, fund community development programs, or allow additional crossing guards for the children. In addition, the required building permits and fees will initially provide significant additional General Fund revenues. 2) Hermosa Beach has developed an image as an upscale, well-to-do beach town, in fact the per capita income increased from $16,355 in 1982 to $25,950 in 1991!. This image is not currently reflected in the housing stock first viewed when traveling north on Prospect past the "WELCOME TO HERMOSA BEACH" sign. The subject houses project an image of the city over 40 years old. A new development of attractive homes is more representative of the community which visitors and residents envision. 3) With the city park just down Prospect Street, both Prospect and VanHorne receive constant pedestrian traffic. The current homes have either an uneven/broken sidewalk or no sidewalk at all, with gas and water meters set in the dirt near the curb. In addition, handicapped members of the community must currently walk IN THE STREET due to the uneven surface and lack of an access ramp. This presents both a major inconvenience for those handicapped, and a liability problem for the city. The proposed parcel map provides for installation of a new, smooth sidewalk with provisions for a wheelchair ramp on the corner of VanHorne and Reynolds 4) The current Van Horne -Reynolds intersection is in terrible shape, with a sharp lip at the intersection and a power pole on the corner. In addition, VanHorne intersects Prospect approximately 40 feet east and the view of east bound cars turning onto Van Horne is blocked by a power pole on the corner of VanHorne and Reynolds. This presents another city liability problem. The proposed parcel map eliminates this problem by moving the pole back to a safe distance from the intersection. 5) The above referenced intersection presents another existing problem with the telephone pole. The subject pole protrudes approximately 18 inches into the traffic lane of westbound traffic on VanHorne. It is only a matter of time until a westbound automobile fails to adjust for the protrusion and crashes head on into the telephone pole! As this is now a city recognized problem, the resulting litigation could be tremendously expensive. As a solution to this safety hazard, the proposed parcel map will eliminate this city liability by moving the pole a safe distance from the traffic lane. 6) According to the Hermosa Beach Fire Chief, the subject area is inadequately served by fire hydrants. Should a major fire occur in the area, he is unsure if it could be contained with existing water resources. To remedy this situation, the proposed parcel map will provide for an additional fire hydrant to be installed. This will be available for fire protection in the immediate community! 7) In addition to the previously mentioned benefits to Hermosa Beach, Redondo Beach will also benefit with the required improvements to Reynolds Lane. -The street is currently covered with dirt and trash constantly washed from the unimproved edges. The proposed parcel map will provide curb and gutter along the length of the street. This will improve the street looks and reduce dirt and trash. 8) Another benefit to the Redondo Beach neighbors is removal of the 8 foot high fence along the length of Reynolds Lane. This fence, running on the city boundary and coupled with the opposing houses, creates an "echo chamber" for any voices, car exhaust, or squealing tires at the VanHorne-Reynolds Lane intersection. To the delight of my immediate neighbofs, the new homes to be constructed will result in tearing down this fence and eliminating the "echo chamber" effect. 9) The benefit most frequently mentioned by the surrounding neighbors is the increased surrounding property values resulting from this project. During by canvass of the neighborhood soliciting project support, numerous times the comments such as "your cleaning up Reynolds right?" and "this will get rid of those ugly houses won't it?" came up. In todays depressed real estate market, the neighbors are excited about any way to recover a portion of their lost home value! These are but a few of the benefits to the citizens of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach resulting from approval of the subject parcel map. As can be seen from this list, the proposed project provides more community benefit than most other projects in the city while also maintaining the largest parcel sizes in the neighborhood. The benefits of this win-win project are recognized by my immediate neighbors as indicated by the number of signatures on the petitions circulated. Unfortunately, I failed to adequately address these issues in the planning commission meeting and the neighborhood suffered for my oversight, however, you currently have the opportunity to correct the situation and allow implementation of these community benefits. Your recommendation for approval of this project in light of the new information provided to you will communicate your support of community upgrades to both the City Council and the citizens of Hermosa and Redondo Beaches! Mark Lueker 1265 VanHorne Hermosa Beach 318 - 3682 NUt.1E_R OF PARCELS 170 1 265 VAN HONE/2i2 PROSPECT SURROUNDING PARCEL SIZES 160 r 150 L-- 140 — 130 120 — 110 — 100 — 90 — 80 — 70 — 60 — 50 — 40 — 30 — 20 — 10 — 0 ►• • ti O ►• • P O O 0 1 11551 9 23 27 e 31 35139 4347 1 51 T55 159 T 63 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 61 PARCEL SQUARE FOOTAGE (X1000) 2500 do MEAN 2800 4200 [13 5100 r AVERAGE PROPOSED PROPOSED COMPARISON OF PROPOSED PARCEL SIZES WITH SURROUNDING AVERAGE AND MEAN PARCEL SIZES �v►b►A►ifed br &fv IiCA.A f o 21 3/417.... November 26, 1991 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach Planning Commission December 3, 1991 SUBJECT: SUBDIVISION 91-2 VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #23246 LOCATION: 212 PROSPECT AND 206 (AKA 1265 VAN HORNE LANE) APPLICANT/: MARK LUEKER APPELLANT 1645 VAN HORNE HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 REQUEST: TO ALLOW THE SUBDIVISION OF TWO LOTS INTO THREE LOTS Recommendation If the Commission determines that the subdivision is acceptable staff recommends adoption of the the attached resolution of approval subject to conditions. Also attached as an alternative is a resolution of denial. Background PROJECT INFORMATION: Zoning: R-1 General Plan: Low Density Residential Current Uses: two single-family dwellings on 2 lots Existing Lot Sizes 206 Prospect (1265 Van Horne): 7,370 sq. ft. 212 Prospect: 6,190 sq. ft. Proposed Lot Sizes 206 Prospect (1265 Van Horne): 212 Prospect: New lot on Reynolds Lane: 5,237 sq. ft. 4,240 sq. ft. 4,092 sq. ft. Environmental Determination: *Categorically Exempt *Pursuant to Section 13515 of the California Environmental Quality Act, minor land divisions are exempt. The applicant has been inquiring about this possible subdivision over the last couple years with staff. Given the uniqueness of the situation of the resulting lot fronting on a 20 -foot wide street in Redondo Beach, staff obtained a legal opinion from the City Attorney in April of 1990 (see attached memorandum). - - 90 Analysis The applicant is requesting approval of a tentative parcel map to re -subdivide two existing lots into three lots. This is possible because the existing two lots are very deep, and the existing houses are sited towards the front of the lots. The proposed access to the new lot would be via Reynolds Lane in Redondo Beach. Reynolds lane is a twenty foot wide one-way street. The land area of the new lot slopes towards the east at a grade of about 8-10%. The low end of the lot is where the access would be available. Currently this area is extra yard area and open space which separates the existing houses from the adjacent church. Adjacent land uses include the Our Lady of Guadalupe School and Church to the north, and low density residential uses to the west and south in Hermosa Beach and to the east in Redondo Beach. Access to the new lot will be rather awkward, as Reynolds Lane is one-way south from Armour Lane to Prospect Avenue. The only way to get to the lot will be from the east via Armour Lane, and the only way to leave the property will be south on Reynolds lane to either Prospect Avenue or Van Horne Lane. Staff initially was opposed to this proposal because of a provision in the Hermosa Beach Subdivision ordinance which requires that "proposed lots, after being divided, front on public streets and do not front on any alleys." The definition of street in the zoning ordinance is a "thoroughfare having a width of not less than twenty-one (21) feet." However, the applicant had obtained a letter from the City of Redondo Beach which stated that they considered Reynolds Lane a street. To determine if the applicant could even apply for the subdivision staff obtained an opinion from the City Attorney (attached) which essentially states the City cannot apply its standards outside of its jurisdiction. Given the Attorney's opinion, the proposed subdivision"appears to comply with all the requirements of Section 29.5-8 of the subdivision ordinance, as follows: (a) The proposed lots will exceed 40 feet in width and exceed 4,000 square feet (b) The proposed lot will front on a public street (per Redondo Beach standards) (c) The a proposed subdivision will not be detrimental to surrounding lot patterns or property values (d) The size of the lots is not smaller than the prevailing lot size in the area (see attached area map, the average lot size in the area is about 2800 square feet) (e) Development of the new lot within the standards of the R-1 zone will not be a problem -15- (f) (g) The subdivision is consistent with he General Plan The map complies with the Subdivision Map Act Staff is still concerned about the ereation of a lot with access on such a narrow street. Along this block of Reynolds Lane it would become the only lot with such direct access. (Between 5th and 6th Street several lots have direct access from Reynolds Lane.) In further reference to the Attorney's opinion, despite the fact that the City's street width standard cannot be applied, the Commission has the authority to decide whether or not Reynolds Lane is consistent with the needs of the community. In other words, the situation of awkward access from a narrow one-way street may be justification for denial as it could be considered inconsistent with objectives of the Circulation, Transporation, and Parking Element to "Develop and construct transporation improvements to provide the capacity and permformance necessary to meet the service needs of the public while preserving open space and the special environmental quality of the City." The service needs for emergency access, for example, may not be possible to provide given the sub -standard right-of-way width. If the Commission approves this request, staff has prepared a resolution of approval incorporating requirements for improving the adjacent public right-of-way as a condition of recording the final map. These include curb and sidewalk improvements for access and drainage (Public Works Department and Redondo Beach), the installation of a fire hydrant and the provision of unobstructed 20 -foot wide access (Fire Department), and improvements along Reynolds Lane (City of Redondo Beach and Fire Department). In regards to the comments of the Building and Safety,Director corrections have been made on the latest revised map submittal to show utilities (The Public Works Department has indicated that utilities are available from both Hermosa and Redondo) and drainage is addressed as a condition. In sum, if the subdivision is approved, the impacts will be mitigated by an overall improvement to the public facilities that will serve the subdivision. 1}�r son ,- CONCUR• Michael Schubach Planning Director Attachments n Ro Associate Planner 1. Alternative resolutions 2. Area Map 3. Departmental Comments and Requirements 4 Correspondence from Redondo Beach 5. Memo from Asst. City Attorney 6. Application 7. Public Notice Affidavit a/pcsr206 -lb- ,; C mrd Mr. Riggs is pouring cement in his side yards prior to a street cubeing made. A verbal agreement has been made to erect a _f-ence between,. the adjacent properties since Mr. Riggs previouslybok the chain -link -,fence out because it was three inches too far onto his property. Comm. Di Monda requested Mr. Riggs work with the Planning Department on this issue. Comm. Marks discussed the drainage problem with Mr. Riggs, discussing the specifics of the installation timing. MOTION by Comm. Suard, seco cad, by Comm. Merl, to approve CON 91-5/ PDP 91-7 with Conditions, plus 'an additional Condition requesting the Planning Department obtaining from the applicant and presenting to the Commission a revised set of plans addressing the stairway, the window on the south elevation not'. -shown on the plan and basement/first level of "B" Unit. AYES: Comms. . NCES: None ABSTAI . _gone None Di Monde, _:arks, Merl, Suard, Chmn. Ketz SUB 91-2 -- REOUES2 FOR APPROVAL OF A VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #23246 TO SUZDIVIDE TWO LOTS INTO THREE LOTS FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 206-212 PROSPECT AVEim: E. Recommended Action: If approved, impose conditions as recommended. Mr. Schubach gave the Staff Report, stating Staff is recommending Conditions imposed through the Resolution. He noted supplemental information, changes requested by the Public Works Department; rather than requiring completion of the off-site improvements prior to approval of the final map, the modified condition gives the application the option to guarantee completion of the improvements, which protects the cities interests. Mr. Schubach described the uniqueness of lots, surrounding lot proportions, proposed sub- division and accesses, noting that while Hermosa Beach considers the fronting roadway an "alley", Redondo Beach considers it a "street". He stated the City Attorney's opinion is that a City cannot apply its Codes outside of its jurisdiction. Mr. Schubach noted the Commission has the authority to decide if Reynolds Lane is consistent with the needs of the community. He stated if the subdivision is approved, the impacts will be mitigated by an overall improvement to tie public facilities that will serve the subdivision. Public Hearing opened by Vice-Chmn. Marks at 8:22 p.m. Mark 'pucker, applicant, read his prepared summary to the Commission, outlining why he feel the subdivision would meet City and neighborhood needs while creating value to the neighborhood. He stated he had been working on this subdivision for a total of two years. He )resented copies of correspondence and photographs of the lots and adjacent areas to the Commission for its review, noting the City of Redondo Beach supports the subdivision. Mr. Lueker confirmed with Comm. Marks that one of the properties will be have sewer lines connected to with the City of Redondo Beach's lines. Comm. Suard discussed area upgrading with Mr. Lueker, F (1-- P.C.Minutes 12/3/91 noting Mr. Lueker has no plans to construction other than one house on the back lot. Robert Brandon, 217 Prospect Avenue, stated he has lived at this address for 50 years. He strongly objected to this application, noting the confusion in address, the application does not agree with the downgrading which was decided upon in the last election and stated the lots are landfill over an old oil sump, used from 1920 through 1950. This waste was never cleaned out, only filled with soil; then houses were built on top of it. He discussed access to the properties and discussed the area traffic problems. Jackie Godo Ikiss, 224 Prospect, felt her home was not a hovel, rather it is a charming property. She felt approval of the subdivision would result in lose of her privacy and protested subdividing two lots into three, increasing rather than decreasing density. Steven Godo Ikiss, 224 Prospect, stated he bought the property 17 years ago because it was large and had open space. He stated his property value and privacy will decrease if the application is approved. He reouested the application not be approved. Hank Dreyfus, 209 Prospect, hoped the project will be rejected, stating his concerns regarding the soil stability and his unhappiness that a subdivision is being considered when there are no plans to build. Jim Barks, 217 2nd Street, opposed the application, stating more R-1 Zones are needed. He felt the City needs less people, not more. Mark Lueker rebutted the comments, discussing proposed property access similar to adjacent properties, stating the house to be built would not interfere with any views or privacy or surrounding homes. He discussed his efforts to change his address to "1265 Van Horn" to the difficulty in locating the house. He discussed with Comm. Di Monda the property history as an oil and trash dump, which Mr. Lueker had not been aware. Public Hearing closed by Chmn. Ketz at 8:54 p.m. Comm. Di Monda asked what the Commission's responsibility and liability might be if it approved this application. Mr. Springer didn't feel that approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map would expose the City to any liabilities resulting from below -grade pollution, because this property does not belong to the City. Mr. Schubach commented that whether the property is subdivided or not, a danger due to soil contamination still exists. This problem will be addressed by the Building Department when a request is made to build a home on the property. If oil exists under ground, removal will be required. Comm. Marks felt that this application was in conflict with Hermosa Beach's efforts to decrease density. Comm. Suard felt that decreasing the lot sizes, the chance of existing home improvement would decrease accordingly. Chmn. Ketz stated the lots being on a 20 -feet street inhibited approval due to the possibility of P.C.Minutes 12/3/91 c increased traffic circulation problems. Comm. Merl noted the lots conform to the General Plan relating to minimum lot requirements, with the proposal being consistent with the General Plan. Mr. Schubach noted the application is consistent, stating the City Attorney had stated the Commission has the authority to decide whether or not Reynolds Lane is consistent with the needs of the community. Comm. Merl questioned this statement in terms of the density issue, to which Mr. Schubach responded enough land exists to meet the General Plan. Comm. Merl, though agreeing with Chmn. Ketz, felt the situation was the real issue. MOTION by Comm. Marks, seconded by Comm. Suara, to deny SUB 91-2. AYES: Ccms. Di Monde, Marks, Merl, Suard, Chmn. Ketz NOES: store ABSTAIN: AiSENT: None (A recess was taken from 8:59 to 9:07 p.m.) 7/ PARK 91-6 -- P'LRKING PLAN TO ALLOW A 150 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION, AND TO PROVIDE REQUIRED ?ARKIi G OFF-SITE AT 1063 AVIATION FOR THE PROSECT. LOCATED LT 1095 AVI =ETON BOULEVARD, AND ADOPTION/ OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECL.:.RATION. i RecommendedN ction: To deny the request. / Mr. Schubach slated the Staff Environmental Review Committee recommended a covenant be required to justify a/off-site parking agreement between the church and applicant, which was obtained to allow four parking spaces, instead of the required seven, and with a revokable parking allowance condition/ He stated work had commenced to expand theN;titchen and bathroom areas, without an increase in seating, of the restaurant/without building permits. Mr. Schubach referenced relevant Code Sections pertaining the parking plans and requirements explaining the reasons. the building r is nonconforming. Mr. SchubacnN. noted no on-site, parking is available and offered solutions. in remodeling to allow rear -property auto access. ,He state approval could establish a precedent, leading to unrealistic paring arrangements to allow square -footage additions./ Public Hearing opened ,byChmn. Ketz at 9:13 Wim. Jose Manuel Mendez', applicant, and Josephine Mendez, applicant's daughter who served as translator, presented a etter from the Church which provided seven parking spaces. It wass"tated that Mr. Mendez's previous associate started construction without permits or a licensed contractor, leaving Mr. Mendez with the problems as they now exist. Chmn. Ketz compared the requirement of sevenNspaces to the four spaces authorized by the church, to which Ms.N Mendez stated the minister will agree to the seven spaces in writing- Mr. Schubach noted the submitted plans displayed six spaces and\the a icant was notified the Code required seven spaces. When ask' what would happen if there was a parking conflict between the ct— P.C.Minutes 12/3/91 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 RESOLUTION P.C. 91-81 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DENYING VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 23246 FOR THE DIVISION OF TWO EXISTING LOTS INTO THREE LOTS AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF PROSPECT AVENUE AND REYNOLDS LANE AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 41 AND 42 AND THE EASTERLY 7' OF LOT 43 HERMOSA HEIGHTS TRACT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 3, 1991, to receive oral and written testimony regarding a request to subdivide said property into 3 lots and made the following findings: A. The created lot will front on a one-way street with a width of only 20 feet, as such, the service needs for access and emergency access to this lot will not be adequate and, therefore, are inconsistent with the Circulation element of the General Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California does hereby deny Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 23246 for a 3 -lot subdivision. VOTE: AYES: Chmn. Ketz, Comms. DiMonda,Merl,Suard,Marks NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None CERTIFICATION I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution P.C. 91-81 is a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of the City of Hermosa Beach, California at their regular meeting of December 3, 199 / ChristineaKetz, Chairperson D.3it e Michael Schubach, Secretary p/persd206 THOMAS W. STOEVER WILLIAM B. BARR CHARLES S. VOSE CONNIE COOKE SANDIFER ROGER W. SPRINGER EDWARD W. LEE HERIBERTO F. DIAZ JAMES DUFF MURPHY JANICE R. MIYAHIRA LAW OFFICES OLIVER, STOEVER, BARR & VOSE A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 1000 SUNSET BOULEVARD LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012 (213) 250-3043 MEMORANDUM TO: Michael Schubach, Planning Director Ken Robertson, Associate Planner FROM: Edward W. Le DATE: April 2, 1990 RE: Interpretation of Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances TELECOPIER (2131 482-5336 The Planning Department has requested that this office provide a legal opinion on two issues related to a proposed subdivision. ISSUES The first question posed by Planning staff, is whether or not the City's definition of a "street" applies to a public right-of-way within another jurisdiction? The second question is, presuming that all applicable provisions of the City's Municipal Code apply, does the Planning Commission have authority to approve a proposed subdivision which does not strictly comply with the requirements of the City's Municipal Code related to subdivisions? FACTS The staff has provided this office the following information. Mr. Mark Leuker is the property owner/applicant who has submitted a tentative parcel map to subdivide two existing lots into three new parcels. Two of the proposed parcels would front on Prospect Avenue and the third parcel would front on Reynolds Lane. Reynolds Lane is a public right-of-way within the jurisdiction of the City of Redondo Beach. Reynolds Lane is 20 feet wide and is considered by the City of Redondo Beach to be a street rather than an alley. This fact was confirmed in writing by Ken Montgomery, Director of Public Works, City of Redondo Beach. The City Planning Commission is delegated the authority to review and approve parcel maps under Section 29.5-18 of the Municipal Code. This section of the Code mandates review of the tentative parcel map in the same manner as review and approval of OLIVER, STOEVER, BARR & VOSE Mic:�ael Schubach, Planning Director Ken Robertson, Associate Planner April 2, 1990 Page 2 a tentative subdivision map in accordance with Section 29.5-8 of the Municipal Code. Under Subsection (b) of that Section, the Planning Commission must make the finding that "the proposed lots, after being divided, front on public streets and do not front on any alleys." The City's Zoning Code, Section 243, defines street to mean "a thoroughfare having a width of not less than twenty- one (21) feet, and dedicated to public use and which affords primary means of access to abutting property." CONCLUSION It is the opinion of this firm that the City's definition for "street" as provided under Section 243 of the Zoning Code would not apply to Section 29.5-8(b) within the strict confines of the facts of this particular case. The subject right-of-way lies outside the jurisdiction of the City of Hermosa Beach and is not subject to regulation by the City. The Planning Commission, nevertheless, has the authority to disapprove the proposed subdivision if it reasonably determines that the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans. DISCUSSION The Subdivision Map Act (hereinafter the "Act") , embodied in Government Code §66410, et sea., regulates the division of property in the State. The Act allows a local jurisdiction the exercise of substantial regulatory powers to further control such divisions within the Act's procedural framework. Section 66421 of the Act provides that State law does not preempt the area of land subdivision but allows a local jurisdiction to enact ordinances to regulate the design and improvement of subdivisions "insofar as the provisions of the ordinance are consistent with and not in conflict with the provisions of this [Act]." The Act specifically grants to local jurisdictions the power to regulate and control the design and improvement of subdivisions. Government Code §66411. Additionally, the California Environmental Quality Act under Public Resources Code §21081 would preclude the approval of a subdivision where such a development would cause significant adverse environmental effects related to the design of or improvements for access to the project. 68 Ops. Atty. Gen. 108. The Act empowers the City to disapprove a tentative map upon making any of the findings listed under Section 66474. The City Municipal Code under Section 29.5-9 conforms to the criteria for map disapproval. The applicable finding in this case to OLIVER, STOEVER, BARR & VOSE Michael Schubach., Planning Director Ken Robertson, Associate Planner April 2, 1990 Page 3 justify disapproval would be found under Subsection (b) which requires a finding "that the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans." On its face, the instant case would appear to warrant a disapproval of the proposed tentative parcel map as the parcel accessing Reynolds Lane does not strictly comply with the standards defined in the City's Municipal Code for a "street". (See as example, Metro Realty vs. County of El Dorado (1963) 222 Cal.App.2d 508 which upheld the rejection of a subdivision map where the road design failed to comply with a county ordinance designating standard specifications.) The factual circumstances in this case however, limits the application of the City's standards for a "street". Reynolds Lane is a public right-of-way which is outside of the jurisdiction of Hermosa Beach. The right-of-way is within the City of Redondo Beach and has been designated as a street by the City Engineer of that City. "It has been held that a City cannot grant a right-of- way over private property nor over a proposed street not yet opened or extended. Neither can it grant rights outside its territorial limits, and after streets and alleys become attached to another municipality, the original municipality has no further power to regulate and control them, although a subsequent incorporation of the City does not affect the rights of the company." McOuillin Mun. Corp. §34.14 (3d Edition). Applying the jurisdictional principle as stated in McOuillin, the City of Hermosa Beach cannot apply its standard for a street to a public right-of-way outside of its jurisdiction. The central issue then becomes a determination as to the meaning of the Section 29.5-8(b) of the City Code which requires the subdivision to "front on public streets." As Reynolds Lane is outside of the City's jurisdiction, the City cannot apply its standard. A determination by the City of Redondo Beach that Reynolds Lane is considered a "street" rather than an alley would appear to meet the intent of Hermosa Beach's Code. The corollary question then becomes what standard to apply in the approval or disapproval of the proposed parcel map. The Municipal Code under Section 29.5-9 provides the grounds for denial of a subdivision map. Specifically, Subsection (b), therein, provides for a finding "that the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision must be consistent with the applicable general and specific plans of the City." It is this firm's opinion that a determination of consistency with the General Plan is reasonably within the purview of the Planning Commission subject to appeal to the City Council. OLIVER, STOEVER, BARR & VOSE Michael Schubach, Planning Director Ken Robertson, Associate Planner April 2, 1990 Page 4 In other words, the Planning Commission has the authority to decide whether or not Reynolds Lane is consistent with the needs of the community in the context of its adopted Traffic and Circulation Element of the General Plan. As an aside, the City can impose conditions reasonably related to the mitigation of impacts caused by the proposed development. This authority is granted both under the Map Act and the California Environmental Quality Act. The City could therefore require improvement of Reynolds Lane to mitigate a determination, if any, of adverse impacts to traffic circulation caused by the proposed subdivision. EWL:cw cc: Kevin Northcraft, City Manager ,Charles S. Vose, City Attorney NN O J3 iW0 u ' `W ti " 0 AN® pO ai I U , Q` .0 to® I O s N O r rn rn0 '-r JO QQ ua N O s O 0 O v W^ W U. W V W N O N u I 0 W -- 0 ---- N I NO rD• t 40 J .9 N O a N O $ 'mu® N ®N N0,p O W D rn 40 5.60'45W.. /ti" r134 rl.-y:, ll'2 5f . ,;l/ ;'/- Q' W; 0 J J 0 �•I o ST = '5 2ND 25 0 041 c"',64 25 /25511 to 1 •4 /79511 25 O 63 25 /7.51 25 N al of 43 44 62 'I 151;25 0 61 25 ST. IZI(J rZ 232- o; 2/.05 395 fqq 146 a 3.93 t2/05 15 23• O 45 60 0 59 2/951' 301 O 1 471 3031 2/95 i 23 /3 58 2.5 0 48 57 25 „9514 10 1- O 4t 50m /if �qm to 111 1` 20 II r 01 561 �qI 20 1.. 5455 O> 55 ,p-9 !455 271 12.11 \.60'43 y. ILS IS.37 /D, 7/ ST. ° 27 TRACT No. 733 M. 8,j7_92 Q-1 00 415 25 q�»,�; g 49 til; $9 _s 26 9 001`O ®®@®C) 30 31 3�2 33 31435 36 37 38 39 4 � ItiO II~ 25 2., r:,...-:;.® O 75 74 73 72 71 70 69 68 67 66 65'' /. — 5f . ,;l/ ;'/- Q' W; 0 J J 0 �•I o ST = '5 2ND 25 0 041 c"',64 25 /25511 to 1 •4 /79511 25 O 63 25 /7.51 25 N al of 43 44 62 'I 151;25 0 61 25 ST. IZI(J rZ 232- o; 2/.05 395 fqq 146 a 3.93 t2/05 15 23• O 45 60 0 59 2/951' 301 O 1 471 3031 2/95 i 23 /3 58 2.5 0 48 57 25 „9514 10 1- O 4t 50m /if �qm to 111 1` 20 II r 01 561 �qI 20 1.. 5455 O> 55 ,p-9 !455 271 12.11 \.60'43 y. ILS IS.37 /D, 7/ ST. ° 27 TRACT No. 733 M. 8,j7_92 Q-1 00 415 /O Cf) rlmm o o. - cin Cn . 0 o -t(P(r1 A Z O G� O5 (n JD Co 0 0•➢ Cl LA Co CD n D n 51.• SPRFLKELS LN. so PR caSpE-c gaff ST 0..br Jan Hcwra' VAN HORNE LN. "This plat is for your aid in locating your land with reference to streets and other parcels. It is not a survey. While this plat is believed to be correct, United Title assumes no liability for any loss occurring by reason of reliance thereon." UT P-2 -- 26'— Hovember 20, 1991 TO: Ken Robertson, Associate Planner FROf: Paul Osekow3ky, Hermosa Beach Fire Dept. Mark Lueker ; owner/applicant 206 Prospect Hermosa peach, Ca. 90254 (310) 310-3662 work (310) 322-2010 RE: Subdivision at 206-212 Prospect r 2 In regard to the fire _afety requirements for the proposed subdivition of lots 41,12 and a portion of lot 43. Hermosa Heights track being o _ubdivi-sion of lot 9, block 87, aecond addition to hertosa beach, o. per nap recorded in book 9, page 64 of maps, in the office of the county records of said county. lie are listing the following requirements. I TEt1S : 1) FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS RHOS: We require a unobstructed road width of not less than 20 feet. Reynolds Lane appears to be narrower than the required width. 1988 UFC Sec. 10.207 2) URTER SUPPLY A new hydrant is required to meet the fire flow demand and the required hydrant spacing requirements for single family residents. The new hydrant shall be located on the corner of Prospect Ave. and llan Horn H/E corner about ten feet east of the drivevay to 212 Prospect Rue. The hydrant SHALL have a minimum of two outlets one 4" inch one 2 1/2" inch, The minimum fire flow from this hydrant shall be 1,500 Gallons Per Minute, Hermosa Beach City ordnance Chapter 12-7 APPEHDIX III -A,4, 1908 UFC APPEHDIX I11 -B TABLE HO. 11I -B -A. If you have any questions regarding these requirements, please feel free to contact me at (213) 376-24?9 or 326 PLAN CHECK TAPE 1 APTS, 206-212 PROSPECT CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH MEMORANDUM DATE: November 19, 1991 TO: Ken Robertson, �a.nt Planner FROM: Homayoun Behboodi, Assistant Engineer fi,P? SUBJECT: Tentative Parcel Map #23246 1265 Van Horne Lane, 212 Prospect Avenue and Reynolds Lane Front of 1265 Van Horne Lane 1. Construct new 6" curb with monolithic 18" gutter realigned with the existing curb alignment to the east on Van Horne Lane. 2. Construct curb return as required by the City Engineer at the northwest corner of Van Horne Lane and Reynolds Lane. ,3. Land dedication shall be required to provide the above mentioned curb return. 4. Construct new AC pavement as required after curb and gutter realignment. 5. Relocate power pole and down guy out of new curb and gutter alignment. v 6. Relocate gas valve as required by California Gas Company. 7. Relocate water meter out of sidewalk area. 8. Palm tree shall be relocated or replaced with a tree or trees of equal value at a location approved by the Public Works Department. 9. Construct new 5' sidewalk as per City standards. 10. Construct new driveway approach as per City Standards. 11. Install wheel chair ramp at the northwest corner of Van Horne Lane and Reynolds Lane. Front of 212 Prospect Avenue 1. Construct new 6" curb with monolithic 18" gutter realigned to match the new curb alignment in front of 1265 Van Horne. 2. Construct new AC pavement as required after curb and gutter realignment. 3. Construct new 5' sidewalk as per City standards. 4. Construct new driveway approach as per City Standards. 5. Lower existing fence to 36" maximum height in the front 10' of the private property and remove existing fence from public property. Along Reynolds Lane 1. All requirements for street improvements on Reynolds Lane shall be set by the City of Redondo Beach, since the east property line of the proposed subdivision is the City limit line between the City of Hermosa Beach and The City of Redondo Beach. (Reynolds is in the City of Redondo Beach.) pworks/subdiv C PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT REQUIREMENTS 1. All work done within the City right of way shall be done by a currently licensed contractor with a Class "A" License and a current City of Hermosa Beach Business License. 2. A separate Public Works construction permit shall be required for each of the following: Scaffolding, utility trenching, lumber drop, dumpster, etc. on the public right of way. 3. Any of the work requiring a permit and started without the necessary permit shall result in the job being stopped until the permit is obtained. A double fee for that permit will be charged. 4. A refundable cash deposit to cover workmanship on all curbs, gutters, sidewalks, paving, driveway approaches, etc. shall be required in addition to the permit fee. The amount of this deposit will be determined by the City Engineer. 5. The Public Works permit must be on the job site and available for review by City officials at all times. 6. The contractor shall maintain and keep in force at all times during construction a policy of liability insurance in the amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) minimum. 7. Any damage to public property such as street pavement, curbs, sidewalks, drainage gutters, etc. shall be repaired or replaced as determined by the City Engineer. Any such repair or replacement must meet the requirements of the Department of Public Works. 8. Proper barricades shall be placed around construction within the public right of way. All utility trenches shall be back-filled anda temporary A.C. patch installed by the end of each work day. 9. Both the Fire Department and the Police Department must be notified if any public street will be blocked or closed during construction. ty/pwreql 30 - OFFICE OF CITY ENGINEER Cella -Tr 007 CCALlEN©M lA February 3, 1990 Mr. Mike Shubach Director of Planning City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Dear Mike: a D)0o c)n JE 3.3 415 DIAMOND STREET P.O. BOX 270 REDONDO BEACH, CA 90277-0270 TELEPHONE (213) 318-0661 The Hermosa Beach Engineering Department contacted me about a two unit development taking place in the City of Redondo Beach. One of those units would front onto Reynolds Lane. The City of Redondo Beach considers Reynolds Lane to be a street rather than an alley even though it is very narrow in width. The City of Redondo Beach does have other homes that front directly onto Reynolds Lane and therefore we do not propose prohibiting the development in the City of Hermosa Beach from taking access onto Reynolds Lane in the City of Redondo Beach. In return for this consideration, the City of Redondo Beach is requesting that the developer construct the necessary street improvements along Reynolds Lane along their property frontage. Their Civil Engineer should contact John Mate of my staff for details. Sincerely, Ocka:661(earere,tiai/ Ken A. Montgomery Director of Public Works/City Engineer KAM:j11 TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH We the citizens of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach support a balanced, practical approach to development and renewal of community land resources. We support an approach to development density which provides for adhesion to our cities General Plan, yet allows individual property owners to utilize unused land and renew deteriorating housing stock. We feel it is your duty to support and encourage sensible development which follows these principles. Based upon this position, we the neighbors of the proposed parcel development at 1265 Van Horne/212 Prospect in Hermosa Beach find that the proposed creation of one additional large parcel of land, and the attendant public works improvements, will enhance the neighborhood, improve property values, and reduce potential traffic safety hazards. As a result of these findings, we respectfully request you to overturn the Planning Commission decision, and allow the project to proceed. TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH We the citizens of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach support a balanced, practical approach to -development and renewal of community land resources. We support an approach to development density which provides for adhesion to our cities General Plan, yet allows individual property owners to utilize unused land and renew deteriorating housing stock. We feel it is your duty to support and encourage sensible development which follows these principles. Based upon this position, we the neighbors of the proposed parcel development at 1265 Van Horne/212 Prospect in Hermosa Beach find that the proposed creation of one additional large parcel of land, and the attendant public works improvements, will enhance the neighborhood, improve property values, and reduce potential traffic safety hazards. As a result of these findings, we respectfully request you to overturn the Planning Commission decision, and allow the project to proceed. NAME Signed, ADDRESS �/&L CITY Q�0 �) 4/P1,1' �i"�-� e,4,5(�e� if Mc A fr1) ' .i I2.5-)/4 C,QZ y 02_ pip S7 �, /? , �A g� BENS/ zz� fi" Pi4c6. GL� J talk)v � TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF-HERMOSA BEACH We the citizens of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach support a balanced, practical approach to development and renewal of community land resources. We support an approach to development density which provides for adhesion to our cities General Plan, yet allows individual property owners to utilize unused land and renew deteriorating housing stock. We feel it is your duty to support and encourage sensible development which follows these principles. Based upon this position, we the neighbors of the proposed parcel development at 1265 Van Horne/212 Prospect in Hermosa Beach find that the proposed creation of one additional large parcel of land, and the attendant public works improvements, will enhance the neighborhood, improve property values, and reduce potential traffic safety hazards. As a result of these findings, we respectfully request you to overturn the Planning Commission decision, and allow the project to proceed. Signed, NAME /(21/.1--\ ADDRESS CITY 3121S - Uovt Dua 322- st 5 )7._cc-7 (.67/glak Yrh- 66.62 / U -J1%/525`/ .fps CA �c y /gc7-44(k q6 `4 HO EtavJcZ.U. AU . /a2 /AI� 4y(/w (207.. / .n / /'jJ" r CJS , ,x-:41, G Jr //7�2L /:11/. !L- 7 //'1 N Mi TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH We the citizens of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach support a balanced, practical approach to development and renewal of community land resources. We support an approach to development density which provides for adhesion to our cities General Plan, yet allows individual property owners to utilize unused land and renew deteriorating housing stock. We feel it is your duty to support and encourage sensible development which follows these principles. Based upon this position, we the neighbors of the proposed parcel development at 1265 Van Horne/212 Prospect in Hermosa Beach find that the proposed creation of one additional large parcel of land, and the attendant public works improvements, will enhance the neighborhood, improve property values, and reduce potential traffic safety hazards. As a result of these findings, we respectfully request you to overturn the Planning Commission decision, and allow the project to proceed. Signed, NAME ADDRESS CITY �t.7- 732 Ya//owel ( /4-J e rl�vno5�� 432 .d2/Oa' Ab'& l�lar�%ri, &,k. L 2 lk()"Sk•-1-- geose017Y87Ata%1 ,a)/256a2,4 /// 76 *a4.1<et, - /6 ? 1/a-ri f/er-kuL 7)16*-td,AsOks /6i011/a/n '!An/ (ido;' ciaL ofz vJ G1 C ‘46e2iJr L-Prl o Oat 14-0-17KLL _35� TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH We the citizens of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach support a balanced, practical approach to development and renewal of community land resources. We support an approach to development density which provides for adhesion to our cities General Plan, yet allows individual property owners to utilize unused land and renew deteriorating housing stock. We feel it is your duty to support and encourage sensible development which follows these principles. Based upon this position, we the neighbors of the proposed parcel development at 1265 Van Horne/212 Prospect in Hermosa Beach find that the proposed creation of one additional large parcel of land, and the attendant public works improvements, will enhance the neighborhood, improve property values, and reduce potential traffic safety hazards. As a result of these findings, we respectfully request you to overturn the Planning Commission decision, and allow the project to proceed. As an additional matter of record, we the citizens of Armour Lane feel the one-way access is not at all awkward, but rather of great benefit in reducing traffic and providing a quiet neighborhood. Signed, ADDRESS CITY (Z 12.w\ockr ,M0) --/S 5/J Sc7) /6/G A r“,,,ourr- L.A) r3 h L� g. 9'62 7j) 4 /L 1 474tiz j3 5L 4k A I fQ /6>0 A(z-(,)\ LL) . C<<i3f 9027' vf. u 1-17Zmouk, l.,v,CIS V 17 TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH We the citizens of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach support a balanced, practical approach to development and renewal of community land resources. We support an approach to development density which provides for adhesion to our cities General Plan, yet allows individual property owners to utilize unused land and renew deteriorating housing stock. We feel it is your duty to support and encourage sensible development which follows these principles. Based upon this position, we the neighbors of the proposed parcel development at 1265 Van Horne/212 Prospect in Hermosa Beach find that the proposed creation of one additional large parcel of land, and the attendant public works improvements, will enhance the neighborhood, improve property values, and reduce potential traffic safety hazards. As a result of these findings, we respectfully request you to overturn the Planning Commission decision, and allow the project to proceed. As an additional matter of record, we the citizens of Armour Lane feel the one-way access is not at all awkward, but rather. of great benefit in reducing traffic and providing a quiet neighborhood. NAME /, • / Signed, ADDRESS CITY j fL t/_ /�J/ (% ( -/fl 2CL z/L_ . 4 L r.//e (17 A (D / %1��//d auvl6 ((//.7,&/, Pt". Robert L. Brandon 217 Prospect Ave. Hermosa Beaoh, CA 90254-4933 )067r .FCakaivev 67) /99z C/7y o Fs7O/-/8'4 ,C' G Ac N /3/s Y/u. ✓ / OR/ Y 4 '1.•;7,"-:'. HOW0-54 C// OA ?6 grg REP lPORL1c #077CE IC6 - adz } o,s?Cc7-. Al/A• — REG-AAA/NS f pP. AL Te 71/1� i ",eilIe,s'4 ,Rff // CUY Co LWC / L cF T// f %ANN/NG COI'1/1 /.<<io4v DE v/RL of R t 5 ' To 081D V/DE Tivo 4o7;/4'7b 7W k E 1.o7 ego /9PP_Ro_vt V Tr v TENT 97/ vE' P%ecA-L /19P 4ta 3, }6 Foe Th'E PROP T f- LDC_11-7- X47 .0204- a7/o2 /^'RoP,L'e_2` r.91// lig, DEAR- fl/1L/19y s&&N v.R9CN P1, /9a/Nm/e D/a7v R4 -,c, Xlt1F 2A1 T/./E /`i'E.2/V001) ggiCy G'/7r CJDtNa/L 777/&) 1 '.2 -_so Or3JEc7" 779 77 -PA /9P 4 4L.. 9,1 irit4 G. ! 1 v - , - D.✓ D 4 4 0 ' Li-'_ A A 3 • ie.. TO mg OR/ cyNA i. 2 t9E,$?`) ,l) 0A/NG 9L) Rb /,1. /`/E1)-ki/vd 14/7Th, THE Ph4NAV/NA 60MM/Zig./au} HE -Lao .ID.'c of 9) /99; 7716.-g .3'AML-- .l"TEill' 774L /3P,°L Y, .� 1-1°P4--77/� C/7Y (°6c9Nc/z. WILL /34.50. �4'ZE-e7 Th'/4 /�f3o6-41L L. , ,G'/Ncc2k - sl' 4' / '_.�.:r.. . _ .1i: L Id CCS (b1 eoP/t,5 Cal it//A/c/L 2/7- 7 RoigPe°l- /4 -(A - 3L4(/ j F/LS Ho7 4 -he//, 04. ?o,t-y (/1 (?io) 3 70,- a y o n : lNFoR/'t4T/0W egiYEET 0619/ 7EF. ] PoRTwv7 f I) c N07"ic� -106 - ./j PRo Peet /9i E, ,.., W FEEL TH/fl' . h F9 u s7 T9 joeD/ Y/wF 7`x/o - ois /4'T T//,f 1.o7.sY '/1ai, 9 roT . 06 V./A0,y, , Rehstoo .ARE i9 PoLL.O*C _.-1)CPA/Pi/VON 6/1(1.7- /,g To Tga 40 cATioN 7kizL!c ..yoT/cc Jc Tr Loc.97/0v , ?de -4407` #(/ /0 ogo( ?o017ccr4VF. NU/413a- _ - oil ?//C t/o A7' 7-1/ . Lo a r/og - - /).s"/.44,..c d o E0 NoT bgkEt' With/ VoWN G iQaD/Nc yo Tc.s , /4/ fvgLI ) ) .,Ec7p/ j 4/42if J ETe. ,9/Pc ,T MTUR. 7/o4/ P0/4/7- _ / ol4 • J /ZEA /!y gvE.v7o/v IA /944 LA/Y.0 f_ihL )YT/Z RH 040 OIL ,UMP ,b/.'9/,e, tk- R/4 -. D(iR./Nc /940 - 77-4fo - gixv PAR. -7 / y� 0 CIL WF/44 WovLP 1,4-r -MEM. EXegA jg ,0k9i,v /NT' 7710 i9RE29 7m: 0€/6'14'& CDD/VT.60, _ ('tj 0/4- %h`a 4 t9NU W9,S' N/.LL 4' 4,3Av iE✓r497Ad 70,910W4,Ca-)W6441)).-77///60/ 0/L. e c 9/W' "148 �f/tw.- K CLEANED . D , 7`/. Pur /f2i'Y _7 / 7/ 4/27 11Y4‘Di/XZif� Oy&-,e.. TH/,g pf/,9,VCc" T6'& OCy 7?' cp,e.. OP 1A44.6 i 4 R' ez T'/ aP/904- 1/Ra) Co'1.0 deur gi/4/ �o�e Ml44ff/ ,ve 7 DO 14/y coy isrk U c.770i/ /N 7 wo PRE -4- CbuL e p 43/3 ,s TR , -- 39 - (/ - ,F- ), LIFol2/07/av flYgoZa,Z,g" filYd h-c/24.2c"7 72/4l 40097/04/ 7/31E- OTACET RkYlvoz-aj 7//44` 4609770N />t 61.04/4-- .14/-9)--a" gri2k-17; /30071-/ $00A() _MLL. /9 Po vof)) -49°T _ a& -r 7",1//is' Loci, 77o, , Ri9FF/e Pko,2447,kg affioi-41) 094/ HOR/Yer.) m'z' 5ED,gPEC7_01Z1(4,6-- 12.4Z .C'/-R .W1WN.5 Fezr_OF__E-4CA) 77-glA /1,9,,g LieS&6 Afowy oeL4-mg p6A7; 094/0 09/yo7714--e __107 0 4-0 14/ TWA / CA9 6)3,06 77/4- _rR O _ p /3/4/7r (1/94/ flogAlc- PR0/6?-a-07) _ _ VC-tifel4 ) WC -07_ 2o owo __oVArv_ Hog ) -77/7"f2. F - 4/0/2T// BONO _TAhFF/C _ oN ?Roy5/06r_fj__ _ 84",SZKi e.76 -D 10E -4S, 77e6 -E- Ai _67a, j___4 -Pc -137-c0 _c7A( _IIERmago3 Ek7)efi 07t 792oPARD/ Nom ffeovA .11-(40 Aphe_rug 4/ 44W 2?ivApry4}-oi 3TREET .EZ/>v _NoT _ ezieRGe-T - -------- H4RAtort4Oghell/S7ket70/CM)l4' Fgcsvr_or.___V.Z-Pg0,V94-a) Doo No7 i9cRE4-- _ WM/ PA 9/VAWG 04-10,7; ?vrtle., Mpe6 Fok atz- „14z-pet,sfx--0— h),vei/Die cirx MR? 6 P HERAIOAA MigN iivo/c4r0 777/4 i,g6tiffortiv ig liCOD400 t3orki) ,gT8EE7 WIfichi Eisiug RFX4-?4/040A • /YoTA- -IN 77/E 4/941- (54) /140h1MX j -mg ,vaN cm9tivazr73 (s) Five Tiwi (3) 7/ITT/Mq il4R1P60,454 R& -Mi/ A41.0 607Wo Thqg PEouroo BQ'4e-H, 19(Y,0 JA 471Lillot CogRce_7-, C 1-NFb&4f6T/o#V FET , c 3 -oF- 3 Sumfriwie /-701 ',7/04/ 95t C/ L of TQC /980 1/6- 74 f v6 -,g7 Sh'oo)T,8E PPPRoYC&, Na. of 7ij /?13 oV&' , ? '0Wto 5E ch', RET NUM13ce. /-Z6- 20.4 7k1),SPEcg" RYE, (b. 11RD 407 l FO/Ne lW YIY01 S i X/1//chi , /4' / DoNOO 2??' J/. REDoNA o &Act/ PRo PE7y o v‘ AWE -r CGVV.g7, v c7/.V1/74z44) F8-NeE Ei; DSV H o,5.9 cN CJ/Ty- PRoPEVyj 9M U,s/Ale 7-N/ PRoPE-47 r FoR 71/vie. UXc d aiFu4/o,v aF s`RCT T , t/ . (VAN Noe /M //4-14a-6mi /ND/c97g (-/Vi'b,v) &: W C17-7' o p r Go w/ D 49C /4/ ekofh D . 71,E 7N/Ne D -PIiz7flWIr ,Yo7 13‘ &oA/vg/ e 4 'y DF 74'6 � Bur /7 Dom f/i9Vf 76' 7f4',5Po z i 8:11.(Ty 1iVFa'f'I 7XE f �CopER.ry oWjV (7e91 7 y ) off' 1/5-4.7,40.g,4 W#41- /,S & 7A/c DONE To cc/Z,PEC.7 7N C-4s4V 0,s/g9,v OFFICE OF CITY ENGINEER - 9.2 �� TELEPHONE u-- -44-�� (213) 318-0661 QTY o]F RE ] DX J fl D) o0 : D3 ` AMa 415 DIAMOND STREET P.O. BOX 270 REDONDO BEACH, CA 90277-0270 February 11, 1992 Mr. Mike Shubach Planning Director City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 RE: Development of 1265 Van Horne Dear Mike: Mr. Mark Lueker approached me regarding a proposal to the City of Hermosa Beach that will place no restrictions on the final map process by the City of Redondo Beach. We have decided on the following agreement: 1. Mr. Lueker will still be required to complete the improvements as requested by the City of Redondo Beach. 2. The City of Hermosa Beach will not issue a building permit until Mr. Lueker has obtained a construction permit from the City of Redondo Beach Engineering Department. 3. The Redondo Beach construction permit will be a $5000.00 cash deposit. Any fees by Redondo Beach will be removed from this deposit before being refunded. This construction permit will be for the curb, gutter, cross gutter and sewer hookup. 4. The City of Hermosa Beach will only grant an occupancy (final) permit when the applicant shows a final on the construction permit from the City of Redondo Beach. If you have any further questions, pleas., contact me at 318-0661. Sincerely, ohn Mate Associate Civil Engineer PROJECT SUMMARY VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FOR 1265 VanHorne/212 Prospect Hermosa Beach This project IS NOT CONDO'4 it creates the large single family parcels Hermosa Beach has always wanted, on a site approximately as large as the residential portion of the Biltmore site. All city zoning and general plan requirements are exceeded for the three parcels, and required public improvements both reduce city liability and increase neighborhood attractiveness. DENSITY Project exceeds all density requirements of the General Plan, and all Planning Department zoning requirements: The three R1 parcel sizes will vary from 4200 to 5100 sq. ft., with 43' to 50' frontages. The surrounding average and mean parcel sizes are 2800 and 2500 sq. ft. respectively. Thus, the new parcels are approximately 2X area parcels Residential density of street block AFTER VESTING is only 2.6 houses/acre! For comparison, project parcel size is approximately that of the Biltmore residential portion, however, only three single family homes will be constructed compared with the 7 proposed for the Biltmore site. Parcel access will be on a wider street than the Biltmore site access. mot 0� 1 500W MEAN AVERAGE PROPOSED PROPOSED COMPARISON OF PROPOSED PARCEL SSS WITH SURROUNDING AVERAGE AND MEAN PARCEL SAS NEIGHBORHOOD APPROVAL I am coming to you, not as a single property owner, but rather the representative of our local community residents who graciously signed the attached petitions requesting the project be approved. This is an unprecedented micro "neighborhood mandate". Petition signatories include one gentleman who initially opposed the project, and a planner for the City of Torrance. Prior to the planning commission meeting, I had naively failed to canvas the neighborhood. This resulted in some neighbor opposition from fear of the unknown. After speaking with these people during the current canvassing effort, the concerns have been eliminated. In fact, one former opponent signed the petition! I live on the property and will continue to do so. This is a good community, I know my neighbors, and enjoy the stable families 170 160 130 140 130 120 110 100 90 60 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1265 VAN HORNE/212 PROSPECT SUIa01Ild"0 MAUI. SIM 10 '5 19 23 27 31 35 39 43 47 1 55 59 63 13 17 2 25 29 33 37 41 43 49 53 37 61 PMOL 30UN6E FOOTAGE (01000) PROJECT BENEFITS 1) Reduced city liability through: Relocation of power pole currently in VanHorne traffic lane and blocking intersection views Addition of sidewalks over rough, broken ground where none currently exist Addition of fire hydrant to cure existing inadequate area fire flow 2) Increased property tax revenue of approximately $20,000/yr for use in general fund supporting community projects 3) Upgrading of city image by replacing older houses north of "WELCOME TO HERMOSA BEACH"sign on Prospect 4) Improvement of Reynolds Lane with curb and gutter where none currently exist 5) Elimination of noisy "echo chamber" effect along Reynolds Lane SUPPLEMENTAL 6) Improvement of neighborhood look and consequently, property values INFORMATION 5 CIRCULATION ELEMENT OF GENERAL PLAN Existing VanHorne/Reynolds intersection will be improved by public works improvements of relocating the power pole, eliminating physical layout which generates tire squeal during turns, and widening Van Horne. Reynolds Lane will be improved with curb and gutter to eliminate dirt washing onto street and widen traffic lane. In terms of traffic flow and safety, Reynolds Lane surpasses 86% of streets in Hermosa Beach, including Ocean Drive access to the Biltmore site(per Circulation Element of General Plan). Parcel approach from Armour Lane is typical of surrounding one-way streets such as 2nd, 3rd, Spreckles, etc. and resulting quiet is enjoyed by current residents. _ , r-- . Quiet streets surrounding parcel enhance both neighborhood cohesion and sense of community HERMOSA BEACH FIRE TRUCK ON UNIMPROVED REYNOLDS LANE INDICATING NO CIRCULATION ELEMENT SERVICE VEHICLE ACCESS PROBLEMS (Note dirt flowing onto asphalt, curb and gutter addition, and intersection issues to be mitigated by my project) IN SUMMARY, THE PROJECT EXCEEDS ALL DENSITY REQUIREMENTS, ENJOYS UNPRECEDENTED NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT, AND ELIMINATES EXISTING CITY LIABILITY PROBLEMS. THEREFORE, I URGE YOU TO USE YOUR LEADERSHIP POSITION IN THE COMMUNITY TO SUPPORT THIS NEIGHBORHOOD MANDATE AND APPROVE THE SUBJECT PARCEL MAP TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH We the citizens of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach support a balanced, practical approach to development and renewal of community land resources. We support an approach to development density which provides for adhesion to our cities General Plan, yet allows individual property owners to utilize unused land and renew deteriorating housing stock. We feel it is your duty to support and encourage sensible development which follows these principles. Based upon this position, we the neighbors of the proposed parcel development at 1265 Van Horne/212 Prospect in Hermosa Beach find that the proposed creation of one additional large parcel of land, and the attendant public works improvements, will enhance the neighborhood, improve property values, and reduce potential traffic safety hazards. As a result of these findings, we respectfully request you to overturn the Planning Commission decision, and allow the project to proceed. Signed, NAME ADDRESS CITY 012O/L 3 Za 2.0l Fc'osPeh- 01 8 do - //3c llint7 -- Iz35-),4 -6. X43 (211/'P ij 73 ,i r '))L bac / rJT �' 6. lI TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH We the citizens of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach support a balanced, practical approach to development and renewal of community land resources. We support an approach to development density which provides for adhesion to our cities General Plan, yet allows individual property owners to utilize unused land and renew deteriorating housing stock. We feel it is your duty to support and encourage sensible development which follows these principles. Based upon this position, we the neighbors of the proposed parcel development at 1265 Van Horne/212 Prospect in Hermosa Beach find that the proposed creation of one additional large parcel of land, and the attendant public works improvements, will enhance the neighborhood, improve property values, and reduce potential traffic safety hazards. As a result of these findings, we respectfully request you to overturn the Planning Commission decision, and allow the project to proceed. NAMA1/4— Signed, ADDRESS 1232, 3�°5 CITY I Rola 32c's-r 14a )2_Sc-/ ac.eIla ": AM12.--6 6/52 /L s k 1(2 ( - 3 �z-( �f. //z ✓i,,,q 5.. /S .,- CA T X74 //c 744(k ,d21 -ac c-7,/ 0 C2( ,6/i-ligzei__ZZe v'l✓17;1 /a? /0,,, Zw 7,3 •J a)/6,4 TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH We the citizens of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach support a balanced, practical approach to development and renewal of community land resources. We support an approach to development density which provides for adhesion to our cities General Plan, yet allows individual property owners to utilize unused land and renew deteriorating housing stock. We feel itis your duty to support and encourage sensible development which follows these principles. Based upon this position, we the neighbors of the proposed parcel development at 1265 Van Horne/212 Prospect in Hermosa Beach find that the proposed creation of one additional large parcel of land, and the attendant public works improvements, will enhance the neighborhood, improve property values, and reduce potential traffic safety hazards. As a result of these findings, we respectfully request you to overturn the Planning Commission decision, and allow the project to proceed. As an additional matter of record, we the citizens of Armour Lane feel the one-way access is not at all awkward, but rather of great benefit in reducing traffic and providing a quiet neighborhood. NAME - Signed, ADDRESS CITY Th.f2Jt /6d 7 Ggiww_ /..A_- ie /1 GC '1 7LA-A iainabei( 6/A-(/27,(y&j, ,bos ZdAte__ TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH We the citizens of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach support a balanced, practical approach to development and renewal of community land resources. We support an approach to development density which provides for adhesion to our cities General Plan, yet allows individual property owners to utilize unused land and renew deteriorating housing stock. We feel it is your duty to support and encourage sensible development which follows these principles. Based upon this position, we the neighbors of the proposed parcel development at 1265 Van Horne/212 Prospect in Hermosa Beach find that the proposed creation of one additional large parcel of land, and the attendant public works improvements, will enhance the neighborhood, improve property values, and reduce potential traffic safety hazards. As a result of these findings, we respectfully request you to overturn the Planning Commission decision, and allow the project to proceed. Signed, NAMEt ADDRESS Vi'rVe/ft 732 Y // i( A -J f 1 CITY f`le,l viv5� aLzLei 2/4s?4 /(,of U "/Y824 %i a„,„4 e. *fra4--ezi S/t /6 ? 1/ai 13 eawiX %G0� /U'n 2�.w 601040&#&kY /6 c)_, 62AAJX.._ t C.1 --s VAL) ‘-\ov__)ur Va-vt_ 14-0-17fte_ qpL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH We the citizens of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach support a balanced, practical approach to development and renewal of community land resources. We support an approach to development density which provides for adhesion to our cities General Plan, yet allows individual property owners to utilize unused land and renew deteriorating housing stock. We feel it is your duty to support and encourage sensible development which follows these principles. Based upon this position, we the neighbors of the proposed parcel development at 1265 Van Horne/212 Prospect in Hermosa Beach find that the proposed creation of one additional large parcel of land, and the attendant public works improvements, will enhance the neighborhood, improve property values, and reduce potential traffic safety hazards. As a result of these findings, we respectfully request you to overturn the Planning Commission decision, and allow the project to proceed. As an additional matter of record, we the citizens of Armour Lane feel the one-way access is not at all awkward, but rather of great benefit in reducing traffic and providing a quiet neighborhood. Signed, ADDRESS CITY / 6 oo-(4--m o c,c1L LN� dcc.c/._ i&og hoL,(013 UaiD lotARo u 2 Lk) e. 13c4i . Ao .Ma -r-15 s , 41/4) (V 2- 1°\2v x o(kr I. A) (6c,11 /676 Ar=4-4vulr- Llit. D . Cn gaz 7mit_ Qxtidku atkt ,y4W LA -c, ?-k8 / 3o ASA LL. K(31 9o27 vi&u 11,03 Z our LN 403 9c TY TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF HERMOSA BEACH We the citizens of Hermosa Beach and Redondo Beach support a balanced, practical approach to development and renewal of community land resources. We support an approach to development density which provides for adhesion to our cities General Plan, yet allows individual property owners to utilize unused land and renew deteriorating housing stock. We feel it is your duty to support and encourage sensible development which follows these principles. Based upon this position, we the neighbors of the proposed parcel development at 1265 Van Horne/212 Prospect in Hermosa Beach find that the proposed creation of one additional large parcel of land, and the attendant public works improvements, will enhance the neighborhood, improve property values, and reduce potential traffic safety hazards. As a result of these findings, we respectfully request you to overturn the Planning Commission decision, and allow the project to proceed. November 25, 1991 To the City of Hermosa Beach: I am a neighbor interested in the Van Horne petition for lot split. I live adjacent to this lot and I personally feel that this split will benefit our street. I believe it will develop a barren lot area of Reynolds Lane which is essentially unused - and sometimes uncared for. This will certainly add value to all our properties and will also bring in additional tax revenue to the city. I feel that the addition of a residence surrounded by suitable landscaping would enhance the value of my property, and I urge your favorable consideration of his request. Address: Sincerely, ALL 1,4 lA 9O2 k November 25, 1991 To the Planning Commission City of Hermosa Beach Dear Sirs: After receiving your letter indicating the lot split of 206-212 Prospect, I would like to comment. The land under review is currently wasted space in the neighborhood with two old homes on it. I own the property across Van Horne from 206 Prospect and keep my property in top shape with new landscaping, room additions, weekly maintenance, etc. I feel this adds value to my property and the neighborhood. In a similar manner, replacing the existing homes at 206-212 Prospect with new homes on the subdivided land will add both aesthetic and monetary value to the neighborhood. I fully support this effort to recycle outdated neighborhood property and would hope you will also. Address: Sincerely, /5k?e, /PA/4.71' Are.lir - /Z',-'/' d? e November 25, 1991 Hermosa Beach Planning Commission Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Dear Sirs, As a resident of Redondo Beach California, I am writing to express my support of the lot subdivision under review at 206-212 Prospect, Hermosa Beach. I live across Reynolds Lane from the proposed subdivision and feel the proposed subdivision and subsequent home construction will greatly increase the attractiveness of the neighborhood. Assuming typical architectural standards are followed in the home design, the resulting homes will enhance the surrounding property values and eliminate the current eyesore status of Reynolds Lane. In closing, I look forward to having new homes as my neighbor. Address: November 25, 1991 City Council of Hermosa Beach To Whom it May Concern: I live across Reynolds Lane from the lot split Mark Lueker is proposing. I think the lot split and new homes that will be built are a good idea for the neighborhood if Reynolds Lane is spruced up in the process. The street has not been kept up and should be improved in the house construction. I think the addition of new houses on the lots will improve surrounding property values, which helps all the neighbors out. In summary, please help improve the neighborhood and approve the lot split. Sincerely, Address: 1600 f Y10 (111L_ l-1 •/Lc' 4,e -'' L-0-0( Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 6, 1992 Regular Meeting of February 11, 1992 THE STRAND BIKEWAY AND PEDESTRIAN PATH, CIP 90-144 Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Review the plans and specifications for the Strand Bikeway and Pedestrian Path, CIP 90-144. Said plans and specifications are on file in• the City Clerk's office and the Department of Public Works for review. 2. Direct the staff to revise the plans and specifications and to return the plans and specifications to Council for approval. Background: On January 28, 1992, a hearing was held on the above referenced project. City Council took the following action: To continue this item to the meeting of February 11, 1992, for further review and to allow staff to contact the funding source to determine the exact time requirements for spending the grant and to see if an extension could be arranged if needed. Analysis: This section is divided as follows: 1. Project Funding Time Requirements 2. Future Project Funding 3. Responses to Concerns and Questions 4. Alternate Design Considerations 1. Project Funding Time Requirements Staff met with -the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (LACTC) to determine the time requirements on the funding. The first grant received will lapse on June 30, 1992, unless the City exercises one of two options. The first grant amount consists of $446,000 in principal and an estimated $75,000 in interest earned through June 30, 1992. The interest earned on the principal is also part of the total grant amount. Option 1: Encumber the funds before June 30, 1992. Encumberment is defined by LACTC as executing a contract. Construction does not have to start before June 30, 1992, to encumber the funds. Therefore Council could advertise for construction bids, award, and execute the contract and set a start of construction for a preferred date. Council would then have two choices: (A) Start construction before the summer but complete only part of the project (e.g., from Herondo to 8th Street) and continue with the rest of the project after the summer. (B) Start the whole project after the summer. Option 2: Go before the LACTC and request a time extension for the grant. Most likely LACTC would grant the time extension, however, future fund applications would be more difficult to be approved until older grants were expended. 2. Future Project Funding Further discussion with LACTC indicated that additional bikeway funds could be requested for the portion of the Strand between 24th Street and 35th Street. However, this would first require the designation of this portion of the Strand as a bicycle route in the Circulation Element of the General Plan to be eligible for the funding. 3. Responses to Concerns and Questions A. Why do we need a wall on the west edge of the Strand? The wall on the west edge of the Strand pavement was installed in the 1940's. The main function of the wall is to protect the Strand and the property to the east of the wall from blowing sand. The wall forms a barrier between the Strand pavement and the beach sand. Before the wall was constructed, sand would blow onto the the walk and the houses on the east side of the Strand. B. How will the color of the wall be selected? Before the color of the wall is proposed, staff suggests that color submittals be reviewed by City Council, the Planning Commission, local architects and the public. If a consensus can be reached, a color will be proposed. Final approval will be subject to City Council discretion. C. Have alternative designs of the wall been considered? Yes, designs with a new separate footing under the wall have been considered. Underneath the Strand wall and slab is a concrete "sea wall" which is apparently monolithic with the slab. Constructing a separate footing would require removing the upper portion of this sea wall to provide enough space for a new footing. Advantages of constructing a new footing include concrete encasement of the reinforcing steel which provides protection against corrosion, and a new structural section. Disadvantages include disruption of the existing sea wall and higher costs. D. Could the wall be constructed integrally with the slab? Yes, however as described above, the existing "sea wall" would have to be partially removed. The new slab would function as a footing for the wall. The advantages would be the same as listed above. The slab and wall would appear the same from the surface as described above. E. Can an anti -graffiti coating be applied to the wall? Anti -graffiti coatings are available which can be applied to concrete. The coatings are clear and designed to make graffiti removal easier. Based on past graffiti removal experience of City maintenance personnel, staff recommends not applying an anti -graffiti coating on the wall. Graffiti problems on the Strand wall have been minimal. Graffiti can be removed or painted over without the expense of applying an anti -graffiti coating. F. Will the old concrete removed from the Strand be recycled? The old concrete can be recycled if a user is identified who will utilize the recycle concrete for another project. G. How will bicycle traffic on Shakespeare Avenue be affected by modifications from the project? Staff does not believe any significant change will occur. 3. Alternate Design Considerations Local architects met with staff suggesting alternate details where the beach is accessed through the Strand wall. The suggested design would include an entrance to the beach at each street intersection. The details include an area with facilities for seating, bicycle racks, trash receptacles and alternate lighting all outside of the Strand bikeway. Sketches of these details are will be available for review in the Council Chambers. The alternate detail would incur some additional costs. Staff estimates these costs at approximately $5,000 per street intersection. Alternatives: Other alternatives considered by staff and available to the City Council are: 1. Change the scope of work. Instruct staff to separate the project into phases. Respectfully submitted, BrianGengl Assistant Engineer Noted for Fiscal Impact: OcAzet-p-tif Viki Copeland Director of Finance strsup Concur: Lynn A Terry Deput City Engineer // —��/ At/ liam Glic 'an, Interim rector of Public Works Steve Wisniewski Interim City Manager Attachment: Letter from Brian and Rosemary S. O'Malley dated February 5, 1992. To: City Council of Hermosa Beach Kathleen Nlidstokke, Mayor Robert Fssertier, Mayor Pro Tempore Robert Benz Sam Edgerton Albert Vliemans February , 1992 RECEIVED ung ." 14,now In response to your January 28th City Council Meeting regarding the proposed repair of the Bike Path and Strand: nPPT The fence should not be lowered or eliminated: 1. It serves as a breakwater against the ocean and anyone living along the Strand can attest to its importance. Remember the last severe storm we had in late 1982. 2. Since our beach is level, we get a substantial amount of sand build- up along the wall and on the Strand near all openings to the beach due to our frequent windstorms. This has to b,e shoveled off by hand from the Strand. Therefore, it would cost extra City dollars to maintain if we were to lower or eliminate the wail. 3. With more sand on the bikeway, we have another safety problem when bicycling. Therefore, more litigation instead of less. 4. Without a wall, bikes,in order to avoid collisions, might veer off into the sand, another dangerous situation. 5. Parents already have a tough time trying to keep their children off the busy Strand. With the wall gone or even lowered, children can more easily and quickly climb over small walls and onto the bike path, presenting a very dangerous situation. 6. The wall serves as a protection against flying objects, such as volleyballs, frisbees, beach paddle balls, footballs, etc., from floating into the Strand. 7. We should not encourage more use of the Strand, an already congested area, but rather encourage people to sit out on our expansive beach. If beachgoers sit on the Strand wall, this encourages congestion due to the "grouping effect". 8. If the wall was turned into a seat, it would make for more night usage and, therefore, disturb the peace for residents living near the Strand. 9. We already have a problem with gang's hanging out and sitting on the swing set in our area at Longfellow. A -lowered Strand wall would provide even more temptations for gangs to hang out, both day and nite. 10. Design the wall so that no one can walk on it. We now see many doing so and falling off - especially when inebriated. 11. Small children can hurt themselves badly falling off even a short concrete wall. Encourage small children away from the dangerously congested Strand and unto the sandy beach. 12. People will tend to sunbathe on the seats instead of the beach. Encourage them to use the beach. p.� 2 Do not re -open the Strand at '35th. It was closed because of a very dangerous slope that exists because of the steep variation in levels between the Manhattan bike path and the Strand in Hermosa at 35th. Do straighten out the bike path at 35th extending it to the Manhattan bike path. 1. Encourage use of the bike path running along Hermosa Avenue. 2. When the Strand was opened at 35th, the bike path on Hermosa Avenue was seldom used. 3. Instead of eliminating the two metered parking spaces behind James Bell's triplex, change the meters so that two spaces could run parallel to the bike path at 35th and Hermosa. Allocate money from the General Fund so that the entire Strand can be renovated all at the same time. The Strand is an important feature of the City and deserves to be kept attractive and safely in repair. The Strand north of,24th to 35th is very dangerously cracked and the wall is falling apart. There are major lawsuits waiting to happen. Get the garbage cans off the Strand. They unduly crowd into an already congested multi-user pathway. Build them into the Strand wall to the ocean side of the wall. Thanking you in advance for taking these above mentioned items into consideration. Phone 372-7144 Sincerely, Brian and Rosemary S. O'Malley 3330 M Sf��,~zD cc: City Manager, Steve Wisniewski Public Works Director, Bill Glickman V ssistant Engineer, Brian Gengler City Clerk, Elaine Doerfling To: City Council of Hermosa Beach Kathleen Midstokke, Mayor Robert Essertier, Mayor Pro Robert Benz Sam Edgerton Albert Wiemans February 5, 1992 Tempore RECEIVED FEB 0 5 1992 CITY MGR. OFFICE In response to your January 28th City Council Meeting regarding the proposed repair of the Bike Path and Strand: The fence should not be lowered or eliminated: 1. It serves as a breakwater against the ocean and anyone living along the Strand can attest to its importance. Remember the last severe storm we had in late 1982. 2. Since our beach is level, we get a substantial amount of sand build- up along the wall and on the Strand near all openings to the beach due to our frequent windstorms. This has to be shoveled off by hand from the Strand. Therefore, it would cost extra City dollars to maintain if we were to lower or eliminate the wall. 3. With more sand on the bikeway, we have another safety problem when bicycling. Therefore, more litigation insteadof less. 4. Without a wall, bikes,in order to avoid collisions, might veer off into the sand, another dangerous situation. 5. Parents already have a tough time trying to keep their children off the busy Strand. With the wall gone or even lowered, children can more easily and quickly climb over small walls and onto the bike path, presenting a very dangerous situation. 6. The wall serves as a protection against flying objects, such as volleyballs, frisbees, beach paddle balls, footballs, etc., from floating into the Strand. 7. We should not encourage more use of the Strand, an already congested area, but rather encourage people to sit out on our expansive beach. If beachgoers sit on the Strand wall, this encourages congestion due to the "grouping effect". 8. If the wall was turned into a seat, it would make for more night usage and, therefore, disturb the peace for residents living near the Strand. 9. We already have a problem with gang's hanging out and sitting on the swing set in our area at Longfellow. A lowered Strand wall would provide even more temptations for gangs to hang out, both day and nite. 10. Design the wall so that no one can walk on it. We now see many doing so and falling off - especially when inebriated. 11. Small childrencan hurt themselves badly falling off even a short concrete wall. Encourage small children away from the dangerously congested Strand and unto the sandy beach. 12. People will tend to sunbathe on the seats instead of the beach. Encourage them to use the beach. p. 2 Do pot, re -open the Strand at 35th. It was closed because of a very dangerous slope that exists because of the steep variation in levels between the Manhattan bike path and the Strand in Hermosa at 35th. Do straighten out the bike path at 35th extending it to the Manhattan bike path. 1. Encourage use of the bike path running along Hermosa Avenue. 2. When the Strand was opened at 35th, the bike path on Hermosa Avenue was seldom used. 3. Instead of eliminating the two metered parking spaces behind James Bell's triplex, change the meters so that two spaces could run parallel to the bike path at 35th and Hermosa. Allocate money from the General Fund so that the entire Strand can be renovated all at the same time. The Strand is an important feature of the City and deserves to be apt attractive and safely in repair. The Strand north of 24th to 35th is very dangerously cracked and the wall is falling apart. There are major lawsuits waiting to happen. Get the garbage cans off the Strand. They unduly crowd into an already congested multi-user pathway. Build them into the Strand wall to the ocean side of the wall. Thanking you in advance for taking these above mentioned items into consideration. Phone 372-7144 Sincerely, Brian and Rosemar S. O'Malley 3.320 7� s o cc: City Manager, Steve Wisniewski Public Works Director, Bill Glickman �ssistant Engineer, Brian Gengler ity Clerk, Elaine Doerfling F EB051992 Clty ofcity clerk Hermosa Beach b .7/ IAAv� l,v�d Ae sz/ta�,p - u a all•T;ST(L tia 1-4 !'Cf SeleeN ci.1`'4-r' 14_ ►'ems( (T. c,)e i 1 k •4 aa, e•r�,— �� l ��f z 'tGre_ epl,? a r' T L 2 ,31-- c. /4,tirl I. LA) _S / A„tt i 74,44 .s-( / 1 t KJ 1 C �'�p ° T tie Toe a (=The c.4../4-itS,clp,i•l JAS /vim % u �; hc 'to,' /LT Seue --1 ,arzc' + reel l� e_. T /4-(%) NG.- 7�' �c ST �,'Y N d Lis r"�,c te✓rviz t) 6 � Jur 71t� �..4(��s y 7' t t/ � /r �•5 / rptT -7 he 0f'(fla.4.1ce /..� (.�,,.1re / ti , -�- - 44 L :� Re !.J eA. ttheS r� t Pt, c Cau-M Mj2 b42,11 I� /.0 I v v --AAs / :�,rl,�,,i �"�,� n a r es. r3� 6UPPLEMENTAL 7e- / INFORMATION s //..5 -)7/1 -- January 21, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council January 28, 1992 THE STRAND BIKEWAY AND PEDESTRIAN PATH, CIP 90-144 AUTHORIZATION TO SOLICIT CONSTRUCTION BIDS Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Approve the plans and specifications for the Strand Bikeway and Pedestrian Path, CIP 90-144. Said plans and specifications are on file in the City Clerk's office and the Department of Public works for review. 2. Authorize staff to solicit construction bids for the Strand Bikeway and Pedestrian Path project. 3. Authorize staff to issue addenda as necessary within budget limitations. Background: On December 10, 1991, the City Council approved the following construction rehabilitation work to begin along the Strand. The work areas for the project are shown by the segment numbers on the attached map. COMPLETE REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT The complete removal and replacement of the Strand bikeway and pedestrian path along with its protection wall is the repair method for these areas. The direction to staff was that the replacement design be as close as possible to what is already there. a) Segment #1 - The work in this area is from the south City limit to Eighth Street b) Segment #3 - The work in this area is from Fifteenth Street to Twenty-fourth Street. PARTIAL REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT The repair method for this portion of the project is to repair only the existing protective wall. The construction is to leave the existing bikeway and pedestrian path concrete surface alone. a) Segment #2 - The work in this area is from Eighth Street to Fifteenth Street. BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENTS ONLY The City Council took further action to consider, with a hearing, the repair of the bikeway on Hermosa Avenue from Twenty-fourth Street to the north City Limit. a) Segment #4 - The work in this area is to design the widening and striping of Twenty-fourth Street (between the Beach Drive and Hermosa Avenue) to accommodate two-way bicycle traffic. b) Segment #5 - The work in this area is to design the asphalt overlay on the Hermosa Avenue bikeway between Twenty-fourth Street and the north City Limit. c) North City Limit - The work in this area is to design a new alignment for the bikeway to connect between the existing Manhattan Beach bikeway and the existing Hermosa Beach bikeway. Analysis: The analysis is divided into the following sections: 1. Proposed scope of work. 2. Estimated Time Schedule. 3. Construction Phasing. 1. Proposed Scope of Work The proposed scope of work is described in the plans and specifications in accordance with the City Council actions listed above in the "Background" section. A. Bikeway and Pedestrian Path Repair The existing bikeway/pedestrian path will be replaced to the same dimension of 20 feet wide. The wall will return to the same height of 32 inches high. The proposed wall is to be poured concrete and colored in a sandy earth tone. The color must be approved before construction of the wall begins. The light poles and trash receptacles will be relocated on the west side of the new Strand wall to facilitate trash removal and cleanup. If the Council allows stamped imprints in the wall, such as dolphins, they will have to be approved by the City prior to the start of construction. B. Twenty-fourth Street Modification The proposed Twenty-fourth Street modification will allow a wider, smoother and safer area for bicyclists. This area is a transition between the bike path on the west side of Hermosa Avenue and the bike path on the Strand. The widening of Twenty-fourth Street and restriping will allow the separation of the bicycle traffic from the automobile traffic. The traffic presently egressing north from Beach Drive onto Twenty-fourth Street and Hermosa Avenue is in conflict with the bicycle traffic. C. Hermosa Avenue Bikeway Overlay An asphalt overlay is proposed on the Hermosa Avenue bikeway between Twenty-fourth Street and Thirty-fifth Street. This overlay will place a new layer of asphalt pavement on the existing bikeway, thus providing a smoother and safer riding surface for the bicyclists. D. New Alignment at 35th Street The new alignment will extend the existing bikeway on the west side of Hermosa Avenue from Thirty-fifth Street northerly for a distance of 235' to the north City limit and connect with the City of Manhattan Beach bikeway. Currently, bicycles must merge with pedestrians in this section and zigzag to continue onto the Manhattan Beach bikeway. The new alignment will straighten the bikeway and provide separate paths for the pedestrians and the bicyclists. Staff recommends eliminating two parking spaces on the west side of Hermosa Avenue located in front of 3500 Hermosa Avenue. The parking spaces are too close to the proposed bikeway and their removal would allow for safer bicycle travel. The spaces hinder pedestrian access to Shakespeare Lane and no one else along Shakespeare is allowed to park their cars on Shakespeare Lane. 2. Estimated Time Schedule Shown below is an estimated time schedule for the project. Begin Advertising for Bids January 30, 1992 Open bids February 18, 19929 Award Contract February 25, 1992 Execute Contract March 16, 1992 Target Start Construction Date* March 23, 1992 Target Complete Construction Date June 21, 1992 *Construction start date depends on approval by Coastal Commission. Hearing is scheduled for March 13, 1992. 3. Construction Phasing The construction of this project will be phased in sections. The sections will be no more than three blocks in length and based on the construction procedures. Each section will be closed to access until construction is complete within that segment. During construction of the section, Strand traffic will be temporarily detoured onto Beach Drive, then join the Strand again on the other side of the construction area. Fiscal Impact: Shown below are estimated project costs. Actual construction costs will not be known until after bids are received. Design(1) $ 16,000 Construction 1,010,000 Inspection(2) 19,000 Subtotal Contingency $1,045,000 105,000 Total Estimated Project Costs $1,150,000 Estimated Funding Available: $1,153,000 Funding Source: Transportation Development Act (SB 821) Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Funding. (1) Design has been performed by in-house engineering staff. Costs are eligible for reimbursement. (2) Inspection will be performed by in-house engineering staff and is also eligible for reimbursement. - 4 - Alternatives: Other alternatives considered by staff and available to the City Council are: 1. Change the scope of work. (This is not recommended at this time but may be necessary after construction bids have been received and the actual costs are known. 2. Delay the project. (This is not recommended because grant funds could lapse if not used this fiscal year.) Respectfully submitted, A/ta.: , k Brian Gengl Assistant Engineer Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Director of Finance Attachments: Project Map pworks/ccstrand Concur: G&2_424V;;i/,,-------- Lynn A. Terry Depu'y City Engineer lliam Glic' an, Interim irector of Public Works Steve Wisniewski Interim City Manager DKS Associates CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH LEGEND i 1 , • ' ki I • •' ' __._. - .. , J I I! 1 , ... •-')_ ••.(''''• ,, • i I • I .1. ..."...: : .:1 et.' C.: :A . ---- 1; 11 in '::.--' '.:Ii -41. ; . : : : i '. ' 1 ' '' i i ' :1 I '' il'L HERMOSA PAVILLION, 12 ,li , . _I! .1,, ..r.:, : ;! 1f ii ,i1 ,i ii : ti / r \ - - i i :4,;-{- ..: 17(„ .4..i.: I. :,,, : , ii . .. .i.11,1/._.._ii,,:). ii,:i PA;;,..K.,,..,ET;,.......E....,i':;',._,.....: 1_- 4-----. . , ,, ! ,i !,....__!,.._ ;. , MOO 1'3.1:..)U -"'ST‘'.= , 1 )1 PARKETTE. . : ... .,rsHOFFINGSt-THEATERS ;1 I. _ .•-• PARK 4; 1 lir A GREENWOODP fp HERMOSA_AVENUE BIKE_ROUTE '94 To CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH •e>6 THE STRAND BIKE ROUTE BIKE PATH PIER/SHOPPING AREA TO CITY OF REDONDO BEACH BIKE ROUTE Figure 13 BICYCLE ROUTES AND GENERATORS OF BICYCLE TRAFFIC prci7 ,Q3 i.,0,,, .., , , , su ,, .. x t „PI- 111 V m i SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 1 , -r=a fit- A4A-e_AL - ' .0--1-- dj� %62 // 9a February 5, 1992 l Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 11, 1992 VEHICLE PARKING ON UNIMPROVED PUBLIC STREET RIGHT OF WAY INCLUDING PEDESTRIAN WALK STREETS Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council return this item back to the Planning Commission for further study of each individual area. Background: 1. On April 16, 1991, the Planning Commission was provided a report dated March 19, 1991, pertaining to vehicle parking on pedestrian walk streets. The Commission requested additional information. 2. On July 2, 1991, the Planning Commission received additional information and made recommendations to the City Council. 3. On July 23, 1991, the City Council reviewed the recommendations from the Planning Commission. The City Council expanded the scope of the study to include other streets within the City where there is the possibility of illegal parking. 4. On December 12, 1991, the City Council and the Planning Commission held a joint meeting and requested additional information from staff. Analysis: The City staff has completed a field review on the four main streets within the City where parking difficulties exist. Those streets are Prospect Avenue, Monterey Blvd., Manhattan Avenue and Beach Drive. These are the major streets having rights-of-way that allow for vehicular parking. The results of the field review are shown on the following page. - 1 - Name of Street Total Number of Parcels Number of Parcels where illegal parking occurs Number of spaces where vehicles park illegally Prospect Avenue 206 25 32 Monterey Blvd. 325 43 54 Manhattan Ave. 328 18 21 Beach Drive (at walk streets) 197 37 130 The issue of vehicles parking on Beach Drive may be different than the other streets. It has been recommended that each area be studied individually at the Planning Commission. Respectfully submitted: Lynn Terry Deputy City Engineer pworks/impvp Steve Wisniewski Interim City Manager The purpose for the vacation of easements and dedications is to guarantee for future generations the open, airy, unique life style that the residents of Hermosa Beach now enjoy. The confiscation of dedications and/or easements within the coastal zone by state agencies demonstrates with crystal clarity that the future of one of Hermosa Beach's unique residential neighborhoods will suffer if not become non-existent without private ownership. Vehicular parking is controlled by zoning codes and not part of a responsibile vacation process. The only result or purpose anyone can accomplish using the parking as an issue of vacation will be to postpone the institution of a responsible vacation process allowing the state to confiscate the dedication and/or easement for coastal access. Other vacations needed immediately are on North and South Streets in Hermosa Beach. The state removed parking on Pacific Coast Highway justifying the removal by stataing North South traffic on Manhattan, Monterey and Prospect would be reduced. No one in Hermosa Beach has witnessed a reduction in North South traffic on our residential streets. Redondo Beach vacated city owned land and/or vacations and dedications on Flagler Avenue to protect a residential neighborhood. Why is it the Hermosa Beach City Council will not direct the Hermosa Beach City staff to institute the same or equal prote4tion for the residential neighborhoods of Hermosa Beach? SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 1' IL February 1992 Attention H.B. City Council and Public Works Department To All Persons Concerned: In July of last year the City Council was addressing the illegal walkstreet parking adjacent to Beach Drive. Prior to the July 23rd Council Meeting, virtually every vehicle on Hermosa Avenue from First Street to Twenty Fifth was flagged with a handbill stating 200 vehicles would be flooding Hermosa Avenue if the City Council abolished the illegal parking. (See attached handbill.) Earlier during the Planning Commission's discussion of this issue Planning Commissioner DiMonda said he had been curious about the actual number of vehicles participating in this illegal parking. He did a count on two weekend days in June and esttpated,"between 55 or 60 vehicles," appear to be parked in front yards east of Beach Drive or on the side yards of the Strand properties. Over the past months I have made actual counts of vehicles parked on the walkstreets. (See Vehicle Survey.) Hopefully, this information will help you while addressing this situation that is highly detrimental to the beauty and safety of our city. Sincerely, John B. McFarlane 25 Eighth Street Hermosa Beach civAl ck D)1,1 O ci . } 4-r i f;114 I (` 1 •w o • �z o co0 vo ai 2 o Z Mia moo rnov)d •N [-+ PQ(I) tI Ng.@1 cal Pi 9 Cr3 t15 o N WHERE WILL YOU PARK NEXT WEEK? On Tuesday, July 23, 1991, the Hermosa Beach City Council will consider a proposal to eliminate HUNDREDS OF PARKING SPACES, including 200 parking spaces in , the immediate vicinity of Hermosa Avenue. Can you imagine?!? Parking is already the most difficult problem with which we must contend in Hermosa Beach ... and the City Council is contemplating making it much MORE DIFFICULT. How long will it take you to find a parking space if "the competition" is increased by 200 cars? COME AND BE COUNTED ► ► ► ► ► WHERE: Hermosa Beach City Hall DATE AND TIME: July 23, 1991 at 8:30 p.m. RESIDENT IAL RECREATIONAL USE Li;4141DS CAPE NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF VEHICULAR PARKING ON WALKSTREETS (1) Liability to Hermosa Beach' (2) Financial gain through parking of auto, motorcycles or storage of r.v.'s and boats on public property by owners, tenants or neighbors. (3) Cars parking just inches away from persons engaged in residential recreational use (eating, sitting, children playing.) (4) Front yard of one property, the one adjacent to Beach Drive, used differently than all other houses on the walkstreet block. (5) Exhaust fumes floating into residential windows at all hours of the day and night. (6) Maintenance of vehicles adjacent to residential recre- ational use including tuning of car engines, changing oil into the sand; washing, waxing, vacuuming autos with stereos playing, creating excessive dirt, dust and noise. (7) Decreased property values and downgrading of general appearances when vehicles replace things of beauty that can be enjoyed by ourselves and our beach patrons. 11 FEBRUARY 1992 ATTENTIC : MAYOR KATHLEEN MIDSTOKKE, COUNCILPERSONS ESSERTIER, BENZ, EDC RTCN, WIEMANS; CITY CLERK DOERFLING, INTERIM CITY MANAGER WISNIEWSKI, AND CITY ATTORNEY VOSE DEAR CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH COUNCILPERSONS AND OFFICIALS: THIS EVENING, 11 FEBRUARY 1992, YOU WILL BE CONSIDERING AGAIN AN ASPECT REGARDING THE ILLEGAL PARKING OF VEHICLES ON CITY PROPERTY. THE MCFARLANE FAMILY IS SPECIFICALLY INTERFS'1'EU THAT THIS COUNCIL EVALUATE THE CONTINUING MISUSE OF THE CORNER PROPERTIES FACING THE WALKSTREETS (THE NORTHEAST AND SOUTHEAST PROTICJN OF EACH INTERSECTION OF BEACH DRIVE AND EACH WALKSTREET). VEHICLES PARKED AT THEAFOREMENTICTi1ED CORNERS ARE PARKED, STORED, MAINTAINED, WASHED OR MOVED IN AND OUT OF AREAS WHICH HAVE BEEN DESIGNATED AS "FRCUT YARDS" AND THIS PRACTICE NEGATIVELY Err ECTS EVERY EVERY PROPERTY CN THE STREET. AS A REVIEW AND FOR THE INTEREST OF THE NEW COUNCILPERSONS, I HAVE INCLUDED: (1) MCFARLANE FAMILY' ORIGINAL LEITER TO THE CITY COUNCIL PRE- SENTED AT THE MEETING OF AUGUST 14, 1990; (2) CITY MANAGER'S RECONIMENDATICJN TO THE CITY COUNCIL DA'Z'ED JULY 30, 1990 AUTHORIZING STAFF AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO REVIEW THE SITUATION WITH THE INTENT TO PROHIBIT SUCH PARKING CN THE "FRONT YARD" PORTIONS OF WALKSTREETS; (3) PUBLIC WORKS' EXTENSIVE STUDY C1 THE PEDESTRIAN WALKSTREETS SUBMITTED TO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF APRIL 2, 1991, INCLUDING THE H.B. CITY CODE, ENCROACHMENT INFORMATION, FOLLOWED BY MEMORANDUM OF THE CITY MANAGER DATED MARCH 28, 1991 (PAGE 16) AND RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AND PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR CATEU APRIL 2, 1991 (PAGE 17) . IT IS MY SINCERE HOPE THAT BY BRINGING THESE ITEMS TO EACH OF YOU THE SUBJECT MA'1'1'ER WILL AGAIN BE FRESH IN YOUR MIND AS YOU FOCUS ON ITEM 7 Chi THE AGENDA TONIGHT: ITLEGAL PARKING ani CITY OWNED PROPERTY AS IT PERTAINS TO WALKSTREETS. RESPECTFULLY SUBMI'LTED, SUSAN W. MCFARLANE 25 EIGHTH STREET HERMOSA BEACH ATTENTION: HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCILPERSONS SUBJECT: PARKING OF VEHICLES ON WALKSTREETS THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION NAS BEEN PREPARED BY: JOHN AND SUSAN MCFARLANE, 31 EIGHTH STREET, H.B. We have owned and resided at this address since 1970. John Mcfarlane has been a resident of Hermosa Beach for 52 years. BACKGROUND: The parking situation at the southeast corner of 8th St. and Beach Drive did not occur for many years as the property owners were living there and kept it beautifully landscaped. After the property was sold it became a rental and the new owner cut away the curbing and instructed his tenants to park on this city owned property. We approached the owner with a request to stop the parking. His response was, "I can charge my tenants extra for this. It may be wrong and even illegal, but if the city does not stop me, I'm taking it." Next we approached City Hall. To paraphrase a bit, we were essentially told, "Gee, we know it is wrong (illegal?) but we have such a parking problem in the city we feel it's better to 'look the other way'." Then he added, "you know the owner submitted a permit to have the parking area paved but we denied it." This he felt was victory enough in dealing with the situation. The next few years would see us visit City Hall to check if a change in policy might be in the offing but were told, "We are looking at the situ- ation and hope to deal with the issue soon." In the meantime, numerous parking encroachments were being made as side walls were removed, and illegal curbcuts occured on other walkstreets. At the time the parking began on 8th St., there were only two other streets with -2 - the same problem, 16th and 21st. Today, out of 15 streets that offer the potential, only 5 are free of parking on the walkstreet portion. Recently we had the opportunity to discuss the situ- ation with a property owner with several vehicles parked in his front yard. When asked why he was doing it, he said, "My L the garage is full of junk and I should get rid of it, but city lets me park here, so I do." Soon we will be moving into a new home we are finish- ing on the lot west of our present residence. During Open House for Brokers, several realtors (professionals in the field of comparing properties) stated, "That parking in front of your house is an example of why property values in Hermosa are not as high as they should be." With this, we traveled Ocean Drive in Manhattan Beach. The difference was graphic. One need only to look at the enclosed photo- graphs to see the contrast. (The photograph of the autos was taken from the deck of our new home. The others from two properties on Manhattan Beach walkstreets.) We can only hope that one day we can live with the beauty that we once had on Eighth Street. WE have enjoyed many good years in our city and truly regret the gnawing aggravation we live with daily over a few residents who, by the geographic location of their property, adversely effect so many of their neighbors' lives. We feel the city government and the public are ieing ' "had"- in -this situation. It -is so -easy to -let -things slide and to "cave in" to issues such as these. It takes courage and strength to up -grade and enforce what is right. Respectfully, John B. McFarlane Susan W. Mcfarlane cc: City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk L C A `rI o N 0F. T1-tE ENCLn 5EZj -t 4)Nc. ,S 7 RA (\-J `D I r f 73EAc,1-4.- -bR_LuE_-_ 8`' July 30, 1990 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council of August 14, 1990 RECOMMENDATION REGARDING VEHICLE PARKING IN FRONT YARDS AND ON PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (NOT STREET SURFACES) Recommendation: That the City Council authorize staff and the Planning Commission as appropriate to review the City's ordinances and enforcement of parking within the front yard setback of properties in the City, with the intent to prohibit such parking. Background: City staff has received a complaint from John and Susan McFarlane regarding the practice on certain walk streets of utilizing the public right-of-way in front of residential property for parking. Analysis: The City has many right-of-ways that are not currently being used for street purposes. The twenty-five walk streets in the City are obvious examples. Also, Monterey Boulevard and Prospect Avenue have right-of-way far in excess of the improved street surface. The use of these right-of-ways by the adjacent proper- ty owners for many years is well established. For this reason, any discussion of changing that use would no doubt be controver- sial, but could be considered if there was an interest in con- sidering vacating the right-of-way or opening it up for public use. A less controversial way of dealing with the complainants concern could be to review the City's policy on using the front setback for parking. Section 1157(D) of the Municipal Code prohibits parking in the first twenty feet of the front yard except where a driveway exists as an approach to a garage. It would seem ap- propriate that this prohibition should apply to the first twenty feet, whether or not it is private property or technically a public right-of-way in use by the adjacent property. This interpretation and enforcement of this provision has ramifica- tions on walk streets and other streets in the City, and could result in a reduction of offstreet parking that would help aggra- vate the current parking problems in the community. However, it is well established that parking in the front of lots that are most visible to the public do have a negative impact on a neigh- borhood and on our community in general. (For this reason, our ordinance provision is similar to ordinances in other cities that are concerned about the quality and aesthetics of their neighborhoods.) - 1 - Alternatives: A variety of alternatives are available to the Council, including direction to staff to: 1) Consider the opening of right-of-way areas not used for street purposes for general public use, 2) Review of the impact of vacating public right-of-ways that are not anticipated to be used for any public purpose, 3) Require encroachment permits and insurance for a continued use of the right-of-way by the adjacent property owners, 4) Prohibition of use of unimproved public right-of-way for parking, 5) Require a permit for use of these areas for private parking. (1 -01,4( -41? -1,1- 64/L_ Kevin B. Northcraft City Manager KBN/ld cc: Planning Department Public Works Department John and Susan McFarlane 2 March 19, 1991 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach Planning Commission April 2, 1991 VEHICLE PARKING ON PEDESTRIAN WALK STREETS Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission: See attached memos. Background: The City Manager's office has received a number of complaints about parking along the walk streets. The City Manager has also received complaints about vehicles parking in what appears to be "front yards" but is really public right-of-way. On August 14, 1990, the City Council authorized staff and the Planning Commission to review the City's Ordinances and enforcement of parking within the setback area, with the intent to prohibit such parking. Pedestrian walk streets within the City of Hermosa Beach, where vehicle parking is possible in the public right-of-way, for the most part are those east -west streets located west of Hermosa Avenue and east of the Strand. (See Figure 1.) The majority of these public streets are sixty feet in width. However, only the center sixteen feet of the street right-of-way is paved with concrete. The remaining right-of-way width is equally divided with twenty two feet of public right-of-way along each side of the walk street. This is the area where it is currently possible to park up to 200 vehicles and that the Commission will be reviewing. (See Figure 2.) Staff will provide a slide show presentation of the current parking situation. - 1 - 5 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH JL - ci ATM LEGEND WALKSTREETS JLJL 1E] i AREA UNDER STUDY Figure 1 r1 STRAND BEACH PARKING IN WHAT APPEARS TO BE "SIDEYARD" EXISTING HOUSE EXISTING GARAGE EXISTING HOUSE EXISTING GARAGE H H H.x a X'0 W m 60' 22' 16 22' R/W BEACH DRIVE R/W TING AGE EXISTING HOUSE Imimmos EXISTING HOUSE EXISTING GARAGE EXIST: HOUS: EXIST GARA PARKING IN WHAT APPEARS TO BE "FRONT YARD" �-- R/W /0--- R/W STING CAGE EXISTING HOUSE Figure 2 - 3 - r EXISTING HOUSE IS EXISTING HOUSE ft _ .r Analysis: The analysis is divided as follows: 1. General Plan Review 2. Current City Code 3. Number of Walk Streets Involved 4. Number of Private Properties on Walk Streets 5. Number of Locations Where Parking is Possible or Occurring 6. Items of Concern 7. Manhattan Beach's Experience 8. Alternatives 1. General Plan Review Open Space Element Philosophy: The underlying philosophy of the Open Space and Conservation Element is to preserve and enhance the existing green areas, and to increase the total open space areas within possible financial ability. Streets comprise nearly one third of the City's area, and considering the small size of private lots and minimal yards, these streets provide much of the "elbow room" within the community. For this reason, these streets should not only be preserved but developed for maximum impact as green areas of landscaped ribbons throughout the City. Stated goals/and policies of the Open Space Element are: 1. Goal: To obtain and preserve open spaces within the City limits of Hermosa Beach, sufficient to provide for anticipated needs of both present and future residents. 2. Goal and policy #19: To obtain, preserve, and enhance green areas, such as street landscape strips, mini -parks and parkways as being necessary to the health and well being of the community. 3. Goal: To provide room for, and adequate protection of, bikeways, pedestrian routes and trails. 4. Goal and policy #22: To provide for the retention and further beautification of streets as open spaces, and to encourage further use of same as pedestrian walkways, malls and plazas. Streets, when closed for whatever reason, should be retained where practical and used for shopping malls, where zoning is appropriate or part of the - bicycling and walkway system. 5. Policy #28: Streets. Any street not currently needed for vehicular access may be landscaped and used as bicycle and/or pedestrian ways. Circulation Element The Circulation Element approved by the City Council on August 14, 1990, includes City Policy No. 12 pertaining to Walk Streets. That policy states, "The City shall maintain its system of walk streets which contributes to neighborhood identity and cohesiveness and near the beach provides a safe and attractive access system for pedestrians, which is particularly important for children, handicapped and seniors. These walk street areas shall be landscaped and lighted and also designated as open space". 2. Current City Code City Code Section 19-61(b) states, -"No operator of any vehicle shall stop, stand, park or leave standing such vehicle...within any parkway". A parkway is defined as, "That portion of a street other then a roadway or a sidewalk". Section 29-38(2)(d) of the City Code also states that "Parking or driving on walk streets is strictly prohibited". Copies of the Code Sections are attached as Attachments "A" and "B". 3. Number of Walk Streets Involved There is a total of twenty five walk streets in the city. Of this number, there are six walk streets that can only be used by pedestrians and those walk streets will not enter into this discussion any further. The location of all the walk streets is shown in Figure 1. - 5 - 4. Number of Private Properties on walk streets There is a total of 568 private properties that face or have frontage on the walk streets within the study area. (See Table "A"). The majority of those private properties have fenced off the public right-of-way and use that land as a part of their front yards. However, only a few of these property owners have a City permit to use the public land. Most of the property owners do not have permission from the city or insurance that protects the city from claims that could occur from within the enclosed public right-of-way. PROPERTIES AFFECTED BY EXISTING PARKING ON WALK STREET PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY 1. Number of properties along the Walk Streets, minus the properties that face the Strand. 305 2. Number of properties along the Walk Streets that do not face the Strand and do not use the public right-of-way for parking. (93.8%) 286 3. Number of properties along the Walk Streets that do not face the Strand but use the public right-of-way for parking. (6.2%) 19 4. Number of properties along the Strand 263 5. Number of properties along the Strand that do not use the public right-of-way for parking. (87.8%) 231 6. Number of properties along the Strand that use the public right-of-way for parking (12.2%) -. 32 Total number of properties along the walk streets and on the Strand. Total number of properties the walk streets and on the that do not park on the public right-of-way. (91.0%) Total number of the walk streets that park on the right-of-way. (9.0%) 568 along Strand properties and on the public 517 along Strand 51 TABLE "A"" 5. Number of Locations Where Parking is Possible or Occurring There is a total of sixty nine locations where the parking of vehicles on the public walk street right-of-way is possible. Of that number, eighteen property owners have fenced or blocked off the public right-of-way so that vehicles can not be parked at that location. At the remaining fifty one locations, vehicles are parked on the walk street public right-of-way, resulting in approximately 200 parking spaces. Thirty two of the existing parking locations are on the west side of Beach Drive and appear to be in what would be considered the property side yard. Nineteen of the parking locations are east of Beach Drive and appear to be in what would be considered the front yard. All of these properties have garages on a public access at the rear of the property. That is the only area where vehicles should be allowed access to the property. The concern is where the property owners next to the walk streets are using the public street right-of-way as their private additional parking area. For the location of the subject properties see Table "B" on page 9. 6. Items of Concern 1. Liability is a concern because at locations where parking is occurring there is no private insurance that protects the city. If someone was hurt within the twenty two feet of public street right-of-way, the City could be sued as the owner of the property. 2. Some of the adjacent private property owners have installed gates or chains on Beach Drive along the edge of the street pavement, at the access to the public property, and do not allow the public to use the public right-of-way. 3. Some of the adjacent private property owners have placed signs on the public right-of-way stating that all others who park there will be towed away. However, the land is public right-of-way and only the City can have a vehicle towed away from public right-of-way. 4. The staff has been told that some of the adjacent private property owners rent out parking spaces within the public right-of-way during the summer and even year round. This activity is not approved or acknowledged by the City. The adjacent property owner also keeps the parking income for their private use if this action is taking place. - 7 - 5. The use of the public right-of-way, along the walk streets, for parking is presently unclear. Because of the impact due to summer time parking, the city has not enforced the parking code along the walk streets. 6. The removal of all parking from the existing locations will cause a serious adverse effect on the parking in the beach area. 7. Cars and trailers stored in the public right-of-way adversely affect the aesthetics of the area. 8. Commercial usage by businesses is significant in some areas, especially the Sea Sprite Motel. 7. Manhattan Beach's Experience In 1969, the City of Manhattan Beach formed a Walk Street Study Committee to study and recommend solutions to the encroachments on the walk streets throughout the City. In 1970, the Committee recommended that the City vacate the walkstreet right-of-way and thereby allowing the use of the vacated property to revert to the abutting property owner. Advantages and disadvantages derived from such vacation are: 1. Elimination of encroachment problems 2. Elimination of City liability 3. Uniform use for all walk street residents 4. Saving of Council, Attorney and staff time 5. Assigns responsibility for maintenance 6. Increases tax base and revenue to City 7. Elimination of present hazards and unsightly areas only if parking is removed. 8. May encourage more intense development of presently undeveloped areas without further zoning restrictions. Because of concerns about higher property taxes to the adjacent property owner, as a result of the vacated land, the issue of vacating the public right-of-way was dropped. Instead, the City of Manhattan Beach established an encroachment policy. The Director of Public Works spoke with the tax assessor and was advised that a reassessment of the vacated land would occur should Hermosa Beach pursue vacating the land. WALK STREETS (Locations on Public Right-of-way Where Parking is Taking Place) No. Intersection S.W. N.W. S.E. N.E. Corner Corner Corner Corner 1. Lyndon St. & Hermosa Ave. 2. 1st St. & Beach Drive 3. 3rd n n n- n 4. 4th " " " " 5. 5th " " " n 6. 6th " " " n 7. 7th " " " n 8. 8th " " " " 9. 9th " " " " 10. 1 6th " " " " 11. 17th " " " " 12. 18th " " It " 13. 19th " " " " 14. 2 0th " " " " 15. 21th " " " " 16. 23rd " It " " 17. 24th " It " " 18. 25th St. & Hermosa Ave. 19. 26th " " 20. 30th P1. " 21. 30th St. & Manhattan Ave. 22. 31st St. " n n 23. 33rd St. & Palm Ave. 24. Longfellow St. & Hermosa Ave 25 34th Place It n n # • Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes # Yes # Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes # # Yes # Yes Yes Parking taking place (51) 18 18 Parking not taking place (18) 0 0 Space not available - # (31) 7 7 TABLE "B" Yes No No No Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes # Yes # C2 5 8 Yes No No Yes No No No No No No No No No No No Yes 13 9 8. Alternatives The alternatives considered are as follows: 1. Strict enforcement of no parking and not allow any parking on the public walk street right-of-ways. (City Goal 6 - Review of residential zoning standards) (City Goal # 8 - Increase parking requirements) (City Goal #10 - Enhance sense of community, improve the image of Hermosa Beach) (City Goal #17 - Improve the quality of life) Pro: The majority of property owners that live along the walk streets do not have the use of public right-of-way for their private parking use. Not allowing any parking on the public right-of-way would treat all of the private property owners equally. Con: To not allow any parking on the public right-of-way would increase the number of vehicles that need to be parked on the streets. This action would increase the parking demand on the streets in the beach area by approximately 200 vehicle spaces. 2. Change the City ordinance and allow private parking on the west side of Beach Drive only, with a city permit and parking fee of $0.50 per square foot per month with no conditions. (i.e. no landscaping, no limit on number of spaces, etc.) (City Goal # 1 - Improve the City financial picture) (City Goal # 6 - Review parking requirements) Pro: The City does allow the private use of public street property at four locations in town and the present rate charged for that use is $.50 per square foot per month. Estimated revenue for 2 parking spaces at each location. No. of locations west of Beach Drive = 32 Each space @ 10' x 20' = 200 square feet (32 locations) x (2 spaces @ each location) x (200 S.F.) x ($0.50 per S.F.) _ $6,400 per month ($6,400 per month) x (12 months) = $76,800:annual revenue The monthly fee alternative would be self policing in that only the parking spaces really needed would be installed. No one would be willing to pay every month for a parking space that was not required. Each of the spaces should be permanently marked and the fee charged against the private property for as long as the parking space exists. Con: With only a parking permit and no other requirements, this alternative would allow preferential treatment to those pri- vate owners who own the 32 corner lots on the west side of Beach Drive. In addition to the parking permit, an encroach- ment permit should be required which would then require landscaping, insurance and city control over the total public area. The properties on the east side of Beach Drive should not be allowed to park in the public street right-of-way because they would be parking in what is their front yard. 3. Change the city ordinance and allow only public parking with meters west of Beach Drive only. (City Goal # 1 - Improve the City financial picture) (City Goal # 6 - Review parking requirement) Pro: This alternative would increase the City's financial picture by providing additional parking spaces next to the Beach that would be in use most of the time. The City would receive additional parking meter income from these spaces year round. (Est. 32 x 2 x $200 = $12,800 annual revenue) The City would then control the parking which at this time is not enforced. Con: Of all the alternatives, this choice would most likely reduce the quality of life and the aesthetics of the adjacent beach area residences. 4. Not allow any parking and use the twenty two feet of public right-of-way for landscaping and to beautify the beach area. (City Goal #10 - Improve image of Hermosa Beach, better public and private landscaping) (City Goal #17 - Improve the quality of life, City beautification) Pro: This alternative provides the highest quality of life by installing large landscaped areas for the benefit of all the public that lives at or uses the beach area. Also this would improve the image of the community and would have the largest beneficial effect on the aesthetics of the area. . This alternative increases the demand for on the street parking and would impact an area that already has a serious parking problem. It appears that this alternative could add approximately 200 additional vehicles to the on -street parking situation. This would have a serious negative parking impact to the Sea Sprite Motel (west of Beach Drive and Mickey's liquor store (east of Beach Drive). 5. Vacate the excess public right of way to the private property owners on each side of the street. (City Goal #1 - Improve the City Financial Picture) (City Goal # 6 - Review open space standards) Pro: This alternative releases the City from the responsibility for these areas. The City would also receive additional taxes from this new private property added to the Community. Con: There would be an added City expenditure to accomplish a vacation (i.e. title search, deed recordation, easement reservation, etc.) A vacation has the potential of increasing the density of the City and may not be the best choice. Without changes to the zoning code, the City could lose all control over the development of these 22 foot wide areas. The open space standards and aesthetics of the area would not be regulated and the image of the community may degenerate and be degraded in the beach area. Someday the City may want or need to use the areas presently in use by the adjacent private property owners. The use of public right-of-way should instead be controlled and regulated by revocable encroachment permits. 6. Change the City ordinance to allow private parking on the pedestrian walk streets west of Beach Drive only, with the requirement that the private use be regulated by a revocable encroachment permit and that parking fees be paid. In addition, parking should be allowed only in the easterly one-third of the right-of-way with no parking allowed near the Strand wall. (City Goal #1 - Improve the City financial picture) (City Goal #6 - Review parking requirements) (City Goal #10 - Enhance sense of community, improve the image of Hermosa Beach) (City Goal #17 - Improve the quality of life, City beautification) This alternative would provide additional revenue, reduced liability and improved aesthetics. Present requirements on encroachment permits include, (1) insurance of $500,000, (2) that the City also be additionally insured, (3) that one-third of the public right-of-way be landscaped and (4) City control. Con: This will result in a loss of parking spaces for the Sea Sprite Motel (west of Beach Drive) and Mickey's liquor store (east of Beach Drive). Summary: a. The opinions among the various department staffs differ on this issue. A single alternative solution is difficult and a compromise alternative appears to be the best solution. b. A zoning ordinance prohibition or encroachment permit condition for the area west of Beach Drive should not allow parking in the westerly one-third of the public street right-of-way areas. c. Some encroachments are long standing and will create a hardship if removed. All current encroachments should receive active restrictions to discourage massive parking areas, storage of vehicles, driving on walk streets; and encourage landscaping, insurance protection and reduced City liability. All new encroachments should follow current permit processes. d. The vacation option needs to be evaluated, although it appears to not be the best solution. Respec fully Submitt d, Concur: Lynn A. Terry / Anthony Antich Deputy City Engineer Public Works Director Michael Schubach Planning Director § 19-58 HERMOSA BEACH CITY CODE § 19-61 Sec. 19-61. Areas where stopping, standing, etc.. prohibited; exceptions.) No operator of any vehicle shall stop, stand, park or leave standing such vehicle in any of the following places, except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic or in com- pliance with the direction of a police officer or other author- ized officer, or traffic sign or signal: (a) Within any divisional island unless authorized and clearly indicated with appropriate signs or markings. (b) Within any parkway. (c) On either side of any street between the projected property lines of any public walk, public steps, streets or thoroughfare terminating at such street, when such area is indicated by appropriate signs or by red paint upon the curb surface. (d) In any area where the city traffic engineer determines that the parking or stopping of a vehicle would obstruct the flow of storm waters, thereby causing such waters to overflow or be diverted from their natural drainage course so as to endanger or damage property, when such area is indicated by appropriate signs. (e) In any area where the city traffic engineer determines that the parking or stopping of a vehicle would constitute a traffic hazard or would endanger life or property, when such area is indicated by appropriate signs or by red paint upon the curb surface. (f) In any area established by resolution of the council as a no parking area, when such area is indicated by appropriate signs or by red paint upon the curb surface. (g) Upon, along or across any railway track in such manner as to hinder, delay or obstruct the movement of any car traveling upon such track. (h) In any area where the parking or stopping of any vehicle would constitute a traffic hazard or would endanger life or property. Attachment "A" ARTICLE V. ENCROACHMENTS* Sec. 29-31. Definitions. Encroachments are features normally located upon public right- of-way that serves a quasi -private use and are not normally in- tended for public use. A public sidewalk would not be defined as an encroachment as it relates to this chapter, whereas, a deck used primarily by the adjacent property owner would be defined as an encroachment. "Encroachment" means and includes any obstruction, tower, pole, pole line, pipe, wire, cable, conduit, wall, fence, balcony, deck, stand or building, or any structure or object of any kind or character which is placed in, along, under, over or across public right-of-way. Sec. 29-38. Guidelines and conditions for approval. These guidelines shall apply both to continuing and temporary encroachments; there being no permanent encroachments permitted. (1) General: a. An encroachment permit does not constitute a build- ing permit. b. Encroachments are definitely a privilege granted by the city. There is no right to an encroachment. (2) Pedestrian walk street a. Fences may be permitted provided a thirty -six-inch maximum height is observed. To ensure visibility at corners, a thirty -six-inch maximum height is required within a distance of five (5) feet from the corner. This precludes any landscaping exceeding thirty -six -inches maximum height. b. Retaining walls of masonry, block, brick or concrete may be permitted provided the grade changes, extreme contours or other factors necessitate such structures. However, the height shall be the minimum necessary for earth retention and shall in no case exceed thirty- six (36) inches maximum. A retaining wall on public right-of-way shall not support any structure on pri- vate property. c. Decks may be permitted provided they do not exceed twelve (12) inches maximum height above the existing natural grade and do not project into the public right- of-way more than half the distance between the prop- erty line and edge of existing or future sidewalk. Deck railings are permitted provided that they are of open wood construction and that deck and railing do not exceed forty-two (42) inches maximum height. d. Parking or driving on walk streets is strictly prohib- ited although exceptions may be granted during con- struction only by the director of public works provided the vehicle(s) do not exceed the weight limit. Attachment "B" CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH MEMORANDUM DATE: March 28, 1991 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commissi n FROM: City Manager Kevin B. Northcraft RE: Use of public right-of-way on pedestrian walk streets. ***************************************************************** Recommendation: That the staff be directed to research the pro- cess to vacate unused public right-of-way while protecting City interests through covenants. The private use of unimproved public right-of-way has existed for decades, perhaps back to the City's origins. Our attorneys indi- cate that there is a fair amount of potential liability that could result if no changes were made in our existing practice. Accordingly, any change should satisfy the following criteria: 1) Reduce or eliminate potential liability to the City, 2) Maintain and/or enhance open space in the community per the City's General Plan, 3) Resolve the uncertainty of use rights and responsibilities regarding these properties, and 4) Recognize the historical uses of the properties and the sig- nificance of preserving these uses. Encroachment permits might appear reasonable to handle the park- ing uses along the Strand (though charging for uses that have existed for decades seems unreasonable). However, extending the encroachment concept to uses throughout the City would result in as many as 1,000 encroachment permits being required. This would result in a red tape nightmare. Our attorneys advise that the concept of vacating the land is reasonable to reduce liability. It also recognizes the histori- cal private uses of these properties. The concern about poten- tial future public uses and increased density can be remedied by the nature of the vacation, and/or zoning changes. For example, the vacation can include covenants that avoid increased bulk and density, preserve utility easements, and require rededication if a future Council chooses. Current zoning then should be clarified to prohibit use of front yards for parking. While vacation may subject the property owners to review of the assessed valuation of their properties, the restrictions on the use of that property should limit that impact. If any minor as- sessment valuation change results, additional taxes based on the increase in value that the vacation causes seem. reasonable. This solution would eliminate the potential liability that cur- rently exists with private uses of public right-of-way along the Strand, on the walk streets, and on existing streets''such as Mon- terey and Prospect Avenue and preserve open space. It would do so at minimum inconvenience to the existing users and clarify the ability to use these properties as they historically have been used. TO: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH MEMORANDUM Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission FROM: Anthony Antich, Public Works Director Michael Schubach, Planning Director SUBJECT: Vehicle Parking on Pedestrian Walk Streets DATE: Regular Meeting of April 2, 1991 Recommendation: It is recommended that the Planning Commission: 1. Select alternative #6 to change the City ordinance allowing private parking on the pedestrian walk streets west of Beach Drive only, with the requirement that the private use be regulated by a revocable encroachment permit and that parking fees be paid. In addition, parking should be allowed in only the easterly one-third of the right-of-way with no parking allowed near the Strand wall. \/y.tevurj4 Michaels SchubachJ Anthony Antich Planning Director Public Works Director pwadmin/AAll - 17 - 4t ."440e 41-#.( CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT y-019 co rr j MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Michael Schubach, Plann1 , ftP! �yrector SUBJECT: 1. City Council, Planning Commission and School Board Joint Workshop Meeting 2. City Council, Planning Commission and Chamber of Commerce Joint Workshop Meeting DATE: February 5, 1992 1. At the 12/12/91 City Council and Planning Commission joint meeting, a decision was made to hold a joint workshop meeting between the City Council, Planning Commission and School Board on Thursday, March 12, 1992 or a fallback date of Thursday, March 19, 1992 (time undecided). The School Board has agreed to join the workshop meeting. However, they suggest Thursday, March 5, or Thursday, March 26, to be the meeting date. The Planning Commission has agreed to the Thursday, March 26 date, and has suggested the following topics: A. Use of the green belt as garden, or nature study area B. Traffic circulation adjacent to schools C. South School Site Staff would suggest that the City Council either confirm the March 26th date or select another meeting date if that is not possible. Also, the City Council needs to select the topics to be discussed, and if the Planning Commission suggested topics will be included. 2. At their meeting of January 28, 1992, City Council agreed to set the joint meeting with the Planning Commission and Chamber of Commerce on the second or third Thursday in May. The Planning Commission indicates that either date would be acceptable. The topics they would like discussed are as follows: A. Downtown Parking B. Ventilation of City Council Chambers (for example, consideration of windows) Please also select your preferred date and time, as well as topics, and if the Planning Commission suggested topics will be included. Steve Wisniewski, Interim City Manager VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 23246 IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH , COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES STATE OF CALIFORNIA BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 41, 42 AND A PORTION OF LOT 43, HERMOSA HEIGHTS TRACT BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 9, BLOCK 87, SECOND ADDITION TO HERMOSA BEACH, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 9, PAGE 84 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. FOR SUBDIVISION PURPOSES PREPARED BY: BLC SURVEYING INC. 1145 ARTESIA BLVD., SUITE 202 MANHATTAN BEACH, CA. 90266 PH. NO. (310) 379-6488 ENGINEER: JAMES C. ORLAND, R.C.E. NO. 22024 DATE: 1-17-92 JOB NO. 3245 OWNER: MARK LUEKER 1265 VAN HORNE LANE HERMOSA BEACH, CA. 90254 PH. NO. (310) 322-2010 SUBDIVIDER: SAME AS OWNER JOB SITE: 1265 VAN HORNE LANE, HERMOSA BEACH, CA. GENERAL NOTES SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEET REVISION JAN 21 1 1. TOTAL EXISTING AND PROPOSED LOTS: EX.=2 AND A PORTION OF 1 , PROPOSED: 3 (THREE) 2. TOTAL AREA: 13,389 ± SQ. FT., PARCEL 1=5,065± SQ. FT., PARCEL 2=4,111± SQ. FT., PARCEL 3=4,213± SQ. FT. 3. PROPOSED USE: 3 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, ONE ON EACH LOT 4. EXISTING AND PROPOSED ZONING: R-1 5. ALL UTILITIES AVAILABLE TO THE SITE. 6. PROPOSED STREET DEDICATION: 180 ± SQ. FT. 7. NO KNOWN EASEMENTS ON SITE 8. AVERAGE RESIDENCE LOT SIZE IN THIS AREA IS 2,800 SQ. ET. EXIST. WATER MAINONwe-) CITY LIMIT LINE //i //i M.H. /// 0 45.0' o -1 I /7/ w * INDICATES HERMOSA NIGHTS TRACT BEING A SUBDIVISION OF LOT 9, BLOCK 87, SECOND ADDITION TO HERMOSA BEACH, M.B. 9-84. EX/ST. RESIDENCE REYNOLDS w N09° 15'00"W EXIST. FENCE 10 BE REMOVED N09° 15'00"W M.H. /// /// 07 EXIST. RESIDENCE LANE PROPOSED 1' STREET DEDICATION r EXIST VP EXIST 6' HIGH CONC. WALL ON SCHOOL PROPERTY EX/ST. SCHOOL PLAYGROUND 0 03 03 T 50.0' / / 7' « PROPOSED /RESIDENCE / Vit, PARCEL 3 / 4,213 S0. FT �/ R y' // / r 4.1 J O 00 J i / /' PROPOSED CURB /^ / / / 178./ ' /I 7 / / 7 i / /it ,F . W'LY PLY L11' OF LOT it ,41,*/ / / .I N09.15'00"W rft. / EXIST DEED INE 128.9' 179.4' !' // M.N. //�% 59A U P.P. l l l/ r 11g4.87 .29i0--rt,, 4.48) ' ' CITY LIMIT UNE EXIST. RESIDENCE PARCEL 1 5,065 SO. FT. o EXIST. RESIDENCE i'N1- / / / I PARCEL 2 / /A// r / 48.0' / / / L -�- ,' 0774,57-70U7 / / h 0 N ° 15'0 W / (pan: DEED _l_ 11 1132.5' r / gl \ \ W'LY LINE OF TI -IE E'LY / 7.0' OF LOT 43, =k // // �, R//�o/ i I / R /I- c G k ' ; T,S) 5`, 4, 1 1 1 SQ. FT. n /1Tj 106.7') � p � lots EXIST: RESIDENCE /