Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/26/92(4-6`- MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Tuesday, May 12, 1992, at the hour of 7:51 P.M. CLOSED SESSION - the closed session was held at 6:30 P.M. regard- ing matters of Employee Meet and Confer; and, potential litiga- tion: pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b). The closed session was recessed at 7:40 P.M. to the regular scheduled public meeting. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Mary Rooney, Community Resources Director ROLL CALL Present: Benz, Edgerton, Midstokke, Wiemans, Mayor Essertier Absent: None PROCLAMATION - Public Works Week, May 17 through May 23, 1992. Mayor Essertier read a proclamation stating that Public Works provided services that were vital to the health, safety and com- fort of the residents of Hermosa Beach and proclaimed the week of May 17 through 23, 1992, as "National Public Works Week". EMPLOYEE OF THE QUARTER - Terry Bindman, Clerk Typist, Public Works Department Robert Blackwood, Personnel Director, joined by Mayor Essertier and City Manager Ferrin, presented the "Employee of the Quarter" award plaque to Terry Bindman, Clerk Typist, of the Public Works Department and congratulated her on her accomplishments. An em- ployee since 1984, Terry Bindman always accepts additional responsibility; notably by identifying and analyzing "billable tasks" performed by the field maintenance crews; and accepting the preparation of the Public Works Department Operating Budget, thus averting a "budget deadline crisis". PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Coming forward to address the Council at this time were: Gene Dreher - 1222 Seventh Place, congratulated Public Safety Officers for their service during the disturbances in neighboring cities, and suggested the citizens prepare for future civil unrest or natural disasters; and, Tim Shea - 1720 Ardmore Avenue, #304, spoke on the problem his brother was having due to his home, at 40 Seventh court, not meeting Hermosa Beach Code requirements; submitted information. The order of the agenda was suspended at 8:00 P.M. to go to the public hearings, taking Item No. 6 first, but the items are shown in order for clarity. City Council Minutes 05-12-92 Page 7790 lac° ID 1. CONSENT CALENDAR Action: To approve the Consent Calendar recommendations (a) through (k), with the exception of the following items which were removed for discussion in item 3 but are listed in order for clarity: (h) Midstokke, and (j) Wiemans, noting a "NO" vote on item (i) registered by Midstokke and Wiemans. Motion Wiemans, second Benz. So ordered. No one came forward to address the Council on items not removed from the consent calendar. (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Recommendation to approve minutes of regular meeting of the City Council held on April 28, 1992. Action: To approve the minutes of April 28, 1992 as presented. Recommendation to ratify Demands and Warrants Nos. 40639 through 40725 inclusive and Nos. 40727 through 40772 inclusive; noting voided warrants Nos. 40639, 40640, 40641, 40671, 40727, 40728, 40729, 40745, and 40747. Action: To ratify the demands and warrants as presented. Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. Action: To receive and file the tentative future agenda items as presented. Recommendation to receive and file the April, 1992 in- vestment report. Memorandum from City Treasurer Gary L. Brutsch dated May 5, 1992. Action: To receive and file the April, 1992 investment report as presented. Recommendation to extend for thirty days the temporary appointment of the Acting General Services Director and an Acting Police Sergeant. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated April 28, 1992. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to extend for thirty (30) days the temporary appointment of: 1) Acting General Services Director; filling of this position is being held pending review of the or- ganizational structure of the Parking Enforcement Division; and, 2) Acting Police Sergeant; the Department has request- ed this temporary appointment be continued until May 21, 1992 for continued shift supervision during City Council Minutes 05-12-92 Page 7791 (f) (g) (h) the medical leave of one sergeant and the vacation of another. Recommendation to approve Project Touch lease renewal for Rooms 3 and 11 at Community Center. Memorandum from Community Resources Director Mary Rooney dated May 4, 1992. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to renew for one (1) year the Project Touch leases for: 1) Room 3 of the Community Center; monthly rent of $423 ($.80 per square foot X 529 sq. ft.) until July 1, 1992; monthly rent of $444 ($.84 per square foot X 529 sq. ft.) for the remainder of the year; and, 2) Room 11 of the Community Center; monthly rent of $320 ($.80 per square foot X 400 sq. ft.) until July 1, 1992; monthly rent of $336 ($.84 per square foot X 400 sq. ft.) for the remainder of the year. All other conditions of the lease renewals to remain the same. And, to authorize the Mayor to sign the agreements. Recommendation to adopt resolution of intent requesting study by Planning Commission re. Section 4-2(6) of the Zoning Code relating to home occupation regulations. Memorandum from Building and Safety Director William Grove dated May 5, 1992. Action: To adopt Resolution No. 92-5535, entitled, "A RESOLUTION OF INTENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DIRECTING THE PLANNING COM- MISSION TO STUDY SECTION 4-2(6) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATING TO HOME OCCUPATION REGULATIONS." Recommendation to receive and file 1992-93 budget calen- dar, and to extend the date for submission of the 1992- 93 Preliminary Budget from May 15, 1992 to June 4, 1992. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated May 6, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Midstokke for further discussion later in the meeting. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to: 1) extend the date for submission of the 1992-93 Pre- liminary Budget from May 15, 1992 to June 4, 1992; and, 2) receive and file the 1992-93 Budget Calendar. But, to note that the extension causes the meetings to fall on dates not regularly scheduled for Council meet- ings; therefore to direct staff to notice the budget meetings in the "Easy Reader" and to have trailers City Council Minutes 05-12-92 Page 7792 (i) placed on cable television to announce those meetings. Motion Midstokke, second Wiemans. So ordered. Recommendation to adopt resolution of denial without prejudice for three -unit condominium project at 1901 Pacific Coast Highway. Memorandum from Planning Direc- tor Michael Schubach dated May 6, 1992. Action: To adopt Resolution No. 92-5536, entitled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DENYING, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, A CONDITIONAL USE PER- MIT, PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TO CONSTRUCT A THREE UNIT CONDOMINIUM UPON PROPERTY LO- CATED AT 1901 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY." Councilmembers Midstokke and Wiemans registered a "no" vote on this Resolution. (j) Recommendation to receive and file Planning Department list of current and future studies initiated by either the Planning Commission or City Council. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 5, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Wiemans for further discussion later in the meeting, due to concerns regarding the residential "bulk" studies and to request that item 5 under current studies be changed to "Private use of public right-of- way", rather than "Residential use...". Coming forward to address the Council on this item was: Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street, questioned the Council and the Planning Department policy regarding H.I.P. (k) Action: To receive and file this item. Motion Midstokke, second Edgerton. So ordered, noting the objection of Wiemans. Recommendation to appropriate $24,000 from the General Fund Contingency account to the City Treasurer Contract Services account to pay 1991-92 fiscal year Bank of American banking service charges. Memorandum from City Treasurer Gary L. Brutsch dated May 5, 1992. Action: To approve the staff recommendation to ap- propriate $24,000 from the General Fund Contingency ac- count to the City Treasurer Contract Services account to pay 1991-92 fiscal year Bank of America banking service charges. 2. CONSENT ORDINANCES. City Council Minutes 05-12-92 Page 7793 (a) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE WITH RESPECT TO COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE; AVAILABILITY TO THE PUBLIC. For waiver of full reading and introduction. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated May 5, 1992. Action: To introduce Ordinance No. 92-1068, with an amendment to Section 1 of the Ordinance which states that, "Section 2-2.5 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code is hereby repealed." Motion Midstokke, second Edgerton. So ordered. Final Action: To waive full reading of amended Or- dinance No. 92-1068, entitled, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE WITH RESPECT TO COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE; AVAILABILITY TO THE PUBLIC." Motion Edgerton, second Midstokke. AYES: Benz, Edgerton, Midstokke, Wiemans, Mayor Essertier NOES: None 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. Items 1(h), and (j) 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. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS/LETTERS FROM THE PUBLIC. (a) Letter from City Treasurer Gary L. Brutsch dated May 4, 1992, commending the Fire and Police Departments for a job well done under dangerous conditions. Recommenda- tion: to receive and file. (b) Action: To receive and file. Motion Edgerton, second Midstokke. So ordered. Letter from June Williams, 2065 Manhattan Ave., dated May 2, 1992, regarding budget review. Supplemental memoranda from City Treasurer Gary Brutsch dated May 12, 1992, and from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated May 12, 1992. Recommendation: to receive and file. Action: To receive and file. Motion Midstokke, second Benz. So ordered. PUBLIC HEARINGS City Council Minutes 05-12-92 Page 7794 5. HEARING REGARDING REMOVAL OF PARKING ON THE HERMOSA VAL- LEY GREENBELT. Memorandum from Community Resources Di- rector Mary Rooney dated May 4, 1992. Supplemental memorandum from Community Resources Administrative Aide Marsh Ernst dated May 11, 1992. Supplemental letter from Harold Cohen dated May 12, 1992. Community Resources Director Rooney presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. The public hearing was opened at 8:16 P.M. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: James Brown - 831 Eighth Street, spoke in favor of the parking ban; Celeste Coar - Hermosa Beach, spoke in favor of the Greenbelt and of allowing parking; stated as a Landscape Design graduate from UCLA, she knew that parking could be integrated into the design and be unobtrusive; Vada Klein - 809 Pacific Coast Highway, thanked the Police and Fire Departments for their efforts during the recent riots; in favor of allowing parking; felt there could be multi -uses for the Greenbelt; J. R. Reviczky - 600 Ardmore Avenue, Parks, Recre- ation and Community Resources Advisory Commis- sion, spoke in favor of compromise and allowing limited parking in front of City Hall; Gene Spencer - 142 Monterey Blvd., spoke against parking on the Greenbelt; Chris Allen - Hermosa Beach, spoke against parking on the Greenbelt; June Williams - 2065 Manhattan Avenue, stated she was also representing Katherine Murray of the Hermosa Beach Senior Citizen's Club and Donie Field of the Hermosa Beach Garden Club in voic- ing opposition to removing the parking across from City Hall; said she had talked to the original developers and the current'owners of the Plaza Hermosa property and both had stated the parking structure reverted to private con- trol when the bonds were paid off; John Hales - 624 Eighth Place, Hermosa Beach Friends of the Library President, stated the parking across from City Hall was needed by Library patrons, many of whom were mothers with young children or elderly and had a difficult time negotiating the dangerous crossing from the Vons parking structure to the Library; con- sidered the Pier/Valley/Ardmore crossing unsafe and in need of a signal system; Ron Schneider - Hermosa Beach Library Manager, stated the Library was heavily used; the day count was over 13,000 in April (590 persons per day average); feared the parking ban would City Council Minutes 05-12-92 Page 7795 hamper Library use; concerned that there was no place for Library staff to park as they could not use the spaces in the City Hall parking lot; Steve Crecy - 1148 Second Street, Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission, stated that his Commission had spent over a year of study on the parking plan; the Commis- sion wanted a way to control large vehicles from parking on the Greenbelt not a total park- ing ban; Anna Belchee - 505 Hollowell, spoke in favor of allowing parking on the Greenbelt across from City Hall; Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street, spoke in opposition to parking on the Greenbelt across from City Hall; said City Hall staff could park in the parking structure under Vons; Gary Brown - 222 1/2 26th Street, spoke in favor of both parking and open space on the Greenbelt; felt a compromise allowing both uses was best; Jim Rosenberger - 1121 Bayview Drive, stated that Ordinance No. 89-1001 stated in Section 2(b), "Improvements to only those two existing _park- ing areas located within the Greenbelt showed that the parking area across from City Hall was recognized and mandated by the peo- ple's vote and thus could not be changed by the Council except in response to a vote of the people; requested the question be placed on the ballot and that parking be allowed until the measure was voted upon; Rosamond Fogg - 610 Sixth Street, stated that the vote of the people on Ordinance No. 89-1001 was a vote to leash dogs on the Greenbelt and not to mandate parking; Al Centanni - President of Hermosa Beach Little League, stated that the present parking situa- tion was not working and requested the Council allow parking on Saturdays and Sundays at least; requested more explicit signage to clarify public parking areas; Susan Blaco - 1163 Seventh Street, Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission, spoke in favor of a compromise al- lowing parking; Allyson Yarbrough - 532-B Eleventh Street, stated that traffic was backed up due to lack of park- ing in the area which impacted on the residents and created a safety and noise problem; felt that jogging and parking on the Greenbelt were not mutually exclusive; Mary Ann Boyle - 142 Monterey Blvd., spoke in opposition to parking on the Greenbelt across from City Hall; City Council Minutes 05-12-92 Page 7796 Joseph Di Monda - 610 Ninth Street, Planning Commission, spoke in opposition to parking on the Greenbelt; stated that additional parking could be made by restripping the existing spaces and City Hall staff could park at the Community Center; Jan Buike - 244 Manhattan Avenue, spoke in opposition to parking on the Greenbelt; John Dunbabin - 2432 Myrtle Avenue, Treasurer for Hermosa Beach Little League, spoke in favor of parking on the Greenbelt across from City Hall; Steve (last name not understood) - 1122 Ardmore Avenue, questioned why the City did not allow parking and meter the spaces to bring in addi- tional revenue; Anne Lattner - 936 - 24th Street, felt that parking on the Greenbelt was necessary to accommodate people attending events at Clark and other City facilities in the area; Jerry Compton - 1723 Valley Park Avenue, objected to the manner in which the Council closed the parking across from City Hall; felt this public hearing should have been held before action was taken; Dallas Yost - Pacific Screen Prints, 55 Pier Avenue, stated the lack of parking impacted the businesses on Pier Avenue, even in the downtown area; asked the Council to be fair and allow parking on the Greenbelt; Donie Field - 1928 Valley Park Avenue, Hermosa Beach Garden Club, in favor of parking on the Greenbelt; Joel Daniel - 611 Porter Lane, wanted the Greenbelt kept as it is; Eleanor Lynn - 2431 Park Avenue, in favor of park- ing on the Greenbelt; Steve Kingdon - 1256 Ninth Street, in favor of parking on the Greenbelt; Gene Dreher - 1222 Seventh Place, considered the Council action unproductive; Dick McCurdy - 1113 Valley Drive, Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Advisory Commission, opposed to parking on the Greenbelt; stated there were parking spaces available last Saturday; Barbara Clark - 1076 Tenth Street, stated there was not enough parking for special events; Tom Kinnare - 701 Ninth Street, in favor of parking on the Greenbelt; Richard Bartz - 901 Fifth Street, Little League Coach, in favor of parking on the Greenbelt; Barbara Sabo - 447 Herondo, stated the parking survey cited by the Council had been done in winter on rainy days; said more parking is needed in the spring and summer when there are City Council Minutes 05-12-92 Page 7797 more activities Jim Sliff - 854 Bard Street, stated his neighbor- hood was severely impacted by the closure of the Greenbelt to parking; often on weekends it is impossible to get out of his house due to traffic trying to find parking; and, Kathy Dunbabin - 2432 Myrtle Avenue, stated that many of the signs are not clear that public parking is allowed in lots around -the City Hall; questioned why the Council could not clarify when public parking was permissible and for what length of time. The public hearing was closed at 9:36 P.M. Action: To maintain the removal of parking on the Greenbelt across from City Hall, and, noting the staff recommendations for increasing parking spaces in the vicinity, direct consideration and implementation of: 1) restripe and expand the Clark field parking lot; 2) restripe the Greenbelt parking across from Clark to make it diagonal parking; 3) eliminate the staff parking on the east side of the City Hall parking lot and reserve staff parking at the parking structure under Vons; increase the handicapped parking in the City Hall lot; 4) design adequate signage for the Mini -storage lot and City Hall lot to show that parking is available for the public when City Hall is closed; create a pedestrian break in the Mini -storage lot wall; 5) increase publicity regarding available parking at City Hall, the Mini -storage lot and the Vons park- ing structure; include a handout to give to renters of Clark Stadium regarding parking; include signs placed in strategic areas giving information on available parking; 6) restrict General Services parking across from Base Three on the week -ends and change the signs saying "City vehicles only - all hours"; and, consider time limits for parking (six hour and/or three hour parking) to be consistent with surrounding parking. Amended to include a study of the removal of parking meters on Ardmore from Pier almost to Eleventh Street,► •• • ■ . . Motion Midstokke, second Wiemans. unanimously. The motion carried Planning Director Schubach stated that an application must be made to the Coastal Commission for approval be- fore some of the changes could be made. The meeting recessed at 9:48 P.M. The meeting reconvened at 10:03 P.M. and returned the agenda to item 1. City Council Minutes 05-12-92 Page 7798 6. CONTINUED HEARING ON PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE FROM OPEN SPACE TO R-2 TO BRING INTO CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AT 598 FIRST STREET. (Continued from April 14, 1992 meeting.) Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 6, 1992. Planning Director Schubach presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. The continued public hearing was opened at 8:06 P.M. Coming for- ward to address the Council on this item was: Harry Pecorelli - 598 First Street, property owner, asked the Council to consider that both the staff recommendation and the Planning Commis- sion vote had twice been in favor of the R-2 zone change. The public hearing was closed at 8:08 P.M. Action: To approve the staff and Planning Commission recommendation to rezone the property to R-2 and intro- duce Ordinance No. 92-1067. Motion Wiemans, second Benz. The motion carried, noting the dissenting votes of Edgerton and Midstokke. Final Action: To waive full reading of Ordinance No. 92-1067, entitled, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP FROM OPEN SPACE TO R-2, TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, FOR THE PARCEL AT 598 FIRST STREET AS DESCRIBED BELOW AND SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED MAP AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION." Motion Wiemans, second Mayor Essertier. AYES: Benz, Edgerton, Midstokke, Wiemans, Mayor Essertier NOES: None At 8:11 P.M., the order of the agenda was changed to hear item 5. MUNICIPAL MATTERS 7. INCREASE IN AMOUNT OF AGREEMENT FOR INSPECTION AND CON- TRACT ADMINISTRATION, SANITARY SEWER REHABILITATION, CIP 88-406. Memorandum from Public Works Director dated March 13, 1992. (Continued from March 24, April 14 and April 28, 1992 meetings.) - kr ..:, X41 Action: To approve/%the $10, 78 increase in the amount of the professional services agreement with BSI Consul- tants for inspection and contract administration due to 22 change orders which lengthened the project time, pro- vided that all aspects of the agreement were performed satisfactorily, and find that thegextra billing was not City Council Minutes 05-12-92 Page 7799 a part of the contract for CIP 88-406. Motion Midstokke, second Benz. So ordered. 8. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE WITH RESPECT TO ESTABLISHING AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE FOR ISSUANCE OF AN EXCEPTION TO THE REFUSE CONTAINER REQUIREMENTS. Memorandum from Building and Safety Di- rector William Grove dated April 21, 1992. (Continued from April 28, 1992 meeting.) Building and Safety Director Grove presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. City Attor- ney Vose responded to Council questions regarding en- croachment permit limitations. Proposed Action: To introduce the Ordinance as amended by changing Building Director to Planning Commission wherever it appears in the text. Motion Mayor Essertier, second Edgerton. The motion was withdrawn. Action: Mayor Essertier directed, with the consensus of the Council, to return this item tpp staff to remove ob- solete sections and requirementsQ'fZthange Building Direc- tor to Planning Commission, -- - - =far 9. REPORT FROM COUNCILMEMBERS BENZ AND EDGERTON ON RECON- FIGURATION OF PARKING LOT "E". An oral report was given by Councilmembers Benz and Edgerton stating that they had failed, thus far, to reach an agreement with Vasek Polak on the reconfigura- tion of parking lot "E" that would allow both Mr. Polak and the other merchants and property owners to have parking access from both Second and Third Streets. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: Arlan Tarhan - representing Vasek Polak, stated that Mr. Polak was concerned about changing his current parking area that was C zoned abutting C zone with the proposed C zone which would abut Residential; concerned with potential gridlock with egress on Second Street in late afternoon; Jim Brisson - Hermosa Saloon owner, stated that current parking configuration is hurting other businesses in the area; if something is not done to allow parking, more businesses will have to close; and, Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street, stated the property to the west is owned by the Barks fam- ily; suggested the Council talk to Gus Barks. No action was taken on this item. City Council Minutes 05-12-92 Page 7800 10. REPORT REGARDING AUTHORITY OF BOARD OF PARKING PLACE COMMISSIONERS. Memorandum from City Attorney Charles S. Vose dated May 5, 1992. City Attorney Vose responded to Council questions. Proposed Action: To disband the Vehicle Parking Dis- trict Board; reinstate the City Council as the VPD Board; and make the current Board advisory only. Motion Benz. The motion was withdrawn. Proposed Action: To direct staff to come back with an Ordinance to disband the Board of Parking Place Commis- sioners and establish the City Council as the VPD Board. Motion Benz, second Mayor Essertier. The motion failed due to the dissenting votes of Edgerton, Midstokke, and Wiemans. Proposed Action: To direct staff to come back with an Ordinance that takes the power to enter into a contract or expend monies without City Council approval from the current Board of Parking Place Commissioners. Motion Edgerton. The motion was withdrawn. Action: To direct staff to come back with a report and a recommendation for the meeting of June 09, 1992, regarding the dissolution of the Vehicle Parking Dis- trict and re-establishing a Commission with an advisory capacity only, in order to deal with problems such as parking validation. Motion Edgerton, second Mayor Essertier. The motion carried, noting the dissenting votes of Midstokke and Wiemans. Coming forward to address the Council on this item was: Jerry Compton - 1732 Valley Park Avenue, Board of Parking Place Commissioner, questioned if a four fifths vote was required in order to dis- solve the Vehicle Parking District and if the decision might be premature due to the need to purchase additional parking area. 11. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER - None 12. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL (a) Certification of results of signature verification of an initiative petition to create and designate the Biltmore Site as Open Space O -S-2 for its preservation and use as a public park. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doer - fling dated April 28, 1992. Supplemental Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated May 12, 1992. City Attorney Vose responded to Council questions. City Council Minutes 05-12-92 Page 7801 Action: To order a report pursuant to Election Code Section 4009.5 regarding the fiscal impact of the ini- tiative petition (such as Police costs anticipated for a public park in that location), the effect on the inter- nal consistency of the City's general and specific plans including housing element, consistency between planning and zoning, limitations on City actions under section 65008, and any other matters the Council requests. To bring the report back for the meeting of June 09, 1992, along with anticipated election costs; and to suggest an agenda item at the next meeting for Coucnil to consider any other ballot measures for that election. Motion Midstokke, second Mayor Essertier. So ordered. Coming forward to address the Council on this item was: Parker Herriott - 224 - 24th Street, requested the election be combined with the national election in November; stated it could not be held ear- lier due to two elections on same subject within a twelve month period. (b) Consideration of legal noticing contract alternatives. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated May 7, 1992. Supplemental Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated May 12, 1992. Action: To approve the staff recommendation No. 1: di- rect the City Clerk to negotiate an extension to the current contract for legal and display advertising with the Easy Reader newspaper for the specified contract periods of one, two and/or three years. And, to direct the City Clerk to look at the type size of display ad- vertising to see if it is possible to lower the cost. Motion Midstokke, second Mayor Essertier. So ordered. 13. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL Requests from Councilmembers'for possible future agenda items: (a) Request by Councilmember Benz for an analysis of the voluntary curfew declaration and to request staff to establish emergency coordination with Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach. Action: To direct staff to establish emergency coor- dination with Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach. Motion Benz, second Edgerton. There was no action taken on the motion. Public Safety Director Wisniewski and City Manager Fer- rin responded to Council questions, stating the curfew had been imposed with the concurrence of the City Man- ager and the Mayor, and emergency coordination is an established procedure among the South Bay Cities. City Council Minutes 05-12-92 Page 7802 (b) Request by Councilmember Benz to discuss cutting ter- minal maintenance and using fees to buy PCs with ter- minal emulation software. Action: To direct staff to consider dropping the ter- minal maintenance after the current contract expires and use the money to purchase PCs with terminal emulation software. Motion Benz, second Mayor Essertier. So ordered. CITIZEN COMMENTS Coming forward to address the Council at this time were: Dave Reimer - 802 Monterey Blvd., suggested consid- eration of disaster communication on Cable TV, i.e., steps for the public to take in an emergency; Jerry Compton - 1200 Artesia Blvd., stated he was pleased that Hermosa Beach took decisive action and imposed a curfew during the recent civil unrest; Don Faulkenstein - (no address given), spoke on a problem due to construction at 2930 Strand; expressed concern about confusing intersections of Valley/Ardmore at Pier and at Gould; con- cerned with telephone disruption during civil unrest; and, Parker Herriott - 224 Twenty-fourth Street, stated he might sue if there were two elections on the open space initiative on the Biltmore site within one year; questioned the Greenwood Hotel progress and stated there would have to be a hearing by June 10, 1992. ADJOURNMENT TO SPECIAL WORKSHOP MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TO BE HELD MAY 14, 1992 AT 7:30 P.M. - The Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, adjourned on Wednesday, May 13, 1992, at the hour of 12:25 A.M. to the Special Workshop Meeting to be held on Thursday, May 14, 1992 at the hour of 7:30 P.M. ^' i// (,.,I it rirt� ; LV,`-t_S Deputy City Clerk City Council Minutes 05-12-92 Page 7803 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. 7 /�,�•� 9.1-5 5:3 3 e -t.4 9.2 - ion ? i "People with tact have less to retract." -Arnold H. Glasow AGENDA REGULAR MEETING HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, May 26, 1992 - Council Chambers, City Hall Closed Session - x:xx p.m. Regular Session - 7:30 p.m. MAYOR Robert Essertier MAYOR PRO TEM Albert Wiemans COUNCILMEMBERS Robert Benz Sam Y. Edgerton Kathleen Midstokke CITY CLERK Elaine Doerfling CITY TREASURER Gary L. Brutsch CITY MANAGER Frederick R. Ferrin 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 LED BY 1ST GRADE STUDENTS OF THE MONTH FROM HERMOSA VALLEY SCHOOL: Danielle Cohen, Nadine Dandah, Ryan Marchand, John Vasquez ROLL CALL: STUDENTS OF THE MONTH: 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 - 1 - (a) (b) (c) (d) i/(e) ✓ (f) (g) /(h) (i) separate discussion of these items unless good cause is shown by a member prior to the roll call vote. * Councilmember requests to remove items from the Consent Calendar. (Items removed will be considered under Agenda Item 3.) * Public comments on the Consent Calendar. Recommendation to approve the following minutes: 1) Regular meeting of the City Council held on May 12, 1992; 2) Special workshop meeting of the City Council, Plan- ning Commission, Chamber of Commerce held on May 14, 1992. Recommendation to ratify Demands and Warrants Nos. through inclusive. Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. Recommendation to receive and file the April, 1992 financial reports: 1) Revenue and expenditure report; 2) City Treasurer's report. Recommendation to) opt resolution approving City's par- ticipation in the Los Angeles Coun y Transportation Com- mission's.subregional mobility program to receive addi- tional funds for Dial -A -Ride Program. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 19, 1992. Recommendation to adopt resolution�of continuing support for light rail sys em, southern extension (Metro Green Line). Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 19, 1992. Recommendation to ado•t resolutions re•ardin• the en- gineer's report an. setting June , 1992 for a public hearing on the Hermosa Beach Crossing Guard Maintenance District 1992-93. Memorandum from Public Works Depart- ment dated May 4, 1992. Recommendation to adopt resolutions regarding the en- gineer's report an setting June 2 , 1992 for a public hearing on the Hermosa Beach Street Lighting District 1992-93. Memorandum from Public Works Department dated May 4, 1992. Recommendation to receive and file report on policy for cablecasting Cable TV Advisory Board meetings. Memoran- dum from Cable Television Coordinator Warren Carter dat- ed May 19, 1992. (j) Recommendation to approve revised class specification for Public Works Director/City Engineer. Memorandum (k) from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated May 21, 1992. Recommendation to approve request for City Council ac- tion to abolish eligibility list for the position of Public Works Director/City Engineer. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated May 21, 1992. 2. CONSENT ORDINANCES. ✓(a) gltDINANCE NO. 92-1067 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP FROM OPEN SPACE TO R-2, TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, FOR THE PARCEL AT 598 FIRST STREET AND(ADOPTION OF EN- VIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION. For adoption. v(b) )RDINANCE NO. 92-106] - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE HERMO- SA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE WITH RESPECT TO CO NCOR- RESPONDENCE; AVAILABILITY TO THE PUBLIC. ForCIL adoption) 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. * Public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS. (a) Letter from Steven DeWees, Real Estate West, dated May 6, 1992 regarding surveys. PUBLIC HEARINGS - TO COMMENCE AT 8:00 P.M. 5. SPECIAL STUDY TO EXAMINE REDUCING THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS IN THE R-3 AND R -P ZONES. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 18, 1992. 6. v A. ADOPTION BY REFERENCE OF THE 1991 EDITIONS OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STAN- DARDS, UNIFORM HOUSING CODE, UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, AND UNIFORM COD FOR THE ABATEMENT OF D EROUS BUILDINGS, WITH ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION Memorandum from Building and Safety Director William Grove dated May 18, 1992. L/B. ADOPTION OF jRDINANCE REPEALING EXISTING CHAPTER 12 IN ITS ENTIRETY, REPLACING IT WITH A NEW CHAPTER 12, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS, AS AMENDED. Memorandum from Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski dated May 19, 1992. HEARING CONSIDERATION OF ADJUSTMENTS TO MISCELLANEOUS USER FEES AND POTENTIAL NEW USER FEES. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated May 19, 1992. /5111111) MUNICIPAL MATTERS 8. REVIEW OF ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR 2930 THE STRAND. Memorandum from Public Works Department dated May 18, 1992. 9. RECOMMENDATION RE. REPORT ON SURVEYING DISCREPANCIES AND EXISTING PROCEDURE FOR PROTECTING SURVEY MONUMENTS ALONG MONTEREY BOULEVARD AND BAYVIEW DRIVE BETWEEN 16TH AND 19TH STREETS. Request a continuance on this issue pend- ing the City Manager's meeting with Dr. Laurel Roberts, Ph.D to address concerns and questions posed in her let- ter to the City Manager of April 28, 1992. /10. PROPOSED REVISION OF CITY CODE PROVISIONS PERTAINING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLI STREET IMPROVEMENTS, WITH 1RDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION Memorandum from Public Works Department dated May 7, 1992. 11. RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE REDESIGN AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION OF ARTESIA BOULEVARD AND PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY INTERSECTION. Memorandum from Public Works Department dated May 18, 1992. 12. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER 13. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL (a) Consideration of additional measures to place on ballot of upcoming special election. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated May 20, 1992. (b) Vacancies - Boards and Commissions Board of Parking Place Commissioners - two terms ending July 27, 1992 Civil Service Board - two terms ending July 15, 1992 Planning Commission - three terms ending June 30, 1992 Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated May 20, 1992. 14. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL Requests from Councilmembers for possible future agenda items: Recommended Action: 1) Vote by_Council whether to discuss this item; 2) refer to staff for a report back on a future agenda; or 3) resolution of matter by Coun- cil action tonight. (a) Request by Councilmember Benz for discussion of use of Biltmore Site. (b) Request by Councilmember Benz for discussion of reduc- tion of parking tickets to $13, and to defray the cost to the City by combining the Building and Planning Departments. (c) Request by Councilmember Edgerton for a motion to repeal Hermosa Beach City Code Section 7.2-27. Conditional Ap- proval, regarding condominium conversions wherein pre- cise development standards may be disregarded if appli- cant makes cash donation or oather gift to City. 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 May 26, 1992 Regular Meeting May 26, 1992 Mayor and Members of the City Council SUPPLEMENTAL TO AGENDA ITEM 1(a)(1) - MINUTES OF MAY 12, 1992 Recommendation In response to questions raised by Councilmember Midstokke, the tape of the meeting of May 12, 1992 has been reviewed. It is recommended that Council approve the minutes of that meeting, with the following amendments: 1) Page 7798, Item 5, delete last two lines of the motion reading "and the possibility of reconsideration in six months to determine summertime use." A review of the meeting tape reveals that the subject phrase was not accepted as an amendment to the motion, and it was noted at the time that Council can reconsider any item at any time. 2 3 Page 7799, Item 7, add the word "final" to the last line of motion on that page, to read "...and find that the final extra billing..." A review of the meeting tape reveals that the word "final" was part of the motion. Page 7800, Item 8, delete from the end of the motion the phrase "and consider a $20 fee for the exception." A review of the meeting tape reveals that while a $20 fee was suggested by Councilmember Edgerton, it was not part of the direction by the Mayor, and is a subject that would be brought back for consideration at a later time. Elaine Doerfling City Clerk SUPPLEMENIi INFORMATION a 0) ACTION SHEET ACTION SHEET REGULAR MEETING HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, May 26, 1992 - Council Chambers, City Hall Closed Session - 6:30 p.m. Regular Session - 7:30 p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: LED BY COUNCILMEMBER EDGERTON ROLL CALL: ALL PRESENT COUNCILMEMBER MIDSTOKKE PRESENTED A CERTIFICATE OF APPRECIATION FROM THE CITY OF LAWNDALE FOR OUR PARTICIPATION AND HELP DURING THE RECENT CIVIL UNREST TO HBPD REPRESENTATIVE JOHN KEARIN. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION SHIRLEY CASSELL - QUESTIONED WHEN WOULD BE ON COUNCIL AGENDA. THE REPORT ON GREENWOOD HOTEL MERNA MARSHALL - RE. THE FIESTA. CITY AT THE VON'S SHOPPING CENTER. 1. CONSENT CALENDAR: (a) (e) CONTINUE NO PARKING ENFORCEMENT FROM Recommendation to approve the following minutes: 1) Regular meeting of the City Council held on May 12, 1992; 2) Special workshop meeting of the City Council, Plan- ning Commission, Chamber of Commerce held on May 14, 1992. Recommendation to ratify Demands and Warrants Nos. through inclusive. Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. Recommendation to receive and file the April, 1992 financial reports: 1) Revenue and expenditure report; 2) City Treasurer's report. Recommendation to adopt resolution approving City's par- ticipation in the Los Angeles County Transportation Com- mission's subregional mobility program to receive addi- tional funds for Dial -A -Ride Program. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 19, 1992. TO NEXT MEETING. RE/KM SO ORDERED. J (f) Recommendation to adopt resolution of continuing support for light rail system, southern extension (Metro Green Line). Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 19, 1992. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 92-5537 (g) Recommendation to adopt resolutions regarding the en- gineer's report and setting June 23, 1992 for a public hearing on the Hermosa Beach Crossing Guard Maintenance District 1992-93. Memorandum from Public Works Depart- ment dated May 4, 1992. ADOPTED RESOLUTIONS 92-5538 AND 92-5539. (h) Recommendation to adopt resolutions regarding the en- gineer's report and setting June 23, 1992 for a public hearing on the Hermosa Beach Street Lighting District 1992-93. Memorandum from Public Works Department dated May 4, 1992. ADOPTED RESOLUTIONS 92-5540 AND 92-5541 (i) Recommendation to receive and file report on policy for cablecasting Cable TV Advisory Board meetings. Memoran- dum from Cable Television Coordinator Warren Carter dat- ed May 19, 1992. PULLED BY SE - CHANTAL HARGIS OF MULTIVISION SPOKE. MOTION SE/RB TO AUTHORIZE TAPING OF CABLE MEETINGS AND IF CON- VENIENT GO LIVE, IF NOT TAPE DELAY. SO ORDERED. (j) Recommendation to approve revised class specification for Public Works Director/City Engineer. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated May 21, 1992. PULLED BY KM - WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS ITEMS J AND K TOGETHER. (k) Recommendation to approve request for City Council ac- tion to abolish eligibility list for the position of Public Works Director/City Engineer. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated May 21, 1992. PULLED BY KM - LYNN TERRY - REQUEST THAT ACTION OF THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD BE UPHELD. MOTION SE/RB TO APPROVE REVISED CLASS SPEC. OK 3-2 (KM/AW-NO). MOTION AW/KM TO NOT ABOLISH THE EXISTING LIST. MOTION FAILS 2-3 (RE/RB/SE-NO) MOTION SE/RB - REVERSE THE DECISION OF THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD AND ABOLISH THE LIST BUT INCLUDE IN THE NEW RECRUITMENT THOSE ALREADY QUALIFIED ON THE OLD LIST. OK 3-2 (KM/AW-NO). 2. CONSENT ORDINANCES. (a) ORDINANCE NO. 92-1067 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING MAP FROM OPEN SPACE TO R-2, TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, FOR THE PARCEL AT 598 FIRST STREET AND ADOPTION OF AN EN- VIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION. For adoption. MOTION AW/RB TO ADOPT ORDINANCE. OK 4-1 (KM -NO) (b) ORDINANCE NO. 92-1068 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE HERMO- SA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE WITH RESPECT TO COUNCIL COR- RESPONDENCE; AVAILABILITY TO THE PUBLIC. For adoption. MOTION KM/RB TO ADOPT ORDINANCE. OK 5-0. 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. * Public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS. (a) Letter from Steven DeWees, Real Estate West, dated May 6, 1992 regarding surveys. MOTION RE/SE TO RECEIVE AND FILE. OK 5-0. PUBLIC HEARINGS - TO COMMENCE AT 8:00 P.M. 5. SPECIAL STUDY TO EXAMINE REDUCING THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS IN THE R-3 AND R -P ZONES. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 18, 1992. THE FOLLOWING PERSONS SPOKE IN OPPOSITION TO ANY CHANGE IN R-3 HEIGHT LIMIT: EDIE WEBBER; RON WALEKI(?); BETTY RYAN; PERRY GOLDWOOD; ROBERT VIAULT; SHIRLEY CASSELL; DAVID LESCH (?); WILLIS HAYES; GREG iEYNOLDS; ED JORDAN(?); JIM ROSENBERGER; MARY(?); VIVA STROYKE; JUDY HOLLIS; BOB STROYKE; JIM LISSNER; JERRY COMPTON; JIM GAL- LAGHER(?); JACK ANDREN; MICHAEL KEATON(?); OTTO PALMER. MOTION AW/TO APPROVE ALTERNATIVE "A". DIES FOR LACK OF SECOND. MOTION SE/RE - TO ASK PLANNING COMMISSION TO HOLD DISCUSSIONS GIVING CONSIDERATION TO ALTERNATIVE "C" IN CONJUNCTION WITH AL- TERNATIVE "E". OK 3-2 (KM/AW-NO). 6. A. ADOPTION BY REFERENCE OF THE 1991 EDITIONS OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STAN- DARDS, UNIFORM HOUSING CODE, UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, AND UNIFORM CODE FOR THE - 3 - ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, WITH ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION. Memorandum from Building and Safety Director William Grove dated May 18, 1992. MOTION RE/SE TO INTRODUCE ORDINANCE NO. 92-1069. SO ORDERED. B. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE REPEALING EXISTING CHAPTER 12 IN ITS ENTIRETY, REPLACING IT WITH A NEW CHAPTER 12, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 1991 EDITION OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS, AS AMENDED. Memorandum from Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski dated May 19, 1992. MOTION KM/RE TO INTRODUCE ORDINANCE NO. 92-1070. SO ORDERED. HEARING 7. CONSIDERATION OF ADJUSTMENTS TO MISCELLANEOUS USER FEES AND POTENTIAL NEW USER FEES. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated May 19, 1992. MOTION KM/RE - TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 92-5542 AMENDING RESOLU- TION 90-5422 TO ADJUST MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND SET NEW FEES TO RECOVER COSTS OF PROVIDING THE SERVICE. OK 3-2 (AW/SE-NO) MUNICIPAL MATTERS 8. REVIEW OF ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR 2930 THE STRAND. Memorandum from Public Works Department dated May 18, 1992. MOTION KM/AW TO CONTINUE UNTIL OWNER CAN BE PROPERLY NOTICED. SO ORDERED. 9. RECOMMENDATION RE. REPORT ON SURVEYING DISCREPANCIES AND EXISTING PROCEDURE FOR PROTECTING SURVEY MONUMENTS ALONG MONTEREY BOULEVARD AND BAYVIEW DRIVE BETWEEN 16TH AND 19TH STREETS. Request a continuance on this issue pend- ing the City Manager's meeting with Dr. Laurel Roberts, Ph.D to address concerns and questions posed, in her let- ter to the City Manager of April 28, 1992. MOTION KM/SE TO CONTINUE. SO ORDERED. 10. PROPOSED REVISION OF CITY CODE PROVISIONS PERTAINING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC STREET IMPROVEMENTS, WITH ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION. Memorandum from Public Works Department dated May 7, 1992. MOTION RE/STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH DELETION OF ITEM C IN SECTION 29-11. DIES FOR LACK OF SECOND. MOTION KM/TO SEND THIS ITEM BACK TO STAFF WITH DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL COME BACK WITH SURVEY OF CERTAIN STREETS FOR (ALSO A BALL PARK FIGURE OF THE NUMBER OF LIENS AND CASH DEPOSITS CURRENTLY ON - 4 - FILE.) (44 LIENS AND 80 SOME CASH DEPOSITS CURRENTLY). BRING BACK A PUBLIC HEARING THAT SAYS SIDEWALKS IN THE ITEM. SECOND? SO ORDERED. MOTION KM/RB TO SEND BACK TO STAFF WITH DIRECTION GIVEN FROM THE COUNCIL THAT WOULD LIKE A SURVEY SHOWING US AREAS AND PERCENTAGES OF SIDEWALKS WITH THE INTENTION OF ELIMINATING THE CASH DEPOSITS AND THE LIENS BUT NOT MANDATORILY REQUIRING SIDEWALKS IN AREAS THAT DO NOT WISH SIDEWALKS. ALSO SHOULD BE A PUBLIC HEARING TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC. THINKS THE ABSENCE OF SIDEWALKS IN THE VALLEY AREA IS GIVING A PREFERRED RURAL ATMOSPHERE VERSUS URBAN. NEED TO LOOK AT THE STREETS ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. ALSO IN- CLUDE A BALL PARK FIGURE ON THE NUMBER OF LIENS AND CASH DEPOSITS AND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY. ALSO BE SURE THE WORD "SIDEWALKS" IS MENTIONED IN THE TITLE OF THE ITEM. SO ORDERED. 11. RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE REDESIGN AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION OF ARTESIA BOULEVARD AND PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY INTERSECTION. Memorandum from Public Works Department dated May 18, 1992. MOTION RE/KM REQUEST M.B. CHANGE PLANS TO TWO MANDATORY LEFT TURN LANES OFF OF ARTESIA ONTO PCH SOUTHBOUND, AND BRING BACK FOR US TO LOOK AT. SO ORDERED. 12. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER MULTIVISION WANTS TO MAKE A QUICK EXCAVATION OIC GREENBELT FROM 25TH ST. GOING TOWARDS MANHATTAN. TOTAL PROCESS SHOULD TAKE ABOUT FOUR DAYS TO INSTALL A FIBER OPTIC CABLE. BRING BACK AS A COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM. MOTION SE/TO AGENDIZE AS MUNI MATTER NEXT MEETING. OK. 13. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL (a) Consideration of additional measures to place on ballot of upcoming special election. Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated May 20, 1992. KM SUGGESTS CIVIL SERVICE ITEM RE. PEOPLE HAVING TO BE CITIZENS, (WHICH IS NOT LEGAL). ALSO THE CLAUSE ABOUT CIVIL SERVICE COM- MISSIONERS HAVING TO RESIGN WHEN RUNNING FOR OFFICE (WHICH MAY ~NOT CONSTITUTIONAL). RB WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST A COMMERCIAL MEASURE FOR THE BILTMORE SITE. MOTION RB TO PUT A 60 PERCENT COMMERCIAL/40 PERCENT OPEN SPACE MEASURE . VOTE: FAILS 2-3 (KM/RE/AW-NO) (b) Vacancies - Boards and Commissions Board of Parking Place Commissioners - two terms ending July 27, 1992 Civil Service Board - two terms ending July 15, 1992 Planning Commission - three terms ending June 30, 1992 - 5 - Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated May 20, 1992. MAYOR SAID CHRISTINE KETZ NOT GOING TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR PLANNING COMMISSION. MOTION SE/RB TO DEFER ANY DIRECTION ON BOARD OF PARKING PLACE COMMISSION VACANCIES UNTIL AFTER NEXT MEETING. OK - NOTING KM/ AW OBJECTIONS). MOTION RB/SE TO ADVERTISE OPENINGS ON PLANNING COMMISSION AND CIVIL SERVICE BOARD. SO ORDERED. 14. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL Requests from Councilmembers for possible future agenda items: Recommended Action: 1) Vote by Council whether to discuss this item; 2) refer to staff for a report back on a future agenda; or 3) resolution of matter by Coun- cil action tonight. (a) Request by Councilmember Benz for discussion of use of Biltmore Site. MOTION RB/SE TO PAVE BILTMORE SITE TEMPORARILY.` VOTE: 1-4 (RB - YES). (b) Request by Councilmember Benz for discussion of reduc- tion of parking tickets to $13, and to defray the cost to the City by combining the Building and Planning Departments. NO ACTION. (c) Request by Councilmember Edgerton for a motion to repeal Hermosa Beach City Code Section 7.2-27. Conditional Ap- proval, regarding condominium conversions wherein pre- cise development standards may be disregarded if appli- cant makes cash donation or other gift to City. MOTION SE/RE TO SEND TO PLANNING COMMISSION TO DELETE SECTION 4'7.2-27. SO ORDERED. AW - EXPRESSED ANGER ABOUT R-3 VOTE TONIGHT. KM THANKED P & R FOR CHANGING THEIR MEETINGS TO THURSDAY SO THEY CAN BE TELEVISED LIVE. 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. BETTY MARTIN - SPOKE ABOUT CHANGING INTERSECTION AT GOULD AND VALLEY. ALSO TALKED ABOUT NUMBER OF TICKETS BEING DISMISSED. THINKS CITY IS ALREADY VERY GENEROUS. JERRY COMPTON - WOULD LIKE CONSIDERATION OF PROVIDING ABILITY FOR RESIDENTS TO PARK AT SILVER POSTED METERS FOR NOTHING. ADJOURNMENT AT 11:37 P.M. TO A BUDGET WORKSHOP MEETING JUNE 8. MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Tuesday, May 26, 1992, at the hour of 7:qO P.M. CLOSED SESSION - the closed session was held at P.M. regard- ing matters of Employee Meet and Confer; and, potential litiga- tion: pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b). The closed session was recessed at 7: P.M. to the regular scheduled public meeting. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE L ► BY 1ST GRAD TUDENTS OF KERMOSAy.✓'�`�Da . 'elle Co . -n, adine D cJ/ Ryan = • - nd, Jo • Va - • ez ROLL CALL Present: Benz, Edgerton, Midstokke, Wiemans, Mayor Essertier Absent: None MONT TU S �F`TH NTH /S--t*`$44$II)L" C /1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 47;:1°" --- Members of the Public wishing to address the City Council on any items within the Council's jurisdiction may do so at this time. (Exception: Comments on public hearing items must be heard during the public hearings.) Please limit comments to one minute. Citizens also may speak: 1) during Consent Calendar consideration or Public Hearings, 2) with the Mayor's consent, during discussion of items appearing under Municipal Matters, and 3) before the close of the meeting during "Citizen Comments". Coming forward to address the Council at this time were: Howard Longacre - 1221 Seventh Place, Wilma Burt - 1152 Seventh Street, June Williams - 2065 Manhattan Avenue, Dave Reimer - 802 Monterey Blvd., Jerry Compton - 1200 Artesia Blvd., • (.%Shirley Cassell - 611Monterey Blvd., 4f((,% ---P -�' )� ygi^-o- ti -4 - Parker Herriott - 224 Twenty-fourth Street, Jim Lissner - 2715 El Oeste Drive, Jim Rosenberger - 1121 Bayview Drive, Tom Morley - 516 Loma Drive, Richard Sullivan - 824 Third Street, Edie Webber - 1210 Eleventh Street, Gene Dreher - 1222 Seventh Place, Joseph Di Monda - 610 Ninth Street, /1 A" ---A-0- vee-=- , ye�� -eat •.�. d‘••,. ••• -- 040,.6 - f 1. CONSENT CALENDAR: The following more routine matters will be acted upon by one vote to approve with the majority consent of the City Council. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless good cause is shown by a member prior to the roll call vote. * Councilmember requests to remove items from the Consent Calendar. (Items removed will be considered under Agenda Item 3.) * Public comments on the Consent Calendar. 1. CONSENT CALENDAR Action: To approve the Consent Calendar recommendations (a) through (k), 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) , (f) , (g) , (h) , (i) (j) and (k) Motion JJ, second • So ordered. Coming forward to address the Council on items not removed from the con nt calendar were: fi 6,& No one came forward to address the Council on items not removed from the consent calendar. (a) Recommendation to approve the following minutes: 1) Regular meeting of the City Council held on May 12, 1992; Ge-et'26/ 19�� (b) 2 ) Special workshop meeting of the City Council, Plan- ning Commission, Chamber of Commerce held on May 14, 1992. Action: To approve the minutes of the regular meeting of May 12, 1992 as and to approve the minutes of the special workshop meet- ing of May 14, 1992 as Recommendation to ratify Demands and Warrants No. 40726 and Nos. 40773 through 40859 inclusive; noting voided warrants Nos. 40776, 40777, 40778, 40809, and 40811. Action: To ratify the demands and warrants as presented. (c) Recommendation to receive and file Tentative Future Agenda Items. (d) Action: To receive and file the tentative future agenda items as presented. Recommendation to receive and file the April, 1992 financial reports: 1) Revenue and expenditure report; 2) City Treasurer's report. Action: To receive and file the April, 1992 financial reports as presented. • //'12 (f) (g) Recommendation to adopt�_r�esolutio approving City's par- ticipation in the Los Angeles -County Transportation Com- mission's subregional mobility program to receive addi- tional funds for Dial -A -Ride Program. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 19, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Midstokke for separate discussion later in the meeting. /7/, 10 - Action: Action: To adopt ResolutionlNo5"7 Entitled," A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY COORDINATED PARATRANSIT PLAN." Recommendation torado_p_`f =esoaution of continuing support for light rail system;'southernextension (Metro Green Line). Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 19, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Midstokke for separate discussion later in the meeting. Action: To adopt Resolution o. 92-55 37,-Entitled,A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL-OF`THE CITY " OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING THE METRO GREEN LINE LIGHT RAIL SYSTEM SOUTHERN EXTENSION AND SUPPORTING ADVANCING THE PROJECT TO THE EIR PROCESS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE." Recommendation to adopt resolutions1regarding the en- gineer's report and setting June 23, 1992 for a public hearing on the Hermosa Beach Crossing Guard Maintenance District 1992-93. Memorandum from Public Works Depart- ment dated May 4, 1992. Action: To adopt Resolution No.�92=55 j, entitled, SIA_ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS OF SAID CITY MADE PURSUANT TO THE RE- QUIREMENTS OF RESOLUTION 92-5521 OF SAID COUNCIL." • (h) Further Action: To adopt Resolution No. 92-55_ , enti- tled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER CERTAIN CROSSING GUARD SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE "THE CROSSING GUARDS MAINTENANCE DISTRICT ACT OF 1974", CHAPTER 3.5, ARTICLES 1, 2, 3 AND 4, SECTION 55530 THROUGH 55570, OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AT CERTAIN LOCATIONS IN THE SAID CITY, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1992 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1993; AND APPOINTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEAR- ING IN RELATION THERETO." Recommendation to ra`$opt resolutino s�regarding the en- gineer's report and -setting June 23, 1992 for a public hearing on the Hermosa Beach Street Lighting District 1992-93. Memorandum from Public Works Department dated May 4, 1992. Action: To adopt �CITY-COUNCIL-6F-THE-CITY R�e�s�olution No. 92=550 entitled,"A C RESOLUTION OF THE ITY-COUNCIL OF -THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS OF SAID CITY MADE PURSUANT TO THE RE- QUIREMENTS OF RESOLUTION 92-5520 OF SAID COUNCIL." Further Action: To adopt Resolution No. 92-55, enti- tled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER CERTAIN STREET LIGHTING FIXTURES AND APPURTENANCES TO BE INSTALLED, MAINTAINED AND ELECTRIC CURRENT TO BE FURNISHED FOR STREET LIGHTING FIXTURES THROUGHOUT THE CITY, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1992 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1993; AND APPOINTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN RELATION THERETO." (i) Recommendation to receive and file report on policy for cablecasting Cable TV Advisory Board meetings. Memoran- dum from Cable Television Coordinator Warren Carter dat- ed May 19, 1992. Action: To authorize the cablecasting of the Cable Television Advisory Board meetings and to authorize the use of volunteers to tape meetings, as recommended by staff. 7 �-- I — /`� • Recommendation to approve revised class specification for Public Works Director/City Engineer. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated May 21, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- cilmember Midstokke for separate discussion later in the meeting. ((c4 10 Action: To approve the revised class specification for Public Works Director/City Engineer; said revision per- mits applications from individuals who possess a Profes- sional Engineering Certificate from either California or a state having a reciprocal agreement with California, and requires the successful candidate to obtain the Cal- ifornia registration within twelve (12) months of ap- pointment, as recommended by staff. Recommendation to approve request for City Council ac- tion to abolish eligibility list for the position of Public Works Director/City Engineer. Memorandum from Personnel Director Robert Blackwood dated May 21, 1992. This item was removed from the consent calendar by Coun- .cilmember Midstokke for separate discussion later in the meeting. c' ' 1/4-0y 4 1�''' (?. e� 4 r .-s.- -4) « *)) ctioii: -To reverse the decision of the Civil Service Board, and thereby abolish the eligibility list for Public Works Director/City Engineer, as recommended by OS, //d/r17 03, staff. 2. CONSENT ORDINANCES. (a) ORDINANCE NO. 92-1067 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HER- MOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP FROM OPEN SPACE TO R-2, TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, FOR THE PAR- CEL AT 598 FIRST STREET AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION. For adoption. Action: To 'adopt Ordinance- No: -"9-2=1067#. Motion /4 , second 0. So o`rd'ered; noting the objections of EdA6 cZA A.) G� ••=-% evoit- ev/v ze(<1 ,-)7 (b) ORDINANCE NO. 92-1068 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HER- MOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE WITH RESPECT TO COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE; AVAILABILITY TO THE PUBLIC. For adoption. Action: To adopt Ordinance No. 92-1068 Motion,1 , second . So ordered, noting the objections of 3. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION. Items 1(a) , (b) , (c) , (d) , (e) , (f) , (g) , (h) , and (k) were heard at this time, but are shown for clarity. (1). (j). in order * Public comments on items removed from the Consent Calendar are shown under the appropriate item. 4. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS. (a) Letter from Steven DeWees, Real Estate West, dated May 6, 1992 regarding surveys. Action: To PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. SPECIAL STUDY TO EXAMINE REDUCING THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS IN THE R-3 AND R -P ZONES. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated May 18, 1992. Planning Director Schubach presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. The public hearing was opened at/L.19P.M. address the Council on this item were: GGA -t.4 GcJ,c-G - /moo //'&56,1-e ,— ? -- M 3 `-C 'a'-- /'7OS A0 � /f 73 • f - 3'`< --a-f Coming forward to et 1_ o-� , 4( -c -e -A �"7 VSs , , /ce5' "V/3,1 ",0 A-oe-oc--oe--0-) �� /676," 4A4 cg -d-7>4_,41 %%% ‘TPAS/ c3.e,.+D ? - ACt;t1A-ti ,,Px,74,,=1-4--el 071- v 40itt.4 )4=7.--) 2,0tA,t0L )4/Le-, ysi 4J • p. " /4' /?/#4d y -/g ff 02_3 (.70-1 e,„ 44‘4.- ice'' (#1-• Of-ca•oG ).r abt-ok-7 -z, 9t -A-4; Jay . s �- 4 ›a P-` V-2 r //e, d_,, • • o .3 7g , �i��� 4, _ ) 56 70 p -=.i YY2„ The public hearing was closed at 5i:QTP.M. ) j.227 Proposed Action: To approve the Planning Commission and staff recommendation to conceptually approve the com- bination of alternatives C, D, E, and G, as the method to reduce height in the R-3 and R -P zones, with specific language for a text amendment to be drafted by staff and presented to the Planning Commission for public hearing z- and final recommendation, and then to the City Council for public hearing and final adoption. Action: To ; Ys 6. A. ADOPTION BY REFERENCE OF THE 1991 EDITIONS OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STAN- DARDS, UNIFORM HOUSING CODE, UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, AND UNIFORM CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, WITH ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION. Memorandum from Building and Safety Director William Grove dated May 18, 1992. Buil ing an fety Direc rove pr- - ted the staff repot resp tided • Counci stions. `N. -7•-•' • The public hearing opened at y:,$? P.M. Coming forward to ad- dress the Council on this matter were: The public hearing closed at y:y.4P.M. Action: To Tin troducepArd nance:,No.�92 10(x . Motion E.s., second. So ordered. Final Action: To waive full reading of Ordinance No. c92-10kg,tentitled, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 7, ARTICLES I, II, III, IV, AND CHAPTER 24 OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO BUILDING AND PLUMBING REGULATIONS AND ADOPTING WITH CER- TAIN ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND AMENDMENTS, WHICH ARE SET FORTH HEREIN, THE RULES, REGULATIONS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS BET FORTH IN THOSE CERTAIN CODES ENTITLED, 'UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, 1991 EDITION', 'UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STANDARDS, 1991 EDITION', 'UNIFORM HOUSING CODE, 1991 EDITION', AND 'UNIFORM CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, 1991 EDITION', PROMULGATED AND PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS AND THE 'UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, 1991 EDITION' AND 'UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, 1991 EDITION' PROMULGATED AND PUBLISHED JOINTLY BY THE INTERNATIOANAL ASSOCIATION OF PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS AND THE INTERNA- TIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS." MotionSd, second,. AYES aJ NO B. ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE REPEALING EXISTING CHAPTER 12 IN ITS ENTIRETY, REPLACING IT WITH A NEW CHAPTER 12, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE 1991 EDITION OF • THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS, AS AMENDED. Memorandum from Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski dated May 19, 1992. Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. The public hearing opened at 9:7Y P.M. Coming forward to ad- dress the Council on this matter were: The public hearing closed at :O P.M. Action: To introduce Ordinance No.:92 101& Motion /9% , second g12.) . So ordered. Final_Action: To waive full reading of Ordinance No. V2-10'20, entitled, HAN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, REPEALING EXISTING CHAPTER 12 OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND ADOPT- ING BY REFERENCE, THE 1991 EDITIONS OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE, INCLUDING APPENDIX CHAPTERS III -A, III -B, III -C, VI -A, VI -C AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS, AS AMENDED. Motion 2' �/ , second C.:1)AYES : (�--`'C NOES: HEARING 7. CONSIDERATION OF ADJUSTMENTS TO MISCELLANEOUS USER FEES AND POTENTIAL NEW USER FEES. Memorandum from Finance Director Viki Copeland dated May 19, 1992. Finance Director Copeland presented the staff report and responded to Council questions. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: ,tom41)A- CO eA. _ • Action: To adopt Resolution No. 92b5 X entitled, "A_ RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION 90-5422 TO ADJUST MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND SET NEW FEES TO RECOVER COSTS OF PROVIDING THE SERVICE." Motion /9'i , second . So ordered, noting the objections of. MUNICIPAL MATTERS 8. REVIEW OF ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR 2930 THE STRAND. Memorandum from Public Works Department dated May 18, 1992. Deputy Cit ngineer nn Ter •resent ported esp• de• o •unc que s. the Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: 646 Action: To allow the existing approved encroachment permit to remain as approved, as recommended by staff. Motion , second . So ordered. 9. RECOMMENDATION RE. REPORT ON SURVEYING DISCREPANCIES AND EXISTING PROCEDURE FOR PROTECTING SURVEY MONUMENTS ALONG MONTEREY BOULEVARD AND BAYVIEW DRIVE BETWEEN 16TH AND 19TH STREETS. Request a continuance on this issue pend- ing the City Manager's meeting with Dr. Laurel Roberts, Ph.D to address concerns and questions posed in her let- ter to the City Manager of April 28, 1992. Action: To continue this item as requested. Motion i'!'% , second E -et . So ordered. 10. PROPOSED REVISION OF CITY CODE PROVISIONS PERTAINING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC STREET IMPROVEMENTS, WITH ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION. Memorandum from Public Works Department dated May 7, 1992. Deputy City Engineer Lynn Terry e s a ort- ad responded to Council questions. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: • 64/ 47---// d, Com- e 5 11. �e. )11 d✓ Action: To `i troduce Ord inance No. 92-1'0. Motion , second Soordered, noting the objections of Final Action: To waive full reading of Ordinance No. 9'2-10�,yentitled, "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVISING AND DELETING CITY CODE PROVISIONS PER- TAINING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC STREET IMPROVEMENTS. Motion AYES: u , second RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE REDESIGN AND TRAFFIC SI MODIFICATION OF ARTESIA BOULEVARD AND PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY INTERSECTION. Memorandum from Public Works Department dated May 18, 1992. i Deputy City Engineer Lynn Terry ea ed -the -staff -re - responded to Council questions. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: 40ag_t.ati40 //S v J �--� �, - y`-•i� e D ' �- ‘___42..ij d ___,--( ",----4 „, C#�r-'' ,' -,;- /4/0 • Cf C-R- 3 �- �-s`- 'Fa' Ste4-61‘v (,�-�� /41("-141 Review and approve the proposed redesign and To approve staff recommendation to: traf- �� (( ' p�� ) fic signal modification of the intersection at `,Cz Artesia Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway; and �-- �-� 2) •Authorize the staff to sign the design drawing for 403/ the proposed changes. 04-7, Motion ?AA/ 13 6,0 "�• ‹ (a) m. Commn , second 0 0 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCIL ered Consideration of additional measures to place on ballot of upcoming special election. Memorandum from City Clerk Ea!adne Doerfling dated May 20, 1992. ** responded to Council questions. forward to address the Council on this item were: g5/4»4j ���%�6•�J - �G ) — 7 7 �� rjee le_40 c7y • e (�� • i9E,ot 60 P7 2 7/7 40 Action: To Motion , second . So ordered. Vacancies - Boards and Commissions Board of Parking Place Commissioners - two terms ending July 27, 1992 Civil Service Board - two terms ending July 15, 1992 Planning Commission - three terms ending June 30, 1992 Memorandum from City Clerk Elaine Doerfling dated May 20, 1992. Action: To (Board of Parking Place C'mmissioners). I Motion , second 4,g. ▪ So ordered. /� v" Further Action: To (Civil Service Board). Motion Aak , second E-4,4 • So ordered. Final Action: To (Planning Commission). Motion f27 , second • So ordered. 14. OTHER MATTERS - CITY COUNCIL Requests from Councilmembers for possible future agenda items: Recommended Action: 1) Vote by Council whether to discuss this item; 2) refer to staff for a report back on a future agenda; or 3) resolution of matter by Coun- cil action tonight. (a) Request by Councilmember Benz for discussion of use of Biltmore Site. Action: To Motion 2 (11 , second . So ordered. (b) (C) Request by Councilmember Benz for discussion of reduc- tion of parking tickets to $13, and to defray the cost to the City by combining the Building and Planning Departments. Action: To Motion , second . So ordered. Request by Councilmember Edgerton for a motion to repeal Hermosa Beach City Code Section 7.2-27. Conditional Ap- proval, regarding condominium conversions wherein pre- cise development standards ma be disregarded if appli- cant makes cash donation or duther gift to City. eftA t 7 • --A-7 Action: To Motion, second . So ordered. CITIgEN 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. Comingforward to address the Council at this time were: �--m -� ---Z LI 4;7;.0 //1 0--"E-.`•.. ,,,ly'''3-ipmee • l"'734#_ �� .mss ,� • //: 30 f• 1 • ADJOURNMENT - The Regular Meeting of the City Council of theity of Hermosa Beach, California, adjourned on , y /%%0'f 1992, at the hour of : �A-1'T. to the Meeting to be J held on Monday, June 8, 1992 at the hour of 7:30/?M "7777" 9(`"‘7 City Clerk MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, held on Thursday, May 14, 1992, at the hour of 7:48 P.M. CLOSED SESSION - the closed session was held at 7:10 P.M. regard- ing matters of Employee Meet and Confer. The closed session was recessed at 7:40 P.M. to the special meeting. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Terry Nannes, President, Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce ROLL CALL Present: Benz, Edgerton, Midstokke, Wiemans, Mayor Essertier Absent: None The special meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council adjourned at 7:57 P.M. to a joint workshop meeting between the City Coun- cil, Planning Commission and the Chamber of Commerce. ALSO IN ATTENDANCE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION: Joseph Di Monda, Christine Ketz, Robert B. Marks, Rod Merl, and Steven Suard. HERMOSA BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: Jerry Compton, Mick Felder, Terry Nannes, Gary Wayland, Jack Wood, John Workman. HERMOSA BEACH CITY STAFF: City Manager Frederick R. Ferrin, Community Resources Director Mary Rooney, Planning Director Michael Schubach, Building and Safety Director William Grove. TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION: CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ITEMS: 1) ONE STOP BUSINESS LICENSE PERMIT - Chamber member John Workman gave the presentation for the Chamber. He stated that many people contemplating opening a business in Hermosa are concerned with the seeming myriad forms and regulations involved with the City process. He ex- plained that the Chamber would like to help streamline the application so that a one-stop process could be evolved. Mr. Workman continued that the Chamber would like to be able to explain to people, coming to its of- fice, what the process is and guide them in filling out the forms in order to shorten the time involved and to have fewer dissatisfied individuals who may decide not to come to Hermosa. He said that ideally there would be one person in City Hall that would work throughout the process with the person applying. City Council Minutes 05-14-92 Page 7804 a(a) 2) BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT OFFICER - Chamber member Gary Way- land of the Business Advocacy Committee gave the presen- tation for the Chamber. He stated that his committee was currently in the process of reviewing resumes and interviewing applicants for the part time position of Business Development Officer, whose job would be to develop guidelines on the types of businesses needed by the community, then try to interest those types of busi- nesses to locate in Hermosa Beach. Mr. Wayland con- tinued that the City could assist in this project through sharing in the funding for the position and, if needed, to relax some requirements (such as parking) to allow the business to open in Hermosa. 3) SIGNS AND BANNER ORDINANCE - Chamber member John Workman gave the presentation for the Chamber. He stated that the Chamber was developing a program whereby an appli- cant could come to the Chamber office, post a deposit of $30 and have the Chamber make the application and post the bond with the City for a temporary banner. Mr. Workman continued that the Chamber felt this would be a positive step that it could take to work with the City to ease the confusion for the applicant and the workload of the City. 4) CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - Chamber member Jack Wood gave the presentation for the Chamber. He stated that the Chamber would like to have more uniformity of conditions for CUPS, with site specific conditions voted on indi- vidually (condition by condition) by the Planning Com- mission. He also asked if the fees could be reduced. Mr. Wood continued by explaining that delays and post- ponements were costly to the applicant, as the applicant would usually secure financing before starting a project and delays kept him/her from making money at the busi- ness while still paying the costs of the financing. 5) R/UDAT - Chamber member Jerry Compton gave the presenta- tion for the Chamber and submitted an additional infor- mation packet. He announced that a meeting would be held Thursday, May 21, 1992, at 12 Noon at the "Light- house Cafe" to introduce the R/UDAT committee and in- vited everyone to attend. CITY COUNCIL ITEMS: 6) IMPROVING COMMUNICATION BETWEEN CHAMBER AND COUNCIL - Councilmember Midstokke stated that she would like ear- lier notice of Chamber events, and explained that the Council's mail from City Hall went out once a week (on Thursdays) and the Councilmembers would not know of an event until it was past. She also asked the Chamber to bring their new directories to City Hall for distribu- tion and availability to the public. City Council Minutes 05-14-92 Page 7805 7) CITY AND CHAMBER ENCOURAGEMENT AND ASSISTANCE FOR NEW BUSINESSES - Asked how the City could encourage new businesses, the Chamber responded that participation and encouragement of the programs listed above would be greatly appreciated, also that parking requirements were more stringent in Hermosa than in neighboring cities. The Chamber suggested that Hermosa's parking require- ments more closely conform to those in Manhattan Beach. 8) BUSINESS PROPERTY MAINTENANCE AND ENFORCEMENT OF TRASH ENCLOSURES - Councilmember Midstokke asked if the Cham- ber could help with business property maintenance and/or trash enclosures. The Chamber replied that if the City would provide a list of businesses that were in viola- tion, it would would contact each business and urge com- pliance. The Chamber said it wished to cooperate with the City however it could in order to alleviate the ini- tial City workload, however, enforcement of those who would not comply would have to be done by the City. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS: 9) DOWNTOWN PARKING - The Planning Commission felt this item would be covered more extensively after the R/UDAT study and report. 10) VENTILATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - The Planning Commission felt this item was more appropriate with City Council and staff. Councilmember Benz stated there would be more ventilation with less noise if the louvers were removed from the ceiling vent fan. CITIZEN COMMENTS Coming forward to address the Council on these items were: Jerry Newton - 2041 Circle Drive, Board of Parking Place Commission, stated that the City Coun- cil's interest in disbanding the Vehicle Park- ing District would have a negative impact on R/ UDAT and the downtown revitalization; June Williams - questioned why 90% of the time was spent on the 10% of the businesses that re- quired a CUP; John Ryan - 229 Longfellow, stated that the City Council had a responsibility to help with the revitalization of the business community; Gary Frost - Coast Drug Store, stated that the cur- rent economic situation in the community and the nation harmed small businesses particularly and only large business (of which Hermosa has few) would be able to survive; Brad Baker - Baker and Burton, said the spirit of cooperation between the City Council and the Chamber of Commerce would foster a better en- vironment for the City and create a win-win City Council Minutes 05-14-92 Page 7806 situation for all; Vada Klein - 809 Pacific Coast Highway, stated she had been concerned with her upcoming CUP, but this meeting had helped to calm her fears; Don Faulkenstein - (no address given) spoke on a problem regarding parking tickets; Jerry Compton - 1723 Valley Park Avenue responded to June William's question by saying the 10% of the businesses requiring CUPs bring in a large percentage of the City's sales tax revenue and thus were of concern to the Chamber. ADJOURNMENT - The Special Workshop Meeting of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, adjourned on Thursday, May 14, 1992, at the hour of 10:19 P.M. to the Regular Meeting to be held on Tuesday, May 26, 1992, at the hour of 7:30 P.M. Deputy City Clerk City Council Minutes 05-14-92 Page 7807 a a a 4$ 0 • 0 F INANCE—S1=A340 TIME 16:12:26 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 05/14/92 • PACE 0001 0 DATE 05/18/92 2l PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN #. AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 3 4 H HERMOSA BEACH • PAYROLL ACCOUNT 00243 001-202-0000-2030 00481 $224,058.40 40726 5 a ro ° PAYROLL/4-16 TO 4-30-92 05/05/92- /ACCRUED PAYROLL $0.00 05/14/92 H HERMOSA BEACH PAYROLL ACCOUNT '• 00243 105-202-0000-2030 00270 $8,455,16 4Q2P6 a ', 13 14 15 16 PAYROLL/4-16 TO 4-30-92 05/05/92 /ACCRUED PAYROLL $0.00 05/14/92 12 H HERMOSA BEACH PAYROLL ACCOUNT 00243 109-202-0000-2030 00068 $1,355.36 40726 3 PAYROLL/4-16 TO 4-30-92 : 05/05/92 ' /ACCRUED PAYROLL $0. 00 05/14/92 15 H HERMOSA BEACH PAYROLL ACCOUNT 00243 110-202-0000-2030. 00273 • $43,919.69 40726 "• e` 20 16 PAYROLL/4-16 TO 4-30-92 05/05/92 /ACCRUED PAYROLL $0.00 05/14/92 v 'a H HERMOSA BEACH PAYROLL ACCOUNT 00243 145-202-0000-2030 00265 $2,179.76 40726 ' z2 23 24 19 PAYROLL/4-16 TO 4-30-92.,; 05/05/92`.. ,- -:.•/ACCRUED PAYROLL - $0.00 05/14/92 i7 - - i . . r .. H HERMOSA BEACH PAYROLL ACCOUNT ', " 00243 155-202-0000-2030 00266 $4, 785. 37 40726 25 26 27 29 2 PAYROLL/4-16 TO 4-30-92 05/05/92 /ACCRUED PAYROLL $0.00 '05/14/92 23 24 H HERMOSA BEACH PAYROLL ACCOUNT 00243 160-202-0000-2030 00263 $7,141.62' 40726 29 30 31 32 25 PAYROLL/4-16 TO 4-30-92 ''05/05/92':—/ACCRUED a PAYROLL $0.00 05/14/92 25 Y '_ L7 H HERMOSA BEACH PAYROLL ACCOUNT ." 00243 - 170-202-0000-2030`00120 "' $29,399.49 40726 33 36 28 PAYROLL/4-16 TO 4-30-92 05/05/92 /ACCRUED PAYROLL $0.00 05/14/92 29 30- H HERMOSA BEACH PAYROLL ACCOUNT . 00243 705-202-0000-2030 00227 $5,192.23 40726 3' 34 39 40 31 PAYROLL/4-16 TO 4-30-92 '05/05/92 - /ACCRUED PAYROLL, $0.00 05/14/92 32 . s .. .. f . • 33 *** VENDOR TOTAL**•***•***•*****•*************#**********arn******** r*ii•**** * ********* $326,387.08 41 42 43 4. 34 35 36 H( PUB EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYS. 00026 001-400-1213-4180 00588 $39,101.50 40773 45 46 47 46 37 RETIREMENT ADV/APRIL 92. 05/12/92 RETIREMENT, /RETIREMENT $0.00 05/14/92 38 •d' 39 *** VENDOR TOTAL ************************•***************•*********•*•*•u•*********•********" .$31,i01.50 49 50 5, 52 40 41 42 H SOUTH BAY MUNICIPAL COURT 00400 110-300-0000-3302 45430 $22.00 2302112 03393 40775 53 54 55 46 43 CITATION COURT BAIL 02112 05/12/92 /COURT FINES/PARKING $0.00 05/14/92 44 45 *** VENDOR TOTAL *******at***************at************a►********i►***oh****************** $22.00 -- 5' sa 59 60 46 47 H WESTERN STATES INFO NETWORK 04654 170-400-2103-4316 00016 $400.00 TR405 00405 40774 61 62 63 44 43 TUIT/4 NARCOTICS OFCRS TR405 05/12/92 SPEC INVF_STOTNS /TRAINING $0.00 05/14/92 50 ' - 51 - 65 66 67 6B 52 53 . 54 69 70 )i 72 55` .. 56 -. s df•4 ' ,{ 4 Y.L. 3 -•74 9r' � C'! /+vim - I 73 75 • • • • 0 • • 0 • • • • • • • • • r V1• • • • • • 1 F I NANC E—SFA:340 TIME 16:13:26 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST PAGE 0002 3 • • run VP/i4/Yd' DATE 05/18/92 PAY VENDOR NAME 1 -' VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # , ' AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK * DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE 0 5 6 7 EXP *:r* VENnOR TOTAL *************, *,r***n*,►*,r*******,►**,,,►*, ***u********** ►****** ********* 8400.00 4 5 a a 9 , *** PAY CODE TOTAL ************3tit********3t#********n**4***-i*****************#*.*jt****.. $s65,910.58 9 10 tl 10 ! 11 2 �i ADAMSON INDUSTRIES -13r---- 00138 001-400-2101-4309 12 13 14 15 00507 8138,56 5466 00043 40779 RADAR REPAIRJAPRIL 92 5466 04/21/92 POLICE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 50.40 05/14/92 14 a' . 15 :tat* VENDOR TOTAL **************#*#tt****iF*it***it*it*****»*******cwt****3t***************** $138,56 1 16 16 19 ' " �'0 ft AM=RICAN STYLE FOODS 00857 001-400-2101-4M06 01172 $77,40 219 0 21 22 23 6949 000n3 40750 MISC. CHARGES /MAY 92 6949 50.00 05/14/92 °I 05/05/92 POLICE /PRISONER MAINTENANCE [2f*** VENDOR TOTAL***********************************************************n******** $77.40 24 zs 2a I.Z. ';.3 1 24 P. AT & T 03423 170-400-2103-4304 00048 $0.73` 25 227 9 30 1 31 00046 40781 MOBILE PHONE/APRIL.92' - ,'05/01/92 SPEC INVESTGTNS/TELEPHONE *0.00 05/14/92 26 27 *** VENDOR TOTAL**************************************at*at***4.*****at**************** _ .. 2° $0.73 32 35 29 3e R AVIATION LOCK & KEY 00407 001-400-4204-4309 02336 $4.06 31 3a 37 3a 391 00047 40782 MISC. CHARGES/APRIL 92 „'05/02/92 .-BLDG MAINT• /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 05/14/92 ( 32 .. w +: 33 R AVIATION LOCK 9.✓. KEY • - Y 00407 001-400-4601-4305 01057xt°: `.''$27.04 40 4z 43 1 00047 40782 34 MISC, CHARGES/APRIL 92 05/02/92 COMM RESOURCES /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *0.00 05/14/92 3546 36 RAVIATION LOCK & KEY 00407 001-400-6101-4309 01247 $1.93 00047 7 m 45 47 1 40782 I MISC. CHARGES/APRIL 92 05/02/92 'PARKS., , /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 80.00 05/14/92 39 R AVIATION LOCK & KEY • ' •. Y ' '. .• - - �)` ' 00407- -. • \110-400-3302-4309 •'00840 $6.76' 4e 091 51 00047 40782 40 MISC. CHARGES/APRIL 92 .05/02/92 PARKING ENF /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 05/14/92 41 42 *** VENDOR TOTAL *******************************************************r************ $29.79 43 52 53 w� BANC ONE LEAPING CORPORATION 03422 " 001-400-•2201-6900 00154^. '$39.770 24 • 042690-001 57 56 59 1 00052 40783 as LEASE PAYMENT/FIRE_ ENGN 0-001 05/08/92 FIRE /LEASE PAYMENTS *0.00 05/14/92 47 *** VENOOR TOTAL************************_'1►******************************************* 60 62 631 47 839,770 24 6a 50- ; ... .. s' H' BFACH CITIFS ARMOURY - '`02100 - O01-400-7101-4309 00505' - '' 8.465 74 ' .45975' sz 65 6887 04184 40784 AMMUNITION/RIOTS 45975 04/:30/92_ POLICE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS ./14/92 53 4000 05 54 55 6a 69 71 ' Y 7g 772, 4 4 10. .. ars ,7 1 .-14 .41 t. - • • • • • 1 dl ,• • 2 2 1• 3 3 • 3 4 4 4 • • • • 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5' 52 r54 55 FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 16:13:26 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST PAGE_ 0003 PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER, TRN # '' AMOUNT INV/REF DESCRIPTION ` DATE INVC _ PROD ## ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT POD)# UNENC vJCHK)#G ILI-I DATE EXP . *** VENDOR TOTAL ********firer**x*erx***u*srir****a ****i***hairu*****x*******sr****ar***x*fir*** $665.74 R BFI MEDICAL WASTE SYSTEMS 04540 001-400-2101-4201 01023 $31.90 920400-0041723 00075 40755 2 2 WASTE PICK—UP/APRIL 92 41723 04/30/92 POLICE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $31.90 ?0.00 05/14/92 4 5 , R RODERT*BLACKWOOD 00366 001-400-1203-4304 00588 $20.76 ' 04626 40786 l MON EXPENSE/MAR—APR 92 04/30/92 PERSONNEL /TELEPHONE R ROBERT*BLACK.W0OD 00366 001-400-1203-4305 00348 $10.17 $0.00 04626 09/14/92 40786 MON EXPENSE/MAR—APR 92 04/30/92 PERSONNEL /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES R R0BERT*BLACKWOOD 00366 705-400-1209-4324 00267 $23,27 $0.00 04626 05/14/92 40786 MON EXPENSE/MAR—APR 92 04/30/92 LIABILITY INS /CLAIMS/SETTLEMENTS *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $54.20 $0.00 00/14/92 ' 5 R BLICKMAN, INC. , 03092 001-400-4601-4201 ' 01371 $126.00 04939 40787 THEATRE TECH/APRIL 25,92 05/11/92 COMM RESOURCES /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $126.00 $0.00 03/14/92'. R STATE*BOARD OF EQUALIZATION 02411 . 001-202-0000-2020 01305 $38.48 8E17078 00079 • 40788 SALES TAX TAPE/JAN—MAR 17078 04/20/92 /ACCOUNTS PAYABLE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $38.48 $0.00 05/14/92 ' R BRAUN LINEN SERVICE_ ' 00163 001-400-2101-4306' 01173 $213.79 070664 00410 40789 MISC. CHARGES/ APRIL 92 70664 04/30/92 POLICE /PRISONER MAINTENANCE *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** x'213.79 $0.00 05/14/92 ' BROWNING pr. FERRIS INDUSTRIES . 00155 001-400-1208-4201 00871 1578.37• 920400-2416006 00005 40790 fi TRASH PICK—UP/MAY 92 16006 05/01/92 GEN APPROP /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT F. BROWNING & FERRIS INDUSTRIES 00155 109-400-3301-4201 00120 $316,63 920400-2416006 $0.00 00005 05/14/92 fi fi b 40790 fi TRASH PICK—UP/MAY 92 16006 05/01/92 VEH PKG DIST /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT •6 $0.00 09/14/92 6 6 7 l 7 77 7 • • • • • • • • • FINANCE-SFA34O t,rtr 4 . 1 ^] . 1 L CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST PAGE 0004 DATE 05/18/92 / I _ PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # • DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP I\ 2 4 14 51 *** V'NDUR TOTAL *****,tat********a*************a**•Haar********************************a $1,095.00 5 6 7 e 7 9 R BROWNING FERRIS INDUSTRIES 00158 001-400-3103-4201 •0`0 - '•'0400-003700? 00004 40791 9 10 12 DUMP CHARGES/APRIL 92 37002 04/30/92 ST MAINTENANCE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 VIII *** VENDOR TOTAL ******* ****************************stair***************************** V).115 .96 13 1s 167 1. I '•3' 14' ! .i'., 115; R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER ''02016 * 001-400-1122-4305 00144 $19.60 03853 40792 Ie 19 20 '51 PETTY CASH/4-27 TO 5-6 05/06/92 ELECTIONS /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 05/14/92 4 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-1205-4305 00123 $23.79 03853 40792 2' zz 23 24 26 27 2e 29 30 31 32 33 35 36 3e 39 40 41 4z 94 <s 47 46 PETTY CASH/4-27 TO 5-6 05/06/92 CABLE TV /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *0.00 05/14/92 1 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-2101-4305 01771 $45.20 03853 40792 22. PETTY CASH/4-27 TO 5-6 05/06/92 POLICE /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES. *0.00 05/14/92 .33 24 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER '02016 001-400-2101-4310 00354 $20.00 " 038.53 40792 -- PETTY CASH/4-27 TO 5-6 05/06/92 POLICE • /MOTOR FUELS AND LUDES *0.00 05/14/92 .. R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 0201.- •• -•••- • -• • - - - •• R5"% 40792 ;-• " PETTY CASH/4-27 TO 5-6 05/06/92 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE • POST *0.00 05/14/92 `9 30 R GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-3103-4311 00778 $7.55 036.73 40792 31 PETTY CASH/4-27 TO 5-6 05/06/92 ST MAINTENANCE ./AUTO MAINTENANCE_ .. *0.00 05/14/92 32 33 R (ARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-4601-430.5 01056 - $.8._00 0:9557 4079P 74 35 is R PETTY CASH/4-27 TO 5-6 05/06/92 COMM RESOURCES /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0.00 05/14/92 GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER 02016 001-400-6101-4310 00106 $5.00 03853 40792 37 3e 39 R ( PETTY CASH/4-27 TO 5-6 ''4 05/06/92 :.PARKS /MOTOR'FUELS AND LUBES • $0.00 05/14/92 751 GARY*BRUTSCH, CITY TREASURER . ' 02016 110-40Q-3302-4:911 00789 $21._6.5 03853 40792 so 52 55 56 57 56 59 60 62 63 64 65 66 67 6e 69 70 71 72 .40 PETTY CASH/4-27 TO 5-6 05/06/92 • PARKING ENF /AUTO MAINTENANCE $0.00 05/14/92 41 43 *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $166.79 433. 44 1 • I - 45 R BSI CONSULTANTS, INC . 00630 001-400-4201-4201 '00758- *243. 62 4189 04212 40793 46 PLAN CK/7.542 GOLDEN AVE 4189 05/04/92 BUILDING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $243.62 05/14/92 47 4A *** VENDOR TOTAL***********4************4******************************************* $243.62 49 . 50 - . ' .. .. 51 R CA LANDSCAPF MATNTFNANCF, INC • 00599. 001-400-3101-4P01 00111 ' $3,800 00' 99A14 00044 40794 52 MEDIAN MAINT/APRIL 92 99634 05/13/92 MEDIANS /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *0.00 05/14/92 53 yl 55 a V r 1 ;;.a % ✓ 3 jg Sp+ a` Q .' �t 73 74 75 7g ,s 1.5:,4ii--ii Y .1•- • } • • • • • • e • • a • • a S 0 • • • • FINANCE-5FA340 TIME 16:13:26 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 05/14/92 PAGE 0005 • DATE 05/18/92 1121 PAY VENDOR NAME '" VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER. TRN It � AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # H DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP ,�Q 2 3 4 4 16 !- - *** VENDOR TOTAL*******ir*srirtr****ar*iritirere ***arttirar+f********sririraritaaritararirir********iritar**a *** $3, BOO. 00 5 6 8 7I R MATTHEW*CAHN 02626 001-400-2101-4312 01940 $64.00 04544 40795 9 10 12 l'' MEALS/P. O. S. T. CLASS 05/04/92 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE . POST $0. 00 05/14/72 :11 :;L-..4—** VENDOR TOTAL **************trust*********•x************tr+,rtrtr********x********+xir+,rtr**** $64. 00 0 f4 5 16 I;3.• 15 R CINTAS CORPORATION.. 00153 001-400-4202-4187 00200 $492.60 99634 00002 40796 0 19 20 15 i ' i 1'B UNIFORM RENTAL/APRIL 92 99634 04/30/92 PUB WKS ADMIN /UNIFORM ALLOWANCE $0.00 05/14/92 R CINTAS CORPORATION 00153 110-400-3302-4187 00338 $42.00 99634 00002 40796 2' 23 23 24 [12 27 21 UNIFORM RENTAL/APRIL 92 99634 04/30/92 PARKING ENF /UNIFORM ALLOWANCE $0.00 05/14/92 _ *** VENDOR TOTAL **************************.r***************************************** $534. 60 " 26 27 28 29 30 32 22 233 J4 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-1121-4304 00514 $8.35 100036040 00417 40797 25 26 2J LONG DISTANCE—APRIL 92 36040 04/30/92 CITY CLERK /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 R - COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-1141-4304 00529 >$10.80 100036040 00417 40797 33 34 35 36 28 e9 3D LONG DISTANCE—APRIL 92 36040 04/30/92 CITY TREASURER /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-1201-4304 00568 $10.42 100036040 00417 40797 37 36 39 40 31 32 33 LONG DISTANCE—APRIL 92 36040 04/30/92 CITY MANAGER /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-1202-4304 00585 $24.50 100036040 00417 40797 41 42 43 44 i4 LONG DISTANCE—APRIL 92 36040 04/30/92 FINANCE ADMIN /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 35 36 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-1203-4304 00590 $17,38 100036040 00417 40797 45 46 47 48 i7 I LONG DISTANCE—APRIL 92 36040 04/30/92 PERSONNEL /TELEPHONE, $0.00 05/14/92 48 39, R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-1206-4304 00487 $28.89 100036040 00417 40797 49 50 51 52 40 LONG DISTANCE—APRIL 92 36040 04/30/92 DATA PROCESSING /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 ql 42 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-1207-4304 00393 $0.92 100036040 00417 40797 53 54 55 56 43 LONG DISTANCE—APRIL 92 36040 04/30/92 BUS LICENSE_ /TELEPHONE $0.00 03/14/92 44: 45 R COM SYSTEMS, INC' 00017 001-400-2101-4304 01025 .. $330:12 100036040 00417 40797 57 58 59 60 45 LONG DISTANCE—APRIL 92 36040 04/30/92 POLICE /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 i47 4e R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-4101-4304 00588 $9.60 100036040 00417 40797 61 62 63 64 49 LONG DISTANCE—APRIL 92 36040 04/30/92 PLANNING /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 50 51 1, - E5 66 67 68 52 . 53 54 69 70 I 71 72 55 56 • a • 'I R.. ` �r' .-. . . e 7 ' .. l 73 T4 l5 75,l• 0 0 0 • 0 • • • • 0 • ly L7 • L. 5• • • • • 1r! • • A • FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 16:13:26 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 05/14/92' PAGE 0006 • DATE 05/18/92 IN • 21 PAY VENDOR NAME # ACCOUNT NUMBER. TRN # .i AMOUNT.; INV/REF PO # CHK # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROD # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMgUNT UNENC DATE EXP 5 a I 7 6 R COM SYSTEMS. INC 00017 001 -400 -420?_ -4304 00619 $27.94 • 100036040 00417 40797 01 7� LONG DISTANCE—APRIL 92 36040 04/30/92 PUB WKS ADMIN /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 � 11 9 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 ' 001-400-4601-4304 00681 $30.03 100436.40_00417 49737 12 LONG DISTANCE—APRIL 92 36040 04/30/92 COMM RESOURCES /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 13 12 R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 001-400-6101-4304 00415 $6.72 100036040 00417 40797 16 3r LONG DISTANCE—APRIL 92. 36040 04/30/92 PARKS. /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 :4I 19 s R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 109-400-2601-4304 00?04 $15 05 10003_,04.2_ Q0417 44797 20 t- LONG DISTANCE—APRIL 92 36040 04/30/92 STREET LIGHTING /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 u 17 23 10' R COM SYSTEMS, INC 00017 110-400-3302-4304 00590 $46.76 1000360400417 40797 24 19; LONG DISTANCE—APRIL 92 :36040 .04/30/92 PARKING ENF /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 z6 ,OI 27 .', *** VENDOR TOTAL '>.****************************4*****************************stir**7**** $567. 48 28 22 29 30 23 ' 31 24 R DANIEL FREEMAN LAX MED. CLINIC 02390 001-400-1243-43 0 00418 $990.00: 004971-00 0 633 40798 3z 25 EMPLOYEE PHYSICALS/APR92 71-00 04/30/92 PERSONNEL /PRE—EMPLOYMENT EXAMS $0.00 05/14/92 33 34 2C ' e 35 27 *** VENDOR TOTAL *************************stat***************************************** $990.00 36 28 37 3a 9 39 30 R ' DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL CARE & 00154 001-400-2401-4291 00186 $266.13 00014 40799 40 J1 SHELTER COSTS/APRIL 92 05/10/92 ANIMAL CONTROL /CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT $0.00 09/14/92 3z 43 33 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** • X66.10 44 34 45 35 ' 46 47 35 R DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 00267 001-400-3104-4251 00097 $611.32 121551 04860 40800 4° ( 37 HWY MAINT/MARCH 92 21551, i 04/27/92 TRAFFIC SAFETY /CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT $0.00 05/14/92 So , 9 '. R DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION _. 00267 105-400-2601-4251 0016 _ - " 5 •4540 40800 52 40 HWY MAINT/MARCH 92 21551 04/27/92 STREET LIGHTING /CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT $0.00 05/14/92 53 54 41 55 42 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $1,222.64 ss 43 57 . 58 44 45 R DIG 'AL_EQUIE[-1ENT CORPORATION 0026/___L_001=44.0=21.01=4201 01022 $724 80 254033592 001206._____405101 60 46 COMPUTER MAINT/MAY 92 33592 05/04/92 POLICE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 62 47 63 4p R DIGITAI EOUIEMENT CORPORATION QQ2¢.5 001-400-220=4201 00302 $483.20 254033592 00006 40801 6a 49 COMPUTER MAINT/MAY 92 33592 - 05/04/92 FIRE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 66 so .. • 67 51 .. .. 69 52 69 53 70 7 71 54 72 56 i. 7q • • ` , .. ,. •' I .. . 75 7 • S • • • • • • • • • • Q j 1.2 2.2 2 �Z • 7 4110 3 3 al 3 4 • a 4 • • • • • FINANCE—SFA340 TIM: 16:13:26 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST PAGE 0007 • 45 4 4 5, 5 54 55 56 57 • 4 s 9 o • • 7 9 • 0 3 • 4 5 • 6 • z 3 • 7 •19 • 5 • 8 9 • 2 3 5 • • • • • • • . "" .. .. `• '- 17,116 PAY VENDOR NAME '' VND #,• ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # , , AMOUNT •INV/REF PO # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC VJ/1C3/7C CHK # DATE EXP 6 *** VENDOR TOTAL**•a********•*******************•*******k****************************** $1,208.00 R DIVERSIFIED PHOTO SUPPLY ' 04394 001-400-2101-4305 01772 $72.42 065922 00422 4Q802 MISC. CHARGES/APRIL 92 65922 04/23/92 POLICE /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES R DIVERSIFIED PHOTO SUPPLY 04394 001-400-4101-4305 00620 $140.81 065790 $0.00 00422 05/14/92 40902 ' MISC. CHARGES/APRIL 92 65790 ' 04/23/92 PLANNING /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES R DIVERSIFIED PHOTO SUPPLY 04394 001-400-4202-4305 00698 $89.61 065790 $0.00 00422 05/14/92 40802 7 MISC. CHARGES/APRIL 92 65790 04/23/92 PUB WKS ADMIN /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES *** VENDXR TOTAL************************************•n***•p•*************************** $302.84 R EASY READER 00181 001-400-1121-4323 00193 $941.85 ' $0.00 00426 05/14/92 40803 a t•1ISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992 04/30/92 CITY CLERK /PUBLIC NOTICING k** vrNDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $941.85 R EFRfM MOBIL 01400 001-400-2101-4310 00355 $217.82 11691005 $0.00 00428 05/14/92 40604 MISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992 91005 05/14/92 POLICE /MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES R EFRAM MOBIL 01400 001-400-4202-4310 00100 $10.85 11691005 $0.00 00428 05/14/92 40804 MISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992 91005 '05/14/92 PUB WKS ADMIN /MOTOR FUELS AND, LUBES *** VENDOR TOTAL****************************************x•****:i;:.n.********sr**•x**•u***** ' $228.67- 228.67"5 $0.00 05/14/92 5 REXECUTIVE—SUITE SERVICES INC. 01294 001-400-4204-4201 00522 $1,460.00 00039' 40805 3 JANITORIAL SERV/APRIL 92 05/05/92 , BLDG MAINT /CONTRACT SERVICE_/PRIVAT .. *** VENDOR TOTAL**************************************************a•*********•a•******* ' $1,460.00 $0.00 05/1'4/92 R FAIR—PLAY SCOREBOARDS 04649 001-400-6101-4309 01244 $84.70 147554 04847 5 408_.06 CLARK SCOREBOARD REPAIR 47554 03/30/92 PARKS /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *** VENDOR TOTAL•u******•r*****ir******************•n*******************•****************' .. - $84.70 $0.00 05/14/92 5 5 6 ' - R STEVE*FILLMAN 03169 001-400-4601-4201 01370 $539.00 04936 6 6 40807 6 • COED V—BALL TOURNEY 05/11/92 • 460004 COMM RESOURCES /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 6 6 6 6 6• 71 7 t • 7 71 45 4 4 5, 5 54 55 56 57 • 4 s 9 o • • 7 9 • 0 3 • 4 5 • 6 • z 3 • 7 •19 • 5 • 8 9 • 2 3 5 • • • • • • • FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 16:13:26 J' I Y:' 10 Iz �2 2 •` 3 3 • 3. 3 • 3i • 3 3 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST • • PAGE 0008 • ° ° PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT PO # UNENC CHK M DATE EXP ` *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $539.00 ' ` < . R GERBER AMBULANCE SERVICE• ' 02897 001-400-2101-4201 01019 $305.00 23376 04179 40$48 PRISONER EMERG SERVICES 23376 04/23/92 POLICE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 2 *** VENDOR TOTAL *********** ***********iritic*crit**********stir**************sr*********crit* $305. 00 3 4 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-1101-4304 00461 $8,39 00401 40810 DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 05/12/92 CITY COUNCIL /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 ' 5 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-1121-4304 00515 $22.76 00431 40810 4' DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 .05/12/92 CITY CLERK /TELEPHONE • $0.00 05/14/92 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-1131-4204 00373 $11:99 04431 40310 2 3 DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 05/12/92 CITY ATTORNEY /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/9; 4 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-1141-4304 00530 $22.76` 00431 40810 5 DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 -• —a 05/12/92 CITY TREASURER /TELEPHONE' $0,00 05/14/92 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 • 001-400-1201-4304 ' 00569 °'$19.17 00431 40,10 3 DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 05/12/92 CITY MANAGER /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 . 3 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-1202-4304 00586 $69 49 00431 40810 DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 05/12/92 FINANCE ADMIN /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 ' R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-1 03-4304' '00591 $28.75 40431 40810 DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 05/12/92 PERSONNEL /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 ' R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-120h-4304 00488 $73 67 00432 40610 , I a.. PHONE CHARGES/APRIL 92 , 05/12/92 • DATA PROCESSING /TELEPHONE. 1F' DATA ., $0.00 05/14/92 ; R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED - 00015 001-400-1206-43Q4 '004$9 $34.74 00431 40810 DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 05/12/92 DATA PROCESSING /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 5 5 5 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-1207-4304 00394 $22.76 00431 40810 DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 . .05/12/92 BUS LICENSE =-/TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 5 '001-400-1208-4304 s GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED }'00015 00216, $11.98 00431 40810 6 DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 05/12/92 GEN APPROP /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 6 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-2101-4304 01Q26 $241.99 00432 40810 6 PHONE CHARGES/APRIL 92 05/12/92 POLICE /TELEPHONE .-. ., $0.00 05/14/92 • S 39 A 4t 42 •'m 45 • , • • st 53 54 55 51 s 6 6 9 0 2 • ° • 4 5 ;• a 2 2 3 5 16 i 9 • • • S • Z S S • • • w FINANCE—SFA340 TIt'1E 16: 13: 26 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 05/14/92 • PAGE 0009 • DATE 05/18/92 12 PAY VENDOR NAME2 VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # 3 DESCRIPTION ' DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP • �17I 3 4 5 . • J_..e��•,�• R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-2101-4304 01027 $449.28 00431 40810 5 6 7 8 1 DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 05/12/92 POLICE , /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 91 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015- 001-400-2201-4304 00438 $188.63 00432 40510 9 12 i3 14 15 16 " 12 PHONE CHARGEES/APRIL 92 05/12/92 FIRE /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED • 00015 001-400-2201-4304 00439 $11.99 00431 40810 1,3: DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 05/12/92 FIRE /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 1141 15 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-2401—•4304 00455 $16.77 00431 40810 t7 8 19 20 "'i DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 05/12/92 ANIMAL CONTROL /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 if 1e R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-4101-4304 00589 $57.51 00431 40810 21 22 23 24 "'i DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 , 05/12/92 PLANNING /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 ''I R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED • 00015. 001-400-4201-4304 00529 $92.25 00431 40810 bIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 05/12/92 BUILDING /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 23 ♦ 24 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-4202-4304 00620 $36.74 00432 40810 25 26 27 28 2`3 30 31 32 25 PHONE CHARGES/APRIL 92 z 05/12/92 PUB WKS ADMIN /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 25 o 27 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-4202-4304 00621 3127.00 00431 40810 33 34 35 36 28 DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 05/12/92 PUB WKS ADMIN /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 29 . 30 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-4601-4304 00682 $34.74 00431 40810 3' 38 39 40 131 DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 05/12/92 COMM RESOURCES /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 32 R GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 001-400-6101-4304 00416 ' $11.99 00431 40810 4' 42 43 44 DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 05/12/92 PARKS /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/922 30 36 GTE CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATED 00015 110-400-3302-4304 00591 $143.77 00431 40810 45 4C 47 48 37 DIRECT DIAL /APRIL 92 • 05/12/92 PARKING ENF • /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 38 ' 39 *** VENDOR TOTAL**************************************at********tit***********:r******* � ` $1.739.12 49 50 52 40 42 GTEL. 01340 001-400-1101-4304 00462 33.44 Z3400000049 00067 40812 53 54 1 55 56 43 GTEL SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 CITY COUNCIL /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 45 .. R GTEL - 01340, 001-400-1121-4304 00513 • $9.35 Z3400000049 00067 40812 57 59 60 45 GTEL SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 CITY CLERK /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 47 40 R GTEL 01340 001-400-1131-4304 00372 $4.92 Z3400000049 00067 40812 61 62 1 63 64 49 GTEL SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049, 05/04/92 CITY ATTORNEY /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 7 . 51 65 66 52 53 69 70 71 72 55 I . .. 56 - . 73 . 77: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • FINANCE—SFA340 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST 11. PAGE 0010 0 DATE 05/18/92 1 LMt lb: 13: cb �.. .., .. , 1 2/ PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ' ACCOUNT NUMBER , TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK N 1 DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 1 •70 3 4 DESCRIPTION 4I 5 6 R GTEL 01340 001-400-1141-4304 00528 $9.35 Z3400000049 00067 40812 5 6 7 ' • 7 GTEL SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 0 .,05/04/92 ` CITY TREASURER, /TELEPHONE $0.06 05/14/92 8 - . 00567 $7.87 Z3400000049 00047_____40812 10 II 12 9 R GTEL 01340 001-400-1201-4304 1., GTEL SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 CITY MANAGER /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 01340 001-400-1202-4304 00583 $326.09 CH36767 03387 40812 :3 m 16 12 R GTEL 13 PHONE ADDITION/FINANCE 36767 05/01/92 FINANCE ADMIN /TELEPHONE 80.00 05/14/92 14 ;y! 001-400-1202-4304 00584 $28.54 Z34DQ090.449 00067 40512 17 I 198 20 15 R GTEL 01340 16 GTEL SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 FINANCE ADMIN /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 1,7 10 R GTEL 01340 001-400-1203-4304 00589 $11.81 Z3400000049 00067 40812 2z 23 24 2G 27 28 " 31 32 35 36 27 39 40 10GTEL Z1; ` 2, SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 PERSONNEL /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 3, R : GTEL 01340 001-400-1206-4304 00486 $14.27 Z3400000049 00067 40812 22 i 23 24 GTEL_ SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 DATA PROCESSING /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 R GTEL01340 001-400-1207-4304 00392 $9.36 Z3400000049 00067 40812 25 26 27 TEL SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 BUS LICENSE, /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 .. < R GTEL 01340 001-400=1208-4304 00215 ' 84.92 Z3400000049 00067 40812 29 29 GTEL_ SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 GEN APPROP ' /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 01340 001-400-2101-4304 01024 8184.50 Z340. 000049 00067 40012 3o 31 32 33 R GTEL GTEL SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 POLICE. /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 ., :. .:. - .. R GTEL.00437 84.92 Z3400000049 00467 40012__44 43 ta 47 46 51 sz 55 56 w u 63 6'1 ca 67 68 34 35„,,----{{{{ 36 GTEL_ SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 FIRE /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 7( GTEL 01340 001-400-2401-4304 00454 $6.89 Z3400000049 00067 40812 37 38 39 f GTEL SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049, 05/04/92 , ANIMAL CONTROL /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 r .. 5 ... R GTEL - 01340 001-40Q-4101-4104.... 00587 $23.`61 - Z3400000049 00067 4081253 42 41 42 GTEL SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 PLANNING /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 01340 001-400-420174304 Q0528 8378 Z3400000049 00067 40812 A3 A459 45 R GTE4 GTEL SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 BUILDING /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 R GTEL 01140 001-4Q6=4,3024304 0061R $92 15 Z3400000049 00067 40RIP 46 1 47 GTEL SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 PUB WKS ADMIN /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 R G E 01340 001-400=4601-4304 00650 814 27 Z3400000049 00067 40812 43 ' 50< 51 GTEL SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 COMM RESOURCES /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 r 52 >3 5.173 69 71 12 55 /5675 67 _ - .. . ” ' 0 ' 74 7J • 4111 4 S S • S a S • • 0 FINANCE-•SFA340 TIME 16:13:26 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST • FOR 05/14/92 e PAGE 0011 • DATE 05/18/92 z PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHR # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 2 3 4 IS R GTEL 01340 001-400-6101-4304 00414 $4.92 Z3400000049 00067 40812 5 7 8 GTEL'SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 ' PARKS /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 I: 6 [6 R GTEL ,'01340 110-400-3302-4304 00589 ' $59.04 Z3400000049 00067 40912 9 ro 12 [12 GTEL SYSTEM MAINT MAY 92 00049 05/04/92 PARKING ENF /TELEPHONE $0.00 05/14/92 *•** VENDOR TOTAL ***•***•nor**••Asa•********************************` *******•***•************* $818. 09 ,3 1 4 15 ,6 •3i 4 15 R HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO.. . 00731'7 001-400-3103-4311 00759 *985.94 4014 04829 40813 ,7 16 9 20 '6 '17 ,8 STREET SWEEPER PARTS 4014 04/23/92 ST MAINTENANCE /AUTO MAINTENANCE $985.94 05/14/92 •»#* VENDOR TOTAL#******#***#*#****##*•n#****n#*•n*#*#*•n****#*•n*****#*•n********•n**#•n#•n* 4985.94 21 2z 24 24 191 20 21 R HERMOSA CAR. WASH -� 00065 001-400-2101-4311 01420 ,. $173.00 0621 00436 40814 25 26 27 28 22 MISC. CHARGES/ APRIL 92 0621 05/01/92 POLICE /AUTO MAINTENANCE $0.00 05/14/92 23 ' 24 R HERMOSA CAR WASH 00065 001-400-4201-4311 00290 $8.00 0621 00436 40814 29 30 31 32 22 MISC. CHARGES/ APRIL 92 0621, 05/01/92 BUILDING /AUTO MAINTENANCE $0.00 05/14/92 _5 27 R HERMOSA CAR WASH " 00065 001-400=4202-4311 00216 "$4.00 0621 00436 40814 33 34 35 36 `28 MISC. CHARGES/ APRIL 92 0621 05/01/92 PUB WKS ADMIN /AUTO MAINTENANCE $0.00 05/14/92 29 35 R HERMOSA CAR WASH 00065 105-400-2601-4311 00258 $5.00 0621 00436 40814 37 38 39 40 3' MISC. CHARGES/ APRIL 92 0621.• 05/01/92 STREET LIGHTING /AUTO MAINTENANCE $0.00 05/14/92 32 - 33 R HERMOSA CAR WASH ‘ 00065 170-400-2103-4311 00042 $20.00 0621 00436 40814 41 4342 44 34 MISC. CHARGES/ APRIL 92 0621 05/01/92 SPEC INVESTGTNS /AUTO MAINTENANCE $0.00 05/14/92 35 36 *** VENDOR TOTAL###*##n#znritr###n*xtrp***#»n#*# $210.00 45 46 47 48 31 • 33 R HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS & ASSOC. 03131 001-400-1202-4201 00317 - #978.65 1012 00054 40815 49 51 52 40 SALES TAX SERV/JAN—MAR92 1012 05/04/92 FINANCE ADMIN /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 41 42 *** VENDOR TOTAL *********•n ***•*****•*****•*•**********•********************************* ?978.65 53 54 ss 56 43 - 44 . - - .. .. 45 R IMA CONCERTS • '- • 03986 " 001-210-0000-2110 04847 ?1° $500.00 '27709 04447 40816 5] 58 59 so 4`° DAMAGE DEPOSIT REFUND 27709 05/07/92 /DEPOSITS/WORK. GUARANTEE $0.00 05/14/92 4 40 *** VENDOR TOTAL *************ars*********************************►atatara►**a•at•n•»u•�t+r•nit4*4* $500. 00 61 62 64 4.1 V..5 ' 51 R INTERNATIONAL_ ASSOCIATION OF 00567 001-400-2101-4315 00216 $100.00 418355 04178 40817 05 66 67 ' 68 52 ANNUAL DUES/WISNIEWSKI 18355 04/22/92 POLICE /MEMBERSHIP $0.00 05/14/92 53 54 , 69 7t70 , 72 +'+ .. i _ 56 Q 13 774 5 L 79 • • • • • • • • • • • • • e FINANCE-SFA340 TIME_ 16:13:26 CITY DF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 05/14/92 PAGE 0012 DATE 05/18/92 •' 5 PAY VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN 0 AMOUNT INV/REF PO 0 CHK 0 DATE INVC PROJ * ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 2 3 4 5 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $100.''00 O 14 15 15 A., 17 �7 19 t 3, O Z0, 21t 22 0 23 24 25 025 27 28 6 6 9 R INTERNATIONAL BILINGUAL SCHOOL 04471 001-210-0000-2110 04849 $504-40 34713 04446 44818 DAMAGE DEPOSIT REFUND 34715 05/07/92 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE $0.00 05/14/92 10 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** *500.00 R RIC*JENNINGS SPRING V -BALL TOURNEY 04251 001-400-4601-4201 01368 $784.40 05/05/92 460004 COMM RESOURCES /CONTRACT SERVICE_/PRIVAT *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** *784.00 R JOHN*KEARIN 'MILES/P. O.S. T. CLASS *** VENDOR TOTAL • 9 30 31 • 3Z 33 34 • 35 36 37 • 36 39 40 * ** 04233-_44819 9 20 23 • 24 25 26 27 • 28 29 30 31 33 32 34 - *0. 00 05/14/92 01032 001-400-2103-4312_" 01935 *66.12 05/05/92 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST **************************************************************** **** COMMANDER MICHAEL*LAVIN MILES/P. 0. S. T. CLASS i68.12 04545 44620 $0.00 05/14/92 00722 001-400-2101-4312 0193_ *32.24 04546 40621 05/05/92 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST *0.00 05/14/92 R COMMANDER MICHAEL*LAVIN 00792 001-400-2 01-4316 00897 $318 OQ 04161 44621 REIMB TUITION/FALL 92 , 05/06/92. POLICE /TRAINING *0.00 05/14/92 ******************************************************************** VENDOR TOTAL 0 41 42 43 LIEBERT, CASSIDY & FRIE_RSON .LEGAL SERV/MARCH 92 !F,'{00. 24 02175 001-400-1203-4201 00918 *568.75 04625 40822 ` 03/31/92 PERSONNEL /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL***********************.********************************************* "45 46 • 47 49 49 x,568. 75 R DIANNE*LOUGHIN 03628 001-400-2101-4316 00899 *83.79 04186 40823 REIMB BOOKS/SUMMER 92 `05/11/92 POLICE /TRAINING . *0.00 05/14/92 •*** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $83.79 115° 51 52 54 55 56 MANHATTAN CAR WASH MISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992 01146 001-400-2101-4311 01419 $5B _35 00445 40824 05/05/92 POLICE /AUTO MAINTENANCE *0.00 05/14/92 5 7 39 40 41 42 •43 45 47 47 • 49 50 •51 52 55 e 59 56 57 • 59 59 60 61 623 63 64 65 66 67 W 68 69 70 ,71 72 73 7479 e 71 t • FINANCE-SFA340 TIME 16:13:26 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 05/14/92 • PAGE 0013 • DATE 05/18/92 1.1 I2; PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # 31 DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 2 3 4 4 6 6 R MANHATTAN CAR WASH 01146 001-400-4101-4311 00157 $4.80 00445 40824 5 6 a 7 MISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992• • 05/05/92 .PLANNING /AUTO MAINTENANCE • $0.00 05/14/92 a 9 *** VENDOR TOTAL***•r.**************•*****•*•**********•****•>*************m**************** $63. 15 l0 12 111 " R NARYMOUNT COLLEGE 04652 001-400--2101-4316 00898 $488.00 04180 13 14 5 16 40825 i3 TUITION/D. LOUGHIN ; 05/05/92 POLICE /TRAINING $0.00 05/14/92 1 15 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $488.00 17 e 20 Is I 17 'e R HICKEY'S LIQUOR 7y, DELI 04648 001-400-2101-4309 00506 $448.69 04185 40626 21 22 23 24 19 PD/FIRE MEALS/RIOTS 05/11/92 POLICE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 05/14/92 21 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** 4448.69 25 26 27 2a 1 :3 \ 24 R NATIONAL REC & PARK ASSOC. 00880 001-400-4601-4315 00103 $210.00 04937 40827 29 30 31 32 12s ANNUAL DUES/M. ROONEY 05/11/92 COMM RESOURCES /MEMBERSHIP, $0.00 05/14/92 127 **x VENDOR TOTAL ****t*****•r*****•r*****************•s***********it***************x•**** '. $210.00 33 34 35 I.5 .2y 30 R PAGENET 02487 001-400-1201-4201 00135 $16.50 20314234 00049 40828 37 39 39 40 131 PAGING SERVICE/MAY 92 14234.. , 05/01/92 CITY MANAGER /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 32 e R PAGENET 02487 001-400-2101-4201 01021 $11.00 20514234 00049 40828 41 4z i 43 44 1133 S4 PAGING SERVICE/MAY 92 14234 05/01/92 POLICE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 35 3' R 1 PAGENET 02487 001-400-2101-4307 00321 $199.00 20514234 00049 40828 45 46 47 4a PAGING SERVICE/MAY 92 .14234 05/01/92 POLICE /RADIO MAINTENANCE $0.00 05/14/92 39 3'' R PAGENET 02487 001-400-2401-4201 00339 - $11.00 20514234 00049 40628 49 W 51 s2 40 PAGING SERVICE_/MAY 92 14234 05/01/92 ANIMAL CONTROL /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 41 42 R PAGENET 02487 001-400-4202-4201 00373 $110.00 20514234 00049 40828 53 54 55 56 43 PAGING SERVICE/MAY 92 14234 • 05/01/92 PUB WKS ADMIN /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 '" 45 R PAGENET - 02487 001-400-4601-4201 01372 $22.00 20514234 00049 40828 51 5a 59 60 A5 PAGING SERVICE/MAY 92 14234 05/01/92 COMM RESOURCES /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 47 • 49 *** VENDOR TOTAL************************•*************************************** **** $369.50 61 62 63 64 43 50 D 51 R PALM SPRINGS MARQUIS HOTEL ._ 03399' 001-400-2101-4312 01937 $125.40 04543 40629 65 66 67 6a 52 LODGING/S. WISNIEWSKI 05/04/92 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE . POST $0.00 05/14/92 53 54 69 70 71 72 55 i. i 56 .. 73 74 75 7,5? • • • • • • • • • • FINANCE—SFA340 TIME_ 16: 13:26 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 05/14/92' PAGE 0014 r ATF_ 05/18 (I11 X12 3 PAY VENDOR NAME VND # ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # - AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP 3 4 4 5 *** VENDOR TOTAL*********t►*************************************u******************** $125.40 5 6 7 • 7 R PCSC ' 04523 001-400-4202-4305 00697 $30-00 58892_03677 40830 9 10 1 '2 1, 12 REPAIR BLUEPRINT MACHINE 58892 05/08/92 PUB WKS ADMIN /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $64.95 05/14/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $30.00 3 ,4 15 ,6 3 14 t5 R PHOENIX GROUP 02530 110-400-3302-4201 00342 $2,044.48 5892=00 00063 40531 Il 6 19 20 ,6 I7 1f0 OUT OF STATE CITES/APRIL 93-00 05/07/92 PARKING ENF /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 R PHOENIX GROUP 02530 110-400-3302-4305 00902 $5,624.00 5 642=0Q_0337Q 40531 31 22 z3 24 73 .21 HAND—HELD PARKING CITES 64-00 . 04/23/92 PARKING ENF /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES $0,700.00 05/14/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $7,668.48 2s 26 28 1`_ 23 24 R PRO TECH FORMS MGMT SYS, INC. 04167 001-202-0000-2021 0021 ` •_•• ••_24 40$32 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 39 40 25 DISCOUNT OFFERED 14600 04/13/92 DISCOUNTS OFFERED $0.00 05/14/92 26 Y 27 R PRO TECH FORMS MGMT SYS, INC. ' s 04167 001-202-0000-2022 00207 '$1. 79CR 14600 04624 4083. :e DISCOUNT TAKEN 14600 04/13/92 /DISCOUNTS TAKEN $0.00 05/14/92 29 30 R PRO TECH FORMS MGMT SYS, INC. 04167 705-400-1217-4201 00144 $195.B3 1_4690 04624 40P,t32 J1 PRINT WORK COMP CHECKS 14600 04/13/92 WORKERS COMP° :-/CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 32 < , 33 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** ' $195.83 42 43 44 34 35 36 RI PUB EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYS. 00026 001-400-1213-4180 00589 $1,125.20 04722 40833 45 46 47 4• Sc s1 52 37 SERV CREDIT/BRUTSCH 05/13/92 RETIREMENT /RETIREMENT ' $0.00 05/14/92 38 39 *** VENDOR TOTAL***********************************************************+r********- $1,125.20 40 41 4CITY OF*REDONDO BEACH 01763 145-300-0000-3654 00067 $2, 531.15CR 01980 40834 F- 53 ss 4FAREBOX RECOVERY/JAN—MAR 05/07/92 /FARES, DIAL A RIDE $0.00 05/14/92 44 45 R CITY OF*REDONDO BEACH 01763 145-400=3401-4201 00209 $37,561.06 01280 4Q 59 60 bz 63 64 65 66 67 6p : 71 i 72 46 WAVE SERV/JAN—MAR 92 05/07/92 SHUTTLE/DIAL /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 47 4p *** VENDOR TOTAL-, **>t********************ai.******************************************** $35,029.91 49 50 51 R SYLVIA*ROOT — Q4061_____001=400-4102=4201 00355 $264_75 42t 01977 40835 52 SEC SERV/4-21-92 421 04/28/92 PLANNING COMM /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 53 54 55 56 .. < 7 73 74 C C C C C C co • • • • • • Q5 • • S S S I) • • • • • 1 • S FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 16:13:26 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 05/14/92 e PAGE 0015 0 DATE 05/18/92 I'I PAY VENDOR NAME VND It ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN 4f AMOUNT INV/REF PO If CHK f 31'DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP ' • •22 • 2 3 4 a 5 e R SYLVIA*ROOT 04061 x'001-400-4102-4201 00356 *164.25 421 01979 40835 5 6 7 e ] IIB 9 r SEC SERV/MAY 5, 1992 421 05/11/92 , PLANNING COMM '/CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 x** VENDOR TOTAL********************************'*****************************x****** ' 3429.00 9 10 z 13 14 '5 16 12 R LAURA*ROZZI 04623 001-400-4601-4201 01369 $37.80 04934 40836 I 1^I 15I SPRING CLASS INSTRUCTOR 1 05/05/92 460001 COMM RESOURCES /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 �. #** VE'JDOR TOTA!_ i**+a'ta*x*i*s**:*ir*a*i*i*i*i*e*i*a*t*s*t*i*t****i*•t*** xuus*s***t*:**iti*i*+ri*a*s*t*s*t*i►s*•s*e*i**s*i*j*i*e*i*s**',. _ $37.80 '] B 19 20 :5 I] 'e DERTHA*SALAZAR 04653 001-210-0000-2110 04848 $100.00 35461 04444 40837 21 23 24 9 DAMAGE DEPOSIT REFUND 35461 - 05/05/92 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE $0.00 05/14/92 I 227 21' *** VENDOR TOTAL * ** ********9** ********a*********** ** *gra*yrs**** *t*a*s**** *3*s*** *s*+*n'tuir*** ** ** $100. 00 25 26 28 22' 23 24 R SAMBA NUTRITION 04055 001-210-0000-2110 04850 $500.00 36527 04443 40838 29 30 31 32 I25 DAMAGE DEPOSIT REFUND 36527' 05/05/92 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE $0.00 05/14/92 27 *46* VENDOR TOTAL *a********a********* ****era*eta*i*i*****t*i*4*i***i***i** ****** ******** *********** $500. 00 33 35 36 2e . 23 i0 MENELAUS*SARIDAKIS 04651 001-210-0000-2110 04851 31,600.00 16637 04448 40839 3] 38 39 40 31 WORK GUARANTEE REFUND 16637 05/07/92 /DEPOSITS/WORK GUARANTEE $0.00 05/14/92 +2 33 *s** VENDOR TOTAL a**** *** *** *3*a* *** **** ** *** **it** ** ** *** *a** * ** *'*** *na*usrir*** ** **** ** ** * $1,600.00 41 42 43 44 34 35 36 RI DAVE*SHAW CONCRETE & BLOCK 01581 110-300-0000-3302 45431 $38.00 1702387/404391 04720 40540 45 46 4] 4e 3' CITATION PAYMENT REFUND 04391 • 05/05/92 /COURT FINES/PARKING $380.00 05/14/92 39 *** VENDOR TOTAL i*i*e*s*i*i** *i*i** *i*a*** *i*i*a*i*e*t*iota*i*4e*i*a** ** *i*i** *i*a*i*aa** *i*i*i*i*i*i** *iF4iF** ** *1** *1*#1* $38. 00 49 50 51 52 40 41 R SINCLAIR PAINT CO. 01399 001-400-4204-4309 02335 $60.41 0317 00461 40841 53 54 55 56 44 MISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992 0319 ' 05/14/92 BLDG MAINT /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 05/14/92 44, 45 R SINCLAIR PAINT CO. 01399 001-400-6101-4309 01245 $16.67 0245 00461 40841 5] 59 59 60 ^6 MISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992 0245 05/14/92 PARKS /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $0.00 05/14/92 47 * 4B *** VENDOR TOTAL ,*a*a*;*s*i**** **a*e**a*a*a*;*a**a*a** **** ***************•n******stat**** *a************* $77. 08 61 62 63 64 •19 50 ... - - 51 R SMART & FINAL IRIS COMPANY 00114 001-400-2101-4306 01171 • $91.06 • 147273 00462 40842 65 66 1 67 66 69 ]0 4 ]1 72 MISC. CHARGES/APRIL 92 7273 04/22/92 POLICE /PRISONER MAINTENANCE $0.00 05/14/92 54 53 " ss .. is I /3 , fy • • • • • S • • i • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 O e e e e e FINANCE—SFA340 TIME_ 16:13:26 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 05/14/92 PAGE 0016 40 DA I I: 05/10/?? 2. 2 PAY VENDOR NAME VND it ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN * AMOUNT • .INV/REF PO 1$ CNH N i'l• 3 DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROJ # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE Exp_._I i 0 �9 • 147 . 4 5 6 *** VENDOR TOTAL **********i►3►i►*•nst`u`u*•Ira►ir*****a`***u*tltl*•uir**irir*,r****iter***s►ita•Ir*ir*:lirirui *** $91.06 '1 I 41, 9 SHARPSHOOTER, INC. ' 02250 001-400-2101-4201 01020 $694, 55 0135390468 4.0843 1J1r R SO. CAL MISC. CHARGES/APRIL 92 13539 04/25/92 POLICE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 '4' 11 n , 12 *** VENDOR TOTAL ************************************`uar******************ar*********** $694.65 ,6 136 14' 1, I 19 00107 705-400-1217-4182 00232 $143 50 8867305/13 04629 144844 20 15 16 :7 IP R SOUTH BAY HOSPITAL TB EXPOSURE TESTING 05/13 04/01/92 WORKERS COMP /WORKERS COMP CURRENT YR $0.00 05/14/92 21 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $143.50 u1 23 24 19 29 21 _ R SOUTH BAY MUNICIPAL COURT 00400 110-300-0000-3302 45432 $170.00 03.192 40345 25 26 27 26 22 J 24 CITATION COURT BAIL 05/07/92 /COURT FINES/PARKING $0.00 05/14/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $170.00 ` 29 30 31 32 27 R SOUTH BAY NOTICING AND 03882 001-400-4101-4201 ' 00148 $230.00 9'HER05A 00564 40846 33 34 35 35 2eMISC.05/07/92 CHARGES/MAY 1992 ER05A PLANNING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 05/14/92 $230.00 3, 3e 39 40 30 31 34 33 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** ... R SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO.w 00159 001-400-3101-4303 00206 $9 61 00466 40847 41 42 43 44 34 i 35 36 MISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992 05/07/92 MEDIANS /UTILITIES $0.00 05/14/92 p SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. 00159 '001-400-3104-4303 00114 $149^63 __ 00466_ 40847 47 46 37 36 9 I MISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992 05/07/92 TRAFFIC SAFETY /UTILITIES• $0.00 05/14/92 •so ., R SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO 00159 001 -40Q -4204-43Q3 . 00562 •- '' $1,469.46 0066 40847 51 52 40 41 42 MISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992 05/07/92 BLDG MAINT /UTILITIES $0.00 05/14/92 R SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. 00159 001-400-6101-4303 00433 $185.93 00466 40847 54 55 56 43 45 MISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992 05/07/92 PARKS - /UTILITIES $0.00 05/14/92 R SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. 00159 105-400-2601-4303 00358 $141.45 00466 40547 60 46 46 MISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992 05/07/92 STREET LIGHTING /UTILITIES $0.00 05/14/92 R SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO.'. 00159 160-400-3102-4303 00195 $54.20 00466 40847 62 53 64 49 50 51 MISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992 05/07/92 SEWER/ST DRAIN /UTILITIES $0.00 05/14/92 ;' _ .. _ .. • 66 67 68 52 53 54 69 70 71 72 73 ST •d ,."f 75 7 .4 S 0 S 4 I 4 t 4 0 yI/ 'FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 16:13:26 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST FOR 05/14/92/ • PAGE 0017 • DATE 05/18/92 I2 ') • O • PAY VENDOR NAME VNO it ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN # AMOUNT INV/REF PO # CHK # DESCRIPTION P'T I OPI DATE INVC PROD # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC DATE EXP N 4 5 5 a +�*# VENDOR TOTAL ****irtr*ar*atatn•n#*�r�r*�r�n*at*�r�»atatar�rau*arar�r**�r�nir�n�rirriririr*araa►ararn�r*arx�ar*eririr**sr*ir *2,010.28 7 1 6 9i '7 R SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. 00442 105-400-2601-4303 00359 411,087.40 9 0 12 13 14 15 16 00012 40848 STREET LIGHTS/APRIL 92 05/01/92 STREET LIGHTING /UTILITIES $0.00 05/14/92 t111 2 +**+* VENDOR TOTAL_ *******3t******3t;s•**�r***** ►********************•x***** ************* ** *11,087.40 :3. 14, R SPARKLETTS DRINKING WATER CORP 00146 001-400-4601-4305 01038 $64.04 1-327-907 00033 40849 17 6 20 16 '] ,e WATER COOLER /APRIL 92 7-907 05/12/92 COMM RESOURCES /OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 40.00 05/14/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL �t*stat:tatat*at�tt�t�x'*itar�t�ret*�t*�t****�taratarat**t�tatetiratthatir*itit�tat:terx'�ratihitatttarater�u�tarat�t*r#�t►it�u* 464.04 2' 22 z4 24 19 C 21 _ . •27 R SPECIALTY MAINTENANCE CO ' 00115.. 001-400-3103-4201 00402 $3,106.00 25 26 26 2809 00027 40850 22 SWEEPING SERV/APRIL 92 2809 04/30/92 ST MAINTENANCE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *0.00 08/14/92 Z3�• 24 R SPECIALTY MAINTENANCE CO 00115 109-400-3301-4201 00119 $3,837.00, 2809 00027 40850 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36F2 37 3389 40 25 1!26 -L0 SWEEPING SERV/APRIL 92 2809 04/30/92 VEH PKG DIST /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *0.00 05/14/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL*********************•**•********************************************* *6,943.00 29 30 R ST. BERNARD HIGH SCHOOL 04019 001-300-0000-3406 00490 490.00 36497 04932 40851 31 32 ,3 THEATRE RENTAL REFUND 36497 05/04/92 ./COMM CTR THEATRE *0.00 05/14/92 ., *** VENDOR 'TOTAL**'�*-it*�tx******#*##****#*#***at*****�t*****�t*pit*********�t*****»*sr**a*** *90.00 91 42 43 44 14 5 35 R TAK'S LAWNMOWER SALES ,' SERV. 00169 001-400-3103-4309 01365 $24.50 2194/2195/2200 00472 40852 45 4487 46 3' 36 39 R MISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992 /2200 05/01/92 ST MAINTENANCE /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *0.00 05/14/92 a .. TAK'S LAWNMOWER SALES & SERV. `0oi69`Y 001-400-6101-4309 01246 ' 426.00 2194/2195/2200 00472 40e52 49 50 51 52 40 41 42 MISC CHARGES/ APRIL 1992 /2200 05/01/92 PARKS /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS *0.00 05/14/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL ******************************************************************** $50.50 53 5545 1 56 44 45 • R J. E.*TALLERICO 04247 001-400-1206-4201 00982' '$191.44 113 04006 40853 57 58 59 60 6i 62 ' 63 64 46 4] 49 COMPUTER SERV/APR 92 113 05/01/92 DATA PROCESSING /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *0.00 05/14/92 *** VENDOR TOTAL ***********************t******************************************** 4191.44 4S s' R U.S. WEST PUBLIC SAFETY.GROUP * , 03767 001-400-2101-4201' 01018 $7,209.88 911234/235 04175 40854 cs 6] ' 69 52 .3 4 MDT INTERFACE INSTALL 4/235 04/29/92 POLICE /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT *0.00 05/14/92 69 70 71 72 55 56 �] ' 73 ]4 )5 ! 79, • . • . . . • • • • • • 0 • • • • • • • V �1 41) iEP 0 • G C • • • FINANCE—SFA340 TIME 16:13:26 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DEMAND LIST i PAGE 410 0018 Y' �, 2 — -- — '— Uf1,G PAY VENDOR NAME VND 0 ACCOUNT NUMBER TRN 0 • AMOUNT INV/REF PO 0 DESCRIPTION DATE INVC PROD # ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION AMOUNT UNENC 03/19/92 CHK 0 DATE EXP 2 4 4 5 • *** VENDOR TOTAL ****s**** ••s•n•n•****•a•ar************** **** r****u•p***•n•.•********►ra•******** $7,209.88 5 6 7 e 7. 8 9 Y .. ,.. - R WARD—THK 02507 705-400-1209-4201 00260 $161304.86 04634 40855 05/14/92 40855 9 f 12 13 ,5 6 10 1T REIMB LIAR/APRIL 1992 04/30/92 LIABILITY INS /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 R WARD—THK 02507 705-400-1209-4324 00268 $2,303.32 04634 11 4 ,5 REIMB LIAB/APRIL 1992 2, 04/30/92 LIABILITY INS ./CLAIMS/SETTLEMENTS $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL *•tt****at**•o-#****• •*****•mat******et*****•x•*•rt****•tt•r*10-****+tx•***it*•p•*•r*****it*at . : *18, 608.18 05/14/92 f' ,9 20 6 `2 13 R WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY 00141 001-400-1131-4201 00716 $143 23 682374..0Q376 40806 05/14/92 4Q$ 2, 22 23 24 25 26 27 25 29 30 31 32 10 , . 2, MISC. CHARGES /MARCH 92 93746 04/02/92 CITY ATTORNEY /CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVAT $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL**********s****s****************•air*******************************sts $143.23 R • WHITLOW EMERGENCY MEDICAL GRP 03457 705-400-1217-4182 00231 4140.00' 325-92209/10 Q462S 22 23 24 = 26 27 TB EXPOSURE TESTING 09/10 04/01/92 WORKERS COMP /WORKERS COMP CURRENT YR $0.00 *** VENDOR TOTAL***************s**********************************************s***** $140. 00 R STEVE*WISNIEWSKI 01364 001-400-2101-4312 01938 $77.25 04541 05/14/92 40$58 05/14/92 4.: ; 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 4f 42 43 44 0 29 30 3, 32 33 MEALS/P. O. S. T. CLASS 05/04/92 POLICE /TRAVEL EXPENSE , POST $0.00 .. .. R STEVE*WISNIEWSKI 01364 - 001-400-2101-4316 00900 - $120.64__________L_________04187 34 35 36 MON EXP/NOV 91—MAY 92 05/12/92 POLICE /TRAINING $0.00 *** VrNDOR TOTAL********s**********s**********s************************************* $205.89 05/14/92 45 46 45 37 30 J9 ) . , I R ZUMAR INDUSTRIES 01206 •' 001-400-3104-43Qq 00894 -' $319.34 12169 Q4: '0-59 09/14/92 49 50 51 52 653 55 56 40 41 42 PORTABLE STOP SIGNS/BASE 12169 04/24/92 TRAFFIC SAFETY /MAINTENANCE MATERIALS $346.40 *** VENDOR TOTAL******************************************************************** $319.34 4] 44 45 , , .. ' , ... .. .. . e. �• + *** PAY CODE TOTAL***********************s*****************************s*********•n** '$Lb?.998.74 57 59 60 46 47 45 49 50 51 *** 'tOTAL_ WARRANTS*******s**•u**********sr***********************s******************** : :.: : 6, 62 64 65 66 ., • 1 HEREBY CER i WY THAT THE DEMANDS OR CLAIMS COVERED BY WARRANT 5 u5 I to ON PAGES LQ_ INCLUSIVE. OFE 52TO 53 , 69 5° 7, 73 THE •WARRANT REGISTER FOR /� I ��,- ARE ACCURATE, ' 5s FUNDS ARE AVAILAIiLt t • , - - = , E754 TQTH DGT -.:� BY F" << DATE YAW/WA '_ :' C DIRECTO ,R •.% . to t s 11 t I, b 6 r Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council June 9, 1992 May 20, 1992 City Council Meeting of May 26, 1992 TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Report and recommendation regarding Vehicle Parking District and Board of Parking Place Comm. Council 10/9/90 Map and time schedule street sweeping Coordination of street sweeping with trash pickup days Recommendation re. report on survey- ing discrepancies and existing procedure for protecting survey monuments along Monterey Blvd. and Bayview Dr. between 16th & 19th Streets Proposed city ordinance on property surveys within the City CIP,85-137 - Valley Ardmore overlay - accept as complete Approval of Land Use Element (GIP) Dispute Resolution Services lease renewal June 11 or 18, 1992 Joint meeting of Council with Planning Commission June 23, 1992 Student of the Month for June Report on civilian enforcement officers (GIP) Public Hearings Street lighting Maintenance District 1992-93 - 1 - City Mgr./City Atty. for Public Wks. Department Public Works Department Public Works Department Public Works Department Public Works Department Planning Director Community Resources Dir. Public Safety Director Public Works Department Crossing Guard Maintenance District 1992-93 Public Works Department July -28, 1992 4th Quarter CIP status report Public Works Director Quarterly update of Goals Implementation Program City Manager August 11, 1992 Hope Chapel Lease renewal (Rms. 5, 6A) Community Resources Dir. September 8, 1992 Association for Retarded Citizens lease renewal (Rm. 1, 2, 15) Community Resources Dir. South Bay Hospital District lease renewal (Rm 9) Community Resources Dir. Easter Seals lease renewal (Rms. 16, 17) Community Resources Dir. December, 1992 Project Touch lease renewal (Rm.C) 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 Re. oil project CUP - define "temporary" as relates to height of project Planning Director Goal 4 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" Public Works Dir. City Mgr.2/21/91 RFP for computer system Data Processing Council 3/12/91 South School Conceptual design Community Resources Council 6/6/91 Review Bldg/Zoning Code changes to improve liveability Planning Director Staff 7/25/91 Adjustment of Park Tax Building Director Council 8/27 Revision of allowable uses in open space zone Planning Council 9/24/91 Effect of nonconforming ordinance on damaged structures Planning Dept. Report on productivity incentives for employees (GIP) Personnel Director Participate w/school civics program coordinator (GIP) Personnel Director Statistical survey - requested at 4/23/91 meeting Report on cost effectiveness of downtown enforcement (GIP) Police/Finance 3 /4(1,04:6L) \\(. May 20, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Meeting the Hermosa Beach City Council of May 26, 1992 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORTS APRIL 1992 General Fund revenue is 83.7% received for 83% of the year. Based on departmental revenue projections for year end 91/92 sub- mitted with the 92/93 budget request, General Fund revenue would be on target, with approximately $15,000 surplus. The department revenue estimates are typically conservative. General Fund expenditures are 83% for 83% of the year. Depart- ment estimates submitted with the 92/93 budget suggest we could be over budget by approximately $20,000. Department projections individually do not exceed budget; however the assumption re- flected in the budget that we will be under budget by at least 3.5% overall, as in past years, may not occur since the budget has been reduced to such a great degree this year. Some addi- tional costs (approximately $13,000) have also been incurred due to the riots in Los Angeles, although we may be able to recover these costs through federal assistance. Parking Fund revenue is 78.6% received for 83% of the year. Court fine revenue through April 92 is 16% down from April 91, suggesting revenue may be less than budget by $70,000 - $100,000. Parking meter revenue is down 6% compared to April 91 which could translate to $28,000 less than budget by year end. Parking expenditures are 80.1% for 83% of the year. Estimates for 91/92 submitted with the 92/93 budget suggest expenditures will be under budget by approximately $77,000, which would help offset the potential revenue shortfall mentioned above. Concur: Frederick R. Ferrin Viki Co eland City Manager Attachments Finance Director 4 1d��� E' TNANCE-FA484 'TIME 14:19:25 FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION 001. GENERAL_ FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3100 TAXES 3101. 3102 3103 3106 3107 31.08 3110 3111. 3112 3113 31.14 3115 OBJECT SUBTOTAL :3200 L_ICE_NSES 3202 3203 3204 3205 3206 3207 3209 3211 3212 3213 3214 3215 3216 3217 3219 32:21 OBJECT SUBTOTAL CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 /CURRENT YEAR SECURED /CURRENT YEAR UNSECURED /PRIOR YEAR COLLECTIONS /SUPPLEMENTAL ROLL SB813 /TRANSFER TAX /SALES TAX /CABLE TV FRANCHISE /ELECTRIC FRANCHISE /GAS FRANCHISE /REFUSE FRANCHISE_ /TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY /BUSINESS LICENSE AND PERMITS 3300 FINES 3301 3303 OBJECT SUBTOTAL_ /.DOG LICENSES /BICYCLE I._ICENSES /BUIL.DING PERMITS /ELECTRIC PERMITS /PLUMBING PERMITS /OCCUPANCY PERMITS /GARAGE SALES /BANNER PERMITS /ANIMAL/FOWL PERMITS /ANIMAL RE_I)EMPTION FEE /AMPLIFIEI) SOUND PERMIT /TEMPORARY SIGN PERMIT /SPRAY BOOTH PERMIT /OPEN FIRE_ PERMIT /AUTO REPAIR PERMIT /BEACH VOLLEYBALL APP p,. FORFEITURES /MUNICIPAL_ COURT FINES /COURT FINES/POLICE DEPT :3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME_ 3402 /RENTS & CONCESSIONS 3403 /PIER REVENUE EST REV 3, 299, 455. 00 222, 102. 00 127, 001. 00 135, 000. 00 70, 000. 00 1, 500, 000. 00 130, 000. 00 41, 478. 00 29, 60:3. 00 160, 000. 00 244, 048. 00 490, 000. 00 6, 448, 667. 00 MONTHLY REV 1, 134, 573. 21 0.00 14, 831. 47 30, 290. 09- 3, 725. 96 97, 000. 00 0. 00 42, 580. 57 30, 878. 83 7, 694. 93 4, 3736. 65 62, 401. 31 1, 36'7, 732. 84 YEAR TO DATE 2, 930, 017. 33 214, 123. 38 168, 565. 70 95, 737. 08 49, 641. 29 1, 123, 580. :34 100, 831. 86 42, 580. 57 30, 878. 83 125, 297. 69 179, 820. 99 416, :304. 29 5, 477, :379. 35 18, 000.00 473. 95 16, 125. 43 200.00 18. 90 215.75 155, 000. 00 6, 889. 75 106, 576. 60 25, 000. 00 926. 49 17, 837. 69 25, 000. 00 1, 747. 10 16, 424. 95 10, 000. 00 1, 043. 76 8, 723. 77 220.00 12.40 233.40 4, 070. 00 387. 00 3, 045. 00 650. 00 ' 0. 00 152. 25 3, 500. 00 351. 00 4, 496. 25 2, 290. 00 109. 50 1, 618. 00 900. 00 157.50 1.04 5. 00 150. 00 47. 25 47. 25 86. 00 0. 00 0. 00 570. 00 178. 50 178. 50 200. 00 0. 00 0. 00 245, 836. 00 1.2.:343. 10 176, 719. 84 114, 996. 00 6, 449. 93 94, 459. 70 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 114, 996. 00 6, 449. 93 94, 459. 70 237, 180. 00 3,.000. 00 10, 700. 00 30, 802. 07 137, 984. 07 322. 56 2, 971.20 457. 10 8.348.00 PAGE 0001 DATE 05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED BALANCE 369, 437. 67 7, 978. 62 . 41, 564. 70- 39, 262. 92 20, 358. 71 376, 419. 66 29, 168. 14 1, 102. 57- 1, 275. 83- 34, 702. 31 64, 227. 01 73, 695. 71 9'71, 307. 65 1, 874. 57 15. 75-- 48, 423. 40 7, 162. 31 8, 575. 05 1, 276. 23 13. 40- 1, 025. 00 497. 75 996. 25-- 672.00 145. 00- 102. 75 86. 00 391. 50 200. 00 69, 116. 16 20, 536. 30 0. 00 20, 536. 30 99, 195. 93 28. 80 2, 352. 00 88. 8 96. 4 132. 7 70. 9 70. 9 74. 9 77.5 102.6 104. 3 78. 3 73.6 84. 9 84. 9 89. 5 107. 8 68. 7 71. 3 65. 6 87. 2 106. 0 74. 8 23. 4 128. 4 70. 6 116. 1 31.5 0. 0 31.3 0. 0 71. 8 82. 1 0.0 82. 1 58. 1 99. 0 78. 0 • I 4 I • • S • S • • • F' INANC:E-FA484 TIME 14 : 19: 25 FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION 001 GENERAL- FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3400 USE OF MONEY & 3404 :3405 3406 3411 3412 3414 3418 OBJECT SUBTOTAL PROPERTY /COMM CTR LEASES /COMM CTR RENTALS /COMM CTR THEATRE /OTHER FACILITIES /TENNIS COURTS /PROP A CONVERSION /SPECIAL EVENTS 3500 INTERGOVERNMENTAL/STATE 3504 3505 350-7 3508 3509 3510 3511 3514 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 3800 CURRENT 3801 3802 3903 3805 3806 3808 3909 3810 3811 38.,12 381.3 3814 3815 3917 3818 3319 3820 3821 3823 3824 3825 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 /IN LIEU OFF HIGHWAY /.IN LIEU MOTOR VEHICLE /HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE /MANDATED COSTS /HOMEOWNER PROP TX RELIE /POST /SIC -SVC OFF TRAINING /CIGARETTE TAX SERVICE CHARGES /RESIDENTIAL_ INSPECTION /SIGN REVIEW /ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT /CONDTL 1.15E PERMIT AMEND /BOARD OF APPEALS /ZONE VARIANCE REVIEW /TENTATIVE MAP REVIEW /FINAL. MAP REVIEW /ZONE CHANGE G P A /CONDITIONAL_ USE REVIEW /PLAN CHECK FEES /PLANNING/ZONING APPEAL /PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES /SPECIAL_ CURB MARKING /POLICE SERVICES /.JAIL SERVICES /TRUSTY ADMAN FEE /FINGERPRINT. SERVICE /SPECIAL EVENT SECURITY /VEHICLE INSPECTION FEES /PUBLIC NOTICE_ POSTING EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE 100, 000. 00 . 8, 120. 00 83, 598. 00 52, 000. 00 3, 892. 50 45, 803. 50 34, 000. 00 6, 724. 00 33, 336. 15 26, 000. 00 1. 86.2.. 50 22, 338. 91 13, 000. 00 1, 097. 00 12, 269. 50 106, 000. 00 0. 00 106, 000. 00 30, 000. 00 6, 390. 50 31, 179. 00 611, 880. 00 59, 668. 23 483, 828. 33 333.00 0.00 318.30 633, 960. 00 53, 1.90 48 519, 658. 59 4, 000. 00 0. 00 4, 991.43 0. 00 • 0. 00 17, 818. 00 64, 780. 00 0. 00 32, 389. 81 20, 000. 00 1, 180. 64 1.4, 970. 20 5, 850. 00 0. 00 2, 680. 56 19, 499. 00 9.18. 98 12, 687. 32 748, 422. 00 55, 280. 10 605, 514. 21 7, 800. 00 1, 085. 50 6, 999. 75 4, 000. 00 534. 00 4, 345. 25 8, 543. 00 925. 50 7, 309. 50 4, 962. 00 334. 75 4, 62:7. 50 150. 00 0. 00 O. 00 1, 892. 00 0. 00 2, 540. 00 962.00 0.00 962.25 2, 802. 00 235. 25 2, 802. 50 3, 765. 00 0. 00 3, 765. '75 6, 493. 00 2, 196. 50 10, 102, 00 95, 000. 00 4, 480. 72 65, 490. 68 2, 132. 00 540. 25 3, 024. 50 10, 000. 00 341. 05- 12, 857. 19 420. 00 0. 00 0. 00 13, 084. 00 1, 281. 50 11, 343. 95 17, 730. 00 1, 155. 00 12, 801. 00 560.00 36. 00- 244. 00 2, 760. 00 162. 50 2, 405. 00 25, 000. 00 3, 392. 50 22, 050. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 80. 00 10. 50 104. 00 PAGE 0002 DATE 05/13/92 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED BALANCE 16, 402. 00 6, 196. 50 663. 85 3, 661. 09 730. 50 0. 00 1, 179. 00- 128, 051. 67 14. 70 114, 301. 41 991. 43- 17, 818. 00- 32, 390. 19 5, 029. 80 3, 169. 44 6, 811.. 68 142, 907. 79 800. 25 345. 25-- 1, 233. 50 334. 50 150.00 648. 00- 0. 25- 0. 50- 0. 75- 3, 609. 00- 2_9, 509. 32 892. 50- 2, 857. 19- 420. 00 1, 740. 05 4, 929. 00 316.00 355. 00 2, 950. 00 0. 00 24. 00- 83. 5 88. 0 98. 0 85. 9 94. :3 100. 0 103. 9 79.0 95. 5 81. 9 124. 7 0. 0 49. 9 74. 8 45. 8 65. 0 80. 9 89. 7 109. 6 85.5 93. 2 0. 0 134. 2 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0 155. 5 68. 9 141. 128.5 0. 0 86. 7 72. 1 43. 5 87. 1 88. 2 0. 0 130. 0 OOP S CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0003 TIME_ 14:19:25 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 83.07. OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 7, 001 GENERAL FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3800 CURRENT SERVICE CHARGES 3826 /REC PROGRAMS/CLASSES 3827 /LIBRARY GROUNDS MA TNT 3831 /STREET CUT INSPECTION 3834 /ENCROACHMENT PERMIT 3836 /FUMIGATION INSPECT FEE 3837 /RETURNED CHECK CHARGE 3838 /SALE OF MAPS/PUBLI:CATIO 3839 /PHOTOCOPY CHARGES 3890 /AMBULANCE TRANSPORT 3841 /POLICE TOWING 3856 /GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 3857 /PKG PLAN APPLICATION 3858 /TENANT REFUSE BILLING 3959 /REFUSE LIEN FEE 3861 /HAZARDOUS MAT PERMIT 3862 /ALARM PERMIT FEE 3863 /FALSE ALARM FEE 3866 /NONCONFORMING REMODELS 3867 /PRECISE DE_VLMNT PLANS 3868 /PUBLIC N(JTICING/300 FT 3869 /2ND PARTY RESPONSE 3870 /LEGAL DETERMINATION HRG 3871 /PARAMEDIC RESP/NON-TRSP 3872 /LOCK -OUT (CAR) 3873 /LOCK -OUT (HOUSE) 3874 /FLOODING WATER REMOVAL 3875 /SPRAY' BOOTH INSPECTION 3976 /FIRE PROTECT/SYS EXISTG 3877 /SPRINKLER CERT TEST 3878 /COMML BLDG/APT INSPECT 3883 /FINAL/TENT MAP EXTNSION 3884 /LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 3890 /300'RADIUS NOTCG/APL CC OBJECT SUBTOTAL 80, 000. 00 2, 329. 00 5, 075. 00 0. 00 30, 000. 00 1, 214. 00 12, 000. 00 1, 614. 00 8.516.00 945.00 1, 000. 00 147. 00 500. 00 106. 00 1, 200. 00 48. 70 9, 500. 00 371. 90 28, 500. 00 1, 886. 25 0.00 0.00 3, 764. 00 0. 00 130. 00 21.00 840. 00 6, 552. 09 2, 100. 00 0. 00 2, 940. 00 189. 00 2, 000. 00 0. 00 4, 843. 00 0. 00 8.331.00 0.00 13, 650. 00 1, 394. 00 500. 00 0. 00 1, 046. 00 0. 00 1, 000. 00 523. 00 240. 00 0. 00 190. 00 0. 00 174. 00 0. 00 • 900. 00 0. 00 105. 00 0. 00 92. 00 0. 00 875. 00 0. 00 1, 841.00 235. 25 0. 00 0. 00 1, 035. 00 115. 00 431, 022. 00 33, 648. 61. 50, 849. 50 5, 075. 00 17, 602. 00 13, 342. 40 8, 457. 00 1, 227. 00 692. 75 847. 85 7. 269. 40 26, 459. 00 0. 00 4, 72.6. 75 156. 00 7, 392. 09 0.00 2, 284.50 1, 666. 00 4, 843. 75 5, 936. 00 15, 824. 25 46. 03 2, 092. 00 6, 034. 00 180. 00 65. 00 87. 00 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1,841.00 0. 00 1, 380. 00 360, 151. 09 29, 150. 50 0. 00 12, 398. 00 1, 342. 40- 59. 00 227. 00- 192. 75- 352. 15 2 230. 60 2, 041. 00 0. 00 962. 75- 26. 00- 6, 552. 09- 2, 100. 00 655. 50 334. 00 0. 75- 2, 395. 00 2, 174. 25- 453. 97 1, 046. 00- 5, 034. 00- 60. 00 125. 00 87. 00 900. 00 105. 00 92. 00 875. 00 0. 00 0. 00 345. 00- 70, 870. 91 63. 5 100.0 58. 6 111. 1 99. 3 122. 7 138. 5 70. 6 76. 5 92. 8 0. 0 125. 5 120. 0 980. 0 0. 0 77. 7 83. 3 100. 0 71.2 11.5.9 9.2 200. 0 603. 4 75. 0 34.2 50. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 0. 0 100. 0 0. 0 133. 3 83. 5 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3901 /SALE OF REAL/PERS PROP 8, 000. 00 0. 00 270. 00 7, 730. 00 3. 3 3902 /REFUNDS/RE'IMB PREY YR 3, 314. 00 2, 950. 94 11, 896. 43 8, 582. 4:3- 358. 9 3903 /CONTRIBUTIONS NON GOVT 25, 465. 00 3, 354. 24 29, 803. 20 4, 338. 20- 117. 0 3904 /GENERAL MISCELLANEOUS 1. 000. 00 49. 32 3, 176. 10 2, 176. 10- 317. 6 3909 /LATE FEE 20.00 95.69 148.86 128. 86- 744. 3 3955 OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 1, 646, 756. 00 136, 891. 43 1, 372, 973. 04 273, 782. 96 83. 3 1 .„i I4. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH rINANCE--FA494 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (4Y FUND) PAGE 0004 'TIME 14:19:25 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREAL I ZED FUND OBJ DESCRIPIIi3N EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 001 LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3900 OTHER REVENUE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1 , 684, 555. 00 143, 341. 62 1, 418, 267. 63 266, 287. 37 84. 1 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 10, 285, 398. 00 1, 678, 464. 43 8, 616, 320. 15 1, 669, 077. 85 83. 7 FUND TOTAL. 10, 285, 398. 00 1, 678, 464. 43 8, 616, 320. 15 1, 669, 077. 85 83. 7 40 w CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0005 TIME 14:19:25 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREAL I ZED FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 105 LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3100 TAXES 3101. 3103 OBJECT SUBTOTAL /CURRENT YEAR SECURED /PRIOR YEAR COLLECTIONS 3400 USE OF MONEY °< PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME OBJECT SUBTOTAL 179, 637. 00 5, 000. 00 184, 637. 00 90, 785. 00 90, 785. 00 46,411.70 0. 00 46, 411. 70 19, 325. 15 19, 325. 15 151, 381. 53 2, 793. 28 154, 174. 81. 87, 453. 07 87, 453. 07 28, 255. 47 2, 206. 72 30, 462. 19 3,331.93 3, 331. 93 84. 2 55. 8 83. 5 96. 3 96. 3 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3902 /REFUNDS/REIMB PREV YR O. 00 O. 00 6, 454. 02 6, 454. 02- O. 0 3904 /GENERAL MISCELLANEOUS 0.00 0. 00 29. 70 29. 70-- O.O 3955 /OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 O.O OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0. 00 O. 00 6, 483. 72 6, 483. 72- 0. 0 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 275, 422. 00 65, 736. 85 248, 111. 60 27, 310. 40 90. 0 FUND TOTAL 275, 422. 00 65, 736. 85 248, 111. 60 27, 310. 40 90. 0 0 V CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE.-FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND! PAGE 0006 TIME. 14:19:25 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 109 VEHICLE PARKING DIST DEPARTMENT 0000 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME_ 9,738.00 2,640.95 10, 239. 69 501. 69- 105. 1 3407 /PARKING LOT RENTAL 15, 71.3. 00 1, 304. 10 13, 041. 00 2,672.00 82.9 3409 VEHICLE PKG DIST/LOT B 0. 00 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 3413 VEHICLE PKG DIST/VPD LEASE 180, 000.00 15, 000.00 151, 508.10 28, 491.90 84.1 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 205, 451.00 18.945.05 174, 788.79 30, 662.21 85.0 3800 CURRENT SERVICE CHARGES 3845 /VPD LOT PERMITS/DAILY 149.00 0.00 148.89 0.11 99.9 3846 /VPD LOT PERMITS/MONTHLY 158.00 0.00 158. 40 0. 40- 100.2 3847 VEHICLE PKG DIST/VALIDATION STAMPS 341.00 0.00 340. 54 0. 46 99.8 OBJECT SUBTOTAL_ 648. 00 0, 00 647.83 0. 17 99. 9 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3955 /OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL_ 0.00 ' 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 206, 099. 00 18, 945. 05 175, 436. 62 30, 662. 38 85. 1 FUND TOTAL 206, 099. 00 18, 945. 05 175, 436. 62 30, 662. 38 85. 1 FINANCE-FA484 TIME 14:19:25 FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION 110 PARKING FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 :3300 FINES & FORFEITURES 3302 /COURT FINES/PARKING OBJECT SUBTOTAL 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME_ 3407 /PARK.ING LOT RENTAL OBJECT SUBTOTAL 3800 CURRENT SERVICE_ 3842 3843 3944 3848 3849 3850 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3955 OBJECT SUBTOTAL DEPT 0000 FUND TOTAL CHARGES /PARKING METERS /PARKING PERMITS:ANNUAL /DAILY PARKING PERMITS /DRIVEWAY PERMITS /GUEST PERMITS /CONTRACTOR'S PERMITS /BUDGETED TRANSFERS IN TOTALS CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 EST REV 1, 127, 390. 00 1, 127, 390. 00 6, 991. 00 7, 200. 00 14, 191. 00 725, 406. 00 191, 000. 00 1, 500. 00 500. 00 600. 00 1, 000. 00 920, 006. 00 0. 00 0. 00 2, 061, 587. 00 2, 061, 587. 00 MONTHLY REV 98, 191. 50 98, 191. 50 284. 54 400. 00 684.54 68, 127. 45 13, 196. 10 0. 00 89. 35 63. B0 231. 00 81, 707. 70 0.00 0.00 YEAR TO DATE 876, 641.52 876, 641.52 2, 630. 12 4, BOO. 00 7, 430. 12 571, 593.63 163, 066.28 1,000.29 428. 70 714. 10 1. 591.00 738, 395. 96 0.00 0. 00 180, 583. 74 1,622,467.60 180, 583.74 1, 622, 467. 60 PAGE 0007 DATE 05/13/92 - 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED BALANCE. 250, 748. 4B 250, 748. 48 4, 360. B8 2, 400. 00 6, 760. 88 153, 812.37 27, 931. 72 499.75 71. 30 114. 10- 591.00- 181,610.04 0- 591.00- 181,610.04 77.7 77. 7 37. 6 66. 6 52.3 78. 7 85.3 66. 6 85. 7 119.0 159. 1 80. 2 0. 00 0. 0 0. 00 0. 0 439, 119.40 78.6 439, 119.40 78.6 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 1"INANCE-FA4R4 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0008 TIME 14:19:25 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 ; 83.07 OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREAL I ZED rum) ORJ DF_SCRTPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR. TO DATE BALANCE 7. 119 STATE GAS TAX FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME OBJECT SUBTOTAL 86, 650. 00 86, 650. 00 8, 685. 54 58, 069. 95 8, 685. 54 58, 069. 85 3500 INTERGOVERNMENTAL/STATE 3501 /SECTION 2106 ALLOCATION 70, 621. 00 8, 224. 17 57, 339. 72 3502 /SECTION 2107 ALLOCATION 143, 553. 00 15, 844. 59 116, 184. 32 3503 /SECT 2107. 5 ALLOCATION 4, 000. 00 0. 00 4, 000. 00 3512. /SECTION 2105 (PROP ,111.) 78, 080. 00 9, 372.. 16 61., 551.. 45 3522 /TDA ARTICLE 3/LOCAL` 4, 611. 00 3, 459. 00 3, 459. 00 3537 /TDA ARTICLE 3/REGIONAL 218, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 518, 865. 00 36, 899. 92 242, 534. 49 DEPT 0000 • TOTALS 605, 515. 00 45, 585. 46 300, 604. 34 FUND 'TOTAL 605, 515. 00 45, 585. 46 300, 604. 34 y0: 28, 580. 15 67. 0 28, 580. 15 67. 0 13, 281.28 81. 1 27, 368. 68 80. 9 0. 00 100. 0 16, 528. 55 78. 8 1, 152. 00 7.5. 0 218, 000. 00 0. 0 276„ 330. 51 46. 7 304, 910. 66 49. 6 304, 910. 66 49. 6 S CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0009 TIME 14:19:25 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE % 120 COUNTY GAS TAX FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 1,809.00 223.24 1,297.10 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1,809.00 223.24 1,297.10 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 1,809.00 223.24 1,297.10. FUND TOTAL 1,809.00 223.24 1,297.10 511. 90 511. 90 511. 90 71.7 71.7 71.7 511. 90 71. 7 r • • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE..-FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) TIME 14 19. 25 FROM 04/01/92_ TO 04/30/92 DATE DATE OS/t3// 0010 92 • 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE ! FUND OBS) DESCRIPTION UNREALIZED EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 125 PART AND RECREATION FACILITIES FUND DFPAR TIIENT 0000 3100 TAXES 3116 /PARK REC FACILITY TAX 14,000.00 OBJEC T SUBTOTAL 14, 000. 00 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401 /IN'TEREST INCOME 80, 000. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 80, 000. 00 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3910 /PARK/RECREATION IN LIEU • 100,000.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 100.000.00 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 194, 000. 00 FUND TOTAL 194, 000. 00 0 0. 00 21, 000. 00 0. 00 21, 000. 00 2, 848. 71 41, 715. 21 2,848.71 41,715.21 0. OO 46, 650. 00 0. 00 46, 650. 00 2, 1348. 71 109, 365. 21 2, 848. 71 109, 365. 21 7, 000. 00- 150. 0 7, 000. 00- 150. 0 38, 284. 79 52. 1 38, 284. 79 52. 1 53, 350. 00 46. 6 53, 350. 00 46. 6 84, 634. 79 56. 3 84, 634. 79 56. 3 • Mir gib glk gib 411, • 4114 1141 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-FA484 REVENUE_ SUMMARY REPORT (HY FUND) PAGE 0011 TIME 14:19:25 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE: 126 UUT RAILROAD 1?IGGHT OF WAY FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3100 TAXES 3120) /UTILITY USER TAX 906, 954.00 71, 450.88 758, 355.36 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 906, 954. 00 71,450.88 758, 355. 36 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOMEE 30, 000.00 10, 434.73 34, 297.80 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 30, 000. 00 10. 434. 73 34, 297. 80 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3955 /OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 33, 685.00 2,807.08 28, 070.80 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 33, 685. 00 2.807. 08 28, 070. 80 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 970, 639. 00 84, 692. 69 820, 723. 96 FUND TOTAL. 970, 639. 00 84, 692. 69 820, 723. 96 148, 598. 64 148, 598. 64 4, 297. 80- 4. 297. 80- 5,614.20 5,614.20 83. 6 83. 6 114. 3 114. 3 83. 3 83. 3 149, 915. 04 84. 5 149, 915. 04 84. 5 r 414 FINANCE-FA494 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0012 TIME -14.19:25 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND OB,1 DESCRIPTION UNREALIZED EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 127 67: UTILITY USER TAX FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3100 TAXES 3120 /UTILITY USER TAX OBJECT SUBTOTAL1,360,441.00 1,360,441.00 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 8,375.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 8,375.00 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 1, 368, 816. 00 FUND TOTAL 1, 368, 816. 00 107, 176. 28 1, 137, 532. 83 107,176.28 1, 137, 532. 133 3, 651. 88 11, 722. 78 3, 651.89 11, 722. 78 110, 828.16 1, 149, 255.61 1 10, 828. 16 1, 149, 255. 61 222, 908. 17 83. 6 222, 908. 17 83. 6 3,347.78- 139. 9 3.347.78- 139.9 219, 560. 39 83. 9 21.9, 560. 39 83.9 • • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH f=INANC:E-FA4R4 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0013 TIME 14:19:25 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED FUND ORJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 140 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK. GRANT FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3700 1NTERGOVERNMENT/FEDERAL 3713 /HOUSING REHAB ILITAT ION 0.00 0. 00 0.00 0. 00 0.0 3715 /CDBG ADMINISTRATION 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0.0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 FUND 'TOTAL 0 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • CITY OF HERMOSA I3EACH r INALJCF_.-FA48/1 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0014 TIME 14:19:25 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 83. 07.. OF YEAR COMPLETE Fl /ND OB•J UEFrRIFTII7N UNR.EAL_IZED EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 145 PROPOS IT TON 'A FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3100 TAXES 3117 /PROPOSITION A TRANSIT 3121. SVBREGNL_ INCENTIVE_ FUNDS OBJECT- SUBTOTAL 173, 896. 00 13, 336. 00 34, 404. 00 0. 00 208, 300. 00 13, 336. 00 127, 749. 00 0. 00 127, 749. 00 3400 IJSE OF MONEY >r. PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 23, 182. 00 3, 063. 17 23, 385. 81 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 23, 182. 00 3, 063. 17 23, 385. 81 :3800 CURRENT SERVICE CHARGES 3854 /FARES, DIAL A RIDE 11., 500. 00 0. 00 6, 420. 45 3855 /BUS PASSES 6, 000. 00 633. 00 4, 958. 00 OBJECT SUB 'TOT AI_ 17, 500. 00 633, 00 11, 378. 45 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3955 OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 0 00 0 00 0 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 0. 00 0.00 DEPT 0000 'TOTALS 248, 982. 00 17, 032. 17 162, 513. 26 FUND TOTAL 248, 982. 00 17, 032. 17 162, 513. 26 46, 147. 00 73. 4 34, 404. 00 0. 0 80, 551. 00 61. 3 203. 81- 100. 8 203. 81- 100. 8 5, 079. 55 55. 8 1, 042. 00 82. 6 6, 121. 55 65. 0 0. 00 0. 0 0.00 0.0 86, 468. 74 65. 2 86, 468. 74 65. 2 • • eit • • • • • • • • • • • • • F I NANCE-FA484 TIt1E 14: 19: 25 FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION 150 GRANT FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0015 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 3500 INTERGOVERNMENTAL/STATE 3517 /OFFICE OF TRAFFIC SAFET 40, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 40, 000. 00 0.0 OB.JF_CT SUBTOTAL 40, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 40, 000. 00 0. 0 3700 INTERGOVERNMENT/FEDERAL 3701 /FEDERAL AID URBAN 9, 765. 00- 0. 00 9,765.42- 0. 42 100. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 9, 765. 00- 0. 00 9, 765. 42- 0. 42 100. 0 390) OTHER REVENUE 3902 /REFUNDS/REIMB PREV YR 0.00 0.00 208.39- 208, 39 0.0 3914 /60 BAY HOSP DIST GRANT 35, 000. 00 0. 00 35, 000. 00 0. 00 100. 0 3955 OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 9, 766. 00 0. 00 9, 765. 42 0. 58 99. 9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 44, 766. 00 0. 00 44, 557. 03 208. 97 99. 5 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 75, 001. 00 0. 00 34, 791. 61 40, 209. 39 46. 3 FUND TOTAL 75, 001. 00 0. 00 34, 791. 61 40, 209. 39 46. 3 IP • • 41 F 1NANrE-'FA484 IMP MF. 14 1 9 : ;'5 FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION 1'55 CROSSING GUARD FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 EST REV 3100 TAXES 310 /CURRENT YEAR SECURED 53.953.00 3103 /PRIOR YEAR COLLECTIONS 5,000.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 58, 953. 00 3400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 4,153.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4,153.00 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3955 OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 0.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 63, 106. 00 FUND TCITAL 63, 106. 00 f • 10$ PAGE 0016 DATE 05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 14, 233. 94 0.00 14. 233. 94 886. 71 (386. 71 46, 106. 20 2, 194. 84 48, 301. 04 4,152.32 4,152.32 7, 846. 80 2. 805. 16 10, 651. 96 0.68 0. 68 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1.5, 120. 65 52_, 453. 36 10, 652. 64 1.5, 120. 65 52, 453. 36 85. 4 43. 8 131.9 99. 9 99. 9 0. 0 0.0 83. 1 10, 652. 64 83. 1 • • • i 0 • • • • • FINANCE-FA464 TIME 14: 19:25 FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION 160 SEWER FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT tBY FUND) PAGE 0017 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREAL I ZED EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE. 3400 USE OF MONEY w PROPERTY 3401 / INTEREST INCOME 140, 298. 00 OBJECT SUB TOTAL 140, 298. 00 3600 INTERGOVERNMENTAL/COUNTY 3602 /BEACH OUTLET MAINTENANC 4,000.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4, 000. 00 3800 CURRENT SERVICE CHARGES 3828 /SEWER CONNECTION FEE 12_,000.00 3829 /SEWER DEMOI_ I T ION FEE 1, 400. 00 38:32 /SEWER LATERAL INSTALL_TN 1, 200. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 14, 600. 00 :3900 OTHER REVENUE 3904 /GENERAL MISCELLANEOUS 0.00 3955 OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 800, 000. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 800, 000. 00 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 956, 898. 00 FUND 'TOTAL 958, 898. 00 25, 1393. 52 118, 332. 23 21, 965. 77 84. 3 25, 1393. 52 118, 332. 23 21, 965. 77 84. 3 0. 00 2, 104. 75 1, 895. 25 52. 6 0 00 2, 104. 75 1, 895. 25 52. 6 0. 00 7, 152. 11 4, 647. 89 59. 6 157. 00 1, 072. 20 327. 80 76. 5 0.00 1.078.00 122.00 89.8 157. 00 9, 302. 31 5, 297. 69 63. 7 0. 00 1, 600. 00- 1, 600. 00 0. 0 66, 666. 67 666, 666. 70 133, 333. 30 83. 3 66, 666. 67 665, 066. 70 134, 933. 30 83. 1 92, 717. 19 794, 805. 99 164, 092. 01 82. 8 92, 717. 19 794, 805. 99 164, 092. 01 82. 8 f CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE—FA484 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND? PAGE 0018 TIME 14:19:25 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 83. O% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE is 170 ASSET SEIZURE_/FORFEITURE FIJNIJ DEPA►:TMENT 0000 3300 FINES Yy FORFEITURES 3304 /FORFEITED FUNDS 1,686,446.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 686, 446. (10 1400 USE OF MONEY & PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 80, 000. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 80, 000. 00 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3901 /SALE OF REAL/PERS PROP 5,030.00 3955 /OPERATING 'TRANSFERS IN 0.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5,030.00 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 1,.771, 476. 00 FUND TOTAL 1, 771, 476. 00 23, 537. 30 23, 537. 30 20, 062. 05 20, 062. 05 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1, 759, 589. 91 1, 759, 589. 91 85, 172. 00 85, 172. 00 5, 030. 00 0. 00 5, 030. 00 43, 599. 35 1, 849, 791. 91 43, 599.35 1, 849, 791.91 73, 143. 91- 73, 143. 91- 5, 172. 00- 5. 1.72. 00- 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 104. 3 104. 3 106.4 106.4 100. 0 0.0 100.0 78, 315. 91-- 104. 4 78,315.91— 104. 4 • • • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH ' FINANCE-FA4134 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0019 TIME 14:19:25 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE a UNREALIZED FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE r 180 FIRE PROTECTION FUND • • I• .1 w Y • • • • • • DEPARTMENT 0000 3400 USE OF MONEY ¶ PROPERTY 3401 /INTEREST INCOME 25,039.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 25, 839. 00 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3912 /FIRE FLOW FEE 65,000.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 65, 000. 00 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 90, 839. 00 FUND TOTAL 90.839.00 7, 125. 09 7, 125. 09 964. 00 964. 00 8, 089. 09 8, 089. 09 30, 811. 70 30, 811. 70 40, 554. 19 40, 554. 19 71, 365. 89 71, 365. 89 4, 972. 70- 119. 2 4, 972. 70- 119. 2 24, 445. 81 62. 3 24, 445. 81 62. 3 19, 473. 11 78. 5 19, 473. 11 78. 5 • • • • • • • • • • • !• CITY OF HERMOSA I3EACH FIN/NNCF:-FA4E)4 REVENUE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0020 I'1MF 14 19 25 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/13/92 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREAL.. I ZED FUND OB.) DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE .30) CAP I TAL. IMPROVEMENT FUN)) DF:PAR IMENT 0000 3900 OTHER REVENUE 395.5 /OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 5, 901, 537. 00 OR.JEC T SUBTOTAL_ 5, 901, 537. 00 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 5, 901, 537. 00 FUND TOTAL 5, 901, 537. 00 b :292, 387. 85 5, 314, 981. 81 292, 387. 05 5, 314, 981. 81 292, 387. 85 5, 314, 981. 81 :292, 387. 85 5, 314, 981. 81 586, 555. 19 5136, 555. 19 586, 555. 19 90. 0 90.0 90. 0 586, 555. 19 90. 0 op • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE--FA404 REVENUE_ SUMMARY REPORT (13Y FUND) PAGE 0021 TIMF 14:19:25 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/30/92 DATE 05/1.3/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE UNREALIZED FUND OBJ DESCRIPTION EST REV MONTHLY REV YEAR TO DATE BALANCE 705 INSURANCE FUND DEPARTMENT 0000 3900 OTHER REVENUE 3902 /REFUNDS/REIMB PREV YR 0. 00 0. 00 15, 916. 22 15,916.22- 0. 0 3955 OPERATING TRANSFERS IN 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0.0 3957 /TRANSFER IN -DEPT INS SVS 1, 075, 515.00 76, 100.00 923, 585.00 151, 930.00 85.8 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 075, 515.00 76, 100.00 939, 501.22 136, 013.78 87.3 DEPT 0000 TOTALS 1, 075, 515.00 76, 100.00 939, 501.22 136, 013.78 87.3 FUND TOTAL REPORT TOTALS 1, 075, 515.00 76, 100.00 939, 501.22 136, 013.78 87.3 26, 154, 639.00 2, 732, 954.63 22, 263, 787.24 3, 890, 851.76 85.1 4 F INANCE-FA454 TIME_ 17-14:-48- i C If1-Y OF HERIIOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 01]G1 • q 5 ] ---FUND--DIV-QBdT-DESCR 001 GENERAL ..,.,, APPROPR-FATiON �,T��.a.��c�v-vtr:�vr-�.. MONTHLY DATE_ --05/13/92----- 83. 0% OF YEAR BALANCE COMPLETE N 2 3 FUND EXP YTD CXPND. ENCUMBRANCE--UNENC- 7, 6 0000 DEPT: 0-00 0. 00 0. 00 e w 11 12 10 12 --21-10-10--GUARANTCE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 3900 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 3, 315. 00 3, 315. 00 3, 315. 00 3, 315. 00- O. 0 O. 0 ,4 IS 6 s -OTHER -REVENUE 3903 CONTRIBUTIONS NON GOVT OBJECT SUBTOTAL O. 00 0.00 O. 00 0.00 0. 00 0.00 O. 00 0.00 O. 00 0.00 0. 0 O. 0 1� t9 16 ] e DIVISION TOTAL O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 3, 315. 00 3, 315. 00- 0. 0 20 21 22 23 21 DEPARTMENT TOTAL ITY COUNC IL DErT: O. 00 LEGISLAT- VC O. 00 O. 00 3, 315. 00 3, 315. 0n25 0- O. 0 24 zn 22 1 2 3 24 1-1-01-C 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102-RE0(:JL-AR-SALAR1ESfMISC 24, 31-0-00 2x282. 54 zn 23 30 31 25 2 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 4112 -PART TIMEfTEMPORAf2Y 352.00 :352. 00 0.00 0. 00 20-99-7-25 0.00 1, 303. 98 15x000 0 0-00 0.00 O. 00 00 3r-31_2_,75 352.00 951. 98- 86. 312 O.0 370 4 u 3$ 3E 28 29 34 4185 SOC IAL SECUR ITY(F I C A) 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS OB JEC--SUB=TOTAL 10, OQs 00 0.00 209. 00 13, 223.-00 1� 500. 00 18.60 17. 40 186.00 174. 01 0.00 O. 00 -0-00 x 3000. 00 186.00- 34. 99 Sr 561. 76 83.3 0.0 83.2 3] 39 39 d3 31 32 33 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 92_04 -CONTRACT 0,818. 54 37,661--24 87. 1 42 43 34 35 36 OERV-ICC/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL i 6,-662.00 6, 662. 00 941.80 941.80 6, 167-34 6, 167. 31 0-00 O. 00 794'-69 494. 69 92-544 92.5 45 46 4] 37 38 39 4300-MATER-IAL6/-SUPPI EGV SLR eq 4304 TELEPHONE 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 1315 -MEMBERSHIP 300.00 7, 500. 00 6, 000-00 14.32 414. 21 O. 00 239.05 3, 429. 71 0.00 27. 07 60. 95 4, 043. 22 79.6 46.0 So S1 ' 40 41 42 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 4319 SPEC IAL EVENTS O. 00 500. 00 3.-347-00 50. OO- 45. 25 67-00 4, 387. 00 150. 00 233. 49 2] 779-00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 1, 613.00 150. 00- 266. 51 7 . d. Q 46.6 2 53 54 65 ' �'` 43 44 45 4396-TRSFR- -OUT-IN S-USER-6HGS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 17, 607. 00 690. 78 11, 218. 25 4-00 27. 07 528-00 6. 361.68 8• , e 63.8 5 58 59 0 Si 62 63 4 46 4, °P 1 DIVISION TOTAL 67, 492. 00 21 -0 -H -V -CLERK DEP-T----LEGI 5, 451. 12 55, 046. 80 27. 07 12, 418. 13 81.6 49 50 5, 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES SLAT 1 VC 22r084. 00 2,416. 00 19,511-701 4 >I 6z 53 4102- REG(JLAR-SALARIES/M I SC 0. 00 2. 572-99 08-3 0 '4 ]1 55 56 ]5 7� 2 3 ]4 ' 4 0 • A a a a a a a a • 1 • x .. e1 • 0 • • FINANCE-FA454 IME --1-7- 14.-48 2 FUND D I V -0B JT DESCR 001 GENERAL FUND CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) IROM 04/01/92-T0-04/30/92 PAGE 0002 DATE -05/13/92---- 83.07 OF YEAR COMPLETE APPROPR-IAT-ION MONTHLY-EXP-YTD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE--UNENC-BALANCE 6 9 1121 CITY CLERK DEPT: LEGISLATIVE I3 4100 -PERSONAL CERY-ICEC ,3 15 0 0 3 • 9 tio 9 0 11 411 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 68.00 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 68.00 4112 PARTTIME/TEMPORARY 25r759.00 4185 SOCIAL SECURITY(F I C A) 0.00 4189 MEDICARE_ BENEFITS 678.00 BJECT SUBTOTAL 86577-00 0. 00 0. 00 1-r398. 50 0. 00 55. 31 -869-81 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 201--CONTRAC-T-SERV iCC/rR I VA OBJECT SUBTOTAL ,9 0 21 23 24 25 •.26 27 Z0 29 r • • • 30 3, S00 -MATERIALS -/SUPPLIES -OHNE 4304 TELEPHONE `4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 310 -MEMBERSHIP 4316 TRAINING 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 4323-PUBLIC-NOT1-CING 26,28570 26, 285, 00 308. 00 3, 508. 00 0. 00 0. 00 19,-804-38 326. 80 536. 02 40, %78-21 1-7, 192. 00 17, 192. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 68. 00 0. 0 68. 00 0. 0 5,-954. 62-----7678 326. 80- 0. 0 141. 98 79. 0 8, 478. 79 02. 5 0-00 9, 093.-00 0.00 9,093.00 4.5. 4 65. 4 ,3 ,4 15 I. ,6 20 2, 22 23 24 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 663. 00 42. 55 2, 220. 00 215. 37 27-00 o-00 0. 00 0. 00 620. 00 0. 00 1-0, 18570 660. 82 1, 954. 00 152. 00 15, 944. 00 1, 070. 74 607. 23 1,724.39 220. 00 0. 00 619. 16 , 478. 77 1, 645. 00 14, 294. 57 0. 00 27. 06 0700 0. 00 0. 00 0-00 0. 00 27. 06 60.77 90.9 468. 55 78. 8 77-00- 74.0 0.00 0.0 34 O. 84 99.8 35 06:21 84.1 89. 8 26 2r 25 29 30 31 309. 00 1,622.37 32 33, 34 36 5400 EQUIPMENT 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 08dECT SUBTOTAL T 6 39 40 42 D FV -1-S iON IOTA 1, 400. 00 i , 400-00 0.00 0. 00 21-286700 0, 44875 1122 ELECTIONS DEPT: LEGISLATIVE 0.00 O. 00 , G64-78- 0.00 0-00 7-0 1, 400. 00 '400. 00 20-594. 0. 0 39 40 41 43 44 15 46 4T 4n 50 5, 4 44 45 46 47 411 49 50 51 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY -OB-JECT SUBTOTAL 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201-CONTRACT-SERVICE/PRIVATE 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 100. 00 0. 00 37-740. 00 224-50 19, 760. 00 25, 500. 00 14, 775. 00 14, 999. 50 0.00 .00 1,-35$:-52- 16, 955. 85 15, 597. 33 0.00 0-00 2,803.40 2.803.40 53 54 55 556 1, 100. 00 1, 100. DO 0. 0 0. 0 ,098752 23-6 99.9 72. 1 0. 75 7,099.27 52 53 54 50 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE 4305 -OFF ICE OPER-SUPPL-If-3 72. 00 r 331-00 0.00 6-78 3.35 ,J 77 74 57 58 59 6, 02 63 64 66 0.00 68.65 4.6 G1 Q.00 256:74 TO T, 72 !3 T4 T5 • • • 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 FINANCE-FA454 • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE- C=UMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0003 t 4 6 r 1, 1c 11 . t't. -t6 FUND --DIV ORJT-DESCR APPROPRIA-TION ,ROM 04/01/92 -TO -04/30/92 DATE -05/13/42 83.0'% OF 83.0% L- --- YEAR COMPLETE '2 7 ° 001 GENERAL FUND MONTHLY -EXP : TD-EXPND. V ENCUMBRANCE--- UNENC- BALANCE-----% 911 1122 ELECTIONS DEPT: 9300 MATERIAL-S/SUPPEIES/OTHCR LEGISLATIVE w 12 It) I 4316 TRAINING 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 367.00 1-,-774-00 0.00 0.00 0.00 367. 16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16- 0.0 1'00.0 13 14 IS 16 I] 9 20 21 22 G3 13 4 15 DIVISION TOTAL 28,270,00 6.78 1,958-25 0.00- 188125- 2,-803,-40--------8,01-17-02 110.6 71.-,-7 6 1131 CITY ATTORNEY DEPT: LEGISLATIVE 15,006-20 17,555,50 9 20 2 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE -OBJECT SUBTOTAL 160, 000.00 168,000-00 1, 125. 00- 1-1425-00 106, 904. 77 0. 00 53, 095.23 66. 8 24 �5 27 ze 23 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 200-00 17.71 -106,904. 77 250.00 0.00 53, 095. 23 66T$ '`� 2303 2 25 J6 27 1304 -TELEPHONE 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES OBJECT SUBTOTAL 325.00 525. 00 65.98 83.69 133. 13 383. 13 0.00 50.-00 0.00 191.87 0.00 141.87 125,0 40.9 72. 9 34 35 36 3, 19 2 5 29 0 DIVISION TOTAL /60,525.00 1,041.31- 107, 287. 90 0.00 53,237.10 66.8 31 32 33 1132 CITY PROSECUTOR DEPT: 41 -00 -PERSONAL --SERVICES LEGISLATIVE 40 41 42 43 44 34 35 36 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 ' 0.00 0.00 0. 0 0.0 445 6 4' 4g T 3 0 39 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJEC-T--SUBTGT-AL637-004,0052 63, 004. 00 5,825.00 5,825-00 39, 399. 95 39x-399--95 0. 00 23, 604. 05 62. 5 ." 5 40 41 42 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 0.00 23, 604,05 62,5----- 54 43 44 AS 4304 -TELEPHONE 204-40 0.00 0-00 0.00 5 59 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 831.00 1, 031. 00 69.00 69.00 640.00 690. 00 2003-00 0.00 141.00 0. 00 341. 00 0.0 83.0 66.9 46 4] 46 DIVISION TOTAL 64, 035. 00 • 5, 894. 00 , 40, 089. 95 O. 00 23, 945. 05 62. 6 50 ,I 6: 13 64 , o6 so st•, 1141 CITY TREASURER DEPT: 1100 -PERSONAL -SERVICE,., LEGISLATIVE sz 53 54 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 31, 096.00 2, 651. 00 25, 794. 00 0. 00 5, 302. 00 82. 9 ,a ]1 • 72 73 ]4 'Y 55 5 6 � �]5 • 4 A a a a I 0 • J 4' FINANCE-FA454 TIME 17:14.48 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FROM -04 /O1 -/92 -TO -04/30/92 PAGE 0004 DATE 05/13/92- 1 21 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 31 - " FUND --DIV --OBJT-DESCR z 3 `- , e 1s ib APPROPRIAT-ION MONTHLY -EXP. ENCUMBRANCE--UNENC BALANCE--- -.-.'/.------ 001 GENERAL FUND 8 i 1141 CITY TREASURER DEPT: LEGISLATIVE 9 ,o II 4100 -PERSONAL -SERV -ICES 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME_ 250.00 0.00 240.24 0.00 9.76 96.0 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 454.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 454.00 0.0 ,4 5 6 16 -4111 ACCRUAL -CASH -IN 454.00 0.00 419.-51 0:00 --34:49 ,., 92.4 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 15, 144. 00 1: 325. 00 12, 746. 00 0. 00 2, 398. 00 84. 1 4185 SOCIAL SECURITY(F I C A) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.019 4139--MEDICARE-BENEFITO 659.00 57.65 568-41 0. OG 90.59 17 10 86.2-- OBJECT SUBTOTAL 48, 057. 00 4, 033. 65 39, 768. 16 0. 00 8, 288. 84 82. 7 21 zz z3 24 4200 -CONTRACT 3ERVi-C£:. 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 1, 500. 00 O. 00 45. 28 0. OO 1, 454. 72 3. 0 21, OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 500. 00 0. 00 45. 28 0. 00 1, 454. 72 3. 0 25 26 27 1 �0 23 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 24 4304 TELEPHONE 840. 00 50. 36 578. 91 O. OG 261. 09 68.9 - O 4305FFI- -E--OFCR CU f'LICS z; 33 31 ; , 34 35 '7 37 3n 39 40 25 1, 545- :- 60 11558- 1, 359. 42 G--00 185. 58 07. (2, 4315 MEMBERSHIP 0.00 0.00 75.00 0.00 75.00- 0.0 27 4316 TRAINING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 -431-7-CONFERENCE-EXPENSE 0.00 0-00 0.00 0-00 0.00 0-0 29 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS 1, 696. 00 131. 00 1, 435. 00 0. 00 261.00 84.6 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4, 081. 00 296. 94 3, 448. 33 0. 00 632. 67 84. 4 ,31 132 :33DIVISION TOTAL 53, 638. 00 4, 330. 59 43, 261. 77 0. 00 10, 376. 23 80.6 41 42 43 44 34 35 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 466, 346. 00 38, 089. 23 334, 906. 78 2, 857. 53 128, 581. 69 72.4 36 i2©1--C-iTY MANAGER 4s 40 4aa 31 DEPT-:---MGMT/CUPPORT 39 139 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4S 50 51 - - 40 4102 -"REGULAR -SAL -,4R , 7 IESfMISC 1801000 117047714 00,-093 7 0-00 204--61-6-23 7475 41 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 13, 399. 00 O. 00 13, 399. 10 0. 00 O. 10- 100.0 42 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 3, 139. 00 0. 00 3, 138. 22 0. 00 0. 78 94.9 53 54 55 3 4112 PART-TIMEtTEMPORARY 0700 0.00 0. OO 07-00 0700 0-0 44 4185 SOCIAL SECURITY(F I C A) 42. 00 0. 00 0. 00 . 0. 00 - 42. 00 0. 0 45 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 1, 242. 00 87. 27 11012. 94 O. 00 229. 06 81. 5 ; 50 5' 6o 61 62 63 64 66 6] 60 4r OBJECT -SUBTOTAL 1 f9, 532700 117124. 41 ' .978447-03 0. 00 20, 887-97 82.3 40 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES , 49 4201--CONTRACT--SERVICE/PRI1tATE 205-00 0.00 142-81 Q. 00 62:63 69.4 50 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 205.00 0.00 142.31 0.00-. 62.69 69.4 51 52 4300 MATER.-IALS/SUPPL-I£S70TMER 53 4304 TELEPHONE 500. 00 42. 24 505. 15 0.00 5. 15- 101.0 54 40 70 71 2 - 56 57 r3 74 75 1 •) • • • • ') U • i i • i FINANCE-FA454 TIME -1-7÷444 FUND -DIV --OB JT-DESCR APPROPR4A448N MONTHLY -EXP YTD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) (ROM 04/01/92 --TO 04/-30/92 001 GENERAL FUND • PAGE 0005 ' 40 DATE- 05/-13/92---- -----T, 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 • . 3 UNENC--BALANCE 4 1° • 17 1201 CITY MANAGER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 1300-- MATER IALS/SUPPL-IES'OTHER 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 1, 498. 00 23. 75 1, 063. 03 27. 06 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4311--AUTO-MAIN-TENANGE 0. 00 0. 00 0.-00 O. 00 4315 MEMBERSHIP 725.00 0.00 665.00 0.00 4316 TRAINING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 131-7--CONFERENCE_EXPENSE 649-00 251.32 647.85 0.-0C► 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 5, 293. 00 418. 00 4, 461. 00 0. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 8, 665. 00 735. 31 7, 342. 03 27. 06 407. 91 0. 00 0. 00 60. 00 0. 00 1. 15 832. 00 1, 295. 91 72. 7 0. 0 0. 5 6 7 B • IC a 12 16 91. 7 0. 0 99. 84. 2 85.0• 17 18 19 >• 20 22 23 ° • 22 23 24 25 25 27 28 29 30 DIVISION TOTAL 127, 402. 00 11, 869. 72 105, 128. 37 1202 FINANCE ADMIN DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 1100 -PERSONAL CERVICES 31 32 33 34 35 35 27. 06 22, 246. 57 82. 5 24 '5 26 4 ].7 26 29 30 31 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 221, 446. 00 20, 360. 07 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 5, 500. 00 500. 44 1140-VACATIGt4/SI6K-PAY-0Fr 11-00-7-00 0.00 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 5, 590. 00 1, 661. 50 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 0.00 0.00 4185 --SOCIAL SECURITY (F I C A) 0-00 0-00 4189 MEDICARE_ BENEFITS 1, 368. 00 120. 18 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 234, 911. 00 22, 642. 19 183, 875. 97 4, 526. 07 0:-00 7, 403. 56 O. 00 0,00 1, 087. 05 196, 892. 65 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 37, 570. 03 973. 93 17 0G7 00 1, 813. 56- 0. 00 0. 00 280. 95 38, 018. 35 83. 0 82. 2 132. 4 0. 0 0. 0- 79. 79. 4 83. 8 32 33 35 � 36 31 36 39 40 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 ' 47 49 49 5° 51 • 53 54 55 156 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 32,495.00 209.00 OBJEGT--BUB TOTAL 32,49-5,-00 209.-00 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 -TELEPHONE 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 4315 MEMBERSHIP 1316 -TRAINING 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS OB JEST -SUBTOTAL 25, 497. 99 257-497--99 3.-500. 00 129-23 1,036,-83 10, 600. 00 857. 24 8, 609. 56 250. 00 0. 00 180. 00 1, 852-00 476. 00 1,-653-06 702.00 0.00 701.90 8, 668. 00 674. 00 7, 318. 00 24r572.00 2,-136.47 20,-299 5 5400 EQUIPMENT 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS -THAN -4500 205.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 205.00 O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 6, 997. 01 O.Od 6,-997-01 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 0. -00 0:00 0. 00 2_04:59 66-3--17 1, 990. 44 70. 00 198-91 0. 10 1, 350. 00 1,-272. 65 204. 59 0. 41 0. 41 78. 4 7 7 81. 2 72. 0 89-2 99. 9 84. 4 82. 6 41 42 43 44 45 47 413 4, A �sl 52 �.I 54 59 99.&----- 99. 8 GI 62 !.3 59 G7 DIVISION TOTAL 292, 183. 00 24. 987. 66 242, 689. 99 204. 59 49, 288. 42 83. 1 ,.o 70 71 (AO. r�; i '�y�N. icer ti yr: 4 e 47=)`.4T]ti d ,3 74 I5 J J J S 0 FINANCE.-FA454 ----TIME_ 17: 14.48 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) f ROM-04/01-/92—TO-04/30/92 0 PAGE 0006 • DATE -05/13/92------ 83. 0% ATE--05113/9,2---- 83.07.. OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 - -FUND -DIV -OB.JT-DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLYEXP—Y-TD-EXPND. II ' 6 ENCUMBRANCE----UNENC BALANCE---%- 001 GENERAL FUND 6 7 e 1203 PERSONNEL , DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 0 IS 4100 -PERSONAL --SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 62, 640. 00 5, 534. 66 52, 110. 61 O. 00 10, 529. 39 83.1 i 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 117.00 0.00 O.00 O 00 117 00 O 0 12 14 ,sl 61 4111- ACCRUAL_ -CASH-IN— 1-r737-00 O. 00 1-,736. �,',I 0b— O. 00 0. 94 99. S 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 2.00- 0.00 O. OO 0.00 2.00- O.O 4185 SOCIAL SECURITY (F I C A) 226. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 226 00 0 ,] e 19 2041H9 221 2 23 0 L=Di CARE SENEF1 3 3 30 i. 17 60 —©. OQ 1 1 ,6 . f6.44 --i i6 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 64, 771. 00 5, 535. 83 53, 853. 27 O. 00 10, 917. 73 83. 1 4200 -CONTRACT SERViCEG 2, 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE_/PRIVATE 31, 640. 00 611. 74 32, 954. 02 O. 00 1, 314. 02- 104. 1 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT ?_, 080. UO 0. Od 2, 201. 94 0. 00 121.94- 105.8 2 '" 3J 31 32 34 35 L 'u 30 39 1 40 -- OBJECT -SUBTOTAL 33, 720-00 ' :3 2,1 611. 74 85,-155-96 O. O0 1, 4'35. 96 104-2 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE f, 100700—IA 0-bO 1, 205. 42 0.-00 1,05=-92 i0 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 7, 000. 00 234. 95 4, 193. 50 O. 00 2, 806. 50 59. 9 X127. 4315 MEMBERSHIP 500 00 O. 00 445. 00 0. 00 z'5.00 99.O 4316 TRAINING 2, 626700 0-00 2, 625-84 O. 00 . 16 7. '7 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 639. 00 0. 00 639. 00 0. 003] 9O. 00 100.0 130 4320 MEDICAL EXAMS 11, 000. 00 1, 282. 00 12_, 491. 00 O. 00 1, 491. 00- 113.5 14327-AOMD INCENT-1-VE:G 1T22007-00. 165-00 J141 1 3z 133' 1,-225-- 00 0.00 25.00 1020 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS 2, 350. 00 169. 00 2, 006. 00 O. 00 344. 00 85. 3 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 26, 415. 00 1, 961. 55 24, 881. 26 O. 00 1, 533. 74 94. 1 42 43 1 C4 34 3, ,, 37 DIVISION TOTAL 124, 906. 00 8, 109. 12 113, 890. 49 O. 00 11, 015. 51 91. 1 45 46 4' 1 i,6 39 40 1205 CABLE TV DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 4100 PERSONAL—SERVICES 48 4'' 51 1 s, 54 55II '6 41 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 13, 264. 00 1, 433. 25 10, 519. 08 O. 00 2, 744. 92 79. 3 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 228.00 O.00 O.00 O. 228.00 O. 43 4f 1 f AC 228 00 O. O 00 44 45 0. OO 0. OO 228. 00 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 1, 344. 00 220. 00 1, 326. 50 O. 00 17. 50 98.6 4185 SOCIAL SECURITY (F I C A) 83. 00 13. 64 82. 23 0. 00 O. 77 5l 58 ss 61 47, 99. 0 4839--MEDICARE-BENEFITS 240-00 47 u] 23.-97 164..-07 0.00 75.93 6E:3 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 15, 387. 00 1, 690. 86 12, 091.88 O. 00 3, '295. 12 78.5 61 62 G3 494200 -CONTRACT -SERVICES 50 51 52 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 5, 000. 00 1, 148. 00- O. 00 O. 00 5, 000. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5, 000. 00 1, 148. 00- O. 00 O. 00 5, 000. 0O O. 0 665 6 6' i 53 54 55 68 6S O , ]I 56 \' ]5 ,2 ,3 4 s • • • • 0 A ll y 4 ✓ 6 • i • i i r • I FINANCE-FA454 TIME_ 17:14:4 FUND- DI V-OBJT-DESCR 001 GENERAL FUND CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FROM 04/01/92 TO --04/30/92 APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP- YTD-EX.PND. . • PAGE 0007 DATE - 05/13/92 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE CNCUMBRANCE--UNENC-BALANCE 7 1205 CABLE TV DEPT: 4300-MATERIAL&/6UPPLIEB/OTHE 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 4315 -MEMBERSHIP 16 18 MGMT/SUPPORT 700. 00 1, 000. 00 400. 00 4316 TRAINING 69.00 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 422.00 4396--TRSFR OUT-INS---{JSER-6HGS 1,-003-00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 3. 594. 00 79. 09 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 80. 00 159. 09 229. 19 0. 00 120. 00 69. 00 421. 42 84-7-00 1,986.61 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0-00 0. 00 470. 81 32. 7 1, 000. 00 0. 0 20. 00- 105. 0 0. 00 100. 0 0. 58 99. 8 156-00 84. 1 1,607.39 55.2 11 12 5 d 81 19 , 21 22 23 72 3 24 DIVISION TOTAL 23, 981. 00 1206 -DATA-PROCESSING DEPT: MGMT-SUPPOF 25 27 26 701. 95 14, 078. 49 0.00 9, 902. 51 58.7 26 2] 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102-REGUL-AR--6ALARIES4MIS6 74,002-00 7,284,65 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 500.00 0 00 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 1,203.00 0.00 1111 AGBRUAL CASH IN 1,439-00 0700 31 3. 34 36 3, 8 39 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 200 -CONTRACT CCRV-ICES 77, 144. 00 7,284.65 67, 532--23 0. 00 0.00 1,488-43 68, 970. 66 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 O. 00 0. 00 G, 469. 77 500. 00 1, 203. 00 0-57 8, 173. 34 `71. 2 0. 0 0. 0 ?9-9 89. 4 78 29 30 2 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE_/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 57, 064. 00 57, 064. 00 8.833.62 8,833.62 57, 871. 30 57, 871. 30 0.00 0. 00 807.30- 807.30- 101. 4 101. 4 33 4 35 46 37 39 39 40 42 43 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE 4305-OFF-I-CE-OPER-6UPPr= IES 3, 700. 00 6, 41-7-00 300. 00 620. 00 8300 42 4 44 45 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 4315 MEMBERSHIP 4316 -TRAINING 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS OBJECT --SUBTOTAL 5400 EQUIPMENT 46 7 49 49 519. 00 3, 310. 00 14. 949-00 5402 CQUIPMEN7 P10RE-THAN-$560 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 50r000-0 400. 14 19. 86 0. 00 25. 00 0.00 0. 00 254. 00 704-00 50, 000. 00 0-00 0. 00 3, 795. 28 0. 00 95. 28- 102. 5 -3,-671. 18 0-00 :,-745 82 57. 2 0.00 0.00 300.00 O.0 610.00 0.00 10.00 se.3 82. 71 0. 00 0. 29 99-6 463. 59 0. 00 35. 41 93. 1 2, 793. 00 0. 00 517. 00 84. 3 11,43576 0.00 3T513:-21 -76. 4 0. 00 0. 00 0-0C' 0. 00 50i-0007-00 50. 000. 00 44 15 47 413 50 52 53 55 5, 58 59 60 0. 0 50 52 54 DIVISION TOTAL 199, 157. 00 1 -207 --BUG LICENSE DEFT: MGMF/SUPP0 55 59 16, 822. 27 138, 277. 72 0. 00 60, 879. 28 69. 4 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 41-02-REGULAR-SALAR-IEJJM-I66 83r-877. 00 7.-054 �B 68 889. 74 0-00 14r-SiQ7-26 82. Ot 62 63 64 66 67 68 6'3 0 71 17 4 i FINANCE-FA454 TIME -1-7-:--144& C1,Y OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) rGnM nd [n f_ioo rn_na.i�nlo-� PAGE 0008 - --- - - --• •- •- - •. --• •- ver a. -„7c 83. 0% OF YEAR CQMPLETE 3I FUND DIV-OBJT-DESCR , 2n 3 4 ; e APPROPRIAT-ISN MONTHLY -E-X( YTD-EX.PND. ENCUMBRANCE-----UNENC-.BALAi CE -% 5� 6 001 GENERAL FUND 5 9 1207 BUS LICENSE DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT z ,2 4100-PERSONAL-SERVIC-EO 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME_ 525. 00 0. 00 0. 00 ' 0. 00 525. 00 0. 0 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 1, 238. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 1, 233. 00 0. O .4 4111-ACCRUAL--CASH-IN 1, 238-00 0. 00 039. 80 0. 00 598. 20 51. 4I s!20 - 4185 SOCIAL SECURITY(F I C A) 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 i 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS ' 393.00 34. 39 334. 22 0.00 58.78 85. 0 OBdE£T-SUB-Tt3TA!_ 87, 271. Od .E, ,3 21 23 24 ;_5 �] 29 25 0 3' i3 34 35 e 7, 098. 97 U7 1-11637-76 0-:-.00 17r407. 24 O+ . ' 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES -4201-£ONTRAC-T-SERV ICE_-iPR IVATE 2 19 .Od 1-9-00 O. -0d 5. 4G 78.4 2.3 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 170.00 0.00 76.96 0.00 93.04 45.2 '2, OBJECT SUBTOTAL 195.00 0.00 96.56 0.00 98.44 49. 5 23 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES%OTHER 24 4304 TELEPHONE 520. 00 36.45 542.88 0. 00 22.88- 104. 4 30'5 OrFi-CE-Q 2.I ;PCR 3Uf`f'LIES 4 50000 21± - 3 3 -05493 0,08--------1,445o7 G7. B 25 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 165. Od 14.06 91.47 0. 00 73. 53 55.4 2, 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 110.00 0.00 56.95 0. 00 53.05 51.7 315 NCMBERSHIP znl :x4-00 Q�70 Q-00 0. 00 50. 00 Q. s 23 4316 TRAINIh1G 1, 608. 00 516. 00 1, 546. 72 O. 00 11. 28 99.2 30 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 358. 00 0.00 357. 93 0.00 0.07 99. 9 4396-TRSFR-OUT-D 3] 3C 4 42 43 44 C U3CR CI IG . 53--2427-00---391. 00----4,-457-:-00X 0. 00 785:-00 85. s 32 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 12, 553. 00 1, 169. 14 10, 157. BB 0. 00 2, 395. 12 80. 9 33 3, 5400 -EQUIPMENT 35 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 230.00 0.00 229.49 0.00 0.51 99.7 35 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 230.00 0.00 229.49 0.00 0.51 99.7 47 49 37 3B 39 DIVISION TOTAL 100, 249. 00 8, 263. i 1 80, 347. 64 O. OO 14, 901. 31 BO. 1 e9 so 51 52 40 41 1208 GEN APPROP DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 42 5., `+5 43 -4100 -PERSONAL-SERVICES57 44 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 28, 804. 00 2, 525. 00 23, 754. 00 0. 00 5, 050. 00 82.4 45 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 421.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 421.00 0.0 sa 5' 61 62 E3 ,,., EL 6, 6., 0 ], 72 4E, 41ACCRUAL-CASH ACCRUAL CASH IN 421--00 0.-00 135. 51 0.00 285. 47 32.1 47 4185 SOCIAL SECURITY(F I C A) 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 4189 MEDICARE_ BENEFITS 407.00 36.62 346.39 0.00 60.61 85.1 ,, OBJEC-T--SUBTQTAL ;Q; 053-00 27-56-1.6 24, 235.'70 0-00 5x817. 10 80-6--- 50 s. 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES SJ 4202-£ONTR.ACT SERViCEfPR IVATE 23, X56. 00 3, 185-6 , 17, 349-6 2116. 33 73.66 53 54 55 5,' \] ' l3 4 ]5 ],' a) so 4 0 4 -4 .40 1 • 1 FINANCE-FA454 TIME -17-14-4 ---FUND-DIV---OBJT DESCR 001 GENERAL FUND CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (6Y FUND) PAGE 0009 FROM -04/01 -/92 -TO -04/30/92 DATE -05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE APPROPRIATION MONTHLY -EX f' YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE -UNENC-BALANCE- -X IJ 121 1208 GEN APPROP DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 4200-6ONTR.ACT-SERVICES 15 OBJECT SUBTOTAL r 4 4 40 e 9 23, 556. 00 3, 185. 65 17, 349. 67 0. 00 6,206.33 73. 6 4300-MATERIALS/SUPPL-IES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE 286.00 18.07 266.58 0.00 19.42 93.2 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 350. 00 1,789.59- 38,325.40- 49. 26 38, 626. 14 10936. 0 4316 TRAINING 115.00 0.00 1-1-5.00 0.00 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS 966.00 74.00 818.00 0.00 8.00 1008.00 84 6 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1,717.00 1,647.52- 37,125.82- 193. 50 84. 6 49. 26 38, 793. 56 2159.3 5400 EQUIPMENT 21 5402 EQUIPMENT -MORE THAN $500 0.00 0.00. 2. 10 0.00 OBJECT-SUBTOTAL2. 10- 0.0 2e' 0.O0 0-001 2. 10 0.00 2. 10- 0.0 23 24 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 2S 6900--LEASE-PAYMENTS 0-00 0. 00 25, OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 20 0.00 0-00 0. 00 0. 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 I4 IS ,6 17 10 19 70 21 9 30 3, DIVISION TOTAL 1212 -EMP-BENEFITS 4 35 37 39 40 42 55, 326. 00 4,049.75 DEP-T. MGMT-/SUPPORT 4,461.85 49.26 50, 814. 89 8. 1 24 .'6 30 3, 12 33 34 35 35 3? 315 39 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 6477-694---00 101r525,93 590,322 556 0.00 577-368.44 91-7-1 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 647, 691.00 101, 525.93 590, 322_.56 0.00 57, 368.44 91.1 41 42 45 .45 45 47 DIVISION TOTAL 647, 691. 00 101, 525.93 590, 322.56 0.00 121 RE-T-IREMENT -DEP-T-:--MGMT/SUPPOR-T 4 4 45 4,i 47 49 49 50 5, 52 53 54 55 57, 368.44 91.1 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4180-RET1REMENT 1, 150,-2_34-00 95,530-91 863.-453-21 0.00 286,-780-79 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 150, 234.00 95, 530.91 863, 453.21 0.00 286, 780.79 75.0 50 52 53 DIVISION TOTAL 1,150,234.00 121---PR.OSP-EXP DEP-T-:----;GMT/SUPPORT 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4322 -UNCLASSIFIED 95, 530. 91 863, 453.21 0.00 286, 780. 79 75. 0 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 0.00 00 9 559 50 62 03 64 55 66 67 6A 69 70 71 56 .17 .2 ,4>t> 1 , ,�5 �i Ia e., � }'%i;ht i ty i;�• ' r d �' f 1'! •i^.r 1,11; !r k � ;j''�;: 72 74 5 t'� iirS • 1 1 0 .0 1 • 1 1 i 5.-7is.�•. • I-1 FINANCE-FA454 CITTY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 001 b %o 6 2 3 4-- 6 I IID-- -1 -z-. v —FUND -DIV --OB,JT--DESCR I APPROPRIA1"-ION I(U11-U4ft) 1 f-Vd--1 U-04f-Ot DA rE.05/ 83. 0% OF YEAR UNENC- BALANCE- 13/ 92 ---- --z, COMPLETE • 2 3 -, 6 , 6 001 GENERAL FUND MONTHLY EXP—YTD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE-- ----7. 6 1214 PROSP EXP DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 1� 9 4300 MATER1-ALS/SUPPLIES/1TIICR 11 ,i 4397 3. 5% ANTICIPATED SAVINGS 369, 849. 00- 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 369, 849. 00- 0. 0 14 12 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 369. 849. 00- 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 369, 849. 00- 0. 0 16 16 13 17 14 IB DIVISION TOTAL 369. 849. 00- 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 369. 849. 00- 0. 0 '9 2J 16 21 7 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 22 a 306-MAT'S--Rte-'AL-S74SUPPLICC/Oii ICR 23 9 js 20 4349 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 562, 779. 00 8, 908. 48 543, 183. 06 0. 00 19, 595. 94 96. 5 26 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 562, 779. 00 Be 908. 48 543. 183. 06 0. 00 19, 595. 27 2: 94 96. 5 29 22 20 23 • 30 24 DIVISION TOTAL 562, 779. 00 8, 908. 48 543, 183. 06 0. 00 19, 595. 94 96.5 31 25 ; 26 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 2, 914, 059. 00 280, 768. 90 2, 695, 833. 43 280. 91 217, 944. 66 92.5 34 35 27 21-01--P0EFEC ,` 23 DEPT. POL-I£C 23 3e 30 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 35 4102-REGULAR---SALARIES/MIS 40 31 369.-847-00 :0.582_. 30 469r857-27 07-00 99,-999-73 02.4 41 32 4103 REGULAR SALARIES/SAFETY 1, 699, 493. 00 131, 959. 30 1, 384, 740. 99 0. 00 314, 752. 01 81.4 42 33 4105 SPECIAL DUTY PAY 4106--REGULAR-OVERT-IMC 25, 200. 00 1, 660. 00 19, 240. 00 0. 00 5, 960. 00 76. 3 43 44 34 -59000. 00 272. 85 :,0 500-45 0. 00 8, 499. 55 85. 5 35 4107 PREMIUM OVERTIME 100, 800. 00 5, 306. 15 65, 024. 25 0. 00 35, 775. 75 64. 5 46 J6 4109 COURT TIME 41-16--VACATI0N/SI-EI:-PAI`-0rr 20, 000. 00 599. 91 10, 764. 91 0. 00 9, 235. 09 53.8 4' 37 17, 600-00 0-00 i0r-112. 3'] 4- 00 7, 4B7761 57. 4 its 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 50, 552. 00 0. 00 49, 159. 54 0. 00 1, 392. 46 97.2 99 39 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 411-4 POLICE -RESERVES 7, 800. 00 434. 00 5, 285. 00 0. 00 2, 515. 00 67.7 51 45 6000-00 2, 069. 00 16, 778. 47 0. 00 778. 47- 104-8 41 4115 EXTRA TIME 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 54 4117 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL_ 9, 065. 00 739. 77 6, 761. 82 0. 00 2, 303. 18 74.5 55 42 41-18 FIELD--TRAININO 5 OFFICER 5.000-00 22.56- 1-,-828:-30 0.00 3r171-90 3L. 5 44 4185 SOCIAL SECUR I TY (F I C A) 1, 294. 00 155. 18 1, 428. 58 0. 00 134. 58- 110.4 •,H 45 4187 UNIFORMS 4ti?9--MEDICARE-BENEF-ISS 38, 500. 00 1, 979. 68 24, 443. 40 0. 00 14, 056. 60 63.4 so 14x980-00 3 61 46 1, 284-68 14 27-7' S. s _ 352-21 94.9 47 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 635, 131. 00 197, 065. 38 2, 130, 153. 16 0. 00 504, 977. 84 80. 8 62 -CONTRACT -SERVICES • 63 6'' 49 4200 50 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 106, 611. 00 8, 727. 87 70, 492. 38 0. 00 36, 118. 62 66.1 66 5, 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT -SUB -TOTAL 32, 851. 00 125. 51 8, 803. 49 850. 00 23, 197. 51 29.3 47 8, 853-38 79, 295-87 050-97-3-167-1-- 00 33 57.4 G9 ov 52 OBJECT t29,-4-2700 53 ]0 54 ]f 72 9 `56 4 75N • a, r b 0 0 0 0) • •' i • 0 • • • 4/1P I .• r z v./ moo 6 0 • F I NANCE-FA454 T -IME_ 17:14:48 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0011 1ROM 04/01/92 -TO -04/30/92 DATE -05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE MONTHLY EXP _ ,YTD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE---UNENC-BALANCE --x-- FUND-DIV--OB,)T--DE6CR APPROPR IAT -ION 001 GENERAL FUND o ,2 20 24 26 27 26 29 30 31 2101 POLICE DEPT: POLICE -4300 MATERIALS/SUPPL_ES/OTHER 4303 UT IL IT LES 206. 00 4304 TELEPHONE 28, 000. 00 -4305 OFF ICE -OPER- -SUPPL--IES 57,-900-00 4306 PRISONER MAINTENANCE 10, 668. 00 1, 258. 53 4307 RADIO MAINTENANCE 9, 112. 00 402. 42 4309 -MAINTENANCE -MATERIALS 7r-500700 237.22 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LURES 21, 175. 00 1, 904. 53 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 32, 000. 00 3, 690. 35 1312--TRAVEL--EXPENSE--,POST 17r575.00 --4.467.4.9 4313 TRAVEL EXPENSE, STC 8, 500. 00 508. 32 4315 MEMBERSHIP 1, 454. 00 100. 00 4316 -TRAINING- 9x000-00 419.63 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 434.00 . 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 481,945.00 OBJEC--SUDTOTAL 685. 469. 00 0.00 229. 14 0.00 23. 14- 2. 220. 09 23, 834. 64 0. 00 4. 165. 36 3, 534-49 46r-903:-97 1, 718. 27 9, 277.-76-- 7. 577. 50 1. 567. 09 1, 503. 41 4. 069. 24 4. 579. 19 463. 57 5x149. 40 319. 25 2x031--35 18. 238. 26 0. 00 2. 936. 74 30. 800. 79 1, 027. OE 172. 13 17, 087. 1-7 0. 00 487. 83 - 2, 566. 11 0. 00 5, 933. 89 560.00 0.00 894.00 3E. 5 7r355. 2B 0. 00 :.355. 28----103.-9 0.00 154.00 0.00 280.00 35. 4 33, 583. 00 414, 777. 00 0. 00 67, 168. 00 86. 0 51-r486-51 581, 302. 5 9. 200. 80 94r935-62 06. 1. 5400 EQUIPMENT 5401-E04IpMENT LE^C THAN $500 5402 EQUIPMENT -MORE THAN $500 5403 VEHICLES OBJE£-T-SUBTOTAL 32 33 34 36 37 30 39 40 1.11. 2 85. 1 83:. 9 85. 9 94. 9 -72-4 86. 1 99. 4 97:-2- 30. 1 12r-007. 00 1, 396-64 40, 489. 00 11, 503. 30 9, 984. 00 0. 00 621-48000 1-2x899-94 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 6900 -LEASE -PAYMENT'.) 150,--676 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 150, 676. 00 1-4-r600:-99 38, 362. 60 0. 00 49.-963. 59 0-00 77-7-8757-11 0. 00 97, 875. 14 0. 00 406. 01-------967-6 5, 356. 34 3, 229. 94- 107. 9 0. 00 9, 984. 00 0. 0 5, 356-34 7.--160-07 08-5 0.00 0. 00 52,800.86 64.9 52, 800. 86 64. 9 42 43 2201 FIRE DIVISION TOTAL DEPARTMCNT TOTAL 3, 673, 218. 00 3, 673. 210. 00 DEPT: FIRE 270, 305. 21 2, 938, 590. 26 15, 437.22 719, 190. 52 270,80521-----2,938,5907-26 1-5. 437. 22 71-97-490-52 00.4 52 63 04 80. 4 z1� 4 o, 9 :°, 40 11 t6 I: 19 20 zl 22 . 23 24 26 26 27 9 33I0 40 32 33 34 35 16 37 36 •39 4U 41 2 43 44 46 e 47 46 .19 50 s, 44 45 4 7 4.8 49 50 52 53 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 47, 065. 00 3, 987. 00 4103-REGULAR-SALAR1ES/SAFETY 9411 265-00 78, 759. 25 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 106, 500. 00 111532. 92 4108 FLSA OVERTIME . 65, 678. 00 5, 552_. 34 4110-VAGATION/SICK-PAY or 14.864-00 0.00 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 14, 864. 00 0. 00 4119 FITNESS INCENTIVE 6, 000. 00 0. 00 4185-SOCIAL-SECURI TY (F I C A) 0. 00 0-00 38, 372. 00 0. 00 761. 814 -28 0. 00 123, 747. 41 0. 00 67, 608. 03 0. 00 0. 0 .-00 12, 943. 72 0. 00 1, 920. 28 5. 900. 00 0. 00 100. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. Q0 8, 693. 00 179, 450:-72 17. 247. 41- 1,930.03- 14,-864,-00 1- 1, 930. 03- 14r864-.00 81. 5 80. 9 116. 1 62 102. 9 63 64 66 87.0 66 # 98.3 67 ��•_[��y������� 66 I (:9 ':,5) 60 •I • FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) rcnm_-nalnt�n� rn_. PAGE 00112 83.7OF COMPLETE 123 2 ) 3sfUND DIV OBJT l . I AYCEEAR 001. GENERAL FUND 6 a ] e 2201 FIRE DEPT: FIRE 9 10 1 12 Io -41"00-PERSONAL--SEfW-ICE.: 4187 UNIFORMS 19, 056. 00 498. 71 4, 831. 51 11, 969. 14 2, 255. 35 88. 1 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 3, 599. 00 374. 47 3, 480. 58 0. 00 118. 42 96.7 13 14 15 1OBJECT-SUBTOTAL 1a ,9 3 is 1, 018,89-100----1007-704,-69 -1-,-018,-69T-53 11-x969. 14 188r 224.-33----84-5 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 76. 5, ,] 201 CONTRAC=T-SSERV-ICE/PRIVATC 27-x-566. 00 037- 60 241'770. 3'7 -0-O0 6-T-595.-61 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 27, 566. 00 837. 60 20, 970. 39 0. 00 6, 595. 61 76. 0 z, 22 23 24 19 20 1.4305 300 MA -TCR IAESfSUPrLIES/On ICR 4304 TELEPHONE 2, 750. 00 244. 47 2, 873. 46 0. 00 123. 46- 104. 4 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 3, 300. 00 781.83 3, 836. 53 0. 00 536. 53- 116.2 2.. '] 30 31 33 34 35 3, 30 3f 40 72 4307 -RADIO --M, !NT-ENANCC 600-00 0-00 424. 77 0.00 1-75. 23 70.7 23 ' 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 8. 200. 00 602. 15 8, 121. 74 0. 00 78. 26 99. 0 4210 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 2, 500. 00 182. 11 1, 877. 52 0. 00 622. 48 75. 1 24 343. 15 -65. t, E -OG 2•.32 #-i-ckiTfl--t9A-iPti"ENAPtCE-0G0:-0G 0. 00 G5b. 85 4315 MEMBERSHIP 650.00 0.00 579.00 0.00 71.00 89.0 z6 4316 TRAINING 1, 359. 00 0. 00 1, 284. 28 0. 00 74. 72 94. 5 74317 z3 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 07-00 0-00 0.00 0.00 O.00 29 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CMGS 138, 735. 00 9, 249. 00 120, 233. 00 0. 00 18, 502. 00 86. 6 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 159, 094. 00 11, 059. 56 139, 887. 15 0. 00 19, 206. 85 87.9 30 31 5400 EQUIPMENT 32 33 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 3, 790. 00 0. 00 2, 634. 01 0. 00 11155. 99 69.4 41 42 43 , 46 4] E HAN $ 00 4, 100. 00 00 1, 36-795 0. 00 -, 732-05 --33:-e 34 '3402-€-GU-If'MENf-M0R-0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 7, 890. 00 0. 00 4, 001.96 0. 00 3, 888. 04 50.7 35 35 A C'0LEAS E -PA &LENTS 3] -- 36 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 82, 541. 00 0. 00 42, 543. 90 0. 00 39, 997. 10 51.5 3q OBJECT SUBTOTAL 82, 541. 00 0. 00 42, 543. 90 0. 00 39, 997. 10 51.5 4J so s, 2 40 4,55 42 DIVISION TOTAL 1, 495, 982. 00 112, 601. 85 1, 226, 100. 93 11, 969. 14 257, 911. 93 82.7 s3 54 55 Ti sa au 6 6? 43 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 1, 495, 982. 00 112, 601. 85 1, 226, 100. 93 11, 969. 14 257, 911. 93 62.7 45 2401 ANIMAL 5044TRoL DEPT. AMAL--REOUL-TN 46 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 0-00 22, 96003 77.7 2 00 8, 55 794-920797- 49 410-REGULAR-SALAR-IES/C1i3C 102,-791-.-00 E4 5 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 1, 100. 00 0. 00 595. 18 0. 00 504. 62 54. 1 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 1, 498. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1, 498. 00 0. 0 51 .b• 66 67 •r3 ]0 ]2 sz 4111 -ACCRUAL -CASH IN 1, 49 1, G72. 97 O. 00 174. 97 111.6 1 53 56 1 ,5S6 3 ]5 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • I. rr' 41, I • • FINANCE-FA454 TIME 17:19:18 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0013 2 .4•1 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND -DIV-OBJT--DESCR 2 3 b ;1•---- 6 APPROPRIATION MONTHLY EXP YTD-E-XPND. ENCUMBRANCE--UNENG-BALANCE- X 001 GENERAL FUND • 7 6 9 2401 ANIMAL CONTROL DEPT: ANIMAL REGULTN 4100 o 12 -PERSONAL SERVICES12 4117 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL 400. 00 79. 31 475. 59 O. 00 75. 59- 118. 8 4185 SOCIAL SECURITY(F I C A) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O. 4157 14 15 6 a 19 20 4 --UNIFORMS 900=00 3'7:52 112. 53 0.00 787.47----12-5 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 696. 00 79.92 671.80 0.00 224.20 74. 9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 109, 073. 00 8, 902. 15 63, 449. 04 O. 00 25, 623. 96 76. 5 16 17 O 21 cCONTRACT SERVICES 22 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 1, 500. 00 99. 11 658. 67 O. 00 841. 33 43. 9 23 4251--GOf FTRAG zy 21 21 24 -SERV-IGE/GOVT 6, 000-00 172. 30 3.-026. 26 0.-00 2,-973=74- 5 . OBJECT SUBTOTAL 7, 500. 00 271. 41 3, 684. 93 O. 00 3, 815. 07 49. 1 26 21 4300 R-TALS/SUPPbI -MATE ES1OTHER 28 22 25 A304 TELEPHONE 700. 00 46. 14 560.93 0.00 139.07 80.1 30 23 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 1, 700. 00 O. 81 -1, 049. 06 O. 00 650. 94 61. 7 31 24 4309 32 4. -MA 600:-00 0. 00 217. 24 0,00 382-76 86-2 33 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 1, 600. 00 141. 71 1, 145. 85 0. 00 454. 15 71. 6 34 6 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE_ 2, 200. 00 O. 00 779. 78 O. 00 1, 420. 22 35.4 15 2, 4315 -MEMBER SH -1 50-00 O. 00 35-00 O. 00 15.00 7£r. e 4316 TRAINING 36 -�-t31 29 85. 00 O. 00 84. 79 O. 00 O. 4�f 99.7 30 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE O. 00 0.00 0.00 O. 00 O. On O. 0 39 30, 4396-TRSFR OUT INS-USER-GHO8 12-.-594-00 ,0 31 1 983:00 10,627-O0 0.00 1T967--00 04--3 32 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 19, 529. 00 1, 171. 66 14.499.6.5 O. 00 5, 029. 35 74. 2 4z 33 43 5400-EQUI PMENT 44 34 35 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 1. 050. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 1, 050. 00 O. 0 46 6 3a OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 050. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 1, 050. 00 O. 0 447 n0 37 6900 4, LEASE PAYMENTS 36 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O. 0rl 39 OBJECT SUBTOTAL O. 00 O. O e 40 e e . 5. 50 O. 00 0. 0 s3 41 54 42 55 DIVTSTON- TOTAL 137,-1-52,00 10-345-22 101--633-62 0.00 35,- 18-38 74-1 5 435 4. 58 45 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 137, 152. 00 10, 345. 22 101, 633. 62 O. 00 35, 518. 38 74. 1 59 60 46 2701 CIVIL DEFENSE DEPT: DISASTER PREP fir 4, 4100-PERSONAL-SERV-ICF"G 48 E� 49 4103 REGULAR SALARIES/SAFETY 26, 373. 00 1, 116. 50 21, 002. 75 O. 00 5, 370. 25 74.6 n so 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 396.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 396.00 O.0 6' 51 41 -1 -1 -ACCRUAL -GASH -TN 396-00 0.00 6n 52 194:-63 0.00 201-37 21-. 69 53 0 54 ,1 72 5S /, 56 4 5, ,5 d d J I 1 • 1 e s • • • • r 4 i 0 • t ]S • t. t• .nI C 41 Y OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-FA454 EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0014 I FROM -04/01-/-92 TO -04/-30/92 DATE --05/13/92 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND -DIV OBJ-T-DESCR APPROPR4ATION MONTHLY-EXP-YTD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE- -•UNENC- BALANCE •JRJ 001 GENERAL FUND • 3 5 6 8 IJ . 14 • r 2701 CIVIL DEFENSE DEPT: DISASTER PREP 4100 PERSONA/---SERVjES 4187 UNIFORMS 175.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 27, 340. 00 0. 00 1, 116. 50 123. 93 21, 321. 31 0. 00 0.00 51. 07 70. 8 6, 018. 69 77. 9 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 4,249.00 330.18 4251--CONTRACT-SERVICE'00VT 3r445 -0O 0.00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 7,697.00 330.18 20 300-MATERi-ALS/ CUPPLIES/OT1-fE ?2 24 25 1126 I 1 p 27 29 3,381.57 2:249.68 5,651.25 0.00 -0. 00 0. 00 867. 43 1,178.32 2,045.75 79. 5 65. 73. 4 9 I0 II 12 to 15 16 17 0 19 23 4305 OFFICE_ OPER SUPPLIES 725.00 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 1 200.00 433 -6 -TRAINING 0:-44 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 4,008.00 4,933.00 ' OBJECT SUBTOTAL • 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 257. 00 257. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0- 00 3, 492. 00 3, 492. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0.00 0. 00 725. 00 0. 0 200. 00 0. 0 0. 00 07O 516. 00 87. 1 1, 441. 00 70. 7 21 a: 23222 24 m r3 O • 2G 27 • 20 30 3, 5400 EGUIPMENT 5402 Ei1UIPMENT-MORE THAN $500 OBJECT SUBT 30 3, 32 33 34 35 fi 37 0 39 DIVISION ---TO AL DEPARTMENT TOTAL 500. 00 0-,-470700 40, 470. 00 0.00 7-'703.6 0.00 0.00 is 3 .- -'07-4647-56 1,703.68 30, 464. 56 -O0 0.00 500. 00 0O. 00 0.0 1070G5-44 75. 10, 005. 44 75. 2 32 133 34 35 3€ 3S 40 al 42 43 3101 MEDIANS 4100-PERSONAL-SERVICE5 4? 43 44 46 4 40 49 50 DEPT: ST/HWY/ST.DRAIN 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 44,007.59 53, 458.00 4,667.17 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 500.00 26.44 381.52 41-t0-VAC-I$N/SICK PAY OFF -51-6.00 0.00 -0700 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 2,636.00 0.00 2,633.77 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 287.00 26.47 207.67 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 57,397700--------4720-.-0 7z-230-55 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201-CONTRACT-:-SERVICE/PR-IVA-TE 477-200-00 3,800-00 04T941768 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 1,300.00 471.38 471.38 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 48, 500. 00 4,271.38 35, 413. 06 0.00 9,450.41 82.3 0.00 118.48 76.3 0.00 ;x16.00 --0.0 0. 00 2.23 99. 9 0.00 79.33 72.3 0. 00 101 -166:-45 02. 2 0-00-322-258732 74:0 0.00 8'8.62 36.2 0. 00 13, 086. 94 73. 0 52 53 54 7 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4303 UTILITIES 7, 800. 00 471.66 6, 426. 52 4309 -MAINTENANCE -MATER -IA LS 4, 000-00 1-75.64 2r181. 79 0.00 27-751 1,373.48 1, 490-70 82.3 45 46 47 48 50 51 52 S3 54 56 57 50 59 60 61 E2 63 64 65 6 60 L9 70 7, 72 74 75 797 Ito r. 0 0 0 • • FINANCE-FA454 TIME 17: 148 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FROM 04/01 92 --TO 04130f92 PAGE 0015 2 - ', 83.0::rOF YEAR COMPLETE -FUND--DIV-0B,tT-DESGR 2 3 4 5 6 APPROPRIATION MONTHLY-EXPY-TD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE---UNENC--BALANCE- !. 001 GENERAL FUND °- 5 e 8 9li 3101 MEDIANS DEPT: ST/HWY/ST.DRAIN ' to 4300 MATER IALS/SUPPIESf13;HER 2 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LURES 350.00 55.24 58. Oh 0.00 291.94 16. 5 14 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 500.00 145.37 495.32 0.00 4.66 99.0 4-396--TRSFR-OUT-INS-USER--CHGS 14i 7r 13700 5.400. 00 11,- 163:00 0. 00 4, 026:00- ---156.-4 " OBJECT SUBTOTAL 19.787. 00 6. 247. 96 20.324. 69 327. 51 865. 20- 104.3 to 19 16 18 20 21 DIVISION TOTAL 125. 684. 00 15, 239. 42 102. 968. 30 327. 51 22, 388. 19 82.1 22 23 2103 25 21 CT MAINTENANC-E DEPT: ST/HWYJS F -DRAIN 24 25 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES �6 22, 23 24 4202-PER=UL 4R O/1LAR�FSfP4�SC Z= .,i4-©@ 13. ]8i-95 127x758. 0. 3f 00 277-855. 89 820 29 _, .4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 210.00 0.00 186. 59 0.00 23.41 88.8 30 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 2, 411. 00 92. 81 2, 501. $9 O. 00 90. $9- 103.7 v I Z Z-AGERIJAL CASH -IN 3.-0417-00 25 26 27 O. 00 2i-5097-92 0. 00 501-08' 83-3 3z 3i 4135 SOCIAL SECURITY (F I C A) 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 34 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 1. 419. OU 101.69 888.37 0.00 130. 63 87. i 35 OBJECT CUB -TOTAL 162. 265,00 13, ze 1 29 3U 576-45 1-23,-844-88 0-00 28,410-12- 62-4 36 37 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES �° - 1201GONTRAG-SERV-ICF/-RRI-VATC 7�.-408.00 31 2 31 4.-931-. 56 55.-167- 2 59 0.00 22,--2.40. 41 71.2 ° 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 0.00 471.38- 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 ;; OBJECT SUBTOTAL 77, 408. 00 4, 460. 18 55. 167. 59 0. 00 22, 240. 41 71.2 43 4 f 5 36 44 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER45 4309 46 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 23. 500. 00 2. 200. 99 14, 810. 31 O. 00 8, 689. 69 63.0 4' 1 37' 38 39 -TOR--FUEL1 AND-L-44BFS 4.604--()0 325-45 -�,--440.0. 09 00 3.1 59 -.ter1 53-9^-"r 49 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE_ 11. 650. 00 1, 147. 54 8, 845. 52 2, 652. 42 152. 06 98.6 50 4316 TRAINING 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 51 4396-TRSFC-R--�3UT---ENS- SER - GS 63, 945. 00 40 41 4255 0. 00 49, 119-00 0. 00 14,2267-00-------76. 0 52 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 103, 695. 00 3, 673. 98 75, 214. 92 2 53 2, 652. 42 5, 8' 7. 66 75. 0 54 43 44 45 5400-E<3L}i-PMENT56 5402 EQUIPMENT -MORE THAN $500 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 A OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 59 46 4, 413 60 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 61 62 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 20. $44. 00 3. 473. 56 19, 104. 58 0. 00 1, 739. 42 91.6 63 496 6' (3B JEC-T--SUBTOTAL 20,844. 4. 00 3. 173. 56 19,-1-047-58 0-00 50 51 'Sz 1-.-739. 42 91. 66 67 DIVISION TOTAL 364,-21-2- 00 25184-17 53 54 ,-6/3 283,334-.-97 ,-652_ 97 2.12 78,-227.61 78,5 6i 70 71 55 56 5 `7 ( 7? • i 74 I '5 79 4.1 S S S • $ w (6,, w t„Iy� l ik�'tl.td6�)eTr+!s A,! -!IOW= 4 4 4 I' • 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 I 4 • r FINANCE-FA454 CITi OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0016' IV= 11-.-1R. ?CV , f[v,TVYrVZ7-7C-11.2-vYr.7vr7C Un,C ‘..7.2,1.2,-,,L- 2 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE • 3 3\ 2 3 4 FUND -DIY- -08v1TDESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY -EXP YTD-EX.PND. ENCUMBRANCE Ut4Et4C BALANCEV.5 5 0 001 GENERAL FUND 6 e el 3104 TRAFFIC SAFETY DEPT: ST/HWY/ST. DRAIN 9 ,o 12 4100 -PERSONAL SC12V-ICI S 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 90, 613. 00 7, 306. 20 73. 869. 82 0. 00 16, 743. 18 81. 5 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 390.00 0.00 65.69 0.00 324. 31 16.8 OFF 00 14 15 ,e 19 -4110--VACATION/SICK-PAY 3, 570700 185.63- 3,-682763 0. --112: 63-- --103:1 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 3, 770. 00 131. 13 3, 462. 63 0. 00 307. 37 91.8 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 260.00 31.89 243.75 0.00 16.25 93. 7 `78� 15 UDJECT-SUBi{3T-AL fi 56. 85- •C1, ;724. 52 -6.-00 17. 2-78-48 02. 4 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES Z 22 23 25 25 27 2e 29 30 11 :~ 34 3 3U ''' AO 4231 CONTRACT SERV-CEIPR-IVATE 20, 195-00 1-T-5627-50 14x365-50 3, 315. 00 2v514.50 877-5 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 7, 920. 00 480. 22 4, 937. 49 0. 00 2, 982. 51 62.3 ,,I OBJECT SUBTOTAL 28, 115. 00 2, 042: 72 19, 302. 99 3, 315. 00 5, 497. 01 80.4 23 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4303 UTILITIES 6.365. 00 937. 18 5, 887. 48 0. 00 477. 52 92. 4 430'7 t;A:NTENAHCC t'IATCR-iALS 26.-1-50-00 4;-179--49 13, 896-11 3)7595. 74 O, 656. 15 66. C 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 1, 570. 00 121.06 1, 406. 09 0. 00 163. 91 89.5 2iI 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 2, 200. 00 8. 02 1. 506. 03 0. 00 693. 97 68. 4 -MEMBERSHIP e 431 -5 L00-00 0.00 80-00 .00 120.-00 -4070 4316 TRAINING 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 3, 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 12, 658. 00 832. 00 10. 992. 00 0. 00 1, 666. 00 86.8 1' OBJECT SUBTOTAL 49-143700---& 077-75 33,-7 7. 71 3. 595-74 11-x•779.-55 76. 32 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS J3 '] 42 43 3., 6900 LEASE -PAYMENTS 10�-0`]6. 00 855. 1-1 9. 392 0.-00 703. 61- 93. 0 3; OBJECT SUBTOTAL 10, 096. 00 855. 11 9, 392. 39 0. 00 703. 61 93. 0 35 45 45 47 q.3 l DIVISION TOTAL 185, 957. 00 16, 632. 43 143, 787. 61 6, 910. 74 35, 258. 65 81.0 ,o 3'f 49 50 5, 52 no DEPARTMENT TOTAL 675. O33. 00 37-05602 33OT-087-88 7. 890767 135, 87.4-45 7970 4, 4101 PLANNING DEPT: PLANNING 42 53 54 55 56 43 m 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 48 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 219, 797. 00 19, 277. 04 180. 018. 56 0. 00 39, 778. 44 81.9 5, 46 106-REGULAR--OVERT-IME 300. 00 0. 00 40-530700----------259747 1.^,7-5 01 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 3, 293. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 3, 293. 00 0. 0 � Af3 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN • 3, 293. 00 0. 00 2, 341. 44 0. 00 951. 56 71.1 G1 54 X49 411 -2 --PART TIME/TEMPORARY 9. 00070C,----943.-75 -6-943 8 O. 00 2, 056. 22 77.1 150 4185 SOCIAL SECURITY(F I C A) 642.00 58.52 430. 52 0.00 211.48 67.0 si 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 2, 379. 00 206. 11 1, 962. 83 0. 00 416. 17 82.5 65 65 67 ,e O u 011UECT-SULI TOTAL X704. 00 20, 485:-42 191, 737. 66 0. 00 46x966-94 80. 3 53 54 56 `5 \7 4 74 ]5 '9 r .01 2 5 6 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-FA454 EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) TIME 17-14-48 FROM 04/01-/92-T0---04/30/92 ---FUND-DIV --O B JT-DF_SC R 001 GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATION PAGE 0017 DATE 05/13/92--- 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE MONTHLY -EXP YTD-EX.PND. ENCUMBRANCE-..----UNENC- BALANCE 9 9 '0 a 13 14 15, 4101 PLANNING DEPT: PLANNING -X200-gONTRACT -SERV ICF_S- 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 137 650. 00 13. 650. 00 1.265. 00 1, 265. 00 107 185. 31 107 185. 31 0. 00 0. 00 3,464.69 3,464.69 74. 6 74. 6 i •4 5 10 12 13 4 1s 16 17 19 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE 1, 832. 00 142. 52 4' 05--OFF-IGE--OPER SUPP-I-ES 17, O50-00 526:-31 242. 00 O. 00 630. 00 O. 00 055 00 216. 00 1, 766. 53 0. 00 65. 47 96. 4 1 4, 605-50 0. 00 12.-444-50 -27-0 89.61 0.00 152.39 37.0 182.23 0.00 4447.77 28.9 721--00 0-00 134.00 84.3 399.00 0.00 458.42 0.00 59.42- 114.8 1, 258. 00 0. 00 17 242. 30 0. 00 15. 70 98. 7 7r186-00 716. 00 7.754. 00 0. 00 1, 432. 00 84. 4- 31, 452. 00 1, 600. 83 16, 819. 59 0. 00 14, 632. 41 53. 4 19 2Gl til 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 431-5- MEMBERSHIP 4316 TRAINING 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 4396--TRSFR OUT-INZ USER CMGS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 22' 23 24 W 0 y r/ 1 3d 25 26 27 28 29 30 6 11 - 20 21 22 23 24 25 r zc •z7 4_9 29 30, tio 5400-COUi P MEN.- 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 5402 EQUIPMENT -MORE THAN $500 OB‘JECTr-SUBTOTAL 3, 32 33 DIVISION TOTAL 4102 PLANNING COMM 2, 000. 00 0. 00 1, 590. 00 1, 590. 00 3, '90. 00 1-x5907-00 287--:396.00 24,-941-25 DEPT: PLANNING 1, 121. 41 1, 590. 00 2 711. 41 0. 00 0. 00 0-00 878. 59 0. 00 078-59 56. 0 100. 0 33 34 5 135 3, 221-7-453. 97 0. 00 657-942.-03 77. 0- 34 35 36 37 38 39 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE f3B lEGT-SUWWTAL 40 41 42 43 44 45 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4305-OFF-IGE-OPCR SUPPL-I-ES 4316 TRAINING 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE OBSE04-SUB-TOTAL 46 47 49 DIVISION TOTAL 6, 000. 00 6.-00000 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 488. 25 488-25 5,-500-00 306.30 8. 00 0. 00 188. 00 0. 00 5, 6960 306.-30 11, 696. 00 3, 662. 00 3,-652-00 27-6 54.44 7. 06 187. 40 2,-848--87 0. 00 0. 00 2, 338. 00 2,-338-00 0-00 0. 00 0. 00 O. 00 61. 0 61. 0 2, 045. 59 40. 2 0. 94 88. 2 0. 60 99. 6 2,-847. 13 50. 0 54 57 .9 794..-55 6,510,87------------0,00 5,-485-13 55-6-:;il 227, 964. 64 O. 00 71, 127. 16 76.2 Fi 299. 092. 00 25, 735. 80 49 50 5, 4201 BUILDING DEPT: 52 V 53 54 55 V 56 CONST/ENGIN/ENF 41 -00 -PERSONAL --SERV ICEC 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 254, 581. 00 21, 175. 12 2007 857. 06 0. 00 53, 723. 94 78. 8 ,4 ,5 �aR a7-, 7-t 1 s, d•' c a` r v�rr n <• t y t; .," i {•ii•Il",§' ���'� :,t,�y�ir�''; t:':w..�l�th' 'f�i•!' ilY,+�. `°;)1"�'T \,:'.� i�' f(.t ct 5'tS,tc'�+'.'� .C, O i1 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • S • • • I' FINANCE-FA454 CjTY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) rs nM_n2�tna_too_sn_naL�nlo•3 PAGE 0018 2 83.07. OF YEAR COMPLETE ---•FUND--DIV-QBJr-DF5CR APPROPRIAT-I(3N 6� MONTHLY -EXP- Y-TD--E-XPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC-- BALANCE 001 GENERAL FUND 91 4201 BUILDING DEPT: CONST/ENGIN/ENF 4100 0 -PERSONAL GERM -ICES 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 500.00 0.00 141.86 0.00 358. 14 28.3 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 3, 677. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 3, 677. 00 0. 0 13 4 1a 's 20 „ 4 16 4111 ACCRUAL -CASH --IN -- 3,677.00 0. 00 17-919. 40 0. 00- -1, 757:60 ----527 2 4185 SOCIAL SECURITY(F I C A) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS , 2, 602. 00 201. 28 1, 853. 16 0. 00 748. 84 71. 2 OBJECT 16 17 B GUB-TOTAL 265, 037. 00 21. 376 40--- 204,-7T�40 000 60r-245-52 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 -CONTRACT 1 22 23 19 20 2 SERVICE/ -PRIVATE 69r709 .-24 00 449199 -- 061=312--64 496. 60 32r899776- -52.: 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 900.00 869.00 869.00 0.00 31.00 96. 5 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 70, 609. 00 5, 360. 99 37, 181. 64 496. 60 32, 930. 76 53. 3 2$ 26 2' 211 " „ .14 35 39 42 A3 • 22 23 24 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE 2, 400. 00 181. 26 2, 331. 74 0. 00 68. 26 97. 1 430J OFF-10E-OPER-SUPP1EG 25 26 27 6. 62`7. 00 312:-95 3, 677: 10 220. 08 2, 71 9:-- 7: 74 -56- 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS O. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 980. 00 84.87 776.80 0.00 203. 20 79. 2 431-1-AUTO-MA-INTENANCE 23 29 30 1, 170-00 28.51 :337-45 0. 00 032. 55 -28:-8-- 4315 MEMBERSHIP 300. 00 115.00 365. 00 0. 00 65. 00- 121. 4316 TRAINING 2, 700. 00 285. 00 2, 306. 06 475. 00 81. 06. 103.0 4317 -EX -PENS- 3 32 33 CONFERENCE 277--00 0.00 0.00 O.00 277.00 -G.0--,„ 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 34, 256. 00 2, 692. 00 28, 874. 00 0. 00 5, 382. 00 84. 2 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 48, 712. 00 3, 699. 59 38, 682. 23 695. 08 9, 324. 69 80.8 34 35 36 5400 EQUIPMENT 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 688.00 0.00 688.47 0.00 0.47- 100.0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL , 4,;I 4'' 41 37 39 608. 00 0. 00 6897 0. 00 0.-47 100. 0 503 51 -• ,,o `''' CO) 40 41 42 DIV -P3 -10N TOTAL 385i-046.-00 30,-4367-98-----'--2817-323. 82 1, 191. 68 102, 5_;O 50 73. ;? 4202 PUB WKS ADMIN DEPT: CONST/ENGIN/ENF 4443 45 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 177, 658. 00 14, 329. 66 140, 620. 75 0. 00 37, 037. 25 79.1 464106 47 4B -REGULAR -OVERTIME 306-00 0.00 346. 89 G. 00 133. -11 7J. „ 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 3, 534. 00 438. 71 3, 935. 71 0. 00 401. 71- 111. 3 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 2, 134. 00 0. 00 561. 97 0. 00 1, 572. 03 26.3 61 '''' 6 66 6' �y ,0 ]I 2 496.5 50 s, 4185 -SOC -IAL --- SECURITY -(F -IC A) 0-00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 4187 UNIFORMS 7, 070. 00 618. 55 5, 097. 72 0. 00 1, 972. 28 72.1 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 1, 861. 00 207. 33 2, 090. 62 0. 00 229. 62- 112.3 2 53 54 OBJECT SUBTOTAL_ 1-927-75770 15, 59425 152 73. 66 00,-083. O0 4 34 7'7. 2 55 56 ' /3 ]4 S • • A # e Q. • It t • • • • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE -F-4454 EXPENDITURE tUMr1ARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0019 TIME 1- DATE -05/1'3/5;2 ---- .60 !, I 1-4--48 FROM 04/01/92 TO 04/80/92 2 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 3 t-LJr�a at 5 6 .l-0BJT OESGR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY -EXE' Y-TD-EXFND. 001 GENERAL FUND ENGUr1BRANCE- UNENC--BALANCE ,. 2 6 , 8 9 4202 PUB WKS ADMIN DEPT: CONST/ENGIN%ENF 10 v.. 1 1 .3 4290-GONTRAGT-SEERVICE3 9 10 1, 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE_ OBJECT SUBTOTAL 15, 623. 00 15, 623. 00 10. 895. 00- 10, 895. 00- 14,451.15 0- 14,451.15 14, 451. 15 0. 00 0. 00 1, 171. 85 1, 171. 85 92. 4 92. 4 i''I 15. 16 J ,] 20 21 22 24 25 26 27 20 ✓ 29 30 31 4/ 32 33 34 ' 35 36 3] 4_38 39 40 42 43 45 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4304 TELEPHONE 6, 400. 00 698. 38 5, 585. 65 0. 00 814. 35 87. 2 18 4305 OFF-i-GE-OPER-SUPPLTEC 10,500-00 555-60 0]-647-01 64,95 4,-788,01 ('2. 9 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 200.00 0.00 55.76 0.00 144.24 27.8 zz 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 750. 00 53. 69 523. 16 0.00 226 84 69 7 23 431-1-Ar}T-O-MA-INTENANGE 882-00 8.00 502-01 0.00 379.99 56.9 4315 MEMBERSHIP 840. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. pry 2' 840.00 O.0 26 4316 TRAINING 2, 000. 00 O. 00 1, 600. 34 O. 00 399. 66 . 80. 0 27 431 -7 -CONFERENCE -EXPENSE 800. 00 0.00 +3 00 O. 00 800. 00 -0. 0 �z9 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 53, 283. 00 4, 241. 00 44, 802. 00 O. 00 8, 481. 00 84. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 75, 655. 00 5, 556. 67 61, 715. 93 64. 95 30 13, 874. 12 81. 6 31 vI i.3 I4 ,5J I6 17 20 24 5400 EQUIPMENT 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 100.00 0.00 90.93 0.00 9.07 90.9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1-00,00 0-00 90-93 0. 00 9.07 90. 4 DI V I C I ON TOTAL 284,-1385-00 1-0r25-5-92 228]-1731-67 64. 95 55,-4-30. 38 80-5 4204 BLDG MAINT DEPT: CONST/ENGIN/ENF 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 158, 741. 00 13, 213.00 129, 867. 82 0. 00 28, 873. 18 81. 8 41-06-REGULAR-OVERT4MF_ ,622=00 0,00 1,-280-06 0.-00 344,94 78. 9 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 3, 571. 00 92. 81 3, 589. 81 O. 00 18. 81- 100. 5 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 2, 371. 00 O. 00 2, 065. 97 O. 00 305. 03 87. 1 4 -187 -UNIFORMS 200-00 18.76 175. 12 0.00 24-88 87. 5 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 100. 00 8. 88 67. 78 O. 00 32. 22 67. 7 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 166, 605. 00 13, 333. 45 137, 046. 56 O. 00 29, 558. 44 82. 2 46 40 47 48 49 50 51 52 a. 53 54 55 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT -SUBTOTAL 31, 596. 00 12,.555. 00 24, 376. 50 O. 00 7, 219. 50 77. 1 31, 596. 00 12,-555-00 24,376. 50 OE -00 7,-219. 50 77. 1 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4303-UTILITIES106,000. 00 0,963. -91 83,956. 14 ' 0-00- 22,-043. 56 7-9. 2 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 35, 090. 00 3, 657. 20 27, 541. 42 410. 94 7, 137. 64 79. 6 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES- 1, 450. 00 120. 90 1,202. 89 O. 00 247. 11 82. 9 4314-AUTO-114-INTENANGE 1--450-00 0,00 959-22 0.001 490-78 66-1 ' 55 57 s, 34 35 3] 30 l9 40 41 42 41.43 4 n4 45 45 4] , 48 50 61 , •:2 54 4 `6 5/ .,9 rg eo 61 62 63 4 66 5] 41 60 •i9 70 71 I 72 74 75 41 7N 410 • • • 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 0 J F INANCF--FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0020 i Q t t • I' • t LI I8 17 T4 , ,(1-1171]'TTVI7TC-lU 5J 7-uVr7.- 1JMIC V:7r 1,]/7C ,'N 2 83. 0% OF YEAR 'COMPLETE 2 3 FUND 4 ---DIY --QB.JT--DESCR APPROPR-1AT-ION MONTHLY EXP YTD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE- -UNENC-- BALANCE --- - , 5 6 6 001 GENERAL FUND ] ] 9 e 4204 BLDG MAINT DEPT: CONST/ENGIN/ENF I6 9 ,2 --4300--MATER-1AeSf,GurrL IE:1/OTHER 13 4316 TRAINING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 14 2 4321 BUILDING SAFETY/SECURITY 4, 600. 00 648. 77 3, 208. 63 O. 00 1, 391.37 69.7 15 4396-TRSFR.-OUT-INS-USER CHGS 34r 265700 27426700 29r418. 00 0-00 4. 947.--00 -85._ 8 ,6 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 182, 855. 00 15, 816. 78 146, 286. 60 410. 94 36, 157. 46 80.2 19 19 i; 5400- EQUIPMENT ] 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O. 0 22 e 5402 EQUIPMENT -MORE THAN $500 2, 100. 00 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 2, 100. 00 0. 0 23 24 O O L 2, 1007-04 0. O0 0. 00 0. 00 2h00. O0 0,-c, 25 20 26 27 zl 28 22 DIVISION -TOTAL 383, 156. 00 4105. 23 307, 709. 66 410. 94 75-,-035-4c •s. 2., 23 30 24 4205 EQUIP SERVICE DEPT: CONST/ENGIN/ENF - 31 2 25 33 26 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 34 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 90, 168. 00 8, 040. 82 80, 612. 88 0. 00 9, 555. 12 89. 4 35 27 28 .1106 REGULAR -OVERTIME 1-00-e0 0-00 62-90 0-00 37. 10 62:-9 ;6 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 3, 709. 00 1, 159. 03 4, 841. 37 0. 00 1, 132_. 37- 130.5 30 29 30 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 1, 609. 00 0. 00 561.97 O. 00 1, 047. 03 34.9 qo 3 4112 PART T IMEfi EMPORARY 6, 754-00 -0700 6. 712. 23 0. 00 41-77- 99.3 32 4185 SOCIAL SECURITY (F I C A) 615. 00 0. 00 410. 76 0. 00 204. 24 66.7 42 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 1, 244. 00 80. 47 ' 998. 31 0. 00 245. 69 80.2 43 33 10 - ,. 280: 32 9200-42 -- 000 9, 998.58------907-4 44 34 ECT SUBTOTAL OB -J., 35 4,, 6 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 - ONTRAeT-SERV-iC 47 37 R4VATt 4387. 00 0-00 4x389-0©OE-00----------------OE-00 10 . 49 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4, 389. 00 Q. 00 4, 389. 00 O. 00 0. 00 100. 0 so 51 40 -MATER ; 4300 IALSJ3UPPLIES-/OTHER 41 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 6, 500. 00 1, 040. 37 6, 214. 22 0. 00 285. 78 95. 6 5. 42 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 3, 840. 00 44. 25 2, 024. 99 O. 00 1, 815. 01 52.7 55 56 43 431-1--AUTO-MAINTENANCE3r575700 22-41 2 700795 0.-00 974-05 75. 5 5, 4,1 4316 TRAINING 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 59 45 4396 TRSFR. OUT -INS USER CHGS 15, 171. 00 982. 00 13, 212. 00 O. 00 1, 959. 00 87.0 50 29r086-.-00---2,-089. 03 24; 1-52-t6 46 OadEeT--SURTQTAL O. 00 4, 933- 37- 84 80 ,,: 47 b.. 5400 EQUIPMENT 63 -EQUIPMENT -THAN -$500 '7?. 49 7.7402 -MORE 10 -- 0700 O: 00 10r365. 23 0. 00 -4-1-77 5 �. 50 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 10, 407. 00 O. 00 10, 365. 23 0. 00 41.77 99.5 66 51 -PAYMENTS 67 f9 5z 6900 -LEASE 1. 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 5, 016. 00 417. 96 4, 179. 60 O. 00 836. 40 83.3 70 53 ]I 55 /33 • 74 56 ]5 i Q t t • I' • FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 1 , 00:` 1 r fhb n.�'1-;ei6''mv:1 mi,• Mli�,1.�; it7' 4r,,"' 14.f r � .btu 4 r; r 17 J B' B' 3 J J J I J d A I s • aia TI,,r_ 17. LY -7-4. ROM -04/01 -7/92_ -TO -04/-c90/92 DATE- 05/13/92----- 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE - FUND 3 --DIV--013JT DESCR APPROPR-IAT-ION MONTHLY EX(' YTD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE- -UNENC--BALANCE - 7.G 001 GENERAL FUND 6900 -LEASE PAYMENT -6 7 e 9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5, 016. 00 417. 96 4, 179. 60 0. 00 836. 40 83. 3 m 11 z DIVISION TOTAL 153, 097. 00 1 1, 787. 31 137, 286. 41 0. 00 15, 810. 54 89. 6 DEP AR.TMEN 3 1s -- -OTAL 1-7-205-1-4347-00- 947195,41 955,-25-1-56 1-,-667-57 248,-514.-87- 79-3 6 14 s 4601 COMM RESOURCES DEP T: COMM PROMOTION Il m ,o h B 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISE 185, 470. 00 13, 824. 00 144, 201. 58 O. 00 41, 268. 42 77.7 4106 . 2z 23 REGULAR OVER=TIME 1,000 QO O. 00 74.24 O. 00 24 23 2:, 925.76 7.4 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 2_, 758. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 2, 758. 00. 0. 0 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 2, 758. 00 '0. 00 2, 140. . .4 77. 6 56 0 00 617 4 4142 27 z PAP.T=F-IME/TF_MPQRARY 717-473. 00 67 047,77 55.-900. 0. 00-----1-5r zn 272. 39 79. 5 z3 ,4185 SOCIAL SECUR ITV ( F I C A) 4, 328. 00 374. 96 3, 465. 89 0. 00 842. 1 1 80. O 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 2, 133. 00 168. 70 1, 754. 49 0. 00 378. 51 82.2 z4 L7 BUE+ �-SUBTOTAL 269.620.(00 30 31 2s 20,-41-5-43 207-.-53-7--aO O. 00 02.-052.62 7 2( 200 CONTRACT SERVICES n 4201 n�.� 32 32 33 4 ; G-0NTR•. � 5E1 V I C E/PRIVATE67, 750. 00 14, 584-50 63r879.- 06 33750 3,-53?_ 64 .7 • . z9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 67, 750. 00 14, 584. 50 63, 879. 86 337. 50 3, 532. 64 94.7 . 42399 -MAF€ TAL£i/SUPPLIES/OTHER ,d 3 40 31 4302 ADVERTISING 32 12, 000. 00 0. OO 7, 139. 12 3, 597. 05 1, 263. 83 89.4 4304 TELEPHONE 3, 600. 00 287. 16 2, 270.15 0.00 1, 34 32. 65 63. 0 305 £]FFI6E-QPEF.-SFIPPLIES 7x500. 41 42 43 4• 00 17-428. 63 7, 4265 G. 00 2,073.:3 27a. 1 44 3G 4308 PROGRAM MATERIALS 12, 500. 00 364. 74 7, 312. 57 0. 00 5, 1E7. 43 58. 5 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 750.00 24.98 43_.8.33 0.00 311.67 58. 4 3G �-A4�TEl-MA-INTE#+IANGE 350-430 0,00 - 4G 4� 7 152,38 0.-04 197.62 43. 5 G 4315 MEMBERSHIP 700.00 115.00 568.00 0.00 132.00 81.1 4316 TRAINING 74. 00 0. d0 74 00 0 00 O 0 39 . . .0 100.0 .,�, 51 40 3i f FONFERENCFI=XPEN.^,E 140 fi0 0. 00 130.0. 00 00- •a 10. 00 92. 8 4, 4396 TR SFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 217421. UU 11686. OU 18, 048. OU O. 00 3, 373. OG 84.2 42 OBJECT SUB TOTAL 61, 035. 00 3, 906. 51. 43, 559. 00 3, 597. 05 13, 878. 95 77. 2 J3 54 5400 EQUIPMENT 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.O >y so 5402 EQUIPMENT -MORE THAN -$500 9-00 0.00 0. 00 O QO 0.00 0.0 i OBJECT SUBTOTAL• 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 �° 62 63 6900-LEACE PAYMENTS G4 1 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 0.60 0. 00 0.00 G. 00 0.00 O.O OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 O. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 ., G, GG C/7 ,o ,1 ,2 5'. JG 3 14 5 1 7 r fhb n.�'1-;ei6''mv:1 mi,• Mli�,1.�; it7' 4r,,"' 14.f r � .btu 4 r; r 17 J B' B' 3 J J J I J d A I s • aia 0 • • 3 4 5 6 FINANCE-FA454 T Ih#F-i=7�i4 : 40 FUN+.) -D I V -0B JT-DESC-R 001 GENERAL FUND CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) rR0M-04,LO1/92 TO 04/-30/92 PAGE 0022 DATE -05/ 13/92---- 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE APPROPRIAT-ION MONTHLY-EXP-YTD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC--BALANCE 3 V 4 8 9 JO • 1 1 • • • 0 • 6101 PARKS DIVISION TOTAL DEPARTMENT -IOTA 398, 405. 00 3 �8, 405- 0O DEPT: PARKS/FEC 38, 906. 44 38; 906. 44 314, 976. 24 3,934.55 ,1-4T-976724 3, 9345 79, 494. 21 80. 0 74,494721 80. 0 151 161 I] 1B 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 1 -06 -REGULAR -OVERTIME 19 20 .`.2 23 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 4465 -SOL -i Ab-SE£UR-%TY (- 4189 MEDICARE_ BENEFITS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 83, 079. 00 500-00 793. 00 3,083.00 z. 40 327. 00 87, 782. 00 7, 122. 53 68, 482. 72 0. 00 14, 596. 28 82. 4 26-44 415. 23 0-00 64.77 8.,. _ 0.00 0.00 0.00 793.00 0.0 0. 00 3, 081. 27 0. 00 1. 73 99. 9 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 26.47 269. 12 0.00 57. 88 82. 2 7, 175. 44 72, 248. 34 0. 00 15, 533. 66 82. 3 24 25 26 2'/ 29 0 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE_ 4251--CONTRACT-SER V I CE-1QOVT OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4300-MATER-IALS/SUPPLIES1-OTHER 31 • 32 33 • • • 3.9 35 35 3] 38 39 110, 613. 00 4, 385. 50 78, 223. 30 0. 00 32, 389. 70 70. 7 5, 500-00 -47-404X-00 4-400-00 0-00 i-100.--00- 6 116, 113. 00 8, 785. 50 82, 623. 30 0. 00 33, 489. 70 71. 1 6U e 9 iIGt CO 12 13 14 t)I'i 16 s 18 19 20 21 22 23 2-5 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 4303 UTILITIES 41, 000. 00 2, 950. 97 30, 652. 91 0. 00 10, 347. 09 4304 TELEPHONE 375. 00 17.71 254.41 0.00 120. 59 4309-MAIN-TENANCE-MATERIAL_S 15, 000:-00 1, 881. 69 12, 0017-23 207-31 2, 791. 46 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LURES 1, 600. 00 86. 05 1, 334. 66 0. 00 265. 34 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 1, 800. 00 56. 48 1, 672. 82 0. 00 127. 18 #31-5-11EMBERSHIt' 200:00 -0. 00 0.00 0.00 200.00 4316 TRAINING 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 17, 330. 00 1, 223. 00 14, 887. 00 0. 00 2, 443. 00 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 77. 305. •O Gni 5. '0 t,Qr-803. 03 2077-31 16, 2947--6G 40 41 42 43 45 74. 7 67. e 81-3 83. 4 92. 9 0. 0 85. 9 30 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 49 49 DI -V -1 -510N ---TOTAL 28-1-7-200:-00 227-1-767-84- 215, 6747-6 207--31 65, S-18-02- 76. 7 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 281, 200. 00 22, 176.84 215, 674.67 207.31 65, 318.02 76.7 8142 CIP 89-142 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY 46 4] 48 49 -4200--CONTRACT-SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 0. 00 0. 0 49 50 51 sz 55 53 54 56 :A 59 U3 63 50 51 613 54 55 DIVISION TOTAL 0. 00 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 0 04 OS 6] DEPARTMENT TOTAL 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 56 t ]0 ]1 72 ]4 ]5 ]6 tI rj d 4 0116 • .. 2 a J 5 6 .4 I r 0 0 FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) I -ROM - 04/0/92 --TO 1 - 04/-30/92 d T FPAGE 0023 40 TIME -V,7-:-1448 DATE 05/13/92 N. 82.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 d FUND --DItf- 313JT DI SCR ARPROPR-IA-r40NMONTHLY—EXP--Y-TD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE--UNENG-BALANCE 4 s 001 LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND i 40 e 9 12 8142 CIP 89-142 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY 4300--MATER4ALS /Sk1P PE4 ES/OTHF_ft FUND TOTAL 11, 587, 211.00 951, 874.63 9, 571, 484. 77 49, 559. 90 1, 966, 166.33 83.0 9 IC 32 13 14 Is 14 15 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 251 261 271 29 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 4, 42 43 44 45 46 16 t7 I9 19 20 2, 22 23 24 25 26 27 29 29 30 31 32 33 34 16 37 38 4o 41 42 43 44 45 45 47 40 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 4] 49 49 50 5, 52 53 54 55 56 57 56 I • i 1 4 1 5.8 59 1 '0 61 62 4 63 65 67 69 r,9 70 . ll 72 /3 74 75 jy • Si • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • i FINANCE-FA454 1 Cv1Y OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (DY FUND) PAGE 00141 /, • -...- -• "-• , ,�V,1 VT, VLI ,c IV VTI Vv, ,c LJh IC-- V.J/ 121 VC z 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 • 3 FUND DIV-0BJT-DESCR APPROPR-iATION ---UNENC-BALANCE - MONTHLY -EXE' YTD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE X 5 5 6 105 LIGHTING DISTRICT FUND r 6 9 6 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT o 9 4300 -MATER FAES7'SUPPtIES/6THE 2 ,o, 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 22, 000. 00 1, 833. 33 18, 333. 30 0. 00 3, 666. '70 83. 3 ,4 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 22, 000. 00 1, 833. 33 18, 333. 30 0. 00 3, 666. 70 83.3 15 16 3I 17 4: 18 ,sl DIVISION TOTAL 22, 000. 00 1, 833. 33 18, 333. 30 0. 00 3,666. 70 83.3 19 zo 16 21 17 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 22, 000. 00 1, 833. 33 18, 333. 30 0. 00 3, 666. 70 83.3 22 23 l8 $ NG 2601 STREET LiHT- 24 19 BEPT. -' STREET LIHT-INE„' 25 20 26 2 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 27 4i-0� 99, 402-E30 8, 311. 9229 017-892755---0700----171-509. '45 8 . 2e 22 REGEJLAR S{�tARiE^/MI:JC 23 , 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME_ 450. 00 0. 00 86. 48 0. 00 263. 52 19. 2 3c 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 1, 448. 00 92. 81 92. 81 0. 00 1, 355. 19 6. 4 31 24 44-1-1--ACBRttAL 32 25 CASi t iN 2, 940. 00 0. 0G 2r435-47 0. 00 312-53 O . 3, 26 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 500.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 500.00 0.0 34 27 4180 RETIREMENT 4185 -60E1 -Ai= SF 13, 707. 00 1, 143. 96 10, 079. 37 0. 00 3, 627. 63 73.5 35 - -000 0. 00 0.00 28 0.00 0700 37 29 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 12, 024. 00 1, 983. 49 10, 517. 05 0. 00 1, 506. 95 87.4 38 30 4184 MEDICARE BENEFITS OBJECT 3UDTfT•AL 622.00 50.43 513.71 0.00 108.29 82. 5 Jy 31. 131, 10-1-00 11, 582:61 105,-61-7744-----------0700----25.-483.-56 =0. ;; 32 33 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 43 44 34 4201-CONTRACT-SERVICE/PR-i-VATE 3r000-00 0700 1, 93 . 00 1r-069:-00--64.3 35 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 14, 782. 00 486. 22 8, 692. 68 0. 00 6, 089. 32 58.8 46 36 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 17, 782. 00 486. 22 10, 623. 68 --0. 00 7, 158. 32 59. 7 47 49 3] 3e 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 50 39 4303 UTILITIES 4204 -TELEPHONE 160, 270, 00 11, 724. 53 112, 987. 98 0. 00 47, 282. 02 70.4 S1 4, 30-1. 00 19, 05 103-83 0. 00 197. 17 4 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 6, 075. 00 1, 139. 32 5, 655. 33 0. 00 419. 67 93.0 s4 42 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 3, 750. 00 114. 00 1, 278. 86 0. 00 2, 47.1. 14 34.1 43 431--AUTO-MAif4TENANCF_ 4-800.00 20. 84 2, 302. 20 0-00 0 G197. eV �1 T7. 57 yl 44 4316 TRAINING 300.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 300.00 0.0 oa 45 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 14, 560. 00 -00 936. 00 12, 689. 00 0. 00 1, 871.00 87.1 53 46 i3S-JECT SUBTOTAL 90T05670 127 953.-74 130;-0 . • ., a s 5;-02B-80 71. 0 GI 47 2 6 63 64 49 DIV- S ION TOTAL 338r939-00 26, 022: 57 251,- 258732 O. 00 87r880-6 4. 65 5o 6E s, DEPARTMENT TOTAL 338. 939. 00 26, 022. 57 251, 258. 32 0. 00 87, 680. 68 74. 1 6' 6A 52 53 FUND TOTAL 360, 939. 00 27, 855. 90 269, 591. 62 0. 00 91, 347. 38 74.6 TL ]1 72 55• 3 ]4 75 • t) tc.) Cg G: G_. V EJ • • • 4 4 4 4 • FINANCE-FA454 CiTY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0025 6- 2 3 rnuv, 4/'+iVi1Ye---14J-V41-1jU/-' DATE 05/-13/92--------N 63.0;: OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 3 5 -.T 5 6 -- -FUND-DIV-0BJT---DESCR ArrROPRIA-TION MONTHL.ILEXr Y-TD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE -{JNENC-- BALANCE -- 109 VEHICLE PARKING DIST 6 7 6 9 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT - 1300- 9 0 ,z I., 2 MA-TE_R-IA47S/SUPPL+ESJOTHER 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 15, 705. 00 1.308. 75 13, 087. 50 O. 00 28617. 50 83.3 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 15, 705. 00 1, 308. 75 13, 087. 50 0. 00 28617. 50 83. 3 ,a :31 14 15 DIVISION TOTAL 15. 705. 00 1, 308. 75 13, 087. 50 0. 00 2, 617. 50 83.3 10 '9 2° I 6 ]DEPARTMENT ,B TOTAL 15, 705. 00 18308. 75 13, 087. 50 O. 00 28617. 50 83.3 3301 VELI PKG-DIST DErT: PAG-FAC-L-FFI-ES z, zz 23 24 9I 12, 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES IT02-REGULAR-SALARIESff1iSCF 2-5 26 27 30 31 32 22r -50 O 1, 355. 3G 12/-1-55;--82 O. O(3 4 18 73 345.29 , 23 24 L 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 236.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 236.00 0.0 '4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 236.00 0.00 388.37 0.00 152.37- 164.5 4180 -RETIREMENT 1.736-A0 184.97 1. 25 5 .27 5557-41 0.-00 390.-57 60.3 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 1, 300. 00 172. 26 1, 004. 67 0. 00 295. 33 77.2 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 138. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 138. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL ?_0, 347-00 1-7-7-12-.-59 3, 34 35 336 1 3s 'O 211 9 3, 15, 104-27 O. 04 5.-242-73 74.2 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 31 32 33 02-r-500.-00---47-121. 63 417-0417-18 2.-77-5-00 38683.62 53. 1 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 82, 500. 00 4, 121. 63 41, 041. 18 2, 775. 00 38, 683. 82 53. 1 '1300 MATERI-ALC/SUrrLIES/OTHER 42 43 44 34 35 36 4304 TELEPHONE 175. 00 10.00 90.87 0.00 94. 13 51.9 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 1, 000. 00 71.94 1, 041. 82 79. 11 120. 93- 112. `300 1$-FROGRAM-MA-TER-FALS 45 46 47 48 3] 36 3,3 4-00 0.00 10.00 0.00 10-00 0.0 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 1, 000. 00 0. 00 997. 41 0. 00 2. 59 99. 7 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 660. 00 52. 00 551. 00 0. 00 109. 00 83. 4 OB )EE BUB-TOTA- 2-635-00 133--94 50 51 53 55 5; 58 57 58 40 41 42 21-691--10 79-11 64. 79 77. 7 5400 EQUIPMENT 5420-DEPRE6-IAT-ION-MCH 43 1 & EQUIP 657-00 0. 00 Or -00-----0,--0C)------2652-00 0. 0 44 45 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 265.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 265.00 0.0 �JT 5600 BL-DHNGS/-TMPROVEMENTC 46 4] 4n 5620 DEPRECIATION/BLDGS&.IMPRV 2. 145.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2. 145.00 0.0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 145. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 2, 145. 00 0. 0 si 62 °3 64 49 50 SI DIVISION TOTAL 108. 092. 00 5. 968. 16 58. 836. 55 2, 854. 11 46. 401. 34 57.0 6 67 52 53 54 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 108. 092. 00 5. 968. 16 58, 836. 55 2, 854. 11 46, 401. 34 57. 0 70 ]2 55 56 V' /3 ]4 75/ go d I v 4 r 4 r I r r qa 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • • • • • 4, FINANCE —FA454 • CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) SROM 04/01 /92 TO -04 30/4'3• PAGE 0026 /I 2 . ...;._ . r . . .. ..., r c 1/1.4‘C. 'VIII L J/'1C— 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 1 2 FUNO--D-IV—OBU1--DESCR APPROPRIATION 4 MONTHLY—EXP YTD—EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC--BALANCE V 5 6 6 109 PARKING FUND 8 7 9 8 3301 VEH PKG DIST DEPT: PKG FACILITIES v II 9 -43G0 -f9ATER1-ALC/SUPrLIES/Ot'I 12 IER I. II 14 FUND TOTAL 123, 797. 00 7, 276. 91 71, 924. 05 2, 854. 11 49, 018. 84 60. 4 15 16 ,7 14 16 15 19 20 6 21 17 22 23 18 24 19 25 20 26 27 21 28 22 z9 23 33 24 31 32 25 33 26 34 35 2] 28 3! 29 39 30 40 31 11 32 Si 33 44 34 45 35 47 6 48 ] 49 38 W 39 51 51 40 ,3 41 55 42 SC 43 5! 44 M S9 45 60 46 61 47 52 4n . 61 FA 49 1,, 50 CC Cl 51 68 ,2 53 ?0 54 71 72 55 l3 • 7 ]54 • t et) R) LJ 4- V 41, 4 .0 FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) 0027 4 J11 ' ralIIT. re-:-t-t-t-,+ f ROM 04/01/92 -TO 04430/92 3 DATE --05/13/92-- 83.07. OF YEAR COMPLETE ------FUND- DI V--OBJT- DEBCR 21 q APPROPR IA1 ION MONTHLY -EX(' YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE--IJNENC,-- BALANCE ------7,-- • 5 6 110 PARKING FUND s • 8 9 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT e 9 0 ,o - 4300 -MATER iAl_S/6iJPPLiES4QTHEft 2 13 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 1, 146, 221.00 75, 250. 02 995, 720. 95 O. 00 150, 500. 05 86.0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 146, 221. 00 75, 250. 02 995, 720. 95 0. 00 150, 500. 05 86. 8 „ 14 15 159 lo DIVISION TOTAL 1. 146, 221. 00 75.250. 02 995, 720. 95 0. 00 150, 500. 05 86.8 16 17 9 „ s 1•J DEPARTMENT TOTAL 1, 146, 221. 00 75. 250. 02 995, 720. 95 O. 00 150. 500. 05 86. 0 3302 PARKINS -EN(- DGR-PI�E�r--FACILN-iEG 20 21 22 ,4 I ' 2 25 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 26 27 22 102-REGULAR-SAL-ARIES/MISC 444x012-00 377-489.73 23• ,4 -343, 131.79 0.00 1007800.-21- 772- 2e 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME_29 12. 000. 00 94. 48 3, 896. 25 O. 00 8, 103. 75 32.4 3, '4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 7, 375. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 7. 375. 00 O. 0 3, 4' 1114-Avr'GRUA6-CASH--IN 25 7r-375-00 4,774. 7G 9,755: 67 ' 26 2 0-00 27380-67 132. 2 4112 PART TIME/TEMPORARY 85, 385. 00 912. 00 590 554. 15 O. 00 25, 830. 85 69.7 34 4117 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL 5, 500. 00 229. 20 2,,592. 56 0. 00 2.907. 44 47. 1 35' 1I-8G-RET-IRE1'IF_NT ze &2r967 --0G 4.953-90 447311-90 0-00 29 30 197-655--10- 70-3-----�`' 4185 SOCIAL SECURITY(F I C A) 2, 240. 00 24. 30 3, 385. 88 O. 00 1. 145. 88- 1.51.1 39 4187 UNIFORMS 3. 900. 00 193. 20 2, 403. 36 O. 00 1, 496. 64 61.6 39 ' 4408-EMP-L-OYES-BENEf 3 TS S ,--520-00 7-.-788.-89 15.769-17 32 33 34 0.00 16.750.83 73.2 "o 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 2. 957. 00 157. 52 1. 908. 78 0. 00 1, 048. 22 64.5 41 OBJECT SUBTOTAL '696. 231.00 56, 614. 98 516, 709. 51 O. 00 179. 521. 49 74.2 4z 43 35 36 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES ;; 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 27, 300. 00 2, 043. 53 19, 404. 98 O. 00 7, 895. 02 71.0 446 7 1 OBJECT-$411-TTAL 27,300. 00 2.043,53 1-9,-404.-98 0-00 7-x895-02 71.0 `9 39 39 a0 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 5a 51 304 -TELEPHONE ZONE 40 37 X39-00 903-95 1,449-17 O. 00128,-5`2 41 42 999-17 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 70, 000. 00 392. 46 42. 403. 26 5. 700. 00 21, 896. 74 66.7 s4 4307 RADIO MAINTENANCE 4, 000. 00 314. 00 3. 140. 00 O. 00 860. 00 78. 5 55 43 9309--MAINTENANCE-MATER IALS 12,-000-00 40. 69 1=155:-95 44 45 553. 22 9,690.-83 19. 2 4310 MOTOR FUELS AND LUBES 7. 260. 00 255. 30 3, 678. 61 O. 00 3, 581. 39 50. 6 50 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 12, 600. 00 926. 65 9, 972. 27 632. 73 1, 995. 00 84. 1 5'3 4 46 9315-MF_MBERSH N' 500.00 0.00 47 48 100-00 0.00 4000 30-060 4316 TRAINING 584. 00 0. 00 583. 14 0. 00 0. 86 99. 8 661 2 4317 CONFERENCE EXPENSE 10. 00 0. 00 10. 00 O. 00 O. 00 100. 0 6' 4 4396 11-54r681100 149 TRSFR-OUT-INS-USER-CHOC 4r036.-00 16,612. 00 50 51 0.00 8,-069.00 85-2 63 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 165, 135. 00 6, 371.05 112, 754. 40 6, 885. 95 45. 494. 65 72.4 66 5400 67 4 52 52 -EQUIPMENT 53 54 55 68 5401 EQUIPMENT -LESS THAN $500 1. 700. 00 - O. 00 1, 068. 00 0. 00 612. 00 64.0 0 7e 71 4 56 5, 72 73 74 7(5 I 40 4 • 4 4 4 • • • r qr 44 r • • • • • • • • • • a • • • • • F I NANCE-FA454 C;i'TY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 001.8 A 2 rzllc-rTz-r:-' L, 1 Nutt v4tv1f're-tU-04tdUtY. DATE 05f13/92----- 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE N 2 3 5 5 6 FUND-DIV-0BJT DCSCR APPROPR-AT-JON MONTHLY-EXI" YTD-EXPND. CNCUMBRANCE UNF_NC- BALANCE --7. 110 PARKING FUND 6 Y e 3302 PARKING ENF DEPT: PKG FACILITIES 9 io 11 Iz 10 12 5400 -EQUIPMENT 5403 VEHICLES 0. 00 0. 00 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 5420 DEPRECIATION -MCH & EQUIP 25, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 25, 000. 00 0. 0 13 14 1 3 14 15 5499 NON-CAP-I-TAL0--16 I -ZED -I 0.00 0.00 00 0.00---- --0.-00-- 0:-0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 26, 700. 00 0. 00 1, 088. 00 0. 00 25, 612. 00 4. 0 „ 16 19 io 22 2_3 24 16 176900 la 6900 LEASE-PAYMENTC LEASE PAYMENTS 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 0.0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 19l 20 2, DIVISION TOTAL 915, 366. 00 65, 029. 56 649, 956. 89 6, 885. 95 258, 523. 16 71. 7 25 26 2' 26 2'3 30 31 32 22 23 24 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 915, 366. 00 65, 029. 56 649, 956. 89 6, 885. 95 258, 523. 16 71. 7 FUND TOTAL 2533 26 27 2. 06-1-r5C7. 00 149279-5B 1, 645 872--84 6, 085-95 409.-023-2-1---8G-! 34 3s 26 29 30 31 38 39. 40 31 32 33 41 42 43 4q 34 35 36 95 46 4/ 4h 37 36 39 43 51 52 53 54 55 56 43 44 45 57 8 59 0 46 4] 61 6: 63 64 6! 1 5G • II 1 79 !I /2 .. - -.--- .._.-.. _.. -- »� ,t1I5 / 3 !4 + ,y, ,.. ,._... 0 t✓ 14, • J J F INANCE--FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0029 = •3 a 5 6 -FUND -DIV-OIISJT -DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY -EXP Y-TD-EXPND. DATE -05/-13/92 - 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 'l. N 2 4 115 STATE GAS TAX FUND ENCUMBRANCE UNENC-BALANCE- 6 > e 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER 9 6 DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 4300 -MATER IALS LSUPPL-IES/OTHER 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 1, 914, 901. 00 166. 875. 40 1, 581, 149. 10 O. 00 333, 751. 90 82. 5 14 12 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 914. 901. 00 166. 875. 40 1. 581, 149. 10 0. 00 333. 751. 90 82. 5 IS 16 •3 11 10 5 DIVISION TOTAL 1, 914. 901. 00 166, 875. 40 1. 581, 149. 10 O. 00 333, 751. 90 82. 5 i9 20 16 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 21 1> 1, 914, 901. 00 166, 875. 40 1, 581, 149. 10 O. 00 333, 751. 90 82. 5 zz Is FUND -TOTAL t,914,90 t,00 166.-875.Aa----1-581 23 J4 9 - 0 -r149 11 G. 00 333, 751. 90 -82,-5----- 20 25 21 2> 20 22 23 10 24 2 33 26 34 2> 35 35 28 3> ?9 30 30 9 40 31 41 32 42 33 43 44 34 45 35 46 36 4> 48 3> 49 38 50 39 51 52 40 53 41 54 42 55 56 43 5I 44 0 45 59 00 46 61 4>62 48 63 G4 49• 50 55 51 6> 58 52 G9 53 10 5q ,1 I2 so . !3 56 4 1s Y `1X.'.1 • d d d d d d d 0 D r1 1 1 1 l 1 1 F I NANCE—FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) —04101/92— i0-04t30�9n PAGE 0030 ,1 Uf IG--VJ/ 0J/WG 83. 07OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 3 3 FUND—DIV--OBJT DESCR APPROPRIATION -- MONTHLYEXP YTD—EXPND. ENC -- BALANCE_-- X,, 5 6 6 120 COUNTY GAS TAX FUND ] 9 7 9 9 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT ,0 4300 MATERIA/SUPPLIES/OTHER LS 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 34, 841. 00 2, 903. 42 29, 034. 20 0. 00 5, 806. 80 83. 3 3 14 2 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 34, 841. 00 2, 903. 42 29, 034. 20 0. 00 5, 806. 80 83. 3 1,, ,6 13 1 14 9 DIVISION TOTAL 34, 841. 00 2, 903. 42 29, 034. 20 0. 00 5, 806. 80 83. 3 19 5 20 17 i DEPARTMENT TOTAL 34, 841. 00 2, 903. 42 29, 034. 20 0. 00 5, 806. 80 83. 3 22 1 9 FUND—TO-AL 34/-94+-00 23 ', 19 2,-903-42 29/-034.20 0.130 5r-806-80 63.3 20 26 21 27 29 22 29 23 30 24 31 32 25 33 25 34 27 35 2A 3] 29 30 30 40 3, 41 32 42 33 43 J4 34 35 St; 3r, 47 49 3l 4Y 39 50 39 5, 52 40 53 al I 54 42 I 55 56 43 I 5] 44 I 50 45 59 60 46 61 q] 62 48 63 64 49 GS 50 60 51 67 c9 52 09 3 70 54 ]1 ]2 55 ]3 •]4 /5 ,I p V4 2 W (d e. 7Il ob J J J I I I i 4 4 4 4 FINANCE--FA454 --T IMF --17 :-14 -48 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FRnM- ._na/r�n�o7 PAGE 0031 2 ..... ..... ... .. ....... • ..... ,,. a.,,--- 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 3 4 - --- FUND --DIV-OBJT--DESCR- APPROPRIATION MONTHLY -EXP VTD-EXPND. -ENCUMBRANCE-----UNEt4c---BALANCE 7.-, 5 6 6 125 PARK AND RECREATION FACILITIES , e 9 6 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT o 9 4'300- MATER IALS/SUPPL-TES/OTHER 12 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 2, 174, 039. 00 231432. 08 2, 127, 174. 80 0. 00 46, 864. 20 97. 8 14 12 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 174, 039. 00 23, 432. 08 2, 127, 174. 80 0. 00 46, 864. 20 97. 8 15 6 3 17 I DIVISION TOTAL 15 2, 174, 039. 00 23, 432. 08 2, 127, 174. 80 0. 00 46, 864. 20 97. 8 '6 20 16' 21 17 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 2, 174. 039. 00 23, 432. 08 2, 127, 174. 80 O. 00 46, 864. 20 97. 8 22 6 23 FUND—TOTAL 271747-03900 23,-432. 08 24 19 27-1277-474. 00 0.-00- 46, 864. 20 97. 8 20 0 21 2, ;II [I 29 23 30 24 31 12 25 33 26 34 2, 35 36 26 3] I 29 38 30 33 40 31 41 32 42 33 43 45 34 35 46 36 4% 46 37 a9 38 50 39 51 52 40 S3 4, 54 42 55 u 43 5, 4450 45 59 60 46 61 4, 62 46 63 64 49 S0 6 51 6, 1A 52 53 O 54 55 If ,4 ,5 a yr • 0 0 d 0 e • • • • FINANCE-FA454 CST T'Y OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0052• • V V v Id Id Id Id tv • , Il,c—Lr—rt--ry , Kurry'*rvr/-te—tu—v4r-aUr e- LMIC-vUr-t ,•i, ---- 1 2 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 3 FUND--DIV-OBIT-DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY-Y-EXP-YTD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE ---UNENC-BALANCE % 5 6 126 UUT RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY FUND ' 6 e 9 6 8514 CIP 89-514 DEPT: PARKS 10 -CONTRACT SERV 11 o'200 -ICES i3 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 40, 085.00 1,158.41 2,328.33 0.00 37, 756.67 5.8 ,4 2 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 40, 085. 00 1, 158.41 2, 328. 33 0. 00 37, 756. 67 5. 8 15 f6 3 1] 14 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS 16 ,5 6900 LEASE PAYMENTS BJEET-SUBTOTAL 618, 813.00 0.00 571, 502.17 -i 0.00 47, 310.83 92.3 19 6 G19T4313-00 0.00 57 -r--502. 17 0.-00 47,-31-0.83-92.3 21 17 22 23 = 4'-ISi-0N TOTAL 24 19 658,-890. 00 1-x158.41 57-3,-830-50 0.00 85rO67-50 07-0 25 20 26 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 658. 898. 00 1, 158. 41 573. 830. 50 0. 00 85, 067. 50 87. 0 27 2 26 22 2.3 23 FUND TOTAL 658, 898. 00 1, 158. 41 573, 830. 50 0. 00 85, 067. 50 87. 0 30 24 31 32 25 33 26 34 35 2] 36 29 30 39 30 40 31 41 32 / 42 43 33 44 34 45 35 46 4] 36 46 3] 49 36 50 51 39 52 40 53 41 54 55 42 56 43 5] 44 sa 59 45 60 46 61 4] 62 63 49 50 66 6] 51 69 52 6, 53 ]0 54 71 ]2 55 13 56 4 ]5 V I ]y • V V v Id Id Id Id tv • J F INANCE-FA454 TIME 17:14=48 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0033 • 2 ..y" vTryi7,r--/U'-vY/3V17C DATE -05/13/92--- 83. 07. OF YEAR COMPLETE -------- FUND- DIV-OBUJT-DESCR 2 3 6 ] 6 4 0 , ]1 APPROPR-IAT-ION ----MONTHLY--EXP ¥TD-EXPNO. ENCUMBRANCE-----UNENC BALANCE X--� 127 6% UTILITY USER TAX FUND B 91 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 9 0 ,2 ) 111 2 1300 -MATER IALS ijPPL-IES/ OTHER 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 1, 120, 830. 00 101, 666. 00 917, 498. 00 O. 00 203, 332. 00 61. 8 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 120, 830. 00 101, 666. 00 917, 498. 00 0. 00 203, 332. 00 81. 8 .13 4 15 13 ' 14. 15 DIVISION TOTAL 11 120, 830. 00 101, 666. 00 917, 498. 00 0. 00 203, 332. 00 81. 8 6 :1 6 'o 16 ( ,] 5 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 1, 120, 830. OO 101, 666. 00 917, 498. 00 0. 00 203, 332. 00 81. 8 FUND—TOTAL 20 22 23 23 25 26 27 9 20 21 1-1-1207-830-00 101-, 666: 00 9-1.47-49800--------07-00.-24 203733200 01-8 22 ( 23 24 26 29 30 31 25 ' 26 27 3342 34 35 '16 3,f 35 40 41 42 43 2N 30 3, 132 33 34 35 36 44 45 46 4, 3 ] m 39 48 a9 50 51 47 41 42 435 52 53 54 55 1 44 45 51 5h 59 1 46 41 bi 4J . 60 r2 6a 64 66 G6 67 1 50 5, 52 5355 54 55 NI 11 / 56 5 \] ]2 ,3 14 15 ]y "'•� �1k.ti i ,i.Y «.'k , f ryte'._, ", yrl Ist so O •1 • FINANCE-FA454 CdTY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY 4 _ ROM -04/-01-/92 TO -04/30/92 1 2 DATE- 05413/92 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND 2 3 -DI V-OBJ-T-DESCR APPROPRI-AT4ON MONTHLY- EXP-Y-TD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE 41 s 6 UNENC-BALANCE% 140 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GR 5 6 1 9 4701 HOUSING REHAB DEPT: OTHER e 9 0 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES ;Z iJ 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 3 14 15 f4 ,6, DIVISION TOTAL O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 Off. 0 16 I1 IB 19 20 4703 CDBG ADMIN DEPT: OTHER 2, 22 23 I 19 -- 4200CONTRACT OEFW-ICES 20 21 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 24 26 21 I 23 24 25 DIVISION TOTAL 0 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0 O 9 S9 0 31 1 26 21 0. 00 0. 00 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 11 V N s : 32 33 34 35 1 29 , : 29 JO 31I 00 0 v -3) 30 39 32 33 34 40 41 42 43 1 35 36 31 y 45 46 41 1 30 39 40 49 50 51 I 41 42 43 i2 53 55 1 as 45 46 56 51 9 41 49 60 61 62 63 50 51 52 6S 66 61 53 54 55 an 69 JO It 1f 1 56 75 12 3 14 II 13/ • V thd 460 -F FINANCE.-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0035 ' -r i, l,-_-: FUND- 145 PROPOSITION f . l-rrKe -DI4'-OB.JT -DESCR APPROPRIATION 1 NUM-04/01-/92--TO-04,430/92 DATE -05/13/92 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 1� 2 3 4' 6 'A FUND MONTHLY E-xrYTD-EXPND. CNGUMBRANCE UNENC-BALANCE % y 7 6 6 7 e 9 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: -4300-MATER-IALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER MGMT/SUPPORT 9 0 3 ,2 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 14 15 16 3I 4ICA DIVISION TOTAL 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 1 7 19 15ZI 7 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 3404-D AL A R RADE 0.00 -TRANSIT 0.00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 22 23 P. 24 19 20 21 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES '1102-REGULAR-SALARIEC/MIGC 1`7,2_2400 1, 666. 26 1-4,-720-87 47-503-13----- 0.00 935. 71- 25 26 27 2. 22 X 23 2d .4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 4180 RETIREMENT 1128 -EMPLOY -BE IEFIT6 0.00 . 936 00 1, 182_-00 0.00 2 23. 95 198. 0.00 1, 871 71 . 0. 00 0. 00 O. OQ 6-. 5 0.0 199.4 29 30 31 32 29 i 26 27 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 219. 00 21, 861. 00 80 20. 38 2, 109. 39 1, 125. 87 146. 36 17, 864. 81 0-00 0. 00 0. 00 356-13 72. 64 3. 996. 19 75. 9 66. 8 81. 7 33 34 35 36 20 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 158, 755. 00 158 755-00 0. 00 0-00 78, 584. 53 78r584-53 0. 00 80, 170. 47 49.5 3,9 39 40 31. 32 33 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4364 TELEPHONE- 50,00 0. 00 80.-1-70:-47 195 nl 42 n3 44 5 46 47 4 8 34 35 36 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS 0B,JEG-T-SUBTOTAL 500.00 173.00 7227-06 4. 16- 197.80 11.00 242-96 4--60 200. 17 157.00 O. 00 0.00 0.00 8.-40 299.83 16.00 03.2 40.0 90.7 32 30 39 DIV IC ION TOTAL 181, 339. 00 2, 222. 398. 77 • - 000 •. 88 324-23 _ • 0: 99 ;5 . b `53. a3 50 51 '5: 55 56 40 41 42 3402 COMMUTER BUS DEPT: PUBLIC TRANSIT 35 9 _ _. 43 44 45 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 91# 1 ACCRUAL -CASH IN 2, 673. 00 0. 00 •vo 236. 82 0. 00 2, 286. 56 0. 00 386. 44 85. 5 46 4, 4180 RETIREMENT 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 41139 -MEDICARE -BENEFITS 321. 00 280. 00 28. 31 1, 911. 79- 0,00 513. 69 1, 647. 29- 0. 00 O. 00 0. 00 0. 00 192. 69- 1, 927. 29 d. f7- 166. d 588.3 61 62 63 6.1.,.s , ,6 67 49 50 5, OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4200 CONTRAC-T-SERVICE -15. 00 3, 289. 00 1.56 1, 645. 10- 11-.58 1. 164. 54 0. 00 0. 00 x.42 2. 124. 46 77 35. 4 52 53 5. 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE_ 20, 000. 00 0. 00 10. 252. 50 0. 00 9. 747. 50 51.2 ..9 70 71 72 55 56 7 7.1 4 ,5 7� 4,0 4 4 I r • r r r r 0 d • 0 1 • • • 0 • 4 4 • 0 0 44. ► 8 • • • • • • • • • FINANCE-FA454 CO' TY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (13Y FUND) PAGE 0036' 4' 1 1Lu Vek 2 1 1 46, • 1t I[_ I1: -I -t:--5 ,111.]19-'Vstvl'/YC-Iu- rJVr7G LM1C-J rIJ/7C-"--- , 2 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 3 % ; FUM} DIV-0B4T-DESCR APPROPR-I*F O N - MONTHLY-EXP-TD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE- -UNENC-BALANCE 5 e 145 PROPOSITION 'A FUND 7 e 3402 COMMUTER BUS DEPT: PUBLIC TRANSIT Io 9 12 io 4200 -CONTRACT SERV -FEES . 13 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 20, 000. 00 0. 00 10, 252. 50 0. 00 9, 747. 50 51. 2 14 15 12 •300HATER-IALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER ;; -- 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHGS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 IB 4 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 19 15 20 5 21 17 22 DIVISION TOTAL 23, 289. 00 1, 645. 10- 11, 417. 04 0. 00 11, 871. 96 49. 0 23 19 24 19 25 zo 3403 BUS PASS SUBSDY DEPT: PUBLIC TRANSIT 26 27 21 20 22 4100 -PERSONAE -SERVICE„, 27 21 , 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 1, 693. 00 144. 36 1, 404. 47 0. 00 288. 53 82. 9 30 L4 4180 RETIREMENT 233.00 19.91 173.02 0.00 59.98 74.2 - 31 5 188-Ei1PLOYEE-BEIYEF I TS 294. 00 34. 76 181. 90 0. 00 112. 20 L 1. „ 26 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 24.00 2. 10 16.38 0.00 7.62 68.2 34 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 244. 00 201. 13 1, 775. 67 0. 00 468. 33 79. 1 35 27 3,. 78 it 29 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 36 30 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 14, 332. 00 2, 637. 00 9, 935. 00 0. 00 4, 397. 00 69. 3 -. ao 3 OBzJECT CUDTOTAL 14-332. 00 2--637.00 9, 935 -00 - 000 4, 397-s # - 91 42 32 33 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 43 34 4396 TRSFR-OUT-INS-USER c -HOS 74 2-00 G20.00 0.00 125.00 83.2 47 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 745.00 62.00 620.00 0.00 125.00 83.2 46 35 47 36 40 49 DIVISION TOTAL 17, 321. 00 2_, 900. 13 12, 330. 67 0. 00 4, 990. 33 71. 1 50 51 3405 FUND -EXCHANGE DEPT. PU8 -C -TRANSIT ;3 54 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 5s s6 4251-CONTRACT-SERVIEE -00' T OBJECT SUBTOTAL 200, 000. 0 200, 000. 00 0 00 O. 00 200u000-00 200, 000. 00 0. 00 O. 00 (300-3. e . 0. 00 100. 0 Se 59 50 i DIVISION TOTAL 200, 000. 00 0. 00 200, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 100. 0 62 63 64 3408-COMMUTER-XPRESS DEPT. PUBLFC-TRANSI-T 66 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 67 776773------------07-00----------124.2 8. 4102 REGULAR-SAtAR!E9/MISC 1, 10.1-00 -106:74 • 4' 1 1Lu Vek 2 1 1 46, • J J J J • • • • • • • • FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0037 0roTE r/^/ttt r -t -#--t . ..122t-.-12rr7c-ttr-avr-r_ DA J iu92 Ea • Os r Er QV d d 0 m ter CP QV QV d 17 -a:.,trikj.r4°[.S ,w Jr 4t �- :? :F �'Iv r.7 :�^ . , ' zr:'• , y�,,t r fal .rt rl • tffp FUND MONTHLY-EXPYTD-EXPND. 83.07 OF YEAR UNENC- BALANCE COMPLETE X.- 21 3 --DIV-OBJT-DESCR APPROPRIAT-ION ENCUMBRANCE --- 5 fi 145 PROPOSITION 'A FUND e 9 3408 COMMUTER XPRESS DEPT: PUBLIC TRANSIT to 9 4100 ,3 --PERSONAL_ -SERV ICES 4180 RETIREMENT 152.00 12.76 133.42 0.00 18. 58 87. 7 14 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 126.00 204. 51- 143.93- 0.00 269.93 114.2 15 4189-1"IEDICARE-BENEFITS 0,00 11.47 0.00 11.47- 0.0 6 -1.54 17 14 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 379. 00 83. 47- 977. 69 0. 00 401. 31 70. 8 19 19 15 ' 200 GON-T-RAC--BERV.TGF_S 20 6 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 9, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 9, 000. 00 0. 0 22 7 Is OBJECT SUBTOTAL 9, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 9, 000. 00 (1.0 23 24 I, 29 26 z1 DIVISION TOTAL 10, 379. 00 83. 47- 977. 69 0. 00 9, 401. 31 9. 4 27 26 22 2J z, 3409.REC TRANSPTN DEPT: PUBLIC TRANSIT 30 31 24 4100 PERSONAL DERV-I-C-Er6 32 z6) 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 1, 275. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1, 275. 00 0. 0 33 34 27 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 275. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1, 275. 00 0. 0 35 2e 37 29 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 39 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 13, 144. 00 695. 00 3, 322. 50 350. 00 9, 471. 50 3 '9 30 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1-3,-144-00 695. 00 3, 322.50 27. 9 31 350-00 9. 471. 50 27. 9 ;. 32I 42 43 33 DIVISION TOTAL 14r4f9-00 695-00 3, 322 44 34 0 350. 00 14.-746-50 25. 4 4, 45 46 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 446, 747. 00 4, 188. 91 324, 896. 01. 350. 00 121, 500. 99 72. 8 47 5 4a 37 43 3e FUND TOTAL 446, 747. 00 4, 188. 91 324, 896. 01 350. 00 121, 500. 99 72. 8 So 51 9 52 40 53 41 54 55 42 Sh 43 5, 44 �f 1,9 45 54 4C G1 47 (2 63 c4 49 550 66 67 51 68 52 - .1 53 7, 71 54 ,2 55 /3 ]M 56 7 .l Ea • Os r Er QV d d 0 m ter CP QV QV d 17 -a:.,trikj.r4°[.S ,w Jr 4t �- :? :F �'Iv r.7 :�^ . , ' zr:'• , y�,,t r fal .rt rl • tffp 411. • • • • • • • • FINANCE-FA454 CJTY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0038. fir' 4 7 11,C-11 . LT. TW , III -11 1 VTr.J17TC-1V-VTTVVTTG DATE- 05/ 13/9e -- ---- - 2 83.07. OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 4 FUND-AIV-OBJ-T-DESCR APPROPR-IATION 3 MONTHLY -EXE' YTD-E-XPND. ENCUMBRANCE---UNENC-BALANCE X ; 5 6 150 GRANT FUND 7 e 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 10 12 -4300--MATER 1ALS/SUPPL!E9-f0THEii 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 75, 000.00 3,333.33 68, 333.30 0.00 6,666.70 91.1 14 12 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 75, 000. 00 3,333.33 68. 333. 30 0. 00 6,666.70 91. 1 13 ,'% 14 C IS DIVISION TOTAL 75, 000.00 3,333.33 68, 333.30 0.00 6,666.70 91.1 19 20 16 21 7 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 75, 000. 00 3,333.33 68, 333. 30 0. 00 6,666.70 91. 1 22 23 B FUND --TOTAL 24 19 iTS/-00Q-. E30 3x-333-33 G8r333. 30 0. 00 - 6x66670 ?1. 1 25 20 26 27 21 28 22 29 23 30 31 1.24 32 25 33 26 34 27 35 28 29 38 39 30 4, 31 41 32 42 43 33 44 34 35 44 47 36 48 37 49 38 50 39 51 52 4o 41 54 55 42 56 43 57 44 58 45 61) 46 61 47 62 ,:3 48 . 64 49 6, 66 61 5, 68 52 6, 53 70 71 72 55 ]3 74 56 Q- 15 • LJ' V Wv b JI kg kg 4 4 • . • • F INANCE-FA454 CjTY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0039 r i 11 V/ V/G-1'V'-lJ't'J-wr-rC UM 1 G"-V.J/ 1.77 7C --" ------N , 1 ,l11.--11,..7.?,,,-, RVT 2 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND APPROPRIATION 2 4I -DTV -OBJ -DESGR MONTHLY EXP----YTD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE UNENC-BALANCE- X 5 6 155 CROSSING GUARD FUND A 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 9 4300- MATER-IALS/SUPPL_IES/OTHER 9 10 o - 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 1.00- 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00- 0.0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1.00- 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00- 0.0 3 .4 15 16 13 1d DIVISION TOTAL 1. 00- 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1. 00- 0. 0 S 17 1A '9 20 6 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 1.00- 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00- 0.0 0 2102--CROSSING-GUARD 2, 22 23 24' 27 30 31 32 DEPT: -POLICE 20 i T 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4102-REGULAR-SALARIES/MISC 2, 12,572.00 1-r032.-95 9,5'84.50 0.00 2,987.50 76.2 2' .4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 180.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 160.00 0.0 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 180.00 0.00 368.37 0.00 208.37- 215.7 24 ' i-4.2r-CROSS'IN�T-GUARD.^., 34-209-00 3.-485. 76 26r961-03 0-00 7r247. 97 78. 8 533 4180 RETIREMENT 1, 394. 00 140. 52 1, 179. 31 0. 00 214. 69 84.5 27 4185 SOCIAL SECURITY (F I C A) 2, 121. 00 216. 13 1, 643. 92 0. 00 477. 08 77.5 137 UNIFORMS 300--00 34 35 ;; 3A 39 " 2A 0.00 59t-94 0-00 240.06 19. 9 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 1, 200. 00 145. 79 851. 76 0. 00 348. 24 70.9 29 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 437.00 50. 53 384.29 0. On 52.71 87. 9 30 s B�)E00T 8U TOTAL 527-593-00- 5.-071:68 I b-053-12 0. 00 1-1. 539. 88 78-0 31 32 33 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT-SERV-ICE/PR-IVATE 2,-000,00 4, 42 43 44 0. 00 973-83 0. 00 1.-026. 17- 487 6 3.1 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 600. 00 0. 00 4. 199. 47 0. 00 3, 599. 47- 699. 9 3' OBJECT SUBTOTAL 2, 600. 00 0. 00 5, 173. 30 .0. 00 2, 573. 30- 198.9 36 46 q7 aA 11 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS 3, 105. 00 222. 00 2, 656. 00 O. OQ 447. 00 6 5.6 =BJECT SUBTO-TAL 3. 105. 41' 50 51 3 req 55 •0 222 0Q 2, 658 00 O. 00 - 447-00 85-6 DI V rSI ON OTAL 58x298-00 5,293. 68 I8,-884-42 43 O. 00 9-,41-3,48------B26-8 44 45 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 58, 298. 00 5. 293. 68 48, 864. 42 0. 00 9. 413. 58 83. 8 A 59 '0 46 FUND TOTAL 58, 297. 00 5, 293. 68 48, 084. 42 0. 00 9, 412. 58 83.8 47 4A 61 62 63 64 49 so SI 66 66 67 6,3 52 53 54 69 70 71 I? • 56 `7 ,3 4 ,5 7y xr.yyl, c+.:c„.� 1 8' f < 9fr f-"' +,,�fn i.f ?Irit7 . ,'„s1:i Cr. R O k 411 40 241 120 V' 11, r eV 0 a M+V • • • • • S S S FINANCE-FA454 TIME -1-7-14 -4O CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) rROM -04/01-/92—TO-04/30/92 PAGE 0040 a� r c----- z 83.07. OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND I IN 2 3 -DIV---OB.1T DCSCR APPROPR-IAT-ION MONTHLY -EXP Y-TD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE--UNENC 4 6 -BALANCE % 160 SEWER FUND 5 B 6 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 9 to 119 2 300 MATERIALS/SUPPEIES/OTHE 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 1, 288, 428. 00 110, 158. 89 1, 068, 110. 26 0. 00 220, 317, 74 82.9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 288, 428. 00 110, 158. 89 1. 068, 110. 26 0. 00 220. 317. 74 82.9 12 113 4 15 16 14 5 DIVISION TOTAL 1, 288, 428. 00 110, 158, 89 1, 068. 110. 26 0. 00 220, 317. 74 82.9 I] 10 19 u, 1 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 1. 288, 428. 00 110, 158, 89 1, 068, 110. 26 0. 00 220, 317, 74 82.9 3102-SEWER/S-�DRAiN DCf T. z0 u 3 ...1T -DRAIN 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 4 zs z6 27 22 102-REGULAR-SALARIES/f1ISC 89. 21 -00 6, 915. 10 GS,�85-97 0700-------207-625.-0a------767-8 23 4106 REGULAR OVERTIME 1, 800. 00 0. 00 1, 648. 31 0. 00 151. 69 91.5 24 `4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 3, 545. 00 185. 63 3, 682. 63 0. 00 137. 63- 103.8 20 20 30 31 zc 1 -1 -1 --ACCRUAL CASH--/ 1, 445. 00 O.-0(} 833. 52 33 0.00 611.-48 57. G 4180 RETIREMENT ^! z6 13, 670, 00 1, 123. 61 8, 894. 28 0. 00 4, 775. 72 65.0 27 4185 SOC IAL SECURITY (F I C A) 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 O. 0 188-EMPLOYEE-BENEF-ITC 1 i, 304-00 33 34 35 ' h-435. 41 7 811-25 O. 00 Si -492.-75 G9. 1 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS 492. 00 40. 89 355. 06 O. 00 136. 94 72.1 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 121, 467. 00 9, 700. h4 91, 811. 02 O. 00 29, 655. 98 75.5 1 36 ] 3/ 338 31 3z 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 33 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 12.015. 00 0. 00 8, 778. 00 0. 00 3, 237. 00 73.0 - 22"51---C(NTRAC-T-SERV ICE/0t3VT 40 41 42 43' 34 3, 255700 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 3, 255:-00 070 ,, OBJECT SUBTOTAL 15, 270. 00 0. 00 8, 778. 00 0. 00 6, 492. 00 57. 4 36 ;; 46 4300-MATER-1-AESI SUPPL ICS /OTHER 4 4303 UTILITIES 700.00 98.39 582.37 0.00 117.63 63.1 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS B, 600. 00 430. 42 3, 065. 83 2, 181. 99 3, 352. 18 61.0 50 51 I 43 t@ -MOTOR FUELS-RND LUBEO 1, 10a,30 104-16 041.62 0. 00 258. 38 76. 552 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE 3, 800. 00 21. 56 865. 27 0. 00 2, 934. 73 22.753 54 4396 TRSFR OUT -INS USER CHCS 3?_, 264. 00 ?_, 471. 00 27, 320. 00 O. 00 4, 944. 00 84.6 55 OBJECT -SUBTOTAL 46,-464.00 3,-125.._53 32,-675.2r-181-79 07 1 606.92 75--0-56 7 1x — 58 g 59 I DIVISION ----TOTAL 83120-1-7130 12. 826. 17 133 244-11 181. 99 47r-754-790-------7.379-----6 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 183, 201. 00 12, 826. 17 133, 264. 11 2, 181. 99 47, 754. 90 73.9 62 i 63 64 FUND TOTAL 1, 471. 629. 00 122, 985. 06 1. 201, 374. 37 2. 181. 99 268, 072. 64 81.7 6c 67 52 68 53 6, 70 1 54 71 55 72 73 74 75 79' �I 'J bre Mss Li J • • • • • FINANCE—FA454 TIME 47:14,4 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0041 1 2 3 '� '• S DATE-dU/13,92 - 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND--DIV--OBIT 2I 3 ° 1 6 DESCR APPROPRIATION MONTHLY—EXr Y-TD—EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE—UNENC-.--BAL_ANCE it- 6 170 ASSET SEIZURE/FORFEITUREFUND 1 9 t2 . 1299 BUDGET TRANSFER DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 0 II 4300—MATERIALS/SUPPED ES/OTHER 12 4399 OPERATING TRANSFERS OUT 37, 000. 00 3, 083. 33 30, 833. 30 O. 00 6, 166. 70 83. 3 113 4 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 37, 000. 00 3, 083. 33 30, 833. 30 O. 00 6, 166. 70 83. 3 5 16 :3 ' 14 10 DIVISION TOTAL 37, 000. 00 3. 083. 33 30. 833. 30 O. 00 6, 166. 70 83. 3 16 I „ 8 20 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 37, 000. 00 3, 083. 33 30, 833. 30 O. 00 6, 166. 70 83.3 22 23 2103—SPEC INVESTGTNS DEPT: t'OL�CC 19 : 20 21 24 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 26i 2] 22 1103 REGULAR—SALARIES/SAFETY 186, 570-00 18,978-00 156,-903-50 26 23 24 O. 00 29, 666. 50 84. s 4105 SPECIAL DUTY PAY 10, 560. 00 1, 100. 00 9, 020. 00 O. 00 1, 540. 00 85.4 326 0 4107 PREMIUM OVERTIME 38, 000. 00 8, 712. 98 44, 694. 94 0. 00 6, 694. 94— 117.6 31 4109—COURT 25 3� TIME 0-00 0. 00 614.88 0.00 z6 2 614. 88 0. e 33 4111 ACCRUAL CASH IN 4, 000. 00 0. 00 6, 435. 50 O. 00 2, 435. 50— 160.6 34 4115 EXTRA TIME 0. 00 0. 00 2, 798. 95 O. 00 2, 798. 95— 0. 0 35 4180—RET-IREMENT 56�-615-00 28 29 30 5, 686-20 41,682_-65 O. 00 14,932. 35 -73. 6 '6 4187 UNIFORMS 3] 2, 800. 00 291. 70 2, 862. 00 O. OO 62. 00— 102. 2 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 12, 000. 00 2, 121.30 10, 189. 78 O. 00 1, 810. 22 84.9 33' 4189—MED LC-ARS—BENEFITS 3, 0 i-,260.00 316.81 1,74-19 O. 00 7�.4. 19 156. 32 33 - OBJECT SUBTOTAL 311, 805. 00 37, 206. 99 277, 176. 39 O. 00 34. 628. 61 88.8 41 42 43 1200—EONTRACT 34 35 36 SERVICES 44 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 5, 000. 00 159. 39 i, 63?_. 41 O. 00 3, 367. 59 3=. 6 448 6 OBJECT SUBTOTAL I 5, 000. 00 159. 39 1, 632. 41 O. 00 3, 367. 59 32.6 4] 3] 38 39 49 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER .13 50 so 04 TELEPHONE 8, 448. 00 3, 352. 79 13, 846. 36 O. 00 5, 398. 36— 163.9 51 a 4310—MOTOR—FUELS AND LUBES 5r600�0 1.703. 70 6,293=42 SZ 42 O. 00 1,393. 42 127.8 4311 AUTO MAINTENANCE O. 00 4. 00 1, 947. 03 0. 00 1, 947. 03— O. 0 ,� 4316 TRAINING 500. 00 O. 00 989. 00 O. 00 489. 00— 197. 8 55 43 4322—UNCLASSIFIED 5,-000-00 O. 00 4,358--00 O. 00 44 45 112. 00 91. 7 4324 CLAIMS/SETTLEMENTS O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 0 57 SN 4396 TRSFR OUT—INS USER CHCS 29, 041. 00 1, 356. 00 26, 331. 00 O. 00 2, 710. 00 90. 6 5') OBJECT :,UBT£3TAL 49 47, 989. OQ 6,416. 49 54,094—. 81 0.--0p 6,405-81=—i4.z. 4, 9 7 60 652 5400 EQUIPMENT- 3 11 5401 EQUIPt1ENT—LESS�HAN X500 2,500-00 0.00 943 000 6° 50 5 2,402. 57 3-8 5402 EQUIPMENT—MORE THAN $500 8, 099. 00 O. 00 12, 653. 26 O. 00 4, 554. 26— 156. 2 5403 VEHICLES 22, 050. 00 O. 00 0. 00 O. 00 22, 050. 00 0. 0 6] OBJECT SUBTOTAL 52 32x649-00 O. 00 12x750-69 O. 00 19--S98. 31 39,0-----r, 53 54 ,0 e ,1 55 56 `] 2 !4 ]5 797 • • • W r c r•••.a ,,.r .,ti •ar ;r `, ��•3 tklg r,�j. 4j 3:, a`.?41ti1 M13„ • 1 FINANCE—FA454 • • • • • • • • • • • CTY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 004?_I 6 1 +1 •`- +. . •-v. -ry , RVI I ,r1r,Jr, TG -I IJ-v,ruvr-L. LI I G-" 'JJ, 1..]/ TG'----" ---"T-N 2 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND—DIV--OBJT DESCR 2 4 4 APPROPR-IATION MONTHLY—EXP Y-TD—EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE --UNENC--BALANCE--- Y. 5 170 ASSET SEIZURE/FORFEITURE FUND 5 6 e 8 2103 SPEC INVESTGTNS DEPT: POLICE 9 9 to o 6700—INTEREST 11 6700 INTEREST 0. 00 0. 00 2, 400. 00 0. 00 2, 400. 00— 0. 0 2 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0. 00 0. 00 2, 400. 00 0. 00 2, 400. 00— 0. 0 14 15 16 13 14 15 DIVISION TOTAL 397, 443.00 43, 782.87 348, 054.30 0.00 49, 388.70 87.5 17 16 19 20 16 17DEPARTMENT TOTAL 397, 443. 00 43, 782. 87 348, 054. 30 0. 00 49, 328. 70 87. 5 19 21 22 23 ?4 FUND—TOTAL 434x443 00 46x866-20 378, 887- - 19 60 000 55r555. 40 07. 2 20 21 25 26 27 20 19 30 1 32 22, 23 24 2534 26 27 33 35 36 28 29 30 37 38 39 40 31 32 33 41 42 43 44 34 35 36 40 4' 47 48 37 38 • 39 49 50 51 "i2 40 41 42 .3 6.1 55 56 43 44 45 57 58 613 46 47 48 lit 62 63 W 49 50 51 66 67 68 52 53 54 69 70 71 72 56 3 74 75 l,r 6 ti✓ V L O ~ ' • 6, • J J .9 J 4 4 4 I. • • • • FINANCE-FA454 T -IME --1-7- 14,-48 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0043 z 3 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUNDDIV--OBIT-DESCR z1 3 5 5 APPROPRIATION MONTHLY -EX(' YTD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE--UNENC--• BALANCE -% 180 FIRE PROTECTION FUND 6 7 9 7 a 2202 HYDRANT UPGRADE DEPT: FIRE 1200 CONTRACT SERV 9 o 1lcz 12 -ICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 100/000.00 26/769.4S 26/769.48 12/684.00 60, 546. 52 39. 4 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 100, 000. 00 26. 769.48 26, 769. 48 12, 684. 00 60/546.52 39. 4 14 15 16 :3 4 15 DIVISION TOTAL 100, 000. 00 26/769.48 26. 769. 48 12. 684. 00 60/546.52 39. 4 17 19 20 6 17 1B 21 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 100, 000. 00 26, 769. 48 26/769.48 12/684.00 60/546.52 39. 4 22 23 FUND-T0TAL 100.-000.00 26,-769. 48 --,26r-769-48 12. 684:-00 60, 546. 52 39-1 2- 9 25 20 26 21 27 25 12 29 23 30 24 31 32 25 33 26 34 27 35 35 28 37 29 3a 30 39 40 31 41 32 qt 33 43 44 34 45 35 4 36 47 48 37 4, 30 50 39 51 52 40 53 41 54 42 43 44 58 45 59 in 46 47 G2 4 3 63 6.1 49 50 66 51 6, GI 52 60 5. 70 54 72 555 73 56 74 75 1 75, :t tiqk 6, r Or • S • S • • • • • • • • • • • • • tr, CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH FINANCE-FA454 EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0044 v 4 2 T2,67. . r. tow t w.UrrU4rr-9t-/-Y48-I LI- U4rr.it?f-re DATE -0/ 13/92 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 1 2 3 FUND-DIV-OBJT DESER APPROPRIAT-ION MONTHLY -EXP ¥TD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE-UNENC--BALANCE % 5 5 6 305 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 7 6 6 9 e 8137 CIP 85-137 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY 10 11 9 4200 CONTRACT'-SERV-I-CEC 2 ,0 13 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 635, 067. 00 O. 00 635, 000. 00 O. 00 67. 00 99. 9 14 12 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 635, 067. 00 O. 00 635, 000. 00 O. 00 67. 00 99. 9 15 16 13 17 4 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 18 5 4316 TRAINING -SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 38.00 0.00 38.00- O. 0 19 io 16 OBJECT 0.00 0.00 38.00 4.00 38.00 O. 0 7 22 23 ION 'TOTAL 24 19 (-DIV-IS G35r067700 O. '0 635, 038700 .-00------29700 99. 9 25 20 26 8141 CIP 89-141 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY 27 2f 28 22 25 23 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 30 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 155, 564. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 155, 564. 00 O. 0 31 24 OBJECT -SUBTOTAL 0-00 0-00 0700 25 1553-564. 00 -1557-5647000.--C 33 26 34 35 27 36 28 , - `• as t. ; 0-0-.-00---15556400 0. l 2'3 30 30 8142 CIP 89-142 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY 39 40 1 41 z 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 42 33 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 35, 000.00 0.00 33, 702. 92 O. 00 1, 297. 08 96. 2 43 35x)00. 00 0700 23, 702_-42 r297: 08 '6-2 ;` 34 OBJECT 3UBTOT-AL 35 u 47 36 DW -1-8-1-8N TOTAL '76.2 49 3l 35r000-00 0.00 33r-702792-0-700-----1-,-29-7-700 49 6 50 8144 CIP 90-144 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY 6' 39 52 40 53 41 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 54 42 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 4112-PART-T 0.00 0.00 121.23 0.00 121.23- O.0 55 55 43 IME/-TEMPORARY 0-00 O. 00 2, 332.87 O. 00 2,-332.97 0-0- 4 4185 SOCIAL SECURITY (F I C A) 0. 00 0. 00 144. 64 0. 00 144. 64- 0. 0 so 45 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS -OBJECT-SUB 0.00 0.00 35. 58 0.00 35. 58- O. 0 59 46 T0TAt O. 00 O. 00 2-F634. 32 0.-00 2;-634 �; 4 l 62 e 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201-CON'TRAC-T--SERVICE1PRi 63 5, 49 VAT C 045, 011700 O. 00 520. 12 O. 00 8447-490. 88 0. O w OBJECT SUBTOTAL 845, 011. 00 O. 00 520. 12 O. 00 844, 490. 88 0. 0 E-6 67 51 GH 52 4300-MATERIAtSISUPPtiEEIOTHER 69 53 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS O. 00 " 238. 25 238. 25 0.00 238. 25- O. 0 70 54 71 72 55 73 74 56 �575 7 7l • 2 t,✓ W W .u/ r.+ W W t,✓ too koo t4/ I 2 s J 'S 'S 4S I 4 4/ 4 a r • FINANCE-FA454 TIME -17-1448 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) FanM-�a�nx�a�-rn_naf�n�o� PAGE 0045 z 3 5 6 --- FUND- DIV--OB.JT--DESGR APPROPRIATION - .- -..--. .- vim. 83. 0% OF ,,,.�,� YEAR COMPLETE 2 3 4 305 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 4300-MATERIALSr SUP rc .Q.�^ MONTHLY-EXP-YTD-€XPND. ENCUMBRANCE--UNENG-BALANCE X 5 6 7 , 8 9 -RSI r.rucR OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 238.25 238.25 0.00 238.25- 0.0 8 0 II I2 IU 12 DIVISION TOTAL ---C 8146.P. -89--x.-46 DEPT: 845, 011. 00236. 25 3, 342. 69 O. 00 641, 618. 31 0. 4 13 14 S 13 14 15 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES -4201 GONTRAGT-SERVIGE/PRIIVA-TE STREET/SAFETY 5,-000-00- 0.00 0.00 6 17 18 19 20 1621 7 18 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0.00 0. 00 5r000-00 5, 000. 00 0.0 0. 0 22 23 24, 9 20 21 DIVISION TOTAL 5, 000. 00 8-1-50-CIP- 89 1-50 0.00 0. 00 O. 00 5, 000. 00 0. 0 25 25 2] 22 23 24 DEP-'F--STREETASAFCTY 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT-SERVICE/PRIVATE 28 3° 31 25 26 27 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4300-MA-TER-IALS/SUPPLIES{OTHE 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.-00-0,00-----0:-00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0-0 0.0 332 3 34 35 20 29 30 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 20, 000. 00 20, 000. 00 0. 00 O. 00 13, 155. 34 13, 155. 34 0. 00 O. 00 6, 844. 66 6, 844. 66 65. 7 65. 7 6 3, 38 39 40 3 1 32 33 DIVISION TOTAL 20, 000. 00 0. 00 13, 155. 34 0. 00 6, 844. 66 65. 7 41 2 43 44 34 35 36 8151 CIP 89-151 DEPT: 424060NTRACT-8ERVIGES STREET/SAFETY 40, 000. 00 40, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 40, 000. 00 40, 000. 00 0. 0 0. 0 45 46 47 48 so S1 52 37 38 39 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 4 0 41 42 DIVISION TOTAL 40, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 40, 000. 00 0. 0 53 54 43 44 45 8152 CIP 92-152 DEPT: 4200 CONTRACT-SERVICES60 STREET/SAFETY so 59 46 47 46 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 15, 000. 00 • 15, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 00 15, 000. 00 15, 000. 00 0. 0 0. 0 61 62 63 ' 64 49 5° 51 DIVISION TOTAL 15, 000. 00 0.00 0. 00 O. 00 15, 000. 00 0. 0 6'5 66 67 ' 68 52 53 54 8165 CIP 87-165 DEPT: 4200 -CONTRACT --SERV ICES STREET/SAFETY 6' 70 5 56 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 17, 545. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 17, 545. 00 0. 0 72 ,4 '1 U 40 r 40 r r • • • • 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • F I NANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0046, w 2 3 4 b TIME -1a=14- 48 f ROM -04/01/92 -Tu -04/30P1' 1Mtc-Uvra�i7�--- 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE YFDEXPND. ENCUMBRANCE --UNENC--BALANCE % 2 3 EXP FUNDDIV--0BJT-DESCR APPROPR-IA-T-ION MONTHLY -- -- 305 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 6 8 ] 8 9 ACTSERVi@CS 4200 CONTR- OBJECT SUBTOTAL 17, 545. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 17, 545. 00 0. 0 9 to 1 12 10 12 DIVISION TOTAL 17, 545. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 17, 545. 00 0. 0 13 i4 16 13 49 8170-CIF-87-170----------------DEPT-:---STREET/SAFETY 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 0(} 2'20x451..3 0.00 :]85.-47-99.7 1, 18 20' 16 1] e 420-1-CENTRAET-SERVICE/PRIVATE 22-1-r0-37-000. OBJECT SUBTOTAL 221, 037.00 0. 00 220, 451. 53 0. 00 585. 47 99. 7 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 4300-MATERIALS-/SUPPL I CS -/OTHER 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 8, 284. 00 0. 00 8, 283. 15 0. 00 0. 85 99. OBJECT SUBTOTAL 8, 284. 00 • 0.00 8, 283. 15 0. 00 O. 85 99. 9 25 26 27 28 22 23 24 DIVISION TOTAL 229, 321. 00 O. 00 228, 734. 68 O. 00 586. 32 99. 7 29 30 31 32 2`i 26 2] 8176 CIP 86-176 DEPT: STREET/SAFETY 33 34 35 28 29 30 30 4200 --CONTRACT oCRVleES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 70, 468. 00 O. 00 71. 24 O. 00 70, 396. 76 0. 1 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 70, 468. 00 0.00 71. 24 0. 00 70, 396. 76 0. 1 38 39 40 31 2 3 DIVISION TOTAL 70, 468. 00 O. 00 71. 24 0. 00 70, 396. 76 . 1 41 42 43 44 34 35 36 - DEPARTMENT STOTAL 2, 067, 976. 00 238. 25 914, 094. 87 O. 00 1, 153, 881. 13 45 4 G 4] 0291 -E -IP -B5 201 DEFT: STREET LI©HTINO 3] 3e 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 395? 00 22000. 00- 0. 49 50 51 4201 CONTRACT SERVICPR-IVATC 22r000-00 0. 00--07-00-----0:-00 r Eo 40OBJECT SUBTOTAL 22, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 22, 000. 00 0. 0 41 42 54 55 4300 MATERIALS1SUPPt.IES/OTHER 43 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 0.00 0.00 0.00 450.27 450.27- 0.0 44 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 450.27 450.27- 0.0 45 50 ''' 60 46 47 DIVISION TOTAL . 22, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 450. 27 21, 549. 73 2. 0 49 61 63 64 49 so DEPARTMENT TOTAL 22, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 450. 27 21, 549. 73 2. 0 51 6., 66 6] 6111 5z O406 -C -W--88-408 DEPT-:--SAN-I--ARI-SEWER 1 53 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 806x 221-90 0. 00 332, 2060 G, 70 ,z >- ss 4201--CONTRAC--T-SERVICE/PRIVATE 1, 1387-4287-00 0-00 - /56 t]* ]4 ]5 7y • t W v • • a • • i • • 0 0 • • • O • t FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0047 2 FUND-DIV-OBJT-DESGR NUM APPROPRIATION U.4,101/Ye--1U U4/iSV/YG UAIt--U::r/13/Yd 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 3 4 305 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND • 200- CONTRAGT-SER V IGEB MONTHLY -EXP Y -- TDEXPND. ENCUMBRANCE-- UNENG-BALANCE �. - 6 1 6 s 9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 1, 138, 428. 00 0. 00 806, 221. 98 0. 00 332, 206. 02 70. 8 y 0 12 1 2 DIVISION TOTAL DEPARTMENT TOTAL 1, 138, 428. 00 1-,-138,-428-00 0. 00 0. 00 806, 221. 98 806, 221,-98 0. 00 332, 206. 02 70. 8 �6 15 ,e 14 5 8506 CIP 86-506 DEPT: PARKS 0. 00- 332206.-02 70-8 ;6 19 20 15 17 e 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OB..JEC- -SUBTOTAL 5, 000. 00 5]-000-00 0.00 0. 00 1, 366. 00 0. 00 3, 634. 00 27. 3 22 23 =' 26 27 `0 9 z0 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 4309-MAI-NTENANCE`MATER-IALS I0rO00-O0 0-00 1-.-366:-00 3r198. 53 0-00 3, 634:-00 27-3 22 23 24 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5400 -EQUIPMENT 10, 000. 00 0. 00 3, 898. 53 0. 00 0. 00 6, 101. 47 6, 101. 47 38-9 38. 9 n 30 3, 26 27 5401 EGUIPMENT-LESS THAN $500 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5, 000. 00 5, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 1, 375. 35 1, 375. 35 0. 00 0. 00 3. 624. 65 3, 624. 65 27. 5 27. 5 34 5 36 28 29 3o DIVISION TOTAL 20, 000. 00 0.00 6, 639. 88 0. 00 13, 360. 12 33. 1 3] 111 31 40 31 32 33 8508 CIP 87-508 DEPT: 4200--EONTR.ACT SERV-ICEC PARKS 41 42 43 "4 34 35 36 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 66, 000. 00 66, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 66, 000. 00 66, 000. 00 0. 0 0. 0 46 4] 49 37 36 39 DIVISION TOTAL 66, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 66, 000. 00 0. 0 49 50 51 52 53 54 :5 55 50 59 60 4„ 41 4 2 8511 CIP 90-511 DEPT: 4200-C-ONTRAGT-SER V -IC -ES PARKS 43 44 45 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 111, 500. 00 111, 500. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 111, 500. 00 111, 500. 00 0. 0 0. 0 46 47 48 DIVISION TOTAL , 111, 500. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 111, 500. 00 0. 0 61 62 63 64 49 50 51 8513 CIP 89-513 DEPT: 4200-EONTRAC -SERV-ICES PARKS 06 66 6] A 52 53 54 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 50, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 50, 000. 00 0. 0 cl ]0 11 55 56 ] to r r 4W • ID a a • a • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • FINANCE-FA454 CJTY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0048 �1 2 - ra11O- z T. LT. TO FUND--DIV-OBJT-DESCR 1 NUM VN/V1/-YG-1U-UWJlirYG APPROPR-IATION U(11 -V/-2J/Yid-------1,, 83. 0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 3 6 e s 6 305 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND 1 200-E ONTR AGS SER V-IGES MONTHLY-EXf YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE- UNENC--BALANC E e 9 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 50, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 50, 000. 00 0. 0 9 10 12 0 12 DIVISION TOTAL 551-5IP-89 54 5 DEPT 50, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 50, 000. 00 O. 0 13 14 15 16 1 3 14 15 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 420 CON-TRAC-r-SE_RV1Ci /rRIVATC PARKS 1, 240-000. 17 1e 9 20 16 17 19 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 5500 -LAND 00 1, 2_40-00 1, 240. 00 O. 00 1, 240. 00 O7.-00 O. 00 O-00 O. 00 +00 0 100. 0 21 22 23 24 9 20 21 5500 LAND 5501 LAND OBJECT SUDTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 2, 341, 614. 00 • 0. 00 2, 341, 613. 85 0.00 O. 00 O. 00 0. 15 0.0 99. 9 `? 15 26 27 Z 30 1 33 34 35 35 22 23 24 2, 341:61-4. 00 0-00- 2-341,-61- 385 2, 342r8547 -00------------07-0a----27-342,8531-85 2, 590, 354. 00 O. 00 2, 349, 493. 73 - 000 07-00 0. 00 07-15 07-15 240, 860. 27 99. 97. 7 90. 7 2s 26 27 Di ,., L DEPARTMENT TOTAL 2e 29 30 8601 CIP 86-601 DEPT: 4200 -CONTRACT SERV -ICES BLDGS & GROUNDS 37 30 39 q° 42 43 44 3 32 33 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 917. 00 60. 49 1, 038. 98 917. 00 60. 49 1, 038. 98 0. 00 O. 00 121. 98- 121. 98- 113. 3 113. 3 34 3 5 6 DIVISION TOTAL 917. 00 60. 49 1, 038. 98 O. 00 121. 98- 113. 3 q, 46 4' 4n 3] 6 9 8604 CIP 86-604 DEPT: --- 420000NTRAC-�-SERVICES BLDGS St GROUNDS 4y 50 G1 S2 40 41 42 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE OBJECT SUBTOTAL 488.00 0.00 488.00 488.00 0.00 488.00 k, 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.0 100.0 53 54 55 56 43 44 45 DIVISION TOTAL 488. 00 0. 00 488. 00 0. 00 0. 00 100. 0 Sl . 5' 46 47 8606 CIP 87-606 DEPT: -MATERIALS BLDGS & GROUNDS 61 02 63 6" 66 62 6.5 49 50 51 4300 SUPPtIES/OTHER 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.O 0. 0 52 53 6y ]0 71 72 55 56 13 74 75 1. W v W V v✓ W W v W W W W v U OS W 0 • • 4 r • 9 • FINANCE-FA454 TIME 17:14:40 CIrTY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) I PAGE 0044' 1 + r.. .... ._ .,T..,�. ,� UAit-0:7/131'i2--- 83.0% 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND--DIV-OBJT-DEGCR a APPROPR-IATION MONTHLY-EXr YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE --UNENC-"BALANCE 6 305 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND ] e 9 DIVISION TOTAL O. 00 0. 00 0. 00 O. 00 0. 00 0. 0 8608 C. re -89 600 9 12 DEFT: DLDGS-&-9ROUNDO 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES15 4201---CONTRACT-SERV-1 CE/PR IVATE 21,-000-00 0.00 0-00 0.00 15 -21,-000:-00 -0: It OBJECT SUBTOTAL 211 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 21, 000. 00 0. 0 10 20 16 „ 18 DIVISION TOTAL 21, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 21, 000. 00 0. 0 604 -GIP 09-607 u 23 24 19 0 2128 DEPS--ULDGS & GROUNDS 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 25 26 21 29 30 31 32 2.2 CONTRACT SERVH I6PRIVATE O. 00 0.430 O. 00 O. 00 z3 4 -_ O. p0-----0-0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 25 26 27 DIVISION TOTAL 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 0 86-1-5-C-1rP 07 615 DErT. DLDGS-Hi.-GROUNDS 34 35 2a 29 30 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 4201 -CONTRACT SERVICE/PRI-VATS 0.00 5 a 9 40 31. 32 � 0.00 43-00 0.00 0.00 O. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 1300 41 42 43 4,4 5 36 MATERIALS/SUPPEIES/OTHER 4309 MAINTENANCE MATERIALS 374.00 0.00 270.40 0.00 103.60 72.2 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 374. 00 O. 00 270. 40 0. 00 103.60 72. 2 445 6 47 ' 48 3] 30 39 DIVISION TOTAL 374. 00 O. 00 270. 40 O. 00 103. 60 72. 2 4•s 0 s1 4 0 41 4256 8616 CIP 90-616 DEPT: BLDGS & GROUNDS 4200 CON=fRAGT-BERV-ICES 6z 53 54 55 1 43 44 45 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 45, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 45, 000. 00 0. 0 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 45.000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 45, 000. 00 0. 0 58 59 45 4] 4a DIVISION TOTAL 45, 000. 00 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00 45, 000. 00 0. 0 60 61 62 63 i 64 66 6] 49 50 51 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 67, 779. 00 60. 49 1, 747. 38 0. 00 65, 981. 62 2. 6 8701 Sz C1P-89 01 DEPS: -OTHER -PROJECTS 53 54 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 120-1 60 ]0 714 72 3 ]4 y 55 CONTRACT SERVICE -/PR IVATE 1-5.-1)00-00 0.00 0. EGA 0 -0O 1-5 56 -000,00 0. 0 • • • • • • • • • 0 0 O F; • ',y • • • • • • • • • • S • • • • • • FINANCE-FA454 TIME CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0050 4 z 1 14.-48- FUND--DIV-0BJT—DESCR 1 MUII--tiatft/ APPROPRIATION 11-Yd—f U - Ad* f-JU/Yd OH I t -U' f 1.-Jr4re 1..r4' 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE ,\ 2 3 s 6 305 INSURANCE FUND MONTHLY -EU' YTD EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE --UNENC-BALANCE 6 7 6 7 8 9 8701 CIP 89-701 —4' DEPT: OTHER PROJECTS 9 10 1 2 10 „ 12 100-PERSONAL--SERVICCS OBJECT SUBTOTAL 15, 000. 00 0.00 O. 00 O. 00 15, 000. 00 0. 0 13 14 15 16 13 4 5 DIVISION TOTAL DEPARTr1ENTf0TAL 15, 000. 00 O. 00 O. 00 O. 00 15, 000. 00 0. 0 17 18 1L z0 i6 7 8 FUND TOTAL 1-57-0000 5, 901, 537. 00 0.00 298. 74 000 4, 071, 607. 96 0.-00-------154-000700-------(1 0 450. 27 1, 829, 478. 77 68. 9 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 25 26 27 29 22 23 24 2L 30 31 32 25 26 27 33 34 35 35 28 29 30 37 3J 39 40 31 ' 32 33 41 42 43 44 34 35 36 45 40 47 49 37 38 39 49 50 51 52 40 41 42 53 54 55 56 43 44 45 5/ `58 59 60 46 47 4A . 61 62 63 64 49 50 51 tis 66 67 68 52 53 54 69 10 71 72 55 56 • 73 74 75 79, • a 0 W W v1✓ 4a14 I W W y kaa lea tio • F I NANC E-FA454 TIME 1-7i-4.4±4 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) • PAGE 00b1 v z 3 . ...r.. .. .. ....• .c ,._. .•T•v..• ,c UMtt_-'J:7/-L3/Yc' 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE FUND DESCR 21 3 a -DIV -OBJ ARPRBPR-IA-BION MONTHLY-EXP----YTD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE-UNENC-BALANCE 7..- 6 705 INSURANCE FUND 5 6 l 79 1 1209 LIABILITY INS DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 4100 10 1 z1 -PERSONAL -SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 24, 540. 00 2, 189. 22 20, 292. 52 0. 00 4, 247. 48 82. 6 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 1111 ACCRUAL 14 15 11 to zo -CASH ----IN 730:-00 0.00 868.03 0.00- 138.-03---118:-9 lal 51 4180 RETIREMENT 3, 384. 00 276. 39 2, 503. 99 O. 00 880. 01 73. 9 4188 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 3. 972. 00 437. 07 2, 403. 57 O. 00 1. 568. 43 60. 5 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 32,-626-00 2, 6' 8 902. 60 26,06&-44----------0,00-63-557,439 74-: 4200 CONTRACT SERVICES 1301-GBI4TRAG SERVICEf{'RIVATE 21 22 23 24 362r630-00- 29r017 84 222,430721 0,00 10, 199. 79 08. - 4i 291 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 362, 630. 00 29, 017. 84 322, 430. 21 O. 00 40, 149. 79 88. 9 z1i 1300 MATERIALSISUPPLiESfBTHE z5 z6 6 22R 23 4305 OFFICE OPER SUPPLIES 300.00 104.36 364.40 0.00 64. 40- 121.4 24 ' 4315 MEMBERSHIP 1, 005. 00 600. 00 860. 00 0. 00 145. 00 85. 5 1316 --TRAINING 250-00 29 30 31 33 34 35 6 25 0.00 139-00 0. .55.. 00 11-100 26 4324 CLAIMS/SETTLEMENTS 94, 285. 00 1, 364. 58 88, 353. 80 O. 00 5, 931. 20 93. 7 27 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 95, 840. 00 2, 088. 94 89, 717. 20 0. 00 6, 122. 80 ' 93. 6 29 29 30 DIVISION TOTAL 491. 096. 00 34, 009. 46 438, 215. 52 O. 00 52, 880. 48 89. 2 3] A 39 40 3 1 1210 AUTO/PROP/BONDS DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 2 33 4200-_CBNTRAG-SER 41 42 43 V39ES 3444 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 27, 000. 00 O. 00 22, 080. 00 O. 00 4, 920. 00 81. 7 35 OBJECT SUBTOTAL 36 27, 000. 00 O. 00 22, 080. 00 O. 00 4, 920. 00 81. 7 45 '"' 4' 45 3l 39 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER • 39 4324 CLAIMS/SETTLEMENTS 10, 500. 00 202. 84 9, 475. 03 O. 00 1, 024. 97 90. 2 OBJECT 'SUBTOTAL 4. 0 51 '= 53 54 55 t0 10x-500-00 202. 81 9,-475-03 O. a9 17-024-97 90-2 4 1 42 4 DI-V-IS-flN - FOTAL 37-.-500:-00 202. 84 31-.-555-03 0-00 5-r-944. 97 04. 1 44 45 1215 UNEMPLOYMENT DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT Si 59 46 O PERSONAL SERVICES 47 49 4186 UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS 14, 000. 00 3, 812. 00 10, 535. 64 O. 00 3, 464. 36 75. 2 ,D 61 62 63 4 OB JEC�SUBTOTAL 49 1-4.-000-00 3.812-G0 10-535.64 0.00 3x4464-36 75. so .6 .6 67 , r" 9 70 I l2 sz Dim -PSI ON TOTAL 14,-000-00 3x822-00 19x535-64 G. 00 3.161.X36 75 5 3 5471 55 56 ) ,3 )4 15 0 y r V I. ';:' "yb�j�.i"'iT *N!"C(ia:.,.Lk4••'LTP;v.�f `S'1:{`. e• a s O • 118 • • • • • • • • s • 0 • • • • FINANCE-FA454 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH EXPENDITURE SUMMARY REPORT (BY FUND) PAGE 0052 fl 1 2110-17. £T:-nU r i9Ul'1 V'rrJt77C-1U-VYT.7VTYC Limit VO/ i r -re - z 83.0% OF YEAR COMPLETE 2 3 FUND-DIV-0BJT--DESCR- E-- --BALANCE 4 APPROPRIATION Y MONTHLY -EX TD-EXPND. ENCUMBRANCE X , 5 6 705 INSURANCE FUND 7 6 e 9 e 1217 WORKERS COMP DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT t0 11 9 2 4100 -PERSONAE -SERVICES 4102 REGULAR SALARIES/MISC 31. 409.00 3,003.01 28, 277.44 0.00 3,131.56 90.0 14 Z 4110 VACATION/SICK PAY OFF 61.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 61:00 0.0 15 4111 ACCRUAL 99:8 ;6 - -CASH -IN - 86900 0.00 868.-03 0:00 0.97-- 4 4180 RETIREMENT 4,301.00 387.71 3,478.31 0.00 822.69 80.8 18 5 4182 WORKERS COMP CURRENT YR 4188 EMPEOYEE-BENEFITS 440, 000. 00 28, 569. 80 334, 233. 10 0. 00 105, 766. 90 75. 9 19 6 Gr834-00 824.48 4r367-80 0. 00 2, 466-:-20 6379 21 17OBJECT SUBTOTAL 483, 474.00 32, 785.00 371, 224.68 0.00 112, 249.32 76.7 u 23 e 4200-EONTRACT 24 19 CERVICES 25 20 4201 CONTRACT SERVICE/PRIVATE 47, 000.00 2,383.00 46, 118.21 0.00 881.79 98.1 26 2 4251 CONTRACT SERVICE/GOVT 0.00 0.00 406.59 0.00 406.59- 0.0 27 47. 000-00 07-00 z. OBJECT -SUB -TOTAL 2-i--383:--004&- 8 524-0 475.20------98. '7 ;9 23 30 4300 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES/OTHER 31 24 4305-SFFI-CE OPER j? 32 25 SUPPL-IE^.. 400700-----------65.68 243 4 O. 00 1-56. 36 GO. 33 26 4315 MEMBERSHIP 45.00 0.00 45.00 0.00 0.00 100.0 34 4316 TRAINING 2,000.00 0.00 453.38 0. 00 1, 546.62 22.6 35 27 36 2x445-00 65.68 20 OB-JEC-T-SUBTOTAL 742-02 0700 1-7-702.98-----3(1 3 29 0 39 0 = 40 3291900-------35,2337-6 31 DI • g, 418;74917- 50 0 (30------114-,---4277-50. 8-.7 41 32 42 33 1218 MEDICARE DEPT: MGMT/SUPPORT 43 44 34 45 35 4100 PERSONAL SERVICES 46 6 4189 MEDICARE BENEFITS ODJCCT-SUBTOTTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0 "' 40 37 O. 00 O. 00 0. O 0 e, e e e, e 0 0. O 49 38 50 51 39 -VI -SW 52 DI : 11. i, 44 of 4700 0700 0. 0 53 41 54 DEPARTMENT TOTAL 1, 075, 515.00 73, 257.98 898, 797.69 0.00 176, 717.31 83.5 55 56 43 5l 4 FUND TOTAL 1, 075, 515.00 73, 257.98 898, 797.69 0.00 176, 717.31 83.5 56 59 45 60 46 REPORT-T&ThL5 29,600-r-21-1-700 1r7067 31-5. 7t-23 806;915. 71 747.--966-22 r718,3297-07 8G. 6 61 4 7 62 63 64 49 05 66 67 51 W 52 6 53 70 71 72 55 73 56 • 74 75 4. W W 4,80 v1I w W W 1v W law kaf FUND GENERAL NUMBER ACCOUNT TREASURER 'S REPORT - APRIL 1992 4/1/92 BALANCE CASH ADJUSTMENTS WARRANTS ADJUSTMENTS 4/30/92 BALANCE 001 GENERAL 105 LIGHTING DISTRICT 109 VEHICLE PARKING DIST. 110 PARKING 115 STATE GAS TAX 120 COUNTY GAS TAX 125 PARK REC.FAC.TAX 126 RAILROAD RT.OF WAY 127 67. UTILITY USERS TAX 140 CDBG 145 PROPOSITION A FUND 150 GRANT FUND 155 CROSSING GUARD DISTRICT 160 SEWER MAINTENANCE 170 POLICE ASSET SEIZURE 180 FIRE PROTECTION FUND 305 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 705 SELF INSURANCE FUND TRUST ACCOUNTS $2,269,101.54 $1,423,629.90 $194,551.51 $20,960.94 $639,839.78 $16,445.70 $209,856.84 $1,154,432.00 $269,024.02 $0.00 $225,655.25 $49,210.77 $65,321.25 $1,907,503.76 $1,477,915.20 $524,885.61 $856,395.77 $493,703.32 $1,652,939.89 $46,411.70 $16,304.10 $181,216.20 $36,899.92 $0.00 $0.00 $81,885.61 $107,176.28 $0.00 $13,969.00 $0.00 $14,233.94 $157.00 $23,537.30 $964.00 $0.00 $1,730.49 $140,292.38 $19,325.15 $2,640.95 $284.54 $8,685.54 $223.24 $2,848.71 $2,807.08 $3,651.88 $0.00 $5,214.65 $0.00 $886.71 $92,560.19 $20,062.05 $7,125.09 $395,241.85 $76,100.00 ($816,600.79) ($25,388.71) ($5,830.19) ($56,765.41) $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 ($1,158.41) $0.00 $0.00 ($6,080.95) $0.00 ($4,910.97) ($10,841.68) ($41,231.91) ($26,769.48) ($298.74) ($74,448.46) ($172,704.51) ($2,883.33) ($1,432.69) ($79,933.78) ($166,875.40) ($2,903.42) ($126,286.08) $0.00 ($101,666.00) $0.00 ($270.80) ($3,333.33) ($222.00) ($112,734.05) ($4,747.53) $0.00 $0.00 ($170.04) $3,073,028.51 $1,461,094.71 $206,233.68 $65,762.49 $518,549.84 $13,765.52 $86,419.47 $1,237,966.28 $278,186.18 $0.00 $238,487.15 $45,877.44 $75,308.93 $1,876,645.22 $1,475,535.11 $506,205.22 $1,251,338.88 $496,915.31 $11,798,433.16 $2,177,425.43 $777,950.01 ($1,070,325.70) ($776,162.96) $12,907,319.94 BALANCE RECEIVED PAID BALANCE $3,315.76 $11,901,568.50 INACTIVE DEPOSIT $1,040,074.56 $537,495.26 INACTIVE DEPOSIT HELD BY FISCAL AGENT RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY $647,263.75 INTEREST RECEIVED TO DATE $622,679.47 $622,160.22 $3,835.01 GENERAL PAYROLL OUTSTANDING CHECKS INACTIVE DEPOSIT $191,331.32 $5,976.28 $197,307.60 $227,795.71 ($30,488.11) $12,941,643.06 BALANCE $12,911,154.95 ‘'/9 May 19, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach City Council May 26, 1992 SUBJECT: LOS ANGELES COUNTY INTERIM PARATRANSIT PLAN FOR THE DISABLED INITIATED BY STAFF PURPOSE: Compliance with Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) Recommendation Adoption of the attached resolution. Background The City Council adopted Resolution 91-5509, at the December 10, 1991 City Council meeting, agreeing to participate in the development of the L.A. County Consolidated ADA paratransit plan. Analysis Federal regulations implementing the ADA require that cities andfixed route operators participating in a coordinated plan must adopt a final plan and submit it to DOT by July 26, 1992. The Los Angeles County Transportation Commission is requesting the City's support of the final Plan. By passing the attached resolution, the City reaffirms its authorization of the LACTC to assume its obligations to provide the complementary paratransit service and submit the final plan as required by the ADA. In addition, adoption of this resolution indicates the City Council's support of the proposed program, its design and concepts, funding and other programming and planning issues. Failure to pass a support resolution will require the City to immediately begin providing complementary paratransit service, as required by the ADA, and to prepare and submit a Complementary Paratransit Plan. To participate in the Los Angeles County Coordinated Complementary Paratransit Plan, the City must pass a resolution by June 15, 1992 certifying its support of the proposed program. The executive summary has been attached, and a complete copy of the plan is on file in the City Clerk's office, and in the Planning Department. ,? -i �% Michael Schubach J /C • J.4rm,.. Planning Director Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager p/ccsrada 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 92- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY COORDINATED PARATRANSIT PLAN. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California held a meeting on May 26, 1992 and made the following findings: A. The Americans With Disabilities Act (hereinafter referred to as "ADA") was enacted on July 26, 1990 (Public Law 101-336); B. On September 6, 1991 the United States Department of Transportation (hereinafter referred to as "DOT") issued a final rule implementing the transportation -related provisions of the ADA (49 CFR Parts 27, 37 and 38, Transportation for Individuals With Disabilities); C. Subpart F, Sections 37.121 and 37.135 of 49 CFR 37 requires that each fixed route transit operator provide complementary paratransit service to disabled individuals, prepare a plan for implementation of such service and begin service implementation by January 26, 1992; D. Subpart F, Section 37.141 of 49 CFR 37 allows the preparation and submittal of a single coordinated paratransit plan among the operators of fixed route transit service with overlapping and contiguous service areas; E. The City of Hermosa Beach (hereinafter referred to as "City") operates a fixed route transit system in Los Angeles County and is required to provide ADA -eligible complementary paratransit service and prepare and submit an 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 annual paratransit plan to DOT; F. The Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (hereinafter referred to as "LACTC"), which is mandated by state statutes to coordinate paratransit services in Los Angeles County, has initiated the development of a countywide coordinated paratransit network (hereinafter referred to as "Network") as the most appropriate and G. effective means of meeting the ADA obligations of the Angeles County fixed route transit operators; The City adopted a resolution on December 10, 1991, Los authorizing its participation in the development of the Plan; and H. On behalf of the Los Angeles County's fixed route operators, the LACTC prepared an interim plan for the provision of the ADA paratransit service, which included support resolutions from fixed route operators and cities which operate or participate in fixed route transit systems and submitted said interim plan to DOT on January 27, 1992; and I. The LACTC has agree to prepare the DOT -required first-year coordinated paratransit plan (hereinafter referred to as the "Plan") to be submitted to DOT on July 26, 1992 for all participating Los Angeles County fixed route transit operators which pass resolutions adopting the Plan; J. The City has participated in the development of the Plan and has provided fiscal and operating data about its current fixed route and paratransit systems to the LACTC in 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 a timely manner; K. The City agrees to maintain current levels of paratransit service until the coordinated plan is fully implemented, in accordance with 49 CFR 37.141; and L. The LACTC will provide funding and coordinate the operations of paratransit services, above the level of elderly and disabled transit services being provided by the City, which may be required by the Plan; M. The City desires to fulfill its ADA -mandated paratransit obligations through participation in the coordinated paratransit through participation in the Plan and Network as developed by the LACTC. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE THE FOLLOWING: Section 1. The City of Hermosa Beach is committed to meeting its ADA -mandated paratransit obligations by supporting and participating in the Los Angeles County Coordinated Paratransit Plan to be submitted to DOT on July 26, 1992; Section 2. The City of Hermosa Beach does hereby adopt the Los Angeles County Coordinated Complementary Paratransit Plan; Section 3. In accordance with 49 CFR Part 37.141, the City does hereby agree to maintain current levels of paratransit service until the coordinated plan is fully implemented. Section 4. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution; shall cause the same to be entered among the original resolutions of said City; and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceeding of the City Council of said City in the minutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adoped. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 26th day of May, 1992. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: p/ccrsada , CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY BACKGROUND MATER/AL Executive Summary 119? CID METRO Los Angeles County Transportation Commission LOS ANGELES COUNTY COORDINATED PARATRANSIT PLAN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), passed by Congress in 1990, guarantees equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities in employment, public accommodations, transportation, state and local government services, and telecommunications. The transportation provisions of the ADA focus on making public transit fully accessible to persons with disabilities and require that public transit operators provide complementary paratransit service to individuals who are unable to use accessible fixed -route bus or rail systems. This plan focuses on the provision of complementary paratransit service in Los Angeles County. The ADA requires each public fixed -route bus operator, such as the Southern California Rapid Transit District, to provide paratransit (dial -a -ride) service to individuals with disabilities that is comparable to the level of service provided to individuals without disabilities who use the regular, fixed -route bus system. The paratransit service is intended to "complement" the regular bus system and is limited to serve strictly defined categories of individuals with disabilities. Complementary paratransit is an alternative form of transportation for those individuals who cannot use the regular, fixed -route bus system, but is not intended to provide a comprehensive system of transportation for all individuals with disabilities. Plan Concepts and Design On behalf of the 37 Los Angeles County fixed -route transit operators, the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (LACTC) has proposed the development of a coordinated countywide paratransit network to provide the ADA -required paratransit service. Called METRO ACCESS, this coordinated network will eliminate duplicative and overlapping service that would result if each fixed -route operator provided the ADA -mandated complementary paratransit service on its own. Additionally, a coordinated network will provide increased mobility for ADA -eligible persons because service will be provided within most of the urbanized portions of Los Angeles County and will not be limited to each fixed -route operator's service area. 1 The proposed network will be comprised of both public and non- profit paratransit operators that will "sell" excess service during off peak times at negotiated rates. The network will also contract with private operators for services. By negotiating with operators to provide METRO ACCESS service at a competitive price, the network will promote the efficient use of existing resources and reduce the overall program cost. Another concept which will make efficient use of existing resources is the utilization of existing public, city -run paratransit systems to continue to provide local service. Approximately 79 of the 88 cities in Los Angeles County and the County of Los Angeles provide local paratransit service which is currently meeting much of the transportation needs of the ADA -eligible population. Individuals with disabilities are strongly encouraged to continue to use their local paratransit service whenever possible. The Plan calls for a "broker" to manage METRO ACCESS. The broker will be responsible for receiving calls for trips, determining which provider has the capacity to provide the trip, and dispatching the trip request to the provider. The brokerage system is currently operating successfully in the first stage of the countywide project in the east San Gabriel Valley. Funding for the development of the Los Angeles County Coordinated Paratransit Plan and implementing the METRO ACCESS service is appropriated from the Proposition A and Proposition C Discretionary Accounts. Description of the METRO ACCESS Service METRO ACCESS service is designed to meet the letter and intent of the ADA, which uses the fixed -route service as a basis for determining the service area, days and hours of operation and fare structure of the ADA paratransit service. METRO ACCESS is a curb -to -curb transportation service provided in areas within 3/4 mile on either side of the fixed route. Because there are over 600 fixed -route bus lines in Los Angeles County, the METRO ACCESS service area will eventually include most of the urbanized area of the county. METRO ACCESS operates 24 hours a day in the service area illustrated in Attachment A, but service hours for a particular trip depend upon the corresponding fixed -route service. The cost of a trip on METRO ACCESS is determined on an individual basis, based on twice the undiscounted fare of a similar trip on the fixed -route system. Eligible individuals will be told the fare when they schedule a trip on METRO ACCESS. The ADA regulations encourage the use of "real time" scheduling, which provides service to individuals when they request it, eliminating the need for advanced reservations. "Real time" scheduling more closely mirrors a person's experiences using the 2 regular bus service in which advanced reservations are not possible. Using this system, METRO ACCESS requires trips to be scheduled within two hours of the requested pick-up time. Individuals may request trips up to 14 days in advance; however, they must call within two hours of pick-up to confirm their trip. Eligible individuals may ride as often as they wish with no priorities given to certain types of trips, such as medical visits. Personal care attendants may ride free of charge with the eligible individual. One companion may ride with the eligible individual at the METRO ACCESS fare, and up to four companions are allowed as long as they do not displace other eligible passengers. Estimated Demand for METRO ACCESS Service Using methodology recommended in the ADA guidelines, the LACTC has estimated that the total population eligible for METRO ACCESS service within Los Angeles County is approximately 90,000 individuals. The LACTC is estimating that, once phased -in countywide, METRO ACCESS and the local paratransit systems will provide 16,000 trips per day. Certification Process The ADA quite clearly intends that complementary paratransit service be provided for those individuals whose disability prevents them from using the regular bus system. The proposed certification process, which was developed in conjunction with a panel of medical and social service disability experts, is designed to clearly identify eligible individuals without greatly inconveniencing the applicant. The proposed certification process requires every applicant to be interviewed in person by a screener, who is a medical or social service professional with experience working with persons with disabilities. The interview, which is initiated by the applicant once he or she has completed the METRO ACCESS application form, is conducted at convenient certification centers located within the service area, or at a prearranged site, such as a social service agency or convalescent home. Transportation to and from the certification site will be provided to the client free of charge. The screener will conduct a 15 -minute, one-on-one evaluation, not a medical examination, asking the applicant a series of questions to determine whether the individual is capable of using the regular bus system. At the end of the evaluation, the screener will make a determination whether the person is eligible. The eligible applicant will receive a photo ADA card and a description of any restrictions on his or her eligibility. If the screener denies the application, the applicant may appeal the decision to a 3 certification professional with expertise in the individual's particular disability, or disabilities. This professional will make the final determination of eligibility. There are three types of eligibility for service: unrestricted, temporary, and restricted. Individuals certified as unrestricted are eligible for any trip on the METRO ACCESS service. Temporary eligibility may be assigned to individuals who have temporary disabilities or are visiting the area. Restricted eligibility is given to individuals whose disabilities may fluctuate or are transient in nature, or who may be able to make certain trips on the regular bus system but not others. Timetable for Countywide Implementation The ADA regulations allow up to five years to phase-in the complementary paratransit service. As shown in Attachment B, the Los Angeles County Coordinated Paratransit Plan proposes to phase- in METRO ACCESS across the county as follows: Area 1 - San Gabriel Valley - METRO ACCESS is currently operating in the east San Gabriel Valley, which is comprised of 15 cities from the 605 freeway extending east to the county line. The Plan proposes the phase-in of the western portion of the San Gabriel Valley, including the cities of Pasadena, South Pasadena, Alhambra and Monterey Park on the western edge, by September, 1992. Area 2 - West/Central Los Angeles - Area 2 encompasses the central portion of Los Angeles and extends west to the Pacific Ocean. Slauson represents the southern boundary, and Mulholland Drive the northern boundary of this area. Area 2 is proposed to receive METRO ACCESS service beginning January 1993 with full implementation by January 1994. Area 3 - Southeast - Area 3 is divided into two sections. Area 3a, which includes Montebello, Commerce and Vernon to the north and Lynwood, Downey and Santa Fe Springs to the south, is scheduled to receive service beginning January 1994. The entire southeast area, which extends south and includes Long Beach, Compton, Norwalk and La Mirada, will be fully implemented by January, 1995. Area 4 - South Bay - Area 4 covers the area from Slauson Boulevard to San Pedro and the Pacific Ocean to Long Beach in the east. This area is scheduled for phase-in beginning January, 1995. Area 5 - San Fernando Valley/North County - Area 5 is divided into three section. Area 5a, the San Fernando Valley, will receive service beginning January, 1996. METRO ACCESS service will be provided to Areas 5b and 5c, which consist of the Santa Clarita Valley and the Antelope Valley areas, beginning June, 1996. 4 Responsibilities of Transit Operators Each of the 53 cities which operate or participate in a fixed -route bus system as well as the Southern California Rapid Transit District (SCRTD), Foothill Transit, and the County of Los Angeles, are required to formally adopt the Los Angeles County Coordinated Paratransit Plan. These 56 entities must pass resolutions adopting the Plan by June 15, 1992 to be included in the Plan which will be submitted to the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) on July 26, 1992. Cities and agencies which fail to adopt the Plan are required to immediately prepare and submit their own plans for the provision of complementary paratransit service and begin that service immediately. The participating cities and agencies are currently reviewing the Plan and are considering resolutions for its adoption. In addition, cities which provide only paratransit or dial -a -ride service (and no fixed -route service) are considering resolutions adopting the Plan to support the development of a countywide network to serve the disabled. Public Outreach and Participation The LACTC has made a tremendous effort to hear from persons with disabilities on the development of the Los Angeles County Coordinated Paratransit Plan. Five public workshops were held in October, 1991 and four in April, 1992, to brief the community on the ADA requirements and the concepts and design of the Plan. In addition, one public hearing was held in January, and four public hearings are scheduled for early May, 1992, at various locations in Los Angeles County, to formally receive public comment on the Plan. A public outreach campaign also was begun in the east San Gabriel Valley to inform potential clients about the METRO ACCESS service. Brochures, letters, presentations, newspaper advertisements and a press event were designed to promote the use of METRO ACCESS to potentially eligible persons. The public information and outreach campaign is ongoing and will be expanded as the service is phased in across the county. All public information, including copies of the Plan, brochures, and fact sheets are available in alternative formats upon request, including Braille, large print and audio tape. Sign language interpreters and assistive listening devices are available upon request for use by persons with hearing impairments at the public hearings or other public meeting. The Los Angeles County Transportation Commission encourages all interested individuals to review the Los Angeles County Coordinated Paratransit Plan and to participate in its development. For more information about the Plan or METRO ACCESS, please call Deidre Heitman, Program Manager, at (213) 244-6744, TDD (213) 244-6908. 5 ATTACHMENT A Fixed Route Transit Service Area CTSA-034.4-92 LOS ANGELES COUNTY Proposed Metro Access Phase -1n Boundaries SAN FERNANDO VALLEY/NORTH COUNTY '7010 • __Ill' METROACCESS Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council -S 3 7 _SA L/ May 19, 1992 Regular Meeting of May 26, 1992 SUBJECT: METRO GREEN LINE LIGHT RAIL SYSTEM - SOUTHERN EXTENSION Recommendation To formally support advancing this project through the EIR process by adopting the attached resolution of support. Background The City Council had previously adopted Resolution 86-4982 on September 23, 1986 supporting an extension to the Century -E1 Segundo Transit project. Analysis The attached letter from the South Bay Corridor (Transportation) Steering Committee requests that the City of Hermosa Beach officially support the advancement of the project known as the Southern Extension of the Green Line. This support is needed to help advance this project through the EIR process as soon as possible, and thus to give this project a potentially higher priority within the Thirty Year Transportation Plan. The Southern Extension of the Green Line is critical to the South Bay, and to Hermosa Beach, as it would become the closest connection to the network of light rail lines anticipated to be constructed within the next thirty years. Res ectffully Submitted, CONCUR: ' L /YG�ly/al,S / Ken Robertson r'.°%j,, �� Associate Planner Michael Schubach P1 ning Director Ak lck..ee.J Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager Attachments 1. Proposed Resolution 2. Letter from Alan West, Chairman, South Bay Corridor Steering Committee p/memol 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 92- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING THE THE METRO GREEN LINE LIGHT RAIL SYSTEM SOUTHERN EXTENSION AND SUPPORTING ADVANCING THE PROJECT TO THE EIR PROCESS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE WHEREAS, the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (LACTC) recently approved a Thirty Year Transportation Plan, which includes the southern extension of the Metro Green Line into the South Bay as a "candidate" project; WHEREAS, advancing this project to the process of preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is needed to make this project a potentially higher priority for construction within the next thirty years; WHEREAS, the City of Hermosa Beach has consistently recognized the need for alternative transportation systems to serve the South Bay, and now recognizes the critical need for the southern extension of the Metro Green Line as the primary connection from the South Bay into the proposed .county -wide light rail network; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The City of Hermosa Beach supports the Southern Extension of the Metro Green Line Light Rail System. SECTION 2. The City of Hermosa Beach strongly supports the advancement of this project to a higher priority within LACTC's - 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 Thirty Year Plan for construction of projects. SECTION 3. The City of Hermosa Beach supports advancing this project to the EIR process, to help make this project a higher priority for construction. SECTION 4. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution; shall cause the same to be entered among the original resolutions of said City; and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceeding of the City Council of said City in the minutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adoped. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 26th day of May, 1992. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: , CITY CLERK p/ccrsrail - 2 - CITY ATTORNEY Fredrick R. Ferrin City Manager City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254. ALAN WEST, Councilman May 7, 1992 Metro Green Line Light Rail System Southern Extension RECEIVED MAY 1 2 1992 CITY MGR. OFFICE In view of the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission's (LACTC) recent approval of the Thirty (30) Year Transportation Plan, Latest Version (dated April 1992) which identified County -wide rail, bus and highway projects for funding, I feel it is critical for us to re-examine the Southern Extension (South Coast) of the Metro Green Line and its priority in the Plan. Last year, many of you assisted in the effort to request the LACTC to move this project into the "funded" category expressing the importance of its completion to our area. Your efforts were successful in that the project is included as one of eight (8) "candidate" projects which will receive funding sometime over the next thirty (30) years. However the project must compete with the other projects for construction priority. Currently, this project is not in a competitive position because an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) identifying all potential alignments has not been completed. As most of you are aware, the Southern Extension of the Green Line is anticipated to extend southerly from the present (1994) terminus at Marine Avenue just west of the I-405 Freeway to the Torrance area. This extension is critical for the business communities located in the South Bay and the employees working and or living in the South Bay. Not only will the extension provide an efficient and environmentally responsible transportation system, it will also: • assist employers in meeting air quality and congestion management requirements of the Air Quality Management District's Regulation XV and the LACTC Congestion Management Plan; Page 1 of 2 -3- 350 Main Street, El Segundo, California 90245-0989 Phone (310) 322-4670 FAX (310) 322-7137 Metro Green Line Light Rail System Southern Extension May 7, 1992 Page 2 of 2 (continued) • help attract continued economic investment in our South Bay communities; and • provide a transportation network that will enable us to meet the future needs of our communities. The next step to put this project in a competitive position in the Thirty (30) Year Plan is to complete an EIR. I would like your continued support for the Southern Extension of the Green Line, and, specifically, your formal support to advance this project to the EIR process as soon as possible. I am requesting that this issue be placed on your next meeting agenda. I or my representative will be there to present the matter, to address concerns you may have and to discuss the critical path this project must take in order for us to ensure the Southern Extension is constructed in the South Bay at the earliest possible date. You may call me direct at (310) 322-1616 or leave a message in care of the City Department of Public Works (Ken Putnam) at (310) 322-4670, extension 230. I look forward to hearing from you regarding your action and how I can assist your meeting. Thank you. Sincerely, N r. A an West, City Councilman City of El Segundo, and Chairman of the South Bay Corridor (Transportation) Steering Committee (JPA) AW/KM/BK/KP/dr/ime - May 4,1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 26, 1992 HERMOSA BEACH CROSSING GUARD MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 1992 - 1993 ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS REGARDING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT AND SETTING JUNE 23, 1992, FOR A PUBLIC HEARING Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Adopt the attached resolution approving the report of the Director of Public Works of said City made pursuant to the requirements of Resolution No. 92-5521. 2. Adopt the attached resolution of intent to order certain Crossing guard services pursuant to the "Crossing Guard Maintenance District Act of 1974", Chapter 3.5, Articles 1, 2, 3 and 4, Sections 55530 through 55570 of the Government Code of the State of California, at certain locations in the said City for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993; setting June 23, 1992 to accept public input on the matter of the proposed Crossing Guard District. Background: On February 25, 1992, City Council adopted resolution 92-5521 ordering the preparation of a report for the formation of the Hermosa Beach Crossing Guard Maintenance District No. 1992 - 1993. Analysis: Adoption of both resolutions is necessary at this time so that a public hearing can be held to take testimony on the assessments. The first Resolution approves the report prepared by the Director of Public Works for the City's Crossing Guard Assessment District. Its adoption confirms that the report has been prepared prior to the public hearing. The report has the estimated assessment for the proposed Crossing Guard Maintenance District and is on file in the City Clerk's office. The district costs are approximately the same as last year. The unit fee is based on equivalent dwelling units. The annual assessment fee is $5.05 per unit. The adoption of the second resolution provides for the setting of a public hearing for June 23, 1992, at 8:00 p.m. (or as soon as possible thereafter) to accept public input on the matter of the proposed Crossing Guard Maintenance District and assessment. At the conclusion of the public hearing on June 23, 1992, the City Council will be provided with a resolution it may adopt concerning the assessment district. - 1 - lg Alternatives: An alternative available to City Council is: 1. Let the District lapse; thereby, causing a potential increased General Fund obligation of $54,843. Respectfully submitted, Concur: Hp-nol Homayoun Behboodi Assistant Engineer Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Director Lynn A. Terry, P.E. Deputy City Engineer Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager and Acting Director of Public Works Attachments: Resolution Approving the District Report Resolution Setting a Time and Place for the Public Hearing pworks/cg 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 RESOLUTION NO. 92- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS OF SAID CITY MADE PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF RESOLUTION 92-5521 OF SAID COUNCIL. HERMOSA BEACH CROSSING GUARDS MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 1992-1993 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, did in Resolution No. 92-5521, adopted February 25, 1992, pursuant to the provisions of the "Crossing Guard Maintenance District Act of 1974", Chapter 3.5, Articles 1, 2, 3 and 4, Sections 55530 through 55570 of the Government Code of the State of California, did require the Director of Public Works to make and file with the Clerk of the City Council a report in - writing, presenting certain matters relating to the proposed "Crossing Guards Maintenance District Act of 1974"; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works, pursuant to the requirements of said City Council as expressed in Resolution No. 92-5521, and of said law, did make and on the 21st day of May, 1992, file in the Office of the City Clerk (who is ex -officio Clerk of the City Council of said City), his report in writing responsive to the requirements of said Resolution 92-5521 and of said law referred to in said Resolution No. 92-5521, and as contemplated under the provisions of said "Crossing Guards Maintenance District Act of 1974"; and WHEREAS, said City Clerk has presented the said report to the City Council of said City, and said Council has proceeded to carefully examine, inspect and consider the said report and is satisfied with said report and with each and all of the items therein set forth. 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 NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: _SECTION 1. That the report of the Director of Public Works in the City of Hermosa Beach, California, bearing the date of the 21st day of May, 1992, which said report was prepared and filed pursuant to the requirements of the provisions of Resolution No. 92-5521 .of the the.. provisions 1974", Chapter City Council of said City and in conformity with of the "Crossing 3.5, Articles 1, Guard Maintenance District Act of 2, 3 and 4, Sections 55530 through 55570 of the Government Code of the State of California on the 21st day of May, 1992, be and the same is hereby approved as so prepared, presented and filed. SECTION 2. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution, shall cause the same to be entered among the original resolutions of said City; and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council of said City in the minutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 26th day of May, 1992. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FO 1 pworks/rescg , CITY CLERK , CITY ATTORNEY - 2 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 RESOLUTION NO. 92- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER CERTAIN CROSSING GUARD SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE "THE CROSSING GUARDS MAINTENANCE DISTRICT ACT OF 1974", CHAPTER 3.5, ARTICLES 1, 2, 3 AND 4, SECTION 55530 THROUGH 55570, OF THE, GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AT CERTAIN LOCATIONS IN THE SAID CITY, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1992 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1993; AND APPOINTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN RELATION THERETO._ HERMOSA BEACH CROSSING GUARDS MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 1992-1993 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The public interest and convenience require, and 11 that it is the intention of the City Council of the City of 12 Hermosa Beach, California, to order certain Crossing Guard 13 Maintenance Services to be provided and maintained at certain 14 street crossings throughout the City for the fiscal year 15 beginning July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. 16 17maintained in accordance with requirements of the Director of All of the services above specified shall be provided and 18Public Works. Said costs shall be funded as referred to in the 19 Report of the Director of Public Works dated May 21, 1992, on 20 file in the office of the City Clerk and which is hereby referred 21 to and by this reference incorporated herein and made a part 22 hereof. 23 SECTION 2. To expedite the providing and maintenance of said 24 services, the City Council may at any time transfer into the 25 "Hermosa Beach Crossing Guard Maintenance District 1992-1993 26 Fund", out of any money in the General Fund, any sums as it shall 27 deem necessary, and the sums so transferred shall be deemed a 28 loan to such fund, and shall be repaid out of the proceeds of the 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 assessments provided for in this resolution (within the same fiscal year) and pursuant to the provisions of Section 55561 of the Crossing Guard Maintenance District Act of 1974. SECTION 3. That said contemplated service, in the opinion of the City Council, is of more than local or ordinary benefit, and said City Council hereby makes the expense of said service chargeable upon a district, which district said Council hereby declares to be the district benefited by said Crossing Guard Services, and to be assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof. Said district is all of the City of Hermosa Beach as shown on MAP OF CROSSING GUARD MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1992-1993 on file in the Office of the City Clerk, on which exterior boundaries thereof are described as the boundary lines of the said City, excepting from said district any portion of any public land, street or alley which may be included therein. Reference is hereby made to the said map as the description of said district. The said map on file shall govern as to the extent of said assessment district. SECTION 4. The Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, shall levy an annual special assessment to pay the costs of maintaining said Crossing Guards. The annual assessment shall be levied and collected at the same time and in the same manner and with the same interest and penalties as general taxes of the City of Hermosa Beach, California. (Said taxes as collected by the Los Angeles County Tax Collector for the City of Hermosa Beach.) SECTION 5. Any lots or parcels of land known as public property, as the same is defined in Section 55560 of said 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 Crossing Guard Maintenance Act of 1974, hereinafter referred to which are included in the said assessment district, shall be omitted and exempt from the assessment to be made to cover the costs and -expenses of said contemplated improvement. SECTION 6. The improvement contemplated by this Resolution of Intention shall be done under the provisions of the "Crossing Guard Maintenance District Act of 1974", Chapter 3.5, Articles 1, 2, 3 and -4, Section 55530 through 55570 of the Government Code of the State of California. SECTION 7. That Tuesday, June 23, 1992, at the hour of 8:00 p.m. of the said day be and the same is hereby appointed as the time, and the City Council Chamber in the City of Hermosa Beach, California is hereby appointed as the place for hearing protests as to the question of approving and confirming the assessment to said improvement. SECTION 8. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized, designated and directed to give notice of said hearing in time, form and manner as required by law. SECTION 9. That the EASY READER, a weekly newspaper of general circulation, circulated within the said City of Hermosa Beach, California, is hereby designated as the newspaper in which said notice shall be published. SECTION 10. That this Resolution shall take effect immediately; and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution; shall cause the original of the same to be entered among the original resolutions of the City Council of said City and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceeding of the City Council of 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 said City in the minutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 26th day of May, 1992. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED. AS TO FORM: , CITY CLERK pworks/cgres CITY ATTORNEY CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH MAP OF CROSSING GUARD MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 1992-1993 ,,..)-#9•Z —$S7 g.1-5SYJ May 4, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 26, 1992 HERMOSA BEACH STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT 1992-1993 ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS REGARDING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT AND SETTING JUNE 23, 1992, FOR A PUBLIC HEARING Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council: 1. Adopt the attached resolution approving the report of the Director of Public Works of said City made pursuant to the requirements of Resolution No. 92-5520. 2. Adopt the attached resolution of intent to order certain street lighting fixtures and appurtenances to be installed and maintained and electric current to be furnished for street lighting fixtures throughout the City for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993; setting June 23, 1992, to accept public input on the matter of the proposed Street Lighting District. Background: On February 25, 1992, City Council adopted Resolution No. 92-5520 ordering the preparation of a report for the formation of the Hermosa Beach Street Lighting Maintenance District 1992-1993. Analysis: Adoption of both resolutions is necessary at this time so that a public hearing can be held to take testimony on the assessments. The first Resolution approves the report prepared by the Director of Public Works. Its adoption confirms that the report has been prepared prior to the public hearing. This report covers matters relating to the proposed Street Lighting Maintenance District and is on file in the City Clerk's office. The district costs for this year are $16.84 per equivalent dwelling unit and are approximately the same as last year. The adoption of the second resolution provides for the setting of a public hearing for June 23, 1992, at 8:00 p.m. (or as soon as possible thereafter). At the conclusion of the public hearing on June 23, 1992, the City Council will be provided with a resolution it may adopt concerning the assessment district. - 1 - 1h Alternatives: An alternative available to City Council is: 1. Let the District lapse; thereby, causing a potential increased General Fund obligation of $182,882. Respectfully submitted, /-Id;./14‘tylgi3e/J6-f--0-04. Homayoun Behboodi Assistant Engineer Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland Finance Director Concur: Lynn A. Terry, P.E. Deputy City Engineer Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager and Acting Director of Public Works Attachments: Resolution Approving the District Report Resolution Setting a time and place for the Public Hearing pworks/st 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 92- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE REPORT OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS OF SAID CITY MADE PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF RESOLUTION 92-5520 OF SAID COUNCIL. HERMOSA BEACH STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT 1992-1993 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, did in Resolution No. 92-5520, adopted February 25, 1992, pursuant to the provisions of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972", (Part 2 of Division 15, Section 22500, et. seq. of the Street and Highways Code of the State of California), did require the Director of Public Works to make and file with the Clerk of the City Council a report in writing, presenting certain matters relating to the proposed installation of certain street lighting fixtures and appurtenances and the proposed maintenance thereof, including the maintenance of all fixtures and appurtenances throughout the City as contemplated under the provisions of said "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972"; and WHEREAS, requirements 92-5520, and the Director of Public Works, pursuant to the of said City Council as expressed in Resolution No. of said law, did make and on the 21st day of May, 1992, file in the Clerk of the City responsive to the said law referred Office of the City Clerk (who is ex -officio Council of said requirements of City), his report in writing said Resolution 92-5520 and of to in said Resolution No. 92-5520, and as contemplated under the provisions of said "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972"; and 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 WHEREAS, said City Clerk has presented the said report to the City Council of said City, and said Council has proceeded to carefully examine, inspect and consider the said report and is satisfied with said report and with each and all of the items therein set forth; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the report of the Director of Public Works in the City of Hermosa Beach, California, bearing the date of the 21st day of May, 1992, which said report was prepared and filed pursuant to the requirements of the provisions of Resolution No. 92-5520 of the City Council of said City and in conformity with the provisions of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972", (Part 2 of Division 15, Section 22500, et. seq. of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California) and which said report was filed in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, in conformity with Section 22623 of said code on the 21st day of May, 1992, be and the same is hereby approved as so prepared, presented and filed. SECTION 2. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution; shall cause the same to be entered among the original resolutions of the City Council of said City and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council of said City in the minutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted. 1 2 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 26th day of May, 1992. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of_ 3 Hermosa Beach, California 4 ATTEST: 5 , CITY CLERK 6 7 APPROED AS TO 8 , CITY ATTORNEY 9 10 pworks/resstl 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 92- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER CERTAIN STREET LIGHTING FIXTURES AND APPURTENANCES TO BE INSTALLED, MAINTAINED AND ELECTRIC CURRENT TO BE FURNISHED FOR STREET LIGHTING FIXTURES THROUGHOUT THE CITY, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 1992 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1993; AND APPOINTING A TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING IN RELATION THERETO. HERMOSA BEACH STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT 1992-1993 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The public interest and convenience require, and that it is the intention of the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, to order certain street lighting fixtures and appurtenances to be provided, installed and maintained; and that electric current be furnished for street lighting fixtures and appurtenances throughout the City for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1992 through June 30, 1993. All of the fixtures and appurtenances above specified shall be installed in accordance with Specifications and Plans as required by the Director of Public Works. The costs of said fixtures, appurtenances and electric current shall be funded as shown in the report from the Director of Public Works 21, 1992, on file in the office of the City Clerk and hereby referred to and by this reference incorporated dated May which is herein and made a part hereof. SECTION 2. To expedite the making of said improvements, the City Council may at any time transfer into the "Hermosa Beach Street Lighting District 1992-1993 Fund", out of any money in the General Fund, any sums as it shall deem necessary, and the sums so transferred shall be deemed a loan to such fund, and shall be 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 repaid out of the proceeds of the assessments provided for in this resolution (within the same fiscal year) and pursuant to the -provisions of Section 22657(b) of the California Streets and Highways Code, "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972" referred to herein. SECTION 3. That said contemplated service, in the opinion of the City Council, is of more than local or ordinary benefit, and said City Council hereby makes the expense of said service chargeable upon a district, which district said Council hereby declares to be the district benefited by said street lighting fixtures and appurtenances, and that district shall be assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof. Said district is all of the City of Hermosa Beach as shown on MAP OF STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT 1992-1993 on file in the Office of the City Clerk, on which exterior boundaries thereof are described as the boundary lines of the said City, excepting from said district any portion of any public land, street or alley which may be included therein. Reference is hereby made to the said map as the description of said district. The said map on file shall govern as to the extent of said assessment district. - SECTION 4. The Council of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, shall levy an annual special assessment to pay the costs of maintaining said Street Lighting. The annual assessment shall be levied and collected at the same time and in the same manner and with the same interest and penalties as general taxes of the City of Hermosa Beach, California. (Said taxes as collected by the Los Angeles County Tax Collector for the City of Hermosa Beach.) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 SECTION 5. Any lots or parcels of land known as public property, as the same is defined in Section 22663, Part 2, Division 15, Streets and Highways Code, (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972), hereinafter referred to which are included in the said assessment district, shall be omitted and exempt from the assessment to be made to covering the costs and expenses of said street lighting fixtures and appurtenances. SECTION 6. The street lighting fixtures and appurtenances contemplated by this Resolution of Intention shall be provided under the provisions of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972". (Now part 2 of Division 15, Section 22500 et. seq. of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California). SECTION 7. That Tuesday, June 23, 1992, at the hour of 8:00 p.m. hereby be appointed as the day and also the same be appointed as the time, and the City Council Chamber in the City of Hermosa Beach, California is hereby appointed as the place for hearing protests as to the question of approving and confirming the assessment district and the levying of the proposed assessment, to said district. SECTION 8. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized, designated and directed to give notice of said hearing in time, form and manner as required by law. SECTION 9. That the EASY READER, a weekly newspaper of general circulation, circulated within the said City of Hermosa Beach, California, is hereby designated as the newspaper in which said notice shall be published. SECTION 10. That this Resolution shall take effect immediately; and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and 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 adoption of this Resolution; shall cause the original of the same to be entered among the original resolutions of the City Council of said City and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceeding of the City Council of said City in the minutes of the meeting at which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 26th day of May, 1992. PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California , CITY CLERK / , CITY ATTORNEY ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: pworks/stres 1 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH 0 MAP OF STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT 1992-1993 May 19, 1992 -y1 -x--7;` dA-l_JL-y Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of of the City Council May 26, 1992 CABLECASTING THE CABLE TELEVISION ADVISORY BOARD MEETINGS RECOMMENDATION: TO AUTHORIZE THE CABLECASTING OF THE CABLE TELEVISION ADVISORY BOARD MEETINGS AND TO AUTHORIZE THE USE OF VOLUNTEERS TO TAPE MEETINGS. BACKGROUND Historically, the Planning Commission and City Council meetings have been the only public meetings cablecast on the cable television system. In March, 1992, the City Council authorized the taping and cablecast of the Parks and Recreation Commission Meetings. Due to the overwhelming interest from the public in the renewal of the cable television franchise and in the operation of the cable television franchise, staff thought that it would be prudent to bring the item before the Advisory Board for review. At its meeting of May 4th, the Cable Television Advisory Board voted 5 - 0 to concur with the staff recommendation to cablecast the meetings of the Cable Television Advisory Board and amended the original staff recommendation to include the use of volunteers to tape the meeting when possible. On March 10, the City Council approved on a 5 - 0 vote the cablecasting of the meetings of the Park and Recreation Commission. The Council directed staff to obtain volunteers to tape the meetings. ANALYSIS Clearly, providing opportunities for additional public input is beneficial to the Advisory Board and to the City decision making process. As all of the Cable Television Advisory Board meetings are open to the public, cablecasting them would likely increase public participation. As has been shown in previous actions by the City Council, the cablecasting of public meetings, including the recent addition of the Parks and Recreation Commission, has increased awareness and participation by residents. The Cable Television Franchise Renewal has generated a considerable amount of interest in the community. The process calls for public input and participation throughout the renewal. The cablecasting of the meetings enables the City to meet the terms and condition of the renewal process as specified in the 1984 Cable Communications Act. 1i - t , 2 Other alternatives available to the City Council include: Recommend that none of the Advisory Board Meetings be televised. Recommend that volunteers be used to tape all of the meeting with no funds appropriated to pay for tapings. Respectfully Submitted, Warren S. Carter Cable Televis'on Coord. Conc )�� J Rick Ferrin, City Manager Concur: Mary ' / oo • - y, hector Co u :: Resources May 21, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 26, 1992 REQUEST TO APPROVE REVISED CLASS SPECIFICATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached revised class specification for Public Works Director/ City Engineer. Background: The class specification for Public Works Director/City Engineer was originally approved at the Civil Service Board Meeting on August 28, 1991, and subsequently approved by the City Council on September 10, 1991. The proposed modification is to accept applications from individuals who possess a Professional Engineering Certificate from either California or a state having a reciprocal agreement with California. The successful candidate would be required to obtain the California registration within twelve (12) months of appointment. The Civil Service Board did not approve the proposed modification at a special meeting on May 21, 1992. Analysis: Following the resignation of the appointed Public Works Director/City Engineer, the class specification for Public Works .Director/City Engineer was reviewed by the Personnel Director and the new City Manager. Noting the original lack of response to the recruitment, the City Manager reviewed the requirements for the position and observed that the requirement for registration as a Professional Engineer in the State of California severely limited the candidate pool. The City Manager was also aware of another California municipality (Woodland) which had experienced a similar recruitment problem. In speaking with the City of Woodland, they confirmed their recruitment problem and indicated that they had canceled their original recruitment and initiated recruitment with a modification to the requirement for the California registration. It was from the City of Woodland that the language for the proposed change in the registration requirement was obtained. The proposed revision is minor in content, yet potentially major in its impact on our ability to recruit a much larger field of qualified candidates. The existing, and proposed, language reads - 1 - lj as follows in the first paragraph of the class specification under SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: (EXISTING) Possession of a valid Certificate of Registration as a Civil Engineer issued by the State Board of Registration for Professional Engineers (at the time of appointment and during employment). (PROPOSED) Applicants must possess (at time of appointment and maintain during employment) a Certificate of Registration as a Civil Engineer either issued by the State of California or by a state having a reciprocal credentialing system. If a candidate is appointed holding out-of-state registration, it is required that California registration be obtained within one year and maintained thereafter during employment. By approving this revision to the class specification, many Civil Engineers who possess their Professional Engineering Registration, but who have not found it necessary to obtain reciprocal registration in California, will be eligible to make application for this position. Since the proposed revision changes the minimum requirements under which the candidates on the existing list were certified, staff is also requested the Civil Service Board abolish the existing eligibility list for Public Works Director/City Engineer. The Board approved that request on May 21, 1992 and, by separate action on this agenda, the Council is requested to ratify that action. Both requests, to revise the class specification and abolish the current list, are intended to ensure that the City Manager has the most highly qualified individuals to select from to fill this most important position. A copy of both class specifications (existing and revised) are attached for Council's review. Respectfully subm ted, Robert A. Blackwood Personnel Director personel/appr Concur: L 014 1,4:12) \ Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager EXISTING CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Class Specification PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER DEFINITION: Under the administrative direction of the City Manager, plans, organizes, directs, coordinates and evaluates Public Works Department activities and programs; serves as City Engineer and City Traffic Engineer; coordinates and supervises the work of consulting engineers; and does related work as required. EXAMPLES OF DUTIES: Plans, organizes, directs and coordinates a City-wide public works program including: engineering; maintenance of streets, parks, public buildings, equipment, traffic signals and street lighting, sewers and storm drains; directs preparation of maps, plans, specifications, reports and cost estimates of proposed projects and in the procurement of rights-of-way; provides technical direction and assistance to supervisory and professional staff in the survey, design, construction, inspection, maintenance and repair of municipal public works facilities; acts as City Engineer and technical advisor to the Mayor, City Manager, City Council and department heads concerning public works and engineering proposals and programs; confers with and advises supervisory assistants on problems relating to the design and construction of public works systems, the interpretation and enforcement of construction codes and the design and operation of traffic systems; confers with other departments and governmental agencies regarding proposed or existing public works projects or problems; confers with the City Manager on policies, programs, procedures and long-range capital improvement programs; supervises the maintenance of records, official maps and files relating to public works; directs formulation of a long-term program of public works improvements; plans, coordinates and reports on the construction, maintenance, inspection and repair of streets, directs the inspection of works in progress for conformance with established plans and specifications; directs the construction, maintenance and repair of sewer, traffic control systems and other public works facilities and equipment; prepares annual budget estimates and justification for public works and engineering activities; prepares talks, correspondence and reports on the City's public works activities; reviews plans, engineering reports, budget estimates and proposed regulations submitted by subordinate staff; determines major policies, plans long-term programs and makes technical decisions; advises on the acceptance of bids received on public works projects; coordinates and directs the work of consulting engineers; personally performs a variety of professional engineering work; compiles information and data and assumes responsibility for Assessment Act procedures; reviews and evaluates department performance and budget expenditures. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: Possession of a valid Certificate of Registration as a Civil Engineer issued by the State Board of Registration for Professional Engineers (at time of appointment and during employment). Possession of a valid California Driver's license issued by the State Department of Motor Vehicles at the time of employment and to be maintained as valid thereafter. DESIRABLE QUALIFICATIONS Knowledge of: Civil engineering principles and practices as applied to the field of municipal public works, including planning, developing, designing, constructing, operating and maintaining a variety of public works facilities; traffic engineering methods and techniques; Technical, legal, financial and public relations problems involved in the conduct of a municipal public works program; methods of preparing designs, plans, specifications, estimates, reports and recommendations relating to municipal and public works facilities; Principles of personnel management, budget preparation, organization and administration; applicable City, County and State laws, codes and ordinances; Methods, materials, tools and equipment used in the repair and maintenance of streets, curbs and gutters, parks, buildings, equipment, traffic signals, street lighting systems; and, installation of water and sewer lines. Ability to: Plan, organize, direct, coordinate and evaluate the work of employees engaged in a wide variety of municipal public works and engineering activities; Supervise and direct professional and technical personnel engaged in office and field work; direct and coordinate the work of consulting engineers. Prepare comprehensive and complex technical reports and make effective presentations before groups and commissions; communicate effectively orally and in writing. Read and interpret construction plans and specifications; Prepare and administer departmental budget and fiscal controls; Establish and maintain an effective and cooperative working relationship with other City departments, employees, contractors and the general public. Training and Experience: Five years of progressively responsible and varied professional public works and engineering experience involving the design, construction, maintenance or operation of a variety of public works, including at least three years in a. supervisory or administrative capacity over professional and subprofessional engineering personnel. Education: Graduation from an accredited four year college or university with a degree in Engineering with an emphasis in Civil Engineering. Approved by the Civil Service Board: August 28, 1991 Approved by City Council September 10, 1991 hull/pwdirsp PROPOSED CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH Class Specification PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER DEFINITION: Under the administrative direction of the City Manager, plans, organizes, directs, coordinates and evaluates Public Works Department activities and programs; serves as City Engineer and City Traffic Engineer; coordinates and supervises the work of consulting engineers; and does related work as required. EXAMPLES OF DUTIES: Plans, organizes, directs and coordinates a City-wide public works program, including: engineering; maintenance of streets, parks, public buildings; equipment, traffic signals and street lighting, sewers and storm drains; directs preparation of maps, plans, specifications, reports and cost estimates of proposed projects and in the procurement of rights-of-way; provides technical direction and assistance to supervisory and professional staff in the survey, design, construction, inspection, maintenance and repair of municipal public works facilities; acts as City Engineer and technical advisor to the Mayor, City Manager, City Council and department heads concerning public works and engineering proposals and programs; confers with and advises supervisory assistants on problems relating to the design and construction of public works systems, the interpretation and enforcement of construction codes and"the design and operation of traffic systems; confers with other departments and governmental agencies regarding proposed or existing public works projects or problems; confers with the City Manager on policies, programs, procedures and long-range capital improvement programs; supervises the maintenance of records, official maps and files relating to public works; directs formulation of a long-term program of public works improvements; plans, coordinates and reports on the construction, maintenance, inspection and repair of streets, directs the inspection of works in progress for conformance with established plans and specifications; directs the construction, maintenance and repair of sewer, traffic control systems and other public works facilities and equipment; prepares annual budget estimates and justification for public works and engineering activities; prepares talks, correspondence and reports on the City's public works activities; reviews plans, engineering reports, budget estimates and proposed regulations submitted by subordinate staff; determines major policies, plans long-term programs and makes technical decisions; advises on the acceptance of bids received on public works projects; coordinates and directs the work of consulting engineers; personally performs a variety of professional engineering work; compiles information and data and assumes responsibility for Assessment Act procedures; reviews and evaluates department performance and budget expenditures. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: Applicants must possess (at the time of appointment and maintained during employment) a Certificate of Registration as a Civil Engineer either issued by the State of California or by a state having a reciprocal credentialing system. If a candidate is appointed holding out-of-state registration, it is required that California registration be obtained within one year and maintained thereafter during employment. Possession of a valid California Driver's license issued by the State Department of Motor Vehicles at the time of employment and to be maintained as valid thereafter. DESIRABLE QUALIFICATIONS: Knowledge of: Civil engineering, principles and practices as applied to the field of municipal public works, including planning, developing, designing, constructing, operating and maintaining a variety of public works facilities; traffic engineering methods and techniques. Technical, legal, financial and public relations problems involved in the conduct of a municipal public works program; methods of preparing designs, plans, specifications, estimates, reports and recommendations relating to municipal and public works facilities. Principals of personnel management, budget preparation, organization and administration; applicable City, County and State laws, codes and ordinances. Methods, materials, tools and equipment used in the repair and maintenance of streets, curbs and gutters, parks, buildings, equipment, traffic signals, street lighting systems; and, installation of water and sewer lines. Ability to: Plan, organize, direct, coordinate and evaluate the work of employees engaged in a wide variety of municipal public works and engineering activities. Supervise and direct professional and technical personnel engaged in office and field work; direct and coordinate the work of consulting engineers. Prepare comprehensive and complex technical reports and make effective presentations before groups and commissions; communicate effectively orally and in writing. Read and interpret construction plans and specifications. Prepare and administer departmental budget and fiscal controls. Establish and maintain an effective and cooperative working relationship with other City departments, employees, contractors and the general public. Training and Experience: Five years of progressively responsible and varied professional public works and engineering experience involving the design, construction, maintenance or operation of a variety of public works, including at least three years in a supervisory or administrative capacity over professional and subprofessional engineering personnel. Education: Graduation from an accredited four year college or university with a degree in Engineering with an emphasis in Civil Engineering. Approved by the Civil Service Board: May Approved by the City Council peradmin/class .447 NOT TO BE DISTRIBUTED UNLESS THE ACTION OF THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD IS APPEALED Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of May 26, 1992 REQUEST TO UPHOLD THE CIVIL SERVICE BOARD ACTION AND NOT REVISE THE CLASS SPECIFICATION FOR PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER Recommendation: To uphold the action of the Civil Service Board and not to approve the proposed revision. Background: The_Civil Service Board reviewed and approved revisions to the class specification for this position only nine months ago, on August 28, 1991. At that time, the Board was of the opinion that the City should employ someone in the top city engineering position that was already a licensed Civil Engineer in the State of California. This standard is used by cities throughout the state. The proposed change to allow a person unlicensed in this state to apply for the position is unwarranted. Registration as a Professional Civil Engineer is a trust to protect the public safety and welfare. The city requirement should not be changed to allow the top engineer of the city staff to be unlicensed in California. This would be the same as allowing a doctor or attorney to practice medicine or law in a professional manner prior to being licensed in this state. At the present time, there are over 46,000 California licensed Civil Engineers. All plans, specifications and engineering reports in the State of California are required by State Law to be signed by a California State Licensed Engineer. Also, the coordination and approval of work by professional consultants on engineering projects or municipal improvements is required to be under the control of a California State Licensed Engineer. This means that if the ' Director of Public Works/City Engineer is unlicensed, he would not be able to approve any city engineering projects for as long as a year or longer. This does not appear to be in the best interest of the citizens of this community. The Civil Service Board held a special meeting on May 21, 1992 to consider the proposed change in the class specification for the position. The board listened to testimony for a hour and made the determination that the existing class= specification should not be changed. 1 of 1 Analysis: The proposed change in the class Specification for the subject position is not in the City's best interest. All engineers that work in positions of responsibility throughout the state, including private practice, state government, county government, and city government, are required to be registered engineers by State Law. In checking job announcements over the last six months, all of the California cities required a State of California License as a "Professional Civil Engineer" for their Director of Public Works or City Engineer positions prior to applying for the job. This is the same as requiring a doctor or attorney to be licensed prior to practicing medicine or law in their profession. The State of California has one of the most difficult civil engineer testing programs for registration in the nation. Approximately 2/3 of those that take the test do not pass. The tests in a number of other states are not equivalent to the test in the State of California. Thus, engineers from those states are required to take additional testing before they can be licensed in this state. The proposed change would only benefit those that have been unable to pass this state's registration reguirements or a retiring federal engineer who has not been required to be registered in this state such as with the federal highway agency. State of California Legislative intent: Section 6730.2 of the State of California, Business and Professions Code, states that it is the intent of the State Legislature that "at least one registered engineer shall be designated the person in responsible charge of professional engineering work for each department or agency of the state, city or county". The section also states that the registration requirements shall be imposed upon the state and any city or county. Evidence of qualifications is California State Registration: Section 6730 of the Business and Professions Code states, in order to safeguard life, health, property and public welfare, any person, either in a public or private capacity, who practices, or offers to practice, civil engineering, including any person employed by the State of California, or any city or county, shall be registered as a civil engineer by the California State Engineer's Board. Only existing registration with the California State Board of Registration for Civil Engineers is to be accepted as evidence that the engineer is qualified to practice civil engineering in this state. Unlawful for person unregistered in California to use the title of civil engineer: Section 6732 of the State Business and Professions Code states, it is unlawful for anyone other than a professional engineer registered under this chapter, of the State Law, to use the title "civil engineer", "professional engineer", "registered engineer" or "consulting engineer" unless registered in this state. 2 of 8 Civil engineering as defined by State Law: Section 6731 of the Business and Professions Code defines the types of activities that are included within the field of civil engineering. The following list is just a portion of the activities involved with this city: 1. Municipal improvements. 2. Supervision of engineering construction. 3. Preparation or submission of engineered designs, engineering plans, engineering specifications and engineering reports. 4. Coordination of the work of professional consultants, technical consultants or special consultants. 5. City and regional planning of civil engineering projects. 6. Civil engineers registered prior to January 1, 1982 are authorized to practice land surveying. Unlawful acts by persons unregistered in this state: Section 6787 of the Business and Professions Code states that it is a misdemeanor offense for any person to practice civil engineering in this state without legal authorization. That authorization under state law is only granted by evidence that the person is qualified to practice civilengineering, by registration as a civil engineer in this state. Some of the actions that constitute an unlawful act are as follows: 1. The practice of civil engineering without being registered as a civil engineer in this state. Section 6734 definds practice as being in responsible charge of civil engineering work. 2. The use in this state of the title "registered civil engineer" unless they are registered in this state. 3. To act as a manager of any place of business from which civil engineering is performed or practiced without having registration in this state. 4. Having responsibility for the preparation of civil engineering plans, engineering specifications and engineering reports without being a registered civil engineer in this state, as indicated in Section 6735 of the State Business and Professions Code. 5. Coordination of the work of professional engineering consultants without being registered in this state. 3 of Summary: The proposed change in the class specification is not in the best interest of the City. What has been perceived as a lack of response due to the registration requirement may not be true. Engineers for the most part prefer calm and nonconflicting working conditions. This City has a reputation for close vote situations such as the ten vote vacillation on the city beach hotel site. Also, the position salary is $10,000 to $15,000 less then other cities in the south bay area and the position was offered in the winter time when people do not like to move. The change should not be made for the following reasons: 1. The State requires that the person in responsible charge of engineering be registered in this state. 2. Only existing State of California registration is accepted as evidence of qualifications. 3. It is unlawful for anyone to use the title "civil engineer" unless they are registered in this state. 4. It is unlawful for anyone to practice civil engineering without being registered in this state. 5. City projects can not be approved by someone that is unregistered in this state. It is respectfully submitted that the proposed change in the class specification for the position of PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER not be approved. It is also respectfully requested that the action of the Civil Service Board be upheld and approved. Respectfully submitted, Lynn A. Terry P.E. Deputy City Engineer 4 of 8 STATE OF CAUFORNIA—STATE AND CONSUMER SERVICES AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor DEPARTMENT OF €flSUfT;ars, BOARD OF REGISTRATION FOR PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS AND LAND SURVEYORS 1428 HOWE AVENUE, SUITE 56, SACRAMENTO, CA 95825-3298 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 659005, SACRAMENTO, CA 95865-9005 TELEPHONE: (916) 920-7466 LAW PUBLICATION PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS ACT LAND SURVEYORS ACT AND BOARD RULES PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS ACT Business and Professions Code Sections 6700 to 6799 5 of 8 6730. Evidence of qualifications; registration. In order to safeguard life, health, property and pub - lic welfare, any person, either in a public or private capacity, except as in this chapter specifically ex- cepted, who practices, or offers to practice, civil engineering, electrical engineering or mechanical en- gineering, in any of its branches in this state, in- cluding any person employed by the State of Califor- nia, or any city, county, or city and county, who practices engineering, shall submit evidence that he is qualified to practice, and shall be registered accordingly as a civil engineer, electrical engineer or mechanical engineer by the board. 6730.1. [Repealed, Chapter 732, Statutes of 1985] 6730.2. Legislative intent. It is the intent of the Legislature that the registration requirements which are imposed upon private sector professional en- gineers and engineering partnerships, firms, or corpo- ration shall be imposed upon the state and any city, county, or city and county which shall adhere to those requirements. Therefore, for the purposes of Section 6730 and this chapter, at least one registered engi- neer shall be designated the person in responsible charge of professional engineering work for each branch of professional engineering practiced in any department or agency of the state, city, county, or city and county. 6731. Civil engineering defined. Civil engineering embraces the following studies or activities in connection with fixed works for irrigation, drainage, waterpower, water supply, flood control, inland waterways, harbors, municipal improvements, railroads, highways, tunnels, airports and airways, purification of water, sewerage, refuse disposal, foundations, framed and homogeneous structures, buildings, or bridges: (a) The economics of, the use arra design of, mate- rials of construction and the determination of their physical qualities. (b) The supervision of the construction of engi- neering structures. (c) The investigation of the laws, phenomena and forces of nature. (d) Appraisals or valuations. (e) The preparation or submission plans and specifications and engineering (f) Coordination of the work of technical, or special consultants. Civil engineering also includes city and regional planning insofar as any of the above features are con- cerned therein. Civil engineers registered prior to January 1, 1982, shall be authorized to practice all land survey- ing as defined in Chapter 15 (commencing with Section 8700) of Division 3. [Amended, Chapter 804, Statutes of 1987] of designs, reports. professional, 6 of 8 6732. Use of seal, stamp or title by unregis- tered person. It is unlawful for anyone other than a professional engineer registered under this chapter, to stamp or seal any plans, specifications, plats, re- ports, or other documents with the seal or stamp of a professional engineer, or to in any manner use the ti- tle, "professional engineer," "registered engineer," or "consulting engineer," or any of the following branch titles: "agricultural engineer," "chemical en- gineer," "civil engineer," "control system engineer," "corrosion engineer," "electrical engineer," "fire protection engineer," "industrial engineer," "manufac- turing engineer," "mechanical engineer," "metallurgi- cal engineer," "nuclear engineer," "petroleum engi- neer," "quality engineer," "safety engineer," "traffic engineer," or any combination of such words and phras- es or abbreviations thereof unless registered hereun- der. [Amended, Chapter 732, Statutes of 1985] 6733. Use of stamp or seal when certificate not in force. It is unlawful for anyone to stamp or seal any plans, specifications, plats, reports, or other documents with the seal after the certificate of the registrant, named thereon, has expired or has been suspended or revoked, unless the certificate has been renewed or reissued. 6734. Acts constituting practice. Any person practices civil engineering when he professes to be a civil engineer or is in responsible charge of civil engineering work. 6735. Preparation of plans and other documents. All civil engineering plans, specifications, and reports shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer or by a subordinate under his or her direc- tion, and shall be signed by him or her to indicate his or her responsibility for them. In addition to the signature, all final civil engineering plans, specifications, and reports shall bear the seal or stamp of the registrant, and the expiration date of the certificate or authority. The registered civil engineer shall use together with his or her signature or seal, the title "civil engineer" or, if he or she has the authority, the title "structural engineer" or, if he or she has the authority, the title "soil engineer." If the final civil engineering plans, specifications, or reports have multiple pages or sheets, the signature, seal or stamp, and expiration date of the certificate or authority need only appear on the originals of the plans and on the original title sheet of the specifications and reports. [Amended, Chapter 804, Statutes of 1987] 7 of 8 6787. Acts constituting udsdemeanor. Every per- son is guilty of a misdemeanor and for each offense of which he or she is convicted is punishable by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars ($1,000) or by imprisonment rot to exceed three months, or by both fine and imprisonment: (a) Who, unless he or she is exempt from registra- tion under this chapter, practices or offers to prac- tice civil, electrical, or mechanical engineering in this state according to the provisions of this chapter without legal authorization. (b) Who presents or attempts to file as his or her own the certificate of registration of another. (c) Who gives false evidence of any kind to the board, or to any member thereof; in obtaining a cer- tificate of registration. (d) Who impersonates or uses the seal of any other practitioner. (e) Who uses an expired or revoked certificate of registration. (f) Who shall represent himself or herself as, or use the title of, registered civil, electrical, or me- chanical engineer, or any other title whereby such person could be considered a practicing or offering to practice civil, electrical, or mechanical engineering in any of its branches, unless he or she is corre- spondingly qualified by registration as a civil, elec- trical, or mechanical engineer under this chapter. (g) Who, unless appropriately registered, manages, or conducts as manager, proprietor, or agent, any place of business from which civil, electrical, or me- chanical engineering work is solicited, performed, or practiced. (h) Who uses the title, or any combination of such title, of "professional engineer," "registered engi- neer," or the branch titles specified in.Section 6732, or the authority titles specified in Section 6763, or "engineer -in -training," or who makes use of any abbre- viation of such title which might lead to the belief that he or she is a registered engineer, without being registered as required by this act. (i) Who uses the title "consulting engineer" with- out being* registered as required by this act or with- out being authorized to use such title pursuant to legislation enacted at the 1963, 1965 or 1968 Regular Session. (j) Who violates any provision of this chapter. [Amended, Chapter 732, Statutes of 1985] 8 of 8 t, May 21, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 26, 1992 REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL ACTION TO ABOLISH ELIGIBILITY LIST FOR THE POSITION OF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER Recommendation Action: It is recommended that the City Council reverse the decision of the Civil Service Board to not abolish the eligibility list for Public Works Director/City Engineer. Background: At the Special Meeting of the Civil Service Board on May 21, 1992, the Board denied staff recommendation to abolish the eligibility list for Public Works Director/City Engineer. Staff had requested the Board to abolish the list to allow a new recruitment with a modification to the minimum requirements which enables candidates who have other than a California Professional Engineering Registration to make application to the position. The previous recruitment for the position of Public Works Director/City Engineer was completed on December 12, 1991 and an eligibility list was certified by the Board on December 18, 1991. The eligibility list contained eight candidates at the time of certification and one appointment was made from that list. The individual appointed began his employment on March 2, 1992 and subsequently resigned on April 6, 1992. Analysis: Following the resignation of the appointed Public Works Director/City Engineer, the list was reviewed by the City Manager and the Personnel Director. Noting the original lack of response to the recruitment, the City Manager reviewed the requirements for the position and observed that the requirement for registration as a Professional Engineer in the State of California severely limited the candidate pool. The City Manager was also aware of another California municipality (Woodland) which had experienced a similar recruitment problem. In speaking with the City of Woodland, they confirmed their recruitment problem and indicated that they had canceled their original recruitment and initiated recruitment with a modification to the Professional Engineering requirement. That modification was to allow candidates who possessed Registration as a Professional Engineer in another state to make application for the position. if a candidate without the California Registration was selected, the California Registration was required within twelve months of appointment. Since the revision to the class specification changes the minimum requirements under which candidates on the existing list were certified, staff requested the Board abolish the existing list to allow a new recruitment. Citing the perception that the Board did not have authority to abolish an existing eligibility list when it still contained more than two candidates, the Board rejected the staff recommendation to abolish the list and the matter is placed before the City Council for action. Should the list be abolished, those candidates who are on the eligibility list, and those who were not qualified because they did not possess California Registration as a Professional Engineer, will be advised of this new recruitment and invited to make application for the position. The request to abolish the current list is intended to ensure that the City Manager has the most highly qualified individuals to select from to fill this most important position. A copy of the existing eligibility list is attached for the Board's review. Respectfully submitted, Robert A. Blackwood Personnel Director paradmin/rat2 Concur: Frederick R. City Manager CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REPORT OF EXAMINATION EXAMINATION TITLE: Director of Public Works/ City Engineer Certified: 12 -18 -91' - Examination Date: December 12, 1991 Name Lynn Terry Carl Malone Bellur Devaraj Richard Shine Thomas Coe Raymond Pang Angel Espiritu Michael Kim DID NOT APPEAR Mahendar Chima Elig. # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Rating From Records Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q DID NOT.MEET MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS George Taylor Charles Herbertson Maureen Lull John Behjan Essam Aly Azad Mohammadi Martin Tatera Saleem Jehangir Herman Chang 1000 Oral 90.67 88.67 81.67 78.00 76.00 75.67 74.67 Jamal Al-Mashat Donald Simmons Harold Elliott Jose' Gondinez Dennis Barnes John Beck Deborah De Bow Glicerio Ramirez Total Number of Applicants Number of Applicants Tested Number of Did Not Appear Did Not Meet Minimum Requirements: pers/pwrep. 26 8 1 17 Final Average 90.67 90.33 88.67 81.67 78.00 76.00 75.67 74.67 PASS: 8 FAIL: 0 May 13, 1992 City Council Meeting May 26, 1992 Mayor and Members of the City Council ORDINANCE NO. 92-1067 - "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP FROM OPEN SPACE TO R-2, TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, FOR THE PARCEL AT 598 FIRST STREET AS DESCRIBED BELOW AND SHOWN ON THE ATTACHED MAP AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION." Submitted for adoption is Ordinance No. 92-1067, relating to the above subject. At the meeting of May 12, 1992, this ordinance was presented to Council for consideration and was introduced by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Concur: Benz, Wiemans, Mayor Essertier Edgerton, Midstokke None None Elaine Doerfligrity Clerk Frederick R. Ferrin, City Manager ORDINANCE 92-1067 3 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP FROM OPEN SPACE TO R-2, TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, 4 FOR THE PARCEL AT 598 FIRST STREET AS DESCRIBED BELOW AND SHOWN SON THE ATTACHED MAP AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE 5'DECLARATION. 6 WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearings on April 14, 7 and May 12 to consider the recommendation of the Planning 8 Commission to approve the requested zone change on March 3, 1992, 9 and made the following Findings: 10 A. The subject parcel is appropriate for residential use as it 11 is surrounded by residential uses and residentially zoned 12 property; 13 B. Changing the zoning to R-2 will make the property consistent 14 with the General Plan designation of Medium Density 15 Residential and will result in a potential density on the lot 16 of 19 units per acre which is in the middle of the range 17 identified for Medium Density of 14-25 units per acre; 18 C. An environmental assessment has been conducted by the Staff 19 Environmental Review Committee and the proposed zone change 20 has been determined to qualify for a Negative Declaration; 21 NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Hermosa Beach, California, does 22 hereby ordain that the zoning map be amended as described as follows and as shown on the attached map, and adopts an 23 environmental negative declaration: 24 SECTION 1. Zone change from OS (Open Space), to R-2 (Two -Family Residential), the parcel at 598 First Street, and 25 legally described as a portion of lot 42, Block 78, Second Addition to Hermosa Beach Tract. 26 SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective and be in full 27 force and effect from and after thirty (30) days of its final passage and adoption. 28 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 SECTION 3. Prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days after the date of its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published in the Easy Reader, a weekly newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the City of Hermosa Beach, in the manner provided by law. SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance, shall enter the same in the book of original ordinances of said city, and shall make minutes of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this day of , 1992, by following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY CLERK 1 1 (^ VO-/IZ CITY ATTORNEY p/pers598 4►un {fur' C41 LA Z S}1un7 SAiuc-4 S.104es sosn 6unsp lurl Location a. Address: 598 First St. b. Legal: Portion of Lot 42, Block 78, Second Addition to iiPrmnAm Rr-h 2. Description Zone change from Open Space (OS) to two-family residential (R-2) 3. Sponsor a. Name: Harry pecorelli b. Mailing Address: 752 22nd St San Pedro 90731 Phone: 31n R12 -1g27 NEGATIVE DECLARATION In accordance with Resolution 89-5229 of the City of Hermosa beach, which im- plements the California Environmental quality Act of 1970 in Hermosa Beach, the Environmental Review Committee must make an environmental review of all private projects proposed to be undertaken within the City, and the Planning Commission must make an environmental review of all public projects proposed to be undertaken within the City, which are subject to the Environmental quality Act. This declaration is documentation of the review and, if it be- comes final, no comprehensive Enviromnental Impact Report is required for this project. FINDING OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE We have undertaken and completed an Environmental Impact Review of this pro- posed project in accordance with Resolution 89-5229 of the City Council of Hermosa Beach, and find that this project does not require a comprehensive Environmental Impact Report because, provided the attached mitigation meas- ures are included in the project, it would not have a significant effect on the environment. Documentation supporting this finding is on file in the Planning Department. � q -/is - Dat of Finding Cfiiaiirman, nvironmenta1 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. DatlZ767 jPc&i 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 May 13, 1992 City Council Meeting May 26, 1992 Mayor and Members of the City Council ORDINANCE NO. 92-1068 - "AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE WITH RESPECT TO COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE; AVAILABILITY TO THE PUBLIC." Submitted for adoption is Ordinance No. 92-1068, relating to the above subject. At the meeting of May 12, 1992, this ordinance was presented to Council for consideration; was amended to repeal Section 2-2.5 in its entirety rather than to delete specific language; and was then introduced by the following vote: AYES: Benz, Edgerton, Midstokke, Wiemans, Mayor Essertier NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Elaine Doerflingy Clerk Concur: Frederick R. Ferrin, City Manager 26 1 ORDINANCE NO. 92-1068 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 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE WITH RESPECT TO COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE; AVAILABILITY TO THE PUBLIC THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES,HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 2-2.5 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code, with respect to Council correspondence; availability to the public, is hereby repealed. Section 2. 'This ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days of its final passage and adoption. Section 3. Prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days after the date of its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published in the Easy Reader, a weekly newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the City of Hermosa Beach, in the manner provided by law. Section 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance, shall enter the same in the book of original ordinances of said city, and shall make minutes of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the city council at which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 26th day of May, 1992. President of the City Council and Mayor of the City of Hermosa Beach, California ATTEST: APP City Clerk C'� orney REAL ESTATE WEST Steve DeWees MANAGER RESIDENCE: (910) 374-6491 905 MANHATTAN BEACH BLVD MANHATTAN BEACH CALIFORNIA 90266 310 546.3441 off:am To Whom It May Concern: Act z, REAL ESTATE WEST RECEIVED MAY 1 9 199 CITY MGR. OFFICE My name is Steve DeWees and I am a realtor in the South Bay. I work for Real Estate West at 905 Manhattan Beach Blvd. Since 1982 I have run into two circumstances where seperate surveys did not match. The first instance resulted in both parties agreeing to rectify it among themselves. The second instance almost was a major disaster. My clients, living at 1540 Golden, saw construction work on the property next door to the north. They checked with the city and found out the property to the north was surveyed and their property line was 1 foot shorter. This caused their house to become legal non -conforming. My clients asked the city to stop the neighbor's construction until they could obtain a survey to verify their prop- erty line (3 days only). The city said they couldn't intervene until they had my clients survey. My clients received their survey, which said that the neighbor's survey was erroneous. I would like to make two points. First, when the city approves a permit they should notify the neighbors if it affects their prop- erty. Such as making it legal non -conforming because of improper setbacks. Second, anytime property lines are in dispute by a survey the city should let the parties affected know so they can get their own survey to protect their property rights. This circumstance cost my clients thousands of dollars for a survey and legal costs. Also, if the construction was completed both properties would have adverse conditions for future salability. In conclusion the system isn't working properly. Let's have full disclosure to all parties so that there will be no litigation in which nobody wins. Sincerely, Steven P. DeWees Real Estate West ,,:tu2z6 2'11 Gr4tA 1,4„ (7)il'- 44 905 MANHATTAN BEACH BOULEVARD / MANHATTAN BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90266 / 213 546.3441 May 18, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach City Council May 26, 1992 SUBJECT: SPECIAL STUDY 92-5 PURPOSE: TO EXAMINE REDUCING THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS IN THE R-3 AND R -P ZONES. Planning Commission and Staff Recommendation The Planning Commission and staff recommend that the City Council conceptually approve the combination of alternatives C, D, E, and G, described below, as the method to reduce height in the R-3 and R -P zones. Specific language for a text amendment would then be drafted by staff and brought to the Planning Commission for public hearing and final recommendation, and ultimately to the City Council for public hearing and final adoption. Alternatives Other alternatives are summarized below, and are further described in the attached Planning Commission staff report. Background At their meeting of April 21, 1992, the Planning Commission voted 3:1 to recommend reducing height through a combination of the staff proposed alternatives. Please refer to the attached Planning Commission minutes for a more detailed description of their final recommendation. For further background on the origins of this height reduction study, including a discussion of how it is consistent with, and partially implements, the Housing Element of the General Plan and Proposition J, please refer to the attached Planning Commission staff report. Analysis Please refer to the attached Planning Commission staff report for the discussion and evaluation of various proposed alternatives. In short, the alternatives presented to the Commission were as follows: A. No Change: Maintain the R-3 height limit at 35 feet, and continue discretionary review of height. B. Reduce Maximum Height: Reduce height limit to 30 feet C. Project Compatibility Approach: Reduce the height limit to 30 feet, but allow the Commission to approve a greater height, up to 35 feet, when demonstrated that a - 1 - 5 project needs additional height for views and for compatibility because of surrounding 30 -foot plus high buildings. D. Neighborhood Approach: Establish different height limits in different neighborhoods based on existing neighborhood character and building heights. E. Heights based on Roof Type: Establish two sets of height requirements depending on the type of roof design (i.e. flat or pitched). F. View Protection Ordinance: Establish a view protection ordinance so view impacts are considered on a project by project basis. G. Bulk Reduction Approach: Reduce the amount of buildable area in upper floors (i.e. greater setback and/or stepback requirements, or building area/volume limits for second and third floors). H. Combine Several Alternatives INTERIM ORDINANCE ? If the Council chooses action that will eventually result in reduction of maximum height in the R-3 and R -P zones, the Council may wish to revisit the discussion of an emergency interim ordinance, otherwise projects that are inconsistent with this proposed reduction will likely be submitted before final adoption of a text amendment. CONCUR: ,; Ken Robertson, Associate Planner l" , Michael Schubach Planning Director Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager Attachments 1. Planning Commission Minutes 2. Planning Commission Staff Report w/attachments 3. Correspondence Comm. Di Monda suggested the week -end closing hours be ext 12:00 .m. and four video games be allowed on site, wi month r -view by the Commission. He discussed the Resolutio Paragraph 11 with Mr. Schubach. Comm. this articl- put a burden on the Police Chief and Condition cha •ed to read, in essence, "The Pol Planning Depart ent may determine that a continu exists and may p -sent that fact to the attent' Commission at a •ublic hearing, which m personnel paid by he business." He s language be approved the City Attorne that the Police Chief -d expressed the Dept. should have authori to resolve p a public hearing, but that Comm. Di feasible. n¢ed to a six- urpose of D Monda felt requested the e Chief and/or g police problem n of the Planning require security gested the specific Mr. Schubach stated opinion that the Police oblems without waiting for onda's suggestion might be Comm. Di Monda felt Paragraph 13, •rohibition of food and drink or game abuse was a business respon b lity and not the Commission's. He questioned Paragraph 14, i tota as being discriminatory, -to which Chinn. Ketz agreed. C. . Marks felt it could be used as a management tool. It was -.reed to wa for the City. Attorney's response regarding this em. Mr. Schub h stated this item had been included in the int rest of consistenc MOTION by Comm. Di M application to the to the Commission until 12:00 a.m. to assure retu the prohibit' the City At AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: )' break was da, seconded by Comm. Ma - , to CONTINUE the eeting of May 5, 1992, and w =n it is returned o AMEND Condition 2 to extend w-ek-end closures Condition 11 s Condition 8(a) to four video games to the Planning Commission, Conditio n against food, drink and game abuse, an rney's opinion regarding Conditions 14 and 11 13 deleting to obtain Comms. Di Honda, Suard, China. Ketz None None Comm. Merl taken from 8:25 p.m. to 8:33 p.m. SS 92-5 -- SPECIAL STUDY AND TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO REDUCE THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHT IN R-3 AND R -P ZONES AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION. Recommended Action: To recommend approval of one of the alternatives listed in the Staff Report and adoption of the Environmental Negative Declaration. Mr. Schubach discussed and summarized the Staff -recommended alternatives regarding the height of condominiums and apartments within the R-3 and R -P zones. He stated the alternatives were consistent with the General Plan Housing Element. Those alternatives were: 6 P.C.Minutes 4/21/92 A. Maintain the R -3 -height limit at 35 feet. B. Reduce the height limit from 35 to 30 feet (or any other acceptable number of feet) C. Reduce the height limit to 30 feet, but allow the Commission to approve limit -exceeding projects up to a 35 -feet maximum when it has been demonstrated that surrounding existing buildings are over 30 feet in height _ D Establish different height limits based on the neighborhood area E Establish two sets of height requirements depen- dent upon the type of roof design F Establish a view protection ordinance instead of changing height limits G Reduce the amount of upper floor buildable area instead of change height limits H A combination of alternatives Public Hearing opened by Chmn. Ketz at 8:40 p.m. Betty Ryan, 588 20th Street, requested the public hearing be continued until individual noticing to all effected property owners be accomplished. Mrs. Ryan volunteered to assist with the noticing. She asked that -if this item were not continued that Alternative A be approved by the Commission. Dean Hult, 830 Monterey Avenue, stated the changes would downgrade all R-3 properties. He discussed his plans to tear down and replace his structure, the impact on property taxes that action would have and requested the height limit remain as is, with no change. Sandy Pringle, 747 Monterey Avenue, recently purchased his property with plans to add a bedroom which would result in a 35 -feet building height. He requested that all property owners be individually notified and volunteered to help accomplish that Sheila Donahue -Miller, 77 17th Street, property owner of 2922 and 2920 Hermosa Avenue, stated the property next to her was 35 feet high. She discussed building a pool, her lack of privacy, her previous ability to build six units, down -zoning of her property to R-2, additional cuts will continue to destroy her property value. She discussed the locations of R-3 lots. She noted she was on her third law suit against Hermosa Beach and would now initiate a fourth. Carol Simons, 218 Longfellow Avenue, felt it was essential that the effected property owners be notified on an individual basis. She proposed the eight possible alternatives be place in writing and sent to the property owners for their review. Jim Babliani, 1011 Bayview Drive, felt the alternatives put too much power in the hands of the Commission. He bought his property with the intention of adding another story, and, therefore, opposed any change in the height limitation. 7 P.C.Minutes 4/21/92 Jim Rosenberger, Bayview Avenue, felt the Commission was being heavy handed in its approach. He stated his neighboring building was taller than 45 feet and doesn't want a restriction placed upon himself. He suggested a careful review area -by -area since each section is independent in nature from the others. He requested the height limit be left as -is or only those alternatives (A, D, E and F) with flexibility be considered. Comm. Di Monda noted that Alternative C also had flexibility and discussed the impacts with Mr. Rosenberger. Mike Fletcher, 414 The Strand, purchased his property with the intention of adding a master bedroom on the second floor. He described the tall, neighboring residents, stating he did not wish to live next to two enormous structures and not be able to add height to his own property. He suggested the Commission consider his problem which is similar to many other property owners and expressed his surprise that only the height, rather than height and bulk, issue was being addressed. He stated height was not targeted by the Ordinance. Mary McGee, 602 Manhattan Avenue, stated she was tired of her property being down zoned. Her neighboring properties' structures are at the 35 -feet height. She stated Alternative B gave too much discretion to the Commission. Mr. McGee reiterated her opposition to any change in height limitation. John Rogers, 326 10th Street, stated residents are 10-0 against any change in height restriction based upon the effect upon property values. He discussed the considerable amount of reconstruction within the City and asked the height limitation remain as -is. Jerry Compton, 1200 Artesia Blvd., discussed a letter he had written and mailed to property owners and stated the importance of getting as much input as possible. He discussed the resident vote, noting that 65% of the voters were tenants, not property owners, and challenged non -owners' participation in the advisory vote. He stated advisory votes are not law and should not be reviewed as such. He cautioned against "railroading" the height modification into existence. He agreed zoning was incorrect in pockets of the City, but felt the entire R-3 zone should not be changed. He discussed the Commission's and Staff's efforts, but felt they were wasted since the City Council already had three votes to change the height limit. He felt that Alternatives C and D allowed an open door and flexibility. He also felt it was absolutely and funda- mentally wrong for the City to suggest or make,a modification to anyone's property rights and values without individually notifying that person and noted there were 1800 R-3 zoned property owners which need to be notified. He volunteered to assist in that notification. Comm. Di Monda discussed with Mr. Compton the possibility that the Commission would recommend a combination of alternatives which would address everyone's concerns. They discussed the loss of buildable square footage and by implementation of Alternative G and the resultant building appearance, which would not be • as attractive. Additionally, they discussed the ramifications and 8 P.C.Minutes 4/21/92 building possibilities associated with the introduction of a sky-exposure plan. Mr. Compton disagreed with the lot coverage draft presented in the Staff Report, feeling an architect could not work with it. Mr. Schubach offered to review any examples showing how the lot coverage would not work that Mr. Compton wished to present, to which Mr. Compton agreed to furnish such examples. Mr. Compton again asked for individual notification, noting only four members of the audience had received copies of the Staff Report. Larry Pella, 67 14th Street, architect, noted the height measurement method was inconsistent and stated clear-cut direction was needed by both the architects and property owners. He felt height alone was not the problem, but rather a combination of items. He suggested the implications of the change be reviewed before taking any actions. Garrison Frost, 58 Pier Avenue, discussed his concern regarding the City's image due to the changes in requirements and the City's reputation for giving people a bad time and the difficulty in dealing with the City. He stated less people are now willing to buy property in Hermosa Beach. Jim Perry, 223 Monterey Avenue, stated he intended to rebuild and improve his property and that the arbitrary changes of the building codes has taken square footage away and another change would result in the same. He stated his neighbor is going into foreclosure on his property due to the City's actions and he, himself, would soon have an unbuildable lot. Jim Gallager, 3314 Highland, agreed with Mr. Frost's previous statements. He stated his 20-year residency, has been an on-going struggle to survive because the City does not leave the property owner's alone. He agreed that Hermosa Beach did have a reputation and that the City had a responsibility to let people know what it is doing. He stated not one person for a height reduction had spoken, so why was the City even addressing the issue. He supported Alternative C. George Taylor, 300 Manhattan Avenue, planned to improve his property by the addition of two condominiums and the height limit would make that extremely difficult. He stated that he thought the purpose of communication was to give direction to the Council, not just implement its biases. He then stated his opposition to any change within the height limit and his support of individual noticing. Comm. Di Monda responded decisions must be based upon reality and with fairness. He stated if an Ordinance is well and clearly written with clear criteria, it gives the power and discretion to deviate from the criteria. Architects may submit a preliminary set of drawings to the Planning Dept., which is not as great a burden as it seems to appear. Shirley Castle, 611 Monterey Boulevard, quoted Councilman Edgerton as having said his mind was made up and not going to be changed. She stated it was not fair to the people of City .f or Councilmembers_ 9 P.C.Minutes 4/21/92 to have closed minds. She discussed the lack of light due to tall buildings surrounding her property and asked why she should take a loss on the sale of her property just because the rules have changed again. She stated the residents had paid a lot of money for their land and the City was down zoning their property resulting is loss of property value. She discussed a current law suit and stated the Commissioners and Councilmembers may end up as part of it. _ Bob Stroffee, 3205 The Strand, reiterated other speakers statements that no one had spoken in favor for reducing the height limit. Bonnie Coke, 1921 Manhattan Avenue, a fourth-generation resident, discussed the down zoning, property growth and changes she has witnessed in Hermosa Beach. Public Hearing closed by Chmn. Ketz at 9:41 p.m. Comm. Marks discussed Alternative F with Mr. Schubach, who explained the requirements and methods of measurement in this alternative. Comm. Di Monda explained to the audience the procedure to be followed by Staff, the Commission and City Council, including review and renotification requirements, which was confirmed by Mr. Schubach. Chmn. Ketz confirmed with Mr. Schubach that the Commission would be making recommendation to the Cit --- Council regarding alternatives, but not a specific ordinance. Comm. Di Monda stated that none of the stand-alone alternatives address all of the concerns, assuming the height limit is lowered. A combination of "C" "E" and "G" would be of interest and discussed the impact of these alternatives. He stated that if "D" became a choice, he wished to see a map displaying the areas to be subject to "D" and relative to "G", requested an example based on'page 72's chart with graphics of typical lot sizes and lot coverage. Mr. Schubach explained the City Council wished toreview each individual standard and had started with height.' Chmn. Ketz confirmed there had been no direction to review all at one time. Comm. Suard felt there were a lot of interacting forces and this was a very piece -meal method and there were more logical procedures which could be taken. He questioned the Commission's ability to complete a recommendation in the short timeframe and noted specific problems, such as island zoning and "half lots". Comm. Suard stated Alternative "E" would allow leeway in architectural significance, to which Chmn. Ketz agreed. The Commission agreed to consider a combination of C, G and E. Comm. Di Monda explained the Commission was only sending some type of concept for approval by the City Council, with a lot more to do thereafter, to which Chmn. Ketz concurred. Comms. Marks and Suard did not feel they were in agreement with the alternatives offered. Comm. Marks felt no change should be made to the 35 -feet height limit and another nuance to lessen density should be considered. The Commission discussed the height necessary to obtain a three - 10 P.C.Minutes 4/21/92 story building. Chmn. Ketz felt flexibility should be allowed while requiring a 30 -feet limit in some areas, the 17 -feet setback and Alternative "G" should be further reviewed. Comm. Di Monda suggested a 35 -feet height with a set -back at the third floor to push the structure back from the street. Comm. Suard felt part of the equation should include consideration as to what the structure blocks (covered by Alternate C). Mr. Schubach responded to the Commission that Staff could develop rough language incorporating Alternatives C, B, D, E and G. Also, a Minute Order, including the a cover sheet and Minutes, could be forwarded to the City Council. Comm. Di Monda suggested the inclusion of a recommendation to consider the problems experienced by the Commission with noticing, so that everyone receives a notice as this issue progresses, to which Chmn. Ketz agreed. MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, seconded by Comm. Suard, to RECOMMEND to City Council a combination of Alternatives C, D, E and G; request Staff to review Alternative D and furnish information to the Commission as to its meaning; and to notice all R-3 lot owners. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Comms. Di Monda, Suard, Chmn. Ketz Comm. Marks None Comm. Merl SS 86-12 -- TEXT AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING ES AND ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION FR►, MARCH 3 AND APRIL 7, 1992 MEETINGS). Rec omme staff to CULT CONTD. ed Action: To review additional data reque ed and direct t for public hearing. Mr. Schubach Staff was tryl defensible, based referenced provision Commission, including Schubach asked for a revi set this item for a public written. esented the Staff Report, st to provide an ordi on recommendations f of previously r formation p of th ing that essentially nce that is legally m the City Attorneys. He uested information by the vided for this meeting. Mr. information and direct Staff to ar g to enable a Text Amendment to be Comm. Di Monda referenc=: several Orange County cities which use County standards and .sked if thos standards could be used by Hermosa City, since ore coverage and •-tail was provided by those standards. He re..mmended Staff review: 7- Page 29,Z ction 287, which should be "mot= /hotel", Sectio V288, which should be "/arcade", Sect' n 297, County's looks more inclusive tha Hermosa Beach's, age 32, Section 2, Paragraph 1, establishes 500 fe- versus 200 feet, 11 P.C.Minutes 4/21 April 16, 1992 Honorable Chairman and Members of the Regular Meeting of Hermosa Beach Planning Commission April 21, 1992 SUBJECT: SPECIAL STUDY 92-5 PURPOSE: TO EXAMINE REDUCING THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS IN THE R-3 AND R -P ZONES. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Commission choose from the alternatives presented below and forward the recommendation to the City Council. The specific language of a text amendment, if necessary, would be developed after receiving direction from the City Council. Background At the meeting of February 18, 1992, the Planning Commission made a recommendation to the City Council to adopt an urgency moratorium on R-3 projects to limit them to a 30 -foot height limit. At their meeting of February 25, 1992, the City Council considered such a moratorium, but did not get the necessary 4 votes to adopt a moratorium. Instead, the Council directed the Planning Commission to examine reducing heights in the R-3 zone as part of a permanent text amendment. The currently applicable height limit of 35 feet was originally established in 1973. Prior to 1973 the height requirement was 45 feet. As such, there is currently a mixture of building heights in the current R-3 areas, with a few apartment buildings built above 35 feet, several newer condominium projects built very close to or right at the 35 -foot limit, and many older buildings below 30 feet. This issue of building heights and view blockage has been discussed several times in the recent past, including an effort to change the height measurement method, to consider lowering R-2 heights adjacent to R-1 zones, and to include height reduction in a ballot measure, but consensus has not been reached to make changes in the height standards (see the additional attached background material), although downzoning has effectively reduced height limits for several neighborhoods. The Planning Department conducted a survey in June of 1991 or R-2 and R-3 properties, when the Council was considering placing height limit changes on the ballot, to roughly estimate the percentage of projects that already have been built to 35 feet. It was estimated that about 210 projects have been constructed to maximum height -(or 4% of all residential developments), with the majority of these in the southwest quadrant R-3 zoned area where - 1 - 10 about 148 projects (11.9%) are built to the maximum 35 -foot height. (Further description of the survey results are in the attached 6/4/91 P.C. staff report, Ballot Measures page 2). HOUSING ELEMENT A discussion of height limits and changes to reduce bulk and view blockage, while discouraging flat roof designs, was an included in the Housing Element of the General Plan, "Housing Standards" section (copy attached, Height discussion begins on page 73). The following policies related directly to height were adopted as part of the Housing Element: "1. Preserve the aesthetic value of neighborhoods by examining the height limitations in each residential zone" "2. Height of structures shall be restricted to limit view blockage when feasible and when hardship does not result" Addition policies that were adopted that are indirectly related to height include the following: "3. Floor area ratio should be examined as a means to reduce the bulk of family residences except where lot size would result in a dwelling "18. A neighborhood approach of "string lining" and/or averaging shall be utilized wherever feasible in relation to any and all required standards" The "Housing Standards" section of the Housing Element also includes extensive discussion of possible changes to other residential standards such as density, setbacks, bulk, open space, and lot coverage. The adopted policies are part of the General Plan and should be implemented. In this respect this effort to reduce heights in the R-3 and R -P zones is consistent with established policy and, in fact, is the implementation of that policy. PROPOSITION J It should also be noted that Proposition J was passed in November of 1991 by the voters of Hermosa Beach, by a margin of 56% to 44%, which strongly suggests that the general public supports further changes to reduce the bulk of new structures. Analysis Staff is presenting this analysis in the form of various alternatives. Each alternative will be evaluated separately for its benefits, its potential drawbacks, its expected impact, and its consistency with policies of the Housing Element. The Commission may see parts of each alternative that could be combined, or used in conjunction with one another, and may request further exploration of these alternatives. ALTERNATIVE A Maintain the R-3 height limit at 35 feet. It should be noted that the current process of reviewing projects with the discretion authorized by the condominium ordinance and by the precise development plan review procedure allows the imposition of stricter standards depending on the project. Existing code sections that can be used to justify requiring lower heights for certain cases are as follows; Condominium Ordinance: Section 7.2-3. Purpose, subsection (d)..."structures should be designed to minimize, within the context of accepted architectural practice, the consumption of natural resources, such a sunlight, air circulation, view sheds, and energy. Condominium Ordinance: Section 7.2-3. Purpose, subsection (e)..."Structures should be situated to take advantage of view, topography, sun and wind, while at the same time not obstructing comparable advantages for adjacent properties Condominium Ordinance: Section 7.2-6. Minimum Design Standards, subsection (i), subsection 2(d) "Consideration shall be given to the effect of the proposed development on the light, -air, view and privacy of adjacent properties." The policies of the General Plan Housing Element (noted above), and the following other sections in the zoning ordinance could which more indirectly address the height issue could also be used to justify restricting height: Condominium Ordinance: Section 7.2-3. Purpose, subsection (a)..."Architectural unity and harmony should be achieved both within the project and between the project and the surrounding neighborhood so that it promotes stability of and does not constitute a disruption to the established character of the neighborhood." Section 1432. Standards and review Criteria, for Precise Development Plans, subsection (A) "Standards. All development shall be in compliance with the minimum standards of the zoning ordinance. On a case by case basis, the planning commission may impose standards above the minimums designated by the zoning ordinance to improve the quality of development and to mitigate any environmental impacts" Although it is clear that the Commission and/or Council have the discretion to perhaps require lower heights in some cases, they have been very reluctant to use that discretion without more specific guidelines. Assuming that reluctance will continue, the impact of maintaining the height limit at 35 feet is a scenario where the old housing stock is gradually replaced by new buildings, which because of land values, will often be maximized to 35 -feet. The question the Commission must consider is whether that scenario, as it unfolds, jeopardizes the existing character and scale of these R-3 areas as compared to 30 -foot buildings, or, would serve to more rapidly improve the areas. Obviously, there are certain neighborhoods where the "recycling" of property to these larger structures will have serious impacts (some walk streets and perhaps the area north of 24th Street, amongst others). On the other hand, much of the older housing stock is multiple -family apartments that are way out of conformance with current density requirements or are substandard, and which arguably need "recycling." Maintaining the 35 -foot limit might serve to speed up that process. ALTERNATIVE B Reduce the height limit from 35 feet to 30 feet (or any other acceptable number like 32 feet). The City of Hermosa Beach is unique in allowing residential buildings up to 35 feet as compared to the cities of Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach. Manhattan Beach currently allow a maximum of thirty (30) feet in their highest density residential zone (RH district), and 26 feet in the single-family and medium density zones. Redondo Beach has a maximum of 30 feet in all its residential categories, R-2, R-2, R-3, and R-4, with the exception of its highest density district, "M -D -R", where up to 32 feet is allowed (Along Catalina Avenue and the Esplanade). Although this type of reduction will definitely impact some property values and ability for new projects to maximize views, staff does not believe that a lower height limit would be significantly adverse to potential development on individual lots, and given adjacent city's requirements it appears reasonable. However, Hermosa Beach's lot pattern is more diverse and includes very small lots, although certain sections of Manhattan Beach are quite similar. Further, Hermosa Beach's R-3 zone allows a fairly high density, but it is actually less than the density allowed in Manhattan Beach's RH district. The benefits of this lower height limit are fairly obvious. A lower scale character would be maintained in several R-3 neighborhoods, and existing views would be less obstructed. Also, this is a simple "hard and fast" rule, which is easily applied and understood. This approach also appears to be consistent with the policies of the Housing Element. Staff's main concern about this change in height limit is based on the premise that an established height limit has been existing for almost 20 years, and a development pattern has thus been evolving based on this standard. If the code is suddenly changed, it may create a hardship for those owners who either have bought recently in anticipation of building equivalent to surrounding properties or to gain a particularly scenic view, or those long-term homeowners who have delayed plans to remodel or expand their buildings. If the hardship potential is true, then this approach may be in conflict with the policies of the Housing Element which appear to envision a more flexible type of height restriction. Further, the incentive to rebuild substandard or existing nonconforming multiple -unit apartment buildings and thus to actually lower density would be somewhat reduced. Another concern is that the ability to create architecturally interesting roof -lines and designs might be inhibited as buildings will even more likely be designed with flat roofs, as designers attempt to maximize square footage in a smaller volume of buildable space. This is already a problem that may be exaggerated, and thus the tendency for designing bulky and boxy buildings may be worsened. ALTERNATIVE C Reduce the height limit to 30 feet, but allow the Commission to approve projects that exceed that limit, up to a maximum of 35 feet, when it is demonstrated by a project applicant that surrounding heights of existing buildings are over 30 feet and thus the 30 -foot limit would cause a loss of view. Suggested language for such an ordinance is as follows: No building shall exceed thirty (30) feet in height. However when demonstrated by a project applicant, to the satisfaction of the Planning Commission, that the following conditions are met a greater height of up to a maximum of 35 feet may be permitted. a) The extension above the 30 foot height limit is necessary to take advantage of a scenic view over surrounding structures, already constructed above thirty (30) feet in height, that would otherwise significantly obstruct the proposed project's view potential; b) A majority of buildings in the neighborhood or in the immediate vicinity of the project are already constructed to a height greater than 30 feet; c) Based on such considerations as the amount and type of structural extension above 30 feet, the additional height will not result in significant obstruction of scenic views currently available to surrounding buildings; d) The structural extension above 30 feet will not adversely impact the available views, and access to sunlight and air of adjacent and surrounding properties; e) Minimizing the interference of the available sunlight, air, and privacy of adjacent properties structures has been taken in to consideration in the design of the entire project. In order to demonstrate compliance with the above conditions the project applicant shall supply the Commission with plans, maps, photographs, surveys, diagrams, videotapes and any such other materials necessary for the Commission to make a determination if the above conditions have been satisfied. This approach represents somewhat of a hybrid of the Alternatives A & B, with an emphasis of allowing up to 35 feet only for projects where its necessary to be consistent with surrounding development. Otherwise the 30 -foot limit applies and the lower scale development character which is still prominent in many R-3 areas would not be jeopardized. This approach still leaves a lot of discretion to the Planning Commission where philosophies change from time to time. By including the set of conditions above, and placing the burden of proof on the applicant, staff has attempted to minimize the potential for arbitrary or inconsistent decisions over time. This alternative, although slightly more complicated than either A or B, would be relatively simple to adopt and is easily understood. Also it would serve to implement a the Housing Element policies noted above. ALTERNATIVE D Establish different height limits based on the neighborhood area. The most obvious separation would be to have a 30 -foot height limit on the R-3 properties located along Hermosa Avenue north of 27th Street, and along the west side of P.C.H., while maintaining the 35 -foot limit for the large R-3 zoned area in southwest Hermosa Beach. Other areas for consideration of a 30 -foot restriction might be the Strand frontage lots and/or walk streets located south of 16th Street. See the areas noted on the attached map. This approach would most directly respond to the Commissioner's concerns about the R-3 areas that have R-2 or R-1 zoned property to the east. Further exploration would be necessary to establish which neighborhoods would be subject to which height limit. This would be another "hard and fast" rule that would be easily applicable and not burden developers with any additional discretionary review. The difficulty here would be with establishing the neighborhoods that would have a lower height vs. those that would stay the same. Overall this idea seems very reasonable and could be considered in conjunction with, or accomplished by, rezoning the more sensitive R-3 areas to R-2. This approach would also be consistent with Housing Element policies particularly policy 18 as noted earlier. ALTERNATIVE E Establish two sets of height requirements depending on the type of roof design. For example, allow up to 35 feet for pitched roofs, but a maximum of 31 feet for flat roofs. This type of approach is used in other cities and is discussed thoroughly in the attached excerpt from the Housing Element. This approach would be more flexible and would encourage architectural diversity by reducing flat roofs. Also it would not burden developers with the unpredictable results of discretionary review. However, some discretion would inevitably be required to determine when a "pitched" roof qualifies for a higher limit, either in the form of case by case review or in a policy statement. The Housing Element discussed this method as it is used in other cities that are similar to Hermosa Beach, but no specific policy was noted. ALTERNATIVE F Instead of changing height limits, establish a view protection ordinance like the type used in the Torrance hillside district, in which view impacts are considered on a project by project basis. In Torrance, silhouettes of proposed buildings are temporarily constructed for precise simulation of the view impacts. Projects are approved, denied, or redesigned on the basis of this simulation and the testimony from surrounding residents. This type of ordinance gives the most discretion to the Commission, and perhaps would end up being resulting in the least predictable decisions and thus the greatest burden on developers and property owners. On the other hand those with existing views that may be threatened will always have a public forum to state their case for protecting those views. By emphasizing view protection it becomes a judgement of who's view is more important than others. The result may be in some cases requiring a project to not only reduce its height to 30 -feet, but perhaps even lower, especially when those with vested interests are most vocal and organized. In other cases, where the potential view blockage might impact properties which are currently occupied by renters or where those who have view impacts are silent for whatever reason, it may be difficult to justify imposing lower height limits. Further exploration would be necessary to create a set of guidelines and criteria to assure that consistent decisions are made in regards to individual projects. An important benefit of this approach is that where no view blockage occurs, the maximum height can be attained. ALTERNATIVE G Instead of changing height limits, reduce the amount of buildable area in upper floors by use of greater setback requirements for second and third floors, and/or by allowing less building volume above a certain height (i.e. from the 25 foot to the 35 foot range only 25% of the volume of the structure would be permitted). This type of approach strays a little bit for dealing with the problem of height, but would serve to address both the concern of view blockage and bulk. A discussion of this type of approach is also included in the Housing Element under the sub -heading Floor Area Ratio, and is graphically depicted in Diagram III (page 70 of Housing Element excerpt). More exploration would be needed to determine what standards to apply (simply setbacks, averaged setbacks, floor area ratios or building volume ratios) and the ordinance would have to be very precise, and probably complicated, to enable fair application on on sloping lots, and on unusual designs where split levels or high ceilings are used. An important benefit of this approach might be the addition of some unique architectural diversity. ALTERNATIVE H - COMBINING THE ALTERNATIVES As noted earlier, a combination of alternatives may be the best alternative. For example, a combination of "C" and "G" might be optimal by allowing structures to exceed 30 -feet when certain conditions are demonstrated but only with reduced bulk in the upper floor(s). Alternative "D" (height standard by neighborhood) could also be combined with these two alternatives to either establish lower height limits or to require more reduction in upper floor bulk icert in nei•hborhoods. CONCU / / a ice en Rob tson, Associate Planner Michael Schubach Planning Director Attachments 1. Planning Commission Resolution of Intent 2. P.C. Minutes 2/18/92 3. C.C. Minutes/Staff Report 2/25/92 4. Excerpt from Housing Element, pages 56-83 5. Selected reports/minutes from previous related studies 6. Alternative D map ** A NOTE ON THE PUBLIC NOTICING PROVIDED ** This initial public hearing has been publicly noticed by a display ad in the Easy Reader, which is the minimum requirement for a city-wide text amendment that effects over 1,000 properties. (There are 1,067 lots in the City zoned R-3 or R -P). It should be noted, however, that all owners of R-3 property may not be aware of this or subsequent public hearings. The only way noticing could be accomplished would be by individually noticing all R-3 and R -P property owners which would be an added cost to the City. Staff will only do this extensive noticing if directed by the Planning Commission or the City Council, and cost is not charged to the Planning Department budget. p/pcsrhite BACKGROUND MATER/Al P.C. RESOLUTION 92-14 A RESOLUTION OF INTENT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF- HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, TO INITIATE A STUDY AND POSSIBLE TEXT AMENDMENT TO REDUCE THE HEIGHT LIMITS IN THE R-3 AND R -P ZONES WHEREAS, the City Council held a public meeting on February 25, 1992, to consider a moratorium on issuance building permits for projects over 30 feet high in the R-3 zone, but instead directed the Planning Commission to study reducing heights in the R-3 zone; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission intends to carry out the study for possible consideration of a text amendment and at their public meeting of March 3, 1992, made the following observations to support such a study: A. Height limits in the R-3, R-2 and R-1 zones are 35 feet, 30 feet, and 25 feet respectively; B. The differences in these height limits can cause view blockage especially where R-1 and R-2 zones border R-3 zones; C. Three story buildings can still be constructed within a height limit lower than 35 feet while views and access to sunlight would be better protected; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City Hermosa Beach, California, directs staff to study the height limits in the R-3 zone for a possible text amendment. _ VOTE: AYES: Comms.Di Monda,Merl,Vice Chmn.Marks NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: Comm. Suard,Chmn.Ketz CERTIFICATION I hereby certify the foregoing Resolution P.C. 92-14 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 March 3, 1992. ,•- ! a cuLlik )/ ach, Secretary Robert B. Marks, Vice Chairman Michael S Date P/PCRSINT C opportunity to review the improvement plan, stating it was the mos important Public Works improvement. Comm. Merl also requested e Commission be given the opportunity to review the -.ital Improvements proposal for the new pier entrance and -oted no relationship,between the two•projects had been identifi Chmn. Ketz discussed with Mr. Schubach and det- fined this plan amendment will be\forwarded to Environment.. Review ,Committee during March 1992, Planning Commission duri - April 1992, and City Council during May 1992.\Comm. Suard sug•-sted a questionnaire and adequate notice be sent. Schubach - ated the General Plan will be noticed in the newspaper st.-sand procedure, allowing the schedule to be followed. MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, s onded by�Comm. Merl, to DIRECT Staff to conduct the environm-• al assessment and schedule for public hearing an amendment t• he Circulation Element regarding the route of the Strand bike . h. AYES: Comms. Di Monda, Marks, Merl, Chmn. NOES: None ABSTAIN: - Suard ABSENT ✓ None STAFF ITEMS a. Consideration of initiating a moratorium on R-3 lots in locations adjacent to R-2 & R-1 zones, and study of lowering height. Mr. Schubach stated this item was requested by the Commission regarding restricting maximum development of R-3 lots that may obstruct R-1 and R-2 zoned lots. He stated the moratorium had expired, with the City Council opting to make no changes to the Zoning Ordinance in terms of height. The proposed moratorium would effect three areas: (1) area bordered by Manhattan Blvd. on the east and Hermosa Blvd. on the west, (2) area bordered by Monterey Blvd. to the beach, and (3) area east of Pacific Coast Highway along Fifth Street east of the commercial area. He noted the Housing Improvement Program was turned down by the City Council. Chmn. Ketz and Mr. Schubach discussed the fact that during the moratorium some buildings had a 25 -feet height limit. Comm. Di Monda thought the City Council had wanted to deal with the issue one at a time and felt HIP was too broad. He preferred the Commission being able to deal with view blockage by establishing a moratorium on all construction over 30 feet in all areas. He suggested R-3 height could then be lowered throughout except where blocked by taller R-3 zone buildings. Chmn. Ketz and Comm. Di Monda agreed this option should be reviewed. Comm. Merl expressed reservations regarding moratoriums, preferring the study be dealt with. Comm. Di Monda addressed Comm. Merl's concerns and stated the moratorium would only be for buildings over 30 feet, and would 12 P.C.Minutes 2/18/92 c prevent rushed, incomplete plans being presented. Comm. Marks agreed with Comm. Di Monda's statements. Comm. Merl reiterated his concerns relating to moratoriums. Comm. Suard felt that 25 feet heights in the R-1 zones was not adequate to build two story and garage/basement area buildings, suggesting all residential R-1 and R-2 zone buildings be allowed to reach the 30 feet height level. Comm. Di Monda felt this would create additional view blockage. Chmn. Ketz noted this would be a different issue. Mr. Lee suggested a. grandfather provision be considered, explaining the various associated considerations. MOTION by Comm. Di Monda, seconded by Comm. Marks, to RECOMMEND to the City Council a moratorium for construction over 30 feet throughout the City until the Planning Commission can address the view blockage issues throughout the R-3 zones, especially those that abuts R-2 and R-1 zones; all approved projects prior to this agenda item would fall under a grandfather provision. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Comms. Di Honda, Marks, Suard, Chmn. Ketz Comm. Merl None None b.. Letter from La Paz Restaurant at 1095 Aviation Boulevard regarding Parking Plan. Mr. Schubach stated Staff received a letter stating the Christ cannot offer the parking to the La Paz Rest applicant is not able to meet the C.U.P. Condition, did not seem feasible, but the Commission may ame if it so wished. Mr.. Lee noted Staff suggested provide other direction as to how applicant mi condition, not necessary -,to waive the condit the applicant must been the requirements felt the Commission had previously agre spaces was marginal, which would.,be a not feel the clientele would be dr— that restaurants on Pier Aven Schubach noted the applicant's RECEIVE AND FILE. c. urch of 'rant. The ther parking the condition, at the Commission t meet the required n. Chmn. Ketz stated f the C.U.P. Comm. Merl the need for the parking ariance. Comm. Di Monda did ing to the restaurant, noting cannot furnish parking. Mr. tions would be discussed with him. Memorandum regard'•g status of Strand wall project and review of the future Capital Improvement Programs by the Planning Commission. Chmn. Ketz ruested the Commission be given the oppor ity to review this/issue. Comm. Merl felt it was a major project, Bing crucial ple Commission review it and have input. He felt the 'er entrance should be integrated with this issue. Mr. Schubach stat Staff7would assure presentation to the Commission. RECEIVE AND FILE. 13 P.C.Minutes 2/18/92 �11 REVIEW OF RECRUITMENT AND TESTING PROCEDURES. Memor um from Personnel Director Robert Blackwo•- dated Feb 18, 1992. Action: To appoi . Counci =••-committee composed of Councilmember Benz an• -_• or Midstokke to review the Recruitment and T-- ng Proce• = and return to Council with any re c ' endations for changes • arifications. Motion- ayor Midstokke, second Edgerton. motion ,___carried unanimously. 8. PROPOSED INTERIM ORDINANCE TO PROHIBIT PROJECTS IN THE R-3 ZONE FROM EXCEEDING 30 FEET IN HEIGHT WHILE THE HEIGHT STANDARD IS BEING STUDIED FOR MODIFICATION. Memorandum from Planning Director Michael Schubach dated February 19, 1992. Supplemental letter from Michael Keegan, Earl Keegan, Kathleen Maher, John Maher, Kris- tine Keegan, Lynn Olsen, Karin Anderson, and Dale Ander- son, all of 1107 Loma Drive, dated February 25, 1992. Planning Director Schubach responded to Council questions. Coming forward to address the Council on this item were: Shirley Cassell - 611 Monterey Blvd., opposed to the moratorium as it would, in effect, downzone various R-3 properties. Michael Devere - (no address given) questioned the staff report and wished to see it; Viva Stroyke - 3205 Strand, realtor, questioned why :the moratorium had come about and if it would affect her client (was told it would not as that project was in the process); (no name given) - questioned the exceptions to the Ordinance (was told there were 13 projects in progress and they would be grandfathered); Otto Palmer - 632 Monterey Blvd., opposed to the moratorium as it hurts investors who can't af- - ford to build now to beat the deadline; stated that views could not be protected in their entirety; Edie Webber - 1210 Eleventh Street, objected to just height limit changes, felt the City should be looked at in its entirety from a zoning per- spective as the zones were very mixed now; Eric Castleman - (no address given), opposed to moratorium; stated that it singled out one group of residents; and, Jim Gallagher - 3314 Highland, opposed to the moratorium as it stops development. Proposed Action: To receive and file. Motion Mayor Midstokke, second Wiemans. The motion City Council Minutes 02-25-92 Page 7719 failed due to the dissenting votes of Benz, Edgerton, and Essertier. Proposed Action: To approve the staff recommendation but have it effective in 30 days. Motion Edgerton. The motion was withdrawn when it was explained by City Attorney Vose that it could not be done. Proposed Action: To adopt staff recommendation. Motion Edgerton. The motion died due to the lack of a second. Action: To send the item back to the Planning Commis- sion to study reducing the height limit from 35 feet to 30 feet in the R-3 zone. Motion Essertier, second Edgerton. The motion carried, noting the dissenting vote of Wiemans. A 9. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY MANAGER - one 10. ISCELLANEOUS ITEMS AND REPORTS - CITY COUNCI• 10:29 the order of the agenda was returned to item no. 5. (a) Adotion of resolution appointing a Ci Manager and appro ing an employment agreement. Action: o announce the appointm t of Frederick R. Ferrin as ity Manager for the C y of Hermosa Beach; approve and authorize the Mayor o sign a two year em- ployment contr ct with Mr. Fe in commencing April 20, 1992 and continu' g through •ril 20, 1994; and to adopt Resolution No. 92 524, en tled, "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY .F HERMOSA BEACH APPOINTING A CITY MANAGER AND APP V•NG AN AGREEMENT WITH FREDERICK R. FERRIN. " Motion Wiemans, seco-d Be The motion carried, noting the dissenting vot: of Ess tier and Mayor Midstokke. Mayor Midstokk- wished the rec d to show that she ap- proved of th appointment of Mr. Ferrin, but had voted NO to some •f the terms in the a• eement, such as the six month ousing allowance of $1,00► per month and the 80 hours of paid Administrative leave • us vacation time of thr-e weeks per year. Councilmember sertier wished the ecord to show that he, too, approved of the ap- po tment of Mr. Ferrin, but objected to the terms of t e agreement. At 8:1. the order of the agenda was returned to item no. (b) Memorandum from Planning Commission dated February 1992, requesting that Council initiate a text amendmen City Council Minutes 02-25-92 Page 7720 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council February 25, 1992 SUBJECT: R-3 ZONE HEIGHT LIMIT PURPOSE: TO CONSIDER AN INTERIM ORDINANCE TO PROHIBIT PROJECTS IN THE R-3 ZONE FROM EXCEEDING 30 FEET IN HEIGHT WHILE THE HEIGHT STANDARD IS BEING STUDIED FOR MODIFICATION Planning Commission Recommendation Adopt the attached interim ordinance. Background At their meeting of February 18, 1992, the Planning Commission recommended that the Council adopt an interim ordinance to limit the height in the R-3 zone to 30 feet. State planning and zoning law allows adoption of urgency measures (i.e. and interim ordinance or moratorium) when its determined that to protect the public safety, health, and welfare it is necessary to "prohibit uses which may be in conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal which the legislative body, planning commission, or the planning department is considering or studying or intends to study within a reasonable time." Adoption of such an interim ordinance requires a four-fifths vote of the legislative body, and it would be in effect for 45 days. Any action to extend of such an ordinance can only be taken after public noticing and a public hearing. Analysis The benefit of such an urgency measure is that it can protect an area during a period when more thorough study of an issue is needed. It is conceivable, for example, that without such an approach that future changes in the law become ineffective if developers are allowed to submit projects under current requirements. The problem with an urgency measure relating to height is that it might place an unnecessary burden on land owners when it is essentially unclear what, if any, zoning changes are being contemplated for a permanent ordinance. Further, the height limits for each residential zoning category have already established a development pattern. If the Council desires to adopt such a measure staff suggests language as contained in the attached ordinance drafted for Council adoption. It would establish an interim ordinance to prohibit projects located in R-3 zoned properties to exceed 30 feet in height. The Council would also have to consider if a grandfather clause would be included in such an interim ordinance for projects in the plan check stage, or C.U.P. review stage which have not yet obtained a building permit. In the past, these types of ordinances in the City have included a statement to grandfather projects which have already submitted an application for building permit or C.U.P. prior to the adoption of the ordinance and as long as a building permit is pulled within six months. Vii;,; / )4(11 Ken Robertson, Associate Planner CONCUR: Michael Schubach 216 i i, ig Direct Steve Wisniewski, Interim City Manager p/memo3 HOUSING STANDARDS The analysis of housing characteristics, current building trends, and residents' voiced opinions has created a list of desired housing standards in the form of policies, meant to address current housing issues and concerns. These policies, when implemented, will also fulfill several objectives related to housing preservation and conservation and "new construction to existing units" relationships. The adoption of the policies as part of the Housing Program is intended to formalize steps to implement the policies into ordinances. The policies being considered deal generally with neighborhood conditions of parking, open space, and physical building form. Each of the topics discussed interrelates to all the others. Adjustments to one standard will alter the results of the other standards. Background Hermosa Beach contains 433 acres of residential land in a total area of 703 acres, exclusive of streets. As one of the beach cities, historically subdivisions have been toward small lots and the problems of bulk, height and parking are common. For the most part, lots range from 25 to 40 feet wide and 80 to 120 feet in depth. Typically the larger lots (two contiguous lots) have been split to allow building of additional units so that even the 50 foot wide lots have ended up as two narrow lots. In the past homes were much smaller and intended to be second residences. It is estimated by Urban Decision Systems, Inc. that over 6,000 homes are over 30 years old in Hermosa Beach. The newer units are primary residences and are being designed as much larger than existing units. And, as has been previously mentioned, it is the older units that are being selected for demolition and replacement by the larger units. Adding to the concerns of the community is the increase in density that has occurred with the demolition of single units that are replaced by multiple units. The multiple units contain approximately the same square footage, individually, as single units and occupy much more space on the lot to accommodate the multiple units. These projects may occur in neighborhoods where the predominant existing character is a lower profile group of buildings. Density The impacts of the existing density in Hermosa Beach have been discussed in several sections of this report. Coupled with high population density is the high housing density that serves the population. The current housing density in Hermosa Beach ranks as the highest in the South Bay region, which correlates with the same ranking for population density. A sample of South Bay communities shows that Hermosa Beach has a density 50% greater than the closest city, Manhattan Beach, and more than eight times greater than the City of Rolling Hills Estates. TABLE IX HOUSING DENSITY (So. Bay) CITY #UNITS SIZE (IN SQ. MI.) #/SQ. MILE Hermosa Beach 10,129 1.30 7,792 Manhattan Beach 15,379 3.89 3,953 Lawndale 9,478 1.90 4,988 Hawthorne 29,513 5.60 5,270 Redondo Beach 28,600 6.20 4,613 Lomita 8,501 1.97 4,315 Torrance 53,566 21.0 2,551 Ranch Palos Verdes 15,356 12.30 1,248 Palos Verdes Est. 5,095 4.75 1,073 Rolling Hills 683 3.00 228 Rolling Hills Est. 2,730 4.81 568 Gardena 18,915 5.36 3,529 El Segundo 7,131 5.47 1,304 Source: The California Planner's 1990 Book of Lists Table IX compares densities on the total area of the specified cities, which includes commercial and industrial uses. The City of Hermosa Beach, using only the 433 acres of residential land and the 10,129 units existing, has an average density of 23.4 units per acre. Some areas will be higher and some lower in order to obtain the average. In the past there have been several efforts toward reducing the density in the City directed toward protecting the existing environment. Further reductions may be accomplished in the same manner or in conjunction with the variety of methods in this section. The citizens also approved a ballot measure in 1986, called Proposition Q (see Appendix F), that requires any request for increased density to be submitted to a vote of the people. The intent was to improve the quality of life in the City by limiting additional housing units. A few months prior to Proposition Q, the City Council had adopted an ordinance that lowered the number of potential new units. Proposition Q was seen as a citizen confirmation of that reduction. Increasing the lot area required for each dwelling unit, as in Proposition Q, should be done by considering general lot sizes in the City and units per acre to be achieved. Existing densities allowed will not increase, except by voter approval, and reductions will only occur as older units are replaced by fewer, newly constructed units. Tables X and XI show the allowable number of units that will occur based on various lot sizes, and units per acre. To use the tables, select a lot size on the left. Moving across the row, the numbers indicate the maximum units allowed under the lot area required per unit. C c TABLE X COMPARISON OF UNITS ALLOWED MEDIUM DENSITY SINGLE LOT TWO ASSEMBLED LOTS 25 U/ 20 U/ 18 U/ acre acre acre 1,750 2,178 2,420 Two 1,750 2,178 2,420 sq.ft. sq.ft. sq.ft. Times sq.ft. sq.ft. sq.ft Lot Size /unit /unit /unit /unit /unit /unit 2,100 1 1 1 x2 2 2 1 2,250 1 1 1 x2 2 2 1 2,400 1 1 1 x2 2 2 2 2,475 1 1 1 x2 2 2 2 2,700 1 1 1 x2 3 2 2 3,000 1 1 1 x2 3 2 2 3,500 2 1 1 x2 4 3 2 3,600 2 1 1 x2 4 3 2 4,000 2 1 1 x2 4 3 3 4,324 2 1 1 x2 4 3 3 4,460 2 2 1 x2 5 4 3 4,600 2 2 1 x2 5 4 3 4,760 2 2 1 x2 5 4 3 5,400 3 2 2 x2 6 4 4 5,600 3 2 2 x2 6 5 4 6,800 3 3 2 x2 7 6 5 c The Low density areas of the City, designated as single-family residential, would be unaffected by a reduction in units per acre. Current regulations allow for one dwelling unit to be built on an existing, recorded lot in any residential zone. In the case of the Medium density areas in the City, the current standard is up to 25 units per acre. Individual lot sizes range from 2,100 to 5,000 square feet. Under the Zoning ordinance there is a requirement for a minimum of 1,750 square feet per dwelling. Duplexes can now be built on the larger lots and on an assembled group of smaller lots that are 3,500 square feet or larger. Examining Table X, it becomes clear that within the medium density range, lowering the density to 20 units per acre, or 2,178 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit will result in lots within this designation of less than 4,356 square feet, having only one unit. This reduction will therefore have some effect since the last large area of medium density, R-2, has approximately 55 lots with approximately 4,324 square feet of lot area. With approximately 4,324 square feet of lot area merging two of these lots would result in 3 units. At 18 units per acre, almost the entire remaining area of medium density, R-2 zoned, lots are effected, since approximately 65 lots, with approximately 4,760 square feet. could have only one unit. The R-2 zone contains about 16 lots that would be affected by only being able to build a duplex on a large lot, where 3 or 4 units are now allowed. These lots contain at least 5,250 square feet of lot area and the largest lot (70x108.12) has 7,568.40 square feet would permit four units. This limitation would reduce the number of potential units by another 17 units. Since most large lot areas of the City were rezoned in 1989 from R-2 to R -2B zoning, limiting the number of units per lot to a maximum of two units, there.would be approximately 15 large medium density R-2 zoned lots which could have more than one unit at 18 units per acre, and approximately 70 lots at 20 units per acre. Most of the R -2B lots would not be effected since they generally are large lots; approximately 8 lots would be reduced to 1 unit at 20 units per acre, and 25 more lots would be reduced at 18 units per acre. In the High density areas most of the lots range between 2,750 and 4,000 square feet. Lowering density to 30 units per acre, 1,452 square feet per unit, would result in approximately 115 lots with one unit. Lowering the density to 24 units per acre, 1815 square feet per unit would result in approximately another 140 lots that could have only one unit. TABLE XI COMPARISON OF UNITS ALLOWED HIGH DENSITY SINGLE LOT TWO ASSEMBLED LOTS 33 U/ 30 U/ 24U/ Acre acre acre 1,320 1,452 1,815 Two 1,320 1,452 1,815 sq.ft. sq.ft. sq.ft. Times sq.ft. sq.ft. sq.ft. Lot Size /unit /unit /unit /unit /unit /unit 2,100 1 1 1 x2 3 2 2 2,400 1 1 1 x2 3 3 2 2,550 1 1 1 x2 3 3 2 2,700 2 1 1 x2 4 3 2 2,850 2 1 1 x2 4 3 3 3,000 2 2 1 x2 4 4 3 3,600 2 2 1 x2 5 4 3 4,000 3 2 2 x2 6 5 4 5,000 3 3 2 x2 7 6 5 Source: City of Hermosa Beach Planning Department Also, the number of lots with a reduction of one unit occurs in lots ranging from 2,750 to 4,000 square feet in size, and since most lots fall within this range, there is approximately an 33% reduction in density at 30 units per acre. At 24 units per acre, closer to a 50% reduction in density occurs. From the tables, it can be seen that assemblage of lots does result in additional units for some lot sizes. Floor Area Ratio Physical building form has become a concern as existing units, in existing neighborhoods, are being demolished and replaced. The replacement unit, according to present practices, will be larger, taller and possibly only 1 of several allowable units on the building lot. It will also contain an average of 2,000 square C c feet of living space compared with an average of 1,200 square feet of its older counterpart. The most noticeable difference with new units is the bulk of the • buildings. Increased amounts of living space, expansive outside walls with no architectural relief and multi -story design in single -story neighborhoods have prompted the policies suggesting implementation of floor area ratios, design incentives, and height limits to protect views. Floor area ratios limit the overall square footage allowed in a building. Ratios are based upon lot size compared to building size. Diagrams I and II are excerpts from a study by the City of Torrance in 1989. These graphics show comparative floor area ratios and the reduction of bulk on individual building lots. Basically, if the floor area ratio is one:one (1:1) and the lot size is 2,500 square feet then a house of 2,500 square feet may .be constructed on the lot. Setbacks and other ordinance provisions must still be met. In order to reduce the size of buildings the floor area ratio is also reduced, (1:.6) or .60 as described in the graphics and the size maximum in this example would be 1,500 square feet. Several alternatives have been considered by other communities throughout California. The City of Mill Valley modified the FAR method and included multi -family construction (See tables XII and XIII). As the tables show, increasing sizes of lots are accompanied by reduced floor area ratios. For example: a lot that contains 7,000 square feet is given a floor area ratio of 35% while a lot of 20,000 square feet only has a floor area ratio of 20%. In Long Beach the neighborhood of Belmont Shores has small lot development that has remained a low profile beach community in the past few years. The reason for this, according to City staff in the Planning department, is the zoning placed on the area in 1988. At that time, regulations were adopted that restricted height and bulk. And with the Belmont Shores neighborhood, a single zoning district (R -2-S) was established to administer the provisions of the ordinance. A complete description of the zone is in accompanying Table XIV which is an excerpt from the ordinance. Belmont Shores is an excellent area for comparison because the lots are small like Hermosa Beach, the community is on the ocean and it has grown over the years like Hermosa Beach. The City of Torrance applied the FAR to living area and included garages in the computations for maximum building size. In determining what the floor area ratio should be, the City staff examined existing ratios in the developed sections of the city. Lot sizes in Torrance are large compared with Hermosa Beach, averaging 5,000 to 6,500 square feet. House sizes were estimated at 1,200 square feet which was the predominant size for single family homes built in the 1950's and 1960's, as the majority in the City of Torrance were. c •I•C EXAMPLES OF FORM (same lot - same standards) I A I •1 p DIAGRAM I Lot Size 5,000 s.f (50'X100') Total Square Footage of FORM = 3,000 Examples A,B,C Sr D are different in terms of built form yet they all meet the same development standards. Minimum Setbacks = 20' front 20' rear _ 5' side Maximum Lot Coverage = 40% Maximum Height = 27' Maximum FAR = 0.6 A floor area ratio is a mathematical equation. It is used to determine a relationship between the lot size and the amount of floor area built on it. The intent of a FAR is to measure the total building bulk. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THE FAR CHANGES? (same lot - same building footprint) fAg.= 1.0 . • • f:AX..045 at • 0/00 • FA -R 0.55 *ki I I i i I 1 I I cco setbacks= 20' front 20' rear 5' side DIAGRAM II SETBACKS Setbacks control the location of the building on the lot. . 1111•111111 MEMO ER NZI C\\.'-% . Milal vv� Lot Coverage = 40% (with minimum setbacks) FLOOR AREA RATIO LOT COVERAGE' Lot coverage controls the size of the building footprint. Lot coverage determines the amount of open space on the lot. FAR controls . the building bulk relative to the lot area. Whereas lot coverage controls only the building foot -print, FAR controls the size of the building. Examples A, B, & C all have the same FAR. FAR controls the size of the second story without dictating its relationship to the first. Maximizing the building footprint will minimize the area of the second story. FAR is meant to control bulk not living area. c TABLE XII CITY OF MILL VALLEY MAXIMUM SIZES FOR SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES Examples at Maximum Adjusted Various Lot Size Floor Area * Formula (sq. ft.) (Acres) (sq. ft.) Maximum Adjusted Floor Area Ratio 4,000 0.09 1,400 .35 35% of 5,000 0.11 1,750 .35 Lot Size 6,000 0.14 2,100 .35 7,000 0.16 2,450 .35 7,500 0.17 2,625 .35 8,000 0.18 2,800 .35 8,500 0.20 2,850 .33 9,000 0.21 2,900 .32 1096 of 9,500 0.22 2,950 .31 Lot Size 10,000 0.23 3,000 .30 +2,000 s.f. 11,000 0.25 3,100 .28 12,000 0.28 3,200 .26 13,000 0.30 3,300 .25 14,000 0.32 3,400 .24 15,000 0.34 3,500 .23 17,500 0.40 3,750 .21 20,000 0.46 4,000 .20 25,000 0.57 4,250 .17 30,000 0.69 4,500 .16 5% of 35,000 0.80 4,750 .13 Lot Size 40,000 0.92 5,000 .12 +3,000 s.f. 45,000 1.03 5,250 .11 50,000 1.15 5,500 .11 55,000 1.26 5,750 .10 60,000 1.38 6,000 .10 65,000 1.49 6,250 .09 70,000 1.61 6,500 .09 75,000 1.72 6,750 .08 80,000 1.84 7,000 .08 87,120 2.00 7,000 .08 108,900 2.50 7,000 .06 7,000 s.f. 130,630 3.00 7,000 .05 Maximum 174,240 4.00 7,000 .04 217,800 5.00 7,000 .03 * "Adjusted Floor Area" includes the gross enclosed floor area in the home plus: any garage space after the first 500 sq. ft.; any enclosed accessory buildings; any second unit space after the first 500 sq. ft. if the unit has a Conditional Use Permit; and any potential living space with minimum dimensions of 8 x 10 and 7.5 feet head room. Z!e TABLE XIII CITY OF MILL VALLEY EXAMPLES OF BUILDING OPTIONS UNDER "HIGHER DENSITY" MULTI -FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT Lot Size Floor Maximum Examples (sq. ft.) Area Ratio Building Size of Options * 10,000 .40 4,000 sq. ft. o 4 - 1,000 s. f. units O 3 - 1,333 s. f. units o 1 - 2,000 s. f. unit and 2 - 1,000 s. f. units o 2 - 2,000 s. f. units 6,000 .40 2,400 s. f. o 3 - 800 s. f. units o 2 - 1,200 s. f. units o 1 - 1,400 s. f. unit and 1 - 1,000 s. f. unit EXAMPLES OF BUILDING OPTIONS UNDER NEW "LOWER DENSITY" MULTI -FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT Lot Size Floor Maximum Examples (sq. ft.) Area Ratio Building Size of Options * 10,000 .35 3,500 s. f. 0 3 - 1,166 s. f. units O 2 - 1,750 s. f. units O 1 - 2,000 s. f. unit and 1 - 1,500 s. f. unit 6,000 .35 2,100 s. f. o 1 - 1,100 s. f. unit and O 1 - 1,000 s. f. unit o 1 - 1,400 s. f. unit and 1 - 700 s. f. unit As long as required on-site parking is provided. —Zi TABLE XIV Rssideetial D.*ele..eatstaa ons District [Jai= Per Lot Lot Area Per Unit (Sq. Ft) Waimea* Lot Area (Sq. FL)(&d Waimea M1nioam Yard Setbacks (Feet Ph Maximo HeigMMaa+ Minimum Flow Ann Ratio Usable Open Space Per Unit Lae Proaap (Feet$*) Maxim Lot Coverage Fres I Sid. Reattas (%of Lott R -1S 1 2.400 2.400 30 810 3 8 247.23' N/A 500 1.2 R -1-M 1 3.600 3.600 40 8 4 8 25' 2 st N/A 1.200 0.67 R -1-N 1 6.000 6.000 . 50 20 .uw 1st st. 10 25' 2 st 50% 1.600 0.6 2nd 4t. 30 R.I.L. 1 12.000 12.000 60 20 6 30 25'. 2st. 40% r 1.600 0.6 R -I -T 1 3.000 3.000 25w 10 3 8 25' 2 st. N/A . 500 1.2 R-24 2 •2 1.200 • 4.800 40 l501 3 10 24'128' N/A 200 1.3 R-2-1 1.000 4.800 40 3(1) 3 8 32'/35'x„ 3 11. N/A 200 N/A R -2-N 2 3.000 6.000 50 13 ale 10 25' 2st. 60% 400 0.73 R-2-Aw 2 3.000 6.000 50 15 441a 10 2.5' • 2st. 60% 400 0.63 R -2-L 2 4.000 8.000 50 13 4 10 35' 2 st 40% 400 N/A R -3-S1) 3 2.100 6.300 50 15 5 20 2.5' st N/A 250 N/A R.3-4 4 1.700 . 4.500 50 15 5 20 25' 2 u. N/A 250 N/A R-34tn N/A See Table 31-2 8 6.300 60 15 5 20 30"n 2 st N/A • 250 NIA R-3-T1T) N/A See Table 31-2 8 2.100 25(i) 10 5 20 J01n 2 u. N/A 500 N/A R - -Rin N/A See Table 31.2 8 18.000 120 10 5 20 30' 2 sttn N/A 150 N/A R -4 -Non N/A See Table 31-28 18.000 120 10 5 20 40'1) 3st N/A 150 N/A R-1.ii10 N/A See Table 31.2 8 18.000 120 I00•' 5 20 404h 3 u. 50 150 N/A RM N/A 2.400 18.000 120 10 4 10 30' 2 st 65% 200 N/A R --U(1) N/A See Table 31-23 2.500 180 10 5 20 4019 3u. N/A 150 3.0 (Long Beach 2.90) The existing floor area ratio in Torrance was then calculated to be .30, using the definitions in the report. The 1989 study recommended a floor area ratio of .60 including all areas that add bulk to the building and excluding basements. An additional recommendation, again to reduce the overall bulk of building on a lot, was to require that no detached second units would be permitted. Manhattan Beach has concentrated on bulk above the first floor by increasing setbacks for second floors. In 1988, the Manhattan Beach Planning Commission was considering the setback method and percentage reductions for floors above the first level, as well. The main objective was to select a method that would control the bulk of buildings in three residential zones in the City of Manhattan Beach. Example A (see diagram III) pictures a setback that could reduce overall bulk by requiring additional distance from property lines. Example B pictures the application of floor area ratio, not as the traditional relationship of lot area to floor area, but as a square footage reduction for second and third stories based upon the maximum square footage allowed for the first floor. Example B is the method chosen by the City of Pasadena to deal with bulk. They established a 507 second floor maximum and applied the standard to all single family residential zones. Hermosa Beach has no regulations dealing with the bulk of units. The cities mentioned above have considered neighborhood compatibility in their recommendations to control bulk, but did not include any specific provisions to insure it. Additional provisions would still be necessary to protect views and insure privacy of adjacent lots. Lot Coverage Torrance also considered provisions for maximum lot coverage, as did Beverly Hills and Santa Monica. All determined that a maximum coverage of 407 was appropriate. The staff recommendations for the City of Torrance from the 1989 study already mentioned stated that "...reducing the maximum lot coverage from 507 to 407 (results) in proportional increases of useable open space." In the case of Torrance, reduced lot coverage also accomplished an objective for additional open space with each unit. Mill Valley and Rolling Hills Estates have larger lots and, in the case of Mill Valley, a sliding scale has been developed that considers a range of lot sizes and lot coverages. Lot sizes in Mill Valley start at 4,000 square feet and end with 217,800 29! C DIAGRAM III B. Reducing 2nd and 3rd . floor areas by a 90 of the first floor. (Could be distributed • anywhere as long as setbacks are maintained) A.Increasing setbacks • @ front and rear above the 1st floor -• C• Utilizing "Open Space" • deck on end and 3rd levels — allowing intrusions into setbacks Source: The Beach Reporter, Aug. 18/ 1988. square feet (5 acres) so that a fixed percentage of lot coverage would be unrealistic at either end of the scale. A 1070 maximum lot coverage at the small lot end• would produce 400 square foot single story homes on 4000 square foot lots while the 217,800 square foot lot could have 21,780 square feet of house. The current regulations for the City of Hermosa Beach allows the largest lot coverage of the cities noted. All residential zones allow for 6570 coverage without respect to lot size. Unlike Mill Valley, where the larger lots can be built to a maximum coverage and have little impact on surrounding properties, the small lots of Hermosa Beach are affected by adjoining lots with the high allowable coverage. In Belmont Shores no lot coverage percentage is provided because the floor area ratio accomplishes the limits desired. Many of the small lots contain around 2500 square feet in Hermosa Beach and a lot coverage of 6570 means that the building footprint can be a maximum of 1625 square feet. That coverage, however, also allows for the same maximum for the second story which then produces a unit of 3250 square feet on the same 2500 square foot lot. A reduction in the lot coverage would implement the stated policy to reduce bulk of buildings and help achieve a Floor Area Ratio. In Table XV the current lot coverage is compared with a reduced coverage equal to 50%. The total square footage of the building could then be equal to the size of the lot when considering a two story building. It should also be noted that the table only shows gross square footage for total building area. The numbers in the table include garages and other accessory uses that are part of the overall footprint on the lot. The table also does not distinguish between single-family and multi -family projects, so the figures that seem high for one dwelling may not be high for a 3 -unit complex. Finally, as has been mentioned, changing the percentage of lot coverage will have an effect on other standards for residential development. Using the figures from the table, the difference in lot coverage on a 7,500 square foot lot is 1,125 square feet at ground level. This increase can become open space under current requirements. Alterations in the design of the building, to meet reduced coverage limits, may also require changes to parking locations and access. The differences become less distinct as the lots get smaller but even at the smallest lot size of 1,250 square feet —31 C there is almost 200 square feet of lot area that would remain open. SIZE OF LOT* (in Sq. Ft.) 1st flr 7,500 4,875 6,800 4,420 6,000 3,900 5,000 3,250 4,000 2,600 3,600 2,340 3,000 1,950 2,700 1,755 2,500 1,625 2,400 1,560 1,500 975 1,250 812.5 TABLE XV LOT COVERAGE 6570/BLDG. SIZE (existing) 2nd flr 9,750 8,840 7,800 6,500 5,200 4,680 3,900 3,510 3,250 3,120 1,950 1,625 5070/BLDG SIZE 3rd flr 1st flr 2nd flr 3rd flr 14,625 3,750 7,500 13,260 3,400 6,800 11,700 3,000 6,000 9,750 2,500 8,000 7,800 2,000 4,000 7,020 1,800 3,600 5,850 1,500 3,000 5,265 1,350 2,700 4,875 1,250 2,500 4,680 1,200 2,400 2,925 750 1,500 2,437.5 625 1,250 11,250 10,200 9,000 7,500 6,000 5,400 4,500 4,050 3,750 3,600 2,250- 1,875 * In a few subdivisions lot sizes are up to 15,000 square feet and would be calculated individually. NOTE: Reduce sizes by 400 sq. ft./unit to include garages. SOURCE: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT The table samples some of the lot sizes in Hermosa Beach. There are areas of 7500 square foot lots and smaller lots of 1250 square feet. The diversity of lot sizes would make a single, reduced lot coverage reduce bulk but could be restrictive for the small lots and for permitted multi -family development. Looking at the table above, and the zoning ordinance, a minimum lot size for a multi -family project of 3 units would be 3960 square feet and each unit could contain a maximum of 1830 square feet of space at 50% lot coverage and three stories in height. A 1500 square foot lot would only allow a 2,250 square foot 3 -story unit in a high density area with a maximum of 750 square feet per floor. A policy being considered is to decrease bulk while maintaining dwelling unit square footage adequate to today's standards. Homes today average over 2000 square feet for single family and for condominiums. The average is somewhat misleading because condominiums tend to have less square footage; 1,300 to 1,500 square feet condo's are not uncommon. Conditions in Mill Valley are similar in that there is a wide variety of lot sizes, and therefore the sliding scale approach to lot coverage may be the preferred method. Adjustments in the scale can help avoid variances for lots that could become unbuildable, or result in dwellings considered obsolete in size. It should be noted that garages are part of the coverage and that amount will reduce the size of the unit unless it is subterranean parking, which does not affect lot coverage. Garages occupy 360-400 square feet (two -car) so that a dwelling of 1500 square feet would actually have 1100 square feet of habitable floor area assuming no other factors as previously noted, i.e. setbacks, open space, F.A.R. etc. have an impact. Height Restrictions Height limits can accomplish two objectives: protect views and prevent "towering". A common complaint from neighborhood residents and especially adjacent homeowners is that views are being eliminated by new construction. In neighborhoods where the profiles of houses are low the introduction a 30 to 35 foot high unit gives adjacent owners the feeling of being towered over or dwarfed. Views are also considered when new construction is proposed in existing neighborhoods. A single story house can have the entire side of a lot become a wall of a building replacing what was a view over the City or toward the ocean. New construction could be designed with respect to views from adjacent houses and the general height size (1 -story, 2 -story) of the neighborhood. Pre -design conferences with local residents could determine the views that should be protected and the impact of a multi -story building before a great deal of time and money is expended by the property owner. In Belmont Shores the approach was to limit building height with maximum allowances and at the same time not require flat roofs. The height of houses can not exceed 24'and 28'. Two measurements are necessary to meet the ordinance definitions. The first number indicates the height of the midpoint of the roof, and the second height indicates height of a building measured to the peak of the roof. In Belmont Shores a building must meet both standards. Santa Monica, also, limits heights of buildings based on the type of roof, flat or pitched. Flat roofs may not exceed 20' in height from the natural grade. Pitched roofs may not exceed 27' in height. Hillside lots must also meet additional requirements. Uphill lots must measure height from the midpoint of the front and rear property lines (theoretical grade). Downhill lots measure the height from the midpoint of the front property line, reduced by a height of eight feet within ten feet of the rear wall of the building. Height limits in Hermosa Beach vary with the classification in zoning. In the R-1, single family zone height limits are 25' and 2 stories. R-2 and R -2B zones, which include duplexes and condominiums, allows 30' and 2 stories. The R-3 zone for multi -family development has the highest with 35' and 3 stories. C C c Compared to the other cities, Hermosa Beach is more restrictive in the single family zone (R-1) but less restrictive in the other zones. In order to address the concerns associated with heights, the provisions of the Precise Development Plan section of the zoning ordinance might be considered to insure compatibility with surrounding properties. The method of two measurements used in Belmont Shores, which results in pitched roofs, still allows 2 -story houses at about the same maximum height as currently used in Hermosa Beach (25' in Hermosa Beach/28' in Belmont Shores). Addition of the measurement at the midpoint of the roof (24' in Belmont Shores) would be the only change. In the multi -family zones in the City, R-2, R -2B, and R-3, the current maximums of 30' and 35' allow flat roofs to those heights. A midpoint measurement of 26' and 31', respectively, would effectively lower height or result in pitched roofs. In addition to improved height limits, other benefits can be expected from the two measurement method. It would eliminate living spaces beyond the 2nd or 3rd story, such as mezzanines or lofts, which are currently being constructed and result in flat roof structures. The bulk of the building, as the roof peaks, will actually be decreased and the perception of bulk will be even less. The design of the unit may require more thought with reduced space but overall design concepts may improve over the current flat walls 3 stories high being constructed in the City. Setbacks Separate from building size, but affecting both size and location, are setbacks. Historically, setbacks had been determined by builders, prior to the establishment of the zoning Ordinance. The result was a variety of setbacks with some complying with existing codes, some not. With a standard setback, however, a new house would be required to maintain the established minimum distance from property lines, even though the rest of the block.may have been built with no required setback. Many of the neighborhoods in the City of Hermosa Beach have setbacks of as little as zero and very common of 2 or 3 feet from the property line as designated on the City zoning map. Current setbacks are as follows: ZONE SETBACK R-1 R-2, R -2B R-3, R -P 10% of lot depth, min. 5', max. 101* 5'* As required on Zoning Map* *Where garages or parking stalls front on a public street the minimum setback shall be 17 feet provided roll -up doors are installed; a minimum of 20 feet shall be required where standard garage doors are installed (Required guest parking may be located in this required setback). Setbacks were recommended to be averaged in the 1989 Torrance study. Both front and rear setbacks would reflect existing neighborhood patterns with a footprint location at the front of the lot to be encouraged. An alternative to the Torrance study and current setback standards may be a combination of the two. A minimum setback with provisions for averaging the standards according to the existing conditions in each neighborhood might be one method to consider. To utilize the average setback in the block where the construction is proposed, similar to the "string line" method, actual setbacks are documented and distances are calculated for each neighborhood with the average setback distance becoming the minimum. The averaging method mentioned for the City of Torrance allows for a range of setback distances. With a minimum of 15' and a maximum required setback of 20' for both front and rear. The building may still be located anywhere within the setbacks, but the range allows for variation. The inclusion of a range of distances is comparable to the historical development in the City of Hermosa Beach. Setbacks vary from neighborhood to neighborhood and a range would reflect existing setback distances in the City. The averaging approach may also be used in the calculations of floor area ratios, maximum heights for neighborhoods, and lot coverage percentages. With the same idea as setback averaging, the average of each standard would be established as a maximum or minimum on the basis of existing construction in each neighborhood. Then if a neighborhood had an average size house of 1200 square feet that would become the square footage maximum for all houses in that neighborhood. If the average height was 14', then that would become the limit, etc. The difficulty with using the averaging approach for each standard is collecting the necessary information that will document the average. Each building would have to be measured for percentage of lot coverage, lot sizes, widths, and depths so that averages could be calculated. A second problem that results is that in some neighborhoods, the standards would be so limiting that inadequate, obsolete size dwellings would result. Parking Off-street parking provisions also relate to neighborhoods and housing. Present standards are suggested for review and updating C c to respond to the increasing number of vehicles per lot. The most obvious shortages are occurring in the multiple unit zoning areas of the City. The combination of narrow lots, designed for one house, and high density zoning add to the pressure for off-street parking. The policies in this revision should focus on proper design and use of all designated parking areas. Other specific objectives to consider are access, location and the minimum spaces needed to serve residential uses. The intent is to provide maximum availability of parking spaces in the community and fulfill a specific policy statement directed at the parking problems in the itY. Hermosa Beach compares very well with other communities in the area for off-street parking standards. Most other cities require the same number of spaces with additional requirements for covered or enclosed spaces (from "Municipal Parking Standards for 115 Selected California Cities", International Parking Design, Inc., Sherman Oaks, CA, June, 1988). Only 9 of the 115 cities included in the study required less than 2 spaces per single-family dwelling. The current residential parking standards are listed below: LAND USE TABLE XVI CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PARKING STANDARDS SPACES REQUIRED Single-family 2 per unit and 1 guest space Duplex 2 per unit and 1 guest space per duplex Multi -family 2 per unit and 1 guest space per 2 units Source: City of Hermosa Beach Zoning Ordinance While the standards provide for minimum parking needs, too often additional spaces are required for extra guests, garages are being used for storage, and/or the minimum number of spaces is less than the number of vehicles in the unit. In fact, national trends suggest that the average household now owns three motor vehicles which would fill the minimum spaces provided with none left for possible guests. Figures from U.D.S. show that the City-wide average is 1.66 vehicles per household and 52.2% of the households own more than two vehicles. The fractional amount of the average must also be rounded up to 2 to account for actual vehicles that need spaces. It is also necessary to analyze the amount of parking spaces or areas used for parking that occur as a practice and not simply as required provisions of an ordinance. A typical neighborhood lot is wider than many of the lots in Hermosa Beach. A typical setback of 20' from the front property line exceeds the sometimes small or non-existant setbacks in Hermosa Beach. A typical house can then provide 6 parking spaces for that lot: 2 required that may be enclosed; 2 in the driveway/setback; and two on the street, even though only the two required are counted. The City of Hermosa Beach, however, is not typical. Narrow lots might provide one on -street parking space and the narrowness allows no parking in the driveway/setback, where there is a setback. Actual parking use in the City is probably one-half the amount found in a typical single-family city neighborhood. In order to provide parking for actual use, the increases would have to be accomplished through off-street parking. While this would alleviate the parking situation, the area left for building would be reduced by the same amount. An alternative method would be to require setbacks of sufficient size to allow them to be used for parking. The current 17' setback requirements in the City, when the garage fronts on the street, allows for parking, which provides two additional spaces. The requirements also allow for reduction in ground floor open space so'that building size for the first floor remains functional. Parking spaces have traditionally been required according to the land use proposed on the property. In the present, with the greatest impact on residential areas, some jurisdictions have considered linking the number of bedrooms with the number of spaces to be provided. Formulas by bedroom more accurately reflect potential vehicle demands. In fact, the parking study shows that many jurisdictions adjust their requirements when multi -family complexes include units with different numbers of bedrooms. Covina and Beverly Hills require 3 spaces per 3 bedroom unit and only two for single-family residences. This approach reflects the reality noted above that typical single-family neighborhoods actually have more parking than required spaces. An interesting note is that commercial uses do utilize the bedrooms -to -parking method and may provide some measure for future residential standards. Hotels and motels in the parking study are required to provide spaces based on the number of units that are in the complex, which generally means bedrooms, and would suggest that a residential standard might be comparably based. Also in Hermosa Beach with its large rental population of single adults living together and each owning a vehicle, it appears appropriate. Open Space Open space is a major topic relating to standards. Private open space has been determined to be necessary for each family and home in Hermosa Beach because of the existing density and complete urbanization of the City. c Continuing growth in population has only increased that density and placed an ever-growing burden on public open space. Private open space, for both passive and active recreation will not eliminate the additional need for public open spaces. However, private open space can be complementary in providing supplemental amounts of land for recreational activity, particularly passive recreation. Present codes and ordinances do require open space for private use with each housing unit. Single-family homes must have a minimum of 400 square feet of open space on a site at least 10' in width. Multiple dwellings must have at least 200 square feet of open space per unit with a minimum of 7' in width. The standards in the Belmont Shores community are the same for square footage per unit. The concerns are that open spaces may be under-utilized, of inadequate size, of improper design or location making them unusable. Two previously mentioned methods may help accomplish the objective of increasing open space. Floor area ratio and maximum lot coverage, while limiting the bulk and footprint of a building can also increase or decrease open space on building lots. The lower the FAR or percentage of lot coverage the greater the amount of open space available. In a study by the City of Manhattan Beach it was noted that this is the way to increase usable open space and to control bulk, too. Landscaping Included in this housing element review is the consideration of landscaping in multi -family construction where the occupants have limited responsibility for the care and maintenance of the landscaping on site. The objective is to insure long-term care of the landscaping and conservation by reducing water needs. With the current trend toward condominium construction, the extended care and maintenance of landscaping is guaranteed through the CC & R's. The CC & R's could include a process allowing the City to arrange for landscape repair and maintenance with the costs to recovered from the property owner. The use of low to moderate water demand plants in landscaping would help in water conservation efforts. A suggested list of plants and their water consumption levels would give the public the information describing the overall advantages to using native and low water demand plants. The City of Santa Monica has instituted a comprehensive program that includes use of proper plant materials in designs for private property and public property. Specific plant types are suggested for their low water demand and overall design characteristics. Examples of plants used by the City are shown with drawings of the gardens where they are located in a brochure prepared by the City of Santa Monica. The City requirements, in ordinance, are the submittal of a landscape plan and annual maintenance program. For the City of Hermosa Beach, that system seems to address both the objectives of water conservation and guaranteed maintenance. Individual portions of a program may vary but using the Santa Monica ordinance as a model might be useful to the City. Overview It becomes apparent that the issues discussed begin to weave together so that any proposed changes will require analysis of the total impact. Reduction of lot coverage can increase open space but size of the building may be adversely affected, parking may be altered and bulk of buildings may be shifted and block view corridors. It is also clear that most of the statistics used to illustrate each issue could not be directly applied to the City of Hermosa Beach. In almost every case modifications would be necessary to "fine tune" standards to the local environment. C C TREES f ll.11[Inlllf .Vnc'rr, Beehwod 62c)czzeit c7104z# Pecudz 694, Saida, (-694-zzza, SIZE COLOR SUN' 20' Woody, F conelike fruit Ll/runpr+-nam lrna•rr;anro, 30' Australian Tea Tree bark -grey, white flower F Mutts tb,fldx'riurua 20'-30' Japanese Black Fine dark green needles F/P Quc'n'ns dery Holly Oak 40'-70' dull green & F silver leaves SHRUBS• • { nprurthrtc roximris Uly-of-the-Nile 18" stalks blue -white F/P flowers (.irllrsrrnron curium Lemon Bomebrush 15' red flower; green leaves F (.isms ln•bnrhis 2'-5' White Pockrose white flowers; F gray -green leaves Ksiallanur 'frades' 6' rose flowers: F/P dark green leaves GROUNDCOVERS .tnra mpin•ht. 18" tall Manzanita 6' spread white flowers; F/P dark green leaves (.i'amubos Joyce Coulter 4'-5' 15' spread blue flowers: green leaves F/P G(L(una 6"-S tall 3" daisies orange, yellow F daisies: green foliage Nandrna danusiic'a 1' tall Heavenly Bamboo red -fall: purple/green summer F/P Rosemannus odici„u/ls 21/2' tall Rosemary blue flowers: green foliage F _ 'SUN: F -Full; P -Partial SIZE COLOR VINES Bouga tilla big mound purplish -red huge vine flowers SUN' F OBITS& rrulrcanc Trumpet Creeper thick orange -red flowers F Hib/x'nrtt Scantkmc dense yellow flowers: P/F Guinea Gold Vine cover dark green leaves Pasv,J/ora crundc-a 3" leaves white. pink & P Passion Vine & flowers lavender flowers: med. green leaves FLOWERING PLANTS AL/i:Ira tomentosa Wooly Yarrow 6"-10" golden flowers: F/P stems green leaves ,atrtotaa /n•blir[. 8" tall white. red, orange F African Daisy 3' spread yellow• purple flowers awn -amines c'/k'hi 1-3' tall yellow, red, pink. F Wallflower orange flowers (.6..'mr6 hipim/arm Dazzler rose, red, pink F/P flowers (A'r(r/mm, ,m. -(Jinn Crane's Bill billowy rose -purple carpet of flowers flowers F/P EDIBLE CROPS Fc'i rr'i ulorriruru Pineapple Guava 18'-25' reddish -green F/P high fruit tree .Ilabonra pinnate, 2'-5 high yellow.flowers: California Grape Holly green leaves F/P I itis 17111071 Grape fast growthgreen leaves F vine. 4"-8" leaves These are just a very few of the hundreds of attractive, water thrifty plants that can help create a beautiful and useful landscape, a Xeriscape, for homes in the Santa Monica area. • r• As an example of what impact could occur based on existing standards and a set of hypothetical standards, the following sample has been provided. TABLE XVIII IMPACT OF REVISED STANDARDS SAMPLE LOT SIZE: 3,500 square feet ZONING: R-2 Standard Existing Sample Lot coverage 65% 50% Floor area ratio NA .60/unit Open space 400 sq.ft. 400 sq.ft. Height 30' 25'/29'peak Increased setbacks and parking were not included in the sample equation since most setbacks are suggested to be neighborhood oriented and parking was assumed to be subterranean. The above sample is only to show a relationship between various standards. Floor area ratio had no impact in this particular case. The building that could be built to the maximum limits described would be 3,500 square feet (1,750 per unit), two stories high with a pitched roof, no lofts or bonus rooms and approximately the same amount of open space. The change in the building size amounts to around a 37% reduction in floor area from the currently allowed 4,550 square feet and 1,000 square feet for lofts or mezzanines. The numbers and selection of factors were used only to provide an illustration in the example. At the time of program action, studies need to present fuller backgrounds on each factor, their interrelationships and suggestions for implementation. Design Review In many cities the minimum standards for development are accompanied by a process that evaluates how well the construction will fit into the surrounding environment. The process, or design review, is tailored to local conditions where standards may not fulfill completely the objectives of the community. As an example, the ordinance from the City of Rolling Hills Estates is compared with the Precise Development Plan that is used in Hermosa Beach. 41 C C Design review can ensure that all the necessary components of a project properly relate to each other. Review would offer suggestions for improvement and consider adjacent lots and the impact of the proposed design. Design incentives can be offered as ways to lessen the impacts of the development. Design incentives encourage variety in the appearance of buildings relating to bulk. The intent is to eliminate long, flat wall expanses and the feeling of being out of place in the neighborhood. Incentives can include reduced setbacks, allowances for decks and balconies in required side yards and use of open space. The City of Rolling Hills Estates outlines in their ordinance the requirements for approval of all new construction in general terms that take into consideration changing conditions from area to area in the City. The specific objectives of the ordinance are: 1) Natural amenities 2) Character 3) Scale 4) Style 5) Privacy 6) Landscaping 7) Views These objectives are to be met through proper design by the architect and subsequent approval for construction by the City. While minimum standards of the zoning ordinance must still be met exact numbers are not prescribed in the design review section which allows for maximum design flexibility. The Precise Development Plan section of the Zoning Ordinance in Hermosa Beach serves the same purpose of trying to improve development and protect surrounding property. The major difference is that the City of Rolling Hills Estates included single family home construction, remodeling projects and any additions. Hermosa Beach specifically excludes single family and remodeling of less than 1,500 square feet. Design review may also extend to historic preservation in both residential and commercial buildings. Improvements and repairs to identified structures of historical significance undergo careful study by a review board, prior to the issuance of permits. This topic will be discussed in depth in the Land use Element and include residential and commercial applications. A Design Review Board should be composed of objective outside professionals (not lay citizens) which can constructively examine proposed development in order to make it more harmonious with the neighboring properties, and/or to enhance its architectural beauty. Since the City, unlike some other cities, does not have one form of architecture the Review Board should not attempt to impose one architectural theme, but instead should allow complete variety of architecture. C c Honorable Chairman and Members of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission SUBJECT: BALLOT MEASURES INITIATED BY CITY COUNCIL Purpose May 13, 1991 Regular Meeting of June 4, 1991 To examine lowering allowable height in the C-2, C-3, R-2, R -2B, R-3, and R -P zones, and to examine proposed advisory ballot measures regarding housing standards. Recommendation 1. Recommend to the City Council to amend the zoning ordinance to lower height as noted in the attached resolution. 2. Determine whether height limitation should be placed on the ballot, and whether the commercial Specific Plan Areas (SPA's) along Pacific Coast Highway should be included. 3. Determine whether advisory measures should be placed on the ballot. 4. If mandated measures are recommended to be placed on the ballot, then, a "Grandfather" clause should be added or a moratorium with an exemption should be adopted for current projects. Background In 1987, the public approved a ballot measure limiting the height in the C-2 and C-3 zones to 35 feet and 45 feet respectively. At the February 26, 1991 meeting, the City Council motioned to table the selection of Housing Improvement Program (HIP) task force members until after the November election when some, yet to be decided, land use measures would be placed on the ballot. At the March 26, 1991 meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare precise wording regarding four mandatory ballot measures, and two advisory measures. At the April 23, 1991 meeting, the City Council requested a staff report on the proposed ballot measures, and to hold a public hearing. Analysis Reduced Height in the R-2, R -2B, R-3 and R -P Zones The height of structures is a significant factor in the overall bulk of buildings. Height can cause a dwarfing effect to adjacent dwellings and canyonize the space between structures resulting in little, or no sun light air, and/or ventilation to adjacent structures.. It also limits growth of any possible landscaping. The unique low profile character of Hermosa Beach and the quality of life can be affected by excessive height. Architecturally, height can provide for pitched roofs which are generally considered aesthetically pleasing, but in the recent past, the allowable height has only resulted in lofts (maximizing floor area) and/or roof -top decks. Some cities have resorted to restricting height of flat roofs and allowing a higher height for pitched roofs. The cumulative effect of tall structures could ultimately take its toll on a neighborhood economically. A few tall structures may not have an impact, but once an entire area is built to excessive heights, it can have a negative effect, particularly where structures are too large for the site, and setbacks are minimal. In regard to views, raising or lowering the height can have either be beneficial, or detrimental. A structure on the view side of another structure with a lower height could have a beneficial impact and vice versa. Height Survey Staff has examined the height of existing structures. Since it has only been generally in the last seven years that developments have been constructed to the maximum allowable height of 35' in the R-3 zone, and 30' in the R-2 and R -2B zones, a block by block "windshield" survey was performed to determine what benefit, or detriment would occur by lowering the height in various neighborhoods throughout the City. The result were as follows: 1. 210 developments have been constructed to the maximum height (approximately) or 4% of all residential developments in the City. 2. The majority of these maximum height developments occur in the southwest quadrant of the City bordered on the east by Pacific Coast Highway, and on the north by Pier Avenue. Approximately 148 developments (11.97) in this area are built to the maximum height. 3. Approximately 5070 of the "maximum height" developments were built to the east, or east side of the street and generally did not have a maximum height development built to the west, or in other words to their view side. In these cases, lowering the height of future development would benefit since it would more or less guarantee that view blockage would not occur to these existing developments when new developments were constructed to the west, the view side.. 4. The other half which are to the west of future developments would probably cause view blockage to new developments if new developments were required to be built to the proposed lower height, but, of course, if the grade did not rise, then, for example a 35' building at the same grade across from another 35' building would not have a view either. 5. In the northwest, northeast and southeast only a few blocks were found to have one or two developments built to the current maximum height; of these, the number of existing, or future developments that appear to benefit, or be hindered by the lower height were minimal particularly on the streets running east/west. 6. Overall, only a small portion of new developments would be impacted by lowering the height. There are some tall structure which were built prior to the last 7 years as the "windshield" survey indicated. All the developments built to the current maximum height would become nonconforming; however, the current City Ordinance allows expansion and remodeling of nonconforming structures. Reduced Height In C Zones The reduced height in the C-3 zone from 45 feet to 35 feet could significantly reduce the intensity of development within the zone since the difference of 10' could reduce the number of floors from 5 to 4 or 4 to 3 in many instances. However, with special construction techniques 4 stories could still be built, but over three story construction requires other than wood framing which becomes generally much more costly and therefore would not be proposed in most cases. Consequently the impact to intensity is not certain. If intensity is reduced by limiting floors, the impact of more intense development will be minimized. The height reduction, however, would reduce the appearance of bulk since as noted it is an important factor contributing to bulk. Potential view blockage may be reduced with the lower height, but it is difficult to determine because of the small difference of 5 feet and the location of commercially zoned property in relation to residentially zoned property. Little change would occur in regard to intensity of development in the C-2 zone since thirty feet is still adequate to build a three story building in most cases. In both the C-2 and C-3 zone, there will be limitations architecturally since a lower height will limit design features; and more flat roofs will occur. In regard to existing nonconforming development as a result of height reduction, any existing commercial structure would not be allowed to expand. Currently, there are several structures in both the C-3 zone, and C-2 zone which would be affected. The new Hermosa Hotel and the office on the northwest corner of Pacific Coast Highway and Gould Avenue are above 35 feet. In the C-2 zone, the Citicorp Bank, Bijou Theater and hotel above the End Zone appear to exceed 30 feet. These structures, however, have little, or no room at this time to expand. Also, the Pavilion, Hope Chapel, and office buildings at the corner of Pacific Coast Highway and 21st Street are above 35 feet, but these structures are in the Specific Plan Area 8 (SPA 8) zone, and are already nonconforming. Other Cities Maximum heights in adjacent beach cities are as follows: C-2 C-3 R-2 R-3 Redondo Beach 30 30 30 30 Manhattan Beach 26 & 30* 26 & 30* 26 & 30* 26 & 30* *Depending on district These cities heights differ with Hermosa Beach somewhat, and also differ in method of measurement. The "averaging" method is used which results in a higher height at the lower grade, and a lower height at the higher grade. Whereas, this City's method results in the same height at all grades of a given lot since structures are not allowed to be higher at any point on the property over the maximum. The averaging method, which was used in Hermosa Beach until 1972, demonstrably reduces view blockage. Commercial Survey The following is a survey of commercial property within the City: Zoning Code Square Feet Acreage Percentage C-1 127,080 2.92 3.670 C-2 801,756 18.41 22.8% C-3 1,292,136 29.66 36.870 SPA -7 699,188 16.05 19.9% SPA -8 591,843 13.59 16.970 From the survey, approximately 59.6% of the commercial property will be affected by the ballot measures. An additional 36.8% will be affected if the City includes the commercial SPA's along Pacific Coast Highway. The SPA's already restrict the, height to 35 feet, except in limited areas where view blockage would not occur, and when there is review and approval by the Planning Commission; a maximum of 40 feet could be allowed unless the SPA's are included in the ballot measure. The commercial SPA's 7 and 8 were carefully examined for height, and only in the southwest area between south City boundary and 8th Street and the northwest between Pier Ave. and 24th Street was the height of 40' allowed, which was based on 40 feet not causing view blockage. Advisory Measures The Planning Staff would agree with the wording noted in the City Manager's report of April 23, 1991 if the measures are to be placed on the .ballot (see attached). As to whether these ballot measures are necessary, the Planning Staff has no comment, but would agree that all housing standards do need review in light of the types of developments constructed 47 - in the last 7 years which have generally been built to all the maximum. Projects in Progress/Moratorium If the mandated ballot measures are placed on the ballot, and the measures pass, the measures are effective immediately. In the past when text amendments have been adopted, a "Grandfather" clause has been added for those projects that have already been approved, but may be at the stage of Building Department plan check. Time should be given to allow these projects to obtain Building Permits and start construction. However, once the public is aware a change may be made, it becomes a stimulus to submit plans for approval. Therefore, a moratorium with a "Grandfather" clause for the near future may be prudent, particularly, since the election is not until November. Overview Lowering height is possible without adversely affecting many existing and/or new developments, but there will definitely be individual situations which cannot be ascertained at this time that will impact someone's view. This possible view blockage probably could not be remedied with a variance since strict criteria for granting a variance could not be met. However, the City at this time has no view ordinance, and many times views are blocked under the current height ordinances. In regard to placing this matter on the ballot, it is a matter of City Council choice as elected representatives of the public, and the Planning Commission functions as an advisory body to the City Council. The advantages and disadvantages are one in the same, i.e., it makes it more difficult for future City Council's to change, and if no "exception" rule is allowed, everyone must abide making it rigid, and on the other hand eliminating potential abuse of the "exception" rule. CONCUR: Not available for signature William Grove Building Director Kevin B'. Northcr City Manager ,e.spec fully spbmitzed, Michael Schubach Planning Director p/ccsrsm April 25, 1990 Honorable Chairman and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission May 1, 1990 SUBJECT: TEXT AMENDMENT 88-9 -- HEIGHT MEASUREMENT METHOD AND VIEW BLOCKAGE REFERRED BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION BY CITY COUNCIL PURPOSE: TO CONSIDER REDEFINING THE METHOD OF MEASURING MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN THE R-1 AND R -2B ZONES TO ADDRESS PROBLEMS OF VIEW BLOCKAGE WHERE THESE TWO ZONES ABUT Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the existing height measurement method and existing maximum heights be maintained. Alternatives 1. Use the averaging method of measuring maximum height in the R-1 and the R -2B zones as suggested by the City Council. 2. Reduce the maximum height allowed in the R -2B zone. 3. Increase the maximum height in the R-1 zone, or only in R-1 zones which abut R -2B and R-2 zones. 4. Reconsider applying the averaging method of measuring height citywide. Background The Planning Commission was directed to study view blockage and methods of height measurement to resolve the view blockage issues described in a height moratorium adopted by City Council on July 26, 1988. After special study and several public hearings beginning in August of 1988, the Planning Commission at their meeting of October 17, 1989, recommended that no changes be made to the current height measurement method, and recommended amendments only to Section 1201, Height of Roof Structures. At their meeting of February 27, 1990 the City Council concurred with the Planning Commission by not changing the height measurement, and they also amended Section 1201, Height of Roof Structures, and Section 1200, Height of Buildings on Through lots. In addition the City Council referred the issue of height measurement and view blockage back to the Planning Commission to -4 - consider using the averaging method for only the R-1 and R -2B zones. HEIGHT MORATORIUM On July 26, 1988, the City Council adopted a moratorium to limit the height to 25 -feet for structures in the R-2 zones located adjacent to and west of R-1 zones. This originally came about because of concern about view obstruction from property owners east of Myrtle Avenue who had been downzoned from R-2 to R-1 while west of Myrtle remained R-2. The R-2 areas along the east side of Hermosa Avenue were also included in this moratorium because of concern about R-1 properties immediately to the east. The City Council eventually rezoned the R-2 area west of Myrtle Avenue from R-2 to R-1 on January 10, 1989. On June 27, 1989, the City Council extended the moratorium for an additional year, and included R -2B areas located east of Pacific Coast Highway in the moratorium. The moratorium will expire on June 27, 1990. Analysis The view blockage problem for borderline areas located adjacent to higher density zones is not only limited to the areas defined in the moratorium, especially when northerly and southerly views are considered. This problem arises because of the 5 -foot differential between height limits between the different zones. Staff does not believe an urgency exists to address only the areas previously identified in the moratorium, since the situation exists in several other locations in the city. Staff has previously attempted to address this problem by proposing the averaging method city wide. It was felt that this was the only approach, using existing maximum height requirements, to retain views in an equitable manner for the maximum number of properties in the city. Staff believes that imposing a different height measurement method based on zoning classifications, although it may alleviate some view blockage problems, has too many negative side effects to be seriously considered. For example, as noted by the Building Director, different height measurement methods would complicate the zoning ordinance, placing a burden on staff, developers, and homeowners (refer to attached memo). In addition, it could create undesirable and awkward situations where zones with differing methods abut. As another alternative, changing the height limits to eliminate or reduce the differences between zones could possibly be considered. The height limits in Redondo Beach and Manhattan Beach, summarized as follows, show that the differential between zones is not usually as severe as that in Hermosa Beach. -co Manhattan Beach Redondo Beach Hermosa Beach LD zones MD zones HD zones 26' 26' & 30' 30' (depending on district) 30' 30' 38' 25' 30' 35' Therefore, an alternative would be to reduce the limit in the R -2B zone to 25 feet for consistency with the R-1 zone, or perhaps to a compromise figure of 27.5 feet. Another option would be to increase the height limit in the neighboring R-1 zones. Staff, however, does not believe it would be appropriate to change height limits at this time. The existing height limits, in most cases, have established a character consistent with the corresponding zone, and resulted in a certain character for neighborhoods and districts. Therefore a lower height limit would give an unfair advantage to those who built to• higher limits to the detriment of those planning to build, or a higher limit would impact the views of existing buildings constructed in conformance with existing height limits. Building heights in each land use or zoning category could be studied as part of the Housing Element. Then the possibility of relating height limits to neighborhoods or districts rather than to particular zoning classifications could be explored. Also, the establishment of one height limit for all residential zones could be explored. Please note that no resolution was included with this study. A resolution will be prepared in response to the Planning Commission's action for the next meeting. A K, -- Ken Robertson 6 Associate Planner CONCUR: At.*) // Michael Schubach Planning Director Attachments: 1. Memo from Building Director, William Grove 2. City Council Minutes 2/27/90 3. Planning Commission Minutes 4. Interim Ordinance 89-995 5. Ordinance 90-1024 t/pcsrheig ALTERNATIVE D: Suggested Lower Height Areas ONEFAMILY RESIDENTIAL,: - TWO PAMILT RRSIDENTIAL L eGE N D: Prepared by the Planning Department 1 7.'22 r -A • •. , , ,•, 22, tl 1.0 „ - .-20 - LIMITED MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDE TIALI .1! LICHT MANUFACTURING t -S -.MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL' RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL; RESIDCNTIAL,PROFESSIONAL.' GENEPAL COMMERCIAL , DI - OPEN SPACE :-1 - MEICKSORBOOD COMMERCIAL; / .// 4•• I . ••• •• •-• •-• • ' ile I - LI I • r .. :L•-•1 :Mb. -.SPECIFIC. PLAN AREA .OR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT RESIDENTIAL! IMCLASS - UNCLASSIFIED. 0 POTENTIAL 11 . R ... CC IN PEETID.,107.0.1!:NATA: A, NN../ " ." ;,. !i - • - , r.. • , . 1 1. lit t \U ULU • ..... AMENDED 1 \\ - [IP IA ! *1 • . ********....**r.**.**: ••• ... i• • • .1 •. •. t • • rm.- • • .• LEL_ 7 • I T.0 • ---• • , fl , • I • 0 • AT p.S.,•••-• • TO: CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Michael Schubach, P161n4 /, ctor SUBJECT: Housing Element "Lot Coverage" Chart DATE: April 27, 1992 In conjunction with the height study, staff provided additional information from the Housing Standards section of the General Plan Housing Element, since it was believed to be relevant; the interrelationship between standards, and their overall impact to development is significant. Some criticism was received from the public concerning Table XV found within the above noted material. It was stated the chart was misleading, and not accurate. Planning Commission did ask staff to investigate. Staff has investigated this matter, and finds that the chart was taken out of context. This chart as it is explained in the text is merely a comparison chart to show the difference between 65% and 50% lot coverage. It is not intended to show actual floor area with all impacting factors included. The following statements regarding this chart are found within the text: "A reduction in the lot coverage would implement the stated policy to reduce bulk of buildings and help achieve a Floor Area Ratio. In Table XV the current lot coverage is compared with a reduced coverage equal to 50%. The total square footage of the building could then be equal to the size of the lot when considering a two story building. It should also be noted that the table only shows gross square footage for total building area. The numbers in the table include garages and other accessory uses that are part of the overall footprint on the lot. The table also does not distinguish between single-family and multi -family projects, so the figures that seem high for one dwelling may not be high for a 3 -unit complex. Finally, as has been mentioned, changing the percentage of lot coverage will have an effect on other standards for residential development. It should be noted that garages are part of the coverage and that amount will reduce the size of the unit unless it is subterranean parking, which does not affect lot coverage. Garages occupy 360-400 square feet (two -car) so that a dwelling of 1500 square feet would actually have 1100 square feet of habitable floor area assuming no other factors as previously noted, i.e., setbacks, open space, F.A.R. etc. have an impact." Throughout the text, there are general statements making it clear that all the standards need to be comprehensively examined. This factor was the impetus for the now defunct "HIP" - Housing Improvement Program (Staff does intend to continue to view standards comprehensively, as each standard is studied). An "Overview" subsection states the following: "Overview It becomes apparent that the issues discussed begin to weave together so that any proposed changes will require analysis of the total impact. Reduction of lot coverage can increase open space but size of the building may be adversely affected, parking may be altered and bulk of buildings may be shifted and block view corridors. It is also clear that most of the statistics used to illustrate each issue could not be directly applied to the City of Hermosa Beach. In almost every case modifications would be necessary to "fine tune" standards to the local environment." Although as noted, this chart was only for comparison purposes, staff did examine some actual current projects, and found that the chart is not unrealistic. The difference between actual floor area and staff's hypothetical floor area ranged from 11.8% to 29.8%, and most of the variation could be explained as a result of projects not having maximum lot coverage, except for the project with the highest difference; reasons for the difference could be topography, design, or other unique features of this development or lot (refer to the attached Exhibit A for details). In addition, staff has provided some computer schematics which were used in staff's assessment of standards. It should be noted that several public hearings were held on the Housing Element, and no concern was voiced at the time, that this chart was misleading, or inaccurate. p/memo6 - 2 - EahlFat a ADDRESS ZONE LOT SIZE ACTUAL GROSS FLOOR AREA LOT COVERAGE F.A.R. HYPOTHETICAL FLOOR AREA wo DIFFERENCE 619 10TH ST R-2 4115 6790 63% 1.46 8024 15.4% 36 15TH ST R-3 3692 5053 65% 1.15 7199 29.8% 930 15TH ST R -2B 5670 6222 56% 0.96 7371 15.5% 1901 PCH R-3 4725 7225 64% 1.28 9214 21.6% 628 MONTEREY R-3 2996 5140 64% 1.45 5842 12.0% 143 MANHATTAN R-3 2900 4986 65% 1.44 5655 11.8% 612 10TH ST R-2 4108 5850 60% 1.23 8011 26.9% CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL LAYOUT 40' 65% LOT COVERAGE 5' REAR SETBACK GROUND: 5' ** 2ND FLOOR: 3' LOT LINE 5' SIDE YARD SETBACK 10% OF LOT WIDTH MINIMUM: 3' MAXIMUM: 5' 10' FRONT SETBACK 10% OF LOT DEPTH MINIMUM: 5' MAXIMUM: 10' LOT SIZE = 4000 SQ. FT. STRUCTURE (30' X 85') - 2550' (63.7%) SETBACKS: Control the location of the building on the lot. LOT COVERAGE: Controls the size of the building footprint. Lot coverage determines the amount of open space on City of Hermosa Beach R-1 Maximum Building Potential (30x70)LotSize 3' Side Setback V Second Floor Setback Alley access (9' Ground Setback) Open space (7x30) Alley 91 Sq. Ft. Deck IV Front Setback 70 LOT COVERAGE: 62% HEIGHT:25' SETBACKS: FRONT: 10' SIDE: 3' REAR: 9' GROUND, V SECOND FLOOR OPEN SPACE: 300 SQ. FT., 91 SQ. FT. IN DECKS SQUARE FOOTAGE: 2074 SQ. FT. FAR: 0.99 City of Hermosa Beach R-1 Maximum Building Potential (50 x 100) Lot Size OPEN SPACE (10'x50') LOT COVERAGE: 64 7g HEIGHT: 25' SETBACKS: FRONT: 10' (Garage 17' Setback ) SIDE: 5' REAR: 10' OPEN SPACE: 500 Sq. Ft. at Grade SQUARE FOOTAGE: 5860 Sq. Ft. FAR: 1.17 of Hermosa Beach I..: u. O u7 0 g N ,.,w II M N & av-,.y 1 Ntd O41t+7 . , .-�0 NQin 0yR LLo W=0cvl 1 . 1 1 1 . *' CO d. ii Ng a� Ne O ' II �Of (� U 0NI coo0WW II try CZ CIV00>° W I-~ II n ~' II W - < 0 ♦- N I— LU c* • II ��U7�Q NII• W II�7v'W 111 W W < WN88F— N r4Cu. 0H II II 4C U6 . cc OI—OOa"Ctl7cc CL CC �Oa4CRl7CC CL CC 0Dcc )Iu-E—WZ< U.oc—WZ•4� -0 1.- _ NQW� �ILtf1�W���� W O -1_,- 00 cZ o FOI-2 - 0 0 in N 1 • 11XXX!lXMA45YNIYYVm a YMffelXh vumeemNVMY !• •NfA•J{(� o^/ . ....!!.!!.Ylt:::l:l.:4:::a:•r ll.'.tSf.•.::.SL'!'J.111 :7f1.'tt::1:l1yjjj,lSS• 4 . 4'4'4 • 1 `. %ANW NAMfgilgiVNN .•••••• •MV %WMW,.W,m rnrnN!tATe: rnrnimd 4 4 4 <�::: .............:.❖.S�:S:f:: :......................... City of Hermosa Beach R--1 Maximum Building Potential (25 x 100) Lot Size LOT COVERAGE: 56% HEIGHT:25' SETBACKS: FRONT: 10'(Garage 17' Setback ) SIDE: 3' REAR: 16' OPEN SPACE: 400 Sq. Ft. at Grade SQUARE FOOTAGE: 2379 Sq. Ft. FAR: 0.95 City of Hermosa Beach R-2 / R -2B Maximum Building Potential (40 X 120) Lot Size AAAAAA 120 LOT COVERAGE: 65% HEIGHT: 30' SETBACKS: FRONT: 10' SIDE: 4' REAR: 12'\ OPEN SPACE: -20t Sq. Ft. Per Unit SQUARE FOOTAGE: 3681 Sq. Ft. Per Unit FAR: 1.53 City of Hermosa Beach R--1 Building Potential Scenario -- 7' REQUIRED FRONT :.ETBACK -- 8.3' X 24' OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT _1--3 SIDE YARD SETBACK: 5.7 X 24 LIVABLE SPACE 616.8 70' t/ 10' I ALLEY 'J' OUE 5T SPACE -ffir-vr -yr AAA A A.. 113;3.8 co LIVABLE )PACE 7 x 14.3 DECK ( 100111 ) :.ET!3.CK 10' ALLEY I A A • \n+AnAAAA� A \ AAAAA \ \^AnA A j \ ),...: \ '" - GU E / SP; i 2 CAR (ARA' —. 100 [1.i DE( k 2004! r\T °FADE OPEN SPACE PEQUIREr1Eld1 — 7. PEQLIIRED FROM :.ETF>A.CK UNIT [DIAL 5O. FT =1805E l LOT CO''ERI\13E IISA3!_E oPEN3PACE=3O0 tf FIEIGHT=25' KS. FRONT=- 7' REQUIRED PEAR =9 (WAND, V ' SECOND FLOOR Al A A AA City of Hermosa Beach R-3 Maximum Building Potential (40 x 100) Lot Size Guest Parking (2) 300 SQ. FT. DECK Property Line Tandem Parking (6) LOT COVERAGE: 64% HEIGHT: 35' SETBACKS: FRONT: 10' SIDE: 4' REAR: 10' OPEN SPACE: 300 Each, 900 Total SQUARE FOOTAGE: 2274 Per Unit, 6821 Total FAR: 1.7 City of Hermosa Beach R-3 Maximum Building Potential ( 30 x 100) Lot Size AAAA AAAAA AAA A A AAA 100 LOT COVERAGE: 64% HEIGHT: 35' SETBACKS: FRONT: 10' SIDE: 3' REAR: 10' OPEN SPACE: 300 Sq. Ft. Per Unit OA X 12' ' J P -c SQUARE FOOTAGE: S48 Per Unit 5113 Total 510 FAR: 1.71- (( l �'° El(c..\Uc\\ Ylc , 90(c.tl e 59--4 "1 ITY OF HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL NAME Dsc - / t/ ,37/6 W N (N 6r c/ _127/ C e// /74-74Ce/L- ADDRESS � ///C Sm7r/9/10 ITEM NUMBER l'D DATE ,, // 02 ` /7%-2 ITEM TITLE • - COMMENTS L!% ,&c/G- J U =rx peye/e7y/ ,r,,/vw/ ,v - 77,474 //Re 4l/11-5 3J7 T x)E /7o' 4G✓i9/t/f 7 a 73 7`,.9-T /7>y/ ./ , STheSle/f/ ✓a q,3r054C- M %v �mo1i¢i o K Axl .vdf ✓ o oma 7-A4 74- i7 (X/4 v4 ,5 �y �o r0,4 is acv ry .5 ,a4 /0/ea eery Please complete this form and submit to the City Clerk if you Thanks to . wish your comments recorded. 147 /Ai/9 2_ To /4V2t ,& ArriviVic Bee.olt /ff-"/)//2 793- ,1 d4Z- "er/,e /sea -e G& -EP -e .s/e //t_e //i -le .fi( 7)t a ‘17/-4& &4? 11,,7v 74 f,tt 6e/va__, zfi4-epez /7L6zr-tfrze /4 a 1,9-6e6 /1.€d.e /Ce7v4; ,mil xaeee'/IvA- /2z9/' 2_ y 7 1 1992 tke /'e ,Gad, /At ��ti�es,,„�aaec- s�r�C.�� 4f/ -r,, /22 -e-e- 1,4‘L -/r/fizt4-e' iiii 'i ���C �rtdmei ,reGn.e- 2 1 1992 2_,42F-4ircZ o, /-=-c--.)/22//9-"v / 7 -"t -S e_e-44v/4/6.)- / TY ,z-z_<_/f2Aies/9 E/C 45 1-7/.---2c,--,174-7 _ 70 /-790 A.L. e_i97-vA//#1/C/ - N•97Lib. /5 2-zy_c„E: • orzi / /2_ / 7-/_"/G- _ _ / 15" / _0 f--= -- r S j_ 3 2 _ Cc--)--t-fz-EIVT>') 0 udry j.k) •/--/_,F__.7z/i-pos /9 _ /42-D /c, -/-t _ c&s- ,1)---/e.,11-6.0 4 --7-Z e 74 j e 7—c) 35 ,9-i/z7 ,UPPLEMENIttex'-oe5-' 7/ - /21c3 /C'--fft-67c; 14- /7' INFORMATIONI/s- /97- -7--/-/-.= , Ajc, 1 C-7- C-2 7774,9 7- "r_ /c -,‘,4620,z2'60 6' (597j 417A AJ 7Z.) t Af /7E: /&///-7z,915 7‘7- ez=._ _Sb2A-kz: / Ls 7/_5:-,-17- 7772S= c _ e'cl/ e-2) 7T cw/ e, -z2 ,"?) / V'9 -'Z_ Aer" ) /7/ c4) a_€4/5 7-)./ Z77. LSC) _27 c Jec) ZI_2T 7 -7 -ti* - - •671/ .f.v? i9A1-1> 74ra/ c c7vvj 2a L_S-772c)VG-y Lszs-/-0 _ ;7-25 / l-zs2stzpso, `L c. ��...�as,c�� �G.— advs.: fSS /G.cS -.5116Jac� 2 �:.�_Qfa-16- 413-1GaC4-7— S FF -re) VC ill 1992 M Y APPO-0 v At— a F 7W—L_ Re v Cr/of c.J Civ0¢,25_,01_ +mac)/e_AD/A.36.-rf G T '2 Az X44,4, 72 C:50 (PI r"sr c.1 : A- C.A.-0.2)/ G- moor L,!irr r 7- 2,>. :D/it3e.;- 6 v c.1f 7/rr .1)-6-._S A --S .:E.traas-ro /Z TO r A -r f K G L.y 106 r- g o xi Aso tir • !) C sS Stmt -'c 7-3,Z $ TJ /, p, -r1 437- , co a f< ,q -T ,-tri Al Esq- Ac-p- / �S/ XTff ,( O .57/2.1-7d ,u<op'r .c) ISO 04-P L_ 4 -LL- ILrl._ : / ��� At - 4'r 14. 74-r c2- 4' 5 , io Aly Z i o /.v / 9 8-6 A --A)/0 ,e)A•xc v 3e) T=o © r r--(.0 ,0,42.61.77Lo.S 1 #J :�D ,Ig-17XJt'K.LiyK 73 f,e.�L��.� c1,557 -,42C) cri o i 4iss Q F- /14 6.11-3 a 2S it/Z._ LA-) 4, / i� 3. v7� - / 7- '4 S<'% �`� :� 2 ct-- Q7-er /&) ✓ #r-e".d_ 0-4) i' V S. 431k55 � s 41-4-1 4/45/ ts-- L-'!rc ,Cs [s TL CPAS -725 �CfCLr�GrG.��7 rts44T7A-14 5' SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 10 April 18, 1992 City of Hermosa Beach Hermosa Beach Planning Commission 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 Pp���� ~` 2 0 '���� RE: Lowering all R3 and RP Zone Heights Limits To Whom It May Concern: I have been advised of the meeting for April 21, 1992 concerning the above. I am unable to attend the meeting, but as a property owner in the City of Hermosa Beach I would like to express my opposition to this measure by the planning commission. I, like anyone else in Hermosa Beach, may want to build on my property and I desire to take advantage of the view that I have accessible to me at this on my property. If you lowered the height limit, many people including myself would be unable to take advantage of the view their property offers them now. Lowering height limits would also decrease property value and hurt the economic real estate market in Hermosa Beach. The City of Hermosa Beach needs as much economic assistance and encouragement to upgrade as possible. Hermosa Beach is really beginning to look unkept in certain pockets of the city. No matter how quaint and 60ish it may appeal to a certain few; why live or buy in Hermosa when Manhattan Beach offers so much more. I am opposed to this measure and would appreciate my council person representing my position in my absence. Sincerely, J4L ,.44v' —t Darrell T. Smith 508-512 Manhattan Avenue Hermosa Beach SUPPLEMENTAL U����8@��U�� o�wo ��:xmmx�U o��:w 10 Mrs. Robert E. Payne Post Office B. 577 Hermosa Beach, California 90254 c�. tngrP G�L� - ca - �z C -k -t..) t �,.-� c am, _ _ �• : c\-- �Q\ ( _ c 35 & -wC Cr ---, -`N. Tc)._ jA \a C_i- , --‘-- Com' .._ -----\\NC2--,, -`--\ ' Of \ (s.,)' ----V\ A SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION 10 CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Public Notice for Special Study of Height Limitation in the R-3 and R -P Zones DATE: April 22, 1992 At the April 21, 1992 meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding height in the R-3 and R -P zones, and motioned to recommend that the City Council notice all the property owners in the R-3 and R -P zones for the upcoming City Council public hearing on this matter. The difficulty staff has with this recommendation is that noticing only R-3 and R -P zoned property owners equates to noticing only the opponents and not the proponents to reducing height limits. Staff would, therefore, either recommend noticing the whole city or placing large ads in the Easy Reader and Beach Reporter; also, cable TV advertising is possible. The cost estimate for noticing the whole City is $14,000. The cost estimate for noticing R-3 and R -P zoned property owners is $5000. A full page ad in the Beach Reporter and Easy Reader will cost $1668.75. Cable TV advertising is free. Funds for any of the above will need to be allocated by the City Council since they are not available in the Planning Department budget. NOTED: Steve Wisniewski Interim City Manager CITY MANAGER NOTE: As there are no funds available for the above noticing, if Council approves this expenditure, funds. will have to be taken from the Contingency Fund. 111 1216 Hermosa Avenue Suite A Hermosa Beach CA 90254-3529 FAX: 310/318-8745 3101318-8744 April 23, 1992 YU YING TING. Planning do City of Hermosa Beach 1315 Valley Drive Hermosa Beach CA 90254 Destination: 310/372-61$6 APR 2 31992 QUOTE FOR SERVICES SUBJECT: LEGAL NOTIFICATION FOR HEIGHT LIMITATIONS Coordination Fees shown below include the following: Preparation of Legal Notification (with Assessor's Maps showing affected properties). Notarized Affidavit, Reproduction/folding, Mailing/Postage. Notice totals are estimated for the "ball -park" figure. Designated Areas Only (RP. R3 & SPA6) (Approximately 5.000 notices) CITY-WIDE (Approximately 14,U0U notices) $1.00/PER NOTICE $1.00/PER NOTICE Reta.ner required as authorization to perform task. Retainer determined upon selection of notification required, and balance of Coordination Fee calculated and billed upon completion of task. TERMS: NET UPON RECEIPT. Galli/ Schulte South Bay Noticing and Subdivision Consulting TOTAL P.01 Honorable Mayor and 9-t__ 9_2-/o6. 9 ,S�oZG�Jr'� May 18, 1992 City Council meeting of Members of the City Council May 26, 1992 ADOPTION OF THE 1991 EDITIONS OF THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STANDARDS, UNIFORM HOUSING CODE, UNIFORM CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, AND THE UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council waive further reading and introduce the attached ordinance for adoption. ANALYSIS The adoption of the referenced codes will update the City's building regulations to be in conformance with state law. As a general law city, Hermosa Beach is required to enforce the codes adopted by the state, although amendments for administration and local conditions can be made. The State of California Building Standards Commission has adopted the 1991 editions of the various uniform codes creating a deadline for local adoption of July 1, 1991. Should the City not take any action to adopt the 1991 codes (with amendments), the codes as adopted by the state would be governing regulations as of July 1, 1992. Detailed changes to the uniform codes from the 1988 editions may be determined by reviewing the 123 page document entitled "Analysis of Revisions to the 1991 Uniform Building Codes" published by the International Conference of Building Officials on file in the City Clerks office. Some examples of Uniform Building Code revisions include the following: 1) Power source requirements for smoke detectors have been revised to require that smoke detectors be equipped with a battery backup. 2) Smoke detectors must now be located in each sleeping room in addition to centrally located in a corridor or area giving access to sleeping rooms. 3) The allowable spacing in guardrails has been reduced from 6 inches to 4 inches to provide additional safety for young children. 4) Outdoor areas accessible to and usable by the building occupants shall be provided with exits as required for buildings. 1 5) The method of calculating required exit width for multi -story buildings is revised to reflect the different volume/flow characteristics of stairways and level exits such as corridors and ramps. 6) Floor level exit signs are now required in interior corridors of hotels in recognition that occupants may not be familiar with exiting paths and exit markings in the upper level of corridors may be obscured by smoke in fire conditions. 7) Skylights may be used to meet natural light requirements and also ventilation requirements if they are openable. All local amendments proposed are those carried forward from previous model code adoptions. They relate to administrative matters and fees and requirements for fire -retardant roofing and automatic fire -extinguishing systems. No new local amendments are proposed beyond those currently in effect. Concur: Steve Wisniewski Public Safety Director Respectfully Submitted: (AL_ William Grove Director of Building & Safety Concur: 2 Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ORDINANCE NO. 92 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTER 7, ARTICLES I, II, III, IV, AND CHAPTER 24 OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO BUILDING AND PLUMBING REGULATIONS AND ADOPTING WITH CERTAIN ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND AMENDMENTS, WHICH ARE SET FORTH HEREIN, THE RULES, REGULATIONS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THOSE CERTAIN CODES ENTITLED, "UNIFORM BUILDING CODE, 1991 EDITION", "UNIFORM BUILDING CODE STANDARDS, 1991 EDITION", "UNIFORM HOUSING CODE, 1991 EDITION", AND "UNIFORM CODE FOR THE ABATEMENT OF DANGEROUS BUILDINGS, 1991 EDITION", PROMULGATED AND PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS AND THE "UNIFORM PLUMBING CODE, 1991 EDITION" AND "UNIFORM MECHANICAL CODE, 1991 EDITION" PROMULGATED AND PUBLISHED JOINTLY BY THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PLUMBING AND MECHANICAL OFFICIALS AND THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF BUILDING OFFICIALS. _ WHEREAS, the 1991 editions of the Uniform Codes have been adopted by the State of California Building Standards Commission, with amendments, to represent the construction regulations for all structures within California; and WHEREAS, local amendments may be made to those codes to address local needs; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that local climatic con- ditions and congestion require amendments to further promote fire safety by eliminating combustible roofing and expanding the requirements for automatic fire -extinguishing systems. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That Chapter 7, Article I of the City Code of the City of Hermosa Beach is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 7-1. Adoption of Uniform Building Code and Standards. Pursuant to the provisions of the Government Code of the State of California, those certain codes designated as the "Uniform - 1 - 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Building Code, 1991 Edition" including appendix excepting Chapters 7, 12 div. 1, 23, 24, 25, 26 and 53 of said appendix and the "Uniform Building Code Standards, 1991 Edition" published'by the International Conference of Building Officials, one (1) copy of which is on file in the office of the city clerk for public record and inspection, are hereby adopted by reference and made a part of this chapter as though set forth in this chapter in full, subject, however, to the amendments, additions and deletions set forth in this chapter and by the State of California, Building Standards Commission and said codes shall comprise the building code for the City of Hermosa Beach. Whenever the word "jurisdiction" appears in said codes, it shall mean and refer to the City of Hermosa Beach. Whenever the term "building official" appears in said building code it shall mean and refer to the Director of Building and Safety of the City of Hermosa Beach." SECTION 2. That Section 7-1.1. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 7-1.1. Board of Appeals Section 204 of said building code is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 204. (a) General. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determinations made by the building official relative to the application and interpretation of this code, there shall be and is hereby created a Board of Appeals consisting of five (5) members who are qualified by experience and training to pass upon matters pertaining to building - 2 - 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 construction and who are not employees of the jurisdiction. The building official shall be an ex officio member of and shall act as secretary to said board but shall have no vote upon any matter before the board. The Board of Appeals shall be appointed by the governing body and shall hold office at its pleasure. The governing board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business and shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant with -a duplicate copy to the building official. (b) Limitations of Authority. The Board of Appeals shall have no authority relative to interpretation of the administra- tive provisions of this code nor shall the Board be empowered to waive requirements of this code. (c) Quorum Meetings. Three (3) members of said board shall constitute a quorum. The board shall elect one of its members to act as chairman. Not less than three (3) days prior to a meeting of said board, written notice shall be given to each member personally, or by registered mail, provided, however, that any meeting of said board shall be legal for any purpose if the written consent of all members of said board to such meeting is executed and filed in the records of such board. Such board shall have the right, subject to such limits as the council may prescribe by resolution, to employ at the cost and expense of said city such practicing architects, competent builders, attorneys and structural engineers as said board in its discretion may deem reasonable and necessary to assist in its - 3 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 investigation and in making its findings and decisions". SECTION 3. That Section 7-1.2. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 7-1.2. Violations. Section 205 of said building code is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 205. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or cor- poration to erect, construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, improve, remove, convert or demolish, equip, use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or cause or permit the same to be done in violation of this code. Any person violating any of the provisions of this chapter or said building code shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punishable as set forth in Chapter 1, Section 1-7 of the Hermosa Beach City Code." SECTION 4. That Section 7-1.3. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 7-1.3. Fees. Section 304 of said building code is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 304. (a) General. Fees shall be assessed in accordance with the provisions of this section. - 4 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 (b) Permit Fees. The fee for each permit shall be as set forth in the latest resolution adopted by the City Council. The determination of value or valuation under any of the provisions of this code shall be made by the building official. Where work for which a permit is required by this code is started or proceeded with prior to obtaining said permit, the fees above specified shall be quadrupled, but the payment of such quadrupled fee shall not relieve any persons from fully complying with the requirements of this code in the execution of the work nor from any other penalties prescribed herein. (c) Plan Review Fees. When a plan or other data are required to be submitted by Subsection (b) of Section 302, a plan review fee shall be paid at the time of submitting plans and specifications for review. Said plan review fee shall be 65 percent of the building permit fee. The plan review fees specified in this subsection are separate fees from the building permit fees specified in Section 304 (a) and are in addition to said permit fees. Where plans are incomplete or changed so as to require additional plan review, an additional plan review fee shall be charged at the rate indicated in the adopted resolution. (d) Expiration of Plan Review. Applications for which no permit is issued within 180 days following the date of applica- tion shall expire by limitation, and plans and other data sub- mitted for review may thereafter be returned to the applicant or destroyed by the building official. The building official may - 5 - extend the time for action by the applicant for a period not exceeding 180 days upon request by the applicant showing that circumstances beyond the control of the applicant have prevented action from being taken. No application shall be extended more than once. In order to renew action on an application after expiration, the applicant shall resubmit plans and pay a new plan review fee. (e) Fee Refunds. 1. The building official may authorize the refunding of any fee paid hereunder which was erroneously paid or collected. 2. The building official may authorize the refunding of not more than 80 percent of the permit fee paid when no work has been done under a permit issued in accordance with this code. 3. The building official may authorize the refunding of not more than 80 percent of the plan review fee paid when an application for a permit for which a plan review fee has been paid is withdrawn or cancelled before any plan reviewing is done. The building official shall not authorize the refunding of any fee paid except upon written application filed by the original permittee not later than 180 days after the date of fee payment. (f) Special Inspections For Change of Occupancy or Tenancy. (1) In order to safeguard life, limb, health, property and public welfare, every commercial and industrial building, structure or portion thereof shall conform to the require- - 6 - 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 ments for the occupancy to be housed therein, or for the use to which the building, structure or portion thereof is to be put, as set forth in the building, plumbing, electrical and fire prevention codes of the City for the proposed occupancy, that portion shall be made to conform. (2) Each change of occupancy or tenancy of any commercial or industrial building, structure or portion thereof shall require an inspection to be made by the Building and Fire Departments. If a portion of any building or structure - does not conform to the requirements of the building, plumbing, electrical and fire prevention codes of the City for the proposed occupancy, that portion shall be made to conform. (3) Before any commercial or industrial building or structure may be occupied, there shall be approval from the Building and Fire Departments. (4) The Building and Fire Departments shall advise the owner or tenant of those alterations necessary to make the building comply, or, if none, approval shall be given. (5) The building official may allow occupancy of the building or structure without requiring complete compliance with all the requirements of the codes of the City, provided that such occupancy does not result in increased hazard to life, limb, health, property or public welfare. (6) Before any inspections will be made by the Building or Fire Departments for such change of occupancy or tenancy, there - 7 - shall be paid to the Building Department a fee as indicated in the latest resolution adopted by the City Council to cover the cost of inspection of the building for which the change is desired. Such fee shall be in addition to the regular building permit fee required by the building code of the City". SECTION 5. That Section 7-1.8. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 7-1.8. Moving Buildings. Section 302 of said building code is hereby amended by adding thereto the following subsection (e) to read as follows: (e) Moving Buildings. To obtain a permit to move a building into the City or to move any building or structure from one location within the City to another, the applicant shall, in addition to the information required in sub- sections, (a), (b), (c) and (d) hereof, furnish the following information: (1) The age of the building, which shall be verified by by Building Department in the City in which said building was erected. (2) Provide a plot plan, which shall include precise new location of building in relation to property lines. (3) Submit a floor plan of all floors of said building. Plan shall be drawn to scale of. one-eighth inch or one-quarter inch equals one foot. - 8 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (4) Furnish a sketch or plan showing the size and general design of the building. (5) Submit four (4) photographs, eight (8) inches by ten (10) inches in size, showing the front, rear and side views of the building, and three (3) photographs of the front and side views of the proposed location. After the applicant has filed such application, the building official of the City shall inspect said building for all necessary requirements and for the purpose of ascertaining whether structurally the same complies with this code, and having made such inspection, the building official shall make findings showing the result of such inspection and refer the same, together with the written application, sketches and photographs, to the Planning Commission of the City. The applicant shall then pay to the Planning Commission a review fee of one hundred dollars ($100.00). The Planning Commission shall hold hearings notice of which to be given to the applicant and to other interested persons in the neighborhood of the proposed location, such notice to be in form and at such time as deemed reasonable to the Planning Commission. After the hearing and within 10 days, the Planning Commission shall make its recommendations to the building official of the City, as to whether or not a permit shall be granted, and if the Planning Commission recommends that a permit be granted, then the building official shall file with the City Council the findings of the Planning Commission and all pertinent information relating to said application within 30 days of receipt of the - 9 - 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 Planning Commission's recommendation for Council's final approval. After final approval from the City Council, the building official shall require the applicant to file with the building official a bond equal to the amount of the estimated cost of placing such building on a foundation as required by this code, and preparing, altering or improving such structure to meet the requirements of this code and the recommendations of the Planning Commission and the City Council. Such bond may be a cash bond in said amount of estimated cost or a surety bond, but, if a surety bond, it shall be in double the amount of the estimated cost, and the sureties thereon shall appear before the building official and satisfy -him as to their financial worth and ability to pay to the City the amount of the surety bond in the event it is necessary for the City to bring action thereon. Such bonds shall be payable to the City and shall be conditioned upon the construction and completion of the structure in compliance with this code and the requirements of the Planning Commission and the City Council, and for the payment of materialmen and laborers, furnishing material and laborers for the rebuilding or completion of the structure, with foundation, as required by this code and the recommendations of the Planning Commission and the City Council." SECTION 6. That Section 7-1.9. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 7-1.9. Roof Covering Requirements Section 3203 of said building code is hereby amended to read as - 10 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 follows: Section 3203. The roof covering on any structure regulated by this code shall be as specified in Table No. 32-A and as class- ified in Section 3204, except that the minimum roof covering assembly shall be a class "B" roofing assembly. The roof -covering assembly includes the roofdeck, underlayment, interlayment, insulation and covering which is assigned a roof - covering classification." SECTION 7. That Section 7-1.10. shall be amended to read as follows: "Section 3404 of said building code is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 3404. All skylight frames shall be constructed of non- combustible materials. Skylights, the glazing of which is set at an angle of less than 45 degrees from the horizontal, shall be mounted at least 4 inches above the plane of the roof on a curb constructed as required for the type of construction. SECTION 8. That Section 7.1.11. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 7.1.11. Fire Extinguishing Systems. Section 3802 (c) 1 of said building code is hereby amended to read as follows: (c) Group A Occupancies. 1. Drinking Establishments. An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed in rooms used 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 by the occupants for the consumption of alcoholic beverages and unseparated accessory uses where the total area of such unseparated rooms and assembly uses exceeds 3,500 square feet. For uses to be considered as separated, the separation shall not be less than as required for a one-hour occupancy separation. The area of other uses shall be included unless separated by at least a one-hour separation. Section 3802 (c) 3 of said building code is hereby amended to read as follows: 3. Exhibition and Display Rooms. An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed in Group A Occupancies which have more than 3,500 square feet of floor area which can be used for exhibition or display purposes. Section 3802 (d) of said building code is hereby amended to read as follows: (d) Group B, Division 2 Occupancies. An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed in retail sales rooms classed as Group B, Division 2 Occupancies where the floor area exceeds 3,500 square feet on any floor or 5,000 square feet on all floors or in Group B, Division 2 retail sales occupancies more than one story in height. The area of mezzanines shall be included in determining the areas where sprinklers are required. Section 3802 (h) of said building code is hereby amended to read as follows: - 12 - 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 (h) Group R, Division 1 Occupancies. An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed throughout every apartment house three or more stories in height or where the floor area exceeds 5,000 square feet, and every hotel three or more stories in height or where the floor area exceeds 5,000 square feet. Residential or quick -response standard sprinkler heads shall be used in the dwelling unit and guest room portions of the building. Table No. 38-A - Standpipe Requirements of said building code is hereby amended to substitute the term "3 stories" wherever the term "4 stories" appears in said table. SECTION 9. That Section 7.1.12. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 7.1.12. Fire Alarm Systems. The first paragraph of Section 1211 shall be amended to read as follows: Section 1211. A manual and automatic approved fire alarm system shall be installed in apartment houses that are three or more stories in height or contain more than 15 dwelling units and in hotels three or more stories in height or containing 20 or more guest rooms, in accordance with the Fire Code. For the purposes of this section, lofts or mezzanines shall be considered as stories." SECTION 10. That Section 7-2. is hereby amended to read as follows: - 13 - "Section 7-2. Adoption of Uniform Housing Code. "That certain code designated as the "Uniform Housing Code, 1991 Edition," published by the International Conference of Building Officials, one copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk for public record and inspection, is hereby adopted by reference and made a part of this chapter as though set forth in this chapter in full, subject, however, to the amendments, additions and deletions set forth in this chapter, and said code shall be known as the Housing Code of this City. Whenever the term "jurisdiction" appears in said code it shall mean and refer to the City of Hermosa Beach, Whenever the term "building official" appears in said code, it shall mean and refer to the Director of Building and Safety of the City of Hermosa Beach." SECTION 11. That Section 7-3. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 7-3. Adoption of Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings. "That certain code designated as the "Uniform Code for the Abate- ment of Dangerous Buildings, 1991 Edition," published by the International Conference of Building Officials, one (1) copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk for public record and inspection, is hereby adopted by reference and made a part of this chapter as though set forth in this chapter in full, subject, however, to the amendments, additions and deletions set forth in this chapter, and said code shall be known as the - 14 - 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 abatement of dangerous buildings code of this City. Whenever the term "jurisdiction" appears in said code it shall mean and refer to the City of Hermosa Beach. Whenever the term "building official" appears in said code it shall mean and refer to the Director of Building and Safety of the City of Hermosa Beach." SECTION 12. That Section 7-3.1. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 7-3.1. Board of Appeals Section 205. of the Uniform Code for the Abatement of Dangerous Buildings is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 205. (a) General. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determinations made by the building official relative to the application and interpretations of this code, there shall be and is hereby created a Board of Appeals consisting of members who are qualified by experience and training to pass upon matters pertaining to building construction and who are not employees of the jurisdiction. Said board shall be the same Board of Appeals specified in Section 204 of the Uniform Building Code as amended by Section 7-1.1. of this Code. The building official shall be an ex officio member and shall act as secretary to said board but shall have no vote upon any matter before the board. The Board of Appeals shall be appointed by the governing body and shall hold office at its pleasure. The board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business and - 15 - shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant, with a duplicate copy to the building official. Appeals to the board shall be processed in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 1201 of this code. Copies of all rules or regulations adopted by the board shall be delivered to the building official, who shall make them freely accessible to the public. (b) Limitations of Authority. The Board of Appeals shall have no authority relative to interpretation of the administrative provisions of this code nor shall the board be empowered to waive requirements of this code." SECTION 13. That Section 7-4. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 7-4. Adoption of Uniform Mechanical Code. That certain code designated as the "Uniform Mechanical Code, 1991 Edition," including "Appendices A, B and C" contained therein, published jointly by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials and the International Conference of Building Officials, one (1) copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk for public record and inspection, is hereby adopted by reference and made a part of this chapter as though set forth in this chapter in full, subject, however, to the amendments, additions and deletions set forth in this chapter and by the State of California Building Standards Commission and said code shall be known as the Mechanical Code of the City of Hermosa Beach. - 16 - 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 Whenever the term "jurisdiction" appears in said code it shall mean and refer to the City of Hermosa Beach. Whenever the term "building official" appears in said code it shall mean and refer to the Director of Building and Safety of the City of Hermosa Beach." SECTION 14. That Section 7-4.1. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 203. of said mechanical code is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 203. (a) General. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determinations made by the building official relative to the application and interpretations of this code, there shall be and is hereby created a Board of Appeals consisting of members who are qualified by experience and training to pass upon matters pertaining to mechanical design, construction and maintenance and public health aspects of mechanical systems and who are not employees of the jurisdiction. Said board shall be the same Board of Appeals specified in Section 204 of the Uniform Building Code as amended by Section 7-1.1. of this Code. The building official shall be an ex officio member and shall act as secretary to said board but shall have no vote upon any matter before the board. The Board of Appeals shall be appointed by the governing body and shall hold office at its pleasure. The board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business and shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant, with a duplicate copy to the building official. - 17 - 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 (b) Limitations of Authority. The Board of Appeals shall have no authority relative to interpretation of the administrative provisions of this code nor shall the board be empowered to waive requirements of this code." SECTION 15. That Section 7-4.3. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 7-4.3. Mechanical Permit Fees. Sections 304(b) and 304(c) of said mechanical code are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 304 (b) Permit Fees. The fee for each permit shall - be as set forth in the latest resolution adopted by the City Council. Section 304 (c) Plan Review Fees. When a plan or other data are required to be submitted pursuant to Section 302(b), a plan review fee shall be paid at the time of submitting plans and specifications for review. Said plan review fee shall be equal to fifty (50) percent of the mechanical permit fee." SECTION 16. That Section 24-1. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 24-1. Adoption of Uniform Plumbing Code. That certain code entitled "Uniform Plumbing Code, 1991 Edition", including appendices and the Installation Standards contained therein, promulgated and published jointly by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials and the - 18 - 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 International Conference of Building Officials, one (1) copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk for public record and inspection, is hereby adopted by reference and made a part of this chapter as though set forth in this chapter in full, subject, however, to the amendments, additions and deletions set forth in this chapter and by the State of California Building Standards Commission and said code shall be known as the Plumbing Code of the City of Hermosa Beach. Whenever the term "jurisdiction" appears in said code it shall mean and refer to the City of Hermosa Beach. Whenever the term "building official" appears in said code it shall mean and refer to the Director of Building and Safety of the City of Hermosa Beach." SECTION 17. That Section 24-2. is hereby deleted in its entirety. SECTION 18. That Section 24-2.4. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 24-2.4. Fees. The schedule of fees contained in Section 30.4(a) of the Uniform Plumbing Code is hereby deleted and the schedule of fees adopted by latest resolution of the City Council hereby substituted therefore." SECTION 19. That Section 24-2.5. is hereby amended to read as follows: - 19 - "Section 24-2.5. Board of Appeals Section 20.4. is hereby added to said plumbing code to read as follows: Section 20.4. (a) General. In order to hear and decide appeals of orders, decisions or determinations made by the building official relative to the application and interpretations of this code, there shall be And is hereby created a Board of Appeals consisting of members who are qualified by experience and training to pass upon matters pertaining to plumbing design, construction and maintenance and public health aspects of plumbing systems and who are not employees of the jurisdiction. Said board shall be the same Board of Appeals specified in Section 204. of the Uniform Building Code as amended by Section 7-1.1. of this Code. The building official shall be an ex officio member and shall act as secretary to said board but shall have no vote upon any matter before the board. The Board of Appeals shall be appointed by the governing body and shall hold office at its pleasure. The board shall adopt rules of procedure for conducting its business and shall render all decisions and findings in writing to the appellant, with a duplicate copy to the building official. (b) Limitations of Authority. The Board of Appeals shall have no authority relative to interpretation of the administrative provisions of this code nor shall the board be empowered to waive requirements of this code." SECTION 20. That Section 24-2.6. is hereby deleted in its entirety. SECTION 21. That Section 24-2.9. is hereby amended to read as follows: "Section 24-2.9. Abandoned Sewers and Sewage Disposal Facilities. Section 1119 (a) of said plumbing code is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 1119 (a). Abandoned sewers and sewage disposal facilities. Every abandoned building (house) sewer or part thereof shall be plugged or capped in an approved manner as designated by the building official. Before any person plugs and/or caps such sewer or sewage disposal facilities contemplated in this section, he shall first post a cash bond with the City in an amount of not less than one hundred dollars ($100.00) to guarantee capping of such sewers and/or sewage disposal facilities, such bond to be returned to the permittee upon completion and inspection to the satisfaction of the building official." SECTION 22. Effective Date. That this ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect thirty (30) days following adoption. SECTION 23. Publication. That the City Council does hereby designate the City Attorney to prepare a summary of this ordinance to be published pursuant to Government Code Section 36933(c) (1) in lieu of the full text of said ordinance. That prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days after the date of its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause the summary to be published in the Easy Reader, a weekly newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Hermosa Beach. SECTION 24. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance; shall enter the same in the book or original ordinances of said city; shall make minutes of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE DAY OF 1992. PRESIDENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM CITY A ORNEY May 19, 1992 --/D 7 ,5-/-2 4.19 .1 - Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council of May 26, 1992 RECOMMENDATION TO INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE REPEALING EXISTING CHAPTER 12 IN ITS ENTIRETY, REPLACING IT WITH A NEW CHAPTER 12, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE, THE 1991 EDITIONS OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS, AS AMENDED Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council waive further reading and introduce the attached ordinance for adoption. Analysis: The adoption of the referenced codes will update the City's fire and life safety regulations to be in conformance with state law. As a general law city, Hermosa Beach is required to enforce the codes adopted by the state, although amendments for administration and local conditions can be made. The Uniform Fire Code is revised and updated every three years in order to keep it current with the various Building and Electrical Codes. After review of the 1991 Uniform Fire Code, staff is recommending that the amendments that have been made to the previous 1988 Uniform Fire Code be carried forward to reflect local conditions, requirements, and the current adopted standards. Examples of the proposed amendments to the 1991 Uniform Fire Code include the following: 1. Reduction in the maximum floor areas where fire sprinklers are required as follows: • Drinking and dining establishments from 5,000 sq.ft. to 3,500 sq.ft.; • Exhibition and display rooms from 12,000 sq.ft. to 3,500 sq.ft.; • Retail sales buildings from 12,000 sq.ft. on any floor to 3,500 sq.ft. on any floor, from 24,000 sq.ft. on all floors to 5,000 sq.ft. on all floors, from 3 stories to 1 story; • Apartments from 15 dwelling units to 5,000 sq.ft.; and • Hotels from 20 or more guest rooms to 5,000 sq.ft.. 2. The standpipe requirements are amended from 4 stories to 3 stories. 3. The bonfire, outdoor rubbish burning, incinerator construction, and hours of burning regulations are amended to reflect the current standards. 4. The regulations regarding storage of combustible rubbish within a building are amended to require sprinkler protection. -1- 8b 5. The current regulations regarding tire storage, fumigation, and gasoline dispensers have been included. 6. And finally, the current fire flow and hydrant spacing requirements have been used to amend those set forth in the 1991 Uniform Fire Code. Frederick R. Ferrin, City Manager William Grove, Director of Building and Safety 2 Respectfully Submitted, Steve Wisniewski, „ ch tttavQ Director of Public Safety ORDINANCE NO. 89-1019 1 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, 2 REPEALING EXISTING CHAPTER 12 OF THE HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE IN ITS ENTIRETY AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE, 3 THE 1991 EDITIONS OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE, INCLUDING 4 APPENDIX CHAPTERS III -A, III -B, III -C, VI -A, VI -C AND THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE STANDARDS, AS AMENDED. 5 6 WHEREAS, the 1991 editions of the Uniform Fire Codes have been 7 adopted by the State of California, with amendments; and 8 9 WHEREAS, local amendments may be made to those codes to address 10 local needs; and 11 12 WHEREAS, it has been determined that local climactic conditions and 13 congestion require amendments to further promote fire safety by 14 eliminating combustible roofing and expanding the requirements for 15 automatic fire -extinguishing systems. 16 17 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 18 19 SECTION 1. The existing Chapter 12 of the "Hermosa Beach Municipal 20 Code" is repealed in it's entirety. 21 SECTION 2. A new Chapter 12 is added to the "Hermosa Beach 22 Municipal Code" to read as follows: 23 CHAPTER 12 24 25 FIRE PREVENTION CODE 26 SECTION 12-1. Adoption of Uniform Fire Code and Standards. 27 28 1 There is hereby adopted by the city for the purpose of prescribing 1 regulations governing conditions hazardous to life and property from fire 2 and explosion that certain Code and Standards known as the Uniform Fire 3 Code and the Uniform Fire Code Standards published by the Western Fire 4 Chiefs Association and the International Conference of Building Officials, 5 being particularly the 1991 Editions thereof, save and except such 6 portions as are hereinafter deleted, modified or amended by section 12-7 7 of this ordinance, three (3) copies of which Code and Standards have been 8 and are now filed in the office of the city clerk and the same are hereby g adopted and incorporated as fully as if set out at length herein, and from 10 the date on which this chapter shall take effect, the provisions thereof 11 shall be controlling within the limits of the City of Hermosa Beach. 12 13 Permits as required by provisions within this code may be issued for an 14 indefinite period of time, subject, however, to the right of the fire chief 15 on his designee to revoke said permit for misuse or violation of the terms 16 of the permit. 17 18 SECTION 12-2. Definitions. 19 20 (a) "Jurisdiction". Shall mean the City of Hermosa Beach. 21 22 (b) "Corporation Counsel". Shall mean the attorney for the City of 23 Hermosa Beach. 24 25 (c) "Building Code". Shall mean the current Edition of Volume I, II and 26 IV of the Building Code published by the International Conference of 27 Building Officials, including its revisions, additions, and 28 2 amendments and including the current edition of the Uniform 1 Building Code Standards. 2 3 (d) "May". Shall mean permissible; the word "shall" is held to mean 4 mandatory. 5 6 SECTION 12-3. Establishment of limits of districts in which 7 storage of explosives and blasting agents is to be prohibited. 8 9 The limits referred to in section 77.107(b) of the Uniform Fire Code, in 10 which storage of explosives and blasting agents is prohibited, are hereby 11 established as follows: All property zoned for residential and commercial 12 uses. 13 14 SECTION 12-4. Establishment of limits of districts in which 15 storage of flammable liquids in outside aboveground tanks is to 16 be prohibited. 17 18 The limits referred to in section 79.501 of the Uniform Fire Code in which 19 storage of flammable liquids in outside aboveground tanks is prohibited, 20 are hereby established as follows: All property zoned for residential and 21 commercial uses. 22 23 24 SECTION 12-5. Establishment of limits of districts in which 25 new bulk plants for flammable or combustible liquids are to be 26 prohibited. 27 28 3 The limits referred to in section 79.1401 of the Uniform Fire Code, in 1 which new bulk plants for flammable or combustible liquids are 2 prohibited, are hereby established as follows: All property zoned for 3 residential and commercial uses. 4 5 SECTION 12-6. Establishment of limits in which bulk storage of 6 liquified petroleum gases is to be prohibited. 7 8 The limits referred to in section 82.103(a) of the Uniform Fire Code, in g which storage of liquified petroleum gas is restricted, are hereby 10 established as follows: All property zoned for residential and commercial 11 uses. 12 13 SECTION 12-7. Amendments made in the Uniform Fire Code. 14 15 The Uniform Fire Code, 1991 Edition is hereby amended and changed in the 16 following respects: 17 SECTION 10.507(A), Article 10, Division V, Entitled Automatic 18 Fire -extinguishing Systems is amended to read as follows: 19 20 (c) Group A. Occupancies. 1. Drinking Establishments. 21 22 23 An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed in rooms used by the 24 occupants for the consumption of alcoholic beverages and unseparated 25 accessory uses where the total area of such rooms and assembly uses 26 exceeds 3500 square feet. For uses to be considered as separated, the 27 separation shall be not less than as required for a one-hour occupancy 28 4 separation. The area of other uses shall be included unless separated by 1 at least a one-hour occupancy separation. 2 3 (3) Exhibition and Display Rooms. 4 5 An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed in Group A Occupancies 6 which have more than 3500 square feet of floor area which can be used for 7 exhibition or display purposes. 8 9 (d) Group B, Division 2 Occupancies. 10 11 An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed in retail sales room 12 classed as Group B, Division 2 Occupancies where the floor area exceeds 13 3500 square feet on any floor or 5000 square feet on all floors or in Group 14 B, Division 2 Retail Sales Occupancies more than one story in height. The 15 area of mezzanines shall be included in determining the area where 16 sprinklers are required. 17 (h) Group R, Division 1 Occupancies. 18 19 20 An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed throughout every 21 apartment house three or more stories in height or containing more than 22 5000 feet on all floors, and every hotel three or more stories in height or 23 containing more than 5000 feet on all floors. Residential or quick 24 -response standard sprinkler heads shall be used in the dwelling unit and 25 guest room portions of the building. 26 27 Table No. 10.510(A) of Article 10, Division V, Standpipe 28 5 Requirements, is hereby amended so that three stories shall be 1 substituted wherever the table refers to four stories. 2 3 SECTION 11.101. Article II, Division 1 of the Uniform Fire Code, 4 entitled "Bonfires and Outdoor Rubbish Fires", is hereby amended 5 to read as follows: 6 7II Division II. SECTION 11.201. Incinerators, Open Burning and Commercial Barbecue Pits. 8 9 10 (a) It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to ignite, set 11 fire to, or cause or permit to be ignited or burned, any grass, weeds, trees, brush, paper, shavings, boxes, trash, rubbish, or other combustible 12 13 materials within the city, except and unless such combustible materials 14 are burned in approved multiple -chamber incinerators, which have been 15 first approved by the fire chief of the city and the chief building inspector 16 of the city, and such approval is granted in writing by such officers. 17 (b) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this section, it shall be 18 19 lawful for any person to set fire and burn combustible materials in any 20 permanent fireplace, grill, or barbecue pit, providing such burning is for the purpose of preparing food or providing heat for human habitation, but 21 22 in no case shall such burning be for the purpose of disposing of 23 combustible trash or rubbish. All such fires shall be kept under competent 24 and continuous supervision and all flammable and combustible material 25 near any such fireplace, grill, or barbecue pit, shall be removed a 26 sufficient distance so as not to constitute a fire hazard. 27 28 6 (c) Outdoor fires such as pit barbeques or bonfires held in connection 1 with special activities, but not otherwise prohibited by city or county 2 ordinances may be permitted, if in the opinion of the Fire Chief, such fires 3 do not create a hazard to persons or property, by obtaining a permit from 4 the fire department. 5 6 (d) For the purpose of safety, all outdoor fires when not kindled or 7 maintained within a permanent fireplace, grill, or barbecue pit, shall be 8 deemed unlawful without a permit from the fire department. The Fire 9 Chief may prohibit all outdoor fires when atmospheric conditions or local 10 circumstances make such fires hazardous. 11 12 SECTION 11.202. Article 11, Division H, of the Uniform Fire 13 Code, 1991 Edition, is hereby amended to read as follows: 14 15 SECTION 11.202. Types and Construction of Incinerators. 16 17 (a) Every incinerator used within this jurisdiction shall be constructed 18 and maintained in accordance with the requirements of the Los Angeles 19 County Air Pollution Control District, and the Building Code and 20 Mechanical Code of this city. 21 22 (b) Whenever an incinerator becomes a public hazard or becomes unsafe or 23 is likely to cause fire to spread to neighboring properties or otherwise 24 endanger the public peace, health and safety of the citizens of the city, 25 then upon notice, the fire chief may prohibit the use of such incinerator. 26 Thereafter, it shall be unlawful to use or maintain the same within the 27 city. 28 7 1 (c) Every incinerator shall be equipped and maintained with a spark 2 arrestor constructed of iron, heavy wire mesh, or other noncombustible 3 material, with openings not larger than one half inch. 4 SECTION 11.112. Article 11, Division I, of the Uniform Fire 5 Code, 1991 Edition is hereby amended to read as follows: 6 7 SECTION 11.112. Hours of Burning. 8 9 Burning of waste matter is prohibited except in an approved incinerator as 10 defined in Section 11.203. 11 12 Burning in approved incinerators as defined in Section 13 11.203(i) is subject to the rules and regulations of the Los 14 Angeles County Air Pollution Control District. 15 16 SECTION 11.301. Article 11, Division III, Subsection (b) of the 17 Unifrom Fire Code, 1991 Edition, is hereby amended to read as 18 follows: 19 20 SECTION 11.302. Accumulation of Rubbish and Vegetation. 21 22 (b) Storage within a building. Whenever it is necessary for a person to 23 store or accumulate combustible or flammable rubbish or waste material 24 within any building, structure, or enclosure, then such material shall be 25 securely stored in metal or metal -lined receptacles or bins equipped with 26 tight -fitting covers or in rooms or vaults constructed of noncombustible 27 materials, with an approved heat actuated self-closing fire door and the 28 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 storage area shall be protected by an automatic sprinkler system on the basis of one head per fifty (50) square feet or portion thereof. SECTION 14.104(g) of Article 14, Group R., Division 1 Occupancies. An automatic fire alarm system shall be installed in apartment houses three or more stories in height (mezzanines and lofts shall be considered as stories), or containing more than 15 dwelling units and in hotels three or more stories in height or containing 20 or more guest rooms. ARTICLE 31 of the Uniform Fire Code, 1991 Edition is hereby amended to read as follows: SECTION 31.107. Inside Tire Storage Tires stored inside of buildings shall not block doors, windows, or exitways. Piles and racks of tires which are placed directly against and parallel to walls shall not extend out from said walls more than five (5) feet. Piles or racks of tires placed in rows perpendicular to the walls shall not exceed the (10) feet in width or fifty (50) feet in length. Every row of tires shall be accessible on at least two (2) sides by an aisleway at least three (3) feet in width. Tires which are stored in such pattern as to form dead-end aisleways against the walls of buildings shall terminate at an aisleway at least six (6) feet wide at the inside end of such pile. Every rack or pile of tires shall be kept at least eighteen (18) inches below sprinkler heads in a sprinklered building. Piles of tires shall be maintained in such manner as 9 to ensure stability and not become a hazard by falling during a fire or 1 other emergency. Under no circumstances shall a pile or rack of tire 2 exceed twelve (12) feet in height unless approved by the fire chief. 3 4 SECTION 31.108. Outside Tire Storage. 5 6 Piles of tires or carcasses shall not exceed two thousand (2,000) cubic 7 feet in volume and shall be separated from every other pile by an aisleway 8 at least ten (10) feet in width. Under no circumstances shall a pile of g tires exceed twelve (12) feet in height unless approved by the fire chief. 10 11 SECTION 31.109. All Tire Storage. 12 13 It is the intent of this section that all tire storage, regardless of whether 14 such storage is in connection with a tire rebuilding plant, shall be made 15 to comply with sections 31.107 and 31.108. 16 17 II Article 47 of the Uniform Fire Code, 1991 Edition is hereby amended to read as follows: 18 19 SECTION 47.112. Pan Locks. 20 21 22 Whenever doors leading into the building or structure being fumigated 23 cannot be bolted or secured from the inside, pan locks shall be provided to 24 prohibit access into the building or structure to persons other than the 25 fumigator. 26 SECTION 47.113. Chloropicrin. 27 28 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 To discourage entrance into the building or structure being fumigated, unless a watchman would otherwise be required, chloropicrin shall be added to the fumigant at the rate of one ounce for each fifteen thousand (15,000) cubic feet of space being fumigated. SECTION 47.114. Fumigation Inspection. The fire department shall make a visual inspection of all buildings or other structures immediately prior to the release of the fumigant into the building or structure, to determine whether the safety precautions outlined in this section have been met. SECTION 79.903(f) of Article 79, Division IX, of the Uniform Fire Code, Entitled Special -Type -Dispensers, is hereby amended to read as follows: Approved special dispensing systems such as, but not limited to, coin operated and remote preset types, are permitted at service stations provided there is at least one qualified attendant on duty while the station is open to the public. (1) The attendant's primary duty shall be to supervise, observe and control the dispensing of Class I Liquids into portable containers not in compliance with Section 79.902(e) control sources of ignition, and immediately to handle accidental spills and fire extingiushers, if needed. (2) Emergency controls shall be installed at a location acceptable to the Fire Department, but controls shall not be more than 100 feet from 11 dispensers. Instructions for the operation of dispensers shall be 1 conspicuously posted. 2 3 (3) Remote preset -type devices are to be in the "off" position while not in 4 use so that the dispenser cannot be activated without the knowledge of 5 the attendant. 6 7 (4) The dispensing device shall be in clear view of the attendant at all 8 times and no obstacle shall be placed between the dispensing devices and 9 the attendant. 10 11 (5) The attendant shall at all times be able to communicate with persons 12 in the dispensing area. 13 14 APPENDIX III - A, Paragraph 5 Entitled Fire Flow Requirement 15 for Buildings is amended as follows: 16 17 (a) The minimum fire -flow requirements for one -and two-family dwellings not exceeding two stories in height, shall be 1500 gallons per 18 19 minute (for other residential buildings, Table No. A -III -A-1 will be used). 20 Exception: Fire flow may be reduced 50 percent when the building is 21 provided with approved automatic sprinkler system. 22 23 The fire flow for buildings other than one -and two-family dwellings shall 24 be not less than that specified in Table No. A -III -A-1. 25 26 Exception: The required fire flow may be reduced up to 75 percent when 27 the building is provided with approved automatic sprinkler system, but in 28 12 no case less than 1500 gallons per minute. 1 2 In types I and II -FR Construction, only the three largest successive floor 3 areas shall be used. 4 5 Appendix III -B, Entitled Fire Hydrant Location and Distribution 6 is amended by adding a paragraph as follows: 7 8 (6) The Chief may require closer spacing between hydrants because of 9 grades, step inclines or other geographic problems, and accessibility. 10 SECTION 12-8. Modifications. 11 12 The fire chief or his designee shall have power to modify any of the 13 provisions of the Uniform Fire Code upon application in writing by the 14 owner or lessee, or his duly authorized agent, when there are practical 15 difficulties in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the code, 16 provided that the spirit of the code shall be observed, public safety 17 secured, and substantial justice done. The particulars of such 18 modification when granted or allowed and the decision of the fire chief or 19 his designee thereon shall be entered upon the records of the department 20 and a signed copy shall be furnished to the applicant. 21 22 SECTION 12-9. Appeals. 23 24 Whenever the chief of the fire department shall disapprove an application 25 26 or refuse to grant a permit applied for, or when it is claimed that the provisions of the code do not apply or that the true intent and meaning of 27 28 13 the code have been misconstructed or wrongly interpreted, the applicant ,1 may appeal from the decision of the chief of the fire department to the 2 city council within thirty (30) days from the date of the decision 3 appealed. 4 5 SECTION 12-10. New Materials, Processes or Occupancies which 6 may Require Permits. 7 8 The fire chief, the fire department plan check officer, and the director of g building and safety shall act as a committee to determine and specify 10 what new materials, processes or occupancies shall require permits, in 11 addition to those now enumerated in said code, after giving affected 12 persons reasonable opportunity to be heard. Their decision shall be final. 13 The fire chief shall post such list in a conspicuous place in his department 14 and distribute copies thereof to interested persons. 15 16 SECTION 12-11. Penalties. 17 18 (a) Any person violating any of the provisions of this code shall be 19 deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not more than 20 five hundred dollars ($500.00), or by imprisonment for a term not to 21 exceed six (6) months in the city or county jail, or by both such fine and 22 imprisonment. The imposition of one penalty for any violation shall not 23 excuse the violation or permit it to continue; all such persons shall be 24 required to correct or remedy such violations or defects within a 25 reasonable time; and when not otherwise specified, each ten (10) day that 26 prohibited conditions are maintained shall constitute a separate offense. 27 28 14 (b) The application of the above penalty shall not be held to prevent the 1 enforced removal of prohibited conditions. 2 3 SECTION 12-12. Repeal of Conflicting Ordinances. 4 5 All former ordinances or parts thereof conflicting or inconsistent with 6 the provisions of this chapter or of the Uniform Fire Code, 1991 Edition, 7 hereby adopted, are hereby repealed. 8 SECTION 12-13. Validity. 9 10 The City of Hermosa Beach hereby declares that should any section, 11 paragraph, sentence or word of this chapter or of the Uniform Fire Code, 12 1991 Edition, hereby adopted, be declared for any reason to be invalid, it 13 is the intent of the city that it would have passed all other portions of 14 this chapter independent of the elimination therefrom of any such portion 15 as may be declared invalid. 16 17 SECTION 12-14. Effective Date. 18 19 That this ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect 20 thirty days after date of adoption. 21 22 SECTION 12-15. Publication. 23 24 That the city council does hereby designate the city attorney to prepare a 25 26 summary of this ordinance to be published pursuant to Government Code section 36933(c) (1) in lieu of the full text of said ordinance. That prior 27 28 15 to the expiration of fifteen (15) days after the date of its adoption, the 1 city clerk shall cause the summary to be published in the Easy Reader, a 2 weekly newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the 3 City of Hermosa Beach. 4 5 SECTION 12-15. 6 7 That the city clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this 8 ordinance; shall enter the same in the book of original ordinances of said 9 city; shall make minutes of the passage and adoption thereof in the 10 records of the proceedings of the city council at which the same is passed 11 and adopted. 12 13 14 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this day of May, 15 1992. 16 17 18 PRESIDENT of the City Council, and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, 19 California 20 21 ATTEST: 22 23 24 CITY CLERK 25 26 27 28 16 APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY an" -e-7` 'A—, ?ti --- ss si..1_ May 19, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 26, 1992 CONSIDERATION OF ADJUSTMENTS TO MISCELLANEOUS USER FEES AND POTENTIAL NEW USER FEES Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Hear public comments regarding adjustments to miscellaneous fees and potential new fees. 2. Amend Resolution 90-5422 (the master fee resolution) to adjust existing miscellaneous user fees and establish new user fees based on the cost of delivering the services. Background: In November, 1990 the City Council approved user fees relating to five departments (Public Works, Planning, Building, Police, Fire) as calculated by the consulting firm of David M. Griffith and Associates (DMG). A master fee resolution was created at that time and included the fees updated by the consultant as well as existing miscellaneous fees. Community Resources fees for classes and programs are set separately and are not included in this review. City Goal #4 is to complete the identification and update of the miscellaneous fees which were not included in the consultant's report. Analysis: Recovery of Cost The DMG report explained the concept of user fees. " A service for which a user fee may be charged can be thought of as an effort performed by a governmental agency on behalf of a private citizen or group. The underlying assumption is that for services benefiting individuals, and not society as a whole, the individual should pay for the cost of the service. Setting user fees, therefore, is essentially equivalent to establishing prices for services. Making a profit is not an objective of the City in providing services. It is commonly felt that fees should be established at a level which will recover the estimated cost of providing each service". Methodology The Finance Department calculated the cost of each service using information provided by the line personnel in the department 7 performing the service. The department itemized the steps involved, the time required and any direct material costs, such as forms, for an average transaction. Final cost calculations were reviewed with department heads. An overhead rate of 10% of direct salaries and benefits was applied since this is the amount allowed by the State for cost reimbursements when no approved indirect cost allocation plan exists. The costing method used is not as sophisticated as the computer model used by the user fee consultant but staff believes that the cost information represents a conservative estimate of the cost involved in providing each service. Fee Recommendations Attachment A provides the cost and recommended fee for each service. Most of the fees were originally set in the 80's. Staff recommends 100% recovery of cost for all of these services since the services benefit the individual requesting the service rather than the public in general. As shown on the last page of Attachment A, the overall impact of the proposed fees would be $415 based on 90/91 volumes. One other fee, a research fee, for extensive requests relating to City records, was considered by staff. After discussion with the City Attorney and City Manager, it was determined that an internal policy relating to such requests was preferable to a fee. Staff will develop such a policy. Setting fees is a policy decision. As outlined in the previous user fee study, there are circumstances which may justify a policy of setting the fee at a level which does not recover the full cost of providing the service. Some of the points to consider when setting fees are: 1. Elasticity of Demand. The fee charged for a service can affect the quantity demanded by potential users. In many instances, raising the price of a service results in fewer units of the service being purchased. Whether total revenue goes up, down, or stays the same results from the magnitude of the fee increase and potential volume decrease. 2. Subsidization Policy. Subsidies may be provided for a variety of reasons. One reason is to permit an identified group to participate in services which they might not otherwise be able to afford. An example of this type of subsidy would be senior citizens programs which are typically heavily subsidized in order to benefit those people who may be on a fixed income. A second type of subsidy is based on the perception of the ultimate beneficiary of the service. Many City activities by their nature provide benefits beyond the immediate recipient. Therefore, it may be regarded as appropriate to spread the cost of certain services over the large base of potential beneficiaries, not only direct recipients. Some recreation programs -and long range, or advance planning are good examples. - 2 - 3. Economic Incentives. In some cases it may be desirable to use fees as a means of encouraging or discouraging certain activities. The animal trap charge of $1 per week in addition to the proposed service charge of $6.50 is recommended to encourage return of the trap after one week. 4. Competitive Restraints. Although the City may have a monopoly on providing certain services within its boundaries, citizens and industries may choose to relocate to other communities with lower fees. There may also be alternatives within the private sector, i.e. recreation facilities, ambulance services, etc. Knowing the true cost of services, the City Council can consider economic as well as political factors when deciding levels to set its user fees. A public hearing and public notice is not required for adjustments to fees and setting of new fees, however, a notice was placed in the paper on May 14, 1992 and the matter was set for a hearing in order to obtain maximum public input. Viki Copeland Finance Director Concur: \\---2/ \ Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager Fee Name EXISTING FEES Duplicate Business License Public Notice Poster Appeal to Council Existing Fee $5.20 $10.50 $278.75 + cost of ad Zoning Code $16.75 Book Zoning Code $5.25 Supplements Copying Audio Tapes (1 side) $21.00 (2 sides) $26.25 Copying Video $26.25 Photocopies2) 1st page $1.10 additional .20 Current Cost $5.15 $15.35 MISCELLANEOUS USER FEES Proposed Fee 1) $5.20 $15.25 $169.35 + $169.25 cost of ad + average (currently $125) cost of ad $35.65 $6.64 $35.75 $6.75 $18.71 per tape $18.75 $20.33 $0.37/min. .03/copy $20.25 $1.85 .03 90/91 Volume Increase/ Decrease 10 0 13 $4.75 13 (109.50) 14 $19.00 14 $1.50 2 ($2.25) 16 (6.00) 141 $.75 (.17) 3,329 Impact on Revenue Comment 0 Fee established 2/82. $61.75 Fee established 12/78 ($1423.50) Advertising con- tract expires 6/92. Clerk will negotiate new price. Fee estab- lished 7/85. $266.00 Fee established 2/82 $21.00 Fee established 2/82 (4.50) Fee established 4/82 (96.00) Fee established 4/82 $105.75 ($565.93) ($460.18) Labor cost based on 5 minute aver- age, most often requested number of copies is 10. Fee Existing Current Proposed 90/91 Increase/ Impact on Name Fee Cost Fee 1) Volume Decrease Revenue Comment Duplicate $0.50 $1.73 $1.75 15 $1.25 $18.75 Animal License Animal lst-$21.00 $51.26 each $26.00 106 $5.00 $530.00 Escalating fee Redemption 2nd -$36.50 $51.00 30 $14.50 $435.00 serves as deterr- 3rd-$52.25 $77.00 21 $24.75 $519.75 ent. Cost of $51.26 spread over existing fee schedule by add- ing 25% to 1st level fee, 40% to 2nd and the bal- ance to 3rd re- demption fee. Fee established 8/84. Returned $10.50 $12.93 $10.003) Checks Sale of Maps $0.75 $1.44 $1.40 Municipal $70.25 $139.93 $140.00 Code Book 121 ($.50) ($60.50) 134 $.65 $87.10 Fee established 2/82 0 0 0 Access via computer will be available with purchase of scanner. 1) Rounding criteria - Under $10 - nearest $.10 - $10 and over - nearest $.25 2) Photocopies of candidate disclosure statements are $.10 per page if filed pursuant to Political Reform Act. Documents over five years old may have additional $5 retrieval fee. 3) Fee is set at $10.00 per Government Code 6157. Will be exempt from CPI adjustment contained in master fee resolution. Legislation pending to allow full cost recovery. Fee Name NEW FEES Existing Fee Municipal Code 0 Supplements Mailing Fee Postage Subpoena Research Loan of Animal Trap hull/userfee2 $50.00 refundable deposit Current Cost $15.15 $2.00 + Postage $6.38 Proposed Fee 1) 90/91 Volume $15.25 0 Increase/ Decrease 0 $2.00 Unknown Unknown + Postage Set by Evidence Code $16/hr., $4/qtr. hr. $.10 per page $.20 per page, microfilm $6.50 + $1/week until returned, $50 refundable deposit 80 $6.50 base fee Impact on Revenue 0 Unknown $520.00 Comment Would apply to mailings other than #10 envelope. Labor cost based on 5 minute average. Including in Master Fee Resolution for reference purposes. $414.67 Total impact of proposed fees 1 RESOLUTION NO. 92- 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING RESOLUTION 90-5422 TO ADJUST MISCELLANEOUS 3 FEES AND SET NEW FEES TO RECOVER COSTS OF PROVIDING THE SERVICE 4 WHEREAS, pursuant to Article XIIIB of the Constitution of the 5II State of California, it is the intent of the City Council of the 6 City of Hermosa Beach to ascertain and recover costs reasonably 7 borne from fees and charges levied in providing certain City 8 products or services;' and 9 WHEREAS, it is a goal of the City of Hermosa Beach to com- 10 plete the identification and update of miscellaneous fees which 11 were not included in the previous user fee study; 12 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA 13 BEACH, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: 14 SECTION 1. That resolution 90-5422, Schedule 6, is hereby 15 amended to include fees as shown in Attachment A as "Proposed 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Fee"; SECTION 2. That this Resolution shall take effect immediately. SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution; shall cause the same to be entered among the original Resolutions of said City; and shall make a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council of said City in the minutes of the meeting in which the same is passed and adopted. 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ATTEST: PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 26th day of MAY, 1992 'PRESIDENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AND MAYOR OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 a1/9 May 18, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 26, 1991 REVIEW OF ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR 2930 STRAND Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council allow the existing approved encroachment permit to remain as approved. Background: The property owner requested to be allowed to use a small portion of the public street right of way along 30th Street. The purpose of the encroachment was to improve and beautify the area. The request was similar but smaller in scale to the landscaped improvements that had been approved for the other side of the walk street. it is the staff's understanding that this planter was agreed to by the City a number of years ago in the settlement of a legal case with the property owner. Analysis: The property owner at 2930 Strand applied for an encroachment permit and the City agreement form was prepared April 2, 1992. The subject area is the northerly 4.5 feet of 30th Street from the top of the stairs to the east end of their patio wall. A distance of 72 feet. The existing improvements are a new raised brick planter on the west half of the 4.5 foot wide strip and a new brick walk. surface on the easterly half of the 4.5 foot wide strip. In addition, the existing roof on the porch area overhangs the planter area by 5 inches. The property owner is in compliance with City code requirements and the construction is an improvement to the area. Thus, the Public Works staff recommends that the permit remain as approved. However, there has been a complaint received at the City Council level against this property recently and a petition to remove the landscaped planter has been submitted to the City Council for appeal. The staff has therefore placed this item on the City Council agenda for City Council review. - 1 - Alternatives: Other alternatives available to the City Council and considered by staff are: 1. Remove the existing landscaped planter. 2. Remove the existing landscaped planters on both sides of 30th Street. 3. Remove all encroachments from public lands along the Strand and walkstreets. Respectfully submitted, Concur: Lynn A. Terry P.E. Deputy City Engineer pworks/enc2930 Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager and Acting Director of Public Works May 7, 1991 /->4/9.a Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 26, 1992 REVISION OF CITY CODE PROVISIONS PERTAINING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC STREET IMPROVEMENTS Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Approve the proposed ordinance changes to revise Sections 29-10, 29-11, 29-14 and delete Section 29-13 of the Hermosa Beach City Code. Background: In the past, deferment of the concrete curb, gutter and sidewalk construction has been allowed by the City. This deferment was granted for the most part at the request of the property developer. The original intent thirty years ago for the construction deferment was to provide relief for those locations where the established street grades had not been determined. However, now that approximately 98% of the properties in the City have been developed, the street grades are fairly well established everywhere in the City. The need for the deferment is no longer necessary and should be deleted. Analysis: At the present time, the deferment of installing the public street improvements is used by the developer as a way to pass the construction costs on to some future property buyer. Also, what is happening at this time is that some of the present property owners are wanting to reduce the interest on their home loans. However, money lenders will not refinance a loan on a property that has a City lien because that lien has a higher priority than their loan. By paying the cash deposit, the lender can place a new loan on the property without the public street improvements being installed. A third situation is where a property owner wants the cash deposit back but they do not want to install the public improvements. We then have the situation of the switch between the cash deposit and the lien agreement (a modern day shell game). There are some properties that have made the switch "back and forth" six or seven times. This was not the intent of the City Code and does not get the public street improvements installed. There is no longer a need to defer any street improvement construction. The staff is recommending that the City Code sections which allow the lien agreement and the cash deposit while deferring construction of the public improvements be deleted. In the future, this will cause the public improvements to be constructed as originally intended. This proposed action 10 will also reduce unnecessary City staff workload. The staff is also recommending that the square footage limits be deleted on the construction requirements. The proposed code changes are attached as Exhibit "A". As a side note, both the cash deposit agreement and the lien agreement do not have built in cost increases to cover increasing construction costs. Thus, the dollar amounts in the past agreements and the past deposits of ten, twenty and thirty years ago are_not_nearly enough to cover the construction costs of today or of any time in the future. Alternatives: 1. Approve the proposed ordinance changes, thus requiring the public street improvements to be installed when there is a future change in the property. 2. Do not approve the proposed ordinance changes and continue to allow the deferment of public street improvements with the associated City staff and future construction costs to the City. Respectfully submitted, Concur: CC Lynn A. Terry P.E. Deputy City Engineer pworks/stcode Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager and Acting Director of Public Works 1 ORDINANCE NO. 92- 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH REVISING AND DELETING CITY CODE PROVISIONS PERTAINING TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC 3 STREET IMPROVEMENTS. 4 WHEREAS, the street grades have now been established 5 throughout the City along all of the streets; and 6 WHEREAS, there is no longer a need to delay construction of 7 curbs, gutters or sidewalks along the City's streets; and 8 WHEREAS, the construction of curbs, gutters and sidewalks 9 will lead to a completeness of the public street improvements; 10 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 SECTION 1. That Sections 29-10, 29-11 and 29-14 of the Hermosa Beach City Code be revised as shown on the attached Exhibit and that Section 29-13 shown on the attached Exhibit "A" be deleted from the Hermosa Beach City Code. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective and be in full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days of its final passage and adoption. SECTION 3. Prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days after the date of its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause this ordinance to be published in the Easy Reader, a weekly newspaper of general circulation published and circulated in the City of Hermosa Beach, in the manner provided by law. SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance, shall enter the same in the book of original ordinances of said city, and shall make minutes of the passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted. ttA" 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. PRESIDENT'of the'City Council, and MAYOR of the. City of Hermosa Beach, California CITY CLERK CITY ATTORNEY ATTEST: APPRQ pworks/stimpord- HERMOSA BEACH CITY CODE Article II. Construction of Concrete Curbs, Sidewalks, Streets, etc., in Conjunction with Building Construction Sec. 29-10. General requirement. Any owner, lessee or agent or any other person or persons constructing or arranging for the construction of : (a) Any commercial or industrial building or residential dwelling struc- ture, or addition thereto, oicaooding four hundred (400) oquoro fo t in flo r aroa, or (b) any accessory building-groatcr than main building shall also provide for the construction of Port- land cement concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks and street pavement between gutter and center line of the street in ac- cordance with the standard specifications of the city engineer unless adequate Portland cement concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks and street pavement already exist along all street frontage adjoining the lot or lots on which the building or dwelling is to be constructed, except as herein provided in Section 29-11. (Ord. No. 235 N. S., § 1; Ord. No. N. S. 463, § 1, 6-5-73) Exhibit "A" STREETS AND SIDEWALKS Sec. 29-11. Exceptions and modifications. The provisions of section 29-10 may be modified by the city engineer under the following circumstances: (a) Portland cement concrete curbs and gutters only shall be required where the topography is such that the installation of Portland cement concrete sidewalks would be impractical. er-loto, thc Portland ccmont concrete -exurb, gutter and aidcwalkc recd xet exeecd a grcntcr di3t-ancc than thc idc yard r nide and rear yard3 in thc cacc of center lot3 defined in thc Z ping C de. (c) Portland cement concrete curbs, gutters or sidewalks need not be installed where the street grade cannot readily be established by the city engineer or whore the otrect for practical r a n hau n t b n grad d t an cotabliohcd grad which w uld enable pr per I cation of ourba, guttcra or 3idc walkc provided that the applicable provisi no of oceti n 20 13 ar eompli d with. (Ord. No. 235 N. S., § 3.) Sec. 29-12. Location of curbs, etc. Curbs, gutters and sidewalks shall be located within the street right of way at the locations and grades established by the city engineer. (Ord. No. 235 N. S., § 2.) Exhibit "A" STREETS AND SIDEWALKS oonntruotion. N twithctanding any othcr proviciono f thio article, the conotruction of turbo, gutter° or oidcwall . (a) If there i3 1c33 ths.n thirty five per cent f curb or oidc walk in3ta11cd on the 3amc aide of thc otrcct in thc black of which thc property i° a part; or (b) If tho oity onginoor dotorminoo that the conditions set fart in ocction 29 11, paragraph (c) cidot; providod, that thc prop will conatruct turbo, guttcro or oidcwalko when thirty fivo (35) percent of thc footage on the 3amc 3idc of thc 3trcct neer dctcrminc3 that tho cen4itie io act forth in 3cction 29-11(,-) have beea cu:ficicntly corrected to mala po oiblo thc conotruction f curb3, guttcro or oidcwallr°. Thc city he-peeerEied a reel peepopty len again3b thc owncr'3 property to occurc thc performance f the agree rncnt. Thc property owincr hall pay to too oity a foo f tcn the licrr whon otandard ourbo and/or oidcwal m arc—seri otruotod. (c) This 3eCtien d C3 not apply if thc prop rty is looatod on no b utcc to cohool etrootc. Tho-etir4o, guttcro ohall not be dclaycei. (Ord. No. N.S. 235, § 4; Ord. No. 77-571, § 1, 9-13-77; Ord. No. 90-1035, 6-12-90) Exhibit "A" STREETS AND SIDEWALKS Sec. 29.14. Construction -er-easy-dot. prerequisite to final approval. cto. — The building inspector shall deny final approval and accep- tance on final public utility connections to any building or dwelling until the Portland cement concrete curbs and gutter or Portland cement concrete curbs, gutters and sidewalks exist or are con- structed with th city in a cum dotorrainod by the pity onginoor bacod upon the number of lineal feet f P rtland ccmcnt c ncr to ourb, gut tcro and cidowalka to be inotallcd, except as set forth in section-- 29-11,and 20 13. (Ord. No. N.S. 238, § 5) Exhibit "A" May 18, 1992 j/,G/P Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 26, 19921 REDESIGN AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL MODIFICATION OF ARTESIA BOULEVARD AND PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY INTERSECTION Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Review and approve the proposed redesign and traffic signal modification of the intersection at Artesia Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway. 2. Authorize the staff to sign the design drawing for the proposed changes. Background: Because of the parking restrictions that were installed on Pacific Coast Highway, it now possible to have three straight -movement lanes and dual left -turn lanes on southbound Sepulveda Boulevard approaching Artesia Boulevard. To improve the traffic flow at this intersection, the City of Manhattan Beach authorized a traffic study to be conducted for this purpose at their expense. The proposed traffic plan is the result of that study. Analysis: The traffic study consisted of conducting field surveys and preparing the attached traffic control plan. The proposed plan proposes to: 1. Widen Sepulveda Boulevard by up to six feet on the west side (southbound) between Tennyson Street and Artesia Boulevard (Gould Avenue), and relocate or rebuild any facilities that are disturbed by the widening. 2. Construct new curb and gutter for approximately 400 feet. Reconstruct the curb return at the northwest corner and reconstruct the existing raised island left of the right -turn lane. 3. Remove approximately 430 feet of raised center divider, and construct pavement to accommodate the relocated dual southbound left -turn -only lanes. 4. Modify the traffic signal, street lighting, and signing installations at the intersection, and restripe the lanes. - 1 - 1 1 All of the proposed changes will be within the State Highway right-of-way and will not affect any private or public property within the City of Hermosa Beach. However, any changes in traffic flow at this intersection will have an effect on the City of Hermosa Beach. Therefore, the City of Manhattan Beach is submitting the proposed plan for concurrent approval by this City. The total cost for the plans, specifications and construction of this project will be paid 100% by the City of Manhattan Beach. The only staff involvement is review of the plans and possible coordination meetings during construction. Respectfully submitted, Lynn A. Terry P.E. Deputy City Engineer pworks/ccsrsigs Concur: Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager May 20, 1992 City Council Meeting May 26, 1992 Mayor and Members of City Council CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL MEASURES TO PLACE ON BALLOT OF UPCOMING SPECIAL ELECTION Recommendation: Discuss and consider possible ballot measures to place on the upcoming special election, and direct the preparation of appropriate documents (draft ordinances, resolutions, ballot wording) for any additional ballot measures that Council decides to place on the ballot. Background: At the meeting of May 12, 1992, the City Clerk presented Council with a Certificate of Sufficiency for the Initiative Ordinance submitted by petition which would designate the Biltmore Site as Open Space to ensure its preservation and use as a public park. At that meeting, Council ordered a report pursuant to Elections Code Section 4009.5, with said report to be presented to Council at its meeting of June 9, 1992, at which time a special election would be called for that ballot measure. Council also requested at that meeting that an item be placed on the May 26 agenda for Council consideration of other measures which might be deemed appropriate to place on the ballot of that special election. Two suggestions for consideration by Council were submitted by Councilmember Midstokke: 1) Reducing the allowable height of buildings in the R-3 zone; and 2) Amending Municipal Code Section 2-25 (Article III. Civil Service) - requiring U.S. citizenship to be eligible for employment (in violation of federal law.) Another suggestion is an issue raised by Council last year: 1) Amending Municipal Code Section 2-29 (Article III. Civil Service) - requiring the automatic termination of any member of the Civil Service Board upon filing notice of candidacy for an elective office of the city. 13 a It should Municipal 1960, and No other be noted that the Civil Service section of the City's Code was approved by the voters at an election held in may only be changed by a vote of the people. suggestions for measures have been received. PLEASE NOTE: Following the last meeting, the City Clerk and the City Attorney conducted additional independent research and have confirmed that the petition requires a special election to be held within 88 to 103 days from the date of the order. The order calling the election must be issued at the meeting of June 9, and the only possible election date within that required time frame is September 15. Concur: Elaine Doerfl'n Frederick R. Ferrin, City anager ity ty Clerk May 19, 1992 City Council Meeting May 26, 1992 Mayor and Members of the City Council VACANCIES - BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Recommendation: It is recommended that Council make a policy decision with regard to the upcoming expiration of terms for each of following boards and commissions. Background: The expiration of terms for seats on the City's various boards and commissions occurs either in June or July. Following established procedures, this item is brought to the attention of Council at its last meeting in May to allow adequate time for noticing and Council appointments prior to the first expiration of terms (June 30). Traditionally, Council has directed that all seats be advertised, and one notice inviting applications for all boards/commissions is published with a filing deadline in mid-June, enabling the item to come back to Council at its last meeting in June for appointments and/or reappointments. At its meeting of May 12, Council directed the preparation of a staff report and recommendation for consideration by Council at its meeting of June 9, concerning possible dissolution of the Vehicle Parking District and re-establishment of the Board of Parking Place Commissioners as a commission serving in an advisory capacity to Council. Due to the uncertainty at this time with regard to the future of this particular Board, Council may wish to defer the issue of expiration of terms on this Board until June 9, pending Council decision on the Vehicle Parking District and the Board of Parking Place Commissioners. If the Board is retained, there would still be ample time for separate noticing and appointments prior to the expiration of terms which for this Board is July 27. BOARD OF PARKING PLACE COMMISSIONERS Two expiration of terms ending July 27, 1992 These seats are currently held by Gerald Compton and Helene Frost, both of whom are eligible for reappointment and have expressed interest in reappointment to the Board as it now exists. The appointments would be for three-year terms ending July 27, 1995. Both members were appointed by Council on July - 1 - 131) 24, 1990, to serve two-year terms (the initial appointments had staggered terms of one, two and three years, with all appointments thereafter to be for three-year terms). There are no other applications on file at this time. Alternatives: 1. Defer direction concerning the two expiration of terms until Council consideration of the VPD and the existing Board at the meeting of June 9, 1992; or 2. Direct the City Clerk to prepare an agenda item for the meeting of July 21, 1992 (or sooner), for consideration of re -appointing Mr. Compton and Ms. Frost to the three-year terms ending July 27, 1995; or 2. Direct the City Clerk to advertise and request additional applications from interested parties. CIVIL SERVICE BOARD Two expiration of terms ending July 15, 1992 These seats are presently held by Ted Dalton and Michael D'Amico, both of whom are eligible for reappointment and have expressed interest in being reappointed to the Board for the four-year terms ending July 15, 1996. Mr. Dalton has served on the Board since June 23, 1981, and Mr. D'Amico has served since November 26, 1991. There are no other applications on file at this time. Alternatives: 1. Direct the City Clerk to prepare an agenda item for the meeting of July 14, 1992 (or sooner) for consideration of reappointing Mr. Dalton and Mr. D'Amico to the two four-year terms ending July 15, 1996; or 2. Direct the City Clerk to advertise and request additional applications from interested parties. PLANNING COMMISSION Three expiration of terms ending June 30, 1992 These seats are currently held by Christine Ketz, Joseph DiMonda, and Rod Merl, all of whom are eligible for reappointment. Ms. Ketz was appointed by Council on June 22, 1988; Mr. DiMonda was appointed on March 12, 1991; and Mr. Merl was appointed on September 24, 1991. Mr. DiMonda and Mr. Merl have both expressed interest in reappointment; as of this date, the Clerk's office has been unable to contact Ms. Ketz to ascertain her interest in reappointment. There were six current applications on file, and attempts were made to contact all of them to confirm their interest in being 2 considered for appointment at this time. Two of the six applicants (M.J. Lull and Dale Nowicki) have withdrawn their applications from consideration. Two of the applicants (Kevin Epstein and Jason Wallace) have expressed interest in being considered for appointment. As of this date, the Clerk's office has been unable to reach the remaining two applicants (George Brown and A. Abbey Silverstone) to confirm their interest in appointment at this time. Alternatives 1. Direct the City Clerk to prepare an agenda item for the meeting of June 23, 1992 (or sooner), for consideration of reappointing the current Commissioners and/or appointing from among the applications on file to fill the three four-year terms ending June 30, 1996; or 2. Direct the City Clerk to advertise and request additional applications from interested parties. PLEASE NOTE: In addition to the applications on file (noted above), a letter was recently received from a citizen expressing an interest in serving on one of the City's boards or commissions. An application has been mailed to the individual, but at this time it is not known which, if any, of the subject boards/commissions might be of interest to this person. Elaine Doerflir , CiCiy Clerk Concur: Frederick R. F rin, 9 ty Manager Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 21, 1992 Regular Meeting of May 26, 1992 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT - APRIL 1992 The Public Works Department is divided into three (3) major functions: Administration, Engineering and Maintenance. ADMINISTRATION The administration function coordinates and blends the efforts of all divisions of the Public Works Department in accomplishing the directives of the City Council and City Manager; includes engineering and management of capital improvement projects. Permits Issued: Type Current Month Last FY To Date This Month FY Last FY To Date Sewer Demolition Sewer Lateral Street Excavation Utility Co's only Dumpster/Strand Banner Permits The O 0 1 1 9 12 O 153 4 0 3 2 Capital Improvement Projects CIP 85-137 FAU, Asphaltic Over- lay, Valley, Ardmore & Prospect CIP 89-144 Strand Walk & Walkway CIP 89-150 Misc. Traf. Sig. Imp. CIP 90-151 Traf. Eng. Program CIP 91-165 Misc. Bikeway Const. CIP 88-201 Light Conversions & New Installations ENGINEERING 6 23 7 13 52 80 108 384 34 4 17 15 which are currently in progress are: CIP 86-176 Traf. Control Pre-emp. CIP 89-406 Sewer Rehab/Area 4 CIP 89-511 R -R -O -W Parking Lot CIP 89-513 Purchase of 5 Lots Edith Rodaway Friendship Park CIP 91-608 City Yard Relocation MAINTENANCE The maintenance function of the Public Works following sections: - Parks/Medians - Street Maintenance/Sanitation - Sewers/Storm Drains - Street Lighting Department is divided into the - Traffic Safety - Building Maintenance - Equipment Service Parks Division/Medians: Mowed and cleaned up entire South School area. Repaired planter boxes on Hermosa Avenue at 30th Street, and Manhattan Avenue at 31st Street. Repaired irrigation city-wide. Street Maintenance/Sanitation: Sawcut and removed concrete and poured new footings for new hoists in the equipment maintenance shop. Removed sample of Strand wall for inspection at 5th Street opening. Backfilled formed and poured concrete after inspection. Repaired street at the 2400 Block of Myrtle Avenue. Repaired streets, sidewalks and curbs city-wide. Sewers/Storm Drain Division: Rodded sewer mains city-wide. Helped street Department on street repair at 2400 Block of Myrtle Avenue. Street Lighting: Installed new electrical system in maintenance garage for new hoists. Hung and removed banners city-wide. Reset time clocks city-wide. Installed new electrical wiring in warehouse at 6th Street & Prospect Avenue. Repaired outside security light at the Community Center. Traffic Safety Division: Painted crosswalk stop and stop bars city-wide. Painted yellow center lines on Pier Avenue and on Aviation from P.C.H. to Prospect. Crossing traffic signal at Valley School. Street sign repairs city-wide. Building Maintenance Division: Removed and replaced old roof at the Clark Field stadium restrooms. Spot painted tennis courts 1 and 3 at the Community Center. Repaired and painted the outside of the Community Center. Equipment Service: Graffiti Removal: JULY 1990 AUGUST 1990 SEPTEMBER 1990 OCTOBER 1990 NOVEMBER 1990 DECEMBER 1990 JANUARY 1991 FEBRUARY 1991 MARCH 1991 APRIL 1991 MAY 1991 JUNE 1991 YTD TOTAL On-going maintenance of City vehicles and equipment. 39.75 48.00 30.00 81.50 79.00 41.00 33.75 29.50 35.00 70.75 40.50 21.50 Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. 550.25 Hrs. Respectfpllysubmitted, Lynn Terry Deputy City Engineer mon2/pwadmin JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL 1991 1991 1991 1991 1991 1991 1992 1992 1992 1992 59.50 27.00 43.50 37.50 24.00 27.00 19.50 14.50 34.00 12.00 Hrs. Hrs. (Revised) Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. Hrs. YTD TOTAL 298.50 Hrs. Noted: Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager /% Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council ACTIVITY REPORT DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY APRIL, 1992 May 19, 1992 Attached for your information are recap sheets of department activity for the month of April. Overall permit activity increased in April as the department issued 75 per- mits of which 41 were building permits. No permits were issued for new structures; however thirty-one permits were issued for alterations or addi- tions to existing dwellings and nine permits were issued for alterations to commercial buildings. One dwelling unit was demolished resulting in a net decrease of one dwelling unit to the housing inventory. The department also processed sixty-three plans for zoning review, plan check or revisions. Plan processing "turn around" averaged one week during April. The department conducted 183 inspections during April not including complaint investigations. Building Department general fund revenue for 83.3% of the fiscal year is $228,471.94 or 70.5% of projected revenue for the fiscal year. Total revenue for all funds is $343,323.24. The Business License division reports that 214 licenses were issued during April resulting in revenue of $62,401.31. Business License revenue to date represents 84.9% of projected revenue for the fiscal year. The department logged 14 new code enforcement complaints during April, of which two were for illegal dwelling units. The department closed two cases in April and currently has twenty-nine illegal dwelling unit cases under investigation. The April report on recycling participation levels and refuse diversion is attached to this report. The report indicates that the participation level (at least one recyclable item set out) averaged 63.7% in April. The total volume of recyclable materials collected in April totaled 184.9 tons and represents a diversion of 22.7% of the residential refuse that would otherwise likely end up in a landfill. Noted: Frederick R. Fer in U City Manager �'� �4;') Respectfu y Submitted, William Grove Director, Bldg. & Safety CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED Month of APRIL 1992 TYPE OF STRUCTURE DWELLING UNITS PERMITS PROVIDED VALUATION 1. Single Dwellings 2. Duplex Dwellings 3. Triplex Dwellings 4. Four Units or More 5. Condominiums 6. Commercial Buildings 7. Industrial Buildings 8. Publicly Owned Buildings 9. Garages - Residential 10. Accessory Buildings 11. Fences and Walls 12. Swimming Pools 13. Alterations, additions or repairs to dwellings 31 223,112 14. Alterations, additions or repairs to Commercial Bldgs. 9 96,205 15. Alterations, additions or repairs to indus. bldgs. 16. Alterations, additions or repairs to publicly owned bldgs. 17. Alterations, additions, repairs to garages or accessory bldgs. 18. Signs 19. Dwelling units moved 20. Dwelling units demolished 1 -1 21. All other permits not listed TOTAL PERMITS: 41 TOTAL VALUATION OF ALL PERMITS: 319,317 ** TOTAL DWELLING UNITS PERMITTED : 0 TOTAL DWELLING UNITS DEMOLISHED: 1 NET CHANGE: -1 NET DWELLING UNIT CHANGE FY 91/92 +9 CUMULATIVE DWELLING UNIT TOTAL: 9692 (INCLUDES PERMITS ISSUED) ** Revised figure based on land use study by the Planning Dept. CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH BUILDING DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REVENUE REPORT Month of APRIL 1992 NUMBER OF THIS MONTH FY TO LAST FY PERMITS CURRENT MONTH LAST FY DATE TO DATE Building 41 26 282 253 Plumbing 21 17 228 228 Electric 13 20 168 171 Plan Check 24 12 176 163 Sewer Use 1 0 12 9 Res. Bldg. Reports 26 46 172 194 Comm. Inspections 25 29 211 258 Parks & Recreation 0 0 6 1 In lieu Park & Rec. 0 0 7 15 Board of Appeals 0 0 0 0 Sign Review 9 7 55 50 Fire Flow Fees 3 4 48 51 Legal Determination 0 0 2 0 Zoning Appeals 0 0 0 0 TOTALS 163 161 1,367 1,393 FEES Building** 6,889.75 6,725.99 106,576.60 175,125.90 Plumbing 1,747.10 1,175.00 16,424.95 16,996.45 Electric 926.49 5,764.00 17,837.69 23,693.00 Plan Check 4,480.72 6,259.98 65,490.68 127,825.03 Sewer Use 32.50 0 7,184.61 6,129.99 Res. Bldg. Reports 1,085.50 1,850.00 6,999.75 7,650.00 Comm. Inspections 1,043.76 1,160.00 8,705.02 7,860.00 Parks & Recreation 0 0 21,000.00 3,500.00 In lieu Park & Rec. 0 0 46,650.00 98,670.00 Board of Appeals 0 0 0 0 Sign Review 534.00 560.00 4,345.25 960.00 Fire Flow Fees 426.50 3,090.30 40,016.69 141,330.57 Legal Determination 0 0 2,092.00 0 Zoning Appeals 0 -0 0 0 TOTALS 17,166.32 26,585.27 343,323.24 609,740.94 VALUATIONS 319,317 628,112 9,289,976 20,379,961 **Includes State Seismic Fee $41.51 Revenue: BUSINESS LICENSE MONTHLY REPORT 62,401.31 60,474.93 416,819.84 376,456.25 Licenses issued: 214 255 RECEIVED MAY 1 31992 Building & Safety C CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH RECYCLENOW REPORT APRIL 1992 Q TRASH YDWST TOTAL ONP COMM DATE RATE ACTUAL MAX % DIV. TONS TONS MIXED GLASS TIN ALUM PET HDPE MIXED WST/TONS 4/1 66.8% 1,000 1.497 17.7% 41.85 9.0 12.820 3.873 492 191 123 232 164 4/2 69.2% 1.081 1.562 20.8% 43.56 11.5 17,138 4.526 436 202 191 197 178 4/6 60.6% 1.105 1.823 22.1% 38.17 10.8 16.660 3.843 410 114 143 247 173 4/7 59.3% 965 1,627 19.7% 37.41 9.2 13.580 3.884 350 134 91 226 115 4/8 66.1% 989 1,497 21.6% 37.03 10.2 14.970 4,073 463 2'21 140 291 192 4/9 67.5% 1,055 1.562 22.3% 33.54 11.1 16.540 4,342 455 230 123 264 196 4/13 54.5% 994 1.823 22.8% 35.13 10.4 15,380 4.111 493 209 150 220 177 4/14 60.4% 983 1.627 23.4% 34.1 10.4 14.330 4.320 407 133 83 242 165 4/15 70.9% 1.062 1.497 21.3% 33.42 9.0 13.520 3.686 391 141 86 128 118 4/16 74.5% 1,163 1,562 24.3% 33.76 10.3 16.360 4,119 442 135 173 179 163 4/20 54.0% 984 1.823 25.3% 33.1 11.2 17.010 4.175 445. 123 155 268 193 4/21 59.9% 975 1.627 24.3% 32.8 10.5 16.070 3.788 481 135 120 273 160 4/22 70.6% 1,057 1,497 26.1% 31.48 11.1 16.400 4.749 429 164 112 276 140 4/23 62.4% 975 1.562 22.5% 32.44 9.4 13.920 3.709 421 201 127 265 177 4/27 63.2% 1.153 1.823 24.0% 32.8 10.4 15.840 3.985 423 15:3 9:3 138 128 4/28 65.5% 1,065 1,627 22.1% 32.16 9.1 13,840 3.603 304 137 62 131 123 4/29 60.7% 908 1,497 26.3% 30.88 11.0 16.220 4.426 531 225 161 237 190 4/30 .65.4% 1.021 1.562 23.6% 31.52 9.8 14.452 3.919 409 197 111 237 177 TOT 63.7% 13,535 29.095 22.7% 630.2 184.9 275.700 73.641 7,832 3.195 2.244 4.154 2,93.1 846.1 BREAKDOWN OF 815.0 TONS OF RESIDENTIAL REFUSE: 77.3% BREAKDOWN OF 1661.1 TONS OF TOTAL CITY REFUSE: 37.9% C; C L TOTAL ONP COMM TONS MIXED GLASS TIN ALUM. PET HDPE MIXED WASTE/TONS (, ---- --- ---- --- BREAKDOWN OF 134.9 TONS OF RECYCLABLES: 100% 74.6% 19.9% 2.1% 0.9% 0.6% 1.1% 0.8% BREAKDOWN OF 315.0 TONS OF RESIDENTIAL REFUSE: 22.7% 16.9% 4.5% 0.5% 0.2% 0.1% 0.3% 0.2% BREAKDOWN OF 1661.1 TONS OF CITY REFUSE: 11.1% 8.3% 2.2% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 50.9% ;- AVERAGE WEEKLY VOLUME OF CITY REFUSE: 369.1 AVERAGE WEEKLY VOLUME OF COMMERCIAL REFUSE: 188.0 AVERAGE WEEKLY VOLUME OF RESIDENTIAL REFUSE: 140.0 AVERAGE WEEKLY VOLUME OF RECYCLABLE MATERIAL: 41.1 RESIDENTIAL PARTICIPATION TRASH YDWST MONTH RATE ACTUAL MAX. % DIV. TONS JUNE 70.4% 18,330 26,036 23.1% 521.1 JULY 70.7% 21,898 30,983 23.2% 634.3 AUGUST 70.8% 19,527 27,598 22.7% 554.3 SEPTEMBER 70.6% 19,680 27,859 25.1% 539.6 OCTOBER 69.9% 21,478 30,722 25.5% 593.7 NOVEMBER 67.9% 17,685 26,036 22.6% 482.2 DECEMBER 69.3% 20,436 29,486 26.1% 600.8 JANUARY 71.1% 20,692 29,095 24.2% 609.1 FEBRUARY 69.6% 18,125 26,036 23.9% 523.3 MARCH 68.4% 20,158 29,486 22.4% 630.7 APRIL 63.7% 18,535 29,095 22.7% 630.2 MAY YTD AVG. 69.3% 19,686 28,403 23.8% 575 ONP/HIRED: JUN JUL AUG SEP CITY OF 9090010 BEACH RECYCLENOW ttstststtsttttstsststtsttttssttt SUMMARY REPORT ttuttts OM WEIGHT OF RECYCLABLE MATERIALS COMM CITYWIDE TOTAL ONP WASTE % TONS 81800 GLASS TIN ALUM. PET HDPE MIXED TNS DIVERSION 158.0 235,610 63,489 6,202 2,565 1,375 2,804 2,018 593.3 12.4% 191.4 298,180 65,059 7,418 3,092 2,153 3,949 2,941 802.2 11.8% 162.9 239,977 66,337 7,466 3,110 2,172 3,849 2,862 746.3 11.1% 180.8 213,050 69,390 7,343 3,182 2,000 3,840 2,745 617.1 13.5% 203.5 316,416 69,789 7,922 3,294 2,284 4,128 3,083 586.2 14.7% 140.8 212,186 53,734 5,992 2,522 1,719 3,083 2,230 540.7 12.1% 211.7 317,610 82,386 8,926 3,588 2,646 4,771 3,546 560.8 15.4% 194.0 276,930 86,561 9,375 3,772 2,731 5,022 3,693 579.8 14.0% 164.2 241,760 67,901 7,255 2,932 2,061 3,754 2,717 510.3 13.7% 182.1 270,391 73,461 7,834 3,199 2,235 4,172 2,949 806.2 11.2% 184.9 275,700 73,641 7,832 3,19.5 2,244 4,154 2,934 846.1 11.1% 119 268.692 70.159 7,597 3,132 2,147 3,957 2,888 654 12.8% REDEMPTION DOLLARS RECEIVED OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR YTD MAY TOTAL TONS 117.8 $ PER TON $15 TOTAL $1,767.15 COMMINGLED: TONS $ PER TON TOTAL 40.2 $40 $1,608.80 TOTAL 33,375.95 149.1 120.0 136.5 $15 315 $15 32,236.35 31,799.85 $2,047.95 42.3 42.9 42.2 340 $40 $40 $1,692.40 $1,716.00 $1,688.00 158.2 106.1 315 315 $2,373.15 31,591.35 45.3 34.7 $40 $40 $1,812.00 $1,388.40 158.8 138.5 120.9 135.2 137.8 $15 315 $15 $15 315 $2,382.00 32,077.50 31,813.50 $2,028.00 $2,067.00 52.9 55.6 43.3 46.9 47.1 340 $40 340 340 $40 $2,116.00 32,224.00 31,732.00 31,876.00 31,884.00 $3,928.75 $3,515.85 33,135.95 $4,185.15 32,979.75 $4,498.00 $4,301.50 $3,545.50 1643.9 N.A. 322,183.80 493.44 N.A. $19,737.60 341,921.40 Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Parking Cites Issued Ghtfrini viccal Y l c'POE PARKING ENFORCEMENT Current Month 3,871 Vehicles Impounded/Booted 23 Calls Responded To 70 Booting Revenue $6,843.50 Dismissals processed 497 Citations Issued Warnings Issued Complaints Responded To Total Number of Animals Picked -Up of which: Returned to Owner Taken to Shelter Injured, taken to Vet Deceased CONCUR: `Henry • Staten, Acting General Services Director 19 0 24 76 16 60 (1) (49) Fredrick Ferrin, ✓ {J City Manager 7' This Month Last Year 4,231 26 197 $5,838 376 ANIMAL CONTROL 62 0 61 42 13 25 4 15 May 11, 1992 City Council Meeting of May 26, 1992 Last Fiscal Year Fiscal Year To Date To Date 50,185 57,621 276 387 1,064 1,430 $67,768.5 $38,495 4,939 872 435 2 790 501 178 318 (10) (179) Respectfully submitted to, Henry L. Staten, Acting General Services Director by Michele D. Tercero, Administrative Aide 326 0 514 493 142 131 48 177 COMMENTS: Positive enforcement of the Public Information Program, has reduced the number of citations issued. (3) IOD's, (2) vacant full-time positions, and (2) Officers on Military leave contributed to the reduced cite count. Dismissed citations reflect only citations dis missed during the month, not Apr. exclusively. HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS of the HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL PLANNING DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY REPORT APRIL 1992 STAFF REPORTS PREPARED May 19, 1992 Regular Meeting of May 26 , 1992 MEETINGS / SEMINARS MEETINGS 29 30 290 • 299 CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES INITIAL INSPECTIONS THIS MONTH THIS MONTH LAST FY FY TO DATE LAST FY TO DATE APPEAL / CITY COUNCIL RECONSIDERATION 1 2 1 1 1 8 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CONDO) 2 5 1 0 2 5 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (COMMERCIAL) 1 4 1 6 4 2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT 2 0 1 2 1 1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION/REVOCATION 0 0 2 5 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/ MAP EXTENSION 1 0 7 2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 0 0 0 0 FINAL MAP 1 0 1 3 1 8 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 0 0 2 24 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT 0 0 0 1 NONCONFORMING REMODEL 1 1 9 3 PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2 0 1 0 2 PARKING PLAN 0 0 3 4 SPECIAL STUDY 3 0 1 1 0 SUBDIVISION 0 0 2 4 TEXT AMENDMENT 0 0 5 1 0 TRANSIT 0 0 6 3 VARIANCE 0 0 3 3 ZONE CHANGE 1 0 4 1 8 MISCELLANEOUS 7 6 6 9 3 0 MEETINGS / SEMINARS MEETINGS 29 30 290 • 299 CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES INITIAL INSPECTIONS 9 15 105 136 FOLLOW UP INSPECTIONS 1 3 7 1 16 94 LEIIEHS GENERATED 6 2 161 237 MEMOS GENERATED 5 4 3 2 60 C.U.P. ACCEPTANCE FORMS RECEIVED 4 2 25 27 C.U.P. COVENANT FORMS GENERATED 2 0 41 4 C.U.P. COVENANT FORMS RECEIVED 2 2 3 7 3 CITATIONS ISSUED 0 0 1 1 C.U.P. VIOLATIONS ABATED 1 1 5 111 4 8 WAVE DIAL -A -RIDE RIDERSHIP MUNICIPAL AREA EXPRESS (MAX) RIDERSHIP BEACH ROUTE 1 1904 1 2018 1 14524 1 13909 BUDGET (FOR 83% OF FY) EXPENDITURE (COMPARE TO BUDGET ESTIMATE) THIS MONTH THIS MONTH LAST FY FY TO DATE LAST FY TO DATE HERMOSA BEACH PASSENGERS 1216 870 16569 8005 REDONDOBEACHPASSENGERS 4071 4052 46807 39102 SATELLITE PASSENGERS 449 446 4508 3580 MUNICIPAL AREA EXPRESS (MAX) RIDERSHIP BEACH ROUTE 1 1904 1 2018 1 14524 1 13909 BUDGET (FOR 83% OF FY) EXPENDITURE (COMPARE TO BUDGET ESTIMATE) 7%- 25 %- EVENUE (COMPARE TO BUDGET ESTIMATE) 27%+ 30 %- The Following Activities Were Undertaken for Transit Projects 1. Routine tasks. Upcoming Agenda Items to City Council 1. Reduced fee for fence and wall exceptions. 2. Report on open space ballot measure. Long Term Projects Underway 1. Recovering permit authority from Coastal Commission. 2. Updating zoning ordinance for compliance with current law, clarification of intent, and procedural correctness. 3. Continue work on oil drilling project. 4. Updating Land Use Element and other General Plan Elements. ..._-COIN, C Michael Schubach Planning Director NOTED: Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager Respectfully submitted, u,nd,24 Lindsay Ifrsh Planning Aide May 20, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Meeting of the Hermosa Beach City Council May 26, 1992 FINANCE DEPARTMENT ACTIVITY REPORT, APRIL 1992 - 1992-93 department budget requests and revenue estimates were submitted on April 8th. The Finance Department is busy entering and compiling the preliminary document for department meetings with the City Manager and Finance Director which are scheduled to start May 5. - The Senior Account Clerk responsible for revenue accounting is meeting with department representatives to compile data for the update of mis- cellaneous user fees. STATISTICAL SECTION ONTHCULA ITLASTS MFYTH I DATEFY D I TOST FY DATE CITATION PAYMENTS 3,016 3,497 34,882 43,455 INVOICES 28 4 133 120 CASH RECEIPTS 1,668 1,849 17,090 17,431 WARRANTS 344 284 3,262 2,932 PURCHASE ORDERS 391 297 3,608 3,606 UUT EXEMPTIONS 697 666 FILED TO DATE PAYROLL FULL TIME 164 163 PART TIME 62 58 DISCOUNTS TAKEN $ 248.61 Noted: 1/4-4 � Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager $ 2,055.25 Viki Copeland Finance Director HERMOSA BEACH FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT FOR CALENDAR i Apr 30, 19921 f _____..-. 1...__ .............___.._.___.----_._._._..__. !FIRE STATISTICS YEAR 1992 T ____. _.__-i_...._ ___...._ -; This Month 1 This Month 1 Year to Date Last Year One Year Ago , To Date Total Calls 631 53! 2191 244 (types) --1- False Alarms 61 4 30! 3! 20 • 20 MutualAid 1_.. _ ._.._........_._._ -.1_..._......_...._.__._...._...._U 231 _-..._.._.._.._._.____._4�_ 981 191 .___ .�. 2 124 15 7 -__._. __._.._.__._ • _ Paramedic assists Residence Fire 41 Commercial Fire 2r 1 51 Vehicle Fire 2! Hazardous Mtls. 5 4 i! 10! 714 12! 54! rt.-_...... ____- 14 50 _-__ _ Other 191 - �._______._..._.__.PARAMEDIC 65 _._._L.__ STATISTICS 80 1 _ _ ___ _._. _______ _ 1 2501 291 Total Responses 4 331_ c 29 46 9 132! L t9 (types) No Patient/aid Medical 117 Trauma 281 1 151 145 1 i 111 10, 481 23 51 29 Auto Accident Assault 121 Jail Cali 7' 6 151 1351 18 Transports 28 17 109 Base Hosp. Cori_ ___ Trauma Center —!___ _ 22 0 27 01 89 106 3i 4 Medical only STRAND AND BEACH 2; 1161 2 Oi CALLS Z�.-_....__.__...__.—.__O_._____.__._._.____. 01 Oi 1T _... __..._..._ ._.._..__0!._._..__._ 01 01 114 1 2 1 7 0 0 Ocean Accident Beach Accident 0 0� 0! 01 0! Bike v Bike 0 ___.................0..._.__............___......._,..._._.01 Bike v Ped0 1 � __. _..__._._._... 0 0 Falloff Bike Skater v Skater 0 Skater v Ped 0 0� 0 i 01 Fall off Skates Bike/Skater v Other 2 2 Assault 2 11 INSPECTIONS and PREVENTION (primary) Commercial Assembly 801 181 01 01 224 1 21 247 0 5 Institutions 1;— 51 Industrial 9 01 10 84 0 Apartments 721 24 T 79 (re—inspections) -__ Commercial 131 18 83 143 Assembly 0i 04 9.i 20 Oi 0 : 0 0 Institutions _ .-_-.1r.._.__._._ 0 Industrial Apartments52 28 80 170 I Fumigations 141 3_....___ 44 29 4— I ._._.._...__.____._._.....1__---...----_.__._._____ I Respectfully Submitted: ---4 .L....____.._._._.........._._! Noted: `r .viii Manager j Steve Wisniewski. Director of Public Safety ^_T -^ Frederick Ferrin, City May 11, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members City Council Meeting of of the City Council May 26, 1992 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY RESOURCES APRIL, 1992 ACTIVITY REPORT The Department of Community Resources has been involved in the following activities for the month of April: RECREATION PROGRAMMING April 4 - The first sports card and collectables show was held in the Gym. Vendors from around South Bay set out their precious collectables in hopes of trading or selling them to avid sports fans. The event brought in approximately $250 in revenue from vendor and participant fees. April 5 - The 1992 Spring Coed Volleyball League began at the Community Center Gymnasium. Seven teams have registered with games being played on Sunday evenings at 5:00, 6:15, 7:30 and 8:45 P.M. The league will continue through July 12. April 13 - A one-week Spring Camp was offered to youth between the ages of 7 to 12. Children participated in the Annual Spring Window Painting in downtown Hermosa, arts and crafts, games, a movie shown at the Hermosa Civic Theatre and an excursion to the Los Angeles Children's Museum. Twenty-five children registered and were supervised by three (3) staff recreation leaders. April 13 - Corky Bell's sports camp was offered to children during the Spring break at Hermosa Valley Park. Approximately 20 youths participated in basketball, soccer and baseball from 2:30 to 5:30 P.M. The Children's Theatre Series continued this month with four performances held in the Hermosa Civic Theatre on Tuesdays at 4:00 P.M. Performances included "Soul of Spain", April 7; movie "The Wiz"; April 14, "bother Earth Sings the Blues"; April 21 (to commemorate Earth Day) and "Laura C. Spitzner", April 28. The audience consisted of approximately 100 youths and adults. April 18 - The 6th Annual Egg Hunt was held at Valley Park. The festivities began at 1:00 p.m. with egg dyeing, face painting and basket making. The Hunny Bunny made her grand entrance on the Hermosa Beach fire truck to the surprise of the children. The fire officers sounded their siren at 1:30 sharp and began the hunt. SPECIAL EVENTS April 11 - The American Diabetes Association held their annual .Ride and Stride event. Approximately 250 participants passed through the City for this fund raising event. The South Bay Christian Surf Alliance held their annual surfing competition on April 18. Fifty surfers participated in the event. Their body boarding competition was held March 28 (the City received $100 in permit fees). April 10 - Staff assisted with a track meet at Hermosa Valley School. The youths who placed 1st and 2nd are eligible to attend the Jesse Owens District Southwest Meet. The first 4 -man professional Volleyball tournament was held in Hermosa Beach on April 25 & 26. The combination of good volleyball and good weather led to an estimated spectator crowd of 3,500 per day. Event fees collected totaled $6,280. COMMUNITY CENTER FOUNDATION David Richter appeared at the Hermosa Civic Theatre, Friday, April 3, at 8:00 P.M. An audience of 120 enjoyed David playing classical music with his guitar. Grant Geissman, with his band entertained a crowd of 150 at the Hermosa Civic Theatre on April 11. Geissman performed fusion - jazz music. FILMING Three commercial film permits were processed for a total of four days of filming. Permit fees of $3,556.50 were collected. Facility 4/92 User Hours 4/91 User Hours Field 248 218 Theatre 163 140 Clark 96 158 Gym 186 205 Room 7 18 10 Room 8 136 88 Room 10 142 82 Room 12 63 108 DEPARTMENT REVENUE Current This month FY Last FY Month Last FY To Date To Date $30,415.50 $18,491.91 $277,603.61 $237,026.46 Revenue Projection: $321,000 Community Resources Department general fund revenue for 83% of the fiscal year is $277,604 or 86% of the projected figure. Community Resources Department general fund expenditure for 83% of the fiscal year is $296,060 or 78% of the budget FY 1991-92. Respectfully submitted, ��>� Caro e segs i4 �e�s , Mary C. Roo,e !'rector Recreation Specialist Dept. of Community Resources Dept. of Community Resources Noted: Frederick R. City Manager errin • . Easy Reacsr/Redoncici Beach News-:• 1.• Four-year-old Morgan Sterling of Hermosa Beach gives a hug to the Easter bunny ''Saturday afternoon at Valley Park.; Nearly 500 children participated in the city .- red eient. Photii by Kevin_cOdY _ sports° ' ix 1'4 • 0 i4. • anwo by Mic.haerMaccIfifi-aldh,ky : • ..- ..,:>,...•-•etts.',A:v; -. ...:,yr.....,,. -.6 I . 4,-. r........, 6Eait :five teams, mum irade - players like .: other sportii::. ,..eylial'OitkiiititiiVerinCriatiliis. 4eigues. Of the 30 players, there. wco.keicC.v4rhf7r(Oik-#10,000:#4Y:ar! sbi. Olympic gold inedgists7j- si*Bu<WaitiDyr.jiitS toWit:J9:p..§:national tiiiik:inernbetf, ;..J14-.Herinusa;Pier Iir#.1iaire—"iiilt 23;',NCAAfAllf.AinericanS; --. bitac ,. ..,nr,271i.a.. pristeg. including Bryan Ivie of team Paul c. S10....OSVi y ''''fk ea- re; -13ti -MircRelL4i: -”VVAr4t---`10 v.n1 011.4q,4... .Pine or vie grew up irisoUtliManhat:- . ..• 4.;tilrAY;each bat Oil- ' T ,:.... : lin .-..4-edge.SP48A&..,.1L.;2.,,,-, •-...-si, 'Strei4,. P;.14nalk. ,:-- ,.I.V.s' .t,1,-,1! thiVgare.tVaka- -'' ' - 4:Cla4441',6-h:Tea14.1*1 W-1111:14C1- excitemegiVjthellndoor, ..4i.14allaii. d and.5OV- were the riombinedwithtlieau, guys hooked UPir 1'' aReivia—urrireetzralltwo-- .•, • ........ - f rir 1,424,,rpfe • , .,:,41t -c& -Internati CAAcpll pate vo . ;;Iil;31 ii"eir951,..,-- 4 indoor court. urf: Il e Om tMlvii went tothe_ .. 'iifigtefarictinoretaakiaiilian titeitScki*erii califOrnia-Ona volley-:, front row on the beach." q- it, 4 ..i-• ,„,:f=ir'a'aid,ti'arg"6-'m-Vris'fielEft game e,:-.. kholarslup, stu prig econoin-,, :.:-. ; Ivie is a member of the United C41 -I and features longer ralligv:4,-i'''''. ics He is one semester away from L: States national team, training in ---.::-.ii• Th FSPN- television network -As.' a degree, He Was theN :C.:A.J.player,-7 s San Diego. He is favored to make ..,-, _,.., . e." the.top ••1* laying indoor junior year. 4 -Man VB In his first professional outdoor season, Ivie said his biggest adap- tation was to changing conditions. "Getting used to the sand, the wind and the sun. The timing is lot slower on the sand. We use a different type of set. Indoors, there are more quick sets and fast attacks. The sand slciws that down. I'm hitting from the right side on the beach. We have to block more in four -man. And the rules allow to you to play front row at all times," Ivie continued. "Indoors with six men, High ta schootyrA you have to rotate three times in . , "University of front and back rm always m the , ,c, has endorsed the Bud47Man cog- of the year back to badin 1990 e his first Olympic team this sum- cept with plans to bioadCaSt all and 1991 while LiScwsn twin. mer. Ivie just returned from a pre - ten events. Theta-UO.5_comprised.. national champithishiEs. *13 Olympic tournament in Spain, .4.4-4,..4.1NtLz•-:_si • • where the USA placed first The • , Bud 4 -Man tour will take a break for the Olympics, since many of their players figure to be corn- . peting Barcerona. The Hermosa event will feature a total purse of $30,000, with $9,500 going to the winning team. Bud 4- .,, Man players are guaranteed their expenses. Winning players pocket $2,280 for the weekend. Fifth -place finishers get $720. Admission is JI. free to spectators. ER • • • • .-'- :rt,• 32 • The Beach Reporter„• March 26,4992 . _ , • • , • • K77,115; ' • '' ' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' ' ' • ;114` .,;.ick,c;c444Voia.• ilM1111.111k ! ' .•.:..? ti am t9: r LE.,1 Pr 0.fi,2- 0 ci, x it: , 1 ..;!...y; .,16 e..)110 , • a. '"..,* "'"• CI , ..e•- '.P.rf$ g 1' .• - n'',' Pi ' eg . '..•.. %II. i'l le's 2%1'4 v..ri,c• .4 .,.,. ' 4 0 P ....3.,'... 0 ID = ,,,..,,,, ...... is g .,5•A'i • .lt.'• it' 0.$ $*.•.:.!.' >' ct: '.., oefi-i ...',. r 1... °.' J. -J.:4: ›,,,,.... • ...• g.,..4, , zi.:. ff. co ccAR. 1,,,,,„„; A. • , ‘ _ ./....„, �.t May 14, 1992 Honorable Mayor and Members of Regular Meeting the Hermosa Beach City Council May 26, 1992 PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT MARCH ACTIVITY REPORT Current This Month FY to Last FY to STATISTICAL SECTION: Month Last Year Date to Date Worker Comp Claims: Claims Opened 0 6 36 37 Claims Closed 7 7 45 53 Total Open 71 72 71 72 Lost Time (Manhours) Safety 0 * 2,468 * Non -safety 232 * 3,416 * Liability Claims: Claims opened 2 3 45 25 Claims closed 7 3 50 22 Total open 39 33 39 33 Employee Involved Vehicle Accidents: Safety Non -safety Employee Turnover: Safety Non -safety 0 1 0 2 * 5 * 7 * 1 * 10 * * * Information not maintained in this format last fiscal year. General Appropriations Secretary: The following summary indicates the amount of the assigned functions: April: 180 hours available Word Processing Mail Processing 76% (136 hrs) 8% (14 hrs) Avg. 7.50 hrs/day Avg. 1.0 hr/day Word Processing Services by Department: Finance City Manager: City Clerk . 29% (40 hrs) 10% (14 hrs) 1% ( 1 hr ) Respectfully Submitted, Robert A. Blackwood, Director Personnel and Risk Management pers/act of time spent on each Directory/Dept Support 16% (30 hrs) Avg. 2.5 hrs/day Public Works .• Personnel .• Community Resources: Noted: -,x4-% Frederick Frederick R. Ferrin City Manager 32% 20% % (44 (27 ( 7 hrs) hrs) hrs) HERMOSA BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1992 APRIL OFFENSES REPORTED This Month This Month Year to Date Last Year One Year Ago To Date Murder 0 0 0 0 Rape 1 0 • 4 0 Robbery 6 0 14 9 Assault 9 26 27 42 Burglary (Total) 25 21 151 107 * Burglaries (Vehicle) 11 70 * Burglaries (Residential) 12 66 = * * Burglaries (Commercial) 2 15 - * Larceny 36 68 188 200 Motor Vehicle Theft 11 14 62 49 ,DUI 32 36 135 121 All Other Offenses 315 301 1235 1030 Disturbance Calls 327 223 917 868 *-Not separated prior to 1-92 PERSONS ARRESTED Adults 84 113 354 365 Juveniles 6 9 32 27 Criminal Citations 81 18 344 237 Bicycle/Skateboard Cites 1 8 1 9 TRAFFIC REPORT ACCIDENTS Fatal 0 0 1 0 Injury 12 2 43 36 Property Damage Only 32 28 128 105 CITATIONS Traffic 294 410 1308 1316 Parking 22 7 70 41 CALLS FOR SERVICE Total Calls 2312 2263 8875 11003 Noted: Respectf fly Subm' te., Frederick Ferrin, City Manager Steve S. Wisniewski Director of Public Safety Exist. NS 3-7PM Mon. to Fri. Evict. NSA PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY (ROUTE 1) RAv Join �`2 Join - Join _— aN 0 0 0, 7 /--- Dote' // Tire AY /' Porkers - V 0 V P/ C{ Cm.> or OF ' tiE Y,(f-- �h IT�ti. ©rcf 9F '�—.---`'-Af erg /12-/.1- 7°°: 7 :'.1 - `>Detail 40 43-'47 - - Typ Pmmc'.'^ curl- e IV(I-) 1 -XP. r'- Deteil ,8 E Dnfril g t -"r. _ _. Def(7.1 -- - ---__ Vnl How for q ci:stnrl(JP 1 -_.°( r,. `r Dm 0 / Fn.,,n•n i-.I�s ' OuN„ t. /,/SAT r. ch,r _ RAI oc'r!n nr R26 ote »— S/ri., 4'24 r S s,91 behin then e4 curb R/v, A 1 3s, Whit', on Grenro with refln•-torized hu`/rn f OrrTl r7+ �l . n,rier nf,r-rf'n'i Rio -I/ (jr ret!Prrlvn #4 Long tturf nal ho( #4 Dowel spaced 4' 'ength '8" - 'y in P.a ref. r:l,]'-r.r. rip-. ^firrrnntrlcc .. "nit of crncrnlc . 1 Concrete Median Berm Detail B (Scale: 1" - 10") I_iCHt'"DC1bi contl'e\'r sirlr ntruoturn In c_crrionce with Caltro : .,td. LH, -P Median Mounted Sign Detail A P , n n n rrr' (Note to Scale) Pn I! Mci r'o- nr - nli''N: Ihrrrnrnif;,Iir iin„ Typo H ., r ilrf - `. O4;F•I ',rra/Pry Concrete Median Curb Detail C (Scale: 1" = 10") NOTES ALL WORK WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY SHALL BE DONE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF THE LANE CLOSURE AND ENCROACHMENT PERMITS TO BE OBTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS) AND FROM THE CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH. 2. TRAFFIC SIGNS SHALL BE REFLECTORIZED AND SHALL CONFORM TO THE CALTRANS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS, DATED JANUARY 1988. SIGNS SHALL BE INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF CALTRANS STANDARD PLANS, DATED JANUARY 1988. 3. ALL SIGNS SHALL BE NEW EXCEPT AS NOTED. SIGNS DESIGNATED "RELOCATE" ARE EXISTING SIGNS TO BE RELOCATED TO THE LOCATIONS SHOWN. IF EXISTING SIGNS ARE DEEMED UNACCEPTABLE BY THE ENGINEER, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH AND INSTALL NEW SIGNS. SIGNS DESIGNATED "EXIST" ARE EXISTING SIGNS TO REMAIN IN PLACE. SIGNS DESIGNATED "SALVAGE" SHALL BE REMOVED AND DELIVERED TO A LOCATION SPECIFIED BY THE ENGINEEEER. SIGNS SHALL BE MOUNTED ON 4 -INCH BY 4 -INCH WOOD POSTS. 4. TRAFFIC PAINT, REFLECTIVE MATERIALS, AND PAVEMENT MARKERS SHALL CONFORM TO THE CALTRANS STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS. PAVEMENT DELINEATION PATTERNS SHALL CONFORM TO THE DETAILS IN THE CALTRANS STANDARD PLANS A20 -A, A20 -B, AND A20 -C. PAINT SHALL BE SOLVENT -BORNE, RAPID -DRY TYPE. TRAFFIC STRIPING AND PAVEMENT SYMBOLS SHALL BE REFLECTORIZED PAINT MARKINGS. STRIPING SHALL NOT BE PLACED UNTIL SPOTTED, AND THE SPOTTING IS APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER. 6. WORD AND ARROW SYMBOLS SHALL BE WHITE AND SHALL CONFORM TO THE DETAILS IN THE CALTRANS STANDARD PLANS A -24A, A -24B, A -24C, AND A -24D. 7. ALL CONFLICTING EXISTING STRIPING, PAINTED SYMBOLS, AND RAISED PAVEMENT MARKERS SHALL BE REMOVED. PAINTED MARKINGS SHALL BE REMOVED BY WET SANDBLASTING. ci LEGEND Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Striping and Markings Striping and Markings Sign Sign 1 I 40 0 40 80 SCALE IN FEET —' CITY OF MANHATTAN BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - ENGINEERING DIVISION i'1ISCTHt+ S flSSOCI ftS 1pArrr 4'!L rMA^ ^ rrFrAT , l ' f'Ir.NFFR S A.40 F ( AVNrPS 1 4 4 3 1 HAMLIN STREET VAN NUYS, CALIFORNIA 91401 818/785-1578 • 213/873-1578 PLAN PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF REVISIONS NO. BY DATE 4-21-91 BERNARD BRAUNER, P. E. DATE CIS/ of LAU1 - T REFERENCES SIGNING AND STRIPING PLAN SEPULVEDA BOULEVARD/ARTESIA BOULEVARD APPROVE BY 'Y 0- MANHATIAN BEACH -OA ,711_,t'• - f 1Z2 -711Z2 -71_,z DIRcCTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE CHECKED BY DATE - DRAWN BY - —`-- ------- - APPROVED BY CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS SCALE DATE DRAWING NO. 1"=40 --------1 T-209 SHEET I OF