|
|
 Planning Commission Minutes September 18, 2001 - Hermosa Beach
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON SEPTEMBER 18, 2001, AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERSThe meeting was called to order by Chairman Perrotti at 7:05 p.m. Chairman Perrotti said the meeting would be adjourned in memory of victims of the terrorism attack in New York. Commissioner Hoffman led the pledge of allegiance. Roll Call
CONSENT CALENDARMOTION by Commissioner Hoffman, seconded by Commissioner Pizer, to APPROVE the August 21, 2001 Planning Commission minutes.
5. Item(s) for consideration
Director Blumenfeld indicated that Commission at the last meeting approved several items with respect to conditioning the project. He said this basically codifies comments of Commission and would be final resolution for the Precise Development Plan attached to this project. Commissioner Tucker commented that a covenant be added regarding the garages to be used for residential. Director Blumenfeld indicated that the garages would be inspected before issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. MOTION by Commissioner Hoffman, seconded by Commissioner Pizer, to ADOPT Resolution P.C. 01-27.
6. ORAL/WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONSCommissioner Tucker commented on the candlelight vigil held on Friday evening for the victims of the terrorist attack. He also said that five people in the community were instrumental in raising $30,000 in three days on a donation drive to benefit the Red Cross. The five people involved were Joe and Dana Denhockey, Jeff Bartlett, Tony Lu, Tiffany Krum, and Emily Williams. He said the fundraiser was done in association with the Kiwanis Club and its president, Carol Larson. PUBLIC HEARINGS7. CUP 01-3 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO LOCATE A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION ANTENNA ON THE EXISTING OFFICE BUILDING AT 2447 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY (continued from August 21, 2001 meeting).Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request. Director Blumenfeld stated that the applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit in order to allow the construction of four additional panel antennas on the northwest side of the building. He indicated that under Section 17.46.240, an applicant is required to process a Conditional Use Permit when a project involves satellite equipment or wireless communication equipment. He further stated that the project is located on a building which is nonconforming to height at 41.5 feet in height on the westernmost side of the building, and pursuant to the City's code, for a device placed on the rooftop of an existing building, the surface area measurement shall only include the measurement of the surface area of the device that exceeds the height of the existing parapet or roof wall, whichever is greater. He said the proposed panel antennas, which are shown in the plans, will be mounted to the northwest side of the existing parapet wall above the roofline but below the top of the parapet wall, which precludes it from the surface area calculation of Section 17.46, and that the GPS antenna, combined with the existing rooftop equipment, exceeds the twelve (12) square foot surface area limitation above the height limit, but is exempt from regulation under Section 17.46.240 B.3 because it is less than one meter in diameter. He further stated that as required in Section 17.46.240, Site Selection Guidelines, the proposed use is consistent with the zone and planned use of the property, and it is located on an existing commercial building with other existing wireless communications facilities, so based on these facts, Staff recommends approval subject to the resolution attached to the Staff report. Commissioner Tucker asked if GPS was a Global Positioning Satellite antenna. Director Blumenfeld responded that the applicant was available and would be able to answer any questions regarding the equipment. Commissioner Kersenboom asked if the two new antennas would be lower than the four existing ones. Chairman Perrotti asked what was to be reviewed as far as the City's jurisdiction. Director Blumenfeld said a Conditional Use Permit is required for any satellite equipment. He said there is limited jurisdiction, but the applicant is willing to comply with the Conditional Use Permit requirements that are suggested. Commissioner Tucker commented on the local jurisdiction zoning already in place. Director Blumenfeld said the City had revised this section of the zone code per the City Attorney, and it includes exemption regarding satellite and telecommunication equipment less than one meter in diameter. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing. Jim Marquez, stated the applicant's chief responsibility was to not pierce the skyline by placing antenna on the walls of the building. He said the GPS is a Global Positioning unit, placed a few inches above the roof below the parapet, that identifies for the system how it tracks satellites for continuous coverage. He also said the antenna would be painted in texture and color to match the building. In response to Commission Kersenboom, Mr. Marquez said the entire mounting does not stick out more than a foot, but they are trying to get it down to nine inches. In response to Commissioner Hoffman, Mr. Marquez said it is a system for a new client, and it is a new technology which will be coupling internet and wireless telecommunication for worldwide communication directly to each home. In response to Commissioner Tucker, Mr. Marquez said the GPS is about the size of a fist, and if another carrier needs to be above, they may need to seek another site. Chairman Perrotti closed the public hearing. Commissioner Hoffman commented on the proliferation of antennas on buildings, and he asked, if the equipment became obsolete in two years, if it could be removed. Director Blumenfeld responded that under the Ordinance there is a condition that says six months after expiration of permit, the owner shall remove the equipment, but it would be incumbent upon the owner of the building and owner of the permit to notify the City that the equipment is not functioning. He said the ordinance encourages co-location in central areas. He also said that screening could be required as a condition of approval. Commissioner Pizer said these installations should be welcomed to obtain more reliable wireless communications. Chairman Perrotti concurred with Commissioner Pizer's comments. MOTION by Commissioner Tucker, seconded by Commissioner Pizer, to APPROVE Staff Recommendation.
8. CON 01-12 - VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 25454 FOR TWO TWO-UNIT CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS AT 940-942 & 944-946 5TH STREET.Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request. Commissioner Kersenboom abstained from the item. City Planner Schubach said Staff is recommending approval of the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map. He said the applicant failed to have the map finaled prior to the previous map expiring. He also stated the project is built correctly and they simply need to have a new map and then they can go on to City Council and have the map finaled and legally they are able to sell the condominium units. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing. Richard Strom, said he was at least in part responsible for allowing the map to expire and apologized for any confusion. He also suggested a notice might be sent out 60 to 90 days prior to expiration in order to avoid the problem arising. Director Blumenfeld responded that it is incumbent upon the applicant to make a request which is explained in the Zoning Ordinance the subdivision law. Chairman Perrotti closed the public hearing. MOTION by Chairman Hoffman, seconded by Commissioner Tucker, to APPROVE the request.
Chairman Perrotti said the record should reflect that Commission Kersenboom returned. 9. CUP 01-5 - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTDOOR DINING IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PROPOSED SNACK SHOP USE AT 1225 HERMOSA AVENUE, THE COFFEE BEAN AND TEA LEAF.Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request. Director Blumenfeld gave a staff report and reviewed the project. He stated that this a request for a Conditional Use Permit for outdoor seating in conjunction with a snack shop. He said the proposed outdoor seating is part of the Coffee Bean, which is located in the Bijou building. He said that in April of 1999, the City Council designated the Bijou an historic landmark. He said the building is under current renovation, consisting of shell improvements and seismic retrofit improvements being completed pursuant to the City's historic preservation ordinance. He stated there are four tenants currently proposed for in the building. He stated the Coffee Bean is proceeding with the proposed improvement but decided they want to provide outdoor seating similar to Starbucks. Director Blumenfeld further explained that a Conditional Use Permit is required for outdoor use, pursuant to Chapter 17.26 of the Zoning Code. He said the kinds of issues that come up with outdoor dining relate to noise and operation hours, as noted in the draft resolution. He said that typically outdoor dining contributes to the parking demand, but there is ample parking based upon the parking credit provided under Section 17.44, for the existing and previous use because of the previous theater use. He said based on the proposed recommendations in the resolution, Staff is recommending approval of the C.U.P. for outdoor seating. In response to Commissioner Tucker, Director Blumenfeld said there is ample parking based on the credit for previous use. In response to Chairman Perrotti and Commissioner Tucker, Director Blumenfeld explained that the parking requirement for the building is calculated against the existing and previous use for the building and the parking credit to park the outdoor dining in connection with the snack shop is more than offset by the credit as shown in the staff report. In response to Commissioner Kersenboom, Director Blumenfeld explained that there is 6' clear from the curb to the face of the columns along Hermosa Avenue and the seats are not supposed to project beyond the column area. He also pointed out that one of the recommendations was to fix the seats. In response to Chairman Perrotti, Director Blumenfeld explained that the sidewalk along Hermosa Avenue is wider in this location compared to the Starbucks building which has a 2' cantilever over the public right of way. In response to Commissioner Tucker, Director Blumenfeld said he would need to consult with Public Works regarding the quantity of trees and that the type of tree specified is a Palm tree. In response to Chairman Perrotti, Director Blumenfeld said the Public Works Department proposed to use existing tree wells. In response to Commissioner Tucker, Director Blumenfeld said Public Works would have to comment on the maintenance of the trees. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing. Ben Steckler, requested that Public Works Department relinquish one of the trees as per the plans. Director Blumenfeld explained that the trees are a requirement of the Public Works Department. Discussion was held among the commissioners regarding the umbrellas, the seating, and the trash areas. Director Blumenfeld suggested that amendments in the resolution regarding the outside seating could be added. He also suggested that the applicant will be required to provide signing with an approved sign plan. Beth Whitfield, stated there would not be any signage. Addressing the seating issue, she said that having the chairs fixed may cause people to loiter after the store was closed. Chairman Perrotti closed the public hearing. In response to commissioner questions, Director Blumenfeld commented that the Planning Commission jurisdiction would encompass nuisance, noise and trash, and he said they could require a trash receptacle be installed pursuant to the requirements of the Public Works Department. He also said the mezzanine was also going to be used for seating, but the location of the stairway was still to be resolved. Commissioner Tucker spoke about different traffic situations developing in the area. Commissioner Hoffman expressed his opinion that since the Planning Commission has no jurisdiction, he would not be able to approve the plan. Director Blumenfeld said the project could be continued in order to request that the Public Works Department address right-of-way issues associated with the project. He also said the use permit would regulate the operating hours. Chairman Perrotti commented on the outdoor seating conflicting with the historic character of the building, the fixed seating diagram, umbrella size and positioning, and suggested continuing the project to allow the Public Works Department to address all the questions regarding access. Commissioner Pizer commented on traffic flow problems and crowding by the umbrellas. Chairman Perrotti re-opened the public hearing. Ben Steckler, spoke about modifying the plan to obtain approval in order to move forward. Chairman Perrotti closed the public hearing. Director Blumenfeld commented that the Public Works Department will issue an encroachment permit if the outdoor dining C.U.P. is approved. He also encouraged the commissioners to obtain Public Works' input on different questions on the project. MOTION by Comissioner Hoffman, seconded by Commissioner Pizer, to CONTINUE CUP 01-5.
A brief recess was taken. 10. TEXT 01-5 - TEXT AMENDMENT TO SECTION 17.46.130 -- WALLS, FENCES AND HEDGES IN RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND MANUFACTURING ZONES.Staff Recommended Action: To recommend approval of said text amendment. City Planner Schubach said Staff is recommending that the Text Amendment be sent to City Council for a change to the Zoning Ordinance to require fences 42" or higher be required to have a permit. He said since 1996, the Ordinance was changed to allow fences as high as 42" in the front yard setback. In response to Commissioner Pizer, City Planner Schubach said a building permit would not be required for fences under 42". Director Blumenfeld discussed eliminating the building permit requirement for fences less than 6' in height. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing. Chairman Perrotti closed the public hearing. Discussion was between the commissioners and Director Blumenfeld regarding whether to eliminate the requirement for a building permit for fences less than 6'. MOTION by Commissioner Pizer, seconded by Commissioner Hoffman, to APPROVE the Text Amendment.
HEARINGS11. TEXT 01-6 / 01-7 - SIGN ORDINANCE STUDY: 1) TO CONSIDER REMOVAL OF "REPRESENTATIONAL ART" FROM THE SIGN DEFINITION. 2) TO STUDY THE CURRENT PROHIBITION OF SIDEWALK SIGNS.Staff Recommended Action: To direct staff as deemed appropriate. Director Blumenfeld said the City Council at the July 24, 2001 meeting, requested Staff to refer the issue of "representational art" as part of the sign definition to Commission. He also said the City Council at their meeting of August 28, 2001, discussed the issue with respect to a petition from one of the local businesses that wanted the Sign Ordinance amended to permit sidewalk or A-frame signs. He said the definition of sign is found in Section 17.52 of the Zoning Code. The definition is: "Sign" is any medium including representational art with its structure and component parts which is intended to be used to attract attention to goods and/or services offered by the business on the premises. He said a mural is defined as a pictoral representation not specifically identifying goods or services offered by the business on the premises. Director Blumenfeld also said if the Commission felt it provided too much latitude, some of the broader wording could be eliminated. He said there is a provision for murals which requires Commission approval. He said Staff's feeling is that the Sign Ordinance is sufficient and ought not be amended because it would complicate the Sign Code. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing. Emily Baum, spoke about how her sign draws the childrens' attention and how the community is trying to encourage businesses other than restaurants, bars and retail downtown. Director Blumenfeld indicated that two issues were referred to Commission; one dealing with the definition of signs and the second item dealing with sidewalk signs. Chairman Perrotti closed the public hearing. Commissioner Hoffman said he felt deleting the wording would not necessarily resolve any issue, and it might make the Sign Ordinance less inclusive. Commission Kersenboom agreed with Commissioner Hoffman regarding the definitions. Commissioner Pizer felt the business people in the community should be notice about the ordinance and to continue the discussion. Commissioner Tucker agreed with Commissioner Pizer. Chairman Perrotti agreed with Commissioner Hoffman concerning the sign definition is adequate, and if objections arise regarding paintings on sides of buildings, then Staff should ask them to apply for a permit for a mural. Discussion was held among the commissioners regarding representational art. MOTION by Commissioner Kersenboom, seconded by Commissioner Tucker, to LEAVE the sign definition the way it is.
Director Blumenfeld said Council received a letter requesting that the City consider allowing sidewalk or A-frame signs within the public right of way under the Sign Code. He said sidewalk signs are not allowed, both for aesthetic and liability reasons at the present time. Commissioner Pizer asked if the business owners could somehow be given notice of the issue. Director Blumenfeld said a notice could be hand-delivered and the Chamber of Commerce could be notified. Discussion ensued regarding noticing of the businesses. Director Blumenfeld discussed the code enforcement issue. Commissioner Hoffman commented that if everybody in the city wanted to have a sign up, that collectively the visual blight generated would not be good for the business community. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing. Emily Baum, said she thought the code was written before the promenade actually became a promenade, and businesses suffer greatly who do not have the visual opportunity to put up a sign or hang a mural. She also said because of the removal of her sign that the positive flow of her business has been affected. She suggested that maybe a plan could be devised for businesses that are not visible to have the same opportunities as the ones that are. She also suggested a kiosk at the entrance of the plaza for everyone to display what services they offer. Chairman Perrotti closed the public hearing. Commission Hoffman said a business directory may not be a bad idea. He said the A-frame sign is out there at the expense of everyone else in town and did not see that as an equitable burden for the City. Chairman Perrotti said he did not have a strong opposition to continuing this after notice to the owners and to the Chamber of Commerce. Commissioner Tucker agreed with Chairman Perrotti regarding noticing and continuing the item. Commission Pizer said this being a study, it needs input from the community. MOTION by Commissioner Pizer, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom, to CONTINUE the study to the October meeting along with notification to the businesses in Hermosa Beach through the Chamber of Commerce and any other ways deemed appropriate.
12. STAFF ITEMS
13. COMMISSIONER ITEMSCommissioner Hoffman discussed logos on equipment. Director Blumenfeld indicated the policy is that any rooftop equipment, if it is approved by discretionary permit, is supposed to be screened from view. Commissioner Hoffman discussed having the Planning Commission meet with the Public Works Commission to discuss items in common. Director Blumenfeld suggested that Staff could be directed to set up meetings and the commissioners agreed this should be accomplished. Commissioner Tucker discussed businesses with 6' grass fencing. Director Blumenfeld indicated that he would direct the fencing question to the Public Works Department. Director Blumenfeld indicated that an issue relating to the completeness of a condominium project, which is currently under construction, will be brought back at the next meeting. 14. ADJOURNMENTMOTION by Commissioner Tucker, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom, to ADJOURN the meeting at 10:15 p.m. No objections, so ordered. CERTIFICATIONI hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and complete record of the action taken by the Planning Commission of Hermosa Beach at the regularly scheduled meeting of September 18, 2001. Sam Perrotti, Chairman
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||