|
|
Planning Commission Minutes September 16, 2003
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON SEPTEMBER 16, 2003, 7:00 P.M., AT THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Hoffman at 7:00 P.M.
Chairman Hoffman welcomed one of the newest members to this community, his grandmother-in-law, Evelyn.
Commissioner Kersenboom led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Kersenboom, Perrotti, Pizer, Tucker, Chairman Hoffman
Absent: None
Also Present: Sol Blumenfeld, Community Development Director
Ken Robertson, Senior Planner
Denise Bothe, Recording Secretary
ORAL/WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
None.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Commissioner Perrotti asked that the word "he" be removed from Page 12, "Commissioner Kersenboom stated that in the he last"
MOTION by Vice-Chairman Tucker, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom, to APPROVE the August 19, 2003, Minutes as amended. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Kersenboom, Perrotti, Pizer, Tucker
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: Hoffman
ABSENT: None
-
Resolutions for consideration
-
Resolution P.C. 03-39 approving a Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54429 for a seven-unit condominium, and adoption of an Environmental Negative Declaration at 2006, 2014 and 2024 Pacific Coast Highway. (PDF File)
Director Blumenfeld advised that staff had discussions with the project architect and representative regarding questions concerning Section 1E, "Each unit shall have an individual trash receptacle storage area. The proposed exterior trash enclosures shall be covered with trellis structures." He indicated that it was staff's understanding during the meeting that there was to be both a common trash area, with a trellis cover, and an individual storage area, which could be accommodated either in the garage or in one of the units.
Commissioner Pizer stated that he did not recall the requirement to provide an individual trash area for each unit; and expressed his belief that the limited number of units at this project should not have individual trash containers plus two storage locations.
It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to strike the following language in Section 1E: "Each unit shall have an individual trash receptacle storage area."
Director Blumenfeld stated that the architect and the applicant's representative also had a question with regard to Section 1F, "Pervious paving materials shall be used for all driveway and parking areas. The type of pervious paving material used shall be at the applicant's discretion, so long as it permits percolation of drainage." He stated that with regard to pervious paving, it was his understanding that the Planning Commission's desire was to introduce pervious paving as an allowable material - pointing out that the City typically incorporates decorative paving in all driveways and parking areas. He added that the applicant is concerned about the condition because there is a down-slope from the driveway into the site, and pervious paving on the driveway would create a hazardous condition when it is wet; advised that approximately 27 percent of this site will be dedicated to landscaping, which is significant; and that the applicant would like to use decorative paving on the driveway where the pervious paving is required.
Elizabeth Srour, applicant's representative, stated that this project has been designed to comply with Coastal Commission guidelines; explained that the drainage plan incorporates the entire motor court and serves as a drainage system for this site because of the topography, etc.; noted that there will be a trench drain system adjacent to the westerly garages, which is designed to capture the water - pointing out that there will be 3 trench drains that have about a foot of rock/pebbles which allows under normal circumstances the water to percolate down into the soil; and that there is also an overflow capability within the trench drain system in the event of a major storm - noting that the overflow water would be directed into the public storm drain system, which is typical and approved by the Coastal Commission. She stated that the parking areas and guest areas will include turf cell material.
It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to strike the words "..shall be used for all driveway and parking areas"; and that the pervious paving remain for the parking areas and decorative paving remain for the driveways.
MOTION by Commissioner Perrotti, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom, to APPROVE Resolution P.C. 03-39, approving a Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54429 for a seven-unit condominium, and adoption of an Environmental Negative Declaration at 2006, 2014 and 2024 Pacific Coast Highway as amended in Sections 1E and 1F. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Hoffman, Kersenboom, Perrotti, Pizer, Tucker
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
-
Resolution P.C. 03-40 denying a request for a Precise Development Plan and Nonconforming Remodel to allow an addition and remodel to an existing commercial building, nonconforming to parking, resulting in a greater than 50% increase in valuation, and denying a Parking Plan to provide required parking in tandem and to include a mezzanine for storage only with parking requirements based on storage at 238 Pier Avenue. (PDF File)
Director Blumenfeld stated that the Planning Commission previously had voted to deny the proposed Parking Plan, Precise Development Plan and Nonconforming Remodel and that staff was presenting the resolution for denial.
MOTION by Vice-Chairman Tucker, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom, to APPROVE Resolution P.C. 03-40, denying a request for a Precise Development Plan and Nonconforming Remodel to allow an addition and remodel to an existing commercial building, nonconforming to parking, resulting in a greater than 50% increase in valuation, and denying a Parking Plan to provide required parking in tandem and to include a mezzanine for storage only with parking requirements based on storage at 238 Pier Avenue. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Hoffman, Kersenboom, Tucker
NOES: Perrotti, Pizer
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Public Hearing(s)
-
CON 03-5 -- Conditional Use Permit and Precise Development Plan amendment to add a roof deck to an existing condominium at 927 17th Street (continued from July 15 and August 19, 2003 meetings). (PDF File)
Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request.
Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request.
Senior Planner Robertson explained that this item was continued because staff had concerns with the submitted survey not being consistent with the survey grades that were used to establish the building height for the condominium project when it was originally built in 1997; noted that staff worked with the former survey firm and found a copy of the original survey to help resolve this concern with the applicant; advised that the applicant has submitted a new survey showing the location of the newer condominium buildings in relation to the property lines, in addition to verifying the current height elevation of the existing condominium buildings in relation to the original survey data; noted that the current survey firm has used the same elevation of an existing lead and tag placed by the former survey firm - stating that, therefore, the grades correlate with the unaltered grade prior to construction. Based upon this original survey data, Senior Planner Robertson stated that the proposed deck does comply with the 30-foot height limit for the R-2B Zone; noted that the applicant is properly indicating the proposed and maximum height elevations at the critical height point on plans; that staff has studied the plans and determined that the proposed roof deck is approximately 2.7 inches under the allowable height limit and, therefore, meets the code; and that the proposed deck addition complies with all zoning requirements, including open space and lot coverage. He added that while the proposed roof deck modifies the architectural appearance of the existing rear building, the change does not appear to compromise the overall architectural appearance of the building.
Chairman Hoffman opened the public hearing; there being no public input, Chairman Hoffman closed the public hearing.
MOTION by Vice-Chairman Tucker, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom, to APPROVE CON 03-5 -- Conditional Use Permit and Precise Development Plan amendment to add a roof deck to an existing condominium at 927 17th Street. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Hoffman, Kersenboom, Perrotti, Pizer, Tucker
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
-
TEXT 03-13 -- Text amendment regarding C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) development standards. (PDF File)
Staff Recommended Action: To recommend approval of said Text Amendment.
Director Blumenfeld stated that previously, the Planning Commission had approved a project at 44 Hermosa Avenue, which is located in the C-1 Zone; noted that at that time, the project was approved as a mixed use project without development standards relative to the residential portion of the project because none are provided in the zone; and advised that staff is proposing to amend Chapter 17.40 of the Zoning Ordinance to provide these standards pursuant to the Planning Commission's direction at the conclusion of that hearing, wherein the Planning Commission directed staff to develop development standards that were consistent with the City's other residential development standards. He indicated that staff has examined the primary issues for setbacks and density and prepared the draft text amendment setting a minimum amount of commercial space on the ground floor, requirements for parking, limitations on the allowed uses, provisions for landscaping, signage, and hours of operation for the commercial operations of mixed use projects.
Director Blumenfeld pointed out that staff examined three options for developing residential standards; that one approach is to use the R-3 development standards and apply those across the board to all mixed use projects; stated that another would be to look at the adjacent residential density and make a determination on that basis as to what standards ought to apply; and noted that whether R-2 or R-3 densities are established, the issues relative to setback, open space and lot coverage remain the same - pointing out that the only difference is the number of allowable units.
Director Blumenfeld stated that the City Council, in examining this issue relative to approval allowing condominium development in the C-1 zone, indicated the need to prohibit residential uses on the ground floor and to limit the appurtenant portions of residential use on the ground floor; noted that in the R-3 zone, there is a setback requirement of 5 feet; and that staff is recommending a 5-foot setback requirement also for the mixed use development because it is consistent with the Condominium Ordinance applicable to either R-2 or R-3 properties. He stated that staff looked at the residential build-out; given the number of C-1 zoned properties and the potential to assemble property - pointing out that there are currently 56 dwelling units on 20 of the 43 C-1 Zoned properties and indicated that half or 10 of these properties have commercial on the ground floor, and the remaining 10 are nonconforming.
Based on the allowable density in the R-2 and R-3 Zones, Director Blumenfeld stated that it is possible to construct 33 units using the R-2 standard or 44 units using the R-3 standard; that since the majority of the C-1 Zoned properties are on contiguous lots, they can be assembled and redeveloped and yield up to a total of 63 units using the R-2 standard or 85 units using the R-3 standard. Director Blumenfeld stated that given some of the C-1 Zoned properties are adjacent to R-2 or R-3 Zoned properties, there also may be some possibility of assembling commercially and residentially zoned property so that the residential development within a mixed use project in the C-1 Zone is combined with residential development on adjacent residentially zoned properties. He explained that relative to the commercial standards on the ground floor, the underlying zoning is commercial and the development of residential exclusively is prohibited, adding that the code already requires that the ground floor be commercially developed, but stated that it doesn't specify how much; and noted that staff is recommending that the Planning Commission establish a minimum. He stated that except for the appurtenant parts of residential uses (stairs etc.), at least 75 percent of the commercial area should be designated for commercial use and that there be a minimum commercial depth of 30 feet, to ensure that the commercial area is functional for a business.
Director Blumenfeld advised that the C-1 uses are restrictive; that because of concerns with noise, staff has included the prohibition of pet stores, animal hospitals, arcades, restaurants, bars; that limitations of hours have been recommended, from 6:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M., Sunday through Thursday, and 6:00 A.M. to midnight, Friday and Saturday; that staff is suggesting that signing be located below the second story only and no higher than the frontage of the commercial use; relative to landscaping, that it be placed along the street frontage (rather than private property); and advised that staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend to City Council the adoption of the attached resolution amending and creating a new subsection in 17.40, entitled, "Mixed Use Development Standards."
Commissioner Perrotti noted his preference to restrict the hours of operation with mixed use from 7:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M. during the week, and 10:00 A.M. on the weekends.
Vice-Chairman Tucker noted his preference for a starting time no earlier than 8:00 A.M.; with regard to setbacks, he briefly commented on his concern with creating a box-like effect with the second floor, especially with that on the side yards; with regard to residential, he noted his preference to maintain a minimum of 3 feet from the side yards, a needed separation on the next floor up; and noted his preference for non-illuminated signage and the placement of this signage up to the mezzanine level.
Director Blumenfeld explained that the Building Code would require at least a 3-foot setback from the property line, for all residential use openings.
Director Blumenfeld noted for Commissioner Perrotti that it is possible to use the front yard setback as allowable open space; or roof decks; and that staff is suggesting in Section 3 to use R-3 development standards, except for the lot coverage.
Senior Planner Robertson estimated for Chairman Hoffman that approximately 2/3rds of these properties abut R-3 and the remaining abuts R-2.
Director Blumenfeld noted for Commissioner Pizer that all these projects would be subject to the conditional use process for consideration by the Planning Commission.
Vice-Chairman Tucker questioning if the top floor on these buildings would be less than 500 square feet and Director Blumenfeld explained that otherwise these buildings must have a second exit, pursuant to the Building Code.
Chairman Hoffman opened the public hearing; there being no input, Chairman Hoffman closed the public hearing.
Vice-Chairman Tucker noted his preference to set the hours of operation in the standards.
Commissioner Kersenboom suggested that the hours of operation be taken on a case-by-case basis and noted that he could support the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M.
Commissioner Pizer suggested that an applicant could apply to alter the hours of operation; and stated that he could support the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M., 7 days a week.
Following brief discussion, Director Blumenfeld stated that Section 3, 1E will be rewritten as follows: "One 36-inch box tree per dwelling unit shall be placed as a street tree to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director."
Vice-Chairman Tucker reiterated his preference for non-illuminated signage.
Director Blumenfeld explained that some signage lighting would be necessary and suggested that such signage be required to be turned off when the business is closed.
MOTION by Commissioner Perrotti, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom, to APPROVE TEXT 03-13 -- Text amendment regarding C-1 (Neighborhood Commercial) development standards, with the following changes: Section 1E, One 36-inch box tree per dwelling shall be placed as a street tree; Section 3C, lighting signs will be illuminated only during business hours; and Item 6, the hours of operation shall be 8:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Hoffman, Kersenboom, Perrotti, Pizer, Tucker
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
-
TEXT 03-14 -- Text amendment regarding State mandated density bonus ordinance. (PDF File)
Staff Recommended Action: To recommend approval of said Text Amendment.
Director Blumenfeld expressed the need to amend the Zone Code to comport with the State requirements for establishing density bonus provisions; explained that the statutory requirements encourage the goals for affordable housing in every jurisdiction; stated that every city must adopt an ordinance that specifies incentives to construct affordable housing units; and pointed out that this City's Zoning Ordinance has no provisions for such density bonuses. He mentioned that this omission was pointed out by the Coastal Commission; stated that Section 17.42.100 is the proposed section to be amended in the City's Zoning Ordinance, providing the granting of density bonuses that are consistent with State law - pointing out that these provisions have been directly taken from State law.
Director Blumenfeld highlighted the developments eligible for density bonuses, which are reflected in staff report (of record); stated that per State law, there are additional incentives that would solely be at the discretion of the City; and noted that this code amendment would satisfy State law and State standards for General Plan Housing Elements. Because of the extremely high land values in this City and the limited availability of undeveloped land, Director Blumenfeld explained that these circumstances may weigh against practicality and a developer's interest in utilizing the density bonus provisions. He highlighted the HUD-based income figures and household size ranges for affordable housing.
Chairman Hoffman opened the public hearing; there being no public input, Chairman Hoffman closed the public hearing.
MOTION by Commissioner Perrotti, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom, to APPROVE TEXT 03-14 -- Text amendment regarding State mandated density bonus ordinance. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Hoffman, Kersenboom, Perrotti, Pizer, Tucker
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
-
PARK 03-5 -- Parking Plan to allow a vocational school for massage therapy and spa related training with shared parking in a shopping center at 1137 Aviation Boulevard. (PDF File)
Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request.
Senior Planner Robertson stated that this proposed vocational school is located in the shopping center at the corner of Aviation Boulevard and Prospect Avenue in a space that was previously occupied by a dance studio; noted that the parking requirement for a business school is 1 space per 100 square feet; advised that the proposed intensification of use results in an increased parking requirement of 7 spaces as compared to the prior use; and stated that the applicant is currently using this space for chiropractic use with massage as a secondary use, which is permitted under the Zoning Ordinance when 25 percent or less of the floor area is used for massage purposes. He explained that the space is being used with an open floor plan with both the chiropractor tables and massage tables in the open large room, with no private massage or treatment rooms; stated that the proposed classes would be offered primarily in the evenings, while the business would continue to offer chiropractor and massage services in the daytime; advised that the proposed use for a school in the evenings would be considered a permitted use in the City's Zoning Ordinance, as it is a vocational school and not a massage therapy business; and noted that business schools are permitted in the C-3 Zone and do not require a Conditional Use Permit.
Senior Planner Robertson explained that the applicant is requesting approval of the Parking Plan to allow parking to be calculated at 1 space per 250 square feet of gross floor area rather than being required to provide the 7 additional parking spaces for the intensification of use; mentioned that currently, this center has 191 parking spaces; that if applying the cumulative parking for all the uses, he explained that the maximum parking requirement for this center would be 240 spaces; and, therefore, this center is a little bit short of this cumulative requirement. He explained that 1 space per 250 square feet is generally considered adequate for shopping centers because of the mixture of uses resulting in shared parking trips and different peak parking demand hours; indicated that the proposed school use results in a proportion of 16 percent of the shopping center's total, which seems reasonable to staff. While the business operates during the same daytime hours as other retail uses, he explained that the school portion will operate in the late afternoon/evening/nighttime hours based on the schedule that was submitted by the applicant; noted that it's clear to staff that the parking at this center is rarely near capacity; and that staff believes this parking is adequate to support the proposed school given its overall size and hours of use.
Chairman Hoffman opened the public hearing.
Dr. Gerald Krause, Director of the Southern California College of Holistic Health, applicant, thanked Senior Planner Robertson for his assistance with this application process; commented on the benefits of chiropractic and massage treatments; stated that his business is open from 9:00 A.M. to 9:00 P.M., Mondays through Fridays, 9:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. on Saturdays, and 9:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. on Sundays; advised that the school operates from 3:30 P.M. to 5:30 P.M., Tuesdays and Thursdays, from 5:30 P.M. to 9:30 P.M. on Tuesdays and Thursdays, from 5:30 P.M. to 9:30 P.M. on Wednesdays and from 5:00 P.M. to 7:00 P.M. on Saturdays.
Dr. Krause explained for Chairman Hoffman that currently, the daytime classes operate from 3:30 P.M. to 5:30 P.M., Tuesdays and Thursdays; that there are usually 3 to 6 people in attendance; that in the nighttime classes, 5:30 P.M. to 9:30 P.M., there are usually 5 to 10 people in attendance; and in the Saturday classes, there are usually 2 to 5 people in attendance. He added that the students would not be treating clients at this facility.
Chairman Hoffman closed the public hearing.
It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that there is adequate parking on this property to accommodate this proposal.
MOTION by Commissioner Pizer, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom, to APPROVE PARK 03-5 -- Parking Plan to allow a vocational school for massage therapy and spa-related training with shared parking in a shopping center at 1137 Aviation Boulevard. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Hoffman, Kersenboom, Perrotti, Pizer, Tucker
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
-
TEXT 03-12 -- Text amendment regarding solar electric and water system as permitted over-height roof top equipment in residential zones. (PDF File)
Staff Recommended Action: To recommend approval of said Text Amendment.
Director Blumenfeld stated that the Planning Commission had directed staff to amend this code because it is good public policy and is consistent with the City's General Plan policies to promote energy utility supplies. He stated that this amendment pertains to the height of roof structures, adding solar electric and water heating systems as permissible roof structures that may exceed the height limitation in residential zones; and he highlighted the following amendment being proposed for Section 17.46.010: "Residential uses may also have solar photovoltaic, passive water heating, and similar systems installed on a roof top that exceed the height limit only to the extent required to optimize system performance and to meet the Uniform Building Code requirements" - pointing out that this would add to the other items that are allowed to exceed the height limit in the residential zones, which are chimneys, flues and vents.
Director Blumenfeld noted for Chairman Hoffman that maximum height of such systems could be an issue that the Planning Commission may want to consider, stating that these systems are generally designed to accommodate the optimum angle of sunlight that is going to strike the roof.
Vice-Chairman Tucker noted his preference that these units not be allowed to be higher than 35 feet.
Chairman Hoffman opened the public hearing; there being no input, Chairman Hoffman closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Pizer stated that he would prefer permitting these units on a case-by-case basis because there are too many variances in the types of installations and applications.
MOTION by Chairman Hoffman, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom, to APPROVE TEXT 03-12 -- Text amendment regarding solar electric and water system as permitted over-height roof top equipment in residential zones and add to the last sentence in Section 3, 1L: "Residential structures may also have solar photovoltaic, passive water hearing, and similar systems installed on a rooftop that exceed the height limit, subject to Planning Commission approval, only to the extent required to optimize system performance and to meet the Uniform Building Code requirements." The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Hoffman, Kersenboom, Perrotti, Pizer, Tucker
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
RECESS AND RECONVENE
Chairman Hoffman recessed the meeting at 8:25 P.M. and reconvened the meeting at 8:30 P.M.
Hearing(s)
-
NR 03-11 -- Addition and remodel of an existing duplex with nonconforming garage setback to convert to a single family dwelling resulting in a greater than 50% increase in valuation at 640 Loma Drive. (PDF File)
Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request.
Senior Planner Robertson explained that this project involves a duplex which was originally constructed in 1971; stated that the only nonconforming condition relates to the garage setback, which measures 15 feet from the nearest public improvement rather than the required 17 feet; and that the existing nonconforming use condition as a duplex is proposed to be brought into compliance when converting this to a single-family residence. He stated that the proposed expansion will increase the house from 1,632 square feet to 2,676 square feet, which will result in a 63.5 percent increase in valuation; advised that this proposal conforms with planning and zoning requirements; that open space is provided in the back yard and on a new deck on the third floor to provide the minimum 300 square feet; that lot coverage is 41.9 percent, which is well below the maximum allowable of 65 percent; and that the building will comply with the height requirements at the critical point on the roof. He stated that given the garage setback condition is not a severe or unusual condition and the amount of expansion is reasonable, staff would recommend approval of this request.
Charlie Schwartz, 2313 ½ Marshall Field, Redondo Beach, representing the applicant, advised that a roll-up door would be installed on the garage.
MOTION by Commissioner Kersenboom, seconded by Commissioner Perrotti, to APPROVE NR 03-11 -- Addition and remodel of an existing duplex with nonconforming garage setback to convert to a single-family dwelling resulting in a greater than 50% increase in valuation at 640 Loma Drive. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Hoffman, Kersenboom, Perrotti, Pizer, Tucker
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
-
A-14 -- Appeal of Director's decision regarding the grade used for the height measurement on a convex sloping lot at 242 33rd Street. (PDF File)
Staff Recommended Action: To direct staff as deemed appropriate.
Due to a possible conflict of interest, Vice-Chairman Tucker recused himself from consideration of this matter.
Senior Planner Robertson advised that the applicant in this case is seeking approval that this be considered a convex lot and that the height measurements be interpolated from intermediate points on the top of the slope rather than as a straight line interpolation, which will allow construction of a single-family dwelling that will have two stories above a basement on the flat portion of the lot; and explained that if a standard straight-line interpolation from the corner points were used, the construction of a second story above a basement and first story would not be possible unless the building is lowered into the grade. He stated that it is staff's opinion that the applicant's request appears to be reasonable given the existing condition of the lot and surrounding terrain; and he indicated that the photos depict the grade of the lot is similar to others on the block in that it is relatively flat before it steeply slopes in the back portion of the lot towards the alley. He stated that this convex condition appears to be the natural grade; and that the grade is either cut and/or protected by a retaining wall or graded.
Doug Leach, 119 West Torrance Boulevard, Redondo Beach, representing the property owner, stated that the applicant will be building a new house; and urged the Planning Commission's approval of this project.
The Planning Commission concurred that the survey shows this is a convex lot, supporting Recommendation Alternative No. 2, "Interpolate from intermediate point on the top of the slope, as proposed by the applicant." No objection was noted, with Vice-Chairman Tucker abstaining.
-
Staff Items
-
Interpretation of business operation as a snack shop at 509 Pier Avenue, Vanilla Bean. (PDF File)
Director Blumenfeld noted that at the previous Planning Commission meeting, this body reviewed the request to allow this business owner to use an outdoor grill in connection with her existing snack shop use, its significant financial implications relative to in lieu parking and a requirement to satisfy parking at a higher ratio for a restaurant as opposed to the retail parking requirement for a snack shop. He stated that the owner is now proposing to significantly limit the amount of table seating, providing 3 interior tables and 3 exterior tables; and explained that this new open space would now contain display cases and retail, but pointed out that the outdoor grill would remain. He highlighted the definition a snack shop as reflected in staff report; and explained that the question before the Planning Commission is whether or not increasing the amount of retail area, while still leaving the outdoor grill to serve the barbequed chicken and ribs, whether that use still remains as a snack shop given this new configuration.
Director Blumenfeld noted for Vice-Chairman Tucker that there will be no permanent seating at the counter.
Commissioner Kersenboom expressed his belief that the business owner has made a significant attempt to make this less of a restaurant atmosphere; and pointed out that anyone can easily purchase more than $20 worth of snacks at a snack shop.
Commissioner Perrotti addressed his concern that the menu items are more in line with the prices of a restaurant and that he does not consider the barbequed chicken and ribs as snacks.
Commissioner Pizer expressed his belief that the chicken and ribs are somewhat expensive snack items; but that because the 2-hour a day outdoor grilling activities is a unique situation, he would support the applicant's request.
Vice-Chairman Tucker stated that he would support the applicant's request because she has taken significant steps to bring this in line with a snack shop by limiting the number of seating. He pointed out that the menu is not big nor is alcohol served at this site.
Chairman Hoffman expressed his concern that limiting the seating might create some viability issues for the success of this business; and stated that he believes the items on the menu are not snacks.
MOTION by Commissioner Kersenboom, seconded by Commissioner Pizer, to APPROVE this business' operation as a snack shop. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Kersenboom, Pizer, Tucker
NOES: Hoffman, Perrotti
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
Director Blumenfeld advised that the applicant's new seating and floor plan will be placed in the property file and original Parking Plan file and that staff will meet with the owner to ensure that re-organization of the space is completed and that any changes to the floor plan will require Commission approval.
-
Status report on Dano's Beach Grill at 1320 Hermosa Avenue. (PDF File)
Director Blumenfeld pointed out that the State ABC License indicates the new owner of this establishment is Southern California Restaurant Endeavors and that the business will now be known as Element.
-
Memorandum regarding height ordinance interpretation at 506 11th Street. (PDF File)
Director Blumenfeld stated that this is an interpretation of building height regulations relative to a trellis detached from a building at 506 11th Street; noted that this has been brought forward due to code enforcement action when it was noted that the property had a new trellis; and mentioned that this is a new condominium project that was approved by this body on May 23, 2002. He explained that the trellis is currently constructed on a code compliant roof deck; that the highest part of the roof in the area of the trellis is a parapet wall that was approved - pointing out that anything above the parapet wall would be over height; and noted that the owner is seeking to determine whether the trellis would be subject to the restrictions of the height limit if it's free-standing, a rigid structure standing on the roof by itself.
Director Blumenfeld advised that the owner is proposing to reduce the height of the trellis structure and leave it free-standing on the roof deck; and that the question before the Planning Commission is whether something attached to the roof is still part of the structure being regulated under the Zoning Code under the allowable height limit. He added that the Zone Code states that the building height is a vertical distance measured from grade to the corresponding uppermost point of the roof, which is shown in the examples provided to the Planning Commission. He advised that the owner contends that the trellis as proposed will not be attached to the roof; and he questioned whether it is regulated by the code if it's reconfigured. He pointed out that the Planning Commission regularly reviews condominium project roof decks with trellises when they are attached, which are required to conform with the height requirements; explained that the Zone Code is clear as to building height, measuring the height from the grade to the uppermost part of the roof; and explained that what is less clear is whether a structure which is detached from a building is still regulated by the height provisions.
Director Blumenfeld stated that it might be more useful to look at the underlying purpose of the height regulations, to avoid constructing buildings that are excessively tall, to avoid impacting views, light or air to adjacent properties; pointed out that the code makes specific exceptions to certain roof top equipment relative to building height, a narrow definition of what can exceed the maximum allowable height, such as air handling systems in the commercial zone, elevator towers, vents, chimneys, stairs -- and a smaller list in the residential zone, with vents, chimneys and flues, solar equipment subject to Planning Commission approval. He added that the allowable structures and equipment are appurtenant parts of a building.
Commissioner Kersenboom expressed his belief that the trellis is a structure, whether bolted to the building or not.
Commissioner Perrotti stated that looking at the intent of the height ordinance, it specifically lists the exemptions; and noted that he does not find this type of structure as part of the list of exemptions. He stated that approval of this trellis structure could set a precedence.
Director Blumenfeld noted for Vice-Chairman Tucker that the parapet where this trellis structure is attached is the maximum allowable height at that point and that everything above the parapet exceeds the height limit in that area.
Commissioner Pizer noted his concern that this structure would obstruct the neighbors' views.
Mrs. Nelson, applicant, explained that she is proposing to reduce the height of the trellis and noted that it will not be affixed to the building. She noted that this is the back condominium unit and that it does not obstruct any neighbors' views; and mentioned that she has not received any complaints about this trellis from the neighbors. She noted that the trellis would be 5.3 feet over the parapet wall.
It was the consensus of the Planning Commission that this trellis is a structure and that similar structures should be subject to the height requirements.
COMMISSIONER ITEMS
Chairman Hoffman highlighted the fact that the development activity report remains consistent - pointing out the example that the removal of 20 old homes is consistently replaced with 20 new homes; and that contrary to some public opinion, the City is not being inundated with excessive density.
Commissioner Pizer requested that the next Planning Commission agenda include an item to discuss the General Plan review, subject being planning districts.
ADJOURNMENT
At 9:12 P.M. Commissioner Kersenboom moved to formally adjourn the meeting in memory of two of his friends who recently passed away, Steven Fishman and Gary Ewing.
|
