|
|
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Present: | Kersenboom, Perrotti, Vice-Chairman Allen |
| Absent: | Hoffman, Pizer |
| Also Present: |
Sol Blumenfeld, Community Development Director Kent Robertson, Senior Planner Denise Bothe, Recording Secretary |
Oral / Written Communications
Alan Stresser, resident, commented on his concerns with pedestrians J-walking across Pacific Coast Highway to get to the Hermosa Pavilion.
Lisa Holcombe, Pet Care Company, urged the City Police Department to increase its law enforcement activity concerning traffic/parking issues along Pacific Coast Highway.
Fred Huebscher, resident, stated that the Hermosa Pavilion should offer 2 hours free parking to lessen the parking impact to the surrounding area.
Patty Egerer, resident, asked that the City revise its code concerning roof equipment, stating that its visual impacts need to be lessened.
Director Blumenfeld explained that the roof equipment for this project currently conforms to the building and zoning codes; advised that the owner of the spa has reduced the height of the chimney by approximately 2 feet to accommodate these code requirements; and that the roof equipment/chimney will be painted to help camouflage them. He added that these are the same requirements for residential chimneys.
Consent Calendar
-
Approval of February 21, 2006 Minutes.
MOTION by Commissioner Perrotti, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom, to APPROVE the February 21, 2006, Minutes as presented. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Allen, Kersenboom, Perrotti NOES: None ABSTAIN: Hoffman, Pizer ABSENT: None -
Resolution(s) for consideration
-
Resolution P.C. 06-9 approving a Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 54429 for a seven-unit condominium project at 801-813 20th Street (previously known as 2006, 2014 and 2024 Pacific Coast Highway).
-
Resolution P.C. 06-10 approving a Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 065881 for a two-unit condominium project at 635 Manhattan Avenue.
-
Resolution P.C. 06-11 approving a Conditional Use Permit amendment for a restaurant with on-sale general alcohol at 934 Hermosa Avenue.
MOTION by Commissioner Perrotti, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom, to APPROVE the above-mentioned Resolutions as presented. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Allen, Kersenboom, Perrotti NOES: None ABSTAIN: Hoffman, Pizer ABSENT: None -
-
Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request.
Senior Planner Robertson stated that the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map for a two-unit condominium project at 406 Ocean View Avenue in October 2003; and advised that the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map has expired and that the applicant is requesting a reinstatement of this map since the construction of the project is near completion.
Vice-Chairman Allen opened the public hearing.
Cheryl Vargo, representing the applicant, stated that Hermosa Beach typically approves these Vesting Tentative Parcel Maps for two years and explained that most often, this is not enough time to get the subdivision maps recorded; and she urged the City to amend its code to extend the time for approval of these maps to three years. She noted that most cities now approve these maps for a period of three years, with three one-year extensions after that.
In response to Vice-Chairman Allen, Director Blumenfeld stated that staff would conduct a survey of other cities and get back with the Planning Commission on this issue.
There being no further input, Vice-Chairman Allen closed the public hearing.
MOTION by Commissioner Kersenboom, seconded by Commissioner Perrotti, to APPROVE CON 06-3 -- Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 060263 for a two-unit condominium at 406 Ocean View Avenue. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Allen, Kersenboom, Perrotti NOES: None ABSTAIN: Hoffman, Pizer ABSENT: None -
Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request.
Senior Planner Robertson stated that the subject property is located on the south side of 1st Street between Hermosa Avenue and Monterey Boulevard; noted that the applicant is proposing two attached units -- one containing 2,216 square feet and the other containing 1,661 square feet; advised that the primary living areas are located on the second floor, with the first floor containing the bedrooms; and noted that the building is designed in a contemporary Mediterranean style, with stucco finishes, flat tile roofs, and iron guard deck rails. He stated that the plan complies with most of the Zoning requirements for the Condominium Ordinance, landscaping, storage areas, trash areas, lot coverage, yards, and open space; advised that the plan does provide the required parking, but noted that the separate driveways each need to have their dedicated guest parking spaces, providing a guest space on the alley side. He added that the plans do not comply with the setback requirement adjacent to the alley; stated that the applicant submitted a revised plan yesterday to demonstrate these changes can be made and brought into complete conformance with code.
Vice-Chairman Allen opened the public hearing.
Elizabeth Srour, representing the applicant, stated that the architect has revised the plans; noted that there is a 9-foot setback in the rear off 1st Court; that the guest parking will be parallel to the garage; and explained that this will reduce the size of the room in the basement level, but other than that, there is no other change to the building. She noted that the stairs have been relocated adjacent to the building and that the landscaping will be placed in the side yard; stated that the plans recently submitted to staff fully comply with code; and that the conditions in the Resolution are acceptable.
Sandra Aiden, resident, noted her support for the 30-foot height limit; and requested that the hours of construction meet code requirements.
Director Blumenfeld urged the residents to contact the City if there is a problem with construction activity not taking place within the permitted hours. He stated that on the weekends, the residents should contact the Police Department.
There being no further input, Vice-Chairman Allen closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Perrotti highlighted the conformance of the revised plans and his support for the project.
MOTION by Vice-Chair Allen, seconded by Commissioner Perrotti, to APPROVE CON 06-2/PDP 06-2 -- Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 65805 for a two-unit condominium at 160 1st Street. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Allen, Kersenboom, Perrotti NOES: None ABSTAIN: Hoffman, Pizer ABSENT: None -
Staff Recommended Action: To deem the application incomplete and withdraw it from Planning Commission consideration.
Vice-Chairman Allen opened the public hearing. There being no input, Vice-Chairman Allen closed the public hearing.
Director Blumenfeld briefly explained that because of various code-related problems, staff is requesting the Commission withdraw this application and deem it incomplete at this point.
MOTION by Commissioner Perrotti, seconded by Vice-Chairman Allen, to deem the application incomplete and withdraw it from Planning Commission consideration CUP 05-13 -- Conditional Use Permit to allow an auto repair and parts installation business at 843 Pacific Coast Highway, Exclusive Automotive. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Allen, Kersenboom, Perrotti NOES: None ABSTAIN: Hoffman, Pizer ABSENT: None -
Staff Recommended Action: To deny said request.
Senior Planner Robertson stated that this restaurant is part of a multi-tenant building that has 135 feet of frontage along the south side of Pier Avenue; advised that the restaurant serves French cuisine in a bistro-like atmosphere and has been in business since October 2001; stated that the applicant is proposing to add on-sale beer and wine to the existing restaurant; that he is not proposing any changes, as the intent is to continue to operate the restaurant in the same manner; and noted that the restaurant contains a relatively small seating area, which does not lend itself to live entertainment/dancing. He explained that the existing restaurant only has one unisex restroom, which is accessed by patrons through the kitchen and storage area; and pointed out that this presents a problem because the Los Angeles County Health Department requires every restaurant selling alcohol to have two restrooms, one for each gender, and that the men’s restroom must have a urinal in addition to a toilet. He added that the restrooms must be located within the food establishment and accessible without going through a food preparation or storage area; advised that these requirements are strictly enforced by the Health Department; and stated that without upgrading the restaurant, the County Health Department will not allow the serving of beer and wine at this location. He stated that the applicant has not provided any plans to reconfigure the floor area of the restaurant to add a bathroom; noted that the minimum size for a new building and health code compliant men’s restroom would be approximately 64 square feet; that the restaurant’s existing floor area is only approximately 715 square feet with a width of only 14.75 feet; and he noted that staff is therefore recommending denial of this request.
Vice-Chairman Allen opened the public hearing.
Bruno Baio, applicant, expressed his understanding that the Los Angeles County Health Department is going to allow him to use the adjacent restaurant’s restroom facilities; stated that the neighboring restaurant has two restrooms; advised that he is working with ABC on obtaining his alcohol license and that he needs the beer and wine sales to keep competitive in this business.
Commissioner Kersenboom suggested that this matter be continued until the applicant receives written approval from the Los Angeles County Health Department for the use of the restroom facilities next door to his business. He stated that if the Los Angeles County Health Department approves that use, he would support the beer and wine sales request.
Patty Egerer noted her opposition to any business serving alcohol outside the building footprint.
Director Blumenfeld commented on the requirements for outdoor dining anywhere other than the Pier Plaza area; stated that a CUP for outdoor dining has to be approved by the Planning Commission; and that in order to conduct a business on the sidewalk and not within private property would require an encroachment permit approved by the Public Works Department – noting that neither of these are being contemplated by this applicant.
Ms. Egerer expressed her belief the alcohol sales in the City have reached a saturation point and that it is taxing the Police Department resources and noted her opposition to adding another alcohol license in the City.
Barbara Elman, resident, noted her support for the applicant’s request.
Lea Reyes noted her support for the applicant’s request, stating that this business owner runs a respectable business.
Lisa Holcombe noted her support for the applicant’s request, stating that this business owner runs a respectable business.
Sandra Aden noted her support for the applicant’s request as long as the Health Department issues can be solved.
There being no further input, Vice-Chairman Allen closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Kersenboom noted his support for allowing beer and wine sales as long as the applicant is able to obtain approval from the Los Angeles County Health Department.
Director Blumenfeld explained that the City’s Building Codes do not support the use of neighboring restroom facilities unless one has a multi-tenant building; and expressed staff’s concern that if this business owner cannot implement this permit, regardless of how worthy the business operator is, the Commission would simply be granting this approval for a future use, since the approval runs with the land; and noted staff’s recommendation for the applicant to clear this hurdle with the Los Angeles County Health Department, clarifying whether the County would permit the use with the proposed bathroom facilities before granting this approval. He noted his intent to discuss this issue with the City Attorney and suggested the Commission may wish to continue this matter.
Commissioner Perrotti noted his support for this restaurant serving beer and wine; suggested that the hours of alcohol sales be tailored in the CUP to address concerns with future businesses at this site; and noted his opposition to passing this matter onto the County, stating that this issue should be resolved at the local level. He stated he would support a continuance to allow staff to seek City Attorney guidance.
Vice-Chairman Allen stated he is not willing to grant a CUP at this point; and advised that he can support beer and wine sales at this site, but only if it fully complies with City codes. He noted his support for continuing this matter to obtain City Attorney input on the sharing of restroom facilities of a neighboring business.
MOTION by Vice-Chairman Allen, seconded by Commissioner Perrotti, to CONTINUE CUP 06-3 -- Conditional Use Permit to allow on-sale beer and wine in conjunction with a restaurant at 424 Pier Avenue, Crème de la Crepe, requesting the applicant to come up with a plan that could be approved by the Los Angeles County Health Department and to have staff confer with the City Attorney and applicant on issues concerning this case. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Allen, Kersenboom, Perrotti NOES: None ABSTAIN: Hoffman, Pizer ABSENT: None -
Staff Recommended Action: 1) To require that the owner provide two hours free parking for customers with validation (or with health club membership) in order to increase use of the parking structure by the fitness club members and other patrons and set a public hearing for modification of the conditions of Parking Plan, to impose this specific condition, and a specific condition to prevent spillover parking in the neighborhood as an enforcement tool; or 2) To accept the efforts of the owner to promote programs to increase the use of the parking structure, and re-evaluate the success of these programs in six months when the Pavilion is more fully occupied. At that time it could be determined if it’s necessary to impose new conditions on the Parking Plan.
Director Blumenfeld advised that at the prior meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to work with the applicant in coming up with some mutually agreeable solutions to the parking problems that were noted in the parking operations in the study prepared by Linscott, Law and Greenspan for this property; highlighted the problems in the report, such as spill-over parking in the neighborhoods; that 30 to 40 percent of the parking on the street in the adjacent neighborhoods were users of the Hermosa Pavilion and the 24 Hour Fitness club; and concluded that this is a measure of inefficiency in the parking operations of the building and why this issue is before the Planning Commission. He advised that staff met with the owner, who submitted his own recommendations which are outlined in staff report; stated that his recommendations to mitigate the spill-over parking problems include tandem-assist parking for two hours, using a double validation system and an attendant on the second parking level in the parking garage, implementation of a $20 monthly parking pass for up to 100 hours (aimed at frequent gym users), implementation of a $25 monthly parking pass for up to 250 hours (aimed at frequent gym users), buying a 3-month parking pass and getting the 4th month free, dollar validation with a smoothie purchase at one of the onsite cafés, a dollar valet program, more convenient cashier operations, a foot pay station, and multi-hour validations for the new Glen Ivy Spa (at an unknown cost, unknown duration).
With respect to the proposed monthly parking pass programs, Director Blumenfeld stated that these are not intended for someone who is going to be using the gym from 2 to 4 times per week – pointing out that one would have to frequently use the gym in order to justify paying for a monthly pass; stated that anyone using the gym less than 20 times a month would have no incentive to pay $20 for a monthly pass; stated that if one were to purchase the 3 months of parking passes and get the 4th month free, they still would be paying a couple hundred dollars a year; and expressed staff’s belief that the problem with this issue is the price of parking, noting It’s a fee-based solution with a limited effect. He noted that staff believes the only way to minimize the on-street parking is to ensure that the customers park in the lot free of charge or that the parking rate is subsidized; and stated that even on a limited basis during peak gym operating periods, it would likely reduce the neighborhood parking impacts. He advised that the City Attorney has advised that the City has authority to regulate parking in order to enforce reasonable conditions on a project to avert nuisance conditions.
Director Blumenfeld explained that the Planning Commission may revisit the parking plan and PDP and add specific conditions which address the issue of spill-over parking in each of those permits in order to prevent the spill-over effect; advised that the Planning Commission can accept the owner’s recommendations, including implementation of restricted parking on the street and parking districts, two other recommendations suggested by the owner; and that the Commission could then consider the adequacy of these solutions in 6 months, which is another of the owner’s recommendations. He expressed staff’s belief that with these public-oriented solutions, they pass on the cost of parking to the neighborhood and the City in terms of enforcement and they don’t deal with the problem with respect to the building. He mentioned that a memo from Mr. Shook’s attorney had been distributed to the Planning Commission this evening (of record).
Vice-Chairman Allen opened the public hearing.
Lea Reyes, representing the owner of the Hermosa Pavilion and the parking company that runs the parking garage in the Pavilion, noted her extensive background in the parking/planning business; stated that the garage can accommodate 550 parking spaces, allowing both valet and tandem parking; and explained that without valet and tandem options, the parking would be reduced by 100 spaces, limiting the parking to 450 spaces. She commented on drivers taking up more than one parking space to save their cars from scratches and dings, making it a valuable asset to have valet parking. She stated that any new development will have a parking issue in this City; pointed out that the $20 per month is 20 cents per hour for parking; stated that the owner is not trying to make a lot of money on parking; and noted that it takes a lot of money to build this type of development, to pay for adequate security, customer service, valet service; and she expressed her opinion that if the City is going to continue to grow, residential permit parking and enforcement is necessary. She mentioned that this lot does get full.
Gene Shook, 1601 Pacific Coast Highway (PCH), stated that there will be more parking available now that the construction work is complete and the construction vehicles are gone; expressed his belief that he has recommended a number of alternatives that will use the parking at its best and lessen the impact to the neighborhoods. He advised that Level 1 typically runs between 90 and 100 percent full; stated that Level 2 will be used more extensively now that a security person will be assigned to that level and assigned to implement tandem parking; addressed his concern with people taking up more than one parking space to save their cars from scratches; and highlighted his interest in implementing a double validation system. He noted that the greatest number of parking problems come from the patrons of the 24 Hour Fitness. He advised that the Glen Ivy customers have parking passes given by that company; that the Keller Williams company will validate their client’s parking. He noted that on Level 2, by validating it and giving 60 spaces, what they’ve offered is a solution that gives a safe, viable area for 60 spaces that will have the 2 hours free on Level 2; and stated that Level 3 will accommodate the monthly parking pass customers. He mentioned that there are currently 150 24 Hour Fitness customers who have paid for a $20 monthly parking pass and that more and more interest is being observed with the newly implemented monthly parking pass program. He expressed his opinion that if he was to implement a blanket 2-hour free parking program and reduce his staffing/security, there would be a tremendously higher increase in the spill-over parking than what the City is currently experiencing. He urged the Commission to allow these newly implemented programs to test run for 6 months from this point; and stated at the end of that time, he would be willing to implement other programs if necessary.
Vice-Chairman Allen asked how many members utilize this 24 Hour Fitness.
Mr. Shook stated that in a normal day at 24 Hour Fitness, 1,000 to 2,000 people come into this facility; noted that on the peak days, the number can be as high as 3,000 customers; and he noted that a substantial number of people walk or ride bikes to this facility. Mr. Shook noted that the height of the spa chimney was reduced to meet code; and stated that it will be painted to blend in better with the building.
Carla Merryman, Executive Director of the Hermosa Beach Chamber of Commerce, advised that the Board of Directors expressed their support for developer Gene Shook and the Hermosa Pavilion; and urged the City to give Mr. Shook 6 months from today to implement his outlined parking procedures before evaluating the program; and asked that the necessary City permits required to build out his facility be granted. She stated that the City support is necessary to encourage new businesses to locate in Hermosa Beach and to improve the quality of life for all its residents.
Allen Stressor expressed his belief that regardless of what is implemented in the parking structure, there still will be some individuals that take the easy way out and park on the residential streets; and urged the City to implement a permit parking program in his neighborhood. He thanked and commended Mr. Shook for listening to and moving on his concerns regarding the reduction in the chimney size/height.
Lisa Holcombe expressed her belief that offering free parking will not fully resolve the problem; and she urged the City’s parking enforcement to become very proactive in catching those who illegally or improperly park, believing that immediate and firm consequences are appropriate at this time. She highlighted the recent death of a child crossing legally on PCH.
Ms. Holcombe noted for Commissioner Perrotti that there has not been a dramatic change in the illegal/inappropriate parking in her lot with the new parking programs at Hermosa Pavilion; and noted that she and several other business owners are now having the illegally parked cars towed away.
Patty Egerer stated that the residential neighborhoods are still impacted by the Hermosa Pavilion patrons; advised that the first 150 feet on 16th Street from PCH east up to Raymond is being completely monopolized by Pavilion patrons; noted that delivery trucks often block residents’ driveways/garages; and stated that the City should dedicate a strip of curb on 16th Street for truck loading/unloading activities. She stated that the residents from PCH on up to Prospect are being impacted by these Pavilion patrons parking on 16th Street. She added that it has recently come to her attention that large vehicles won’t go into the Pavilion parking structure; that the drivers of these vehicles have asked merchants on the east side of PCH if they can park in their parking lots; and therefore she questioned the adequacy of the height of the parking structure. She expressed her belief that the residents should not have to pay for a parking district should one be implemented.
Travis Jones, owner of Still Water Restaurant, stated that he has been validating his customers’ parking passes; noted that he has done over $400 in validation in the last two weeks with this new program; and advised that some of his customers have indicated they park on the street instead of the parking structure because it is more convenient, not because of the fee. He stated he would be willing to offset some of the cost to the neighbors for parking permits; and expressed his belief free parking will not solve the problem with people parking on the street.
Marlene Ramirez, owner of Kid’s Cabaret in Hermosa Pavilion, stated that Mr. Shook has spent a great deal of money in turning this vacant building into a viable development; and expressed her belief that the applicant has worked with the City to resolve these issues and that he should not be penalized for this development’s success. She urged the City to be proactive in its traffic/parking enforcement.
There being no further input, Vice-Chairman Allen closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Perrotti briefly commented on this Commission’s approval of this development and expansion of the building, believing the City has been generous in its approval process; stated that he has also witnessed the problems with spill-over parking because of the Hermosa Pavilion; pointed out that parking permits/districts are within the purview of the Public Works Commission and City Council, not the Planning Commission; and that it is the Commission’s responsibility to determine whether the parking plan for this building is working efficiently. He expressed his belief that it is not working efficiently; and stated that at this point, he would support staff recommendation No. 1, which is to provide 2 hours of free parking and to set up a public hearing to modify the conditions of the parking plan.
Vice-Chairman Allen noted his support for recommendation No. 1, 2 hours of free parking, but expressed his belief this will not fully solve the problem; and urged the City to widely advertise the 2-hour free parking.
Commissioner Kersenboom stated that the City needs to be more proactive in its traffic/parking enforcement in this area; urged the business owners to have illegally parked cars towed away; and stated that he does not want to penalize neither the applicant nor the residents.
MOTION by Commissioner Perrotti, seconded by Vice-Chairman Allen, to APPROVE staff recommendation No. 1, to require the owner to provide 2 hours of free parking with validation, to set up a public hearing to modify the conditions of the parking plan for parking operations at the Hermosa Pavilion - 1601 Pacific Coast Highway. The motion carried as follows:
AYES: Allen, Perrotti NOES: Kersenboom ABSTAIN: Hoffman, Pizer ABSENT: None -
STAFF ITEMS
-
Aviation Corridor Specific Plan Status Report. (PDF File)
Director Blumenfeld stated that the Commission has received a report identifying issues of concern in the project area, such as parking, traffic, lack of pedestrian areas/amenities, deferred maintenance, lack of retail business, non-attractive buildings, some inconsistent zoning; and asked the Commission if any other items should be included on this list. He stated that staff will return with a final list in order to commence with public meetings to gather community input.
The Commissioner agreed this was a comprehensive list and directed staff to go forward with their plans for public input.
Director Blumenfeld briefly highlighted the large increase in the amount of building activity/valuation for this fiscal year to date.
-
-
COMMISSIONER ITEMS
None.
-
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:18 P.M.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
HEARING(S)
CERTIFICATION
I 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 March 21, 2006.
| Kent Allen, Vice-Chairman | Sol Blumenfeld, Secretary |
| Agendas / Minutes Menu | Planning Commission Agendas | Planning Commission Minutes |