|
|
 City of Hermosa Beach --- 12-03-98
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION METING OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH HELD ON NOVEMBER 17, 1998, AT 7:00 P.M. IN THE CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Tucker at 7:08 p.m.
Commissioner Pizer led the pledge of allegiance.
Roll Call
Present: Commissioners Ketz, Perrotti, Pizer, Schwartz, Chairman Tucker Absent: None Also Present: Sol Blumenfeld, Community Development Director Michael Schubach, City Planner Diane Cleary, Recording Secretary
Director Blumenfeld presented Commissioner Chris Ketz to the Commission. She is a Planner for the City of Carson and has been in the profession since the 70's. She went to school at Bloomsberg University, has an MBA from the University of Tennessee, an MS in Community Development from the University of Louisville, has worked in Louisville on their City Planning Commission. She has been a private consultant for several years, has had her own company and worked on this Commission previously. Chairman Tucker welcomed her.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Commissioner Perrotti asked the Minutes be pulled. On page 5, paragraph beginning "Motion by Commissioner Perrotti", fifth line down, the word "wrought" should replace the word "rod."
4a. Resolution P.C. 98-55 approving a Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan, and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map #25248 for a two-unit condominium at 120 Monterey Boulevard (continued from October 20, 1998 meeting).
Director Blumenfeld stated the applicant wanted to make some changes to the project plans which are attached to the Commission's Packet. This resulted in the applicant not having to set the building 2 feet below the finished grade. As a result, the applicant could avoid using a sump pump. The building's east evaluation appears to be 2 feet higher but is within the height envelope. There has also been some cosmetic changes to the railing.
4e. Resolution P.C. 98-61 approving a Conditional Use Permit, Precise Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map #25265 for a three-unit condominium at 1419 Monterey Boulevard.
Mr. Schubach stated there will be roof changes involving the material and color. The material will be more like a cement tile.
MOTION by Commissioner Pizer, seconded by Commissioner Perrotti, to APPROVE the Resolutions and Minutes as modified.
AYES: Commissioners Perrotti, Schwartz, Pizer, Chairman Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Ketz
6. ORAL/WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
7. CON 98-21/PDP 98-26--CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP #25177 FOR A TWO-UNIT CONDOMINIUM AT 1036 MONTEREY BOULEVARD (CONTINUED FROM OCTOBER 20, 1998 MEETING).
Staff Recommended Action: To continue to December 3, 1998 meeting.
Mr. Schubach stated the applicant is asking for a continuance because they were not able to get the plans in time for staff to review. The plans are in presently and will be ready by December 3, 1998 for the next meeting.
Chairman Tucker opened the public hearing.
Chairman Tucker closed the public hearing.
MOTION by Commissioner Perrotti, seconded by Commissioner Pizer, to CONTINUE the Conditional Use Permit to the December 3, 1998 Meeting.
AYES: Commissioners Ketz, Perrotti, Schwartz, Pizer, Chairman Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None
8. PDP 98-6--PRECISE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONVERT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING TO A DUPLEX AND TO ADD 534 SQUARE FEET AT 1734 PROSPECT AVENUE.
Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request.
Mr. Schubach stated this was a continued item in April but the applicant withdrew and it was renoticed. It is a new public hearing tonight. Staff is recommending approval for the project. It is an existing single family residence that was given a Variance previously to allow an additional kitchen for a disabled son but this property owner has moved. The new property owner would like to make the project a legal two unit dwelling and do some remodeling and expansion.. Staff has added several additional Conditions. The landscaping is not acceptable currently and there are other missing items such as the trash area location and storage facilities. These Conditions can be met and the project will conform to the height limit.
Commissioner Schwartz asked about the illegal fence that was put up. Mr. Schubach stated it has been removed.
Commissioner Perrotti asked for clarification on page 4 of the proposed Resolution, paragraph a, Basement Qualification Calculation. Director Blumenfeld stated in order to meet the basement requirements of the Building Code, the distance from the finished floor above to the finished grade must be 6 feet or less over 50% of the building area. The Zoning Ordinance has a slightly less restrictive requirement. Staff is asking the applicant to provide this calculation on the plans.
Chairman Tucker asked if there is adequate space available for the trash facilities. Mr. Schubach stated there is adequate space in front of the vehicles for the trash and storage area.
Chairman Tucker opened the public hearing.
Willy Vilenica at 27721 Eastvale Road, Palos Verdes, the owner of the project, stated he will provide a beautiful home and thanked the Commission for considering the plans.
Mr. Schubach clarified the height and stated staff used the convex slope method in determining building height in this case because there is a convex curve on the lot and it rises abruptly from Prospect and then levels off. Staff required that the applicant provide a survey at 2 foot interval elevations along both side property lines.
Chairman Tucker closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Pizer stated the plans are not complete and cannot approve them currently.
Commissioner Schwartz stated the elevations look fine and has no problem approving this project as long as the fence is remedied.
Commissioner Perrotti agrees and the proposed Resolution does provide Conditions of Approval concerning the landscape plan which has to be submitted along with other items of concern.
Commissioner Ketz was surprised that the Zoning Ordinance does not require that the required parking be in a covered space or garage. She feels the project is fine and the plans do not need to come back to the Commission for review.
Chairman Tucker asked if the whole area in front will be curb cut? Director Blumenfeld stated it is an existing condition. Mr. Schubach stated there is a slight widening of the driveway, but not enough to remove another parking space and there will be four guest spaces. The applicant is compensating for any loss off the street.
Chairman Tucker asked about the access to the back yard for the open space? Mr. Schubach stated the deck out in front has direct access to the front room of the one unit, and the upper unit will have a front door being accessed to the back yard.
MOTION by Commissioner Schwartz, seconded by Commissioner Perrotti to APPROVE the request with the City Staff working with the applicant to meet all the zoning requirements.
AYES: Commissioners Ketz, Perrotti, Schwartz, Pizer, Chairman Tucker NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None
HEARINGS
9. A-4--APPEAL OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR'S DECISION TO DENY A LANDSCAPE/HARDSCAPE PLAN IN THE OS-O ZONE AT 2040 THE STRAND. Staff Recommended Action: To deny said appeal.
Director Blumenfeld stated the applicant's architect presented a plan which is attached to the Commission's file and shows an entryway connecting to a new single family home which is proposed to be developed on the property adjacent to the OS-O property -- an open space and parking overlay zone. The OS-O Zone is explicit about what is allowed and staff also referred to the underlying Allen Settlement Agreement which was the basis for creating the zone. The City Attorney felt the entryway constitutes a "structure" which is not permitted in the zone, and that approval of any element not expressly permitted is not in the Planning Commission's jurisdiction.
He noted that there was more ambiguity relative to a proposed recessed patio area which is to the west of the entry area. Both the Ordinance and the Settlement Agreement make provision for providing recessed areas such as ponds and fire pits. Staff believed that this area did not constitute a "structure". Staff is looking for direction regarding the recessed patio area.
Commissioner Pizer stated there is a note on the plan that states the four steps on the stairway does not extend in the OS-O Zone. Director Blumenfeld stated that staff and the City Attorney felt the assemblage of stairs, landings and decks constituted a "structure", which bears on whether it complies with both the Settlement Agreement and the OS-O Zone.
Commissioner Pizer asked if the recessed patio area could be considered a decorative wall or barbecue pit? Director Blumenfeld stated the matter was ambiguous but staff felt that it did not appear to be a structure. The stairs to the patio, however present a problem per the City Attorney's interpretation of "structure".
Commissioner Ketz asked if this is public right-of-way? Director Blumenfeld stated a few years ago there was a lawsuit and settlement agreement that enabled the property owners on the west side of Beach Drive fronting the walk streets to utilize what historically had been parking area. One of the stipulations of the settlement agreement was upon completing certain improvements, the City would vacate this area which is considered excess right-of-way. This occurred for those who were a party to the original litigation, but there were several property owners who weren't a party to the litigation and still haven't completed their improvements and had the property vacated. Once all the improvements have been made in these areas the remaining excess right-of-way will be vacated to the property owners.
Commissioner Ketz asked if the property has been vacated? Director Blumenfeld stated generally properties which had not completed required improvements did not have OS-O zoned property vacated. This property did not have a required barrier wall 40 feet west of Beach Drive that prohibits parking beyond that point.
Chairman Tucker opened the public hearing.
Brad Koppel at 447 Herondo Street, the applicant, stated he has spoke to staff and feels the Commission doesn't have authority if it is an OS-O settlement issue but he is here to give the Commission an idea of what is being done with the project. Perhaps a re-visit by the City Attorney may allow a reading the Ordinance differently. There is no attempt on the OS-O open area of the lot portion of his property to increase density, height, etc. He just wanted to have occasional grade changes between the exterior on the lot to where their property entry is located on the plans. Also, they would like to take the patio area of below grade so it will have continuity between the inside and the outside of the house. It appears the grade of the patio is not an issue because barbecue pits, etc., are indicated as being allowable. The gradual changes of grade from the walk street to the entry of the house looks more like hardscape as opposed to steps or landings. They have hardscape with occasional grade changes. They are not trying to take it above and beyond the height limits that are indicated when it is read further into what is allowed and not allowed in the open zone. He will be required to put up a 24 inch or 2 foot wall and the occasional grade changes from the walk street to the entrance of the home wouldn't be higher than 24 inches.
Chairman Tucker suggested leaving the entryway at the grade with the fountain and move the steps back. He is concerned with the recessed patio and there could be flooding. Mr. Koppel stated they have engineered it with pumps for emergency. The patio area can be reached with steps from the buildable property as opposed to the OS-O property.
Chairman Tucker closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Pizer feels this is more of a legal issue and is out of the Commission's hands. The attorney's interpretation of the law is the key issue. It is possible that the encroachment and the assemblage of all the elements together and the extent of the work being done in the yard could be considered as structure.
Commissioner Schwartz stated the stairs is a legal issue. She doesn't really care for the recessed patio. Along the Strand, there is a certain life and vitality with a continuity with yards being at the same level or raised above the level. This patio is 4 feet below the Strand and standing in the patio, you would be looking at everybody's shins as they walk by. Commissioner Pizer agreed.
Commissioner Perrotti suggested instead of having stairs to use a design like a ramp, going up gradually to the entrance. Would this be considered a structure? The letter from the City Attorney's Office is specific and states the encroachment consists of structure and is not allowed. At this point, he does not want to question the City Attorney. They feel the stairs are part of the improvement and is considered the structure. Commissioner Perrotti doesn't have any problem with the recessed patio which could be similar to a barbecue area or fire pit.
Commissioner Ketz stated this will set a precedent for what happens on future properties. The whole area will be pavement with hardly any greenscape. The patio will be 4 feet below grade along with a 3 foot wall and the Strand would not be visible unless wrought iron was used.
Chairman Tucker agrees with the Commissioners. He has a problem with the recessed patio and questioned if there are easements available for utilities? Director Blumenfeld believes there are no utilities. Public Works Department would require an easement if there were utilities.
Chairman Tucker asked if the fence will be taller than 36 inches due to the recessed patio? Director Blumenfeld stated they establish height as follows: The area that is protecting a cut does not contribute to the height of the fence. If the applicant constructs a 36 inch high fence on top of the retained area, it would be in compliance.
Commissioner Schwartz asked if the Building Code requires that if there is a level change of more than a certain amount that the wall has to be 42 inches? Director Blumenfeld stated the way the Zoning Ordinance is written a grade change in a yard doesn't have to be protected. The Building Code has a provision for protecting a grade change with a guardrail.
Commissioner Pizer feels there could be a safety issue being a 7 foot drop from the top of the wall. Director Blumenfeld stated there would be a landscaped area which will separate the Strand area to the recessed area, so that it isn't a 7 foot drop.
Commissioner Ketz stated the Permitted Use List does not specifically list patios. It list ponds but they can't be more than 1.5 feet in depth. Director Blumenfeld stated the list allows decks which is consistent with a patio.
Chairman Tucker noticed on the survey that north is incorrectly shown.
Director Blumenfeld stated staff is requesting that the Commission confirm by Minute Order whether the recessed patio is in conformity with OS-O Zone. The applicant may be eliminating the stairs.
Commissioner Perrotti feels the patio falls under the same category as ponds and fire pits. Chairman Tucker suggested the patio being recessed down to the depth of a pond requirement which is 1.5 feet.
MOTION by Commissioner Ketz by Minute Order that both the recessed patio and the stairs are not a permitted used in the open OS-O Zone. Passed 5-0.
10. STAFF ITEMS
Commissioner Perrotti asked if the memorandum rescheduling the December meeting applied only the next December Meeting in 1999? Director Blumenfeld stated staff is suggesting that the meeting day be a permanent change.
11. COMMISSIONER ITEMS
Chairman Tucker stated there are many complaints about beer bottles, etc. behind the establishments. Are the rear exists being used at night? Director Blumenfeld stated staff would need to know where the complaints are in order to follow up.
Chairman Tucker stated valet parking is charging people to park where they have required parking such as at the Beach House Hotel which is $17. Is there self-parking? Director Blumenfeld stated they are not precluded from valet parking for their required parking. However, they are not allowed to use their required parking for another property or project. There are several businesses that do valet park and charge to valet park because they can get more efficiency out of their parking areas. It is hard to regulate how the required parking is managed.
Commissioner Pizer asked what could be done with the OS-O Zone to prevent what was discussed tonight? He feels the pit approach to the Strand properties ruins the appearance of The Strand and the feeling of Hermosa Beach. Director Blumenfeld stated the Commission may want to make a determination on other items pertaining to development standards in the Zoning Ordinance.
Director Blumenfeld stated you are allowed to have in the front yard a wall up to 42 inches in height and would be commensurate with a guard rail height. In the case of an OS-O Zone, you are limited to a 36 inch high wall.
Commissioner Ketz asked if any of the properties on The Strand are in a flood zone? Director Blumenfeld stated they aren't shown in the Flood Hazard Maps as flood areas.
Chairman Tucker asked staff to look at the tandem parking. Director Blumenfeld stated they will be addressing this when staff looks at the Development Standards.
MOTION by Commissioner Pizer to ADJOURN the meeting at 8:20 p.m.
No objections, so ordered.
|
|
|
|