|
|
 City of Hermosa Beach --- 04-17-01
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF THE CITY
OF
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Perrotti at 7:10 p.m. Commissioner Tucker led the pledge of allegiance.
Roll Call
CONSENT CALENDAR MOTION by Commissioner Tucker, seconded by Commissioner Pizer,
to
APPROVE
the February 20, 2001 Planning Commission minutes.
In response to Commissioner Tucker, Director Blumenfeld indicated that he met with the architect concerning the property at 1303 Hermosa Avenue, and the materials proposed will be non-reflective and the color of the building.
MOTION
by Commissioner Hoffman, seconded by Commissioner Pizer, to
APPROVE
Resolutions P.C. 01-3, 01-4 and 01-5.
None. 6. ORAL/WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Director Blumenfeld gave a brief staff report, and stated that staff believes the Ordinance should be changed so that a device placed on the rooftop of an existing building nonconforming to the height limit would have the same surface area limitations of conforming buildings, and that measurement of the surface area of the device be applied only to that area which exceeds the height of the existing roof or parapet wall, whichever is greater as long as it is adequately screened from view. Staff also believes that discretionary review should be required for all future wireless communication facility proposals and that such uses should be limited to the commercial zones (C-1, C-2 and C-3) and industrial zones (M-1). He also said staff has some design standards and guidelines for adoption, and also preference in site selection is recommended for public structures, co-location and shared sites on commercially zoned property. It is suggested that the applicant submit a map that accurately shows the location of the facility and any abutting facilities both within the City and outside the City. Also, if there is public facility available to locate the wireless communication facilities, that it be shown on the plan. It is further suggested that the applicant certify by letter from the adjoining facility if such co-location is not possible. With respect to design and screening, staff is recommending that the facilities located within 200 feet of a residential use comply with setback requirements. Also, staff is recommending that the facility be architecturally integrated into the color or material of the building and screened with landscaping if possible. Priority also should be given in locating the facilities along a secondary frontage and on existing buildings. He also said it is recommended that a provision be made by Council resolution to find suitable public locations wherever possible and practical, and the applicant would still need to come before Commission to get approval, regardless if a lease had been negotiated. In response to Commissioner Hoffman, Director Blumenfeld stated there is reference in the Ordinance that government facilities would be allowable, and accommodation could be made under the provision of the Open Space Zone with reference to the inclusion of utility, corridors or utility structures. In response to Commissioner Pizer, Director Blumenfeld said there is provision in the Zoning Ordinance allowing the ability for certain structures over height based on an area requirement, and some of the provisions for wireless facilities would fall under this provision. He indicated that the Text Amendment discussed this evening would expand and clarify the application of rooftop antennas. In response to Commissioner Tucker, Director Blumenfeld indicated that the widest area of a satellite dish or antenna is the surface area on its widest part. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing.
In response to Commissioner Tucker, Director Blumenfeld stated that as the applications come before the Commission, they can be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, as they will be subject to a CUP, and a site plan will be provided along with a map showing the distribution of the antennas. He also stated that a requirement for screening could be made under the CUP. In response to Commissioner Pizer, Director Blumenfeld stated that the proposed ordinance is independent of the ordinance for rooftop equipment and structures. Chairman Perrotti appreciated staff’s work and research and said they have done a great job.
MOTION
by Commissioner Hoffman, seconded by Chairman Pizer, to
APPROVE
TEXT 01-1 – Text amendment to Section 17.46.240 regarding
antennas satellite dishes and similar equipment.
Director Blumenfeld gave a staff report and stated it has been suggested by City Council to amend Section 17.46.070, Subsection B, striking "and three feet from the front lot line," which would then allow the encroachment with limitation into the front lot line. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing.
In response to Commissioner Hoffman, Director Blumenfeld explained there would be no material change which would be observed from the current building line setback in the zone for new projects. For existing nonconforming buildings, it would be possible to allow a building to have an encroachment into the front yard without limitations up to the property line, but the encroachment could not be greater than 30 inches in depth. He also said that the other provisions for the architectural projection would remain in place. Commissioner Tucker believed that 30 inches in encroachment is too much and 24 inches would be sufficient to accommodate the effect desired, and the window should be factory built. Director Blumenfeld explained that the design and framing for a window seat typically requires approximately 30 inches (two feet of seat and six inches of framing and finish). Commissioner Pizer expressed concern with crowding conditions occurring with nonconforming buildings which may impact the neighbors. In response to Chairman Perrotti, Director Blumenfeld explained that the City Council could modify the Commission’s findings at their own hearing.
MOTION
by Commissioner Tucker, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom to
APPROVE
TEXT 01-2 – Text amendment to Section 17.46.070 regarding
architectural projections, with the projections being no more
than 24 inches outside to outside measurements, and that the
windows be no more than 48 inches in height.
Director Blumenfeld gave a brief staff report and indicated that the applicant is required to prepare a new traffic and parking study because the development program has changed to a gym and office. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing.
MOTION
by Commissioner Tucker, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom, to
RE-NOTICE
for future meeting PDP 01-3/PARK 01-1 – Precise
Development Plan and Parking Plan for alterations to an existing
retail and entertainment center to accommodate offices, a health
and fitness club, and retail uses at 1605 Pacific Coast Highway,
Hermosa Pavilion.
Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request. Director Blumenfeld gave a staff report and stated that staff has worked with the applicant and architect to make the necessary changes discussed at the previous meeting. The driveway area has been revised to show the adequate amount of guest parking clearance, the lot coverage issue has been corrected to be conforming to the 65 percent coverage requirement, the open space deficiencies have been corrected, the project conforms to the height limit based upon a new survey submitted, and a landscape plan was submitted that picks up the minimum of two 36-inch box trees required. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing. Elizabeth Srour stated she is representing the applicant and the project has been revised to comply with all of the issues raised by staff and the Commission. She said that the conditions recommended by staff are acceptable to the property owner including the requirement for two trees in the front. Commissioner Tucker expressed concern with the neighbor to the east viewing a wall taller than 6 feet. Chairman Perrotti closed the public hearing. Commissioners Hoffman and Pizer stated that the project is in conformance and recommended approval.
MOTION
by Commissioner Hoffman, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom to
APPROVE
PC Resolution 00-, a Resolution of the Planning Commission of
the City of Hermosa Beach, California, Approving a Conditional
Use Permit, Precise Development Plan, and Vesting Tentative
Parcel Map #26219 for a two (2) unit condominium project, at 222
Culper Court.
Staff Recommended Action: To approve said request. Director Blumenfeld summarized the staff report and reviewed the project. He said that the applicant has provided a detailed survey verifying that the lot is steeply sloping and may have been convex, and the lower part of the lot at the Bay View side represents a cut at the alley. Also, he presented photos of the interior and outside of the existing garage. In summary, it appears that a convex condition exists, but cannot be confirmed from any City street grading records. Therefore, staff recommends that pursuant to the Zoning Code definition of grade that "in the absence of supporting documentation the corner point shall be established at ½ the difference between the adjacent elevation and the elevation of the property in question." In this case, ½ the difference, or the average, between the corner points and the top of the steps would be logical. This gives a measurement datum for the northwest corner of 95.1, and for the southwest corner, 94.7. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing. Elizabeth Srour, representing the applicant, thanked staff for their research. She indicated that the records show that this property was first purchased in 1902, and the assessor’s records show that this property was built in 1916, and when this property was developed, there wasn’t the type of equipment available today to do the alterations to the property of concern. She believed that there is sufficient evidence provided through the data provided by the engineer and the site inspection of staff. She asked the Commission’s support that a convex configuration be accepted and that the two corner points be accepted. Also, the conditions of approval are acceptable to the applicant. She stated that concerning the Monterey elevation and use of the parkway, Mr. Cleland has agreed to sign the assumption of risk document that the City requires. She indicated that this proposal is a very attractive use of the site and is in full compliance with all the development standards, and approval and acceptance of staff recommendations are requested. Chairman Perrotti closed the public hearing. Commissioner Pizer stated that the design is attractive and all of the requirements are now in conformance. Commissioner Tucker did not agree with the convex slope theory, and he believed that the lot was artificially created based on looking at the back wall of the garage, and he could not agree with 7 feet of difference. He also requested that the alley elevation be on the Monterey side, and that a ¾ bath be provided in the lower unit. Director Blumenfeld stated that by extending the line from the interior of the retaining wall in the garage to the adjoining property, that property is retained also approximately 3.5 or 4 feet.
MOTION
by Commissioner Kersenboom, seconded by Commissioner Pizer to
APPROVE
the staff resolution for CON 01-2/PDP 01-2, Conditional Use
Permit, Precise Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
No. 26216 for a two-unit condominium at 220 6th Street.
Commissioner Hoffman recused himself from the dais at 8:30 p.m. The Commission took a break at 8:30 p.m.
Director Blumenfeld gave a staff report and reviewed the request. Staff is requesting that the Commission confirm the convex slope method for determining height as noted in the attached resolution. He also said that in order to comply with the new standard, staff is proposing a condition that the 6-foot deck on the second story be widened to 7 feet, provide a minimum of 100 square feet, and be at least 50 percent open to the sky. In response to Commissioner Pizer, Director Blumenfeld believed that the chimney was removed because it interfered with the new addition. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing. Steven Freidman expressed concern with view blockage and congestion. Director Blumenfeld stated that the issue before the Commission is to determine whether or not there is a convex slope because it affects ultimately the profile of the building. Chairman Perrotti closed the public hearing. In response to Chairman Perrotti, Director Blumenfeld stated that over the last several years, a standard condition has been made to landscaping requirements with a minimum number of box trees and other landscaping requirements. He also pointed out that this project is conforming to the new code relative to height. Commissioner Tucker believed that the stairs were artificially created based upon the supporting evidence of the lot to the north and the northeast corner of the applicant’s lot. Director Blumenfeld informed that under the zoning ordinance the difference can be split between the elevation or a point can be taken within 3 horizontal feet which represents unaltered grade. In response to Commissioner Tucker, Director Blumenfeld believed that the deck would not be considered a floor area. The Commission agreed that the slope is a convex slope. Director Blumenfeld suggested calculating new heights based on alternatives and come back with a recommendation to the Commission. Commissioner Tucker believed that the addition is not a mezzanine.
MOTION
by Commissioner Kersenboom, seconded by Commissioner Tucker to
CONTINUE
CON 01-3 – Conditional Use Permit amendment to add a
mezzanine to an existing two-unit condominium at 858 Loma Drive,
and have staff come back with alternatives that either split the
difference or take an alternative datum that represents an
alternate grade.
Commissioner Pizer would like to see before and after pictures. Commissioner Hoffman returned to the dais at 9:25 p.m.
Director Blumenfeld gave a staff report and reviewed the project. He stated that the project conforms to the Zoning Ordinance, meets the lot coverage requirement, the building conforms to the height limit, a full compliment of open space is provided, all the required yards are provided, and there is a 10-foot front yard required which is unique and consistent with the block. In response to Commissioner Pizer, Director Blumenfeld stated that the requirement for guest parking is to provide one space per two units, and there is no net loss of parking with this project. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing. Elizabeth Srour stated she is representing the applicant and pointed out that there is a condition of approval (Condition No. 2) that the property owner has to seek the approval of Public Works and the building official with regard to on street parking to insure that there is no loss of parking on street or complies with the requirement if parking is displaced. She said that the parking is regulated by the Homeowners’ Association, and as guest parking, it functions for the entire complex. The project is in full compliance with the development standards for condominium use and for the R-3 zoning, and she said the applicant has done a fine job in creating a building elevation that is attractive, containing a lot of articulation. She pointed out that the active areas for the three units are facing the east side of the property. The entry side yard on the west is a configuration with the side yard averaging. She also indicated that the conditions of approval are acceptable. In response to Commissioner Tucker, Ms. Srour indicated that there is a significant retaining wall on the east side with walls to be constructed on the west side which will be dealt with during plan check. In response to Commissioner Tucker, Director Blumenfeld explained that enough distance has to be created vertically or horizontally to avoid surcharging the wall. He also said that if the room in the front unit is a sleeping room, it will have to meet every requirement for light and ventilation required under the Building Code. Chairman Perrotti closed the public hearing. Commissioner Tucker would like to see the exterior more broken up on the east and west elevations. Chairman Perrotti agreed.
MOTION
by Commissioner Tucker, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom to
APPROVE
PC Resolution 01-, a Resolution of the Planning Commission of
the City of Hermosa Beach, California, approving a Conditional
Use Permit, Precise Development Plan, and Vesting Tentative
Parcel Map #26298 for a three (3)-unit condominium project, at
421, 423, and 425 11th Street.
Director Blumenfeld requested that the Planning Commission continue this item to permit time for the applicant to make changes required for conformance to the Zone Code. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing.
MOTION
by Commissioner Tucker, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom to
CONTINUE
CON 01-5/PDP 01-5 – Conditional Use Permit, Precise
Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map No. 26290 for a
two-unit condominium at 2935 Palm Drive.
Director Blumenfeld gave a staff report and described the project. He stated that the project conforms to the Zone Code with respect to lot coverage, full compliment of open space is provided adjacent to primary living area and the balance of the open space is provided on roof decks and in the rear yard. The landscape plans are consistent with Commission policy and the project conforms to the height limit. Chairman Perrotti opened the public hearing. Cheryl Vargo, representing the applicant, stated that the lot coverage meets and exceeds the requirements, and the driveways and open spaces are oriented toward the west to benefit the units with the maximum light and air. She said the building has extensive articulation, and the bathroom in the basement level is a ¾ bath. She also said that both the west and east side property line walls are existing and will remain. Al Lai stated he lives in the rear residence of the property to the east of 617 First Street. He indicated that his living room space faces west into the yard. He presented a prepared statement to the Commission and expressed concern with congestion, traffic, noise and pollution with the construction of more condominiums. In response to Mr. Lai, Director Blumenfeld pointed out that construction noise is a short-term unavoidable impact with a beginning and end and is not a long term impact. In response to Mr. Lai, Chairman Perrotti indicated that there is no compensation involved from the impacts of construction. Chairman Perrotti closed the public hearing. In response to Commissioner Tucker, Director Blumenfeld stated that the parking meets the minimum turning radius of 25 feet based on the width of the garages. He also said that the project is unique in that it has an exceptionally large yard area at the rear. Chairman Perrotti reopened the public hearing. Ms. Vargo explained that the guest parking space is greatly covered by building overhang above and nothing will grow under it. She said there will be a porch with decorative brick or concrete and the concrete mass will be broken up. Commissioner Tucker expressed concern with the slope of the property out to the street and suggested that a sump pump be installed. Chairman Perrotti pointed out that there has been a lot of construction in the area, and he recommended that anyone living in the area that is impacted to keep an eye on their property, taking photographs of cracks, etc.
MOTION
by Commissioner Kersenboom, seconded by Commissioner Pizer to
APPROVE
PC Resolution 01-, a Resolution of the Planning Commission of
the City of Hermosa Beach, California, approving a Conditional
Use Permit, Precise Development Plan, and Vesting Tentative
Parcel Map #26299 for a two (2)-unit condominium project, at 617
and 619 First Street.
Director Blumenfeld gave a brief staff report and stated that staff has re-inspected the site over the last two weeks and found that the parking area is free of stacked lumber. The Commission RECEIVED AND FILED the report.
17. COMMISSIONER ITEMS In response to Commissioner Tucker, Director Blumenfeld indicated that the Ryder property has been notified with two letters. He also said that staff has been in communication with the owner of the property at Aviation and Prospect, and he said some of the truck storage is permitted providing it is in a proper location and pertinent to a commercial use. He said the owner is making sure that there is a legally permitted commercial use for truck storage. Also, where there is large earth moving equipment, the owner was advised that this had to be removed immediately. In response to Commissioner Hoffman, Director Blumenfeld indicated that staff is proceeding with the issue of architectural projections with support from the ground. In response to Commissioner Tucker, Director Blumenfeld indicated that regarding the property for sale on 14th Street, collaborating with the property owners would have to be looked at, having it be an owner participation project in order to make it work, as the lot value is very high. 18. ADJOURNMENT MOTION by Commissioner Pizer, seconded by Commissioner Kersenboom to ADJOURN the meeting at 10:10 p.m. No objections, so ordered. |
|
|
|