The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m.

1. Roll Call

   Present: Commissioners Winnek (chairman), Cheatham (vice-chairman), Howell, Koch, Lombardo,

   Also Present: Harold Williams, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
   Michael Flaherty, Public Works Superintendent
   Rhea Punneo, Administrative Assistant, Public Works Department

2. Flag Salute

   Mr. Winnek led the flag salute.

3. Approval of Minutes: July 17, 2002

   The minutes of the July 17, 2002 meeting were approved as written with the caveat that Mr. Winnek asked Mr. Cheatham to sign also since Mr. Winnek had missed much of that meeting.

4. Public Comments

   Public Works will have a booth at the Picnic in the Outfield being held on September 22 from 12:00 noon to 4:00 p.m. at Clark Field.

5. Correspondence

   None.

6. Items for Commission Consideration

   1. Summary of Updated 5-Year Capital Improvement Plan, 2002-03 through 2006-07 (PDF file)

      Mr. Williams presented the item indicating that the Commissioners have received the revised summary of the Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan. Mr. Williams noted that the plan has been adjusted to include Fiscal Year 06-07, and additional projects have been added for that year. Concrete sidewalk repairs will be added, and it will be requested that Council program that out over four years. A signage replacement project has been requested for Fiscal Year 06-07 along with road construction on Pier Avenue and on 20th Street, between Valley and Powell (as a result of the work done on 21st Street, which led residents of 20th Street to want to have their street improved as well).

      Mr. Williams reminded the Commission that the plan is constantly changing, that it is a living document with additions and revisions from year to year. Since last year, the plan has added some street improvements and postponed others, added sewer repairs, and added painting and landscaping of City Hall. He also noted that the City Manager establishes funding after staff presents the proposed. Final projects may differ from what was originally requested.

      Discussion following the presentation highlighted the following:

      • The long-term financial plan would be finalized by November of this year.
      • It was noted that the cost breakdown for the new projects was excellent.
      • Some projects have been re-scoped while others have been delayed
      • The project previously proposed for widening Ardmore Ave. was rejected by Council.
      • The Fire Station remodel will be significantly re-scoped.
      • The TyCom project on 2nd Street isn't listed as a CIP due to the lack of control of timing and funding. It is considered a special project and, as with the new undergrounding projects, will be handled apart from the usual CIP's.
      • TyCom will fund street improvements after their fiber optic project has been completed.
      • The Loma Drive projects (sewer and street improvements) are under design; completion is anticipated in November this year.
      • There will be an initial public meeting prior to beginning construction on Loma Drive to describe the scope and timing of the work. When possible, street parking will be preserved and, unless necessary for drainage, concrete curbs will not be installed.
      • Contractors are required to give a 48-hour notice to residents prior to beginning construction. This would include door hanger notification as well as going door-to-door.

7. Commissioners' Reports

   Tree Subcommittee

   Mr. Howell reported that the City's tree subcommittee just got off the ground and just had their first meeting. Its purpose is to make sure that appropriate trees are planted in accordance with long-term policy. The subcommittee decided to look at updating the tree policy and preferred species list; citizens will be invited to identify trees they like and how they might fit with the list.

   Infrastructure Standards Subcommittee

   Mr. Cheatham presented the Infrastructure Standards Subcommittee Report, a copy of which was distributed to those present. Mr. Cheatham gave a brief summary of the history of the Subcommittee.

   Mr. Cheatham raised four issues to be voted on:

   1. Development of standards for street repair. Some CIP repairs could be done with overlay instead of reconstruction. At the present time, new developments may or may not be required to repair the street to centerline; the City Engineer makes this determination. Mr. Cheatham's recommendation is to add additional guidelines to standard plans and identify the pavement study recommendation in the City budget. The rationale being that the City would be better able to budget and developers better able to identify the scope of projects.

   2. Development standards for patching and retrenching. Patching and pavement cuts can be inconsistent and use different materials. Standard Plan No. 115 is currently used, and the current minimum is 3 feet wide or 3 feet by 3 feet, and Mr. Cheatham indicated that this may be too small. Mr. Cheatham's recommendation is to revise the standard plans to review the required size of pavement cuts, and to hold utility companies to the standards. Mr. Cheatham pointed out that larger patches hold up better and have better aesthetics; concrete is more expensive if you have a small amount, and asphalt is cheaper and requires less skill to install for a temporary patch. Cable companies are required to take out permits before they make cuts.

   3. Development standards for underground utilities. Repaving streets end up being retrenched. Current practice allows pavement cuts across streets as necessary. Mr. Cheatham recommends laying PVC pipe across street during CIP construction; his rationale is that will improve the longevity of streets. Mr. Koch disagreed with the recommendation and pointed out that it is difficult to keep track of problems and guess which redevelopment will occur in the future. Mr. Williams indicated that the cost of PVC pipe should not be a concern for the commission; the City Council will determine if it is cost effective. Mr. Williams expressed concern that the conduit can become clogged (for example if concrete is accidentally poured into the PVC). PVC is cheap, but it may not work years later; Mr. Williams said that one ought not to trust old pipes. Mr. Howell asked if people prefer underground utilities, and Mr. Winnek asked if every house would have to be viewed as a potential upgrade, and if PVC pipes eventually degrade.

   4. Curbs, gutters, and street widths. Unimproved and some improved properties encroach on City right of way, and lax permitting in past decades has led to variations. In practice CIP projects are not straightening out streets, and problems remain with parking, pedestrian flow, and water runoff. Owners are expected to fix problem when property is improved. Mr. Williams indicated that new curb and gutters are done by homeowners when they do improvements; the City does concrete work if and only if there is a drainage problem. Mr. Cheatham recommends grading and paving to the edge of right of way, add berms or swales, and owners can add curbs, gutters, and sidewalks when property is improved. Paving right of way also applies to "sidewalk exempt" streets-no curbs or gutters required. The rationale is that the standard plans are due for revision and are a result of "cut and paste" of other cities' plans. Mr. Williams said that our standard plans borrow from other cities; this is called "technology transfer."

   Mr. Cheatham submitted these four issues to a vote to determine if they should be brought forward to the City Council. The results were as follows:

   1. Development of standards of street repair. Recommendation approved (unanimous).

   2. Development of standards for patching/trenching. Recommendation approved (unanimous).

   3. Development of standards for undergrounding utilities. Recommendation approved with the caveat that it not dramatically increase costs and applies to reconstruction. Developers would be responsible if PVC doesn't work. This will be taken forward to the City Council to see if they think it is cost effective. This should be tried on a test basis to make sure it is effective before it is implemented widely.

   4. Curbs, gutters and street widths. Recommendation approved (unanimous).

8. Council Agendas/Minutes

   All received and reviewed.

9. Items Requested by Commissioners

   None.

10. Other Matters

    Commissioner Cheatham asked about looking at the possibility of reducing the red space in front of the Coffee Bean. Mr. Williams suggested waiting until we have the new traffic engineer look into it.

    Mr. Flaherty raised the issue of the sewer pump failure at 33rd and Ingleside within the last two weeks. Five feet of sewer water flooded the station and damaged electronics; they got the pump going, but it is on its last legs and needs replacing. This is a sizable project that we must accelerate; all five stations are forty to fifty years old, and we need a game plan to ensure consistency.

    Mr. Winnek mentioned that Congress was considering block grants for sewer repairs. Mr. Williams agreed that we should be vigilant in looking for grants, but Hermosa Beach is too affluent to qualify for federal block grants.

    Mr. Cheatham raised the issue of parking tickets and the possibility of issuing parking permits for residents. Mr. Williams said that parking permit issues are beyond the scope of Public Works.

    Mr. Flaherty said that standards for street tree planting are being developed and they want input from agencies and existing organizations. Mr. Flaherty hopes that information can be exchanged and standards developed for all of southern California for street tree planting.

11. Public Comment

    None.

12. Adjournment

    The meeting was adjourned at 8:32pm. The next meeting will be on September 18, 2002 in Council Chambers.