CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
RESOLUTION NO. 23-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING HISTORIC RESOURCES PRESERVATION NO. 22-01 FOR DESIGNATION OF A LANDMARK FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2204 MONTEREY BOULEVARD IN THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH,
CALIFORNIA
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council finds as follows:
A. On April 7, 2022, the property owner of 2204 Monterey Boulevard submitted an application to nominate their property at 2204 Monterey Boulevard as a Hermosa Beach Landmark as outlined per the requirements of Chapter
17.53 Historic Resources Preservation of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code (HMBC). The home is a single-family residence constructed in 1913 and is designed in the Craftsman architectural style (the “Project”).
B. The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the 25th day of April, 2023. All interested parties were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence.
C. The City Council approves Resolution No. 23-XX, which designates the property located at 2204 Monterey Boulevard as a City of Hermosa Beach Landmark.
SECTION 2. Historic Resources Preservation Findings. Based on the testimony and evidence received, the City Council hereby further finds, determines and declares pertaining to the application for Historic Resources Preservation pursuant to Hermosa Beach Municipal Code (HBMC) Section 17.53.060 if it meets one or more of the following criteria.
A. It exemplifies or reflects special elements of the City’s cultural, economic, political, aesthetic, engineering, or architectural history: The analysis 226
conducted at the site indicates that the property does not exemplify, symbolize, or manifest elements of the cultural, social, economic, political, or architectural history or development of Hermosa Beach. The property merely reflects a continuation of an early trend of residential development of the First Addition Tract by an owner-builder. The property reflects the early trend of residential development within the First Addition Tract of Hermosa Beach, however, the association with this trend itself does not substantiate significance. Therefore, the property does not meet the requirements of Criterion A.
B. It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history: Research did not reveal any evidence that the original or subsequent owners listed above (see Table 2) would be considered historic personages, or that they made any demonstrably significant contributions to local, state, or national history while working in their respective fields.
Research also did not reveal any evidence of association with an historic event. Therefore, the property does not meet the requirements of Criterion B.
C. It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship: While the Craftsman style is common throughout Southern California, not many intact examples remain in Hermosa Beach. The subject property embodies the style as applied to a modest, one-story house by an owner-builder. Therefore, the property is significant under Criterion C as a good and rare example of a modest Craftsman bungalow in Hermosa Beach.
D. It is representative of the notable work of a builder, designer, or architect:
The original 1913 building permit identifies the original owner, F. A. Kidder, as the contractor. While Kidder was a builder/contractor, research did not reveal that he was considered a significant builder, as there is no information of note on his other buildings. The subject property is the only known example of his work to be identified as part of the research report. Additional contractors and architects were associated with the modification of the property such as: Merrill and Dan Richardson. However, additional information regarding their personal histories or works could not be ascertained. Even if any architects or contractors associated with the 227
property were determined to be notable, their work consisted of minor additions to a pre-existing property, would likely not be considered a notable example of their work. Therefore, the property does not meet the requirements of Criterion D.
E. Its unique location or singular physical characteristic(s) represents an established and familiar visual feature or landmark of a neighborhood, community, or the City: The property is centrally located in Hermosa Beach’s Sand Section neighborhood. It has remained mostly unchanged since construction, however much of the surrounding neighborhood has been developed and redeveloped since 1913. The property is a regularlyshaped, corner parcel and is surrounded by contemporary multi-story single family residences and large multi-family residences that range in size, scale, and construction date. The property is not a unique location, possess a singular visual characteristic, nor is it an established or familiar visual feature. Therefore, the property does not meet the requirements of Criterion E
SECTION 3. Approval.
The City Council finds, that based on the foregoing findings, evidence in the record testimony provided at the hearing, that approval of the Historic Resources Preservation (HRR 22-01), is hereby APPROVED.
These approvals are granted subject to the following conditions, which must be met at all times, unless otherwise stated, in order to enjoy the use of the subject property for any and all uses permitted by the granting of the requested approvals.
1. The maintenance and continued use of the property shall be in conformance with the requirements of Chapter 17.53 Historic Resources Preservation of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code.
2. The project shall comply with all requirements of the City of Hermosa Beach Building Division, Public Works Department, Los Angeles County Fire Department, and the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code.
3. The subject property shall be maintained, and operated in full compliance with the conditions of this permit and any law, statute, ordinance or other 228
regulation applicable to any development or activity on the subject property. Failure of the permittee to cease any development or activity not in full compliance shall be a violation of these conditions.
4. To the extent permitted by law, Permittee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Hermosa Beach, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside, or void any permit or approval for this project authorized by the City, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorney’s fees and costs in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its choice.
5. The permittee shall reimburse the City for any court and attorney's fees which the City may be required to pay as a result of any claim or action brought against the City because of this permit. Although the permittee is the real party in interest in an action, the City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of the action, but such participation shall not relieve the permittee of any obligation under this condition.
6. Each of the above conditions is separately enforced, and if one of the conditions of approval is found to be invalid by a court of law, all the other conditions shall remain valid and enforceable.
SECTION 7. Environmental Review.
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed project qualifies for a Class 1 categorical exemption, Historical Resources Restoration/Rehabilitation as defined in section 15331 of the CEQA Guidelines, as it consists of a building to be preserved as a historical resource consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings.
SECTION 8. Severability. If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such 229
decision will not affect the validity of the remainder of this resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this resolution, and each and every section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions thereof is declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 9. Record of Proceedings. The City Clerk is directed to certify the adoption of this Resolution and to keep a copy of same along with such other documents and records of proceedings as may be designated by the City Manager.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED on this 25th day of April 2023.
Ray Jackson, PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, CA
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________ ________________________________ Myra Maravilla Patrick Donegan
City Clerk City Attorney
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 23-XX was adopted by the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach at a regular meeting held thereof on the 25th day of April 2023, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
230
________________________________
Myra Maravilla
City Clerk
231
Landmark Assessment Report
Date: March 28, 2023
For: James Atkins, Senior Planner, City of Hermosa Beach Subject: 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach
From: Emma Haggerty, Associate Architectural Historian, GPA Consulting _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Executive Summary
The property located at 2204 Monterey Boulevard in the city of Hermosa Beach is a single-family residence designed in the Craftsman style that was constructed in 1913 (see Figure 1). The property owner submitted an application to nominate the property as a Hermosa Beach Landmark on April 7, 2022. As a result, GPA Consulting (GPA) has been retained by the City of Hermosa Beach (City) to prepare this Landmark Assessment Report to determine if the property is eligible for designation, and if so, under which criteria.
GPA evaluated the property under the five Hermosa Beach Landmark criteria and assessed its physical integrity.
As a result of this analysis, GPA concludes that the property is significant under Criterion C and retains sufficient physical integrity to convey its significance; therefore, it appears to be eligible for designation as a Hermosa Beach Landmark.
Figure 1: 2204 Monterey Boulevard, view looking northwest.
GPA Consulting, January 27, 2023.
232
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Landmark Assessment Report – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA 2 Introduction
The purpose of this memorandum is to evaluate the residence located at 2204 Monterey Boulevard as a Hermosa Beach Landmark in response to a designation application submitted by the property owner on April 7, 2022.
The single-family residence is located on a corner parcel on Monterey Boulevard at S. Park Avenue in the Sand Section neighborhood of Hermosa Beach (see Figure 2). The property comprises one legal parcel (Los Angeles County Assessor’s Parcel No. 4182-016-001).
Figure 2: 2204 Monterey Boulevard indicated with a yellow outline. Base image courtesy of Bing Maps.
Andrea Galvin, Principal Architectural Historian, Jenna Kachour, Senior Associate Architectural Historian, and Emma Haggerty, Associate Architectural Historian, were responsible for the preparation of this memo. Audrey von Ahrens, Associate Architectural Historian, was responsible for the photographic documentation taken during the site visit. They each fulfill the qualifications of a historic preservation professional outlined in Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 61. Their resumes are included as Attachment A.
Methodology
In preparing this report, GPA performed the following tasks:
1. Reviewed existing information provided by the City, including the landmark designation application. 233
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Landmark Assessment Report – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA 3
2. Conducted a field inspection of the property to ascertain the general condition and physical integrity of the residence thereon. Digital photographs of the exterior of the residence were taken during this field inspection.
3. Conducted research into the history of the property. Sources referenced included building permit records, city directories, newspaper archives, genealogical databases, and historic maps.
4. Reviewed the City of Hermosa Beach 2017 General Plan (“PLAN Hermosa”) to identify the appropriate contexts for the evaluation, including the early development of Hermosa Beach and Craftsman architecture.
5. Reviewed and analyzed ordinances, statutes, regulations, bulletins, and technical materials relating to federal, state, and local historic preservation designations, and assessment processes and programs to evaluate the property for significance as a Hermosa Beach Landmark.
Previous Evaluations
GPA reviewed PLAN Hermosa and the Built Environment Resources Database (BERD) maintained by the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). The property appears to have not been previously evaluated for eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places, California Register of Historical Resources, or as a local landmark. The property was identified as one of 220 potential historic resources during a windshield survey of Hermosa Beach conducted as part of the Technical Background Report for PLAN Hermosa. 1 The
property was also included in the book Castles on the Sand in 1977.2 See Attachment D for excerpts of these publications.
Historic Context
The significance of a property must be evaluated within its historic context(s). Historic contexts are those patterns or trends in history by which a specific property is understood. The most applicable contexts for evaluating the property at 2204 Monterey Boulevard are early residential development of Hermosa Beach as well as the Arts & Crafts Movement including the Craftsman style and Craftsman bungalows.
Early Residential Development in Hermosa Beach3
In 1901 George Steele began surveying the townsite of Hermosa Beach for the Hermosa Beach Land and Water Company. The first area Steele surveyed was between the boardwalk, also known as The Strand, and Hermosa Avenue and named the Hermosa Beach tract. Steele divided the small strip of land into hundreds of lots for both commercial and residential purposes, while short streets running east and west connected the boardwalk to Hermosa Avenue.
Later in 1901, Steele surveyed land east of Hermosa Avenue. This “First Addition to Hermosa Beach” ran from 26th Street in the north to the City’s southern border with Redondo Beach and 1 PCR Services, “Section 7.0 Cultural Resources,” Appendix C – Technical Background Report, PLAN Hermosa Draft Environmental Impact Report, City of Hermosa Beach, October 2016. 2 Patricia A. Gazin, Castles on the Sand: An Incomplete Chronicle of the Habitations of Ancient Hermosans (Hermosa Beach:
1977).
3 This historic context is excerpted from PCR Services, “Section 7.0 Cultural Resources,” Appendix C – Technical Background Report, PLAN Hermosa Draft Environmental Impact Report, City of Hermosa Beach, October 2016, 7-5 – 7-7. 234
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Landmark Assessment Report – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA 4 added more lots and streets between Hermosa Avenue and Loma Drive. A year later, in December of 1902, Steele added the “Second Addition to Hermosa Beach” shaping the remaining territory between Loma Drive and the eastern border of Hermosa Beach, just beyond Prospect Avenue.
The area north of 26th Street, between The Strand and Highland Avenue, was surveyed in 1903 on behalf of the Los Angeles Pacific Railroad Company. This area was known as Shakespeare Beach with many of the streets named after famous poets, such as Alfred Tennyson, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Nathaniel Hawthorne, and John Keats. East of Shakespeare Beach was the Carnation Villa Tract, surveyed in 1905, and the Shakespeare Heights Tract added in 1912.
The addition of Shakespeare Heights in 1912 marked the completion of major survey work for Hermosa Beach… The rural area along Prospect Avenue on the eastern border of the City was further subdivided in the 1920s as the population of Hermosa grew.
Due to the rapid subdivision of the City’s land, residential development occurred sporadically throughout the first two decades of Hermosa Beach’s existence. The 1915 map of the City shows dense residential development along the beach, west of Manhattan Avenue, as well as the South End, while the North End remains sparsely developed.
However, it wouldn’t be long for the North End to catch up. With the addition of Hermosa Beach to the Pacific Electric’s popular Balloon Route in 1910, the City was as popular as any Los Angeles seaside community. The Los Angeles Times reported the purchases of hundreds of lots in the Shakespeare Beach neighborhood as early as 1907. By the 1920s, many new residences appeared throughout the Shakespeare Beach neighborhood. A 1920s Map of Hermosa Beach shows most of the residential sections had been subdivided by that time.
The dominant residential building type throughout Hermosa Beach was the vernacular beach cottage, popular among most Southern California beach communities, constructed between the initial subdivision of the City up to 1930. In many cases these beach cottages contained elements of popular period revival styles and the Craftsman style. The Spanish Colonial Revival, Shingle, Arts and Crafts, and Period Revival styles were also applied to Hermosa Beach residences and can be found throughout the City.
Despite the early development of Hermosa Beach’s coastal tracts, areas east of Shakespeare Beach remained undeveloped, possibly as late as 1946. The 1927 Sanborn Maps, amended in 1946, contained no structures in the Carnation Villa Tract or Shakespeare Heights tract, suggesting that these areas remained undeveloped. The 1950s Ranch style home was popular in this area indicating a post-World War II period of development.
Sanborn Fire Insurance maps show the construction of many homes in the formerly rural area to the east of Camino Real (Pacific Coast Highway) along Prospect Avenue with larger lots than those along the coast. While a few of these homes appeared to be post-World War II additions, most of the homes in this area were characteristic of earlier years in Hermosa Beach’s development. Like the neighborhoods closer to the beach, the vernacular beach cottage style was popular east of Camino Real.
235
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Landmark Assessment Report – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA 5 Craftsman Style4
Craftsman architecture reflected the Arts and Crafts Movement’s [from 1895 to 1930] conscious search for the supposed simplicity of a pre-industrial time when objects revealed the skill and craftsmanship of the laborer and, further, a rejection of the highly ornamented Victorian aesthetic. The Craftsman style applied to more than the building envelope; architects designed everything in harmony, from the furniture and fixtures to the landscape. The “ultimate bungalows” of the Craftsman style were usually two stories in height and custom designed by architects working closely with local artisans. Later [in the 1900s through the 1920s], the aesthetics of the Craftsman style would be adapted to single-story, mass-produced bungalows grouped in neighborhoods for the middle class.
Craftsman Bungalows5
Although the term “bungalow” has been closely associated with the Arts and Crafts movement and the Craftsman style of architecture, it refers to a type of house rather than a style of architecture. As Craftsman style architecture reached the masses in the form of small homes described in catalogues as bungalows, the term became inextricably linked with the style.
The bungalow appeared in California during the first decade of the twentieth century. It was a house type ready made for the mild climate and profound demand brought about by the rapidly expanding population. While some bungalows were custom designed by architects, most were selected from plan books or catalogues and were constructed by contractors or assembled from prefabricated pieces. The average price was $3,000.
The Craftsman bungalow dates from the early 1900s through the 1920s. The bungalow’s simplicity of form, informal character, direct response to site, and extensive use of natural materials – particularly wood – was a regional interpretation of the socio-economic and aesthetic reforms espoused by the Arts and Crafts Movement’s founder, William Morris.
Craftsman bungalows generally have rectangular or complex plans and are one to one-and-ahalf stories tall. They have wood clapboard or shingle exteriors and are defined by their horizontality with broad front porches, often composed with stone, clinker brick, or stuccoed porch piers. Other character-defining features include low-pitched front-facing gabled roofs, and overhanging eaves with exposed rafter tails.
4 GPA Consulting, “Architecture and Engineering, Arts and Crafts Movement (1895-1930), Housing the Masses (1880— 1980), Arts and Crafts Neighborhoods (1890-1930)” Los Angeles Citywide Historic Context Statement (City of Los Angeles Office of Historic Resources, June 2016), 8-15.
5 Ibid.
236
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Landmark Assessment Report – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA 6 Property Description
The property located at 2204 Monterey
Boulevard is a single-family residence
constructed in 1913 in the Craftsman style
located on a rectangle-shaped, corner parcel on
Monterey Boulevard at S. Park Avenue in the
First Addition Tract in the Sand Section
neighborhood of Hermosa Beach. The property
is one story in height with a raised concrete
foundation, cross-gabled roof clad in composite
shingles with wide, overhanging eaves with
extended rafter tails behind added fascia boards
(see Figure 3 and Attachment B for additional
photographs of the property).
Figure 3: Primary (south) elevation, GPA Consulting, January 27, 2023.
The property has a T-shaped floor plan and is
clad in a combination of horizontal wood
clapboard siding along the bottom half of the
first floor and wood shingles along the upper
half. The enclosed front porch (an alteration
after c. 1946) is clad in stucco with shingles in
the upper gable. Fenestration is a mix of dividedlight double hung windows arranged individually, in pairs, and in groups of three,
large single and divided light fixed windows (see
Figure 4). Multilight metal casement windows
were added to the enclosed porch. Figure 4: Window and cladding detail, east elevation, view looking west, GPA Consulting, January 27, 2023.
The property is located on an irregularly shaped
parcel surrounded by a small stucco retaining
wall and painted wood picket fence. The parcel
is landscaped with brick paving, plants and
trees (see Figure 5). The primary, south
elevation faces Monterey Boulevard and has an
off centered entrance that consists of a single
solid Dutch door flanked by narrow wood
shutters (both are later alterations). The
entryway is located on the enclosed projecting
front porch with a gable roof. Windows along the
elevation include a large, fixed window on the
recessed portion of the south elevation and five
divided light metal casement windows on the
enclosed porch (see Figure 3).
Figure 5: Southeast corner of parcel, view looking northwest, GPA Consulting, January 27, 2023.
237
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Landmark Assessment Report – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA 7 The east elevation faces S. Park Avenue and has
a side gabled roof with extended eaves and
exposed rafter tails behind an added fascia
board. A forward-facing gable over a bay window
is located in the center of the elevation. The
elevation has a non-original metal casement
window in the southeast corner, a tripartite
window grouping and the central bay window
with three divided light, double hung wood
windows. A singular double hung wood window
is next to a pair of divided light French doors
towards the northeast corner. In the northeast
corner of the parcel is a single car garage
(replaced in 1974) with a metal roll up door (see
Figure 6).
Figure 6: East elevation, view looking northwest, GPA Consulting, January 27, 2023.
The north elevation has a narrow setback from
the adjacent parcel. The elevation is made up of
the northern side of the garage which does not
have any fenestration and is clad in horizontal
clapboard siding. The north elevation of the
residence is recessed from the garage and steps
below grade. The elevation has painted,
concrete block foundation followed by wood
horizontal clapboard siding and wood shingles
in the upper gable. There is a single double hung
window and a single door and stoop that leads to
a brick-paved area along the north and west
property lines (see Figure 7). Figure 7: North and west elevations, view looking southeast, GPA Consulting, January 27, 2023.
The west elevation is narrowly setback from the
west property line and has a side gabled roof
with extended rafters covered by an added
fascia board. There is a small bump out located
in the center of the elevation with a single double
hung window (see Figure 8). There is a leaded
glass window to the south of the bump out,
closer to the primary elevation, that replaced a
stained-glass window that has been removed
and is being stored inside the garage. A nonoriginal metal garden window is located in the bathroom near the northwest corner of the
western elevation and is obscured by a wooden
screen.
Figure 8: West elevation, view looking northeast, GPA
Consulting, January 27, 2023.
238
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Landmark Assessment Report – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA 8 Construction History
The property at 2204 Monterey Boulevard (sometimes referenced as “Summit Avenue” or “22nd Street”) appears to be in overall good condition.6
The original building permit from 1913 was for a 24’ by 34’ one-story single-family residence. It identifies S.S. Kidder as the owner and F. A. Kidder as the contractor. 7 Since
construction, the property has undergone minor modifications including the addition of a 10’ by 14’ garage by the owner-builder in 1914, unknown repair work in 1936, and the replacement of a 30 inch wall in 1962.8 The referenced wall is likely the retaining wall that runs along the parcel boundaries. The next available permit identifies a new garage being built in 1974, replacing the 1914 garage. 9 The final available permit was from
1979 when a portion of the roof was raised to match the existing roof.10 The location was not disclosed on the permit, however per the property owner the raised roofline is along the east elevation next to the garage. All available building permits are outlined below (see Table 1 and Attachment E for copies of building permits).
Table 1. Building Permit History
Date Permit
#
Scope of Work Architect/Builder/
Contractor/ Engineer
Owner
1913/05/24 62 24’ x 34’ one-story building C – F. A. Kidder S. S. Kidder 1914/10/01 253 10’ x 14’ garage with cement floor C – S. S. Kidder S. S. Kidder 1936/09/14 1323 Repair work N/A N/A
1962/06/01 11666 Replace 30” wall C – Merrill Blackford 1974/10/05 253 Garage N/A N/A
1979/08/01 18131 Raise portion of roof to tie into existing roof.
A – Dan Richardson Marsha A.
Luecke (now
Majka)
Additional modifications that were noted during the site visit, but were not included in the building permit history include:
• Enclosed front porch with stucco cladding, added metal windows, added wood shutters, and added Dutch door, likely post-1946.11
• Removal of stained-glass window for leaded glass window, west elevation, date unknown. • Removal of original entry door and wall inside enclosed front porch, south elevation, likely post-1946. • Addition of garden window, west elevation, date unknown. • Addition of fascia boards and gutters along roofline, all elevations, date unknown.
Ownership and Tenant History
The original owners of 2204 Monterey Boulevard were Francis A. Kidder and Sarah S. Kidder per the original building permit. Francis was a builder who constructed properties in San Fernando and Van Nuys.12 He resided in the subject property until his passing in 1930.13 His wife, Sarah was a local charter member and secretary of 6 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps and early city directories identify the street as Summit Avenue between 1912-1921, original building from 1913 identifies street as Monterey Boulevard; 1930 Census Records identify the street as 22nd Street. 7 City of Hermosa Beach, Building Permit No. 62, May 24, 1913. 8 City of Hermosa Beach, Building Permit No. 253, October 1, 1914; City of Hermosa Beach, Building Permit No. 1323, September 14, 1936; City of Hermosa Beach, Building Permit No. 11666, June 1, 1962. 9 City of Hermosa Beach, Building Permit No. 253, October 5, 1974. 10 City of Hermosa Beach, Building Permit No. 18131, August 1, 1979. 11 The Sanborn Fire Insurance Map dated 1946 shows the porch as covered but open on three sides. 12 “Death Takes Pioneer Resident of Valley,” Los Angeles Times, July 24, 1930. 13 Ibid. 239
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Landmark Assessment Report – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA 9 the Hermosa Women’s Club and volunteered with the Red Cross. 14 She resided in the subject property until her
passing in 1938.
15 Per city directories, Ivar and Josephine Winding resided in the property in 1947.16 No additional information could be found regarding their personal histories other than attending social events within Hermosa Beach from 1940 through 1953. Nancy L. Blackford was identified as an owner in a wedding announcement in 1956 and resided in the property until 1970 per building permit records. 17 Benjamin Russell
and Elizabeth Russell are listed as tenants and resided in the property from 1975 until 1979.18 No additional information could be found regarding their personal histories. Marsha A. Majka, the current property owner, has owned the property since 1979 (see Table 2 and Attachment C for copies of city directories).19 Table 1: Property Tenant History
Date Name Occupation
1913-1938 Francis A. Kidder and Sarah S. Kidder Builder; N/A 1947 Ivar Winding and Josephine R. Winding N/A
1956-1970 Nancy L. Blackford N/A
1975-1979 Ben Russell and Elizabeth Russell N/A
1979-Present Marsha A. Majka Current owner
14 “Sarah S. Kidder,” Redondo Reflex, February 25, 1938 15 Ibid. 16 City Directory, Hermosa Beach, 1947. 17 “Licensed to Wed,” Redondo Reflex, March 23, 1956. 18 City of Hermosa Beach, Building Permit Records, September 1, 1979. 19 City of Hermosa Beach, Building Permit No. 18131, August 1, 1979. 240
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Landmark Assessment Report – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA 10 Evaluation for Local Landmark Designation
Per §17.53.060 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code (adopted in 1998) a historic resource in accordance with §17.53.070 through §17.53.120 may be designated as a Landmark if it satisfies one or more of the five designation criteria. The following discussion considers the significance of 2204 Monterey Boulevard under each criterion.
Criterion A: It exemplifies, symbolizes, or manifests elements of the cultural, social, economic, political, or architectural history.
The property does not exemplify, symbolize, or manifest elements of the cultural, social, economic, political, or architectural history or development of Hermosa Beach.
2204 Monterey Boulevard was constructed in 1913 in the present-day Sand Section neighborhood. The property was constructed 12 years after the First Addition Tract was subdivided in 1901 and six years after Hermosa Beach was established as its own city in 1907. At the time of construction, Hermosa Beach was a seaside tourist destination with limited development and mainly made of up modest bungalows. The rate of development within Hermosa Beach steadily increased in the 1920s and 1930s for both commercial and residential development. The original building permit indicates that 2204 Monterey Boulevard was originally constructed in 1913 as a 24’ by 34’ single family residence. The construction occurred during the initial period of residential development in Hermosa Beach. As such, it reflects an association with early single-family residential development in Hermosa Beach and the First Addition Tract.
National Register Bulletin #15 is a federal publication that includes instruction for evaluating resources under each criterion within an appropriate context and what does, or does not, constitute historic significance. When local governments do not include specific guidance regarding the interpretation of local evaluation criteria, the industry standard is to utilize the guidance outlined in National Register Bulletin #15. The bulletin states that “ …mere association with historic events or trends is not enough, in and of itself, to qualify under Criterion A [or Hermosa Beach Criterion A]: the property’s specific association must be considered important as well. For example, a building historically in commercial use must be shown to have been significant in commercial history.”20 While the subject property was constructed during an early trend of single-family residential development, research did not reveal evidence to suggest that the association itself is significant, or that the property was especially unique, influential, or important in single-family residential history.
Francis A. Kidder is the original owner and contractor noted on the original building permit. Kidder does not appear to have any influence in the early residential development of Hermosa Beach. He appears to have only constructed this one house within Hermosa Beach and retired three years after he constructed the property.21 Kidder appears to be best associated with larger developments in San Fernando and Van Nuys. 22 The property at 2204 Monterey Boulevard merely reflects a continuation of an early trend of residential development of the First Addition Tract by an owner-builder. The property reflects the early trend of residential development within the First Addition Tract of Hermosa Beach, however, the association with this trend itself does not appear to have significance.
20 “National Register Bulletin 15,” 12. 21 “Father of Local Woman Passes,” Covina Argus, July 25, 1930. 22 “Death Takes Pioneer Resident of Valley,” Los Angeles Times, July 24, 1930. 241
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Landmark Assessment Report – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA 11 Therefore, the property does not appear to be significant under Criterion A.
Criterion B: It is identified with persons or events significant in local, state, or national history.
The following residents of 2204 Monterey Boulevard were identified through city directory, building permit, and newspaper research. The original owners as identified on the original building permit are Francis A. Kidder and Sarah S. Kidder. Francis was a builder who constructed properties in San Fernando and Van Nuys and resided in the subject property until his passing in 1930. His wife, Sarah S. Kidder was associated with various charities and volunteer organizations throughout Hermosa Beach and resided in the property until her passing in 1938.
There is no information to suggest that the original owners were significant within Hermosa Beach or within the organizations that they were associated.
Research did not reveal any additional evidence that the other residents or owners discussed above (see Table 2) would be considered historic personages, or that they made any demonstrably significant contributions to local, state, or national history while working in their respective fields.
Research also did not reveal any evidence of association with an historic event. Therefore, 2204 Monterey Boulevard does not appear to be significant under Criterion B.
Criterion C: It embodies distinctive characteristics of a style, type, period, or method of construction, or is a valuable example of the use of indigenous materials or craftsmanship.
2204 Monterey Boulevard embodies the distinguishing characteristics of the Craftsman style. The style is expressed through horizontal massing, low-pitched gable roof forms with overhanging eaves and exposed rafter tails and beams, as well as wood shingles and clapboard siding. Other features include divided light, double hung wood windows arranged in groups, and the use of natural materials including wood windows, wood clapboard, and wood shingles. The property retains a good level of integrity. Modifications to the property include a new garage in the original footprint, an enclosed patio limited to the rear, east-facing elevation and an enclosed patio on the primary elevation which still conveys the form of the original front porch.
While the Craftsman style is common throughout Southern California, not many intact examples remain in Hermosa Beach. The subject property embodies the style as applied to a modest, one-story house by an ownerbuilder.
Therefore, 2204 Monterey Boulevard appears to be significant under Criterion C as a good and rare example of a modest Craftsman bungalow in Hermosa Beach.
Criterion D: It is representative of the notable work of a builder, designer, or architect The original 1913 building permit identifies F. A. Kidder as the contractor. Francis A. Kidder was a builder in San Fernando and Van Nuys. He was also the owner of the subject property with his wife Sarah S. Kidder and resided in the property until his passing in 1930. The exact addresses of Kidder’s other works are unknown, however his obituary notes that he was responsible for the construction of “large buildings” in San Fernando and a Presbyterian church within Van Nuys.
23 While Kidder was a builder, research has not revealed that he would be 23 “Building and Improvements, News of the Latest Developments,” The Van Nuys News and the Van Nuys Call, December 20, 1912.
242
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Landmark Assessment Report – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA 12 considered a significant builder, as absent documented information on his other buildings, the subject property is his only known example of his work to be identified as part of this report.
Additional contractors and architects were associated with the modification of the property such as: Merrill and Dan Richardson. However, additional information regarding their personal histories or works could not be ascertained. Even if any architects or contractors associated with the property were determined to be notable, their work consisted of minor additions to a pre-existing property would likely not be considered a notable example of their work.
Therefore, 2204 Monterey Boulevard does not appear to be significant under Criterion D.
Criterion E: Its unique location or singular physical characteristic(s) represents an established and familiar visual feature or landmark of a neighborhood, community, or the City.
The property at 2204 Monterey Boulevard is centrally located in Hermosa Beach’s Sand Section neighborhood.
The subject property has remained mostly unchanged since construction, however much of the surrounding neighborhood has been developed and redeveloped since its 1913 date of construction. The property is located on a regularly-shaped, corner parcel and is surrounded by contemporary multi-story single family residences and large multi-family residences that range in size, scale, and construction date. The property does not have a unique location, a singular visual characteristic, nor is it an established or familiar visual feature.
Therefore, 2204 Monterey Boulevard does not appear to be significant under Criterion E.
Summary
2204 Monterey Boulevard appears to be significant under Hermosa Beach Criterion C, for a good and rare example of a modest Craftsman style bungalow within the City of Hermosa Beach. The property’s period of significance is 1913, the year of construction.
Integrity Analysis
It is standard practice to assess a property’s integrity as part of a historic evaluation. Integrity is a property’s ability to convey its historic significance through its physical features. National Register Bulletin #15 defines seven aspects of integrity: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. In order to convey significance, a property must retain some combination of these aspects of integrity from its period of significance. The aspects of integrity that are essential vary depending on the significance of the resource.
Location: The place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred.
The property retains integrity of location as there is no evidence to suggest the property has been moved since it was constructed in 1913.
Design: The combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of the property.
The property retains integrity of design. Existing characteristics of the building, including its rectangular massing and irregular plan, decorative detailing and extensive use of wood shingles and siding, and the majority of its fenestration that reflects its original aesthetic, style, and function. Although the front porch and rear patio have been enclosed, the building retains its footprint and overall design from 1913. 243
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Landmark Assessment Report – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA 13 Setting: The physical environment of a historic property.
The integrity of setting has been compromised. The immediate setting has been retained as the original building footprint remains relatively unchanged with no major new additions. The original garage was removed but replaced in its original location. The broader setting has not been retained but rather altered with contemporary construction directly next to, behind, and across from the subject property, such that the neighborhood no longer reflects the same feeling from the building’s original construction date.
Materials: The physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property.
The property retains integrity of materials. The key exterior materials are present, including wood windows, wood shingles and clapboard siding. The front porch has been enclosed with divided light metal casement windows and stucco cladding; however, it retains the same roofline and footprint. Two windows on the west elevation facing the neighboring property have been replaced with a garden window and a leaded window; however, there are sufficient original windows remaining to convey the residence’s original materials palette. The stained-glass window which was located where the leaded window is has been retained onsite by the property owner.
Workmanship: The physical evidence or the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory.
The property retains integrity of workmanship which is conveyed through the construction techniques that made the configuration of the property possible, as well as more minute details including the divided-light wooden windows, wood shingle and clapboard siding, and exposed eaves with extended rafters.
Feeling: A property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time.
The property retains integrity of feeling, as the combination of its intact location, design, (immediate) setting, materials, and workmanship evoke the sense of an early 1910s Craftsman style residence.
Association: The direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property.
The integrity of association is not relevant as the property is significant under Criterion A or B.
Character-Defining Features
Character-defining features are the architectural components that contribute to a building’s sense of time and place. Character-defining features can generally be grouped into three categories: the overall visual character of a building, the exterior materials and craftsmanship, and the interior spaces, features, and finishes. The relative importance of character-defining features depends on the level of craftsmanship, visibility, and integrity.
In addition, some character-defining features are more important than others in conveying the significance of the building. The character-defining features identified below are considered the most important elements contributing to the significance of the property, and generally include features that date from the period of significance, directly relate to the original use, type, and style, display craftsmanship, are highly visible, and retain integrity.
Overall Visual Character
• One-story height and rectangular massing
• Medium-pitched gabled roof forms
244
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Landmark Assessment Report – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA 14 • Wood cladding
• Multiple window groupings
Exterior Materials and Craftsmanship
• Wood shingles and horizontal clapboard siding
• Exposed rafter ends and beams
• Divided-light wood windows with varying operation.
• Extended lintels over windows
Conclusion
The residence at 2204 Monterey Boulevard is significant as an example of a modest Craftsman style bungalow in the First Addition Tract in the Sand Section neighborhood of Hermosa Beach. The subject property retains integrity of location, design, materials, workmanship, and feeling, and therefore has sufficient physical integrity to convey its historical significance. As such, the residence appears to be eligible for listing as a Hermosa Beach Landmark under Criterion C.
Sources
Ancestry.com. Various digital collections.
“Building and Improvements, News of the Latest Developments.” The Van Nuys News and the Van Nuys Call.
December 20, 1912.
City of Hermosa Beach. Building Permits. Various Dates
“Death Takes Pioneer Resident of Valley.” Los Angeles Times. July 24, 1930. “Father of Local Woman Passes.” Covina Argus. July 25, 1930.
Gazin, Patricia A. Castles on the Sand: An Incomplete Chronicle of the Habitations of Ancient Hermosans.
Hermosa Beach: 1977.
GPA Consulting, “Architecture and Engineering, Arts and Crafts Movement (1895-1930), Housing the Masses (1880—1980), Arts and Crafts Neighborhoods (1890-1930)” Los Angeles Citywide Historic Context Statement. City of Los Angeles Office of Historic Resources, June 2016. “How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation.” National Parks Service. U.S. Department of the Interior, 1995. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/index.htm. “Licensed to Wed.” Redondo Reflex. March 23, 1956.
PCR Services. “Section 7.0 Cultural Resources,” Appendix C – Technical Background Report, PLAN Hermosa Draft Environmental Impact Report. City of Hermosa Beach, October 2016.
Sanborn Map Company. Sanborn Fire Insurance Map for Hermosa Beach, Los Angeles County, California. 1946.
“Sarah S. Kidder.” Redondo Reflex. February 25, 1938.
245
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Landmark Assessment Report – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA 15 Attachments
Attachment A: Résumés
Attachment B: Additional Photographs
Attachment C: City Directory Listings
Attachment D: Previous Surveys
Attachment E: Sanborn Map
Attachment F: Building Permits
246
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment A Attachment A: Résumés
ANDREA GALVIN
Andrea Galvin is the President and Principal Architectural Historian of GPA.
She has been professionally involved in the research and documentation of historic districts, sites, buildings, and structures since 1995. Her experience includes working for the California Department of Parks and Recreation conducting architectural surveys of historic buildings and structures, the California Department of Transportation working on California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Section 106 compliance, and the California Office of Historic Preservation reviewing projects for Section 106 and Secretary of the Interior’s Standards compliance. As such, Ms. Galvin has a deep understanding of the environmental review process as it relates to historic resources and a close working relationship with decision-makers. Her past projects have included assisting numerous municipalities in developing historic preservation programs, managing large-scale historic resource surveys, and preparing Section 106 and CEQA compliance reports. Many of Ms. Galvin’s projects have involved coordinating with many local, state, and federal agencies as well as conducting public outreach with stakeholder groups. She has conducted training on a wide variety of topics at conferences and workshops throughout California and is an active member of several state and national preservation organizations.
• M.S., Historic Preservation, University of
Pennsylvania, 1999
• Certificate, Preservation Planning, Istanbul
Technical University, Turkey, 1998
• B.S., Environmental Design, University of
California, Davis, 1994
• Section 106 Support for the City of Los Angeles Housing and Community Development agency for the
Rehabilitation of the William Mead Apartment Complex,
2016-present
• Long Beach Art Theater Historic Structures Report, 2013 • U.S. Department of General Services, International
Building, San Ysidro Land Port of Entry Master Plan, San Ysidro, 2015-2019
• 6th Street Viaduct Replacement, Los Angeles, 2011-2019 • State Route 710, Los Angeles County, Section 106
Finding of Effect, 2017-2018
• Orange Coast College HABS-Like Documentation, Costa
Mesa, 2016
• City of Long Beach On-Call Consultant for Section 106 Review of multiple CDBG-funded projects, 2013-2018
• Historic Structures Report for the Sugar Beet Factory in Chino, California, 2009
• St. Regis Condominium Preservation Plan, Long Beach,
2018
• Santa Paula Railroad Depot and Mill Rehabilitation, Santa Paula, 2007
• Poole Bunkhouse Maintenance Plan for Southern
California Edison, 20015
• Nelles Correctional Facility Specific Plan, CEQA Historical Resource Report, Whittier, 2014-2015
• North Spring Street Viaduct Widening and Rehabilitation, Section 106 Finding of Effect, Los Angeles, 2011-2015
• Patriotic Hall, Preservation Plan, Los Angeles County, 2006
Professional Experience:
• GPA Consulting, President and Principal
Architectural Historian, 2003-Present
• California Office of Historic Preservation, Assoc.
Architectural Historian, 2002-2004
• Caltrans, District 7, Los Angeles, Assoc.
Architectural Historian, 1999-01/ Headquarters,
Sacramento, 2001-2004
• California Department of Parks and Recreation,
Cultural Resource Specialist, 1995-1999
Qualifications:
• Meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualifications Standards for history and
architectural history pursuant to the Code of
Federal Regulations, 36 CFR Part 61, Appendix A.
247
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment A
JENNA KACHOUR
Jenna Kachour is a Senior Associate Architectural Historian/ Preservation Planner at GPA. She has 16 years of diversified planning experience in the private, public, and non-profit sectors. She has been dedicated to the field of historic preservation since 2010. Trained as a professional planner, Ms. Kachour’s work at GPA is informed by her understanding of preservation’s role within the larger context of land use and decision making. Since joining GPA in 2013, she has skillfully supervised the preparation of environmental compliance documents in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, National Environmental Policy Act, and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act for projects throughout California. Her involvement in several large-scale transportation corridor projects has entailed the management of historical resource surveys through multiple cities in Los Angeles County.
She is also experienced in preparing applications for Mills Act Historic Property Contracts as well as inspecting properties with existing contracts.
Educational Background: Selected Projects:
• Master of Planning, University of Southern
California, 2007
• Certificate, Historic Preservation,
University of Southern California, 2007
• B.S., Public Policy, Management and
Planning, University of Southern California,
2007
• North Hollywood Southern Pacific Railroad Depot, Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Compliance Memo, 2021
• Los Angeles Union Station Five New Capital Projects,
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Compliance Memo,
2020-2021
• Mariposa Condominiums, El Segundo, CEQA Historical
Resource Evaluation Report, 2021
• North Hollywood to Pasadena Bus Rapid Transit Corridor Project, CEQA Historical Resource Technical Report, 2019- 2021
• Union Street Cycle Track, Pasadena, CEQA/NEPA Historical Resource Technical Report, 2019-2020
• High Speed Rail, Burbank to Los Angeles Project Section, CEQA/NEPA Historical Resource Technical Report, 2016-
2018
• 250 E. Union Street, Pasadena, CEQA Historical Resource Technical Report, 2018
• Figueroa & Flower, Los Angeles, CEQA Historical Resource Technical Report, 2018
• 949 S. Hope Street, Los Angeles, CEQA Historical Resource Technical Report, 2017
• Olympic & Figueroa, Los Angeles, CEQA Historical Resource Technical Report, 2017
• 1442-52 Tamarind Avenue, Los Angeles, CEQA Historical Resource Evaluation Report, 2016
• 1336-1400 Gordon Street, Los Angeles, CEQA Historical Resource Evaluation Report, 2016
• 3200 W Adams, Secretary of the Interior’s Standards
Compliance Memo, 2015
Professional Experience:
• GPA Consulting, Senior Preservation
Planner, 2013-Present
• Pasadena Heritage, Preservation Director,
2010-2013
• Deborah Murphy Urban Design +
Planning, Planner, 2009-2010
• Brown/Meshul, Inc. Land Use Consultants,
Assistant Project Manager, 2006-2009
Qualifications:
• Meets the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualifications Standards for
history and architectural history pursuant
to the Code of Federal Regulations, 36
CFR Part 61, Appendix A.
• National Preservation Institute, Section
106: An Introduction
248
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment A
EMMA HAGGERTY
Emma Haggerty is an Associate Architectural Historian at GPA and has been involved in the field of historic preservation since 2016.
Emma graduated from the University of Vermont with a Master of Science in Historic Preservation. She has since worked in the public sector in both New Jersey and California on a variety of projects. Emma joined GPA in 2021 and her experience has included review of environmental compliance documents in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA); design review for consistency with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (SOIS); and municipal code compliance. Additionally, Emma has experience reviewing Mills Act Applications, preparing Mills Act Contracts, and performing site inspections for properties under and interested in the Mills Act.
Educational Background: Selected Projects:
• Master of Science, University of Vermont, 2018
• B.A., Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers
University, 2016
• 1102 Pacific Coast Highway, City of Huntington Beach, CEQA Historical Resource Technical Report, 2021
• 2501 Curtis Avenue, Redondo Beach, CEQA Historical
Resource Evaluation Report, 2021 –2022
• 3014 4th Street, City of Santa Monica, Local Landmark Assessment, 2022
• 325 Georgina Avenue, City of Santa Monica, Local
Landmark Assessment, 2022
• 400-432 S. San Vicente Boulevard, City of Los Angeles, CEQA Historical Resource Evaluation Report, 2022
• 631 Colorado Avenue, City of Santa Monica, Local
Landmark Assessment, 2021 –2021.
• 660-664 W. Wilson Avenue, City of Glendale, CEQA
Historical Resource Evaluation Report, 2022
• Carnegie Library, City of Yreka, Historic Structures
Report and Section 106 Finding of No Adverse Effect
Report, 2022
• CEQA Significance Report Evaluations, Planner, City of San Diego, 2018- 2021
• Chula Vista Center, City of Chula Vista, CEQA Historical Resource Evaluation Report, 2021 –2022
• Ole Hanson Beach Club, City of San Clemente,
Secretary of Interior’s Standards Compliance, 2022
• Sewage Pumping Plant #669, Port of Los Angeles,
Historical Resources Technical Memorandum, 2022
• Telfair Multi-Modal Bridge, City of Los Angeles, USACE Cultural Resources Assessment Report, 2022
• Whittier Citrus Association Packing House, Historic
Preservation Treatment Plan, 2022
Professional Experience:
• GPA Consulting, Associate Architectural
Historian, 2021-Present
• City of San Diego, Historical Resources Senior
Planner & Mills Act Coordinator, 2018-2021
• New Jersey Historic Preservation Office,
Program Associate, 2018
• National Trust for Historic Preservation –
Lyndhurst Mansion, Historic Preservation Intern,
2017
Qualifications:
• Meets the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualifications Standards for history
and architectural history pursuant to the Code of
Federal Regulations, 36 CFR Part 61, Appendix
A.
• National Preservation Institute, Section 106: An
Introduction
249
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment A
AUDREY VON AHRENS
Audrey von Ahrens is an Associate Architectural Historian at GPA. She has been involved in the field of historic preservation since 2013. Audrey graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with a Master of Science in Historic Preservation and City Planning where she focused on preservation planning and community economic development. She has since worked in private historic preservation consulting in California. Audrey joined GPA in 2017 and her experience has included the preparation of environmental compliance documents in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; historic context statements; Secretary of the Interior’s Standards analysis; large-scale historic resources surveys; and evaluations of eligibility for a wide variety of projects and property types throughout Southern California.
Audrey is also experienced in coordinating with property owners and local governments in the preparation and review of Mills Act Property Contract applications and the inspection and reporting of properties applying for or with existing contracts.
Educational Background: Selected Projects:
• M.S., Historic Preservation, University of Pennsylvania, 2016
• Master of City Planning, University of Pennsylvania,
2016
• B.A., Architectural Studies and Urban Studies,
University of Pittsburgh, 2013
• 425 S. Union Avenue, Los Angeles, CEQA Historical
Resource Evaluation Report, 2021
• 11343-45 W. Ventura Boulevard, Los Angeles, CEQA
Phase 1 Historical Resource Evaluation Report, 2020
• 1360 Vine Street, Los Angeles, CEQA Historical
Resource Technical Report, 2020
• 1400 Vine Street, Los Angeles, CEQA Historical
Resource Technical Report, 2020
• 3008 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CEQA
Historical Resource Evaluation Report, 2022-2023
• 325 S. Boyle Avenue, Los Angeles, CEQA Historical
Resources Technical Report, 2022-2023
• 328 N. Oakhurst Drive, Beverly Hills, CEQA Historical Resource Evaluation Report, 2019
• 4080 Lafayette Place, Culver City, CEQA Historical
Resource Evaluation Report, 2019
• 4900-20 Eagle Rock Boulevard, Los Angeles, Phase 1
Historical Resource Evaluation Report, 2020
• 933 S. Gramercy Place, Los Angeles, CEQA Phase 1
Historical Resource Evaluation Report, 2020
• Broadway Federal Midtown Branch, Los Angeles,
Character-Defining Features Analysis and CEQA
Historical Resource Technical Report, 2018
• CF Braun & Company Plant, Alhambra, CEQA
Historical Resource Technical Report, 2019
• Los Angeles Union Station Five New Capital Projects,
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Compliance
Memo, 2020-2021
• Nakase Brothers Wholesale Nursery, Lake Forest,
CEQA Historical Resource Evaluation Report, 2019
Professional Experience:
• GPA Consulting, Associate Architectural Historian,
2017-present
• Heritage Consulting, Inc., Intern, 2015-2016
• Tacony Community Development Corp., Intern, 2014
• Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation, Intern,
2013
• University of Pittsburgh, Teaching Assistant, 2012-
2013
• Pittsburgh Planning Department, Intern, 2012
• Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership, Intern, 2011
Qualifications:
• Meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualification Standards for history and architectural
history pursuant to the Code of Federal Regulations, 36 CFR Part 61, Appendix A.
Professional Activities:
• Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council,
Planning and Land Use Committee, 2018-present
• Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council, Board of
Directors, Area Wide Alternate, 2019-2020, 2022-
present
250
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment B Attachment B: Additional Photographs
Figure 9: Front elevation, view looking north.
GPA Consulting, January 27, 2023.
Figure 10: Side elevation, view looking west.
GPA Consulting, January 27, 2023.
251
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment B Figure 11: Rear of driveway, view looking southeast.
GPA Consulting, January 27, 2023.
Figure 12: Northwest elevation, view looking southeast.
GPA Consulting, January 27, 2023.
252
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment B Figure 13: Side elevation, view looking northeast.
GPA Consulting, January 27, 2023.
Figure 14: Photo 6: Primary elevation, view looking northeast.
GPA Consulting, January 27, 2023.
253
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment C Attachment C: City Directory Listings
1921 City Directory, Ancestry.com.
254
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment C
1925 City Directory, Ancestry.com.
255
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment C
1927 City Directory, Ancestry.com.
256
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment C
1930 Census. Census addresses property as 2240 22nd Street which was former name of Monterey Boulevard/ Ancestry.com.
257
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment C 1931 City Directory, Ancestry.com.
258
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment C
1936 City Directory, Ancestry.com.
259
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment C
1947 City Directory, Ancestry.com.
260
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment D Attachment D: Previous Surveys
Excerpted from PCR Services, “Section 7.0 Cultural Resources,” Appendix C – Technical Background Report, PLAN Hermosa Draft Environmental Impact Report, City of Hermosa Beach, October 2016, 7-21. (2204 Monterey Boulevard enlarged and highlighted in red.) 261
_____________________________________________________________________________________________ Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment D Excerpted from Patricia A. Gazin, Castles on the Sand: An Incomplete Chronicle of the Habitations of Ancient Hermosans (Hermosa Beach: 1977).
(Provided by Homeowner)
262
Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment E Attachment E: Sanborn Map
Excerpted from Sanborn Map Company, Sanborn Fire Insurance Map for Hermosa Beach, Los Angeles County, California, 1946.
(2204 Monterey Boulevard outlined in red.)
263
Memorandum – 2204 Monterey Boulevard, Hermosa Beach, CA Attachment F Attachment F: Building Permits
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
City of Hermosa Beach
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach shall hold a hybrid public hearing on Tuesday, April 25, 2023 to consider the following:
HISTORIC RESOURCES PRESERVATION (HRR 22-01) REQUEST TO ADOPT CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 22-XX APPROVING HISTORIC RESOURCES PRESERVATION NO. 22-01 FOR THE DESIGNATION OF A LANDMARK FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2204 MONTEREY BOULEVARD.
SAID PUBLIC MEETING shall be held in-person and virtually as a hybrid meeting. The public may attend in person at Council Chambers, 1315 Valley Drive, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 or virtually by Zoom using the meeting link provided on the agenda posted on the City’s Agendas/Minutes/Video webpage 72 hours before the meeting. The public may also view the hearing on Spectrum Channel 8, Frontier Channel 31, and https://www.youtube.com/c/CityofHermosaBeach90254. The City Council meeting begins at 6:00 P.M. and the matter will be heard in the order as listed on the posted agenda.
ANY AND ALL PERSONS interested are invited to participate and speak at these meetings. See the meeting agenda or contact the City Clerk’s office at [email protected] for participation details. All written testimony by any interested party will be accepted prior to or at the scheduled time on the agenda for the matter.
Written comments may also be submitted via e-Comment in 3 easy steps once the agenda has been posted on the City website:
1. Go to Agendas/Minutes/Video webpage and find the meeting on which you’d like to comment.
2. Find the agenda item on which you’d like to comment; and
3. Sign in to your SpeakUp Hermosa Account or sign in as a guest, enter your comment in the field provided, provide your name, and if applicable, attach files before submitting your comment.
IF YOU CHALLENGE the above matter(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the above-listed departments at, or prior to, the public meeting.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, please contact the City Clerk’s office at (310) 318-0204 or [email protected]. The Department operates from 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM, Monday through Thursday.
A copy of the agenda and staff report(s) will be available for public review 72 hours in advance of the meeting on the City’s website at www.hermosabeach.gov.
Myra Maravilla, MPA, CMC
City Clerk
277
278
Public Notice Posters – 2204 Monterey Boulevard
279
280
From: Robert Fortunato <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2023 6:12 AM
To: City Council <[email protected]>
Cc: Suja Lowenthal <[email protected]>; Ann Yang <[email protected]> Subject: Historic Preservation Opportunity for City Council Honorable Mayor Jackson, Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council and Staff, Monica, Carter Fortunato and I would like to fully support the item that will be on your agenda as a Public Hearing at your Tuesday, April 25 City Council Meeting. The Item is the Historic Resources Preservation request for the designation of Marsha Majka’s property at 2204 Monterey Blvd.
As you know, the history of Hermosa Beach's buildings is being lost with every new development. This is a unique circumstance that would allow us to save a piece of the past and build a living time capsule.
The future will thank you for your support on this important matter.
Thank you,
Robert Fortunato
281
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
RESOURCES
HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION
2204 MONTEREY BOULEVARD
282
Background
• Historic Resources Preservation
• Landmark Nomination initiated by the
property owner
• Fee Waiver Policy
283
2204 Monterey Boulevard
• Single-family home constructed in
1913
• Located in the First Addition Tract in
the Sand Section Neighborhood
• Craftsman Style Architecture
284
Analysis
• GPA Consulting
• Criteria requirements for Local
Landmark Designation
285
Evaluation
• Landmarks must satisfy one or more of the five
designation criteria in accordance with Section
17.53.070 of the HBMC
• Criterion C
oIt embodies distinctive characteristics of a style,
type, period, or method of construction, or is a
valuable example of the use of indigenous materials
or craftsmanship
286
Architectural Elements
Primary elevation
287
Architectural Elements
East elevation
288
Architectural Elements
Window grouping
289
Architectural Elements
Exposed rafter tails
290
Architectural Elements
Extended eaves
291
Administration of Landmarks
• Altering Landmarks
• Removal of Landmark Status
• Mills Act
292
General Plan
Land Use Element
• 5.5 – Provide incentives for the preservation of adaptive reuse or historic and iconic landmarks
• 5.6 – Seek to maintain and enhance neighborhood
character through eclectic and diverse architectural style • 10.1 – Encourage the voluntary designation of potentially historic resources as landmarks or historic districts
• 10.8 – Provide expert technical assistance to owners of potentially eligible and designated historic properties with tools and incentives to maintain historic resources
293
Fiscal Impact
• Fee Waiver Program
oWaives up to 90% of fees to a maximum of $10,000
• Staff determines if property qualifies via a prima facie review
• 2204 Monterey Boulevard fees totaled $13,086.72
• Applicant was responsible for $3,086.72
294
Environmental Determination
The project qualifies for a Class 1
Categorical Exemption under Section
15331 of the CEQA Guidelines for
Historical Resources
Restoration/Rehabilitation as a building
to be preserved as a historical resource
295
Recommendation
Based upon the professional analysis and
evaluation conducted by GPA
Consulting, staff recommends that the
City Council approve the Resolution
designating the property located at 2204
Monterey Boulevard as a Local Historic
Landmark in the City of Hermosa Beach
296
Questions and Discussion
297
City of Hermosa Beach
Staff Report
City Hall
1315 Valley Drive
Hermosa Beach, CA 90254
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council Regular Meeting of April 25, 2023
ADOPT ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING PERMANENT OUTDOOR PERMIT
PROGRAMS AND DOWNTOWN LANE RECONFIGURATIONS AND
ACCOMPANYING RESOLUTIONS
(Environmental Programs Manager Doug Krauss)
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends City Council:
1. Introduce and waive first reading of Ordinance 23-XXXX amending various sections of Chapter 12.16 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code establishing a permanent outdoor dining program and the determination that the project is Categorically Exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Attachment 1);
2. Adopt a resolution approving revised guidelines for encroachments on Pier Plaza and offPlaza public rights-of-way (Attachment 2);
3. Adopt a resolution approving lane reconfigurations and bike lanes in the downtown area (Attachment 3);
4. Adopt a resolution establishing a fee schedule for encroachments citywide (Attachment 4); and
5. Consider staff recommendations for the remaining elements of the outdoor dining program with a plan for staff to return to Council for formal action at a future meeting.
Executive Summary:
At its December 14, 2021 meeting, City Council provided staff with direction to develop long-term versions of the temporary outdoor dining and downtown lane reconfiguration programs that were created in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Council subsequently extended the temporary program through May 1, 2023 with direction to staff to bring the elements of the program to Council before that date.
The final elements necessary to establish the long-term program are presented here for Council’s consideration and approval. These include an ordinance amending Chapter 12.16 (Encroachments) of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code, a resolution revising existing operational and design guidelines for Pier Plaza and other off-street encroachments, a resolution approving the downtown lane reconfigurations and bike lanes, a resolution for new encroachment fees, and accompanying City of Hermosa Beach Page 1 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™298
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
lane reconfigurations and bike lanes, a resolution for new encroachment fees, and accompanying CEQA determinations for these projects. Staff recommends some program elements, as described below, be brought back to Council for formal action at a future meeting.
Background:
The City has long supported and encouraged outdoor dining on private and public property to supplement indoor operations. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and related heath orders, businesses were limited from operating indoors in varying degrees. Recognizing this hardship, City Council approved a program to allow expanded outdoor dining and other commercial activity. The City also suspended zoning and parking requirements to allow outdoor dining on private property and established a temporary encroachment permit program to allow encroachments into sidewalks, public streets, and Pier Plaza. Both the private property programs and encroachment program included a basic set of guidelines pertaining to hours of operation, permitted uses, maintenance, etc., collectively referred to hereafter as the Outdoor Permit Program.
The City issued over 60 permits during the term of the Outdoor Permit Program in a variety of commercial locations citywide including extended encroachments on Pier Plaza and encroachments into other public right-of-way areas. This included encroachment into on-street parking spaces, which had previously not been allowed in Hermosa Beach. These on-street encroachments, also known as “dining decks”, involved businesses constructing decks adjacent the business, accessible from the sidewalk, and with minimum required traffic barriers and other safety features. Initially, City Council allowed these uses without consideration of any encroachment area rents or reimbursement of lost parking meter revenue. In June 2021, Council approved extension of this pilot program through December 31, 2021 and authorized implementation of a reapplication process for outdoor encroachment areas that included renewal of permissions from neighboring businesses and requirement of deposits to pay for removal of the decks should the City need to do so.
At its December 14, 2021 meeting, Council approved an extension of the programs through May 31, 2022. At its January 25, 2022 meeting, Council discussed implementing new fees for the temporary outdoor dining encroachments and approved a fee of $1.50 per square foot per month to begin March 1, 2022.
Program revenues for the temporary encroachment areas were estimated to be approximately $400,000 annually, based on the number of areas in place at the time. At its February 8, 2022 meeting, Council also approved reinstatement of the encroachment fees for preexisting encroachment areas. These fees generate approximately $280,000 annually. At that meeting, Council also approved program refinements related to the use of temporary canopies, branded furniture, and enhanced maintenance.
Council subsequently extended the program in both May and November of 2022 with a final City of Hermosa Beach Page 2 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™299
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
extension to May 1, 2023 and direction to staff to bring the permanent program for consideration.
Lane Reconfiguration
At the May 12, 2020 City Council meeting, City staff presented an item describing a concept to repurpose sections of public right-of-way to improve multimodal traffic safety and expand physicaldistancing options for the public and businesses per Los Angeles County Health orders related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Doing so, additionally, worked to support many of the mobility goals described in PLAN Hermosa. The City Council moved quickly to accommodate these programs and staff developed guidelines based on information gathered from existing programs in other cities and internal review of policies and regulations.
City Council directed staff to work with the Economic Development Committee (EDC) to explore aspects of the program that could directly benefit local businesses. At meetings in August and September 2020, Council directed staff to move forward with designs of lane reconfiguration concepts for both Hermosa Avenue and Pier Avenue. These concepts included removing one through vehicle lane in each direction, addition of a bike lane, installation of new on-street accessible parking spaces, and associated signage and pavement markings. At the October 27, 2020 meeting, Council awarded a contract to perform the work. Work began in early January 2021 and was completed by January 16, 2021. At its July 13, 2021 meeting, Council approved a Resolution extending the Downtown Lane Reconfiguration Program through the end of 2021. At its May 24, 2022 meeting, Council approved an extension of the program through January 1, 2023 and, in November 2022, extended the program again till May 1, 2023.
Past Council Actions
Meeting Date Description
June 9, 2020 Approved Ordinance 20-1410U allowing temporary permit program for outdoor dining in response to pandemic.
July 14, 2020 Directed staff to proceed with development of lane closure plans.
June 22, 2021 Approved extension of the outdoor permit program through December 31, 2021.
July 13, 2021 Approved Resolution authorizing extension of lane reconfigurations.
October 26, 2021 Approved development and implementation of permanent versions of these programs.
December 14, 2021 Approved development of permanent programs, and extension of temporary programs through May 2022
January 25, 2022 Discussion and approval of new fees for temporary encroachments February 8, 2022 Approved reinstatement of existing fees for permanent encroachment areas
May 24, 2022 Approved extension of programs through January 2023 June 14, 2022 Approved additional refinements to the outdoor dining programs November 3, 2022 Approved extension of temporary programs through May 1, 2023 J242023 Cidtikt tiltftdiid
City of Hermosa Beach Page 3 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™300
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
of these programs.
December 14, 2021 Approved development of permanent programs, and extension of temporary programs through May 2022
January 25, 2022 Discussion and approval of new fees for temporary encroachments February 8, 2022 Approved reinstatement of existing fees for permanent encroachment areas
May 24, 2022 Approved extension of programs through January 2023 June 14, 2022 Approved additional refinements to the outdoor dining programs November 3, 2022 Approved extension of temporary programs through May 1, 2023 January 24, 2023 Consideration market rate appraisal, temporary rooftop dining, and changes to Pier Plaza temporary encroachments
March 28, 2023 Considered a draft ordinance related to permanent outdoor dining and retail
Discussion:
As directed by Council at its October 26, 2021 meeting, staff developed the elements necessary to establish a permanent version of the Outdoor Dining Program and Downtown Lane Reconfiguration Program. These elements include:
1. An ordinance amending Hermosa Beach Municipal Code Chapter 12.16 to establish basic guidelines for a permanent outdoor dining and retail program.
2. A resolution establishing a new fee schedule for encroachments citywide.
3. A resolution permanently establishing the downtown lane reconfigurations and bike lanes.
4. A resolution amending operational and design guidelines for Pier Plaza.
5. A CEQA determination for the program elements.
6. A resolution adopting guidelines for operational and design standards for on-street dining decks.
These elements were considered and developed by a diverse team of City staff, representing all City departments. The City secured specialists to help with traffic counts and analysis, CEQA findings, traffic safety and on-street dining deck specifications, and market appraisal of encroachment areas.
Staff gathered feedback from businesses, community members, other agencies, and an array of stakeholders since 2020. The Economic Development Committee meetings, along with numerous City Council meetings, have provided excellent feedback both from Councilmembers and the many people that have shared their views at these meetings. The Chamber of Commerce has been an essential partner in all these efforts, both sharing vital information with its members and gathering data through multiple surveys over the lifetime of the temporary outdoor dining program (Attachment 5).
The status of each of these elements, along with recommendations, is detailed below.
1. Ordinance: Staff worked with the City Attorney to identify the various code amendments in Chapter 12.16 necessary to establish permanent outdoor dining programs in the public right-of-way.
Staff recommends creating a single program to regulate encroachments that were approved before the pandemic, as well as all temporary encroachments that may become permanent through this City of Hermosa Beach Page 4 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™301
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
the pandemic, as well as all temporary encroachments that may become permanent through this program. A single program would be easier for staff to implement and more coherent and efficient for the businesses and public. These modifications propose outdoor dining encroachments that would be allowed in certain public areas (Pier Plaza and the public rights-of-way such as sidewalks and parking spaces) and that encroachments for retail use would be allowed only on Pier Plaza. This would be accomplished via an encroachment permit subject to required findings by the City Manager or designee that must be renewed annually. Each possible type of encroachment (i.e., Pier Plaza, dining deck in a parking space, areas on the sidewalk) has its own operational standards and the City Manager would have the ability to promulgate regulations furthering the intent of the ordinance without contradicting it.
Additionally, these encroachment permits are not vested land use rights such as a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) or similar permit. Because the City is granting the use of public space for this private commercial activity, the City retains the ability to revoke the permit without cause. Importantly, the proposed regulations would require all applicants for an encroachment to be free of outstanding code violations or delinquent encroachment fee payments. Upon annual review, any applicant in violation would not be allowed an encroachment permit.
Contained in this draft Ordinance (Attachment 1) is language related to the regulation and administration of the encroachments, as mentioned above. Also included is language related to the maximum size and configuration of these encroachments. Informed in part by City Council’s discussion at the March 28, 2023 meeting, staff recommends:
· The option for businesses on Pier Plaza and other off-street encroachment areas to add up to 500 square feet of area with a not-to-exceed total area of 1,000 square feet. Pier Plaza encroachments would be limited to a maximum depth of twenty-five feet from the frontage, similar to the current temporary configuration (Attachment 6). This would allow many businesses to keep their entire temporary encroachment area created during COVID-19 pandemic. A few businesses would be required to reduce their temporary encroachments to meet this requirement but it also allows prior, permanent encroachments (such as Martha’s on 22nd Street), to maintain its historic encroachment areas intact. A map of existing encroachment areas and a chart of their square footage is attached for reference (Attachment 7). Should all businesses choose to participate, the future encroachment areas would appear almost identical to the current layout with a few reducing in size from their current temporary encroachment areas.
On-street encroachment areas (“dining decks”) would maintain their current maximum size regulations of two parallel or three head-in parking spaces. Where the encroachment is entirely within the business frontage, these maximum areas are three parallel and four head-in City of Hermosa Beach Page 5 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™302
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
parking spaces.
· Restricting encroachment areas on Pier Plaza to only the limits of the property’s frontage. This too would require a few businesses to reconfigure or reduce their temporary encroachments.
Because of their unique location, Loreto Plaza encroachments could be allowed pending review and approval of the City Manager.
· Limit hours of operation on the encroachment areas to midnight for Pier Plaza, applied to the entire encroachment area, including both the historic “permanent” encroachments and any newly added encroachment area. On-street encroachments would continue to be limited to 11:00 P.M. closure. Encroachments adjacent residential properties or with other unique considerations, such as North End Bar and Grill, may be subject to alternative operational hours and conditions, per City review.
The more specific guidelines and operational standards for these different encroachments are recommended to be approved separately via resolutions including: one for encroachments on Pier Plaza, sidewalks, and off-street areas (Attachment 2) and another resolution for on-street encroachments, to be brought to Council at a later date.
2. New fee schedule for encroachments. In January of 2022, City Council approved establishing fees for temporary encroachments created during the pandemic. These fees were set at $1.50 per square foot per month. Additionally, Council approved reinstating prior encroachments fees per the schedule shown below:
Location and Operation Category Fee per square foot per month On Pier Plaza, open after midnight $5
On Pier Plaza, closed before midnight $2
Not on Pier Plaza; snack shop on Pier Plaza $1
City staff analyzed many potential fee structures for these encroachments. This analysis includes surveys of other agencies in the region and extensive feedback from local businesses, including data from a recent survey performed by the Chamber of Commerce. Additionally, the City hired a thirdparty expert to perform a market rate appraisal of all pre-existing and temporary encroachment areas, which was considered by City Council in January 2023.
After careful analysis of this varied data, staff proposes a fee schedule (Attachment 4) that seeks to balance the City’s costs, the value to private businesses of using public right-of-way, and the need to establish a reasonable fee that would encourage utilization of the outdoor dining program. The following table illustrates the proposed fees and encroachment categories:
City of Hermosa Beach Page 6 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™303
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
Location and Operation Category Fee per square
foot per month
Percent increase over
current fees
On Pier Plaza, open after midnight,
serving alcohol
$6 20 percent
On Pier Plaza, closed before
midnight, serving alcohol
$3 50 percent
On-street, sidewalk, off-Pier Plaza, on
Pier Plaza not serving alcohol, Pier
Plaza retail
$2 100 percent for previous
$1 fees. 33 percent for
temporary $1.50 fees.
The proposed fees and categories reflect feedback from Council that current fees should be increased yet are proposed as modest increases which would encourage utilization of these encroachment areas, especially during this first year of the new permanent dining and retail program.
For comparison, the market rates stated in the recent aforementioned appraisal report were as follows:
· Pier Plaza properties-$5.67 per square foot
· Hermosa Avenue properties (including off-street encroachments)-$4.83 per square foot · Properties east of Hermosa Avenue (i.e., Pier Avenue)-$4 per square foot The proposed rates are mostly lower than the appraisal’s market rates in part to avoid a sudden dramatic increase to program participants. Fees could be adjusted in phases moving forward to reach parity with market rates, should Council so choose. Staff estimates that these proposed fees would generate approximately $913,260 annually, 64 percent more revenue than the current revenue for all permanent and temporary encroachment area fees (Attachment 8).
Staff is also developing new application review fees for all encroachment types. These would factor in rates for City staff review time and will be brought back to Council soon for review and approval.
3. Downtown lane reconfigurations and bike lanes. Staff recommends Council adopt a resolution to make permanent the downtown lane reconfigurations, bike lanes, and lane closures implemented on a temporary basis beginning in 2020 (Attachment 3). Although the lane reconfigurations are technically separate from the outdoor dining program, the two programs are connected and, for CEQA purposes, were analyzed concurrently to determine overall environmental impact. The current on-street outdoor dining decks are made effective and desirable largely due to the presence of the lane reconfigurations. The bike lane not only provides a valuable option for multimodal transportation, but primarily serves as a necessary buffer zone between the dining decks and vehicular traffic, improving both safety and comfort for dining patrons. The City’s traffic engineer affirms the necessity to maintain the buffer zone to improve both the safety of the dining decks and City of Hermosa Beach Page 7 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™304
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
affirms the necessity to maintain the buffer zone to improve both the safety of the dining decks and passing vehicles-for this reason, the prior four lane cross section is not compatible with the on-street dining decks (Attachment 9).
In addition, traffic counts performed each summer since 2020 have shown that the effect of the lane reconfigurations on traffic has been negligible (Attachment 10). Although a 32 percent increase in overall vehicular volume in the downtown area was observed between summers 2021 and 2022 (as volumes returned to pre-COVID levels), a five percent decrease in speeds was also measured along with increases of 33 percent and 26 percent in walking and biking activity, respectively.
4. Operational and design guidelines for Pier Plaza, sidewalks, and off-street encroachments. Staff recommends Council approve a resolution adopting amended guidelines for encroachments on Pier Plaza and other off-street public right-of-way areas (Attachment 2). These guidelines include more specific details on operational and design concerns such as application procedures, placement of furniture, accessibility and insurance requirements, maintenance and cleanliness minimums, etc. These are largely unchanged from the guidelines that have been in place since 2015 but do reflect the prohibition to queueing that was implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic.
5. CEQA determination. The City utilized a third-party CEQA specialist to analyze the proposed permanent programs and develop a report. The consultant analyzed separately the two projects:
A. The permanent Pier Plaza and other prior off-street encroachment program (“Pier Plaza Encroachment Program Modifications”); and
B. The permanent on-street outdoor dining and lane reconfigurations (“Outdoor Dining”).
Per the report (Attachment 3) the proposed projects are Categorically Exempt per the California Environmental Quality Act. The projects’ descriptions and exemption categories are each described below:
A. Pier Plaza Encroachment Program Modifications: the proposed project would modify the existing program that allows retail, eating, and drinking establishments to encroach onto the public right-of-way on Pier Plaza for the purpose of providing outdoor dining. The project would allow an increase of 4,200 square feet of outdoor dining in the public right-of-way on Pier Plaza. The City currently allows 5,700 square feet of outdoor dining on Pier Plaza, excluding additional areas allowed under the temporary ordinance. The project would thus result in a total allowable square footage of 9,900 on Pier Plaza.
Outdoor dining is currently allowed to extend up to 13 feet into the Plaza area along the entire length of the dining establishment’s frontage on Pier Plaza. The proposed project would allow dining areas City of Hermosa Beach Page 8 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™305
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
of the dining establishment’s frontage on Pier Plaza. The proposed project would allow dining areas to extend an additional 12 feet into Pier Plaza for a total of 25 feet. Under the proposed program, individual establishments would each be limited to a maximum of 1,000 square feet of outdoor dining (and in no case exceed 500 additional square feet beyond what they are allowed under the current Pier Plaza Encroachment Program.
Unlike the outdoor dining areas that would be allowed elsewhere, outdoor dining areas on Pier Plaza would not include dining decks or any permanent modifications within the public right-of-way, but would be limited to the temporary placement of tables, chairs, umbrellas, planters, and other elements that serve the allowed use. Canopies would not be allowed to extend beyond currently allowed outdoor dining areas and umbrellas would be removed at the end of business hours. All individual encroachment permits would be subject to the review and approval of the City Manager to ensure compliance with the modified program’s restrictions and guidelines, including avoidance of significant visual intrusion into the public view corridor to the open sky and ocean from Pier Plaza.
Environmental Determination:
The proposed project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as defined in Section 15300 of the CEQA Guidelines, in accordance with Section 15061, the ‘common sense’ exemption, and Section 15301 which addresses minor alteration of existing public facilities, specifically:
15061(b)(3)-The project is covered by the common sense exemption that applies where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.
15301(c)-Existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities (this includes road grading for the purpose of public safety), and other alterations such as the addition of bicycle facilities, including but not limited to bicycle parking, bicycle-share facilities and bicycle lanes, transit improvements such as bus lanes, pedestrian crossings, street trees, and other similar alterations that do not create additional automobile lanes.
None of the exceptions to the Categorical Exemption apply, nor would the project result in a significant cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place over time or have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances or damage a scenic highway or scenic resources within a state scenic highway. The site is not located on a hazardous waste site and would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
B. Outdoor Dining: the Outdoor Dining Program would enable commercial eating and drinking establishments located in specific areas of Hermosa Beach to use portions of City right-ofway for outdoor dining purposes. The proposed project consists of two components: (1) a Downtown Lane Reconfiguration Program that would establish permanent lane reconfigurations on Hermosa City of Hermosa Beach Page 9 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™306
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
Lane Reconfiguration Program that would establish permanent lane reconfigurations on Hermosa Avenue and Pier Avenue to create areas designated for outdoor dining and improve safety for multimodal traffic; and (2) an Outdoor Dining Permit Program that would create a permanent program to permit outdoor dining in specific areas.
Downtown Lane Reconfiguration Program
The attached resolution would establish long-term encroachments into sidewalks, travel lanes and on -street parking spaces along sections of Hermosa Avenue between 8th and 14th Streets (from the 800 block at 8th Street to the 300 block at 14th Street), at the intersection of Hermosa Avenue and Greenwich Village, and on Pier Avenue between Valley Drive and Hermosa Avenue (Attachment 3).
These lane reconfigurations exist today under the City’s Temporary Outdoor Dining Program and would be made permanent under the proposed project. On the designated segments of Hermosa Avenue and Pier Avenue, they would result in permanent closure of the northbound and southbound number two travel lanes (closest to the curb) and would be accompanied by addition of a permanent Class II bike lane in each direction, installation of new on-street ADA accessible parking spaces and associated signage and pavement markings. Approximately 7,000 linear feet of new Class II bike lanes would be made permanent within the former vehicle travel lanes. These lanes would be available for bicycles (electric and conventional) and other wheeled devices.
The permanent lane closure at the intersection of Hermosa Avenue and Greenwich Village would consist of closure of the right turn lane from westbound Greenwich Village to northbound Hermosa Avenue and a portion of Hermosa Avenue immediately adjacent to 2626 Hermosa Avenue.
Outdoor Permit Program
The project would establish an administrative permit process to allow outdoor dining at commercial eating and drinking establishments within Neighborhood Commercial (C1), Downtown Commercial (C2) and the Upper Pier Avenue Specific Plan Area (SPA 11) zones. The geographic extent of these areas is depicted in Exhibit 3 (Attachment 3). The proposed program is bound by limits:
A. The maximum square footage of total outdoor dining in all areas shown in Exhibit 3 must not exceed 9,500 square feet.
B. The maximum number of on-street public parking spaces that can be converted to permanent dining areas is 78 spaces. In addition to the overall limit of 78 spaces, the program would also limit the number of spaces converted to outdoor dining in each of the City’s three Coastal subzones to no more than 2 percent of the on-street parking in each zone. Per the City’s most recent parking inventory (City of Hermosa Beach, 2019), there are 3,969 total on-street parking spaces within the Coastal Zone, with 2,016 spaces in Zone 1, 1,183 in Zone 2, and 770 in Zone 3 (See Table 1 below and Exhibit 4). Applying the 2 percent limit, the maximum spaces available for outdoor dining in Zone 1 would be 40, 23 in Zone 2 and 15 spaces in City of Hermosa Beach Page 10 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™307
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
spaces available for outdoor dining in Zone 1 would be 40, 23 in Zone 2 and 15 spaces in Zone 3. At present, 35 on-street public spaces have been converted to outdoor dining areas and/or bike lanes through the City’s Temporary Lane Reconfiguration Program. These spaces would be able to retain their current configuration under the proposed project, along with the conversion of up to an additional 43 on-street spaces.
TABLE 1
PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE FOR OUTDOOR DINING USE
UNDER THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Parking Zone Total On-Street
Spaces
2 Percent Spaces Currently
Used for Outdoor
Dining
Proposed Available
Spaces Currently Not
In Use
ZONE 1 2,016 40 2 38
ZONE 2 1,183 23 33 10
ZONE 3 770 15 0 15
TOTAL 3,969 78 35 43
C. Lane reconfigurations to accommodate outdoor dining are limited to the existing lane reconfigurations shown in the attachment.
D. The proposed program would be subject to additional restrictions. To be eligible for an outdoor dining permit, individual eating and dining establishments must not only be located in one of the three zones identified above (C1, C2 or SPA11); in addition, if the outdoor dining area is to be located in the public right-of-way that fronts a street, the street must have a speed limit of 25 miles per hour or less.
E. The proposed project also limits outdoor dining to locations that meet the following conditions.
1. The use does not obstruct access to public utilities and infrastructure for emergency or maintenance purposes.
2. All dining areas are in an area where all public services and facilities are available to allow for maximum development permissible in the General Plan.
3. The area in which individual dining areas will be located is not environmentally sensitive.
4. No individual dining area that significantly impacts an historical, cultural, or tribal resource will be permitted.
Under the proposed program, outdoor dining permit applications would be reviewed administratively by the City Manager or designee with the participation of the Public Works, Police, and Fire Departments. The proposed permanent Outdoor Permit Program includes a set of Guidelines and Conditions of Approval for individual projects permitted under the program, along with design City of Hermosa Beach Page 11 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™308
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
Conditions of Approval for individual projects permitted under the program, along with design guidelines for encroachment.
Environmental Determination:
The proposed project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as defined in Section 15300 of the CEQA Guidelines, as follows.
The Lane Reconfiguration component of the project is exempt in accordance with Section 15301, which addresses minor alteration of existing public facilities; and Section 15304, which addresses minor alterations to public land. More specifically, the following two subcategories of exemption both apply.
15301(c)-existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities (this includes road grading for the purpose of public safety), and other alterations such as the addition of bicycle facilities, including but not limited to bicycle parking, bicycle-share facilities and bicycle lanes, transit improvements such as bus lanes, pedestrian crossings, street trees, and other similar alterations that do not create additional automobile lanes. 15304(h)-the creation of bicycle lanes on existing rights-of-way.
The Outdoor Dining component of the project is exempt in accordance with Section 15301, which address additions to existing structures and 15303, which addresses construction of limited numbers of new, small structures. More specifically, the following subcategory applies. 15301(e)-additions to existing structures, provided that the addition will not result in an increase of more than 10,000 square feet if:
A. The project is in an area where all public services and facilities are available to allow for maximum development permissible in the General Plan; and B. The area in which the project is located is not environmentally sensitive. 15303(e)-construction of new small facilities or structures including accessory (appurtenant) structures including garages, carports, patios, swimming pools, and fences.
None of the exceptions to the Categorical Exemption apply, nor would the project result in a significant cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place over time or have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances or damage a scenic highway or scenic resources within a state scenic highway. The site is not located on a hazardous waste site and would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
Though both projects are categorically exempt. The City conducted extensive analysis of the City of Hermosa Beach Page 12 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™309
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
Though both projects are categorically exempt. The City conducted extensive analysis of the potential environmental effects of the on-street outdoor dining deck and lane reconfigurations to help support the determination. The effort included technical studies on traffic, noise, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and energy consumption impacts (Attachment 3). This was also done because the project is based on a relatively new, temporary program that did not exist before the COVID-19 pandemic, as opposed to the Pier Plaza encroachment program, which is simply a revision of an existing program.
6. Operational and design standards for on-street dining decks. Staff will finalize these standards and return to Council for review and approval at an upcoming meeting. The delay on these program elements would allow time to further refine and be coordinated with a phased implementation that would be more administratively efficient for the City and potential applicants. The proposed delay is also reflective of the still-evolving nature of on-street dining programs throughout the region, which has made difficult staff’s ability to gather definitive information on safety and construction.
The operation and design standard will include process guidelines for applicants, as well as aesthetic and operational parameters. Operational parameters will include essential traffic safety and structural specifications. Staff is working closely with a traffic engineer on these elements of the program. From a risk management standpoint, staff is consulting with California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (JPIA) on its guidelines regarding on-street dining decks and will incorporate these recommendations into the staff recommended standards. Additional time to develop these standards would ensure that staff has considered every aspect of the physical elements of the on-street dining deck program.
Next Steps
Staff recommends that these various program elements go into effect immediately, but also that Council authorize the City Manager to adjust implementation schedules as needed to ensure efficiency. As mentioned above, staff will return to Council soon for approval of the final design and operational guidelines for the on-street dining decks. Staff recommends that existing on-street decks be allowed to endure through the summer before reapplying for permits in fall. At that time, on-street decks would be required to submit official plans to be fully reviewed and vetted per the approved guidelines.
City staff has also met with Coastal Commission staff and established that a 5-year pilot program would be an effective approach to lead to a permanent program. The pilot program would include ongoing monitoring and assessment to document the project’s effect on parking and coastal access.
This may also include testing a variety of programs and measures to ensure adequate coastal access is maintained during the pilot. Staff is currently working to develop acceptable measures to be incorporated into the program that would satisfy the criteria for the Coastal Development Permit.
City of Hermosa Beach Page 13 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™310
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
General Plan Consistency:
The proposed program options match the model of “living streets”, also known as “complete streets”, which supports a key guiding principle of the General Plan Vision, of fostering a vibrant local economy. A living street combines safety and livability while supporting ground floor and outdoor economic activities. This centers on designing streets that can be safely shared by both vehicular and non-vehicular traffic. A living street should also contribute to an engaging public realm and a vibrant local economy.
Relevant Goals and Policies are listed below:
Governance Element
Goal 6. A broad-based and long-term economic development strategy for Hermosa Beach that supports existing businesses while attracting new business and tourism.
Policies:
· 6.4 Business support. Support the Chamber of Commerce, retailers, tourist service businesses, artists, and other agencies to develop an aggressive marketing strategy with implementation procedures.
· 6.6 Pop-up shops. Develop plans and programs for underutilized spaces, such as vacant buildings, utility corridors, parkways, etc., for temporary retail, restaurant, and community promoting uses.
Mobility Element
Goal 1. Complete Streets (Living Streets) that serve the diverse functions of mobility, commerce, recreation, and community engagement for all users whether they travel by walking, bicycling, transit, or driving.
Policy:
· 1.1 Consider all modes. Require the planning, design, and construction of all new and existing transportation projects to consider the needs of all modes of travel to create safe, livable and inviting environments for all users of the system.
Goal 7. A transportation system that results in zero transportation-related fatalities and which minimizes injuries.
Policy:
· 7.1 Safe public rights-of-way. Encourage that all public rights-of-way are for all users at all times of day where users of all ages and ability feel comfortable participating in both motorized and non-motorized travel.
City of Hermosa Beach Page 14 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™311
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
Fiscal Impact:
The Capital Improvement Fund includes $60,000 appropriated for the CEQA specialist to perform the CEQA analysis and an additional $60,000 was appropriated to fund additional traffic and parking analysis to support this work. Funds for ongoing annual traffic and parking analysis will be appropriated in the FY 2023-24 Budget.
The proposed encroachment fees are estimated to generate approximately $913,260 in revenue annually, an approximate 64 percent increase over current encroachment fee revenues for continuing encroachments.
Staff will return to Council at a later date to establish application review fees and provide revenue estimates at that time.
Attachments:
1. Draft Ordinance and CEQA Determination
2. Draft Resolution Approving Guidelines for Permanent Encroachments
3. Draft Resolution Approving Permanent Lane Reconfigurations and Bike Lanes
4. Resolution Establishing a Fee Schedule for Permanent Encroachments
5. Recent Chamber of Commerce Survey Report Regarding Outdoor Dining
6. Pier Plaza Encroachments
7. Map of Current Encroachment Areas
8. Existing and Proposed Encroachment Rate Comparison
9. Traffic Engineer Memorandum
10. Traffic Study and Report
11. Link to June 9, 2020 City Council Staff Report
12. Link to July 14, 2020 City Council Staff Report
13. Link to June 22, 2021 City Council Staff Report
14. Link to July 13, 2021 City Council Staff Report
15. Link to October 26, 2021 City Council Staff Report
16. Link to December 14, 2021 City Council Staff Report
17. Link to January 25, 2022 City Council Staff Report
18. Link to February 8, 2022 City Council Staff Report
19. Link to May 24, 2022 City Council Staff Report
20. Link to June 14, 2022 City Council Staff Report
21. Link to November 3, 2022 City Council Staff Report
22. Link to January 24, 2023 City Council Staff Report
23. Link to March 28, 2023 City Council Staff Report
Respectfully Submitted by: Douglas Krauss, Environmental Program Manager Concur: Carrie Tai, Community Development Director
Concur: Joseph SanClemente, Public Works Director
Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director Legal Review: Pat Donegan, City Attorney
Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager
City of Hermosa Beach Page 15 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™312
Staff Report
REPORT 23-0247
City of Hermosa Beach Page 16 of 16 Printed on 4/25/2023 powered by Legistar™313
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
ORDINANCE NO. 23-XX
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA AMENDING CHAPTER 12.16 OF THE HERMOSA
BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE ESTABLISHING AN OUTDOOR DINING
PROGRAM AND MAKING PROCEDURAL CHANGES TO THE ISSUANCE
AND RENEWAL OF ALL ENCROACHMENTS IN THE CITY AND
DETERMINING THE ORDINANCE TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (“CEQA”)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS
A. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, on June 9, 2020, the Hermosa Beach City Council adopted Ordinance No. 20-1410U, Implementing a Temporary Permit for Outdoor Dining/Seating and Outdoor Retail Display to Assist in the Reopening of Restaurants, Food, and Retail Establishments.
B. Relatedly, on July 14, 2020, the City Council extended the provisions of Ordinance No. 20-1410U until at least January 13, 2021, in light of the ongoing pandemic, and directed City staff to work with a traffic engineering consultant to develop options for closing parking and vehicle lanes on the downtown sections of Hermosa and Pier Avenues that would encourage foot traffic and allow for more room for outdoor dining encroachments in the public right-of-way.
C. On September 8, 2020, the City Council authorized plans to temporarily close one lane of vehicular traffic in each direction on Pier Avenue, between Hermosa Avenue and Valley Drive, and plans to temporarily close vehicular traffic the northbound and southbound # 2 travel lanes (closest to the curb) on Hermosa Avenue from the 800 block at 8th Street to the 1300 block at 14th street to facilitate outdoor recreational and economic activity in the City’s downtown area on a temporary basis and add a Class 2 Bike Lane in both directions throughout this project area.
314
D. Further, during this same period, businesses located adjacent to Pier Plaza were temporarily allowed to expand commercial encroachments into Pier Plaza to allow for more room for outdoor dining, increase economic vitality and provide alternative dining options for residents during the COVID-19 pandemic.
E. The creation and activation of these spaces for pedestrian oriented uses such as outdoor dining have been beneficial to the Pier Plaza and Downtown areas of the City. These programs have provided residents and visitors with the unique ability to patron City businesses via outdoor dining.
Further, businesses have been able to avail themselves to this new opportunity which provides for a more robust economic environment and business friendly environment.
F. The City has received positive feedback from residents, visitors and businesses about all of the benefits of these expanded outdoor dining programs.
G. Based on the positive impacts and positive feedback of these temporary outdoor dining programs (i.e., dining decks and expanded encroachments in Pier Plaza and other public rights-of-way), the City desires to implement permanent versions of these programs with specific operational and design standards that limit any possible view, noise or other impacts from these expanded dining uses.
H. Further, after review of Chapter 12.16, certain procedural and administrative changes are necessary to provide for a more efficient and effective regulatory regime for all encroachments in the City – not just the new or expanded encroachments for outdoor dining.
I. Thus, the City desires to amend Chapter 12.16 (Encroachments) to enact permanent versions of the various components of the current temporary outdoor dining program subject to operational and design standard(s).
SECTION 2.
Chapter 12.16 (Encroachments) of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended as provided in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 3. Environmental Review.
315
Outdoor Dining Deck and Off-Plaza Encroachments
The proposed project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as defined in Section 15300 of the CEQA Guidelines, as follows.
The Lane Reconfiguration component of the project is exempt in accordance with Section 15301 which addresses minor alteration of existing public facilities; and Section 15304 which addresses minor alterations to public land. More specifically, the following two subcategories of exemption both apply. 15301(c) – Existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities (this includes road grading for the purpose of public safety), and other alterations such as the addition of bicycle facilities, including but not limited to bicycle parking, bicycleshare facilities and bicycle lanes, transit improvements such as bus lanes, pedestrian crossings, street trees, and other similar alterations that do not create additional automobile lanes.
15304(h) – The creation of bicycle lanes on existing rights-of-way.
The Outdoor Dining component of the project is exempt in accordance with Section 15301 which address additions to existing structures and 15303 which addresses construction of limited numbers of new, small structures. More specifically, the following subcategory applies.
15301(e) – Additions to existing structures provided that the addition will not result in an increase of more than 10,000 square feet if:
(A) The project is in an area where all public services and facilities are available to allow for maximum development permissible in the General Plan; and
(B) The area in which the project is located is not environmentally sensitive.
15303(e) – Construction of new small facilities or structures including accessory (appurtenant) structures including garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences.
None of the exceptions to the Categorical Exemption apply, nor would the project result in a significant cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place over time or have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances or damage a scenic highway or scenic resources within a state scenic highway. The site is not located on a hazardous waste site 316
and would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
Additional environmental analysis, including technical studies on traffic, noise, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption impacts, was conducted to support the CEQA determination. A summary of the analysis and the technical studies in support of this CEQA determination are presented in Exhibit B.
Pier Plaza Encroachments
The proposed project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as defined in Section 15300 of the CEQA Guidelines, in accordance with Section 15061, the ‘common sense’ exemption, and Section 15301 which addresses minor alterations of existing public facilities, specifically:
15061(b)(3) – The project is covered by the common sense exemption that applies where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.
15301(c) – Existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities (this includes road grading for the purpose of public safety), and other alterations such as the addition of bicycle facilities, including but not limited to bicycle parking, bicycleshare facilities and bicycle lanes, transit improvements such as bus lanes, pedestrian crossings, street trees, and other similar alterations that do not create additional automobile lanes.
None of the exceptions to the Categorical Exemption apply, nor would the project result in a significant cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place over time or have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances or damage a scenic highway or scenic resources within a state scenic highway. The site is not located on a hazardous waste site and would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
SECTION 4. Severability. If any provision of this ordinance or its application to any person or circumstance is held to be invalid, such invalidity has no effect on the other provisions or applications of the ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this extent, the provisions of this ordinance/resolution are severable. The City Council declares that it would 317
have adopted this ordinance/resolution irrespective of the invalidity of any portion thereof.
SECTION 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its passage and adoption pursuant to California Government Code section 36937 and shall be retroactive to June 1, 2023.
SECTION 6. Certification. The City Clerk is directed to certify the passage and adoption of this Ordinance; cause it to be entered into the City’s book of original ordinances; make a note of the passage and adoption in the records of this meeting; and, within fifteen (15) days after the passage and adoption of this Ordinance, cause it to be published or posted in accordance with California law.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED on this 25th day of April, 2023.
Ray Jackson
PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, CA ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________ ________________________________ Myra Maravilla Patrick Donegan
City Clerk City Attorney
318
Chapter 12.16 Encroachments
12.16.010 Definitions.
12.16.020 Permit.
12.16.030 Commencement of work without permit.
12.16.040 Authority to grant.
12.16.050 Residential encroachments.
12.16.060 Commercial encroachments.
12.16.070 Findings necessary to grant an encroachment.
12.16.080 Requirements and conditions of approval.
12.16.090 Commercial outdoor dining.
12.16.100 Commercial encroachments–Retail display areas.
12.16.110 Application procedure.
12.16.120 Maintenance of encroachment.
12.16.130 Nonconformance of encroachment.
12.16.150 Revocation.
12.16.160 Encroachment violation.
12.16.170 Violation–Misdemeanor.
12.16.180 Violations of encroachment regulations–Additional remedies.
12.16.190 Fees.
12.16.010 Definitions.
As used in this chapter:
Commercial encroachment shall mean an encroachment into the adjoining public right-of-way for any commercial purpose.
Encroachments are structures, objects, uses or landscaping owned by a private property owner and located on or over adjoining public right-of-way for the property owner’s private use and enjoyment. Permissible residential encroachments are those which place a minimal burden on the right-of-way, are easily removable and do not materially alter the character of the right-of-way as open space, and include landscaping, fencing, movable personal property (such as furniture and planters), patios, decks, landscape irrigation and lighting systems and similar structures and objects, in accordance with the standards, conditions and requirements of 319
this chapter. No building or structural element of a building (including walls, roofs, structural supports, balconies, stairwells, and the like) shall be permitted to encroach on or over a public right-of-way.
Encroachment means and includes any obstruction, tower, pole, pole line, pipe, wire, cable, conduit, wall, fence, balcony, deck, stand or building, or any structure or object of any kind or character which is placed in, along, under, over or across public right-of-way.
Pedestrian walk street is defined by council under a separate resolution Person includes any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, corporation, estate, trust, business trust, any district, any city, any county including this county, and all departments and bureaus thereof except the city of Hermosa Beach.
Residential encroachment shall mean an encroachment into the adjoining public right-of-way for the residential property owner’s private use and enjoyment.
Shall and May. “Shall" is mandatory; "may" is permissive.
Structure is defined by the Uniform Building Code as that which is built or constructed, an edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner.
12.16.020 Permit.
An encroachment permit is required for any landscaping in excess of forty-two (42) inches in height, and any structure, object or use which is permitted by this chapter to encroach on or over a public right-ofway. The encroachment permit shall be in a form provided by the public works directorcity and approved by the city attorney. Issuance of an encroachment permit is within the city’s sole discretion and constitutes a privilege granted by the city as a convenience to an adjoining property owner and not a right. No land use rights or any other kind of vested rights are created by virtue of an encroachment permit. Encroachment permits shall be for a period not to exceed one (1) year and must be renewed annually. An application for renewal shall require the same findings as an original application except as otherwise noted and shall be submitted no later than sixty (60) days prior to the expiration of any existing encroachment permit. An encroachment permit is not a substitute for a building permit or a construction permit when either is otherwise required by this Code.
12.16.030 Commencement of work without permit.
Any person who shall commence any work, for which a permit is required by this chapter, without first having obtained a permit shall stop work and apply for such permit. The fee for the permit shall be doubled.
In addition, failure to stop constitutes a misdemeanor and is defined in this chapter.
12.16.040 Authority to grant.
A permit to encroach into a planned or existing public right-of-way may be granted upon such terms and conditions as are deemed necessary. The authority to grant or deny such permit application is vested in the director of public worksCity Manager or designee, unless otherwise specified. Approval of encroachments which deviate from the established guidelines can only be granted with city council approval in an appeal process. If the applicant for an encroachment permit is an officer or employee of the city, only the city council is authorized to issue the permit. 320
12.16.050 Residential encroachments.
Approvals of all residential encroachments is vested with the City Manager or designee director of public works and the rules and guidelines are set forth herein. Only the owner of record of real property is eligible to apply for and receive an encroachment permit for encroachments from adjacent residential property. No commercial activity of any kind is permitted on residential encroachment areas.
12.16.060 Commercial encroachments.
The authority to grant or deny commercial encroachments is vested with the director of public worksCity Manager or designee. Commercial encroachments shall comply with the requirements set forth in this chapter.
A. If a conditional use permit is required for the encroachment. pursuant to this chapter, approval of the commercial encroachment shall be coordinated with the conditional use permit process.
B. Only theThe owner of record of real property is eligible to apply for and receive an encroachment permit for encroachments from for adjacent commercial property, except that commercial outdoor dining encroachment permits authorized under Section 12.16.090 may be issued to a lessee, with written approval from the owner of record. who shall not delegate or assign that responsibility.
C. Use of the public right-of-way for commercial uses shall be subject to the conditions set forth in this Section as well as any additional guidelines, regulations or directives as adopted by the City Manager or designee. Section 12.16.090(A).
12.16.070 Findings necessary to grant an encroachment.
The director of public works, inIn granting approval of an encroachment permit application the City shall make a finding that the plans and application meet the guidelines and conditions of approval as set forth in Section 12.16.080in this Chapter, any additional regulations promulgated by the City and the granting of such encroachment will not adversely affect the general plan of the city nor be injurious or negatively impact the health and wellbeing of the public. Approval of encroachments which deviate from these established criteria can only be granted with city council approval in an appeal process upon a showing of good cause..
12.16.080 Requirements and conditions of approval.
Permitted encroachments shall comply with the following minimum requirements and conditions. The City Manager or designee may determine that additional or more strenuous requirements are required.:
A. General (Applicable to All Encroachments).
1. All construction shall conform to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code, the Municipal Code, and the Department of Public Works Standards and Policies.
2. Landscaping encroachments for residential encroachments within the public right-of-way shall not exceed the building height limitation of the zone in which it is planted.
3. In the case of an encroachment occupying the public right-of-way enclosed by the extension of the two side property lines between the front property line and the existing or future sidewalk, a 321
minimum of one-third of the encroachment area shall be landscaped in accordance with a landscape plan to be approved by the public works departmentCity Manager or designee in conjunction with the encroachment permit application.
4. Height of any encroachment shall be measured from the natural grade unless otherwise specifically approved by the director of public works by virtue of unusual topography or other extraordinary physical circumstances.
5. Encroachments shall not obstruct access to underground utilities nor significantly impair scenic vistas from neighboring properties or the public right-of-way.
6. Public right-of-way, through receipt of an encroachment permit, shall not satisfy required open space or any conditions of building or zoning that are normally provided on-site, except for providing required residential guest parking, pursuant to Sections 17.44.090(C) and 17.44.110(B) of the Zoning Ordinance, and for providing required parking approved by a parking plan granted pursuant to Section 17.44.210 of the Zoning Ordinance.
6.7. Encroachments that comply with the provisions of this Chapter shall be exempt from compliance with the off street parking requirements of this Code unless otherwise noted.
7.8. An encroachment shall not provide structural support for any structure located on private property.
B. Pedestrian walk street (applicable only to those streets):
1. Fences shall not exceed a maximum height of forty-two (42) inches.
2. Fences are allowed at a height of forty-two (42) inches maximum on top of retaining walls of masonry, block, brick or concrete. The fence height is measured from the natural grade. A retaining wall on public right-of-way shall not support any structure on private property.
3. Decks may be permitted to a maximum height of twelve (12) inches height above the existing natural grade and if they do not project into the public right-of-way more than half the distance between the property line and edge of existing or future sidewalk. Deck railings are permitted provided that they are of open construction and that deck and railing do not exceed a maximum height of forty-two (42) inches.
C. Vehicular Street (Applicable Only to Those Streets).
1. Fences shall not exceed a maximum height of forty-two (42) inches.
2. Encroachments shall not be placed over an existing or planned sidewalk.
3. Encroachment permits for new curb cuts for ingress/egress on Pier Avenue between Valley Drive and Hermosa Avenue shall not be granted.
12.16.090 Commercial outdoor dining.
Use of the public right-of-way for commercial outdoor dining may be permitted subject to issuance of an encroachment permit in compliance with this chapter, and subject to the following conditions:
A. Every encroachment permit for commercial outdoor dining shall ensure the following:
322
1. Provides for and maintains an area of passage for pedestrian traffic;
2. Does not inconvenience pedestrian traffic;
3. Conforms to all applicable health codes and this Code;
4. Applicant is to pay all appropriate fees, including but not limited to rental fees as set by the City Council;
5. Applicant is to maintain and keep in force at all times a policy of liability insurance, naming the city as an additional insured in the amount of no less one million dollars ($1,000,000) unless a higher amount is determined to be appropriate in the sole discretion of the City Manager or designee ; andApplicant shall obtain and maintain in force comprehensive general liability, broad form property damage and blanket contractual liability insurance in a combined single limit amount, per claim and aggregate, of at least two million dollars ($2,000,000) covering the applicant’s operation unless a higher amount is determined to be appropriate in the sole discretion of the City Manager or designee. Such insurance shall name, on a Special Endorsement form, the City, its elected, appointed boards, officers, agents and employees as additional insureds. A Certificate of Insurance shall contain provisions that prohibit cancellation, modification, or lapse without thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City. Both the Certificate of Insurance and the completed standard Special Endorsement form shall be submitted with the completed application for an Commercial Encroachment Permit.
6. Applicant is to pay restorative costs, if applicable, in an amount to be determined by the director of public worksCity Manager or designee, plus administrative costs.
B. Pier Plaza Commercial Encroachments. Encroachment for commercial outdoor dining activity on Pier Plaza shall comply with Section 12.16.060 and the following minimum design and operational standards and any additional standards as adopted by the City Council and/or the City Manager or designee. adopted by resolution of the city council. Deviations from the standards set forth in this section may be allowed pursuant to an appeal to the City Council following a determination by the City Manager or designee. conditional use permit granted in compliance with Chapter 17.40.
1. Limited outdoor dining in compliance with this sectionPier Plaza Commercial Encroachments shall be exempt from compliance with off-street parking standards in Chapter 17.44 if it meets the following standards:
a. The encroachment area does not exceed two hundred (200)one thousand (1,000) square feet. In no event shall any encroachment area, regardless of square footage extend more than twentyfive (25) feet into Pier Plaza. ; b. Use of the encroachment area is limited to the hours of operation of the adjacent commercial establishment. food dining establishment. However, in no event shall any encroachment area operate past 12:00 a.m.establishment, not to exceed 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.; and However, if in the sole discretion of the City Manager or designee, an earlier closing time is warranted then the City Manage or designee may condition an encroachment permit on an earlier closing time.
c. Alcoholic beverages aremay only not be offered, sold or consumed within the encroachment area pursuant to a valid California Department of Alcohol Beverage Control license for the area. 323
Any other limitation on the business involving the sale or consumption of alcohol shall also apply in the encroachment area. If, in the sole discretion of the Police Chief, the encroachment area has demonstrated a repeated pattern of behavior involving the service or consumption of alcohol that violates this Chapter or any other City permit or provision of law, then the City may prohibit the service of alcoholic beverages within the encroachment area. d. The encroachment area does not extend past the frontage of the business for which it is connected to.
e. In no event shall any canopy, shade structure or any other similar improvement extend more than thirteen (13) feet into Pier Plaza. Further, all improvements, fences, railings, gates, tables, chairs, umbrellas, furniture or any other items or structures shall be designed and used in a way that protects all ocean views from the public right-of-way. The temporary use of umbrellas is permitted provided that they are only utilized while customers are actively using the specific umbrella(s) in the encroachment area. The City Manager of designee shall retain the complete discretion to direct any permitee to curtail the use of any umbrellas, furniture or other items or structures to protect the public view of the ocean.
f. There are no outstanding code enforcement violationsMunicipal Code violations or violations of any other City-issued permit. In reviewing renewal applications the City Manager of designee must determine that there are unresolved violation of this Chapter (and any related regulations) related to the Pier Plaza Commercial Encroachment. If, in the preceding twelve (12) months, there were three (3) violations of this Chapter or related Regulations as determined by the City Manager or designee, then the City Manager shall not issue a Pier Plaza Commercial Encroachment for a period of one (1) year.
g. The encroachment area shall be managed, operated, and maintained as an integral part of the adjacent dining establishment.
h. Any improvements, fences, railings, gates, tables, chair or other equipment related to the Pier Plaza Commercial Encroachment shall be installed in such a way that, upon forty (48) hours’ notice from the City, can be entirely removed and the area be returned to its previous state without any Pier Plaza Commercial Encroachments. In the event of written notice from the City, any Pier Plaza Commercial Encroachment holder shall remove or cause to be removed any and all improvements, fences, railings, gates, tables, chair or other equipment related to the Pier Plaza Commercial Encroachment to the satisfaction of the City Manager within thirty-six (36) hours notice. No rental fee shall be charged for the time the City requires removal of the improvements, fences, railings, gates, tables, chair or other equipment related to the Pier Plaza Commercial provided that the business is not using the encroachment area for commercial purposes.Encroachment.
c.i. The encroachment are shall be designed and operated in compliance with any regulations adopted by resolution of the City Council and any further regulations promulgated by the City Manager or designee in furtherance of City Council direction.
2. Pier Plaza Commercial Encroachments issued prior to the effective date of this ordinance(INSERT EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE) shall be valid for a period not exceeding one (1) yearfour (4) months from the date of adoption date of this ordinance.issuance. After this date, any expiration, any new Pier Plaza Commercial Encroachments shall be issued under this Chapter. 324
C. Commercial Zoning DistrictsEncroachments, Excluding Pier PlazaDining Decks and Specific Plan Area No. 11 (Upper Pier Avenue). Commercial Encroachments for commercial outdoor dining onactivity on sidewalks or in public parking areas or vehicular streets are only permitted within commercial zoning districits (exlcuing Pier Plaza) and Specific Plan Area No. 11 (Upper Pier Avenue) and shall comply with Section 12.16.060, the following minimum standards and any additional standards as adopted by the City Council and/or the City Manager or designee. Deviations from the standards set forth in this section may be allowed pursuant to an appeal to the City Council following a determination by the City Manager or designee. within commercial zoning districts, excluding Pier Plaza and Specific Plan Area No. 11 (Upper Pier Avenue), shall comply with Section 12.16.060this Chapter and if in compliance with the following design and operational standards and limitationlimitations, be exempt from the off-street parking standards in Chapter 17.44.s:
1. Outdoor dining site located in public parking areas shall only occupy a maximum of two parallel onstreet parking spaces or three, on-street, head-in parking spaces. Notwithstanding the previous sentence, for commercial encroachments located entirely in front of the encroaching business’ frontage (i.e., no permission for use is required from a neighboring property owner or business), a business may occupy a maximum three parallel on-street parking spaces or four head-in on-street parking spaces. Encroachments shall only be permitted adjacent to streets with a speed limit of 25 miles per hour or less.
The outdoor diningcommercial encroachment area shall be managed, operated, and maintained as an integral part of the adjacent food establishmentcommercial establishment. Food establishments include restaurants, snack shops, food and beverage markets, supermarkets, bakeries, delicatessens, or similar establishments that offer food or beverages, as determined by the director of public works in consultation with the community development department. Food establishment does not include temporary, mobile or freestanding food service providers or vendors.
1. 2. Use of the encroachment area is limited to the hours of operation of the adjacent food establishment, not to exceed 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. However, if in the sole discretion of the City Manager or designee, an earlier closing time is warranted then the City Manage or designee may condition an encroachment permit on an earlier closing time.
3. Alcoholic beverages may only be offered, sold or consumed within the encroachment area pursuant to a valid California Department of Alcohol Beverage Control license for the area. Any other limitation on the business involving the sale or consumption of alcohol shall also apply in the encroachment area. If, in the sole discretion of the Police Chief, the encroachment area has demonstrated a repeated pattern of behavior involving the service or consumption of alcohol that violates this Chapter or any other City permit or provision of law, then the City may prohibit the service of alcoholic beverages within the encroachment area.
4. The encroachment area does not extend past the frontage of the business for which it is connected to.
5. All improvements, fences, railings, gates, tables, chairs, umbrellas, furniture or any other items or structures shall be designed and used in a way that protects all ocean views from the public right-ofway. The temporary use of umbrellas is permitted provided that they are only utilized while customers are actively using the specific umbrella(s) in the encroachment area. The City Manager or 325
designee shall retain the complete discretion to direct any permitee to curtail the use of any umbrellas, furniture or other items or structures to protect the public view of the ocean.
6. There are no outstanding Municipal Code violations or violations of any other City-issued permit. In reviewing renewal applications the City Manager of designee must determine that there are unresolved violation of this Chapter (and any related regulations) related to the Commercial Encroachment. If, in the preceding twelve (12) months, there were three (3) violations of this Chapter or related Regulations as determined by the City Manager or designee, then the City Manager shall not issue a Commercial Encroachment for a period of one (1) year.
7. The encroachment area shall be managed, operated, and maintained as an integral part of the adjacent dining establishment.
8. All furnishings, decks and barriers shall be maintained free of appendages or conditions that pose a hazard to pedestrians or vehicles, and ensure visually impaired pedestrians can detect the objects safely. No appendage shall extend outside the encroachment area. No persons including customers shall place anything within or near the encroachment area that could pose a tripping hazard or interfere with accessibility of vehicles, pedestrians or cyclists, such as animals tied to signs or utility poles, bicycles, etc.
9. Any improvements, fences, railings, gates, tables, chair or other equipment related to the Commercial Encroachment shall be installed in such a way that, within seven (7) days’ notice from the City, can be entirely removed and the area be returned to its previous state without any Commercial Encroachments. In the event of written notice from the City, any Commercial Encroachment holder shall remove or cause to be removed any and all improvements, fences, railings, gates, tables, chair or other equipment related to the Commercial Encroachment to the satisfaction of the City Manager within thirty-six (36) hours. No rental fee shall be charged for the time the City requires removal of the improvements, fences, railings, gates, tables, chair or other equipment related to the Commercial Encroachment provided that the business is not using the encroachment area for commercial purposes.
10. The encroachment are shall be designed and operated in compliance with any regulations adopted by resolution of the City Council and any further regulations promulgated by the City Manager or designee in furtherance of City Council direction.
2. The encroachment area shall be located adjacent to the building, and shall not be located within or separated from the establishment by landscaping, street furniture, parking spaces, drive aisles, alleys or streets, or other elements as determined by the City Manager or designee.
Encroachment areas along any street frontage shall be located at least ten (10) feet from any residential zone.
11. Outdoor dining site located in public parking areas shall only occupy a maximum of two parallel onstreet parking spaces or three, on-street, head-in parking spaces. Notwithstanding the previous sentence, for commercial encroachments located entirely in front of the encroaching business’ frontage (i.e., no permission for use is required from a neighboring property owner or business), a business may occupy a maximum three parallel on-street parking spaces or four head-in on-street parking spaces.
326
D. Commercial Encroachments, Non Pier Plaza and Non Dining Decks. Commercial Encroachments for commercial outdoor dining on sidewalks or other public rights-of-way that are not public parking spaces or vehicular streets and not in Pier Plaza shall comply with Section 12.16.060 and the following minimum standards and any additional standards as adopted by the City Council and/or the City Manager or designee. Deviations from the standards set forth in this section may be allowed pursuant to an appeal to the City Council following a determination by the City Manager or designee.
1. The encroachment area shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) square feet.
2. Use of the encroachment area is limited to the hours of operation of the adjacent food establishment, not to exceed 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. However, if in the sole discretion of the City Manager or designee, an earlier closing time is warranted then the City Manage or designee may condition an encroachment permit on an earlier closing time.
3. Alcoholic beverages may only be offered, sold or consumed within the encroachment area pursuant to a valid California Department of Alcohol Beverage Control license for the area. Any other limitation on the business involving the sale or consumption of alcohol shall also apply in the encroachment area. If, in the sole discretion of the Police Chief, the encroachment area has demonstrated a repeated pattern of behavior involving the service or consumption of alcohol that violates this Chapter or any other City permit or provision of law, then the City may prohibit the service of alcoholic beverages within the encroachment area.
4. The encroachment area does not extend past the frontage of the business for which it is connected to.
5. A clear, continuous pedestrian path not less than five (5) feet in width or more as deemed appropriate by the City Manager or designee for pedestrian circulation outside of the encroachment area shall be maintained at all times. As used herein, "pedestrian path" means a continuous obstruction-free sidewalk area between the outside boundary of the encroachment area and any obstructions, such as street trees or planters, utility poles, street furniture, newsstands, bus benches, or curbs.
6. All improvements, tables, chairs, umbrellas, furniture or any other items or structures shall be designed and used in a way that protects all ocean views from the public right-of-way. The temporary use of umbrellas is permitted provided that they are only utilized while customers are actively using the specific umbrella(s) in the encroachment area. The City Manager of designee shall retain the complete discretion to direct any permitee to curtail the use of any umbrellas, furniture or other items or structures to protect the public view of the ocean.
7. There are no outstanding Municipal Code violations or violations of any other City-issued permit. In reviewing renewal applications the City Manager of designee must determine that there are unresolved violation of this Chapter (and any related regulations) related to the Commercial Encroachment. If, in the preceding twelve (12) months, there were three (3) violations of this Chapter or related Regulations as determined by the City Manager or designee, then the City Manager shall not issue a Commercial Encroachment for a period of one (1) year.
8. The encroachment area shall be managed, operated, and maintained as an integral part of the adjacent dining establishment.
9. All furnishings and barriers shall be maintained free of appendages or conditions that pose a hazard to pedestrians or vehicles, and ensure visually impaired pedestrians can detect the objects safely. No appendage shall extend outside the encroachment area. No persons including customers shall place 327
anything within or near the encroachment area that could pose a tripping hazard or interfere with accessibility of vehicles, pedestrians or cyclists, such as animals tied to signs or utility poles, bicycles, etc.
10. Any improvements, tables, chairs or other equipment related to the Commercial Encroachment shall be installed in such a way that, within seven (7) days’ notice from the City, can be entirely removed and the area be returned to its previous state without any Commercial Encroachments. In the event of written notice from the City, any Commercial Encroachment holder shall remove or cause to be removed any and all improvements, fences, railings, gates, tables, chair or other equipment related to the Commercial Encroachment to the satisfaction of the City Manager. No rental fee shall be charged for the time the City requires removal of the improvements, fences, railings, gates, tables, chair or other equipment related to the Commercial Encroachment provided that the business is not using the encroachment area for commercial purposes.
11. The encroachment are shall be designed and operated in compliance with any regulations adopted by resolution of the City Council and any further regulations promulgated by the City Manager or designee in furtherance of City Council direction.
12. Commercial Encroachments issued for the public right-of-way that are not public parking spaces or vehicular streets and not in Pier Plaza prior to (INSERT EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDINANCE) shall be valid for a period not exceeding three (3) months from the effective date of this ordinance. After this date, any Commercial Encroachments shall be issued under this Chapter.
The encroachment area when located on sidewalks shall not exceed two hundred (200) square feet, shall not exceed five (5) feet in depth, and shall not occupy more than thirty (30) percent of the sidewalk width excluding curb. On pedestrian walk streets the encroachment area is not subject to the depth or width limitations but shall not exceed two hundred (200) square feet.
1. Outdoor dining in compliance with this section shall be exempt from compliance with off-street parking standards in Chapter 17.44.
2. Use of the encroachment area shall be limited to the hours of operation of the adjacent food establishment, not to exceed 7:00 a.m. to 110:00 p.m.
3. The encroachment area is limited to sit-down food and beverage consumption for seated customers only. Servingware used in the encroachment area shall be resistant to shattering or breaking into fragments (no glass, ceramic or similar materials).
4. Alcoholic beverages shall not be offered, sold or consumed within the encroachment area.Alcoholic beverages are only offered, sold or consumed within the encroachment area pursuant to a valid California Department of Alcohol Beverage Control license for the area
5. A clear, continuous pedestrian path not less than five (5) feet in width or more as deemed appropriate by the director of public worksCity Manager or designee for pedestrian circulation outside of the encroachment area shall be maintained at all times. As used herein, "pedestrian path" means a continuous obstruction-free sidewalk area between the outside boundary of the encroachment area and any obstructions, such as street trees or planters, utility poles, street furniture, newsstands, bus benches, or curbs.
328
6. The layout of the encroachment area shall not impede ingress or egress, and shall be fully accessible to the physically disabled, as required by the California Building Code, Title 24, Disabled Access Standards, any other requirements of law, and the city fire marshal.
7. Barriers shall conform to the Public Works Director's installation standards and be removable.
Barriers need not be removed each evening, but shall be capable of being removed; if imbedded into the pavement they must be fixed through the use of recessed sleeves and posts, or otherwise by wheels that can be locked into place or weighted in place. Barriers cannot be exposed and must be covered on all sides with a durable exterior material to the satisfaction of the City. No offpremises signs or banners of any kind shall be placed, displayed or erected on barriers or anywhere else in the outdoor dining area. around the encroachment area shall not be provided unless required by the director of public works for public safety, such as protection from vehicles or in cases of surface or grade changes. Unless otherwise specified, required barriers need not be removed each evening, but shall be capable of being removed. If embedded into the pavement, barriers must be fixed through the use of recessed sleeves and posts, or by wheels that can be locked into place or weighted in place. Required barriers shall conform to requirements for the sight-impaired and shall be properly maintained. The height of any barrier shall not exceed three (3) feet, six (6) inches. All barriers must be able to withstand inclement outdoor weather, and one hundred (100) pounds per lineal foot of horizontal force at the top of the barricade when in their fixed positions.
8. The elevation of the encroachment area shall not be altered (e.g., no platforms or recesses). No modification to the surface of the right-of-way, such as resurfacing, texturing or borings for recessed sleeves, shall be made unless approved by the director of public works.
9. Furnishings shall be limited to sturdy chairs, benches and tables, and umbrellas sheltering tables.
Furnishings shall be designed for outdoor use. No portion of an awning or umbrella No portable canopies (i.e., EZ Ups or other similar devices) are permitted in the outdoor dining area. Shade canopies must be structurally affixed to the dining deck and fully retractable. The City, in its sole and complete discretion, reserves the right to determine whether or not a shade canopy complies with this requirementshall be less than eight (8) feet above the sidewalk or extend outside the encroachment area. Awnings may extend up to four (4) feet from the building front or cover up to fifty (50) percent of the sidewalk width, whichever is less. A building permit shall be obtained prior to installation of an awning. No other objects, including but not limited to host/hostess podiums, bars or bar-height tables, light stands, signs, menu boards, service items or grills, are allowed.
Furnishings shall not display prominent logos or advertising. All furnishings shall be maintained in good condition at all times.
10. All furnishings and barriers shall be maintained free of appendages or conditions that pose a hazard to pedestrians or vehicles, and ensure visually impaired pedestrians can detect the objects safely. No appendage shall extend outside the encroachment area. No persons including customers shall place anything within or near the encroachment area that could pose a tripping hazard or interfere with accessibility, such as animals tied to signs or utility poles, bicycles, etc.
11. Approved furnishings and objects shall be removed from the encroachment area daily prior to close of business, but no later than 10:30 p.m., unless such furnishings are required to be bolted to the pavement or are approved to remain by the director of public works. 329
12. No entertainment, music, audio speakers, televisions or visual media of any type, whether amplified or unamplified, shall be located within the encroachment area.
13. The encroachment area, including surfacing, shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner, free of litter, food scraps, soiled dishes, and graffiti, at all times. The business shall actively monitor the area and promptly remove food serviceware, food scraps, litter and other trash. Trash receptacles shall be supplied in an easily accessible location on the subject property. Surfacing in and around the encroachment area shall be cleaned during the business day as needed and at the end of each business day. Cleaning and the use of water for cleaning the encroachment area shall comply with good housekeeping best management practices approved by the director of public works in accordance with Chapters 8.44 and 8.56. Under no circumstances shall debris or runoff be swept, washed, or blown into the sidewalk, gutter, storm drains or street. The director of publicpublicity Manager or designee works may issue the encroachment permit only after determining that the request complies with the standards and provisions of this section and any other requirements applicable to the use set forth in the Municipal Code.
14. Use of the encroachment area shall not adversely affect the welfare of the nearby residents or commercial establishments.
15. The final location and configuration of the encroachment area shall be subject to approval by the director of public worksCity Manager or designee, after determining that the request complies with the standards and provisions of this section and any other requirements applicable to the use set forth in the Municipal Code. The City Manager or designee =director may attach conditions to mitigate public health, safety and convenience impacts unique to the specific location.
The encroachment permit shall be valid for one (1) year and may be annually renewed.
16. Deviations from the standards set in this section may be allowed pursuant to a conditional use permit, granted in compliance with Chapter 17.40.
17. Specific Plan Area No. 11 (Upper Pier Avenue). Encroachments for commercial outdoor dining on sidewalks within the boundaries of the Specific Plan Area No. 11 zoning district (Upper Pier Avenue) are prohibited.
12.16.100 Commercial encroachments–Retail display areas.
Use of the Pier Plaza and other public rights-of-way for commercial outdoor retail display areas may be permitted subject to issuance of an encroachment permit in compliance with this chapter, and subject to the following conditions:
A. General Provisions. Every encroachment permit for commercial outdoor retail display areas shall ensure the following:
1. Provides for and maintains an area for passage of pedestrian traffic;
2. Does not inconvenience pedestrian traffic;
3. Conforms to all applicable health codes and this Code;
4. Applicant to pay all appropriate fees, including but not limited to rental fees; 330
5. Applicant to maintain and keep in force at all times a policy of liability insurance, naming the city as an additional insured in the amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000.00)Applicant is to maintain and keep in force at all times a policy of liability insurance, naming the city as an additional insured in the amount of no less one million dollars ($1,000,000) unless a higher amount is determined to be appropriate in the; and
6. Applicant to pay restorative costs, if applicable, in an amount to be determined by the director of public works, plus administrative costs.
B. Retail Uses. The encroachment area shall be managed, operated, and maintained as an integral part of the adjacent retail establishment.
1. For purposes of this section, retail establishment generally means a commercial establishment that sells or offers a product available on site in the adjacent retail establishment. The following types of businesses are not eligible for encroachment permits:
a. Businesses such as grocery, convenience, drug, and liquor stores, tobacco/smoke shops, secondhand stores, or adult businesses as defined in Section 17.04.060. b. Businesses where retail sales are secondary to the primary service function, such as beauty salons, personal services, or repair businesses, are not eligible for encroachment permits. c. Third party vendors, concessions, seasonal or other promoters, solicitors, or any other business, product or service promoted or offered by any entity or party other than the business owner to whom the encroachment permit was issued are not permitted within the encroachment area.
2. In addition, the following items or types of activities are not permitted within the encroachment area:
a. Food or beverages of any type, whether pre-packaged or not. b. Alcoholic beverages or tobacco or smoking products or paraphernalia of any type. c. Hazardous or controlled substances or goods, or goods or services that cannot be sold to minors with or without parental permission.
d. Adult paraphernalia of any kind.
e. Display of information or signs about a product or service is not allowed; rather, products available for sale at the business may be displayed.
f. Products or services shall not be demonstrated within the encroachment area. g. Rental or sale of any used merchandise.
C. Design and Operational Standards and Limitations. Commercial eEncroachments for commercial outdoor retail display areas shall comply with Section 12.16.060this Chapter and the following design and operational standards and limitations. Deviations from the standards set forth in this section may be allowed pursuant to an appeal to the City Council following a determination by the City Manager or designee. :
331
1. Commercial Eencroachment areas shall be available for and located adjacent to ground floor retail businesses. The encroachment area on Pier Plaza shall not exceed thirteen (13) feet in depth. The encroachment area on Loreto Plaza shall not exceed five (5) feet in depth. The encroachment area shall not exceed the width of the tenant space frontage. The encroachment area for any tenant space fronting Pier Plaza is restricted to the Pier Plaza frontage only.
2. Barriers around encroachment areas on Pier Plaza with a maximum height of forty-two (42) inches shall be provided; provided, that barriers shall not be installed or allowed on Loreto Plaza. Each perimeter barrier shall use the same design and materials on all sides. Barriers shall be attractive with a quality appearance, made of new materials such as wood and wrought iron. Barriers shall be of a permeable design that allows for visibility of merchandise through the barrier. Chain-link fencing or other low quality materials are not permitted. The elevation of the encroachment area shall not be altered. No modification to the surface of the right-of-way, such as resurfacing, texturing or borings, shall be made.
3. Awnings may extend over the entire depth (maximum thirteen (13) feet on Pier Plaza and five (5) feet on Loreto Plaza) and width of the encroachment area. Awnings must be retracted to cover not more than fifty (50) percent of the encroachment area depth when the business is closed or the encroachment area is not in use. No portion of an awning shall be less than eight (8) feet above the paved surface. A building permit must be obtained prior to installation of an awning. Awnings shall not provide signage and shall be maintained in good repair at all times.
4. Use of the encroachment area shall be limited to the hours of operation of the adjacent retail establishment, not to exceed 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.
5. Outdoor retail displays/furnishings placed within the commercial encroachment area shall be designed and limited as follows:
a. Tables or racks to display goods offered for sale may be placed in the encroachment area.
Other furnishings such as umbrellas, shade canopies, light stands, planters or signs are not allowed. All furnishings within each individual encroachment area shall be of uniform design and materials. All furnishings shall be of sturdy construction and maintained in good condition at all times. Plastic merchandise display furnishings are not permitted unless of quality nonplastic appearance. b. Tables, racks or display furnishings, and merchandise, shall not exceed five (5) feet in height; provided, that six (6) new suriboards not to exceed seven (7) feet in height may be displayed vertically in a rack positioned against the exterior wall. Racks or shelf units individually or placed end-to-end or in any configuration shall not exceed six (6) feet in length. c. Merchandise/displays shall be contained and adequately secured so that they do not become windborne, create litter or breakage, spill, drip, or create any health or safety impact. d. All merchandise within the encroachment area, including any attached to the building, must be removed daily when the business is closed.
e. ATM machines, food service units, vending machines, podiums or stands from which to conduct sales, and similar furnishings are not permitted within the encroachment area. 332
f. No entertainment, music, audio speakers, televisions, or visual media of any type, whether amplified or unamplified, shall be located within the encroachment area.
6. The layout of the encroachment area shall not impede ingress or egress, and shall be fully accessible to the physically disabled, as required by the California Building Code, Title 24, Disabled Access Standards, any other requirements of law, and the city fire chief.
7. A clear, continuous pedestrian path not less than five (5) feet in width, or more as deemed appropriate by the director of public works for pedestrian circulation outside of the encroachment area, shall be maintained at all times. As used herein, pedestrian path means a continuous obstruction-free sidewalk area between the outside boundary of the encroachment and any obstructions, including but not limited to street trees or planters, utility poles and street furniture.
8. All outdoor retail displays and allowed objects shall be maintained free of appendages or conditions that pose a hazard to pedestrians or vehicles, and ensure visually impaired pedestrians can detect the objects safely. No appendage shall extend outside the encroachment area. No persons including customers shall place anything within or near the encroachment area that could pose a tripping hazard or interfere with accessibility.
9. The encroachment area shall be maintained in a neat and clean manner, free of litter and graffiti, at all times. The business shall actively monitor the area and promptly remove litter and other trash.
10. Surfaces in and around the encroachment area shall be swept during the business day as needed and at the end of each business day. Cleaning shall comply with good housekeeping best management practices approved by the director of public works in accordance with Chapters 8.44 and 8.56. Under no circumstances shall debris or runoff be swept, washed, or blown into the sidewalk, gutter, storm drains, or street.
11. The director of public worksCity Manager or designee may issue the encroachment permit only after determining that the request complies with the standards and provisions of this section, any other requirements applicable to the use set forth in the Municipal Code, and as follows:
a. Information on the proposed retail uses and conduct of the use, the types of products to be displayed within the encroachment area, a dimensioned floor plan that clearly designates where each merchandise display will be located, and the design of barriers, awning and types of furnishings within the encroachment area shall be submitted with the encroachment permit application. Changes to the retail use, floor plan, furnishings, barriers and awnings must be submitted and approved in advance. Deviation from the approved plan may result in revocation of the encroachment permit.
b. Use of the encroachment area shall not adversely affect the welfare of the nearby residents or commercial establishments.
c. The type of retail uses that are allowed within the encroachment areas, the final location and configuration of the encroachment area, and the barriers, awnings and display furnishings within the encroachment area shall be subject to approval by the director of public works, after obtaining written concurrence of the community development department, and determining that the request complies with the standards and provisions of this section and any other requirements applicable to the use set forth in the Municipal Code. The director of public works may attach conditions to ensure the use and its design conform to these 333
standards and mitigate public health, safety, access and convenience impacts unique to the specific location.
d. An encroachment permit granted pursuant to this section shall preclude issuance of any additional encroachment permit pursuant to Section 12.16.090. e. The encroachment permit shall be valid for one (1) year and may be annually renewed. f. The encroachment permit is issued to the business owner, does not create a vested right, and shall be revocable by the city at any time without a showing of cause or prior notice by the city. Upon a finding of noncompliance with any condition of granting an encroachment permit, or upon revocation of an encroachment permit, the encroachment permit shall not be renewed and a new encroachment permit shall not be granted for a period of one (1) year. g. Upon termination of the encroachment permit, the permittee shall remove the barrier, return the pavement to its original condition, and remove all personal property and furnishings from the right-of-way.
12. Deviations from the standards set forth in this section may be allowed pursuant to a conditional use permit granted in compliance with Chapter 17.40.
12.16.110 Application procedure.
A. Filing. An application for an encroachment into a planned or existing public right-of-way shall be filed by the owner of the property, or when provided, the business owner with written approval from the property owne, forowner, for which the encroachment is sought or by an authorized representative of the owner. Such application shall be made to the director of public worksthe City Manager or designee and shall be on forms furnished by the department of public works.
B. Filing Fee. A uniform fee, established by council under separate resolution, shall be required upon the filing and investigation of the application for encroachment or transfer of an encroachment permit to defray administrative costs incurred by the city in processing the application. Such fee shall be nonrefundable and shall include the costs of recordation of the encroachment, if granted.
C. Investigation. An investigation shall be conducted by all departments of the city having an interest in, or jurisdiction over, the matter. Upon the receipt of an application pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, the director of public worksCity Manager or designee shall transmit the application to all affected departments for written reports of findings and recommendations. All such written reports shall be submitted to the director of public worksCity Manager or designee for consideration when making a decision on the application.
D. Director of Public Works Findings and Decision. The director of public worksCity Manager or designee shall make a written decision. Such decision shall recite the findings upon which the director bases his decision is based. If the decision is favorable to the granting of the encroachment, it shall set forth the conditions to be imposed. The conditions set forth in Sections 12.16.080 through 12.16.100this Chapter and any operational or design standards adopted via resolution y the City Council and/or City Manger or designee shall automatically apply to every permit unless otherwise noted.be attached to every permit approval.
334
E. Appeal. The Any decision of the director of public worksCity Manager or designee made pursuant to this Chapter, including a decision to revoke an encroachment permit, shall be final ten (10) days after mailing a copy of his decision to the applicant. Within said ten (10) day period, the applicant may appeal the decision of the director of public worksCity Manager or designee to the City Ccouncil to review. ; a denial of the application or any conditions attached to an approval other than those set forth in Section 12.16.080. Upon consideration of such appeal, the council may approve, modify, or disapprove the application for encroachment. The council may add, delete or modify the conditions attached to the encroachment permit. The action of the council shall be final.
F. Time Limit for Development. Any encroachment granted pursuant to the provisions of this chapter shall be developed and utilized within a period not to exceed six (6) months from and after the date of the granting of such encroachment, and, if not so developed and utilized, such encroachment automatically shall become null and void at the expiration of such six (6) month period.
G. Extension of Time. The permittee may apply in writing for one extension of time, not to exceed six (6) months, within which to develop and use such encroachment. The director of public works, after due consideration, shall either grant or deny the extension of time for such development and use.
H. Renewal. Encroachment permits shall be for a period not to exceed one (1) year and must be renewed annually. An application for renewal shall require the same findings as an original application except as otherwise noted and shall be submitted no later than sixty (60) days prior to the expiration of any existing encroachment permit. An encroachment permit is not a substitute for a building permit or a construction permit when either is otherwise required by this Code.
12.16.120 Maintenance of encroachment.
It shall be the responsibility of the adjacent property owner to maintain the encroachment in a condition satisfactory to the Ccity.
12.16.130 Nonconformance of encroachment.
No building permit shall be issued for construction of a new residential dwelling structure or addition thereto, exceeding four hundred (400) square feet in floor area, or for the remodel of an existing residential dwelling structure valued at more than fifty (50) percent of the replacement cost of the existing structure, until the adjacent city right-of-way is determined to be in accordance with city standards.
Encroachments in existence on May 15, 1996, which do not conform to the standards set forth in Section
12.16.080 may remain as they exist as of May 15, 1996, whether or not a valid encroachment permit is obtained from the city as long as the encroachment is not expanded, increased or intensified, until the earlier of either of the following events:
1. The city revokes the encroachment permit or requires removal of the encroachment for any reason, including construction of public improvements, which requires access to the encroachment area;
2. The primary structure on the property benefiting from the encroachment is remodeled or reconstructed at a cost which exceeds fifty (50) percent of the replacement cost of the existing structure.
335
In either of the above events, the encroachment shall be removed and any replacement encroachment shall be subject to receipt of an encroachment permit and shall conform to the requirements of Section
12.16.080this Chapter.
12.16.150 Revocation.
The director of public worksCity Manager or the council may revoke any encroachment permit for noncompliance with the conditions set forth in granting such encroachment or if it is determined that such permit is not in the public interest. A written notice shall be mailed to the permittee of such revocation.
Within ten days of mailing of such notice of revocation to the permittee, a written appeal of such action may be filed. Any such appeal shall be reviewed by the council, and its determination of the matter shall be final.
The encroachment permit does not create a vested right of any kind, and shall be revocable by the City Manager or City Council at any time without a showing of cause upon forty-eight (48) hours’ notice. A written notice shall be mailed to the permittee of such revocation. Within ten days of mailing of such notice of revocation to the permittee, a written appeal of such action may be filed. Any such appeal shall be reviewed by the council, and its determination of the matter shall be final.
Upon revocation of an encroachment permit for violation(s) of this Chapter, the encroachment permit shall not be renewed and a new encroachment permit shall not be granted for a period of one (1) year for the at-issue property and the applicant.
An encroachment permit shall expire and be of no further force and effect upon the removal of the primary building on the property.
12.16.160 Encroachment violation.
It is unlawful for any person to construct or maintain, or cause to be constructed or maintained, any encroachment in violation of the provisions of this chapter.
12.16.170 Violation–Misdemeanor.
Any person violating any of the provisions of this chapter shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof, shall be fined in an amount not exceeding five hundred dollars ($500.00) or be imprisoned in the county jail for a period not exceeding six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment.
Each day such violation is committed or permitted to continue shall constitute a separate offense and shall be punishable as such.
12.16.180 Violations of encroachment regulations–Additional remedies.
As an additional remedy, the construction or maintenance of any encroachment in violation of any provision of this chapter shall be deemed, and is declared to be, a public nuisance and may be subject to abatement summarily by a restraining order or injunction issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. In addition, violations of the provisions of this chapter are subject to the administrative penalty provisions of Chapter 1.10.
12.16.190 Fees.
All fees applicable pursuant to this chapter shall be set by resolution of the city council. 336
Exhibit B
337
OUTDOOR DINING PROGRAM
Supplemental Environmental Analysis
In addition to identifying the project’s exemption status under CEQA, City Staff and consultants reviewed the proposed project’s potential to result in adverse environmental effects, guided by the topics of the Initial Study checklist derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The Initial Study checklist is used by the City to determine the potential for environmental effects and the possible need for an Environmental Impact Report or other forms of CEQA documentation.
A. Direct physical Impacts
Impacts of proposed projects are of two types – construction related impacts and operational (post-construction) impacts. Most construction-related impacts are avoided if the project results in no, or minimal, subsurface disturbance of soils, grading or excavation, as is the case with the proposed Outdoor Dining Program. Because the project will not result in substantial subsurface disturbance, it will not significantly affect any of the following natural or cultural resources considered under CEQA:
▪Geology & Soils
▪Biological Resources
▪Hydrology & Water Quality
▪Wildlife
▪Agriculture & Forestry
▪Cultural Resources (including Historical & Paleontological Resources) ▪Tribal Resources
▪Mineral Resources
None of these resources will be impacted by the project as a result of either construction-related or operational impacts.
B. Impacts to Services, Facilities, Utilities and Housing A small group of potential impacts addressed under CEQA relate to adverse effects on public services (police and fire), utilities (water, waste water, storm drain), public facilities (parks, schools, libraries) and housing. Impacts to these resources result when a project introduces a substantial number of new residents into the local population, or a substantial number of additional employees, or otherwise creates an increased demand for these services. Although the outdoor dining project has the potential to result in a minor increase in seating capacity at local restaurants, a potential incremental increase in patronage will not substantially increase the demand for services, or in the capacity of public utilities or facilities, or result in a substantial increase in housing demand. Nor will the project directly impact public facilities or utilities physically, either during construction or as an effect of their long-term operation. Avoidance of any physical impact is assured through the project’s provision that the use does not obstruct access to public utilities 338
and infrastructure for emergency or maintenance purposes (See Project Characteristics).
C. Conflicts with Land Use Plans, Policies and Regulations Impact assessment under CEQA considers a project’s potential conflict with any land use plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding an environmental effect. The proposed project poses no such conflict and thus avoids this category of potential impact.
D. Transportation and Traffic
The evaluation of potential impacts related to transportation (including traffic) under CEQA is limited to four topics:
(1) Will the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? The lane configuration component of the project proposes to modify lanes in specific road segments. Rather than conflict with programs, plans, ordinances or policies addressing the circulation system, the project implements policies of Goal 3 of PLAN Hermosa’s Mobility Element, including Policy 3.1 Enhance public right-of-ways, Policy
3.6 Complete bicycle network, Policy 3.8 Encourage shared streets, and Policy 3.10 Require ADA standards. Consistent with its goal to improve safety for multimodal traffic, the project will result in the addition of approximately 7,000 linear feet of new Class II bike lanes available for electric and conventional bicycles and other wheeled devices, and new on-street ADA accessible parking spaces with associated signage and pavement markings.
(2) Will the project result in a significant increase in vehicle miles travelled? Based on screening thresholds recommended by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research1, a project that consists of less than 50,000 square feet of retail use (including retail restaurants) will not have a significant impact related to vehicle miles travelled (VMT) and is too small to warrant a technical analysis of VMT impacts. The proposed project has a maximum square footage of 9,500 square feet, well below the recommended screening threshold.
(3) Will the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature? The proposed lane reconfigurations are identical to those that have been put in place under the temporary outdoor dining program. They were designed by the City’s traffic engineer to avoid the creation of any hazardous conditions. 1 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), 2018, Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20180416-743_Technical_Advisory_4.16.18.pdf 339
(4) Will the project result in inadequate emergency access? The City’s traffic engineer has determined that the proposed lane reconfigurations with their reduction in vehicular travel lanes will not result in inadequate emergency access at any of the proposed locations, or along any designated emergency route.
Traffic Issues Raised by the Public
In addition to the questions posed by CEQA, the supplemental environmental analysis addressed comments received from the public. In correspondence received by City Staff in June 2022, a Hermosa Beach resident, speaking of the temporary outdoor dining program, asserted that “the Pier Avenue Lane Reduction Project has shifted more and more commercial and commuter traffic into residential neighborhoods and turned 27th street into a defacto truck-route serving the plaza area businesses.” To respond to this concern, City Staff and consultants performed a technical analysis focused on the question of traffic diverting from downtown as a result of the temporary lane reductions and impacting other areas in the city. The study investigated potential diversion effects throughout the city, but also specifically investigated the question of traffic diversion impacting the segment of 27th Street between Hermosa Avenue and Morningside Drive. The study also analyzed the potential for the proposed project to induce significant traffic diversion under future conditions with the project and regional background traffic considered.
The analysis examined trip distribution along primary and secondary routes for trips travelling to or from Downtown and found that 27th Street experienced a 1% decrease in distribution of downtown trips from 2019 (prior to lane reconfigurations) to 2021 (with lane reconfigurations in place). Total vehicular activity on 27th Street decreased by approximately 15% from Summer 2019 to Summer 2021. These observations lead the traffic engineers to conclude that lane reductions are not contributing significant traffic diversions onto secondary routes and 27th Street, and are not likely to do so as a result of the proposed project. The full technical analysis is provided in Appendix A (Fehr & Peers, January 2023).
E. Noise Impacts
A technical noise study was conducted to identify the potential for the project to result in significant impacts from roadway noise (increased traffic) or from noises related to outdoor dining. The study identified future noise levels on nine roadway segments, eight of which were selected because they serve the downtown area where most of the areas proposed to be eligible for outdoor dining are located. The study found that roadway noise with the maximum allowable outdoor dining (worst case) and lane reconfigurations in place, and with future background regional traffic conditions in place, would increase 0.1 dBA CNEL or less, at a distance of 30 feet from the roadway centerline, when compared to the baseline conditions of 2019 when outdoor dining and lane reconfigurations were not in place. In the case of the ninth roadway segment, 27th 340
Street west of Morningside Drive, the study found that roadway noise will decrease by an estimated 0.0 to 0.1 dBA, compared to 2019 baseline conditions.
Potential noise sources associated with outdoor dining activities include noise generated by outdoor restaurant patrons conversing, potentially at high volumes and/or in large groups. The study identified the potential noise level under extreme worst case conditions (40 persons dining together and all talking at once) and determined that the City’s exterior noise standard of 65 CNEL would not be exceeded under those conditions at a distance of 20 feet. City Staff has determined that no proposed dining areas are within 20 feet of a residence or residential property line.
The proposed project explicitly prohibits amplified or live music from being audible beyond outdoor dining areas. Televisions may be allowed, but only with audio turned off. These restrictions ensure the project will not adversely impact the acoustic environment.
The technical noise study (MD Acoustics, April 2023a) is provided in Appendix A.
F. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy Impacts A technical assessment was performed to evaluate the project’s potential to result in significant impacts related to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption. The study found that the project’s air quality emissions are well below the AQMD’s significance thresholds (7% or less of threshold levels for criteria pollutants) and that the project is well below screening thresholds for significant contributions to greenhouse gas emissions. The project was found not to have impacts related to excessive or wasteful energy consumption. The technical study (MD Acoustics, April 2023b) is provided in Appendix A.
G. Visual Resources
Neither the proposed lane reconfigurations nor the dining decks and their related features (planters, umbrellas, heaters, podiums, tables and chairs, etc.) are large enough in scale individually or cumulatively to substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views, or significantly obstruct scenic vistas from any of the prominent public viewpoints identified in PLAN Hermosa. Overhead objects (poles, posts, canopies, signs, etc.) are restricted in height to 8 feet above ground level.
H. Cumulative Impacts
For all categories of potential environmental effects considered by CEQA, the proposed Outdoor Dining Project has no environmental effect or, in some cases, a very minimal effect that is well below thresholds of a significant impact. Based on this environmental assessment and the supporting technical studies prepared to evaluate the project’s impacts, there is sufficient substantial evidence to support the statement that the project would not trigger significance thresholds even if it were 2 to 3 times greater in 341
magnitude (square footage) than proposed. Its contribution to cumulative potential cumulative effects on the environment is non-substantial and not significant.
I. Summary
In summary, the proposed Outdoor Dining Program does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to decrease below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory. Nor will the project jeopardize long-term environmental goals in favor of short-term environmental goals, being consistent with the long-term goals established by the City as reflected in the General Plan.
The project as proposed and with implementation of all standard conditions of approval and compliance with proposed City ordinances, resolutions and guidelines will have no significant impacts to humans, directly or indirectly. Nor does the project have impacts which are cumulatively considerable.
* * *
In defining activities that are categorically exempt, CEQA does not assert that activities conforming to the exemption categories of Section 15300 will have no impacts. Rather, CEQA’s categorical exemption provision establishes as a matter of law that impacts of categorically exempt projects are effectively de minimus and the Secretary for Resources has found that they do not have a significant effect on the environment. As such they require no further analysis, documentation or disclosure.
The supplemental analysis performed for this project is above and beyond the requirements of CEQA, especially for a project of this scale and which causes no substantial disturbance to the physical environment. It was conducted by Staff to facilitate a clear and transparent understanding of the CEQA determination for the project, and to address questions raised in public testimony related to potential effects of the City’s temporary outdoor dining program and the CEQA process that would accompany the proposed permanent outdoor dining project. 342
Appendix A
343
344
345
346
347
100 Oceangate | Suite 1425 | Long Beach, CA 90802 | (562) 294-5848 | www.fehrandpeers.com Memorandum
Date: February 21, 2023
To: Douglas Krauss, Environmental Programs Manager– City of Hermosa Beach Ed Almanza, Ed Almanza & Associates
From: Sean Reseigh, Senior Transportation Planner, and Michael Kennedy, Principal – Fehr & Peers
Subject: CEQA Transportation Assessment for City of Hermosa Beach Outdoor Dining Program
LB22-0029.02
Introduction
This memorandum documents Fehr & Peers’ evaluation of the potential for significant transportation impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) associated with the City of Hermosa Beach’s proposed outdoor dining program in Downtown Hermosa Beach.
Project Description
The City of Hermosa Beach’s proposed outdoor dining program would allow for permanent outdoor dining primarily along Pier and Hermosa Avenues (“proposed Project”). Temporary pilot outdoor dining was implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under the proposed permanent outdoor dining program, a cap of 9,500 square feet Citywide of outdoor dining use would be implemented. These uses would be associated with existing restaurants and incidental to their existing operations. The location of potential outdoor dining is expected to primarily continue to be in Downtown Hermosa Beach, where 87% of the commercially zones parcels are located. However, up to 13% of the total commercially zoned parcels are located outside of Downtown Hermosa Beach, so a limited amount of outdoor dining could be located in other parts of the City. Due to the concentration of outdoor dining expected in Downtown relative to other parts of the City, this impact analysis is focused on the evaluation of travel to/from Downtown, as it constitutes the highest potential for significant transportation impacts associated with outdoor dining. Outside of Downtown, any outdoor dining is expected to be very limited in nature, and therefore, unlikely to have any significant transportation impacts under CEQA. Outdoor dining is expected to primarily continue to occur in converted on-street parking spaces. 348
Douglas Krauss & Ed Almanza
February 21, 2023
CEQA Transportation Evaluation
Impact Criteria
Pursuant to Appendix G of the CEQA guidelines, impacts to transportation would be considered significant if the proposed Project were found to:
1. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy (PPOP) addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.
2. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b). CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b) includes the criteria for analyzing transportation impacts for land use projects, as follows: Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact.
3. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment).
4. Result in inadequate emergency access.
Impact Analysis
The following details the qualitative evaluation of the proposed Project under these impact criteria.
Criterion 1: Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy The proposed Project is not expected to conflict with any local or regional programs, plans, ordinances or policies when adopted by the City Council of the City of Hermosa Beach.
Criterion 2: Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b) The ultimate level of vehicle miles travelled generated by the proposed Project will depend on the types of restaurant uses that apply for and are granted approval for outdoor dining, as well as whether or not they are locally or regionally serving uses, which would affect mode choice (how many drive, take transit, bike or walk to a use), as well as the average vehicle trip length.
Guidance from the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) in the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA1 provides recommended screening thresholds to determine whether VMT analysis would be required, based on project characteristics, including:
• Locally serving retail
• Small project
• Transit Priority Area (TPA)
1 https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20180416-743_Technical_Advisory_4.16.18.pdf. Accessed 1.6.2023. 349
Douglas Krauss & Ed Almanza
February 21, 2023
• Low VMT Area
The proposed Project is expected to qualify for the locally serving retail screening criteria as discussed below. It is not expected to qualify for small project or TPA screening, and low VMT area screening applies only to office and residential uses.
As recommended by OPR, 50,000 square feet of retail uses can be considered locally serving.
Locally serving retail may include specialty retail, shopping center, grocery store, pharmacy, financial services/banks, fitness center or health club, restaurant, and café. According to OPR’s Guidance, the proposed Project is considered locally serving and presumed to have a less than significant impact related to VMT, and no further quantitative VMT analysis is required.
Criterion 3: Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature The proposed Project will not alter street design, it will simply allow for the continuation of the temporary outdoor dining program on a permanent basis. Consistent with the temporary outdoor dining program, this will occur primarily within on-street parking stalls, which will be protected by jersey barriers, or other traffic safety devices subject to the approval of the City’s Traffic Engineer to ensure safe separation between outdoor diners and vehicles on City roadways. Outdoor dining areas will not impede on sight distance for motorists and pedestrians, as protective jersey barriers are lower than the height of drivers and pedestrian lines of sight. Therefore, the proposed Project’s impact under this criterion will be less than significant.
Criterion 4: Result in inadequate emergency access.
The proposed project will not alter street design or parcel access that could affect emergency access. It will solely modify existing on-street parking stalls to allow for outdoor dining, which will have no effect on access. Additionally, the proposed Project will add negligible traffic volumes to roadways in the City as further detailed below. Therefore, the proposed Project’s impact under this criterion will be less than significant.
Proposed Project Trip Generation
While a quantitative VMT impact analysis is not needed because the proposed Project can be screened as locally serving, to support CEQA impact analyses associated with air quality and noise impact areas, Fehr & Peers prepared trip generation estimates for the proposed Project. The ultimate trip generation will vary based on the types of restaurant uses that apply for and are approved for permanent outdoor dining under this program. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, was used to estimate daily and AM and PM peak hour trips reflecting the different restaurant uses that are present in Downtown Hermosa Beach. They include:
• Fast Casual Restaurant (example: Chipotle on Pacific Coast Highway) 350
Douglas Krauss & Ed Almanza
February 21, 2023
• Fine Dining Restaurant (example: Zane’s on Pier Avenue) • High Turnover- Sit Down Restaurant (example: Fritto Misto on Pier Avenue • Drinking Place (example: Hennessey’s Tavern on Pier Plaza) Table 1 presents the daily and AM and PM peak hour estimates for the proposed Project.
Scenario 1 presents the worst-case trip generation estimates for the proposed Project, assuming that 100% of the 9,500 square feet of outdoor dining are associated with the High-Turnover Sit Down Restaurant trip rate, which has the highest daily trip rate compared with the other restaurant categories. Daily trip generation estimates for this scenario are 1,072 trips, with 96 trips in the AM peak hour, and 91 trips in the PM peak hour. In addition to using the highest trip rate, this analysis likely also overestimates the number of trips because it does not account for potential walk/bike access to Downtown Hermosa Beach, or for visitors to the coastal zone also choosing to patronize a local restaurant, which would both result in reduced trip generation compared with standard ITE rates. Additionally, because outdoor dining uses will be incidental to existing indoor restaurants, they are unlikely to generate vehicle trips at the level of trip generation accounted for in ITE rates. However, the numbers are presented here for a potential worst-case trip generation estimate.
Scenario 2 presents a more realistic scenario with the variety of restaurant use types in Hermosa Beach. For this scenario, the spit is assumed to be equal across the four categories. As with Scenario 1, it is still expected to be an overestimation of potential vehicle trips, as it does not account for walk/bike access and internalization of trips from visitors to the coastal zone. Daily trip generation for this scenario is 749 trips, with 30 AM peak hour and 102 PM peak hour trips.
Table 1: Proposed Project Daily AM and PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Estimates [a] Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation 11th Edition, analysis by Fehr & Peers, 2023, StreetLight Data, 2022.
Proposed Project Trip Assignment
In order to estimate the worst-case trip generation estimates on roadways used to access Downtown Hermosa Beach, Fehr & Peers used StreetLight Data, a cell phone based origin destination data set to evaluate the share of total travel to/from Downtown Hermosa Beach on various roadways. Due to changes in transportation conditions over the COVID-19 pandemic, data 351
Douglas Krauss & Ed Almanza
February 21, 2023
for Summer 2019, 2020 and 2021 were analyzed to determine if there were varying travel patterns across those years. Table 2 presents the percentage share of total travel to/from Downtown Hermosa Beach at nine study locations on 27th Street, 8th Street, Hermosa Avenue, Manhattan Avenue, Monterey Boulevard, and Pier Avenue. While the table presents the minor variations in the StreetLight Data share of travel to/from Downtown Hermosa Beach over the three years analyzed, Summer 2021 is considered the most typical, as most businesses had reopened from the temporary closures associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, Summer 2021 distribution was used to estimate trips on the study locations.
Table 3 details the worst-case daily proposed Project-only trips expected at each of these study locations. They were estimated by applying the 2021 StreetLight Data trip distribution percentage to daily trip generation for Scenarios 1 and 2. Pier and Hermosa Avenues are expected to carry the vast majority of trips to/from Downtown Hermosa Beach associated with outdoor dining. The other corridors will experience negligible increases in trips per day. To be conservative 100% of the outdoor dining is assumed to occur in Downtown Hermosa Beach in order to estimate the worst-case traffic volume increases that could occur on roadway segments in the City.
Table 2: StreetLight Data Daily Distribution of Travel to/from Downtown Hermosa Beach
Study Corridor Location
Summer 2019
Daily % of Total
Travel
Summer 2020
Daily % of Total
Travel
Summer 2021
Daily % of Total
Travel
1. 27th Street (west of Morningside) 7.0% 5.9% 6.2%
2. 8th Street (west of Valley 7.4% 7.2% 6.0%
3. Hermosa Avenue (north of 16th) 17.2% 16.9% 17.1%
4. Hermosa Avenue (north of 8th) 21.7% 22.7% 22.6%
5. Manhattan Avenue (north of Pier) 2.9% 1.6% 2.0%
6. Manhattan Avenue (south of Pier) 2.5% 2.0% 2.1%
7. Monterey Boulevard (north of Pier) 2.2% 2.0% 1.6%
8. Monterey Boulevard (south of Pier) 3.0% 2.3% 2.5%
9. Pier Avenue (west of Valley) 36.1% 39.4% 39.9%
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023, StreetLight Data, 2022.
352
Douglas Krauss & Ed Almanza
February 21, 2023
Table 3: Proposed Project Daily Trips on Corridors Serving Downtown Hermosa Beach
Study Corridor Location Scenario 1 Daily
Project Only Trips
Scenario 2 Daily
Project Only Trips
1. 27th Street (west of Morningside) 64 44
2. 8th Street (west of Valley 61 42
3. Hermosa Avenue (north of 16th) 174 122
4. Hermosa Avenue (north of 8th) 230 161
5. Manhattan Avenue (north of Pier) 21 15
6. Manhattan Avenue (south of Pier) 22 15
7. Monterey Boulevard (north of Pier) 16 11
8. Monterey Boulevard (south of Pier) 25 18
9. Pier Avenue (west of Valley) 405 283
Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023
Baseline + Project ADT Volumes
In order to estimate pre-project (2019) pre-pandemic baseline conditions, StreetLight Data were used to estimate average daily traffic (ADT) for 2019, as no in-field collected traffic counts were available for pre-pandemic conditions.
StreetLight Data applies proprietary machine-learning algorithms to measure travel patterns and makes them available on-demand via StreetLight InSight®, the world’s first SaaS platform for mobility. StreetLight provides powerful analyses for a wide variety of transportation studies including volume, counts, Origin-Destination (O-D) and more. StreetLight algorithmically transforms trillions of location data points into contextualized, aggregated, and normalized travel pattern data to deliver unique insights into how vehicles, bikes, pedestrians, and bus and rail passengers move on virtually every road and Census Block. StreetLight Data collects all its transportation data as Location Based Services (LBS) data which are services based on the location of a mobile device. They obtain “low fidelity” cell phone data scrubbed of all Personally Identifiable Information (PII), and pair it with data with “high fidelity” data from GPS devices.
StreetLight Data were used to estimate ADT for summer (July & August) weekend days in 2019.
ADT on the study segments are presented in Table 4, which also includes proposed Project trips, and the expected percent change in daily traffic volumes associated with the proposed Project. As shown in the table, under Scenario 1, the maximum change in daily segment traffic volumes change is expected to be approximately 2.3%. Under Scenario 2, the maximum change is approximately 1.6%.
353
Douglas Krauss & Ed Almanza
February 21, 2023
Cumulative Conditions
In order to assess the potential for increased traffic volumes under cumulative conditions, Fehr & Peers reviewed the traffic analysis conducted for the PLAN Hermosa environmental impact report.
Based on analysis from the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) forecasting model, as well as the modelling conducting for PLAN Hermosa, regional traffic volumes are not expected to increase, as land use patterns change to focus more on urban infill housing, as the regional transportation network is developed, and as transportation demand management (TDM) measures become more commonplace. As noted in the PLAN Hermosa Drafty EIR, “PLAN Hermosa would guide future development and reuse projects in the city in a manner that would not increase overall demand for travel within Hermosa Beach… Regional population and employment growth will not result in increased vehicular travel demand.”2 Therefore, the Baseline plus Project traffic volumes contained in this memorandum represent the expected worst-case scenario.
While the PLAN Hermosa Draft EIR noted that vehicular travel demand is expected to reduce Citywide, due to some localized travel pattern changes, the PLAN Hermosa EIR projected an increase in peak hour traffic volumes at the intersection of Manhattan Avenue & 27th Street.
However, PLAN Hermosa would reduce traffic volumes at that location compared to the Future without PLAN Hermosa scenario. Appendix G to the PLAN Hermosa Draft EIR includes peak hour traffic volume changes at study intersections. The primary change to traffic volumes forecast in the PLAN Hermosa Draft EIR were on the eastbound left movement, so most of the increased volumes would not travel on 27th Street, and instead would continue northbound on Manhattan Avenue. Therefore, even under Cumulative conditions, traffic volumes on 27th Street west of Morningside Drive are not expected to substantially increase.
While not needed for CEQA transportation impact analysis, the volumes provided in this memorandum serve as input data for the air quality and noise impact analysis of the proposed Project.
2 PLAN Hermosa Draft Environmental Impact Report, City of Hermosa Beach, 2016. Page 4.14-45. Accessed 2/20/23 from https://www.hermosabeach.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/8538/637001018228830000 354
Douglas Krauss & Ed Almanza
February 21, 2023
Table 4: Baseline plus Proposed Project Daily Trips on Corridors Serving Downtown Hermosa Beach Study Corridor Location
Baseline
(2019)
ADT
Scenario 1
Project Only
ADT
Scenario 2
Project Only
ADT
Baseline +
Scenario 1
ADT
Baseline +
Scenario 2
ADT
Scenario 1
Delta (%)
Scenario 2
Delta (%)
1. 27th Street (west of Morningside) 8,081 64 44 8,145 8,125 0.8% 0.5%
2. 8th Street (west of Valley) 6,256 61 42 6,317 6,298 1.0% 0.7%
3. Hermosa Avenue (north of 16th) 14,466 174 122 14,640 14,588 1.2% 0.8%
4. Hermosa Avenue (north of 8th) 15,003 230 161 15,233 15,164 1.5% 1.1%
5. Manhattan Avenue (north of Pier) 2,334 21 15 2,355 2,349 0.9% 0.6%
6. Manhattan Avenue (south of Pier) 2,121 22 15 2,143 2,136 1.0% 0.7%
7. Monterey Boulevard (north of Pier) 3,839 16 11 3,855 3,850 0.4% 0.3%
8. Monterey Boulevard (south of Pier) 4,014 25 18 4,039 4,032 0.6% 0.4%
9. Pier Avenue (west of Valley) 17,563 405 283 17,968 17,846 2.3% 1.6% Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023
355
AZ Office CA Office
4960 S. Gilbert Road, Ste 1-461 1197 Los Angeles Avenue, Ste C-256 Chandler, AZ 85249 Simi Valley, CA 93065
p. (602) 774-1950 p. (805) 426-4477
www.mdacoustics.com
MD Acoustics, LLC 1
JN: 0AQ etc. 4.12.23 final
April 3, 2023
To: Ed Almanza & Associates
From: MD Acoustics, LLLC
Subject: Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining Project –Focused Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Evaluation, City of Hermosa Beach, CA MD Acoustics, LLC (MD) has completed a focused Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Evaluation for the proposed Hermosa Beach Downtown Post-Pilot Installation Vehicular Changes Project located in the City of Hermosa Beach, California. The purpose of this focused study is to evaluate the air quality and greenhouse gas operational emissions as well as energy consumption of the proposed project, and to compare projected emissions and energy consumption to the relevant thresholds of significance. A list of definitions and terminology is located in Appendix A.
1.0 Project Description
The project proposes that certain commercial establishments may provide outdoor dining in public rightof-way areas (including on-street parking areas and sidewalks) in the downtown area of Hermosa Beach.
The project would reconfigure travel lanes to accommodate areas where outdoor dining would be allowed and to provide lanes for bicycles and other zero-emission modes of transportation.
2.0 AQ/GHG Thresholds of Significance
2.1 AQ Significance Thresholds
Project emissions were compared to both regional and localized SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance for operational emissions1,2.
2.2 GHG Significance Thresholds
The project emissions were compared to the SCAQMD’s 3,000 MTCO2e draft threshold for all land uses3.
3.0 Evaluation Procedure/Methodology
MD utilized the latest version of CalEEMod (2022.1) to calculate the operational emissions from the project site4. The project was modeled to be operational in 2023. Regional emissions were based on an increase of 1,018 trips per day, based on the maximum scenario generated by the traffic analysis from Fehr & Peers, with a ten-mile trip length for a conservative estimate, and localized emissions were based on a two-mile trip length to approximately cover the project area twice. As stated by Fehr & Peers, the project is not anticipated to increase traffic regionally, and the estimates used in this analysis are a worstcase scenario. CalEEmod defaults were utilized. Assumptions and output calculations are provided in Appendix C.
1 https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/ceqa/handbook/scaqmd-air-quality-significance-thresholds.pdf 2 https://www.aqmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/localized-significance-thresholds 3 https://www.aqmd.gov/home/regulations/ceqa/air-quality-analysis-handbook/ghg-significance-thresholds/page/2 4 https://www.caleemod.com/
356
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining Project
Focused Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Evaluation City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 2
JN: AQ etc. 4.12.23 final
4.0 Local Ambient Conditions
The project site is located in South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) in the Southwest Coastal Los Angeles Source Receptor Area (SRA) 3
5 . The nearest air monitoring station to the project site is the Los AngelesWestchester Parkway Monitoring Station. Historical air quality data for the vicinity can be found both at CARB and SCAQMD’s websites
6,7
. Temperature and historical precipitation data can be found at the Western Regional Climate Center (WRCC)
8 .
5.0 Findings
The following outlines the emissions for the project:
5.1 Regional Operational Emissions
The operating emissions were based on year 2023, which is the anticipated opening year for the project.
The number of trips was based on the transportation assessment from Fehr & Peers9 and a trip length of 10 miles.
The summer and winter emissions created by the proposed project’s long-term operations were calculated and the highest emissions from either summer or winter are summarized in Table 1. The data in Table 1 shows that the operational emissions for the project would not exceed the SCAQMD’s regional significance thresholds.
Table 1: Regional Significance – Operational Emissions (lbs/day) Activity
Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)1
VOC NOx CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Mobile Sources2 4.00 3.47 38.60 0.08 2.89 0.56
SCAQMD Thresholds 55 55 550 150 150 55
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No No No
Notes:
1 Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1
2 Mobile sources consist of emissions from vehicles and road dust.
5.2 Localized Operational Emissions
Table 2 indicates that the local operational emission would not exceed the LST thresholds at the nearest sensitive receptors, located adjacent to the project. This was based on trip lengths of two miles and localized significance thresholds for a 25-meter distance to the nearest sensitive receptor and a one-acre project size, which is a highly conservative comparison as the project is spread over more than 100 acres across Hermosa Beach. Therefore, the project will not result in significant Localized Operational emissions.
5 https://www.aqmd.gov/docs/default-source/default-document-library/map-of-monitoring-areas.pdf?sfvrsn=6 6 https://www.aqmd.gov/home/library/air-quality-data-studies/historical-data-by-year 7 https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/
8 https://www.wrcc.dri.edu/summary/Climsmsca.html
9 Fehr & Peers. CEQA Transportation Assessment for City of Hermosa Beach Outdoor Dining Program. February 21, 2023. 357
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining Project
Focused Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Evaluation City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 3
JN: AQ etc. 4.12.23 final
Table 2: Localized Significance –Operational Emissions (lbs/day) Phase
On-Site Pollutant Emissions (pounds/day)1
NOx CO PM10 PM2.5
Mobile Sources2 0.69 7.72 0.58 0.11
SCAQMD Threshold2 91 664 1 1
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
Notes:
1 Source: Calculated from CalEEMod and SCAQMD’s Mass Rate Look-up Tables for one-acre, to be conservative, in Southwest Coastal Los Angeles Source Receptor Area (SRA 3).
2 The nearest sensitive receptors are the residential uses located along the multiple routes being studied; therefore, the 25-meter threshold was utilized.
5.3 GHG Emissions
Table 3 outlines the construction and operational GHG emissions for the project. The project’s emissions are below (1,386 MTCO2e) the SCAQMD’s draft screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e for all land uses and; therefore, the impact is less than significant.
Table 3: Opening Year Project-Related Greenhouse Gas Emissions Category
Greenhouse Gas Emissions (Metric Tons/Year)1
Bio-CO2 NonBio-CO2 CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Mobile Sources4 0.00 1,365.00 1,365.00 0.07 0.06 1,386.00 SCAQMD Draft Screening Threshold 3,000
Exceeds Threshold? No
Notes:
1 Source: CalEEMod Version 2022.1
4 Mobile sources consist of GHG emissions from vehicles.
5.4 CO Hotspot Analysis
CO is the pollutant of major concern along roadways because the most notable source of CO is motor vehicles. For this reason, CO concentrations are usually indicative of the local air quality generated by a roadway network and are used as an indicator of potential local air quality impacts. Local air quality impacts can be assessed by comparing future without and with project CO levels to the State and Federal CO standards which can be found from the CARB website.
10 To determine if the proposed project could cause emission levels in excess of the CO standards, a sensitivity analysis is typically conducted to determine the potential for CO “hot spots” at a number of intersections in the general project vicinity. Because of reduced speeds and vehicle queuing, “hot spots” potentially can occur at high traffic volume intersections with a Level of Service E or worse.
Micro-scale air quality emissions have traditionally been analyzed in environmental documents where the air basin was a non-attainment area for CO. However, the SCAQMD has demonstrated in the CO attainment redesignation request to EPA that there are no “hot spots” anywhere in the air basin, even at intersections with much higher volumes, much worse congestion, and much higher background CO levels
10 https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/carbon-monoxide-and-health 358
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining Project
Focused Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Evaluation City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 4
JN: AQ etc. 4.12.23 final
than anywhere in Riverside County. If the worst-case intersections in the air basin have no “hot spot” potential, any local impacts will be below thresholds.
The traffic impact analysis showed that the project would generate a maximum total of 1,018 trips per day, and the maximum daily trips in a single corridor would be 17,968 along Pier Avenue (west of Valley).
The 1992 Federal Attainment Plan for Carbon Monoxide (1992 CO Plan) showed that an intersection which has a daily traffic volume of approximately 100,000 vehicles per day would not violate the CO standard. The volume of traffic at project buildout would be well below 100,000 vehicles and below the necessary volume to even get close to causing a violation of the CO standard. Therefore, no CO “hot spot” modeling was performed and no significant long-term air quality impact is anticipated to local air quality with the on-going use of the proposed project.
5.5 Cumulative Regional Air Quality Impacts
Cumulative projects include local development as well as general growth within the project area.
However, as with most development, the greatest source of emissions is from mobile sources, which travel well out of the local area. Therefore, from an air quality standpoint, the cumulative analysis would extend beyond any local projects and when wind patterns are considered, would cover an even larger area. Accordingly, the cumulative analysis for the project’s air quality must be generic by nature.
The project area is out of attainment for both ozone and PM10 particulate matter. Construction and operation of cumulative projects will further degrade the local air quality, as well as the air quality of the South Coast Air Basin. The greatest cumulative impact on the quality of regional air cell will be the incremental addition of pollutants mainly from increased traffic from residential, commercial, and industrial development and the use of heavy equipment and trucks associated with the construction of these projects. However, in accordance with the SCAQMD methodology, projects that do not exceed the SCAQMD criteria or can be mitigated to less than criteria levels are not significant and do not add to the overall cumulative impact. Therefore, as the project does not exceed any of the thresholds of significance, the project is considered less than significant. Additionally, per the project traffic analysis from Fehr & Peers (and the PLAN Hermosa EIR), cumulative traffic volumes are expected to decrease regionally, in addition to a long-term decease in local traffic volumes as a result of implementation of the City’s General Plan.
5.6 Consistency with Applicable Plans
Consistency with AB32 Scoping Plan
The ARB Board approved a Climate Change Scoping Plan in December 2008. The Scoping Plan outlines the State’s strategy to achieve the 2020 greenhouse gas emissions limit. The Scoping Plan “proposes a comprehensive set of actions designed to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions in California, improve our environment, reduce our dependence on oil, diversify our energy sources, save energy, create new jobs, and enhance public health” (California Air Resources Board 2008). The measures in the Scoping Plan have been in place since 2012.
359
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining Project
Focused Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Evaluation City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 5
JN: AQ etc. 4.12.23 final
This Scoping Plan calls for an “ambitious but achievable” reduction in California’s greenhouse gas emissions, cutting approximately 30 percent from business-as-usual emission levels projected for 2020, or about 10 percent from today’s levels. In May 2014, the CARB released its First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan (CARB 2014). This Update identifies the next steps for California’s leadership on climate change. In November 2017, the CARB released the 2017 Scoping Plan. This Scoping Plan incorporates, coordinates, and leverages many existing and ongoing efforts and identifies new policies and actions to accomplish the State’s climate goals, and includes a description of a suite of specific actions to meet the State’s 2030 GHG limit. The 2017 Scoping Plan builds upon the successful framework established by the Initial Scoping Plan and First Update, while identifying new, technologically feasible, and cost-effective strategies to ensure that California meets its GHG reduction targets.
As the project was found to not increase traffic regionally by Fehr & Peers in the project traffic assessment, the project is consistent with the Scoping Plan.
Consistency with SCAG’s 2020-2045 RTP/SCS
At the regional level, the 2020-2045 RTP and Sustainable Communities Strategy represent the region’s Climate Action Plan that defines strategies for reducing GHGs. In order to assess the project’s potential to conflict with the RTP/SCS, this section analyzes the project’s land use profile for consistency with those in the Sustainable Communities Strategy. Generally, projects are considered consistent with the provisions and general policies of applicable City and regional land use plans and regulations, such as SCAG’s Sustainable Communities Strategy, if they are compatible with the general intent of the plans and would not preclude the attainment of their primary goals.
Table 4 demonstrates the project’s consistency with the Actions and Strategies set forth in the 2020- 2045 RTP/SCS. As shown in Table 4, the project would be consistent with the GHG reduction related actions and strategies contained in the 2020-2045 RTP/SCS.0 Table 4: Project Consistency with SCAG 2020-2045 RTP/SCS1 Actions and Strategies
Responsible
Party(ies) Consistency Analysis
Land Use Strategies
Reflect the changing population and demands,
including combating gentrification and displacement,
by increasing housing supply at a variety of
affordability levels.
Local
Jurisdictions
Consistent. The project is an expansion of
outdoor dining space for local restaurants and
will not impact housing.
Focus new growth around transit. Local
Jurisdictions
Consistent. The project is an expansion of
outdoor dining space for local restaurants that
would be consistent with the 2020 RTP/SCS
focus on growing near transit facilities.
Plan for growth around livable corridors, including
growth on the Livable Corridors network.
SCAG, Local
Jurisdictions
Consistent. The project is an expansion of
outdoor dining space for local restaurants that
would be consistent with the 2020 RTP/SCS
focus on growing along the 2,980 miles of Livable
Corridors in the region.
Provide more options for short trips through
Neighborhood Mobility Areas and Complete
SCAG, Local
Jurisdictions
Consistent. The proposed project would help
further jobs/housing balance objectives. The
360
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining Project
Focused Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Evaluation City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 6
JN: AQ etc. 4.12.23 final
Actions and Strategies
Responsible
Party(ies) Consistency Analysis
Communities. proposed project is also consistent with the Complete Communities initiative that focuses on
creation of mixed-use districts in growth areas.
Support local sustainability planning, including
developing sustainable planning and design policies,
sustainable zoning codes, and Climate Action Plans.
Local
Jurisdictions
Not Applicable. This strategy calls on local
governments to adopt General Plan updates,
zoning codes, and Climate Action Plans to further
sustainable communities. The proposed project
would not interfere with such policymaking and
would be consistent with those policy objectives.
Protect natural and farmlands, including developing
conservation strategies.
SCAG, Local
Jurisdictions
Consistent. The project is an expansion to
outdoor dining for local restaurants that would
help reduce demand for growth in urbanizing
areas that threaten green fields and open
spaces.
Transportation Strategies
Preserve our existing transportation system.
SCAG, County
Transportation
Commissions,
Local
Jurisdictions
Not Applicable. This strategy calls on investing in
the maintenance of our existing transportation
system. The proposed project would not
interfere with such policymaking.
Manage congestion through programs like the
Congestion Management Program, Transportation
Demand Management, and Transportation Systems
Management strategies.
County
Transportation
Commissions,
Local
Jurisdictions
Consistent. The proposed project is an expansion
to outdoor dining for local restaurants that will
minimize congestion impacts on the region
because of its proximity to public transit and
general density of population and jobs.
Promote safety and security in the transportation
system.
SCAG, County
Transportation
Commissions,
Local
Jurisdictions
Not Applicable. This strategy aims to improve
the safety of the transportation system and
protect users from security threats. The
proposed project would not interfere with such
policymaking.
Complete our transit, passenger rail, active
transportation, highways and arterials, regional
express lanes goods movement, and airport ground
transportation systems.
SCAG, County
Transportation
Commissions,
Local
Jurisdictions
Not Applicable. This strategy calls for
transportation planning partners to implement
major capital and operational projects that are
designed to address regional growth. The
proposed project would not interfere with this
larger goal of investing in the transportation
system.
Technological Innovation and 21st Century Transportation Promote zero-emissions vehicles. SCAG, Local
Jurisdictions
Consistent. The project includes lane
reconfigurations which would provide new lanes
for bikes and other zero-emissions
transportation modes.
Promote neighborhood electric vehicles. SCAG, Local
Jurisdictions
Not applicable. The proposed project would not
interfere with the goal of promoting
neighborhood electric vehicles.
Implement shared mobility programs. SCAG, Local
Jurisdictions
Not Applicable. This strategy is designed to
integrate new technologies for last-mile and
alternative transportation programs. The
proposed project would not interfere with these
emerging programs.
361
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining Project
Focused Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Evaluation City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 7
JN: AQ etc. 4.12.23 final
Actions and Strategies
Responsible
Party(ies) Consistency Analysis
Notes:
1 Source: Southern California Association of Governments; 2020–2045 RTP/SCS; September 3, 2020.
6.0 Energy
Energy consumption in support of or related to project operations would consist of transportation energy demands (energy consumed by employee and patron vehicles accessing the project site). Additional energy that would be consumed by the construction or operation of the additional outdoor dining is assumed to be negligible as no additional buildings are to be built.
This energy analysis is based upon Appendix F of the CEQA Guidelines which states that any project that results in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy, or wasteful use of energy resources would have a significant impact.
6.1 Transportation Fuel Consumption
The largest source of operational energy use would be vehicle operation of customers. The site is located in an urbanized area just in close proximity to transit stops. Using the CalEEMod output, it is assumed that an average trip for all vehicles were assumed to be 10 miles. To show a worst-case analysis, it was assumed that vehicles would operate 365 days per year. Table 5 shows the worst-case estimated annual fuel consumption for all classes of vehicles from autos to heavy-heavy trucks. Table 5 shows that an estimated 155,002 gallons of fuel would be consumed per year for the operation of the proposed project.
Table 5: Estimated Vehicle Operations Fuel Consumption
Vehicle Type Vehicle Mix
Number
of
Vehicles1
Average
Trip
(miles)2
Daily
VMT
Average
Fuel
Economy
(mpg)
Total
Gallons
per Day
Total Annual
Fuel
Consumption
(gallons)
Light Auto Automobile 518 10 5,184 31.82 162.92 59,467
Light Truck Automobile 56 10 559 27.16 20.56 7,506
Light Truck Automobile 183 10 1,832 25.6 71.56 26,121
Medium Truck Automobile 174 10 1,737 20.81 83.47 30,468 Light Heavy Truck 2-Axle Truck 37 10 369 13.81 26.73 9,755 Light Heavy Truck 10,000 lbs + 2-Axle Truck 9 10 92 14.18 6.52 2,380 Medium Heavy Truck 3-Axle Truck 11 10 114 9.58 11.87 4,331 Heavy Heavy Truck 4-Axle Truck 29 10 293 7.14 41.03 14,975 Total 1,018 -- 10,180 -- 424.66 --
Total Annual Fuel Consumption 155,002
Notes:
1 Per the trip generation assessment, the project is to generate 1,018 total net new tripsin the maximum scenario. Default CalEEMod vehicle fleet mix utilized. 2Based on the size of the site and relative location, trips were assumed to be local rather than regional.
Trip generation of the proposed project is consistent with other similar commercial uses of similar scale and configuration as reflected in the traffic analysis from Fehr & Peers. That is, the proposed project does not propose uses or operations that would inherently result in excessive and wasteful vehicle trips, nor 362
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining Project
Focused Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Evaluation City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 8
JN: AQ etc. 4.12.23 final
associated excess and wasteful vehicle energy consumption. Additionally, as stated by Fehr & Peers, the project is not anticipated to increase traffic regionally, and the estimates shown in this analysis are a worst-case scenario. Therefore, project transportation energy consumption would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary.
7.0 Conclusions
Operational project emissions were evaluated and compared to both regional and localized SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance. In addition, project GHG emissions were evaluated and compared to SCAQMD’s draft threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year for all land uses. Project emissions are anticipated to be below SCAQMD’s thresholds of significance with no mitigation and project energy usage was found not to be inefficient, wasteful, or otherwise unnecessary. Therefore, the impact is less than significant.
MD is pleased to provide this focused Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas, and Energy Impact Evaluation. If you have any questions regarding this analysis, please don’t hesitate to call us at (805) 426-4477.
Sincerely,
MD Acoustics, LLC
Tyler Klassen, EIT
Air Quality Specialist
363
Appendix A
Glossary of Terms
364
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CARB California Air Resources Board
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CFCs Chlorofluorocarbons
CH4 Methane
CNG Compressed natural gas
CO Carbon monoxide
CO2 Carbon dioxide
CO2e Carbon dioxide equivalent
DPM Diesel particulate matter
GHG Greenhouse gas
HFCs Hydrofluorocarbons
LST Localized Significant Thresholds
MTCO2e Metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
MMTCO2e Million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NOx Nitrogen Oxides
NO2 Nitrogen dioxide
N2O Nitrous oxide
O3 Ozone
PFCs Perfluorocarbons
PM Particle matter
PM10 Particles that are less than 10 micrometers in diameter PM2.5 Particles that are less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter PMI Point of maximum impact
PPM Parts per million
PPB Parts per billion
RTIP Regional Transportation Improvement Plan
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
SCAB South Coast Air Basin
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SF6 Sulfur hexafluoride
SIP State Implementation Plan
SOx Sulfur Oxides
SRA Source/Receptor Area
TAC Toxic air contaminants
VOC Volatile organic compounds
WRCC Western Regional Climate Center
365
Appendix B
Project Map
366
Appendix C
CalEEMod Output
367
AZ Office CA Office
4960 S. Gilbert Road, Ste 1-461 1197 Los Angeles Avenue, Ste C-256 Chandler, AZ 85249 Simi Valley, CA 93065
p. (602) 774-1950 p. (805) 426-4477
www.mdacoustics.com
MD Acoustics, LLC 1
JN: Noise_Letter Report 4.11.23 final
April 11, 2023
To: Ed Almanza & Associates
From: MD Acoustics, LLLC
Subject: Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining – Noise Assessment – City of Hermosa Beach, CA MD Acoustics, LLC (MD) is pleased to provide this noise assessment for the Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining Project in the City of Hermosa Beach, CA. The project proposes that certain commercial establishments may provide outdoor dining in public right-of-way areas (including on-street parking areas and sidewalks) in the downtown area of Hermosa Beach. The project identifies areas where outdoor dining would be allowed. This assessment analyzes the baseline and baseline plus project traffic noise conditions for nine (9) street segments that were identified by the technical traffic consultants as the key routes for vehicular access to and from the project area. It provides a quantitative analysis of outdoor dining noise and compares projected roadway and outdoor dining noise levels to the City’s applicable noise standards. For your reference, Appendix A contains a glossary of acoustical terms.
1.0 Assessment Overview
This assessment evaluates the baseline noise conditions and the baseline + project noise conditions experienced along the following streets:
1. 27th Street (west of Morningside)
2. 8
th Street (west of Valley)
3. Hermosa Avenue (north of 16th Street)
4. Hermosa Avenue (north of 8th Street)
5. Manhattan Avenue (north of Pier)
6. Manhattan Avenue (south of Pier)
7. Monterey Boulevard (north of Pier)
8. Monterey Boulevard (south of Pier)
9. Pier Avenue (west of Valley)
The nine analyzed roadways will be the most affected by the project and represent the worst-case scenario.
Baseline traffic conditions for each roadway were provided by Fehr & Peers (February 2023 in Appendix B of this report). The traffic noise level has been compared to the City’s noise standards. All modeling assumptions follow FHWA traffic noise modeling protocols. The study also assesses the stationary noise impact on adjacent land uses due to outdoor dining. Exhibit A identifies the roadway segments that were assessed. The eligible outdoor dining areas are shown in Exhibit B.
2.0 City of Hermosa Beach Noise Standards
The City of Hermosa Beach outlines their noise regulations and standards within the Public Safety Element from the General Plan and the Noise Ordinance from the Municipal Code. Table 6.3 in the City’s Public Safety Element outlines the interior and exterior noise standards (Table 1 of this report). 368
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining
Noise Assessment
City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 2
JN: Noise_Letter Report 4.11.23 final
Exhibit A
Roadway Segments
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 1. 27th Street
(west of Morningside)
2. 8
th Street
(west of Valley)
3. Hermosa Avenue
(north of 16th Street)
4. Hermosa Avenue
(north of 8th Street)
5. Manhattan Avenue
(north of Pier)
6. Manhattan Avenue
(south of Pier)
7. Monterey Boulevard
(north of Pier)
8. Monterey Boulevard
(south of Pier)
9. Pier Avenue
(west of Valley)
369
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining
Noise Assessment
City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 3
JN: Noise_Letter Report 4.11.23 final
Exhibit B
Project Area
370
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining
Noise Assessment
City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 4
JN: Noise_Letter Report 4.11.23 final
Table 1: Interior and Exterior Noise Standards1
Land Use Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL)
Exterior Interior
Residential 65 dB 45 dB
Hotels/Motels 65 dB 45 dB
Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes 65 dB 45 dB Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters 65 dB 45 dB
Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports 65 dB N/A
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 70 dB N/A
Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemeteries 75 dB N/A Office Buildings, Business Commercial and Professional 70 dB 50 dB Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture 75 dB 65 dB Notes:
1. Outdoor environment limited to private yard of single-family residences; private patios of multi-family residences that are accessed by a means of exit from inside the unit; mobile home park; hospital patio; park picnic area; school playground; and hotel and motel recreation area.
2. Interior environment excludes bathrooms, toilets, closets, and corridors. Noise level requirement is with windows closed. Mechanical ventilation system or other means of natural ventilation shall be provided pursuant to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code (UBC).
3. See Table 6.3 Public Safety, PLAN Hermosa1
3.0 Study Method and Procedure
Traffic Noise Level Prediction Modeling
Traffic noise from the vehicular traffic was projected using the FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWARD-77-108). The software utilizes FHWA protocol and is similar to the Traffic Noise Model (TNM 2.5) algorithms to calculate noise level projections and are typically accurate within ± 3 dBA. The FHWA model arrives at the predicted noise level through a series of adjustments to the Reference Energy Mean Emission Level (REMEL).
Roadway volumes and project trip generation were obtained from Fehr & Peers. Fehr & Peers estimated pre-pandemic (2019) and post-pandemic (2020-2021) conditions using StreetLight Data. The estimates show that traffic volumes decreased significantly from 2019 to 2020 and began to increase in 2021, indicating that activity is returning to pre-pandemic conditions. Traffic volumes were analyzed during summer weekends to represent the loudest conditions. Temporary roadway diversions were put in place after 2019, and the project proposes to make the lane reconfigurations permanent. The baseline condition represents the worst-case noise before roadway diversions were put in place and without projectgenerated traffic. The baseline plus project condition represents the worst-case noise with projectgenerated traffic and with the roadway diversionsin place. 27th Street traffic volumes and vehicle distribution were monitored by Fehr & Peers on 12/15/2022, after roadway diversions were put in place. For this study, MD evaluated 27th Street separate from the other roadways to compare baseline conditions, existing conditions, and baseline plus project conditions. Baseline conditions represent pre-pandemic (2019) traffic volumes prior to lane reconfiguration. Existing conditions represent the current post-pandemic traffic volumes with roadway diversions put in place. Baseline plus project conditions represent 2019 traffic volumes, including the roadway diversions and project-generated 371
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining
Noise Assessment
City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 5
JN: Noise_Letter Report 4.11.23 final
traffic. Fehr & Peers found that the lane reductions caused a 1% decrease in distribution on 27th Street, making it highly unlikely that the lane reductions diverted 27th Street traffic.
Fehr & Peers provided two trip generation scenarios. Scenario 1 provides the worst-case trip generation estimates and Scenario 2 provides more realistic estimates by accounting for the variety of restaurant uses.
For this analysis, MD utilized the trip generation estimates from Scenario 1 in order to calculate the absolute worst-case scenario.
The following outlines the key adjustments made to the REMEL for the roadway inputs:
Roadway classification – (e.g. freeway, a major arterial, arterial, secondary, collector, etc), Roadway Active Width – (distance between the center of the outermost travel lanes on each side of the roadway)
Average Daily Traffic Volumes (ADT), Travel Speeds, Percentages of automobiles, medium trucks and heavy trucks
Roadway grade and angle of view
Site Conditions (e.g. soft vs. hard)
Percentage of total ADT which flows each hour throughout a 24-hour period Vertical and horizontal distances (Sensitive receptor distance from noise source) Noise barrier vertical and horizontal distances (Noise barrier distance from sound source and receptor).
Traffic noise source spectra
Topography
The Model doesn’t include the noise reduction effects of the single family residencies Roadway modeling assumptions utilized for the technical study are provided in Table 2 and Table 3.
Table 2: Roadway Noise Modeling Parameters
Roadway Segment Limits Baseline
(2019) ADT1
Project
Only ADT1
Baseline +
Project
ADT1
Distance to
Centerline
(ft)2
Speed
(MPH)
8th Street West of Valley Dr 6,256 61 6,317 25 25
Hermosa Avenue North of 16th St 14,466 174 14,640 48 30 Hermosa Avenue North of 8th St 15,003 230 15,233 50 25
Manhattan Avenue North of Pier Ave 2,334 21 2,355 23 25 Manhattan Avenue South of Pier Ave 2,121 22 2,143 25 25 Monterey Boulevard North of Pier Ave 3,839 16 3,855 23 25 Monterey Boulevard South of Pier Ave 4,014 25 4,039 25 25 Pier Avenue West of Valley Dr 17,563 405 17,968 50 25
Notes:
1. Provided by Fehr & Peers (February 2023).
2. Distance from the nearest residential property to the centerline. 372
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining
Noise Assessment
City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 6
JN: Noise_Letter Report 4.11.23 final
Table 3: Vehicle Mix Data
Motor-Vehicle Type Daytime %
(7 AM to 7 PM)1
Evening %
(7 PM to 10 PM)
Night %
(10 PM to 7 AM)
Total % of
Traffic Flow
Automobiles 77.5 12.9 9.6 97.42
Medium Trucks 84.8 4.9 10.3 1.84
Heavy Trucks 86.5 2.7 10.8 0.74
Notes:
1 Typical Southern California Traffic Mix
Roadway modeling assumptions for 27th Street are provided in Table 4 and Table 5.
Table 4: 27th Street Roadway Noise Modeling Parameters
Roadway Segment Baseline
(2019) ADT1
Existing
(2022) ADT2
Baseline +
Project ADT2
Distance to
Centerline
(ft)3
Speed
(MPH)
27th Street West of Morningside 6,036 8,081 8,145 16 30 Notes:
1 Baseline ADT volumes provided by Fehr & Peers, February 2023.
2. Existing ADT volumes and vehicle distribution provided by Fehr & Peers, 12/15/22.
3. Distance from the nearest residential property to the centerline.
Table 5: 27th Street Vehicle Mix Data
Motor-Vehicle Type Daytime %
(7 AM to 7 PM)
Evening %
(7 PM to 10 PM)
Night %
(10 PM to 7 AM)
Total % of
Traffic Flow
Automobiles 77.5 12.9 9.6 97.6
Medium Trucks 84.8 4.9 10.3 2.2
Heavy Trucks 86.5 2.7 10.8 0.2
Notes:
1 Existing ADT volumes and vehicle distribution provided by Fehr & Peers, 12/15/22.
Stationary Noise Prediction Modeling
MD utilized the inverse square law to calculate noise level projections due to outdoor dining noise. MD assumed that the maximum number of outdoor guests at any given restaurant would be 40 people. A typical voice would be 65 dBA at 3 feet away when speaking normally. As a worst-case scenario, the calculation assumes that all 40 guests are speaking simultaneously. MD analyzed the minimum allowable distance between an outdoor dining area and a sensitive receptor in order to meet the City’s code.
4.0 Findings
Traffic Noise
The potential off-site noise impacts caused by the increase in vehicular traffic as a result of the project were calculated at the nearest residential location for each affected road segment. The noise levels both with and without project-generated vehicle traffic were compared and the increase was calculated. The 373
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining
Noise Assessment
City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 7
JN: Noise_Letter Report 4.11.23 final
distance to the 55, 60, 65, and 70 dBA CNEL noise contours are also provided for reference (Appendix C).
Noise contours were calculated for the following scenarios and conditions (excluding 27th Street):
Baseline Condition: This scenario refers to the baseline traffic noise condition (2019, prior to temporary roadway diversions) and is demonstrated in Table 6. Baseline + Project Condition: This scenario refers to the baseline plus project traffic noise condition (with roadway diversions in place) and is demonstrated in Table 6.
Table 6: Change in Noise Levels as a Result of Project Generated Traffic Roadway Segment
Modeled Noise Levels (dBA CNEL) at Nearest Residence
Baseline
Without
Project
Baseline
With Project
Change in
Noise Level
Increase of 3
dB or more2
8th Street West of Valley Dr 62.8 62.9 0.1 No
Hermosa Avenue North of 16th St 66.4 66.4 0.0 No
Hermosa Avenue North of 8th St 64.3 64.4 0.1 No
Manhattan Avenue North of Pier Ave 59.1 59.1 0.0 No
Manhattan Avenue South of Pier Ave 58.1 58.2 0.1 No
Monterey Boulevard North of Pier Ave 61.2 61.2 0.0 No
Monterey Boulevard South of Pier Ave 60.9 60.9 0.0 No
Pier Avenue West of Valley Dr 64.5 64.6 0.1 No
Notes:
1 FHWA roadway noise modeling worksheets provided in Appendix C. 2 Typically, the human ear can barely perceive the change in noise level of 3 dB As shown in Table 6, the baseline plus project noise will meet the residential noise limit of 65 dBA CNEL for every roadway segment except for Hermosa Avenue north of 16th Street. However, the noise due to the project will not increase the baseline noise and would not be significant. The baseline and baseline plus project conditions analyzed in this study represent the loudest conditions. 27th Street noise levels for existing, baseline, and baseline plus project traffic conditions were compared and the increase was calculated. The distance to the 55, 60, 65, and 70 dBA CNEL noise contours are also provided for reference (Appendix C). Noise contours for 27th Street were calculated for the following scenarios and conditions:
Baseline Condition: This scenario refers to the baseline traffic noise condition (2019, prior to temporary roadway diversions) and is demonstrated in Table 7. Existing Condition: This scenario refers to the current traffic noise condition (2022, with roadway diversions in place) and is demonstrated in Table 7.
374
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining
Noise Assessment
City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 8
JN: Noise_Letter Report 4.11.23 final
Baseline + Project Condition: This scenario refers to the baseline plus project traffic noise condition (with roadway diversions in place) and is demonstrated in Table 7.
Table 7: 27th Street Change in Noise Levels as a Result of Project Generated Traffic Roadway Segment
Modeled Noise Levels (dBA CNEL) at Nearest Residence
Baseline
(2019)
Without
Project
Existing
(2022)
Without
Project
Baseline
With
Project
Change in
Noise
Level3
Increase
of 3 dB
or
more2
27th Street West of Morningside 67.3 66.0 67.3 0.0 No
Notes:
1 FHWA roadway noise modeling worksheets provided in Appendix C. 2 Typically, the human ear can barely perceive the change in noise level of 3 dB.
3. Change in noise level between baseline noise conditions and baseline + project noise conditions.
As shown in Table 7, project-generated traffic noise will not increase the baseline traffic noise. Thus, the temporary roadway diversions do not have an impact on the existing or baseline traffic noise conditions.
Existing traffic noise along 27th Street has decreased by 1.3 dBA CNEL since 2019 due to a decrease in activity caused by the pandemic. The existing traffic noise will increase by a maximum of 1.3 dBA CNEL as traffic volumes increase to pre-pandemic conditions and will not be a noticeable change in loudness. Thus, the impact is less than significant.
Stationary Noise
Stationary noise at sensitive receptors cannot exceed the City’s noise limit of 65 dBA CNEL for residential properties, per City standards. As a worst-case scenario, stationary noise was calculated assuming that 40 guests are speaking simultaneously. The average speaking voice is 65 dBA from 3 feet away. 40 people speaking from 20 feet away would be 64 dBA. Thus, the impact due to stationary noise will not be significant if residential locations are located 20 feet or further from future outdoor dining areas.
Music (live or otherwise) is not going to be an impact assuming that the noise due to music does not extend past the dining area. Any additional noise sources (speakers, extra guests, etc.) must abide by the City code.
5.0 CEQA Analysis
The California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines establishes thresholds for noise impact analysis as presented below:
(a) Would the project result in the generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise Code, or applicable standards of other agencies? Transportation Noise Impacts
Traffic noise would be significant if levels are increased by more than 3 dBA to levels above 65 dBA CNEL in areas with sensitive uses. Baseline traffic represents the worst-case future traffic when activity returns to pre-pandemic conditions. The worst-case baseline plus project traffic noise levels will meet the residential noise limit of 65 dBA CNEL at seven of the nine roadway segments. Baseline plus project traffic volumes are 375
Hermosa Beach Downtown Outdoor Dining
Noise Assessment
City of Hermosa Beach, CA
MD Acoustics, LLC 9
JN: Noise_Letter Report 4.11.23 final
expected to be up to 0.1 dBA CNEL louder respectively than baseline traffic noise levels at existing land uses and will not result in a significant noise increase.
MD also compared baseline (2019) conditions, existing (2022) conditions, and baseline plus project noise conditionsfor one of the roadway segments. The project will not increase the baseline traffic noise and will not have an impact. Thus, the project will not have an impact on existing noise conditions and is not significant. However, the baseline plus project noise will increase the existing noise by a maximum of 1.3 dBA CNEL due to traffic volumes returning to pre-pandemic conditions. It takes a change of 3 dBA to perceive a change in loudness, thus, the impact is less than significant.
Stationary Noise Impacts
Stationary noise will be significant if it exceeds the levels outlined in the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code as outlined in Section 2.0. Assuming an outdoor dining area consists of 40 people speaking simultaneously, the noise level due to outdoor dining will meet the City’s standard of 65 dBA CNEL when sensitive receptors (residential locations) are at a minimum of 20 feet away from an outdoor dining area. Music (live or otherwise) is not going to be an impact assuming that the noise due to music does not extend past the dining area. Any additional noise sources (speakers, extra guests, etc.) must abide by the City code. The impact will not be significant.
5.0 Conclusions
MD is pleased to provide this noise assessmentfor the Outdoor Dining Projectin the City of Hermosa Beach, CA. The worst-case traffic noise due to the project will increase the baseline conditions by 0 to 0.1 dBA CNEL and will not be significant. A typical outdoor dining area will meet the City’s standard of 65 dBA CNEL. If you have any questions regarding this analysis, please call our office at (805) 426-4477.
Sincerely,
MD Acoustics, LLC
Mike Dickerson, INCE Rachel Edelman
Principal Acoustic Consultant
376
Appendix A
Glossary of Acoustical Terms
377
Glossary of Terms
A-Weighted Sound Level: The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighted filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the response of the human ear. A numerical method of rating human judgment of loudness.
Ambient Noise Level: The composite of noise from all sources, near and far. In this context, the ambient noise level constitutes the normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.
C-Weighted Sound Level: The sound pressure level in decibels as measured on a sound level meter using the C-weighted filter network. The C-weighting filter greatly de-emphasizes very high frequency components of the sound and slightly de-emphasizes the very low frequency components. A numerical method of rating human judgment of loudness.
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL): The average equivalent A-weighted sound level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of five (5) decibels to sound levels in the evening from 7:00 to 10:00 PM and after addition of ten (10) decibels to sound levels in the night before 7:00 AM and after 10:00 PM.
Decibel (dB): A unit for measuring the amplitude of a sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure, which is 20 micro-pascals.
dB(A): A-weighted sound level (see definition above).
dB(C): C-weighted sound level (see definition above).
dB(Z): Z-weighted sound level (see definition of dB above).
Equivalent Sound Level (LEQ): The sound level corresponding to a steady noise level over a given sample period with the same amount of acoustic energy as the actual time varying noise level. The energy average noise level during the sample period.
Maximum Sound Level (LMAX): This is the highest sound level measured during a single noise event. Lmax does not consider the number and duration of these events, and cannot be totaled into a one-hour or 24-hour cumulative measure of impact.
Habitable Room: Any room meeting the requirements of the Uniform Building Code or other applicable regulations which is intended to be used for sleeping, living, cooking or dining purposes, excluding such enclosed spaces as closets, pantries, bath or toilet rooms, service rooms, connecting 378
corridors, laundries, unfinished attics, foyers, storage spaces, cellars, utility rooms and similar spaces.
Human Sensitivity to Sound: In general, the healthy human ear can hear between 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz. Frequencies below 125 Hz are typically associated with low frequencies or bass. Frequencies between 125 Hz and 5,000 Hz are typically associated with mid-range tones. Finally, frequencies between 5,000 and 20,000Hz are typically associated with higher range tones.
The human ear is sensitive to changes in noise levels, depending on the frequency. Generally speaking, the healthy human ear is most sensitive to sounds between 1,000 Hz and 5,000 Hz (Aweighted scale) and perceives a sound within that range as being more intense than a sound with a higher or lower frequency with the same magnitude. At lower and higher frequencies, the ear can become less sensitive depending on a number of factors. Figure 1 provides a brief summary of how humans perceive changes in noise levels.
Figure 1: Change in Noise Level Characteristics1
Changes in Intensity Level, dBA Changes in Apparent Loudness 1 Not perceptible
3 Just perceptible
5 Clearly noticeable
10 Twice (or half) as loud
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/regulations_and_guidance/polguide/polguide02.cfm L(n): The A-weighted sound level exceeded during a certain percentage of the sample time. For example, L10 in the sound level exceeded 10 percent of the sample time. Similarly, L50, L90 and L99, etc.
Noise: Any unwanted sound or sound which is undesirable because it interferes with speech and hearing, or is intense enough to damage hearing, or is otherwise annoying. The State Noise Control Act defines noise as "...excessive undesirable sound...".
Percent Noise Levels: See L(n).
Sound Level (Noise Level): The weighted sound pressure level obtained by use of a sound level meter having a standard frequency-filter for attenuating part of the sound spectrum. Figure 2 provides the sound level associated with common noise sources. 379
Figure 2: Common Sound Levels
Sound Level Meter: An instrument, including a microphone, an amplifier, an output meter, and frequency weighting networks for the measurement and determination of noise and sound levels.
Single Event Noise Exposure Level (SENEL): The dB(A) level which, if it lasted for one second, would produce the same A-weighted sound energy as the actual event. 380
Appendix B
Fehr & Peers Traffic Counts
381
Appendix C
Traffic Noise Calculations
382
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
RESOLUTION NO. 23-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
ESTABLISHING OPERATIONAL AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR
ENCROACHMENT AREAS ON PIER PLAZA AND OFF-STREET
ENCROACHMENT AREAS CITYWIDE
WHEREAS, On August 9, 2005, the City Council conducted a public meeting to review the outdoor dining standards and procedures for outdoor dining areas on Pier Avenue adopted in 1997, pursuant to Title 12, Chapter 12.16 of the Municipal Code pertaining to encroachments into the Public Right-of-Way; and WHEREAS, On May 8, 2012, the City Council adopted a resolution amending standards and procedures for the design and operation of outdoor dining areas on Pier Plaza; and
WHEREAS, On May 11, 2015 the City Council adopted a resolution further amending the aforementioned standards and procedures for the design and operation of outdoor dining areas on Pier Plaza; and
WHEREAS, In October 2021, City Council directed staff to develop permanent versions of the temporary extended outdoor dining programs implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic ; and
WHEREAS, City staff has gathered input from the City Council, local businesses and community stakeholders to develop the proposed guidelines for permanent encroachments on Pier Plaza and off-street encroachments citywide.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby declare that the recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference.
SECTION 2. The City Council hereby adopts the attached Plaza Guidelines attached as Exhibit A and incorporate herein. Resolution Nos. 05-6417, 12-6802, and 15-6955 are hereby rescinded.
383
SECTION 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this resolution is found to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the remaining provisions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 4. Environmental Review. The proposed project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as defined in Section 15300 of the CEQA Guidelines, in accordance with Section 15061, the ‘common sense’ exemption, and Section 15301 which addresses minor alterations of existing public facilities, specifically:
15061(b)(3) – The project is covered by the common sense exemption that applies where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.
15301(c) – Existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities (this includes road grading for the purpose of public safety), and other alterations such as the addition of bicycle facilities, including but not limited to bicycle parking, bicycleshare facilities and bicycle lanes, transit improvements such as bus lanes, pedestrian crossings, street trees, and other similar alterations that do not create additional automobile lanes.
None of the exceptions to the Categorical Exemption apply, nor would the project result in a significant cumulative impact of successive projects of the same type in the same place over time or have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances or damage a scenic highway or scenic resources within a state scenic highway. The site is not located on a hazardous waste site and would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution which shall be effective upon its adoption. The City Manager may delay the implementation of this ordinance to ensure continuity and effective and efficient execution of the Pier Plaza outdoor dining program. 384
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED on this 25th day of April, 2023 Raymond Jackson
PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, CA ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________ ________________________________ Myra Maravilla Patrick Donegan
City Clerk City Attorney
385
Exhibit A
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
OUTDOOR DINING DESIGN AND OPERATIONAL STANDARDS
FOR PIER PLAZA AND OFF-STREET ENCROACHMENT AREAS
I. INTRODUCTION
A. The Outdoor Dining Design and Operational Standards are adopted pursuant to Section 12.16.100 of the Municipal Code in order to establish specific design and operational criteria for outdoor dining on the public right-of-way known as Pier Plaza (including Loreto Plaza) and other offstreet encroachment areas citywide. These standards balance the respective interests of restaurant and establishments that desire to offer outdoor dining to their patrons, restaurant patrons and the City, which encourages the atmosphere created by outdoor dining but seeks to assure and protect the availability of the right-of-way for safe and convenient pedestrian passage. All outdoor dining on Pier Plaza shall comply with the standards set forth herein, and all encroachment permits issued for outdoor dining on Pier Plaza shall be in conformance herewith. No person shall use the public right-of-way on Pier Plaza for outdoor dining without first obtaining an Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit from the City.
These guidelines also apply to retail businesses on Pier Plaza.
B. An outdoor dining area is a place on the public sidewalk where patrons may consume food and/or beverages provided by an adjacent food service establishment.
C. Establishments serving alcoholic beverages that apply for an Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit shall meet the additional requirements of the State of California Alcohol Beverage Control Board.
D. These standards and procedures regulate the design and operation of outdoor dining areas on Pier Plaza. However, they do not provide information on all the government agency requirements for starting a new restaurant or expanding an existing one. Business owners must secure the appropriate licenses and permits from the State Alcohol Beverage Control Board, Los Angeles County Health Department, the City of Hermosa Beach Community Development Department and Business License Office.
E. Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permits are not transferable, salable, delegable or assignable. In the event of a transfer of the business, to the extent of 51% or more, the transferee shall apply to the Public Works Department for a new Encroachment Permit.
386
F. These regulations do not apply to outdoor dining on private property.
II. APPLICATION PROCEDURE
A. An application form for an Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit may be obtained from the Public Works Department. A scaled and measured plan prepared by a licensed design professional shall accompany the application form. The plan shall delineate the encroachment area and the layout of furnishings and allowable amenities. The plan shall comply with all building and fire code regulations, and shall comply fully with all State and federal laws providing for access by the disabled. If the Applicant intends to modify the arrangement of furniture and other amenities or otherwise deviate from the plan at any time or times during the term of the Permit, the plan shall delineate all alternate arrangements to be utilized and all shall comply with the requirements set forth herein. The application will also include information on any variations of operating hours that will affect calculation of quarterly encroachment fees.
B. An application fee in an amount determined by resolution of the City Council shall be paid at the time the application is submitted to the Public Works Department.
C. Public Works Department staff shall obtain the written concurrence of the Community Development Department before approving any Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit.
D. The Director of Public Works is authorized to approve an outdoor dining application and to issue an Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit on behalf of the City. The Encroachment Permit will specify the amount of the Outdoor Dining License fee to be paid by the applicant as established by resolution of the City Council.
E. A maintenance deposit, in an amount not to exceed five thousand dollars ($5000), shall be paid to the City at the time the Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit is issued. It is the responsibility of the Applicant to maintain sidewalk paving and fixtures within the outdoor dining area in the condition they are in at the time of permitting. The Applicant shall be responsible for any repairs required as a result of the Applicant’s use of the area. Upon termination of the Permit and inspection of the paving and fixtures by the Public Works Department, the deposit shall be refunded to the Applicant less any offset for repairs.
F. An application for renewal of an Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit may be submitted to the Public Works Department on a form obtained 387
from the Director. The application must be filed with the Public Works Department no later than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the existing Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit. Upon determination by the Director that the Permit should be renewed, the Applicant shall pay the annual fee as determined by resolution of the City Council.
III. OUTDOOR DINING SITES
A. The outdoor dining encroachment area on Pier Plaza shall be a maximum depth of twenty-five feet (25’) and include a clear, continuous pedestrian path not less than five feet (5’) in width or more as deemed appropriate by the Director of Public Works for pedestrian circulation outside of the outdoor dining area. As used herein, pedestrian path means a continuous obstruction-free sidewalk area, paved to City standards, between the outside boundary of the dining area.
B. The outdoor dining area shall be accessible to the disabled. The buildings adjacent to these dining areas shall maintain building egress as defined by the Uniform Building Code and Title 24 Disabled Access Standards.
C. The final location and configuration of the outdoor dining area shall be subject to approval by the Director of Public Works, who shall consider public safety issues unique to the specific location.
D. No underground utilities are permitted within the encroachment area.
IV. DESIGN STANDARDS
A. Establishments that serve alcoholic beverages in the outdoor dining area shall provide a physical barrier that satisfies both these Standards and the requirements of the Alcohol Beverage Control Board. It is the responsibility of the applicant to research and verify design compliance with the Alcohol Beverage Control Board prior to filing an application for an Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit. Barriers shall be attractive with a quality appearance, made of new materials such as wood and wrought iron. Barriers shall be of a permeable design that allows for visibility through the barrier. Chain-link fencing or other low quality materials are not permitted. Furnishings that provide the functional equivalent of a fixed barrier may be approved.
B. Barriers shall conform to the Public Works Director’s installation standards and be removable. Barriers need not be removed each evening, but shall be capable of being removed; if imbedded into the pavement they 388
must be fixed through the use of recessed sleeves and posts, otherwise by wheels that can be locked into place or weighted in place. No signs or banners of any kind shall be placed, displayed or erected on barriers.
C. Any modification to the surface of public sidewalks, such as borings for recessed sleeves, shall be approved by the Director. In no case shall there be any modification to the existing sidewalk surface.
D. Barriers shall be able to withstand inclement outdoor weather and one hundred (100) pounds of horizontal force at the top of the barriers when in their fixed positions.
E. The height of any barrier shall not exceed three feet, six inches (3’- 6”) with the exception that clear glass or plastic windscreens not to exceed six feet, six inches (6’- 6”) in height may also be installed on the westerly side of the encroachment area.
F. The use of awnings or umbrellas over the outdoor dining area is permitted, provided they do not interfere with street trees. No portion of an awning or umbrella shall be less than eight feet (8’) above the sidewalk. Umbrellas must be contained in the encroachment area. Awnings may extend up to six feet six inches (6’-6”) from the building front or cover up to fifty percent (50%) of the outdoor dining area, whichever is less. On Pier Plaza, retractable awnings may extend up to thirteen feet (13’) from the building front or cover up to one hundred percent (100%) of the outdoor dining area, whichever is less. Retractable awnings shall be fully retracted to their closed position when the business is closed. A building permit must be obtained prior to installation of an awning.
G. Outdoor lighting fixtures should complement the style of the building.
Lighting fixtures shall not be glaring to pedestrians on the adjacent rightof-way, and shall illuminate only the outdoor dining area. Outdoor lighting may be installed on the facade of the building. Lighting shall be installed by a licensed electrician and requires an electrical permit from the Building and Safety Division.
H. Tivoli lights, table lamps and candles are encouraged. The use of any candles shall comply with State of California Fire Code and applicable City of Hermosa Beach requirements.
I. An Historic Preservation Certificate of Appropriateness shall be required prior to attaching any lights, awnings, or physical barriers to an historic structure that has been designated “landmark” or “significant” by the City Council.
J. Flowering plants are encouraged.
389
K. Television sets are permitted with a building permit and electrical permit.
L. Heaters are permitted with a building permit, electrical and plumbing permit.
M. No queueing is permitted on any encroachment areas.
1. No dine-in restaurant shall permit the congregating or lining up of customers in any public right-of-way. A “dine-in restaurant” means a restaurant that provides customers the option to dine on the site of the restaurant. The congregating or lining up of customers outside a dinein restaurant, in any manner, on sidewalks or other public rights of way is prohibited.
2. Unless no table is available, a dine-in restaurant must immediately seat a customer in its outdoor dining area if the customer is dining on-site.
In the event no table is available, the restaurant staff shall ask the customer to wait in a vehicle or at a location away from the restaurant premises.
3. Dine-in restaurants shall implement a phone reservation or call-back system that notifies customers via text, phone call, or other method once a table has become available. No customer shall be permitted in the dining area until the customer has been notified by the restaurant that he or she can be seated.
4. Restaurant staff shall be responsible for instructing customers not to form lines or congregate in abutting public areas while waiting to be seated.
5. One host/hostess podium located outside the encroachment area is permitted per business as follows:
a. The podium shall be a maximum of 30” wide (length), 30” deep, and 48” high. One single-pole umbrella, without advertising, attached to the podium to shield the employee from the elements is permitted; no portion of an umbrella shall be less than eight feet (8’) above the sidewalk. Identification of the business name and menu board may be affixed to the podium provided the dimensions above are not exceeded. Display or sales of merchandise from the podium is not permitted. Any podium that does not comply with these standards shall be located within the encroachment area at all times.
b. Podiums placed outside the encroachment area shall be located adjacent to the perimeter of the encroachment area in an approved 390
location on the Encroachment Permit site plan. The podium shall be placed within the encroachment area or inside the business during hours that the business is closed.
6. Portable heaters located outside the encroachment area shall be limited to one heater per 15 feet of linear frontage on the Plaza, provided that heaters need not be spaced at 15-foot intervals. Heaters placed outside the encroachment area shall be located adjacent to the perimeter of the encroachment area in an approved location on the Encroachment Permit site plan. All heaters shall be placed within the encroachment area or inside the business during hours that the business is closed.
V. STANDARDS OF OPERATION
A. Restaurant management is responsible for running and operating the outdoor dining area and shall not delegate or assign that responsibility.
Outdoor dining areas shall be continuously supervised by management.
Patrons are prohibited from disturbing customers or passersby on the adjacent right-of-way by loud, boisterous, and unreasonable noise, offensive words or disruptive behavior.
B. Restaurant management shall keep the outdoor dining area clear of litter, food scraps, and soiled dishes and utensils at all times. Trash receptacles shall be provided in outdoor dining areas used for consuming take-out items.
C. At the end of each business day, establishments are required to clean (sweep and wash) the area in and around the outdoor dining area and remove the debris to a closed receptacle. No debris shall be swept, washed, or blown into the sidewalk, gutter or street in conformance with the City’s NPDES regulations.
D. Televisions shall not be operated with audio.
E. If disposable materials are used, the establishment shall comply with all applicable City recycling programs.
F. Plants shall be properly maintained and stressed or dying plants shall be promptly replaced. Because plant fertilizers contain materials that can stain the pavement, water drainage from any plants onto the adjacent rightof-way shall not be allowed. Potted plants shall have saucers or other suitable systems to retain seepage and be elevated to allow for air flow of at least one inch (1”) between saucer and sidewalk.
391
G. Awnings and umbrellas shall be washed whenever they are dirty and, in any event, no less than two times each year.
H. All plans and permits for the outdoor dining area approved by the City shall be kept on the premises for inspection at all times when the establishment is open for business.
I. Outdoor dining areas shall be operated in a manner that meets all requirements of the Los Angeles County Health Department and other applicable regulations.
J. Upon termination of the Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit, the Permittee shall immediately remove the barriers around the outdoor dining area, return the sidewalk to its original condition, and remove all personal property, furnishings, and equipment from the sidewalk. Any personal property remaining on the premises shall be removed pursuant to the laws of the State of California.
K. All existing CUP provisions for the adjoining commercial establishment shall be enforced within the encroachment area. Noise, hours of operation and other city requirements shall be strictly enforced as if the encroachment area were an extension of the permittee's place of business.
If the encroachment permit requirements should not agree with the CUP requirements the stricter of the two requirements shall prevail.
L. The allowable hours of operation within the outdoor encroachment area shall be consistent with the CUP requirements for a particular permittee.
City Council will have the option to extend these hours for special events.
City Council may extend or reduce these hours.
VI. INSURANCE
A. The Applicant shall obtain and maintain in force during the life of the Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit comprehensive general liability, broad form property damage and blanket contractual liability insurance in a combined single limit amount, per claim and aggregate, of at least two million dollars ($2,000,000) covering the applicant’s operation on the sidewalk. Such insurance shall name, on a Special Endorsement form, the City, its elected, appointed boards, officers, agents and employees as additional insureds. A Certificate of Insurance shall contain provisions that prohibit cancellation, modification, or lapse without thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City. Both the Certificate of Insurance and the completed standard Special Endorsement form shall be submitted with the completed application for an Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit. 392
B. The Applicant shall obtain and maintain in force during the life of the Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit Worker’s Compensation insurance with statutory limits, and employer’s liability insurance with limits of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident.
C. Comprehensive general liability policy shall provide coverage for all of the Applicant’s outdoor operations and facilities whether or not within the encroachment area.
D. The Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless City, its officers, employees and agents from and against all claims, causes of action, liabilities and damages for injuries to persons and property, including reasonable costs of defense and attorney fees, arising from the Applicant’s encroachment on City property, including but not limited to the Applicant’s negligent or wrongful acts, errors or omissions in the construction, erection, operation and continued maintenance of the encroachment in its location. The Applicant shall promptly pay the amount of any judgment rendered against City, its officers, employees and agents for any such indemnified claims, and reasonable costs and attorney fees incurred by City in the defense of such claims.
VII. ENFORCEMENT
A. Notice of violation of the outdoor dining design standards or standards of operation shall be made in writing to the Permittee by any Code Enforcement Officer, Public Works Inspector, Building Inspector, Police Department Official, or Fire Department Official of the City. A copy of the notice shall be filed with the Public Works Director. The Permittee shall immediately cure the violation upon receipt of notice. If the violation is not cured within ten (10) days after issuance of the notice to the Permittee, the Director may suspend or revoke the Encroachment Permit.
B. The Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit is in the nature of a revocable license, and is revocable at will by the City. The Public Works Director may revoke an Outdoor Dining Encroachment Permit upon thirty (30) days written notice. with or without cause. The Director’s decision may be appealed to the City Council pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 12 of the Hermosa Beach Municipal Code. The City Council’s decision shall be final.
393
CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
RESOLUTION NO. 23-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH
ESTABLISHING PERMANENT LANE RECONFIGURATIONS AND BIKE LANES
ON HERMOSA AVENUE AND PIER AVENUE, CLOSING A PORTION OF
PUBLIC STREET CONNECTING GREENWICH VILLAGE TO HERMOSA
AVENUE, AND FINDING THE SAME EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, On June 9, 2020, the Hermosa Beach City Council adopted Ordinance No. 20-1410U, Implementing a Temporary Permit for Outdoor Dining/Seating and Outdoor Retail Display to Assist in the Reopening of Restaurants, Food, and Retail Establishments during COVID-19; and WHEREAS, On July 14, 2020, the City Council extended the provisions of Ordinance No. 20-1410U until at least January 13, 2021, in light of the ongoing pandemic, and directed City staff to work with a traffic engineering consultant to develop options for closing parking and vehicle lanes on the downtown sections of Hermosa and Pier Avenues that would encourage foot traffic and expand socially distanced outdoor dining and retail opportunities in the public right-ofway; and WHEREAS, On August 25, 2020, the City Council approved a resolution authorizing the City Manager to close parts of public streets on a temporary basis and, specifically, a section of Greenwich Village to allow the North End Bar and Grill to have outdoor dining; and
WHEREAS, On September 8, 2020, the City Council authorized plans to temporarily close one lane of vehicular traffic in each direction on Pier Avenue, between Hermosa Avenue and Valley Drive, and plans to temporarily close vehicular traffic the northbound and southbound # 2 travel lanes (closest to the curb) on Hermosa Avenue from the 800 block at 8th Street to the 1300 block at 14th street to facilitate outdoor recreational and economic activity in the City’s downtown area on a temporary basis and add a Class 2 Bike Lane in both directions throughout this project area; and
394
WHEREAS, The lane closures were necessary to facilitate outdoor economic and recreational activity in compliance with County Health Officer Orders to reduce the spread of COVID-19. Implementation of the Order was thus exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under the statutory exemption for actions necessary to prevent or mitigate an emergency (Public Resources Code § 21080(b)(4); CEQA Guideline § 15269(c)) and the categorical exemption for minor temporary use of land (CEQA Guideline § 15304(e)); and WHEREAS, In October 2021, City Council directed staff to develop permanent versions of the temporary extended outdoor dining and lane reconfiguration programs implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic; and WHEREAS, City staff has worked with traffic engineering professionals to determine that these permanent lane reconfigurations, street closures, and bicycle lanes are an acceptable and desirable complement to the proposed permanent outdoor dining program; and
WHEREAS, the City has studied the environmental impacts of the project and has declared that the proposed temporary project is categorically exempt under CEQA.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The City Council does hereby declare that the recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference; and SECTION 2. The City Council hereby authorizes the following:
A. The closure of one lane of vehicular traffic in each direction on Pier Avenue, between Hermosa Avenue and Valley Drive;
B. The closure of the northbound and southbound # 2 travel lanes (closest to the curb) of vehicular traffic on Hermosa Avenue from the 800 block at 8th Street to the 1300 block at 14th street;
C. The addition of a Class 2 Bike Lane in both directions throughout the project area; and
D. The closure of parts of public streets connecting Greenwich Village to Hermosa Ave.
395
The closures and bike lane additions are detailed in the attached Exhibit “A” is incorporated into this Resolution.
SECTION 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this resolution is found to be unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the remaining provisions of this resolution.
SECTION 4. Environmental Review. The proposed project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act as defined in Section 15300 of the CEQA Guidelines, as follow:
The Lane Reconfiguration component of the project is exempt in accordance with Section 15301 which addresses minor alteration of existing public facilities; and Section 15304 which addresses minor alterations to public land. More specifically, the following two subcategories of exemption both apply. 15301(c) – Existing highways and streets, sidewalks, gutters, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and similar facilities (this includes road grading for the purpose of public safety), and other alterations such as the addition of bicycle facilities, including but not limited to bicycle parking, bicycle-share facilities and bicycle lanes, transit improvements such as bus lanes, pedestrian crossings, street trees, and other similar alterations that do not create additional automobile lanes.
15304(h) – The creation of bicycle lanes on existing rights-of-way.
Environmental analysis in support of these exemptions is attached as Exhibit “B” and is incorporated into this resolution.
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution which shall be effective upon its adoption. .
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED on this 25th day of April, 2023 Raymond Jackson
PRESIDENT of the City Council and MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, CA 396
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________ ________________________________ Myra Maravilla Patrick Donegan
City Clerk City Attorney
397
Exhibit B
398
OUTDOOR DINING PROGRAM
Supplemental Environmental Analysis
In addition to identifying the project’s exemption status under CEQA, City Staff and consultants reviewed the proposed project’s potential to result in adverse environmental effects, guided by the topics of the Initial Study checklist derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. The Initial Study checklist is used by the City to determine the potential for environmental effects and the possible need for an Environmental Impact Report or other forms of CEQA documentation.
A. Direct physical Impacts
Impacts of proposed projects are of two types – construction related impacts and operational (post-construction) impacts. Most construction-related impacts are avoided if the project results in no, or minimal, subsurface disturbance of soils, grading or excavation, as is the case with the proposed Outdoor Dining Program. Because the project will not result in substantial subsurface disturbance, it will not significantly affect any of the following natural or cultural resources considered under CEQA:
▪Geology & Soils
▪Biological Resources
▪Hydrology & Water Quality
▪Wildlife
▪Agriculture & Forestry
▪Cultural Resources (including Historical & Paleontological Resources) ▪Tribal Resources
▪Mineral Resources
None of these resources will be impacted by the project as a result of either construction-related or operational impacts.
B. Impacts to Services, Facilities, Utilities and Housing A small group of potential impacts addressed under CEQA relate to adverse effects on public services (police and fire), utilities (water, waste water, storm drain), public facilities (parks, schools, libraries) and housing. Impacts to these resources result when a project introduces a substantial number of new residents into the local population, or a substantial number of additional employees, or otherwise creates an increased demand for these services. Although the outdoor dining project has the potential to result in a minor increase in seating capacity at local restaurants, a potential incremental increase in patronage will not substantially increase the demand for services, or in the capacity of public utilities or facilities, or result in a substantial increase in housing demand. Nor will the project directly impact public facilities or utilities physically, either during construction or as an effect of their long-term operation. Avoidance of any physical impact is assured through the project’s provision that the use does not obstruct access to public utilities 399
and infrastructure for emergency or maintenance purposes (See Project Characteristics).
C. Conflicts with Land Use Plans, Policies and Regulations Impact assessment under CEQA considers a project’s potential conflict with any land use plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding an environmental effect. The proposed project poses no such conflict and thus avoids this category of potential impact.
D. Transportation and Traffic
The evaluation of potential impacts related to transportation (including traffic) under CEQA is limited to four topics:
(1) Will the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? The lane configuration component of the project proposes to modify lanes in specific road segments. Rather than conflict with programs, plans, ordinances or policies addressing the circulation system, the project implements policies of Goal 3 of PLAN Hermosa’s Mobility Element, including Policy 3.1 Enhance public right-of-ways, Policy
3.6 Complete bicycle network, Policy 3.8 Encourage shared streets, and Policy 3.10 Require ADA standards. Consistent with its goal to improve safety for multimodal traffic, the project will result in the addition of approximately 7,000 linear feet of new Class II bike lanes available for electric and conventional bicycles and other wheeled devices, and new on-street ADA accessible parking spaces with associated signage and pavement markings.
(2) Will the project result in a significant increase in vehicle miles travelled? Based on screening thresholds recommended by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research1, a project that consists of less than 50,000 square feet of retail use (including retail restaurants) will not have a significant impact related to vehicle miles travelled (VMT) and is too small to warrant a technical analysis of VMT impacts. The proposed project has a maximum square footage of 9,500 square feet, well below the recommended screening threshold.
(3) Will the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature? The proposed lane reconfigurations are identical to those that have been put in place under the temporary outdoor dining program. They were designed by the City’s traffic engineer to avoid the creation of any hazardous conditions. 1 Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), 2018, Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20180416-743_Technical_Advisory_4.16.18.pdf 400
(4) Will the project result in inadequate emergency access? The City’s traffic engineer has determined that the proposed lane reconfigurations with their reduction in vehicular travel lanes will not result in inadequate emergency access at any of the proposed locations, or along any designated emergency route.
Traffic Issues Raised by the Public
In addition to the questions posed by CEQA, the supplemental environmental analysis addressed comments received from the public. In correspondence received by City Staff in June 2022, a Hermosa Beach resident, speaking of the temporary outdoor dining program, asserted that “the Pier Avenue Lane Reduction Project has shifted more and more commercial and commuter traffic into residential neighborhoods and turned 27th street into a defacto truck-route serving the plaza area businesses.” To respond to this concern, City Staff and consultants performed a technical analysis focused on the question of traffic diverting from downtown as a result of the temporary lane reductions and impacting other areas in the city. The study investigated potential diversion effects throughout the city, but also specifically investigated the question of traffic diversion impacting the segment of 27th Street between Hermosa Avenue and Morningside Drive. The study also analyzed the potential for the proposed project to induce significant traffic diversion under future conditions with the project and regional background traffic considered.
The analysis examined trip distribution along primary and secondary routes for trips travelling to or from Downtown and found that 27th Street experienced a 1% decrease in distribution of downtown trips from 2019 (prior to lane reconfigurations) to 2021 (with lane reconfigurations in place). Total vehicular activity on 27th Street decreased by approximately 15% from Summer 2019 to Summer 2021. These observations lead the traffic engineers to conclude that lane reductions are not contributing significant traffic diversions onto secondary routes and 27th Street, and are not likely to do so as a result of the proposed project. The full technical analysis is provided in Appendix A (Fehr & Peers, January 2023).
E. Noise Impacts
A technical noise study was conducted to identify the potential for the project to result in significant impacts from roadway noise (increased traffic) or from noises related to outdoor dining. The study identified future noise levels on nine roadway segments, eight of which were selected because they serve the downtown area where most of the areas proposed to be eligible for outdoor dining are located. The study found that roadway noise with the maximum allowable outdoor dining (worst case) and lane reconfigurations in place, and with future background regional traffic conditions in place, would increase 0.1 dBA CNEL or less, at a distance of 30 feet from the roadway centerline, when compared to the baseline conditions of 2019 when outdoor dining and lane reconfigurations were not in place. In the case of the ninth roadway segment, 27th 401
Street west of Morningside Drive, the study found that roadway noise will decrease by an estimated 0.0 to 0.1 dBA, compared to 2019 baseline conditions.
Potential noise sources associated with outdoor dining activities include noise generated by outdoor restaurant patrons conversing, potentially at high volumes and/or in large groups. The study identified the potential noise level under extreme worst case conditions (40 persons dining together and all talking at once) and determined that the City’s exterior noise standard of 65 CNEL would not be exceeded under those conditions at a distance of 20 feet. City Staff has determined that no proposed dining areas are within 20 feet of a residence or residential property line.
The proposed project explicitly prohibits amplified or live music from being audible beyond outdoor dining areas. Televisions may be allowed, but only with audio turned off. These restrictions ensure the project will not adversely impact the acoustic environment.
The technical noise study (MD Acoustics, April 2023a) is provided in Appendix A.
F. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy Impacts A technical assessment was performed to evaluate the project’s potential to result in significant impacts related to air quality, greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption. The study found that the project’s air quality emissions are well below the AQMD’s significance thresholds (7% or less of threshold levels for criteria pollutants) and that the project is well below screening thresholds for significant contributions to greenhouse gas emissions. The project was found not to have impacts related to excessive or wasteful energy consumption. The technical study (MD Acoustics, April 2023b) is provided in Appendix A.
G. Visual Resources
Neither the proposed lane reconfigurations nor the dining decks and their related features (planters, umbrellas, heaters, podiums, tables and chairs, etc.) are large enough in scale individually or cumulatively to substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views, or significantly obstruct scenic vistas from any of the prominent public viewpoints identified in PLAN Hermosa. Overhead objects (poles, posts, canopies, signs, etc.) are restricted in height to 8 feet above ground level.
H. Cumulative Impacts
For all categories of potential environmental effects considered by CEQA, the proposed Outdoor Dining Project has no environmental effect or, in some cases, a very minimal effect that is well below thresholds of a significant impact. Based on this environmental assessment and the supporting technical studies prepared to evaluate the project’s impacts, there is sufficient substantial evidence to support the statement that the project would not trigger significance thresholds even if it were 2 to 3 times greater in 402
magnitude (square footage) than proposed. Its contribution to cumulative potential cumulative effects on the environment is non-substantial and not significant.
I. Summary
In summary, the proposed Outdoor Dining Program does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to decrease below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory. Nor will the project jeopardize long-term environmental goals in favor of short-term environmental goals, being consistent with the long-term goals established by the City as reflected in the General Plan.
The project as proposed and with implementation of all standard conditions of approval and compliance with proposed City ordinances, resolutions and guidelines will have no significant impacts to humans, directly or indirectly. Nor does the project have impacts which are cumulatively considerable.
* * *
In defining activities that are categorically exempt, CEQA does not assert that activities conforming to the exemption categories of Section 15300 will have no impacts. Rather, CEQA’s categorical exemption provision establishes as a matter of law that impacts of categorically exempt projects are effectively de minimus and the Secretary for Resources has found that they do not have a significant effect on the environment. As such they require no further analysis, documentation or disclosure.
The supplemental analysis performed for this project is above and beyond the requirements of CEQA, especially for a project of this scale and which causes no substantial disturbance to the physical environment. It was conducted by Staff to facilitate a clear and transparent understanding of the CEQA determination for the project, and to address questions raised in public testimony related to potential effects of the City’s temporary outdoor dining program and the CEQA process that would accompany the proposed permanent outdoor dining project. 403
Appendix A
404
405
406
407
408
100 Oceangate | Suite 1425 | Long Beach, CA 90802 | (562) 294-5848 | www.fehrandpeers.com Memorandum
Date: February 21, 2023
To: Douglas Krauss, Environmental Programs Manager– City of Hermosa Beach Ed Almanza, Ed Almanza & Associates
From: Sean Reseigh, Senior Transportation Planner, and Michael Kennedy, Principal – Fehr & Peers
Subject: CEQA Transportation Assessment for City of Hermosa Beach Outdoor Dining Program
LB22-0029.02
Introduction
This memorandum documents Fehr & Peers’ evaluation of the potential for significant transportation impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) associated with the City of Hermosa Beach’s proposed outdoor dining program in Downtown Hermosa Beach.
Project Description
The City of Hermosa Beach’s proposed outdoor dining program would allow for permanent outdoor dining primarily along Pier and Hermosa Avenues (“proposed Project”). Temporary pilot outdoor dining was implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under the proposed permanent outdoor dining program, a cap of 9,500 square feet Citywide of outdoor dining use would be implemented. These uses would be associated with existing restaurants and incidental to their existing operations. The location of potential outdoor dining is expected to primarily continue to be in Downtown Hermosa Beach, where 87% of the commercially zones parcels are located. However, up to 13% of the total commercially zoned parcels are located outside of Downtown Hermosa Beach, so a limited amount of outdoor dining could be located in other parts of the City. Due to the concentration of outdoor dining expected in Downtown relative to other parts of the City, this impact analysis is focused on the evaluation of travel to/from Downtown, as it constitutes the highest potential for significant transportation impacts associated with outdoor dining. Outside of Downtown, any outdoor dining is expected to be very limited in nature, and therefore, unlikely to have any significant transportation impacts under CEQA. Outdoor dining is expected to primarily continue to occur in converted on-street parking spaces. 409
Douglas Krauss & Ed Almanza
February 21, 2023