CITY COUNCIL - March 25, 2025
1. CLOSED SESSION—CALL TO ORDER 5:00 PM
Public Comments:
Mayor Francois called the Closed Session meeting to order at 5:01 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Public Comments:
City Clerk Myra Maravilla announced a quorum.
3. PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE CLOSED SESSION AGENDA
Public Comments:
This Public Comment period is limited to Closed Session agenda items only. Public Comment is limited to three (3) minutes per speaker.
Mayor Francois opened Public Comment. No public comment was provided.
4. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
Public Comments:
The City Council recessed to Closed Session at 5:05 p.m.
4.a
MINUTES: Approval of minutes of Closed Session held on March 11, 2025 Public Comments:
4.b
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL
Public Comments:
Existing Litigation - Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) The City finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation.
Name of Case: Koerner v. City of Hermosa Beach, et al.
Case Number: 25STCP00891
Date Filed: 3/07/2025
4.c
CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL: GENERAL PUBLIC LIABILITY LITIGATION Public Comments:
Existing Litigation - Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1) The City finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation.
Name of Case: Cocking
Carl Warren Claim Number: CJP-3051850
D.O.I.: 01/14/2024
5. OPEN SESSION—CALL TO ORDER 6:00 PM
Public Comments:
Mayor Francois called the Open Session to order at 6:16 p.m.
6. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Public Comments:
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Paige Kaluderovic.
7. ROLL CALL
Public Comments:
City Clerk Maravilla announced a quorum.
8. CLOSED SESSION REPORT
Public Comments:
City Attorney Donegan provided the Closed Session Report. No reportable action was taken.
9. ANNOUNCEMENTS—UPCOMING CITY EVENTS
Public Comments:
Mayor Francois announced the Spring Paper Shredding and Compost Giveaway for Earth Month on Saturday, April 5th from 8:00 a.m. to noon and the State of the City Address on Thursday, April 10 at 5:30 p.m.at the Community Theater.
10. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Public Comments:
This is the time for the City Council to discuss any changes to the order of agenda items.
Mayor Francois provided comments in support of hearing item 17.e and not continuing the item.
Motion 1
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Councilmember Jackson
To approve the order of the agenda, pull Consent Calendar item 15.i and 15.j for separate discussion, continue item 17.a to the next meeting and, 17.e until the Final EIR is released. No vote was taken on this motion.
Substitute Motion 1
Moved by:
Councilmember Jackson
Seconded by:
Mayor Pro Tem Saemann
To table item 17.e until the Final EIR is released.
Ayes (3)
Councilmember Jackson, Mayor Pro Tem Saemann, and Councilmember Detoy Noes (2)
Mayor Francois, and Councilmember Keegan
Motion Carried
Motion 2
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Mayor Pro Tem Saemann
To approve the agenda, remove items 15.i and 15.f for separate discussion and continue item 17.a.
Motion Carried
11. PROCLAMATIONS / PRESENTATIONS
Public Comments:
11.a
RECOGNIZING DAVID PEDERSEN FOR HIS SERVICE AS A PLANNING COMMISSIONER Public Comments:
City Manager Lowenthal recognized David Pedersen on behalf of City staff. City Manager Lowenthal read a letter from former Community Development Director Carrie Tai into the record. A letter was also read from former Planning Commissioner Marie Rice.
Planning Commissioner Hoffman recognized David Pedersen.
Planning Commissioner Izant recognized David Pedersen.
Mayor Pro Tem Saemann recognized Rob Saemann.
City Treasurer David Pedersen shared a few words.
11.b
LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE SERVICES AND MCCORMICK AMBULANCE JULY–DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REVIEW. - 25-CMO-022 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. SEMI-ANNUAL REVIEW JULY - DEC 24 LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE SERVICES AND MCCORMICK AMBULANCE - 25-CMO-022.pdf
2. 1. RCC Call Transfer Report, July - December 2024.pdf
3. 2. LA County Fire Call Transfer Report July - December 2024.pdf
4. 3. LA County 3rd and 4th Qt Response Report 2024 (Activity Report).pdf
5. 4. 2024 LACoFD and McCormick Ambulance Incident Report 2024.pdf
6. 5. Automatic Aid Report, July - December 2024.pdf
7. 6. Film Permit Report, July - December 2024.pdf
8. 7. McCormick Ambulance Report July-Dec 2024.pdf
9. SUPPLEMENTAL PowerPoint - 11.b.pdf
CEQA:
Determine that this report is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) or, in the alternative that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Emergency Management Coordinator Maurice Wright)
Emergency Management Coordinator Maurice Wright provided a presentation.
Councilmember Detoy provided comments about the improved times.
12. CITY MANAGER REPORT
Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. SUPPLEMENTAL PowerPoint - 12.pdf
City Manager Suja Lowenthal provided the City Manager Report.
12.a
POLICE CHIEF UPDATE
Public Comments:
Chief Paul LeBaron provided the Police Chief Update.
Mayor Francois provided comments about the accessibility mats on the beaches at 2nd & 22nd Street.
13. PUBLIC COMMENT
Public Comments
Richard Gotthoffer
General comments pdf file
Chris Bredesen
Hello Council,
In regards to Item 17b on the agenda (specifically the Pier Ave Street improvement capital improvement project), I humbly request the city delays this project until LATE FALL 2025.
Our Upper Pier Ave businesses welcome the re-asphalting of our streets, but not in Spring Time (when the weather is nice and people want to sit outside and enjoy our wonderful city).
We just received notice the the city wants our dining decks removed by mid April (paid by us). In addition we have already booked these tables for MOTHERS DAY coming up April, and will dust be flying around during Mothers Day Brunch? I hope not.
Do this project in NOVEMBER! Lets the businesses enjoy the Spring / Summer business with the outdoor we love. The street is in good condition, this is not an emergency (right?).
We appreciate the city and all they do, but believe this project should be delayed for the good of the businesses and the patrons that enjoy our Spring Time! Chris Bredesen
howard lee
Please Tap/Click this message and then Tap/Click on the attachement link.
This is the time for members of the public to address the City Council on any items within the Council's jurisdiction and on items where public comment will not be taken (City Manager Reports, City Councilmember Comments, Consent Calendar items not pulled for separate consideration, and Future Agenda Items).
The public is invited to attend and provide public comment. Public comments are limited to two minutes per speaker and shall only be taken from those present in City Council Chambers. No remote public comment will be taken during this time unless required by the Brown Act. A total of thirty minutes will be allocated to this initial public participation item. This time allotment may be modified due to time constraints at the discretion of the Mayor or City Council. Another period is also reserved for general comment later in the meeting for those who could not be heard at this time.
No action will be taken on matters raised during public comment, except that the Council may take action to schedule issues raised during public comment for a future agenda. Speakers with comments regarding City management or departmental operations are encouraged to submit those comments directly to the City Manager. Members of the audience will have a future opportunity to speak on items pulled from the Consent Calendar for separate discussion, Public Hearings, and Municipal Matters when those items are heard.
Mayor Francois opened Public Comment. The following public comment was provided:
In Person Public Comment:
Sarah Harper
Jenette M. Kurth
Paige Kalvderovie
Bob Wolfe
Zein Obagi
Richard
Gotthoffer
Wayne Craig
Kimberly Gill
Jim Rosenberger
Colleen Villegas
Chelsea Schreiber
Niki Negrete-Mitchell
Kevin Mitchell
Yvonne Bernard
Carolyn Petty
14. CITY COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS
Public Comments:
Mayor Francois provided comments about item 17.e.
Councilmember Detoy provided comments about Pay by App.
City Manager Lowenthal provided information.
14.a
UPDATES FROM CITY COUNCIL AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEES AND STANDING COMMITTEE DELEGATES/ALTERNATES Public Comments:
Mayor Francois attended the Los Angeles Sanitation Board Committee meeting and Assembly Member Al Muratsushi's Town Hall on e-bikes and bike enforcement.
15. CONSENT CALENDAR
Public Comments:
The following matters will be acted upon collectively with a single motion and vote to approve with the majority consent of the City Council. Councilmembers may orally register a negative vote on any Consent Calendar item without pulling the item for separate consideration before the vote on the Consent Calendar. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember removes an item from the Consent Calendar, either under Approval of the Agenda or under this item before the vote on the Consent Calendar. Items removed for separate discussion will be provided a separate public comment period.
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Councilmember Jackson
To approve the Consent Calendar and hear items 15.f and 15.i separately.
Ayes (5)
Councilmember Jackson, Mayor Francois, Mayor Pro Tem Saemann, Councilmember Detoy, and Councilmember Keegan Motion Carried
15.a
WAIVE READING IN FULL OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS ON THE AGENDA Public Comments:
Recommendation:
Staff recommends City Council waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions on the agenda and declare that said titles which appear on the public agenda shall be determined to have been read by title and further reading waived.
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Councilmember Jackson
To waive reading in full of all ordinances and resolutions on the agenda and declare that said titles which appear on the public agenda shall be determined to have been read by title and further reading waived.
Motion Carried
15.b
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES - 25-CCO-017
Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. City Council Minutes - 25-CCO-017.pdf
2. 1. March 11, 2025 Regular Meeting.pdf
(City Clerk Myra Maravilla)
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Councilmember Jackson
Staff recommends City Council approve the minutes for the March 11, 2025 Regular Meeting.
Motion Carried
15.c
CHECK REGISTERS - 25-AS-025
Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. Check Register 3-25-25 - 25-AS-025.pdf
2. 1. 2-27-25.pdf
3. 2. 3-5-25.pdf
4. 3. 3-12-25.pdf
(Administrative Services Director Brandon Walker)
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Councilmember Jackson
Staff recommends City Council ratify the check registers for the period February 27, 2025 through March 12, 2025. The Administrative Services Director certifies the accuracy of the attached demands.
Motion Carried
15.d
CASH BALANCE REPORT - 25-AS-027
Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. CASH BALANCE REPORT - 25-AS-027.pdf
2. 1. February 2025 Cash Balance Report.pdf
(Administrative Services Director Brandon Walker)
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Councilmember Jackson
Staff recommends City Council receive and file the February 2025 Cash Balance Report.
Motion Carried
15.e
CITY TREASURER’S REPORT - 25-AS-026
Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. CITY TREASURER'S REPORT - 25-AS-026.pdf
2. 1. February 2025 Treasurer's Report.pdf
(City Treasurer David Pedersen)
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Councilmember Jackson
The City Treasurer recommends City Council receive and file the February 2025 City Treasurer’s Report.
Motion Carried
15.g
PLANNING COMMISSION TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS - 25-CDD-052 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. PLANNING COMMISSION TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA - 25-CDD-052.pdf
2. 1. Planning Commission Tentative Agenda April 15, 2025.pdf (
Planning Manager Alexis Oropeza
)
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Councilmember Jackson
Staff recommends City Council receive and file the April 15, 2025 Planning Commission tentative future agenda.
Motion Carried
15.h
SUBJECT: FINAL MAP NO. 84202 (CUP, PDP No. 23-05) LOCATION: 168 HILL STREET - 25-CDD-043 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. 168 Hill Street - 25-CDD-043.pdf
2. 1. Draft Resolution.pdf
3. 2. Final Map No. 84202.pdf
4. 3. Letter from County Engineer.pdf
APPLICANT: CHRISTINA CORDOBA
REQUEST: TO ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING A FINAL MAP FOR AN ADDITION TO AN EXISTING CONDOMINIUM LOCATED AT 168 HILL STREET ENVIRONMENTAL:
Determine
the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. (Contract Planner Kaneca Pompey)
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Councilmember Jackson
To determine that the Project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act; adopt Resolution No. RES-25-7476 approving Final Parcel Map No. 84202, which is consistent with the approved Vesting Tentative Parce Map; and authorize the City Clerk to endorse the certificate for said map.
Motion Carried
15.j
ACTION MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 15, 2025 - 25-PW-022 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. Minutes - PW_Jan15_2025 - 25-PW-022.pdf
2. 1. Action Minutes of the January 15, 2025 Public Works Commission Meeting.pdf Kathleen Knoll
Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers
In my view, the current LVR fee is a major barrier to developing small lots in Hermosa’s downtown. This fee makes reinvestment difficult. If we want to see positive growth, we need to make it easier for property owners to build mixed-use housing. Otherwise, that investment will happen elsewhere, and Hermosa will lose a key opportunity to support local businesses and preserve our small town character.
I strongly encourage the Council to revisit the Land Value Recapture program and the development standards for mixed-use projects. Small-scale developments should be considered for exemptions or alternative approaches. These types of projects can boost foot traffic, improve business activity, and increase property tax revenue—providing the City with more resources to serve the community.
By supporting thoughtful, incremental development driven by locals, we can help shape Hermosa’s future on our own terms.
Thank you - Kathy Knoll. Uncorked Wine Shops
(Public Works Director Joe SanClemente)
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Councilmember Jackson
Staff recommends City Council receive and file the action minutes of the Public Works Commission meeting of January 15, 2025.
Motion Carried
15.k
ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE REPEALING HERMOSA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE (“HBMC”) SECTIONS 12.28.010(H) AND 12.20.240 AND ADDING CHAPTER 12.40 TO THE HBMC REGULATING CAMPING IN PUBLIC AREAS - 25-CA-006 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. Summary Ordinance - Camping in Public Areas - 25-CA-006.pdf
2. 1. Ordinance 25-1486.pdf
CEQA:
Determination the Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. (City Attorney Patrick Donegan and Deputy City Manager Angela Crespi) Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Councilmember Jackson
To waive the full second reading and adopt by title only Ordinance No. ORD-25-1486 of the City of Hermosa Beach, California, repealing Hermosa Beach Municipal Code (“HBMC”) sections 12.28.010(H) and 12.20.240 and adding Chapter 12.40 to the HBMC regulating camping in public areas and finding the ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”); and direct the City Clerk to print and publish a summary ordinance in a newspaper of general circulation within 15 days following adoption and post a copy on the City’s bulletin for 30 days.
Motion Carried
15.l
APPROVE AND DIRECT THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A PUBLIC SERVICES CONTRACT WITH THE LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH FOR PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES AND FINDING THE SAME EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT - 25-CMO-020 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. Los Angeles County Department of Public Health contract - 25-CMO-020.pdf
2. 1. City of Hermosa Beach PH-005620.pdf
CEQA: Determine that the approval of this agreement is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (Emergency Management Coordinator Maurice Wright)
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Councilmember Jackson
Staff recommends City Council approve, authorize, and direct the City Manager to enter a Public Services Contract with the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health.
Motion Carried
15.f
ACTION MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 18, 2025 - 25-CDD-053 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 18, 2025 - 25-CDD-053.pdf
2. 1. Planning Commission Action Minutes Regular Meeting of March 18, 2025.pdf Nancy Schwappach
Honorable Council Members. With respect to agenda item 7.c: Please support your planning commission and retain expert land use counsel to advise staff and make appropriate recommendations so planning commission may DENY the application for PDP 24-08. Ample grounds exist to do so as provided in the public comments. Thank you. (Planning Manager Alexis Oropeza)
Councilmember Keegan asked about the updated parking plan for the 24-Hour Fitness at 1601 PCH.
Planning Manager Alexis Oropeza provided information.
Virtual Public Comment:
Kent Allen
Mayor Francois, Mayor Pro Tem Saemann, and Councilmember Keegan supported hearing the item at the City Council level.
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Mayor Pro Tem Saemann
To receive and file the action minutes of the Planning Commission regular meeting of March 18, 2025 and bring item 7.d to the City Council for deliberation.
Ayes (5)
Councilmember Jackson, Mayor Francois, Mayor Pro Tem Saemann, Councilmember Detoy, and Councilmember Keegan Motion Carried
15.i
REVIEW OF SUBMITTAL OF THE 2024 HOUSING ELEMENT ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT - 25-CDD-041 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. 2024 Housing Element Annual Progress Report - 25-CDD-041.pdf
2. 1. Hermosa Beach 2024 Housing Element Progress Report.pdf Adam Malovani
Regarding the Land Value Recapture Program, I think we got it wrong and should reopen this issue.
We should have at least taken Staff's recommendation to exclude small properties. This huge expense to small property owners discourages the development of mixed use properties which we need to add vibrancy and foot traffic and increase housing.
John Burry
Please consider the possibility of allowing a public study session on the subject of Builders Remedy. This need not be specific to any project, but instead provide an opportunity for all stakeholders to gain a better understanding of the possible outcomes. I believe that the City should consider hiring a land use expert for this purpose.
Given the impact to the whole city (and the possibility that our Housing Element may fall out of compliance) we need to make sure that we provide a full picture to residents.
Respectfully,
John Burry
Randy Balik
Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers,
As a Hermosa Beach resident, I’m writing to respectfully ask that you discuss the Land Value Recapture (LVR) Program as part of your review of the Housing Element Progress Report.
I’m concerned that the LVR fee is making housing projects on our small downtown lots financially infeasible. If we don’t start actively incentivizing our local commercial property owners to build mixed-use housing, those investment dollars will go elsewhere—outside Hermosa Beach—and we will lose the opportunity to revitalize our own downtown.
I know that there are opposing views on mixed use, but in my opinion, there are so many benefits if done tastefully and thoughtfully, both from design and permitting perspectives, including but not limited to more housing availability and more foot traffic for our downtown business. But with LVRs that make it uneconomical, a real conversation can't even be had.
Moreover, I fear "Builders Remedy" issues with regards to our Housing Element. There are an increasing number of developers looking to take advantage, and I assure you that will happen regardless of how airtight some feel our Housing Element compliance is (and admittedly, with such a complicated topic, I'm not so sure that optimism is well-founded).
I urge the Council to re-examine the Land Value Recapture program and development standards to consider exemptions or alternatives for smaller-scale projects. Encouraging incremental change downtown would increase foot traffic for our businesses, raise property tax revenue, and help fund better public services for all residents.
Most importantly, by removing these barriers and encouraging locally-driven reinvestment, we retain control over our city’s future.
Thank you for your service and for considering this important discussion.
Sincerely,
Randy Balik
Hermosa Beach Resident
Laura Pena
Dear Mayor, Council Members and Staff,
I respectfully ask you to exempt small, commercial lots from the Land Value Recapture Program as was originally recommended by staff in our Housing Element Meetings.
This policy, while perhaps created with good intentions, is actively hindering the very kind of mixed-use development we need to revitalize our urban core. In reality, it’s functioning as a barrier to progress at a time when we should be doing everything possible to encourage thoughtful, walkable, investment-ready projects.
First, eliminating this fee would unlock opportunities for mixed-use development, combining commercial storefronts with residential housing above. Downtown thrives when it becomes a true village center—where people live, work, shop, and dine within walking distance. Instead, the added cost burden from this fee has stalled momentum. We’ve already seen interest from property owners, but no applications have moved forward in our commercial zones since this program was adopted. That silence speaks volumes.
Second, mixed-use development isn't just a trend—it’s a solution. With the rising cost of housing and a growing need for sustainable land use, integrating housing into our commercial corridors is essential. Removing the fee would help us meet housing goals, reduce reliance on cars, and bring more residents closer to our local businesses—all without sacrificing Hermosa’s charm.
Third, a thriving downtown benefits everyone. Filling vacant or underutilized commercial spaces with housing and businesses doesn’t just generate economic activity—it strengthens our social fabric. More foot traffic, more “eyes on the street,” more life and vibrancy. That’s what small businesses need to survive. That’s what makes a city feel safe and welcoming.
Lastly, I encourage you to consider the broader economic picture. The land value recapture fee may generate some short-term revenue although it hasn’t shown any to date, but it’s holding back far greater long-term gains. We’re talking about increased property taxes once development is complete, higher sales tax from thriving storefronts, providing incremental revenue and business growth. These recurring benefits will far outweigh the one-time fees collected under the current structure.
I urge this Council to show visionary leadership. Let’s stop discouraging investment and start creating the kind of downtown that reflects who we are—innovative, connected, and forward-thinking.
Let’s reexamine the feasibility of the entire land value recapture program and mixed-use development standards—and start by eliminating the fee on small downtown lots, where redevelopment potential is most immediate and most needed.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration.
Laura Pena
MC Guerry
I encourage the city to advance its housing goals by streamlining development on housing element sites and encouraging more housing construction. In particular, I request that the City Council exempt Upper-Pier lots from the Land Value Recapture program. I believe the city should actually just do away with the program, so this request is a compromise for me. The city and its residents (current and future) would be much better with more housing development. As a resident of north Hermosa, I particularly like the planned 5 unit apartment building. We need a lot more buildings like that in addition to a lot more mixed-use buildings. I urge the council to make facilitating them part of their planning goals.
Gren Newman
Dear Mayor and City Councilmembers,
As a local business owner, I urge you to discuss the Land Value Recapture (LVR) Program alongside the Housing Element Progress Report.
The current LVR fee makes development on our small downtown lots unfeasible, stalling Housing Element projects. Without incentives for mixed-use housing, investment will go elsewhere, missing a crucial opportunity to support local businesses and preserve Hermosa’s character.
I urge the Council to reconsider the LVR program and development standards, exploring alternatives or exemptions for small-scale projects. This would boost foot traffic, improve business conditions, and increase property tax revenue—strengthening city services for all.
By fostering responsible, local-led growth, we shape Hermosa’s future on our terms.
Thank you for your leadership.
Sincerely,
Greg Newman
Hermosa Beach Business Owner
Jon David
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers,
As long-standing local commercial property owners, we represent a majority portion of the Upper-Pier downtown housing-element sites. We have been deeply invested in the success of Hermosa Beach for many decades. Our businesses and properties are part of the fabric of this community, and we are committed to its economic vitality and future growth.
The Upper-Pier corridor serves as a critical gateway to our downtown, and we strongly believe it holds the key to fostering the kind of investment and energy needed to enhance the resilience of our entire downtown area. However, despite our willingness to invest in mixed-use development that aligns with the city’s goals, economic and regulatory realities—particularly development standards and the Land Value Recapture Program—have created significant barriers to progress.
The recently published 2024 Annual Progress Report revealed a complete lack of movement on our downtown’s Housing Element sites, and as long as these sites remain subject to Land Value Recapture, we fear this trend will continue. The added financial burden discourages small-scale projects that could otherwise bring much-needed housing and vibrancy to our community.
Moreover, we do not want to see Upper-Pier change hands to large developers whose projects could alter the unique character of our town. As long-standing local business owners, we are the best custodians of this important downtown gateway. We are committed to responsible, thoughtful development that enhances Hermosa Beach while preserving its small-town charm.
We respectfully request that the City Council discuss the findings of the Annual Progress Report at an upcoming meeting and consider exempting Upper-Pier lots from the Land Value Recapture program. This adjustment would open the door for meaningful reinvestment while still upholding the city’s broader planning objectives.
We appreciate your time and consideration and look forward to working together to ensure a prosperous future for Hermosa Beach.
Sincerely,
Mike Granis (US Postal Office, Hermosa Professional Building, Miss Bee’s Tutoring, Skin Medix) Albro Lundy (Baker, Burton & Lundy, The Source, Redwood Pizza) Chris Bredenson (Rockefeller, State Farm, The Bike Shop, Door to Door Cleaners) Peter Nolan (338 Pier Ave – 404 Pier Ave)
Ed Hart (Maximus Salon)
Dino Capaldi (Hook & Plow, Breck & Brix)
Jon David (Pier Medical Aesthetics)
Mike Daneshmand (Mimosa Salon)
Mark Kernen (Uncorked, Off-Set Coffee, Fritto Misto)
Tony Higgins
my post below should have been posted to the short term agenda item 17d not this item (15i) my apologies
Anthony Higgins
please see above PDF.
Nancy Schwappach
I respectfully request you pull this important item from the consent calendar. While the City has pending a “Builder’s Remedy” application for a 53’ high 5 unit apartment building in Hermosa Beach, it is becoming very clear the Housing Element has the power to change our community forever. Several components of the Housing Element require the City, by the end of 2025, review its progress toward achieving its affordable housing goals. If the State finds such progress inadequate, and the City fails to modify the component to the State’s satisfaction by the end of 2026, I believe the City will be in non-compliance with its Housing Element and the Builder’s Remedy loophole may reopen as early as January 2027.
Therefore, I request you ask staff to go over this 2024 report with you at this meeting. As you have a very busy agenda, instead consider continuing this item to a future meeting. And in any event, I suggest you request staff provide you an update as to the City’s progress in achieving its affordable housing goals under the Housing Element EARLIER than the end of 2025, so there may be time to make adjustments before the end of the year.
Thank you for your consideration of my request and your service to our City.
CEQA:
Determine the (i.e. project, ordinance, etc.) is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. (Planning Manager Alexis Oropeza)
Planning Manager Oropeza provided a staff report.
Mayor Francois asked various questions.
Councilmember Keegan asked various questions.
In Person Public Comment:
Richard
Gotthoffer
An unidentified male spoke
Laura Pena
David Grethen
Moved by:
Councilmember Jackson
Seconded by:
Mayor Pro Tem Saemann
To receive and file the 2024 Housing Element Annual Progress Report; and direct staff to submit the report to the California Department of Housing and Community Development .
Ayes (5)
Councilmember Jackson, Mayor Francois, Mayor Pro Tem Saemann, Councilmember Detoy, and Councilmember Keegan Motion Carried
16. PUBLIC HEARINGS—TO COMMENCE AT 6:30 P.M
Public Comments:
16.a
REQUEST FOR A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT (TA 25-01), PERTAINING TO THE REGULATION OF TEMPORARY USES AND EVENTS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, AMENDING HBMC: 1) CHAPTER 17.04 Public Comments:
REGARDING DEFINITIONS; 2) CHAPTER 17.28 REGARDING M-1 LIGHT MANUFACTURING ZONE; AND 3) CHAPTER 17.42 REGARDING GENERAL PROVISIONS, CONDITIONS AND EXCEPTIONAL USES.
CEQA: The project qualified for a Categorical Exemption per Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. (Planning Manager Alexis Oropeza)
Item 16.a was continued to the April 8, 2025 City Council Meeting.
17. MUNICIPAL MATTERS
Public Comments:
17.a
RENAMING THE GREENBELT PEDESTRIAN TRAIL IN HONOR OF GEOFF HIRSCH AND CASEY ROHRER AND THE SOUTH PARK ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND IN HONOR OF CASEY ROHRER - 25-CR-026 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. Renaming the Greenbelt Pedestrian Trail and South Park Accessible Playground - 25-CR-026.pdf
2. 1. Joint Subcommittee Report.pdf
3. 2. Draft Resolution for the Renaming of the Greenbelt Pedestrian Trail.pdf
4. 3. Draft Resolution for the Renaming of the South Park Accessible Playground.pdf
5. 4. Municipal Naming, Monument, and Sponrship Policy Guide.pdf
6. SUPPLEMENTAL Email for item 17.a.pdf
howard lee
Click/Tap this comment and then Click/Tap the attachement to read comment.
Carolyn Petty
Naming rights should only be conferred in circumstances in which the people were highly significant contributors or benefactors to the community or the country. For instance, Zamperini airport is Torrance is named after Louis Zamperini who was an Olympian, a WWII veteran who became a Prisoner of War when he was captured by opposing forces. What a incredible person and American he was. He sacrificed for our country and was a longtime Torrance resident.
It important that something of this significance is used rarely, judiciously, and thoughtfully, and ONLY when the body of evidence of their community contributions are astounding and overwhelming, as in the case of Zamperini.
Otherwise, it diminishes the value and significance of such an acknowledgement.
Rick Koenig
Dear Mayor & Councilman,
I will keep this short due to that fact that I do not believe it is good form to speak poorly of the dead especially in a publicly accessible email.
Due to my FIRST HAND knowledge, I highly recommend that you postpone naming a portion of Hermosa's municipal property in honor of Geoff Hirsch until more data can be collected and reviewed. Frequent racial slurs and unprovoked violent behavior were frequent prior to his stroke and have been witnessed by myself and many other residents.
Here is a thought; Regardless of how you proceed, I believe that Ron Kovic who was portrayed by Tom Cruz in the movie "Born on the Fourth of July" who has been a South Bay local for many years might be a good choice for naming consideration. He is still active in rights for the disabled and lives in Redondo. He was seen frequently in the 80's & 90's wheeling down Pier Ave.
In Closing, Please take my statements seriously, proceeding without all the information would be a real mistake and potentially an embarrassment to all of us.
Sincerely,
Rick Koenig
CEQA:
Approval of the renaming of the Greenbelt Pedestrian Trail and South Park Accessible Playground would be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15304. The proposed renaming of each facility will have negligible or no permanent effect on the environment. (Community Resources Director Lisa Nichols)
Item 17.a was continued to the April 8, 2025 City Council meeting to give the Naming Subcommittee another opportunity to meet.
17.b
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM STATUS REPORT AS OF MARCH 13, 2025 - 25-PW-023 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. CIP Status Report March 2025 - 25-PW-023.pdf
2. 1. Capital Improvement Program Status Report as of March 13, 2025.pdf
3. SUPPLEMENTAL PowerPoint - 17.b.pdf
Andrea N Giancoli
Subject: Concerns Regarding Timing of CIP Projects 105 and 695 Greetings Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem and Councilmembers,
I hope this message finds you well. I am writing to express my concerns regarding item 17B, specifically related to CIP projects 105 and 695, which involve repaving activities that are set to commence shortly.
The timing of these projects is less than ideal, as they coincide with a period when outdoor dining is ramping back up. For our local pier restaurants, this presents a significant financial strain. The significance of outdoor dining has surged in recent years, particularly following the pandemic, which has altered our dining habits and preferences. Many patrons have come to enjoy the ambiance and freshness of eating outside, making it a key component of the experience at pier restaurants. The timing of the repaving projects, set to occur at the peak of this seasonal trend, poses a considerable risk to the viability of these establishments.
These restaurants, often operating on thin margins, rely heavily on consistent patronage during the warmer months. With repaving disrupting access to these venues and potentially creating an unattractive environment for diners, we can expect a steep decline in customer turnout. This financial strain could force some establishments into difficult decisions regarding staff retention, service hours, or even their very survival in a competitive marketplace.
Rescheduling the projects to a time when outdoor dining is less prevalent would not only alleviate some of the economic pressures on these businesses but also allow for a smoother transition into the busy season. January and February of 2026 would provide a natural lull in outdoor dining, thus minimizing disruptions while allowing for necessary maintenance to be carried out.
Ultimately, thoughtful planning and consideration of the local economic landscape can make a significant difference for businesses that contribute so much to the community's vibrancy. I urge you to reconsider the timing of these repaving projects to ensure that our beloved pier restaurants can continue to thrive.
Thank you for considering the impact of this decision on our community’s dining establishments. I am hopeful that we can find a solution that benefits both our local economy and the ongoing development needs of our area.
Healthful best,
Andrea N. Giancoli, MPH, RD
Hermosa Beach Resident
Josh Royal
Hello,
Josh Royal with the Lighthouse Cafe. These projects are great and much needed, but feel the timing should be better and coordinated with the businesses.
The restaurants and bars have had a really tough winter and right now is when we expect to improve our sales. Loss of parking and loss of patio extensions during this critical time will hurt local businesses.
I propose you rescheduled for February 1st of 2026 or even November of 2025 if needed the portion that affects the small businesses parking and patio extensions such as Lot A. This would be much better to schedule during slow season for the local businesses. Thank you (Public Works Director Joe SanClemente)
Item 17.d was heard before item 17.b.
Public Works Director Joe SanClemente provided a presentation.
Mayor Francois recessed for a five-minute break.
The meeting resumed at 9:16 p.m. City Clerk Maravilla conducted a roll call and all members were present.
Director SanClemente resumed his presentation.
Councilmember Jackson asked various questions.
In Person Public Comment:
David Grethen
Richard
Gotthoffer
Virtual Public Comment:
Kent Allen
Laura Pena
Mayor Francois asked various questions.
Councilmember Detoy asked various questions.
Moved by:
Councilmember Jackson
Seconded by:
Councilmember Keegan
To move item 17.d before item 17.b.
Ayes (5)
Councilmember Jackson, Mayor Francois, Mayor Pro Tem Saemann, Councilmember Detoy, and Councilmember Keegan Motion Carried
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Councilmember Keegan
To receive and file the Capital Improvement Program Status Report as of March 13, 2025.
Ayes (5)
Councilmember Jackson, Mayor Francois, Mayor Pro Tem Saemann, Councilmember Detoy, and Councilmember Keegan Motion Carried
17.c
MIDYEAR BUDGET REVIEW FISCAL YEAR 2024-25 - 25-AS-029
Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. 2024-25 Midyear Budget - 25-AS-029(1).pdf
2. 1. Projected Change in Financial Position(1).pdf
3. 2. Midyear Budget Amendment(1).pdf
4. 3. 2024-25 City Council Travel Summary(1).pdf
5. SUPPLEMENTAL PowerPoint - 17.c.pdf
Nancy Schwappach
I respectfully request you retain the $553,832 in “unspent” funds in this fiscal year’s budget and use some of those funds to retain an expert outside land use attorney to investigate and advise you (and Planning Commission) as to every legal means to DENY the Builder’s Remedy application for a 53’ high 5 unit apartment building in Hermosa Beach.
Thank you for your consideration of my request and your service to our City. (Administrative Services Director Brandon Walker)
Administrative Services Director Brandon Walker provided a presentation.
Mayor Francois asked various questions.
Councilmember Detoy asked various questions.
Councilmember Jackson asked various questions.
Moved by:
Councilmember Keegan
Seconded by:
Councilmember Detoy
To approve the revisions to estimated revenue, appropriations, budget transfers, and fund balances as shown herein and in the attached Projected Change in Financial Position and the Midyear Budget Amendment; Transfer $553,832 of unspent funds from the Midyear Budget Review 2024–25 from the unassigned fund balance category to the assigned fund balance category; and receive and file the City Council Travel Summary.
Ayes (5)
Councilmember Jackson, Mayor Francois, Mayor Pro Tem Saemann, Councilmember Detoy, and Councilmember Keegan Motion Carried
17.d
REPORT ON THE CITY’S REGULATION OF SHORT-TERM VACATION RENTALS - 25-CA-007 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. Informational Report on Short-Term Vacation Rentals - 25-CA-007.pdf
2. SUPPLEMENTAL PowerPoint - 17.d.pdf
3. SUPPLEMENTAL Email for item 17.d.pdf
4. SUPPLEMENTAL Email for item 17.d (Post Deadline).pdf CEQA:
This report is not a “project” under CEQA. In the alternative, this report falls within the “common sense” exemption set forth in State CEQA
Guidelines section 15061(b)(3).
(City Attorney Patrick Donegan)
City Attorney Donegan provided a staff presentation.
Mayor Francois asked various questions.
Public Speaker:
Jonah Breslau
Kena Castaneda
David Grethen
Claudia Aguilera
Richard Gothoffer
Mayor Francois asked various questions.
Councilmember Keegan suggested supporting short-term rental regulations in a limited area and on a trial basis for owner-occupied properties.
Mayor Pro Tem Saemann provided comments.
Councilmember Jackson provided comments.
Mayor Francois provided comments.
Councilmember Keegan provided comments.
Moved by:
Councilmember Detoy
Seconded by:
Councilmember Jackson
To r
eceive a report on the
City’s short-term vacation rental ordinance.
Ayes (4)
Councilmember Jackson, Mayor Francois, Mayor Pro Tem Saemann, and Councilmember Detoy Noes (1)
Councilmember Keegan
Motion Carried
17.e
CONSIDERATION OF A POSITION ON LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY C LINE EXTENSION ROUTE INTO TORRANCE - 25-CMO-024 Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. Provide Staff Direction for Position on Metro C Line Extension into Torrance - 25-CMO-024.pdf MC Guerry
As a resident of Hermosa Beach, I am confused why the council is wasting their time on this matter. The council member who brought this up for discussion is unable to articulate any sensical reason why this is even on Hermosa Beach's agenda. Hermosa Beach should be working through the COG instead. Furthermore, the final EIR isn't even finished yet.
If Hermosa Beach is to take a position, I urge the council to not support the Hawthorne alignment. It makes no sense either financially or logistically. I support the C/K Line Extension on the Hybrid Alternative which was selected by the Metro Board and recommended by Metro staff. It is cheaper, will be built sooner, and connects with the Redondo Beach Transit Center.
Thank you for your time.
David Grethen
The City of Hermosa Beach should take a neutral position on this subject, as doing so would strike a balance between the interests of your local Hermosa Beach constituents versus political considerations regionally, especially with our Redondo Beach neighbors.
If a position must be taken, that should be to support a right-of-way (ROW) option such as the Metro-Staff-recommended Hybrid option because it is in the best direct interest of your local constituents, who must be your primary consideration. I have attended multiple Metro outreach events on this issue over the years and, as supported by Metro documents and presentations, can assure you that the Hawthorne option is substantially costlier and its longer schedule will delay operational availability to riders. There is also substantially more complexity and risk with the Hawthorne option due to unique factors such as Federal requirements, CalTrans coordination, and private real estate acquisition. Furthermore, I am not aware of any significant advantages of the Hawthorne option to Hermosa riders, whereas the ROW/Hybrid options will stop at the Redondo Beach Transit Center to most readily and closely accommodate us.
There may be regional political considerations and a temptation to align with our Redondo Beach (and Lawndale) neighbors and Councilmembers in support of the Hawthorne option, given their objections to ROW options over concerns with operational issues such as noise disturbances. Support to Redondo Beach and its Council who are hearing concerns over these issues could potentially help Hemosa later on when we need to collaborate on other projects and issues that, unlike this one, will directly affect Hermosa. But Redondo's concerns over the C Line are not our concerns.
A neutral position, versus a ROW/Hybrid support position would not directly provoke our Redondo neighbors while at the same time not completely disregard the direct interests of your local Hermosa constituents. Support of a ROW/Hybrid option would most directly support your local constituents but may alienate our Redondo neighbors and strain our relationship. A Hawthorne support position, in my view, is unacceptable since it would directly conflict with the best direct interests of your Hermosa constituents, to whom you owe your primary allegiance.
David Grethen
Hermosa Beach Resident
Justin Massey
Honorable Mayor & Council:
The South Bay Cities COG considered the alternative alignments being studied for the C Line Extension to Torrance (the Right of Way, or ROW, alignment and the Hawthorne alignment) and took no position. In light of that decision, I recommend Hermosa Beach participate in C Line decision making through the COG, which has dedicated transportation staff and multiple Metro Board members on its own Board of Directors.
If the Council considers taking a position for the City of Hermosa Beach that differs from the COG, and chooses to do so prior to the final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that will report the costs, benefits, and impacts of the C Line Extension, please consider the following. The Hawthorne alignment is estimated to cost at least $730 million more than the ROW alignment, and it would strand the Redondo Beach Transit Center, on which the COG spent over $15 million of local transit funds, with the purpose of preventing modern light rail from running on long-existing freight train tracks along the Right of Way that Metro acquired several decades ago. The claims of marginally higher ridership (prior to the final EIR) and economic development along Hawthorne Boulevard that have been used to support the Hawthorne alignment are illusory and do not justify $730 million in additional cost. The Hawthorne alignment has *no stops* on Hawthorne Boulevard in Lawndale and *one stop* on Hawthorne Boulevard in Redondo Beach -- located exactly across the South Bay Galleria (and a short walk) from the Redondo Beach Transit Center, which has parking, pedestrian safety, and other essential amenities.
One stop with fewer amenities in essentially the same location is unlikely to promote greater economic development. Additionally, I recommend you examine Figure H-10 of the Redondo Beach Housing Element (https://www.redondo.org/RB%202021-2029%20HE%20(Final%20HCD%20Certified).pdf). You will see the Sites Inventory for that section of Redondo Beach clusters planned additional housing units around the Redondo Beach Transit Center, which is intended to "improve regional mobility, linking Beach Cities Transit with other regional transit providers such as Los Angeles Metro, Torrance Transit, GTrans, and Lawndale Transit, along with pedestrian and bicycle access to these services." (https://www.redondo.org/departments/community_services/transit/redondo_beach_transit_center/index.php).
I encourage you to ride Beach Cities Transit line 109 from Hermosa Ave to Riviera Village, downtown Manhattan Beach, or El Porto, and ride Metro line 232, which goes up and down PCH, to LAX, The Point, or Manhattan Village. You will see the service workers (housekeepers, line cooks, bus staff, dishwashers, etc.) and others who rely on efficient and effective transit. The responsibility of decision makers is to spend regional transit dollars efficiently for the greatest regional benefit. Uncharitably, the Hawthorne alignment is a billion dollar boondoggle that seeks to prioritize residents along the ROW in Lawndale and Redondo Beach over the rest of the South Bay and greater LA region. Charitably, the case for the Hawthorne alignment over the ROW alignment simply has not been made and, absent new information in the EIR, cannot be made.
Thank you for serving the City, and thank you for considering my comment. I wish you well.
Bob Wolfe
I am a Hermosa Beach resident and an active user of public transit. I am very familiar with Metro’s proposed light rail extension of the C / K Line from its current southern terminus on Marine Avenue to the Torrance Transit Center.
I have read the Draft EIR on the project and filed comments on it. I publicly spoke at the latest Metro board meeting on the subject on May 23, 2024. I participated in Supervisor Holly Mitchell’s walk through on the project site, and attended numerous public hearings in conjunction with the Draft EIR.
There is no reason for the Hermosa Beach City Council to take a position on the Torrance Light Rail extension at this time. It would be a mistake to do so.
Here’s why. Metro is currently in the process of preparing the Final EIR for the project. There is no projected completion date. Instead, we are told it will occur some time “in the second half of 2025.” The EIR project team is now engaged in performing field work and investigations, and compiling technical, design, environmental, environmental to respond to the hundreds of comments received in response to the Draft EIR. This includes my own.
Studies in conjunction with the Draft EIR revealed that the Hawthorne Alternative would cost at least $730 million more than the Hybrid Option. These estimates, with potential funding sources, are in the process of being refined and updated as the Final EIR is being prepared. Ridership projections will be updated as well.
I have serious concerns whether there are any benefits for Hermosa residents from the Hawthorne alternative. It is located in the median of an 8-lane heavily trafficked state highway, with some 70,000 vehicles per way, accessible only by a signalized crosswalk. There is no parking, bicycle storage or drop-off area.
By contrast, the Hybrid Option places the light rail tracks immediately adjacent to the Redondo Beach Regional Transit Center. This transit hub contains a 320-space parking lot, a pickup and drop off area, 11 bus bays, public bathrooms and bicycle storage lockers. It is much safer and more convenient than the Hawthorne Option.
But it is premature to consider these benefits and burdens now. Once the Final EIR is completed, there will be public hearings and multiple opportunities for comment before the matter goes to the Metro Board for decision.
There is another reason to defer action. Metro is now in the process of implementing a new operational plan for the C and K Lines. Rather than providing what essentially is east / west service from Redondo Beach to Norwalk, the revised operating plan will provide north-south service from Redondo Beach to LAX and the Expo (E), and ultimately from Torrance to Hollywood.
This new operating plan has yet to be fully implemented. The next – and critical stage should occur within the next several months when the $900 million LAX Metro Connector Station opens, and when we truly will have one-seat service up to the airport, and to the Mid-city L.A.
Under these circumstances, it is absurd for the city of Hermosa Beach to prematurely take a position on the Torrance extension while the Final EIR is still being prepared, and before the C / K lines are fully operational.
As a stakeholder who is fairly knowledgeable and engaged on the subject of transit for the Beach Cities and the region, I will be happy to provide my own input. But now is not the time.
I urge the Council to defer action, if any, until the Final EIR is submitted.
Thank you for your consideration.
Bob Wolfe
(Senior Management Analyst Ken Bales)
Item 17.e was continued until the Final EIR of the project is submitted.
18. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Public Comments:
This is the time for Councilmembers to schedule future agenda items and to ask questions about the status of previously approved future agenda items. No discussion, debate, or public comment will be taken. Councilmembers should consider the city's work plan when considering new items. The tentative future agenda items document is provided for information only.
Mayor Francois requested an informational item on Builders Remedy. Support was provided by Councilmember Keegan.
Councilmember Keegan directed the Planning Commission to revisit the Land Value Recapture program for small lots. Support was provided by Mayor Francois and Councilmember Detoy.
18.a
TENTATIVE FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS - 25-CMO-025
Attachments
|
Public Comments
1. 2025-03-25 Tentative Future Agenda - 25-CMO-025.pdf
2. 1. Tentative Future Agenda.pdf
Attached is the current list of tentative future agenda items for Council’s information.
19. PUBLIC COMMENT
Public Comments:
This time is set aside for the public to address the Council on any item of interest within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council that could not be heard under the first public comment opportunity because there were too many prior public speakers and the thirty-minute maximum time limit was exhausted.
20. ADJOURNMENT
Public Comments:
The meeting was adjourned at 10:42 p.m.