Hermosa Beach planning commission studies expanded rules for temporary uses and events; no vote taken

Hermosa Beach planning commissioners held a December study session on proposed changes to the city's rules for temporary uses and temporary events, hearing staff's presentation, questions from commissioners, and public comment but taking no formal action.

City planning manager Alexis Oropeza opened the presentation, saying the item was a study session on "temporary uses and temporary event regulations" tied to the broader zoning-code update and Plan Hermosa. Oropeza described proposals to consolidate scattered rules into a single "temporary uses and temporary events" section of the Municipal Code (Chapters 17.42 and 17.55), and to clarify and expand certain allowances and standards.

Oropeza described several specific proposals: extend the maximum administrative permit duration from six months to one year for temporary minor special events; recategorize events as indoor or outdoor and simplify frequency rules; permit outdoor events up to seven times per year with a maximum of four days each and indoor events up to 12 times per year with a maximum of three days each; retain existing hour limits; allow alcohol service with restrictions; permit entertainment subject to a four-hour-per-day cap and an approximate 80-decibel limit at the property line; require applicants to maintain building occupancy and, where needed, to provide temporary restroom facilities; and add parking flexibility through a parking-management plan for off-season use or, outside the coastal zone, year-round with director approval. Oropeza also noted exceptions for events on school district property and private events contiguous with a city-approved special event on public property.

Why it matters: the proposals are an attempt to streamline overlapping provisions in the zoning code and make temporary uses easier to locate and administer, while balancing neighborhood impacts such as parking, noise and public safety in a coastal community.

Key points from commissioners and staff discussion - Process and scope: Commissioners emphasized this was a study session and not a decision. Oropeza confirmed the planning commission's role is limited to land-use regulation; fees and some administrative practices are set by City Council but the commission may forward recommendations. - Permit duration and application process: staff said most construction-related temporary uses remain tied to building permits; certain temporary uses (for example, storage containers and temporary real-estate offices) currently require separate administrative permits. The proposed one-year permit was described as intended to allow yearly planning without multiple six-month renewals. - Frequency and "bankable days": commissioners and members of the public debated whether to set limits by "events" (counts) or by total "days" per year and whether to allow applicants to bank days for future use. Several commissioners and business owners urged more flexibility (for example allowing a larger total number of days per year and letting businesses decide how to allocate them), while others warned frequent recurring events may effectively convert a temporary activity into a permanent business use that should be handled through a conditional-use permit (CUP). - Holidays and public-safety impacts: staff proposed a short list of holidays when temporary events might be restricted because city resources are already committed (examples discussed included Memorial Day weekend and Labor Day weekend). Commissioners asked that police department resource concerns be resolved before any final restrictions are adopted. - Parking and the Coastal Commission: staff explained that coastal regulations and the city's local coastal development permit limit how on-street parking can be repurposed, so the draft includes a parking-management-plan option to allow some on-site displacement outside peak season and, where appropriate, outside the coastal zone. Businesses and commenters urged more flexibility for small private lots downtown, arguing a small private lot's occasional use has negligible impact on overall downtown parking supply. - Noise, lighting and public-safety details: the draft maintains shielded lighting rules (prohibiting strobes and moving lights), a sound limit around 80 decibels, and allows limited entertainment hours. Staff also said temporary sanitation facilities may be required if the event creates a need.

Public comment and business perspectives - Adam Malovani (resident) urged commissioners to pursue a vision of greater downtown vibrancy modeled on the post-COVID outdoor dining and activity "renaissance." He told the commission he walks Pier Avenue frequently and described examples of successful outdoor activations. - Cathy Knoll (Uncorked, business owner) described long experience using the temporary-minor-special-event permit and asked the commission for more flexibility: "As someone who's taken advantage of this special minor event permit for 13 years, I've given our anniversary party out in our parking lot." She urged allowing substantially more days (for example suggesting 24'to 36 total indoor days in some zones) and easier, lower-cost amendments when businesses need to change dates. - Laura Pena (business owner and Economic Development Advisory Group member) linked the proposal to the city's economic strategy, saying the code should "introduce and facilitate downtown experiences" and urging the commission to be "bold" in increasing allowances so downtown businesses can realize the adopted economic-development strategy. - A commenter identified as Marley argued the parking impact of small private lots is negligible compared with the city's total downtown parking supply: after run-through figures he asked, "It's like, really? Do we really have to have such restrictions and an alternate parking plan?" He and others described the current permit process as costly and time-consuming and asked staff to streamline applications and to consider nominal fees for later date changes rather than full new permit fees.

Proposed direction from commissioners Several commissioners expressed support for more flexibility than the initial draft proposes and suggested alternatives the staff should analyze and return with, including: - Allowing a larger number of total "bankable" days per year (several commissioners suggested figures in the 24'to 36-day range, or a similar total-day approach rather than counting only distinct events), with limits on the maximum number of consecutive days per event and minimum spacing between events. - Differentiating between small private parking lots downtown and larger site parking (for example allowing greater on-site use in very small lots without creating coastal-access impacts), and considering seasonality (more flexibility off-season). - Clarifying definitions (for example of "limited entertainment" and what constitutes activity "outside the scope" of a licensed business) and returning a redlined ordinance so commissioners can see proposed edits in context. - Asking the police department to provide clear rationale for any holiday-based restrictions (for example Memorial Day and Labor Day) so that the commission and applicants understand the operational basis for those limits.

Formal actions and next steps No land-use decisions were made at this study session. Commissioners directed staff to return with revised draft language and to schedule a public hearing (the chair suggested seeking a February hearing if possible). Staff said it will consider changes on frequency limits (including bankable days), parking distinctions between small and large lots, revised holiday language based on police input, clearer definitions and a redlined ordinance, and options to reduce the fee burden for small date amendments.

Votes at a glance (procedural votes taken during the meeting) - Agenda approval: voice vote; roll call recorded all five commissioners as "Yes" (Commissioner Hoffman: yes; Commissioner Flaherty: yes; Commissioner Zahn: yes; Vice Chair Hirsch: yes; Chair Peterson: yes). Outcome: approved. - Consent calendar (minutes): motion/second recorded; roll call recorded all five commissioners as "Yes" (same roll call). Outcome: approved. - Receive and file January agenda: motion/second; roll call recorded all five commissioners as "Yes." Outcome: approved.

What happens next Staff will revise the draft based on tonight's direction and public input, produce a redlined ordinance for commissioners to review, and return to the planning commission for a public hearing and a formal recommendation to City Council. Commissioners asked staff to coordinate with the police department on holiday limitations and to explore ways to reduce permitting friction and fee burden for date changes.

Ending: The planning commission closed the study-session discussion and moved to other staff items; the community-development manager noted recruitment for the department and the meeting adjourned for the holiday recess.