Hermosa Beach Throws Cold Water on Home Addition

Ever since Jim and Liza Anderson bought their Hermosa Beach home three years ago, they planned on adding an apartment above the garage. What they didn’t plan on was solving their neighborhood’s firefighting problems in the process.

But city and water company officials are telling the Andersons--and others who want to build or add to homes--that they must pay to bring the entire neighborhood’s water system up to firefighting codes.

In the Andersons’ case, the estimated $100,000 cost is more than the cost of their addition. Jim Anderson said if another solution isn’t found, his family may give up the project, or wait until a neighbor who builds or adds to a home pays for the water system improvements.

The City Council will hold a public hearing on the matter at its Tuesday night meeting.

Anderson said the Hermosa Beach Fire Department initially said he would have to improve one of the two fire hydrants near his lot. His architect estimated the cost at $1,500. Although Anderson did not think it was fair that he alone would have to pay for an improvement that would benefit the entire neighborhood, he accepted the fee as another cost of getting his addition.

But he could not accept it when the estimates grew recently to more than the cost of his $95,000 project.

California Water Service, the private company that owns and operates the water system in Hermosa Beach, told him that the hydrants were fine, but the main water line had to be upgraded--at an estimated cost of $100,000, according to Anderson.

‘Incredibly Frustrating’

“I like Hermosa a lot,” he said. “I’m happy I live there for a lot of other reasons. It’s just incredibly frustrating that this is happening. . . . It bothers me so much that if it becomes completely unfeasible to do what I want to do, then I probably won’t continue to live in Hermosa. I can’t shoulder all of their problems.”

Anderson, who has already invested about $15,000 and 1 1/2 years in the project, can legally build the apartment without paying for the improvements. He just couldn’t get an occupancy permit, so nobody could live in it.

The situation is the result of concern about the ability of the city’s water system to supply enough water to fight major fires. While conducting safety inspections last October, fire officials noticed several large, single-family houses were being constructed as replacements for much smaller houses and they worried about the impact on the water system.

“They’re building all these monstrous houses in town, and if they catch fire we’re not going to be able to put them out,” said Fire Capt. Paul Osekowsky.

Since then, fire officials have routinely reviewed building plans with more than 500 square feet of construction to determine the impact on the system, Public Safety Director Steve Wisniewski said.

The result has been frustration for builders as they deal with governmental and corporate bureaucracies that seem to have different answers, or no answer, to several questions: How much of the system needs to be upgraded? Who should pay for the improvements? If the water system is inadequate, how dangerous is the situation?

A tentative analysis by city officials indicates that 66 of the city’s 240 fire hydrants need to be brought up to city firefighting codes and 113 new ones need to be installed, Wisniewski said. The hydrant work would cost about $1 million, he said.

But that estimate does not include upgrading the water mains, which in most cases means installing bigger pipes. City officials think the California Water Service should pay for that.

The water company says it cannot afford that and says that such extensive work is unnecessary.

Seek Compromise

Joe DeMersseman, general superintendent, said the company spent $600,000 from 1980 through 1987 to upgrade the Hermosa Beach system and plans to spend an additional $500,000 by 1990, he said.

“I think the Fire Department is asking for more than what they really need,” he said. “I think they’re trying to do the best job they can . . . and we are too. And I think we’ll find a happy medium.”

DeMersseman said only small parts of the system need upgrading. These include a few blocks in the northern end of the city, north of Longfellow Avenue--in the Andersons’ neighborhood--and a few scattered sections in the center of town. Still, DeMersseman insists, “there never has been an unsafe condition in the city.”

Wisniewski disagrees. He said water mains throughout the city need upgrading, but the biggest problem is in the southern end of town--east of Pacific Coast Highway and south of Aviation Boulevard.

The city has adopted national Uniform Fire Code standards that require the water system to generate 1,500 gallons per minute, Wisniewski said. But, he said, the Fire Department and California Water Service calculate water flows differently, and the city will recalculate the capabilities using the water company’s standards. That may reduce the amount of work needed, he said.

Wisniewski said he worries that a fire could destroy a house in parts of the city where some homes are more than 300 feet from a hydrant.

“Right now, we would have to lay so many (hoses) we might not be able to put the fire out quickly if it was fully engulfed,” he said.

For years, the city has charged commercial and multiunit residential developers to improve the water system in accordance with the impact of their projects on the neighborhoods, Wisniewski said, but the city has only recently begun asking small-scale residential builders to chip in.

The Hermosa Beach Building Department estimates the city will have 1.5-million square feet of residential construction during the next 10 years.

A committee of high-ranking city officials--which includes Wisniewski, City Manager Kevin Northcraft, City Atty. James Lough, Building and Safety Director Bill Grove and members of the Fire Department--is recommending that the council charge builders 50 cents per square foot of residential construction and the city contribute $50,000 a year to a fund to pay for fire hydrant improvements.

City Estimate

Builders would be reimbursed for any money over the cost of improvements, which city officials estimated at 66 cents a square foot. The city’s recommendation would not appear to help the Andersons since their case deals with a water main, not a fire hydrant.

Under the recommendation, the city would hire a consultant to set priorities for upgrading hydrants, Wisniewski said. As money became available, the city would upgrade or replace the worst hydrants, except when someone wanted to build in an area that needed to be improved. In those cases, that part of the system would be upgraded first, he said.

Wisniewski said it has not been determined what would happen under the plan if there were more building projects than money. “I think it’s a real major question,” he said.

One possibility, he said, would be for the city to institute a building moratorium. Otherwise, the city would risk liability for allowing people to build houses without having enough water to extinguish fires, he said.

Wisniewski said: “It’s a step in the right direction. It’s a lot more equitable than what we’ve been doing. I don’t think it’s a long-term solution, though.”

‘Equitable Solution’

Councilman Jim Rosenberger said: “I’m in favor of a just and equitable solution, which this seems to be. . . . It should be the people who are adding to the hazards who pay the cost.” Other residents who would benefit by the improvements would pay their fair share through the city’s contributions, he said.

Mayor Etta Simpson and Councilwoman June Williams said the burden should be borne equally by anyone who will benefit by the improvements. Williams said the recommendation “may be a good stopgap measure,” but she suggested a citywide assessment district might be a good solution for the long run.

Until a better solution is found, Anderson and other builders may be able to avoid paying for water-system improvements by installing indoor sprinklers.