Panel Rejects Hermosa’s Plan for Biltmore Site : Development: The Coastal Commission instead votes to allow a mixture of commercial and residential usage of the beachfront property.

The California Coastal Commission on Wednesday rejected a proposal by Hermosa Beach to build residences on the controversial former Biltmore site, approving instead an alternative that will allow a mixture of business and residential developments and create public open space elsewhere in the city.

The commission’s action sends the issue back to the City Council, where debate is expected to continue over what to do with the city’s last vestige of undeveloped beachfront land, city officials said.

A citizen-sponsored initiative recommending that the site be preserved as open space is already scheduled for the November ballot.

Citing concerns about parking and public access to the beach, the commission Wednesday unanimously rejected Hermosa Beach’s proposal to turn the 0.82-acre site on The Strand into a housing development and use the proceeds to buy open space elsewhere in the city, including the 4.4-acre site at the now-closed South School on Valley Drive.

The commission’s alternative, approved 9 to 3, will allow 70% residential and 30% commercial development and require the city to use 80% of the estimated $8-million sale price to purchase open space. Building on the site could not begin until the city purchases the open space property or signs a binding contract for it, the commission ruled. The compromise also requires that public beach access parking be provided at the site.

In making the decision, commission members noted that the site is currently zoned for a hotel and lies in an area between residential and commercial zoning.

“It is important that new development protect, preserve and enhance nearby water-related recreational opportunities,” the commission’s staff wrote. “The proposed residential designation is not the most compatible land use of the beachfront property.”

Speakers before the commission displayed the diversity of opinion that exists in the community, variously arguing to keep the site open, develop it commercially, put up residences or combine businesses and homes.

“Our little beach town is paralyzed by indecision,” said Mayor Charles Sheldon, who had previously voted against the city’s residential proposal. He spoke in favor of the commission’s residential/commercial compromise so the land would not be “lost to a few homeowners.”

Councilman Robert Essertier supported the city’s 100% residential plan and said the compromise will probably create more divisiveness in the community.

The Rev. Richard Parker, meanwhile, called for the site to remain undeveloped. “This is a piece of property that belongs to all the citizens,” he said. “It should be used by all of the people, not some of the people.”

The debate over what, if any, development should rise on the site has raged for 25 years, since the old Biltmore Hotel was razed.

Hermosa Beach has already approved a 172-room luxury hotel on an adjacent site, where the abandoned Strand Bathhouse now stands. A larger version of the hotel, which would have sat on the Biltmore site, was approved by the commission in 1984 but struck down by voters.

Hermosa Beach residents have rejected nine other ballot measures attempting to find a use for the now-vacant site.