CC MINS 19920707 ADJM I N U T E S
CITY COUNCIL & PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT SESSION
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING /WORK SESSION
JULY 71 1992
This joint session of the City Council and the Planning Commission
was called to order at 6:00 P.M. at Fred Hesse Community Park,
29301 Hawthorne Boulevard by Mayor John McTaggart, notice having
been given with affidavit thereto on file.
PRESENT: BROOKS, KUYKENDALL, BACHARACH & MAYOR MCTAGGART
ABSENT: RYAN
The Planning Commission was called to order by Chairman Katherman:
PRESENT: MOWLDS, HAYES, BYRD, CLARK, LORENZEN, ALBERIO &
CHAIRMAN KATHERMAN
ABSENT: NONE
City Manager Paul Bus sey summarized the format of the meeting would
be to have the Planning Commission present their concerns regarding
the following items:
1. Who sets policy and how is it communicated to the
decision makers, staff and the citizens.
2. Neighborhood compatibility - how are items such as "pop -
up" garages, variances, architectural compatibility
addressed.
3. The role of the Design Review Committee - What impact
this would have on the proposed revisions to Title 17 of
the Development Code.
4. Discretionary Permits - what level of review is needed
for certain activities such as parking lots, flagpoles,
signs, height variations, grading permits,. Who is the
appropriate reviewing body: City Council, Planning
Commission or staff?
The Commission presented its concerns relative to Grading issues:
if projects under 1000 cu, yds. should be heard at the Commission
level;if grading should be approved by the Building and Safety
Division prior to the approval of the development permit; and, the
mechanism by which the procedure could be changed so that the
Planning Commission can determine if this type of issue can be
accomplished at the staff level.
A brief discussion ensued and centered on whether items such as
these were a trend or just once -in -a -while occurrence.
The Council and the Commission then discussed the feasibility of
listing these routine items and making a recommendation for
changing the Code.
Additional discussion focused on how procedures can be re- examined
so that the process can be made less cumbersome and more efficient
and whether making such a change required a change in the Code.
With regard to the issue of setting policy, the discussion focused
on a number of issues: the fact that the Planning Commission can
recommend but not set policy; how far the Planning Commission
should go in the re- design process with applicants? How new policy
issues can be brought to the City Council.
The consensus was that the method for presenting new policy issues
to the Council would be through a resolution accompanied by a
memorandum from the Planning Commission.
Neighborhood Compatibility as Applied to Adding on to a Garage -
Comments centered on how the original ordinance tries to minimize
the view impact resulting from this add on situation; the fact that
staff currently uses that ordinance as a guideline; the necessity
of having more specific criteria; and, at what point projects like
this should go to the Planning Commission for hearing.
Role of the Design Review Committee (DRC) - After a brief review
of the DRC's recommendations by the City Attorney, it was the
consensus that the City Attorney would prepare a discussion of
those guidelines.
Council concerns regarding the recommendation of the Committee were
as follows: if these items can be handled by the Planning
Commission, the staff or the DRC; the cost and time the DRC will
engender; how this committee might be able to streamline the
process; if standards could be established. The consensus was that
the Council subcommittee will work with the Planning Commission on
this matter. The City Attorney will then review these proposed
guidelines.
Discretionary Permits - It was the consensus that the City Manager
will work with the staff and the Planning Commission to address
some of these issues.
ADJOURNMENT: At 6:40
Councilwoman Bacharach,
carried.
P.M. the meeting adjourned on motion of
seconded by Counci oman Brooks and
MA
2- WORK SESSION JULY 71 1992