CC MINS 19781107 M I N U T E S
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
NOVEMBER 7, 1978
The meeting was called to order at 7:32 P.M. by Mayor Dyda at the Palos Verdes
Peninsula Unified School District Building, 30942 Hawthorne Boulevard. Following
the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag, roll call was answered as follows:
PRESENT: RYAN, BUERK, SHAW, AND MAYOR DYDA
11/ ABSENT: HEIN
Also present were City Attorney Patrick Coughlan, City Manager Leonard G. Wood,
Director of Planning Sharon Hightower, Director of Public Works Dennis Pikus,
Administrative Services Officer George Wunderlin and Deputy City Clerk Mary Jo Lofthus.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA After addition of Coastal Commission Meeting
(Ryan) ; and, Indian Peak Road Traffic (Dyda) ,
the agenda was approved on unanimous motion
of Councilman Ryan, seconded by Councilwoman Shaw.
WAIVER OF FULL READING OF Councilman Ryan moved, seconded by Councilwoman
ORDINANCES & RESOLUTIONS Shaw, and unanimously carried, to waive reading
in full of all ordinances and resolutions adopted
at this meeting with consent to the waiver of
reading to be deemed to be given by all members of Council after the reading of title,
unless specific request was made at that time for reading of such ordinance or resolu-
tion.
CONSENT CALENDAR: After removal of the minutes of October 17, 1978,
the consent calendar was approved as follows:
MINUTES Approved as presented the minutes of September 30
and October 24, 1978.
REGISTER OF DEMANDS ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 78-71 OF THE CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 78-71 OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ALLOWING
(1504) CERTAIN CLAIMS AND DEMANDS IN THE SUM OF
$741,146.69, DEMAND NUMBERS 5530 THROUGH 5604.
TRACT NO. 31394 Approved work and reduced monumentation surety
APPROVAL OF WORK bond for Tract No. 31394 located on Montemalaga
(1411) Drive, northwest of Grayslake Road.
SIDEWALK REPAIR PROJECT Approved awarding contracts to Mushroom
(1407) Construction Company and Dyno Construction
Company for Citywide curb and sidewalk repair
project.
The motion to approve the Consent Calendar carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: RYAN, BUERK, SHAW AND MAYOR DYDA
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: HEIN
# II 11 # 11
-1-
RALPHS MARKET - Mayor Dyda instructed the audience that dis-
MEDIAN CUTS cussion of this matter would pick up from
(1503) where Council left off on August 15, 197$.
He advised all interested parties to read
the minutes of that meeting which were part of the agenda package.
Speaking on behalf of Federated Department Stores, Traffic Engineer William Law, re-
ferred the Council to his letter of September 22, 197$ which outlined the studies made
in determining the traffic count at peak hours at the intersection of Crest Road and
Hawthorne Boulevard.
He requested Council reconsider the issue of median cuts on Hawthorne and Crest Road.
In response to Mr. Law's request, Mayor Dyda asked the members of Council if they
wished to reconsider and reopen this issue. No such motion was made.
Mr. Law's presentation then dealt with the traffic accident record of that inter-
section for the past four years. It was his opinion that it had a good safety record.
A film was then shown which demonstrated cars making "U" turns on Crest Road at the
Hawthorne Boulevard intersection.
Also presented for viewing was a topographical map of the Peninsula which outlined the
area from which the store would draw customers. As a result, an increase of 20 to 25%
in traffic was anticipated in the area of the store.
Additionally, the statistics of a traffic count of the area taken on March 17, 1978
were presented.
Council discussion then followed regarding what the ultimate traffic in the area would
be, taking into consideration the developments that are planned for that area.
Art Garcia, Real Estate Manager for Ralphs Division, requested Council to reconsider
the issue of allowing "U" turns.
There was no response to the Mayor's call for a motion to reconsider the matter of
"U" turns.
Mrs. Agnes Moss, 6405 Chartres Drive, representing Jim Moss the President of Monaco
Homeowners Association, told the Council that the denial of the median cuts answered
most of the concerns of the Association. The group was also concerned about car
headlights shining into homes located on Cachan and Sattes Drive.
Donald Shearer, member of the Palos Verdes Monaco Homeowners Association, concurred
with the remarks made by Mrs. Moss.
Mr. Martello, 6523 Sattes Drive, whose home backs onto Crest Road described the terrain
of the area: the real estate developments currently under construction, and how the
traffic will be substantially increased because of these developments. He suggested
waiting until all of the buildings were completed and the homes occupied to see what
the traffic impact would be in the area.
Council discussion then followed regarding the hazards created by allowing the re-
quested U turns ; the danger of the heavy fog in this area; traffic generated in the
neighborhood surrounding the store if these "U" turns were now allowed; and, the
possibility of posting "no right turn on red light" signs at the intersection.
Councilman Buerk moved that the applicant be required to post a bond for five years
in the amount required to modify the signal to provide for left turn phasing on Hawthorne
and Crest Road, and to include "U" turns on the north leg of Hawthorne and the east leg
of Crest, including the appropriate "no right turn on red light" signs for safety.
(Recommendation No. 2 from the Traffic Committee as outlined in the memorandum of
August 9, 1978. )
The motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: BUERK, RYAN AND MAYOR DYDA
NOES: SHAW
ABSENT: HEIN
Council Meeting -2- 11/7/78
Councilman Ryan moved, seconded by Councilman Buerk, to adopt the Traffic Committee's
Recommendation No. 1 that no "U" turns be permitted, and so posted, at the inter-
section of Crest Road and Hawthorne Boulevard. The motion carried on the following
roll call vote:
AYES: RYAN, BUERK AND MAYOR DYDA
NOES: SHAW
ABSENT: HEIN
Councilman Buerk moved not to allow any cars to exit from the parking lot onto Crest
Road. The motion was seconded by Councilman Ryan and died on a tie vote.
Mayor Dyda moved that the driveway be sloped to ensure that headlights from cars, both
low and high beam, didn't interfere with the privacy of residents in Monaco and that
the driveway configuration slope be subject to Staff approval. The motion was seconded
by Councilwoman Shaw.
Councilman Ryan moved to amend the motion that if lights from the interior of the
project, because of drainage swails and speed bumps, should shine on residents,that
no exits be allowed on Crest Road. The amendment was seconded by Councilwoman Shaw.
The amended motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Dyda moved to adopt the Traffic Committee's third recommendation that in the
event it is established that prohibiting "U" turns at this intersection does create
undesirable and potentially hazardous conditions at other locations, the signal be
modified at the applicant's expense upon approval of the City Council. The motion
was seconded by Councilwoman Shaw and carried unanimously.
Councilman Ryan moved, seconded by Councilman Buerk, to construct necessary street
improvements on Crest Road and Hawthorne Boulevard (I.E. additional median, sidewalk)
and to provide a cash deposit for landscaping of the medians on Crest Road and
Hawthorne Boulevard adjacent to the development. (Traffic Committee Recommendation
No. 4). The motion carried unanimously.
Councilman Buerk moved, seconded by Councilman Ryan to approve the curb cuts subject
to the conditions discussed. The motion carried on the following roll call vote:
AYES: RYAN, SHAW AND MAYOR DYDA
NOES: BUERK
ABSENT: HEIN
At 9:10 P.M. Mayor Dyda declared a brief recess. At 9:15 P.M. the meeting reconvened
with the same members present.
ORDINANCE NO. 110 Councilman Ryan moved, seconded by Councilwoman
ZONE CHANGE NO. 3 Shaw, to waive further reading. The motion
(1802) carried unanimously.
Councilwoman Shaw moved, seconded by Councilman Ryan to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 110 OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO. 3. The motion carried on
the following roll call vote:
AYES: RYAN, SHAW AND MAYOR DYDA
NOES: BUERK
ABSENT: HEIN
Council Meeting -3- 11/7/78
REPORT ON STOCK COOPERATIVES Director Hightower summarized the legal
(1801) definitions of condominiums, stock cooperatives
and community apartments as outlined in her
memorandum of November 7, 1978. Additionally,
this memorandum described the controls, ownership, responsibilities and the similar-
ities and dissimilarities between this type of housing and condominiums. Further
explained were the major concerns with converting apartments to cooperatives.
Mr. Otis Tabler, 6568 Beachview Drive, Apartment 133, representing Porto Verde
Residents Association, requested that in adopting the proposed ordinance, the Council
consider providing for bringing up to City code, property that would be converted
to cooperatives; that present tenants have the first right of refusal; not change
the General Plan housing mix, and to provide for relocation of residents.
Mr. Faherty, 6600 Beachview Drive, told the Council that if the apartment building
where he lives is going to be converted to a stock cooperative, then all local
government agencies should be informed.
Mr. Carlton W. Miller, 6568 Beachview, spoke in favor of establishing controls over
cooperatives and requested that the controls be made retroactive to the date when the
ordinance was passed.
Councilman Buerk moved to initiate a Code amendment regulating stock cooperatives
and any similar developments and refer the draft ordinance to the Planning Commission.
Additionally, that the Council include in this initiation an amendment to the sign
section of the Code relative to signs in the public right-of-way. The motion was
seconded by Councilman Ryan and carried unanimously.
Mayor Dyda requested that the Planning Commission take into consideration the comments
made on this matter at the meeting and that they also have the services of the City
Attorney in working out the details of these proposed ordinances.
Director Hightower noted that this matter would be brought back to Council for a
public hearing and adoption of the proposed ordinance.
DRAFT LETTER TO CITY Mayor Dyda requested that the City of Rolling
OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES Hills Estates review and justify the disparity
RE COMMERCIAL COMPLEX between their parking requirements for com-
(1203) mercial structures and the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes.
Councilman Buerk moved to approve the draft letter as presented with the inclusion
of the Mayor's amendment. The motion was seconded by Councilman Ryan and carried
unanimously.
VARIANCE NO. 32 Director Hightower summarized the Staff memo-
APPELLANT: YAIR HOLTZMAN randum of November 7, 1978 which gave the
LOCATION: 30725 CARTIER DRIVE background on this appeal of the Planning
(1804) Commission's decision to deny the construction
of this tennis court; the applicant's request
for refund of the filing deposit; and, the alternatives available to Council in
considering this appeal.
Staff recommended that Council direct that an appropriate resolution of denial be
prepared for the meeting of November 21, 1978 and, further, deny the request for
refund of the original filing deposit.
City Attorney Coughlan stated that numerous attachments, exhibits and minutes had
been furnished to the Council concerning this matter and such documents were part of
the record.
Mayor Dyda reminded the audience that this was an informal hearing and that participants
in the discussion should speak only to the items on the agenda, present information
for Council's benefit, and avoid repetition.
Council Meeting -4- 11/7/78
Mr. Yair Holtzman, 30725 Cartier Drive, the appellant, introduced his attorney
Bruce Smiley, 9911 W. Pico Boulevard, Los Angeles.
Mr. Smiley said that his client got an Environmental Assessment approval for the
tennis court on August 30, 1974. The plans were submitted to Los Angeles County
on February 3, 1978 and a building permit was issued for the construction of a
cantilevered tennis court. Taking down this construction would cause his client
a lot of expense since $15,000 had already been spent before the first stop work
order was served on March 20, 1978. When these stop orders were served, it was
Mr. Holtzman's recollection that statements were made to the effect that he could
proceed with the construction. In Mr. Smiley's opinion, sufficient administrative
errors were made to allow the building of this project. His client would not
proceed with its construction until proper approval had been granted by the City.
Since so much expense had already been incurred on this project, it was Mr. Smiley's
opinion that this constituted exceptional and extraordinary circumstances.
In considering whether this variance would be detrimental to the public welfare, it
was Mr. Smiley's opinion that although the project may now be an eyesore, this
could be cured with proper landscaping.
Additionally, since the General Plan encouraged private recreation, he felt the
building of this tennis court was consistent with those goals.
Although this appeal was based on grounds of administrative error, Mr. Smiley was
primarily basing his appeal for the stated reasons.
In response to Council's question, Mr. Smiley said he was not representing the
appellant at the time the stop work orders were issued, however, it was his under-
standing that when they were issued, oral statements were made indicating that he
need not be concerned about them and could continue to build.
Director Hightower explained that Environmental Assessment (EA) 90 did not have
details for a cantilevered tennis court. Mr. Holtzman explained that the plans
did not indicate the exact details, however, its location as well as the location
of the pool were marked on the plans.
Responding to Council's inquiry, Director Hightower said that when EA 90 was approved,
it permitted only the building of a single family residence with an attached garage.
Mr. Holtzman said that when the house was originally built, it was his intention to
build both a tennis court and a pool.
City Attorney Coughlan inquired of Mr. Holtzman if when the house was built, had he
constructed anything at the present location of the tennis court. Mr. Holtzman re-
sponded that he had started to prepare the area for the future tennis court. This
included excavation, pouring of concrete and striping.
Mrs. Carol Berkowitz, 30736 Cartier Drive, said that she lives across the street from
Mr. Holtzman and was not opposed to the tennis court.
Dr. Roger Bier, 30807 Marne Drive, who lives adjacent to the appellant, also spoke
in favor of the court.
Mrs. Agnes Moss, 6405 Chartres, representing the Monaco Homeowners Association,
said she agreed with the Planning Commission's denial of this project. That it was
not consistent with the Association's CC&Rs and that plans for both it and the pool
were never submitted for their approval.
Mr. Brugman, 6312 Sattes Drive, a member of the Monaco Homeowners Association, said
he felt the appellant ignored both the CC&Rs and the City's regulations. He ques-
tioned the ability of the landscaping to hide the court.
Dr. Mahlon D. Cannon, 30714 Cartier Drive, spoke in favor of the court and didn't
feel that the stated grounds were sufficient reasons to disallow it.
Council Meeting -5- 11/7/78
Mr. Klaus Schuegraf, 30331 Cartier Drive, told the Council that he was chairman
of the Architectural Committee of the Homeowners Association at the time of the
original construction of the house and that the plans did not identify a tennis
court in its present configuration. They only showed a lower pad and did not in-
dicate a cantilevered structure as it exists today.
Mr. Fred Eaton, 30615 Cartier Drive, who lives up the street from the appellant,
spoke in opposition to this court.
Mr. Donald Shearer, 6467 Sattes Drive, President of the Architectural Committee
of Monaco Homeowners Association, said that no plans were submitted for the con-
struction of a tennis court. Among other things, the Association was concerned
about the safety aspects of this court inasmuch as it did not appear to meet either
their setback requirements or those of the City. If a ball was to go over the
fence, it would land in the middle of traffic on Hawthorne Boulevard. Insofar as
screening the tennis court with landscaping, it was his opinion that in observing
the structure, there appeared to be only a four foot clearance between the existing
retaining wall on Hawthorne Boulevard and the edge of the tennis court. Con-
sequently, there would have to be some type of unusual landscaping that would be
very narrow and of sufficient height to fully screen it.
Planning Commission Chairman Mel Hughes, speaking on behalf of the Commission, told
the Council that on EA 90 there was only a small note on the drawing that referred
to the site of a future tennis court. This did not indicate any cantilevered structure
or a structure of any kind, but simply the potential for a site that might accommodate
a tennis court. In visiting the site, it was evident that there had been construction
of a sports court or paddle tennis court on the site. The new cantilevered beams
and structure that now existed on the site had destroyed the usefulness of the existing
structure. The beams had been placed on top of it and the cement had been chipped
away so that the existing court could not become part of the future expansion of the
court. What was built there previously was unrelated to the construction that was
presently taking place. It appeared to the Planning Commission that this was a second
phase of construction since the original structure. EA 90 did not show any structure
that currently exists on the site. Additionally, the Planning Commission heard tes-
timony that the beams were placed on the sports court because of severe settling
that occurred as the result of heavy rains this past winter thereby making the small
court no longer serviceable or level. The beams were placed on top of the concrete
to level the surface and provide a new tennis court surface that would be larger,
full size and level. The Planning Commission was now concerned about the geology
of the area: if there would be further settling due to the more massive structure
that would be required for this larger court.
Mr. Holtzman then presented the plans that he submitted with the original EA 90. For
the sake of reference, those plans were marked as follows:
Exhibit "A" - Topographical Plan stamped January 11, 1978 by Los Angeles
County Building & Safety Division.
Exhibit "B" - Plans dated 6/1/74 , revised 11/12/74.
Exhibit "C" - Letter from the City of Rancho Palos Verdes dated 9/12/74
Director Hightower noted that Exhibit "A" was not for approval of EA 90 .
Responding to the City Attorney's inquiry, Mr. Holtzman said that no additional work
had been done on Exhibits "A" and "B" since the time the original drawings had been
submitted. The plans presented at this meeting were the same as the original plans
presented to the City and had not been changed.
Mr. Holtzman remarked that Exhibit "A" was submitted to the City because grading on
Exhibit "B" did not show exactly what the effects were. He had to change grading to
show the pad and therefore the reason for the revised plot plan and the letter.
Responding to the City Attorney's inquiry, Mr. Holtzman said that he would submit
these plans to the City as evidence. (The Clerk later issued a receipt to Mr. Holtzman
for these exhibits and they are on file with the Environmental Services Department.)
Council Meeting -6- 11/7/78
In considering this variance, the City Attorney advised that if the Council found
significant administrative error, they had the ability to grant the variance. If
sufficient error couldn't be established, then the application would have to be
viewed with regard to the required findings, all of which must be made. He sug-
gested dealing with the administrative error and if this could be established,
then Staff should be instructed to prepare a resolution approving the project. If
this could not be established, and any one of the other findings could not be made,
then staff should be instructed to prepare a resolution denying the application.
Councilman Buerk moved that based on the fact that the Council could not determine
significant enough administrative error to warrant this appeal, that conditions
could not be found to grant the variance. The motion was seconded by Councilman
Ryan.
It was the consensus of Council, that it appeared that the County did issue a permit
without proper authorization from the City, but that the appellant contributed in
that he did not comply with the stop work orders. Additionally, that the letter
dated September 12, 1974 (Exhibit "C") specifically defined the limitations of the
approval and did not authorize the construction of a cantilevered tennis court.
The motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Dyda moved to direct Staff to prepare a resolution denying this appeal with the
proposed findings and present to the Council at the November 21, 1978 meeting. This
denial should also cover the request for return of the filing fee. The motion was
seconded by Councilman Ryan and carried unanimously.
RECESS: At 11:05 P.M. the Mayor declared a brief recess.
At 11:12 P.M. the meeting reconvened with the
same members present.
SKATEBOARD RAMP ON Director Hightower said that a skateboard
FLOWERIDGE DRIVE ramp had been built on Floweridge Drive and
(1201) that the City had received a letter com-
plaining about it. The ramp is situated
on property owned by Western America Development Corporation in an open hazard zone.
It is the responsibility of the owner to remove the ramp and no permits have been
issued.
Ery Unvert, 3318 Seaclair Drive, told the Council that the ramp was built on a
plateau behind his property by neighborhood children.
Victor R. Gurske, representing Western America Development Corporation, presented
Council with a letter which expressed that company's concern about the matter of
liability for injuries arising from use of the ramp. Additionally, the letter re-
quested that the structure be removed.
Council discussion then followed regarding the possibility of moving this ramp to
another location or alternative uses. Concern was expressed that the City's
insurance coverage might restrict sponsoring such an activity.
Mayor Dyda moved to instruct Staff to review the alternative possibilities for this
skateboard ramp. The motion was seconded by Councilman Buerk and carried on the
following roll call vote:
AYES: RYAN, BUERK AND MAYOR DYDA
NOES: SHAW
ABSENT: HEIN
COUNCIL/PLANNING COMMISSION Council set November 29, 1978 at 7:30 P.M.
JOINT MEETING as the date for a joint meeting with the
Planning Commission.
Council Meeting -7- 11/7/78
PARKING AT ABALONE COVE Councilman Ryan reported on his meeting with
(109) the Coastal Commission where they approved a
parking lot to accommodate 125 cars. Residents
of the area would be issued special parking
stickers. The Commission requested that the Board of Directors of the West Portuguese
Bend Homeowners Association issue a resolution endorsing this action.
The Director of Public Works was directed to meet with the members of the Association
and go over the details of this parking lot with them.
Councilman Ryan moved that based on the Coastal Commission's decision that Staff
develop alternatives for the parking lot, including financing details, and bring
back to Council for approval. The motion was seconded by Mayor Dyda and carried
unanimously.
TRAFFIC ON INDIAN PEAK In consideration of the proposed developments
ROAD planned for Indian Peak Road, Mayor Dyda re-
(1503) quested that the Traffic Committee study and
review the traffic in and around Peninsula
Center with emphasis on Indian Peak Road, giving
approximation and location of the number of curb cuts, consistent with City policy
in and around that area. The motion was seconded by Councilman Ryan and carried
unanimously.
ORDINANCE NO. 111 ORDINANCE NO. 111 OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS VERDES IMPOSING A STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR
FOR ACTIONS ATTACKING ZONING ACTIONS ATTACKING ZONING DECISIONS was read
DECISIONS by title.
(1801)
Councilman Ryan moved to waive further reading and introduce ORDINANCE NO. 111. The
motion was seconded by Councilwoman Shaw and carried unanimously.
MINUTES OF OCTOBER 17, 1978 The second line of Zone Change No. 3, on page
four was amended to read: ". . .this change to
RM12 would make it more. . ."
Councilman Ryan moved, seconded by Councilwoman Shaw to approve the minutes as amended.
The motion carried unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE At 11:50 P.M. on motion of Councilman Buerk,
SESSION seconded by Councilman Ryan, Council adjourned
to Executive Session for discussion of legal
matters. The motion carried unanimously.
At 12:45 A.M. on motion of Councilman Ryan, seconded by Councilman Buerk, the
meeting reconvened with the same members present.
PURCHASE OF PROPERTY Councilwoman Shaw moved, seconded by Council-
ON RUE DE LA PIERRE man Ryan to authorize Staff to negotiate the
(1404) price on the purchase of two properties located
in Tract No. 30119 on Rue de la Pierre. The
motion carried unanimously.
Councilwoman Shaw moved, seconded by Councilman Ryan, to modify easements on Calle de
Suenos to be located adjacent to the northern boundary of Tract No. 33034. The
motion carried unanimously.
Council Meeting -8- 11/7/78
Councilman Buerk moved, seconded by Councilman Ryan, that expenditure of any
City funds for cost of path from Calle de Suenos to Rue de la Pierre be only
made if maintenance district is assured. The motion carried unanimously.
ADJOURNMENT At 12:46 A.M. on motion of Councilman Buerk,
seconded by Councilwoman Shaw, the Council
adjourned. The motion carried unanimously.
A4F
111 -e
MAYOR
ATTEST:
LEONARD G. WOOD, CITY CLERK AND
EX OFFICIO CLERK OF THE COUNCIL
1.,..410_„ .
/ ITY VERK
Council Meeting -9- 11/7/78