PC MINS 20100824 Approved
September 28, 2010
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 24, 2010
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Gerstner at 7:03 p.m. at the Fred Hesse
Community Room, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard.
FLAG SALUTE
Commissioner Knight led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.
ATTENDANCE
Present: Commissioners Emenhiser, Knight, Leon, Vice Chairman Tomblin, and
Chairman Gerstner.
Absent: Commissioners Lewis and Tetreault were excused.
Also present were Community Development Director Rojas, Principal Planner
Mihranian, Senior Planner Schonborn, and Associate Planner Fox.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The agenda was unanimously approved as presented.
COMMUNICATIONS
Director Rojas reported that the Coastal Commission approved the Coastal Specific
Plan land use designation change from agricultural to residential for the Nantasket
parcel, with additional restriction on non-native landscaping.
Director Rojas distributed two items of correspondence and a Resolution for agenda
item No. 2.
Commissioner Knight reported that he was contacted by a resident regarding agenda
item No. 2.
COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (regarding non-agenda items):
None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Code Amendment— Specific Plan clean-up code amendments (Case No
ZON2010-00223)
Associate Planner Fox presented the staff report, explaining this was a code
amendment in regards to an omission in the Development Code of the specific plan for
Eastview Park. He also explained the other components of the proposed code
amendment, as specified in the staff report. He stated that staff was recommending the
Planning Commission adopt the draft Resolution before them, which forwards a
recommendation of approval to the City Council.
Commissioner Knight moved to approve staff's recommendation, thereby
adopting PC Resolution 2010-27, seconded by Commissioner Emenhiser.
Approved, (5-0).
2. Revision "A-1" to Conditional Use Permit No 100 Revision "A" Grading
Permit, Coastal Development Permit (Case No ZON2010-00275)• Lower
Point Vicente Parking Lot
Principal Planner Mihranian presented the staff report, reviewing the previously
approved project components. He noted that the Commission had approved grading
quantities for the site, however in reviewing the plans prior to submittal to Building and
Safety for plan check, staff noted that the grading quantities had increased by
approximately 6,400 cubic yards. He explained the increase was due to some changes
to the grades near the Coast Guard property as well as the need to create a flat area for
the construction staging area. Staff is asking the Commission to amend the grading
quantities to allow 25,885 cubic yards of total grading, which will be a balanced site in
terms of grading. Staff was also asking the Planning Commission increase the grading
deviation to 1,000 cubic yards. He discussed the revised Resolution that was
distributed, noting the changes that were made.
Commissioner Knight compared the current grading plan to the grading plan approved
by the Commission February 9t", and noted additional grading on the current plan. He
asked staff to explain the additional grading.
Principal rPlanner Mihranian explained that in order for the grades on the City property to
blend into the grades on the Coast Guard property additional grading will be needed to
fill in the area in question. He noted that the fill will come from an area on site where
grading is also being performed.
Chairman Gerstner noted that the area of grading where the dirt will be removed is very
close to the proposed Annenberg project. He asked staff what would happen to that
area in terms of the grading if the Annenberg project is not approved. He questioned if
the area would be landscaped over or left as is.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 24,2010
Page 2
Principal Planner Mihranian explained that before a final can be issued on this project
the City has to ensure that all of the impacted areas of the project is completed and
landscaped.
Vice Chairman Tomblin noted that there was a condition of approval on the original
approval that before this project start there be in place the easement with the Coast
Guard. He stated that he did not see this condition of approval with this revised project.
Principal Planner Mihranian answered that a grading permit cannot be issued until the
easement is secured with the Coast Guard, and noted the corresponding condition of
approval. He noted that the application has been submitted with the Coast Guard and
staff is hoping to hear back within the coming week.
Vice Chairman Tomblin noted the original approval included a landscape plan and
specific conditions of approval regarding the landscaping. He asked staff why a new
landscape plan was not included with this revision, noting that there is now additional
areas that would need landscape.
Principal Planner Mihranian explained that the adopted landscape plan is still part of this
project and that original plan accounted for the areas in question. He also stated that
the City will ensure that all areas at the site are landscaped before a final approval is
given. He noted that there is a condition of approval requiring a landscape plan that
covers the entire project area, and now that the grading has increased staff will ensure
the landscaping includes all areas covered in the project.
Vice Chairman Tomblin felt that to make this separate and consistent that this be
included in the Resolution and the Planning Commission should see an updated
landscape plan.
Commissioner Knight noted that the new plans say "The Annenberg Project" while the
originally approved plans stated "The Lower Point Vicente Parking Expansion Project".
He felt that these two projects should be kept separate and requested the new plans not
say The Annenberg Project, but rather say The Lower Point Vicente Parking Expansion
Project.
Principal Planner Mihranian agreed, and stated that sheets on the plans would be
corrected.
Commissioner Leon questioned why the City felt some urgency to do this project quickly
instead of having some sort of integrated plan for the entire 26 acre site.
Director Rojas answered there is a plan for the entire site which is in the vision plan that
was approved by the City Council.
Principal Planner Mihranian added that there is also a Planning Commission approved
plan from 1998 which shows all of the grading in the proposed area.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 24,2010
Page 3
Chairman Gerstner opened the public hearing.
Tricia Johns stated she is the civil engineer of record for this project and was available
for any questions.
Commissioner Knight referred to a section on the plans and asked why such a large
area was needed for a relatively small amount of fill.
Ms. Johns answered that she was trying to create the least amount of impact to the
area. She explained the grading for this area is a thin layer that is being removed to get
the fill for the area. She noted that it is important that this be a balanced grading site.
Commissioner Leon asked Ms. Johns to explain where the change of approximately
11,000 cubic yards of fill is being placed.
Ms. Johns noted on a plan the various locations on the site where fill is needed for this
project. She noted that her focus has always been on a balanced site and not on a
particular number in terms of moving earth around.
Chairman Gerstner asked Ms. Johns where she was finding select fill on the property.
Ms. Johns answered that it was mostly rock, which will be re-used in several ways on
the property.
Vice Chairman Tomblin asked Ms. Johns what her scope of work was in regards to this
specific project.
Ms. Johns answered that her scope of work was to design and build a parking lot and
one of the scope items was to create a balanced site.
Vice Chairman Tomblin asked if in her scope of work there was any direction given to
prepare this site for any future development or expansion.
Ms. Johns answered that her direction was that this was a completely separate project
from any other project at the site.
Commissioner Leon began by explaining that he was not part of the Commission when
this project was originally approved. He felt that it appears that this is a single site, and
although it is being divided into two projects, the two projects, as a minimum, need to
dovetail such that, at some time in the future people will note that this is a nice plan for
the entire site. He felt that if a parking lot were designed for the interpretive center with
the idea of having open space in the other portion, it would be a different design than
one that anticipated the Annenberg project at the site. He felt this current design seems
to anticipate that the Annenberg project will be approved, and that this is a bit
premature. He felt that in accommodating the increase in grading, the City is being
Planning Commission Minutes
August 24,2010
Page 4
premature. Therefore, he felt that the City should live with the current situation and then
get an integrated, best design at a later date. He recommended that the Commission
not approve staffs recommendation.
Commissioner Emenhiser agreed with the Vice Chairman in that he would like to make
sure these two projects are not related. He noted that this project was previously
approved, and the only change he can see between the previously approved project
and this current project was a change in the amount of cut and fill needed.
Director Rojas explained the City staff has been very clear to the Annenberg Foundation
that they do not want to end up with a parking lot that the City would just have to live
with, but rather one that would meet the City's needs. There has been quite a bit of
input from the City Manager's office, Recreation and Parks, and the Public Works
Department on the proposed parking lot plan to make sure this project meets the City's
needs in the long run, with or without the Annenberg project. He noted that all of the
City Department representatives feel this is an improved plan over the original 1998
plan.
Commissioner Knight stated that he would like to add a condition that would ensure that
the plans submitted to Building and Safety are labeled correctly as the Lower Point
Vicente Parking Lot Expansion Project, and have no referral to the Annenberg project.
Principal Planner Mihranian stated that this language can be added to condition No. 1.
Vice Chairman Tomblin moved to approved staff's recommendation, as amended,
to add a condition that the plans are labeled correctly so as not to reflect any
connection to the Annenberg project, thereby adopting PC Resolution 2010-28, to
amend condition No. 29 to adjust the grading quantities as outlined in the draft
Resolution, seconded by Commissioner Emenhiser. Approved, (4-1) with
Commissioner Leon dissenting.
3. General Plan Update — "Draft" Circulation Element
Senior Planner Schonborn presented the staff report, briefly explaining the purpose of
the circulation element and noted the element is divided into two parts: the first part
discussing transportation systems and the second discussing infrastructure. He
explained that a draft of the element has been given to the Traffic Safety Commission to
review the vehicular and street network subsections, which will take place during their
first meeting in September. He stated that staff would keep the Planning Commission
subcommittee informed of any changes or comments from the Traffic Safety
Commission. As such, staff is recommending the Planning Commission provide
general direction to the subcommittee and staff on the proposed draft circulation
element.
Commissioner Emenhiser stated that he was always looking to make sure this
document is user friendly for the public. Therefore, he questioned the placement of
Planning commission Minutes
August 24,2010
Page 5
infrastructure in the circulation element, as he felt there may be a disconnect between
the discussion on transportation and a discussion on sewage. He questioned if a
member of the public looking for the waste water section of the General Plan would be
able to find if placed in the circulation element. He also asked staff to look at the graphs
found in the element to make sure they are consistently clear and user friendly.
Commissioner Knight asked how the trails plan would be implemented in the circulation
element of the General Plan.
Director Rojas explained that staff did not intend to have a trails plan in the General
Plan, noting that staff did not want to have to do a General Plan amendment every time
the trails plan is updated.
Commissioner Knight noted some minor changes on several pages of the draft element,
of which staff made note.
Chairman Gerstner opened the public hearing.
Lynne Swank (Chair of the Traffic Safety Commission) stated that the Commission has
started the traffic study, noting that it is a very large study that will impact what the City
does for the next 35 years. Therefore, the Traffic Safety Commission wants to put in
time to make sure the document is correct. She noted that the plan is to finish the study
at their September 13th meeting.
Chairman Gerstner closed the public hearing.
Senior Planner Schonborn thanked the Commission for their input and stated that staff
would forward the draft element to the subcommittee.
ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS
4. Pre-Agenda for the meeting of September 14, 2010
Commissioner Emenhiser suggested moving the Annenberg EIR item to be heard
before the General Plan element discussion. The Commission agreed.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:32 p.m.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 24,2010
Page 6