Loading...
PC MINS 20130122 Approve& Fe&uzwy 12 013 CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 22, 2013 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Tetreault at 7:02 p.m. at the Fred Hesse Community Room, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard, FLAG SALUTE Vice Chairman Emenhiser led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance. ATTENDANCE Present: Commissioners Leon, Nelson, Tomblin, Vice Chairman Emenhiser, and Chairman Tetreault. Commissioner Tomblin arrived at 7:20 p.m. Absent: Commissioners Gerstner and Lewis were excused. Also present was Deputy Director Pfost, APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was unanimously approved as presented. COMMUNICATIONS Deputy Director Pfost stated there were no City Council items to report. He distributed one item of late correspondence related to agenda item No. 1; one item of late correspondence related to agenda item No. 2; and a draft General Plan Land Use Map related to agenda item No. 1. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (regarding non-agenda items): None CONTINUED BUSINESS 1, General Plan update — review proposed changes to the existing Land Use "Map regarding the location of the Hillside (Hazard) Lane Use boundary Deputy Director Pfost presented the staff report, giving a brief history with the Planning Commission of this proposed change and the three canyon areas being discussed at this time. He explained that at the December 11 th meeting the Planning Commission', directed staff to re-review all of the maps to ensure the proposed boundary did not cover any structures. At that meeting, public speakers requested staff visit seven specific properties in three different areas to look at the areas in a bit more detail. Since that time, staff and the City Geologist met with the public at the requested properties and have re-reviewed the maps. He noted that in the review of the map staff identified seven properties where the boundary was touching or slightly on a structure. This was reviewed with the City Geologist, and he in turn adjusted the boundary off of the structures. He briefly discuss three areas brought up by the seven speakers at the December 11th meeting, explaining structures can still be built on these properties, and that staff and the City Geologist met with property owners in these areas as requested. He stated that staff is still recommending the Planning Commission adjust the Open Space Hillside boundaries as proposed by the City Geologist and as presented in the staff report. Vice Chairman Emenhiser complimented staff for working with the residents who had voiced their concerns at the last public hearing. However, his concern was for the residents who did not speak at the last meeting, and the process they may have to go through in the future if they feel the line is incorrectly placed on their property. He asked if there was a process staff could envision that would satisfy these residents without holding several Commission meetings. Deputy Director Pfost explained that staff knew that going through this process there would be some unhappy residents. However, staff believes that in looking at the General Plan and the intent and purpose of the General Plan, that this is the intent of the General Plan. However the mapping and capabilities that were available when the General Plan was written were not as advanced as what we have now. In working with the City Geologist, staff feels this is the direction that the City should move in. He pointed out that over two-thirds of the properties affected will actually see a reduction of the line on their property. He was not sure how else to approach this with the Planning Commission, but did note that the properties coming before the Commission in the future appear to be much easier than what these entail, Commissioner Tomblin arrived at the dais. Commissioner Leon questioned the contour lines shown on the aerial photos. He noted that there are contour lines running through houses and structures and questioned how this can happen, and did not think the contour lines could exist as they are shown on the map. He asked staff how the contour lines were drawn. Deputy Director Pfost answered that it is a flown survey done in 2002. He felt this was a fairly reliable source, and noted that when one visits the properties, the contour lines appear to be fairly accurate. Planning Commission Minutes January 22,2013 Page 2 Commissioner Leon explained that when they mapped out the zones in Portuguese Bend they provided a buffer to those zones, with the intent to be a bit conservative. He suggested the City try to follow a contour line that is five feet down from the pad so that it's not right at the edge where the slope starts. He felt this would allow any error on the side of the property owner. Commissioner Leon asked if it would be possible to have some rules associated with how the contour lines are chosen. As an example, he said the City could follow five feet down from the contour or follow on the contour. He felt that the types of rules for generating the shape of the contours could be used rather than what is done right now, which seems to be a bit artsy, Deputy Director Pfost felt there may be a way to create a process to change the line or move the boundary so that the more expensive geology review may not be needed. Commissioner Nelson asked how many undeveloped lots will be impacted by the Open Space Hillside line. Deputy Director Pfost did not think there were many undeveloped lots that would be affected. He noted that out of the 260 lots currently before the Commission there are only two that are undeveloped, Commissioner Nelson referred to a letter that was sent to the Commission from a resident in which the resident feels the amendment to the General Plan will eliminate the possibility for any case by case determination such as practical matter. Amendment of the General Plan for specific applicants and issues will be virtually impossible. He asked staff to comment. Deputy Director Pfost explained that the Zoning Code currently has a provision to allow the boundary line to be moved up to 100 feet, Therefore, he disagreed with the term `virtually impossible" because they can go through that process to move the boundary line 100 feet, provided the City Geologist agrees the area can be developed and it's not an extreme slope. Chairman Tetreault opened the public hearing, Madeline Ryan was pleased with staff's recent revisions, but still believed there should be some provision, especially for properties in the Q District, to rebuild or construct animal shelters in those hillside areas that are going to be designated. To prohibit them from building any animal structures would be the same as prohibiting them from animal keeping. She noted staff's comment that two-thirds of the properties will see a reduction with this designation, and wondered how many of those are in the Q District. Chairman Tetreault asked staff if any such consideration has been given to these types of structures in the Q District. Pianning Commission Minutes January 22,2013 Page 3 Deputy Director Pfost explained that redrawing any of these lines does not change the things like the number of horses allowed on a property, as that is based on the area of a property. Where structures are located, that could change. He explained that structures are not allowed on slopes greater than 35 percent and explained that many of these slopes are the sides of canyons which naturally are flat at the bottom of the canyon. However, many of these canyons contain blue fine streams at the bottom and these types of structures are not permitted near blue line streams. The blue line streams are managed by the Army Corp of Engineers. He explained the Commission can explore a path of allowing structures for the care of animals on extreme slopes that can be pursued separately from the General Plan amendment. Chairman Tetreault noted there are rules in the Q District as to where horse keeping can occur on a property. He stated that some of these properties are hillside properties and are somewhat limited as to where they can place these structures. He questioned if the line is drawn and decreases the amount of buildable area could the City be eliminating the possibility of horse keeping on the property in the future. He asked if the City Geologist has taken that into account when drawing this line. He realized the City Geologist made accommodations for traditional habitable structures, but he hasn't heard anything about making accommodations for horse keeping. Deputy Director Pfost explained that if the line were to go over developable areas then that would be the case. However, the line does not go over developable areas but rather over steep slopes that currently do not permit horse structures on them. Chairman Tetreault asked staff if they had any estimate or percentage of the number of properties in the Q District that would be adversely affected by this redrawing. Deputy Director Pfost answered that staff has not done this kind of survey in the Q District, Commissioner Tomblin asked if over a period of time stables were built down at the bottom of these canyons and since that time Codes were put in place to prohibit these types of structures. Deputy Director Pfost explained that since the City incorporated structures have not. been permitted at the bottom of these canyons. He realized there are many structures at the bottom of canyons, and noted that they are prohibited by Code. He added that there could be a future agenda item to address these issues as a separate code amendment that is separate from the General Plan update. Janet Shoenfeld stated her property on Coach Road would be one of the 374 properties that would be labeled with a new Open Space Hillside designation if the proposed changes are adopted. She was concerned with a potential adverse impact on real estate values, and did not think City staff has neither addressed nor explored the proposal's possible impact on residential real estate values. She felt the City's Planning Commission Minutes January 22,2013 Page 4 proposed changes constitute an acceptable and unwarranted risk on the City's homeowners, especially those homeowners who had no open space hillside designation on the property when it was bought. She also felt this change could cause a potential adverse impact on insurance costs and availability. She felt that nobody could predict how insurance companies will use the data from the proposed land use revision to affect homeowners policy availability and insurance rates. She felt that both a detriment on the value of the property she owns as well as an increase to her costs of insurance are a form of taking. She noted many residents have expressed dissatisfaction with option No, 2, and felt that given the number and the variety of concerns expressed it is only prudent for the City to proactively address those concerns. She stated she was in favor of adopting option No. 4 rather than option No. 2. She encouraged the Planning Commission to adopt option No. 4 or option No.3 rather than option No. 2. Vice Chairman Emenhiser asked Ms. Shoenfeld why she felt her property values or insurance rates or availability would be affected with staffs proposal. Ms. Shoenfeld explained it was her understanding that when land has a contingency or restriction attached to it, it is not desirable. If it is not desirable, the land value may decrease. In regards to insurance, she explained how difficult it is to find affordable insurance when you live near a canyon, let alone have a hazard line drawn on your property. Carol Falstrup (49 1/4Rockinghorse Road) stated she agrees with adjusting the hazard lines to where it makes sense. Her concern was the taking away the privilege of the use of land, as will happen on her property. She felt every property is unique, however she understood city staff could not go out to every property and do an individual assessment. However, she felt that the onus is now put on the property owner to hire their own geologist to be able to challenge the placement of the line. She felt the City should focus on freeing up land but not taking away, which will achieve a better balance. Chairman Tetreault closed the public hearing. Commissioner Nelson noted that option No. 4 was previously before the Commission and he was disappointed that it did not receive the majority vote of the Commission. In regards to tax assessment, he read from the staff report that it was staff's understanding from communications with the County, that because the hazard land use will be placed upon portions of a property that cannot be developed as defined in the General Plan and Zoning Code and will removed from the developable portions of the lot, the proposed changes to the hazard land use boundary will not decrease the property value or tax assessed value of a lot where the hazard designation has increased or newly introduced, but could increase the property value for areas removed from the current inaccurate hazard mapping. He stated that if the line is going to be removed, the County can certainly increase your taxes; however, if the line is added to your property don't worry, you'll still pay the same amount in taxes. He felt this was extremely unfair. Planning Commission Minutes January 22,2013 Page 5 Chairman Tetreault discussed the purpose for this proposed General Plan update, noting the line generally follows contours of many of the canyons. Deputy Director Pfost agreed, noting that it is important to note the General Plan does not only address the open space hazard from a geologic standpoint, but also addresses it from a landform issue. He explained the intent and purpose was to keep these as open space and open, and not developable not only from a geologic standpoint but also from a landform standpoint. Chairman Tetreault agreed that there is the issue of aesthetics and the visual looks of the City that is very important for people who live on the Peninsula. Deputy Director Pfost added that is what the General Plan is all about; to keep the semi- rural atmosphere of the City, and creating the Open Space Hazard was one method or tool in which to do so. Chairman Tetreault stated that this is now being done by basically looking at contour lines on topo maps and aerials and following canyons, Deputy Director Pfost agreed, adding that for the most part staff is sticking to the areas that are already designated as Open Space Hazard and just modifying to actually represent what the topography really is. Chairman Tetreault understood, however there are property owners who currently have no restrictions on their property who will have significant restrictions over portions of their property with this proposal, and they will feel that this is a restriction being put on their property. Further, staff can go through the process and explain to them that there are ways around all of this and they can use their property in ways in which they want, or they could never use this property anyway because it's an extreme slope. He felt that the City can have this conversation over and over again with these property owners and they still won't believe that they're not being impaired in some way. With that, he felt option No. 3 is a better way to go. Chairman Tetreault moved to adopt option No. 3 proposed by staff, seconded by Commissioner Nelson. Chairman Tetreault understood the reasoning for trying to fix these lines, noting the lines seem to be placed arbitrarily on many properties. He realized that these lines were placed in a way for aesthetic reasons, but did not think there are safety issues involved. Commissioner Nelson read option No. 3, and stated he supported the Chairman's motion. Planning Commission Minutes January 22,2013 Page 6 Vice Chairman Emenhiser stated he too would support the motion as he felt it was the way to reduce the pain to affected property owners, Commissioner Leon referred to the vacant lot on Rockinghorse, noting the property has severe limitations as it is limited by the boundary of the open space hazard. This limitation has caused the proposed house to be placed in an area where the neighbors would rather it not, be placed. He felt it would be beneficial to remove the open space hazard boundary on this property and allow for that house to be placed in a way that makes sense. He noted that on this lot the owner could not apply to have the line moved 100 feet as it would still be on an extreme slope. Commissioner Leon asked for a friendly amendment to the motion to exclude the open space boundary on vacant lots. Chairman Tetreault respectfully declined the friendly amendment, explaining he does not want to get into looking at individual lots with the old designations. Commissioner Leon moved a substitute motion to direct staff to follow option No. 3, as modified, in that the open space hazard boundary be removed from vacant lots, seconded by Commissioner Tomblin. Chairman Tetreault asked if there are only two vacant lots in the area currently being looked at. Deputy Director Pfost recalled there are two lots plus three lots that are currently land- locked and not buildable at this time. Chairman Tetreault asked Commissioner Leon to clarify if his motion is discussing just the two vacant lots, or if it includes the three lots that are currently undevelopable. Commissioner Leon answered it would cover all vacant properties within the 260 that are currently being considered. The substitute motion failed by a vote of (2-3) with Commissioner Nelson, Vice Chairman Emenhiser, and Chairman Tetreault dissenting. The motion to adopt option No. 3 was approved (5-0). Deputy Director Pfost noted that the Commission went through a public hearing process in August 2012 to address the various options, and voted on option No. 2. Now that the Commission seems to be going in a different direction, he asked if the Commission wanted to bring this item back with a new notice to allow the public to speak on the subject. Commissioner Nelson noted the Commission unanimously voted in favor of option No. 3. Further, this item has been before the Commission numerous times. He didn't see Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2013 Page 7 any reason to bring the item back to the Commission for a full vote, as it would not change the outcome. Commissioner Tomblin explained that he changed his original vote for option No. 2 because he liked the idea of the review because there are some properties that will benefit from the line being moved. He also thought that possibly some of the review between option No. 2 and option No. 3 will be of some benefit, Chairman Tetreault understood the Deputy Director's concern and suggested the next meeting on this subject be dedicated to just the issue of going with option No. 3 citywide. It will also help the staff with direction and prevent them from mailing out notices that don't need to be mailed out. The Commission agreed, PUBLIC HEARINGS 2, General Plan update — "Draft" land use changes Commissioner Tomblin disclosed that he was a member of the Palos Verdes Unified School District Board at the time when there was a lawsuit between Trump and the school district. However, that was many years ago and he did not think there is any conflict of interest and will not cause any prejudice on his part in hearing this item. Deputy Director Pfost presented the staff report, discussed the three sites which include Martingale Trailhead Park, a portion of the Trump National golf course, and a portion of the Portuguese Bend Club and why, as discussed in the staff report, the land use designation at the sites should be changed. Commissioner Tomblin referred to the Portuguese Bend area and asked if making this change will down-zone properties in the area. Deputy Director Pfost responded that the change will make it consistent with the density that is currently in the area and is consistent with the Zoning Map that was changed in 2009. Chairman Tetreault opened the public hearing. Douglas Butler stated he is representing Ms. Marcz who owns the property adjoining Martingale Trailhead Park in the city of Rolling Hills. He stated she objects to the rezoning of the property from Residential to Recreational Passive, as this is not a park and there are no park facilities except for a water fountain and horse trough. Further, he did not think Martingale Trailhead Park is a trailhead, as there are no trails from which one can access from the park. He felt that the Martingale Trailhead Park is an attractive nuisance, explaining from the Park trespassers can access Ms. Marcz's Manning Commission Minutes January 22,2013 Page 8 property. He felt changing the zoning will only encourage more use of the property, and therefore felt the zoning should remain residential. Vice Chairman Emenhiser asked Mr. Butler if Ms. Marcz had any preference to the future use of the property and how it is zoned. Mr. Butler did not think his client had a preference. Deputy Director Pfost displayed an aerial showing Martingale Trailhead Park and Ms. Marcz's property and pointed out the trail. Commissioner Tomblin asked Mr. Butler if Ms. Marcz's property is fenced, Mr. Butler responded that the property in that area is not fenced. He noted Ms. Marcz has asked the City to fence the area and the City has declined. He thought Ms. Marcz: will fence the property eventually. Che[yl Marcz thanked staff for walking Martingale Park to better understand her issues. In regards to fencing, she noted that she cannot even keep Private Property signs up without being vandalized. She felt that for her to put up fencing, as it would be a constant issue with people vandalizing it. She stated people come to the trail with equipment to repair the trail and she can't see them from her property. She stated this is the second time she's come to the City for assistance in this matter, noting the City is giving the public the idea that her property is part of the Martingale Trail, and it isn't. Chairman Tetreault asked Ms. Marcz how she thought this proposed zoning change would adversely affect her property. Ms. Marcz explained that it continually adversely affects her property and she is questioning what will happen to her property value if everyone from the east side of the hill trespasses on her property to get to the Willow Springs Trail. She felt this property was designated as a park over 34 years ago it was done prematurely, as the City never fulfilled the concept of the plan. Chairman Tetreault felt Ms. Marcz does have a real issue with respect to trespassers, some of which may be accessing it through Martingale Park. However, he did not understand how this proposed land use designation changes that situation. Ms. Marcz: explained that the designation may invite or encourage more people to use the area. Commissioner Nelson asked Ms. Marcz if she has ever called the Sheriff's Department out to the property. Ms. Marcz stated that she really cannot see the people as they are on the trail, and by the time she does see them and the Sheriffs Department arrives, it's too late. Planning Commission Minutes January 22,2013 Page 9 Commissioner Nelson explained that the role of the Planning Commission is land use, and that in this situation there is a bad definition of land use for this property, as it is not really residential. While he sympathized with the situation, the matter before the Commission is to correct the designation of the land use. Kristen BpM stated she represents the Homeowners Association for the Rolling Hills Community Association and wanted to emphasize Ms. Marcz: point that the rezoning of this property will only compound the problems on her property. She felt that people who are out repairing the trail and preserving the park are actually trespassing on Ms. Marcz property. She also explained that the Association has received calls from people, thinking the trail is in Rolling Hills, stating that the trail is dangerous and needs some type of demarcation that it is not safe for novice horseback riders. She felt the first mistake was calling the area a park without a trail going anywhere; the second mistake was calling it a trail head, as it is path that goes 500 feet and ends. Rezoning it and making it a permanent park only compounds the two prior mistakes and invites more people to trespass on Ms. Marcz's property. Commissioner Tomblin asked Ms. Regg if the Association has official met with any of the numerous organized clubs and associations that hike and use the trails in the area to discuss the concerns. Ms. Regg answered the Association has only contacted the City and the Palos Verdes Horseman's Association with their concerns. Chairman Tetreault closed the public hearing, Vice Chairman Emenhiser asked the Deputy Director if he had any comment about this issue or if he had any solution to the problem. Deputy Director Pfost was not sure if there was a solution to this problem. He explained that issue of the City fencing the area is an issue for the City Council to discuss. He noted that he will be forwarding the property owner's request for the City to take some action to the City Manager's office. Commissioner Nelson asked if this is an issue the Ranger could handle. Deputy Director Pfost was not sure, and that this may be a method the City Manager may look into. Commissioner Leon asked if this property is a buildable lot. Deputy Director Pfost answered that while he doesn't know much about the geology of the lot, it did at one time have a residential land use designation and a residential zoning designation. He explained the City bought the property in 1978. Planning Commission Minutes January 22,2013 Page 10 Commissioner Tomblin felt there is a real problem in this area, and the owner has to protect her rights with a fence. He felt it will take some collaboration between the City, the Rolling Hills community, and the owner to meet with the appropriate agencies to find some resolution to the problem. He felt that the property owner may have some liability and needs to secure her property in some way. He did not think changing the zoning would make the problem any better or worse. Chairman Tetreault asked if there were any other possible appropriate zoning classifications that can be considered. Deputy Director Pfost did not think there were any other zoning classifications that could be used. Chairman Tetreault asked, with the property zoned Recreational Passive, could it be developed in some way by Recreation and Parks, consistent with the zoning. Deputy Director Pfost answered that as Recreational Passive the area could be developed with some type of structure, such as a restroom. He noted it would be up to the City Council as to what, if any, improvements would be made on the land. Chairman Tetreault understood Ms. Marcz's concerns, as calling the park a trail head and having some known trails that extend through her private property is a problem. He felt the majority of the people on the trails probably don't realize they're trespassing onto private property. He felt something should be done by the City to address the issue in some fashion. He explained that he doesn't really have a problem with changing the zoning as he does with what is happening on Ms. Marcz's property, Deputy Director Pfost agreed, and noted the property owner's attorney has submitted letters that he has forwarded to the City Manager's office in regards to issues with the trails. He stated it is a City Council decision as to what types of improvements, if any, they want to do based upon the information received from the property owner. However, staff did not feel these issues are related to the actual land use change proposed by staff, Commissioner Nelson did not see where changing the land use definition of this property is going to make any difference as to how many horses will use it or how many people will walk the trail. He felt this was an issue for law enforcement and not an issue the Planning, Commission should consider. Chairman Tetreault agreed with Commissioner Nelson, adding that this is a good clean- up measure for the City and will more accurately reflect what is at the site. He added that he would really like to see the problem solved for Ms. Marcz, but agreed this was not something the Planning Commission could do. Commissioner Nelson moved to accept staff's recommended changes to the General Plan Land Use Map related to Martingale Trailhead Park, the former Planning Commission Minutes January 22,2013 Page 11 school district property at Trump National Golf Club, and Tract 16540 of the Portuguese Bend Club, seconded by Vice Chairman Emenhiser. Approved, (5-0). APPROVAL OF MINUTES 3. December I T, 2012 Minutes Vice Chairman Emenhiser moved to approve the minutes as presented, seconded by Commissioner Leon. The minutes were approved, (3-0-2) with Commissioners Nelson and Tomblin abstaining since they were not at that meeting. ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS 4. Pre-AcIenda for the meeting on February 12 2013 The pre-agenda was reviewed and approved. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 9:43 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes January 22,2013 Page 12