Loading...
PC MINS 20130625 Approved July 9, 013 CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING JUNE 25, 2013 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairman Leon at 7:04 p.m. at the Fred Hesse Community Room, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. FLAG SALUTE Commissioner Nelson led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance. ATTENDANCE Present: Commissioners Gerstner, Lewis, Nelson, Tetreault, Tomblin, and Vice Chairman Leon. Absent: Chairman Emenhiser was excused. Also present were Community Development Director Rojas and Associate Planner Mikhail APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Tomblin requested that item No. 1 be removed from the Consent Calendar to allow open discussion. There was no objection from the Commission. COMMUNICATIONS Director Rojas reported that at the June 18th City Council meeting staff intended to present the Western Avenue Vision Plan along with the Commission's comments on the plan. However, the City Council continued the item to their July 16th meeting. Commissioner Tomblin noted that he has been in communication with the Director in regards to comments he has been receiving from neighbors and residents with respect to the lighting at the new Chase Bank. Associate Planner Mikhail updated the Commission on the lighting at Chase Bank, explaining there are no conditions of approval relating to the interior lighting of the bank. However, staff is working with the property owner to look into reducing the impacts from the interior and exterior lighting. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (regarding non-agenda items): None NEW BUSINESS 1. Height Variation, Grading and Conditional Use Permit (Case No. ZON2007- 00M) 5 Cayuse Lane Director Rojas gave a brief staff report, explaining the owner is requesting the Development Code requirement that the utilities be placed underground when constructing a new residence be waived. He noted there is a provision in the Development Code which states the requirement can be waived by the Planning Commission or City Council for certain unique situations or hardships. In this case, the applicant notified staff that the neighbor is not willing to grant an easement to underground the utilities, which forces the lines under a retaining wall which would increase the cost and hardship. He noted that staff has checked with Edison, and they agree this is a unique situation. With that, staff is recommending the Planning Commission exempt the new residence from having to underground the utilities. He noted that the applicant, or anyone representing the applicant, were not in the audience. Commissioner Tetreault questioned why this item was placed on the Consent Calendar and not under public hearings. Director Rojas explained staff puts items on the Consent Calendar when they don't expect any discussion of the item. Commissioner Gerstner asked staff to be more specific on what the hardship is. Director Rojas did not have the details of the distance from the house to the pole or how deep the utilities will have to go underneath the wall. He added that the Commission can continue this item if they would like to speak to the applicant to better understand the hardship. Commissioner Gerstner agreed with the approach of continuing the item so that the Commission could speak to the applicant and get more information. Commissioner Tomblin agreed, noting that is the reason he asked the item be taken off of the Consent Calendar, Vice Chairman Leon opened the public hearing, and there being no speakers, closed the public hearing. Commissioner Gerstner moved to continue this item to a date certain to allow the applicant to be at the meeting to better explain the hardship, seconded by Commissioner Tomblin. Planning Commission Minutes June 25,2013 Page 2 Commissioner Nelson stated he could not support the motion, as a hardship in the midst of a construction project can be very expensive. He felt it was very unfair to the person trying to build the house, particularly when a neighbor won't agree to grant a utility easement. Commissioner Tetreault asked what stage of construction this house is at present. Director Rojas responded that this was a very controversial project when it was approved and the applicant has struggled to progress through the construction phases. At this time the permits have expired and the owners are asking the permits be re- issued. He added that this item can be placed on the next meeting's agenda and did not think that would cause any hardship to the applicant, Commissioner Tetreault felt that the requirement to underground utilities on new construction is a good one. He acknowledged there should be exceptions to this requirement, but there should be a good explanation and a good record kept as to why the Planning Commission made the exception. The motion to continue the public hearing to the July 9, 2013 meeting was approved, (5-1) with Commissioner Nelson dissenting. 2. Variance, Lot Line Adjustment (Case No. ZON2013-00181 and SUB2013- 00004): 4 Thyme Place Vice Chairman Leon stated he lives within 500 feet of this property and would therefore recuse himself from the hearing. He asked Commissioner Tetreault to step in to preside and he left the dais. Associate Planner Mikhail presented the staff report, stating that in 2010 this project was before the Commission and was approved. However, since that time the approvals have expired and the case is back before the Commission. She noted the proposed residence before the Commission is the same one that was before the Commission in 2010. She gave a brief description of the project and the need for the Variance and Lot Line Adjustment. She stated staff was able to make all of the findings and was recommending the Commission approve the project as conditioned by staff. Commissioner Lewis disclosed that he had reviewed the Planning Commission minutes from 2010 when this project was before the Commission. Commissioner Tetreault opened the public hearing. Ross Bolton (representing the owner) stated he is the civil engineer for the project, and verified that this is the same project that was before the City previously. He stated he was available for any questions. There being no questions, Commissioner Tetreault closed the public hearing. Planning Commission Minutes June 25,2013 Page 3 Commissioner Lewis stated he voted against this project the last time it was before the Commission, as he could not find there were exceptional circumstances pertaining to the property. Given it is the same project, he would again be voting to deny the project. Commissioner Nelson moved to approve the project as recommended and conditioned by staff, seconded by Commissioner Gerstner. PC Resolution 2013- 16 was approved, (4-1) with Commissioner Lewis dissenting and Vice Chairman Leon recused. Vice Chairman Leon returned to the dais. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 3. Minutes of May 28, 2013 Commissioner Nelson moved to approve the minutes as presented, seconded by Commissioner Tomblin. Approved, (5-0-1) with Commissioner Gerstner abstaining since he was absent from the meeting. ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS 4. Pre-Agenda for the meetinq on July 9, 2013 The pre-agenda was reviewed and approved as presented. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7.25 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes June 25,2013 Page 4