PC MINS 20130611 Approved
July 9
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 11, 2013
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Emenhiser at 7:04 p.m, at the Fred
Hesse Community Room, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard.
FLAG SALUTE
Commissioner Lewis led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.
ATTENDANCE
Present: Commissioners Lewis, Nelson, Tetreault, Tomblin, Vice Chairman Leon,
and Chairman Emenhiser.
Absent: Commissioner Gerstner was excused.
Also present were Community Development Director Rojas, Associate Planner Kim, and
Assistant Planner Harwell.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The agenda was unanimously approved as presented.
COMMUNICATIONS
Director Rojas reported that at their June 4t" meeting the City Council agreed to
participate in the Beacon Award Program that rewards cities that reduce their
greenhouse gas emissions and directed that the program be presented to the Planning
Commission for its input, since greenhouse gas emissions will be addressed in the
General Plan update.
Director Rojas distributed one item of late correspondence for agenda item No. 1.
Commissioner Tomblin noted that he had discussions with residents about the Chase
Bank lighting, which he communicated to the Director.
Chairman Emenhiser reported that he updated the Mayor and others on the recent work
of the Planning Commission at the last Mayor's Breakfast.
COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (regarding non-agenda items):
None
CONTINUED BUSINESS
1. Zone text amendment— arterial fences and walls
Commissioner Lewis disclosed that he may have a financial impact based on this item
and would therefore recuse himself from the item. He left the dais.
Assistant Planner Harwell presented the staff report, giving a brief background of the
text amendment and reviewing the direction given to staff at the previous Commission
meeting. She noted the Commission had asked staff to research an alternative to chain
link fencing, and explained that staff had found that aluminum fencing seemed to be the
most viable replacement option. Staff felt it was more aesthetically pleasing than chain
link and noted that it is readily available. She displayed photos of examples of similar
fencing currently found in the City.
Commissioner Tomblin asked staff if there was any input in terms of a wrought iron
fence design, as there are many different designs available,
Assistant Planner Harwell answered that at this time staff has not included in any design
standards for wrought iron, however if the Commission wishes to be more specific on
the wrought iron they can. Staff wanted to stay basic and if residents choose to invest
in additional design staff did not feel it would be inconsistent, as the actual fencing
would still be black and consistent with other similar fences.
Director Rojas stated staff was focusing on a replacement for chain link fencing and
tried to leave it open and not get too regulated. He clarified that while staff and the
Commission may refer to these fences as wrought iron, the recommendation is to
designate aluminum fencing as the approved replacement fence which resembles
wrought iron fencing but is less expensive. If a resident chooses to use the more
expensive wrought iron or steel, that would be allowed.
Vice Chairman Leon expressed concern with the language in that how do you get an
individual resident replacing a fence to match what the neighbor replaced two years
earlier.
Director Rojas understood and suggested putting the same language that is in 6.A.2
into Section 1, which would require the new fence to reasonably blend with other
existing fences.
Commissioner Nelson moved to approve staff's recommendation as amended to
add the language from section 6 into section 1, seconded by Commissioner
Tomblin. Resolution 2013-14 was approved, (5-0) with Commissioner Lewis
recused.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 11,2013
Page 2
Commissioner Lewis returned to the dais.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Conditional Use Permit, Grading Permit, Minor Exception Permit (Case No.
,ZON2012-00257): 28637 Crenshaw Boulevard
Chairman Emenhiser recused himself as he works in the wireless industry. He left the
dais.
Associate Planner Kim presented the staff report, giving a brief description of the scope
of the project and the need for the various permits. She stated that, based on the
topographic condition of the site and a lower pad area, staff did not find any view
impacts as a result of the proposed project. In addition, staff did not feel the proposed
project, as conditioned, will adversely impact any adjacent properties or the public
welfare. Therefore, staff was able to make all of the required findings to recommend
approval of the project as conditioned.
Commissioner Tetreault asked if there were any Federal restrictions or regulations that
would bear upon the Commission's review of this since it involves a wireless
application.
Director Rojas answered that it was his understanding based on past conversations with
the City Attorney, the Federal Telecommunications Act applies to antennas, and to his
knowledge there are no antennas included as part of this application.
Commissioner Tomblin asked how the item the Commission just passed in regards to
arterial walls and fences apply to this project. He referred to page A4 of the plans
where they are proposing a wrought iron fence and retaining wall.
Associate Planner Kim noted the proposed fencing is not in the setback and would
therefore not apply.
Director Rojas also noted that the text amendment previously discussed regulates
replacements along arterials and this is not a replacement fence, but rather a new
fence.
Commissioner Tomblin asked staff if there was any reason this building was proposed
to be located so close to the street rather than farther back on the property.
Associate Planner Kim explained there is a ten foot easement on the property and in
order to construct over that easement they would have to obtain authorization from the
easement holder. In addition, there would not be enough room to build the structure
behind the easement. She noted the location of the proposed structure is
approximately thirty-eight feet from the front property line.
Plann¢ng Commission Minutes
June 11,2013
Page 3
Commissioner Lewis asked if there was anything written into the Conditional Use Permit
that allows for a review of the use of the property in the future, in terms of new
technology.
Director Rojas answered there is nothing written into the conditions of approval,
however the Commission can write a condition that after a certain amount of time the
Conditional Use Permit come back to this body for review at a noticed public hearing.
Vice Chairman Leon asked staff if there was something in the Code that requires the
applicant to create a retaining wall around the building rather than having a foundation
and building on top of it so that the overall footprint is reduced.
Associate Planner Kim explained that doing that would eliminate all of the walkways
around the building. She stated that there is nothing in the code that requires them to
do it this way.
Vice Chairman Leon opened the public hearing.
Rob Searcy (representing AT&T Wireless) stated he had thought this project would be
very easy to assimilate into the surrounding environment, as it is surrounded by an
existing utility substation, there is open space across the majority of the lot, and the
homes to the south are quite elevated above the property. He stated that AT&T
Wireless is trying to provide a way to assimilate wireless communication into the
community in the least intrusive manner, and housing is required to store all of the radio
equipment and ancillary supporting equipment. He noted that as technology evolves
there may be different types of radio equipment housed in the building, however there
would be no other propagating structures or items located at the site. Therefore, he had
no problem with the condition of approval limiting the type of equipment to radio and
ancillary equipment. He agreed with the Director that there are no Federal mandates
covering this project, as this is not a telecommunications project, but rather a hub that
supports telecommunications. He stated he worked diligently with staff to have a
project designed that meets all code requirements and minimize visual impacts to both
the residents above and the traveling public in the area. He noted he has also met the
Fire Department's requirements for clearance around the building. He addressed the
retaining walls, explaining they are to provide support for the pad. He stated that he has
minimized the height of the retaining walls as much as possible and will soften the
visual impact of the walls with a colored or textured material on the walls as well as with
landscaping.
Commissioner Lewis asked Mr. Searcy if he would object to an added condition that
states that if the applicant intends a use other than radio equipment, the applicant will
come back before the Planning Commission to get approval for that new use.
Mr. Searcy answered that he would have no problem limiting the use to radio equipment
and the ancillary support equipment.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 11,2013
Page 4
Commissioner Tomblin referred to the air conditioning equipment, and asked if it would
be running 24-hours.
Mr. Searcy explained it operates like a thermostat in a home, and the equipment will
operate when a certain temperature is reached.
Commissioner Tomblin asked if there was a reason they are using individual wall units
versus a central air conditioning.
Mr. Searcy answered this is a modular construction and it works better to actually cool
each of the modular units in this manner. It also reduces the type of ventilation system
on the exterior. He noted that there is a condition of approval that addresses the noise
of the units, and he must provide specifications to the City in regards to the noise of
these units.
Vice Chairman Leon asked Mr. Searcy if he intends to leave the mature trees on the
property.
Mr. Searcy answered that they will leave the mature trees to every extent possible.
Vice Chairman Leon closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Lewis moved to approve staff's recommendations with two
changes: 1) that condition No. 15-2 be changed from antenna equipment to radio
switching equipment and related supporting equipment; and 2) A new condition
be added that states if the applicant intends any use other than the radio support
use that the applicant come back before the Planning Commission for approval of
the new use, seconded by Commissioner Tomblin. The motion was approved,
and PC Resolution 2013-15 was adopted, (5-0) with Chairman Emenhiser recused.
Chairman Emenhiser returned to the dais.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3. Minutes of May 14, 2013
Vice Chairman Leon moved to approve the minutes as presented, seconded by
Commissioner Nelson. Approved, (5-0-1) with Commissioner Lewis abstaining
since he was absent from that meeting.
ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS
4. Pre-agenda for the meeting of June 25, 2013
The pre-agenda was reviewed and approved as presented.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 11,2013
Page 5
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 11,2013
Page 6