PC MINS 20140114 Approved
January 28, 2014
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES N
V --
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
JANUARY 14, 20.14
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Emenhiser at 7-07 p.m. at the Fred
Hesse Community Room, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard.
FLAG SALUTE
Commissioner Tomblin led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.
ATTENDANCE
Present: Commissioners, Nelson, Tetreault, Tomblin, Vice Chairman Leon, and
Chairman Emenhiser
Absent: Commissioners Gerstner and Lewis were excused.
Also present were Community Development Director Rojas and Associate Planner
Mikhail.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The Agenda was unanimously approved as presented.
COMMUNICATIONS
Director Rojas stated there were no action items related to the Planning Commission to
report from the December 17th and January 8th City Council meetings,
Director Rojas provided an update on the recruitment for new Planning Commissioners,
and informed the Commission that the project located at 3344 Palos Verdes Drive West
was approved by the Coastal Commission on appeal with a reduced height, Lastly,
Director Rojas distributed three items of late correspondence related to agenda item No.
3.
Commissioner Tomblin reported that, with the consent of Mayor Duhavic, he is planning
to meet with the County Fire Department to discuss the newly imposed design
requirements that may be affecting residents.
COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (regarding non-agenda items):
None
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. HeiL ght Variation and Grading Permit (Case No. ZON2013-001971: 3602
-
Coollheights Drive
Commissioner Tetreault stated that he had recused himself from the public hearing for
this item and would recuse himself from the vote on the Consent Calendar.
Vice Chairman Leon moved to approve the Consent Calendar as presented,
seconded by Commissioner Nelson. The motion was approved thereby
approving PC Resolution 2014-01 (4-0), with Commissioner Tetreault recused.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. Height Variation, Variance, and Site Plan Review Permit (Case No. ZON2013-
00437): 99 Vanderlip Drive
Commissioner Tomblin disclosed that he is a personal friend of the property owner,
however he did not feel there would be any financial ties or conflict of interest.
Vice Chairman Leon disclosed he lives in the neighborhood, however is outside of the
500 foot radius.
Associate Planner Mikhail presented the staff report, explaining the scope of the
proposed project and the need for the three applications. She stated staff was able to
make the necessary findings and was recommending approval of the project as
conditioned in the staff report.
Chairman Emenhiser opened the public hearing.
John Colich (owner) explained his vision was to have a beautiful home, and the City will
see this when the home is completed. He explained that this will not be used as a
private home, but rather as a museum or a monument to the Vanderlips which at times
can be used for functions for the City or other agencies that he felt could use the home,
Commissioner Nelson asked Mr. Colich what improvements will be done on the
property to address the high fire danger in the area.
Mr. Colich explained he has already grubbed the entire property as well as clearing and
improving the road behind the property for fire truck access.
Kel Vanderlip felt he was lucky having Mr. Colich coming in as a neighbor. He was very
pleased with the work Mr. Colich has done in clearing the property of brush and
overgrowth.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 14,2014
Page 2
Don Ch, ri____sty stated he was the previous owner of the property and described the
difficulties over the years with people trespassing and vandalizing the property. He
stated he was in favor of the tall wall on the property,
Commissioner Nelson moved to approve the project as recommended in the staff
report, seconded by Commissioner Tetreault.
Vice Chairman Leon asked staff if there have been any negative comments submitted
to staff regarding the project,
Associate Planner Mikhail answered that staff has received no negative comments,
Commissioner Tetreault stated he was able to make the necessary findings to support
approval of the project.
The motion to approve the project was approved, thereby adopting PC Resolution
2014-02 (5-0).
3. Height Variation and Site Plan Review Permit (Case No. ZON2013-002550:
30034 Via Victoria
Associate Planner Mikhail presented the staff report, explaining the scope of the project
and the need for the Height Variation. She stated staff was able to make the necessary
findings, with one exception which was the railing around the roof deck. She stated
staff was recommending the Planning Commission condition the project to require a
maximum 42 inch tall railing around the roof deck. She stated staff was recommending
approval of the Height Variation and Site Plan Review applications as conditioned in the
staff report.
Commissioner Tetreault asked staff if they had received any correspondence with
respect to issues of privacy in regards to the roof deck.
Associate Planner Mikhail answered that staff had received no comments or
correspondence in regards to privacy issues with the roof deck.
Director Rojas noted that there were no public speaker slips submitted for this item.
Commissioner Nelson noted staff had received four letters from neighbors urging
approval of the item.
Commissioner Nelson moved to approve the project as recommended by staff,
seconded by Commissioner Tomblin,
Commissioner Tetreault commented that he realized the second story deck is alongside
a second story window that is at approximately the same height, and theoretically the
same views would be afforded from that side of the house. He felt a deck provides a bit
Planning Commission Minutes
January 14,2014
Page 3
more visual impact and a sense of loss of privacy than windows, however since the
neighbors were not complaining he was satisfied with the deck,
Vice Chairman Leon asked staff if it was costing the owners more money to lower the
ridge height by four inches as opposed to requesting the extra height,
Associate Planner Mikhail stated that the applicant is available for questions, but noted
that a portion of the proposed project requires an improvement to that existing ridgeline,
and the other option would be a Variance. She stated the applicant has chosen to
move away from applying for a Variance and modify the roof line.
Vice Chairman Leon asked if at this point the Commission could grant a Variance for
those four inches should they desire.
Associate Planner Mikhail explained that a Variance would require an additional
analysis and a public notice.
Chairman Emenhiser opened the public hearing.
Jeff Lyon (architect) stated they opted to not go through the Variance process as it
would greatly impact the cost of the project. He also noted that the owner did not want
to go through the extra complexities of the Variance process.
Vice Chairman Leon asked if there was a strong desire to have a six foot wall.
Mr. Lyon answered the six foot wall was something the owners wanted for their privacy
and their neighbor's privacy, explaining it was a screened louvered wall rather than a
solid wall. However, if it is an issue the owner will lower it.
Chairman Emenhiser closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Tetreault asked if the motion before the Commission is to approve a 42
inch tall wall.
Associate Planner Mikhail acknowledged the current motion is to approve a 42 inch tall
wall, noting condition No. 20 in the Resolution discusses the 42 inch tall wall..
The motion to approve the project, thereby adopting PC Resolution 2014-03 was
approved, (5-0).
ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS
4. Pre-Agenda for the meeting on January 28, 2014
Commissioner Nelson discussed issues at Golden Cove and noted the owner is
currently being more restrictive with some conditions than is allowed under the
Planning Commission Minutes
January 14,2014
Page 4
Conditional Use Permit. He suggested that a future agenda item be added to discuss
the Conditional Use Permit at Golden Cove.
Commissioner Tetreault questioned the Commission's authority and to what extent the
Commission can modify an existing Conditional Use Permit. He felt that before
something like this is put on an agenda the Commission be informed as to the extent of
their authority in this regard.
Director Rojas explained that in there were a consensus to agendize such an item the
staff report to the Commission would discuss the Commission's authority to open a
Conditional Use Permit and how it occurs,
Commissioner Tomblin supported Commissioner Nelson's thoughts on this and was
open to bringing this item up at a future meeting.
Director Rojas stated that staff was bring a follow up to the Golden Cove signage
program issues to the Commission in February, and this topic could be part of the
discussion at that time.
The pre-agenda was reviewed and approved as presented,
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 14,2014
Page 5