Loading...
PC MINS 19770208M I N U T E S City of Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Commission Regular Adjourned Meeting February 8, 1977 The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 30942 Hawthorne Boulevard, by Chairperson Shaw. PRESENT: Blue, Hughes, McTaggart, Rosenberg, Shaw ABSENT: None Also present were Director of Planning Sharon Hightower and Associate Plan- ners Larry Davis and Gary Weber. MINUTES APPROVAL 25, 1977, were approved as submitted. On motion of Mr. Blue, seconded by Mr. Rosenberg, and unanimously carried, the minutes of the meeting of January TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31617 Mr. Weber reviewed the Commission's Crest Road at Highridge Road five major concerns from the last Applicant: Presley of So. Calif. meeting as being hydrology, grading, trails, views, and CC&Rs. He said the project engineer prepared a hydrology study and explained that the project site currently drains into five watershed -areas with only one area experiencing drainage problems, that being Altamira Canyon. He said the Flood Control District has initiated a study of the area's flood problems which should be completed by mid-March. He said further that the project engineer submitted several examples of velocity reducers. Mr. Weber discussed the proposed grading and an alternate approach; and the proposed trails and four alternatives. He showed cross sections and photos indicating view lines. Staff recommended the applicant submit the CC&Rs prior to final approval of the tract map, not at this time; and suggested that the Commission direct certain issues be placed in the document. Staff recommendation was that the discussion of the tract map be resumed and that the item be continued to the next meeting. In response to Commission concerns, Mr. Weber said a condition of approval could be that a hydrology study be done prior to the final approval. Mike Nickels, Lanco Engineering, and Joe Perring, Presley, answered questions and discussed the following issues which wefe of concern to the Commission: widening the street or putting sidewalks on both sides as opposed to the rolled curb, which the applicant felt was necessary in order to retain the rural effect; maintenance of the median strips indicated on Highridge; the necessity of increasing the lot sizes to ensure adequate buildable areas; preventing additional drainage from flowing into impacted watersheds; pro- tecting the views from below by having the homes set back with a building line across the lots; whether or not the grading of the pads should be done by the subdivider or the individual lot owners; and height limits. RECESS At 9:05 p.m. a brief recess was called. The meeting reconvened at 9:13 p.m. with the same members present. The Commission reached a consensus on the major issues, as follows: 1) To have a 16 -foot height limit on all lots unless it can be demonstrated that a two-story home (above 16 feet) would not be detrimental to any views. 2) That some sort of building line is appropriate for hydrology problems and consideration of the views from the area below. 3) That staff review the pad sizes carefully and if it is improbable that homes (df a reasonable size, 16 -feet maximum height, with standard amenities included) would fit, that the possibility of less lots,and bigger pads be explored. 4) That foot trails be included in the project, per staff recommendation. 5) To concur with the staff recommendation concerning the CC&Rs. On motion of Mr. McTaggart, seconded by Mr. Hughes, and unanimously carried, this item was continued to the next regular meeting, at which time staff will present a draft resolution and conditions. GRADING NO. 130 Mr. Weber reviewed the request, stating Crownview, Lot 86, Tract 25376 that Commission concern was raised at Applicant: Bill Robinson for the last meeting about the visual impact Gilbert Sedillo of the retaining wall, and that the applicant has revised the plans, re- flecting also the new location of the house. He said there was an additional 58 yards of grading because of re - contouring the earth on the downhill side of the retaining wall. Staff recommendation was for approval, subject to the submittal of a landscape plan. After a brief discussion, Mr. Blue proposed a motion, seconded by Mr. McTaggart, and unanimously carried, to approve Grading Application No. 130, subject to the submission of a landscape plan to be approved by the Director of Planning. SIGN APPEAL Director Hightower explained that this 6760 Los Verdes Drive item had been continued at the last Palos Verdes Apartments meeting in order to allow the entire Commission to view the identification sign from Hawthorne Boulevard. She presented photos taken from various points on Hawthorne Boulevard, and said Staff felt the sign could not be read from any great distance, and that from the point at which the words are legible, they would also be legible if the sign were five (5) feet high. Lee Henderson, manager of the Palos Verdes Apartments, said the office sign from the parkway has been removed. He said the identification sign is rustic in design and because it blends so well with the background, it would not be seen from a lower height, particularly with the five-foot wall. He pointed out that the sign blocks no views from anyone's property. There was some disagreement among the Commission, with some members feeling that the sign was not offensive, that the height was necessary for visibi- lity, that the five-foot wall creates unusual circumstances, that it was consistent with the intent of the Code and could create a safety hazard. Others felt that it was important to enforce the current Code or change it, that granting this would set a precedence, that lowering the sign would not decrease its visibility or create a safety hazard. Mr. Rosenberg proposed a motion, seconded by Mr. McTaggart, to approve the existing "office" sign on the property at 6760 Los Verdes Drive, and deny the appeal for the eight -foot high directional sign located at the corner of Hawthorne Boulevard and Los Verdes Drive. Roll Call vote was as follows: AYES: Hughes, McTaggart, Rosenberg NOES: Blue, Shaw ABSENT: None Mrs. Shaw explained to the applicant that the directional sign must be re- moved or lowered to five feet in height and that sign permits must be ob- tained, per the staff recommendation. She also advised him that this decision may be appealed to the City Council within ten (10) calendar days. P.C. MINUTES -2- 2/8/77 Mr. McTaggert requested that this item, if appealed, not be scheduled for the City Council agenda prior to the Commission's approval of tonight's minutes. In order not to create agenda -scheduling problems, he and the other Commissions agreed to the Chairperson approving that section of the minutes if the appeal is heard prior to the Commission's next meeting. GRADING NO. 136 Mr. Weber gave the staff report for 30092 Cartier Drive this request for the grading of 650 Applicant: Chester Smith for cubic yards to construct a single Harry Christian family home, access, and rear yard, pointing out that the lot has an average slope of 22.70. He listed the Code criteria (per the staff report) and indicated on the plans the location of the retaining walls, pointing out an error on the plans re the height of one of the retaining walls. Staff recommendation is for approval with the submittal of a landscape plan. Chester Smith, architect, discussed the retaining wall and said they have followed the contours of the lot as much as possible. He further said there would be a 2:1 maximum slope and that the lot is quite difficult to develop. On motion of Mr. Rosenberg, seconded by Mr. McTaggart, and unanimously carried, Grading Application No. 136 was approved subject to the submittal of a landscape plan to be approved by the Director of Planning. SPECIAL ANIMAL PERMIT NO. 9 Director Hightower described the 26603 Menominee Place request and explained the location, Applicant: Larry Z&mlin present zoning, and said the previous County Code permitted horses on this lot and that the applicant has had horses in the past, but not at present. She discussed the easement and said it would permit a temporary structure only. She said six letters of opposition have been received from neighbors and that to approve, the Commission must make three findings (as listed in the staff report). She said there was no staff evaluation of the health concerns, as there are no horses currently on the site. There are no trails in the nearby area. She said staff has reservations about approving this application, and that if the Commission approves the permit, staff recommends that approval be subject to the four conditions listed in the staff report. Larry Zemlin, applicant, 26603 Menominee Place, said there was little, if any, visibility of the corral from the nearby residences, the corral was eighty (80) feet from the nearest home, and that there was an ocean breeze. He said he understood the concern for cleanliness and that he would properly maintain the site, thus making this an asset for the neighbors as well. He stated that when he previously had horses, he received only one complaint from a neighbor and that he immediately corrected the situation. He showed pictures taken from various points showing the view of the corral and said if this permit is granted, he would be making some repairs. He discussed the access, riding areas, and his safety record over the past 41, years. He objected to the staff recommended condition for a probationary period, as he felt the approval, if granted, should be more definite due to the expense of refurbishing the area and buying the horses. Heinz Acker, 26605 Grayslake, objected to the request, stating that when horses were previously kept there, he and his son suffered from severe allergic reactions, as well as from the flies and unpleasant odors. He showed photos taken in 1974 showing what he claimed to be typical unsani- tary and hazardous conditions while the horses were kept there. John Chang, 26609 Menominee, said there were continuous instances of in- consideration to the neighbors during the years the applicant had horses on the property, and there were numerous complaints to the applicant. In response to Commission questions, Mr. Zemlin said his trash is picked up twice a week, and after reviewing the pictures submitted by Mr. Acker, indicated that they must have been taken on a day he was cleaning the area. Public participation was declared closed. P.C. MINUTES -3- 2/8/77 During Commission discussion, concern was expressed over the distance from existing trails, that there is substantial neighborhood objection, and that it does not appear to meet the required findings. On motion of Mr. Rosenberg, seconded by Mr. Blue, Special Animal Permit No. 9 was denied based on the failure to substantiate the following find- ings: 1. That the requested animal or animals, at the location proposed, will not jeopardize, endanger, or otherwise be detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare; and 2. That any other variance from the terms or requirements of this Ordi- nance will not be materially detrimental to the use, enjoyment, or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity and will not jeopardize, endanger, or otherwise be detrimental to the public health, safety, or general welfare. Roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Blue, Hughes, McTaggart, Rosenberg, Shaw NOES: None ABSENT: None Mrs. Shaw advised the applicant that this item may be appealed to the City Council within ten (10) calendar days of this decision. RECESS At 11:10 p.m. a brief recess was called. The meeting reconvened at 11:20 p.m. with the same members present. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 31714 Mrs. Shaw said that due to the late Crenshaw behind St. John Fisher hour, she would like the staff report Applicant: Urban West Communities and input from the applicant and the audience, but wished to limit all dis- cussion to approximately 45 minutes, and continue the item to the next meeting. Mr. Davis described the project and explained that the environmental impact report (EIR) was prepared and finalized as a residential planned development. He said the slopes on portions of the site were in excess of 25% and there is a drainage course along the southern area leading into Altamira Canyon. He said the tentative tract map was submitted showing a different configura- tion than the EIR, with a more conventional arrangement, and will be 31 lots instead of 32. He further said staff was concerned over the grading, as there will be more impact than -originally analyzed in the EIR. He said comments have not vet been received from the Flood Control District re drainage, and that the study on Altamira Canyon should be concluded by early to mid-March. He said staff had no dollar figure for taxing the sub- division for improvements, and that the Commission must determine whether the applicant needs to file a subsequent EIR dealing with the grading, etc., or whether the submittal of additional information would suffice. Mike Nickels, Lanco Engineering, said the effect of this project on the - total drainage area is minimal, and that the grading is substantially more in order to create usable pads and yard area. He said there was 8 to 13 feet of uncertified fill presently in the bottom of the canyon which has to be removed and replaced in a compact form, and he did not feel that the grading would cause more environmental damage than putting back natural contours. He said the Del Cerro Homeowners Association has approved this plan. In response to Commission concern about drain blockage with rocks and other loose debris, Mr. Nickels said the private drains in the area are not being maintained. Larry Kaltman, Urban West Communities, said they have made an effort to cooperate with the Del Cerro Homeowners group and have been involved with the property for almost four (4) years. P.C. MINUTES -4- 2/8/77 0 Don Hill, president of the Del Cerro Homeowners Association explained that the association met with neighboring associations and the applicant. Dave Allister questioned the lot sizes. Mrs. Shaw closed the public hearing and continued it. During Commission discfission the following comments were expressed: the homes should conform more naturally to the site and is the amount of pro- posed grading necessary and at a minimum. They also requested copies of the applicant's hydrology study in order to evaluate the impacts, as they were very concerned about the hydrology and felt they needed all of the professional help available. On motion of Mr. Hughes, seconded by Mr. McTaggart, and unanimously carried, this item was tabled to the next regular meeting at which time they will consider the grading aspects. STAFF REPORTS Director Hightower reminded the Commis- sion that its first meeting in March, being the 8th, was Election Day, and whether the Commission wished to change the date. The Commission concurred to change that meeting to Monday, March 7. COMMISSION REPORTS Mrs. Shaw said at the February 3 work session on the antenna ordinance, the Commission reached agreement on several points and scheduled another work session on Thursday, February 17. She said they also want to begin work on the tree trimminq ordinance at that meeting. The Commission briefly discussed the letter to the City Council from Marcia Graham concerning the Planning Commission's decision on the Peninsula Baptist Church. Because of their concern about possible inaccuracies, they requested that Mr. Weber review the letter for errors on the facts and figures, and they agreed to carefully review the letter themselves as well. Mr. Hughes was concerned about the lack of a coordinated effort on the part of the City in dealing with the trail plan. He felt the Commission should make a recommendation to the City Council and perhaps they would refer it to the Park and Recreation Committee. Mrs. Shaw asked Mr. Hughes if he would draft a letter, and he agreed. ADJOURNMENT At 12:32 a.m. it was moved, seconded, and unanimously carried, to adjourn the meeting to Thursday, February 17, 1977, at 7:30 p.m. P.C. MINUTES —5- 2/8/77