Loading...
PC MINS 19770915M I N U T E S City of Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Commission Regular Adjourned Meeting September 15, 1977 The meeting was called to order at 7:43 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 30942 Hawthorne Boulevard, by Chairman McTaggart. PRESENT: Bacharach, Hughes, Rosenberg, McTaggart ABSENT: None Also present were Director of Planning Sharon Hightower, Associate Planner Gary Weber, and Assistant Planner Keith Turner. MINUTES APPROVAL On motion of Mr. Rosenberg, seconded by Mr. Hughes, and unanimously carried, the minutes of the meeting of August 23, 1977, were approved as submitted. On motion of Mr. Rosenberg, seconded by Mr. Hughes, and unanimously car- ried, the proposed tree trim ordinance was changed to be the first item on the agenda. TREE TRIM ORDINANCE Mr. McTaggart said this was a continued public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak. Mr. Lawson, Director of the Miraleste Recreation and Park District, read and submitted copies of a letter concerning the policy of the District with regard to the proposed ordinance, and the need for certain revisions to that ordinance. Also speaking were: Don Blocka, El Prado Estates; John Feyk, 2727 San Ramon; Pat Vilicich, Miraleste; Russ McGuire, 3905 Palos Verdes Drive South; Mrs. Goldbrick, 5507 Bayleaf Road; Mrs. Smith, 6617 Via Siena; Van Nugent, 5530 Littlebow; and Mrs. Hansen, Bayridge Road. They made the following comments: the cost of the tree trimming should be borne by the owner of the subject trees; that the ordinance read -- the loss of 25 per- cent or 10 degrees of significant view, whichever is less; there is noth- ing in the grant deeds assuring anyone of a view; a view can mean different things to different people; when tree is being trimmed, owner should not be permitted to interfere with tree trimmer; and it was suggested that there be some kind of an educational program re tree trimming to make people aware of partial trimming and lacing. Elza Cortes, 29681 Highpoint, read and submitted copies of a letter from Rancho Palos Verdes Council of Homeowners Associations, which she stated represented the majority opinion of the Council. The letter included changes to various sections of the proposed ordinance as well as additions and deletions. On motion of Mr. Rosenberg, seconded by Mrs. Bacharach, and unanimously carried, the public hearing was continued to a future meeting. RECESS At 8:15 p.m. a brief recess was called. The meeting reconvened at 8:25 p.m. with the same members present. GRADING APPLICATIONS #106,107,108 Mr. Turner reviewed the background of 3292, 3294, 3296 Via Campesina this item and discussed the revised Applicant: Robert Hellweg (for plans. He said restorative off-site A. Horowitz & Smith Realty) grading is currently in progress on the 411 411 adjacent property. Staff recommendation is for approval subject to the four conditions listed in the staff report. Robert Hellweg, applicant, and Tony Wiezorek, attorney representing the applicant, spoke concerning the revisions and the grading restoration. Mrs. Bacharach expressed concern that a letter from Mr. Nordahl, approv- ing off-site grading, had not yet been received. Mr. Turner said he understood that Mr. Nordahl has been on vacation, but has indicated tentative approval. He said that staff would not clear the plans until such a letter was received. Mr. McTaggart expressed concern about the apparent lack of a turn-around of sufficient size to accommodate emergency vehicles. Mr. Hellweg explained a plan he was proposing creates a turn-around area. Mr. Rosenberg was concerned that the erosion control had not been started as stated at the previous meeting. Mr. Turner explained that staff interpreted that motion as meaning if the matter was not resolved before the next Commission meeting, because nor- mally there is a two-week period between meetings. In addition to requiring a letter from Mr. Nordahl, Mrs. Bacharach felt that they should also require a letter from Mr. Voce and Mr. York to be sure the restoration was done to their satisfaction. Mr. Turner pointed out that if Mr. Voce and Mr. York still plan to take legal action, it may be impossible to obtain such a letter from them. Mrs. Bacharach suggested that condition A be amended to include that such a letter at least be requested from Mr. Voce and Mr. York. Mr. McTaggart suggested that condition B also call for an irrigation plan. On motion of Mr. Hughes, seconded by Mr. McTaggart, and unanimously car- ried, condition E was added, requiring that the deeds be recorded to reflect a restriction of building and development on the slope. The Commission also added condition F as follows : No construction acti- vity except grading, slope restoration, erosion control and landscaping shall take place until the site has been inspected for compliance with approved grading, landscaping, slope restoration, and erosion control plans. Mrs. Bacharach proposed a motion, seconded by Mr. Hughes, to approve Grading Application Nos. 106 , 107, and 108 , subject to the conditions A-F as listed in the staff report and as amended tonight. Roll call vote was as follows : AYES: Bacharach, Hughes, Rosenberg, McTaggart NOES: None ABSENT: None RECESS At 9 : 25 p.m. a brief recess was called. The meeting reconvened at 9 : 30 p.m. with the same members present. Mrs. Bacharach moved to change the order of the agenda by placing Height Variation No. 67 next, as it appeared the majority of the audience was present for that item. The motion died for lack of a second. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 32977 Mr. Weber reviewed the background of CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 27 this item and the concerns of the Com- Palos Verdes Drive South and mission at the last meeting; those Clipper Road concerns being grading, landscaping, Applicant: Herbert Angel and Homeowner Association approval. He P.C. MINUTES -2- 9/15/77 410 410 said the pad elevations on Lots 3 and 4 have been lowered, but the engi- neer felt Lots 1 and 2 could not be adjusted because of drainage require- ments. He said the revised plan shows the tennis court would not be lowered. Based on review of the grading, staff feels the revisions ade- quately satisfy the expressed concerns. He expressed some staff concerns related to the landscaping, and said a letter was submitted by the presi- dent of the Architectural Committee re homeowner association approval. The public hearing was opened. Herb Angel, 4373 Dauntless, spoke briefly. On motion of Mr. Rosenberg, seconded by Mr. Hughes, and unanimously car- ried, the public hearing was closed. Mrs. Bacharach said she would have to abstain from voting on this item as she was absent from the last meeting and was unable to listen to the tape, as the recorder was apparently not working properly the night of the meet- ing. The Commission expressed concern that Lots 1 and 2 were not lowered as they felt those were the critical lots. Mr. Weber explained what the project engineer said about the drainage problems, and said the Director of Public Works concurred with the engi- neer. Mr. Rosenberg proposed a motion, seconded by Mr. Hughes, that Tentative Tract Map No. 32977 and Conditional Use Permit No. 27 be continued until such time as the applicant shows a method of lowering the roof line on Lots 1 and 2 by two feet, at which time staff is to prepare the proper resolution and conditions. After a brief discussion, the motion and second were withdrawn. On motion of Mr. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Rosenberg, and carried (with Mrs. Bacharach abstaining) , Tentative Tract Map No. 32977 and Conditional Use Permit No. 27 were given conceptual approval subject to the applicant lowering the pad elevations of Lots 1 and 2 by an additional two feet. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 15 On motion of Mr. Rosenberg, seconded Palos Verdes Drive South, east by Mr. Hughes, and unanimously car- of Seacove Drive ried, a 180-day extension (to February Applicant: Los Angeles County 6 , 1978) was granted to Conditional Sanitation District Use Permit No. 15. HEIGHT VARIATION NO. 67 APPEAL Mr. Weber described the proposal and 5523 Elmbank Road reviewed the background information Appellant: Jean Goppert, et al concerning the staff approval of the Applicant: The Builders project and the subsequent appeal. He reviewed the basis for the appeal, as stated in the appeal letter, and said although the letter revealed valid concerns, staff feels it showed no evidence of view obstruction. He read the definition of a view, as defined in the City' s General Plan. He said one of the two letters (from Mr. Goppert) given to the Commission tonight requests that the item be con- tinued to allow additional time to prepare evidence. The letter also ex- pressed concern that there was no ten-day notification period. Director Hightower explained that since this was not a public hearing, there was no required notification period. She said an agenda was sent. Jean Goppert discussed the four criteria, as stated in the ordinance, and the City Attorney' s interpretation. He said the definition of view is not limited to a downhill direction, nor is there any restriction as to what is included in a view. He submitted photographs and sketches. Rollin Sturgeon said the deed restrictions and the ordinance use the word compatible and felt it should be removed from the ordinance if it is no longer desirable. P.C. MINUTES -3- 9/15/77 410 Mr. McTaggart explained that the City Attorney has ruled that the Commis- sion and the Council shall not make rulings based on aesthetics, and that the decisions on height variations must be based on view obstruction only. The Commission further explained that the interpretation of the City Attor- ney was agreed to by the City Council, who instructed the staff to apply the ordinance in that way. It was also pointed out that the City is unique in having this type of ordinance. Also speaking in were: Mr. Dawson, 5516 Bayridge, Mr. Sorensen, 5519 Elmbank; Mrs. Babbock; and Louis Romay, 5508 Elmbank. Some of the concerns expressed were the loss of privacy, light, and view of the sun and sky. Mr. Romay felt the ordinance should be upheld as it reads. Larry Baker, The Builders, representing the applicant, answered questions of the Commission. Public participation was closed. Mrs. Bacharach felt she could not vote against the appeal. She said if the Commission was not to base its decision on what is now in black and white, the language of the ordinance should be changed. Mr. Rosenberg felt the second story addition would create view obstruction to adjacent properties, based on his inspection of the site and surrounding area. Mr. Hughes and Mr. McTaggart did not feel there was any obstruction of view and felt their decision must be based on the City Attorney' s interpretation of the ordinance. Mrs. Bacharach proposed a motion, seconded by Mr. Rosenberg, to grant the appeal of Height Variation No. 67. Roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Bacharach, Rosenberg NOES: Hughes, McTaggart ABSENT: None Mr. McTaggart advised the audience that the appeal had been denied and that this decision could be appealed to the City Council within fifteen days. A complaint was issued to the Commission that the home was presently occu- pied by two families and it was speculated that the addition was to accom- modate a third family. Mr. McTaggart advised that this complaint should be given to the Code In- spector in the Environmental Services Department with some verification. OTHER MATTERS Mr. Hughes expressed concern that the Commission was operating with no vice- chairman. The eemsensus of the Commis - - - - - - _ - Mr. McTaggart directed that in the event of his absence, the Commissioners take turns chairing the meeting, beginning in alphabetical order. ADJOURNMENT At 11: 41 p.m. it was moved, seconded, and carried, to adjourn to Tuesday, September 27, 1977, at 7 : 30 p.m. P.C. MINUTES -4- 9/15/77