Loading...
PC MINS 197711080 0 (08-) M I N U T E S City of Rancho Pa°1 cis Verdes Planning Commission Regular Adjourned Meeting November 8, 1977 The meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 30942 Hawthorne Boulevard, by Chairman McTaggart. PRESENT: Baeharach, Hughes, Rosenberg, McTaggart ABSENT: Hinchliffe Also present were Director of Planning Sharon Hightower, Associate Planner Gary Weber, and Assistant Planner Keith Turner. MINUTES APPROVAL On motion of Mr. Hughes, seconded by Mr. Rosenberg, and carried (with Mrs. Bacharach abstaining), the minutes of the meeting of October 22, 1977, were approved -as s"ubintted`: _ On motion of Mr. Rosenberg, seconded by Mr. Hughes, and carried (with Mrs. Bacharach abstaining), the minutes of the meeting of October 25, 1977, were approved as submitted. Mr. Rosenberg proposed the following changes to the minutes of November 2, 1977: Section 9691.1,B, should read "...to the top of the slope of the pad elevation of the lot above on an upsloping lot..."; and second line from the bottom, should read "...schedule another continued public hearing. On motion of Mrs. Bacharach, seconded by Mr. Rosenberg, and carried (with Mr. Hughes abstaining), the minutes of the meeting of November 2, 1977, were approved as amended above. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 33093 Mr. Weber said refined versions of the CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 29 alternative access designs had been West of intersection of Island submitted. He discussed alternative View and Ocean Crest #1, to widen the existing drive, and Applicant: South Bay Engineering alternative #2, for a separate parallel Landowner: Omer K. Tingle road. He presented pictures showing what a 40 -foot wode drive would look like, pointing out it would provide ample room for parking and traffic lanes. Staff felt that given all factors, the widening concept was the most desirable approach. Staff recommendation was that the Commission conceptually approve widening the north leg of the existing drive and that the entry be modified to allow for more vehicle storage. Mr. McTaggart re -opened the public hearing. Russ McGuire, South Bay Engineering, said at the request of the Commission at the last meeting, he condensed the four alternatives into two alterna tives. He discussed the proposed modifications to the gate and the retaining wall proposed as part of alternative 2. He said because of the opposition of the Seagate residents, the applicant wished to go with the separate access route. He said the increase in grading was due to the soils report. Mr. Rosenberg said he would like to see a cross section showing the existing and proposed slopes, the roadway, and the retaining wall. Don Galbraith, 6542 Ocean Crest Drive, president of the Seagate Homeowners Association, expressed opposition to widening the road, as the additional vehicles would add to the congestion and noise. He said he saw no reason to extend the gate for car storage of 4-6 cars. He said for security reasons they did not wish the gate to be moved. He felt more than one lane of traffic through the gate would create problems. Mr. Hughes said the Commission had received a great deal of testimony re how narrow the existing street is, and the problem of congestion at the gate. He explained that widening the street would alleviate the existing problems by allowing for additional parking, ease of access, etc. He pointed out that noise from additional traffic would exist with the parallel road also, as the drives would only be five feet apart. Mr. Galbraith felt the speed of traffic would increase if the road was widened. He said congestion at the gate was a rare occurrence, that there were no more than 3-4 cars involved when there was a problem, and that the main cause for any congestion was a guest coming through the gate who was not familiar with the procedure. He did not feel this represented a problem, as it did not occur on a day-to-day basis. Mr. McTaggart felt 3-4 cars at the gate would completely block the road. He also felt that a separate access would concentrate noise and traffic on the north side. Frances Marks, Seagate resident, said she was concerned about safety with the increase in vehicles. She was in favor of separate access. Alberta Bunker, manager of Seagate, said she was opposed to widening the street, and that she has never seen traffic congestion at the gate. She wished the gate to remain where it is for aesthetic �reasbns___as- well as security and privacy. Fay Fowler, 6542 Ocean Crest, said Mr. Galbraith stated the feelings of 300 residents of Seagate who were unable to be present this evening. Jack Trembler asked how widening the road would alleviate any of the problems. Mr. Hughes said a lot of the testimony received concerned the difficulty with traffic getting through the gate, that widening the road would there- fore help the existing residents, and that the proposed project consisted of only 25 additional units. Burt Arga, 6542 Ocean Crest, said a very small portion of the existing traffic goes past the end buildings. He was opposed to widening the road as he felt the further away the traffic was, the better for the residents of the end buildings. Mrs. O"Jerman, Seagate, concurred with the previous speakers. Robert Spray, Seagate, also concurred and said security was a factor when he purchased his home. On motion of Mr. Rosenberg, seconded by Mrs. Bacharach, and unanimously carried, the public hearing was continued to a future date. Mrs. Bacharach felt the speed on a parallel road would increase the noise. Mr. Hughes concurred and felt a parallel road contradicted everything the Commission has tried to do in the past. He felt widening the road would resolve a great deal of the existing problems. He also felt from a planning and practical standpoint, a parallel road would be inappropriate. Mr. Rosenberg said he had been in favor of an alternate road but was dissatisfied looking at the proposals presented tonight. He said he did not like either approach and felt that all of the alternatives have not been analyzed. P.C. MINUTES -2- 11/8/77 Mr. McTaggart said that although at the last meeting he expressed a desire not to force the Seagate residents to share the road, he still felt the widening process would be the best plan. He said it would r.edUo ��e the noise and pollution on the north side and would be the safest and sanest approach. Mrs. Bacharach felt widening the road would be best with the addition of a sidewalk and perhaps benches for pedestrian traffic. She was concerned about moving the gate; however, as she did not wish to see the loss of security. 1 Mr. Rosenberg felt most of the traffic problem existed on the north road and suggested that the applicant look into the continuation of the road, to be one-way in a counter -clockwise direction. There was a consensus that this approach should be looked into. There was also a consensus that the upper portion of the development take its access off Island View. The applicant agreed to explore alternatives re the gate, with perhaps a visitor lane on the inside to alleviate the congestion. He further agreed to concrete curbing and to show what the impact of the grading would be with sidewalks on the inside lane and on the outside lane. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 7559 Mr. Weber said the draft resolution and West end of Tarragon Road conditions had been prepared for the Applicant: Herbert Angel Commission's review, and that staff recommended adoption of the resolution. After a brief discussion, Mr. Hughes proposed a motion, seconded by Mrs. Bacharach, to adopt Resolution P.C. NO. 77-21, approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 7559 subject to the conditions in Exhibit "A", as presented in the agenda packet. Roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Bacharach, Hughes, Rosenberg, McTaggart NOES: None ABSENT: Hinchliffe At 9:23 p.m. a brief recess was called. The meeting reconvened at 9:32 p.m. with the same members present. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 30 Mr. Weber said the applicant submitted VARIANCE NO. 15 revised plans which included increase Crestridge Road of the area abutting the parking lot Applicant: Merril Bickmore for screening (thereby eliminating the Landowner: The Church of Jesus need for that portion of the variance); Christ of the Latter Day Saints an increase in parking area landscaping (which would meet the required 5% with the elimination of additional parking space); reduction in parking spaces (which staff considers adequate); building height (which staff has de- termined after review of a detailed analysis as not to exceed the Code requirement); steeple height (staff provided a chart concerning the proposed steeple height to those of existing religious facilities on Crestridge); grading (which will need the Commission's evaluation); and lighting (which the applicant would present tonight). Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit and variance subject to the conditions attached to the draft resolution. He suggested amending condition no. 4 of Exhibit "A" to require the posting of a bond/cash deposit for the sidewalk construction, road improvements, etc., to be pursuant to the street standards; said deposit to be reimbursed if not used within a certain period of time. P.C. MINUTES -3- 11/8/77 In response to a Commission question, Mr. Weber said there was 5,067 square feet of landscaping proposed, but that -an additional 168 square feet was necessary to meet the 5% requirement. Reed Lawrence, architect, said the proposed light standards were 18 feet high and explained the lighting plan. He said the lighting was necessary for safety and security reasons. The -Commission was concerned about light spilling over onto someone else's property. Director Hightower said it was common practice for lighting fixtures to be no higher than 12 feet. Mr. Rosenberg suggested looking into ground level lighting. Dr. Harvey Brown, 29234 Beachside Drive, President of the Mesa Palos Verdes Homeowners Association, expressed concern about the steeple height and the lighting plan. Mr. Weber said the spire was the only portion of the steeple which would extend above the horizon. Mr. McTaggart did not feel 18 -foot lighting fixtures were necessary. Mr. Hughes concurred and felt that residential lighting standards which allow for 10 -foot high lighting fixtures should be complied with as the property abuts residential properties. The other Commissioners concurred. Director Hightower pointed out if the fixtures are reduced in height, it may be necessary to increase the number of fixtures in order to provide the necessary light. It was the consensus of the Commission that ground level lighting be used in the rear. The applicant agreed to these changes. It was the consensus of the Commission to amend condition no. 4. as suggested by staff with a three-year time limit. Condition no. 5 should be added stating that the height of the lighting fixtures shall not exceed ten feet; the fixtures shall be fully shielded; and only ground level lighting shall be used along the rear of the building. Mr. Rosenberg proposed a motion, seconded by Mr. Hughes, to adopt Resolution P.C. No. 77-22, approving Conditional Use Permit No. 30 and Variance No. 15 for the construction of a religious facility subject to the conditions in Exhibit "A", as amended tonight. Roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Bacharach, Hughes, Rosenberg, McTaggart NOES: None ABSENT: Hinchliffe HEIGHT VARIATION NO. 72 APPEAL Mr. Turner reviewed the proji.ect and 5909 Waukesha said staff denied the request because Applicant: Mr. & Mrs. T.' Thorsen it was determined that the project 'would obstruct views from at least three properties. He said at the time of!ihis decision, view obstruction was the only finding being applied to projects. Since the change in ruling at the Council meeting of November 1, all of the findings must be applied as worded in the Code. Staff recommended that the Commission uphold the staff decision based on view obstruction and that the cumulative effect would adversely affect the neighborhood view. Mr. McTaggart asked if there was anything in writing from the City Attorney re the ruling of the City Council, and requested same. P.C. Minutes -4- 11/8/77 Thomas Thorsen, applicant, said the view obstruction would be minimal, and felt each case should be judged on its own merits. The following people spoke in opposition to the project: Alfred Smith, 5903 Finecrest Drive; Gerald Howard, 5857 Finecrest Drive; Russ Harrison, 5915 Finecrest; Lucian Rochte, 5925 Finecrest, and Ms. Driscoll, 5911 Finecrest. Their main concern was the view obstruction. The public participation was closed. Mr. Hughes said under the current guidelines of the Council, he was unable to make findings A, B, and C in Section 9113 of the Development Code. The other Commissioners concurred. Mr. Rosenberg proposed a motion, seconded by Mr. Hughes, to deny the appeal of the staff decision, thereby denying Height Variation No. 72, based on the inability of the commission ommibsibh to meet the above stated findings. Roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Bacharach, Hughes, Rosenberg, McTaggart NOES: None ABSENT: Hinchliffe Mr. McTaggart advised the applicant of his right to appeal within fifteen calendar days of this decision. Director Hightower said staff would be submitting the guidelines for the review of the City Attorney, City Council and Planning Commission. Councilman Dyda briefly discussed with the Commission his reasons for xyotkgq, to change the ruling concerning Height Variation criteria. OTHER MATTERS Re the letter ori driveway access, Director Hightower said the Council sent this to the Commission for study and recommendation, as they are seeking to develop guidelines for future cases. Mrs. Bacharach requested a copy of the Council minutes prior to the Commission's review of this item. A meeting on the tree trimming -ordinance was scheduled for November 16. At that time the Cl-ion-iion will also discuss driveway access, per the Council's request. ADJOURNMENT At 11:20 p.m. it was moved, seconded, and carried, to adjourn to Wednesday, November 16, 1977, at 7:30 p.m.