PC MINS 19780425M I N U T E S
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Planning Commission
Regular Adjourned Meeting
April 25, 1978
The meeting was called to order at 7:33 p.m. in the City Council Chambers,
30942 Hawthorne Bouelvard, by Chairman Hughes.
PRESENT: Bacharach, Hinchliffe, McTaggart, Hughes
ABSENT: None
Also present were Director of Planning Sharon Hightower, Associate Planner
Gary Weber, and Assistant Planner Keith Turner.
Mr. Hughes introduced newly -appointed Commissioner Harvey Brown, and ex-
plained that he would not be participating as a Commission member this
evening because the State requires a ten-day waiting period after filing
the financial statement.
MINUTES APPROVAL On motion of Mr. Hinchliffe, seconded
by Mr. McTaggart, and unanimously car-
ried, the minutes of the meeting of
March 28, 1978, were approved with the following amendments: page 1, para-
graph 9, line 2, should read "...United States..."; page 5, paragraph 7, line
1, should read "...30008 Via..."; page 5, last paragraph, line 4, should read
"...Mr. Reiter..."; page 6, paragraph 2, line 3, should read "...letter be
sent by the City Council to the..."
On motion of Mr. Hinchliffe, seconded by Mr. McTaggart and unanimously car-
ried, the minutes of the meeting of April 11, 1978, were approved with the
following amendment: page 3, paragraph 6, line 4, should read "...safety
and access..."
Re the S & S Construction project, Mr. Hinchliffe asked if Mr. Chartier had
checked on whether the power of the radar antenna would automatically turn
off if depressed below its normal limits, as he stated at the March 28
meeting.
Mr. Weber said he has reconfirmed that with Mr. Chartier but has not yet
received the information.
Mr. Hughes asked that this information be passed on to the Commission when
received.
Mr. McTaggart asked if the Commissioners had any concerns re the rewriting
of Resolution No. 78-31 (The Burrell project). As there were no comments,
the resolution stands as written.
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 10241 Mr. Turner reviewed the staff report
VARIANCE NO. 27 for the variance, giving the applica-
Portion of Lot 21, Tract 22946 tion and project description, location,
(Just west of Cayuse Lane) and average slope. He said proper pub -
Applicant: All Cities Eng. lic notice had been given. He reviewed
Landowner: Lowell Blau the required findings and said staff
found conflict with findings A, B, and
D. Staff recommended denial of the
variance because of failure to meet the findings. He said the applicant
had submitted another parcel map which met all of the standards, and that
staff recommended approval of this two -lot parcel map.
The public hearing was opened.
Lowell Blau, 47 Avenida Corona, said he felt three lots would fit in very
well because of the size of the lot.
Ron Clark, 24 Cayuse, said after reading the staff report and knowing the
area, he hoped the Commission would deny the variance for three lots.
On motion of Mrs. Bacharach, seconded by Mr. Hinchliffe, and unanimously
carried, the public hearing was closed.
Mr. McTaggart felt finding C was the only finding which could be met and
said he could not make the other findings required to grant the variance.
Mr. Hinchliffe concurred and said he agreed with the staff recommendation.
Mrs. Bacharach proposed a motion, seconded by Mr. McTaggart to deny Variance
No. 27 because findings A, B, and D could not be made.
Roll call vote was as follows:
AYES: Bacharach, Hinchliffe, McTaggart, Hughes
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The Commission reviewed the draft resolution and conditions for the alterna-
tive parcel map.
On motion of Mr. McTaggart, seconded by Mr. Hinchliffe, and unanimously car-
ried, condition #8 was amended to include a copy of the report to which it
is referenced.
On motion of Mrs. Bacharach, seconded by Mr. McTaggart, and unanimously car-
ried, staff directed that Mr. Turner investigate conditions #15 and #16 and
remove condition #16 if it is found to be unnecessary.
On motion of Mr. McTaggart, seconded by Mrs. Bacharach, and unanimously car-
ried, a condition was added as part of condition #2 to the effect that when
a sewer system becomes available that the owner agrees to participate in
the sewer district.
Mr. Hinchliffe expressed concern about condition #15.d. re erosion problem,
as he did not wish to have the applicant responsible for the correction of
that.
Mr. Turner said he would red -flag that with the Design Division of the
County and ask them to pay special attention to that problem.
Mr. Hinchliffe proposed a motion, seconded by Mrs. Bacharach, to adopt
Resolution No. 78-34 approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 10241 for two lots
subject to the conditions in Exhibit "A" as amended this evening.
Roll call vote was as follows,
AYES: Bacharach, Hinchliffe, McTaggart, Hughes
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
The Commission requested copies of the amended resolution in their next
agenda packet.
Mr. Hughes advised the audience of the -right to appeal the above actions
to the City Council within fifteen calendar days.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 39 Mr. Weber reviewed the staff report
Revision to CUP #28 giving the background of the project.
Crenshaw Blvd. (TT #31714) He reviewed the three reqeusted modi-
Applicant: Rancho Crest Assoc. fications and showed plans. He said
the intent of front setback modifica-
tions was to maximize use of the rear
yard and that staff recommended approval. Re the height variations, staff
had evaluated the project based on the Code criteria and on recent Council
policy which eliminated compatibility, and staff recommended approval since
there was no view obstruction. Re the encroachment of rear yard decks into
the common open space area, he said the intent was to increase the rear
living area and that a landscape buffer was proposed. He said the decks
would not interfere with the drainage. He discussed the slopes and said
staff considers this an insignificant encroachment into the common area
and recommends approval. He explained that this was only a revision to the
original conditional use permit and did not void the original permit. He
said the Commission was not approving house plans, that each home would be
4/25/78 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -2-
submitted as a site plan review. He said this was an informal review
because the changes were considered to be insignificant. He said notice
was sent, but not as for a public hearing.
Stuart Woodard, landscape architect, Newport Beach, representing the appli-
cant, discussed the swale, drainage, and said they were well over the re-
quired open space. He felt it was good planning to maximize the rear yards
and said they were trying to provide quality homes.
Edward Bright, 5243 Crestwind Drive, said he lived above the project site
and was opposed to the modifications, particularly the proposed height.
Mr. McTaggart said he disagreed with the staff report, as when the project
was originally granted, it was asked that a traditional appearance be
achieved because of the concerns of the neighbors. He said the homes pro-
posed now are larger than originally proposed. He said he was not pre-
pared to give blanketapproval for any or all of the homes to be built up to
30 feet. Re the front yard setback, he felt the driveway as now proposed
would not allow opening the garage door if a car was parked there unless it
was partially out into the street. He said he did not feel the Commission
should grant front yard setbacks unless there is a real hardship. Re the
decks, he was concerned that there were no design plans and was also con-
cerned about putting anything over swales.
Mrs. Bacharach agreed with Mr. McTaggart and also felt that placing the
homes closer to the street would create a towering effect. She felt the
decks created an invasion of privacy to the neighbors. She did not feel,
however, that the Commission should deny the height variations since there
was no evidence of view obstruction.
Mr. Hinchliffe was opposed to the setback requests and the decks. Re the
height variations, he wondered if cross sections would be beneficial in
making the decision.
Mr. Hughes felt it was important to keep the open area and was opposed to
the decks. He felt the front setback modifications would add to the mas-
siveness of the homes and would not allow enough room for cars to park in
the driveways. Re height variations, he could see no view obstruction,
but was concerned about a 30 -foot wall of homes.
Mr. Woodard showed various proposed elevations. He said they would main-
tain the specific ridgeline elevations which are shown on the site plan.
On motion of Mr. McTaggart, seconded by Mr. Hinchliffe, and unanimously
carried, the request for front setback modifications on lots 2-11 was
denied.
On motion of Mr. McTaggart, seconded by Mr. Hinchliffe, and unanimously
carried, the height of the structures was limited to the ridgeline eleva-
tions shown on the site plan as presented tonight.
On motion of Mrs. Bacharach, seconded by Mr. Hinchliffe, and unanimously
carried, the request for common area decks for lots 2-11 was denied.
The Commission directed that staff make the appropriate changes in the
resolution and present the original for signature at the next meeting.
It was also requested that copies of the resolution be submitted to the
Commission in their agenda packets.
Mr. Hinchliffe proposed a motion, seconded by Mr. McTaggart, to adopt
Resolution No. 78-35 as amended subject to the conditions in Exhibit "A"
as amended.
Roll call vote was as follows:
AYES: Bacharach, Hinchliffe, McTaggart, Hughes
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Mr. Hughes advised the audience of the right to appeal the above action to
the City Council within fifteen calendar days.
4/25/78 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -3-
RECESS At 9:42 p.m. a brief recess was called.
The meeting reconvened at 9:50 p.m.
with the same members present.
GRADING NO. 262 Mr. Turner presented the staff report
11 Rockinghorse Road on this request for the creation of a
Landowner: Richard Hardie flat pad for a horse corral and stable
area. He reviewed the pro3ect des-
cription and its location and showed
the proposed plans. He discussed the proposed grading and staff's findings
on the criteria. Staff recommended that the Commission deny the appeal to
staff's previous denial.
Bob Quinn, E. L. Pearson and Associates, discussed the studies which have
been performed. He said with the use of retaining walls, the project would
be in compliance but would not be aesthetically pleasing. He said the plan
met the intended use of the site, grading was being kept to a minimum, there
would be no import or export, and the visual impact would be minimal. He
said the surrounding property owners had been consulted and had no concerns
with the proposal.
Richard Hardie discussed the staff ob]ections. He said people pay more
money for a horse lot and that the proposal should be considered a primary
secondary use of the -lot. He discussed the proposed horse stalls and said
he wished the pad area to be large enough for the horses to move around.
Mrs. Bacharach said she did not find the plan objectionable.
Mr. McTaggart felt the proposal presented did not meet the Code and said
he agreed with the staff.
Mr. Hinchliffe concurred with Mr. McTaggart.
Susan Hardie said they have made many changes to their plan in order to
comply with all of the codes.
Mr. Hughes said he would have difficulty justifying approval of a project
which would violate the Grading Ordinance. '
Mr. Hinchliffe proposed a motion to deny the appeal of Grading No. 262.
Mr. McTaggart asked for discussion as he felt the structures could be re-
designed to make the entire graded area less.
Mr. Hughes asked if the applicant had given consideration to alternate
layouts.
Mr. Turner said the applicant has had several alternatives, but all with
similar layout.
The Commission discussed alternatives with the applicant, including: re-
working the walkway, having the runs going downhill, relocating the struc-
tures, etc.
Mr. Hughes said the ob3ections were: the creation of a slope which would
be steeper than the existing slope; grading on slopes greater than 35% for
use other than primary use, and excessive grading. He said one of the
problems was that this was an area very close to being not buildable or
gradable.
Mr. McTaggart suggested locating the stables against the wall and the runs
going down the hill with steeper slopes than now proposed.
Mrs. Hardie said they would not want the slope too steep as horses living
on hillsides tend to develop swollen legs, cracked hoofs, etc.
Mr. Hardie agreed and said he would not wish for the horses to be on any
slope greater than loo for any period of time.
On motion of Mrs. Bacharach, seconded by Mr. McTaggart, and unanimously
carried, Grading No. 262 Appeal was tabled to the next meeting as the
4/25/78 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -4-
first item under Old Business, at which time the Commission will review the
alternative plans submitted by the applicant.
Mr. Turner said staff would need the alternative plans no later than the
Wednesday before the meeting.
STAFF REPORTS
he would submit them to staff.
COMMISSION REPORTS
Director Hightower asked Mr. Hinchliffe
about the minutes of the February 7
work session, and Mr. Hinchliffe said
Mr. Hughes suggested theelectionof a
vice-chairman at the next meeting.
Mr. Hinchliffe felt it would be helpful for the Commission and particularly
Mr. Brown to schedule a work session on a City Council meeting night to
discuss with the City Attorney the scope of the Commission, and explore
with him the limits of the Commission and what is reasonable and unreasonable.
Mrs. Bacharach suggested an orientation meeting when new commissioners are
appointed. She felt that new commissioners sometimes do not know what ques-
tions to ask, and that an informal presentation by staff would be benefi-
cial.
Mr. Hughes suggested that the Commission collect questions for the next two
meetings to be submitted to the City Attorney for the following Council
meeting.
Mrs. Bacharach asked the status of the Coastal Plan.
Director Hightower said she and the City Attorney are to meet with the
State staff.
Director Hightower reported that the Council wants to test the proposed
Tree Trimming Ordinance using City trees only and using the Environmental
Committee as an arbitration committee starting July 1.
Director Hightower said the Council has formed a subcommittee re the pro-
posed Antenna Ordiance. Mr. McTaggart said that Mr. Hughes had been ap-
pointed to that subcommittee.
Mrs. Bacharach said she spoke with Mr. Reiter and postponed discussions
on the peninsula tour until perhaps September.
ADJOURNMENT
At 11:10 p.m. it was moved, seconded,
and carried, to adjourn to Tuesday,
May 9, 1978, at 7:30 p.m.
4/25/78 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -5-