Loading...
PC MINS 19780926M I N U T E S�� City of Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Commission Regular Adjourned Meeting -September 26, 1978 The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 30942 Hawthorne Boulevard, by Chairman Hughes. PRESENT: Bacharach, Brown, Hinchliffe, McTaggart, Hughes ABSENT: None Also present were Director of Planning Sharon Hightower and Assistant Plan- ner Charlie Jencks. Associate Planner Gary Weber was present for the Work Session. APPROVAL OF MINUTES the meeting of September 7, 1978, On motion of Dr. Brown, seconded by Mr. Hinchliffe, and carried, with Mr. McTaggart abstaining, the minutes of were approved as submitted. On motion of Dr. Brown, seconded by Mrs. Bacharach, and carried, with --Mr. McTaggart abstaining, the minutes of the meeting of September 12, 1978, were approved with the following amendments: page 2, paragraph 6, line 4, should read "...and product..."; page 7, last paragraph, last line, should read "...the reason the geologist was currently conducting tests on the property."; and page 8, paragraph 2, line 1, should read "Shelly Ashmore, 3573..." RESOLUTION NO. 78-39 Mr. Jencks explained that the signing Parcel Map No. 6548 and adoption of the resolution was postponed at the last meeting at the request of the applicant and future developer in order to allow for the submittal of information which would possibly change or eliminate condition 19 of Exhibit "A", which addresses removal of the existing structure on lot 1. He reviewed the information and referred to the plans. It was staff's opinion that the parcel map process was not the proper stage of the development process to review future location of structures. Staff felt the re -use of such a structure may be feasible, but that establishment of the re -use could in effect pre- determine the location of any future uses on the site. He said the proper time for submission of the proposal for re -use would be in the conditional use permit stage. Staff recommended that either the original condition 19 stand or, if the Commission finds the re -use feasible, that condition 19 be amended as recommended in the staff report. Paul Barron, son of the future developer, reviewed the plans" and said the structural engineer indicated the only way a building could be put on the lot was to do it the way he was proposing. Mr. McTaggart expressed concerns re soil compaction, the size of the footing for such a large structure as was proposed, and drainage. Mrs. Bacharach was concerned about the safety aspects of leaving the struc- ture unsecured. She asked if it could be temporarily covered or fenced off. Mr. Barron indicated that something could be done. Mr. Hughes expressed concern that the only access proposed was a stairwell. Mr. Barron said that was also a concern to him and it was already being worked on. Mr. McTaggart expressed concern about approving something which may create the need for a variance. Director Hightower pointed out that the change to condition 19, as proposed by staff, in no way binds the Commission to approving re -use of the struc- ture. She said the bonding guarantees its removal if its use is not approved. Mr. Hinchliffe said the City would just be allowing the future developer the opportunity to explore the possibility of re -using the structure. He said if it proves unfeasible, the Commission does not have to approve its use. On motion of Dr. Brown, seconded by Mr. Hinchliffe, and unanimously carried, condition 19 was amended to read: "A bond Be posted for removal of the structure on lot 1 of said map or that plans for re -use of the structure be approved by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes within one year of the date of the signing of Resolution No. 78-39. Dr. Brown proposed a motion, seconded No. 78-39, for approval of Parcel Map Exhibit "A", as amended. Roll call vote was as follows: by Mr. Hinchliffe, to adopt Resolution No. 6548, subject to the conditions in AYES: Bacharach, Brown, Hinchliffe, McTaggart, Hughes NOES: None ABSENT: None ZONE CHANGE NO. 3 Mr. Jencks explained that approval of Lots 1 through 8, Tract 27832 the request would change the zoning (Indian Valley) map designation of Residential Single Applicant: Charlotte Ferris Family Four (RS -4) to Residential Multiple Family Twelve (RM -12). He re- viewed the background of the request and the required procedures. Staff recommended that the Commission recom- mend to the City Council that the zoning designation on the official zoning map be changed to RM -12 for lots 1 through 8 of Tract 27832. Public hearing was opened. Charlotte�Ferris, 613 Camino de Encanto, Redondo Beach, said she was re- questing the zone change in order to have compatibility with the adjoining properties. Since hers is the only vacant lot affected, she felt the pro- posed change would not represent a significant impact. Robert Cousins, 29325 Indian Valley, said he owned the lot above the vacant lot. He said he would like nothing better than to see the lot developed, as it has been a nuisance. He was not opposed to the zone change. Norman Alperin, 29334 Stadia Hill Lane, said he was not opposed to the zone if it was to be compatible with what was already existing. Sally Alperin, 29334 Stadia Hill Lane, expressed concern about the parking problems in the area. Mr. Hughes explained that the change would affect only the vacant lot unless the existing structures were destroyed by fire. Mr. Jencks said any new structure would have to conform to all of the cur- rent codes and two off-street parking spaces (one enclosed) per unit plus 25 percent of the total number for visitor parking would be required. Mr. Cousins said if his existing four -unit structure burned down, he would be able to replace with a maximum three -unit building. He wondered how much of the structure would have to be destroyed for this to affect him. Director Hightower said it would apply if the structure was destroyed more than 50 percent of the assessed market value. On motion of Mrs. Bacharach, seconded by Dr. 78-44 for Zone Change No. 3, recommending to zoning designation on the official zoning map Multiple Family Twelve units per acre (RM -12) No. 27832. Brown, to adopt Resolution No. the City Council that the be changed to Residential for lots 1 through 8 of Tract 9%26/78 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -2- Roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Bacharach, Brown, Hinchliffe, McTaggart, Hughes NOES: None ABSENT: None CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 40 Mr. Jencks said the applicant was re - Beach area of Portuguese Bend Club questing approval of lighting for two Applicant/Landowner: Portuguese paddle tennis courts. He described Bend Homeowners Association/ the location and the elevations of the Palos Verdes Properties surrounding properties. He discussed the lighting fixtures, the wattage, and the light intensity. He said the primary concern was the effect the lighting would have on the views of the upslope residents. He explained that he took photographs of the lights a week ago from properties upslope from the site to determine the impact, but that they were not yet ready. He said the lights could be seen from those properties. Staff recommended that the Commission approve the request sub- ject to the condition that all direct viewing of the existing fixtures and off-site illumination be eliminated through either extended shielding or realignment of the fixtures. He distributed pictures submitted by the appli- cant and other material, including information from the lighting company. Mr. Hinchliffe said he would abstain from voting because he was a member of the Homeowners Association. Public hearing was opened. John Murphy, president of the Portuguese Bend Homeowners Association, 121 Spindrift Lane, said the original poles were in the process of falling down and also represented an electrical hazard. He said they replaced those poles and added two additional poles and four lights. He said the only com- plaint they received was prior to the shielding which they now have. Mrs. Bacharach noted that one of the shields was missing and asked if the lights were only turned on when the courts were used. Mr. Murphy said he would check into the missing shield and said the lights were turned on as needed and were not on all the time. Mrs. Dunbar, 83 Spindrift Drive, said there has been lighting on the courts since 1961, and that in order for her to see the lights she would have to go outside her home and look down on the courts. She said she has not heard any complaints re the lighting. Steven Stewart, previous president of the Homeowners Association, said the work was done when he was president. He said they replaced the poles be- cause they were falling down and added the two new poles. He said there were no complaints once the shields were put on. He felt it was a family club and the families used the courts. He said the lights have been angled down towards the nets and drew a diagram for the Commission.. Mr. Hughes asked if they obtained permits for the work. Mr. Stewart said they were re -wiring what was a hazardous condition and that at the time they did not feel a permit was necessary. Mr. McTaggart said he felt a permit would be necessary and asked about sur- face treatment which was mentioned in the staff report. Mr. Jencks said that was included for informational purposes only, as staff did not feel reflection was a problem. Mr. Hughes asked if the light source could be seen when staff was looking down from the upslope residences. Mr. Jencks said he used a 250 mm lens for the pictures and that when looking through the lens he felt he was looking right into the source. Without the camera a bright light could be seen. 9/26/78 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -3- On motion of Mrs. Bacharach, seconded by Mr. McTaggart, and carried, with Mr. Hinchliffe abstaining, the public hearing was closed. Mrs. Bacharach felt this was a recreational club and people moving into the area are aware of that. She said lighting for the courts was part of the recreational club and felt condition 2 should be eliminated. Dr. Brown felt the only problem was to eliminate direct viewing of the light fixtures. Mr. Hughes agreed that this was a private community, not open to the general public, and they wanted lights for their courts, but he felt uncomfortable applying different standards on a private court than he would anywhere else in the City. Mr. McTaggart felt established standards should be used. He suggested changing the wording of condition 2 of Exhibit "A". Director Hightower pointed out that this request must also go before the Coastal Commission for approval and that they may consider the nighttime view. Mr. McTaggart proposed a motion, seconded by Mr. Hughes, to change condition 2 of Exhibit "A" of the draft resolution to read as follows: 2. That shielding be extended and/or realignment of the fixtures be implemented to eliminate direct viewing of the light source in the fixtures from surrounding residents, to be approved within thirty (30) days by the Director of Planning. Vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Brown, McTaggart, Hughes NOES: Bacharach ABSTAIN: Hinchliffe ABSENT: None Mr. McTaggart proposed a motion, seconded by Mrs. Bacharach, to adopt Reso- lution No. 78-45, approving Conditional Use Permit No. 40, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit "A", as amended. Roll call vote was as follows: AYES: Bacharach, NOES: None ABSTAIN: Hinchliffe ABSENT: None Brown, McTaggart, Hughes Mrs. Bacharach said she was in favor of approving Conditional Use Permit No. 40, but was opposed to condition 2 of Exhibit "A". Mr. Hughes advised of the right to appeal this decision to the City Council, in writing, within fifteen calendar days. COMMISSION REPORTS The Commission briefly discussed the Geology Field Trip field trip scheduled for Saturday, September 30. All those attending were to meet at City Hall at 1:00 p.m. Mr. Hughes said he would provide a van with three bench seats, which would seat nine comfortably, and possibly up to twelve people. Porto Verde Project the applicant was to respond. She no response from the applicant. Mrs. Bacharach said the Commission at its meeting of June 28, 1977, included in its motion a list of items to which said at the meeting in August,uthere was /q'77) 9/26/78 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -4- Mr. Hughes asked staff to notify Mr. Tretheway to review the minutes and respond to that list of items before the next meeting on the project, if they plan to proceed with the project. Iacono Project In response to Commission questions, Mr. Weber said the Commission and staff could either meet at the resi- dence at 8:00 p.m. or meet at City Hall and car pool to the residence. He said due to the steepness of some of the streets in that area, it may be wise to meet at City Hall and drive there in one or two cars. He said Mr. Iacano was expecting them at 8:00 and the arrangements had been made with the specified neighbors for the Commission to observe the lights from their properties. In addition, all residents within the 500 -foot radius had been notified that the lights would be turned on. The Commission decided to meet at City Hall Thursday, September 28, at 7:30 p.m. and go as a group to the residences. I RECESS Cooperatives and would like Council to consider At 9:25 p.m. a brief recess was called. The meeting reconvened at 9:38 p.m. with the same members present. The Planning Commission requested a memo be sent to the City Council stating the Commission was concerned possible Code amendment. WORK SESSION The Planning Commission began the Height Variation Revisions Work Session by reviewing a memo sub- mitted by Commissioner Hinchliffe re- garding suggested changes to the working draft of September 7. Following a brief discussion, the Commission reviewed the draft on a point -by -point basis, making various changes. Dur- ing the review, staff was asked to discuss with the City Attorney issues of view location criteria --from vacant lots and whether proposed wording in Section 9113 B.2. could include privacy or personal property rights. ADJOURNMENT At 12:45 a.m. it was moved, seconded, and carried, to adjourn to Thursday, September 28, 1978, at 7:30 p.m. at City Hall. 9/26/78 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES -5-