Loading...
PC MINS 198308096 0 � I ?,) M I N U T E S City of Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Commission Regular Adjourned Meeting August 9, 1983 The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 30942 Hawthorne Boulevard, by Chairman Hinchliffe PRESENT: McNulty, Hinchliffee, McTaggart, Brown LATE ARRIVAL: None ABSENT: Hughes Also present were Associate Planner Sandra Massa Lavitt and Assistant Planner Jonathon Shepherd. COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes of July 26, 1983 OLD BUSINESS Golden Cove Resolution was approved as presented. NEW BUSINESS Variance No. 93 John Schoenfeld 30565 Rue Langl6is Memo from League of Women Voters replying to questions of Planning Commission meeting of July 12, 1983 Mr. McTaggart and Dr. Brown requested that the minutes be pulled. Ms. Lavitt presented Resolution P.C. 83-11 to the Commission for review and signing. Resolution P.C. 83-11 Mr. Shepherd gave staff report with staff recommendation to deny since only one of the findings could be made. Mr. Hinchliffe asked if the applicant had had any contact with the City before erecting the fence. Mr. Shepherd stated that the applicant had told him that he had had some communication with staff but apparently some wrong information had been given or was interpreted wrongly. Mr. McNulty asked when had the fence been erected. Mr. Shepherd replied earlier this year. The Public Hearing was opened. John Schoefifeld,30565 Rue Langlois, addressed the Commission stating that he had talked verbally with some of the staff at City Hall before he erected the fence and felt that because of those conversations he had built the fence in accordance with City Code and that they had planned to plant the fence but had stopped because of the problems that had arisen regarding the height of the fence. He added that only a small portion of the fence was 7 feet, 6 inches and that the people around him had less of a slope and a more usable pad than he. In conclusion he stated that he felt that the fence was necessary for their enjoyment as property owners and for their protection. Mr. McTaggart asked staff how was the fence measured. Mr. Shepherd replied that it was measured vertically from grade at the post. Mr. McTaggart asked the applicant why did the fence have to be higher where it was sloping. Mr. Schoenfeld stated that it was for the purposes of safety. Mr. McTaggart asked the applicant if he was satisfied with five feet' on the level portion. Mr. Schoenfeld stated that that portion of fence is to neighboring properties. Mr. McNulty asked if the applicant had ever submitted plans. Mr. Schoenfeld stated no, it was all verbal. Mr. McNulty asked if he had sulmitted plans to the contractor; Mr. Schoenfeld stated yes and that lowering the fence would be detrimental to his purposes. Christina Piburn, 30557 Rue Langlois addressed the Commission stating that the applicant had talked to her before the fence was built and assured here that the fence would not be over six feet high and that only one section was bothersome to her. Mrs. Piburn distributed photographs showing the fence from her property. She added that the fence disrupted her view. Dr. Brown moved to close the public hearing, Mr. McNulty seconded, motion passed. Dr. Brown moved to approve Resolution P.C. No. 83-12 denying Variance No. 93, motion was seconded. Discussion was held and the Commission came to the conclusion that all the findings could not be met on this application. A roll call vote was taken resulting in all ayes for approving the motion. Grading No. 668 Mr. Shepherd gave the staff report Hank Zdonek and recommendation for denial. Lot 78, Tract 25376 Crowview Mr. David Johnson, 11949 Jefferson Boulevard, Culver City, representative of the applicant addressed the Commission stating that within the vicinity there were houses larger than the one proposed and that they had accomodated this lot as best they could to get a house that was compatible with the neighborhood and that the 66 percent -slope -in -the rear yard was in the southwest corner and only 5 percent. He went on to add that the fill that is over 6 feet is only a back fill behind a retaining wall and on the uphill side on the southwest corner he needed the first wall at six feet and the succeeding walls at three feet and that the building material would be about V-2 feet thick. Dr. Brown asked what the square footage was for the project including all rooms and garages. Mr. Johnson stated approximately 4700 square feet for living area. PLANNING COMMISSION -2- August 9, 1983 ?—A Mr. Henry Zdonek, 26622 Deepbrook, applicant, addressed the Commission stating that they had attempted to meet the criteria of height and to put as much as possible on one level. In order to accomodate two ill people in the family they have put in an elevator but have tried to design for one level use although there will be some stairs. They will also try to make as little difficulty as possible in exporting the soil. Mr. Hinchliffe asked how much interaction had the applicant had with staff. Mr. Johnson replied that the extent of communication was obtaining the permits. Dr. Brown moved to a& Grading Application No. 668, Mr. Hinchliffe seconded, motion passed unanimously. Grading No. 674 Charles Abbott 6866 Verde Ridge Road No. 674, Mr. McNulty seconded. Ms. Lavitt presented the staff report to the Commission. Dr. Brown moved to approve Grading Mr. McNulty asked the staff if there was any impact to lower areas. Ms. Lavitt stated that there was -,ohl/y..canyon-'--b�low. Mr. McTaggart asked if there was a geology report. Ms. Lavitt replied no. Mr. McTaggart stated that he felt that perhaps the geology report should be made a part of this approval and that he was concerned with the 12 foot deck. Ms. Lavitt replied that if a geology report is required the Building and Safety Department will require it before it issues a permit. Charles Abbott, 6866 Verde Ridge Road, applicant, addressed the Commission stating that with the footings set the deck will be 9 feet or less and that he did not believe that a geology report was required if there was not excessive grading. Mr. McTaggart stated that he felt that a geology report should have been required as a condition and that he was concerned with the soil compaction. Mr. Lavitt replied that one of thefootings is on a 43% slope, the - - r ,the - deck bxtbmd6d,.oiit over a 50% slope with ,the,.extended-footing -placed on a 29% slope, and that Building and Safety will check to see if a geology report is necessary. Mr. Abbott again addressed the Commission stating that there is a natural canyon under the deck and no evidence that it is a fill. Also, that if a geology report is required that he would get one. Motion was Motio—n,-p`a­s­s- dd�unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION -3- August 9, 1983 4 -3 0 Grading No. 675 William and Jane Fawell 17 Bronco Lane those requirements are met. • Ms. Lavitt stated that the applicant has been requested to redesign and and obtain a geology report and that the application should be tabled until Mr. McTaggart moved to table this item, Dr. Brown seconded, motion passed unanimously. CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes of July 12, 1983 Mr. McTaggart requested that the follow- ing be added to the last paragraph on page 2. "If we were to convert this it would be extremely difficult to ever take residential property and convert it to commercial. To go the other way would be extremely difficult." Dr. Brown requested that the following take the place of his statement under Grading No. 670. "Dr. Brown recommended that a condition could be placed on the plans for the park." Mr. McNulty requested the following be made part of his comments on page 2. "Mr. McNulty stated that it was unfortunate that it appeared to ham that the .developer had -been -mislead regarding__uni.t6 per -acre -and ti:_ that this was a severe departure from the original -intent of the City, and coupled with all the signatures and my own discussions with other people that I then found that this particular concept would be un- acceptable. " Dr. Brown moved to approve the minutes as amended, Mr. McTaggart seconded, motion passed. COMMISSION Second Units Mr. McTaggart, one of the members of the sub -committee to draft an ordinance on second units, read a draft ordinance. The Commission directed staff to type the draft and to also reprint the package of ordinances of other cities to beused for work shop review by the Commission. Meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION MEIC August 9, 1983 4-