Loading...
PC MINS 198310256 M I N U T E S City of Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Commission Regular Adjourned Meeting October 25, 1983 The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 30942 Hawthorne Boulevard, by Chairman Hinchliffe. PRESENT: Hinchliffe, McTaggart, Hughes LATE ARRIVAL: McNulty ABSENT: Brown Also present were Director of Environmental Services Sharon W. Hightower, and Assistant Planner Jonathon Shepherd. COMMUNICATIONS: CONSENT CALENDAR: ITEM A - MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 27, 1983 None Mr. McTaggart requested that the Communications, second paragraph, after "communication was very mis- leading." be amended to include the following: "The survey erroneously compared the cities of Rolling Hills Estates and Palos Verdes Estates. The cities which should have been compared were Rolling Hills Estates and Rolling Hills, and each city had seven residential crimes in the same period. There was therefore, no difference in the crime rates." ITEM B - MINUTES OF OCTOBER 11, 1983 ITEM C - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 58, TRACT 39673 TUMANJAN AND TUMANJAN SIX MONTH EXTENSION Mr. McTaggart made the motion, seconded by Mr. Hughes, to approve the Consent Calendar as amended. The motion passed unanimously. OLD BUSINESS GRADING NO. 670 Sharon Hightower gave the staff report, TUMANJAN AND TUMANJAN stating that this matter is now not only VISTA PARK (TRACT 39673) a grading application but an application for improvement of a park. She reviewed the recommendatins of the Parks and Re- creation Committee; trees would be reduced to 6 to 8 palms and 8 pines, and the buffer hedge will not be myoporum as it is difficult to maintain at six feet. She stated that there are several types of shrubs which could be used. There is to be a 42 inch high railing installed at the edge of the park, cutting off vehicular access. The revised grading plan call for 2000-2500 cubic yards of excess earth from the owner's adjacent 11 lots to be used as fill in the park, contoured and raising the elevation a portion of the park an average of two feet. In response to Mr. Hughes' query as to where else in the City there is a 42 inch high railing, Director Hightower said such a railing exists all along the Point Vicente Park bluff. #604X -B22-23 Peter Delgado, representing Tumanjan & Tumanjan, briefly addressed the Commission and responded to Chairman Hinchliffe's question as to why the excess was to be placed in the park by saying the reason was economic; to remove the excess would require 100 truckloads at $140 per load, and the owner would save 40% of that $14,000. Mr. Hughes asked how much the 42 inch railing would cost along the access easement and why the developer could not pay for it. Director Hightower responded that cost estimates for the railing are not in yet, that the railing is not part of the application nor part of Tract 39672 or 39673 requirements, and that since the railing relates to an access easement, the developer is not responsible. Chairman Hinchliffe asked for estimates as to how much the park would cost, noting that the owners had posted a $100,000 bond. Director Hightower stated that she would discuss with Council any extra costs involved in the park and where the funds might come from. She said that the park would cost close to $100,000. Mr. McTaggart moved that Grading Application 670 City Council for approval as recommended by the Mr. Hughes seconded the motion with the addition construction of a railing on the public easement park development, and that the park design allow the public easement. The amendment was accepted The motion passed unanimously. be recommended to the staff report, and that the City pursue the concurrently with the access from the park to as part of the motion. GRADING NO. 677 - Jonathon Shepherd presented the staff BRIDGES report. 6469 CHARTRES Mr. Tim Racisz, on behalf of the owner, NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE addressed the Commission. Mr. Hughes asked if the chain link fence was on the property line, and Mr. Racisz responded that the property line is in dispute and that owner Bridges has contacted an attorney on the matter and that a licensed civil engineer was hired by the owner to ascertain the true property line. Mr. Shepherd added that the surveying done by the civil engineer has shown the property line to be accurate. Mr. Hughes commented that if the fence is on the property line, the house is in the setback. Chairman Hinchliffe added that the application ought to show the dispute over the property line. Director Hightower stated that the application can be approved conditional upon the County of Los Angeles checking the property line submitted by owner's surveyor. Mr. Hughes queried why the new plan shows retaining walls as concrete blocks whereas on the original plan the walls were stuccoed. Mr. Racisz responded that he plans to paint the concrete block, or perhaps something else, but that stucco is no longer planned for economic reasons. Mr. Hughes made a motion, seconded by Mr. McTaggart and approved unanimously, to approve Grading Application 677 with the following conditions: 1) that staff ask the County to verify the lot line; 2) that visible retaining walls be finished in the same manner as the rest of the house, that is, textured stucco; and 3) that the deck be pulled back five feet from the side property line. GRADING NO. 683 RUCCIONE 30568 GANADO GARAGE ADDITION ern wall of the garage and retain would extend eleven feet from the the rear and will be stepped. Jonathon Shepherd presented staff report, stating that the maximum depth of the cut is five feet, or 26 cubic yards of total earth to be removed. The retaining wall would be integrated into the north - up to five feet of earth, and the wall front of the garage and ten feet from Kenneth D. York, representing the owner, addressed the Commission, stating that he had nothing to add. PLANNING COMMISSION ucnnv_Dnn_nc -2- 10/25/83 7- Mr. Hughes made a motion, seconded by 683 as submitted, and staff to send a of the garage can take place without building permit process. The motion Mr. McTaggart, to approve Grading letter advising that no conversion approval of the City through the passed unanimously. GRADING NO. 685 - Jonathon Shepherd presented the staff MARTIN report, stating that the application 27865 PALOS VERDES DR. WEST was made to bring illegal construction RETAINING WALL AND LAND- into conformance with height regula- SCAPING tions and that three code requirements were exceeded in the application, including: 1) depth of fill exceeds the five foot maximum by 2-1/2 feet; 2) the down slope retaining wall is eight feet, not 3-1/2 feet; and 3) the side retaining wall is four feet, not 3-1/2 feet. Mr. Hughes asked why the application was not a variance request and Mr. Shepherd responded that the applicant chose the grading application procedure as an alternate. Chairman Hinchliffe queried how the construc- tion was discovered, and Mr. Shepherd responded that a neighboring resident complained as to the pool cabana construction without permits. Thereafter, the City Building Department issued a stop work order, which was obeyed. Mr. Bill Cameron, representing the owner, addressed the Commission, giving a history of the site development. Mr. Martin wanted a poolhouse and commissioned an architect to have the plans drawn. The architect however, did not consult the City as to its Ordinances or Code. After the stop work order, he approached the Environmental Services Department and was told the plans were not in conformance. After the neighbor's complaint and work stoppage Mr. Martin retained Mr. Cameron whose input to date was revising the plans. Mr. Cameron proposes lowering the height of the structure on the deck from its present 22 feet so as to be in compliance with City Code with the grading, and the roof would be pitched in both directions. Dr. Wells addressed the Commission, stating he lives at 27829 Palos Verdes Drive East and is the adjacent neighbor to the north. He submitted photo- graphs showing that the owner's deck is at the level of the top of his own poolhouse. Dr. Wells stressed that his concern is the unsightliness of the structure above the deck and potential lowering of property values. Mr. Bowman of 27649 Palos Verdes Drive East, stated to the Commission that he was the property owner on the east, downhill side of the subject property. His and his wife's concern is with the poolhouse structure on the deck; he stated that the size is substantial and that it looks like a house. he mentioned the steep grade, such that the poolhouse looks down onto their property and affords them no privacy. he stated that he has talked to Mr. Martin about possible screening, but that the structure is so close to the property line there is little room for planting. he is also concerned about drainage. Mr. Martin, owner, addressed the Commission stating he had added 1100 square feet to the original house and works on the property as a hobby. He was forced to put in a new retaining wall. He contended that the poolhouse structure is a replacement screen for a previous wall between him and the Wells and that he is willing to supply privacy screening for the neighbors below. Mr. McNulty asked whether a permit was issued for the hot tub, and Mr. Martin responded no. Mrs. Wells addressed the Commission, stating that she is worried about future garding and walls. In response to Chairman Hinchliffe's question as to where the former grapestake fence was located, she stated that it was much further back, closer to the Martins' pool, and that it was much lower in height. Margaret French, 27601 Palos Verdes Drive East, stated that she lived just below the Wells and that she looks up 35 feet and sees a huge structure. She mentioned that the water from above comes down a corner onto her patio and gets flooded, sometimes 2-3 feet deep. Chairman Hinchliffe asked if this problem was new, and Mrs. French responded that it was a problem within the last couple of years. PLANNING COMMISSION -3- 10/25/83 #Aneu_Q09_')7 2 In readdressing the Commission, Mr. Martin stated that Mrs. French's drainage problem was longstanding, and that the Bowmans had drainage concerns with the people who sold the Martins their house 13 years before. He agreed that the water naturally goes downhill, and said he was working with the Bowmans for a solution but that the recent structure didn't affect the drainage. In response to Chairman Hinchliffe's question as to the height of the poolhouse, Mr. Martin stated it was over 13 feet high from the level of the deck, and that the deck is at ground level on the inside of the slope and 5-6 feet in height at the outside slope. Mr. Martin said that the existing grade around the pool has not been changed and that the new deck is the same level as before. Mr. Hughes stated that he wishes to continue the matter while staff ascertains what has been permitted and what grades and elevations existed before the retaining wall was built. Chairman Hinchliffe made a motion, seconded by Mr. McNulty, to table the application with directions to the staff to obtain more information. The motion passed unanimously. REPORTS COMMISSION Mr. McTaggart stated that residents thought that the Seacrest Trail, Tract Number 31617, would have trails suitable for walking on. Director Hightower responded that such a trail easement exists but that it is unimproved and unmarked. Mr. McTaggart asked her to check on the trail to see if it can meet residents' expectations. ADJOURNMENT There being no man Hinchliffe by Mr. McNulty, to adjourn the Meeting. With the approved, the Meeting was adjourned at 8:55 P.M. PLANNING COMMISSION -4- further business, Chair - made a motion, seconded motion unanimously n 10/25/83