Loading...
PC MINS 19840814M I N U T E S City of Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Commission Regular Meeting August 14, 1984 The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. at the Hesse Park Community Building at 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. PRESENT: BROWN, ORTOLANO, VON HAGEN, WIKE, McNULTY ABSENT: NONE Also present were Associate Planner Steve Rubin, Assistant Planner Pedroni, Secretary Ann Brenesell, Director of Environmental Services Sharon Hightower, City Manager Don Guluzzy, Mayor Bacharach, and City Councilman Doug Hinchliffe. CONSENT CALENDAR It was the consensus of the Commission to move the CIP to the end of the meeting. MINUTES OF JULY 24, 1984 The following corrections were made: on Page 4, a comma was inserted between the words La Cresta and Mesa. Also page 4, was changed to read between January - September 1985 and not 1984. On Page 5, insertion of ...City Council thought it was appropriate for a Conditional Use procedure for the Temple Beth El use. On Page 1, under Tentative Tract Map 40640, it was changed to read: ...about the height measurement ,problem which arose in the application for a permit on Calle de Suenos... Mr. Von Hagen moved to approve the minutes as amended, seconded by Mr. McNulty and passed unanimously. OLD BUSINESS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 90 Assistant Planner Gary Pedroni presented 22 CAYUSE LANE the staff report stating it was a request to allow an 800 square foot addition to be made to an existing retirement/boarding home at 22 Cayuse Lane and to allow an additional four patients. This use would include a total of 15 patients. He briefly outlined and referred to the staff report of June 26, 1984. Staff had directed the applicant and applicant's architect to find the capacity of the septic tank and leachfield to determine if this expansion could be handled on this site. The volume of the septic tank had not been established. The leachfield could not be found. Staff, therefore, put together an estimate of what would be required on the basis of sewage #603X-AO5 flow per person, number of bedrooms, and soil type. An average of 2,500 square feet is needed for the leachfield. Taking into account the Uniform Plumbing Code, required setbacks from slopes and 100% backup, the total area needed on this site is 5,000 square feet to have a workable system with the proposed intensity of use. The site is 4,500 square feet short. Mr. Pedroni said the findings remain the same as the staff report of July 26, 1984. Staff could not make any of the findings. Therefore, it was staff's recom- mendation to adopt Resolution P.C. No. 84- denying Conditional Use Permit 90. Dr. Brown referred to a letter which stated that the percolation tests were adequate. Mr. Pedroni explained that it was done by the pr03ect architect whose Sanitation Engineer established the total figure of 2,500 square feet based on the number of bedrooms; that figure coincided with the figures staff had worked up. The problem is available area suitable for the leaching system. The architect came up with 3,000 square feet and was unaware of the plumbing code requirements for building setbacks and 100% backup area. Dr. Parvis Parsa,23712 South Main, Carson, CA., applicant, stated he felt uncomfortable because proving enough sewage disposal capacity when there has never been a sewage problem is difficult. After Tuesday's review, it was decided there was not adequate sewage disposal area. He felt there was misunderstanding and apprehension amongst the neighbors also. He stated his intention was to upgrade the property and he did not agree there is a parking or noise problem and deferred to his architect relative to the review of the sewage concern. Mrs. Ortolano asked how many cars could be parked in the driveway. Dr. Parsa answered, easily three cars. Mr. Belak-Berger, 415 North Broadway, #6D, Redondo Beach, Architect, said in light of the recent data, there was not enough time to digest the material. The codes that govern the design of the leachfields were over- looked and thus they concluded substantial portions of the lot would become useless. A new architectural statement is necessary to address the needs. He thought the location initially requested is not the correct location and continued to discuss alternatives. Dr. Brown stated this is a different application and suggested the proceed- ings be continued. Mr. Pedroni said anything that would expand the use of the property would still require 5,000 square feet available for the leachfield and was not in agreement with a continuation. Mr. McNulty stated the Commission cannot redesign the project and thought a continuance would be appropriate. PLANNING COMMISSION -2- 8/14/84 #603X -A6 Dr. Brown clarified that a problem still existed with the leachfield and it was a severe constraint and perhaps the applicant could meet with staff to solve the problem. Ms. Ortolano said she found more wrong with the proposal than the sewage problem. Parking,, noise, degradation of property values were all expressed concerns. Mr. Von Hagen also said there were other areas of concern. Since the application is different, he thought the Commission should not proceed. He stated he had a problem with the leachfield. Mrs. Wike shared the Commission's concern about the leachfield. She expressed further concern about noise, parking, and open space. Mr. McNulty spoke about fairness to the applicant and was in favor of allowing time for alternatives. Dr. Brown suggested continuance of the public hearing to allow the applicant time to redesign his project. He reiterated his concerns. Mr. Rubin said the scope of the project would not be changing other than the location of the addition. Dr. Brown said that in fairness the applicant needs to be allowed to present his new application. Dr. Brown moved to continue the public hearing, seconded by Mr. McNulty, and passed unanimously. Staff was advised to renotice the application. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Associate Planner Steve Rubin stated that NO. 91 attached to the staff report of 8/14/84 PVPUSD is the staff report of 7/24/84 and the MIRALESTE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL minutes of 7/24/84. He stated the differ- ence between the applications is that the present application includes the proposed Harbor Foundation for the Retarded. At the last meeting, the Planning Commission asked for clarification of 6 items. Mr. Rubin reiterated those items and said the applicant had attempted to provide complete responses to those items. Mr. Rubin believed the most important item is that the overall use of the site does not exceed the intensity of the site as that its use as an elementary school facility. Staff was provided a plan to restripe the parking lot. It is possible to obtain 35 parking spaces that do meet the standard requirements for parking. Staff recommended a stipulation for overflow parking needed to be directed to Miraleste High School. The question before the Commission was if the uses are appropriate for the site now then they would be appropriate 6 months or a year from now. It is, therefore, staff's recommendation that Commission adopt Resolution P.C. 84- with the conditions of approval as attached in Exhibit A, and these conditions include time limits relating to the Harbor Foundation for the Retarded and Temple Beth El for occupancy no later than September 1985. PLANNING COMMISSION -3- 8/14/84 #603X -A10 13 Mr. Von Hagen aired concern about the evening hours of usage. He saw a major differentiation of usage and did not think these facilities are easily adaptable for the proposed uses. Mr. Rubin stated that adult usage would only be two evenings a week. Mrs. Ortolano asked about the ability to control sub -leasing. She was concerned with the ability of the Commission to review any use for the school property that is different from the Harbor Foundation for the Retarded, Temple Beth El and First Church of Christ Scientist. Further discussion ensued relative to adults vs. children usage, noise, and hours of usage. Dr. Brown referred to Mrs. Konzak's letter to staff, paragraph 4, regarding scheduling by the District Office. He questioned the control factor if the scheduling is maintained through that office. Mr. Rubin said a monthly submittal schedule was discussed. Mrs. Wike asked about enforcement of overflow parking. Mr. Rubin explained that complaints would be referred to the Code Enforce- ment Inspector for direct follow-up. Mrs. Wike asked about staff's ability to cease the activity if many complaints were registered. Mr. Rubin referred to Condition #8, which states that the approval may be revoked by staff action or by the Commission if any conditions are not carried out. Mrs. Ortolano thought a monthly schedule would be burdensome for the City as well as for the School District and excessive entanglement in the operation of the facility. She asked if any other property users in the City needed to submit a monthly schedule. Jan Konzak, PVP Unified School District, 3801 La Selva, Palos Verdes Estates, indicated she spoke to the President of Miraleste Homeowners Association and asked her to review the matter with its Board. The Board indicated a favorable response to allowing the Harbor Foundation for the Retarded as well as the other uses at the site. In response to the inquiries about different usages and the hours of usage, Ms. Konzak deferred to Rabbi Lieb for specifics. She also responded to the issue of sub -leasing. She stated the School District's intention, under the Civic Center Act, is for the type of uses within the definition of the Civic Center Act and requests that do not meet the criteria would be rejected. Also, Civic Center uses need to be scheduled two weeks in advance. The number of evenings would be approximately 4 evenings per week and not later than 9:30 P.M. Parking enforcement was also discussed. Dr. Brown spoke about the intensity issue. PLANNING COMMISSION -4- 8/14/84 #603X -All I 1� Mr. Rubin said the resolution and conditions address the time limits for Temple Beth El and Center and the Harbor Foundation. He thought it would become burdensome to review each and every Civic Center use. Dr. Brown said the Commission would not be giving a carte blanche for all large organizations. Lengthy discussion ensued about adult usage by the Temple Beth El. Rabbi David Lieb, 6908 Kings Harbor, RPV, clarified the Temple Beth El's usages. He stated Tuesday evening use for Jr. High programs and Monday and Thursday usage for adult programs. He also stated he would be willing to change these to another appropriate time, if necessary. Dr. Brown asked about the frequency of religious services on Friday evenings and about the date of occupancy. Rabbi Lieb replied that he did not have that information yet. He thought it would not be in September. It could possibly be between October and January. He said the Temple would only need the facility for religious services for a period of one month, four Friday nights. Dr. Brown reiterated the concerns about traffic in relation to these services. Mr. Von Hagen asked if there would be a problem with a condition of 9:00 P.M. termination of activity. Rabbi Lieb said 9:00 P.M. termination of adult meetings would be difficult but 10:00 P.M. would be more reasonable. Maria Lawrence, 600 W. 8th Street, San Pedro, represented the Harbor Foundation for the Retarded and stated the intent was to operate a pre- vocational program for mentally retarded adults and a pre-school program for the developmentally delayed and at -risk infant children. Families would be involved in the infant children programs and some early evening use for the facility would be needed and on a quarterly basis, a meeting would be held with the families. Mrs. Ortolano asked if the School Board would come before the Commission with their next major tenant, when the 3 tenants vacated? Mr. Rubin said yes, it would be appropriate. Ms. Konzak replied that was her understanding. Jean Crawford, 5700 Ravenspur, RPV, represented the First Church of Christ Scientist, Rolling Hills Estates, and said they have been tenants for a year and a half and the schedule consists of two meetings a week, Sunday morning and Wednesday evening from 8:00 P.M. till 9:00 P.M.; three business meetings a year and a few small committee meetings. It includes 20 cars on Wednesday and about 30 cars on Sunday. She stated there have been no problems to date. Dr. Brown aired concern about fund raising events relative to the generation of traffic. PLANNING COMMISSION -5- 8/14/84 � #603X-Al2 Mr. Rubin said Special Events occurring outside the building require a Sepcial Use Permit; however, if the activity occurs inside the building a permit is not required. Ms. Konzak said none of the groups will be having fund raising events. Mr. McNulty moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Mr. Von Hagen and passed unanimously. Mr. Von Hagen said his primary concern was for the right to peace and quiet of the neighbors. The request is for an intense use of the property. A time limit is necessary for the termination of activities. He thought 10:00 P.M. is too late. Also, he thought there should be some input for sub -lease control by the Director of Environmental Services prior to a sub -lease commitment by the School District. He did not think the Com- mission need to be involved with a monthly schedule. However, he thought the Planning Commission should be advised of any new use. Dr. Brown stated the proposed conditions as follows: (1) a time limit, (2) fund raising control, (3) Director of Environmental Services as approv- ing agency on Condition #2, (4) sub -leasing control, (5) New Use, and (6) control number of cars. Mrs. Ortolano said she thought the problem is that this is a new process for the City and the School District. Because of the concern of the neighbors being negatively impacted, she thought the Commission is becoming too involved in the management of the property especially relative to special events and sub -leasing: These matters should be referred to the Director of Environmental Services. She did not think any additional conditions needed to be imposed. Mrs. Wike aired concern about controlling the number of cars in the evening. No other Commission member shared this concern. Dr. Brown asked about new uses. Mr. Rubin stated that any new uses would return to the Commission. Dr. Brown suggested inserting the words for review and approval by the Director of Environmental Services, under Condition #2. Discussion ensued relative to monthly scheduling, and it was agreed, with Mrs. Ortolano in opposition, that the School District submit a monthly schedule for review by the Director of Environmental Services. The consensus of the Commission was that the approving authority be the Director of Environmental Services relative to sub -leasing. This condition is an addition. The question of time limits was discussed. Mrs. Rose Lachman requested to address the Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION -6- 8/14/84 #603X -A13 Mrs. Ortolano moved to reopen the public hearing, seconded by Mr. McNulty and passed unanimously. Rose Lachman, President of Board of Education, 1636 Dalton Road, Palos Verdes Estates, said the School Board does everything possible to work with the community to make the school sites available for all activities that community groups wish. Use prevents vandalism. She was concerned about the sub -lease restriction. She referred to the Educational Code section of the Civic Center Act, and stated the intent of that Act was to make school facilities available to community groups and that is the right of the School District and School Board to do so. She believed restrictions falling within the Civic Center Act would negate the Act and challenge it. She was concerned about the sub -lease restriction. she re -far -rad t_o-the W.L the eivic eenter Act, and stated the inte of ies avaitable tU L;QItULLUIIitY YLUUJJ5 .-,U-x-s the right of the Schooi DistrTct and Schoo± board tv do so. IR 1 re . Fi the Giv*e Gente-r- -an-t- weuld negate the e it. She did not think that was appropriate. She asked the Commission to strike sub -lease from the conditions. Dr. Brown stated the need for control and asked staff to deter -mine whether the sub -lease was appropriate. Mrs. Lachman stated her intent was for the School District to be permitted to follow through on the Education Code permissive uses of the site. Mrs. Ortolano dsm9C 4"e/tg�believe that even though the Education Code is addressed to the School District, that it does not preempt the City from some measure of control of that property. Mr. McNulty moved to close the public hearing; seconded by Mr. Von Hagen and passed unanimously. Time limits were discussed again and by a 3 to 2 vote, 9:30 p.m. was the established time. Mr. McNulty requested 10:00 p.m. Mrs. Ortolano concurred. By a revote of 3 to 2, the time limit was then established at 10:00 p.m. Dr. Brown requested staff to return with a resolution and conditions of approval. RECESS 9:30 p.m. RECONVENED 9:40 p.m. REDEVELOPMENT PLAN Councilman Hinchliffe was pre - Change in Pr03ect Area sent at this meeting and gave Boundaries a summary on the history of the landslide, the City's action in attempting to stablize the area, and the rationale in revising the boundaries of the survey area for the Redevelopment Area. He presented the downside is the requirement for #603X -A14 q low/moderate income housing; the more undeveloped land picked up as part of the Redevelopment area, the more requirement for low and moderate income housing. Mr. McNulty asked if there were a mechanism of disposing of the agency if and when a solution exceeded the expectation of the agency. Councilman Hinchliffe responded yes. Mrs. Ortolano asked if the project area is expanded to include Seaview and Portuguese Bend and what is the increase in low and moderate income re qu i reme nt. Councilman Hinchliffe said the form as originally adopted with 300 new units, it would be 45. There are 47 additional sites in the P V Properties area, City would pick up an additional 15% of 47. Mrs. Ortolano's understanding was that low and moderate income housing would not have to be placed within the Redevelopment area. Councilman Hincliffe said that was not entirely true and deferred to City Attorney Bill Stausz. Councilman Hinchliffe said 20% of the revenue generated by the Redevelop- ment Agency must be earmarked for the development of that low and moderate housing. Dr. Brown reiterated that if the City does nothing, there is ultimate grave jeopardy for the moratorium area and the outlined red area. Councilman Hinchliffe said the rationale was to pick up some land that will help the City financially and from the City's perspective, it is an attempt to equitably designate the area that will benefit the most and at the same time limit the area so as not to impose stigma. Including the additional area will financially help the Redevelopment area to generate the necessary money to deal with the slide and to remove a division within 2 neighborhoods which has existed because of the Klondike' Canyon Abatement District. Mr. Bill Strausz, Attorney for the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, stated that relative to the low/moderate income housing there are 2 requirements: (1) of the housing that is developed in the future in the project area, 15% of that housing has to be available at affordable cost to persons who need low and moderate income housing. The requirement is in the aggregate and can be met by a good faith effort at a time in the future, (2) of the tax increment that is allocated to the agency, 1/5 must be used to increase and improve the City's supply of low and moderate income housing. It does not have to be in the project area. Ms. Ortolano asked for clarification of Redevelopment Project Area and Redevelopment Plan. #603X -B19 5 Mr. Strausz said a Redevelopment Project Area is one that has defined geographic boundaries and Redevelopment plan is a document that provides for what will be the activities of a Redevelopment Agency within that Redevelopment Project. The Agency would provide in the Redevelopment Plan for installation and construction of public improvements to eliminate whatever conditions exist in the project area which gave rise to its condition. The following were present and protested the change in boundaries of the Project Area for the Redevelopment Plan. Pro3ect Area for the Redevelopment Plan: Mr. George Cannady, 4037 Admirable Way, Rancho Palos Verdes Mr. Ludwig O. Zelt, 4354 Exultant Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes Mr. Jeff Younggren, 4362 Exultant Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes Ms. Betty Runyon, 4319 Palos Verdes Drive South, Rancho Palos Verdes Mr. Bill Bartz, 3936 Admirable Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes Mr. Douglas Murray, 4136 Palkos Verdes Drive South, Rancho Palos Verdes Mr. Joseph McLaren, 3923 Palos Verdes Drive South, Rancho Palos Verdes Mr. D. L. McGrew, 4113 Palos Verdes Drive South, Rancho Palos Verdes Mr. George B. Potter, 4014 Exultant Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes Mr. Harry Gibb, 4005 Dauntless Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes Mr. Ron Wolf, 4040 Admirable Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes Mr. Jack Jones, 4225 Palos Verdes Drive South, Rancho Palos Verdes Mr. Michael Unger, 3245 Barkentine Road, Rancho Palos Verdes David Potter, 4014 Exultant Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine Road, Rancho Palos Verdes The Mayor's concern was a loss of property values and the stigma of a "blighted area". The question of noticing by the City arose. The City Manager, Donald F. Guluzzy also stated there was notification of the Redevelopment Agency in the City's last 2 issues of Newletter, plus Notice in P. V. News, Daily Breeze, and the San Pedro News Pilot. The rationale was: Mrs. Ortolan supported the pr03ect area as proposed. The persuading fact was the fact there will be change in law on January 1. Thus, if the area is included later, the benefits will be greatly reduced. Mr. Von Hagen supported the proposed Project Area and was not convinced about a stigma. He thought controlling the slide would benefit everyone. Mr. McNulty said he supported the revised boundaries. Mrs. Wike also supported the revised boundaries for similar reasons as Mrs. Ortolan. Dr. Brown did not agree with the idea of a stigma and decreased property value, He disagreed with Council and did not feel it was fair to include Seaview without including part of Barkentine. He was not convinced of the Council's rationale. #603X -B20 q Mr. McNulty moved to adopt Resolutin P.C. No. 84-21 as proposed, seconded by Mr. Von Hagen and passed. ROLL CALL: AYES: McNulty Ortolano Von Hagen Wlke NOES: Brown NEW BUSINESS It was the consensus of the Commission to move Grading #655 and Grading 739 to August 28 due to the late hour. ADJOURNMENT Mr. McNulty moved to ad3ourn to Friday August 17 at 7:30 a.m., City Hall Conference Room at 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard, seconded by Mrs. Ortolano at /2:50 a.m, and passed. I/Z sfS,t #603X -B21