Loading...
PC MINS 19850409MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 9, 1985 The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Chairman McNulty at the Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. PRESENT: MCNULTY, ORTOLANO, VON HAGEN, WIKE ABSENT: NONE Also present were Director of Environmental Services Sharon W. Hightower, Senior Planner Ann Negendank, Associate Planners Steve Rubin and Alice Angus, Assistant Planner Greg Fuz and Secretary Ann Brenesell. COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR None Minutes of March 26, 1985 A typographical error was corrected. The date should read March 26, 1985. Mr. Von Hagen moved to approve the minutes as amended; seconded by Mrs. Mike and passed unanimously. WORK SESSION t Senior Planner Ann Negendank presented the staff report of March 26, 1985 which outlined the following items. A brief question and answer period ensued between staff and the Commissioners and the following recommendations were made: Interior Access./Outside Stairs - By majority vote, the Commission agreed to require interior access and to review the need for prohibiting exterior stairs next year because there was not enough concern for revision at this time. Q District Standards - The Commission consenus was to delay review until next year. Fences Allowed with Minor Exception Permit - By majority vote, the Commission supported staff recommendation to only count the portion above 42" for the 90% calculation. OLD BUSINESS Variance #111/Grading #759 A brief staff report was presented 30520 Palos Verdes Drive East by Associate Planner Steve Rubin which recommended a 90 -day extension based on applicant's request. He stated that the City was filing a Notice of Intention to file a Notice of Violation against the subject property. Robert Kerwin, 30438 Palos Verdes Drive East, applicant stated he will return and attempt to prove the legality of the lot. He wished an extension to confer with his attorney. Also, he asked the appropriateness of presenting a model of the project and whether the issue of the legality of the lot and the Variance could be heard simultaneously. It was explained the model was an appropriate tool in dealing with the Variance, should the legality of the lot be proven. Commissioner Von Hagen moved to grant a 90 -day extension; seconded by Commissioner Wike and passed unanimously. Minutes April 9, 1985 Page 2 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT #96/VARIANCE #116 The staff report was presented ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT #461 by Associate Planner Steve Rubin St. John Fisher which recommended adoption of Resolution P.0 85-6 and Variance #116 subject to conditions contained in Exhibit A He highlighted the recommended street improvements and gave a cost breakdown He stated that some of the work for Crest Road would overlap with the Trail -s improvements He also said the cost breakdown reflected the work being done individually on each frontage. Mr. Rubin commented on the following unresolved items from the previous meeting: Reservations of Powers, Parking Restrictions on Crest Road, and Bond Amounts paid by Cayman Development for Crenshaw improvements. Staff asked Commission's consideration in changing Condition #7 to specify a time limit on the bond. The applicant hesitated in posting a bond for an indefinite period of time and 5 years was a suggestion made by them Staff supported this suggested time limit. JoAnna Strada, 37 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia, represented the Archbishop of Los Angeles and addressed the cost of street improvements and said based on the cost limitations already presented, it was not a problem. Regarding the trail bond, she asked for a time limit and an amount to be agreed to by the applicant as well as the Director of Environmental Services Lastly, regarding Bingo, she asked that this be made subject of another Conditional Use Permit. Shirley Schwarz, 6 Cayuse Lane, represented the Palos Verdes Horsemens Association and supported staff's recommendation. Sunshine, 6 Limetree, represented the Palos Verdes Horesmens Assocation and favored staff's recommendation and was concerned with specific improvements and the timing of the trail She added that the Trails Study of 1982 does not address equestrian trails immediately adjacent to a street and, therefore, asked to participate in the development of that standard. She asked that the Commission reenact the Large Animal Advisory Committee for this purpose. The Commission asked staff for suggestions for an appropriate process for any interested party to address the issue before the trail is adopted. Director Hightower was aware that some adaptations are necessary She did not have a precise process to suggest, but she said information and suggestions could be made to the Environmental Services Department One Commissioner iterated that approval of the trails plans should not be by committee but by staff. When asked how the public could be notified of the trail (specifically, PVPHA) Director Hightower replied that it could be done on a personal level. Jo Bright, 15 Crestwind Drive, addressed the parking situation and supported Condition #10, prohibiting Bingo. There being no further requests to speak, Mr. Von Hagen moved to close the public hearing; seconded by Mrs. Wike and passed unanimously. Minutes April 9, 1985 Page 3 Commission discussion ensued which related to the cooperativeness of the applicant and the appropriateness of the City requiring street improvements, a time limit on the trails bond , and the parking situation. The pros and cons of Condition #5 were discussed. Since the applicant is already short the parking requirement, it was felt in the instance of simultaneous use, this condition would minimize street parking. However, in opposition was the thought that excessive entanglement existed and, therefore, foreclosed solutions. Without further discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission to reword Condition #5 as follows: "The Church facility shall be operated in such a manner so as to best avoid simultaneous demand for maximum parking requirements which would exceed 359 spaces on site. An agreement to this effect shall be recorded by the applicant prior to issuance of a building permit. Should demand require such, the church shall utilize attendant parking Using tandem parking to increase parking capacity. Concern was aired relative to the applicant's request that the trails bond be negotiable. When the Commission asked the Director to specify an amount, she replied that the City had no idea what the bond amount would be for this at this time since there Was no design yet. The of the Commission -Was that the trails bond amount should not be a negotiable item. When asked if there was a vehicle for the applicant to use to object to the bond amount rather than letting the Conditional Use Permit expire, Director Hightower said, at the very least, the applicant could appeal the condition /z -3/q9 but it would have to be within the appeal fd L h could request a hearing �,��h� Discussion of elimination of condition #10 relating to Bingo ensued. Director Hightower cautioned that the interpretation that maY need to be made later is what is a church facility and church use, so she recommended that bingo be an amendment to the C.U.P. By majority, the CU00fssf0n supported deleting Condition #10 with the rationale that traffic is the issue and not bingo itself and Condition #5 addresses the traffic situation. Mrs. Wike remained in opposition based on the fact that if the issue is not addressed now, it cannot be considered later' Another issue raised was the condition requiring the applicant to provide a raised median on Crenshaw. With Mrs. Wike in opposition, the 0a'Vrltv supported the recommendation Of the Public Works Director and agreed that the median is required for safety reasons. Discussion then centered around exempting the Church from moving the power 4�//K^^ poles at a later date, should it become necessary. It was decided that it was not a requirement at this time and that the City could not come back after the fact and require the removal by the church. . H -8 / ��o4�, /^' � A Minutes April 9, 1985 Page 4 One Commissioner if the City was poles. 4# is expressed concern over the potential demise of the trails unable to be financially responsible for removing the power Staff requested that the wording of Condition #6 be changed to include at Director's approval and the Commission concurred. Mr. Von Hagen moved to adopt Resolution P.C. No. 85-6 in concept, approving Conditional Use Permit #96, with the proposed changes, Final Negative Declara- tion for Environmental Assessment #461 and approve Variance 1116 for reduction in parking requirements; seconded by Mr. McNulty and passed on a 3 to 1 roll call vote with Mrs. Wike dissenting. Mrs. Wike stated for the record that her vote was not in opposition to the application for construction of a social hall but rather the unrelated relationship between the condition imposed by Exhibit A, #7, the City's trails standards plan, and the benefit conferred to the applicant. TPM 16778/EA 461 The staff report of 419185 3270 Via Campesina was presented by Associate Planner Steve Rubin which recommended adoption of Resolution P.C. No.85- approving the Final Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 463 and TPM 16778 based on the fact that TPM 16778 is in conformance with the City's Development Code and State Subdivision Map Act. A concern was raised regarding the maintenance of the upper strip of land by the driveway. The public hearing was opened by Chairman McNulty. Racho Palos Verdes resident, Mr. Schneider, 24506 Crenshaw Boulevard , aired his objection of the proposed project and stated it was not commensurate with the development in the area (proposed house too small) and therefore property values could be decreased. He stated he owned a piece of property in the area. Richard Meine, 3270 Via Campesina, applicant, was present and available for questions. He simply stated his intention was not to detract from the neighborhood and that he intended to maintain the upper portion of the lot. Without further speakers, Mrs. Ortolano moved to close the public hearing; seconded by Chairman McNulty and passed unanimously. Staff was instructed to bring back language requiring proper maintenance of the upper "tail" to parcel 'A'. Commissioner Ortolano moved to approved Resolution P.C. No. 85- in concept, with the additional condition that the tail of the lot be cared for by the owner and review of the language by the Planning Commission; seconded by Commissioner Von Hagen and passed unanimously. Minutes April 9, 1985 page 5 GRADING #692/ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT #457 The staff report was presented by LOTS 13 & 14, TRACT 32574 Associate Planner Steve Rubin which recommended approval of Grading #692 and Final Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment #457, subject to mitigation measures contained in the Initial Study. He gave a brief history, highlighted project considerations and outlined Environmental Issues as stated in the 4/9/85 staff report. He supported approval of the applicant's request to allow these property owners of Lots 13 and 14 to perform remedial grading in an existing drainage channel. He stated the City's main concern is for the preservation of the lower portion of the channel during construction and afterwards. John Vilicich, 1622 S. Gaffey, applicant, requested the Commission to write letter to the Flood Control District relating to the distribution of costs. The Commission consensus was that this request should be made to Council for a letter to Dean Dana's office. Without further discussion, Chairman McNulty moved to approve Grading #692 and Final Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment #457 subject to mitigation measures and further recommended that the City get involved by letter from City Council or the Mayor to the appropriate County department and further recommended fencing be installed as a protective measure pending completion of the project; seconded by Mr. Von Hagen, and passed unanimously. GRADING #788 - APPEAL The staff report was presented 29501 Ocean Port Road by Assistant Planner Greg Fuz which recommended denial of Grading #788 - Appeal. Bob Parker, applicant, 29501 Oceanport Road, explained his project as part of a landscape remodel. He presented landscape drawings for review. He said he objected to the cantilever option because of the additional cost. The Commissioners aired some concern about the number of pilings in the slope and asked about the feasibility of scaling down the deck. However, because of the uniqueness of the parcel of land, Mr. Von Hagen moved to approve Grading Application #788 - Appeal. Following the motion, several conditions were discussed as follows: (1) space between the floor of the deck shall be screened on all sides by land- scaping and approved by the Director of Environmental Services, (2) the color of the deck structure shall be natural wood or earth tones approved by Director of Environmental Services, (2) run-off from the deck shall be collected and discharged in a manner approved by the City Engineer and, (4) rain gutters and downspouts shall be installed on the primary structure. Mr. Von Hagen amended his motion to include the 4 conditions; seconded, and passed unanimously. Iv r Ni nutes April 9, 1985 Page 6 REPORTS COMMISSION None STAFF None ADJOURNMENT It was moved, seconded and passed unanimously to adjourn at 9:40 p.m to April 23, 1985 at 6:30 p.m.