Loading...
PC MINS 19851120M I N U T E S Planning Commission November 20, 1985 The meeting was called to order at 7:40 PM by Chairman McNulty at Dodson Junior High School, 28014 Montereina Drive. PRESENT: MC NULTY, HODGE, ORTOLANO, VON HAGEN, WIKE ABSENT: NONE Also present were City Manager Don Guluzzy, Councilman Hinchcliffe, Director of Environmental Services Sharon Hightower, Associate Planner Alice Bergquist Angus, Associate �� Planner Steve Rubin, and Assistant Planner Jack CONTINUED BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS Specific Plan No. 2 Associate Planner Alice E.A. No. 478F-q ­ g u:Cst Angus -presented 28821-28839 S. Western the staff report on this Specific Plan for commer- cial redevelopment or renovation of the Harbor Heights Shopping Center and vacant Texaco service station properties. The staff recommendation was for the Commission to reopen the public hearing, take testimony, then close the public hearing. It was further recommended. the Commission discuss the issues identified in the staff report and direct staff to make appropriate changes. In addition, staff recommended the Commission adopt Resolution P.C. No. 85-32 recommending approval of Specific Plan No. 2 to the City Council. Staff stated handwritten corrections were made to Draft Specific Plan No. 2 and noted Commission concerns to be as follows: Building Colors Alcoholic Beverage Control Standards Traffic Flow/Access View Preservation Office Use Limitations - Second Story Buffering and Rooftop Equipment Delivery Hours Percent of Compact Parking Implementation Minutes November 20, 1985 Page 2 Staff discussion was as follows: Noting Commission concerns regarding the emphasis on white as an acceptable color staff recommended the Commission accept the reword -1 -ng, or. Page 11 of Dr=ft Spccific PIE_ -ii No. 2, "Colors that are light and neutral: white, cream i — �_�::_ -- and pastels, with accent colors that are of high intensity. Staff also noted the Commission will review individual color changes once the plan is in effect. "Accent colors" were noted to be those on the smaller parts of a building such as trim, doors and awnings. Staff discussed Commission concerns regarding Alcoholic beverage control standards and recommended the Commission discuss whether it is appropriate to prohibit the sale of alcohol and gas and noted the appropriate place to do so is in a Conditional Use Permit. With regard to traffic flow/access, staff mentioned no traffic study for the area has been done and stated the investor/developer will do a traffic study once a specific development plan is finalized. Staff noted its revisions to the proposed building height envelope diagram and stated the 2% angle would preserve the existing views. Based on the new topo survey, the viewing stations were said to be more accurate and staff recommended the new drawing replace the previous one as mentioned in Draft Specific Plan No. 2. Staff displayed a large scale cross section of the area and Assistant Planner Jack Roberts explained the 2% envelope and how it is used to preserve long-range views. He noted the views calculated with the 2% envelope are exactly the same as those which presently exist. Staff suggested the 25% limit of the floor area for office space apply to the first floor only and Page 13 Draft Specific Plan No. 2 be changed to reflect same. Staff recommended the Commission discuss and determine whether office, non -retail uses should be allowed without a percentage limit above the ground floor. Staff also suggested hours for deliveries, lot sweeping and trash be controlled and recommended revisions to Page 13 Draft Specific Plan, "Deliveries, lot sweeping, use of blowers, and garbage collection shall not take place between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM." Minutes November 20, 1985 Page 3 Staff discussed rooftop buffering and screening and suggested the building height envelope be applied to the rooftop as well as the buildings. Staff recommended the Commission discuss this item ;to determine if the equipment should be prohibited or allowed within the height limits if screened. Staff recommended the Commission discuss the issue of compact car stalls and suggested staff be directed to reduce the percentage of compact car stalls from the current 30% to 200. Staff suggested the Commission discuss at what point an addition or renovation of existing floor area triggers implementation of the Plan, recommending 25% as the amount necessitating the site's compliance with Specific Plan No. 2. Renovation was noted to be anything done to change the exterior of the building and should not be interpreted as remodeling the inside. Staff also noted grading is not addressed by the Plan and recommended language be added to the Plan regarding a consideration of building on existing slopes keeping the eight foot retaining wall maximums, evaluating those codes generally related to grading. Staff stated specific plans will be drafted for commercial areas on both sides of Western. City Council's exclusion of Westmont Plaza from a Specific Plan was mentioned. Commission discussion began as follows: The Commission voiced concern over the language on Page 11 Draft Specific Plan No. 2, "...accent colors of high intensity" and suggested the Plan avoid language which leaves room for misinterpretation. The Commission discussed alcoholic beverage controls and the concurrent sale of alcohol and gas. The Commission expressed concern over the safety of bikeriders along Western and noted Western Avenue to be a State Highway. Minutes November 20, 1985 Page 4 With regard to view preservation, the Commission was pleased to note Page 20 Draft Specific Plan No. 2 requires plant heights and potential view blockage be reported. The Commission also noted staff's presentation explaining the 2% envelope to be informative and agreed the new diagram should replace the previous one. Air conditioning noise attenuation and the shielding of rooftop equipment were discussed. Placing mechanical noise -producing machinery on the ground was suggested. Suggested delivery, lot sweeping and trash collection hours of 7:00 AM -10:00 PM were discussed with 7:00 AM being noted as the start time for City construction and 10:00 PM giving shop keepers adequate time to load and clean up after 9:00 PM closings. Concern over a developer leveling the site was expressed and the advantage of dealing with grading in the Plan was noted as being a reduction in the applications for Minor Exception Permits and Variances. Chairman McNulty opened the public hearing. Concerned citizens included: Jody Culver 28918 Gunther Road Melinda Downing 1914 Caddington Jerry Lewin 28533 Vista Madera Scott Lindsay 28825 Gunther Road Anthony Sosa 28909 Gunther Road Milo Whitson 28802 Gunther Road Nina Yoshida 28808 Gunther Road Citizen concerns included color (earthtones as opposed to white or bright colors), traffic, density, restaurants, cafes and similar odor -producing establishments, bikerider safety along Western Avenue, grading, delivery hours, view preservation, and excessive air/noise pollution (Carl's squawk box). Minutes November 20, 1985 Page 5 Mr. Leron Gubler, Executive Director, San Pedro Chamber of Commerce, 390 W. 7th Street, San Pedro, noted the Chamber has not adopted any views on the Plan but is concerned that other areas along Western Avenue will be pressured to conform with changes resulting from Specific Plan No. 2. Mr. Gubler suggested property owners within the City be notified the Plan could have an impact on their existing/future properties and questioned Westmont Plaza's exclusion from a specific plan. Addressing the Carl's Junior noise problem, City Manager Guluzzy noted a letter was written to Carl's resulting in the turning down of the squawk box and, now that he is aware of further problems, Mr. Guluzzy stated his intent to look into same. Chairman McNulty closed the public hearing. Commission discussion continued as follows: With regard to traffic access, the Commission discussed restricting access from Caddington and suggested this item could be presented to the Traffic Committee for review. It was again stated a traffic/environmental/geological report will be done once a specific development plan is finalized. The item of restricting tenants with regard to the request of no cafes, restaurants or odor -producing establishments was discussed noting parking is restrictive so that, when a restaurant is the tenant, the developer must provide more parking. City attempts to control restaurant odors with scrubbers and venting fans were mentioned:to be --effective. The Commission stated lot coverage, parking requirements and landscaping requirements all limit density of the site and the developer's plans must fall within the Building Code parameters. Commission discussion noted other sites along Westerm Avenue will definitely be influenced by Specific Plan No. 2. It was also mentioned the City initially launched the prosect by inviting merchants (not owners) along Western Avenue with hopes the merchants would relate information to owners. The possibility of holding a public hearing to determine owner interest was mentioned. Minutes November 20, 1985 Page 6 It was stressed that, with Specific Plan No. 2, the City is attempting to set parameters for architectural design so that when a project is brought before the Planning Commission there will be guidelines under which the developer's plans must fall. It was noted the City is making an effort to control property with residents in mind, with the Western Avenue sector in mind and with the developer of the area in mind. Texaco was cited as an applicant and it was mentioned the City is attempting to have the Texaco application fall under the Plan. It was also stressed that a developer does have plans for the site but that no specific development plans have been presented to the City. Commission recommendations were as follows: The Commission discussed redrafting the language with regard to colors in order to insure no misinterpretation and applicant's right to determine building colors was stressed. It was recommended that language regarding accent colors be changed. The Commission stated its agreement with staff regarding the Conditional Use Permit being the appropriate place to deal with alcoholic beverage controls. The Commission discussed office use limitation and voiced its agreement with staff's recommendation that the 25% maximum be applied only to the ground floor. The Commission noted its agreement with staff's recommenda- tion that delivery, lot sweeping and trash collection hours be 7:00 AM -10:00 PM. The Commission discussed screening for noise and visual impact with the recommendation that the building envelope be applied to rooftops as well as buildings and, if not within the envelope, it was recommended the equipemnt be placed on the ground. E Minutes November 20, 1985 Page 7 The Commission stated its agreement with staff's recommenda- tion of the compact car space reduction to 200. The Commission discussed additions/renovations of 25% of existing floor area dictating implementation of the Plan and the hardship this could place on owners was mentioned. 35% as opposed to staff's recommendation of 25% was recom- mended as the amount which would trigger the Plan's implementation due to additions/renovations. Building renovation as a means of completely remodeling was discussed and the Commission recommended that, from the time the Plan is adopted, with a cumulative -redevelopment of 35% the building be brought into compliance with Specific Plan No. 2. The Commission recommended that, with a cumulative renovation of 25%, utilities are to be placed underground to the nearest power source at the property line. The Commission stated its agreement with staff's recommendation that the Plan include grading guidelines within the Conditional Use Permit with general criteria in the Code, not subject to variances, and recommended grading which is not reviewed and does not have a geological report not be allowed. Making Western Avenue safer for bikeriders was mentioned along with Class II Bikeway (lane) and Class III Bikeway (signs). The idea of a Class II Bikeway was recommended along with the -suggestion that, the- State requires the lane, the stripes could be removed. -- Mr. Von Hagen moved to adopt the proposal as amended and to send the proposal to City Council with Recommendations and with the further recommendation that City Council consider holding further public hearings before which time letters be sent to business associations, homeowners associations and the Chamber of Commerce announcing the city is considering this type of proposal and a press release be sent to the San Pedro News Pilot that similar specific plans possibly affecting future development along Western Avenue are to be considered. Seconded by Mrs. Wike and passed unanimously. ,X: Minutes November 20, 1985 Page 8 ADJOURNMENT • The meeting was ad]ourned at 10:15 PM to 7:30 PM November 26, 1985.