PC MINS 19860408,�•��( , (012.x/ ��
M I N U T E S
PLANNING COMMISSION
APRIL 8, 1986
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M. by Chairman Von Hagen at
Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard.
PRESENT: HODGE, MCNULTY, VON HAGEN, WIKE
ABSENT: ORTOLANO
Also present were Acting Director of Environmental Services Ann Negen-
dank, Associate Planner Steve Rubin, Assistant Planner Greg Fuz, and
Assistant Planner Jack Roberts.
COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Von Hagen noted the
following communications: (1)
A copy of supportive materials
and Resolution approving
PC 7713 - CUP No. 23, (2) Ray
Brundstrom's letter to Don
Guluzzy regarding hazardous material disposal programs, and (3) South-
west Area Planning Council announcement of the Friday, April 25, 1986
meeting in the City of Gardena.
CONSENT CALENDAR
CONTINUED BUSINESS
Minutes - February 11, 1986.
Mrs. Wike moved to approve the
Consent Calendar, seconded by
Mr. Hodge and passed with Mr.
McNulty abstaining (due to Feb-
ruary 11, 1986 absence).
GOLDEN COVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING The Golden Cove Affordable
PRIORITY GROUPS WORKSHOP Housing Priority Groups Work-
shop was held April 8, 1986,
the minutes related to this
item being attached hereto.
NEW BUSINESS
GR No. 896 - Stefan Assistant Planner Greg Fuz pre -
7433 Via Lorado sented the staff report on this
request to allow construction
603CP/MIN2.1
Minutes
April 8, 1986
Page Two
of a single-family residence on a lot whose total average slope ex-
ceeds 35% with the recommendation that the Commission direct applicant
to redesign.
Staff noted applicant's willingness to revise plans in order to ad-
dress staff's concerns of exterior stairs leading directly to a bed-
room, grading/steep slopes, and enhancing the exterior of the garage
adjacent to Via Lorado.
Staff discussed applicant's revised plans for exterior stairs leading
to a hallway thereby resolving the problem of access to a separate
room, the Code intent of prohibiting exterior stairs leading to second
story additions, and requested Commission direction with regard to ex-
terior stair approval.
Mr. Ted Mohan, 7433 Via Lorado, applicant's architect, addressed the
Commission regarding applicant's exterior stair request noting appli-
cant's intent is not for the stairs to lead to a second rental unit,
the plans have been redesigned so the exterior stairs lead to a hall-
way, impossible street access to the stairs, the stairs are for conve-
nience only, for aesthetic reasons the stairs should be on the outside
of the structure, and problems with applicant waiting for another Com-
mission hearing date.
The Commission discussed applicant incorporating the exterior stairs
within the home, stairs which are built within the normal transporta-
tion areas of a home to not pose problems with residents eventually
converting stair access to gain a second rental unit, considering each
application on an individual basis, the Code's intent of prohibiting
exterior stairs leading to second story additions, the Code not apply-
ing to applicant's design since the interior design includes hallway
access instead of a specific room in a new dwelling as opposed to a
second story addition, the Commission's past disapproval of exterior
stairs being related to legitimate questions as to the stairs' use,
and considering the City's exterior stair policy separately from
applicant's proposed design.
Staff discussed the Commission's past disapproval of exterior stairs
being related to legitimate questions as to the stairs' use, all ex-
terior stair applications having Commission review, Variance possibly
being required until such time as the Commission decides how to apply
the Code, the Commission possibly being required to precisely explain
why applicant's design is not subject to the Code, applicant's concern
603CP/MIN2.2
Minutes
April 8, 1986
Page Three
over redesigning delays, Commission direction with regard to the
Code's exterior stair language, and the possibility of the City adopt-
ing a written exterior stair policy before acting on applicant's
request.
Mr. McNulty moved to approve applicant's request on the condition that
the finished slopes in the side and rear yards not exceed 35%; that
the garage wall facing the street is accented with a window or plant-
er; that the exterior stairway at the rear will lead to an interior
hall - not directly to a bedroom; and that staff -can approve appli-
cant's plans if they are revised accordingly. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Von Hagen.
The Commission further discussed the Code's exterior stairway policy
and Mrs. Wike emphasized that the Code should be upheld.
The motion was passed by majority with Mrs. Wike dissenting.
GR 898 - BOLLINGER Associate Planner Steve Rubin
5918 OCEAN TERRACE presented the staff report on
this request for approval to
construct a new single-family
residence involving 2,268 cubic
yards of remedial and develop-
mental grading with the recommendation that the exterior foundations
be placed one foot into bedrock and fill be removed and recompacted
within the house's footprint to a depth of two feet. In addition,
staff recommended Conditions of Approval be (1) absolutely no excavat-
ed soil material shall be placed or stockpiled beyond the Building
Grading Restriction (BGR) line on a temporary or permanent basis and
(2) only at -grade patio slabs or decking may extend beyond the BGR
line.
Staff discussed the City geologist recommending the remedial grading
must extend three feet beyond the outside edge of the footings if the
foundations are placed in compacted fill, applicant moving the house
three feet closer to the front setback line, geology and soils issues,
and alternative foundation designs.
The Commission discussed the geological engineers recommendations, the
location of bedrock and recompacting two feet of soil, and grading be-
yond the BGR line to be staff's only problem with the application.
Mr. George Shaw, 28101 Lobrook Drive, applicant's architect, addressed
grading options noting the proposed structure is already planned clos-
er to the street than houses on either side and moving the house for-
603CP/MIN2.3
Minutes
April 8, 1986
Page Four
ward would not aesthetically benefit the neighborhood, problems asso-
ciated with placing footings in bedrock and recompacting fill, appli-
cant's most favorable approach and the most sound approach from an en-
gineering principle to be the option which includes grading beyond the
BGR line, and total yardage excavated to be seven yards out of 2,000
yards.
Mr. McNulty moved to approve Grading Application No. 898 as submitted
including staff's recommended Conditions of Approval stating: (1) ab-
solutely no excavated soil material shall be placed or stockpiled be-
yond the BGR line on a temporary or permanent basis; and (2) only at -
grade patio slabs or decking may extend beyond the BGR line. The mo-
tion was seconded by Mr. Von Hagen and passed unanimously.
CUP 23, REVISION "G" Assistant Planner Greg Fuz pre -
GR NO. 892 sented the staff report on this
LOT 18, TRACT 34834 request to modify the foot-
print, open space and setbacks
for Lot 18, Tract 34834, with
the recommendation that the
Commission direct applicant to
redesign.
Staff discussed applicant's request to include 60% open space which
would be 10% less than the approved 70% included in the tract plan,
applicant's proposed structure height complying with Code thereby ne-
cessitating excessive grading and a 121 upslope retaining wall adja-
cent to the driveway (Code allows a 51 retaining wall adjacent to a
driveway), relocating the pool and deck since part of the decking
would be 51 above grade with a 31 rail above that, original site plans
providing for extra space between homes to prevent the appearance of a
solid wall of homes along Palos Verdes Drive South, all of the build-
ing setbacks excepting the front exceeding those required by CUP No.
23, applicant's proposed setbacks as being adequate, raising the foun-
dation with the proposed structure easily falling within the 161 al-
lowed by the Code, and the Residential Planned Development (RPD) site
plan open space figures to mainly consist of 75% or higher (with a few
70%).
The Commission discussed applicant's proposed setbacks, problems with
the 121 retaining wall adjacent to the driveway, the difficulty in de-
fining application requirements before a completed application is pre-
sented to the Commission, Commission awareness of problems associated
with the original developer selling the lots, applicant working with
staff to achieve design parameters, applicant's lot having been part
603CP/MIN2.3A
Minutes
April 8, 1986
Page Five
of a RPD previously before the Commission, continuing the application
directing applicant to redesign, encouraging any efforts applicant
would make to assist neighbors by minimizing the view obstruction, and
problems associated with huge homes clustered together without enough
open space.
Mr. Ken Francis, 1474 4th Street, #600, Santa Monica, applicant's ar-
chitect, discussed applicant's willingness to eliminate or relocate
the pool, the effort involved in meeting applicant's desired home pro-
file, the building height being well within the 16 foot Code limita-
tion from average grade at street side, lowering the height would im-
pact grading, the possibility of reducing the garage size thereby
lessening lot coverage, the Commission directing applicant as to the
amount of open space desired, and noted applicant's desire to work
with staff in order to resolve application problems.
Mr. McNulty moved to continue the CUP 23, Revision 11G11, Grading Appli-
cation No. 892 application in order for applicant to work with staff
in an effort to comply with staff's recommendations as much as possi-
ble. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Wike and passed unanimously.
CUP 23, REVISION "E"
3324 Palo Vista Drive
space of the original site plan
dards with other Conditions of
Commission.
Assistant Planner Jack Roberts
presented the staff report on
this request to revise the
building footprint specified in
CUP No. 23 and to allow a
change in setbacks and/or open
as well as conform to all Code stan-
Approval as deemed appropriate by the
Staff discussed the proposed home size of 5,665 square feet, the 3,500
square foot building footprint, the proposed total average slope of
22%, the proposed exterior staircase, additional grading being requir-
ed for the rear lawn, applicant's requested 71% open space (as opposed
to the CUP 23 75% open space requirement), agreement with applicant
reversing the proposed sideyard setbacks of 10'6" and 15' noting view
corridors would be maintained and the lots across from the subject lot
are not affected by the change, and the proposed 7.51 retaining wall
adjacent to the driveway with a 3.51 freestanding wall on top noting
applicant's willingness to redesign to bring same into Code compli-
ance.
603CP/MIN2.4
Minutes
April 8, 1986
Page Six
The Commission discussed approving the application with a 4% open
space reduction, reversing the sideyard setbacks and how doing so
would affect view obstruction, the rear stairway leading only to the
deck and to be requested for safety purposes, the RPD including 400
square feet outside for each bedroom unit noting the proposed back
yard area would meet the requirement, problems with area buyers not
being made aware of grading/open space restrictions in conjunction
with CUP No. 23, the area lots being extremely small for R1 zoning,
applicant's architect doing an excellent job in preserving view corri-
dors, a low elevation being advantageous to future developers, the
four -car garage, applicant's agreement to redesign the retaining wall
adjacent to the driveway to bring same into Code compliance, problems
associated with deviating from the RPD Code, the primary concern of
CUP No. 23 to be view preservation, and the cumulative effect once the
three tracts are developed.
Mr. Ken Francis, 1424 4th Street, #600, Santa Monica, applicant's ar-
chitect, discussed working with staff to bring the retaining wall ad-
jacent to the driveway into Code compliance and offering applicant's
willingness to park his four cars in the proposed four -car garage ra-
ther than on the street and the proposed structure of less than the 16'
maximum height allowed as mitigation measures to offset the 4% open
space reduction.
Mr. Kevin Sears, 5767 West 75th Street, Los Angeles, applicant, dis-
cussed efforts to keep the proposed structure's profile as low as
possible so as not to overpower the lot size and not appear too close
to surrounding structures and noted no rememberance of being informed
of the CUP No. 23 grading restrictions and open space requirements.
Mr. Von Hagen moved to approve CUP No. 23, Revision "E", according to
staff's Alternative No. 1 approving the project as proposed with the
existing exterior staircase, with redesign on the proposed retaining
wall adjacent to the driveway to bring same into Code compliance, and
to allow for the 4% reduction in open space. The motion was seconded
by Mr. McNulty and passed by majority with Mrs. Wike dissenting.
QUESTION FROM THE PUBLIC None
(Regarding Non -Agenda Items)
STAFF Staff discussed: (1) City Coun-
cil actions as related to the
Forrestal Tract, (2) Variance
111 and related appeal having
603CP/MIN2.5
Minutes
April 8, 1986
Page Seven
been dismissed by City Council, (3) Glazer Height Variance noting City
Council upheld the appeal thereby denying the project, and (4) the
Commission/staff dinner having been scheduled for the third Monday in
June.
COMMISSION
reports, expressed enjoyment working
his new position as Associate Planner
Chairman Von Hagen noted Assis-
tant Planner Greg Fuz's resig-
nation effective April 18, 1986
and the Commission thanked Greg
for all his precise, impressive
with Greg, and wished him well in
for the City of Glendale.
In addition, the Commission requested Affordable Housing Criteria be a
future agenda item.
ADJOURNMENT Upon motion from Mr. McNulty
and seconded by Mrs. Wike, the
meeting was adjourned at 9:20
P.M.
603CP/MIN2.6