Loading...
PC MINS 19860610t !� M I N U T E S PLANNING COMMISSION June 10, 1986 The meeting was called to order at 7:35 PM by Chairman Von Hagen at 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. PRESENT: HODGE, MC NULTY, ORTOLANO, VON HAGEN, WIKE ABSENT: NONE Also present were Acting Director of Environmental Services Ann Negendank, Associate Planner Steve Rubin, Assistant Planner Jack Roberts, and Director of Public Works George Wentz. COMMUNICATIONS A letter from the Howard Adler/Bredero Hawthorne Joint Venture was distributed. The letter discussed the affordable housing issue of Tentative Tract Map 44239, and some potential incentives for the developers. Staff stated the letter was distributed for the Commission's information and would be provided to the City Council for the next hearing on this matter. CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes of April 8, 1986 The Commission noted approval of the Affordable Housing Workshop April 8 Affordable Housing Workshop minutes Minutes of April 22, 1986 The April 22, 1986 minutes were amended as follows: Page 2, Paragraph 5 was amended to read, "Mr. Paul noted his opinion that power lines do not run directly over the structure (the Commission did not agree)" .., and Page 2, Paragraph 9 was amended to read, "Mrs. Ortolano moved to grant the Variance request, subject to inspection by the City." Mr. McNulty moved to approve the April 8, 1986 minutes of the Affordable Housing Workshop and the April 22, 1986 minutes. The motion was seconded by Mr. Von Hagen and passed unanimously. Minutes of April 8, 1986 The Commission discussed Page 2, Paragraph 6 and Page 3, Paragraph 1 were not cohesive and noted no related motion was included. Staff stated the minutes would be returned to the Commission for approval at a later date. Minutes June 10, 1986 Page 2 CONTINUED BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS CUP 103, VAR 132, EA 482, GR 859 - Tabatabay 29941 Hawthorne 11 Associate Planner Steve Rubin presented the staff report with the recommendation that the Commission adopt the negative declaration and approve the project plans. Staff stated that almost all concerns previously raised by the Commission have been addressed. Staff noted (1) as a result of relocating the handicapped parking space a regular parking space would be lost, (2) in order to not further reduce the number of proposed parking spaces -the architect added an 8th compact stall so that the percentage of compact spaces would be raised from 20% (Code maximum) to 22%, (3) one extra compact space is more desireable than reducing the total number of parking spaces, (4) CC&Rs could be brought back to the Commission for review, and recommended the freestanding wall around the parking area surround all of the exposed sides in order to help block headlight glare down the canyon. The Commission discussed handicapped spaces are always 9' X 20' with a 5' wide aisle along one side, CC&Rs would be required as a condition of approval and should contain the prohibition of medical and dental uses,, and the Commission also reviewed prohiba.ting the use of the unstable fill areas. ^'The Commission questioned the conditions being included in the CC&Rs instead of the exhibit _ _ = to the resole ion, - Staff stated conditions in the CC&Rs would be an added precaution and the use of CC&Rs could be one method where, with the transfer of property, it is more apparent to a buyer that the building has restrictions on it. Staff stated typically CC&Rs-for-tracts are reviewed by the City Attorney -and can be brought before. -the Commission if so desired. The Commission discussed that the applicant could request a medical/dental use Variance in the future and the CC&Rs could be amended should such uses be approved. Chairman Von Hagen opened the public hearing. Mr. David Bieberly, 1451 W. 18th Street, San Pedro, 90732, applicant's architect, discussed his agreement with staff's recommendation to approve the resolution, the 14' handicapped stall was relocated and is now closer to the building's elevator, whether it is customary for the City to require landscaping of medians and Striping,,. marking, and signing of a Class II bikepath, and voiced concern over the $253,358 deposit required for public improvements. Staff stated it is appropriate for the City to require various public improvements, that the $253,358 could be justified, property owners could be required to share the $253,358 burden as they develop in the future, and existing developments Minutes June 10, 1986 Page 3 in the area probably already contributed. Director of Public Works George Wentz discussed that when staff put together the improvement estimate the preliminary plan was to improve all of the hardscaped area from Hawthorne back, noted staff's` preference for a combination of planter boxes and hardscape stated staff's desire to remove the bomenite and noted if the bomenite were left in place the contractor's burden would be reduced by approximately $35,000. The Commission noted the developer of the Lincoln Savings/California Federal Buildings probably paid to put in the concrete median. Sunshine, 6 Limetree, requested the Commission include in the CC&Rs a provision for future trail use in the Agua Armaga Canyon. The Commission discussed whether it is appropriate to address the trails issue in the CC&Rs and whether the City might require an irrevocable offer of dedication rather than an easement at this time. Staff discussed that the portion of the canyon south of Hawthorne has no trails in the Trails Network Plan, there is some property on the north side of the canyon with a very limited potential for further development, and the area east of Hawthorne is in Rolling Hills Estates. The Commission noted its agreement that something should be done to preserve use of the area and a standard staff process should be consideration of trail possibilities. Mr. John Kendall, 6653 Crest Road, discussed that the canyon is very steep, the walls on the west side of the proposed parking area should be sufficient to block lights and engineered to stop rolling cars from going down the canyon, the Eucalyptus tree near the driveway should remain, there should be a 6' wall around the trash bin, the ancient landslide could be reactivated by compression of the area, excavated material should be removed from the site and not dumped down the canyon, problems with getting trash out from the northwest corner of the property, and he received no notice on the previous public hearing for the item. The Commission discussed that a stipulation of the proposed plan was that the geology of the site be found sound, the plans as proposed will allow assurance of the stability of the property, and Mr. Kendall's testimony showed the value of citizen participation. Staff stated permits would not be issued if the City was not satisfied that all of the geologic safety factors had been met and trash carriers would be necessary. Minutes June 10, 1986 Page 4 Mr. Scott Berglund, 7183 Avenida Altisima, Monte Verde Homeowners' Association, discussed the project is much too large, the parking is inadequate thereby forcing cars to park on the road, the ground is unstable, and problems with the project failing and the building becoming vacant. The Commission stated painting the curb red between Hawthorne and the driveway would be required to prohibit parking there and Code requirements for parking are one space/200 square feet, and that the requested Variance has 1%250 square feet. Mr. McNulty moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Mrs. Ortolano and passed unanimously. The Commission discussed adding conditions to the project to address the concern that the walls be designed to stop a rolling car, the 6' trash bin enclosure is standard, the Eucalyptus tree should remain, the CC&Rs should be brought back to the Commission for review prior to recordation and issuance of permits, instructing staff to bring back language regarding the trail, that there should be a standard provision addressing all utilities being underground including CTV which shall be installed and connected to the nearest trunk line at the developer's expense, and stated that it would be in the City'_s,, best interest to require the improvement of the public right of way and suggested staff work with the Public Works to possibly develop a plan whereby applicant would save money. Staff said any approvals made during the meeting would be in concept only. Mr. McNulty moved to adopt Resolution P.C. No. 86-15 approving Final Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment No. 482, Conditional Use Permit No. 103, Variance No. 132, and Grading No. 859 subject to Exhibit "A" with the following changes: Item No. 7 - CC&R's shall be provided to the City Planning Commission for review and approval prior to recordation and issuance of permits; that the freestanding wall surrounding the parking area be engineered in order to prevent vehicles from encroaching into the surrounding area and extend from Hawthorne all of the way to .Crest; that the enclosure for the trash receptacle be of sufficient material and height to enclose the trash so that it is ~prevented from blowing into the canyon or the surrounding properties in whatever way would seem appropriate; that the contractor be subject to removal of all building materials from the site including the canyon should any be inadvertently or purposely placed there; that if the subject Eucalyptus tree is within the control of the developer every effort be made to maintain the tree; that the CC&Rs make some reference to the potential future use of the canyon for trail purposes and should that occur, the property would be subject to an irrevocable offer of dedication for:,such-trail purposes in the manner staff would approve; that the utility companies and Cable Television connections be a standard building permit; and that the cash deposit for public improvements be as determined by the Director of Public Works. The motion was seconded by Mr. Von Hagen and passed by majority with Mrs. Wike dissenting. Mrs. Wike noted her objection to the irrevocable offer of dedication for trail purposes. • Minutes June 10, 1986 Page 5 0 Chairman Von Hagen stated the resolution should be brought back to the Commission for review as a Consent Calendar item and the Commission noted the project was approved. Applicant noted no objection Applicant was advised of appeal rights. INFORMAL HEARINGS GR 845 & GR 913 - Vakili Associate Planner Steve Rubin presented 3841 & 3837 Crest Road the staff report on this request to allow construction of two single family residences on lots whose total average slopes are greater than 35% with the recommendation that the request be approved according to staff's recommended conditions. Staff discussed the GR 913 Certicate of Compliance is presently under review, a condition of approval would require that the Certificate of Compliance for GR 913 be recorded prior to permit issuance, and applicant has complied with the majority of requests in terms of revisions. The Commission discussed an informal hearing would not be necessary. Mrs. Ortolan moved that the Commission approve GR 845 and GR 913 sub=ject to staff's proposed Conditions No.'s 1-6. The motion was seconded by Mr. McNulty. Staff noted that the applicant might have some comments regarding the proposed conditions. -- The motion passed unanimously. Applicant was advised of appeal rights. NEW BUSINESS Sign Permit No. 304 Assistant Planner Jack Roberts presented 29621 So. Western the staff report on this request for approval Pierson of two illegally installed identification signs with the recommendation that, if the applicant elects to maintain a wall sign on the building face, it must conform to Code and applicant would then be required to remove the pole panel sign. Staff discussed the pole panel sign is amortized with a required compliance date of June 1990, the main issues for consideration should be signage and Code compliance, the 45 square foot cannister sign should be reduced to 25 • Minutes June 10, 1986 Page 6 0 square feet as per Code, applicant's window signage should be displayed a maximum of 30 days and does not currently exceed 10% of the total window area of the establishment as called out in the Code, window signs don't require permits and are intended to enable commercial establishments to-' advertise sales, applicant's neon signs are not in Code compliance in terms of when they are lit, every time the sign copy is changed a permit is necessary, Code defines a sign as, "...any physical form of visual communication.... including all parts and support of the sign....", and amortization letters were mailed to owners and renters. The Commission discussed that the establishment has been notified of the amortization, the cannister sign was installed after the amortization period began, the possibility that the cannister could be considered the sign and the word '!Cas.ualcutd"iwas,,placediingilde the sign, and problemsivith,,properpy owners misinforming tenants of City sign Codes. Mr. Don Pierson, P.O. Box 1187, San Pedro, 90733, applicant discussed the expense in making the cannister sign and the pole panel sign conform with others, problems with the building sitting back from others, the cannister sign is new, and his m—onceptions with the City's sign Code. -,,Mr.-Chris Maron, Casua cuts owner, ­di_s_cussede—qualsignage, his —opinion t­Xa-t----------�, -- with others the-'---- the cannister sign conforms center, ftoblems with the building sitting back from others, and in 1990 his business will be built up sufficiently so that the signs won't be of such major concern and competing signs will then be brought into conformance also. The Commission discussed the policy issue faced by the Commission as to the amortization of signage along Western Avenue and problems with businesses there not understanding the City's sign Code, the wall sign being almost twice as big as that allowed by Code, the plastic replacement in the pole panel sign during the amortization period should be allowed, the assumption that the City's amortization letter was not clear, and the possiblilty of sending letters explaining the City's sign Code to establishments along Western Avenue. Mr. McNulty moved (1) the application for the panel sign on the post be approved (2) to direct applicant to take his "Casualcuts" sign and trim off approximately one third or more of that sign and keep it in the same general configuration of the area; (3) to have applicant bring the sign to staff to reduce it as much as possible to bring it within Code but that if Code compliance was not achieved it should come back to the Planning Commission and (4) that the sign which will remain will be conforming to the amortization period of the other signs in the area. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hodge. Minutes June 10, 1986 Page Y1 The Commission emphasized the importance of giving a new City business a chance to succeed. Staff noted the cannister sign must be brought down to 3' X 8', there is no Minor Exception Permit on sign size, the purpose of the sign permit fee is not just a revenue generating tactic on the City's part but is a user's fee for processing applications, and amortization notice will be included on the sign permit. The motion was passed by majority with Mrs. Wike dissenting. REPORTS STAFF Staff discussed the future plans for the S&S project at the end of Crest Road. COMMISSION The Commission discussed problems with the Bredero Hawthorne/Adler Joint Venture request to eliminate the air conditioning units and noted air conditioning was included as a noise reduction factor because of Hawthorne traffic. The Commission also discussed that earthoned concrete swales could not be a meaningful additional cost to the applicant. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion from Mr. McNulty and seconded by Mrs. Wike, the meeting was adjourned at 10:20 PM to 6:30 PM June 16, 1986 at Borrelli's 672 Silver Spur, Rolling Hills Estates.