Loading...
PC MINS 19860930,�irove{f M I N U T E S PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 30, 1986 ev,-7 QUV e_M4 i I o/ f_8l tw The meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Chairman Von Hagen at 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. PRESENT: 40D" MC NULTY, ORTOLANO, VON HAGEN, WIKE ABSENT: NONE Also present were Director of Environmental Services Robert Benard, Associate Planner Steve Rubin, Assistant Planner Jack Roberts, and As- sistant Planner Carolynn Wilker-Roesch. COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Von Hagen related a letter from Mr. & Mrs. Sirianni thanking the Commission for its diligent work on their appeal. Staff discussed: (1) A letter from Steve Rubin to Mr. Van Wagoner addressing the environmental impact of the post office expansion/Pe- ninsula Center remodel on the Levitt project; and (2) Draft P.C. Reso- lution No. 86- related to CUP No. 105, Var. No. 134, and GR No. 875. Mrs. Ortolano, Mrs. Wike and Mr. Benard noted receipt of a phone call from Ms. Naomi Phillips voicing concern over the large size of the Seacliff Hills homes and stating support of denial of CUP No. 23, Rev. L and GR No. 933. CONSENT CALENDAR Mrs. Wike requested removal of Item IV.B from the Consent Calendar. She also stated intent to abstain from Item IV.A due to her absence at the August 26, 1986 meeting. Mr. McNulty moved approval of the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item IV.B. Mr. Von Hagen seconded and the motion was passed by ma- jority with Mrs. Wike abstaining on item IV.A. The Commission reviewed P.C. Resolution No. 86- (approving Var. No. 137). Mrs. Wike emphasized her objection to Sections 2 and 4 and stated she could not support the item. Mr. McNulty moved approval of Item IV.B. The motion was seconded by Mr. Von Hagen and no action taken on a 2-2 vote with Mrs. Ortolano and Mrs. Wike dissenting. 602CP/MIN2.1-10 • Minutes September 30, 1986 Page Two • Mr. McNulty stressed approval of the resolution is inherent in the Commission's previous 3-2 vote approving the appeal. Mrs. Wike dis- cussed that, until the resolution is adopted, the Commission's appro- val of the project is not final. Mr. Benard suggested the vote be held in abeyance until the City At- torney's opinion is obtained and that a motion be made to reconsider the Commission's previous vote. Mr. McNulty moved to reconsider the vote on the resolution due to the difficult technical problem facing the City. Mr. Von Hagen seconded and the motion passed by majority with Mrs. Wike dissenting. Chairman Von Hagen recommended the item be held in abeyance until the October 14, 1986 meeting so the City Attorney's opinion can be obtain- ed. Mr. Nick Bjazevich, 1615 West 21st Street, San Pedro, 90732, appli- cant, discussed concern over approval of the resolution finalizing his application and stressed there were no appeals on his project. NEW BUSINESS CUP No. 23 Assistant Planner Carolynn Wil - Rev. L to Rev. C ker-Roesch presented the staff GR No. 933 report with the recommendation that the Commission approve the application and require applicant to reduce the height of the retain- ing wall adjacent to the staircase to 31611, remove the railing on the section of the deck that encroaches into the rear yard setback so that the overall height does not exceed 30", and submit a landscape plan for staff review and approval to screen the pool and buffer the re- taining wall from Palos Verdes Drive South. Staff stated applicant's architect is willing to comply with the rec- ommended revisions, that the adoption of the new Seacliff Hills guide- lines reduce open space calculation from 68% to 50% with the addition of the pool, spa and entry steps, the previously approved fence has not been constructed, and applicant's proposal includes a 61 fence with self-latching/closing gates. Mr. Benard noted his receipt of a call from Ms. Naomi Phillips (Coun- cil of Homeowners Association) voicing concern over the large size of the Seacliff Hills homes and stating support of denial of the applica- tion. A er 4@610 Commissioq said that interested parties should attend Planning Com- mission meetings and reviewed the problems associated with staff con- veying resident concerns to the Commission. 602CP/MIN2.1-10 Minutes September 30, 1986 Page Three Mr. Tim Racisz, 30751 Tarapaca Road, applicant's architect, discussed willingness to comply with staff's proposed changes and a fence was approved for construction but has never been built. Mrs. Wike voiced concern over the amount of encroachment into the open space. Mrs. Wike moved to deny CUP No. 23, Rev. L to Rev. C and GR No. 933. The motion was seconded (for purposes of discussion) by Mrs. Ortolano. The Commission discussed that all requests should be submitted at the outset of a project and emphasized difficu!lties related to considering applications for amenities which other area residents might have been permitted prior to the new guidelines. Staff discussed 50.4% lot coverage seems substantial and applicant elected to not exercise development rights by not including the pro- posed amenities in the original application. Staff noted future ap- plicants will have the option of covering 'a lot with a house or ameni- ties. The Commission said Seacliff Hills is a residential planned develop- ment in which open space would be preserved. The motion, by a 2-2 vote with Mr. McNulty and Mr. Von Hagen dissent- ing, resulted in no action. Mr. Von Hagen moved to adopt staff's recomirendation to approve the ap- plication including staff's Conditions A,, B, and C, and adding that, if possible, a design be made and vegetation be used to minimize any other impact. The motion was seconded by Mr. McNulty and resulted in no action by a 2-2 vote with Mrs. Ortolanoland Mrs. Wike dissenting. Mr. McNulty moved to continue the item until October 14, 1986. The motion was seconded by Mr. Von Hagen. The Commission discussed that, by continuing the item, applicant will have an opportunity to revise the proposal'. The Commission determined that continuing the item until a new Commissioner is present would be in order and that, without a continuation, applicant could make an ap- peal to City Council since a previous motion to approve the project resulted in no action. Mr. McNulty withdrew the motion. Mr. McNulty moved to continue the matter for full reconsideration and review at the first opportunity after a new Commissioner is chosen. The motion was seconded by Mr. Von Hagen 'and passed by majority with Mrs. Wike dissenting. 602CP/MIN2.1-10 E Minutes September 30, 1986 Page Four CONTINUED BUSINESS Levitt - CUP No. 105, Var. No. 134, GR No. 875 11 Associate Planner Steve Rubin distributed a revised copy of the resolution. The Commission discussed revising Exhibit A, No. 3, to include deed restrictions instead of CC&Rs and voiced concern that doing so would impair applicant's ability to get financing. The Commission said the City should not get involved in enforcing CC&Rs and that prohibiting medical uses (not dental) would be appropriate. Staff stated the importance of future owners being made aware of con- ditions running with the property and awareness diminishes with staff changes. Exhibit A, No. 3, was modified to read, "Medical uses (not dental) shall be prohibited." Exhibit A, No. 8, was modified to read, Only retail and commercial uses...". The Commission discussed modify- ing Exhibit A, No. 15 to extend delivery hours from 4:30 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. Possible traffic congestion after 4:30 P.M. was mentioned. Ex- hibit A, No. 15, was modified to read, "...7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. ...and 8:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. Exhibit A, No. 21, was modified to read, "...for retail and commercial uses only." Mr. Albert Levitt, 24520 Hawthorne Boulevard, Suite 120, Torrance, 90505, applicant, in regards to Exhibit A, No. 22 stated he carries a large insurance policy and a contractor's completion policy to cover any possible property damage. The Commission discussed Exhibit A, No. 22. The Commission stated the City Attorney's opinion should be obtained in writing regarding appli- cant naming the City or Homeowners' Association as additional insured and whether Mr. Levitt's insurance policy. would be equally or more appropriate than a bond. A 4bkA-- commissio . reviewed that Mr. Levitt should be required to cover property owners against any damage (per- sonal or property). Exhibit A, No. 22, was modified to read, "The ap- plicant shall post a cash deposit, bond, or insurance, or combination thereof—against any damage...". Mr. McNulty moved approval of P.C. Resolution No. 86-23 as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Von Hagen. Mrs. Wike stated intent to abstain due to her absence at the August 26 meeting. Staff mentioned the related application expires October 7, the City Attorney will incorporate the Commission's concerns into Exhibit A, No. 22, and finalized Resolution P.C. No. 86-23 will be given to the Commission on October 14. 602CP/MIN2.1-10 0 Minutes September 30, 1986 Page Five • The motion was passed by majority with Mrs. Wike abstaining. PUBLIC HEARINGS CUP No. 101, GR No. 950 Final Associate Planner Steve Rubin Negative Declaration for EA presented the staff report with No. 477 - Continued the recommendation that the Commission conduct and close the public hearing, give direction to applicant and staff regarding appropriate revisions and conditions of approval, and direct applicant and staff to bring revised plans and a resolution of approval back to the Commission at the earliest possible meeting. The Commission discussed alternatives other than stamped concrete for the median are limited because Caltrans will not accept the responsi- bility for landscaping the median. Chairman Von Hagen opened the public hearing. Mr. David Roderick, 140 The Village, #203, Redondo Beach, 90277, ap- plicant, discussed his concern over staff's architectural design ori- ented suggestions, preference for peaked towers, undergrounding the transformers at the rear of the building would cost approximately $75,000 as opposed to leaving them as they presently exist, utilities in the new structure would be underground, 24" letters would improve Level B sign visibility, money should be spent on the project and not in the right-of-way construction hours should be 7:00 A.M. - 7:00 P.M. Monday through Saturday for approximately thirty days, the lights will be oriented away from the center toward Western, his escrow on the property is due to close before the end of the year, and the problems associated with the fountain in the parking area. Staff said 24" letters on Level B identification signs would be appro- priate, extending construction hours until 7:00 P.M. during Standard time would be useless, Specific Plan II calls out operating business hours as 6:00 A.M. - 12:00 midnight, no lighting plan has been provid- ed to date, Specific Plan II applies to the project and becomes effec- tive when 35% of the improvements are made, and if the utility under - grounding required in Specific Plan II is deleted from the project it must be deleted from the Specific Plan. The Commission discussed operating business hours should be 7:00 A.M. - 12:00 midnight, the possibility of applicant constructing public amenities in exchange for not being required to underground utilities at the rear of the existing building, the transformers could be pad mounted, monument signs should call attention to an entire center ra- ther than to individual tenants, agreement with applicant's opinion that money should be spent on the project instead of the right-of-way, rooftop equipment should be screened, and if the rooftop equipment re- mains on the roof it could be made to match the roof color. 602CP/MIN2.1-10 • Minutes September 30, 1986 Page Six • Ms. Jody Culver, 38918 Gunther Road, discussed that the rooftop equip- ment is noisy and unsightly, the Portofino odors are excessive, Porto- fino's garbage dumpsters are not covered, Portofino's garbage collec- tion is at 4:00-5:00 A.M. each morning, and stressed the importance of residents being protected against damages resulting from the project. Staff stated a resolution has been drafted to include mechanical equipment screening to dampen noise and scrubbers to eliminate odors. Staff said Portofino's garbage collection hours will be examined and that garbage collection within the proposed project should begin no earlier than 7:00 A.M. Staff noted the project contains no hillside construction. The Commission mentioned the City Attorney's opinion should be obtain- ed to determine if a condition of approval can be that the developer/ contractor must supply the City with proof of protection against any damages and if the City can be named as additional insured. Mr. McNulty moved to continue the public hearing to October 14, 1986. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Wike and passed unanimously. The Commission reviewed that it seems unlikely enclosing the transfor- mers at the rear of the existing building at ground level would cost as much as undergrounding them, a condition of approval requiring uni- form tenant identification sign sizes could be considered, all utili- ties should be undergrounded, a 101 monument sign height would be ap- propriate, the Director of Public Works should be contacted regarding asphalt/stamped concrete medians, the Health Code provides for garbage dumpsters to be covered and Code Enforcement should be contacted re- garding Portfino's uncovered dumpsters, Portofino should be contacted regarding offensive odors, and a condition of approval should be that restaurants have scrubbers to eliminate odors and screening to dampen noise. CUP No. 106 Sign Permit No. 305 Draft Neg. Declaration for EA No. 489 nal Negative Declaration for EA No. ject to the conditions contained in Associate Planner Steve Rubin presented the staff report with the recommendation that the Commission adopt the Resolution approving CUP No. 106, the Fi- 489 and Sign Permit No. 305, sub - Exhibit A attached hereto. Staff stated the primary concern is parking and recommended applicant obtain the exclusive use of approximately 15 to 20 off-street parking on adjacent properties. The Commission discussed that the exclusive use of the off-street spa- ces should coincide with the length of the applicant's use of the lo- cation and should be in the form of a lease. 602CP/MIN2.1-10 • Minutes September 30, 1986 Page Seven Chairman Von Hagen opened the public hearing. • Those speaking in favor of the application were: Audra Heath 1434 Dalmatia, San Pedro, 90732 Georgia Louros 1336 264th, San Pedro, 90710 Don Pierson Colt Road, San Pedro, 90724 Mr. & Mrs. Mark Sandoval 2204 Barrywood, San Pedro 90732 Felicia Wilson 1204 Alton, Wilmington, 90744 Those in favor discussed the current 15 minute staggering between classes should not be increased, many patrons carpool, patrons park on both sides of Western and at the nearby gas station, window partitions screen the view of the establishment from Western, applicant will con- tact M.C. Bloome and the Tasman Sea regarding use of off-street park- ing spaces, morning parking is no problem, reducing the cannister sign would be possible, the City's sign codes/Western sign amortization, applicant's signs are not new, and Jazzercise promotes the use of sur- rounding businesses. The Commission discussed the "Ship Shape" wall sign on the outside of the building should be removed, severe parking problems would result if Caltrans decided to post no parking along Western, and other busi- nesses have complained that Jazzercise patrons park in their spaces and are thereby discouraging use of their businesses. Ms. Jeannine Etcheverry, 29641 South Western, #313, 90732, Eastview Homeowners' Association, voiced opposition to the request and said Jazzercise patrons park in the condominium's private parking area. Chairman Von Hagen closed the public hearing. The Commission discussed continuing the item to give applicant an op- portunity to obtain identifiable off-street parking spaces. Mr. McNulty moved to continue the public hearing until November 12,, 1986 to give applicant an opportunity to obtain approximately 10 to 20 identifiable off-street parking spaces. The motion was seconded by Mr. Von Hagen and passed unanimously. The Commission emphasized its desire for the City's businesses to be successful. Var. No. 141, GR No. 925 Assistant Planner Carolynn Chester Smith & Assoc. Wilker-Roesch presented the 3532 Newridge Drive staff report with the recommen- 602CP/MIN2.1-10 • Minutes September 30, 1986 Page Eight • dation that the Commission approve the application with the conditions that: (1) the 3 -car garage be equipped with automatic door openers and articulated garage doors; and (2) applicant obtain necessary per- mits from Los Angeles County Fire Department, California Water Compa- ny, and the City's Public Works Department to relocate the fire hy- drant. Chairman Von Hagen opened the public hearing. Mr. Chester Smith, 22850 Crenshaw, #204, Torrance, 90505, discussed the staff report as extremely thorough and concise and stated the Cal- ifornia Water Company has no problems with relocating the fire hy- drant. He noted his complete agreement with staff's Alternative No. 3. Chairman Von Hagen closed the public hearing. Mr. McNulty moved to adopt Resolution P.C. No. 86-24 , approving Var. No. 141 and GR No. 925 according to staff's Alternative No. 3. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Ortolano and passed unanimously. Applicant was advised of appeal rights. CUP No. 109 In the interest of time, Mrs. Coastal Permit No. 23 Ortolano moved to waive reading Brewer - 6410 Palos of the staff report. Since no Verdes Drive South one wished to address the item, Chairman Von Hagen opened and closed the public hearing. Mr. McNulty moved to adopt Resolution P.C. No. 86-25, approving CUP No. 109 and Coastal Permit No. 23 according to staff's Alternative No. 1 and including staff's recommendations. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Ortolano and passed unanimously. Appeal rights were noted. CUP No. 104, Revision Kubicek 18 & 19 La Vista Verde use recreational facility with with any additional conditions or tions. Assistant Planner Jack Roberts presented the staff report with the recommendation that the Commission approve the joint the conditions as proposed by staff revisions to staff's proposed condi- The Commission discussed the City does not have a copy of the recorded easement, applicant has not shown good faith by his lack of compliance with the previous conditions of approval, and the grant deed for pass- age to the canyon only has no termination date. 602CP/MIN2.1-10 Ll Minutes September 30, 1986 Page Nine Chairman Von Hagen opened the public hearing. 11 Mr. Ed Masi, 17 La Vista Verde, voiced opposition to applicant's re- quest and discussed he paid for a survey on the property in which the easement was located and that applicant's construction has caused his home to crack. Mr. Masi requested the Commission assist him in obtaining Mr. Kubicek's cooperation. Mr. Josef Kubicek, 18 La Vista Verde, applicant, requested 90 days to comply, discussed he has no plans to purchase Mr. Masi's property, the tennis court has not been used in recent months, and his garage will not be completed for one year. Chairman Von Hagen closed the public hearing. Staff discussed three weeks would be a reasonable amount of time to obtain the survey to determine the property line in relevance to the structure. Staff said all of the conditions could be met in 30 days except for the two car garage which would take one year. The Commission said it must be determined if the easement is plotted and legal before the Commission can assist Mr. Masi in obtaining Mr. Kubicek's cooperation, a 60 day compliance period for all conditions except the garage would be appropriate, and reviewed the possibility of applicant being required to grant the easement back to Mr. Masi should the conditions other than the garage not be met. Mrs. Ortolano moved to adopt Resolution P.C. No. 86-26 supporting the inserting of 60 days where staff has 90 days as the compliance period and all of staff's recommendations reflected in the revised Exhibit A accompanying staff's proposal. Mr. McNulty seconded the motion. Staff noted Code Enforcement will be notified in the event applicant does not comply within 60 days. The motion passed unanimously. Appeal rights were noted. QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE None. "'Djawly Staff Staff requested the Commission form a subcommittee to begin the Specific Plan IV review process. The Commission stated the new Commissioner should be present before doing so. 602CP/MIN2.1-10 E Minutes September 30, 1986 Page Ten • Commission Mrs. Ortolano requested that Mr. Benard check the accuracy of a Los Angeles Times article regarding Western annexation in which Greg Fuz was quoted as saying none of the sign amortization notifica- tions had gone out to properties there. Mr. Benard responded stating pole sign notifications have not been sent out but signs on the buildings have been noticed. Mr. Benard discussed that Mayor Hinchliffe will address the Los Ange- les City Council and ask them to reconsider the City's boundary ad- justment application which a Council Committee previously received and filed. Mrs. Ortolano stressed the importance of lobbying the issue. Mr. Von Hagen mentioned the September 26, 1986 Mayor's Breakfast. He noted mid-November as a reasonable date for the arrival of a new Com- missioner. He also noted the second joint meeting of the Peninsula Cities Planning Commission Chairs and Directors will be held in mid- October. The Commission discussed the idea that the Specific Plans are becoming too involved with architectural constraints and said the issue should be resolved before proceeding with Specific Plan IV. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion of Mr. McNulty and seconded by Mrs. Wike the meet- ing was adjourned at 11:20 P.M.