Loading...
PC MINS 19861112.1 M I N U T E S PLANNING COMMISSION November 12, 1986 141��eei I 12 - C) - t4p The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M. by Chairman Von Hagen at 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. PRESENT: CONNOLLY, 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 Assistant Planner Carolynn Wilker-Roesch. Chairman Von Hagen introduced Mr. Connolly as the newest member of the Commision. The Commission welcomed Mr. Connolly. COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Von Hagen related: a letter from Fred Ross and family re- garding King Arthur Court residents' concerns relating to the Wallace Ranch proposed grading; a letter from the attorney representing the Johnson's requesting a two week continuation on Variance No. 142; a reminder regarding the Southwest Area Planning Council's next meeting Friday, November 21, 1986, 11:30 A.M. at Charlie Brown's in Redondo Beach; and a reminder regarding the Western Avenue merchant/owner's meeting November 13, 1986, 8:00 A.M., 29050 Western Avenue. CONSENT CALENDAR October 14, 1986 Minutes The October 14, 1986 minutes were amended as follows: Page 2, Paragraph 5, "...economic hardship..." and Page 1, Para- graph 5, "...Mr. Bill Ailor ... 11. Mrs. ortolano moved ed; seconded by Mrs. staining. PUBLIC HEARINGS Variance No. 142 Johnson 5840 Scotwood to approve the October 14, 1986 minutes as amend- Wike and passed by Majority with Mr. Connolly ab - Chairman Von Hagen noted appli- cant's request to continue the item. Mr. McNulty moved to waive the reading of the staff report; seconded by Mrs. Wike and passed unanimously. 602CP/MIN3.1-9 Minutes November 12, 1986 Page Two Chairman Von Hagen opened the public hearing. Mr. McNulty moved to continue the item to November 25, 1986; seconded by Mrs. Wike and passed unanimously. CUP No. 37 - Rev Associate Planner Steve Rubin Var. No. 148 presented the staff report. Coastal Permit No. 25 GR No. 949 The Commission discussed Exhibit "A", Condition 1, which would grant the applicant one, one-year extension. Staff responded that Condi- tion 1 could be amended if the applicant could always request an extension. Staff said that, as an alternative to Condition 1, the Commission could include wording to the effect of, "Extensions to be granted." and delete any references to time limits. The Commission discussed the proposed 5,100 cubic yards of cut and 6,300 cubic yards of fill. Staff said that the bulk of the project's cut and excavation is proposed from underneath the tanks. The Commission discussed Exhibit "A" Condition 4, regarding runoff. Staff said that runoff conditions were basically standard language. Staff stated that, since more of a hard surface area is proposed, there would be more runoff. Staff noted that Condition 4 was included as part of Exhibit "A" to put the applicant on notice that the in- creased runoff should be addressed in the plans. The Commission discussed that the seating capacity of the proposed stadium would be greater than the existing stadium's. Staff said that, even though the size of the stadium would be approximately two times the size of the existing stadium, the intensity of the existing use would not be increased. The Commission discussed the orientation of the proposed stage. Staff said that the proposed stage would face northwest which would afford the public an ocean view while sitting in and entering the stadium, and direct sound away from existing residences located to the north- east. Chairman Von Hagen opened the public hearing. Mr. John Corcoran, 6610 Palos Verdes Drive South, representing Marine - land, stated the staff report was very complete. He said that, in or- der to bring various facilities up to state of the art and to provide a natural setting and health considerations to the animals, renovation is proposed for certain portions of the park. He presented diagrams showing the proposed renovations. He stated a great effort has been 602CP/MIN3.1-9 Minutes November 12, 1986 Page Three made to maintain the existing view corridors. He discussed that the plans include a tide pool/touch tank exhibit and the water area would be expanded to accommodate a sea lion pool. Mr. Corcoran related that an area currently unavailable to public access is proposed for dining/ resting. He said a trellis is proposed there for shade since wind would make umbrellas unpractical. Mr. Corcoran discussed that comple- tion of the project is envisioned by June 30, 1987 and that the lower plaza would be closed during construction with the remainder of the park continuing to operate. Responding to a Commissioner's concern over safety in the proposed dining/resting area, Mr. Corcoran empha- sized that safety would be a primary concern. Mr. McNulty moved to close the public hearing; seconded by Mrs. Orto- lano and passed unanimously. Mr. McNulty moved approval, with the attached Conditions, of the staff recommendation; seconded by Mrs. Ortolano. A Commissioner discussed that a condition should be added to the ef- fect that a plan for fencing must be submitted to the Director of En- vironmental Services for safety approval purposes. Mr. Benard stated that a fence which is approximately 42" and of an open design would be consistent with the park's existing fence. He said a more restrictive fence requirement (such as a higher fence) could be a Commission requirement. A Commissioner voiced concern over requiring approval of a fence from the standpoint of safety and noted legal problems could result from the City becoming involved in fence design. A Commissioner said that as long as a fence complies with the Code, safety should not be dic- tated by the City. The motion passed unanimously. Appeal rights were noted. Var. No. 144 Mr. Von Hagen moved to waive Malakoff the reading of the staff re - 30017 Via Rivera port; seconded by Mr. McNulty and passed unanimously. Chairman Von Hagen opened the public hearing. Since there were no re- quests to speak to the item, the public hearing was closed. Mr. McNulty moved approval of staff's Alternative No. 1, including re- visions; seconded by Mrs. Wike and passed unanimously. Appeal rights were noted. 602CP/MIN3.1-9 Minutes November 12, 1986 Page Four Var No. 146 GR No. 954 DeLossa 2345 Sparta Assistant Planner Carolynn Wil- ker-Roesch presented the staff report. The Commission discussed whether staff researched the safety of the existing railroad ties as they currently stand. Staff said no engi- neering data was submitted to the City for analysis. A Commissioner voiced concern over access to the "re-established" plants if the terracing is removed. Staff said walkways/stairways could be constructed out of the removed railroad ties. Staff said Code allows for a maximum 711 rise from one step to the next with a minimum of 1011 on the tread depth and would require a handrail, etc. A Commissioner discussed concern over staff's statement that previous- ly excavated dirt could be restored through compaction and that it is difficult to believe that the soil could be recompacted without the use of caissons. Chairman Von Hagen opened the public hearing. Mr. and Mrs. Robert DeLossa, 2345 Sparta, applicant, discussed: bur- den ur-den of proof statements for Variance No. 146; City information that if no electrical hook-ups were involved landscaping permits were not of concern; that hillside work follows nature's contours; a questionnaire they prepared and submitted to neighbors; their large expense in sub- mitting plans to the City, the difficulty to re-establish the previous level by compaction; neighbors encouragement of the project -- some of whom are now objecting, the work being done by hand; their intention of obtaining a permit for the accessory structure; 20 yards were cut/ filled; staff's recommendation of sixty days to complete the project showing no understanding of what is involved; and their waiting for Commission direction before obtaining a formal geologic opinion. Mr. DeLossa stressed staff's recommendation would be devastating from an emotional and financial standpoint. He emphasized staff's recommen- dation is weak from an engineering perspective. Staff responded to Mr. DeLossals statement that 20 yards were cut/ filled, stating that Phase II includes 183.5 cubic yards of grading, including the accessory structure. Staff stated that, according to Code, cut and fill are calculated as grading. The Commission discussed that there has not been an engineering report done on the project so it is not possible to know whether the project would meet Code. The Commission reviewed the flood line running through the project and crossing between Phase I and Phase II. The Commission noted that the canyon on which the applicant's property is 602CP/MIN3.1-9 Minutes November 12, 1986 Page Five located is a natural and urban overlay district. The Commission said applicant's property is well maintained. A Commissioner voiced con- cern over erosion resulting from continual watering of the plants. Staff related that the overlay district is similar to an open space hazard zone and that there is a degree of flexibility as to where the exact line is. Staff discussed that the flooding concern is related to the possibility of a 50/100 year flood. Assistant Planner Jack Roberts discussed the City Geologist's opinion that, in the interest of safety, the project should either be reinforced with caissons or restored to its natural condition. A Commissioner stated the City Geologists's opinion would imply that the railroad ties are not appro- priate. Mr. Benard discussed that, if approval is granted, a condi- tion should be included to the effect that the applicant must provide a geological report and that applicant bears the burden of his ac- tions. Interested parties were as follows: Peter Albano 2441 Sparta Ed Bratton 2403 Sparta R. McVey 2333 Sparta M/M Marc Mittleman 2255 Sparta Mike Phillips 2265 Sparta Ann Wonder 2566 Colt Nancy Budde 2564 Colt Interested parties discussed: that terracing provides a great fire break; the railroad ties are sunk in concrete; erosion existed prior to applicant's terracing; the applicant should be given a chance to prove that the work is sound from an engineering standpoint; caissons would be an absurd solution; objections to Phase II, workmen dumped boulders into the canyon; the cumulative effect if the project is ap- proved; no electricity or plumbing proposed in the accessory struc- ture; noise resulting from use of the accessory structure; and the positive aesthetic qualities of the project. Mr. McNulty moved to close the public hearing; seconded by Mrs. Orto- lano and passed unanimously. The Commission discussed cumulative problems related to the approval of the project and questioned staff regarding the Code requirement for fire breaks. Staff related the Code requires removal of home in a linear fashion. Staff said 50 property through the middle of Phase II. 602CP/MIN3.1-9 chapparral 50 feet from the feet would cross applicant's • Minutes November 12, 1986 Page Six The Commission reviewed idea of approving Phase the City Geologist. • staff's Alternative No. 2 and discussed the I on the condition that it passes approval by Mrs Ortolano moved approval of staff's Alternative No. 2. The motion died for lack of a second. A Commissioner emphasized the possibility that an attempt to restore Phase II to its natural condition could have a detrimental effect. The Commission discussed the idea of requiring applicant to submit a landscape plan which would include drought resistant type plants. Mr. McNulty moved to continue the matter until the applicant has had an opportunity to show information to staff relative to engineering, that staff be given an opportunity to discuss with applicant a correct method of restoring the bottom of the slope to its natural condition as much as possible, and that the item be returned to the Commission for approval. Mr. Benard suggested that a decision to accept or reject the project with some condition that addresses the issue of geology would be ap- propriate. Mr. McNulty withdrew the motion. Mrs. Ortolano moved to deny Variance No. 146 and that the application for GR No. 954 be approved subject to the following conditions: Phase I grading to remain subject to geologic and engineering review to de- termine its stability and geology; Phase II shall be restored to its natural condition based upon geologic and engineering studies; the railroad ties may remain in "Phase 2" only if their removal is deter- mined by the City to be a safety hazard; and applicant provide a land- scape plan for the entire graded area to include drought resistant materials as well as vegetation consistent with the natural overlay. The motion was seconded by Mr. McNulty and passed unanimously. Staff said the resolution will be presented to the Commission at the November 25, 1986 meeting. Appeal rights were noted. CONTINUED BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS Ht Var No. 461 Appeal - Fass 2080 Dorado 602CP/MIN3.1-9 None. Associate Planner Steve Rubin presented the staff report. .7 Minutes November 12, 1986 Page Seven E Mr. Benard reviewed that the height variation was approved at the staff level subject to the Commission's approval of Variance No. 137 and GR No. 908 which occurred September 9, 1986. The Commission reviewed the view blockage of the proposed Bjazevich house. Staff discussed that Mr. Bjazevich's home would not block the Fass and Koch views as defined by Code. Staff said that the Bjazevich home would be approximately the same height as the pad level of the Koch property. Staff related that the line where Mr. Bjazevich's roof meets the wall of the house is 23 feet from the Koch's rear property line. Staff said that the portion of the Bjazevich home that Mr. Koch would see would only be obstructing the Koch view of houses across the street. Mr. Roy Fass, owner of 2015 Caddington, appellant, stated: the Bjaze- vich property is short from front to back, so his house would occupy considerably more of the property to the back side. He voiced concern over view impairment from 2015 Caddington and stated the site is an old land fill. Mr. Karl Koch, 2083 Caddington, discussed: concern over view impair- ment, concern over view blockage resulting from smoke emanating from the chimney of the Bjazevich home and related damage to his home; the possibility of structural damage to his home from grading; the Bjaze- vich house is too large for the small lot; and objection that his room addition is not considered a primary viewing area. The Commission discussed that a geologic report must be made approving the project before the Bjazevich home can be built. The Commission discussed the idea that a view of a house across the street does not qualify as to the meaning of a view according to the Code. Staff said that the Koch view is not over the highest point of the proposed house. Staff stated the chimney would be located approxi- mately 50 feet from the rear wall of the abutting property line. Staff said that any portion of a house that did or would have required a height variation or variance at the time it was built is not con- sidered a legitimate viewing area. The Commission discussed that the Bjazevich lot is a legally created lot on which the applicant has a right to build. The Commission dis- cussed that the Code definition of a view is from a primary living area. The Commission reviewed staff's opinion that, while Mr. Koch will see the roofline of the Bjazevich house, it is not going to sig- nificantly impair his primary view. Two Commissioners that the Bja- zevich house is oversized for the undersized lot and said that the height of the Bjazevich house should be within Code. 602CP/MIN3.1-9 • Minutes November 12, 1986 Page Eight Mr. McNulty moved approval of staff's Alternative No. 1 denying the appeal; seconded by Mr. Connolly and passed by majority with Mrs. Or- tolano and Mrs. Wike dissenting. Appeal rights were noted. Sign Permit No. 312/324 Mr. McNulty moved to waive Diversified Development Co. reading the staff report; sec - SE Corner of Westmont/Western onded by Mrs. Ortolano and passed unanimously. Staff noted that all of the signs in the general area were not noticed because some of the signs were approved as part of Sign Permit No. 285. A Commissioner questioned why the bank has three major identification signs. Staff voiced intent to check into the matter. The Commission reviewed a possibility that, with approval of signs on the structures, anything over 5% signage in the window must be remov- ed. Ms. Barbara Kennard, 3402 Deluna, said it would be an economic hard- ship to replace the signs. She asked the Commission to be generous, kind and to show good faith. She said the signs there should be grandfathered. She stated her opinion that the amortization program along Western is not legal. She noted the signs were legally erected in Los Angeles County. Ms. Kennard also discussed problems with over- night parking citations being issued to cars legally parked overnight in the Los Angeles County area. Mr. Benard stated that the parking citation issue is not a planning related issue and that the Sheriff should be contacted regarding same. The Commission discussed the idea that the signs should remain until the amortization process is over and that the signs are legal until that time. The Commission discussed the fact that new tenants should be required to conform to Code. The Commission reviewed problems with new tenants being misinformed as to what the difference is regarding a cannister vs. face. The Commission discussed agreement with staff's recommendation regarding uses with no street frontage and with staff's recommendation that two six square foot temporary leasing signs would be sufficient to advertise leaseable space. Mr. McNulty moved to approve staff's recommendations regarding Sign Permit No. 312 and Sign Permit No. 324. 602CP/MIN3.1-9 E Minutes November 12, 1986 Page Nine A Commissioner clarified that all of the signs addressed in the staff report are legal, non -conforming signs which had permits issued by Los Angeles County before Western Avenue was annexed into the City. The Commission noted that the amortization period for the legal, non -con- forming signs ends October 2, 1990. Mr. Connolly seconded and the motion passed unanimously. REPORTS Staff Mr. Benard discussed that City Council heard and rejected the Eaton appeal of the Pitz height variation; that the Levitt CUP appeal was accepted by Council and a hearing date on Condition 22 has been set for December 2; and the Southwest Area Planning Council luncheon on November 21, 1986, 11:30 A.M. at Charlie Brown's in Redondo Beach. Commission Staff A Commissioner requested that area map show the Thomas Guide page numbers and coordinates. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion of Mr. McNulty and seconded by Mrs. alike, the meeting was adjourned at 11:40 P.M. to 6:30 P.M., November 25, 1986. 602CP/MIN3.1-9