Loading...
PC MINS 19871027M I N U T E S PLANNING COMMISSION October 27, 1987 The meeting was called to order at 7:35 PM by Chairperson Ortolano at the Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. PRESENT: CONNOLLY, MC NULTY, ORTOLANO, VON HAGEN, WIKE Also present were Director of Environmental Services Robert Benard, Associate Planner Ben Ortega, Assistant Planner Laurie Brigham and Assistant Planner Carolynn Wilker. COMMUNICATIONS Chairperson Ortolano indicated that communications would be related during discussion of pertinent items. At this time, Chairperson Ortolano noted Mr. Dierl's request to speak to Extreme Slope Permit No. 3, an item not appearing on the October 27, 1987 meeting agenda. Mr. Dierl, who related his understanding that Extreme Slope Permit No. 3 was scheduled for the October 27, 1987 meeting, presented a Citv notice to that effect. Director of Environmental Services Benard explained that Mr. Dierl was incorrectly noticed. He noted that the item, which is scheduled for November 10, 1987, will be renoticed if required and that the item was continued until the November 10, 1987 meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes of Commissioner Wike inserted an September 22, 1987 additional paragraph after Paragraph 4 of Page 3 to include, "Commissioner Wike expressed concern over: the location of the equestrian trail; the number of proposed lights; and noise problems at the location. She suggested that the applicant work with the residents of The Terraces and consider providing supervision of the young people in the evening when the Church groups are breaking up." Minutes October 27, 1987 Page 2 CUP No. 104 - Revision Director of Environmental Services Kubicek - 18 La Vista Verde Benard pointed out that an approval of CUP No. 104 - Revision would include an approval of a six month extension, as recommended by staff. Commissioner Von Hagen moved approval of Consent Calendar Item A as amended and Consent Calendar Item B; seconded by Commissioner McNulty and passed unanimously. Parking Lot Permit No. 2 Commissioner Wike questioned whether Health Access Systems a reduction in parking, as recommended 9409 Western Avenue by staff, would be appropriate. Chairperson Ortolano expressed concern over a possible assumption that an emergency medica1_faci7it­y­c`_ou_1d require 1 -e -s -sparking than other uses. Commissioner Von Hagen questioned whether a medical use would actually require a reduction in parking. Commissioner McNulty pointed out that the likelihood of the parking lot being full would be minimal; in which case, he voiced no objection to the staff recommendation. Director of Environmental Services Benard provided input pertaining to the parking requirements as included in the Code. He discussed-, a parking survey of similar uses in other jurisdictions which revealed khat the City's s-tandakds-for this use are -higher than others. Commissioner McNulty moved approval of Consent Calendar Item C; seconded by Commissioner Von Hagen and passed by a 3-2 majority vote with Commissioner Wike and Chairperson Ortolan dissenting. PUBLIC HEARINGS CUP No. 127 Times Mirror 32201 Forrestal There were no requests to speak to the item. Commissioner Von Hagen moved to continue the public hearing until November 10, 1987; seconded by Commissioner Wike and passed unanimously. Minutes October 27, 1987 Page 3 CUP No. 128 Chairperson Ortolano noted a Latter Day Saints communication from The Terraces 5845 Crestridge Homeowners' Association to the Jesus Christ Church of Latter Day Saints regarding parking, landscaping and parking lot lights. There were no requests to speak to the item. Commissioner Von Hagen moved to continue the public hearing until November 24, 1987; seconded by Commissioner McNulty and passed unanimously. Variance No. 173/ Assistant Planner Carolynn Walker GR No. 1031 presented the staff report. Cucuk - 1887 McArthur Chairperson Ortolano opened the public hearing. The proponents of the request were: Mr. Gavarilo Cucuk 1887 McArthur Mr. Nick Cucuk 1887 McArthur Applicant The proponents of the request discussed; the background of the request; similar retaining walls in the neighborhood; understanding that the appropriate permits were obtained by the contractor; and the security issues surrounding the installation of the existing wall. Commissioner McNulty moved to close the public hearing; seconded- by econdedby Commissioner Wike and passed unanimously. Commissioner McNulty discussed the difficulties involved when annexing an area into the City, especially regarding changing codes. He indicated that the applicant's remedy should be against the contractor who did not obtain the proper permits. He voiced concern over the cumulative impact of an approval of the request and over the possi- bility of "walling in" the City. He related his support of the staff recommendation. Commissioner Von Hagen concurred with the stated difficulties encountered when annexing an area into the City and related the possibility that a permit may or may not have been issued for the existing wall. He expressed his support of the staff recommendation; however, he indicated that the proof of the issuance of the proper permits could have influenced the way he looked at the issue. Commissioner Connolly commented on the possibility that the proper permits could have been issued. He related his support of the staff recommendation. E Minutes October 27, 1987 Page 4 Commissioner Wike voiced agreement with the staff recommendation. She discussed the other walls in the neighborhood, the majority of which are not permitted uses. Chairperson Ortolano explained that, with an approval of the staff recommendation, the applicant would be required to work with staff on a Minor Exception Permit which would include the review of the existing wall, the lights and the motorized gate. She expressed concern over the negative visual impact of the existing wall. She stated her support of the staff recommendation. Staff explained the current Code requirements pertaining to the existing wall and provided input regarding the County requirements at the time the wall was constructed. Staff revealed that the applicant's second story addition has never been finalized; that an electrical permit for the motorized gate is necessary; and that the lights atop the pileastors require a permit -- all of -which would be included in a Minor Exception Permit and building permits, as recommended by staff. Commissioner Wike moved approval of Alternative No. 3; seconded by Commissioner McNulty and passed unanimously. Chairperson Ortolano advised City Council. Variance No. 176 Dan Delight 28707 Mt. Langley the applicant regarding an appeal to Assistant Planner Laurie Brigham presented the staff report. Chairperson Ortolano opened the public hearing. The proponents of the request were: Mr. Dan Delight Mr. Nagy Jacob 28707 Mt. Langley 6510 Via Baron The proponents of the request discussed: an auto repair service will not be operated at the location; compliance -with zoning and Cod'e- req-uirem-ent!f-. Commissioner Wike moved to close the public hearing; seconded by Commissioner Connolly and passed unanimously. 0 Minutes October 27, 1987 Page 5 Chairperson Ortolano questioned the possibility that -the structure is being permitted closer to the property line than it would be absent the toe of the slope. She commented on the effect that the structure would have on the property above the applicant's. Staff clarified that the property owner living above the applicant was noticed of the request. Staff provided input pertaining to setbacks/toe of the slope. Commissioner McNulty moved approval of Alternative No. 1; seconded by Commissioner Von Hagen and passed unanimously. Appeal rights were noted. CONTINUED BUSINESS NEW BUSINESS CUP No. 51 - Revision "B" Monte Rosa Partnership Tract 35040 (Lots 1-22) None. Assistant Planner Laurie Brigham presented the staff report. Chairperson Ortolano invited interested parties to speak to the item. Mr. Paul Dettenmaier, 2889 N. Las Fresnos Circle,7-Camarillo, CA - 93010, Project Manager, related the developer's willingness to negotiate with the City regarding a fence or wall along Palos Verdes Drive South. He noted that many of the home buyers are concerned over privacy, safety and noise. Chairperson Ortolano emphasized that a fence or wall along Palos Verdes Drive South should be required for traffic, safety and aesthetic pTr-poses. She pointed out that the pro3ect was previously conditioned to include landscaping which would not exceed the ridge line. She related her position that the item should be continued until the City's negotiations with the developer are completed. Commissioner Wike stressed that the landscape requirements should be extensive in order to control the height of the vegetation. She expressed concern over view impairment along Palos Verdes Drive South resulting from a fence or wall which might be constructed. Commissioner McNulty agreed that any fence or wall along Palos Verdes Drive South should not obstruct the view. Commissioner Von Hagen expressed his opinion that staff has the ability to solve the fencing issue. Minutes October 27, 1987 Page 6 Staff indicated that the previously required landscape plan insures that none of the landscaping will project above the ridge line and that the view corridors will be maintained; and, in addition, the original Conditional Use Permit contains language to prevent view blockage. Staff noted that, with the Director's approval, individual homeowners could construct a fence in the common area. Director of Environmental Services Benard provided information regarding the City's continuing efforts to work with the developer to solve the fencing issue. He indicated that, because there are no time constraints running with the application, the item could be continued until November 10 in order to complete the negotiations. Commissioner Wike moved to continue the item until November 10, 1987; seconded by Commissioner McNulty and passed unanimously. Height variation Assistant Planner Carolynn Welker No. 508 - Appeal presented the staff report. Baumann, Rad 5319 Littlebow Road Chairperson Ortolano invited interested parties to speak to the item. Those opposing the request were: Mr. Edwin Baumann 5327 Littlebow Appellant Ms. Veronika Aichinger 5423 Littlebow President, Littlebow Homeowners' Association Those opposing the request discussed: concern over view impairment and over the depletion of the open space within the City; support of a 16 foot addition which would minimize the view impairment; a desire for a duplicate photograph illustrating the pole which measures the height of the proposed structure; the view from the appellant's den window should be considered a protected view; the CC&Rs for the tract do not allow second story additions to one story buildings; and concern over noticing of the July 15 meeting after that date. Commissioner Von Hagen discussed the Code interpretation of a view and he explained that the view from the appellant's den window is considered an unprotected view. On that basis, he related his support of the staff recommendation. 0 Minutes October 27, 1987 Page 7 Chairperson Ortolano discussed the City's notification program to the Homeowners' Associations. She voiced concern that Ms. Aichinger did not receive notice of the July 15 meeting until after that date. She advised that the Homeowners' Association could pursue enforcement of the CC&Rs through legal action. She pointed out that staff did not explore any alternatives to the proposal. However, because she is not persuaded that the appellant's unprotected mountain view is a principle view, she supported the staff recommendation. Commissioner Wike voiced concern that staff did not explore any alternatives to the proposal. She stressed that alternatives may exist which would minimize the view impairment. Commissioner Wike moved to continue the item so that staff can work with the applicant to minimize the view impairment. The motion died for lack of a second. Commissioner McNulty noted that the proposed addition would be two stories. He discussed that the affected portion of the appellant's view is an unprotected view and that there does not appear to be significant view impairment. He related his support of the staff recommendation. He noted that a denial of the appeal should include conditions that the applicant must remove any trees which block the appellant's view. Commissioner Connolly discussed that the affected portion of the appellant's view is unprotected and that it is not his principle view. As a result, he voiced his agreement with the staff recommendation. Director of Environmental Services Benard provided information pertaining to the Code interpretation of a view. He discussed his opinion that, in the appellant's case, the principle view is seen from the back and that the view from the den window is an unprotected view. He commented on the City's notification program to Homeowners' Associations. Commissioner McNulty moved to deny the appeal with the Conditions that : (1) The applicant remove all trees blocking any portion of any view existing from anywhere on the appellant's property; and (2) The window on the second floor on the west elevation of the applicant's addition be modified so that it is opaque and does not provide any view into the appellant's home. Such actions to be approved by the Director of Environmental Services. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Von Hagen and passed by a 4-1 majority vote with Commissioner Wike dissenting. • Minutes October 27, 1987 Page 8 • Commissioner Wike emphasized her opinion that tk�o al_te.r._n_at,jves_exist_ which would minimize the view impairment and should be explored. Director of Environmental Services Benard related the City Attorney's opinion that Conditions such as those included in the motion to deny the appeal can be enforced. Appeal rights were noted. Coastal Permit No. 32, Coastal Permit No. 32, GR No. 1045 GR No. 1045 and Coastal Permit No. 34, GR No. JCC Enterprises 1047 were considered in con3unction 6580 Seacove Drive with Coastal Permit No. 35, GR No. 1049. CoastalPermit No. 34, _ GR No. 104?- 'JCC =Enterprises----- Associate Planner Ben Ortega 6450 Seacove-Drive Presented the staff report. Coastal Permit No. 35, Chairperson Ortolano invited GR No. 1049 interested parties to speak JCC Enterprises to the item. 6560 Seacove Drive The proponents of the request were: Mr. Bruce Gelb 21515 Hawthorne, #1140, Torrance, 90503 Attorney Mr. Kurt Nelson 22330 Hawthorne, #212, Torrance, 90505 Applicant Mr. Richard Gould 22330 Hawthorne, #212, Torrance, 90505 Racisz & Gould The proponents of the request discussed: general concurrence with the staff recommendation; concern over the landscape/irrigation plan requirements as included in Exhibit "A" of each request; alternate rear yard grading plans; the proposed grading would be to allow an ocean view from the first floor; and willingness to relocate the catch basins outside of the structure setback area. • Minutes October 27, 1987 Page 9 Those opposing the request were: Mr. Nagy Jacob 6510 Via Baron Ms. Ilse Oetiker 6504 Via Baron Those opposing the request discussed: is concern over the instability of the land; concern over drainage; concern over the height and the number of proposed fireplaces; concern over traffic noise; any fences should not be solid; the vegetation height should be limited; and street lights should be installed by the developer. Director of Environmental Services Benard related that the land was approved for gross stability and that drainage was addressed as part of the original tract map. He noted that the approval of the Vista Pacifica project included a Condition requiring some street lights. Commissioner Connolly stressed the importance of preserving the natural habitat. Commissioner McNulty questioned whether the rear yard lengths, as recommended by staff for Coastal Permit No. 32 and Coastal Permit No. 35, would be reasonable. Commissioner Von Hagen related his opinion that the proposed grading would not be excessive. Chairperson Ortolano stressed the importance of preserving the natural terrain, especially in such a visually sensitive part of the City. She voiced concern over the applicant's continuing efforts to encroach into the structure setback wi�.h"a-catch basin. She mentioned that any-fences.and hedges could be.90'percent light and air. —She noted that the item could be continue& to allow further -staff analysis. - -' Commissioner Wike emphasized the importance of preserving the natural habitat. She noted that the purpose of the excessive grading is to create a level pad for recreation or aesthetics. She discussed the landscape and irrigation plan requirement, as included in Exhibit "A" of each request, which she indicated would enable staff to provide instruction regarding appropriate landscaping. She requested clarification regarding the possibility of a rear yard pool with regard to Coastal Permit No. 32, GR No. 1045 and Coastal Permit No. 35, GR No. 1049. 9 Minutes October 27, 1987 Page 10 Staff noted that the catch basins should the structure setback areas, as included dations. Staff pointed out that fencing requirements are included in the original Is be relocated outside in the staff recommen- and vegetation Conditional Use Permit. During discussion regarding the importance of preserving the natural terrain, Director of Environmental Services Benard provided infor- mation pertaining to the City guidelines which refer to minimization of grading. He pointed out that the grading, as proposed for Coastal Permit No. 32, GR No. 1045 and Coastal Permit No. 35, GR No. 1049 would be excessive but that the installation of a rear yard swimming pool on those lots is a possibility since grading for same is not considered as such according to the Code. He commented on a design which necessitates excessive grading in order to create an ocean view from the first floor. He cautioned the applicant that the landscape and irrigation plan approval process could take up to two months and that those plans must be submitted prior to occupancy. The Commission agreed to continue Coastal Permit No. 32, GR No. 1045 and Coastal Permit No. 35, GR No. 1049 in order to allow further staff analysis. Commissioner McNulty moved approval of Coastal Permit No. 34, GR No. 1047 as recommended by staff with the Conditions of Approval as set forth in Exhibit "A"; seconded by Commissioner Wike and passed unanimously. Commissioner McNulty moved to continue Coastal Permit No. 32, GR No. 1045 and Coastal Permit No. 35, GR No. 1049 until November 10; seconded by Commissioner Von Hagen and passed unanimously. QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE None. (Regarding Non -Agenda Items) "ta Staff Director of Environmental Services Benard mentioned that updated General Plan and Coastal Specific maps are forthcoming. Commission None. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was duly adjourned at approximately 11:15 PM to 7:00 PM, November 10, 1987.