Loading...
PC MINS 19871208r� a5 � M I N U T E S ),gg PLANNING COMMISSION G December 8, 1987 The meeting was called to order at 7:15 PM by Chairperson Ortolano at the Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. PRESENT: CONNOLLY, MC NULTY, ORTOLANO, VON HAGEN, WIKE ABSENT: NONE Also present were Director of Environmental Services Robert Benard, Senior Planner Ann Negendank, Associate Planner Greg Fuz, Associate Planner Ben Ortega, Assistant Planner Laurie Brigham, Assistant Planner Carolynn Wilker, Director of Public Works George Wentz and Assistant City Attorney Quinn Barrow. COMMUNICATIONS Chairperson Ortolano indicated that communications would be related during discussion of pertinent items. CONSENT CALENDAR With regard to Consent Calendar Item C, Director of Environmental Services Benard discussed the rationale behind the applicant's request for a one year extension. Commissioner Von Hagen moved approval of the Consent Calendar; seconded by Commissioner Wike and passed unanimously. Appeal rights were noted with reference to Consent Calendar Item C. Minutes December 8, 1987 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS Variance No. 180/ Coastal Permit No. 17 Lou Dimegilio (Architect) Associate Planner Ben Ortega presented the staff report. and Donald Barclay Director of Environmental 4115 Maritime Road Services Benard indicated that, since Chairperson Ortolano reviewed the staff report which addressed the item as a resubmitted project, she could participate in the discussion of and voting on the item even though she was absent from the November 24 meeting. Chairperson ortolano opened the public hearing. There were no requests to speak to the item. Commissioner Wike moved to close the public hearing; seconded by Commissioner Von Hagen and passed unanimously. Commissioner Wike voiced concern over the applicant's extremely small lot with a 20 percent reduction in the open space. Director of Environmental Services Benard clarified the Code requirements with regard to a Minor Exception Permit which he indicated could be approved by the Director if a reduction in open space does not exceed 20 percent. However, he noted that the applicant preferred to come to the Commission for a Variance since such an_application was already under review. Commissioner Von--H-agnn-moved-,approviil-:=of the project subject to the Conditions as -proposed by staff; seconded by Commissioner Connolly and passed unanimously. Appeal rights were noted. Minutes December 8, 1987 Page 3 Coastal Permit No. 41 - Appeal - Rancho Palos Verdes Redevelopment Agency, Palos Verdes Drive South East of Narcissa 0 Commissioner McNulty noted a communication which he received from one appellant requesting a continuance of the item. Chairperson Ortolano questioned whether there would be a conflict of interest as a result of Mr. Benard serving as Director of Environmental Services for the Planning Commission and as the Hearing Officer for Coastal Permit No. 41. She expressed her understanding of the appellants' desire for the Commission to address the merits of Coastal Permit No. 41 - Appeal. She voiced concern over the lengthy processing of Coastal Permit No. 41 - Appeal, which resulted in the item becoming somewhat urgent. Assistant City Attorney Barrow clarified that no conflict of interest would result from Mr. Benard serving as Director of Environmental Services and as the Hearing Officer. He cautioned the Commission to initially consider only the merits of the appeal. Associate Planner Greg Fuz presented the staff report. He indicated that Mr. Sargent's appeal of Coastal Permit No. 41 was received after the appeal period had closed and would, therefore, be invalid. Staff reviewed and rebutted the issues raised in each appeal, elaborated on the Coastal Permit process and discussed the Commission's role in connection with the appeal. Staff pointed out that the easterly view along Palos Verdes Drive South, which is not addressed in the City's General Plan or Coastal Specific Plan as a protected view, will, nevertheless, be enhanced as a result of the project since the elevation of Palos Verdes Drive South will be raised. Commissioner Von Hagen questioned whether the City has the ability to use aerial surveys to document field conditions and survey points. He emphasized his understanding that the Commission's initial role is to determine whether the Hearing Officer's position on Coastal Permit No. 41 is valid and, if so, to not hold a public hearing on the appeal of the permit. Director of Public Works George Wentz presented input pertaining to the City's ability to conduct aerial surveys and define survey points. He discussed the processing delays which led the item to become urgent. Chairperson Ortolano invited public testimony. The proponents of the appeal were: Mr. Andrew Sargent 19 Narcissa Ms. Jean Smolley 56 Limetree Minutes December 8, 1987 Page 4 The proponents of the appeal discussed: concern over the geological stability of the project area; concern over possible modifications to the shoreline as a result of the project; concern over view impairment easterly along Palos Verdes Drive South; and for those reasons, that the Commission should hear the merits of Coastal Permit No. 41 - Appeal. Director of Environmental Services Robert Benard explained the supplemental staff report (as distributed). During discussion of the Coastal Permit process, he clarified that there is no administrative appeal process for the Environmental Impact Report, as it had- been certified by the Redevelopment Agency after extensive public noticing and public hearings. He commented on the processing delays and discussed possible future appeals of Coastal Permit No. 41. Commissioner Von Hagen moved that, after receiving public testimony on the merits of the appeal, the Commission dismiss the appeal without a public hearing. The motion was seconded by Commissioner McNulty and passed unanimously. Appeal rights were noted. Mr. Barrow explained that any subsequent appeal of Coastal Permit No. 41 will tentatively be heard by -City ty Council at 9:Q0 AM-on�December 24. CUP No. 127; Times Mirror 32201 Forrestal Associate Planner Greg Fuz presented the staff report. Chairperson Ortolano opened the public hearing. There were no requests to speak to the item. Commissioner McNulty moved to close the public hearing; seconded by Commissioner Von Hagen and passed unanimously. Commissioner Von Hagen related his approval of the size of the proposed satellite dish antennas. He noted that the existing satellite dish antenna is designed to pick up more than one satellite. With regard t, Condition No. 6 to Exhibit "A",, -he Jko pointed out that liveccasting could require manned operation of the facility between the hours of 11 PM and 6 AM daily. He commented on his concern over the Director of Environmental Services being contacted as long as 48 hours after an emergency, as discussed in Condition No. 6 to Exhibit "A". 1] Minutes December 8, 1987 Page 5 Commissioner Connolly noted various difficulties related to the classroom being unidentified. Chairperson Ortolano stressed the importance of properly maintaining the landscaping at the location, as did Commissioner Wike. Staff provided information pertaining to the proposed location of the additional satellite dish antennas. During discussion of the parking facilities at the site, staff noted that a certain number of parking spaces must be maintained. Staff indicated that the applicant will be contacted regarding the possibil-ity of identifying the classroom and that landscaping could be discussed as part of the lease negotiations. Staff commented on the intent of Condition No. 6 to Exhibit "A" in which an effort was made to maintain the residential character of the surrounding area. Staff suggested that the Resolution should include that the proposal will have no signifi- cant impact on the environment and that a Negative Declaration will be issued. The Conditions to Exhibit "A" were modified as follows: Condition No. 5, "Use of additional classrooms shall be subject to the terms of the lease between the City and the applicant as well as the approval of...". Condition No. 6, "Manned operation of this facility shall not occur between the hours of 11 PM and 6 AM daily except in an emergency and for live cablecasts." Resolution P. C. No. 87- was modified to include, "Section 1: That the Commission has reviewed the Initial Study for EA No. 533 prior to making a decision on this project and determined that the proposal will not have any significant impact on the environment and that a Negative Declaration will be issued. Commissioner McNulty moved approval of the staff recommendation, including the Conditions as amended; seconded by Commissioner Von Hagen and passed unanimously. Appeal rights were noted. Director of Environmental Services Benard indicated that the modifications to Exhibit "A" and the Resolution will be returned for Commission review. Minutes December 8, 1987 Page 6 CUP No. 128; Church of Jesus Assistant Planner Carolynn Christ of Latter Day Saints; Welker presented the staff 5845 Crestridge Road report. Chairperson Ortolano commended staff on a well written report and a very succinct presentation. She invited interested parties to speak to the item. Mr. Roy C. Trick, 1517 Via Arco, Palos Verdes Estates, 90274, discussed the need for additional lighting at the location and related safety concerns. He voiced his disagreement with the idea of a fence across the Church driveway, as mentioned by staff. Commissioner Wike noted that the height of the proposed light standards would be 15 feet. Commissioner McNulty related his understanding that a lighting engineering study was to be provided by the applicant. Commissioner Von Hagen restated his previous concern over the illumination impact of the lights, especially in fog. Staff indicated that the 15 foot height of the light standards, as proposed, would increase the pool of light that hats the ground. Staff discussed that the overall lighting at the location, would not be ancrea'sed but would be more efficient. Staff presented information regarding the illumination of the proposed lighting and noted the manufacturer's opinion that it is one of the better lights to use in fog. With regard to previously stated resident concerns over noise at the location, staff mentioned that a chain could be installed across the Church driveway to prohibit congregating after hours. Commissioner McNulty moved approval of the staff recommendation; seconded by Commissioner Connolly and passed unanimously. Appeal rights were noted. 0 Minutes December 8, 1987 Page 7 Development Agreement for General Plan Amendment No. 16 and Zone Change No. 15 and EA No. 538; Paul Lupo, 28041 Hawthorne Blvd. Ej Commissioner McNulty moved to continue the item to January 12, 1988; seconded by Commissioner Wike and passed unanimously. Tentative Parcel Map No. 19016, Associate Planner Ben Ortega GR No. 1048, EA No. 530; presented the staff report. Lanco Engineering, Molina, 30600 Block of PV Drive East Chairperson Ortolano noted that the developer's cash payment for improvements was not included in the Negative Declaration. Staff indicated that the developer's cash payment for improvements will be included in the revised Conditions of Approval which will be presented to the Commission in the future. Commissioner Von Hagen moved to continue the item to January 12, 1988; seconded by Commissioner McNulty and passed unanimously. CUP No. 132; The reading of the staff PVPUSD report was waived. 6245 Via Canada Chairperson Ortolano opened the public hearing. Interested parties included: Pastor S. Blower 1801 S. Grand Ave., #2, San Pedro 90731 Mr. D. Capelouto PVPUSD Interested parties discussed: the Church's meeting schedule; parking; the School District's concern over subleasing; the School District's obligation to permit use to such groups as AYSO; and maintenance of the facility, including the School District's position not to expend funds to paint the schools. Commissioner Wike moved to close the public hearing; seconded by Commissioner McNulty and passed unanimously. E Minutes December 8, 1987 Page 8 • Commissioner Connolly voiced concern over the poor drainage and the accumulation of trash at the location. Commissioner Von Hagen expressed his concern over parking, hours of operation, density, the intensification of the use, drainage and signage. He emphasized his understanding that, in the State of California, a tenant cannot be denied the right to sublease his leasehold interest. Chairperson Ortolano noted that residents did not attend the meeting to discuss any concerns they might have. She pointed out that a modification to the existing signage is recommended by staff. She explained her opinion that the Commission should approve any potential subleases through-a.CUP Revisioft.- - She. commented on the City's authority_ to a restrict th-.e--- location and emjphasi7,.e.d that the: -,Commission shodld--6-kept breast thereof. Commissioner McNulty related his concern over the poor maintenance of the facility and emphasized that it should not detract from the community. He discussed his opinion that the Director could exercise his judgment regarding which subleases should be approved by the Commission. He noted the difficulty of enforcing hours of operation. He explained his understanding that the deed restric- tions require the property to be used for school purposes. Commissioner Wike stressed that any intensification of use in connection with subleasing should be approved by the Commission. Exhibit "A" was modified as follows: Condition No. 2, "...in the attached use descriptions. Temporary/ interim uses shall be approved...". Condition No. 3, "A revised onsite parking lot plan...". Condition No. 9, "...non-compliance with any of these conditions of approval." Condition No. 11 was added to include, "A drainage plan must be submitted for the Director of Environmental Services approval." Director of Environmental Services Benard related his intent to research the State's requirements pertaining to subleasing. Commissioner McNulty moved approval of the staff recommendation, including Exhibit "A" as amended; seconded by Commissioner Wike and passed unanimously. Appeal rights were noted. Minutes December 8, 1987 Page 9 Tentative Parcel Map Assistant Planner Carolynn No. 19021, CUP No. 133, Wilker presented the staff EA No. 529 and GR No. 1073; report. Irani & Farboudmanesh, Ferris, 29375 Indian Valley Chairperson Ortolano noted a communication from the attorney representing the landowner, Mrs. Ferris. Chairperson Ortolan opened the public hearing. Those opposing the request were: Mr. Frank Angiuli Mr. Joe Chody Indian Valley, RHE 29336 Indian Valley, RHE Those opposing the request discussed: concern over parking, view impairment, intensification of use and a reduction in the front setback. Mr. Robert Vanderhoof, Rolling Hills Estates, architect representing the applicant, discussed: the encroachment into the front setback was because of stability; attempts to reduce the height of the retaining walls; concern over required archaeological studies at the site; and concern over instability related to a requirement of planting mature trees. Commissioner McNulty moved to close the public hearing; seconded by Commissioner Wike and passed unanimously. Chairperson Ortolano mentioned that the Traffic Committee could be asked to study the impact of the development and whether "No Parking" signs should be posted on Indian Valley. She noted that archaeological study of a site is a standard condition of approval. Commissioner Wike emphasized that the building could be designed to eliminate the need for the reduction in the front setback and to minimize the visual impact. With regard to the applicant's concern over the requirement of planting mature trees, Director of Environmental Services Benard stressed that the City would not enforce a condition which would be adverse to a geological condition. He explained the City's procedures with regard to a Minor Exception Permit request and noted that Condition No. 5 to Exhibit "A" should be deleted. Commissioner McNulty moved approval of the project with the Conditions as stated; seconded by Commissioner Von Hagen and passed by a majority vote with Commissioner Wike dissenting. s Minutes December 8, 1987 Page 10 Appeal rights were noted. R Commissioner Wike indicated that she could not support a-r-a4ipe� .s-f--a-Minor Exception Permit request for the encroachment into the front setback. Code Amendment No. 24 Commissioner McNulty moved to Satellite Dish Antennas continue the item to January 12, 1988; seconded by Commissioner Von Hagen and passed unanimously. CONTINUED BUSINESS GR No. 1051; Assistant Planner Laurie Brigham John Winkler presented the staff report. 2043 Jaybrook Commissioner McNulty related his intent to abstain since he was not present at the November 10 meeting, during which the item was discussed. Chairperson Ortolano invited interested parties to speak to the item. Interested parties were: Mr. John Winkler 722 Ellery, San Pedro 90732 Applicant Dr. Charles Winkler 722 Ellery, San Pedro 90732 Mr. Robert Merrill Robt. Stone & Assoc. Interested parties discussed: the basement, built because the house needed a new foundation, is used for a workroom; the speeding problems on Jaybrook necessitate a backyard for safety purposes; stability of the soil; aesthetic and functional concerns over the staff proposal; neighborhood support of the project; preference for a Minor Exception Permit; concern over an interior stairwell as recommended by staff; the scope of the project; and Mr. Merrill's opinion that the primary difference between the applicant's desires and the City's recommen- dations is aesthetics. Commissioner Wike pointed out that it would be appropriate to place a time limitation on the submission of a landscape plan and that the landscaping should be completed prior to the building being finaled. She suggested that a deed restriction prohibiting the conversion of the basement/workroom into a second unit should be included in the Conditions of Approval. She related her concern over the exterior stairs, the light well and the sliding glass door. Minutes December 8, 1987 Page 11 Commissioner Connolly discussed the possibility of constructing two walls on the western side of the property and emphasized that the transition there should be as smooth -as possible. During discussion of her concern over drainage problems related to a light well, Chairperson Ortolano related her reluctance to impose such a Condition. She expressed her disagreement with an interior stairwell as recommended by staff and expressed her opinion that the conversion of the basement/workroom into a second unit would be unlikely. While discussing his understanding of the difficulties related to the property, Commissioner Von Hagen expressed his disagreement with an interior stairwell as recommended by staff. He stressed that, with regard to the retaining walls, some middleground should be explored in order to lessen the applicant's burden. Staff indicated that the construction of two walls on the western side of the property, as discussed by Commissioner Connolly, would minimize the impact of the applicant's pro3ect but would not be consistent with the Grading Code. Staff elaborated on the issue of drainage and related the City's opinion that a drain pipe should extend from the light well area to the bottom of the canyon. Staff provided information pertaining to the specifics of a Minor Exception Permit which is desired by the applicant. Director of Environmental Services Benard noted the difficulties of enforcing landscaping requirements. He discussed the rationale behind staff's, recommendation of a light well. He elaborated on staff's concern over 8 to 9 foot retaining walls on either side of the property. Commissioner Connolly moved approval of GR No. 1051, subject to the following Conditions: (1) The stairway_ to_ the= exterior bei permitted; (2) The retaining wall to the east be as ptesc`ribed by staff; (3) The retaining and garden walls to the west be designed to allow transition slopes to the rear so that the rear of the yard remains level to the basement; (4) The impact of the precipitous cut be softened by the addition of a third 3 foot wall immediately adjacent to the stairs going down -- in essence, a planter; (5) The grading next to the sliding glass door be as described by the applicant at a level to the floor of the basement out to the existing grade level, extended approximately 22 feet from the glass door; Minutes December 8, 1987 Page 12 (6) A landscaping plan be submitted to the Director of Environmental Services within 90 days, said landscaping to be completed prior to the building being finaled; and (7) A deed restriction to run with the property prohibiting the use of the basement/workroom as an accessory structure. The motion was seconded by Chairperson Ortolano and passed by a majority vote with Commissioner Wike dissenting and Commissioner McNulty abstaining. Appeal rights were noted. NEW BUSINESS Height Variation No. 509 Assistant Planner Carolynn - Appeal; Virjee, Marshall Wilker presented the staff 86 Rockinghorse report. She provided background information regarding the addition to 84 Rockinghorse (appellant). Chairperson Ortolano invited interested parties to speak to the appeal. Those supporting the appeal were: Captain & Mrs. Fram Virjee 84 Rockinghorse Appellant Mr. W. R. Van Liere 10 Stirrup Mr. Murzean Virjee 3424 Jaybrook Representing the Appellant Those supporting the appeal discussed: the appeal should be continued; the view from the study/deck of 84 Rockinghorse should be considered a primary view; concern over the design of the pr03ect; view impairment and the cumulative impact of an approval of the request; neighborhood support of the appeal; the appellant's initial understanding that staff felt the primary view from 84 Rockinghorse would be impaired; the addition would violate the CC&Rs; and the Homeowners' Association's support of the appeal. Mr. Rick Marshall, 86 Rockinghorse, applicant, requested denial of the appeal. He noted that the CC&Rs do not contain guidelines regarding additions and that there are a number of two story homes in the neighborhood. During discussion of the Code intent with regard to the Director's determination of a viewing area for a Height Variation, Chairperson Ortolano stressed that a viewing area depends on the arrangement of a home. She emphasized that all information pertaining to the related Height Variation should have been provided to the Commission. She noted that it is the Homeowners' Association's responsibility to Minutes December 8, 1987 Page 13 enforce the CC&Rs. She questioned whether alternative designs were explored. She explained her concern over staff's determination of the appellant's pad lot and related her support of the appeal. Commissioner Wike expressed her opinion that the appellant's viewing areas include the study and the exterior deck. She explained her concern over the application of a Height Variation requirement which did not exist at the time of the appellant's addition. She noted that the view from 6 Bridle Lane, which could be enhanced with the removal of vegetation, was not discussed by the Commission. She emphasized that the project should be redesigned to minimize the view impact and communicated her support of the appeal. Commissioner Connolly discussed his concern over the effect that the addition would have on the appellant's privacy. He commented on his opinion that the appellant's lot is an upslope lot and expressed his support of the appeal. Commissioner McNulty noted that the vegetation in the area reduces the views. He pointed out that there are other two story homes in the neighborhood. He discussed various viewpoints regarding the appellant's type of lot and, after much consideration, he related his support of the appeal. Commissioner Von Hagen voiced his agreement with staff's opinion regarding the appellant's pad lot. He supported a denial of the appeal. Staff commented that it was determined that the addition would not block any primary views but alternative designs were explored. With regard to the staff determination of the appellant's pad lot, staff pointed out that the level area of the lot is not natural and it must have been cut and filled to create the area on which the home is situated. Director of Environmental Services Benard elaborated on staff's determination of the appellant's pad lot which he noted was not affected by review of the appellant's building plans for the addition. He explained that the addition would have required a Height Variation had the Code been in existence at the time. He mentioned that information pertaining to the related Height Variation could be provided to the Commission and that alternative designs were explored but they would have required grading of the slope. Commissioner Wike moved to grant the appeal; seconded by Commissioner Connolly and passed by a majority vote with Commissioner Von Hagen dissenting. Appeal rights were noted. Minutes December 8, 1987 Page 14 QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE None. (Regarding Non -Agenda Items) REPORTS None. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was duly adjourned at approximately 1:00 AM. t