Loading...
PC MINS 19880628�- KIli0 US PLANNING COMMISSION JIINE 28, 1988 The meeting was called to order at 7:40 p.m. by Chairman Connolly at Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. PRESENT: Connolly, Ortolano, Von Hagen, Wike Commissioner McNulty arrived at 9:10 p.m. Also present were Director of Environmental Services Robert Denard, Associate Planner Greg Fuz and Associate Planner Carolynn Wilker. COP KUNICATION CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes of April 26, 1988 Minutes of May 10, 1988 Minutes of May 24, 1988 No communications had been received. Change Paragraph 1, Page 3 to read: "Commissioner Wike voiced her concern over the placement of structures within the Coastal Setback area and over the proposed grading which she maintained would be excessive." Strike the last paragraph on Page 4. Add a sentence to motion at top of Page 3 to indicate that the motion was unanimously passed. Motion was made by Commissioner Von Hagen and seconded by Commissioner Wike to approve the Consent Calendar as amended. Motion unanimously passed. PUBLIC HEARINGS Variance No. 189 100 Vanderlip Drive Associate Planner Fuz read the Staff Report related to this item and distributed an aerial photograph of the property. Mr. Fuz amended the Staff recommendation to add the following to Exhibit "A" Variance No. 189 Conditions of Approval. 14. Submit a dimensioned, scaled, site plan or a scaled aerial photograph showing all structures and property lines within 90 days of variance approval. 15. Allow staff to enter the site within 90 days of variance approval for the purpose of photographing each structure to establish a visual record of existing development. Minutes June 28, 1988 Page Two Mr. Fuz noted that information is needed from the applicant to establish a visual record of existing conditions as a reference in the -event that 'future construction occurs on the property. Commissioner Ortolano reported that she was denied access to the applicant's property, and by virtue of not being able to inspect the property, she could not disagree with the Staff's conclusions. She was concerned that staff might -not beable-to obtain information from the applicant if the applicant was not cooperative. _ Chairman Connolly opened the public hearing. Blin Vanderlip, 100 Vanderlip Drive, stated she does not wish to comply with the staff conditions and categorically denied she is a public nuisance. She will not abide by rent control, will not sign a legal waiver, and will continue to refuse access to her property. Mrs. Vanderlip also threatened to file a lawsuit against the City, claiming she has been harrassed for the past 17 years. Mrs. Vanderlip explained to Chairman Connolly that what he believed were exposed sanitary drains were actually gray water irrigation lines for the trees on her property. Commissioner Von Hagen pointed out that Mrs. Vanderlip has disregarded three building permits by having installed kitchens in three structures on her property in direct opposition to conditions - prohibiting such action. Director of Environmental Services Benard noted that Condition 12 in Exhibit 'A" (Controls on Rent) was placed on the applicant because of the nature of the request (Additional Units.) Staff wanted a condition that would provide some benefit to the city in return for granting the variance. Mr. Benard make it clear that Staff is not placing any conditions on Mrs. Vanderlip that it would not place on another applicant under similar circumstances. John Vanderlip, 99 Vanderlip Drive, explained why he could not condone the maintenance of rental units by Mrs. Vanderlip. Mr. Vanderlip requested that either Staff or the Commission review the front property line setback. He had no strong objections to Mrs. Vanderlip's units encroaching onto his property until a wall was constructed. He noted his support for the condition to reduce the height of the wall. Edward Horton, 85 Vanderlip Drive, expressed his support of Mrs. Vanderlip's efforts to improve her property. It was his opinion that the proposed conditions were not consistent with resolving the situation, therefore he was not in favor of the Conditions of Approval for the Variance. Minutes June 28, 1988 Page Three F. David Ruth, 40 Cinnamon Lane, objected to Condition No. 8 which requires Mrs. Vanderlip to install dewatering wells at her cost. Mr. Ruth was also concerned about Condition No. 9 which requires Mr. Vanderlip to join sewer districts affecting her property, and he concluded that he had no objections to the way Mrs. Vanderlip maintains her property. Associate Planner Fuz discussed why the applicant was designated to bear the cost of the dewatering wells. Harriet Medve, 29 Sweetbay Road, noted that the Abalone Cove Landslide Abatement District (ACLAD) has jurisdiction over the Vanderlip property, and has no knowledge that wells are necessary on the property, either at this time or at any time in the future. She stated that she has been a long-time acquaintance of Mrs. Vanderlip's, and is pleased with what Mrs. Vanderlip has done with her property. Director of Environmental Services Benard clarified the condition about the wells by stating that this recommendation was made by Robert Stone & Associates as determined by Dr. Ehlig. Mrs. Vanderlip made a rebuttal to Mr. Vanderlip's comments, and restated her desire to file legal action against the Department of Environmental Services. Motion was made by Commisioner Ortolano and seconded by Chairman Connolly to approve Variance No. 189 with the following changes: Add the two additional conditions as stated by Associate Planner Fuz; Condition No. 12 to be deleted from the Conditions of Approvals a clarifying comment to be added to Condition No. 8 stating that this Condition will apply only if found to be required by Robert Stone & Assoc., at a cost not to exceed 825,000 for both wells. In the discussion that took place regarding the Motion, Mr. Fuz clarified Condition No. 13, and also noted that the City Attorney has stated that the ability still exists to establish an amortization period to bring the units into compliance. Mr. Fuz added that all required plana (per Condition No. 13) will be prepared by a licensed surveyor. Motion was unanimously passed. Commissioner McNulty abstained because he had arrived at the end of the item. Chairman Connolly noted that this item will be placed on the Consent Calendar for the July 12th meeting, and that the appeal period will start after July 12th. Vatianae no. 191, 18611 Plainfield Avenue The staff report was waived. Chairman Connolly opened the public hearing. Minutes .l�1� 1988 Page Four Director of Environmental Services Benard indicated that no one wished to speak to this .item. Chairman Connolly closed the public hearing. !lotionwas rade by Comissioner Ortolano and seconded by Connissioner Wike to approve Staff Alternative No. 2 which approves the variance to allow the water heater to rennin in the garage, but requires the laundry facilities to be relocated within 60 days. Notion unanimously passed. Appeal rights were noted in absentia. Tentative Parcel flap No. 19424, B.A. No. 548, and Grading No. 1123 at 3023 Crest Road Associate Planner Carolynn Wilker noted the staff recommendation to continue the project to September 13, 1988 to allow two public hearings on the item before the final action date. This item was continued from the July 14, 1988 meeting, in order to allow the applicant to address several issues raised in the Staff Report. The final action date on the project is July 1, 1988, however, the applicant has granted the City a 90 day extension to September 28, 1988. This is the last continuance the City will request of the applicant. Motion was made by Commissioner McNulty and seconded by Commissioner Von Hagen to approve the Staff recommendation to continue to project. Motion unanimously passed. NEW BUSINESS Height Variation No. 529- Associate Planner Wilker presented Appeal, 28845 Briarhurst Drive photographs used in conducting a view analysis for the proposed addition, taken from 29016 Maple - park Drive, 28845, 28853, and 28862 Briarhurst Drive. Chairman Connolly opened the public hearing. Beatrice Rasof, 28845 Briarhurst Drive, the appellant, read a comprehensive prepared statement to substantiate her reasoning for requesting an appeal. She also addressed the cumulative effects that the denial of the appeal would have on the neighborhood. Minutes 0 91 .lune 28, 1988 Page Five John McTaggart, 6916 Purpleridge, explained he had discussed his proposed testimony with the City Attorney. He was advised he could testify before the Commission, but could not vote on this issue should it come before the City Council. Mr. McTaggart noted why the addition would pose significant view impairment to property other than his. He also noted that the balcony would significantly interfere with privacy, and addressed the issue of the hipped roof as opposed to a flat roof. Mick Bouchaert, 29016 Maplepark Drive, requested denial of Height Variation 529. Marty Bouchaert, 29016 Maplepark Drive, also strongly opposed the Height Variation request. She noted that the Bouchaerts have voluntarily complied with neighbors' requests to trim vegetation on their property so as not to obstruct views. Carolyn Crowder, 28853 Briarhurst Drive, focused on the stress this issue has created within the neighborhood. Hank Crowder, 28853 Briarhurst Drive, seconded his wife's position. Antonia Parker, 28903 Briarhurst Drive, supported Mrs. Rasof's request to appeal the denial of the variance. Thomas Parker, 28903 Briarhurst Drive, also requested that the variance be denied because it would obstruct both view and privacy. Barl Lawrence, 28741 Blythewood Drive, presented his support for Mrs. Rasof's appeal to deny the Height Variation. James Hudson, 29010 Maplepark Drive, the applicant, felt that the staff had conducted a thorough view analysis, and stated that he had no intention to overbuild his property. Mr. Hudson also indicated a willingness to remove/trim any trees that obstruct the views of his neighbors. It was his opinion that insignificant impairment would be caused by the addition. He noted that positioning the addition on a different section of the house would entail major structural changes to the house. Chairman Connolly closed the public hearing. Commissioner Ortolano requested an analysis on the issue of cumulative impact on properties in proximity with the applicant's property. 'Motion was made by Commissioner Ortolano and seconded by Commissioner hike to adopt Staff Alternative No. 3 to approve the appeal, thereby overturning the staff approval and denying Height Variation No. 529. Commissioner Von Hagen discussed the motion and agreed that the appellant's is the most affected property, and suggested that some offending vegetation be removed as -a compromise. !lotion did not pass. Chairman Connolly, Commissioners Von Hagen and McNulty dissented. Meeting June 28, 1988 Page Six Motion was made by Commissioner Von Hagen and seconded by Commissioner Ortolano to adopt Staff Alternative No. l: Adopt the attached resolution denying the appeal, as there are no grounds for the Planning Commission to grant the appeal as set forth by the Development Code, with the Condition that the trees on Mr. Hudson's property be removed or trimmed with Staff approval, so that as much view as possible is provided to the Rasofs Commissioner Ortolano amended the Motion to state the trees identified in the Staff Report should be removed, along with the three trees and large shrub that have been identified as causing additional view impairment, and add the Condition that no tree on Mr. Hudson's property should exceed the existing ridge line in the future. Amendment accepted by Commissioner Von Hagen. Director of Environmental Services Benard read revised Section 1 of the Resolution, which will be brought before the Commission at the next meeting. Motion passed 4 -- 1. Commissioner Wike dissented. Chairman Connolly noted that the appeal period will run for 15 days from July 12th. A brief recess was taken from 10:50 p.m. to 10:55 p.m. Height Variation No. 530- Associate Planner Carolynn Welker Appeal. 2072 Trudie Drive presented the staff report and distributed photographs that were used in conducting the view analysis. Ms. Wzlker added that Height Variation No. 530 was approved on March 18, 1988, based on Staff's findings that there was no signifi- cant view impairment resulting from a redesign of the proposed addition. On April 4, 1988, Staff approval was appealed by Dan Goodrich. Chairman Connolly opened the public hearing. Dan Goodrich, 1143 Via Sebastian, the appellant, presented a letter and photographs from the family that lives diagonally across from the applicant's property on Trotwood. Mr. Good requested that the addition not be shifted as far west as recommended by Staff, but in a more northwesterly direction in order to preserve views. Minutes June 28, 1988 Page Seven I/ Dermot McGettiger, 2072 Trudie Drive, concurred with Mr. Goodrich's opinions. Susan McGettiger, 2702 Trudie Drive, also requested a denial of the Height Variation. John Strauss, 716 Border Avenue, validated the McGettigers' statement that the bank appraised the property as a view lot. Carl Maruya, 2066 Trudie Drive, the applicant, was in agreement with the staff's decision, and noted how costly and impractical the addition would be as proposed by Mr. Goodrich. He added that he has arrived at the best design alternative. Chairman Connolly closed the public hearing. Commissioner Wike concluded that after an analysis of the surrounding properties, if the second story were to be shifted to the north, there would be less view impairment, however, residents on Trotwood would lose views. Commissioner Von Hagen reported that he had visited the appellant's house and had observed that the McGettiger's view falls below the 16 foot height limit and this is not a protected view. Commissioner Von Hagen also commended Associate Planner Wilker for her effort on the two Height Variation issues. Commissioner Ortolano did not feel that the proposed structure was planned so as to minimize view obstruction. She reviewed Mr. Goodrich's suggestion in terms of how to position the structure to maximize view preservation. Chairman Connolly asked Staff about possible alternatives that would be beneficial to those on both sides of the issue. Director of Environmental Services Benard pointed out that Mr. Goodrich's recommendation was to modify the design to preserve an unprotected view. Motion vas made by Commissioner Wike and seconded by Commissioner Ortolano to approve thl second story addition and that the addition be shifted forvard by approximately ten feet to the north over the garage and over a portion of the existing living area. Motion failed. Chairman Connolly, Commissioners Von Hagen and McNulty dissented. Motion vas made by Commissioner Von Hagen and seconded by Commissioner McNulty to approve Staff Recommendation No. 1 to adopt the resolution denying the appeal, as there are no grounds for the Planning Commission to grant the appeal as set forth in the Development Code. Motion passed 4 to ] with Commissioner Wike dissenting. Appeal rights were -noted.- - - —`---- "-- Miputes June 28, 1988 Page Eight QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE No questions were received from the audience. STAFF REPORT Director of Environmental Services Benard announced the the Four -Cities Planning Group will meet at 9:00 a.m. on July 9th at Hesse Park. Mr. Benard recommended using the date of the Four -Cities Group meeting to inspect the Watt property. This will be an adjourned meeting. Mr. Benard suggested July 26, 1988 for a workshop on the Watt property, and announced that the next work session for Subregion 7 - 8 will be held on Thursday, July 14, 1988 in the Community Room at City Hall. with regard to Subregion 1, Staff will be preparing a report to the City Council suggesting proceeding on a specific plan with the development team of VMS. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was duly adjourned at 11:30 p.m. to July 12, 1988, 7:30 p.m. at Hesse Park Community Building.