PC MINS 19900626MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
JUNE 26, 1990
at Hesse Community Park, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard.
PRESENT McNulty, Von Hagen, Hotchkiss, Brooks,
Katherman
7-4
The meeting was called to order at 7:36pm by ChairmanMcNulty
Also present were Director of Environmental Services Robert
Benard, Planning Administrator Curtis Williams, Senior
Planner Carolynn Petru, Associate Planner Laurie B. Jester,
and Assistant Planners Bonnie Olson and Fabi.o de Freitas.
COMMUNICATIONS
Chairman McNulty acknowledged receipt of the following
communications: A letter from the City Attorney regarding
use determination on the Windport property ; a letter from
Allan White objecting to the proposed extension on SUP 76; a
copy of a 10/17/89 letter from the Monaco Homeowners
Association regarding the same issue, and a letter from LCB
and Associates regarding CUP 155.
A. Minutes of May 22, 1990 -- Commissioner Brooks asked that
it be noted she visited 2027 Delasonde on Grading Permit
1405.
B. Minutes of June 12, 1990 -- Commissioner Katherman asked
that Grading No. 1176 - Revision "A", sections (b) and (c) in
the motion, be clarified.
Commissioner Katherman moved approval of the consent calendar
as amended, Commissioner Hotchkiss seconded, and the motion
carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 155, ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT NO. 601,
VARIANCE NO. 252, GRADING
PERMIT NO. 1442
Green Hills Memorial Park
27501 Western Ave.
Associate Planner Laurie
Jester presented the staff
report regarding the
applicant's request to
approve a 100 -year master
plan for the development of
the cemetery. Staff's
recommendation is to approve
the applications with conditions. Director Benard noted the
PLANNING COMMISON MEETING
June 26, 1990
City Attorney's letter regarding installation of grave sites
within the required setbacks, and Chairman McNulty
acknowledged receipt of a letter from R. Booth Tarki.ngton
regarding the issue.
Robert Levonian, 436 W. Colorado, Glendale, representing the
applicant, expressed thanks for the staff assistance he has
received, and noted that no other area cemeteries have
setback requirements applying to below ground burials. He
also stated he would accept the average setbacks researched
in the staff report, and agreed to relocate the family
mausoleum 10' south as requested. Mr. Levonian also reviewed
the changes he has made to accommodate staff and resident
concerns.
Rodman Small, 2110 PVDN, Lomita, representing the Vista Verde
Owners Association, presented a prepared statement in support
of the accommodations made by Green Hills management and in
opposition to the smaller setback and requested that the
Pacifica Mausoleum extension be set back 10 additional feet
to the west.
Roger Metzler, 1921 Avenida Feliciano, asked that the setback
be adjusted to no less than 24' for privacy reasons and
requested no solid walls on the common property line.
Leo Connolly, 1953 Avenida Feliciano, asked that the setback
be increased, perhaps by providing a perimeter road, and that
the existing drainage swale be gated to keep children away,
and that some sort of measures be taken to keep the cemetery
eucalyptus tree roots from destroying adjacent neighbor's
retaining walls. He agreed that setback landscaping be
installed 10 years prior to adjacent phase development.
Dick Brunner, 1906 Peninsula Verde Drive, representing
Peninsula Verde Homeowners Association, objected to the
proposed family mausoleums and "Garden Walls" on the basis of
potential view impairment, and asked that the planned
development phases be readjusted to keep the portion planned
near his property from being built for a while.
Gloria Valenti, 1948 Rolling Vista Drive, #40, Lomita,
representing the Rolling Hills TownClub Association, stated
that the reduced setback would adversely affect property
values and asked for a 40' setback.
R. Booth Tarkington, 1902 Peninsula Verde Drive, objected to
the proposed "Garden Walls" in the setbacks and the reduction
of the setback.
Mike McClung, 1896 Peninsula Verde Drive, suggested that the
cemetery make further concessions in exchange for a smaller
setback, and suggested that the "garden walls" be no higher
k,, than 2' to avoid view impairment from a seated position. He
PLANNING COMMISSW MEETING
June 26, 1990
asked to see details of proposed landscaping and he doesn't
understand the grading.
Arnold Oksenkrug, 1979 Avenida Feliciano, also objected to
the reduced setback and to above -ground structures in close
proximity to his property.
Lori Brown, 2110 PVDN #205, objected to the noise of the
burial equipment used by the cemetery.
Dan Sword, 2067 Avenida Feliciano, asked that the setbacks
not be reduced, citing loss of privacy and property value.
Mr. Sword also passed out a copy of a petition signed by 19
residents opposing the master plan. He also stated that dust
and grading was a problem, and that occasionally the Bell
Tower is played at 6 a.m. on Sunday.
Paul Deshler, 1814 Peninsula Verde Drive, noted that large
piles of loose dirt in the cemetery previously blocked drain
swale at the rear of all the residences on Ponte Verde and
had caused a large amount of damage to his neighbor's
property.
Robert Giedt, 1836 Peninsula Verde Drive, also noted the dirt
stockpiling done by the cemetery on a daily basis, and stated
his objections to any reduction in the setbacks, and
recommended greater than 40' setback.
Henry Jeffries, 2110 PVDN #101, asked about the inverse
condemnation aspects of this issue. Director Benard stated
that the City Attorney had opined that the staff position in
relation to the setbacks was appropriate and free of inverse
condemnation aspects. Mr. Jeffries stated his objections in
the setback reduction and concerns with landscaping and
grading requirements being too vague and the erosion problem.
Charles Bella, Councilman, City of Lomita, no address given,
asked the City to look into the dirt stockpiling and erosion
problem which is blocking drams and asked that the
landscaping height be specified.
David Brinn, 1935 Avenida Feliciano, expressed concern about
the potential drainage problems.
Robert Levonian, 436 W. Colorado, Glendale, stated that the
drainage problem brought out by the residents could be
addressed if the City desired. Mr. Levonian also expressed
objection to homeowners attempting to exercise control over
the cemetery property, and pointed out that his company has
made efforts to meet with the property owners and work out
compromises. He also stated that a re -grading plan
indicating a balanced distribution of stockpiled dirt had
been submitted and detailed plans of Phase I were all
submitted.
Page 3
PLANNING COMMISS"!'dN MEETING
June 26, 1990
9,
Commissioner Hotchkiss expressed concern regarding grading,
the stockpiling of dirt and related erosion and drainage
problems and asked that the CUP concern Phase I only.
Director Benard suggested that the conditions be stated to be
appropriate to Phase I only, and that any development on
Phases 2 through 5 require submission of a major revision of
the CUP. All Commissioners agreed with the suggestion.
Commissioner Brooks stated her concern regarding the smaller
proposed setbacks, the dirt stockpiling, and suggested that
better communication was needed with some of the residents.
Commissioner Katherman suggested that a water conservation
plan be included in the master plan, and that he was not
willing to approve the CUP for 100 years, but for Phase I
only. Mr. Katherman also stated that he felt that the
weekend hours of operation for construction equipment should
be revised to be more restrictive.
Commissioner Von Hagen commended the 100 -year master plan,
and stated his support for a continuation of the hearing to
examine the possibility of approving the CUP for Phase I.
Mr. Von Hagen also suggested that the conditions clearly
indicate that the applicant should have the prior written
approval of the Director of Environmental Services for any
dirt placement, and also expressed concern regarding grading
and drainage problems.
Chairman McNulty suggested continuing the item for further
study, and expressed his support for a 20 -year CUP for Phase
I only. Mr. McNulty also noted the need to give the
applicant further time to respond to the grading and drainage
concerns brought up by the speakers, and that there should be
a height limit on the proposed family mausoleum to avoid view
impairment.
Director Benard noted that the dirt stockpiling would be a
code enforcement issue only if a hazard was created or a code
violated; otherwise, it was not within the context of the
application.
Commissioner Brooks moved to continue the public hearing to
July 24, 1990, Commissioner Hotchkiss seconded the motion,
and it passed unanimously.
A 15 -minute recess was called at 9c35pm.
B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT The staff report was waived
NO. 153 on the motion of Commissioner
Unocal Station Hotchkiss, seconded by
31186 Hawthorne Blvd. Commissioner Katherman.
Page 4
PLANNING COMMIS MEETING
June 26, 1990
Commissioner Hotchkiss then moved acceptance of the staff
recommendation to allow an increase in the gasoline island
canopy clearance height from 13'3" to 1416", Commissioner Von
Hagen seconded, and the motion passed without objection.
C. VARIANCE NO. 261, Assistant Planner Olson
GRADING PERMIT NO. 1437 presented the staff report
6111 Arrowroot regarding the applicant's
request to approve grading
within an extreme slope and within the required side setback
for construction of a structure and freestanding retaining
wall, a 10' encroachment in the front setback and
400 cubic yards of grading for downslope retaining walls.
Staff's recommendation is to approve the grading for the
retaining wall within the setback and extreme slope with
conditions, and to deny the 10' encroachment and grading for
the downslope retaining walls.
Russell LaRose, 6111 Arrowroot, applicant, presented slides
of compatible homes in his area and outlined the project.
The public hearing was closed, and Commissioner Brooks noted
that she had visited the site. She also expressed concern
regarding the encroachment into the side setback.
Commissioner Katherman suggested that Condition 6 of Exhibit
"A" be revised to allow the covered entry to encroach into
the setback but to deny a carport use within the front
setback. Commissioner Von Hagen moved to adopt staff
recommendation as amended, Commissioner Katherman seconded,
and the motion passed 4-1 with Commissioner Brooks
dissenting.
D. EXTREME SLOPE NO. 23 The staff report was
29126 Oceanridge presented by Director Benard
regarding the applicant's
request to allow construction of a deck over an extreme
slope. Staff's recommendation is to approve the request with
conditions.
The public hearing was opened, but as there were no speakers
to the issue, it was closed on the motion of Commissioner
Hotchkiss, seconded by Commissioner Katherman.
Commissioner Hotchkiss moved to adopt staff's recommendation,
Commissioner Katherman seconded, and the motion passed
unanimously.
CONTINUED BUSINESS
A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Director Benard stated that
NO. 23 REVISION "PP", the applicant had requested a
GRADING PERMIT NO. 1388 continuance so that the
32541 Seacliff Drive revised plans could be
submitted, but that staff
Page 5
PLANNING COMMISON MEETING
June 26, 1990
recommended tabling the stem until adequate revised plans
were submitted, at which time the item would be rescheduled.
Commissioner Brooks moved to table the item, Commissioner
Katherman seconded the motion, and it passed without
objection.
B. USE DETERMINATION
APPEAL
End of Windport D
adjustment of
zoning district
boundary line
of the code, and that
the applicant submit a
-- Director Benard stated that
the City Attorney had
ive, determined that the action
the Commission had taken on
this item at the previous
meeting was inappropriate
pursuant to various sections
it would be more appropriate to have
rezoning application.
Tim Burrell, 4038 Exultant Drive, agreed with the City
Attorney, but asked that a shorter Resolution be adopted
carrying forward the original motion or to just table the
item altogether.
Director Benard stated that the original motion had been
advised against, but agreed with procedurally tabling the
issue.
Commissioner Brooks moved to suspend the previous action and
table the item. Commissioner Von Hagen seconded the motion.
Chairman McNulty expressed disagreement with the City
Attorney's evaluation that the Commission had acted
improperly, and stated his support for the original action.
At this point, Commissioner Von Hagen withdrew his second,
and Commissioner Brooks restated her motion to merely table
the item, but not to suspend the previous action.
Commissioner Katherman seconded the new motion, and it passed
4-1 with Chairman McNulty dissenting.
C. SPECIAL USE PERMIT The staff report was
NO. 76 -- EXTENSION presented by Planning
Tract No. 45667 Administrator Curtis Williams
PVDS/Seahill Drive regarding the applicant's
request to approve an
extension on the permit to allow the use of rock crushing
equipment until October 31, 1990. Staff's recommendation is
to deny the requested extension.
Commissioner Von Hagen noted that although he had dealt with
the previous owners of the project, the City Attorney had
determined that his participation in voting on this issue
would not constitute a conflict of interest.
Steve Kaplan, 1334 Park View, Manhattan Beach, applicant,
reviewed his company's noise and dust control efforts, and
Page 6
PLANNING COMMIS& MEETING
June 26, 1990
asked that three months that the machinery was inoperative
during the beginning of the approved operation period
be added now at the end to allow the operation to continue.
Neil Patren, 1334 Park View, Manhattan Beach, project manager
for the applicant, answered Commissioner Katherman's
inquiries regarding transportation costs of uncrushed
materials.
Thomas J. Mattis, 3 Thyme Place, spoke in support of the
permit extension.
Joe Sullivan, 32679 Seagate Drive, spoke against extension of
the permit, citing excessive noise and early operation hours.
J. W. Mohlman, 32542 Coastsite, a member of the Seahill
Townhomes Homeowners Association, asked that the uncrushed
rock be taken elsewhere for crushing, such as Long Beach.
Phil Robinson, 3205 Barkentine Road, also spoke against the
extension, asking that the rocks be crushed elsewhere, and
noting that the trucks were wrecking the roads.
Mary Jo Morris, 6407 W. Sealpoint Court, representing the
Seabluff Board of Directors, expressed concern about the dust
problem at the building site.
Bud Di Giovanni, 6502 Sandy Point Court, also noted that
there was excessive dust on the site. Commissioner Brooks
noted that she had received a letter from Mr. Di Giovanni
regarding the issue.
Mrs. W. G. Kelly, 6611 Vallon Drive, spoke against the
extension, stating that the watering did not work to keep the
dust levels down.
Jean Nerko, 6 Packet Road, also cited dust problems from the
site, and spoke against the extension.
Jack Morris, 6407 Seal Point Court, spoke against the
extension, citing dust problems.
Marjory Jensen, 32614 Coastsite Drive #G, spoke against the
extension, stating that dust particles and slivers of rock
were emitted by the equipment.
Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine Road, suggested a conflict of
interest on Commissioner Von Hagen's part, and asked that he
not vote on the issue.
Steve Kaplan, 1334 Parkview Avenue, Manhattan Beach, spoke to
some of the residents' concerns, stating that the rock could
not be crushed in Long Beach, that the water truck was always
operating, that the noise requirements were always being met,
Page 7
PLANNING COMMISON MEETING
,Tune 26, 1990
that the dust was not caused by the rock crusher, and that
the job would take 3-4 months longer if the rock crusher were
not used.
Commissioner Hotchkiss stated his dislike for changing
requirements "midstream," and suggested giving the applicant
a three-month extension with a 2 -week extension after that.
Commissioner Katherman expressed concern regarding the impact
of the entire site on the surrounding community, and stated
he would suggest denial of the extension unless the other
options were unsatisfactory.
Commissioner Von Hagen noted that the issue seems to be dust
control, and that the use of the rock crusher would shorten
the entire dust -producing grading operation. Mr. Von Hagen
stated his support of a three-month extension.
Commissioner Brooks stated she felt there was a significant
impact of the crushing operation, and suggested the operation
be moved to another area.
Chairman McNulty reminded the speakers that there were two
years of hearings in which the major concern voiced by
residents was the possible proliferation of truck traffic,
and that the rock crusher was the fastest method by which to
get the job done and with the least amount of traffic. Mr.
McNulty also noted that the originally approved project dial
not include this much grading, and that since he wants to see
it over and done with, he supports the extension.
Commissioner Hotchkiss moved to give the applicant a three-
month extension with a 2 -week extension to follow, with the
condition that the applicant work with staff to develop
mitigating measures to control the dust at the crusher and
during excavation at all times. Chairman McNulty seconded
the motion. Commissioner Katherman stated he felt the
mitigation measures should be required immediately, and then
he could support the extension. The motion passed 3-2 with
Commissioners Brooks and Katherman dissenting.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 12:47am.
Page 8