Loading...
PC MINS 19900814MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AUGUST 14, 1990 The meeting was called to order at 7:35pm by Chairman McNulty at Hesse Community Park, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. PRESENT McNulty, Von Hagen, Hotchkiss, Brooks, Katherman ABSENT None Also present were Director of Environmental Services Robert Benard, Associate Planner Laurie Jester, and Assistant Planners Bonnie Olson, Terry Silverman and Fabio de Freitas. COMMUNICATIONS Chairman McNulty acknowledged letters from the Scotts and the Jacobellys regarding Height Variation No. 668; and Commissioner Brooks noted that she had received a letter from Maryann Kipper, but that it did not concern any items on this agenda. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of July 24, 1990 B. Resolution No. 90--, Height Variation No. 661 C. GRADING NO. 1444, 44 Oceanaire Commissioner Brooks moved, seconded by Commissioner Von Hagen and carried, to approve the consent calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. HEIGHT VARIATION NO. Assistant Planner Bonnie Olson 668 -- APPEAL presented the staff report 4115 Miraleste Drive regarding the appellant's request to overturn staff denial of a second story addition to an existing single story development. Staff's recommendation is to deny the appeal. Commissioner Von Hagen noted that he had been unable to gain access to the Jacobelly property at 4109 Miraleste, and to 6537 Via Lorenzo. The public hearing was opened. Gary Chaffin, 4115 Miraleste Drive, appellant, asked the Commission to overturn the staff denial of his application, stating that he did not believe there was significant view PLANNING COMMISON MEETING August 14, 1990 impairment to any of his neighbors. Mr. Chaffin also noted that he had not received any objections to the project personally, and also expressed frustration with the Proposition "M" requirements. Joe Jacobelly, 4109 Miraleste Drive, spoke against the appeal citing view impairment, and said he was also representing his neighbor Mr. Scott. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Von Hagen stated that of all the properties listed as potentially view -impaired, he only found that the Scotts property at 6533 Via Lorenzo would suffer any significant view impairment. Commissioner Brooks stated she had been unable to gain access to that property, and that she did not find significant view impairment at the other addresses either. She also stated that she felt these families had the right to add on to their smaller homes. Commissioner Brooks then moved to adopt staff alternative #3, to direct the applicant to redesign the proposed second story to minimize view impairment, and to bring back the redesign to the Commission within 60 days. Commissioner Katherman seconded the motion. The motion passed 3-2, with Commissioner Hotchkiss and Chairman McNulty dissenting. Mr. Benard noted that the item would come back on the October 9, 1990 meeting agenda, and that it would not be re -noticed. B. HEIGHT VARIATION NO. Assistant Planner Terry 677 -- APPEAL Silverman presented the staff 1959 Jaybrook report regarding the appellant's request to overturn staff's denial of a second story addition. Staff's recommendation is to deny the appeal. Becky Sayson, 1959 Jaybrook Drive, appellant, expressed her need for the small addition to accommodate her family, and asked the Commission to uphold her appeal. Ms. Sayson also stated that she felt she was being denied a right to add to her house with a second story as other property owners in her immediate vicinity have done. Juan Guerrero, 2738 Van Buren, architect and contractor for the appellant, noted that there had been no objection to the project on the part of the neighbors, and that he had taken care to design the addition so it would interfere as little as possible with views and use the space available efficiently. Mr. Guerrero also questioned the staff claim that there was an unused but available 583 sq.ft. on the property by claiming out that it consisted of basically unusable space within the side setbacks of the garage and house. Staff clarified that the 583 sq, ft. calculation was N m M - / PLANNING COMMISON MEETING August 14, 1990 based on the difference between existing lot coverage percentages and Development Code standards for the zone. Nancy Budar, 1975 Jaybrook, spoke in support of the appeal, noting that there were many houses across the street with second story additions, and that she did not feel that the proposed addition would impair any views. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Von Hagen stated that he had visited all of the sites thought by staff to have potential view impairment and that the one neighbor at 1992 Jaybrook who could possibly suffer impairment expressed no objection to the project, and that therefore the appeal should be upheld based on the provisions of Proposition "M". Commissioner Brooks also stated she had visited all the sites and also talked to Mr. Foster at 1992 Jaybrook, and she did not perceive any significant view impairment or cumulative impact because she found it difficult to define a view through existing foliage and the area was changing so fast, and she supported the appeal based on the provisions of Proposition "M". Commissioner Hotchkiss noted that it was difficult to imagine a view that was completely blocked by heavy foliage, and that he found it difficult to apply the code requirements in cases like this. Commissioner Katherman agreed that the existing vegetation made it difficult to analyze the situation, but that he could make the findings to uphold the appeal. Chairman McNulty stated that he did not believe the project violated the spirit of Proposition "M", and that the appellant had no other options. Commissioner Von Hagen moved to adopt staff alternative #1, to uphold the appeal, thereby overturning Staff's determination. Commissioner Brooks seconded the motion, and it passed unanimously. A five-minute recess was called at 8;45pm. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 155, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 601, GRADING NO. 1442, VARIANCE NO. 262 Green Hills Memorial P 27501 S. Western development plans and the Associate Planner Laurie Jester presented the staff report regarding the applicant's request to approve a 100 -year master plan for the ark development of the cemetery. Staff's recommendation is to approve a portion of the site grading for the entire site. Page 3 PLANNING COMMISON MEETING August 14, 1990 Ms. Jester also explained the City Attorney's position on four key points on which the Commission had asked for clarification related to setbacks, regulation of cemeteries, partial CUP, and County of Los Angeles approval. The Commission made some minor changes in the Resolution, and then allowed applicant Levonlan to address the contents of the Resolution only, since the public hearing had been closed. Mr. Levonian then expressed strong opposition to Item 1 in Exhibit "A". Commissioner Brooks moved to approve the staff recommendation with the amendments in the Resolution. Commissioner Katherman seconded the motion, which passed 3-2 with Commissioner Von Hagen and Chairman McNulty dissenting. The Commission also complimented Planner Jester on her comprehensive staff report. B. GRADING NO. 1410 Assistant Planner Terry 6200 Via Canada Silverman presented the staff report regarding the applicant's request to allow construction of a single family residence on a lot with an overall average slope greater than 35%. Staff's recommendation is to approve the request subject to modifications and conditions of approval in Exhibit "A". Judi Benson, 7648 Airport Blvd., Los Angeles, applicant, asked the Commission to approve her request. Ray Mathys, 5738 Whitecliff Drive, representing the applicant, agreed with the staff concerns regarding the underfloor area, and requested that the project be approved with the provision that the modifications be made to the plans allowing the under floor area subject to the requirements of Building and Safety. Director Benard stated that if the applicant redesigned to bring the underfloor area up to building code standards, the project could be reviewed by staff as a site plan. Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine, objected to the project being built on a slope greater than 35%. Director Benard pointed out that the portion of the property to be developed is not a 35% slope. Commissioner Katherman moved approval of the staff recommendation, including the redesign of the underfloor area to bring it up to code. Commissioner Brooks seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. Page 4 PLANNING COMMISN MEETING August 14, 1990 NEW BUSINESS A. ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. 18 6400 Corsini Place within the public right-of-way. deny the request. • Planner de Freitas presented the staff report regarding the applicant's request to allow construction and improvements Staff's recommendation is to Commissioner Brooks asked if the City had plans to landscape the unimproved right-of-way in question, and Mr. de Freitas stated that the Public Works Department had indicated there may be future improvements. Ms. Brooks also stated that she was acquainted with the applicants, but that she did not perceive any conflict of interest. Commissioner Katherman pointed out that the property owner would have to carry specific liability insurance on the right-of-way encroachment. Ned Bosworth, 419 Malverne Avenue, Fullerton, landscape architect for the project, stated that encroachment had been requested due to serious safety and privacy reasons, since the City had not been maintaining the area. Mr. Bosworth pointed out that the proposed improvements did not block the view corridor. Bob Winship, no address given, spoke on behalf of the applicants. Chairman McNulty stated he was acquainted with Mr. Winship. Gary Rothwell, 6400 Corsini Place, also spoke in favor of the project. Commissioner Hotchkiss objected strongly to allowing private improvements on city right-of-ways. Commissioner Von Hagen asked Mr. Benard if this right-of-way question was similar to the situation on Via Colinita. Director Benard replied that it was not, since it was a case of mis-identification of the right-of-way in the Via Colinita case, whereas the right-of- way on PVDE has always been consistent. Chairman McNulty cited the Parsons property across the street where they were denied a fence in the right-of-way, and Mr. Von Hagen pointed out that the security problems were much more immediate in this case. Commissioner Brooks stated she saw no reason to deny the driveway, and only had concerns regarding the height of the fence. She agreed with Mr. Von Hagen that this property was subject to unique security problems requiring special attention. At the suggestion of the Commission, Mr. de Freitas agreed that it might be possible to allow an encroachment parallel Page 5 PLANNING COMMISON MEETING August 14, 1990 to the right-of-way line at about 10-121, to include the stairs. Chairman McNulty agreed that this was a unique situation, and moved continuation of the stem to the next meeting so the staff and applicant could work out a compromise with regard to the location of the fence line along PUDE, the stairway and the landscaping, with the driveway approved as is, and the pilasters along Corsini to remain below 61. Commissioner Brooks seconded the motion, which passed without objection. AUDIENCE QUESTIONS Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine, complained that she had not been able to speak to the Green Hills stem. Chairman McNulty again explained that there had been several public hearings, where she had been in attendance, and that the public hearing on that stem was now closed, and could not be re -opened without extensive re -noticing. STAFF REPORTS Director Benard reminded the California chapter conference staff will be attending. ADJOURNMENT Commissioners about the APA in September, and noted that The meeting was adjourned at 10:08pm. Page 6