Loading...
PC MINS 19901211MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DECEMBER 11, 1990 The meeting was called to order at 6;40 p.m. 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, Planning Administrator Curtis Williams, Senior Planner Carolynn Petru, Associate Planner Terry Silverman, and Assistant Planner Fabio de Freitas. COMMUNICATIONS There were no communications to be distributed. Chairman McNulty announced that the evening's meeting was being video recorded for replay on Cable Channel 3 on December 22, 1990 at 1;00 p.m. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of November 27, 1990 -- Commissioner Hotchkiss offered a correction on page 3 to indicate that Commissioner Katherman seconded the motion on Height Variation No. 674 - Appeal, not Commissioner Hotchkiss. B. P.C. Resolution No. 90-_, Height Variation No. 674. C. P.C. Resolution No. 90- , Variance No. 273 and Grading No. 1491 -- Commissioner Katherman indicated that the discussion in the minutes regarding this item should include the Commissioners' statements that the City's policy should be to require Variance requests for height to follow the same procedures for early neighbor consultation as Height Variations. D. GRADING NO. 1320 Commission Brooks moved, seconded by Commissioner Katherman, to approve the Consent Calendar as amended, and the motion was passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. VARIANCE NO. 279 Director Robert Benard presented the 83 Miraleste Plaza staff report regarding the placement of a satellite dish at the Miraleste Fire Station. Mr. Benard indicated that since the variance for the satellite dish was submitted, the application has been revised to include a wall in excess of the allowable height for the Fire PLANNING COMMIS W MEETING December 11, 1990 Station. Staff's recommendation is to continue the item until January 8, 1991 to allow proper notice of the amended application. Commissioner Brooks requested that the Miraleste Parks District be notified of the hearing. Commissioner Von Hagen moved to continue the item as per staff's recommendation, Commissioner Brooks seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. B. VARIANCE NO. 274 Associate Planner Terry Silverman 2123 Summerland presented the staff report regarding the applicant's request to allow after -the -fact construction of a garage extension 9 feet into the front setback, resulting from an inaccurate representation of the location of the applicant's property line. Staff's recommendation is to approve the variance, with conditions. Commissioner Hotchkiss questioned whose plans were inaccurate and whether the City has maps to better identify property lines. Director Benard stated that the Public Works Department maintains maps depicting property lines, and that staff is now attempting to clarify plans where the property line and the curb line are not both shown. The public hearing was opened, but there was no one to speak. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Brooks noted that the Commission denied a similar case last week. Commissioner Katherman indicated that in this case there are unusual circumstances in that there are numerous nonconforming 15 -foot setbacks in the area. Commissioner Von Hagen moved to approve the project as per staff's recommendation, Commissioner Katherman seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. C. HEIGHT VARIATION NO. Assistant Planner Fabio de Freitas 642 - APPEAL presented the staff report regarding 6921 Larkvale the applicant's appeal of staff's denial of a second story addition. Staff feels that there would be significant view impairment caused by the addition, and therefore recommends that the appeal be denied. The public hearing was opened. Commissioner Von Hagen asked if the staff analysis was conducted excluding foliage which might block views. Mr. de Freitas stated that the Code does require such analysis, and that regardless of foliage, staff felt that the structure would significantly impair the neighbor's view from inside his structure. John Poorman, 6921 Larkvale, applicant/appellant, discussed Page 2 PLANNING COMMIS N MEETING December 11, 199 a discrepancies in the square footage of the addition, as indicated in the staff report, and disputed staff's estimate of the degree of arc of the view. Mr. Poorman stated that removal of vegetation through view restoration would result in the impairment caused by the structure being insignificant, and urged the Commission to uphold his appeal. Commissioner Katherman asked whether Mr. Poorman had evaluated alternative designs to minimize view impairment, and Mr. Poorman stated that he had pulled the plans back so as not to extend over the entire garage in order to respect the setback. Stanley Taylor, 28231 Golden Meadow, supported the project, indicating that he could not see the structure from his house. William Taylor, 6924 Larkvale, also expressed support for the project, feeling that it was not incompatible with the neighborhood, and stated that the Poorman's had been delayed by the passage of Proposition M. Charles Hoff, 28205 Ambergate, distributed a letter opposing the appeal, and stated that the project was not compatible with the area, and would result in the loss of views from neighboring structures. Sheila Hoff, 28205 Ambergate, supported staff recommendation to deny the appeal in order to protect views. Ann Stone, 28125 Ambergate, agreed with staff's recommendation, and indicated that there were no 2 -story structures on Larkvale. Bill Cleary, 6935 Brookford, supported denial of the appeal, and felt that the structure would not be compatible and would double existing house sizes. Marion Koines, 28133 Ambergate, also supported denial of the appeal. Richard H.C. Lee, 28285 Trailriders, objected to the project because it would eliminate his primary views from the living room, dining room, and bedroom, and stated that his view includes the ocean and San Nicholas Island, and therefore urged denial of the appeal. Rosalind Lee, 28285 Trailriders, also opposed the project as it would significantly block their view. Albert Lee, 3923 Minerva, West L.A., also indicated that the view sitting in his parents' living or dining rooms would be blocked and that the portion of the view to be blocked would be in the center of the overall view. The public hearing was closed. Page 3 PLANNING COMMISI1 MEETING December 11, 1990 Commissioner Brooks stated that she felt that the structure would not be incompatible with the neighborhood and that there would not be a cumulative impact, but that there would be a direct view impact and she concurs with staff's recommendation for denial. Commissioner Hotchkiss also felt there was not a compatibility problem, but that the impairment in the center of the view would be significant. Commissioner Katherman agreed that the impairment of the central portion of the view would be significant, and would support denial of the appeal. Commissioner Von Hagen felt that this was clearly a view restoration case, and that the foliage significantly blocks the view, not the structure. Chairman McNulty stated that the proposed structure would significantly block the view, especially because of its location in the center of the view. The public hearing was re -opened. Mr. Poorman indicated that, with view restoration, the Lee's would have a 105 degree view restored, and could see Catalina Island to the south and the Malibu coastline to the north. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Brooks moved staff recommendation to deny the appeal, seconded by Commissioner Katherman, and the motion passed by a vote of 4-1, with Commissioner Von Hagen dissenting. D. VARIANCE NO. 275 29702 Grandpoint structure in excess of 30 feet an extreme slope. The public hearing was opened. Presentation of the staff report was waived. The proposed project would include a deck which would create a in height, and a covered deck over Robert Lerma, 29702 Grandpoint, the applicant, indicated his agreement with the conditions of approval. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Katherman moved to approve staff's recommendation for approval, seconded by Commissioner Von Hagen, and the motion passed unanimously. The Commission recessed at 8:10 p.m. and reconvened at 8:25 p.m. Page 4 PLANNING COMMISA� MEETING December 11, 1990 E. LONG POINT EIR Chairman McNulty stated that the 6610 Palos Verdes purpose of the hearing was to Drive South accept comments directed to the adequacy of the Draft EIR, not the merits of the project itself, and that the hearing was scheduled to occur within the time period for review of the document. He further indicated that subsequent hearings will be held to consider the Conditional Use Permit and related applications. Senior Planner Carolynn Petru presented the staff report regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Monaghan Company's proposed 495 room destination resort hotel with ancillary uses and a nine hole golf course. Ms. Petru stated that the document has been available since October 29, 1990 and that the 45 day review period will end on December 13, 1990. Commissioner Von Hagen noted that the only remaining significant impact after mitigation was the stationary and mobile source emissions. Ms. Petru explained that due to the strict AQMD standards, even minor additions exceed the limitations imposed by the agency. Gary Peterson, ETR consultant, further explained that the AQMD significance relates only to the mobile sources, and that if the project was taken out of the context of the basin requirements, it would have no significant impact. The public hearing was opened. Joan Hanley, 3037 Deluna Drive, representing the Monaghan Company, stated the Monaghan Company felt the ETR was an excellent report that addressed the issues well, and she also noted that the traffic information was based on a largely abandoned and demolished facility and did not take into account the amount of traffic Marineland brought in when it was open. She also stated that they were more than willing to fulfill traffic mitigation measures, but asked that the same standards be imposed on the other projects before the City. Barbara Dye, 1035 Hartcrest Drive, representing the Trails Committee, asked that the EIR clarify the public parking area and address the coastal shore access issue in order to protect the haul -out and tidepool areas from public access. Ms. Dye also asked that the project schedule include the trail design, and claimed that the helipad would have a negative impact on the trails. She also stated that the text regarding the trails plan and bikeways was not accurate, and should be corrected. Lorna Burrell, #1 Park Place, stated she was in favor of the project as it would bring much needed revenue to the City. PLANNING COMMISAW MEETING December 11, 1990 044 John Arand, 5731 Mistridge Drive, representing his Homeowners Association, asked that the EIR clarify the municipal golf course and employee housing issues, and suggested that the project be approved as a total project, not a piecemeal basis. Angelika Brinkmann-Buri, 1354 Stonewood Court, San Pedro, representing the California Native Plant Society, stated that the project area was part of an ecological preserve, and that the EIR did not address the potential impact of the project on rare and endangered vegetation present on the coastal bluffs, and asked that mitigation measures in this area be included. Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine, stated she personally felt the EIR was inaccurate, and that she was opposed to the helipad. June Li.pshutz, 3756 Hightide, also objected to the helipad and potential traffic congestion. Kay Bara, 1 Peppertree, outlined some additional areas of traffic impact she felt should be looked at in the EIR, and asked that the school redistricting and impacts on neighboring cities be addressed as well. Elise Gorman, 3675 Vigilance Dr., also expressed concern regarding traffic through San Pedro and PVDS. Ilse Oetiker, 6504 Via Baron, expressed concern regarding the helipad, citing noise impact. Gar Goodson, 2939 Via Zorita, PVE, representing Save Our Coastline 2000, stated he felt the EIR was inadequate with respect to low- income housing, endangered species, pedestrian and bike trails, and that it was not in line with the General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan. Cathy Manning, 29438 Quailwood, stated she felt the traffic impact created by the project would be greater than Marineland due to the 24 -hour -a -day nature of the hotel traffic. Ms. Manning also noted that conference facilities affected the amount of traffic, and stated it was important to specify the hotel operator and type of ancillary facilities planned. Al Esser, 71 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills, asked that the EIR comparatively address traffic impact using Marineland numbers. Dr. Chris Manning, 14 Crest Road, Rolling Bills, also stated he felt the traffic impact was not adequately examined with regards to conference center usage and intersection impacts. Richard Bara, #1 Peppertree, questioned the amount of revenue the hotel would generate, and stated he felt the increased street maintenance costs might be underestimated. Page 6 PLANNING COMMISI* MEETING December 11, 1990 Commissioner Von Hagen stated he felt that the EIR should address traffic impacts on 25th Street/PVDS, and Gaffey, not Highridge, and that the traffic impact be compared with that from Marineland in its operative stage. Mr. Von Hagen also asked that the golf course be addressed in further detail, and that more information be presented regarding mitigation of employee housing needs. Commissioner Hotchkiss expressed concern about a "luxury" hotel with a commercial theme, and stated he felt It would be impossible to clearly define the usage until the operator was named. Commissioner Katherman also expressed concern about the type of hotel it would be, which he felt would impact traffic, and that the school redistricting should be taken into account. Mr. Katherman also felt the traffic impact should be compared with that of Marineland, and that a mitigation monitoring program be established. He also asked that the employee housing, golf course ownership, native plant replacement and neighboring cities traffic mitigation be addressed in the EIR. Commissioner Brooks agreed that the traffic and school district impacts be examined more closely, and that the usage of the facilities be more clearly outlined using other hotels as examples. Ms. Brooks asked if the City would be involved In the golf course, and what the decibel readings would be from the helipad. She also suggested that the existing buildings within the coastal setbacks be examined for geologic stability, and that a mitigation monitoring program be set up. Chairman McNulty thanked all the residents who commented in writing or in person. Mr. McNulty also stated he agreed with the comments of all the other Commissioners and the public regarding additional issues the EIR should address. Chairman McNulty then specifically requested that the Draft EIR present a specific account of whether or not, and how, the City has the right to go forward with this project, and to examine the consistency with the General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan, in order to confirm that the City has the right under current municipal codes and ordinances to allow this project to exist. The public hearing was continued to Monday, February 4, 1991, at 7:30pm at the Ladera Linda Community Center. It was noted that the public hearing will be re -noticed. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. GRADING NO. 1483 - Associate Planner Terry Silverman REVISED; 27995 presented the staff report related Palos Verdes Dr. South to the applicant's request to allow remedial grading and construction of retaining walls in the front portion of the property and grading the rear yard extreme slope for retaining walls. Staff's recommendation is to deny the request for remedial grading and PLANNING COMMIS* MEETING December 11, 1990 walls in the front, and to approve the retaining wall in the rear yard slope in conformance with the staff alternative. Ms. Silverman added that condition #6 should include additional language regarding the trail easement, and that new conditions are suggested for approving the haul route for export material and mitigation for control of dust during construction. Commissioner Brooks commented that the City should offer assistance to the applicant in the design of a Category 5 trail. Terry Taylor, 27995 Palos Verdes Drive East, the applicant, stated that the slope in the rear was not a natural slope, and that they would like to move the dirt to the front of the lot, that the alternative garage location was only acceptable if everyone wanted it there, and that he would like to relocate the barn onto the extreme slope area where it would be out of the setback. Steven Taylor, 433 Via La Selva, Redondo Beach, indicated that they are requesting the turnaround design from the original application, as well as the relocated barn. Mr. Taylor felt that the rear slope was created by a bulldozer many years ago, that the proposed project would keep all dirt onsite, and that it wouldn't affect any neighbors. Chairman McNulty questioned whether the slope was natural and whether it was uncompacted. Steven Taylor showed a video of aerial views of the site. R. M. Patterson, 27965 Palos Verdes Drive East, the applicant's neighbor, opposes relocation of the garage to the front of the lot because of potential view impacts. Sunshine, 6 Limetree, expressed thanks to the Taylors and the Commission for their cooperation in implementing the trail for this site. Commissioner Hotchkiss stated that the garage shouldn't be placed on the lower level of the lot and questioned how the current turn- around inadequacies were created. Commissioner Katherman also felt that the garage should be in the rear, and that the front area needed recontouring, but that he would support a modification of staff's turnaround design. Commissioner Von Hagen commented that he could support the applicant's original plan. Commissioner Brooks also expressed support for the original plan due to the impact of placing the garage at the lower level on Mr. Patterson's view and the pressing need for more turnaround space. Chairman McNulty indicated that he also felt the garage should not PLANNING COMMIS* MEETING December 11, 1990 a be in front and concurred with the need for turnaround space, but expressed concern that the hardship was self-imposed in the construction of such a large home. Commissioner Brooks moved approval of the applicant's original application, including the placement of 850 cubic yards of excavated dirt on the front of the lot, and that staff should prepare a resolution with appropriate conditions for the next meeting. Commissioner Hotchkiss seconded, and the motion passed 4-1, with Commissioner Katherman dissenting. NEW BUSINESS A. GRADING NO. 1180 This item was continued until the 4105 Palos Verdes January 8, 1991 meeting due to lack Drive East of time. QUESTIONS FROM AUDIENCE There were no questions from the audience. STAFF REPORTS Director Benard indicated that the City Council would be holding a budget hearing at 8:00 a.m. on Saturday morning, December 15th. Mr. Benard also updated the Commission regarding scheduled meetings in January and February, including beginning regularly scheduled meetings on January 8th and 22nd at 6:30 p.m. at Hesse Park, and holding special Commission meetings at 7:30 p.m. on Mondays, January 14th, January 28th, and February 4th, all at Ladera Linda School. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:35 p.m. Page 9