Loading...
PC MINS 19910108r MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING JANUARY 8, 1991 The meeting was called to order at 6:42pm by Chairman Von Hagen at Hesse Community Park, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. PRESENT Von Hagen, McNulty (arrived 6:44pm), Brooks, Hotchkiss, Katherman (arrived 6:50pm) ABSENT None Also present were Director of Environmental Services Robert Benard, Senior Planner Carolynn Petru, Associate Planners Joel Rojas, Terry Silverman and John Leung, and Assistant Planner Mike Patterson. Director Benard and Commissioner McNulty congratulated Mr. Von Hagen on his new chairmanship, and Chairman Von Hagen thanked Commissioner McNulty for his year of fine leadership as the chairman. Commissioner McNulty moved, seconded by Commissioner Brooks and carried, to place the election of the vice chairman on the agenda, to be voted on when all five members were present. COMMUNICATIONS There were no communications acknowledged. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of 11/13/90 B. P. C. Resolution No. 91-01, Grading No. 1483 C. SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 5768 Commissioner McNulty moved, seconded by Commissioner Hotchkiss and carried without objection, to approve the Consent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. HEIGHT VARIATION NO. Associate Planner Leung 692 -- APPEAL presented the staff report 28737 King Arthur Ct. regarding the appellant's request to overturn staff approval of a second story addition, thereby denying the proposed project. Staff's recommendation is to deny the appeal, thereby upholding staff approval. PLANNING COMMIS MEETING January 8, 1991 Russell Clark, 28743 King Arthur Ct., appellant, showed a drawing and detailed model of his house and the house in question, to demonstrate his point that the addition would create a massive wall that would interfere with his enjoyment of his backyard. He also claimed that the average square footage of the surrounding homes was incorrect in the staff report. Jeff Jackson, 28737 King Arthur Ct., applicant, stated that the square footage of the surrounding homes was taken directly from the tax rolls. Mr. Jackson also stated he had been trying to work with the appellant during the design process to mitigate any negative impact his second story would have on Mr. Clark, and that as a result, he had lowered the wall 61. Chairman Von Hagen noted that he lived in the vicinity, but outside of the 300 foot radius and he had been advised by the Director that he had no conflict of interest based upon proximity to the subject property. Bill Cameron, 24254 Hawthorne Blvd, Torrance, project architect, also explained mitigating measures that had been taken to reduce the massiveness of the wall. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Katherman stated that he agreed with the appellant that the wall was massive, and suggested using landscaping to mitigate the problem. Director Benard explained that the heights and other technical aspects of the project were within code requirements, and that, in Staff's opinion, the project was not in conflict with the neighborhood compatibility provisions of the Code. Commissioner Brooks agreed with Mr. Katherman and pointed out that the existing tree if it were allowed to remain, could help hide the wall. Commissioner McNulty moved to adopt the staff recommendation to deny the appeal, amending the recommendation to include a stipulation that it be based on the revised plans. Commissioner Brooks seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. B. VARIANCE NO. 280, Assistant Planner Mike Patterson MEP NO. 380 --APPEAL presented the staff report 91 Marguerite Drive regarding the applicant's request to allow construction of a swimming pool and 6' high fence/wall combination in the front yard setback. Staff's recommendation is to deny the request. The public hearing was opened, and then closed as there were no requests to speak. Page 2 PLANNING COMMIS'& MEETING January 8, 1991 Commissioner McNulty moved staff recommendation to deny the variance, and Commissioner Hotchkiss seconded, but the motion was not voted upon. Commissioner Brooks noted that the applicant might have thought the meeting started at 7:30pm, and suggested holding the item. Commissioner Katherman moved to table the item to be heard after Item "C", Commissioner Brooks seconded, and the motion passed 3-2, with Commissioners Hotchkiss and McNulty dissenting. C. VARIANCE NO. 279 Associate Planner Joel Rojas Miraleste Fire Stn. presented the staff report regarding the applicant's request to allow placement of a satellite dish antenna in the intersection visibility triangle, to allow an existing 6'10" wall to remain, and to allow placement of a 30' hose tower. Staff's recommendation is to approve the request with conditions. The public hearing was opened. James Corbett, 83 Miraleste Plaza, Assistant Fire Chief, noted that the 30' tower had been at the original station before its demolition, and that the tower had to be 30 feet high to dry 50-100' hoses and tarps. Chief Corbett also stated that if the tower was located in the rear, it would be more visible, whereas in the current proposed location, it is near a concealing tree, and that the tower was absolutely necessary to the operation of the station. He also stated that the dish antenna would be used for communications and training. Chairman Von Hagen expressed concern that the dish might come under a commercial use application, but Commissioner McNulty stated the fire station was not a profit-making commercial organization, and Director Benard agreed that the standard dish requirements were in effect. The public hearing was closed, and Commissioner McNulty moved staff recommendation, seconded by Commissioner Hotchkiss. Commissioners Katherman and Brooks agreed that the dish needed some concealing landscaping, and Mr. McNulty amended his motion to include a condition in Exhibit "A" to stipulate that Staff look at appropriate methods to screen the dish and hose tower with planting, within the guidelines of the Public Works Department. The motion passed unanimously. (The following Item was tabled until this point to allow the applicant a chance to speak) B. VARIANCE NO. 280 The public hearing was re - MEP NO. 380 --APPEAL opened. Marshall Lewis, 721 Latimer Road, Santa Monica, project architect, stated his client wanted a slightly wider pool, and that the 6' fence was required around the pool. Page 3 PLANNING COMMIS_ MEETING January 8, 1991 The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Katherman stated he felt there was no basis to make the findings on the pool, but that other properties did have block walls at the 12' setback lines, and he suggested an alternate motion to deny the variance for the pool width, but to approve a 5' wail -- 3.5' block and 1.5' wrought iron. Planner Patterson noted that there was a current approval for a pool and 5' fence outside the setback. Commissioner McNulty declared that the applicant was creating a self-imposed hardship, and saw no good reason to make the findings. The motion on the floor was restated-- to deny the variance, made by Commissioner McNulty and seconded by Commissioner Hotchkiss, and the motion passed 3-2 with Commissioners Katherman and Brooks dissenting. At this point, Commissioner McNulty made a motion to appoint Commissioner Hotchkiss vice chairman. Commissioner Brooks seconded, and the motion passed without objection. RECESS AND RECONVENE A ten-minute break was called at 8:10pm. D. FORRESTAL DRAFT Associate Planner Joel Rojas SUPPLEMENTAL EIR, presented the staff report GRADING NO. 1390, regarding the applicant's EA NO. 596 request to certify the DSEIR for remedial grading activity involving 1.05 million cubic yards. Staff's recommendation is to open the public hearing and receive public comment on the Draft Supplemental EIR associated with the grading. The public hearing was opened. Bob Trapp, 3501 Jamboree Road, Newport Beach, representing applicant J.M. Peters Company, stated that they would comply with the City's request to dedicate the quarry bowl area to the City, and would do all clearing and recompaction on site, with no soil export from the site. Mr. Trapp estimated it would take 6-7 months to complete the work. Scott Kerwin, Senior Geologist, Warren Taber Company, stated that he had worked on the project since 1983, stating in response to a query by Commissioner Katherman that there was only one landslide impacted by the grading. Director Benard pointed out that the landslide in question was not one of the major identified ones, but probably an ancient one reactivated by the quarrying, and that the remedial grading should enhance the area's stability. Mark Sikand, 15230 Burbank Blvd, Van Nuys, project engineer, stated in response to a question from Commissioner Hotchkiss that there would be three groundwater monitoring wells, and that the locations had been determined by Director of Public Page 4 PLANNING COMMIS_ MEETING January 8, 1991 Works Wentz. Commissioner Hotchkiss asked that his request for additional monitoring wells near the bowl site be noted. Al Esser, 71 Crest Rd. E., Rolling Hills, presented a detailed written statement involving the storm drain systems in the area, and asked that the system be examined to ensure proper capacity. Jess Morton, 787 W. 4th St., San Pedro, representing the PVP Audubon Society, expressed several concerns about the effect of the grading on endangered plant and animal species in the area, especially the coastal sage scrub, noting that some of these species were isolated populations only found in this area. Mr. Morton also described the California gnat catcher, and stated he would find out if reduced grading would mitigate negative effects on this bird. Ellen Hocking, 4014 Admirable Drive, representing the Seaview HOA, objected to the grading, citing potential nose and dust pollution. Angelika Brinkmann-Busi, 1354 Stonewood Ct., San Pedro, representing the Southern California Native Plant Society, stated that the EIR did not sufficiently address the threat to or amount of species of plants endangered by the project. She also claimed that it would not be sufficient to just re- seed, but that a more detailed survey and restoration plan needed to be established to preserve the integrity of the species in question. Edward Stevens, 32418 Conqueror Drive, objected to the grading, citing potential noise and dust pollution, and asked about code enforcement for construction hours. Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine, stated that some of the geological statements in the draft EIR were incorrect. Commissioner Katherman suggested extending the 45 -day EIR circulation period to allow for more written comments. Commissioner McNulty moved to close the public hearing and to extend the period for written comments an additional 15 days (for a total of 60 days) to February 1, 1991. Commissioner Brooks seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. RECESS AND RECONVENE A 15 -minute break was called at 9:30pm. Commissioner McNulty left at this time. Page 5 PLANNING COMMIS MEETING January 8, 1991 CONTINUED BUSINESS A. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP Senior Planner Carolynn Petru NO. 19847 REV. "A", presented the staff report GRADING NO. 1180, REV. detailing the applicant's "A", EA NO. 560, request for a revision of the REV. "A" Tentative Map and Grading Permit 4105 PVDE to modify the building pad configuration and install a buttress fill to stabilize the property. Staff's recommendation is for the Commission to direct the staff to prepare a focused EIR for the proposed buttress fill. Director Benard noted that the applicant had requested the Commission to consider an EIR or Negative Declaration, since they prefer a buttress fill, but that it could all be avoided if they used caissons. Gary Wynn, 1852 Lomita Blvd., Lomita, project manager, claimed the ancient landslide that created the need for the buttress fill had been discovered before approval of the original map. Mr. Wynn stated he did not feel an EIR was necessary, just a Negative Declaration. Commissioner Katherman stated that he would not be in favor of such a massive buttress fill, with or without EIR, and suggested the applicant come up with another design that did not require moving so much dirt. Director Benard advised Mr. Wynn that had the landslide information been available to the staff two years ago, Staff would not have made the positive recommendation they previously made on the tentative map. Mr. Wynn stated that the caissons were not at all feasible economically, and would kill the project. Chairman Von Hagen said that he felt some kind of limited EIR was necessary, considering the project was abutting a major street, and would be generating a considerable amount of grading and impact on the area. Planner Petru also noted that the EIR would look at alternatives that might not yet have been considered. Dave Brieholz, 1852 Lomita Blvd., Lomita, project engineer, stated he would accept the focused EIR, but didn't feel the amount of grading was excessive. Commissioner Brooks moved to adopt staff recommendation, limiting the EIR to a focus on plants, hydrology and geology. Commissioner Katherman seconded the motion, asking that the EIR also emphasize alternative design solutions to the problem. The motion passed 4-0. NEW BUSINESS Page 6 PLANNING COMMISA MEETING January 8, 1991 _ A. MINOR EXCEPTION PERMIT Associate Planner Terry NO. 399 --APPEAL Silverman presented the staff 37 Marguerite report regarding the appellant's request to overturn staff's denial of the MEP and to allow a loo reduction of the side yard setback for construction of a 1.85' encroachment into the required setback. Staff's recommendation is to deny the appeal. Lee Clow, 37 Marguerite, appellant, presented a drawing and scale model of the small balcony piece to be added, stating it was a question of aesthetics. Mr. Clow also stated he had talked to his neighbors, who had no objections to the balcony. Director Benard explained the staff's concern that these were among the largest houses in the City, and that there would be plenty of room for the balcony if the building did not fill so much of the lot. Commissioner Brooks stated that although she did not like to approve additions to already large houses, she would move to adopt staff alternative #1, to uphold the appeal, thereby approving the project. Commissioner Katherman seconded the motion, commenting that he felt the odd shape of the lot gave the findings for the minor exception permit, and that the articulation of the house was well-designed, so that it did not present a solid wall against the setback. Chairman Von Hagen expressed his support for the motion because he felt it was an appropriate minor exception case, and would substantially improve the product. Mr. Von Hagen also added that this was not a message that this kind of request would always be honored. The motion passed 4-0. AUDIENCE QUESTIONS There were no questions from the audience. STAFF REPORTS Director Benard noted that the 1/28/91 meeting is cancelled, and the next meeting will be the regular time of 7:30pm on 1/22/91. Mr. Benard also stated that there would be a meeting on Long Point on 2/4/91 at Ladera Linda at 7:30pm, then a regular meeting at 6:30pm on 2/12/91 to include Kajima and Forrestal. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:46pm. Page 7