Loading...
PC MINS 19910204MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING FEBRUARY 4, 1991 Z° ! The meeting was called to order at 7:40pm by Chairman Von Hagen at Ladera Linda Community Center, 32201 Forrestal. PRESENT Von Hagen, McNulty, Hotchkiss, Katherman ABSENT Brooks Also present were Director of Environmental Services Robert Benard, Planning Administrator Curtis Williams, and Senior Planner Carolynn Petru. COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Von Hagen acknowledged a letter from June Lipshuts concerning the Long Point project, as well as a communication from the City Manager of Palos Verdes Estates requesting they be kept apprised of the status of the same project. CONSENT CALENDAR A. P.C. Resolution No. 91-_ (Height Variation No. 695) B. P.C. Resolution No. 91-_ (Minor Exception Permit No. 407) Commissioner McNulty moved, seconded by Commissioner Hotchkiss and carried without objection, to approve the Consent Calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Senior Planner Carolynn Petru NO. 136, COASTAL PERMIT presented the comprehensive NO. 52, GRADING NO. 1246, staff report regarding the LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT Monaghan Company's request to NO. 38, ENVIRONMENTAL approve a 495 -room hotel, ASSESSMENT NO. 540 conference/community center, Long Point spa/fitness center, two freestanding restaurants and a nine -hole golf course. Staff's recommendation is to open the publi,c hearing on the project applications, accept public testimony and consider the merits of the project. Staff also requested direction from the Commission on various aspects of the project. Chairman Von Hagen complimented Planner Petru on the outstanding job she had done on the staff report. Commissioner Hotchkiss asked for clarification from staff regarding the traffic statistics in the EIR. The public hearing was opened. Joan Hanley, 3037 Deluna Drive, Director of Public Affairs for the Monaghan Company, introduced Robert Spence, a new partner in the SPECIAL PLANNINGWOMMISSION MEETING February 4, 1991 0 company, and presented a five-minute video with computer graphics of the proposed project. Ron Wortman, HNTB, Phoenix, Arizona, representing the Monaghan Company, outlined the unique aspects of the project, stressing that public access was a major feature, and also promising restoration planting of native shrubs to promote water conservation, which would also `include using "gray water" to fill the golf course lake. Mr. Wortman also asked for height restriction limitations on identifying features of the hotel structure, such as a rotunda or tower. He also pointed out that the City would receive tax benefits of $2 million or more per year from the operation, and said that they would also be taking traffic mitigation measures such as ride -sharing for the employees. Mr. Wortman explained that the hotel was being labeled as a "world class luxury hotel" based on the level of service and types of amenities. In response to queries from the Commissioners, he explained that the project had been divided into three parcels for more financial flexibility, and also that the Baja Swim Through Aquarium would probably be torn down. Bob Spence, International Asset Group, Los Angeles, also representing the Monaghan Company, stated that they would not seek an operator for the hotel until the project was approved, and that he felt the shorter golf course would not affect their ability to get a top-quality operator in. Chairman Von Hagen asked him to find out if there are any other world class luxury hotels with 9 - hole golf courses. Elin Vanderlip, 100 Vanderlip, outlined the history of Palos Verdes development, including the original concept to make the Peninsula more recreationally oriented, and asked the Commission to support the project. David Rubenstein, 15290 Sherman Way, Van Nuys, representing the owners of neighboring Porto Verde apartments, stated the owners were in favor of this project for its recreational benefits. Stan Wilson, 32700 Coastsite Drive, #207, representing the Palos Verdes Bay Club, spoke in support of the project because it would give the Peninsula an exclusive destination reputation. Eric Allan, 2324 Via Anacapa, PVE, President of the Palos Verdes Chamber of Commerce, endorsed the project, stating it would bring many positive benefits to local businessmen and residents, and that the bed tax would be a valuable asset. Susan McNeill, 6636 Channelview Court, stated she was in favor of the project because Marineland was currently an unsightly nuisance that attracted vandals. She also stated that the City needs the revenue from the bed tax, and she did not feel the helicopters would create a noise problem. SPECIAL PLANNINAMMISSION MEETING February 4, 1991 Nicholas Lam, 6606 Channelview Court, president of the Seabluff Homeowners Association, stated he personally endorsed the project since he felt the developer was demonstrating sensitivity to the local residents' needs. Ron Stankey, 6940 Starstone Drive, spoke in support of the project because he felt it would give the underserviced Peninsula more accessible amenities. Mr. Stankey also said he felt that the fact an operator had not been selected for the project was not a problem as long as the positive aspects promised by the developer were part of the conditions of approval, but he also admitted he was disappointed that the golf course would only be 9 holes. Ken McNeill, 6636 Channelview Court, spoke in favor of the project, stating the property as it stood now was subject to vandalism. Mr. McNeill also pointed out that much of the projected traffic would probably be mitigated by the fact that the hotel guests, especially the convention ones, would be arriving in vans or buses, and would use hotel vans for local trips. Cisco Frances David Ruth, 40 Cinnamon Lane, also expressed support for the project, stating that the City needs the revenue and that traffic had never been a problem with Marineland, even in its heyday. Sandra Stager, 32703 Via Palacio, spoke in favor of the project, noting that local clubs and groups were forced to leave the Peninsula to find large enough facilities for their meetings, and that a resort of this caliber would be beneficial to all residents and create fobs for young people. Erica Stuart, 80 Narcxssa, spoke in favor of the project, and said she believed the Monaghan Company would honor their promises to the community. Jack Downhill, 20 Vanderlip, stated he felt this was one of the most significant projects ever, socially, economically and culturally, for the area, and said it would put RPV on the map. Jim Summerlin, 32502 Seahill Drive, also expressed approval of the project, stating it would be a great asset to the neighborhood, especially the cliff paths, the amenities and the financial gain to the City. RECESS AND RECONVENE A ten-minute break was called at 9:30pm. John Vanderlip, 99 Vanderlip, spoke in favor of the project, agreeing with all the previous speakers, and stating that this was in the best tradition of Palos Verdes development and would create a positive community spirit. Steve Kuykendall, 6544 Locklenna Lane, expressed support of the project, and asked the Commission to address the added fire F J SPECIAL PLANNING.- MMISSION MEETING February 4, 1991 protection needs that would be created. Mr. Kuykenall also stated he thought that since the coastline would be developed in one way or another, that this project with its large amounts of open space and public access would be a good solution. Bob Lusian, 32735 Seagate Drive #G, agreed with all the previous speakers, and asked that the traffic statistics be more carefully compared with those of Marineland. Mr. Lusian also noted the need for local dining facilities, and felt the project would give much needed employment to local youth and the surrounding communities. Sunshine, 6 Limetree Lane, spoke in support of the project as it stands if specifically conditioned. She also said she felt that the four years the project has been in the works has not been wasted as it is a much better project now. Sunshine also pointed out that the trails plan was incomplete with regards to the entrance area, and asked that this be addressed more completely though the Trails Network Plan. Vic Bennett, 30515 Rue De La Pierre, expressed support of the project, citing fiscal benefits to City. Jacki McGuire, 4935 Rolling Meadows Rd., RHE, RHE Councilwoman, expressed concerns about the potential cumulative traffic impact through RHE with the hotel and other projects currently in the works. Ms. McGuire said she had noted that the EIR called for a widening of the Hawthorne/PVDN intersection, and she stated that she had no intention personally of ever allowing that change to be made. Director Benard noted that the project would either be approved or not by RPV, and that if the project impacted another area, the developer would have to seek mitigation from that city, which would then be able to make their own decisions on only the level of mitigation. Chairman Von Hagen noted that Hawthorne had originally been designed to handle a per acre density of 22-25 units along the bluffs, and since there is only a density of 1 unit per acre currently, the boulevard was only handling 10% of its designed capability. Commissioner McNulty pointed out that RHE has some traffic problems of their own they might want to mitigate first, such as a widening of PVDN. June Lipshuts, 3756 Hightide, objected to the project on grounds of potential traffic pollution and because of the need for water conservation. Muriel Titaler, 3 Ginger Root Lane, spoke in favor of the project if the developer fulfilled their water reclamation promises and used native plants. Gar Goodson, 1709 Via Zurita, representing Save Our Coastline 2000, presented a written statement and spoke against the project, stating that in his opinion, it was contrary to the General Plan, and would not conserve water. Mr. Goodson also asked that the Baja Reef building be preserved and used. Page 4 SPECIAL PLANNIN*MMISSION MEETING February 4, 1991 Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine Rd., objected to the project, stating she felt it would not be geologically sound. Director Benard noted that extensive geological studies are always required. Chris Manning, 14 Crest Rd. W., RH, representing the Peninsula Preservation Society, agreed that the amenities offered were attractive to the majority of Peninsula residents, but that he felt the project was too big, more of a convention center than a luxury hotel, and should be sized down. Richard Bara, 1 Peppertree, asked for clarification on the trails location, potential coastal erosion, the three -parcel aspect of the project, and the cost of additional protection services. Director Benard stated that the coastal setback line is being addressed. J. J. McLaren, 3923 PVDS, asked if an economic report on the developer was required, and Director Benard replied that it was not. Ilse Oeticker, 6504 Via Baron, objected to the proposed heliport and outdoor dining facilities because of potential noise. Director Benard presented to the Commission revised traffic figures. Chairman Von Hagen stated he felt these statistics were the weak link in the analysis and asked Mr. Benard to re -clarify them for the next meeting. Commissioner Hotchkiss moved to close the public hearing on the EIR. Commissioner McNulty seconded, and the motion passed without objection. Staff noted that the first public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit and related planning applications would be scheduled for February 26, 1991. This hearing will receive full public notice. Commissioner Katherman made the following comments and suggestions to staff: * That there is a need to make the legal findings as to the consistency of the plans with the Coastal Specific Plan; * That maintenance of the facilities and trails be conditioned in the CUP; * That public access be limited at the tidepools and wildlife areas, and that cliff safety be examined; * To look into how the lot split would affect facilities maintenance; * To obtain a guarantee on the * To examine water and energy especially the lake; * To look into downsizing the * To suggest that the hotel be transportation; * To examine low-cost housing open space; conservation of the project, number of rooms, perhaps to 350; marketed to encourage mass for some employees; Page 5 SPECIAL PLANNIN*OMMISSION MEETING February 4, 1991 * That perhaps the long ridge line of the hotel as proposed was too stark and bulky; * Whether or not the facilities would be private or public pay - by -the -day. Commissioner McNulty expressed the following concerns and comments to staff: * That the designation of the hotel type must be pinned down; * An objection to the lot split without some sort of consistent plan for all three; * A request to verify the traffic statistics in the EIR; * That the project size is OK if the operator is capable. That a top operator will mostly likely want to have some say in the design of the hotel, and that there should be some time limit imposed on finding the operator, since this is a mayor concern. Commissioner Hotchkiss make the following comments: * That the increased need for protection services (ie., fire, police) should be carefully examined; * That he doesn't like the idea of low-income housing in the project, and that it would not mitigate the traffic problems; * That he is uncomfortable with the actual fulfillment of all of the developer's promises, especially with regards to identification of the hotel operator. Director Benard noted that the purpose of the low-income housing is to fulfill state requirements. Chairman Von Hagen stated his concerns as follows: * That the traffic statistics be verified in the EIR, and to see if van transportation is taken into account; * To make sure that a hotel could be labeled as "world class" with only a 9 -hole golf course; * To look into the public housing element; * To make sure that fire and police protection is adequate for the hotel and all amenities; * That he like's the architecture and aesthetics of the project. Chairman Von Hagen also reminded the audience that no permits are ever issued in RPV without extensive geological studies. QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE There were no questions from the audience. STAFF REPORTS Director Benard stated that a meeting schedule will be distributed, and also that there is a Planning Commissioners Institute Meeting on February 20-22. SPECIAL PLANNIN*OMMISSION MEETING February 4, 1991 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:57pm. Page 7