Loading...
PC MINS 19910326f MINUTES' PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING��'9 MARCH 26, 1991 The meeting was called to order at 6:40pm by Chairman Von Hagen at Hesse Community Park, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. PRESENT Von Hagen, Brooks, Katherman, Hotchkiss (arrived 6:45pm) ABSENT McNulty 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 Chairman Von Hagen acknowledged a flyer from the California Contract Cities Association regarding the upcoming meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of February 26, 1991 B. P. C. Resolution No. 91-_, Height Variation No. 663 -- Appeal C. Site Plan Review No. 5843 Commissioners Katherman and Brooks stated they had reviewed the tapes of the February 26 meeting and felt qualified to vote to approve them, and Director Benard stated he would verify this action with the City Attorney. Under this qualification, on the motion of Commissioner Katherman, with a second from Commissioner Brooks, the Consent Calendar was approved without objection. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. VARIANCE NO. 260, Director Benard stated that COASTAL PERMIT NO. 97 this item has been continued 6450/6470 Seacove to the April 23 meeting on the request of the applicant, and that all interested parties would be notified of the rescheduling. B. VARIANCE NO. 285, Reading of the staff report was GRADING NO. 1517 waived regarding the applicant's 19 Amber Sky request to allow minor PLANNING COMMISSION ETING March 26, 1991 construction into extreme slope areas for a new single family residence. Staff's recommendation is to approve the request with conditions, and staff noted the applicant had agreed with all the conditions. The public hearing was opened, and then closed since there were no speakers. Commissioner Brooks moved to adopt the staff recommendation, Commissioner Katherman seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. C. VARIANCE NO. 290, Associate Planner Terry ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. Silverman presented the staff 19, GRADING NO.1522 report regarding the applicant's request to allow construction of a 5' high retaining wall within the front setback in an extreme slope and to allow construction of two pilasters with lights within the public right-of-way. Staff's recommendation is to continue the item to the April 9 meeting due to trails issues on the site that need to be addressed by the Trails Committee. Commissioner Hotchkiss moved to adopt the staff recommendation to continue the item; Commissioner Katherman seconded, and the motion passed without objection. D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Associate Planner Terry NO. 132 --REVISION "A", Silverman presented the staff ENVIRONMENTAL report regarding the applicant's ASSESSMENT NO. 619 request to allow use of a 6245 Via Canada portion of the existing facilities at Miraleste Elementary School by the Discovery World Infant Center and Preschool with a proposed enrollment of 120 students and 20 employees. Staff's recommendation is to adopt the Negative Declaration for the Environmental Assessment and approve the revision to the CUP with conditions. The public hearing was opened. Sheryl Austin, 1741 W. O'Farrell, San Pedro, applicant, stated she was in agreement with all the conditions of approval except #4 regarding fencing in the grassy area near the softball diamond. Mrs. Austin said she had a letter from the school district stating that the fenced -in area as proposed would not interfere with any activities at the diamond, although she stated her willingness to compromise on the size of the area. The applicant also objected to Condition #8 regarding the amount of parking spaces, and pointed out that although the Mommy & Me class was listed as having 25 spaces in the staff report, she had checked with the school district, who informed her that the class was only entitled to 18 spaces, and Mrs. Austin asked that the difference of 7 spaces be allocated to her, for a total of 24 spaces. She also addressed the transient nature of her Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION WTING March 26, 1991 traffic, and stated she would ask parents to use Picardie as an alternate route to cut down on congestion. Commissioners Katherman and Brooks asked if there would be public access to the play area on the weekends via a gate, and Mrs. Austin stated that her insurance company had advised her that she would be liable for the play area as the lessee, but that the fence would only be 4' high. Mike Giltner, 29077 PVDE, spoke in favor of the application, stating it was an excellent operation and would be a great asset to the local parents and would result in improvements to the site's current condition of disrepair. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Katherman noted the school would be a wonderful addition to the area, and that he would like to see both the softball and play areas accommodated. Katherman also suggested consolidation of Conditions 7, 8, and 10 into a comprehensive plan such as a demand management plan to examine traffic patterns, tandem spaces for employees, and hours of operation for the various uses on the site, and to conditionally relate this application to the master CUP. Commissioner Katherman moved to adopt the staff recommendation, with the consolidation of Conditions 7, 8, and 10 to refer to the master CUP and the transportation demand study, and amending Condition #4 to direct staff to review the layout of the ballfield to accommodate both the baseball/soccer area and proposed fenced -in play yard to allow the applicant to fence in as much of the grass area as feasible. Chairman Von Hagen questioned the Commission's ability to require the school district to do the transportation study, and suggested that the request be made instead at the time of the master CUP extension hearing. Commissioner Katherman clarified that the applicant was getting the 17 parking spaces as recommended by the staff, and at the time of the master CUP extension hearing, could take the opportunity to prove the existence of more available spaces. Commissioner Katherman amended his motion to remove the requirement for a transportation management study, instead directing staff to bring back the issue at the time of the master CUP extension, and to add that these conditions shall be consolidated with the master CUP if the master is extended, and that if the master is not extended, this application shall continue as specified in Condition #3. Commissioner Brooks asked that the fence condition be amended further to require a gate for public access, and Mr. Katherman agreed. Mrs. Brooks then seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. RECESS AND RECONVENE A 20 -minute break was called at 7:30pm. Page 3 PLANNING COMMISSION TING March 26, 1991 E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 136, GRADING NO. 1246, COASTAL PERMIT NO. 52, LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NO. 38, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 540 Monaghan Company 6610 PVDS �J Senior Planner Carolynn Petru presented the staff report regarding the applicant's request to approve a 495 -room hotel project with ancillary uses and a nine -hole golf course. Staff's recommendation is to review the final EIR and provide staff with comments on the draft conditions of approval. In response to a query from Commissioner Katherman regarding the heliport, staff explained that it may not be possible to ban the existing facility, but that the current use could be regulated to be limited to emergencies only. Commissioner Hotchkiss pointed out that it was not yet definitive that there would indeed be a problem with the helipad, and suggested instead that a condition be created to allow the Commission to review the use at a later date if necessary. Mr. Hotchkiss also inquired why the applicant had not addressed the "marine theme" requirement for a development on the site, and Director Benard noted the council -adopted guidelines had not been specific as to how the marine theme should be incorporated, but it could include anything from a motif to an interpretive center. Planner Petru also noted that a re -calculation of the traffic generated by the hotel had been provided to the Commission reflecting the staff - suggested room cap of 373. The public hearing was re -opened specifically to take testimony on the proposed conditions of approval only. Commissioners Brooks and Katherman announced that they had reviewed all the material regarding the previous meetings on the application, and felt qualified to vote on the matter. Robert Spence, International Asset Group, 2897 Woodsorrel Drive, Chino, representing the Monaghan Company, read from a prepared statement now on file, explaining that they were willing to take any measures necessary to mitigate the traffic problems that had instigated the suggested cut in the size of the project. Mr. Spence also complained that he had not had enough time to review the staff report; that he had not been able to meet with the staff to resolve the problems more agreeably; and that the current staff recommendation was neither acceptable nor economically feasible. He pointed out that the EIR traffic study had included a "worst case" scenario, and that his company had isolated this project's impact on the intersections and found that their suggested mitigation measures would improve the current level of service. Mr. Spence urged the Commission to seek a "creative" solution to these issues and stated he felt a continuance would be beneficial. He also expressed regret Page 4 PLANNING COMMISSION TING March 26, 1991 that Commissioner McNulty was not present. Commissioner Katherman brought up the idea of a mix of room types including long-term casitas. Director Benard commented that the Council had already offered the mixed-use concept to the applicant who rejected it and revised the design, so that to again revive the would involve rezoning, and be outside the scope of the current application. Mr. Spence stated that as long as the room mix added up to the desired 495, it would be economically feasible for the applicant. He also stated they would be examining the incorporation of the marine theme. Chairman Von Hagen expressed fear of approving a facility that would not be economically viable, and would fail in some area, and strongly suggested a continuance to take a look at bringing to the community a design concept minimizing these fears. He also suggested that since the applicant also desired a continuance, there should be a meeting between staff and the applicant to address their concerns, and that staff bring back the recommendations to the full Commission with the benefit of the applicant's point of view. Director Benard stated he did not feel it was appropriate to negotiate a solution with the applicant outside of the public forum, and that staff had based their recommendations on the boilerplate pro forma and other information provided by the applicant, as well as anticipated impacts flowing from this specific project. He also pointed out that whether or not the hotel would be economically viable was not based on the number of rooms the staff recommended, but rather on some economic agreement between the property owner and the hotel operator. Jack Downhill, 20 Vanderlip Drive, stated he found the staff recommendations too restrictive, and the EIR traffic statistics questionable, and that he supported the project because it would be an asset to the Peninsula. Juan Forteza, 24050 Madison, Torrance, also spoke in favor of the project. Keith Orr, 9 Golden Spur Lane, spoke in favor of the project as proposed. Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine, expressed objections to the project, based on excessive water consumption. RECESS AND RECONVENE A 15 -minute break was called at 10:15pm. Ilse Oetiker, 6504 Via Baron, spoke in support of the staff recommendation to eliminate the helipad and commented on the apparent low rates projected for such a good hotel. Page 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RETING March 26, 1991 Commissioner Brooks moved to continue the public hearing to April 23, to be re -noticed for the purposes of commenting on the proposed Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Hotchkiss questioned why a continuation was necessary, pointing out that the Commission could vote the project up or down now, as per the application or as recommended by staff. Commissioner Katherman stated he would like to see the project heard before the full Commission, and noted that the applicant had asked for more time to respond to the staff's recommendations. Chairman Von Hagen suggested that the re -noticed hearing deal with the Draft Resolution as well as the Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Brooks amended her motion to include commenting on the Draft Resolution as well as the Conditions of Approval. Commissioner Katherman seconded the amended motion, and it passed without objection. AUDIENCE QUESTIONS There were no audience questions. STAFF REPORTS Commissioners Brooks, Von Hagen and Katherman expressed interest in attending the California Contract Cities Association annual seminar. Mr. Von Hagen and Mr. Katherman stated they would only need to have their registration covered. Commissioner Katherman reported on a session he attended at the Planning Commissioners Institute in which an interesting design in a Marina del Rey high-density project had been discussed, and suggested the concept be applied to RPD projects. He asked staff to contact the speaker and arrange a presentation to the Commission. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:10pm.