Loading...
PC MINS 19910514Y MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING / MAY 14, 1991 The meeting was called to order at 7:36pm by Chairman Von Hagen at Hesse Community Park, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. PRESENT Von Hagen, Hotchkiss, Brooks ABSENT McNulty, Katherman Also present were Director of Environmental Services Robert Benard, Senior Planner Carolynn Petru, Associate Planner Terry Silverman, and Assistant Planner Fabio de Freitas. Item "E" on the agenda, Conditional Use Permit No. 31, Revision "C", was continued without objection at the request of the applicant. COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Von Hagen acknowledged a communication from Luella Wike regarding the Trail Amendment, and correspondence regarding the Contract Cities Conference. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of April 23, 1991. B. SIGN PERMIT NO. 543. Commissioner Hotchkiss moved, seconded by Commissioner Brooks and carried without objection, to approve the consent calendar. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Associate Planner Terry NO. 132 -- EXTENSION Silverman presented the staff Miraleste Elementary report regarding the school district's request to allow extension of the CUP to allow continued use of the Miraleste Elementary School facilities by various organizations. The staff recommendation is to approve the request with conditions. The public hearing was opened. Carleen Vose, PVPUSD, 3801 Via La Selva, PVE, representing the applicant, stated that they agreed with all the conditions of approval. PLANNING COMMISSIOMWEETING May 14, 1991 W 0 The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Brooks moved to adopt the staff recommendation amending Condition #2 to require pick-up and loading only/tow-away signage in the loading area to prevent parking and to cross -stripe the area. Commissioner Hotchkiss seconded the motion, which passed unanimously. B. HEIGHT VARIATION NO. Assistant Planner Fabio de 697 -- APPEAL Freitas presented the staff 28105 Golden Meadow report regarding the appellant's request to overturn the Director's decision to approve a second story addition at the address. staff's recommendation is to deny the appeal, thereby approving the Height Variation request. In response to an inquiry from Chairman Von Hagen, Mr. de Freitas confirmed that this appeal applied to the second story addition only, not the first floor addition. The public hearing was opened. Richard van der Weyde, 28111 Golden Meadow, appellant, asked the Commission to overturn the approval of the Height Variation. Debora van der Weijde, 28111 Golden Meadow, co -appellant, objected to the proposed addition, stating it was too massive for the lot, was against the intent of Proposition "M", was not compatible with the neighborhood, presented view impairment to other homes and passing traffic, and did not comply with the CC&R requirement to get architectural committee approval first. Chairman Von Hagen pointed out that conditions of CC&R's were not enforced by the Commission., Mr. F. A. Van Slyde, 27917 Golden Meadow, stated they agreed with Ms. van der Weijde, and objected to the addition. Ann Stone, 28125 Ambergate Dr., spoke in favor of the appeal, citing neighborhood incompatibility and cumulative impact. William Cleary, 6935 Brookford, also spoke against the Height Variation, citing view impairment from the street and cumulative impact. I Thomas L. Iles, 6921 Brookford, spoke in favor of the appeal for the same reasons. Sheila Hoff, 28205 Ambergate, stated she had not been notified of the Height Variation, but felt that significant view impairment and cumulative impact would affect her property across the canyon. Charles Hoff, 28205 Ambergate, also spoke against the addition, stating that there were no other two-story residences, and that it would affect their view. Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSIOEETING May 14, 1991 W 0 Diane Iles, 6921 Brookford, spoke in favor of the appeal for the same reasons. Grace Chang, 29031 Warnick Rd., spoke in favor of the appeal, stating that the structure would be too massive and was not compatible with the neighborhood. Y. Y. Chang, 29031 Warnick Rd., spoke against the addition for the same reasons. Betty and Gary Chang, 1476 Via Coronel, PVE, also spoke for the appeal. Rosalind H. Lee, 28285 Trailriders Dr., spoke in support of the appeal, stating the structure was massive and bulky. Carol Ozark, 1468 Via Coronel, PVE, supported the appeal, objecting to the fact that the first story addition had not' been outlined to give a total idea of the project. Ming -Ho Liu, 6918 Maycroft, stated that the homeowner had a right to develop his property. Ronald Buss, 1472 Via Coronel, PVE, spoke against the Height Variation, citing view impairment, neighborhood incompatibility, and area support for the appeal. Gary Rinzler, 28105 Golden Meadow Drive, applicant, presented a detailed model of the proposed addition and photos of other two-story homes in the tract with similar orientations. Dr. Rinzler also pointed out he had done extensive neighborhood consultation, and outlined the compromises he had made as a result. He stated that the house was too small for his growing family, and that compatibility, not uniformity, was his intention. Commissioner Brooks objected to the overall bulk and mass of the total project including the first story addition, even though she acknowledged that the first story addition was not within the scope of this appeal. Sung Rinzler, 28105 Golden Meadow, co -applicant, stated that the bulk of the addition was not great. Daniel Gehman, 15375 Barranca Pkwy., Irvine, architect for the project, stated,he felt the design was sensitive to the neighbors" concerns and the City Codes, and that it was compatible with the area. Robert Reamer, 23505 Crenshaw, Torrance, attorney for the applicant, stated that the applicant had compromised to accommodate the neighbors and address their concerns; that the project fully complied with the Code, and that he felt the opponents just didn't want'to see any changes at all made Page 3 PLANNING COMMISSIOIEETING May 14, 1991 0 in their neighborhood. Mr. Reamer also pointed out that the only residents identified as having potential view impairment had signed waivers and did not formally object. Chairman Von Hagen noted that he has had a professional relationship with Mr. Reamer, but has not discussed this case with him and has no interest in this case. Janey Poorman, 6921 Larkvale, spoke against the appeal, stating that she felt there was a contingency in the neighborhood that resented any kind of change. Ms. Poorman also acknowledged the concessions the applicant had made as a result of the neighborhood consultation, and said she felt the addition would enhance property values. Rosemarie Frey, 300 Tejon Place, PVE, also stated her support for the project, stating that as a realtor, she felt the improvement would benefit the community and increase property values. James Sondecker, 28151 Highridge, also spoke against the appeal, stating he felt the applicant had been accommodating and reasonable. Debora van der Weijde, co -appellant, reiterated her earlier concerns about the project, and claimed that there were only two other two-story homes in the subdivision. Richard van der Weyde, co -appellant, clarified some points brought up by the applicant regarding the tract boundaries and foliage. Robert Reamer presented a letter in favor of the project from a nearby neighbor. The public hearing was closed. Commissioner Hotchkiss stated that although he did not like the Code requirements for second story additions, he felt that the architect and applicant had done a good job, and that there was not a strong enough argument to support the appeal. Commissioner Hotchkiss then moved to adopt the staff recommendation to deny the appeal, and Chairman Von Hagen seconded the motion. Chairman Von Hagen stated that he could not support the appeal because the project application completely met all City Code requirements, and that he felt the staff analysis had effectively addressed the appellants' issues. Mr. Von Hagen also said he saw no cumulative impact or significant view impairment, although he agreed with Commissioner Brooks that perhaps this section of the Code needed to be rewritten to deal with today's home market. Page 4 PLANNING COMMISSIUMMEETING May 14, 1991 W- 0 Commissioner Brooks reiterated her concerns with regards to the subjective issues of neighborhood compatibility, mass and bulk, and asked why Brookford was not a protected view area. Director Benard explained that the many committees that had originally determined such view areas to be designated in General Plan had not included that street in their final recommendations. The motion on the floor was voted upon, and passed 2-1, with Commissioner Brooks dissenting. C. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT Associate Planner Terry TRAILS Silverman presented the staff report regarding the request to amend the City's General Plan to incorporate the Trail Development Policy for' implementation of the Conceptual Trails Plan. Staff's recommendation is to recommend amendment of the General Plan to the City Council. Commissioner Brooks asked if the plan had been looked at by the City Attorney with respect to accident and crime liability on easements. Director Benard stated that the attorney had reviewed the document and those comments were incorporated. Mr. Benard also said that the City assumes the liability, of which the Council is aware. Barbara Dye, 7035 Hartcrest Drive, representing the RPV Trails Committee, pointed out that the City had never had a liability claim on a trail, or evidence of any crime problems, which she stated were usually associated with unsupervised parking. Ms. Dye stated that this was a protective plan, not a plan to improve trails, and would only require trails on undeveloped property if appropriate. Commissioner Brooks inquired about Category 4 trails in open space hazard areas, and Ms. Dye said that if implemented, these trails would be developed to meet Forest Service safety standards. Chairman Von Hagen noted that the California vehicle code allows horses on city streets other than highways if no alternative trails are available. Luella Wike, 29172 Oceanridge, asked that the public hearing be continued to a date when the full Commission could make an advisory recommendation. Mrs. Wike also declared that this plan had been developed by a special interest group that might not represent the population, and that the amendment should not be added to the General Plan without a formal census of horses. She also suggested implementing an ordinance establishing a fee schedule for horse licensing and some sort of trail usage fee. Mrs. Wike alleged that trails jeopardized the security of residents and should not be required in new developments, and that trail inspections and cleanup should be done regularly. She also did not feel Page 5 PLANNING COMMISSIONWEETING May 14, 1991 0 there should be an attempt to link RPV trails to trails in Rolling Hills Estates. In response to Chairman Von Hagen's inquiry on the suggested equestrian census, Mrs. Wike explained that since the plan was based on equestrian use, the burden of cost and liability should be examined in relation to the numbers that would be involved. Mr. Von Hagen pointed out that not only were there pedestrian trails to take into consideration, but that if connective trails were not made between the two cities, horses would use the streets, which could be very dangerous. Mrs. Wike suggested that an ordinance could be adopted to prevent that, and Chairman Von Hagen asked Geoff Hall to look into the vehicle codes regarding this issue, since the state vehicle code would supercede any local ordinances. However, he agreed that the license fee would help pay for a code enforcement officer, but that liability should not be an issue. Mrs. Wike stated that her main objection to developing a conceptual plan giving allowances for trail development in the future was that it was aggressive, and encroaches into non -equestrian areas with connecting trails. Ron Beck, 43 Santa Barbara, president of the Island View Homeowners Association, spoke against the policy, stating it was too vague and instead suggested isolating types of trails and developing a criteria for each. Chairman Von Hagen pointed out that that specific process took place when a specific trail was proposed, and that this was a general policy designed to establish a mechanism with which the City could protect its interests in a development or area where trails might be required in the future. Tom Coull, 49 Santa Catalina, agreed there should be a plan, but stated he felt this one was not adequate. Mr. Coull also expressed concern about liability, and objected to the use of his development as a cut -through for equestrians, stating that he had photographs of members of the Horsemen's Association walking their horses over the Island View grass and defecating. Lawrence Burke, 3437 Palo Vista, expressed his concern that a trail was slated to cut across his property in the future, and suggested that the City give residents more chances to review this proposal and maps of the proposed trails. Ms. Dye stated that the reason maps are not in general circulation was due to a concern that people would use it as a guide to trails which, at this time, has not been implemented. She also noted that people who use trails which have not yet been implemented are trespassing on private property and that the City does not currently have a guide to existing trails for public use. Luella Wike, 29172 Oceanridge, read a letter from John and Pat Aaron objecting to the proposed amendment, and requesting Umm PLANNING COMMISSICfWEETING May 14, 1991 examination of costs in relation to the minority or horseowners in the community. Commissioner Brooks moved to continue the public hearing, but the motion died for lack of a second. Chairman Von Hagen moved to close the public hearing, Commissioner Hotchkiss seconded, and the motion passed 2-1, with Commissioner Brooks objecting. Chairman Von Hagen explained that he had voted to close the public hearing because he felt that there had been numerous hearings before the Trails Committee, and that this was strictly an advisory situation for the Planning Commission. Mr. Von Hagen also said he believed the City Council was the appropriate body to deal with these trails policies and that he would like clear direction from them on these issues before the upcoming hearings on the last major tracts along the blufflands. Commissioner Brooks agreed with the suggestion that there should be an equestrian census done to determine what percentage of the community would be benefiting from these suggested amenities. Mrs. Brooks also suggested including strong criteria regarding safety, cost, health, neighborhood compatibility, and potential crime problems, and stated she felt this was a document in favor of a special interest group, and that it needed to be reworked with better input from the community as a whole. Commissioner Hotchkiss stated he felt It was appropriate to plan for the future, but that determining the use of each trail at this time was not feasible because there was no way to know if a particular area would be developed or not. Mr. Hotchkiss also declared that it would not be possible to make a cost estimate for the plan, since standards, geology and other factors were not now available to make those determinations. I Commissioner Hotchkiss moved to incorporate the recommendations of staff and send the draft Trail and Bikeway Development Policy to the City Council. Chairman Von Hagen seconded the motion, which passed 2-1, with Commissioner Brooks dissenting. D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Assistant Planner Fabio de NO. 23 -- REV. "EES Freitas presented the staff 3355 Palo Vista Drive. report regarding the applicant's request to revise the original CUP and grading approvals to allow for additional grading for a level rear yard area. Staff's recommendation is to deny the request. Kirby Larson, 3355 Palo Vista, applicant, stated he disagreed with some of the staff figures on lot coverage, and felt Page 7 PLANNING COMMISSI-'EETING May 14, 1991 1-0 there was neighborhood precedent for this application. Mr. de Freitas stated that there were some discrepancies with the applicant's figures on coverage, and Director Benard noted that altering natural topography through grading added that area to lot coverage figures, which the applicant may not have taken into consideration. Mr. Benard stated that placing such a large flat area high on a slope was also an issue. The applicant .indicated he would be willing to move the pad down, and the Commission suggested he work with staff to come to an agreement on the issue. Commissioner Hotchkiss moved to continue the item to the May 28 meeting, and the motion passed without objection. E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Chairman Von Hagen acknowledged NO. 31, REV. "C" the request from Shapell Shapell Industries Industries to continue the Tract No. 33206 item, but noted that a representative of the FAA was present and desired to give testimony on the item. The staff report was waived, and the public hearing was opened. Arman Dryer, FAA, 8665 Gibbs Drive, S. 100, San Diego, stated that a letter sent to the Planning Department by one of his employees, a Mr. Wynan, reflected Mr. Wynan's personal views, and dial not represent the FAA. Mr. Dryer also pointed out that there was an existing water runoff problem, and asked to be notified if there was to be any additional grading done. The public hearing was continued to May 28 without objection. QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE There were no questions from the audience. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 12:10 a.m. Page 8