PC MINS 19911008MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
OCTOBER 8, 1991
The meeting was called to_order at 6:35pm by Chairman Von
Hagen at Hesse Community Park, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard.
PRESENT Von Hagen, McNulty, Hotchkiss, Brooks (arrived
6:45pm), Katherman (arrived 6:45pm)
ABSENT None
Also present were Director of Environmental Services Robert
Benard, Senior Planner Carolynn Petru, Associate Planner Joel
Rojas, Assistant Planners Fabio de Freitas and Donna Jerex,
and Contract Planner Nancy Hutar.
COMMUNICATIONS
Staff acknowledged receipt of letters from Dorothy Bunten and
the Stewarts regarding the Municipal Code Revisions.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Minutes of September 10, 1991
B. P.C. Resolution No. 91-49, CUP No. 9 --Rev "C"
C. P.C. Resolution No. 91-50, Grading No. 1552
D. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 23 -- REV "W"
Commissioner Hotchkiss moved, seconded by Chairman Von Hagen
and passed without objection, to approve the Consent
Calendar. Commissioner Hotchkiss noted that he was
abstaining from voting on Consent Calendar Item "B".
PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NOS. 50666 AND 50667,
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NOS.
23004 AND 290701
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NOS. 162 & 163, GRADING
PERMIT NO. 1541, AND
COASTAL PERMIT NO. 103
Subregion 7 & 8/PVDS
Director Benard noted that the
applicant had requested the
continuance in order to,
complete geotechnical studies.
The public hearing was
opened.
Mike Mohler, 25200 La Paz, Laguna Hills, representing the
applicant, requested the continuance so.that the City could
review the geology before the open public forum took place.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
October 8, 1991
Bill Ailor, 1052 Via Palestra, PVE, representing the PVP Land
Conservancy, presented a letter supporting retention and
development of Shoreline Park as part of the, project.
Director Benard pointed out that the speaker's remarks were
more germane to Subregion 8, which is not a part of this
application, and is under different ownership.
Commissioner McNulty moved to continue the public hearing to
November 12 as per the staff recommendation. commissioner
Hotchkiss seconded, and the motion passed without objection.
B. MUNICIPAL CODE REVISIONS commissioner Hotchkiss stated
(CHAPTER 15.20, that he had been advised"by
MORATORIUM ON LAND USE the City Attorney not to
PERMITS) participate in this item since
he resided within the
moratorium borders. Project Planner Nancy Hutar presented
the staff report. Staff recommendation is to open the public
hearing and for the commission to provide comment and
direction to Staff regarding the proposed revisions.
Director Benard, commenting on the inaccurate publicity on
this item circulated by a local organization, clarified the
following points for the audience:
1) That these revisions did not in any way modify the
boundaries of the moratorium;
2) That these revisions did not in any way propose to lift
the moratorium or in any way suggest a procedure to lift the
moratorium that is not now already in place, but rather that
these revisions would make.current City policy even more
legally binding;
3) That one proposal made by the Subcommittee would allow
large or small property owners the ability to take advantage
of their property for open space development without
eliminating any of the City's geological requirements.
Mr. Benard then noted that because the City Attorney had
submitted only minor corrections, the staff felt that based
on the testimony and direction from the Commission, this item
could either be continued or directed forward to the City
Council for a final decision.
The public hearing was declared open.
Lorna Burrell, 1 Park Place, referred to her letter in
support of the proposed revisions, stating that this would
possibly allow geologically safe land adversely impacted by
the moratorium designation to be used in a positive way.
Jim Gilman, 4335 Exultant, also spoke in support of the
revisions, stating that the moratorium designation had
burdened him with extra costs and loss of property value, and
Page 2
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
October 8, 1991
that these changes could help area residents financially.
Mr. Gilman also objected to the inaccuracy of the flyers that
had been distributed throughout the area.
Sharon Hegetschweiler, 16 Clovetree, also spoke in support of
the staff recommendation, and said that as a real estate
broker, she had seen deals fall through because lenders did
not like to deal with moratorium properties. The speaker
then asked the Commission to recommend that the 100% rebuild
aspect remain in the revisions, and also suggested that the
1/2 acre minimum remain, but that lot coverage be 20%, not
10%.
Mike Mohler, 25200 La Paz, Laguna Hills, also expressed
concern with the misinformation contained in the "panic
pieces" that had been distributed, and stated his support for
the revisions, which he declared would allow some financial
relief for landowners burdened by property liens to pursue
open space recreational uses, given certain geotechnical
affirmations.
Al Edgerton, 50 Oceanside Drive, representing the Del Cerro
Homeowners Association, agreed that the proposed revisions
could give residents in the moratorium area the ability to
make the best of their property.
Jeanne Smolley, 56 Limetree, asked questions about the
existing code, and made some wording suggestions on the
proposed revisions.
D.E. Clarke, 10 Peppertree, objected to the language in the
informational flyer, and the fact that the open space was
currently a fire hazard and trash dump, and stated that she
would support the revisions if it would mean useful
development of that open space and financial relief for
moratorium residents.
Bill Griffin, 5 Ginger Root, referred to his letter and asked
for clarification on the boundaries of the Klondike slide.
Gale Lovrich, 104 Spindrift, representing the Portuguese Bend
Club, applauded the Subcommittee and staff recommendations,
noting that it would be less difficult to get fire insurance
and financing if the proposed revisions were adopted. Ms.
Lovrich also expressed support for the idea of developing
current open space if it would improve and -stabilize the
area.
John McCarthy, 105 Spindrift, president of the Portuguese
Bend Club Homeowners Association and Chairman of the Klondike
Canyon Hazard Abatement District, expressed his support of
the proposed revisions. Mr. McCarthy also stated that he
would support redefining the Klondike moratorium boundaries
since they had been haphazardly demarcated in the beginning,
Page 3
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
October 8, 1991
and suggested that land not suffering from geological
problems be taken out of the moratorium to provide relief for
homeowners.
John Beringer, 3412 Seaglen, president of the RPV Council of
Homeowners Association, spoke against the staff
recommendation, stating that he felt the changes were
substantial.
Laurie Jester, 21 Pomegranate, suggested that visual and
aesthetic criteria be applied to remedial grading, and that
the scope of the language regarding ancillary structures be
made more specific. She also pointed out conflicts in the
language allowing permanent structures in open space hazard
districts.
Maureen Griffin, 5 Ginger Root Lane, submitted a letter with
questions regarding liability protection, and spoke in favor
of the 100% rebuild aspect of the revisions.
Carlton Miller, 32724 Coastsite Drive, expressed concern that
the "economic use" aspect could create further problems.
RECESS AND RECONVENE Due to excessive noise and
comment, Chairman Von Hagen
called a recess at 7:50pm, indicated that this item would be
held until later in the agenda, and stated that the meeting
would proceed with the next item.
C. VARIANCE NO. 306 Assistant Planner Fabio de
1 Avenida de Magnolia Freitas presented the staff
report regarding the
applicant's request to allow a fountain and pilasters to
exceed the maximum allowable height within the required front
yard setback and to allow an entry arch to encroach into said
setback. Staff's recommendation is to approve the two
existing pilasters and fountain only. The public hearing was
opened.
Greg Abramowitz, 1360 Capitol Drive, San Pedro, architect
representing the applicant, explained that the arch
encroached into the front setback because of the unusual
concavity of the front lot line, and asked the Commission to
allow it.
Steve Heboian, 1 Avenida de Magnolia, applicant, noted that
his neighbors were using similar concepts in their front
yards, and that he was not aware of any objections to the
idea.
The public hearing was closed. Planner de Freitas noted that
the reason the item was before the Commission was due to code
enforcement response to a neighbor objecting to the project.
Commissioner McNulty moved to adopt the staff recommendation.
Page 4
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
October 8, 1991
Commissioner Katherman stated he felt the arch was
attractively done, and that he could make the necessary
findings due to the unusual front lot line and ability to
provide an attractive entryway. The motion on the floor died
for lack of a second. Commissioner Ratherman moved to
approve the application as submitted, commissioner Brooks
seconded, and the motion passed 4-1, with Commissioner
McNulty dissenting.
D. VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP NO. 49067,
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
NO. 600, CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT NO. 154, COASTAL
PERMIT NO. 95, GRADING
NO. 1420, VARIANCE NO.
297, MINOR EXCEPTION
PERMIT NO. 414
PVDS/Schooner Dr.
Commissioner McNulty moved to
recommendation, commissioner
passed without objection.
Assistant Planner de Freitas
confirmed the applicant's
request to continue this item
to the November 12, 1991
meeting.
adopt the continuance
Brooks seconded, and the motion
E. GRADING NO. 1390, Associate Planner Joel Rojas
SEIR NO. 16 FOR presented the staff report
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP regarding the applicant's
NO. 37885 request to allow 810,000
Forrestal/Pirate Drs. cu.yds. of grading for
development of the previously
approved residential tract and 1,050,000 cu.yds. of remedial
grading to correct specific geologic hazards on the site.
Staff's recommendation is to certify the Final SEIR and
approve the project with conditions. Mr. Rojas also noted
receipt of a copy of a letter to the Homeowners Association
from the developer in compliance with the Commission's
direction. Chairman Von Hagen complimented Mr. Rojas on his
outstanding job on the conditions of approval.
In response to a query from Commissioner Katherman, Mr. Rojas
explained that there would be no grading in the Klondike
Canyon area, and that there would indeed be some encroachment
onto the soccer fields during grading operations to elevate
Forrestal, but that the conditions required the operations
take place outside of the soccer season.
Commissioner Brooks asked about the viability of Alternative
"All which would involve no cutting or filling of the quarry
bowl, and Mr. Rojas pointed out that the geotechnical studies
had indicated that it was -necessary to fill the quarry bowl
as proposed to adequately stabilize the area geologically
according to the City Geologist. Director Benard stated that
the slope as it currently exists would continue to
Page 5
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
October 8, 1991
destabilize on its own if not dealt with. The public
hearing was opened.
Paul Lukes, J.M. Peters Co., applicant, stated that the
quarry slope would be graded to 1-1/2:1 in accordance with
the City's geologist.
Mark Sikand, Sikand Engineering, 15230 Burbank Blvd.,
Burbank, in response to Commissioner Katherman's questions,
added that the slope would be benched as well, and that a 1:1
slope would not be safe according to the geologists.
Angelika Brinkmann-Buri, 1354 Stonewood Ct., San Pedro,
representing the California Native Plant Society, pointed out
that the impact on the rare Crossosoma plant by the proposed
fill was not addressed correctly, and that proper mitigation
measures had not been identified.
sunshine, 6 Limetree Ln., inquired whether the proposed
project would impact the previously approved trails.
Pat Stenehjem, 32215 Searaven, objected to the possible noise
from the proposed grading activities.
Lois Larue, 3*136 Barkentine, opposed the project, citing
geological hazards.
The public hearing was closed. In response to a query from
Commissioner Brooks, Planner Rojas explained that the
analysis of the area's stability was based on extensive
geological reports that had indicated the grading would have
no adverse impact on the adjoining landslide. Director
Benard further noted that the development had been removed
from the moratorium area after establishment of a recommended
geologic buffer zone, with a loss of several lots, and that
the developer was required to mitigate the hazards associated
with the quarry slope.
Commissioner McNulty moved to adopt the Resolutions
certifying the final EIR and approving
g the grading
application with conditions. loner Brooks objected to
making any recommendation until the mitigation monitoring
program, which was presented to the Commission earlier in the
evening, had been reviewed. Director Benard stated that the
only aspect of that program not discussed earlier was the
level of monitoring and the monitoring agency. The motion on
the floor was seconded by Commissioner Hotchkiss.
Commissioner Brooks reiterated her concerns regarding the
amount of grading, biological issues and possible
interference with soccer activities at Ladera Linda.
Commissioner Katherman suggested a public forum be held to
review hydrology, drainage, biology and grading aspects of
the project, and Director Benard stated that the Commission
Page 6
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
October 8, 1991
could require the applicant to come back before the
Commission for public discui.-sion of those items. Chairman
Von Hagen pointed out that the grading issue had been dealt
with for years, and Commissioner Katherman agreed that
filling the quarry bowl was safer, but that it was important
to examine the follow up aspects of the grading. Chairman
Von Haqen recommended that the Director confirm that the
mechanics protecting the biological aspects of the project
were working.
Commissioner Brooks stated she could not support the motion
on the floor, and again stated her preference for Alternative
"All.
Commissioner Hotchkiss supported filling the quarry bowl.
Commissioner Katherman opined that the Commission should not
vote until the mitigation monitoring program had been
reviewed.
The question was called, and the motion on the floor passed
3-2, with Commissioners Katherman and Brooks dissenting.
RECESS AND RECONVENE
B. MUNICIPAL CODE REVISIONS
(CHAPTER 15.20,
MORATORIUM ON LAND USE
PERMITS)
(continued)
A 20 -minute break was called
at 9:20pm.
Chris Manning, 29438 Quailwood, claimed that he did not
object to anything in the proposed revisions but the
potential exclusions, which he stated he felt were in
violation of CEQA and General Plan guidelines. Chairman Von
Hagen stated for the record that he was concerned with the
irresponsible statements that the speaker had made in the
widely distributed flyers, and he asked.Mr. Manning to
present verbal proof of his written statements claiming that
the moratorium boundaries were going to be removed or
altered. Mr. Manning claimed that his statements were
accurate, but he was not able to verbally substantiate them.
Roy Good, 15 Cinnamon Lane, referred to his letter outlining
his concerns with potential liability, and stated that he
felt that any developer should assume a lien or post a bond
to protect homeowners.
Kay Bara, 1 Peppertree, objected to any development in the
area.
Page 7
0
Ll
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
October 8, 1991
Don Fraser, 26 Peppertree, stated he had lived for 49 years
at the same address but not in the same place, and he
objected to the potential geological hazards that might be
inherent in any project, questioning the competency of
geologists, and suggesting that there be a way to hold
developers liable should there be any future problems.
Carole Black, 5964 Ocean Terrace, asked that the Commission
not do anything that might jeopardize her property.
Kathy Snell, 8 Vanderlip Driveway, submitted a letter
questioning why she was within the moratorium when her
property was on a stable part of the area, and she suggested
that no grading be allowed on any open space uses.
Tom Coull, 49 Santa Catalina, spoke in support of most of the
revisions, but asked that the term "geotechnical staff" be
defined, suggested that a geological panel be created, and
that the liability insurance for developers indemnify the
project for at least 10 years.
Roy Fulwider, 28219 Hazelridge, spoke in support of a golf
course in the open area.
Ed Hallot, 27922 Longhill Drive, representing the Peninsula
Rim Homeowners Association, stated his organization had
unanimously agreed that the existing General Plan should
remain unchanged and unamended by the Planning Commission and
City council.
Dawn Henry, 6525 Via Colinita, expressed concern about the
proposed Hon project, citing liability and risks of
development.
Chuck Himelwright, 21 Kumquat Lane, stated he was opposed to
using open space for recreational uses.
Andrew Sargent, 1 Peppertree, stated he could support
development in the open space hazard area.
Richard Bara, 1 Peppertree, stated he felt the proposed
revisions should wait until the Coastal Ridge Rezoning report
was in, and that any developer indemnification should be long
term.
Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine, stated she wished she were in
the moratorium area, and expressed her opposition to the
proposed revisions.
Commissioner Brooks moved to continue the public hearing to
November 22, 1991, stating that she felt it was necessary to
continue the hearing to comply with the time contingencies in
the Negative Declaration. commissioner Katherman seconded
the motion.
Page 8
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
October 8, 1991
Chairman Von Hagen stated he was not opposed to continuation,
but would prefer a discussion and decisive motion since he
had been on the Subcommittee and could share the results of
their many days of work on the item. He also explained that
he felt that property owners outside of the actual landslide
area but within the moratorium boundaries had a legal right
to make reasonable improvements of their property if they
could provide adequate geotechnical information. Chairman
Von Hagen also noted that the language in the proposed
revisions regarded non-structural, recreational uses only,
which he said should be encouraged, especially if the City
geologists feel such development could assist in landslide
abatement.
Commissioner Brooks stated she felt the public hearing should
be continued because the public did not have enough notice,
and that she supported the idea of an independent
geotechnical panel and indemnification by the developers.
Mrs. Brooks also stated she favored the optional language
proposed for Section 15.20.040.J.
RECESS AND RECONVENE A 10 -minute break was called
at 11:10 pm.
Commissioner McNulty stated that the flyers that had been
distributed were an inappropriate way to get the attention of
the people, and he expressed resentment that the author of
the flyers had accused the Commission of engaging in illegal
activities. Mr. McNulty stressed the importance of codifying
and legalizing current standards in the area, pointed out
that no one was guaranteed anything except property rights,
and suggested that this item be moved along to the city
Council as soon as possible.
Commissioner Brooks moved to continue the public hearing to
the October 22 meeting, Commissioner Katherman seconded, and
the motion failed 2-2.
Commissioner McNulty moved to adopt the staff recommendation,
Chairman Von Hagen seconded, and the motion failed 2-2,.
Director Benard duly noted the no -action vote, and stated the
matter would be presented to the City Manager for review.
F. VESTING TENTATIVE Senior Planner Carolynn Petru
TRACT MAP NO. 46228 presented the staff report
PVDW/Hawthorne regarding the request to
accept public testimony on
Draft EIR No. 35 for a 94 -lot subdivision, including 93
single family residential lots and one common open space lot.
Staff's recommendation is to open the public hearing, accept
public testimony on the adequacy of the EIR, and close the
public hearing.
Page 9
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
October 8, 1991
Bill Gilmone, 340 E. 2nd St., LA., representing the
applicant, outlined their intent to comply with all
requirements and expressed sensitivity to environmental
concerns, and that the open space development would be
compatible with the golf course.
Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine, complimented the staff on the
quality of the EIR.
Commissioner McNulty moved, seconded by Chairman Von Hagen
and carried, to close the public hearing.
CONTINUED BUSINESS
A. ZONE CHANGE 19, Senior Planner Carolynn Petru
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP presented the staff report
NO. 18947 regarding the applicant's
End of Windport Drive request to permit a zone
change and subdivision of an
8.8 acre site into four single family residential lots.
Staff's recommendation is to recommend certification of the
FEIR, and approval of the zone change to the City Council and
approve the tentative parcel map and grading permit.
Tim Burrell, 59 Marguerite Drive, asked that the conditions
be modified to allow potential future construction of pools
or spas, freestanding if necessary, and asked that the issue
of the boundary determination be tabled. Director Benard
stated that if this issue were left unresolved, it was an
opportunity for de facto rezoning, should the zoning
application fail.
Mr. Benard also.pointed'out that the conditions only prohibit
in -ground pools and spas, not freestanding ones, and that if
the Commission wanted to modify the condition to allow in -
ground units, staff would recommend that there be a
requirement for geological review and approval.
Commissioners McNulty and Hotchkiss supported the
modification, while Commissioner Brooks expressed doubts.
In response to queries from Commissioners Katherman and
Brooks, Planner Petru explained that statements regarding the
instability of the area were required to be placed on the
final map, and that the developer was also required to enter
into an indemnification agreement for the City.
Commissioner Hotchkiss moved adoption of P.C. Resolution No.
91-53, recommending certification of the EIR. Commissioner
McNulty seconded the motion, which passed 4-1, with
Commissioner Brooks dissenting.
Commissioner Hotchkiss moved to adopt P.C. Resolution No. 91-
54, recommending approval of the zone change from OH to RS -2.
Chairman Von Hagen seconded, and the motion passed 4-1, with
Page 10
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
October 8, 1991
Commissioner Brooks dissenting.
The Commission expressed concern that future homeowners might
not be made aware of the potential instability of the area in
spite of the requirements to place statements on the final
map. Director Benard pointed out that title reports will
reflect such encumbrances on a property.
Commissioner Hotchkiss moved to adopt P.C. Resolution No. 91-
55, approving the Tentative Parcel Map and Grading Permit,
with the appropriate change in Item 'IN" regarding pools and
spas. Commissioner McNulty seconded the motion, which passed
4-1, with Commissioner Brooks dissenting.
Commissioner Hotchkiss moved to receive and file P.C.
Resolution No. 91- , denying the applicant's appeal on the
zoning district boTdary determination. commissioner McNulty
seconded, and the motion passed without objection.
QUESTIONS FROM THE AUDIENCE There were no questions from
the audience.
STAFF REPORTS
Director Benard informed the Commissioners that opening of
the Tramonto (A&H) project had been delayed.
COMMISSION REPORTS
-Commissioner Brooks suggested that there be an llpm deadline
for all Planning Commission and city council meetings even if
it meant more meetings would be necessary.
ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at
1:15am.
Page 11