Loading...
PC MINS 19940712APPROVED 00 1.0 7/26/94 CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING July 12, 1994 The meeting was called to order at 7:08 P.M., by Chairman Alberio at the Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. The Pledge of Allegiance followed, led by Nancy Hutar. PRESENT: Commissioners Hayes, Ferraro, Vannorsdall, Wang, Whiteneck, Vice Chairman Mowlds and Chairman Alberio ABSENT: None Also present were Planning Administrator Petru, Senior Planner Rojas, and Associate Planner Silverman. COMMUNICATIONS A. STAFF Associate Planner Silverman distributed correspondence to the Planning Commission from the Portuguese Bend Homeowners Association and Architectural Committee for Agenda Item VIIIA, 29 Sweetbay Road. B. COMMISSION - NONE ORIENTATION A. CEQA Presentation by David Evans and Associates, and Staff Mark Blodgett and Nancy Hutar presented a complementary overview of the California Environmental Quality Act and answered questions from the Planning Commission. RECESS AND RECONVENE Recessed at 7:56 P.M. and reconvened at 8:04 P.M. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Planning Commission Minutes of June 14, 1994. Commissioner Vannorsdall requested that, on Page 3, the fourth paragraph be changed to read "Commissioner Vannorsdall wondered if the project involved grading or if it was on the original slope". Vice Chairman Mowlds noted that on Page 5, the second "not" should be deleted in the second sentence. Commissioner Hayes asked that, on Page 8, the fourth paragraph be revised to read "Commissioner Hayes felt it was important to determine whether or not a home could be built on each of the two proposed lots". Commissioner Hayes moved to accept the June 14, 1994 minutes, as amended, seconded by commissioner Wang. Approved (7-0). B. Planning Commission Minutes of June- 28, 1994. Commissioner Ferraro moved to accept the June 28, 1994 minutes, as written, seconded by commissioner Vannorsdall. Approved (6-0-1), with commissioner Hayes abstaining (as she was not present at the June 28, 1994 meeting). CONTINUED BUSINESS A. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 16 & 17 OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE (DEVELOPMENT CODE REVISIONS)_• City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Citywide. (JR) Reading of the Staff report was waived. 17.60.020(1) (Conditional Use Permits - Purpose] Commissioner Wang noted that the paragraph letters should be revised since "Public utility structures" was deleted and Senior Planner Rojas said that he would make the correction. 17.60.0501BI (Conditional Use Permits - Public Hearing] Vice Chairman Mowlds asked why a public hearing was not required for master television antennas in multiple -family developments and asked if this was due to a Federal regulation. Senior Planner Rojas replied that he did not think there was a Federal regulation regarding this but he would investigate the matter. He believed that this type of project was minor enough that it did not warrant a public hearing. 17.60.080 (Conditional Use Permit - Time Limit] Commissioner Ferraro commented that, in the middle of the paragraph, the words "based on" had been deleted and replaced with "in light of". She felt "based on" was more appropriate. I Senior Planner Rojas explained that this was a revision from 1991 but that it could be changed back to the original language, if the Commission so desired. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 12, 1994 PAGE 2 It was the consensus of the Planning Commission to change the words to "based on". 17.62.020(8) [Special Use Permits - Uses and Developments Permitted] Commissioner Wang asked if a section number has been assigned yet and Senior Planner Rojas responded that this would be in the next portion of the revision process. 17.62.060 (Special Use Permits - Appeals) Commissioner Ferraro asked that, in the next to the last sentence of this section the word "had" in the phrase "no appeal to the City Council may be had" be changed to "made" to read "no appeal to the City Council may be made". Senior Planner Rojas said he would make the change. 17.68.070 [ZoneChangesand Code Amendments - Filing Fee] Commissioner Hayes asked if the word "or" could be added to the sentence to read "A filing fee..... and/2r Code Amendment application...." and Senior Planner Rojas said that the sentence would be amended as suggested. 17.68.080(A) [Zone Changes and Code Amendments - Notification] Commissioner Wang and commissioner Vannorsdall confirmed with Staff that the letters in parentheses should indeed read 11 (a) , (b) , (c) , (e) and (f}", and that the letter "(d)" was deliberately excluded. 17.70.020(D) [Site Plan Review - Application] Commissioner Hayes stated that the word "planning" before director should be removed and Senior Planner Rojas said he would delete it. Commissioner Hayes also asked why the Director has the right to waive the requirement for information. Planning Administrator Petru answered that sometimes certain information was not necessary for Staff to review the application. Senior Planner Rojas added that this instance would apply mostly to Site Plan Reviews applications that Staff encountered every day over-the-counter. 17.70.020(D)(12) [Site Plan Review - Application] Commissioner Vannorsdall asked if the location of all easements should be included in the list of required information. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 12, 1994 PAGE 3 Senior Planner Rojas agreed that this was a good idea because easements were important and should be required to be shown on the plan. 17.70.030 [Site Plan Review - Approval] Commissioner Hayes asked why the portion regarding extensions was deleted and asked if the Director could no longer grant time extensions. Senior Planner Rojas explained that this deletion was from the previous revisions and Staff would further investigate this issue. As in Section 17.62.060, Commissioner Ferraro asked if, in the last sentence of this section the word "had" in the phrase "no appeal to the Planning Commission or City Council may be had" be changed to "made" to read- "no appeal to the Planning Commission or City Council may be made" and Senior Planner Rojas said he would make the change. 17.72.040(C) [Coastal Permits - Uses and Developments Permitted in the Coastal Setback Zone] Vice Chairman Mowlds asked if other, items should be prohibited in the Coastal Setback Zone, such as irrigation systems, water lines, fountains, and flagpoles and Senior Planner Rojas agreed to expand this list. 17.72.060 [Coastal Permits - Uses and Developments Excluded from the Coastal Permit Procedure] Vice Chairman Mowlds suggested that walls and fences should be prohibited, unless they were 90% open. Planning Administrator Petru explained that this portion of the Code included the entire Coastal Zone, while the requirement for 90% light and air fences only applied to areas seaward of the coastal setback line. 17.72.090(A) [Coastal Permits - Public Hearing, Appealable Development] Commissioner Wang noted that the word "may" should be deleted in the second sentence and Senior Planner Rojas said he would make the correction. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 12, 1994 PAGE 4 • 0 17.72.090(B) [Coastal Permits - Public Hearing, Nonappealable Development] Vice Chairman Mowlds asked for a definition of a "nonappealable development" and Planning Administrator Petru explained that projects approved by the City in the area between Palos Verdes Drive South and the first public road (the "nonappealable area") could be appealed only to the City Council and not to the Coastal Commission. 17.72.110(A)(5) [Coastal Permits - Appeals] Vice Chairman Mowlds asked who the Secretary to the Planning Commission was and Planning Administrator Petru said it was the Director. 17.72.110(A)(5)_[Coastal Permits - Appeals] Vice Chairman Mowlds asked if the Hearing Officer was also the Director and Planning Adm±nistrator Petru answered that this was correct. As an aside, Vice Chairman Mowlds asked in what portion of the Code was there a provision to make sure that related applications which currently require action by different bodies (i.e. Planning Commission approves the Conditional Use Permit and City Council approves the Tentative Tract Map) would all be approved by the City Council, instead. Planning Administrator Petru stated that she believed this was already in the Code Revisions but that Staff would verify this fact. 17.74.050(A) (Residential Planned Development Permit - Occupancy Permit] Vice Chairman Mowlds noted that the Code needed to address the fact that sometimes there are two tract maps with one Conditional Use Permit and the occupancy permits could be held up for one tract if the common open space improvements had not been completed in the other tract, as in the case of Ocean Trails. I Planning Administrator Petru clarified that the Code did say that the Director could approve the release of each building phase, avoiding the problem Mr. Mowlds described. vice chairman Mowlds made motion to continue to public hearing to July 26, 1994, seconded by Commissioner Vannorsdall. Approved (7- 0). PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 12, 1994 PAGE 5 Prompted by a request from Commissioner Hayes, a discussion ensued between the Planning Commission and Staff regarding how the final Code language would be presented to the Commission and it was the consensus of the Commission that they would like the entire Code at one time in order to check cross references and also that they would like at least an extra week before the scheduled meeting in which to make their final review. B. EXTREME SLOPE NO. 35; ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO. 23; GRADING PERMIT NO. 1723; Mr. and Mrs. Soderstrom, 3324 Crownview Drive. (FF) Commissioner Hayes recused herself due to a possible business relationship with a family member of the applicant. vice Chairman Mowlds moved that waived, seconded by Commissioner Commissioner Hayes abstaining. reading of the Staff Report be Ferraro. Approved (6-0-1), with The Public Hearing was still Open from the June 14, 1994 meeting. Charles Soderstrom, 3324 Crownview Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mr. Soderstrom said that he was available for questions. Commissioner Wang asked about a letter received immediately before the June 14, 1994 meeting regarding a resident near the subject property who wanted to install solar panels but was not allowed to do so. At that time, Staff had indicated that no details were known and Commissioner Wang asked if there was additional information available. Both Vice Chairman Mowlds and Chairman Alberio agreed that whether or not a neighbor had been denied permission to install solar panels had no -bearing on the decision regarding the subject property. Vice Chairman Mowlds noted that one of the Conditions of Approval specified that the deck should be of a color which would blend with the natural slope, subject to review and approval of the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement, and asked if this restriction would apply to the screen wall rather than to the deck. Planning Administrator Petru explained that the screen wall was considered to be part of the deck. When Mr. Soderstrom asked if the face of the deck had to be the same color as the slope, Planning Administrator Petru clarified that the color need not necessarily match the slope, but be wood toned or another natural color to blend with the color of the slope. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 12, 1994 PAGE 6 Vice Chairman Mowlds commented that the vegetation being planted would fill in over the years to screen the stucco screen wall. However, until that time, if the stucco matched the color of the house, rather than blending with the slope, the house would appear to be three stories high. Vice Chairman Mowlds wanted to make sure Mr. Soderstrom understood Staff's intent and Mr. Soderstrom. said that he did. Planning Administrator Petru added that the condition controlling the color of decks over extreme slopes came from the performance criteria included in the Code. Vice Chairman Mowlds moved to Close the Public Hearing, seconded by Commissioner Vannorsdall. Approved (6-0-1), with Commissioner Hayes abstaining. Vice Chairman Mqwlds moved to accept the Staff's recommendation to Approve Extreme Slope No. 35, Encroachment Permit No. 23, and, Grading Permit -No. 1723; in accordance with the Conditions of Approval, seconded by Commissioner Vannorsdall. Approved (6-0-1), with Commissioner Hayes abstaining. Chairman Alberio stated that the P.C. Resolutions would be signed that evening and that the decision would be final, unless appealed within 15 days. Commissioner Hayes returned to the dais. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. VARIANCE NO. 375; Mr. and Mrs. Michael Barth, 29 Sweetbay Road. (TS) Associate Planner gilverman presented the Staff Report. Included was the fact that the applicants wish to construct a 384 square foot second story loft/storage area above the new detached garage and that Staff recommended denial of the Variance. Associate Planner Silverman noted that Staff had been made aware that day of possible discrepancies in the plans which affect the determination of height of the proposed structure in relation to the existing residence. She added that the architect clarified that the proposed addition would be approximately one foot lower than the ridgeline of the house and that the architect was present to answer any questions the Planning Commission might have regarding this issue. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 12, 1994 PAGE 7 Commissioner Hayes asked Associate Planner Silverman to explain the change in the height of the proposed structure and Ms. Silverman said that the ridge of the house was actually slightly over elevation 129'; the addition to the house would be at elevation 129' and the garage would be at elevation 1281. Chairman Alberio asked from where these measurements were taken and Associate Planner Silverman explained that, for an accessory structure (unlike a main residential structure), the maximum height was measured from any point around the structure. A discussion ensued between Vice Chairman Mowlds and Associate Planner Silverman regarding alternate building sites on the property. Ms. Silverman mentioned that one possible location was between the existing guest quarters and the existing garage, but indicated that Staff's analysis was based on the square footage available for development and was not necessarily a detailed analysis to determine alternate building locations on the property. Commissioner Ferraro asked'for clarification of the fact that the Staff Report mentioned that there was an existing 3,510 square feet house on the subject property; however, even with the new construction, the house itself would be only 2,100 square feet. Associate Planner Silverman replied that the Staff Report indicated that the 3,510 square feet included the existing guest quarters, as well as the approved garage, covered patios and all other structures on the property. Chairman Alberio Opened the Public Hearing. Michael Barth, 29 Sweetbay Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mr. Barth explained that a large portion of the open space area on the lot was unbuildable•- because of the existing cesspool. He indicated that there was room between the front of the house and the street but, aesthetically, that was not an appropriate site. He noted that the Portuguese Bend Architectural Committee had approved the project (in writing) and added that he and his architect took into consideration the needs of the neighbors, as well as his family's needs, stating that they wished to improve, not damage, the neighborhood. He explained that additional garage space was needed because his children would be driving soon and there was no on - street parking in the area. He also explained the need for storage space because the house, even with the addition, would be only 2,150 square feet in size. He added that the house is located on a large lot with a number of large trees, which will remain to help shield the house from view from the street and the adjacent neighbors. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 12, 1994 PAGE 8 Commissioner Vannorsdall asked what utilities would be required in the garage/storage area and Mr. Barth said there would be only electricity (no water, sewer, natural gas, etc.). Prompted by a question from Commissioner Vannorsdall, a discussion ensued between Mr. Barth, Vice Chairman Mowlds, and Commissioner Vannorsdall, which determined that the ceiling height in the storage area would be 811". Commissioner Whiteneck made motion to Close the Public Hearing, seconded by Commissioner Hayes. Approved (7-0) Commissioner Ferraro said that she could see no problem with neighborhood compatibility because the lots were large, there was a lot of large trees for screening, and the design of the structures was in keeping with the equestrian area. Chairman Alberio asked if Ms. 'Ferraro felt that the project would be appropriate In other parts of the City, for instance, Island View, and commissioner Ferraro said that she felt it would not be appropriate in the Island View tract. I In agreement with commissioner Ferraro's answer, Vice Chairman Mowlds moved to approve the project with the stipulation that the proposed building is 11 lower than the ridge height of the main structure, seconded by Commissioner Vannorsdall. Approved (7-0) Commissioner Hayes mentioned that the compelling argument for her was the written approval of the Portuguese Bend Architectural Committee and reiterated that this project would not be appropriate in many parts of the City and Commissioner Whiteneck agreed. Planning Administrator Petru said that a Resolution would be brought to the -July 26, 1994 meeting for signature and that a 15 - day appeal period will begin at that time. Mr. Barth expressed his appreciation of the spirit of service evident in the Commission and the Staff and thanked them for their efforts. REPORTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. STAFF 1. Pre -Agenda for the July 26, 1994 meeting. B. COMMISSION - NONE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 12, 1994 PAGE 9 COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ,(regarding non -agenda items) Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine Road, relayed a humorous anecdote and discussed her geological studies in Northern California and the Palos Verdes earthquake fault. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Whiteneck moved, seconded by Commissioner Hayes, to Adjourn. Motion carried and the meeting was duly adjourned at 9:10 P.M. to the regular meeting on July 26, 1994. (A JD MINUTES DISK #4 - MIN? 12) PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES JULY 12, 1994 PAGE 10