Loading...
PC MINS 19941025APPROVED 11122194 CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING October 25, 1994 The meeting was called to order at 7:07 P.M., by Chairman Alberio at the Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. The Pledge of Allegiance followed, led by Trent Pulliam, Director of the City's Public Works Department. PRESENT: Commissioners, Ferraro, Wang, Whiteneck, Vice Chairman Mowlds and Chairman Alberio 9 ABSENT: Hayes and Vannorsdall (excused) Also present were Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Bernard, Planning Administrator Petru, Senior Planner Rojas, Associate Planners Silverman and Jerex, Assistant Planner de Freitas, and Recording Secretary Drasco. COMMUNICATIONS A. STAFF Planning Administrator Petru noted that there were many pieces of late correspondence for both Conditional Use Permit No. 101 - Revision 11G11, Sign Permit No. 567 - Revision (The Terraces Shopping Center}; and, the Development Code Revisions regarding final draft language for Chapter 17.46 (Large Animal Overlay District). All late correspondence had been placed before the Commission. B. COMMISSION - None CONSENT CALENDAR A. Planning Commission Minutes of September 13, 1994. Vice Chairman Mowlds and Commissioner Wang requested the following changes in the minutes: On Page 10, 2nd paragraph, 1st line: The word "items" should be changed to the word "item". On Page 10, 2nd paragraph, 7th line: The words "as it represented an tract entrance sign" should be changed to "as a tract entrance sign". PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 1 s • On Page 19, 4th paragraph from the bottom of the page, 1st line: The words "Mr. Scala and if Staff..." should be changed to "Mr. Scala asked if Staff..." Vice Chairman Mowlds moved that the Minutes of September 13, 1994 be adopted as amended, seconded by Commissioner Whiteneck. Approved, (5-0). B. Planning Commission Minutes of September 27, 1994. Vice Chairman Mowlds and Commissioner Wang requested the following changes in the minutes: On Page 3, 3rd paragraph from the bottom of the page, 4th line: 421 should be changed to 42". On Page 7, last paragraph, 6th line: The words "it clearly shown" should be changed to the words "it is clearly shown". On Page 8, 6th paragraph, 3rd line: The words "had been able" should be changed to the words "had been unable". On Page 24, 2nd paragraph, 10th line: The words "stressed that he sorry he was not present" should be changed to the words "stressed that he was sorry he was not present". Vice Chairman Mowlds moved that the Minutes of September 27, 1994 be adopted as amended, seconded by Commissioner Whiteneck. Approved, (5-0). C. Approve, via Minute Order, Grading Permit No. 1777 for 22 Golden Spur Lane, thereby allowing the repair of an extreme slope damaged by irrigation failure (Bodner). (DJ) Vice Chairman Mowlds moved to approve Grading Permit No. 1777, seconded by Commissioner Wang. Approved, via Minute Order, (5-0). , D. SIGN PERMIT NO. 683 - REVISION• Diversified Development, 28300 - 28350 S. Western Avenue. (FF) Vice Chairman Mowlds moved to approve Sign Permit No. 683 - Revision, seconded by Commissioner Wang. Approved, via Minute Order, (5-0). - 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) 0 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 2 • The agenda was re -ordered to hear this item after the consideration of Conditional Use Permit No. 101 - Revision 11G11 and Sign Permit No. 567 - Revision (The Terraces Shopping Center) . B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 101 - REVISION "G", SIGN PERMIT NO. 567 - REVISION• BOSC Group, 28901 S. Western Avenue. (FF) Assistant Planner de Freitas presented the Staff Report. Staff felt the proposal fit the Code and Specific Plan criteria, believed that the proposed parking standards were feasible and, therefore, recommended approval of the proposed improvements to the existing shopping center. A discussion between Chairman Alberio, Senior Planner Rojas, Assistant Planner de Freitas, and Commissioner Wang revealed that the new driveway on Western had not been approved by Cal Trans. The applicant was awaiting the Planning Commission's decision, even though the final decision would be made by Cal, Trans, since Western Avenue is a State highway. Assistant Planner de Freitas reported that Mr. Trent Pulliam, Director of the City's Public Works Department, Dean Allison, also from the Public Works Department, and Steve Sasaki, the City's Traffic Consultant, were present to answer questions. Mr. Trent Pulliam discussed the proposal to widen the southern entrance driveway and the possibility of using one way traffic adjacent to the Blockbuster video store to remove safety hazards caused by conflicting traffic. Chairman Alberio asked Traffic Consultant Steve Sasaki about his analysis of the traffic circulation on the property. Steve Sasaki agreed with the plan for the south driveway, and, although his firm did not complete a full analysis of the traffic and circulation conditions on the third level, he concurred with the proposed plan. He added that he felt widening the south driveway and other improvements mentioned would greatly improve the traffic circulation. He felt one-way traffic and angled parking would also help. Vice Chairman Mowlds asked if construction of these traffic improvements wexe acceptable to the applicant. Senior Planner Rojas said that the applicant was agreeable to the conditions of approval and that they would discuss these issues further as part of their oral presentation to the Commission. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 3 The Public Hearing was still Open and Chairman Alberio called the applicant to the podium. Mr. Richard Atto, (applicant) The BOSC Group, 6905 Telegraph, #250, Bloomfield Hills, MI 48301. Mr. Atto summarized the proposed improvements initially discussed at the first hearing on October 11, 1994. He explained that, since that date, he had taken a closer look at traffic situation and conferred with the Traffic Consultant and Planning Staff members to identify alternate solutions to alleviate the congestion problem at the south driveway. Mr. Atto informed the Commission that he had reviewed the conditions of approval and was in general agreement, but requested a few minor changes, as follows: Condition No. 3.: He asked that the phrase "applicant shall be responsible" be changed to "owner shall be responsible". Condition No. 14 regarding the Sign Program: Mr. Atto requested that any future sign program modifications be approved by the Planning Staff. Condition No. 7 in respect to Hours of Operation: He advised that a potential second level tenant, Kinko's, who provides printing and rental of computer time, had requested 24-hour operation, which was the case for all of their facilities. Their customers are mostly students and people dropping off work to be copied for pickup in the morning. Chairman Alberio conjectured that this operation would not be a source of loud noise. Mr. Atto agreed and added that there would be no deliveries allowed after regular business hours. Chairman Alberio wondered how much business was generated by Kinko's from Midnight to the next morning. He assumed this was profitable or they wouldn't operate during those hours. Mr. Atto replied that sometimes they only have about two or three customers in an hour through the night, but it is a service they provide for people who are unable to do this kind of work during normal business hours. Chairman Alberto asked if Kinko's provided security guards. Vice Chairman Mowlds commented that he had used the services at a Kinko's at the University of Southern California at 3:00 A.M. and there was a guard. Also, he had been to the Kinko's on Hawthorne Boulevard in Torrance at 4:00 A.M., but there was no guard at that location. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 4 Vice Chairman Mowlds asked about Condition No. 24 and the reference to "air blower" which he assumed was for parking lot maintenance, rather than blowers on top of the building. Senior Planner Rojas explained that there was a list of minor modifications to the conditions of approval regarding sweeper trucks being operated in the morning. Commissioner Ferraro asked if there would be an individual Conditional Use Permit for the theater's hours of operation. Senior Planner Rojas responded that the current Conditional Use Permit would be used as the guideline for all present and future tenants. Commissioner Ferraro asked how an exception would be made for Kinkols. Senior Planner Rojas answered that, if approved, an added condition for Kinko's would be read into the record, stating that this business would be the only 24-hour service allowed in the shopping center. Mr. Ward Nadhir, (applicant) The BOSC Group, 6905 Telegraph, #250, Bloomfield Hills, MI 48301. Mr. Nadhir, as president of the BOSC Group, explained that the shopping center had been in foreclosure and by a baiik for the last two years. During that time, due to poor management, occupancy dropped and security problems increased. He informed the Commission that the BOSC Group owned neighborhood shopping centers, not mayor ones, and they felt they could address all the problems to make the Terraces an asset to the community. Ms. Linda West, (representing Rockinghorse Road Homeowners Association) 2037 Ave Aprenda, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. West stated that she had lived in the area for 23 years and had been on an Eastview Goals Committee when the area was annexed into the City. This committee met for over a year to discuss concerns of the community and one of the major ones was Western Avenue. She felt that Variances were needed in Rancho Palos Verdes along Western to compete with San Pedro. Even though San Pedro had improved, some parts of Rancho Palos Verdes had became an eyesore. She did not include the Terraces in this negative category, but had noticed an increase in vandalism because of the recent neglect of the center. However, she was not sure that larger signs alone would bring business into the center. Commissioner Ferraro asked for her suggestions for improving the Terraces and Ms. West said her solution would be simply better run businesses. Mr. Robert De Lossa, 2345 Sparta Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mr. De Lossa thanked Staff for making recommendations to address the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 5 ingress problems and other additional information which he felt indicated that the problems had been analyzed more thoroughly since the last hearing on this item. He stated that he generally favored business, but believed that the first responsibility of the City was to its citizens. A violation of that commitment would be reflected at election time, both for positions and revenue bonds. He noted -that parking was a problem discussed when the center was originally developed. He realized that restricting the ratio of retail to non -retail could provide benefits, but could also be a liability to the community. He was opposed to Kinko's being allowed to operate 24 hours a day or any other late night businesses which might attract gangs. He stated that there had been many violations of the Conditional Use Permit. He felt that adding a driveway would help traffic circulation and favored redesigned parking spaces. He felt that the shopping center suffered from a poor initial design and that it had not been run efficiently, especially by the bank. Even though he hoped that the Terraces would be successful, he did not see that taller signs would increase visibility of the shopping center and would decrease property value in the neighboring residential community instead. He believed that the BOSC Group should operate the shopping center for a while and then review the signs issue to see if taller signs were truly necessary. Chairman Alberio speculated that having more businesses open at night might discourage gang activity. Mr. De Lossa mentioned that families attending movies at night had been intimidated by hecklers in the back seats of the theaters. Chairman Alberio asked Mr. De Lossa if he shopped at the Terraces. Mr. De Lossa said he shopped at Trader Joe's but, because of -the poor design of the shopping center, he did not go there often. Commissioner Ferraro asked Mr. De Lossa if he knew the height of the signs on Western. Mr. De Lossa was not sure, but wondered if it was beneficial for Rancho Palos Verdes signs to be based on Los Angeles City standards. Commissioner Ferraro advised Mr. De Lossa that there were signs within the City that were 271, 30f, 331, and 401 in height. Mr. De Lossa replied that it was his understanding that, because of the expense involved with removing the higher signs, businesses were given five years to bring those signs into conformance with the Code, but it didn't seem to have been enforced. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 6 Planning Administrator Petru noted that the suspension of the Sign Amortization Program was based on City Council direction. Mr. De Lossa realized that the City Council wanted sales tax revenue, but mentioned again the voting power of the Eastview area and hoped that their needs would be remembered. Dr. Barbara Silver, 28737 Gunter Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Dr. Silver stated that she lived immediately adjacent to the shopping center and was concerned about the possible shift to more non- retail and more night businesses. She felt this was a quiet family neighborhood, but it had become noisy on weekend nights with young people in cars racing up and down the hill. She felt that the proposed changes would cause further disruptions. Mr. Robert Clauss, 2159 Ronsard Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mr. Clauss said that he lived at the top of Caddington Drive. He mentioned that he occasionally patronized Blockbuster and often had to wait for a parking space. He noted that there was plenty of parking on the third level, but no one goes there except to the movies. He felt that the relocation of Blockbuster to the third level would improve the traffic congestion. Ms. Marion Reeve, 2022 Mendon Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Reeve stated that she lived two blocks from the Terraces since 1990. She was worried about the vandalism, and stated that she had lights broken and plants killed on here property since the theater opened. She was in favor of Kinko's moving into the shopping center. Mr. David Trujillo, (representing Rockinghorse Road Homeowners Association), 2015 Toscanini, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mr. Trujillo informed the Commission that he had lived in the neighborhood for 11 years. He suggested that the businesses causing the most traffic congestion be moved to a different location within the shopping center. He was happy that the Terraces was in the neighborhood and would like to see the remodeling, but did not feel that taller signs were necessary. Commissioner Ferraro said that she had originally suggested the relocation of some of the more popular businesses to improve the traffic circulation, but that the City could not tell the BOSC Group how to handle their leases. Mr. Don Brandeiever, 2447 Sparta Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mr. Brandemeyer stated that he had lived in his home for 22 years and agreed that Blockbuster should be moved to the third level where there was always plenty of parking. He too opposed larger signs. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 7 Ms. Nina Yoshida, 28808 Gunter Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Yoshida said that she spoke at last meeting and felt strongly that the original conditions should be enforced. She was opposed to the 24 hour Kinko's because she felt it would disturb the peace and quiet of the surrounding residential neighborhood. Chairman Alberio noted that Kinko's was proposed to be located on the second level, not the third, so that it would not be immediately adjacent to the residential area. Ms. Yoshida still did not want the 24 hour business in the shopping center and was worried about the current problems of vandalism, gangs and graffiti. Ms. Jody Culver, 28918 Gunter Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Culver reported that her home abutted the third level of the center. She was unhappy about the proposed 24-hour operation of Kinko's because she felt it opened the door for tremendous problems in the future. She noted that she had not heard an answer regarding the mechanical equipment on the roof. There was a discussion between Chairman Alberio, Vice Chairman Mowlds, and Ms. Culver in which Ms. Culver said that this equipment was not allowed to be on the roof at all, but only at ground level. The members of the Commission noted that the Staff Report mentioned a condition limiting the sound level of the roof -mounted equipment to 45 decibels (a more restrictive level than permitted by State law) and that visual screening was also required. Ms. Culver disagreed that vandalism began only when the vacancies increased because she felt there were security problems from the time the center was first opened. She felt that the three levels could not be patrolled adequately by one security person. She expressed concern about the types of businesses which might move into the center that would attract the wrong kind of clientele, such as a topless bar that was allowed under the table in Long Beach. She complimented the Planning Commission on their responsiveness to the public in the past. Ms. Dawn Henry, (representing Rancho Palos Verdes Council of Homeowners Associations) 6525 Via Colinita, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Henry reported that she was the current president of the Rancho Palos Verdes Council of Homeowners Associations. She reported that the Homeowners Association Council was not aware of the proposed changes to the Terraces until late last week and had not had chance to review or participate in the hearings regarding the project. She requested a continuance to allow for the formation of a committee of residents within one mile radius of the site to work together in order to provide a shopping center that the community would be proud of and to avoid alienating anyone. She said that, PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 8 even though there are some larger signs on Western, many of them were grandfathered in, and were not representative of the kind of signs the Council of Homeowners Associations wanted in Rancho Palos Verdes. She noted that residents on the east side of the City had noticed a crime increase in their area. She felt the Terraces could be an asset to the community and was happy that the BOSC Group was interested in making it more profitable and more convenient for their customers, but she wanted to make sure the center did not negatively impact the community. She said that, even though Kinko's in itself might not seem threatening, the 24- hour concept could set a precedent, as could the larger signs and adjustment of the retail vs. non -retail ratio. Chairman Alberio noted that the project was noticed according to the rules and regulations of the Development Code. Assistant Planner de Freitas confirmed that notification was sent to all residents within a 500 foot radius around the subject property and, in accordance with a request made at the last hearing, a notice was sent to the surrounding Homeowners Associations. Planning Administrator Petru added that there was, as always, a public notice in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News and on the reader board for the Government access cable TV channel. Ms. Henry said that she did not receive notification and Chairman Alberio reiterated that Staff had complied with the law. Planning Administrator Petru added if the Council of Homeowners Associations wished to receive notification in the future, they could provide the City with a supply of self-addressed, stamped envelopes, as other groups had done, in order to receive a copy of an agenda for each Planning commission meeting. She said that no request for notification had ever been received by the Council of Homeowners Associations. Ms. Henry replied that this would be satisfactory for the future but she was presently concerned about the fact that the local homeowners had been unaware of this particular project. Chairman Alberio felt that the residents in the immediate vicinity had been informed and he asked Ms. Henry how she had received information inthepast. Ms. Henry replied that someone might see the reader board and, if they are affected, they might call us. She said it was a hit and miss situation and that they had missed this one. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 9 Vice Chairman Mowlds said that not all the tall signs along Western. were grandfathered, because some of them were recently approved by the Planning Commission. Ms. Henry understood the fact that all of the signs were not grandfathered, but was still concerned with setting a precedent. She concluded by stating that she wanted to see the Terraces improve and to become an asset to the community, but that she felt the proposed changes would cause further problems and again requested that a resident committee be formed to work with the BOSC Group. Ms. Kathy Snell refused to give her address and would say only that she lived in Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Snell's concern was that the neighborhood surrounding the Terraces had to be protected. She made reference to the City's Redevelopment project area in Portuguese Bend and said that most of the low income housing required by State law would be located in the Eastview area and that low income housing would increase crime, gang activity and graffiti in that area of the City. Mr. Scott Gobble, 505 Maple, Torrance, CA 90503. Mr. Gobble said that he was speaking as Vice President of Economic Development of the Palos Verdes Chamber of Commerce and that the chamber supported new business and looked forward to working with the new owner of the Terraces. He added that he hoped the Commission would be able to analyze the different mitigating factors and support the project. He mentioned that the Palos Verdes Chamber hoped that action would be taken quickly because of the opportunity for a sales tax increase during the upcoming holiday season. Mr. Ward Nadhir, Rebuttal. Mr. Nadhir commented on the following subjects: (1) Non -retail: He felt there was a gross misunderstanding because they had no intention of leasing to any tenants such as a topless bar. He had understood there was a night club on third level at one time, but the types of tenants he had in mind were a dry cleaner, dance studio, Tae Kwan Do studio and Discovery Zone for children, a dentist, and an optometrist. Mr. Nadhir said the shopping center was not targeting tenants who would cater to the late night crowd and Kinko's was proposed only because of the unusual type of service they offer, the fact that the use is sedate, and would certainly not be used to set a precedent for future tenants. (2) Signage: Mr. Nadhir said that, even though there was a great deal of objection to the taller signs, he explained that there were special circumstances with this particular center compared to all PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 10 the others on Western. It contains three levels and most of the leasable area (105,000 square feet out of a total of 180,000 square feet) is on the third level, where most of the vacancies are. Potential tenants on that level have felt that there is a lack of visibility and identification on the roadway. Therefore, Mr. Nadhir felt that this particular property required a Variance for signage. (3) Security: Mr. Nadhir agreed that there was a lack of security. Because the center was only 30% occupied, it was impossible to have a large budget for security. He said that, if the center was fully occupied, they could have one guard for the third level alone and another for the first two levels. (4) Noise: Mr. Nadhir said they would comply with all the rules and regulations regarding the roof -mounted equipment, the hours for the disposal company and the cleaning of the theaters. He said that they have contacted all the groups involved and have commitments that they will comply, including the fact that Krekorian theaters will make sure their doors are closed during cleaning operations. Chairman Alberio asked about the possibility of moving Blockbuster to the third level. Mr. Nadhir said that Blockbuster did not want to jeopardize their success at the current location. He added that his six years with the Blockbuster organization had enabled him to penetrate the higher levels of management to investigate this possibility. Chairman Alberio asked if Kinko's would be interested in operating less than 24 hours a day and Mr. Nadhir said they would not locate in the center with such a restriction. Commissioner Ferraro mentioned to Mr. Nadhir that one of the letters suggested an 11800 number" be established for neighboring residents to register their complaints and concerns. She asked if that could be arranged. Mr. Nadhir replied that there was a 310 area code number already in place that automatically forwarded any calls to the correct party. Chairman Alberio asked Mr. Nadhir if there were any records kept regarding gang activity and Mr. Nadhir suggested the property manager be called forward to answer that question. Ms. Cindi Ybarra, (property manager for the applicant) Pacific West Asset Management Corporation, 43 Corporate Park, Suite #101, Irvine, 92714. Ms. Ybarra reported that she had been the acting property manager for the BOSC Group since May 9, 1994. In regard PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 11 to Ms. Ferraro's issue of security, she assured the members of the Commission that the BOSC Group had provided as much security as the budget would allow which, at the current time, was one person from 10:00 A.M. to 2:00 A.M., seven days per week. She explained that security is very expensive and represented a significant portion of the budget. She pointed out that most of the residents were not aware that the BOSC Group had been replacing very expensive broken plate glass caused by vandalism to maintain a respectable appearance for the shopping center. Chairman Alberio asked Mr. Nadhir if Kinko's would be interested in moving in on a trial basis. Mr. Nadhir said that since the cost of the installation of the Kinko's facility would be nearly a million dollars, he did not think that would be possible. Vice Chairman Mowlds asked the hourly cost of one security guard and Mr. Nadhir said it was about $12.00 to $13.00 per hour. Vice Chairman Mowlds said that he had paid as much as $15.00 per hour for security personnel and calculated that the BOSC Group's costs were about $200 per day at their current level of coverage. He asked Mr. Nadhir if he felt it was reasonable that the Commission ask for additional security admitted as one of the conditions of approval. Mr. Nadhir said that, if the community and Planning Commission felt that strongly, they would be willing to provide additional security on the site. Chairman Alberio asked the length of Kinko's lease and Mr. Nadhir said it would be ten years because of the large investment required to establish the business. Senior Planner Rojas commented that Staff was only made aware of Kinko's being considered as a potential tenant late that afternoon, but in consulting with the Director, Staff's opinion was that this was low intensity use on the second level, which was buffered from the neighborhood. If the Commission allowed Kinko's to operate around the clock, there would be a condition to limit this 24-hour usage only to Kinko's and special approval would be needed from the Planning Commission to allow any other tenant the same hours of operation. There could also be a performance condition to monitor Kinko's operation for the first six months or year and, if there were problems, the conditions could be modified at that time. Vice Chairman Mowlds was concerned that it would be difficult to negotiate a lease with the latter condition suggested by Staff. Planning Administrator Petru acknowledged the difficulty, but said that this would be a performance review only to address any problems that may have arisen during the year and to make changes PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 12 in the Conditions of Approval as necessary, to address the problems. After a discussion between the Commission and Staff concerning the provision of the adequate security on the property, Mr. Nadhir reiterated that the BOSC Group would commit to providing a second guard on the site, immediately. Senior Planner Rojas brought up the subject of traffic circulation and said that the relocation of Blockbuster Video to the third level of the center would not solve the long term problem, because it was likely that a new tenant on the first level might produce the same amount of traffic. Chairman Alberio felt that one-way traffic was a good idea and that the situation would be monitored to see if it was effective. since Ms. Henry had requested a continuance, Chairman Alberio asked for comments from the Commission. Commissioner Whiteneck thought that the Commission had heard from a large number of people who live in the area and that probably all of the problems and concerns anyone could think of had been mentioned. Therefore, he saw no reason for a continuance. Commissioner Ferraro said that, ordinarily, she would agree to provide more time when citizens felt they had not received proper notice. However, because there had been two hearings, both with a large number of speakers and the fact that flyers were circulated to notify residents in the area, she did not see that a two week continuance would be beneficial. Vice Chairman Mowlds concurred with commissioner Ferraro. He added that the holiday shopping season was approaching and he believed that more delay would hurt the owners who were trying to improve this shopping center for the community. Chairman Alberio believed that even though a large group of concerned citizens had spoken at two hearings and the holidays were approaching, in balancing the rights of the applicants and the neighbors, he felt it was the duty of the Planning Commission to continue the item. vice chairman Mowlds moved to Close the Public Hearing, seconded by Commissioner Whiteneck The motion failed on the following roll call: AYES: Whiteneck, Mowlds NOES: Ferraro, Wang, Alberio PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 13 Commissioner Ferraro said that the reason she changed her mind was that she was willing to continue this item, but only if there is a concrete plan established for the homeowners and the applicant to get together to work out the issues. Planning Administrator Petru commented that Staff would be willing to facilitate such a meeting between the landowner and the community. Chairman Alberio asked Ms. Henry to return to the podium and re- state her reasons for requesting a two-week continuance of this item. Ms. Henry stated that the continuance would provide the opportunity to set up a citizens committee made up of residents living within a one-mile radius of the site to meet with the project manager, to establish a working relationship and to take care of all of their concerns. She believed that this could be done in the next two weeks. She suggested that possibly customers of Blockbuster could withhold their patronage to put pressure on Blockbuster to change their location and time would be needed to organize this. Vice Chairman Mowlds acknowledged that Ms. Henry represented many Homeowners Associations, but pointed out that the Homeowners Associations within a mile radius of the project had been heard from at the two hearings. The Commission had heard comments about larger signs, the 24-hour operation of Kinkols, moving Blockbuster, operation of the theater, security, traffic flow (with input from a professional traffic consultant), diagonal parking, driveway access, removal of buildings to provide more parking, and proper security. Therefore, Mr. Mowlds did not believe a continuance of two weeks would provide any new information and that the people who were affected had already given their input. Ms. Henry disagreed, stating that other people who didn't live near the Terraces were affected because a precedent could be set for other areas of the City. She said, for example, the Golden Cove shopping area may want to make similar changes in the future. She explained that she was not implying that someone in the community might be more knowledgeable than the traffic consultant, but only that it would be better to build a consensus from the people. This could be dealt with in committee format, so citizens would be allowed to express their concerns and have project they want. She felt that people weren't opposed to the Terraces, but had some fears that could be resolved in working with the project manager. Vice Chairman Mowlds explained that Western Avenue was the only commercial general (CG) zone in the City and that Golden Cove was in a commercial neighborhood (CN) zone. Therefore, the types of commercial uses allowed at Golden Cove would be much more limited PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 14 than on Western Avenue. Chairman Alberio asked the president of the Homeowner Association in the area to come to the podium. Ms. April Sandell, 28026 Pontevedra, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Sandell said that one of her personal concerns was illuminated signs and that she felt that light pollution had not been addressed. She explained that she lived across the street from Thrifty Drug Store, which had illuminated signs that did go off until 11:00 P.M. She said that she had not received notification of the proposed changes to the Terraces shopping center but was informed by a neighbor who does not belong to the Homeowners Association. She asked Staff which Homeowners Associations were notified. Assistant Planner de Freitas explained that for a Conditional Use Permit, the Development Code requires that the City notify property owners within a 5001 radius of the subject property and that this had been done twice. In response to a request at the last hearing, five Homeowners Associations were also notified. Ms. Henry argued that the Staff's information regarding the current presidents and mailing addresses for the various Associations was out of date. Mr. De Freitas indicated that he used the most current information that Staff had. Ms. Sandell said that the City needed an updated list and asked that the item should be continued because of inadequate notification. She acknowledged that, although the traffic engineer had expertise, the residents could offer valuable information because they actually lived there and fought the traffic on a daily basis. She believed that Blockbuster would never relocate and that, if there was a movement against them, they would simply leave the shopping center. She noted that a Discovery Zone, even though it would be wonderful for the children, would cause massive traffic problems. Chairman Alberio called the applicant to the podium and asked him how a further delay would affect his business conditions. Mr. Rich Atto (applicant) replied that a delay would cause problems. He addressed commission and the homeowners present also and asked them to please look at what they were actually asking for. He pointed out that everyone agreed the Terraces was a problem shopping center and they were asking to remove buildings and replace them with needed parking space; improve the appearance of the remaining buildings; modify building elevations and remove PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 15 congestion with an additional driveway, a one-way driveway, and diagonal parking; decrease vacancies; and improve signage, according to the Planning Commission's precedent, to attract major tenants. He acknowledged a vandalism problem and restated that they had agreed to increase security, even though they have a low occupancy percentage. He believed that Kinko's 24-hour operation would be a fine asset to the community and that many of the homeowners present would use it. He pointed out that a boycott of Blockbusters could still be carried out if residents so desired and the BOSC Group could still meet with local neighbors to maintain communication, regardless of approval of the proposed changes. Mr. Atto indicated that they want to be accepted by the community because they couldn't exist if they were at odds with the neighbors Mr. Ward Nadhir (applicant) returned to the podium and added that he appreciated the concept of a committee process, but believed that the members of the Planning Commission, appointed to represent the residents of the City had very thoroughly reviewed this project and the BOSC Group had done everything they could to cooperate. He believed that a committee process would take longer than two weeks, and, by that time, potential tenants might no longer be interested in moving into the center. Chairman Alberio asked if anyone in the audience had additional comments. Mr. Robert Clauss indicated that the people most impacted by this project live up caddington, an area for which there is no Homeowners Association. He pointed out that Ms. Henry does not represent this group either. He stated that the majority of the speakers live in this area and that they are a very independent group who normally can't agree on anything. Mr. Robert De Lossa thought that two weeks was not a long period of time and there were still a lot of unresolved issues, included the tall signs which were grandfathered, approved, or to be removed within five years. He believed there were still items on which compromises could be reached, included the applicant operating with the current signage and revisiting the situation in a year. He suggested that possibly a special meeting could be scheduled in a week, rather than two weeks, to allow time for input from those citizens who had not been able to attend the hearings because notification was received too late to re -arrange their schedules. He was particularly interested in what could be received from Kinko's in trade for their being allowed to operate 24 hours per day. Chairman Alberio asked for comments from the Commissioners. Commissioner Ferraro commented that this was a very difficult PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 16 decision to make and that, at the two hearings, the same items had been repeated. She did not believe that the applicant was going to bring in tenants that would attract a bad element or do anything else detrimental to the neighborhood because it would be counterproductive. She felt Kinko's would be an asset to the neighborhood. She indicated that there would be improvement in traffic flow with the proposed changes, including angled parking, which was discussed at length at the last hearing. With respect to signage, although she was not sure that the signs needed to be 25', that height would certainly be consistent with other signage along Western, which ranges from 8' to 501. She felt the decision could be made that night. Commissioner Ferraro moved the Close the Public Hearing, seconded by Commissioner Whiteneck Motion passed on the following roll call: AYES: Ferraro, Whiteneck, Wang, Mowlds NOES: Alberio Vice Chairman Mowlds thought that some of the problems were never going to be solved. He believed that Blockbuster would never be relocated, Staff and the applicant had worked with the theater to cut down noise, the applicant had agreed to provide more security, and that the 24-hour operation of Kinko's could be restricted to just the one tenant. Mr. Mowlds felt that traffic flow had been adequately addressed and suggested a compromise regarding signage. He thought one taller monument sign could be allowed and that the two other signs could be brought back later on a separate sign permit without a fee. Commissioner Ferraro asked Mr. Mowlds which sign he thought should be approved now and he replied it would be the one giving the name of the shopping center. Assistant Planner de Freitas clarified that three new signs had been requested to replace the existing two signs. The two signs at the north and south driveways identified the name of the center and the sign in the center was for the theater. Commissioner Whiteneck wondered if Vice Chairman Mowlds' suggestion would be acceptable to the applicant. Mr. Nadhir was agreeable, but he noted that the theater sign was only 16' high, and, therefore, complied with the Code. Vice Chairman Mowlds confirmed that, in that case, only one monument sign would need to come back later. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 17 Mr. Nadhir said he was willing to accept that compromise. Assistant Planner de Freitas was then asked by the Commission to read the changes to the conditions of approval into the public record, as follows: Condition No 3: Instead of "applicant", the condition will specify that the "owner" shall be ultimately responsible. As an aside, Assistant Planner de Freitas said that, unfortunately, because of time restraints, Staff was not able to complete the document. The required parking table was not attached, but will be attached to the Resolution. Conditions Nos. 5 and 20: A reference was made to the number of parking spaces at the site and 784 spaces should be inserted into that blank. Condition No.11: In regard to Signs, this condition was modified to read "The" new monument "sign", instead of The "two" new monument "signs" and a notation added that the two-sided sign shall be limited to 25 feet in height. Condition No. 14: The same change as above was made to indicate "one" sign in Exhibit C. Condition No. 15: This condition also dealt with the sign program, addressing any deviation from the approved sign program. This condition was modified by the Commission to specify that the approved sign program (dated September 27, 1994) and as amended this evening, could be amended by the Director to assure that any changes would not be detrimental to health, safety and welfare. Any changes that did not conform to this standard would be forwarded to the Planning Commission for review. Condition No. 1: With respect to traffic, there will be additional striping, a right hand turn, but also an entry into the southern most driveway. Condition No. 7 (renumbered) : Conditions relative to Kinko I s would specify that Kinko's shall be the only 24-hour establishment allowed in the center and that there would be no deliveries to their facility between certain hours, to be determined by Staff. Assistant Planner de Freitas added that any new request for a 24- hour operation would be reviewed by the Planning Commission. Regarding security, a condition could be added requiring that sufficient security shall be provided at the center. Chairman Alberio added that Kinko's shall be reviewed after one PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 18 year of operation, which could result in subsequent conditions of approval, such as requirements for additional security. Vice Chairman Mowlds wanted to make sure that the city's restrictions do not hinder the signing of a lease. The condition could state that no review would be required, unless they have failed to meet the conditions of the Conditional Use Permit. ,Condition #24: Assistant Planner de Freitas brought up the subject of mechanical sweepers in the parking lots. Vice Chairman Mowlds suggested that this be distinguished from roof -mounted mechanical equipment such as air blowers on a restaurant. Vice Chairman Mowlds asked the applicant if the suggested performance review for Kinko's would damage the potential lease. Mr. Nadhir said he believed it would not cause a problem. He asked for a clarification regarding the appropriate level of security. A discussion ensued between Chairman Alberio, Vice Chairman Mowlds, and Staff regarding the appropriate level of security. It was determined that the matter should be negotiated between the applicant and the director. Chairman Alberio asked Staff if they had sufficient direction and Senior Planner Rojas said they did. Vice chairman Mowlds moved to approved the amendment to the Conditional Use Permit in accordance with changes to Exhibit A, seconded by Commissioner Whiteneck. Approved (5-0). Chairman Alberio said that he would sign the Resolution that night and that there was a 15 -day appeal period before the Commission's action became final. RECESS AND RECONVENE Recessed at 9:35 P.M. and reconvened at 9:50 P.M. Chairman Alberio requested that the Development Code Revisions discussion regarding the Equestrian Overlay District be continued at a future meeting. Ms. Sharon Hegetschweiler (representing Portuguese Bend Community Association) , 6 Clovetree Place, Rancho Palos Verdes approached the speaker's podium and protested this continuance because numerous speakers had waited for almost three hours to provide input on this topic. She believed they should be allowed to speak. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 19 i 2 Chairman Alberio asked for comments from the Commissioners. Vice Chairman Mowlds believed that it would be fair to hear the public testimony and continue the discussion to another date. Commissioner Ferraro believed the speakers should be heard, inasmuch as they stayed for the entire meeting and no announcement of a continuance of this item was made earlier. Planning Administrator Petru said there was an announcement at the beginning of the meeting that Item VIB would be heard before Item VIA. The consensus of the Commission was to hear the public testimony that evening but to continue discussion of the subject at a later date. However, two items requiring little time would be addressed before hearing item VIA. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CODE AMENDMENT NO. 39• Ridgegate Homeowners Association. (DJ) Reading of the Staff Report was waived. The Public Hearing was Opened. Mr. Alan Pendlev representing the Ridgegate Homeowners Association), 27920 Ridgecove Court, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mr. Pendley was present to answer questions from the Planning Commission, but there were none. The Public Hearing was Closed. Vice Chairman Mowlds moved to adopt P.C. Resolution No. 94- 52, recommending approval of Code Amendment No. 39 to the City Council, seconded by Commissioner Ferraro. Approved, (5-0). NEW BUSINESS A. GRADING PERMIT NO. 1768; Mr. and Mrs. Fernando, 6345 Via Colinita. (FF) Reading of the Staff Report was waived. Commissioner Ferraro moved to approve Grading Permit No. 1768, seconded by Commissioner Whiteneck. Approved, via Minute Order, (5-0) . CONTINUED BUSINESS (continued - according to reorganization of PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 20 agenda) 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 and the Public Hearing was Opened. Mr. Bill Griffin, 5 Ginger Root Lane, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mr. Griffin said that he had lived in Portuguese Bend for 33 years and CC&Rfs did allow horses. He preferred a controlled situation and felt that residents running a commercial board business was inappropriate. Under those conditions, the areas do not seem to be kept clean and there were odors and flies. Ms. Luella Wike (representing Mesa Homeowners Association), 29172 Oceanridge Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Wike was concerned about the changes in Section A & B on "circle" page 93 and asked the Commission to consider the fact that, in Section "A", three large animals would be on 15,000 square feet (a little more than a third of an acre of land) including a home and that the Code previously allowed only one. She recommended that the words "on a developed lot, or parcel of at 15,000 square feet or more" have added to them the following words: "in addition to the structure, two large domestic animals may be kept on a lot or parcel". In Section "Bit, adding an additional one horse for each 5,000 square feet, there would be four horses on 20,000 square feet, (just a half an acre) and that this was not enough land ror tour iarge animals. Ms. Wike wanted to add a new Section, I'D", stating that "abutting lots or parcels under the same ownership shall be considered a single parcel for determining the maximum number of horses. She wanted to add a Section E establishing a procedure for dealing with violations of the equestrian overlay district. There would be a 30 -day period to correct the violation and then a fine established by the City Council. Ms. Toni Deeble, 3 East Pomegranate Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Deeble read from circle Page 93 and 94, "Bit and licit I which is included in both the current and proposed Code, and made a recommendation that the Planning Commission utilize the same procedure when changes to the existing code are to be made that affect the property owners in that area, specifically change residential into commercial. Mr. Robert Maxwell, 7 East Pomegranate Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mr. Maxwell believed that the boarding of horses for money was the central problem and this is prohibited by the current Code and he felt this should still be prohibited. Mr. Maxwell passed around a PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 21 ! it set of photographs for each Commissioner taken on October 23, 1994 from his car and from his house. He felt that the photographs showed that anyone driving down the road can see that the size of these establishments is excessive and not just for friends and children but to make money. He was concerned about lowering property values in the area and expressed his opinion that people were enjoying the equestrian lifestyle at the expense of the residential neighborhood. He asked that the Code remain the same regarding, prohibiting commercial boarding of horses. Sunshine, 6 Limetree, Rancho Palos Verdes. Sunshine said that she had promised that she would submit a alternate proposal for the Code and typed up three pages but felt it was not any better than current Code. She pointed out that the City had been living with the existing Code for 17 years and, even though it is not perfect, her concept wasn't either, nor was Staff's. She wanted to keep the Code as it is. Mr. Richard Bara, #1 Peppertree Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mr. Bara thanked the Commission and Staff for making some changes from the meeting from two weeks ago regarding deleting the language regarding abutting parcels, the 35% slope and, most of all, the authoritative, confrontational language about screening. He concurred with Sunshine and indicated that he and his wife had researched Codes in Rolling Hills Estates, Rolling Hills, and Los Angeles and mixed and matched regulations and couldn't create anything better than the current Code in Rancho Palos Verdes. He said that he could not speak for others but he boarded horses and charged for just his expenses. Vice Chairman Mowlds pointed out that if the language is retained from the existing Code on circle Page 94, the shaded "C", horses could be boarded only if you put this language back in, and that horses should be maintained only for the personal use of the family members, except as specifically provided in this chapter. Mr. Bara replied that this section should remain as it is. He said that, although he might not come out even on expenses on any one given month, sometimes over or under, for a year's time, he broke even. He indicated that he kept 7 horses on 12 acres, which he didn't think was excessive and all horses boarded belonged to friends. Another section he wanted to see retained provided that animals could be raised for sale for pro3ects for 4H, Future Farmers, or other similar groups, because when the project is complete, often the animals need to be sold. Regarding former Commissioner Wike's statement, there were three horses allowed on 15,000 in the existing Code, not one horse, but the method of calculating was described in a different way so it was confusing. Mr. Daniel Blatt (representing Mesa Palos Verdes Homeowners PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 22 Association), 29225 Stonecrest Road, Rolling Hills Estates. Mr. Blatt was in agreement with comments made by Luella Wike made and Bill Griffin. Mr. Blatt indicated that he had sent a letter sent to the City Council and the Planning Commission, asking that no horse may be kept on a second lot not adjacent to the owner of the horse in question. He was also opposed to boarding for profit, wondering if normal costs for board could be estimated and he was concerned about the density of horses on a small piece of land. He believed there should be more details regarding licensing requirements, how many horses would be allowed, and costs for maintenance of trails. Ms. Muriel Titzler, 3 Ginger Root Lane, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Titzler indicated that she had lived in the area for 40 years and had established the Pony Club in her neighborhood to teach stable management and proper riding and care of horses. This group encouraged consideration of local residents, riding on roads because there were no trails. She was disappointed to see that now she has seen people ride four abreast on the road, which is dangerous, particularly at dusk and she was surprised that there have been no serious accidents. She was distressed also that too often people who board horses that do not belong to them do not maintain the horse facilities and neither do the horse owners. She felt, in some cases, the horses were not being cared for properly and relayed an incident in which she heard a horse which appeared to be in agony and she felt helpless because she could not do anything about it. She believed that horse traffic would increase if boarding for money was allowed, which would put a strain on gates and roads, with more large trucks for manure disposal which keep knocking down the touch panel on the Narcissa gate, causing it to be constantly out of kilter. Ms. Titzler remarked that manure was not handled properly because it does not compost by itself, it needs help. She wondered who would establish the guidelines and inspections to enforce proper maintenance and adherence to the regulations. Mr. Ed Sutton, One Pomegranate Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mr. Sutton stated that he had lived in the area for 27 years and that there had been horses all around during that time. He wanted the Code to remain as it is. Mr. Sepp Donahower, 3 West Pomegranate Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mr. Donahower thought that the horse issue was emanating from the Portuguese Bend area and, given time, and the fact that a lot of horse owners have become more sensitive to other residents and vice versa, the problems would disappear, with no assistance from the City. Chairman Alberio asked Mr. Donahower if he was saying that the problem would take care of itself, with the enforcement of the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 23 CC&Rls already in place. Mr. Donahower said that was correct and, although the CC&Rls would never be enforced to the letter, everyone is more aware of the problems and the problems will be resolved. Mr. John Garvey (representing Portuguese Bend Riding Club) , 40 Narcissa Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mr. Garvey thought that licensing would lead to more regulations against the horse owners. He was in favor of retaining the Code as it is. Mrs. Kay Bara, 1 Peppertree, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mrs. Bara indicated that there were 500 members in Horseman's association, living in all four cities on the peninsula and she was familiar with codes in all of the other cities. She believed that the Code in Rancho Palos Verdes had been sufficient for many years and it should be left as it is. She suggested that a "cooling off" period would allow the problems to take care of themselves. The Horseman's Association is opposed to licensing because money would go the SPCA and not to the City and because there are no diseases passed from horses to humans. She believed that licensing would provide a data base of horse owners to be used against them. She referred to recreational boarding, a term to be used instead of commercial boarding. She explained that she and her -husband boarded friends' horses. She concluded by saying that horses are a herd animal and she didn't want to see one horse on a parcel which would be like putting a person in solitary confinement. She supported retaining the current Code. Ms. Lynn Petak, 25 Sweetbay Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Petak informed the Commission that she and her husband had moved to the area in July 1994 because they wanted to raise a family in the environment of horses. She wanted the Code to remain the same. Ms. Bridget Heller, (representing the Pony Club) 9 Fruit Tree Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Heller agreed with Sepp Donahower,'s comments. She added that if Pony Club members were riding four abreast, she would like to know about it because they would be corrected. Ms. Ora Jean Stevenson, 30136 Via Rivera, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Stevenson remarked that she boarded her horse at a commercial stable but agreed that the current Code is adequate. Ms. Mary T. Kortens, 6542 Ocean Crest, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Kortens thought licensing was impossible and did not understand how one horse could be determined from another. For example, one bay looked like any other bay. She mentioned that, if anyone believed a horse was suffering, the SPCA or the sheriff should be called. She believed the rules and regulations should remain as they are PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 24 and that they should be enforced. Ms. Caroline French, 3330 Palos Verdes Drive East, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. French explained that she had lived in the area for three years and has established a 4H horse club to teach children to ride properly which currently has 36 members. Chairman Alberio asked if she lived in Miraleste. Ms. French said she did not live in Miraleste but near there. She liked the current rules and compared maintenance of horse facilities to the maintenance of homes or yards, indicating that not all citizens comply in any of these. She was against licensing. Mr. Ron Howard, 7 Clipper Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Mr. Howard indicated that he did not live in Portuguese Bend and did not own a horse but he had friends in Portuguese Bend who owned horses and he occasionally rode their horses. It was his opinion that the problems would take care of themselves. He was in support of the Pony Club and thought it was rare that four members might ride four abreast. He believed that the Code should remain as it is. Ms. Kathy Snell, 8 Vanderlip Dr., Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Snell said that, although she had lived in the Q district for 30 years, she had never been horse back riding. She indicated that she had moved there for the higher property values and the acreage. She said she was happy to see a speaker from an area other than Portuguese Bend because she felt the horse regulations could lead to elimination of citizens' property rights in general. She was opposed to licensing horses when the City is not dealing with the transients on the beaches who start fires and constitute a health and safety hazard. She pointed that there were good reasons for keeping horses, including weed abatement (as horses running around keep weeds down), the composting of manure which can replace topsoil, and the pleasure received from horseback riding. She acknowledged a traf f is problem in Portuguese Bend and remarked that the Association has allowed people to put up fences. She was unhappy that the City took away the bridle trails to install larger drains and this forced children to ride on the roads, which was dangerous. She indicated that Miraleste does not allow horses but a horse area was nearby on the streets of Bronco, Rockinghorse Road, and Golden Spur. She was in favor of keeping the existing Code. Ms. J. Smolle , 56 Limetree Lane, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Smolley was in favor of keeping the existing Code and mentioned also that horses were herd animals which meant that the Code should never restrict the number of horses kept to only one. She felt that when horse land was leased, the tenant might not maintain the property PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 25 properly if they were neither a horse owner or a land owners. She saw a "feud" situation existing in Portuguese Bend and suspected selective Code enforcement. She suggested a mediation board that possibly the City could provide, whereby each side would pay $100 to have their complaint settled. This would force the two parties to meet face to face with an independent person who could also perform an objective inspection and analysis. She felt that there would be always be about 5% of the people who would not comply because that was simply human nature but that they should not be allowed to spoil things for the rest and a procedure should be established to deal with that 5%. Chairman Alberio noticed that several speakers had indicated this was a "family" problem that could be resolved within the "family". He appreciated Ms. Smolley's suggestion of a mechanism to enforce the Code. Ms. Sharon Hegetschweiler (representing Portuguese Bend Community Association), 6 Clovetree Place, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Hegetschweiler explained that she was President of the Portuguese Bend Community Association which had received complaints regarding the keeping of horses and the Association Board had been asked to help resolve the problems as opposed to the City's involvement. She said that someone else had evidently had a different idea and contacted the City. She agreed with Jeannie Smolley that human nature would mean that not everyone would comply but she believed think the Association Board could mediate some of these "family" disputes. Ms. Hegetschweiler indicated that she had heard from both sides and both sides believed the Association Board was siding with the other. She said that there are Association members who believe that the CC&Rls are the letter of the law and must be upheld and members who are used to living the way Portuguese Bend has evolved. Ms. Hegetschweiler informed the Commission that the Association had sent out a letter asking for input from the members, however, it was very hard to categorize the data and as not helpful. She was planning to send out another letter which would asked for a "vote" on issues and hoped that would provide useable information and they would be willing to share their findings with the Planning Commission. Ms. Hegetschweiler asked when the City started considering horse licensing. The discussion ensued between Director Bernard and Ms. Hegetschweiler which revealed that the City Council first discussed licensing with Staff in the early summer of this year and, when Ms. Hegetschweiler expressed interest in which City Council member had actually made the motion, Director Bernard said he could provide that information. Ms. Hegetschweiler made the statement that no other City licenses horses and Planning Administrator Petru clarified that the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 26 licensing of horses was not being proposed but only the licensing of boarding facilities. Ms. Hegetschweiler said it sounded like a business license. Chairman Alberio pointed out that if a person was making a business of horses, he would need a business license. A discussion between Planning Administrator Petru and Ms. Hegetschweiler revealed that the license was tied to land use but horse boarding would not be considered a home occupation because a home occupation did not allow people to come to a resident's home for a service. Ms. Hegetschweiler asked why the 'IQ" District was changed to "Large Animal" District. Vice Chairman Mowlds took responsibility for the change, made to include other large animals such as goats and sheep, as opposed to cats or dogs. Senior Planner Rojas explained that Staff and the Planning Commission were dealing with Code language for the equestrian overlay district, specifically with the 35% slope and the abutting parcels question. At about the same time, the City Council was considering the horse boarding ordinance and enlisted the help of the City Manager's office. The Planning Staff was not involved with the boarding ordinance but the City Manager's office was in communication with the Planning Staff to make sure the changes the two areas were not in conflict. Ms. Hegetschweiler felt communication to the public could be improved and explained that people felt their lifestyles were being threatened and that there was a movement to eradicate horses from Rancho Palos Verdes. She suggested that people in the horse community should have been contacted, possibly Sunshine, with whom the City and the Commission is familiar, or maybe the Horseman's Association to get them involved in the process so that they can send out messages through the network. Vice Chairman Mowlds pointed out that the Planning Commission had been working with Dick Bara for the last six weeks now, asking for his input and Mr. Mowlds said that he had provided his notes to Sunshine and had talked to at least four other people present in the audience that evening. Ms. Hegetschweiler responded that she was not inferring that the Commission was not seeking consultants. She asked the Commission if they would be willing to wait until December to continue the deliberations in order to have available the data received from the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 27 r� new letter being sent Community Association recreational boarding. 9 to the members of the Portuguese Bend which would ask if they were in favor of Chairman Alberio agreed there had to be a balance between public and private property rights, along with respecting rights of neighbors. He noted that some speakers had called this a "family" problem or indicated that the CC&Rls could be enforced to solve the problem. He indicated that the Planning Commission would do the best job they could to recommend reasonable regulations. Ms. Hegetschweiler believed that the horse owners would like to police themselves rather than involve the City's Code Enforcement Department. Ms. Betty Strauss, 10 West Pomegranate Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Strauss believed that people should have a right to enjoy horses. She mentioned that she was one of the founders of the Save our Coastline movement and had worked for three years to incorporate the City. She did not feel the problem involved just one community association. She indicated that her work with the incorporation of the City convinced her that good zoning was needed and that commercial and residential uses should not be mixed. She knew that for years back yard horse boarding operations had proliferated and because of this situation there were things in Portuguese Bend that were not seen in any part of the peninsula, like corrugated iron, etc. She stressed that she was not against horses as her children had participated in the Pony Club and she enjoyed seeing people ride. However, she compared commercial horse boarding to someone opening up their private swimming pool or tennis court as a public health club, with people coming and going and the creation of parking problems. She wanted good land use in the City because it was founded on intelligent planning and added that she appreciated the efforts of the Planning Commission. Ms. Joan Wright, 1 Fruit Tree Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Wright stated that she had been a resident for 37 years, had horses in the past, and lived very near the Pony Club and the riding stable. She felt that people were running boarding businesses even though they denied it. She noted that when a person boards six or seven horses, those horses have to be fed each day and the corrals have to be cleaned and she did not believe people would be willing to do that for their friends. She was worried about the situation escalating if were not stopped now and she referred to Mr. Maxwell's photographs as proof of commercial boarding. Vice Chairman Mowlds moved to continue this item, seconded by Commissioner Wang. Approved (5-0). Chairman Alberio suggested that a special meeting be scheduled for PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 28 distributed to the Commission. Vice Chairman Mowlds asked for an explanation regarding tabling the barbecue issue, based on the pending Development Code Revisions. Associate Planner Silverman responded that one of the Code revisions proposed would allow minor equipment and structures to be located in the setback area when these structures were located adjacent to a solid block wall. since the barbecue satisfies these criteria, if this proposed revision were adopted, the barbecue could then be reviewed by Staff. It was suggested that the Commission postpone making a decision on this item until after the Code revisions are adopted. At that time, if a Variance is needed, the process would continue and, if a Variance is not required, the barbecue would be reviewed under a Site Plan Review at Staff level. Vice Chairman Mowlds questioned whether this would apply to structures located seaward of the 251 Building Setback Line. Planning Administrator Petru stated that, although she did not have the draft Code language readily available, her recollection was that, minor structures were allowed in the 251 Building Setback area, based on a policy memo created by a previous Director. The attempt of the Code revision was to allow minor equipment and structures in that area, under certain conditions, but not seaward of the Coastal Setback Line. Chairman Alberio summarized the three issues and it seemed to him that the light pole was not a problem because Dr. Hunt was willing to move it landward of the Coastal Setback Line. Associate Planner Silverman added that Staff had suggested that the fountain height be lowered to 61 in exchange for tabling the barbecue issue. Chairman Alberio mentioned that the symmetry of the fountain needed to be considered, with its different tiers, but still felt that the fountain could be lowered without losing symmetry. Associate Planner Silverman noted that the landowner had investigated restructuring the fountain or lowering the foundation further into the ground and apparently felt this was not a viable solution. Commissioner Wang asked why lowering the fountain would not be possible and Director Bernard replied that Mr. George Hillyard, who has represented Dr. Hunt heretofore, thought that lowering the fountain was physically possible, but would be too expensive. Vice chairman Mowlds asked if anyone had requested to build a PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 30 similar barbecue in Lunada Pointe and Associate Planner Silverman indicated that she was not aware of any similar requests in that development. Since this was a continued Public Hearing, Chairman Alberio called for the first speaker. Mr. Fred Gaines, (attorney for the applicant) Reznik and Reznik, 15456 Ventura Blvd., 5th Floor, Sherman Oaks, CA 91403. Mr. Gaines said he thought a compromise was very near and that the one item which remained was the height of the fountain. He referred to the barbecue issue as being tabled. Vice Chairman Mowlds asked the section number in the Code which would apply. Mr. Gaines replied that there was no number on the sheets he was given, as he had only had a few pages listing the exceptions. He assumed that if the barbecue was approved through a Site Plan Review that it would not need a Variance. Regarding the fountain, Mr. Gaines relayed that fact that Staff found a maximum height of 61 acceptable and provided each member of the Commission with photographs and measurements of the fountain. He felt the reason Staff would allow a maximum of 61 was because of the 61 solid walls in the front yards on either side of the Hunt property. He explained that the top part of the fountain was only ill' over the 61 measurement and they were hoping to avoid taking the fountain apart. They had investigated this possibility and it was not feasible, involving a crane lifting the fountain out of the ground, removing the work and digging to lower the fountain 1111 below ground. He added that the fountain had no detrimental effect on the neighbors, given the solid 61 walls located on either side of Dr. Hunt's property. He concluded by stating again that Dr. Hunt was willing to move the light post out of the 251 Building Setback area and that he assumed the barbecue issue could be tabled because of the pending code revisions. Dr. Robert Hunt (applicant) , 6470 Seacove Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes. Dr. Hunt reiterated that he would prefer not to destroy the fountain and that his neighbors had no objections to it. He said that he enjoyed sitting out by the fountain with his dogs and asked that he be allowed to keep the top 1111 of the fountain. Vice Chairman Mowlds asked if the neighbors had 61 solid walls within the 201 setback. Dr. Hunt replied that he was not sure, but he felt that the fountain was more aesthetically pleasing than the 61 high walls and that it did not block anyone's view. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 31 Ms. Mintra Sharma, 6490 Seacove Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Sharma stated that the 61 walls had been built according to the City's Code. She clarified that she was not opposed to the fountain but came to the hearing to obtain an explanation from the Staff and Commission why previous decisions had not been enforced. She was specifically referring to the palm trees located in her view which Dr. Hunt was to have removed. She also mentioned other violations of the Code, such as the underground sauna and the gazebo, annoy the neighbors. She pointed out that Dr. Hunt had objected to small things like her childrens' playhouse, which had to be removed. Director Bernard explained that Ms. Sharma had been informed about the situation regarding the trees and sidewalks and that Code Enforcement was dealing with these problems. He added that the items before the Commission that night were separate issues and that they had to be dealt with, -by law, within a certain period of time. Ms. Sharma asked what the City was going to do about their lost view and suggested that the City immediately remove the trees and charge the cost to Dr. Hunt, as is done in other cities. Chairman Alberio expressed sympathy for Ms. Sharma and explained that he had experienced a similar situation at his own property which had taken 2-1/2 years to resolve. He emphasized that Code Enforcement was already working on the problem. Ms. Sharma repeated that no other approvals should be granted to Dr. Hunt until the old issues were resolved. Chairman Alberio explained that the law didn't work that way. Ms. Sharma referred to Dr. Hunt's dogs, which he had mentioned, and said that they bark from 7:00 A.M. until all hours of the night. She concluded by again requesting a solution to her problem and thanked the Commission for listening. Dr. Rick Quintero, 6490 Seacove Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes. Dr. Quintero repeated that their view had been lost and asked about the next step in the process of recovering it. Director Bernard explained that Dr. Hunt was still obligated to remove most of the palm trees and sidewalks in his rear yard. A previous schedule had not been met and Dr. Hunt's attorney was to have provided a new schedule, but that had not been done as yet. Dr. Quintero felt that Dr. Hunt had lied and suggested that the City discuss the situation with the City Attorney. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 32 Director Bernard said that the City Attorney would probably advise that a reasonable period of time must be given to the property owner to comply before the City prosecutes. Mr. Fred Gaines, Rebuttal. He re -stated the three issues at hand and explained that he was trying to go through the entire list of problems with the City to try to solve each one. He added that the condition required the trees to be removed within 60 days of the City's approval of a landscape plan. The landscaper had been asked to prepare a plan but this had not yet been submitted to the City. He felt it was wrong to call Dr. Hunt a liar and suggested that a decision be made on the items before the Commission at that time. Vice Chairman Mowlds located the Code section regarding the barbecue issue: Section 17.48.030(E)(3)(b)(3). He said that it was his interpretation that it was not the City's intent to have any structures built seaward of the Building Setback Line. Mr. Mowlds was concerned about consistency and, even though it would cost money to move the barbecue, it could be done. Chairman Alberio asked about the policy from a previous Director. Planning Administrator Petru clarified that there were two policy memos from a previous Director, Robert Benard. One had to do with minor development allowed seaward of the Coastal Setback Line and the other pertained to allowing minor structures and equipment to be located within the 251 Building Setback area. Chairman Alberio asked if the second memo applied to the barbecue issue. Planning Administrator Petru said that it did, and that it was Staff's intent to incorporate the policy into the Code through the revision process. However, she clarified that accessory structures (such as gazebos and balconies) would still be prohibited from encroaching into this area. Vice Chairman Mowlds asked if the policy would allow the barbecue to be located within the side yard setback area. Planning Administrator Petru said that a barbecue could be a minimum of 31 from the side property line. However, a minor structure located closer than 31 currently requires a Variance, as in the case at hand. Commissioner Wang asked the current height of the fountain. Associate Planner Silverman said it 714", as measured from the center point. If it was measured from the lowest point of adjacent grade, pursuant to the Code, it would be much higher. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 33 Vice Chairman Mowlds asked if the fountain was built after the Variance was approved for the wall in the front yard and Planning Administrator Petru, Mr. Gaines, and Associate Planner Silverman all agreed that it was. Mr. Gaines discussed the various means of measuring height of the fountain. He said that it was about 1511 higher than 71411, or about 81611, if measured from down the steps. If measured from the center, it was 1111 higher than the 61 maximum allowed. Vice Chairman Mowlds emphasized that it should be 4211, according to the Code and the conditions of approval for the original Site Plan Review issued for the fountain. Mr. Gaines said that the fountain was only 4211 high in the first 201 from the front property line and that the higher portion was located behind the 20 front setback. Vice Chairman Mowlds expressed a philosophical problem about differentiating between the height of the fountain at the 201 setback mark and at the 211 setback mark. Mr. Gaines noted that Staff said the maximum height could be 61. Associate Planner Silverman clarified that Staff said it could favorably support a Variance request to allow the fountain to be over 4211 high and suggested, not recommended, that the fountain could be allowed at 61 in height. Chairman Alberio wondered about the expense of lowering the fountain and Vice Chairman Mowlds acknowledged that it would be an expensive proposition. Chairman Alberio suggested that the fountain should be lowered to a maximum of 61 in height. Associate Planner Silverman noted that the Code required measuring from the lowest point adjacent to existing grade and that the measuring method could make a significant difference in how much the fountain must be reduced in height. Vice Chairman Mowlds believed that the Code should be followed in regard to the method used in measuring the height of the fountain. Chairman Alberio asked Dr. Hunt to return to the podium and asked him if he would be willing to compromise on the height of the fountain. Dr. Hunt stated that, when the fountain was approved by the City, nothing was ever mentioned other than 4211 height limit within the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 34 first 20' , and it was built to those specifications. Recently, the fountain was disassembled and reassembled because of a water leak. The man who made the repairs went to the City and was told that, since this was an existing structure, he could repair it without obtaining a building permit. Dr. Hunt said that it was not until after those repairs were made that he was told that the fountain was too high. Chairman Alberio asked when the fountain was built and Dr. Hunt said he thought it was in 1990. He said that he would move the light and, regarding the barbecue, if approval could not be given, he would have to take it down. Director Bernard referred to a set of plans provided by Dr. Hunt which have a City approval stamp dated 10/2/89 for a 4211 high, 1811 deep fountain. However, there is no record of any building permit being issued for this structure. Associate Planner Silverman added that, because the City has no record of a building permit being issued for construction of the fountain, Dr. Hunt's statement, that no permit for repair was needed because the structure was already existing, was not meaningful. She explained that no permit would have been allowed to be issued for repairs to the fountain because it was currently the subject of a Code Enforcement investigation. She reminded Dr. Hunt that they had a conversation on his property about problems with the fountain when he was in his car and she was standing in his driveway. Dr. Hunt replied that the did not recall that conversation. He said that he did remember touring the property with George Hillyard and Associate Planner Silverman. He and Mr. Hillyard had asked Ms. Silverman if there were any other approvals needed, and the fountain was there then. He repeated that the contractor had been told that no permission was needed to repair the fountain because it was existing. He said that the permit shows the 20, setback and the 501 setback and that the fountain could not exceed 4211 in the 20", and that he had complied. Associate Planner Silverman explained that the clearance forms appeared to have been changed to indicate that there was a 501 setback. Dr. Hunt said that they were not changed by him or any of his representatives. Associate Planner Silverman replied she was not saying that. Dr. Hunt asked who did make the change since the farm was in possession of the City. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 35 Vice Chairman Mowlds noted that the planning clearance form dated 10/2/89 indeed stated that the fountain should not exceed 421, in height and that the 201 setback is not mentioned in the conditions of approval. Dr. Hunt answered that this was not what they were told by the Staff . Director Bernard agreed that the clearance form was consistent with the Staff's practices, i.e., structures are not approved for the first foot only. Dr. Hunt stressed that he took these plans to the fountain builder who complied with the letter of the law. They were told by the contractor that, if the fountain did not exceed 4211 in the first 201, it would be considered legal. Vice Chairman Mowlds emphasized that the clearance form clearly indicated that the height of the fountain, as a complete structure, was limited to 421 and that a landowner was responsible for a structure built in the wrong place, even if the error is discovered several years later. Mr. Gaines returned to the podium and repeated that they were hoping for a compromise. He felt that the findings could be made to grant the Variance for the fountain at 61 high. Chairman Alberio asked Dr. Hunt if the fountain was allowed to remain as it was and if the Commission tabled the barbecue issue as Staff suggested, would he be willing to move the light pole and also restore the neighbor's view. Dr. Hunt said he would take out the palm trees. Director Bernard noted that the palm trees should not be considered part of this compromise. Chairman Alberio said that he just wanted to settle that point. Vice Chairman Mowlds moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Ferraro. Approved (4-0-1), with Commissioner Whiteneck abstaining. Vice Chairman Mowlds commented that the barbecue was not an issue for now because of the policy of the past Director. Planning Administrator Petru clarified that a Variance might still be needed, if the Commission does not adopt the proposed Code revisions. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 36 Vice Chairman Mowlds said that the light pole would be reasonably easy to move. Therefore, the fountain was main issue and he did not think that it was appropriate to approve a height over 42". Chairman Alberio bought up the possible ambiguity in the previous plans' approval. Vice Chairman Mowlds and Commissioner Ferraro felt there was no ambiguity and that the conditions of approval clearly indicated a 4211 maximum height limit. Mr. Gaines asked, in the spirit of compromise, for the Commission's consideration of the fountain at 61 high. There was a discussion between commissioner Ferraro and vice Chairman Mowlds about previous cases in which the Commission had required the removal of unpermitted structures located in the front yard setback. Chairman Alberio was concerned that the 201 and 501 setbacks were both indicated on the approved plans. Commissioner Wang suggested that, because this property had a complicated history and many problems, that a compromise be reached and recommended that Staff's Alternative No. 2 be approved, seconded by Chairman Alberio. Commissioner Ferraro did not agree because she felt that the fountain should be 42", as shown on their plans and as required by the Code. Commissioner Wang repeated that she was attempting to come to a compromise and that, even though the fountain was over 4211, it did not block anyone's view, and she thought a height of 61 was appropriate. Vice Chairman Mowlds said that he did not like the situation but would agree, as a compromise, with the proviso that the height would be measured as specified in the Code. Chairman Alberio still felt there was an ambiguity and that any ambiguity might be to be construed in favor of the applicant. The motion passed (3-1-1) on the following vote: AYES: Wang, Mowlds, Alberio NOES: Ferraro ABSTAIN: Whiteneck Director Bernard noted that Staff would return with a Resolution PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 37 for the Commission's review and approval at the next Planning Commission meeting on Wednesday November 9, 1994. Chairman Alberio added that the 15 -day appeal period would start at that time. IX. ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS A. STAFF 1. Pre -Agenda for the adjourned Planning Commission meeting of Wednesday, November 9, 1994. B. COMMISSION - None COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE (regarding non -agenda items) Ms. Kathy Snell, 8 Vanderlip Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms. Snell, representing the Friends of the Bend, spoke about the formation of the City's Redevelopment Agency, its relationship to low-income housing, transients living on the City's beaches, the increase in crime in the City, and the need for additional protection from the Sheriff's Department. ADJOURNMENT Vice Chairman Mowlds moved, seconded by Commissioner Wang, to adjourn to Tuesday, November 9, 1994. The motion carried and the meeting was duly adjourned at 12:57 A.M. The next regular meeting of the Commission, scheduled for Tuesday, November 8, 1994, was cancelled due to the statewide and local elections being held that day. The meeting room will not be available and a quorum will not be present. Therefore, the next meeting of the Planning Commission will be an adjourned meeting, and is scheduled for Wednesday, November 9, 1994, at 7:00 P.M. (A JD MINUTES DISK #6 - MINIQ 25) PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 25, 1994 PAGE 38