PC MINS 19950613APPROVED
6/27/95
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 13, 1995
The meeting was called to order at 7:01 P.M. by Chairman Mowlds
at the Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard.
The Pledge of Allegiance followed, led by Nellie Atuatasi.
PRESENT: Commissioners Alberio, Ferraro, Vannorsdall, Wang,
Whiteneck, and Chairman Mowlds.
ABSENT: Vice Chair Hayes (excused)
Also present were Director of Planning, Building and code
Enforcement/Planning Commission Secretary Bernard, Planning
Administrator Petru, Associate Planner Silverman, Assistant
Planners de Freitas and Klopfenstein, and Recording Secretary
Drasco.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Approved as written, (6-0).
COMMUNICATIONS
Staff•
Planning Administrator Petru advised that a copy of the summons
for the Hunt lawsuit was distributed to Commissioners as
addressed, as well as a flyer and map for the L.A. Harbor tour on
Saturday, June 24, 1995, sponsored by Commissioner Alberio.
Commission: None
APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Minutes of May 9, 1995
Commissioner Ferraro stated that, on Page 6, Paragraph 4, Line 9,
the word "of" should be deleted after the word "ordinance"., She
also questioned, on Page 6, Paragraph 5, Line 1, the address of
speaker Daniel Blatt, guessing that he lived in Rancho Palos
Verdes, rather than Rolling Hills Estates. Staff stated that
this was the address he had written on his Request to Speak form.
Staff indicated that his City of residence would be confirmed
and, if he did live in Rancho Palos Verdes, the Minutes would be
changed accordingly.
Commissioner Vannorsdall moved to accept the Minutes of May 9,
1995, as amended, seconded by Commissioner Wang. Approved (5-0-
1), with Commissioner Ferraro abstaining, as she was not present
at the May 9, 1995 meeting.
2. Minutes of May 23, 1995
Commissioner Ferraro made the following corrections:
On Page 1, Paragraph 2, Line 1: Add Commissioner Ferraro to the
list of Commissioners present at the meeting.
On Page 2, Paragraph 3, Line 1: Correct the spelling of
Commissioner Alberiols name.
On Page 6, Paragraph 2, Line 6: Change 'land" to "an".
On Page 14, Paragraph 2, 2nd line from the bottom: Change
"considered" to "considering".
On Page 19, Paragraph 3, Line 1: Add "bell after "wouldit.
Commissioner Vannorsdall made the following corrections:
On Page 3, Paragraph 2, Line 12: Delete "would" before
"illegal".
On page 7, Paragraph 8, Lines 1 and 3: Fill in the names of the
Commissioners making and seconding the motion. Planning
Administrator Petru explained that the information was unclear
from the meeting notes or the audio tape, and asked the
Commissioners if they could supply the names. It was determined
that Commissioner Vannorsdall had made the motion, seconded by
Commissioner Wang.
On Page 7, Paragraph 11, Line 1: Change "NOTES" to "NOES".
On Page 9, Paragraph 6, Line 4:
On Page 11, Paragraph 3, Line 2:
"addition".
Delete "to" before "the City".
Change "additional" to
Commissioner Wang made the following corrections:
On Page 3, Paragraph 2, Line 2: Delete "the" after "Mr.'
Maxwell".
I
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JUNE 13, 1995
PAGE 2
On Page 10, Paragraph 3, Line 13: Add "bell after "would".
Commissioner Alberio moved to accept the Minutes of May 9, 1995,
as amended, seconded by Commissioner Wang. Approved (5-0-1),
with commissioner Whiteneck abstaining, as he was not present at
the May 23, 1995 meeting.
3. APPEAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 23912, ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT NO. 661, GRADING PERMIT NO. 1727, AND GRADING
PERMIT NO. 1743; Mr. Richard Ducharme, 6324 Via Colinita.
(KK)
Assistant Planner Klopfenstein presented the Staff Report,
stating that, based on the revised Slope Density Analysis, which
had been confirmed by the City Engineer, Staff was now
recommending approval of the proposed lot split, subject to
conditions of approval.
Since this was a continued public hearing, Chairman Mowlds called
the applicant's representative to the podium.
Mr. Jim Marquez (applicant's representative), 1860 S. Elena
Avenue, Suite A, Redondo Beach, CA 90277.
Chairman Mowlds asked Mr. Marquez if he understood Staff's
recommendation, specifically the fact that no action was
recommended on the Grading Permits.
Mr. Marquez said he understood and concurred. He noted that
Tentative Parcel Map Condition No. 2 stated that the map had to
be finalized within six months of the approval and that the owner
of the property would prefer taking this action at a later time.
Planning Administrator Petru explained that this was a standard
condition on all parcel and tract maps, but that there was no
requirement that the application for a final map be submitted
within six months, only that the filing fee be paid. She added
that the applicant may request three, one-year time extensions,
beyond the initial two-year approval period, which may be
granted.
Commissioner Alberio asked Mr. Marquez if he understood that, by
accepting the condition that prohibited construction on slopes
over 35 percent, these portions of the property would be
unbuildable once the lots were subdivided. However, the current
configuration of the property (as one lot) would allow
construction on a slope over 35 percent in steepness.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JUNE 13, 1995
PAGE 3
0 . 0
Mr. Marquez indicated that he understood this condition of
approval.
Commissioner Alberio asked Mr. Marquez if he realized that the
new owner would have to file a grading permit application for
each new lot.
Mr. Marquez said that he understood.
Since there were no other requests to speak on this item,
Chairman Mowlds declared the public hearing closed. There were
no objections from the other Commissioners.
Commissioner Alberio moved to accept the Staff Recommendation.
Chairman Mowlds clarified that this motion adopted the Negative
Declaration for the Environment Assessment and for the Tentative
Map, approving the lot split, but stated that no action would be
taken on the Grading Permits.
Planning Administrator Petru asked if the approval included
accepting the conditions as written.
Chairman Mowlds said yes.
Commissioner Ferraro seconded the motion.
The motion carried (5-1) on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Alberio, Ferraro, Wang, Whiteneck,
Chairman Mowlds
NOES: commissioner Vannorsdall
Planning Administrator Petru indicated that P.C. Resolutions Nos.
95-20 and 95-21 would be signed by the Chairman that evening.
Chairman Mowlds noted that the 15 -day appeal period would begin
that evening.
Director/Secretary Bernard thanked Assistant Planner Klopfenstein
for working on this project for over a year, as this was a
difficult project and involved analyzing numerous sets of plans.
Chairman Mowlds concurred with Mr. Bernard's comments.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JUNE 13, 1995
PAGE 4
0
0
4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 181; Mr. and Mrs. Roger Wolff,
5333 Ironwood Street. (TS)
Associate Planner Silverman presented the Staff Report,
indicating that the applicant had submitted revised plans
modifying the side entrance and stairway to the second unit in
response to the Commission's direction at the last meeting.
As this was a Continued Public Hearing, Chairman Mowlds asked to
hear the additional public testimony.
Mrs. Diana Wolff (applicant), 5333 Ironwood Street, Rancho Palos
Verdes. Mrs. Wolff stated that all the concerns mentioned at the
previous hearing had been addressed in the new design, and she
provided photographs, explaining how each one related to the
proposed project. Mrs. Wolff indicated that she would be willing
to work with her neighbors regarding any other concerns. She
asked that the Commission please grant the Conditional Use Permit
because she felt she had complied with all requirements.
Commissioner Alberio asked who owned the fence adjacent to the
addition.
Mrs. Wolff replied that the fence belonged to her neighbors, Mr.
and Mrs. Boothe.
Ms. Marcia Weiss, 5312 Ironwood Street, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms.
Weiss stated that Diana and Roger Wolff had been good neighbors
since 1973. She believed that the addition would not create any
hardship on the neighborhood and that the Conditional Use Permit
should be granted.
Mrs. Paula Boothe, 5327 Ironwood Street, Rancho Palos Verdes.
Mrs. Boothe indicated that she lived next door to the subject
property. She expressed appreciation that the applicant was
willing to install translucent glass on the windows on east side
of their house because her house had a bathroom window on the
west side. However, she listed some additional concerns,
suggesting that the existing house be built out to the side 3 1/2
feet and the door to the second unit placed so that it faced the
front of the property to avoid echoing between the two
residences. She also asked if the parking requirements were
being met.
Associate Planner Silverman replied that the State Law regarding
second units did not contain any parking requirements.
Commissioner Alberio asked the height of the fence between the
Wolff and Boothe residences.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JUNE 13, 1995
PAGE 5
Mrs. Boothe said that the fence was 61 high and was built on her
property after a survey was made.
Commissioner Alberio asked Mrs. Boothe if she had participated in
the Early Neighborhood Consultation for the Height Variation
application.
Mrs. Boothe said that she had not.
Commissioner Alberio pointed out that the applicant had addressed
every concern from the last hearing and that Mrs. Boothe had been
present at that hearing.
Mrs. Boothe said that she was present but that parking was not
discussed and she did not feel that noise was adequately
addressed.
Commissioner Alberio doubted that there would be a difference in
the noise level after the addition was built.
Mrs. Boothe disagreed, stating that there would be another
dwelling unit with a separate entrance.
Commissioner Alberio asked Staff about the possibility of the
second unit door facing the street, along the side of the
existing house.
Associate Planner Silverman replied that this option was
considered, but rejected, because this design would clearly
indicate from the street that there was a second unit on the
property.
Chairman Alberio wondered if the design would be attractive, and
if there would be any setback problems.
Associate Planner Silverman said that the City did not wish to
have second units be obvious when viewed from the public right-
of-way. However, there would be no setback problems created by
the proposed design.
Commissioner Vannorsdall speculated that narrowing the distance
between the two houses might actually increase noise.
Mrs. Boothe disagreed, because the door would face the street.
Commissioner Vannorsdall said that this assumed noise came from
the door, which was not necessarily true.
Mrs. Boothe believed that noise would come from the door and that
Mr. and Mrs. Wolff's daughter, as a single person, would be
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JUNE 13, 1995
PAGE 6
coming in at all hours of the night, near Mrs. Boothe's 2 -year
old son's bedroom.
Mrs. Diana Wolff, rebuttal. Mrs. Wolff addressed the parking
issue, stating that there would be no additional cars because her
daughter already lived with them. She did not feel that an
entrance facing the street would decrease noise and said that her
daughter did not keep late hours or have large crowds of people
visiting. Mrs. Wolff closed by stating that she wanted to work
with Mr. and Mrs. Boothe to ensure their privacy.
S
Commissioner Vannorsdall moved to Close the Public Hearing,
seconded by Commissioner Ferraro. Approved, (6-0).
Commissioner Ferraro noted that, on Page 6 of 6 in the Staff
Report, Condition No. 10 should reflect that the windows on the
east elevation of the addition should be translucent, not opaque.
Commissioner Alberio moved to accept that Staff Recommendation
with the change to translucent glass, seconded by Commissioner
Vannorsdall. Approved, (6-0).
Chairman Mowlds said that he would sign P.C. Resolution 95-22
that evening and that the 15 -day appeal period would begin
immediately.
PUBLIC HEARINGS (NO ITEMS)
5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 176 - REVISION A• Montessori
School of Manhattan Beach, 32201 Forrestal Drive (Ladera
Linda Community Center) (FF).
Reading of the Staff Report was waived by consensus of the
commission.
Commissioner Vannorsdall asked why two new rest rooms were being
added.
Assistant Planner de Freitas explained that it was a State
requirement since the Montessori school was proposing to add
elementary school-age children to this campus.
Commissioner Vannorsdall asked Staff if these changes were being
paid for by the priVate school, rather than the City.
Assistant Planner de Freitas said the cost of the improvements
would be paid for by the Montessori School.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JUNE 13, 1995
PAGE 7
Commissioner Whiteneck moved to accept the Staff Recommendation,
seconded by Commissioner Wang. Approved, (6-0).
6. SIGN PERMIT NO. 743; Foodmaker Inc. (Jack in the Box), 29317
Western Avenue (FF).
Commissioner Alberio moved to waive reading of the Staff Report,
seconded by Commissioner Vannorsdall. Approved, (6-0).
Chairman Mowlds called the applicant's representative to the
speaker's podium for questions from the Commission.
Mr. Tim Ribant, (applicant's representative), 9330 Balboa Avenue,
San Diego, CA 92123. Mr. Ribant explained that he worked in the
corporate office of Foodmaker, who owned the Jack in the Box
site, and that the operator, Mr. Dillon, was also present.
Commissioner Vannorsdall asked Mr. Ribant if he had read the
Staff Report, understood the conditions and if he had a
preference between Options No. 1 and No. 2.
Mr. Ribant said that he had read and understood the Staff Report
and that he preferred Option No. 3. He stated that the Staff
Report pointed out that the Jack in the Box franchise was being
asked to change signage as a corporate mandate. He noted that
there were other signs in the area, such as those at Val-U-Mart
and the Karate Studio, that he suspected did not comply with City
standards. He disagreed that there was no public access on the
north side of the building, as mentioned in the Staff Report,
stating that there was access on both sides. Mr. Ribant asked if
the two palm trees, 20 to 25 feet in height and blocking the pole
sign, might be trimmed or replaced, even though they were located
on an adjacent property. He concluded by urging the Commission
to approve Staff's Option No. 3 to allow the signage as requested
by the applicant.
Planning Administrator Petru informed Mr. Ribant that the faces
on the two signs he mentioned, Val-U-Mart and the Karate Studio,
were installed without City permits.
Commissioner Alberio believed that the Rancho Palos Verdes
businesses on Western Avenue needed help in competing with
businesses across the street in the City of Los Angeles, which
had less stringent sign regulations. He felt concessions should
be made.
Commissioner Ferraro thought the pole sign should stay because it
had been there a long time and no one had complained about it.
She felt it was less obtrusive than some of the other signs in
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JUNE 13, 1995
PAGE 8
the area, since it was merely a tall, thin pole with the logo on
top. She wanted the City to support these businesses and was in
favor of Option No. 3.
Commissioner Whiteneck and Commissioner Wang both said they
agreed with Commissioner Ferraro.
Commissioner Vannorsdall believed the pole sign should come down
because there were too many signs along Western. In addition,
the pole sign was not visible from the southbound traffic lanes
and did not adequately identify the business.
Commissioner Alberio supported retaining the pole sign since he
thought it was appropriate for a commercial area.
Commissioner Alberio moved to approve Staff Option No. 3,
seconded by Commissioner Wang.
Chairman Mowlds clarified that Option No. 3 approved the
application as submitted by Foodmaker, granting all their
requests, including re -facing the pole sign.
The motion was approved, by Minute Order, (5-1) on the following
vote:
AYES: Commissioners Alberio, Ferraro, Wang, Whiteneck,
Chairman Mowids
NOES: commissioner vannorsdall
Director/Secretary Bernard stated that there was no notice of
this hearing sent to the neighbors, as it was not required in
this case. In addition, he noted that the palm trees would die
if they were trimmed and that the property owner would probably
want them to be replaced in some manner.
ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS
Staf f :
7. Pre -Agenda for the regular Planning commission meeting of
Tuesday, June 27, 1995.
Planning Administrator Petru stated that a Continued Business
item, a continuation of the appeal of Height Variation No. 806
(Mantikas), was not on the Pre -Agenda, but that it would be on
the agenda for the June 27, 1995 meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JUNE 13, 1995
PAGE 9
•
Commission•
0
The Commission asked that an item be included on the next agenda
(June 27, 1995) to discuss a possible change in the fee schedule
for parcel maps, from a flat fee to a trust deposit account, due
to the length of time needed for Staff to review these types of
projects.
COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE (regarding non -agenda items):
Ms. Lois Large, 3136 Barkentine Road, Rancho Palos Verdes. Ms.
Larue expressed her concern about how the City was handling the
abatement of the landslide and pollution in the ocean off the
Rancho Palos Verdes coast.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Ferraro moved to adjourn, seconded by Commissioner
Wang. The motion carried (6-0) and the meeting was duly
adjourned at 8:12 P.M.
The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission would be on
June 27, 1995.
(A 7DMIN#10 - MIN6 13)
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
JUNE 13, 1995
PAGE 10