PC MINS 19960326APPROVED
4141-96'
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 26, 1996
The meeting was called to order at 7.00 P.M. by Chair Clark at the Hesse Park
Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard The Pledge of Allegiance followed,
led by Director/Secretary Bernard.
PRESENT- Commissioners Alberio, Cartwright, Franklin, Ng, Whiteneck, Vice Chair
Vannorsdall, and Chair Clark.
ABSENT None
Also present were- Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement/Planning
Commission Secretary Bernard, Planning Administrator Petru, Associate Planner
Silverman, Assistant Planner de Freitas, and Recording Secretary Drasco.
Planning Administrator Petru noted that Item No 3 was a Public Hearing item, rather
than a Continued Business item
Commissioner Alberio moved to approve the agenda, as amended, seconded by
Commissioner Whiteneck. Approved (7-0).
�rZ!��►I�L•g�
Staff- None
Commission -
Commissioners Ng, Cartwright, Alberio, Whiteneck, Vice Chair Vannorsdall, and Chair
Clark reported on their experiences at the League of California Cities Planners Institute
in Long Beach which was held from March 20-22,1996 The Commission discussed
the possibility of providing a written report to the City Council on what they learned at
the Institute, either individually or as a Commission.
,APPROVAL OF CONSENT CALENDAR
MINUTES OF MARCH 12., 1996
Vice Chair Vannorsdall moved to accept the Minutes, as written, seconded by
Commissioner Aiberio. Approved, (6-0-1), with Chair Clark abstaining, as he was
not present at the March 12, 1996 meeting.
2 MISCELLANEOUS HEARING; Palos Verdes Villa Condominiums, 5630
Ravenspur Drive (FF)
Reading of the Staff was waived by the Commission
After a short discussion regarding the request to install two roof -top stairway coverings
(which would exceed the maximum height limit for the building) to prevent rain water or
moisture from entering the condominium complex, the following motion was made*
Commissioner Whiteneck moved to accept Staffs recommendation to approve
the request, seconded by Commissioner Cartwright. Approved, (7-0), via Minute
Order.
Director/Secretary Bernard indicated that there was a 15 -day appeal period for any
interested party to appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council
CONTINUED BUSINESS (NO ITEMS)
3. VARIANCE NO 405, GRADING PERMIT NO. 1866, AND SIGN PERMIT NO
795, Mira Catalina Homeowners Association on behalf of the landowners, Guy
and Kimberly Candido, 30871 Casilina Drive. (TS)
Chair Clark left the dais, recusing himself from participating on this item, since his
home is near the subject project
Vice Chair Vannorsdall presided over the review of this item
Commissioner Alberio moved to waive reading of the Staff Report, seconded by
Commissioner Whiteneck. Approved (6-0-1), with Chair Clark abstaining.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 26,1996
PAGE 2
Mr. Earl Casler, 3324 Narino Drive, Secretary of the Mira Catalina Homeowners
Association, stated that he was present to answer any questions for the Commission.
During a discussion between Mr Casler and the Planning Commission, it was
determined that the new retaining wall would be partially paid for through a City
Recycling Grant
Commissioner Cartwright moved to close the public hearing, seconded by
Commission Ng. Approved, 6-0-1., with Chair Clark abstaining.
Commissioner Franklin moved to accept Staffs recommendation to approve the
request, seconded by Commissioner Whiteneck. Approved, 6-0-1., with Chair
Clark abstaining.
Planning Administrator Petru noted that Variance No 405 was approved via Resolution
96-8, and that Grading Permit No. 1866 and Sign Permit No 795 were be approved by
Minute Order. She also noted that there was a 15 -day appeal period to appeal the
Planning Commission's decision to the City Council.
Chair Clark returned to the dais and resume presiding over the remainder of the
meeting.
NEW BUSINESS
4. P.C. RULES AND PROCEDURES, P.C. RESOLUTION 92-37 (CP)
At Chair Clark's suggestion, the Commission reviewed the Planning Commission Rules
and Procedures page by page.
Commissioner Cartwright recommended that Paragraph 1 1 (Quorum) be broken into
two paragraphs, the first on Appointment, similar to the more recently adopted View
Restoration Commission Procedures, and the second regarding Quorum.
Planning Administrator Petru asked for the consensus of the Commission
After discussion among the Commission regarding Commissioner Cartwright's
suggestion, Chair Clark determined that there would be further discussion on this
recommendation and a decision made later on in the meeting
Commissioner Whiteneck suggested that Paragraph 12 (Regular Meetings) be
changed to say that Commission meetings may be rescheduled to the following day
when a meeting day falls on a holiday, instead of will be rescheduled.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 26,1996
PAGE 3
After some discussion between the Commissioners, it was decided that the sentence
would be modified to read "will generally be rescheduled "
The Commission decided to amend Paragraph 1 2 to specify that the meeting will be
adjourned "on or before 12 00 a m ", rather than "at 12 00 a m "
Commissioner Alberio suggested that the requirements for Paragraph 1 6 (Open and
Closed Sessions) were part of the Brown Act, rather than this Resolution, as it was
stated
The Commission agreed that the first sentence in Paragraph 1 6 should be modified to
read "Except as otherwise provided in the Ralph M Brown Act "
Upon a suggestion by Planning Administrator Petru, the Commission agreed that
Paragraph 2 1 (Minutes and Recordings) should be revised to match the View
Restoration Commission's Rules and Procedures regarding making copies and
destruction of the tape recording used to prepare the minutes
Regarding Paragraph 2 2 (Order of Presentation), Commissioner Ng asked if the public
hearing should be opened before the presentation of the Staff Report in reference to
the VRC Rules and Procedures.
The consensus of the Commission was to maintain the current procedure of opening
the public hearing after the Staff Report had been given, but suggested that Staff ask
the opinion of the City Attorney
The Commission agreed to modify Paragraph 2 2 to read "Public hearing may be re-
opened by a motion of a Commissioner and approval by the Commission majority "
Commissioner Cartwright suggested that Paragraph 2 5 (Oral Evidence, Time Limits,
and Number of Speakers) be changed to be consistent with the View Restoration
Commission's Rules and Procedures, thereby providing more discretion for the Chair to
allot the appropriate amount of time for speakers to make their points
After discussion by the Commission, it was decided that this would be a good change,
especially since it was more similar to the City Council's procedure. Therefore, Chair
Clark asked Staff to compose language to amend the Planning Commission's Rules
and Procedures more consistent with those of the City Council and View Restoration
Commission The Commission also asked Staff to check with the City Attorney to
determine if the Commission can legally require a speaker to state their name and
address before addressing the Commission
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 26,1896
PAGE 4
Regarding Paragraph 2 6 (Questioning of Speakers), Commissioner Cartwright asked
about potentially slanderous remarks from the public, and the appropriate methods for
maintaining decorum
Planning Administrator Petru explained that this issue was addressed in Paragraph 5 2
(Chairperson's Rules of Order) She added that the cover sheet for the City Council
agendas includes a list of rules of conduct at meetings
The Commission agreed that rules similar to those used by the City Council should be
incorporated into the Planning Commission Rules and Procedures.
Planning Administrator Petru noted that Staff recommended that the following sentence
be added to the end of Paragraph 2 8 (City Attorney). "Commission members are able
to contact the City Attorney directly with regard to any concerns about potential
conflicts of interest "
Regarding Paragraph 3 6 (Motions for Reconsideration), the Commission agreed that
the paragraph should be clarified to indicate that a motion for reconsideration must be
made at the same meeting or a meeting on a succeeding day.
The Commission agreed that Paragraph 4 1.2 (Abstentions) should be expanded to
include similar language as the View Restoration Commission Rules and Procedures.
After discussion of Paragraph 4.1.5 (Absentees), the Commission decided to leave the
wording as it currently exists.
Chair Clark re -opened the issue that Commissioner Cartwright had raised earlier
regarding Paragraph 1 1(Quorum)
After additional discussion, the Commission agreed to split this paragraph into two
parts, Appointment and Quorum, as Commissioner Cartwright had suggested.
Chair Clark made a motion to direct Staff to incorporate the Commission's
suggestions into a draft P.C. Resolution for approval at the meeting on April 23,
1996; and, to establish a Subcommittee consisting of Commissioners Alberio
(Chair), Cartwright, and Whiteneck, to prepare a point paper to the City Council
regarding appointment of Commission Chair and Commission term of office to be
reviewed by the Commission at the April 23, 1996 meeting, for possible
submission to the City Council, seconded by Commissioner Alberio. Approved
(7-0).
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 26,1996
PAGE 5
Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine Road, Rancho Palos Verdes, commented on the fact that
the Rules and Procedures require all speakers to state their name and address for the
record, and that the City Council did not always enforce this rule She also discussed
decorum at City meetings and disagreed with the rule which stated that a member of
the public could only speak for a total of 10 minutes during in any one meeting She
stated that the Brown Act requires the City to allow anyone to speak on any item on the
agenda
Chair Clark asked Staff to consult the City Attorney regarding the assertions made by
speaker.
Director/Secretary Bernard presented a report describing the events which led to Mr
Hermann's presenting a letter to the Planning Commission at a recent meeting Mr
Hermann had disagreed with actions taken by the Planning Staff and had filed a
lawsuit, which was settled out of court in favor of Mr. Hermann by the Joint Powers
Authority, even though the City Council was convinced that Staffs actions were
correct
ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS -
Staff:
6 Pre -Agenda for the regular Planning Commission meeting of Tuesday, April 9,
1996.
Planning Administrator Petru noted that there were no items currently scheduled for
this agenda and suggested that the Commission may wish to cancel the meeting
Vice Chair Vannorsdall moved to cancel the meeting of April 9, 1996, due to a lack
of scheduled items, seconded by Commissioner Whiteneck. Approved, (7-0).
Commission: None
COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE (regarding non -agenda items) None
(Note. There was a speaker who would not provide their name and address for the
record Therefore, the speaker was not recognized by the Chair )
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 26,1996
PAGE
ADJOURNMENT-
Director/Secretary Bernard announced that he would be leaving the City on April 15,
1996 to accept a position as the Director of Community Development with the City of EI
Segundo He further stated that he was pleased that Planning Administrator Petru had
been named as the new Director. Mr. Bernard expressed his appreciation to the
Commission, the public, and Department Staff members for their support and
dedication during his three-year tenure with the City.
Commissioner Whiteneck moved to adjourn, seconded by Commissioner
Cartwright. The motion carried unanimously and the meeting was duly adjourned
at 9.14 P.M.
The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission would be on Tuesday, April 23,
1996
N \GR0UPIPLANN1NG\PCM1N\96DTMN3 26
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
MARCH 26,1996
PAGE 7