Loading...
PC MINS 19960813APPROVED 9/24/96 CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 13, 1996 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7.03 P M by Chairman Clark at the Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard FLAG SALUTE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Assistant Planner de Freitas. ROLL CALL Present Commissioners Alberio, Cartwright, Ng, Whiteneck, Vice Chairman Vannorsdall, and Chairman Clark Absent. Commissioner Franklin (excused) Also present were Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement/Planning Commission Secretary Petru, Senior Planner Rous, Assistant Planner de Freitas, Assistant Planner Klopfenstein, and Recording Secretary Atuatasi APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Cartwright moved for the approval of the agenda as written. The motion was seconded by Chairman Vannorsdall and, there being no objection, it was so ordered by Chairman Clark (6-0). COMMUNICATIONS Staff Director/Secretary Petru distributed the site plan related to Item #3, two late letters regarding Item #3 and one letter regarding Item #4 In addition, a draft P.C. Resolution regarding Item #5 (Ocean Trails) was distributed Commission None CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes of June 11, 1996 The following modification was made to the Minutes of June 11, 1996 Page 5, Paragraph 10, "Commissioner Ng observed that low wattage lights..." Vice Chairman Vannorsdall moved for the approval of the Minutes of June 11, 1996, as amended, seconded by Commissioner Alberio. Approved (5-0-1), with Chairman Clark abstaining, as he was not present at the meeting. 2. Grading Permit No. 1878 - Walter and Ruth Lang, 26730 Shorewood Road Chairman Clark presented a brief summary of this item. Vice Chairman Vannorsdall inquired if there were any speakers for this item Director/Secretary Petru replied that there were no requests to speak on this item. Commissioner Cartwright moved to approve Grading Permit No. 1878, as recommended by Staff. The motion was seconded by Vice Chairman Vannorsdall. Approved (6-0). CONTINUED BUSINESS 3 Variance No. 411 and Conditional Use Permit No. 101 -Revision "I" - The Terraces Shopping (Do -it -Center), 28901 S. Western Avenue Chairman Clark and Commissioner Ng both left the dais, recusing themselves from participating on this item, since they both were not present at the last meeting Chairman Clark requested that Vice Chairman Vannorsdall conduct the hearing for this item in his place. Assistant Planner de Freitas presented that Staff Report for this item He stated that this item was last discussed at the meeting of July 23, 1996 and that the Commission identified several items of concern that would impact the adjacent residential properties Assistant Planner de Freitas stated that the applicant would address these issues during their oral presentation to the Commission He also stated that the applicant had submitted a letter stating how they intended to resolve the concerns PLANNING COMMISSION August 13, 1996 Page 2 identified by the residents and the Commission All of these items were included in the Staff Report and the draft Conditions of Approval for the Conditional Use Permit Revision He stated that, with the placement of these Conditions, Staff felt that all of the findings necessary to grant both the Conditional Use Permit Revision and Variance applications could be made. Therefore, Staff recommended that the Commission approve the project, with the appropriate Conditions Commissioner Albeno inquired if Staff had addressed all of the concerns raised by the residents at the last meeting, and if any additional communications had been received from them. Assistant Planner de Freitas replied he felt that all of the residents concerns had been addressed by the applicant and incorporated into the revised Conditions, and that no further communications from the residents had been received Chairman Vannorsdall called for the first speaker Mr. Mike Mauck, 6633 Odessa Avenue, Van Nuys, CA, 91406, represented the California Do -it Center. He stated that he received a letter from Assistant Planner de Freitas regarding the issues raised by local residents, as well as the Commission, after the last meeting Mr. Mauck stated that all of the items had been taken into consideration and that their proposed solutions had been made to the best of their ability. He stated that he had submitted an exhibit indicating the new garden area and the adjoining existing area, and the proposed area to be covered with a shade cloth indicated in green He noted that the shaded area would comprise 75% of the entire nursery area. The only part that would be uncovered would be the area where the green plants are displayed, since they need sunlight to survive He added that the two proposed parking lot lights will be 400 watts apiece and will shine downward toward the parking lot area Commissioner Alberio inquired about the signs for trucks unloading at the rear of the shopping center Mr. Mauck explained that one of the issues raised by the local residents was the noise during delivering and unloading He stated that the employees and vendors had already been informed that signs will be posted in the back area for all trucks to cut-off their engines when delivering, that all stereos be turned down and conversations be kept to a minimum. He also stated that the previous approval for delivery hours of the center were 7 00 am. to 6 00 p.m., but that the applicant had changed them to 8 00 a m to 5,00 p m and have instructed employees that truck deliveries will not be accepted before or after those times. Mr. Mauck stated that these deliver hours comply with the existing requirements of the City's Development Code PLANNING COMMISSION August 13,1996 Page 3 Ms. Nina Yoshida, 28808 Gunter Road, discussed her concerns regarding the project She faxed correspondence to the Planning Department and requested that 1) the hours of construction be limited to Monday through Friday, 7.00 a.m to 4.30 p m, with absolutely no construction allowed on Saturday and Sunday, 2) the trash enclosures be secured from use by transients and to eliminate illegal dumping; 3) the correction of the drainage problems in the rear parking lot be coordinated with the expansion of the garden center, for the local residents did not desire to live through extended days of construction, 4) the residents be notified upon completion of the project, and, 5) the City inspect the work required to correct the drainage system to make sure that it was properly done. Commissioner Alberio clarified for Ms Yoshida that the permitted hours of construction in the City were Monday through Saturday, 7.00 a m. to 7:00 p m. Director/Secretary Petru added that, if desired, the Commission could modify the hours of construction for this particular protect, as part of the Conditions of Approval Commissioner Alberio asked Staff how long the applicant had to complete the project Assistant Planner de Freitas replied that, if the project is approved and no appeal is filed, the applicant will have 6 months after the P C Resolution was adopted to submit the protect to the Building and Safety Division for plan check review Commissioner Whiteneck noted that Condition No 11 stated that a drainage plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to the commencement of work Mr. Mauck stated that 1) a drainage plan had been approved by the City Engineer and that the landowner will make work necessary corrections to the parking area to correct the drainage problems, 2) the applicant did not wish to conduct any construction on Saturdays, since this was a busy sales day, 3) that the protect would be completed no later than November 1996, and lastly, 4) the trash enclosures were being closely monitored and that the landowner was looking into the possibility of covering and securing them to discourage scavenging and illegal dumping Commissioner Whiteneck inquired if the Commission agreed to exclude Saturday from the hours of construction Mr Mauck replied that the applicant was not opposed to this restriction PLANNING COMMISSION August 13,1996 Page 4 Commissioner Cartwright made a motion to close the public hearing. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Alberio. Approved, (4-2-0), with Commissioner Ng and Chairman Clark abstaining. Commissioner Alberio moved to approval of the Staff recommendation with the Conditions of Approval as outlined. The motion was seconded by Vice Chairman Vannorsdall. Director/Secretary Petru inquired if the Commission desired to amend Condition No 14 to include no construction on Saturdays Commissioner Alberio expressed concern that this limitation may result in the construction failing behind schedule and further inconveniencing the adjacent neighbors. However, if the applicant agreed with the modification, he had no further objection. With a approval of the maker and seconder of the motion, the motion was amended to modify Condition No. 14 to require no construction on Saturday. The motion was passed by unanimous roll call vote (4-0-2), with Commissioner Ng and Chairman Clark abstaining. Vice Chairman noted the 15 -day appeal period from this date Commissioner Ng and Chairman Clark returned to the dais. Chairman Clark resumed presiding over the remainder of the meeting PUBLIC HEARINGS 4 Conditional Use Permit No 191 and Environmental Assessment No. 682, Pacific Bell Mobile Services, 6507 Ocean Crest Drive. Vice Chairman Vannorsdall left the dais, recusing himself from participating on this item, since his home is near the subject property. Assistant Planner Klopfenstein provided a brief Staff Report, stating that Pacific Bell proposed to install an unmanned Personal Communication Services (PCS) facility on the roof of the sixth story portion of the Oceanview Apartment Complex. Four panel antennas with equipment boxes would be mounted on the elevator shaft with two antenna panels facing west and two others facing east In addition, two base transceiver stations will be located on the roof of the complex between the elevator shaft and the stairwell case. Staff felt that the antenna panel and the equipment on the roof would not create any view impairment The proposed antenna panels and PLANNING COMMISSION August 13,1996 Page 5 9 0 associated equipment would comply with the minimum setback and open space requirements for the zoning district and would not exceed the height on the roof of the apartment complex Furthermore, the antenna panels and equipment will be buffered by the large setback distances Staff had reviewed the proposed project and determined that all findings necessary to grant the request could be made Therefore, Staff recommended approval for the project, subject to conditions Commissioner Whiteneck made a motion to open the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Ng. Approved, (5-0-1) with Vice Chairman Vannorsdall abstaining. Mr Jerome Buckmelter, 23534 Aetna Street, Woodland Hills, CA, 91367, representing Pacific Bell stated that Personal Communication Services (PCS) represented the next technological advancement of cellular telephones He stated that the main reason for Pacific Bell submitting the application for this site was that the elevation of the building provided the necessary transmission voice quality. Mr. Buckmelter stated that they proposed to mount the antennae on the sides of the penthouse wall and that the equipment cabinet would be painted the exact color as the exterior wall of the complex He felt that the antennae would not be visible to the local residents. Mr Buckmelter also stated that a slight modification was made after the application was submitted. He stated that the original request was to install 63 inch tall antennae, but a height reduction of 10 inches had been requested and that the antennae would now stand at a height of 53 inches He stated that PCS was providing an important service for the community and that they would do their best to conceal the equipment by abiding with the City's ordinances Commissioner Cartwright inquired if the applicant anticipated submitting required for other site locations in the near future and how many. Mr Buckmelter presented a map of the Palos Verdes Peninsula and indicated that the proposed cell sites, including the subject property He stated that Pacific Bell anticipated needing two more cell sites. He stated further that one application had already been submitted to the City and that the other proposed site would be located near City Hall Commissioners Cartwright, Ng and Alberio each expressed concern regarding the radiation effects caused by the PCS facility which might affect adjacent residents. Mr Buckmelter explained how the PCS facility operated and that the radiation generated by the equipment would be less significant than that generated by a microwave oven or the transmission of radio or television waves. He indicated that there were no long term effects, as far as human health was concerned PLANNING COMMISSION August 13, 11996 Page 6 Chairman Clark inquired as to the reason Pacific Bell selected this apartment complex and did not seek a commercial property for the proposed facility. Mr. Buckmelter replied that PCS had considered commercial properties, but that the property owners were not interested in accommodating them He also indicated that the height of the apartment complex was one of the primary reasons for selecting the proposed location. Chairman Clark inquired if a contract had been executed between the landowner and the applicant. Mr. Buckmelter replied yes Commissioner Alberio inquired if Pacific Bell had installed this equipment in the City of Los Angeles Mr. Buckmelter replied yes Commissioner Alberio inquired if Pacific Bell had sought a franchise Mr Buckmelter replied no Commissioner also inquired if a business license was applicable Mr Buckmelter replied if it is required, then Pacific Bell will comply with the City regulations. Commissioner Ng stated that a letter received from a nearby resident raised concerns regarding the effects the PCS facility might have on older cordless phones or a pacemaker Mr. Buckmelter replied that there in no information to indicate that PSC facilities affect cordless phones or pacemakers Ms. June Wisner, 29600 Island View Drive #306, stated opposition to the proposed site location due to potential radiation exposure and that this project may encourage the area to become more commercialized in the future. She also questioned if other competitors would also have interest in this area to install their equipment which may have more powerful transmissions Ms Wisner inquired if this was the only area available for the proposed project. PLANNING COMMISSION August 13,1996 Page 7 Commissioner Cartwright inquired if she had obtained a copy of the material provided by Pacific Bell which addressed most of the concerns she had raised regarding human health. Ms Wisner replied that she had received the materials Mr Buckmelter asked Ms Wisner to give him an opportunity to explain the situation and technology to her personally at her convenience. Commissioner Ng moved the motion to close the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Alberio. Approved (5-0-1), with Vice Chairman Vannorsdali abstaining. Chairman Clark requested Staff to comment on the proposed project with regards to the General Plan and Development Code Director/Secretary Petru stated that the Development Code allows commercial antennae to be installed in residential areas with a Conditional Use Permit. The issues concerned would be minimizing impacts, which consisted view impairment and noise She indicated that Staff had done some research regarding the safety concerns and found that it several reliable sources have determined that this type of technology does not pose any significant public health risk She stated further that the General Plan encourages the City to provide adequate utility services to the community, while balancing this against any negative impacts that providing such services may create Commissioner Whiteneck inquired if PCS falls under a State franchise. Director/Secretary Petru replied no. Assistant Planner Klopfenstein added that the Assistant City Manager had indicated that a local business license would not be required. Commissioner Ng inquired about what would happen if other companies proposed similar projects at the same location in the future Director/Secretary Petru stated that any future requests would be controlled by the Conditional Use Permit process Applicants desiring PCS facilities in the same location must be reviewed by the Planning Commission. At the time each one is proposed, the Commission could make a judgement as to whether there would be a cumulative impact that was significant. PLANNING COMMISSION August 13, 1996 Page 8 Commissioner Cartwright made a motion to approve the Staff recommendation subject to conditions, seconded by Commissioner Whiteneck. The motion was passed (4-1-1), with Commissioner Alberio dissenting and Vice Chairman Vannorsdall abstaining. Chairman Clark noted the 15 -day appeal period from the date of the meeting. At 8.30 p m there was a recess until 8 40 P M when the meeting reconvened with all Commissioners present. 5. OCEAN TRAILS - REVISION "C" - Zuckerman Building Company and Palos Verdes Land Holding Company, subregions 7 & 8. Chairman Clark introduced the public hearing He walked through the various aspects of the request and the chronology of events leading up to the current revision proposal He then requested that Staff and the landowner comment on the proposed changes of the project. Director/Secretary Petru stated that Staff had distributed the P C Resolution for EIR Addendum No. 5 to the Commission. She mentioned that the proposed changes to the project would not change or increase in any of the impacts that were analyzed in the previous Final EIR or Supplemental EIR prepared for the project However, several changes were now proposed to the adopted Mitigation Monitoring program. The changes were primarily intended to clarify and streamline the implementation of the mitigation measures for the developer Therefore, Staff recommended for readoption of the revised Mitigation Monitoring Program Mr. Ken ZuckermanL 2 EI Portal, Palos Verdes Estates, CA, 90274, project manager representing the Ocean Trails project discussed and summarized the proposed changes for the project Mr Zuckerman explained that the revisions included 1) the relocation of two residential lots in Vesting Tentative Tract No 50667, that two residential lots (Nos. 34 and 35) from Street "A" would be relocated to Street "C" (Lot Nos. 8 and 9) and that the proposed change would accommodate the design of the golf course, 2) the layout of the golf course had been revised which affected Golf Holes Nos. 3, 4 and 5, and the slope supporting the tee for Golf Hole 18 would be located in the Bluff Top Activity Corridor; 3) modifications to the boundaries of the Open Space Lots B, C, and H would result due to the proposed relocation of the two residential lots and proposed redesign of the golf course, 4) modifications to the public trails system to allow golf carts to use certain trails„ 5) re-routing of pedestrian/bicycle tail between La Rotonda Drive and the bluff top such that the new route would be much safer for the public since it will no longer cross any fairways; 6) re -location of a pedestrian trail which would provide access to Los Angeles County Shoreline Park and require PLANNING COMMISSION August 13,1896 Page 9 seasonal closure of another pedestrian trail to protect habitat in the area and during gnatcatcher nesting and also that signs be posted to direct the public to alternative routes; 7) combining parallel pedestrian and bicycle trails for recording purposes, 8) modifications to the approved lot configuration and maximum building heights in VTTM No. 50667 which would allow the lots in this tract to drain into the streets rather than the adjacent open space area and height modifications to allow two story homes within the tract, 9) modifications to the approved residential lot sizes in VTTM Nos. 50666 and 50667 which included the gross lot area and pad sizes in both tracts, 10) construction of a paved fire access road to the existing fire hydrants in the area to enhance the public safety for the residents in the Ocean Terraces condominium complex; and 11) changing the timing for compliance with regards to several of the mitigation measures and conditions of approval, as indicated in Exhibit "A" of draft P C Resolutions Mr Zuckerman mentioned that he had some specific comments regarding some of the proposed changes to the Conditions of Approval that he would address later in the meeting Vice Chairman Vannorsdall made a motion to open the public hearing. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Ng. Approved (6-0). Chairman Clark asked about any impacts associated with the relocation of the two residential lots He also asked in the issues regarding the use of the School District property had been resolved. Mr Zuckerman replied that the two residential lots were only relocated to accommodate a change in the design of the golf course and that the School District property had been included into the golf course as part of the previous revision to the project. Chairman Clark asked for more clarification on the proposed changes to the layout of Golf Hole No. 18. Mr. Zuckerman replied that the City and Coastal Commission limited grading that could occur within the Bluff Top Activity Corridor The tee for Hole No 18 was not within this area, but some grading to support the tee was required to encroach into the Bluff Top Activity Corridor However, the graded slope would not affect any habitat area of interfere with any of the public trails in this area He added that as part of the Settlement Agreement, the developer had agreed to maintain minimum setbacks for the golf course from the top of the bluff, which varied from 100 to 150 feet. Commissioner Whiteneck asked how much the setback had been reduced by the proposed encroachment of Hale No 18 PLANNING COMMISSION August 13,1996 Page 10 9' 0 Mr. Zuckerman replied that the setback would be reduced by approximately 40 feet Chairman Clark noted that the Settlement Agreement also created additional "non -golf' setbacks. He asked if this meant that the golf course had less space, since it was moved father back from the bluff in some areas. Mr. Zuckerman replied yes He also stated that the area west of Halfway Point Park the bluff top setback had been Increased from 25 feet to 50 feet. Commissioner Ng asked about the combined golf cart path and public trails. Director/Secretary Petru explained that the developer was proposing to combine the golf cart path with a public trail in three different areas of the project In two cases, the golf cart path would be combined with a pedestrian trail and in one case it would be combined with a bicycle path She noted that the project had previously been approved to have a pedestrian/golf cart path along the Slide Scarp, north of Golf Hole No. 18, Chairman Clark asked how safety could be protected where a golf cart path is combined with a pedestrian trail Commissioner Ng expressed her concern regarding the safety factors as well Vice Chair Vannorsdall asked how wide was the combined path would be Mr. Zuckerman replied that it would be 8 feet wide. He explained that safety precautions would consist of signage which would explain to the public of safety procedures Commissioner Whiteneck asked about the combination of the pedestrian trail and bicycle path easement and if this would affect the physical design of the trails Mr. Zuckerman replied that only the easement would be combined, but that each trail would have a separate tread width within the easement Commissioner Alberio inquired about the view impacts if the heights of the homes in VTTM No. 50667 were increased from single story to two story homes. Mr Zuckerman explained that a view impact analysis has been prepared and submitted to the Staff which indicated that the increases in building heights would not impair views from Palos Verdes Drive South, PLANNING COMMISSION August 13,1996 Page 11 Director/Secretary Petru confirmed Mr Zuckerman's statement concerning the potential for view impairment, but indicated that Staff had concerns about three of the lots being two story from an aesthetics standpoint, due to the way that those particular lots physically related to the lots around them. Chairman Clark noted that the issue would be whether or not to allow the split-level residences to be a combination of one and two story homes instead. Mr Clark asked Mr Zuckerman to explain the reduction in the lot sizes for both lots 50666 and 50667 Mr Zuckerman explained that in order to accommodate changes in the size of the golf course and habitat areas, the sizes of the residential lots had to be adjusted. Chairman Clark declared the public hearing to be open and called for the first speaker Mr. Don Barclay, 4115 Maritime Road, stated that he was generally supportive of the project. However, he mentioned that Mr Zuckerman made a presentation before the Portuguese Bend Club homeowners sometime ago and that most were supportive as he, but that there had been some changes have been made to the project since that time which would negatively impact the neighbors Along the west property line some of the houses would have a pedestrian and bicycle trail that would be very close to the property line In some cases, the trail would be only 4 or 5 feet away from a home Mr Barclay recalled that the developer promised that there would be a minimum 50 feet wide buffer zone between property line and the proposed trail Director/Secretary Petru explained that in 1992 when the project was first approved, the trails were not actually drawn on the site plan the way they were currently They were indicated by a "point to point" line However, she believed that since Revision "A" was approved in August 1994, that the trails had been shown in their current alignment on the submitted site plans Mr. Ron Maricich, 4125 Maritime Road, stated that he was also in favor of the project, but that his only concern was the placement of the trails which run between the homes in the Portuguese Bend Club and the closest access roadway into the project. He felt that there would be a buffer between the trails and the homes He indicated that he had made several inquires at the City Hall about the alignment of the trails, but was never informed of their exact location. Therefore, he could never before determine if the trails would have a negative impact on his property The proposed trail would be approximately 10 feet away from his property line In addition, the benches and shade structure proposed at the bluff top had never been shown on the plans and he had only learned of it very recently PLANNING COMMISSION August 13,1996 Page 12 Mr Bob Olsen, 4101 Seahorse Lane, stated he had similar concerns as the other speakers, but that also he was concerned about security, since the trails might be used at night by people who had no business on the property at that time Mr. Olsen stated that his property was two houses away from the proposed trail Ms. Dorothy Karfs* 3200 La Rotonda Drive, #404, stated that she was concerned about the proposed paved fire access road in front of the Ocean Terraces condominiums her unit would be only 35 feet away from the proposed access road. She felt that it would be unsightly and would be used in an inappropriate manner by the general public Mr. Chip Zelt4 4100 Seahorse Lane, stated that he had concerns about the negative impacts to security, noise and aesthetics that would be created by having a public trail so close to his property line Arnold Medearis 4048 Palos Verdes Drive South, stated that he also objected to having a public trail adjacent to his property line due primarily to concerns regarding security. Ms. Sandy Medearis. 4048 Palos Verdes Drive South, stated that she was generally supportive of the project, but was concerned about the negative impacts created by the proposed public trail and overlook area adjacent to the Portuguese Bend Club residents. She also submitted a letter from an adjacent resident to the Commission addressing their concern of the distance between the proposed trail and their home. Ms. Pat Maricich, 4125 Maritime Road, stated that she was completely in favor of the project, but was very opposed to the proposed trails plan since it would be too close to her property. She indicated that she was concerned that the trail would be available to the public on a 24 hour basis and opposed this idea due to the fact that teenagers were already congregating in the cliff area She also mentioned that the proposed trail would not be safe for handicapped persons since it was so isolated William Simmons 4181 Maritime Road, expressed his concerns regarding the privacy and security of all the residents in the immediate area of the proposed trail and asked that the Commission review the matter and to require the developer to come up with a solution to establish an appropriate buffer zone between the resident's homes and the proposed trail. In responding to concerns raised by some of the speakers, Mr Zuckerman explained that the path that would be located at natural grade and that there would be minimal grading needed to install the trail. However, the location of the access roadway from Palos Verdes Drive South provides very little flexibility in moving the trail farther away from the adjacent residents However, he noted that there may be a possibility to PLANNING COMMISSION August 13,1996 Page 13 change the alignment of the path as it proceeds to the south to move it further away from the homes, but adding to the conditions which have approved by the Coastal Commission would cause further delay in the project Mr. Zuckerman said that he would be willing to work together with the Staff and residents within the perimeters that currently exist He also mentioned that he would be willing to work with the Coastal Commission to obtain permission to gate the entrance to the trail at night to increase security Commissioner Ng asked if the clubhouse would have after-hours functions. Mr. Zuckerman replied that the clubhouse would have a banquet facility that would probably be used at night Commissioner Ng asked about closure time of the proposed trails. Mr Zuckerman replied that the Coastal Commission conditions did not address this particular issue, but they do have approval to close a parking lot on the east side of the project at night Therefore, there may be some possibility of limiting the hours that the public may use the trails at night. Chairman Clark inquired about moving the trails to the access roadway. Mr. Zuckerman explained that the road is coming down at maximum grade of 11 5%, which is too steep for a bicycle path. Director/Secretary Petru stated that, as currently approved, there would not be sufficient easement width available on Street "C" to accommodate both pedestrian and bicycle trail on the west side of the road. Chairman Clark asked Staff if they had any thoughts on the issue that the speakers expressed regarding the conflict between proximity of the trails and the adjoining properties. Director/Secretary Petru stated that Staff would be very willing work together with the developer, the residents and the Coastal Commission Staff to arrive at a solution Vice Chairman Vannorsdall made a motion to close the public hearing. Seconded by Commissioner Ng. Approved (6-0). Chairman Clark asked the Commission if they had any desires to discuss the proposed revisions, Item Nos 1 through 11 PLANNING COMMISSION August 13,1996 Page 14 By acclamation, it was determined that Items 1 through 3 of the proposed revisions (relocation of the residential lots, golf course and open space lots) were generally acceptable to the Commission Chairman Clark stated to the Commission that Item No. 4 (combined golf cart paths and public trails) should be reviewed once again due to safety hazards before a final decision is made. Commissioner Ng stated that she felt that there would still be safety issues, even if signage was posted, by combining the golf cart path with the public trails. Commissioner Alberio stated that accidents would occur whether or not signage was posted Chairman Clark stated that there must be some way to enhance the protection of pedestrian utilizing the golf cart/bicycle trails Commissioner Ng stated that the golf cart/bicycle trails should not be combined due to safety reasons. Mr. Zuckerman stated that striping the path could reduce the likelihood of accidents Commissioner Cartwright responded that striping may actually cause more problems Chairman Clark suggested that signage should be required at a minimum, but that the developer should be required to explore additional safety measures. If they prove to be unsuccessful, the City can require the developer to separate the public trails from the golf cart path. The Commission concurred with Chairman Clark's suggestion. The Commission then expressed it general approval of Item Nos. 5 (re-routing pedestrian/bicycle trail between La Rotonda Drive and the Bluff Top Activity Corridor), 6 (relocation of the pedestrian trail which would provide access to Los Angeles County Shoreline Park); and, 7 (combining parallel pedestrian and bicycle easements for recording purposes) of the proposed revisions The proposed revision for Item No 8 (modifications to the approved lot configurations and maximum building heights in VTTM No 50667) was approved after it was passed by a roll call vote (4-2), with Commissioner Ng and Vice Chairman Vannorsdall dissenting. PLANNING COMMISSION August 13,1996 Page 15 The Commission then expressed it general approval of Item Nos 9 (modifications to the approved lot sizes in VTTM Nos. 50666 and 50667) and 10 (construction of a paved fire access road adjacent to the Ocean Terraces Condominium complex) of the proposed revisions. The proposed revision for Item No 11 (changes to the timing for compliance with several mitigation measures and conditions of approval for the project) was approved after it was passed by a unanimous roll call vote (6-0). Vice Chairman Vannorsdall made a motion to approve Revision "C". Seconded Commissioner Alberio, subject to modification to the Conditions of Approval requested by the Commission. Approved (6-0). Chairman Clark suggested that Staff, the developer, and the Portuguese Bend Homeowners attempt to resolve the issues regarding the proposed trail prior to the City Council's consideration of the proposed revision to the project In addition, Staff was directed to coordinate with the Coastal Commission on this issue NEW BUSINESS 6 DISCUSSION OF THE FINAL STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 17.02.040 Chairman Clark stated that this item would be discussed at an adjourned meeting on Monday, August 19, 1996 at 7.00 p.m. at Hesse Park 0 all1*111aNM-4'Ir Commissioner Ng made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Commissioner Whiteneck. Approved (6-0). At 12 21 P.M. the meeting was formally adjourned to an Adjourned Meeting on Monday, August 19, 1996, 7 00 P M N ZROUMPLANNINGVCMINWIN8.13 PLANNING COMMISSION August 13,1996 Page 16