Loading...
PC MINS 19970812- Approved 09/23/97 CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 12, 1997 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:01 P M by Chairman Vannorsdall at the Hesse Park Community Building, 29310 Hawthorne Boulevard FLAG SALUTE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Vice Chairman Whiteneck. ROLL CALL Present Commissioners Albeno, Cartwright, Clark, Slayden, Vice Chairman Whiteneck, and Chairman Vannorsdall Absent Commissioner Ng (excused). Also present were Director/Secretary Petru, Associate Planner Fox, Assistant Planner Ward, and Recording Secretary Atuatasi APPROVAL OF AGENDA Chairman Vannorsdall moved to consider Agenda Item Nos. 3 (Height Variation No. 826 & Grading Permit No. 1886) and Agenda Item No. 4 (Height Variation No. 835 and Site Plan Review No. 7988) before Agenda Item No. 1, since both items were recommended by Staff for continuance to an Adjourned Meeting on August 14, 1997. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cartwright and passed, (6- 0). COMMUNICATIONS Staff Director/Secretary Petru distributed. 1) correspondence from Mary Healy with Prudential Realty regarding Agenda Item No 4 (Height Variation No 835 and Site Plan Review No 7988), 2) correspondence from Dr and Mrs John Jordan regarding Grading Permit No 1933 to be considered at the August 14, 1997 Adjourned meeting, and, 3) the City Manager's response to Mr. Anthony Segreto's letter regarding the Marriott Lifecare Project Commission Vice Chairman Whiteneck distributed a memorandum regarding the Commissioner's responsibility involving findings offered by the City Engineers and other specialist employed by the City. At this time Agenda item No 3 was considered. PUBLIC HEARINGS 3 Height Variation No. 826 - Appeal and Grading Permit No. 1886: applicant: Mr. & Mrs. Kispal, 7460 Alida Place, appellants: Jane C. Botello, 7400 Alida Place, Avery Knapp, 7435 Alida Place, Michael Tjong, 7440 Alida Place, and Jimmy Naumovski, 7420 Alida Place. Chairman Vannorsdall stated that, although Staff recommended continuing the item to August 26, 1997, the applicant submitted a request to continue the public hearing to August 28, 1997 (which is not a regular Planning Commission meeting date), since they would be out of the country until that time Chairman Vannorsdall stressed the importance of the presence of both applicant and appellant at the public hearing in order to discuss and give testimony before the Commission Therefore, he suggested that the item be continued to September 9, 1997, when all parties involved could be present Commissioner Alberio moved to continue the public hearing of this item to September 9, 1997. The motion was seconded by Vice Chairman Whiteneck and passed by a roll -call vote, (6-0). 4 Height Variation No. 835 and Site Plan Review No. 7988: Mr. & Mrs. Al Edgerton, 59 Oceanaire Drive. Chairman Vannorsdall read aloud the requested action and Staff's recommendation for this item He stated that even though the public hearing of this item was to be continued to an adjourned meeting on August 14, 1997, as recommended by Staff, he felt that it was appropriate for the Commission to listen to the testimony of those who requested to speak on this item that evening. Chairman Vannorsdall asked how many requests there were to speak to this item. Recording Secretary Atuatasi replied that there were two requests Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1997 Page 2 Commissioner Clark felt that no testimony should be taken that evening, since the item was to be continued to a later date. He felt that it would be more beneficial for the Commission to hear all of the testimony at the same time. Director/Secretary Petru stated that the applicant had withdrawn his request to speak that evening, and would hold his testimony until the adjourned meeting on August 14, 1997 Chairman Vannorsdall felt that the Commission should still hear the one speaker who was opposed the proposed project and wished to address the Commission that night, since he could not attend the August 14, 1997 meeting Commissioner Alberio moved to open the Public Hearing, seconded by Vice Chairman Whiteneck, and passed, (6-0). Mr. Timothy Cotter, 57 Oceanaire, stated that the appellant, Mr Paul Cotter was not present that evening to give testimony, but that he would attend the meeting of August 14, 1997 with a representative to discuss his concerns about the proposed project. Director/Secretary Petru informed the Commission that a request to speak from Mrs Teng Li -Ann Lee was submitted to her while Mr. Cotter was approaching the podium to speak. Chairman Vannorsdall stated that any other members of the audience that wished to speak to this item would be given the opportunity do so at the adjourned meeting on Thursday, August 14, 1997. From the audience, Mrs. Lee stated her desire the speak to the item that evening, instead of waiting until August 14, 1997 Commissioner Albeno stated that the Commission could not hear her remarks from the back of the room and asked her to approach the podium to speak into the microphone. Mrs Teng Li -Ann Lee. 55 Oceanaire Drive, stated that the public hearing for this item should not be continued, since appropriate notification has not been provided to the residents in a timely fashion. Director/Secretary Petru stated that the notice for this item was properly issued through publication in the newspaper as well as mailed to all residents within a 500 foot radius of the site Ms Petru also added that the Commission had the authority to continue the public hearing to a date certain without any additional public notice without violating the Ralph M Brown Act Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1997 Page 3 Chairman Vannorsdall asked the Commission for a motion regarding this item Commissioner Cartwright moved to continue the Public Hearing to the adjourned meeting of August 14, 1997 as recommended by Staff. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Slayden and passed by acclamation, (6-0). At this time Agenda Item No. 1 was considered. CONSENT CALENDAR The Commission had no comments or objections regarding the Minutes of July 22, 1997 and, therefore, approved the minutes as presented, (6-0). CONTINUED BUSINESS 2 Tentative Parcel Map No. 24546, Coastal Permit No. 134, Grading No. 1882 and Environmental Assessment No 685; Frank Sciarrotta, 6560 Palos Verdes Drive South. Vice Chairman Whiteneck excused himself from the dais for this item, since he lived in close proximity to the subject property Director/Secretary presented the Staff Report for Senior Planner Snow, who was unable to attend the meeting She stated that when the Commission last considered this item at the meeting of July 8, 1997, they requested that the applicant place a silhouette framework on the property to represent the proposed ridge lines In addition, the Commission requested that Staff conduct a detailed view analysis on the site to analyze the differences that would occur based on the applicant's proposed maximum ridge height and Staff's recommended lower ridge heights. Ms Petru indicated that Staff had taken views both from eastbound and westbound direction on Palos Verdes Drive and found that there was no view impairment caused by the applicants proposed ridge height from the westbound traffic direction, but felt that there would be an impact for those traveling eastbound on Palos Verdes Drive South, particularly bicyclist and pedestrians Staff had once again reviewed the General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan with regards to view corridors over the subject site and included the specific policies in the Staff Report on page 3 Ms Petru noted that the Coastal Specific Plan contained stronger language than the General Plan regarding the preservation of views over the site, particularly with regards to the view directly over the site, which was the Catalina island view as well as the blue water view She stated that Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1997 Page 4 Staff takes the most conservative approach in protecting views in accordance with both the General and Coastal Specific Plan Therefore, Staff believed that the view analysis supported Staffs previous July 8, 1997 recommendations to lower the maximum allowable ridge heights on the proposed lots However, Ms Petru noted that if the Commission decided to concur with Staffs recommendation, there would still be an issue associated with providing adequate drainage for the proposed lots Staff had previously recommended that this issue be addressed by requiring the applicant to obtain a drainage easement across the adjacent Seabluff tract common open space lot in order to connect the drainage to Sandy Point Court Since this was a continued public hearing, Chairman Vannorsdall called for the first speaker Mr Tom Yuge. (applicant's architect) 521 Fay Lane, Redondo Beach, CA reiterated his comments from the meeting of July 8, 1997. He concurred with Staffs recommendation with the exception of lowering the pad elevations. Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentine Road, was pleased with Staffs recommendations regarding view protection and requested that the Commission concur with Staff and require the reduced ridge heights Chairman Vannorsdall asked if there were any other speakers for this item Recording Secretary Atuatasi replied that there were none Chairman Vannorsdall asked the Commissioners for a motion to close the public hearing Commissioner Slayden moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Clark. With no objections from the Commission Chairman Vannorsdall declared the public hearing closed. Chairman Vannorsdall informed the public that Vice Chairman Whiteneck had recused himself before discussion of this item since he lived within close proximity of the site. He then asked the Commission if they desired to discuss this item. Commissioner Slayden believed that if the ridge height were lowered a few feet more as recommended by Staff, it would place the proposed project in a hole Mr Slayden felt that the applicant's proposal would not result in significant view impairment from Palos Verdes Drive South and felt that the new homes would be compatible with the neighboring residents. Therefore, he favored approving the project, as requested by the applicant. Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1997 Page 5 Commissioner Cartwright felt that the current architectural design of the proposed homes was low enough to be compatible with the neighboring residents in the Seabluff tract He believed that if the ridge heights were lowered any further, as recommended by Staff, that the homes would not be compatible with the neighboring homes. As far as the view was concerned, Commissioner Cartwright believed that the only view impairment would be for the pedestrians or bicyclist traveling eastbound on Palos Verdes Drive South. He felt that this impairment was not significant. Mr Cartwright concluded by saying that he favored the applicant's proposal Commissioner Alberio concurred with Staff's findings regarding the potential impairment of public views over the property He felt that the proposed project should be required to conform with City's Code, General Plan and Coastal Specific Plans and should be compatible with the adjacent properties Therefore, he favored requiring the lower ridge heights Chairman Vannorsdall stated that Staff had prepared its recommendation in accordance with the City's Code and land use documents, but that the Commission had the discretion and flexibility to disagree with Staffs recommendations He echoed the opinions of Commissioners Slayden and Cartwright that the project would not result in significant view impairment at the proposed ridge heights and, therefore, supported the applicant's proposal. Commissioner Clark reiterated Chairman Vannorsdall's opening statement with regards to Staff's findings and recommendation, but concluded by saying that he agreed with his fellow Commissioners who favored the project, as proposed Commissioner Slayden moved to approve Tentative Parcel Map No. 24546, Coastal Permit No. 134, Grading Permit No. 1882, and Environmental Assessment No. 685, as proposed by the applicant, and directed Staff to prepare the appropriate resolutions and conditions of approval for the meeting of August 26, 1997. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cartwright and passed by a roll -call vote, (4-1-1) with Commissioner Alberio dissenting and Vice Chairman Whiteneck abstaining. At this time the Commission reconsidered Agenda Item No. 5 and Vice Chairman Whiteneck returned to the dais PUBLIC HEARINGS 5. Conditional Use Permit No. 178 - Six -Month Review: Steve Saporito, Hilltop Automotive, 28732 Highridge Road. Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1997 Page 6 Associate Planner Fox presented the Staff Report and stated that since building permits for this project were not obtained until September 20, 1995, a certificate of occupancy was not Issued to the applicant until February 4, 1997. Mr. Fox stated that in order to better assess the actual operation of the business, the Director determined that the Commission's review of the project would occur six months after the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Mr. Fox summarized the compliance of the project with the 19 mitigation measures and 27 conditions of approval, which were adopted by the City Council He stated that compliance with some of the conditions had been contested by interested parties, such as aesthetics, parking, landscaping, and hours of operation. Staff felt that the landowner had not complied with requirements related to removing a curb cut along Highridge Road In addition, Staff suggested some minor changes to the conditions of approval to clarify items related the on-site sale of cars, parking of vehicles awaiting service and the hours of operation. Staff recommended that the Commission to review the project for compliance with the conditions of approval and provide direction to the Staff regarding any proposed modifications to the project Chairman Vannorsdall asked If there were any speakers for this item Recording Secretary Atuatasi replied that there were a total of six speakers Commissioner Slayden moved to open the Public Hearing, seconded by Vice Chairman Whiteneck. Chairman Vannorsdall declared the public hearing open. Mr Steve Saporito. (owner of Hilltop Automotive) 28732 Highridge Road, stated that he read the Staff Report and had a couple items that he wished to clarify for the Commission. Mr. Saporito explained the incident regarding the car that was for sale on the property. He informed the Commission that this vehicle was undergoing service and that the owner happened to have a `for sale' sign displayed within the vehicle Mr Saporito stated that he was aware of residents who felt that he had been violating his approved hours of operation, particularly regarding the activities which occurred after 5.00 p m Mr Saporito stated that on a daily basis the clean-up process and relocation of vehicles into the shop took approximately from two to three hours to complete, which gave the appearance to residents that his business was still being conducted after 5.00 p m. He informed the Commission that because of the cleaning solvents and exhaust fumes which posed a health hazard for his employees, he needed to leave the doors to the service bays partially open during the clean up activities Mr Saporito requested that the Commission delete the 5.00 p.m. restriction Lastly, Mr Saporito felt that he should not be required to remove the existing curb cut He felt that the existing planter and foliage served as a deterrent to motorists trying to enter the site from this curb cut. Mr. Saporito also requested that the Commission delete this condition. Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1997 Page 7 �r s Ms Fran Saporito, 5517 Seaside Heights Drive, relinquished her time to speak to Steve Saporito. Ms Sheri Sprague 4353 Palos Verdes Drive South, expressed how pleased she was with the service he provided to the community and how it had exceeded all of the community's expectations. Ms. Sprague stated that the appearance of the facility did not resemble an automotive repair center She supported the business and felt that Mr Saporito had complied with all of the conditions of approval for his repair station Mr. Ken Combs 29322 Whitley Collins Drive, supported Mr Saporito's business and believed that he provided a necessary service to the community. Ms. Jo Landau, 2 Hilicrest Meadows Road, stated that her home was directly adjacent Mr. Saporito's repair station She believed that he had not been complying with the conditions of the CUP and was particularly concerned with two issues- 1) The landscaping did not provide adequate screening for the vehicles parked outside of the facility, and she suggested that Oleander trees be placed in that location, and 2) She stated that Mr Saporito had violated his hours of operation (8 00 a m to 5 00 p m.). Ms Landau stated that Mr Saporito's doors frequently remained opened after 5 00 p m , which created a light glow (impact) for the resident She requested that the Commission require Mr. Saporito to comply with these conditions Mr. Angelo Revels, 11 Hillcrest Meadows Road, stated that the automotive repair station had not been built at the time he purchased his home across the street. Now that was there, he and the rest of the neighbors would have to learn to live with it Mr. Revels requested that the Commission require the applicant abide with the approved hours of operation At this time Mr. Saporito was recalled to the podium by the Commission to answer questions. Commissioner Clark asked Mr. Saporito why he selected the present screening materials (Podocarpus) along Highridge Road, instead of Oleander trees Mr Saporito replied that the reason for selecting the present screening material (Podocarpus) was that it provided a dense foliage, even though it was slower growing With Oleander trees, the growth would be rapid, but it would quickly become woody and thin, and would have an aggressive root system that may break up his paved driveway Commissioner Clark asked Mr Saporito if he had any objections with the Commission adding language to the CUP prohibiting the use of the property for car sales Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1997 Page 8 Mr. Saporito replied that he had no objections to that change to the conditions. Commissioner Slayden moved to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Commissioner Cartwright. Chairman Vannorsdall declared the public hearing closed. Chairman Vannorsdall asked the Commission if they desired to discuss this item At this time, the Commission went through the Staff Report and discussed each of the conditions highlighted therein: Condition Nos. 17 & 21 (Hours of Operation Commissioner Cartwright stated that if the doors were closed at 5 00 p m , it could create a health and safety problem for the employees engaged in the clean-up process Mr Cartwright felt that the doors should remain opened for ventilation while employees cleaned and relocated vehicles inside the building Chairman Vannorsdall was concerned that, if the doors were allowed to remain open after 5.00 p.m., the light from the repair station would shine onto adjacent properties and create an adverse visual impact during the winter season Mr. Saporito replied that the lighting under the canopy of his repair station was very bright, but that these lights were rarely turned on. The normal illumination did not shine off the property He stated that only the lights inside the building would be utilized during the winter season. It was the consensus of the Commission that the current hours of operation were appropriate for the repair station, but that the owner should be allowed to leave the doors of the services bays open between 5 00 p m and 7:00 p m. to facilitate clean-up activities and re -location of the cars inside the building Mitigation Measure No. 9 (Aesthetics) and Condition No. 8 (Landscaping): Commissioner Clark believed that the existing landscape screening was adequate to screen the view of vehicles stored in the parking area Mr Clark felt that additional landscape screening was not necessary The other Commissioners concurred with Commissioner Clark's opinion and agreed not to amend this mitigation measure and condition Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1997 Page 9 Mitigation Measure Nos 10 and 14 through 16 (Parking). Commissioner Clark suggested adding language to this condition to prohibit the parking lot from being used for the sale of vehicles Vice Chairman Whiteneck suggested to Mr. Saporito that if someone brought in a car for service that had a "for sale" sign on it, he should encourage the customer to place the sign on the car seat or otherwise out -of -sight while the car was being serviced. It was the consensus of the Commission that a condition of approval should be added prohibiting the storage or display of vehicles exclusively for the purpose of advertising them as "for sale" The Commission agreed with Staffs recommendations to reword Mitigation Measures 10, 14, 15 and 16 to clarify when and where vehicles undergoing and awaiting service may be parked on the site The Commission also agreed that employee vehicles could be parked in any marked parking space on the site Condition No 6 (Curb Cuts). Commissioner Clark felt that since the Director of Public Works had determined that removal of the abandoned curb cut on Highridge Road was necessary for public safety, the landowner should be required to comply with this condition within a reasonable time period The other Commissioners agreed with Commissioner Clark's statement. Commissioner Clark asked Staff for a recommendation on a reasonable time period for compliance. Director/Secretary Petru suggested that the curb cut be required to be removed within 90 days The Commission agreed that this was a reasonable time period Commissioner Clark moved to direct Staff to amend the mitigation measures and conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit No. 178 pursuant to the Commission's discussion. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Slayden and passed (6-0) by a roll -call vote. Planning Commission Minutes August 12,1997 Page 10 Director/Secretary advised the Commission that Staff would prepare the appropriate resolution to memorialize the modifications discussed by the Commission and would bring the resolution back on the Consent Calendar at the meeting of August 26, 1997 NEW BUSINESS 6 Potential Overlay Control Districts for the Portuguese Bend Club and the Eastview areas of the City. The Commission inquired about the necessary procedures for establishing an overlay control district Director/Secretary Petru briefly explained the procedure to develop an overlay control district. She stated that either Staff or Commission could propose an overlay district be established for a particular area in the City. This recommendation would then be submitted to the Council for discussion and direction However, Staff could only commence preparation of an overlay district after City Council authorization had been granted Chairman Vannorsdall suggested that the City's General Plan should be updated since it was required to be updated every five years by state law. Commissioner Clark suggested that Staff prepare a summary report regarding the procedure to create an overlay control district. Commissioner Cartwright agreed with Commissioner Clark's remarks and added that the Commission should have a better understanding of how an overlay control district is created before making any recommendations to the City Council Mr Cartwright suggested forming an ad hoc subcommittee of the Planning Commission to review the General Plan in order to identify potential modifications or policy issues, factual inconsistencies, and updates which could then be forwarded to the City Council The Commission directed Staff to prepare a memorandum for a future meeting regarding the process to create an overlay district. The Commission also formed an ad hoc subcommittee compromised of Vice Chairman Whiteneck and Commissioners Clark and Cartwright to review the City's General Plan for potential revisions, (6-0). Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1597 Page 11 ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS Staff 7 Pre -Agenda for the Planning Commission Meeting of August 26, 1997 Director/Secretary Petru informed the Commission that the Public Hearing for Height Variation No 750 - Revision "C" and Variance No 350 - Revision "B" (3558 Bendigo Drive) was on the agenda for the meeting of August 26, 1997. She indicated that the City Council had requested that the Commission hold a closed session with the City Attorney prior to that meeting to briefly discuss the litigation and legal issues associated with the project The Commission agreed to conduct a Closed Session with the City Attorney at 6:00 P.M. on August 26, 1997 regarding Height Variation No. 750 - Revision "C" and Variance No. 350 - Revision "B" (3558 Bendigo Drive). Commission: The Commission requested that the City Attorney provide any relevant written information regarding Height Variation No. 750 - Revision "B" and Variance No. 350 - Revision "B" to the Commission prior to the Closed Session on August 26, 1997. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE Lois Larue, 3136 Barkentme Road, stated that she objected to the Commission's approval of the parcel map that evening that would block views from the public road She felt that it was not necessary for the Commission to review the City's General Plan at that time, since the Long Point Master Plan would be moving forward soon ADJOURNMENT At 10:12 P.M. Commissioner Clark moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Vice Chairman Whiteneck. There being no objection, the meeting was duly adjourned by Chairman Vannorsdall. N \GROUP\PLANNINGTWINWIN08 12 Planning Commission Minutes August 12, 1997 Page 12