Loading...
PC MINS 19980113CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING JANUARY 13, 1998 APPROVED JANUARY 270 1998 The meeting was called to order at 7 00 P.M by Chairman Vannorsdall at the Hesse Park Community Building, 29310 Hawthorne Boulevard FLAG SALUTE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Acting Director/Secretary Rous. ROLL CALL Present- Commissioners Alberio, Cartwright, Clark, Slayden, and Vice Chairman Whiteneck, and Chairman Vannorsdall. Absent Commissioner Ng (late/excused). Also present were Acting Director/Secretary Rojas, Senior Planner Snow, Associate Planner Fox, Assistant Planner Louie, Assistant Planner Schonborn, Staff Assistant Zents and Recording Secretary Atuatasi APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Alberio moved to approve the agenda as presented. The motion was seconded by Vice Chairman Whiteneck and passed, (6-0). COMMUNICATIONS Staff Staff distributed revised resolutions for Agenda Item Nos. 2 and 3 and reduced revised plans for Agenda Item No. 3. Acting Director/Secretary Rojas introduced Assistant Planner Schonborn and Staff Assistant Zents to the Commission. Commission Commissioner Clark and Chairman Vannorsdall commended Acting Director/Secretary Rojas on his promotion and welcomed him to the Commission meeting. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Fence, Wall & Hedge Permit No. 20 - Appeal: Jeff Logan, 28757 Enrose Avenue [applicant]; R.A. Bundgard, 6708 Via Canada [appellant].. (KF). Associate Planner Fox stated that this item was considered at the December 9, 1997 meeting The Commission's action resulted in overturning the Director's decision to require additional trimming of the ash trees and therefore the Commission directed Staff to bring back the appropriate resolution to the meeting of January 13, 1998 Mr Fox recommended that the Commission adopt the resolution for this issue, but in regards to the construction of the wall, suggested that the Commission modify the resolution to require portions of the wall exceeding four feet in height be modified to meet the four foot requirement. Commissioner Alberio suggested that the Commission should listen to the public testimony regarding this item, and Acting Director/Secretary Rojas suggested that the Commission remove this item from the Consent Calendar in order to do so Commissioner Clark moved to remove this item from the Consent Calendar. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Alberio and passed. Mr. Roy Bungard, (appellant) 6708 Via Canada, Bungard stated that he was out of town during the holidays and upon his arrival home noticed that the wall being built exceeded the height limitation and was visible from his property Mr Bungard was informed by his neighbor, Mr Johnson that Mr Fox was investigating this issue Mr Bungard was inquired about the status of this situation and ended his testimony by stating that the wall was too high and that there was no wrought iron railing on the top of the wall Mr. Arthur Johnson. (adjacent neighbor) 6712 Via Canada, stated that his neighbor, Mr Daniel Hall who resides at 6716 Via Canada was not able to attend this meeting, but had written a letter to the Director describing the construction of the wall, its exceedance of the height limitation and how it blocks half of his view Mr Johnson stated that the construction of the wall commenced during the holidays He confronted Planning Commission Minutes January 13, 1998 Page 2 Mr Logan regarding this issue and told him that the four foot limitation of the wall should be measured on his side of the wall, not the interior side Mr Jeff Logan. (applicant) 28757 Enrose, stated that when he originally applied for the permit he asked about the six foot block wall around his property He stated that it was confirmed by the City that a four foot or five foot block wall could be erected with the exception that the four foot wall required one foot of wrought iron. Mr. Logan stated that when he submitted his original plans to the City, the wall to the north was approved for a height of four and five feet and that he was told by the City that this did not require a fence, wall and hedges permit since he was the "abutting" property owner He was also told that as long as the wall was under six feet that he was within the City Guidelines Mr Logan stated that he had received a letter from the City regarding the appeal, and believed that the appeal did not include the building of the wall. He interpreted that construction of the wall as approved. After the holidays, Mr. Logan contacted Associate Planner Fox and inquired if he could fill two and a half feet where the four foot wall was located and then inquired if it was necessary to obtain a permit. He stated that Mr. Fox replied that he was not required to obtain one Mr Logan then provided photographs to the Commission for their review Commissioner Ng arrived at 7.29 p m during the discussion of this item Commissioner Clark moved to continue the Public Hearing of this item to a date certain to reopen the matter to examine the issues associated with the wall, directed Staff to conduct further review of this project, and suggested that the Commission revisit the site. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cartwright and passed by a roll -call vote, (5-0-2) with Commissioner Ng and Vice Chairman Whiteneck abstaining. Acting/Director Secretary Rous reminded the Commission that the Public Hearing must be renoticed and therefore should be scheduled for the February 10, 1998 meeting. CONTINUED BUSINESS None. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. Height Variation No. 851; Gary and Michelle Miley, 1541 Toscanini Drive (LL) Assistant Planner Louie presented the Staff Report and stated that the applicant Planning Commission Minutes January 13,1998 Page 3 submitted the application seeking approval of a height variation to allow a second floor addition of 457 square feet above the existing 472 square foot two -car garage, with a maximum height of twenty-two feet seven inches Ms Louie stated that the application was deemed complete on November 20, 1997, after submittal of the necessary information Ms Louie concluded her presentation by stating that Staff analyzed the information and determined that the nine findings for granting a height variation to the applicant could be made The second story addition in excess of the sixteen foot height limit was found to be compatible with the other homes in the neighborhood therefore, Staff recommended approval of Height Variation No 851 subject to conditions Chairman Vannorsdall asked if there were any speakers for this item, and Recording Secretary Atuatasi replied that there were none Chairman Vannorsdall asked the Commissioners if they desired to discuss this item, the Commission had no comments Commissioner Clark moved to accept Staffs recommendation to adopt P.C. Resolution No. 98-1, thereby approving Height Variation No. 851 subject to conditions. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Slayden and passed by a unanimous roll -call vote, (7-0) Chairman Vannorsdall noted the 15 -day appeal period RECESS AND RECONVENE At 7 59 P M there was a brief recess until 8 07 P M when the meeting reconvened 3. Conditional Use Permit No. 68 - Revision 'D' and Grading Permit No. 1931; John and Madonna Beal, 19 Marguerite Drive (KF) Associate Planner Fox presented the Staff Report and stated that the landowner submitted an application for grading to the City on March 12, 1997 The request included modifications to the northerly side -yard setback and side -yard wall height and 1,648 cubic yards of grading for the construction of a new 7,702 square foot single- family residence in the Lunada Pointe Community Mr Fox mentioned the fact the Commission adopted P C Resolution No 81-57, approving Conditional Use Permit No 68 for a residential planned development in conjunction with Tract No 40640 (Lunada Pointe), a 25 -lot single-family subdivision Planning Commission Minutes January 13, 1998 Page 4 located seaward of Palos Verdes Drive West at Marguerite Drive Conditional Use Permit No 68 established development standards for the Lunada Pointe community, including individual pad elevations, ridge heights, wall heights and setbacks Mr Fox stated that after the January 13th Staff report for this item was completed, the applicant provided revised square footage and lot coverage figures, based on minor changes to the project. He stated that Staff had no time to review this minor changes due to short notification from the applicant Mr Fox ended his presentation and stated that based on the analysis as presented in the Staff Report, it was believed that the findings for a conditional use permit revision or grading permit could be made for the project as proposed However, Staff also believed that the requested reduction in the northerly side -yard setback was not consistent with the original intent of the conditional use permit and the quantity of grading proposed was excessive. Mr. Fox stated Staff believed that the proposed project could be redesigned so that the findings for both permits could be made. Therefore, staff recommended denial of Conditional Use Permit No. 68 - Revision 'D' and Grading Permit No 1931 as proposed. Commissioner Ng moved to open the Public Hearing. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cartwright and passed. Chairman Vannorsdall asked if there were any speakers for this item. Mr. Russ Barto. (applicants architect) 3 Malaga Cove Plaza, stated that he was trying to develop a proposal that the Commission would find acceptable He stated that the subject site has many constraints due to its location Mr Barto stated that he was designing the proposed project to accommodate the functional needs of his client who utilizes a wheel -chair. Mr John Beal. (applicant) 7242 Avenida Altisima, stated that his home was being designed for his use due to his physical condition. Mr Beal stated that he travels at least three times a week to Irvine for his exercise program, where he has access to wheel -chair accessible equipment for training, and that his doctor recommended increasing his exercise program to arrest his neurological condition Mr Beal stated that exercise facilities in this area do not carry this type of exercise equipment, so he decided to incorporate a gymnasium into the proposed single-family home. The proposed basement would have ample space for the wheel -chair accessible equipment and, noise levels would be kept to a minimum He mentioned that the only negative issue in constructing his new home would be the removing of the soil (grading) from the subject site Mr. Beal stated that if the grading does take place to allow the residence as proposed, it would be beneficial to him in the years to come He stated that his Planning Commission Minutes January 13,1998 Page 5 present home is difficult to enter due to the stairways and has other accessibility problems that he would very much like to resolve in the construction of his new home as proposed Mrs. Madonna Beal 7242 Avenida Altisima, requested that the Commission consider the proposed project She mentioned the fact that her husband (John) drives a hand control vehicle, and requested approval of the proposed grading to avoid difficulty for her husband in driving on a steep slope Mrs Beal stated that an additional reason for the requested grading was to create flat space that is wheel -chair accessible and would allow Mr. Beal to travel around the home Mr Bruce Burrell, 1605 Patton Street, San Pedro, CA, stated that he had no other comments to add, but based on his historic involvement in the Lunada Pointe development that he would be glad to answer questions that the Commission had regarding the subdivision conditional use permit for the subject site. Ms. Lorna Burrell, 31244 Palos Verdes Drive West, commended the applicant for the design of the proposed project She stated that she was very familiar with the area (Lunada Pointe) and felt that the proposed height would not impact the view of the adjacent neighbor. Ms. Burrell felt that exporting sixteen hundred cubic yards of soil would be no problem since the area residents were very pleasant, cooperative and would not mind if a couple of trucks exported the soil from the subject site Ms Burrell requested that the Commisison grant approval to the applicant for the construction of the proposed home Commissioner Cartwright moved to close the Public Hearing, seconded by Commissioner Ng. There being no objection, the Public Hearing was declared closed by the Chairman. Chairman Vannorsdall began the discussion among the Commissioners and stated that he believed raising the elevation (final grade) of the proposed project by one or two feet would be practical and would reduce the slope of the driveway, and would reduce the amount of soil to export Chairman Vannorsdall suggested that Staff conduct further review and work together with the applicant to explore other alternatives. Commissioner Slayden concurred with the Chairman and added that Staff should review the subject site, fences and height level in order to resolve the situation Planning Commission Minutes January 13,1998 Page 6 Commissioner Ng suggested that Staff conduct further review of the proposed project and explore other means to reduce the quantity some of grading. She too suggested that Staff work together with the applicant to resolve the issues. Commissioner Cartwright supported continued work between the applicant and Staff to explore different options regarding this significant grading issue He stated that raising the roof line would be challenge, but that Commission and Staff need to be sensitive to the site constraints Commissioner Clark concurred with his colleagues and stated that there should be a solution meaningful for both the Commission and the applicant and that Staff should conduct further research Vice Chairman Whiteneck also concurred with his fellow Commissioners and felt that exporting another 200 to 300 cubic yards of fill was not that much different if it resulted in a superior site layout Commissioner Alberio commended the architect for the design of the proposed project and stated that he had no problem with the amount of export propose He felt that raising the elevation may impose problems for the adjacent residents with respect to views. Commissioner Alberio supported the proposed project Commissioner Albeno requested to entertain a motion At this time, Acting Director/Secretary Rojas clarified to the Commisison that evaluating the alternatives, such as raising the elevation, would be done without the benefit of a silouhette unless the Commission requested that the applicant erect one. Mr. Rojas sought Commission direction regarding the side -yard setback issue. The Commission indicated that silhouette construction was not necessary for this project. Commissioner Clark responded by saying that they should continue to listen to Commissioner Albeno's motion and then decide on direction for Staff regarding the side -yard setback issue Commissioner Alberio moved to approve Conditional Use Permit No. 68 -Revision 'D' and Grading Permit No. 1931 as currently proposed, and direct Staff to return with the appropriate resolution for adoption. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Slayden and failed by a roll -call vote, (3-4) with Commissioners Cartwright, Clark, Ng, and Chairman Vannorsdall dissenting. Commissioner Clark moved to continue the Public Hearing of this item to a date Planning Commission Minutes January 13, '1998 Page 7 certain and directed Staff to work with the applicant to explore other alternatives to resolve issues pertaining to the reduction of the northerly side -yard setback and the excessive grading. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Cartwright and passed by a roll -call vote, (5-2) with Commissioner Alberio and Vice Chairman Whiteneck dissenting. Acting Director/Secretary Rojas reminded the Commission that it would be necessary for the applicant to obtain an extension for the project if it is continued for Public Hearing beyond January 19, 1998 deadline, and Mr. Barto indicated the applicants concurrence with the necessary extension. Chairman Vannorsdall asked Staff for scheduled date to continue this item. Acting Director/Secretary Rojas responded that February 10, 1998 would be appropriate to allow Staff to conduct further analysis of the proposed project, and to meet with the applicant NEW BUSINESS ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS Staff 4. Pre -agenda for the Planning Commission meeting of January 27} 1998. Commission Commissioner Ng announced that she had not re-applied for the Commission this year and that this was her last meeting to attend. She expressed her gratitude towards the Commission and Staff and commended them for their professionalism and services contributed during her tenure. Commissioner Ng stated that this was a very enriching experience for her. Fellow Commissioners expressed appreciation to Commissioner Ng for her service. The Commission requested a projection and description of the future workload for 1998 particularly the major projects such as, the Marriott and Ocean Trails Planning Commission Minutes January 13, 1998 Page 8 projects. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE (regarding non -agenda items) At 9:25 P.M. Commissioner Alberio moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Vice Chairman Whiteneck. There being no objection, the meeting was duly adjourned by Chairman Vannorsdall. N \GROUP\PLANNING\PCMIN\MIN01-13 98 Planning Commission Minutes January 13,1998 Page 9