Loading...
PC MINS 19980414CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING APRIL 14, 1998 CALL TO ORDER Approved 05/12/98 v The meeting was called to order at 7.05 P M by Chairman Clark at the Hesse Park Community Budding, 29310 Hawthorne Boulevard FLAG SALUTE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Recording Secretary Zents. ROLL CALL Present- Commissioners Alberio, Paris, Slayden, Vannorsdall, Vice Chairman Cartwright, and Chairman Clark. Absent Commissioner Lyon (excused) Also present were Acting Director/Secretary Rojas, Senior Planner Snow, Associate Planner Pfost, Associate Planner Fox, and Recording Secretary Zents. It was the consensus of the Commission to approve the agenda as presented. With no objection, it was so ordered by Chairman Clark, (6-0). COMMUNICATIONS Staff Staff distributed an item of late correspondence from Mr. Mitchell Albert regarding Agenda Item No. 3 (Site Plan Review No. 8017 - Appeal); a memorandum from Staff pertaining to Agenda Item No. 4 (Conditional use Permit No. 151 - Revision 'D' and Grading Permit No. 1389 - Revision 'B'); and, two correspondence of opposition from Mr. and Mrs. Blackwelder and Mr. Lawrence Haddad regarding Agenda Item No. 5 (Conditional Use Permit No. 158 - Revision 'B'). Commission: Commissioner Vannorsdall informed the Commission that he had discussed the pending project at 7435 Alida Place with Councilman McTaggart. Mr. Vannorsdall stated that Councilman McTaggart felt that the presence of the City Attorney may be appropriate at the next public hearing for this item. On behalf of the Commission and Staff, Chairman Clark expressed condolences to Vice Chairman Cartwright on the passing of his mother. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes of March 24, 1998 Chairman Clark requested a strike -out on page 6, paragraph 4, line 6, where it reads'..clanty and address concerns of the public 'and insert the following to read as, 'conceptualize aspects of this mayor project and to facilitate addressing concerns of the public' On page 9, paragraph 2, line 1 an insertion be made to read as, ' stated that he supported the project, but the applicant's proposed plans ' 2. Minutes of March 28 1998 Chairman Clark requested that on page 1, paragraph 2, line 3 be modified to read as, 'excused'. Chairman Clark requested that all Commissioners inform him when they will not be able to attend any Planning Commission Meetings. Commissioner Alberio suggested to agendize the Planning Commission Rules and Procedures for discussion pertaining to the communication procedure regarding unavailability of a Commissioner to attend meetings Commissioner Alberio moved to approve the Minutes of March 24, 1998 and March 28, 1998, as amended. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Paris and passed, (6-0). Planning Commission Minutes April 14,1998 Page 2 CONTINUED BUSINESS 3. SITE PLAN REVIEW NO. 8017 - APPEAL: Mark Abrams, 44 Oceanaire Drive [applicant]; Karyl Newton, 46 Oceanaire Drive [appellant]. Associate Planner Fox briefly summarized the action of the Council at the April 7, 1998 meeting that affected the proposed project Mr Fox stated that the Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No 336U which places a 45 -day moratorium on the processing of any applications related to the installation of more than one ham radio or commercial antennae structure on a property. The Commission therefore Is precluded from taking any action on this application or appeal until the moratorium is lifted, and Staff can re - notice and re-agendize this item for further consideration by the Commission at that time. Commissioner Vannorsdall moved to form a Subcommittee to study the issues of ham and radio antennae and report back to the Commission with a draft revision of the City's Code, based on language included in the Council adopted Urgency Ordinance He proposed a Subcommittee compromised of three members of the Commission, a Staff representative, City Attorney representative, and a voluntary consultant Commissioner Vannorsdall volunteered himself and stated that Commissioner Albeno volunteered his services and suggested that Commissioner Lyon join the subcommittee He further suggested that Senior Planner Snow; Craig Steele from the City Attorney's Office, and, Dr. Bruce Franklin, a consultant, be included in the Subcommittee Commissioner Vannorsdall stated that the first proposed meeting of this Subcommittee could be scheduled for Monday, April 20, 1998, 7:00 P.M.. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Albeno Chairman Clark asked for Commission discussion on this item Commissioner Paris asked if Dr Franklin resided in close proximity of the applicant's property (44 Oceanaire Dave) and if there would be any conflict for him to participate in the discussions of this Subcommittee. Chairman Cartwright stated his belief that the motion extended beyond the Oceanaire situation and would, therefore not present a conflict of interest for Dr Franklin to participate in the Subcommittee Chairman Clark added that this dealt with the request from the Council that the Commission and Staff study the Development Code sections relevant to the issues of ham and radio antennae. Commissioner Vannorsdall stated his intention that the Subcommittee assist in Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1998 Page 3 rewriting the code as needed, based on its review of the issues. Acting Director/Secretary Rous informed the Commission that he, the City Manager, and the City Attorney intended to meet and draft the proposed amendments to the ordinance which would then be presented to the Commission in standard procedure utilizing the 15 -day notice process. Mr. Rous stated that Staff would bring back a final ordinance to the Commission and then forward it to the Council Chairman Clark asked Acting Director/Secretary Rojas what his reaction would be on relying on a Subcommittee of the Commission to draft the initial amendments, with Staff and City Attorney involvement. Acting Director/Secretary Rojas stated that the priority was time, and stated that the main concern was the 45 -day moratorium and associated noticing criteria Mr Rojas stated that the Council could extend the Moratorium, but that would require noticing for a public hearing He stated that if the Commission desired to form a Subcommittee to review the issues, the committee's meetings should be scheduled to allow completion of a draft ordinance for Council consideration prior to the expiration of the moratorium on May 20, 1998. Commissioner Alberio suggested that the Commission request that the City Council extend the moratorium allowing additional time for the Subcommittee to further analyze and prepare the draft language. Commissioner Vannorsdall felt that this was a very complex issue that warranted experienced professional consultant involvement regarding technical aspects of ham and radio antennae Acting Director/Secretary Rojas stated that if the Commission desired an extension of the moratorium by the Council, Staff will forward that recommendation to the Council. Mr. Rojas stated that Staff is aware of professional consultants that advise cities in terms of drafting this type of ordinance. In speaking with the City Attorney it was the Staffs intent to secure the services of a consultant that would assist in the technical aspect of the ordinance In terms of the non-technical aspects of the ordinance Staff would deal with issues in regards to antennae structure, visibility, and the impacts to the neighborhood. Acting Director/Secretary Rojas informed the Commission that Dr Franklin had signed a petition opposing Mr. Abrams antennae Therefore, this might present a conflict of interest Chairman Clark proposed to the maker and the seconder to amend the motion to Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1998 Page 4 indicate the proposed consultant (Dr Franklin) participation would be subject to confirmation by the City Attorney Commissioners Vannorsdall and Alberio had no objections Acting Director/Secretary Rojas informed the Chairman that there were two speakers and recommended that they speak only on the Subcommittee proposed by the Commission and not the Appeal of Site Plan Review No 8017 Chairman Clark informed the speakers that the Commission sought testimony on the proposed Subcommittee Mr. John Freeman, 6850 Faircove Drive, stated that he was at the last Council meeting and was under the impression that Council directed Staff to provide recommended changes to the ordinance with the input from the Palos Verdes Radio Club Mr Freeman suggested that the Subcommittee include a member affiliated with this club and believed that there would be a balance in the ordinance if there was input from all sides Mr. Mitchell Albert. (appellant's attorney) 2601 Airport Drive, Torrance, CA, stated that he had no objection with the motion as proposed by the Commission, but suggested that there should be community involvement and that his client Karyl Newton (appellant) would be willing to serve on the Subcommittee Mr Albert also mentioned that he could provide input as to some of the legal issues Chairman Clark indicated that the appropriate place for general public involvement would be during the public hearings held on any proposed code amendments Mr. Mark Abrams. (applicant) 44 Oceanaire Drive, felt that the idea of including Ms Karyl Newton and Dr Bud Franklin on the Subcommittee would be unfair and would constitute a conflict of interest. He stated that should the Subcommittee include Mrs Newton, he would also like to be made a member The motion was reiterated by Chairman Clark as a motion for formation of an Ad Hoc Subcommittee to draft the recommended revisions to the Development Code in the area of commercial and ham radio antennae and to bring back recommendations to the Commission for discussion and further revision, with public input, and then forward the recommended revisions to the City Council. The subcommittee membership would be compromised of three members of the Commission (Vannorsdall, Alberio, Lyon), Staff support as needed, and an outside consultant, Dr. Franklin. The motion was amended to include that the outside consultant's membership in the Subcommittee would be subject to Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1998 Page 5 0 confirmation by the City Attorney and if the City Attorney feels that there is a conflict of interest Dr. Franklin he will not be able to participate. The motion was passed by a unanimous roll -call vote, (6-0). Chairman Clark asked if action should be taken to continue the matter of the appeal to the Director's decision on this item and Acting Director/Secretary Rojas replied that a recommendation has been made to table this until the moratorium has been lifted Commissioner Vannorsdall moved to table the consideration of this item until the City Council imposed moratorium on the processing of applications for more than one ham radio or commercial antennae on a given property is lifted. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Slayden. Commissioner Alberio stated that there were 30 days left of the 45 day moratorium and felt that there would not be sufficient time to analyze and prepare the draft language. In response to Commission comments regarding the desire to seek extension of the 45 day moratorium, Acting Director/Secretary Rojas stated that Staff will agendize and give notice for the May 19, 1998 Council meeting to allow the Council an opportunity to consider the Commission's recommendation to extend the moratorium Chairman Clark returned to Commissioner Vannorsdall's motion to table the consideration of this item until the moratorium had been lifted. With no further discussion, the motion passed 6-0. 4. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 151 - REVISION 'D' and GRADING PERMIT NO. 1389 - REVISION 'B'; Warmington Homes/PHD Development; Seabreeze Tract No. 4665, Crest Road and Highridge Road. In lieu of presenting the full Staff Report Associate Planner Pfost pointed out the memorandum distributed earlier that evening that Staff had recommending continuance of this item to the April 28, 1998 meeting since the noticing list prepared by the applicant was not complete Planning Commission Minutes April 14,1998 Page 6 0 0 Commissioner Slayden moved to accept Staff's recommendation to continue the Public Hearing of this item to the meeting of April 28, 1998. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Alberio and passed, (6-0). 5. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 158 - REVISION 'B' ; RPV Associates I -I -c; Subregion 1, Hawthorne Boulevard and Palos Verdes Drive West Associate Planner Fox stated that this was the second revision of the proposed project and presented a brief overview of the proposal. Mr. Fox stated that Council adopted Resolution No. 92-27 approving Conditional Use Permit No 158 for a residential planned development with the approval of Vesting Tentative Tract Map No 46628 Those applications established architectural and site development standards for the seventy-nine single-family residences to be built as part of the project including setbacks, building height and open space requirements Mr. Fox summarized the revisions previously approved by the Planning Commission involving minor modification, relocations and renumbering of two lots in the subdivision. The modifications accommodated the requests of the U S Fish and Wildlife Service to achieve more viable natural habitat areas within the proposed project Associate Planner Fox stated that the applicant submitted a request for Conditional Use Permit No. 158 - Revision 'B' to the City on February 9, 1998 for miscellaneous revisions to the architectural and development standards of the project to accommodate the homes they wished to build. Based on the analysis presented in the Staff Report, Staff believes the applicant's requested revisions were warranted, subject to the recommended conditions Chairman Clark asked the Commission if they had questions for the Staff. Commissioner Vannorsdall asked about placement of awnings on proposed roof decks used to protect the resident while out on the deck. Mr Vannorsdall also questioned code considerations relating to equipment and railing heights Acting Director/Secretary Rojas replied that railings could be restricted to the minimum required by the Building Code, and that trellises and awnings could be prohibited Commissioner Slayden indicated his support of the 20% maximum Flat Roof Area recommended by Staff. Planning Commission Minutes April 14,1998 Page 7 Vice Chairman Cartwright stated that roof decks were not uncommon, but inquired about the code restrictions on installing umbrellas Acting Director/Secretary Rous replied that there were none only so long as the overall permitted structure height limit was met Commissioner Paris inquired if the applicants proposed request for miscellaneous revisions to the proposed protect would be separated out and Chairman Clark replied that the Commission would consider each item separately for discussion purposes Commissioner Vannorsdall moved to open the Public Hearing. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Alberio and passed. Mr Tam Hamilton, 30796 La Mer, Laguna Niguel, CA, stated that there were ten floor plans for the proposed project and that five will be addressed that evening Mr Hamilton stated that Capitol Pacific Holdings was dedicated to the proposed project and will make it a flagship project for the City Mr. Robert Coyle, 29 Sweet Rain, Irvine, CA discussed the renderings and sectional drawings of the proposed project He also discussed garages, and varied roof the colors, and responded to the Commission questions. Chairman Clark suggested incorporation of landscaping in motorcourt areas and driveways, such as to add moss or grass strips in order to soften these features Mr. Coyle stated that they had discussed this issue with the landscape architect and were considering including driveways with two concrete runners and grass in between Chairman Clark asked what the initials sale prices of the homes would be and Mr Coyle replied the cost was approximately between one and three million dollars Chairman Clark asked if models of the proposed homes would be on display and the applicant replied that there would be five homes on display in a full model complex which is scheduled to open in February, 1999. In the meantime grading will continue, and installation of a temporary sales trailer is scheduled to occur in .lune, 1998 Commissioner Alberio asked if this would be a gated community and Mr. Michael Gagnet, representing the applicant, replied that he was under the impression that they could not because of the need for public access to the bluff top Planning Commission Minutes April 14,1998 Page 8 Mr Coyle stated his concurrence with the recommended restriction on optional bonus space above garages to preclude use as a second unit. He also stated that the appearance of the homes would not significantly change as a result of requiring second floor walls to be off -set from those on the lower floor He believed the articulation sought by this requirement was already provided in the home designs due to the incorporation of covered veranda areas on the first floor with decks on the second floor Vice Chairman Cartwright asked if he had any concerns with the conditions that Staff had recommended such as, no cooking facilities and Mr Coyle replied no and that the bonus space above garages was a buyer option only Commissioner Alberio asked if there was an expiration date on the CCR's and Mr Gagnet replied that the CCR's would require the City's approval, which has not yet occurred. Mr. Ron Blackwelder, 30531 Rue Langlois stated he had reviewed all requests of the applicant and then voiced some concerns. Mr Blackwelder disagreed with the proposed lot coverage and flat roof area changes He stated that the proposed lot coverage (40%) was too high and accommodated the four and six garages proposed for the new homes Mr Blackwelder felt that there was more of a need for landscape and not hardscape, and stated that the lot coverage did not account for future pool construction. In terms of the roof issue, he felt that the size of the homes was not a valid reason to necessitate the flat area since the home size could be reduced to meet the current criteria. He also opposed the idea of roof decks, and felt that roof deck usage would be hard to control with CCR's He stated his belief that the facade articulation requirements were put into force by the Commission years ago to eliminate some of the larger facades, and felt the criteria should be retained Mrs. Mary Ellen Call, 30623 Rue Valois stated that the presentation displayed by the CPH Staff was very professional and that the proposed homes were very beautiful She stated that each of the additional requests made by the architect do little other than to increase the square footage of the homes which already are of 'small hotel stature' Mrs Call felt that the bonus space was not necessary, and stated that she did not support the proposed modifications Mr. Lawrence Haddad, 30643 Rue Valois stated that he recently purchased his home and was attracted to the City because of the natural beauty of the Peninsula area. Mr Haddad's main concern was the roof deck that it would impact views from above the proposed development and would be very hard to control the CCR's as mentioned by Mr Blackwelder He opposed the modifications, and specifically those related to the bonus space, articulation requirements, and the increase in lot coverage Planning Commission Minutes April 14,1998 Page 9 • Commissioner Vannorsdall moved to close the Public Hearing and seconded by Commissioner Paris. RECESS AND RECONVENE At 9.10 P M. there was a brief recess until 9.39 P M when the meeting reconvened Chairman Clark requested that the Commission discuss the six proposed miscellaneous revisions one by one 7) Modifications to Roof Ridge Orientation for Lots 40 and 45. Chairman Clark asked the Commission if they had any objection to the applicant's proposal or Staffs recommendation regarding the roof ridge orientation of these lots The Commission had no objections and accepted the proposed request (6-0) 2) Increased Lot Coverage Allowance for Motorcourts and Driveways. Chairman Clark stated that the applicant proposed the extension of lot coverage up to 45% in some cases while Staff recommended an alternative for two-tiered lot coverage of 30% as structural lot coverage, and 10% for driveways, motorcourts, and parking areas Chairman Clark asked for Commission discussion on this request. Commissioner Alberio stated that if the lot coverage increased the hardscape would also increase and that there would be less landscape He saw no trade-off Commissioner Slayden stated that the motorcourt hardscape would not be visible from above or the street, since it would be internalized by surrounding structures Commissioner Vannorsdall and Vice Chairman Cartwright expressed their concurrence, and supported the enhanced aesthetics of screened garages and driveway areas Commissioner Paris echoed the comments of Commissioner Alberio regarding increased hardscape and decreased landscape area. He stated that there would not be enough landscaping Chairman Clark stated concurrence with the Staff recommended approach of allowing the additional hardscape coverage with mandated softening features such as, landscape planters or fountains Planning Commission Minutes April 14,1998 Page 10 0 Vice Chairman Cartwright stated that the compromise which Staff had come up with gave some protection that coverage does not go overboard Commissioner Vannorsdall moved to accept Staff's recommendation for this request, seconded by Commissioner Slayden Chairman Clark suggested requiring 10% of the total area of all driveway, motorcourts and parking areas to incorporate tree wells, fountains, landscape area or similar features rather than the 5% recommended by Staff A majority of the Commission supported this request, with the stipulation of 10% of the motorcourt/parking areas used as tree wells, fountains, etc, (5-1) with Commissioner Paris dissenting 3) Increased Flat Roof Areas. Chairman Clark asked for Commissioner comments Commissioner Slayden felt that the recommended 20% maximum for the flat roof area was acceptable Vice Chairman Cartwright felt that Staffs recommendation for the paint color of the flat roof area to match the color of the roof tiles on the pitched -roof areas was a good mitigating measure Commissioner Vannorsdall had no objection to flat roofs, but opposed roof decks Commissioner Alberio asked what type of material would be used for the flat roofs and Mr Coyle replied maybe broken tiles of the color of the pitched -roof The Commission supported the proposed 20 % maximum of the total roof area as flat roof (6-0) 4) Inclusion of Roof Decks. Commissioner Slayden supported the allowance for a maximum of 10% of total roof area for use as roof decks, as Staff recommended Chairman Clark and Vice Chairman Cartwright supported the recommendation provided that restrictions on what could be placed on the deck area were established. Commissioners Vannorsdall, Paris, and Alberio objected to roof decks Planning Commission Minutes April 14,1998 Page 11 Commissioner Alberio stated that he would support a maximum of 5% of the roof area for use as decks instead of 10% as recommended by Staff Mr. Hamilton stated that their intent was not to have very large roof decks and could accept the 5% limitation but pointed out that the decks would be towards the rear (seaward) side of the homes and not towards Palos Verdes Dave West He stated that their intent was not to have the roof decks visible from the neighbors behind or above Chairman Clark asked if the reason for inclusion of the roof decks was for a more dramatic views of the ocean and Mr. Hamilton replied yes Mr Hamilton stated that if desired the CCR's could state that umbrellas and other such items are prohibited Commissioner Alberio asked if the 5% would effect the home interiors and Mr Hamilton replied that there would be no impact Chairman Clark proposed that the Commission agree on the 5% limit at the rear (seaward side) of the home and require that the CCR's put restrictions on umbrellas and other items that could detract from the overall view of the homes. Commissioner Vannorsdall expressed concern that the City would not enforce the CCR's, however it was noted that the City had the authority to include the restriction in the CCR's and leave enforcement to the tract residents. Vice Chairman Cartwright questioned a homeowners ability to install windscreens If proposed, such an element would likely require a Variance due to exceeding allowable structure height The Commission supported a maximum roof deck area of 5% of the total roof area, provided that the decks are located only on the seaward side of the homes, and the language is included in the CCR's to prohibit umbrellas, bar-b-ques, etc. on the roof decks (6-0) 5) Inclusion of optional Habitable `Bonus' Space above Garages. Commissioner Slayden supported the maximum height limitation of the garage at no more than sixteen feet and believed the design treatment made the bonus space acceptable, because it was attached to the main structures. Vice Chairman Cartwright concurred. Commissioner Alberio wanted to make sure that the garage was not a 'pop-up' type and that the CCR's include that this would not be a second unit Planning Commission Minutes April 14,1998 Page 12 Commissioner Paris and Chairman Clark opposed this request due to concern about the illegal second unit conversions. Commissioner Vannorsdall expressed concern that the ceiling height was not standard The Commission opposed the incorporation of habitable space above the garages (4-2), with Vice Chairman Cartwright and Commissioner Slayden dissenting 6) Modifications to front and rear facade articulation. Chairman Clark suggested that the Commission could go along with the applicant's proposed plan, accept Staffs recommendation or revisit this item later. Commissioner Alberio suggested that Staff work together with the applicant on a compromise. The Commission directed Staff to work with the applicant to reach a satisfactory conclusion Commissioner Slayden moved to adopt P.C. Resolution No. 98-13 approving Conditional Use Permit No. 158 - Revision 'B', subject to conditions thereby permitting the modifications as further refined by the Commission, with the exception of proposed additional habitable space above the garages, which is denied. The motion was seconded by Commisisoner Vannorsdall and passed, (6-0). 6. INTERPRETATION HEARING; U.S. Dhurandhar, 3344 Palos Verdes Drive West. Associate Planner Fox stated that the applicant for the Code Interpretation was not present for that meeting and requested an that this item be continued for the meeting of April 28, 1998 Commissioner Alberio moved to continue the Public Hearing of this item the meeting of April 28, 1998. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Vannorsdall and passed, (6-0). Planning Commission Minutes April 14,1998 Page 13 ff IA�NJIIA;L--J 7. BUDGET ITEMS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1998-1999: Chairman Clark asked Commissioner Paris while serving as Planning Commissioner Chair for the City of Redondo Beach if that Commission was reimbursed for gas, insurance, etc and Commisisoner Paris replied no Chairman Clark proposed that a seventy-five dollar month reimbursement for the Commission be included as part of the budget based on the site visits made by each Commisisoner. Chairman Clark provided information on several other jurisdictions that reimburse Planning Commissioners. Vice Chairman Cartwright supported this idea and stated that this was better than a system based on processing of monthly reimbursements, due to an unnecessary processing burden Commissioners Vannorsdall, Paris, and Albeno also supported this proposal. Chairman Clark appointed Commissioner Alberio and Vice Chairman Cartwright to draft a recommendation to the Council that the Commission receive reimbursement for costs incurred in the amount of seventy-five dollars a month, and that the 1998-1999 reflect this item. With no objections from the Commission, it was so ordered, (6-0). ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS staff 8. Pre -agenda for the Planning Commission meeting of April 28, 1998. Commission The Commission discussed that due to lack of a quorum for the meeting of April 28, 1998, the meeting would be cancelled. Commissioner Alberio requested that the Commission review and discuss the Planning Commission Rules and Procedures with respect to meeting attendance. An item for discussion will be placed on the next agenda. Planning Commission Minutes April 14,1998 Page 14 Commissioner Paris requested that project applicants provide additional information such as, 1) actual owners of the property including specific names of partners in limited partnerships, trusts, and other groups; 2) disclosure of local consultants or local persons retained for lobbying for a particular project; and 3) increased bonding requirements pertaining LLC's and LLP's. An item for discussion will be placed on a future agenda. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE (regarding non -agenda items) None At 10:52 P.M. Commissioner Slayden moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Commissioner Paris. There being no objection, the meeting was duly adjourned by Chairman Clark, (6-0). N M+ROLPWLA NINGWCMIMMIN0.4UA9 Planning Commission Minutes April 14,1998 Page 15