Loading...
PC MINS 19990914CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Cartwright at 7 02 p m at the Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Director/Secretary Rotas led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag ATTENDANCE Present Commissioners Alberio, Clark, Paris, Vannorsdall, Vice Chairman Lyon and Chairman Cartwright. Absent Commissioner Slayden was excused. Also present were: Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Rojas, Senior Planner Pfost, Assistant Planner Louie, and Recording Secretary Peterson. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Alberio moved to approve the agenda as presented, seconded by Commissioner Paris. There being no objection, it was so ordered by the Chairman COMMUNICATIONS Council Policv Items. Director/Secretary Rous reviewed items discussed at the September 7, 1999 City Council meeting which included- 1) The approval of the final tract map for Tract 50667 (Ocean Trails); 2) the adoption of the Resolution for the height variation on Stallion Road, 3) A request for de -annexation from the community around Via Campesina and Yellow Brick Road, and 4) The expiration of the moratorium in the Via Campesina and Yellow Brick Road area. Staff Director/Secretari Rotas distributed several items of late correspondence- 1) A letter opposing the proposed sign change at Highndge Car Wash (Agenda Item No 3), 2) two letters opposing the proposed variance on Via Ciega (Agenda Item No 4), 3) A letter APPROVED 9/28/99 CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 14, 1999 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Cartwright at 7 02 p m at the Hesse Park Community Building, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Director/Secretary Rotas led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag ATTENDANCE Present Commissioners Alberio, Clark, Paris, Vannorsdall, Vice Chairman Lyon and Chairman Cartwright. Absent Commissioner Slayden was excused. Also present were: Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Rojas, Senior Planner Pfost, Assistant Planner Louie, and Recording Secretary Peterson. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Commissioner Alberio moved to approve the agenda as presented, seconded by Commissioner Paris. There being no objection, it was so ordered by the Chairman COMMUNICATIONS Council Policv Items. Director/Secretary Rous reviewed items discussed at the September 7, 1999 City Council meeting which included- 1) The approval of the final tract map for Tract 50667 (Ocean Trails); 2) the adoption of the Resolution for the height variation on Stallion Road, 3) A request for de -annexation from the community around Via Campesina and Yellow Brick Road, and 4) The expiration of the moratorium in the Via Campesina and Yellow Brick Road area. Staff Director/Secretari Rotas distributed several items of late correspondence- 1) A letter opposing the proposed sign change at Highndge Car Wash (Agenda Item No 3), 2) two letters opposing the proposed variance on Via Ciega (Agenda Item No 4), 3) A letter regarding Agenda Item No 6, and, 5) A memo from Commissioner Vannorsdall regarding the Golden Cove Shopping Center application. Director/Secretary Rojas briefly updated the Commission on the status of the Long Point project, as well as the status of the Ocean Trails project None CONSENT CALENDAR Minutes of August 24, 1999 Commissioner Paris requested that on page 8, last paragraph, the word "under" be changed to "over". Commissioner Vannorsdall requested that his memo of August 24, 1999 regarding the Abalone Cove proposed restoration be attached to the minutes as requested at the last meeting Director/Secretary Rojas apologized for the oversight and assured the Commission the memo would be attached to the final copy of the minutes Commissioner Clark stated that on page 9 the top paragraph did not fully explain his concern for not only the parking, but whether the revitalization of the center also required new building construction as opposed to refurbishment of the market and existing infrastructure. He requested that be reflected in the minutes Commissioner Vannorsdall stated on page 8, second paragraph did not reflect what he was saying about taking down the old flags and putting up new flags. He asked that paragraph be clarified Commissioner Alberio moved to approve the minutes as amended, seconded by Commissioner Clark. There being no objection, the minutes were approved, (6-0). CONTINUED BUSINESS 2. Conditional Use Permit No. 206, Variance No. 446, Grading No 2135 and Environmental Assessment No. 771; Hannibal Petrossi, Petrossi & Associates (applicant), Golden Cove Center 31100-31176 Palos Verdes Drive West. Director/Secretary Rojas explained that at the last meeting of the Planning Commission issues were discussed and direction was given to staff and the applicant as to specific items Several days after the meeting the applicant requested a continuance of the Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 2 project as they were having internal meetings to deal with the issues brought up at the Planning Commission meeting. Therefore, staff requested a continuance of the item to the September 28 meeting. Further, Commissioner Vannorsdall had distributed a memo to the Commission addressing specific direction on certain items. At this time the Planning Commission took several minutes to read Commissioner Vannorsdall's memo regarding the Golden Cove shopping area application. Commissioner Vannorsdall explained that regarding the reflagging, he had changed his mind and now felt that reflagging would not accomplish anything in addition to it being costly and time consuming He felt the applicant has already done quite a bit to accommodate the view considerations Chairman Cartwright asked for clarification from Commissioner Vannorsdall as to what he was hoping to accomplish with this memo Commissioner Vannorsdall responded that he was looking for the Commission to give direction to the staff so they could work with the applicant He felt that the Commission could modify and add to the previous direction given to staff Chairman Cartwright stated that at the last meeting the applicant had been directed to reflag the site and he did not see any reason to change that decision now. Commissioner Paris suggested that each Commissioner be given the opportunity to respond to Commissioner Vannorsdall's memo on a point by point basis and that information along with the memo be forwarded to the developer to use as they see fit. Vice Chairman Lyon agreed and stated that the reason for Commissioner Vannorsdall's memo was to make it easier for the developer to understand the direction of the Commission. He felt if there was some reason for the Commission to change their original direction, he had no problem with that In reviewing the memo, Commissioner Clark felt that the applicant should reflag the property He felt that reflagging would give a physical representation of the revised and modified proposed shopping center. He felt the residents in the immediate area were confused on what the actual physical representation would be and many residents expressed the opinion that there had been a lot of positive progress made but needed to see the flagging for validation. Commissioner Paris understood the concerns for keeping costs down, however the changes requested are not insignificant in nature and the reflagging would be necessary to show the reduction in view impairment He felt much of the opposition due to view impairment would be resolved once the new flags were in place Chairman Cartwright supported the comments of Commissioner Paris and Commissioner Clark. He did not see any reason to change their original decision Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 3 Director/Secretary Rojas commented that reconstructing the flagging was a costly process due to the wood and framing associated with the process. However, leaving what was at the site now and using different colored flags to represent the changes was a less costly process, however may be confusing He explained that what was decided at the last meeting was to reconstruct the flagging using one color where the developer was in agreement with staff, but if there was disagreement another color would be used so that staff could evaluate the difference. Commissioner Vannorsdall stated that it appeared the consensus of the Commission was to stand by their original decision He continued with a discussion on parking He questioned the two hour parking limit and who will enforce the parking limit He suggested creating additional parking behind the existing building for the public and employees Chairman Cartwright commented that staff was given clear direction to do additional analysis regarding the proposed dining area at the Golden Lotus Restaurant regarding how many parking spaces would be generated. He commented that two hour parking was suggested and the applicant was directed to consider employee parking He felt that the responsibility was placed on staff to report to the Commission exactly how many parking spaces would be required He was not sure what would be gained by giving more direction to staff when they have not yet received responses to the original questions that were asked Commissioner Paris suggested that instead of two hour parking, the developer may want to consider 3 hour parking He felt the idea was to make sure people did not leave their cars in the lot all day Three hours would give the customers time to have a meal and do some shopping. Two hours would make it a little rushed Commissioner Alberio wondered if, because of the limited number of parking spaces, three hour parking may cause some problems Commissioner Paris agreed with Commissioner Vannorsdall's idea in the memo regarding the ramp behind the grocery store and the idea that it be gated at both ends with a breakaway gate for the fire department He also strongly agreed with the idea of blocking people from cutting through the gas station. Commissioner Vannorsdall requested that the City Attorney be consulted on the subject of underground utilities in the shopping center He felt there was a safety issue to be considered Director/Secretary Rojas stated that staff, as well as the developer, was looking into the process as well as cost of undergrounding the utilities. Commissioner Clark moved to continue the item to the meeting of September 28, 1999, seconded by Commissioner Paris. There being no objection, it was so ordered by the Chairman. Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 4 r Chairman Cartwright asked staff to forward Commissioner Vannorsdall's memo to the developer of the project. 3. Highridge Car Wash; Shiraz Govani (applicant) 27774 Hawthorne Boulevard Assistant Planner Louie presented the staff report She explained the applicants requested to expand the hours of operation for the sale of gasoline Staff felt this extension was warranted since they were not requesting extension beyond what the 4C-4 (automotive overlay) guidelines allowed and no problems have occurred with the current hours of operation during the past six months Secondly, the applicants requested an amendment to the sign permit They requested to replace the existing 24 x 4 car wash price sign with two new price signs Staff felt that two identification signs "side by side" above the vacuum line were not necessary since having one sign achieves the same result Ms Louie further stated that all of the greeting cards had been removed from the cashier area, therefore the project complies with all of the conditions of approval. Staff did identify one troublesome area on the site Due to the orientation of the canopy, the area between the gas dispenser closest to Highridge Road driveway and a planter along the Highridge sidewalk is narrow and does not have sufficient area to allow another vehicle to pass through when a vehicle is pumping gas at that dispenser Staff recommended that "No Parking" lettering be written on the pavement that is near the interior edge of the planter and the restriction be enforced by the applicant. Staff further recommended deletion of Condition of Approval No 29, which required the one-way travel plan Many vehicles do not adhere to the one-way restriction and removing the condition will not cause any circulation problems on the site. Staff also recommended placement of an additional condition to the effect that if any type of security lights are installed, those light fixtures must face the car wash building to prevent direct illumination to the neighboring properties Chairman Cartwright stated he had visited the site and felt the signs were difficult to see and having one sign would be even more difficult for everyone to see. He also pointed out that the applicant felt that one sign may create a safety issue as drivers would be looking at the sign rather than where they were driving Assistant Planner Louie answered that staff believed that centering the sign above the vacuum line would allow people in all four lanes to easily view the sign Chairman Cartwright asked if there was a required distance between a car pumping gas and a parked car He felt that there was adequate space for a car to pass between the parked cars and the car pumping gas, and putting the "No Parking" restriction signs would eliminate several parking spaces Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 5 0 0 Assistant Planner Louie answered that if there is a large vehicle pumping gas at the last gas pump staff felt even a compact car would have trouble passing through Vice Chairman Lyon felt that the need for "No Parking" was restricted to the area at the southern end of the circular planter area. He also felt as you drove near Hawthorne Blvd. there was sufficient area for parking and suggested restricting the no parking zone to the area nearest the south-western most pump He felt there was no safety issue regarding the sign, although the sign is not visible to customers at the fuel dispensers He suggested replacing the existing signs with smaller placards at each pump area so that people could see the signs while pumping their gas Commissioner Alberio agreed with Commissioner Lyon's comment about the sign Commissioner Paris moved to open the public hearing, seconded by Vice Chairman Lyon. The public hearing was opened. Curtis Coleman 6601 Center Drive West #500, Los Angeles (representing the applicant) stated he was generally in agreement with the staff recommendations with two exceptions, the parking issue and the sign He verified that all non -automotive items have been removed from the cash register area Regarding the parking issue, he agreed that there is a troublesome area as you enter on Highridge Road He stated that area is the only troublesome area on the site since it is only approximately 16 feet from the pump to the curb line, however it gradually widens approximately 7 to 8 feet, resulting in a 30 foot distance between the pump and the planters Therefore, he did not think there was a problem and did not feel parking should be restricted If the Commission felt there was a problem, he requested the restriction be placed only in the one area at the southwest corner where it is narrow. Regarding the sign issue, he pointed out the previous owners had numerous signs on the property Due to the relocation of the vacuum line, the car wash lanes are now lengthier which shifted the field of vision of the customers at the fuel dispensers As people pull up to the vacuum line and try to see what services are offered, he felt there was a safety issue involved with just one sign posted He felt the blue background of the sign, which blends in with the standard Chevron colors, does not stand out as much as a white background He requested the Commission approve the two signs as proposed Commissioner Paris questioned the proposed hours of operation He wondered why the applicant did not request the maximum hours allowed during the week through the OC -4 guidelines Mr. Coleman responded that was the choice of the owner. Vice Chairman Lyon asked staff if there had been any complaints regarding the extension of hours Assistant Planner Louie responded that there was only one complaint received during the six month review. Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 6 Lois Larue 3136 Barkentine Road felt that the car wash was providing a service to the community by selling greeting cards She felt the City should permit them to continue the sale of greeting cards Don Ferrara 6301 Via Ciega stated he has been a customer of Chevron for over thirty years He agreed there is a bottle -neck at the one troublesome area and agreed that the one way restriction requirement should be taken away He felt the signs were not very noticeable and were cluttered with too many prices Commissioner Alberio moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Clark. There being no objection the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Paris agreed that there was a bottleneck situation at the property He was not sure the proper way to adjust the parking situation, but if an adjustment were to be made he would prefer a minor change to see if that change would be sufficient before making a larger change Vice Chairman Lyon suggested the "No Parking" area shall be restricted to only the area where the planter becomes straight in a southerly direction and continue to the Highridge Road driveway Chairman Cartwright commented that he was at the station that day and requested the owner park a large car at the last pump and pull it forward as far as he could. While that car was parked at the pump another large vehicle was able to pass through with no problems He felt that from a business perspective there is a lot to gain by having that area available for parking He felt Vice Chairman Lyon's suggestion on the parking restriction was one to consider Director/Secretary Rous suggested taking the approach suggested by Vice Chairman Lyon and monitoring the results to report back to the Planning Commission. Chairman Cartwright asked staff to report back to the Commission in six months on the issue of the parking restriction. Regarding the issue of one way traffic rule, Commissioner Paris felt that this rule was too restrictive and increases the already congested situation on Highridge Road Therefore, he felt this condition should be deleted Commissioner Alberio did not have any problem with lifting the one way restriction Regarding the issues of exterior security lighting and extended hours of operation all Commissioners agreed with staff recommendations Regarding the signs, Commissioner Paris felt two signs would be an overkill and one sign would be much more appropriate. Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 7 0 0 Vice Chairman Lyon again suggested replacing the large overhead signs with placards within the gas dispenser area so that they would be at eye level with customers in the vacuum lines Director/Secretary Rojas stated that he heard from the Commission that the signs currently have too much information He stated that whatever the Commission approves, the applicant may wish to modify the face of the sign to change the presentation of the information He questioned the Commission as to whether they would like to see these changes, if made, or allow the owners to make changes without further review Commissioner Alberio moved to reopen the public hearing, seconded by Vice Chairman Lyon. There being no objection, the public hearing was reopened. Mr Coleman clarified that not everyone who goes to the car wash will stop first to pump gas That is the reason the why the signs are posted above the vacuum line He stated that he had been advised by the sign company that one sign may not be strong enough and could be blown over by the wind, while two signs would be braced together and become stronger He commented that if the Commission directed them to the use of one sign he felt it would be helpful if the Commission gave some discretionary authority to the staff so they could work directly with staff Commissioner Alberio moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Clark. There being no objection the public hearing was closed. Chairman Cartwright asked staff if placing placards on the property for signage would require approval from the Planning Commission Assistant Planner Louie answered that it would require Planning Commission approval Chairman Cartwright asked the Commissioners if they would like to see the new sign if the owners redesigned it. Commissioner Alberio requested that if any information were to be changed on the sign it should be reviewed by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement. Commissioner Paris felt that the content of the sign was up to the discretion of the applicant. The Commission agreed with Commissioner Paris Director/Secretary Rojas clarified that he would be reviewing changes in the size, color, and location of the sign The Commission agreed Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 8 Commissioner Clark brought up the issue raised in one of the letters to the Commission requesting the applicant clean up the back of the property in terms of the weeds Director/Secretary Rojas stated that property maintenance could be referred to the Code Enforcement Division Commissioner Clark stated that the resident had proposed cleaning up the weeds and planting something on the slope that was aesthetically pleasing He felt the Commission should consider making this a condition Chairman Cartwright was reluctant to approve any type of replanting without knowing what type of material would be planted Commissioner Clark suggested planting some type of ground cover that is consistent with what is in the area. Vice Chairman Lyon moved to accept the staff recommendations on all items with the amendment to the circulation recommendation which was to restrict the no parking area to the area immediately adjacent to the southwesterly corner of the pumping area and to return in six months for review of the parking restriction. Further, any request to change the location or size of the sign must be approved by the Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement. Commissioner Clark questioned including the requirement of clearing the weeds and replanting with ground cover Vice Chairman Lyon felt that the issue was for Code Enforcement. Commissioner Clark stated that the clearing of the weeds was a code enforcement item, however the requirement to replant should be handled by the Planning Commission. Commissioner Vannorsdall agreed with Commissioner Clark Chairman Cartwright opened the public hearing. Denise Nolan 99 Hilltop Circle stated that she is on the board of directors for the condominium property at the top of the slope She stated that the board had been in communication with the owners of the car wash regarding the slope. Last year the board had received a beautification grant from the city to improve the top of the hill, however they could not do the lower slope, since it is not their property. Commissioner Clark asked Ms. Newman if she was supportive of the idea of requiring the slope be cleared and planted Ms. Nolan stated she was very supportive of the idea Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 9 n Mr Curtis stated that the owners were aware of the problem on the hillside and were willing to do what was needed to help beautify the area Chairman Cartwright closed the public hearing. Vice Chairman Lyon amended his motion to include the condition the slope be cleaned up and planted in a manner that staff considers appropriate, seconded by Commissioner Clark. The motion was approved, (6-0). 4. Encroachment Permit No. 26 and Minor exception Permit No. 536: Edward Murphy (applicant), Via Ciega. Commissioner Vannorsdall moved to table the item as requested by staff, seconded by Vice Chairman Lyon. As there was one request to speak on this item, Commissioner Alberio moved to open the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Clark. There being no objection the public hearing was opened. Don Ferraro 6301 Via Ciega began discussing some of his objections to the project and the encroachment into the public right-of-way He felt the owner of the property knew that what he was doing was illegal and had many concerns he wanted to discuss Chairman Cartwright reminded Mr Ferraro that the staff recommendation was to table the item and that the Planning Commission was probably not going to discuss the item or make any decisions regarding the item until a later time. He felt that Mr Ferraro's comments would be more appropriate if heard at the time the Commission was discussing the item Mr Ferraro was concerned that a decision would be made without a public hearing and the item would be approved without him being able to voice his concerns Director/Secretary Rojas explained that the procedures were still to be drafted and taken to the City Council so the exact process of what hearings were to take place and who would be noticed was still to be determined by the City Council He informed Mr Ferraro that he could address the City Council as to his opinions on how the procedure should be handled. Mr. Ferraro stated he would like to have input on the recommendation report that goes to the City Council Chairman Cartwright closed the public hearing. Commissioner Vannorsdall repeated his motion to table the item which was seconded by Vice Chairman Lyon. The motion passed without objection, (6-0). Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 10 RECESS AND RECONVENE At 9.15 p.m. the Commission took a short recess to 9.30 p.m. at which time the Commission reconvened 5. Tentative Parcel Map No. 25942; Mr. John Bowler (applicant) 3456 Via Campesina Assistant Planner Louie presented the staff report She explained that staff was able to make the six necessary finding to support the subdivision and recommended the Commission approve the tentative parcel map subject to conditions. Commissioner Vannorsdall asked if this property was in the same area as the moratorium discussed earlier. Assistant Planner Louie answered that it is in the area, however this project was exempted from the moratorium by the City Council Also, It appears that the moratorium will be allowed to expire on October 2 Commissioner Paris asked if Palos Verdes Estates would allow this type of lot split under their code. He was concerned that the owner was intending to split the lot before they became part of Palos Verdes Estates and this may be something the City of Palos Verdes Estates may not allow Assistant Planner Louie answered that she did not know what the City of Palos Verdes Estates allowed and was only considering what was allowed in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Chairman Cartwright stated that there were some drainage concerns and wondered if the drainage study had been done and approved by the city Assistant Planner Louie answered that the drainage study had been done and reviewed by the Director of Public Works. Commissioner Alberio asked if the new lot would be a land -locked lot Assistant Planner Louie answered that a flag lot was proposed. Vice Chairman Lyon moved to open the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Vannorsdall. There being no objection, the public hearing was opened John Bowler (applicant) 3456 Via Campesina stated that he was available for any questions. Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 11 • Roger Meurer 8790 Hillcrest Road Buena Park stated he was here as Mr Bowler's engineer and was also available for any questions Commissioner Vannorsdall asked if he saw any problems in building a home on the proposed lot. Mr. Meurer responded that the lot was already a finished pad and has been used with a horse barn and corral for several years. There is a water line to the property from California Water Service and there was a sewer line available which was in Palos Verdes Estates The electrical service is currently underground on the existing house and will be underground for the new house Commissioner Clark moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Alberio. There being no objection, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Alberio moved to approve the staff recommendations as presented, thereby adopting P.C. Resolution No. 99-30 approving Tentative Parcel Map No. 25492, seconded by Commissioner Vannorsdall. Approved, (6-0). 6. Conditional Use Permit No. 201, Coastal Permit No. 138 -Revision `A' and Grading Permit No. 2125; Air Touch and Nextel Communications (applicants), St. Peter's By the Sea Church (landowner), 6410 Palos Verdes Drive South. Senior Planner Pfost distributed to the Commission two attachments that were not included in their packets He explained that Nextel and Airtouch were jointly proposing to construct a 35 foot high cross to house an antenna The grading application is for approximately 42 cubic yards of grading to construct an equipment area on a small slope, as well as a retaining wall Mr. Pfost distributed photos that were taken both the day of the Planning Commission meeting and several weeks ago Staff received a letter in opposition to the project from a homeowner living on Tarragon Road The resident felt that the antenna impacted their view Staff, however, did not feel the cross would be a significant impairment given the large breadth of view the homeowner currently has Staff could make all of the significant findings for the Coastal Permit and recommends approval of the project. Commissioner Paris asked staff if this cross was being built more for a business purpose as the church was allowing the applicant to build a larger cross in order to derive revenue by putting another antenna on the site Senior Planner Pfost answered the purpose of the cross was to house an antenna and the church may obtain some revenue from that Commissioner Alberio moved to open the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Vannorsdall. There being no objection, the public hearing was opened. Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 12 Ed Gala 17275 Derian Ave , Irvine (representing Nextel) explained that Nextel is charged by the Telecommunication Act to provide coverage of their wireless service throughout Southern California The Palos Verdes area represents a gap in their coverage and they have received numerous complaints from their customers The church represents the only feasible location to place an antenna After trying many locations on the site, the rear of the property provided the best coverage There was an existing cross on the site that needed refurbishing and Nextel thought this would be the perfect solution, however in putting a ladder against the cross to examine it the cross fell over While in the process of planning the antenna Airtouch approached the city and the city directed them to Nextel He did feel visibility may be a problem and in anticipation of that asked his engineers what the lowest possible height was that they could use The engineers felt that they could go as low as 25 feet and Airtouch could be at 35 feet. Commissioner Paris clarified that the reason the cross was proposed at 35 feet was not because that was the height necessary to perform, but to accommodate co -location on the site Mr Gala agreed, stating that co -location was something that the staff and city ordinances encourage He stated that he had read the staff report and concurred with the recommendations made in the report. Chairman Cartwright asked if there was any flexibility In terms of moving the location of the cross further behind the church so it would not be as visible from the residence on Tarragon Road Mr Gala answered that Nextel had explored that Idea but the church had a problem with moving it to that location There is a large field there the children play and outdoor weddings and receptions are held Commissioner Paris asked if there would be any way to minimize the impact of the equipment. Mr Gala answered that the equipment would have a wall around It as well as landscaping Paul Wolcott 357 Van Ness Way Torrance (representing Airtouch) stated he had nothing further to add but was available for questions Commissioner Paris asked how many more antennas Airtouch may need to put up on the peninsula Mr Wolcott answered that there may be small repeater antennas needed, but as far as large structures the only other one would be on Crest Road at the California Water Service site Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 13 W D Woodruff 29208 Firthridge Road stated he was here representing St. Peter's By The Sea Church as their project manager He verified that the old cross, built in 1961, did indeed fall over. He stressed that the location of the cross and the plan to enhance the equipment area was a win-win situation for everyone involved Chairman Cartwright asked Mr Woodruff to respond to the comments that the church is involved in a commercial venture for the sole purpose of generating money Mr Woodruff responded that the church's business was not to generate money He agreed that the church could use the money derived from a number of corporate sources to support the mission of St Peter's Church He also reminded the Commission that the church in a non-profit organization and that it is written into the contract with Nextel and Airtouch that their being at the site will not impact their non- profit status. Vice Chairman Lyon stated that he felt the antennas also provided a valuable service to the community Commissioner Alberto asked if the congregation was agreeable to the use of a cross being used to house an antenna Mr. Woodruff replied that of a congregation of 1,150 members he knew of only 2 members who raised the question of having an antenna inside a cross. Michael Garcia 6350 Tarragon Road stated that his property is the one most affected by the proposed commercial antenna project His opposition to the project was that the proposed antenna configuration on the east side of St Peter's Church would be directly in his main view corridor. He felt this proposed project would be a step backwards with regards to view preservation. He asked the Commission to either deny the project or make the parties involved design an antenna so as to be non -view impairing The existing cross is not visible from his viewing area. Lois Larue 3136 Barkentine Road reviewed her background in the church and the field of religion She strongly objected to the use of a cross to house an antenna and stated her belief that such a structure would be blasphemous and pornographic. She felt the staff report was full of mistakes regarding the proposal She felt the proposal would create a significant aesthetic and visual impact on Mr Garcia's property She urged the Planning Commission to make a decision that was for the betterment of humankind and children in the community, and not sell out to the highest bidder. Commissioner Alberio moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Paris. There being no objection, the public hearing was closed. Commissioner Vannorsdall felt that the applicants have completely complied with the guidelines and he commended staff and the companies for doing so. Further, he resented Ms. Larue's comments and felt they were out of line. Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 14 Chairman Cartwright stated that everyone is entitled to their own opinions, however the Commission did not have to listen to the type of comments made by Ms Larue Commissioner Paris stated that his questions regarding the business aspect of the proposal had been answered satisfactorily and he had no problem with this application. Commissioner Vannorsdall also had no problem with the application Commissioner Clark was concerned with the issue of view impairment However, in viewing the photographs, the area that the cross takes up does not represent a significant view impairment in perspective of the total view that the homeowner enjoys. Commissioner Albeno felt that if the congregation of the church was satisfied with the proposal he had no problem with it either Vice Chairman Lyon felt that cellular communication has become a very important part of our daily lives and providing that communication vehicle on the peninsula is a valuable service Chairman Cartwright also had no problem with the proposal. He commented that he had visited Mr Garcia's home to see the view impairment. While he sympathized with Mr. Garcia he did not feel the view impact was significant. Commissioner Vannorsdall moved to approve the staff recommendations as presented, thereby adopting P.C. Resolution No. 99-31 approving Conditional Use Permit No. 201, Coastal Permit No. 138 -Revision `A', and grading Permit No. 2125, seconded by Vice Chairman Lyon. The motion was approved without objection, (6-0). NEW BUSINESS 7. Time Extension Request: Conditional Use Permit No. 136, Grading Permit No. 1246 and Lot Line Adjustment No. 38; York Long Point Associates (applicant) 6610 Palos Verdes Drive South Commissioner Alberio moved to open the public hearing, seconded by Vice Chairman Lyon. There being no objection, the public hearing was opened. Lois Larue 3136 Barkentine Road pointed out that the application expired on September 11, 1999 and therefore the applicant could not apply for an extension as the application has already expired. Mike Mohler (representing York Long Point Associates) stated the applications for extension were filed before the expiration date He explained that it was important to keep the existing approvals alive Sometimes projects are infeasible and sometimes Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 15 circumstances arise that require an extension to allow one to keep working on the project mainly to make it feasible to be built. He stated that they have filed an application that has not been accepted by the City for a different protect on Long Point and are rapidly trying to bring that protect and application to a form that the City can look at and decide whether or not they would be willing to accept the proposal. Commissioner Clark asked if it was likely the Planning Commission was going to see the new protect proposal before the end of this year Mr Mohler replied that it was almost certain to be before the Planning Commission this year Commissioner Alberio moved to close the public hearing, seconded by Commissioner Vannorsdall, There being no objection the public hearing was closed. Vice Chairman Lyon felt there was a compelling reason to keep the application open as there was a lot of community concern over the current proposal and the use of city land for part of the golf course He felt the Commission needed to be responsive to that concern and retain the option of reverting back to doing the entire project on the land owned by Mr York He felt that alone was sufficient reason to extend the application. Commissioner Clark agreed that this just preserves the ability for the developer to revert back to the already approved plan if the need arises. Commissioners Vannorsdall and Alberio did not believe there was a reason to deny this extension request. Chairman Clark asked staff how many extensions the applicant would be entitled to. Director/Secretary Rojas answered that there is no set number of extensions for a Conditional Use Permit. Commissioner Vannorsdall moved to approve the requested one year extension, thereby setting the expiration date as September 11, 2000 with all conditions of approval remaining in full force and effect, seconded by Vice Chairman Lyon. There being no objection it was so ordered, (6-0) ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS 8. Pre -agenda for the Planning Commission meeting of September 28, 1999 Vice Chairman Lyon asked staff if there were any items on this agenda that could be postponed to a future meeting, as this agenda was very full Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 16 Director/Secretary replied that he would look at the agenda and see if there was anything that had not already been noticed that he could move to a future agenda COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE Lois Larue 3138 Barkentine Road asked staff to try to reduce the agenda for the meeting of September 28 because she felt it was important for the Commission to hear the Abalone Cove issue, which she opposes ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Clark moved to adjourn, seconded by Commissioner Alberio The meeting was adjourned at 10 40 p m to the next regular meeting on September 28, 1999 Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 17 Planning Commission Minutes September 14, 1999 Page 18