Loading...
PC MINS 20150811 Approved September 8, 2015 CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES T.V PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING AUGUST 11, 2015 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Nelson at 7:06 p.m.at the Fred Hesse Community Room, 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Blake and Sean from Boy Scout Troop 191 led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance. ATTENDANCE Present: Commissioners Cruikshank, Emenhiser, Gerstner, Leon, Vice Chairman Tomblin, and Chairman Nelson. Absent: Commissioner James was excused. Also present were Community Development Director Rojas, Senior Planner Mikhail, Associate Planner Seeraty, Mayor Knight, Los Angeles City Councilman Buscaino, City Manager Willmore, Deputy Public Works Director Jules, and Chairman Self from the Traffic Safety Committee. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was unanimously approved as presented. COMMUNICATIONS Director Rojas reported that at their August 4th meeting the City Council heard an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of a new residence on Knollview Drive and approved a modified plan with direct access to Knowlview Drive. Director Rojas distributed eight items of late correspondence related to agenda item No. 1, three items on agenda item No. 2, and six items for agenda item No. 4. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (regarding non-agenda item): None CONTINUED BUSINESS 1. Western Avenue Guideline Plan Vice Chairman Tomblin disclosed that he sits on the Los Angeles Police Reserve Foundation Board with Councilman Buscaino, however he did not feel that would have any effect on his discussions or decisions. Senior Planner Mikhail presented the staff report, noting that when this item was before the Commission in April the Commission did not approve any of the presented options, but rather formed an alternative option. She gave a brief overview of the Western Avenue Guideline Plan, noting it is a partnership between the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, Los Angeles, Cal Trans, and SCAG. In addition, there are two plans that could concurrently be implement, the Western Avenue Traffic Improvement Plan and the Western Avenue Corridor Design Implementation Guidelines, and she briefly described the purpose of each plan. She discussed the past timeline for the overall Western Avenue Vision Plan, leading up to this present meeting for the Design Guidelines. She explained this item was before the Commission to allow staff the opportunity to hear updates on the reviews by the other various Commissions and Committees involved, and to see if the Planning Commission would like to maintain their current position or provide a different recommendation in light of the new information. Commissioner Emenhiser noted that the Planning Commission's recommendation for Western Avenue did not include bike lanes, and he could not recall any of the public speakers at previous meetings asking for bike lanes. Yet the consultant's report includes bike lanes in their recommendation. He questioned if bike lanes are mandatory in order to get the Measure R funding. Senior Planner Mikhail explained that Option D was created by the consultant as a combination of the Planning Commission's recommendation as well as the general feedback given by some Commissioners on all of the options. The consultant combined the recommendation and the feedback to come up with this fourth alternative they also called Option D. She stated that bike lanes are not required for Measure R funding. However for complete streets, bike lanes make an application more competitive and much easier to qualify for outside funding. Vice Chairman Tomblin noted at the previous meeting he had recommended an overlay district across both cities to help have consistent codes and guidance for property owners in both Rancho Palos Verdes and Los Angeles for both private and public development. He asked where this current recommendation includes this overlay district. Senior Planner Mikhail explained that if these guidelines were approved, the next step would be for Rancho Palos Verdes to adopt a specific plan or modify private development code language for Rancho Palos Verdes. The City of Los Angeles would also address their own code changes or neighborhood plans with the ultimate goal of consistency between the two. Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 2 Director Rojas explained that the current plan focuses on the right-of-way and traffic issues first, and the specifics of land use issues will be discussed during the next step of the process. Commissioner Cruikshank stated the goal appears to be have uniform guidelines so that both cities can have a uniform street, and asked staff if the goal is to have one guideline document or two. Senior Planner Mikhail answered that the goal is to have one document. Commissioner Cruikshank referred to the minutes of the previous hearing and the consultant's comments about a possible future study of bicycle ridership on Western Avenue. He asked staff if such a study was being done. Senior Planner Mikhail responded that there currently is not a study being done on the ridership along Western Avenue. Commissioner Cruikshank stated that he agreed with the consultant that a study should be done to better understand the number of bicycle riders on Western Avenue, as this could impact the discussions on bike lanes. Chairman Nelson opened the public hearing. Councilman Joe Buscaino felt it was important for the City of Los Angeles to work with its neighboring cities to create a better community for both. He felt that Western Avenue needs a face lift and was proud to lend his support to the Western Avenue Design Guidelines, and supported the preferred alternative being recommended by staff from the City of Los Angeles, Option B. He stated that the design guidelines incorporate complete street elements that are meant to enable safe access on Western Avenue for all users, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit riders. With that, he stated his strong support for Option B, noting this option includes a bike lane on both the east and west side of the street without any reduction in the number of traffic lanes. He noted that Western Avenue is already designated as a bicycle route, so creating bike lanes will increase safety for bicyclists and motorists alike. He felt this option was also the most financially feasible, and because it accommodates all modes of transportation, will likely be the most competitive when applying for grants for implementation. He stated that one of the goals of the guidelines is to encourage a single consistent identity along Western Avenue, and it is important that both cities are on the same page in supporting both a public and private side in the Design Guidelines. He encouraged the cooperation between the two cities to work together to make much needed improvements on Western Avenue. Commissioner Emenhiser stated that when he reviews Option B it appears the lanes are being reduced by approximately one foot in width and he was concerned about bicyclist safety with these narrower lanes and the larger trucks that use Western Avenue. He asked the Councilman to clarify his position on Option B. Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 3 Councilman Buscaino explained that it is imperative that the cities be competitive with the many grants that are offered, especially when looking at continued funding from Measure R. He discussed bicycles and bicycle lanes, noting that bicycles in a bicycle lane should be no different than a car in a vehicular lane. He felt that bicycle lanes may cause drivers to be more alert and slow down a bit when they see someone in a bike lane. As far as the width of the lanes, he stated that traffic involves engineering, education, and enforcement, and he was sure engineers took this into account when recommending the width of the lanes for both cyclists and motorists on Western Avenue. Commissioner Cruikshank noted that in Option B there is still parking shown on both sides of the street. He stated his concern was someone parks on the street, opens their car door, and a cyclists pulls out into the traffic lane to avoid the door and gets hit. He asked the Councilman his opinion on this. Councilman Buscaino agreed that this is a concern. He felt it was imperative that both cyclists and drivers have to be more aware, which is part of the three E's of traffic. Commissioner Cruikshank asked Councilman Buscaino if he had heard from any of his constituents about removing parking on Western Avenue. He noted that currently there is some parking allowed on Western Avenue. Councilman Buscaino stated that he has heard suggestions that during peak traffic hours there be no parking zones along Western Avenue. However, he deferred to the Community Outreach or the Neighborhood Council in terms of residents' concerns with the parking issues on Western Avenue. Vice Chairman Tomblin noted that much of the biking areas near the beach to Santa Monica are shared paths with cyclists and walkers. He asked Councilman Buscaino what he thought of a combination sidewalk/ bike lane on Western Avenue. Councilman Buscaino stated he has been on the strand several times, and he personally does not think that pedestrians and cyclists are a good mix, and sharing the same lane is a recipe for disaster. Councilman Buscaino introduced his Director of Planning, David Roberts, and the Planning Deputy, Rebecca Liu, and stated that they were available for any questions or comments. Vice Chairman Tomblin asked the staff from the City of Los Angeles their thoughts on an overlay for Western Avenue for consistency. Conni Pallini-Tipton (Chief Planner for the City of Los Angeles — San Pedro area) explained that when the City of Los Angeles talked about a consistent set of codes with consistent and uniform design regulations, it was discussed as part of the private regulations. She stated those private design regulations are part of options A, B, and C. Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 4 Vice Chairman Tomblin asked if there were a restriction in the overlay that bicycles need to stay in the bike lanes, if that would be something that would be enforceable through the overlay district. Ms. Pallini-Tipton explained that the City of Los Angeles could not regulate that through the private design regulations. She stated the public realm has a different set of regulations that are developed together with the Department of Transportation. She clarified that the City of Los Angeles currently recognizes an existing bike route on Western Avenue, and Option B is about improving the safety of the bicyclists and the motorists. She thought that in the first phase proper paint and proper signalizing will show that bicycles are encouraged in this corridor, and in later phases the use of barriers may be encouraged. Commissioner Emenhiser asked Ms. Pallini-Tipton to clarify what types of barriers would be considered. Ms. Pallini-Tipton explained that widening the sidewalk and allowing bikes on the sidewalk can be considered a type of protective bike lane, and the sidewalk or landscaping can be considered a barrier separating traffic from the cyclist. She noted that the City does discourage the mixing of bicyclists and pedestrians. She explained that the City of LA is exploring different types of bike lanes, showing several examples on a photo slide. Commissioner Gerstner noted Western Avenue is a major north-south thoroughfare and asked Ms. Pallini-Tipton if the City of Los Angeles was considering improving the street with a bike lane through other cities to the north of San Pedro. Ms. Pallini-Tipton explained the newly approved mobility element does put forth a twenty plus year vision plan and the area of Western that is shared with RPV is on the bike plan improvements. She could not speak for areas north of this. Mayor Jim Knight was very pleased that the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and the City of Los Angles were working closely together on this project. Mayor Knight noted that he is speaking tonight, not as a member of the City Council, but as a private resident of the City and his comments do not reflect the opinions of the other City Council members. He agreed that it is very important that the flow of traffic on Western Avenue is not negatively impacted by this plan, but also did not want to lose sight of the overall design elements of the entire plan. He felt there was a middle ground and meshing of the private sector and the right-of-way. He suggested looking at this project in two phases, and addressing and focusing on the public right-of-way at this point, as the public right-of-way and traffic flow is a very important element that needs to be addressed. Mayor Knight noted that he is also Vice President of South Bay COG, and he has been working on a plan to get Western Avenue into the South Bay Highway Plan. He noted that he has found in government that there are dozens of parallel plans happening at the same time, and he felt it would be helpful if staff would consolidate these plans and give the Commission some type of matrix showing the various types of plans and funding. He discussed the Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 5 two-way bike lane on one side of the street, noting he has spoken to consultants and agrees that it is not the best solution. In regards to the private element of the plan, he thought the idea of reducing the number of curb cuts along Western Avenue was something that should be explored. He noted that bus stops, and encouraging public transportation, is one way to attract funding. He noted that there are quite a few elements that can be looked at that make a difference in terms of funding. He encouraged the Commission to look at this as a two-step process, addressing the public right-of-way and private design issues in two phases. Vice Chairman Tomblin asked the Mayor which option he preferred in terms of bicycles on Western Avenue. Mayor Knight explained that he did not think it was a good idea to have bikes in the traffic lanes, as that will slow down traffic on Western Avenue. He did not think that was the goal of what the constituents wanted or the goal of the Planning Commission. He also noted that parking on Western may not be necessary, as there appears to be plenty of off-street parking. He noted that having bikes lanes on your plan is certainly not a mandate, however having it on the plan gives the City a higher probability of getting funding. Doug Willmore (City Manager) explained he was previously the Chief Executive Officer of Salt Lake County, and how the County and Salt Lake City worked together to create bike lanes and corridors in the City and County. He explained that the end product created safer conditions for cyclists and drivers alike, and felt this type of bike lane will create a safer condition on Western Avenue as well. Secondly, he felt the focus should also be on this opportunity to create a great boulevard. Aside from the private design guidelines, he felt that this was a great opportunity to design and improve the roadway, the median, the streetscaping, the planting, the benches, bike lanes, everything together to create an outstanding boulevard. He felt bike lanes are an important part of that vision for a beautiful boulevard. He felt that what goes with the bike lanes are the significant traffic flow improvements. He felt the two go hand in hand and are not mutually exclusive. Lastly, he encouraged the Commission to look at the partnership with the City of Los Angeles and the importance of that partnership to make this project work. He felt that, based on his past experiences, that the chances of getting funding for this project without bike lane improvements included was very, very slim. He stated that in today's world, with the other competing projects, bike lanes are a necessity in order to gain funding. Commissioner Cruikshank asked Mr. Willmore how much room he felt was needed as a safe buffer between the traffic lane and the bike lane. Mr. Willmore answered that was a question that should be answered by more technical people. He noted that when looking at the options, he felt Option B was the best option and one way to improve on that option might be to look at the parking. He questioned if street parking was needed on Western Avenue. Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 6 Commissioner Leon stated he likes to support bike lanes when he can, however he did not think a green stripe on pavement constitutes a bike lane. He asked Mr. Willmore about his experience with whether just painting green lines on the pavement is sufficient. Mr. Willmore answered that there is a lot of good data available that paint is sufficient. However, as an administrator the down side of that is they have to be repainted. As a driver, one would see the green lane and know that is not a place for the car to be. He stated that it is obvious that a barrier and no parking along the street would make it even safer, however the painted lane alone is significant. Nicole Jules (Deputy Director of Public Works) stated that she echoed the comments of the Mayor and the City Manager. She reemphasized that Western Avenue is state highway and is owned by Cal Trans, and therefore any design elements will have to adhere to the standards of Cal Trans. She stated she has been working with the South Bay COG as well as the Safety Highway Program to get funding for improvements on Western Avenue, and the projects the City is looking to implement on our segment of Western Avenue is only a small segment of the greater picture. There are plans to carry the improvements that we're looking at further along the corridor into the South Bay. She explained that the Public Works Department is responsible for implementing the improvements that are being discussed in the Design Guidelines, noting it is a collaborative effort with the City of Los Angeles and Cal Trans. She noted the three agencies have developed a Western Avenue Improvement Plan which focuses on operational improvements on Western Avenue. As a result of these efforts, there will be a significant improvement to all uses of the road. Another focus is on improving mobility for all users on Western Avenue and that improvements at intersections and at the edge of the roadway does not degrade the level of service. She stated that Public Works is in favor of Option B, and supported the fact that the travel lanes should be a minimum of twelve feet in width, and supported the idea of removing parking to accommodate a bike lane and buffer zone. She stated that for any design guidelines that are contemplated, the Public Works Department would highly recommend that further studies are considered, which may include the impacts of parking, what the parking capacity is, what the parking utilization is, and whether or not the off street parking facilities can accommodate the parking that is displaced from Western Avenue. Commissioner Emenhiser asked Deputy Director Jules if she was in favor of Option B, but with the revision of eliminating one or both of the parking lanes. Deputy Director Jules answered that eliminating one or both of the parking lanes would be an added improvement, and that she was in support of a modified Option B, as long as there were studies that could substantiate removing the parking and it does not create additional impacts to off-street parking facilities. Vice Chairman Tomblin asked Deputy Director Jules how she would like to see the lanes on Western Avenue configured under Option B. Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 7 Deputy Director Jules noted that there would be in favor of a five foot wide bike lane on each side, a three foot buffer on each side, and twelve foot wide traffic lanes, with a possible eleven foot wide turn lane. Conni Pallini-Tipton from the City of Los Angeles concurred with these suggested potential lane widths. Commissioner Gerstner asked if there were power and communication lines down Western Avenue, and if so would the Public Works Department be placing these utilities underground. Deputy Director Jules stated there are power and communication lines on Western Avenue, however the undergrounding of these utilities would not be a Public Works responsibility, but rather a responsibility of Cal Trans since it is their right-of-way. Commissioner Leon asked what steps would be involved to remove as much parking as possible from Western Avenue and limiting curb cuts. Deputy Director Jules explained that, in regards to the parking, there should be several studies undertaken to understand the current demand, a parking utilization study should be commissioned, as well as the accommodation of the displaced parking onto existing private parking lots. She felt that at a minimum, a full-blown traffic study would be required. Commissioner Leon felt that the process seemed backwards to set up a set of guidelines and then do an analysis to see if those guidelines will work. Senior Planner Mikhail explained that the Vision Plan and the Guidelines are what the City would use in applications for grants and funding, and those funds would create and pay for the more detailed plans and studies. Anthony Self (Chairman of the Traffic Safety Committee) prefaced his discussion by explaining that a discussion on bicycle lanes is a bit dicey. He stated that in their discussions, the Traffic Safety Committee felt that Option A was the best choice. However, if a bike lane is necessary, the Traffic Safety Committee felt that Option B was the best choice. He explained that the Committee was very concerned with on street parking and the opening of car doors into the bicyclist's path. However, he was fairly certain the Committee would have chosen Option B as their first choice if the on street parking was removed. Deputy Johnson (LA County Sheriff's Department) explained there are a lot of laws that protect bicyclists, including laws that bicyclists have to follow themselves. The Sheriff's Department wants to make the safest situation possible for both cyclists and motorists. He briefly explained the Three Feet For Safety Act, and felt that if cyclists are riding in a bicycle lane in most cases that will give them that three feet of safety. He also discussed the legal times a cyclist can legally leave a bicycle lane. He did not recommend one Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 8 bicycle lane allowing cyclists to go in both directions, as the Vehicle Code requires bicyclists ride on the right side of the roadway. Vice Chairman Tomblin commented that many of his friends are cyclists, and they have commented that they prefer not to use bike lanes many times because the gutters and areas next to the curbs create an uneven surface and many times are unsafe and unusable. Deputy Johnson understood this comment, but felt that in Rancho Palos Verdes the roadways are very well maintained and the cyclists should not feel they have to leave the bike lanes. Deputy Director Jules also understood the comment, which is why the Public Works Department's design standards require a minimum five foot bike lane, which gives room to accommodate the gutter. Commissioner Cruikshank asked Deputy Johnson if he saw any issues with enforcement of cyclists with a five foot wide bike lane and the buffer zone. Deputy Johnson explained that with large groups of cyclists it typically only requires a Deputy getting on the PA system and asking the cyclists to stay on the right side of the roadway, and he has not run into a situation where the cyclists have refused the Deputy's orders. Commissioner Cruikshank asked how traffic control works on Western Avenue, given there is both the LA County Sheriff's Department and the LAPD. Deputy Johnson explained the Sheriff's Department is able to enforce traffic laws anywhere in the County of Los Angeles, and is therefore able to work traffic safety issues on both sides of Western Avenue. Commissioner Cruikshank questioned the extreme buffer between the bike lane and traffic lane, noting that it may be difficult for a smaller vehicle to cross that buffer if the car needs to pull over because it has broken down or in the case of an emergency. Deputy Director Jules responded that the Public Works Department's ideal buffer would be paint or pavement markings only, and not a raised concrete device. Glenn Cornell stated he lives in the Rolling Hills Riviera section of the City off of Western Avenue. He did not think the current plan will work, and would like the City to remember the priorities of what Western Avenue is all about. He also felt these discussions would be more meaningful if a member of Cal Trans was in attendance. Additionally, he felt that the City was making a rush to judgement in an effort to get some funding from the Federal Government. He felt residents will have to live with decisions that were made that may be a compromise in order to get this funding. Lastly, he felt the plans are extremely complicated, and feared that all of the money being allocated may be spent on consultants Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 9 and hearings, and at the end of the day nothing will be done. He asked the Commission to consider a fifty option that he called Option AX, which he felt was the affordable and achievable option. Chairman Nelson asked Mr. Cornell if he was in favor of Option A. Mr. Cornell responded that Option A was the closest, adding that he is also a bicyclist. Walt Yeager stated Western Avenue has always been an issue with traffic, and today the traffic is nearly at a standstill. He felt it was more important to add additional traffic lanes to the street to address the traffic issues. He questioned how many people actually ride bikes along Western Avenue, if a study had been done, and if bike lanes were really needed. He asked if any of the options include plans to improve traffic on Western Avenue, and how the Ponte Vista Developer figures into all of this. He stated the utility poles are all along the sidewalk and service to the surrounding residents is often disrupted because of traffic accidents. Commissioner Cruikshank asked staff if the Ponte Vista developers are going to do any street improvements on Western Avenue. Vice Chairman Tomblin added that he did not remember any discussions on adding traffic lanes to Western Avenue. Conni Pallini-Tipton stated that there are mitigation measures associated with the Ponte Vista development, however she did not have those details with her at this meeting. She recalled that this mitigation measures were not limited to the area of Western Avenue in front of the development, and that there were several intersections that would have to be improved. She recalled that signalization and synchronization were included in the mitigation. Chairman Nelson asked Ms. Pallini-Tipton to have a member of her staff send those mitigations to Mr. Rojas. Ms. Pallini-Tipton responded that she would make sure that happened. Barbara Sattler stated she was happy to see the buildings that were on the original plan have been removed from the sidewalk area, but questioned if they have been removed from the plan. She stated she spent some time looking at the maps in the plan, and that there were some very nice things included, noting that many of the driveways into the shopping center have been removed making it safer for pedestrians, cyclists, and autos. She was concerned that so much time has been spent on discussing bicycles, and public transit seems to have fallen off of the radar. She felt something had to be done to improve the public transit if the traffic situation on Western Avenue was going to be improved, and saw nothing in the current plan that mentions public transit. She felt this had to be a big component of any plan for Western Avenue, and felt that before any bike lane is planned all bus stops have to be worked out and planned. Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 10 Ken Dyda felt the City has to consider how bad the traffic currently is on Western Avenue when they're discussing any future plans. He felt narrowing the lanes will slow the traffic down, which will only increase the problem. He also noted that the residents of the eight hundred or so homes being built at Ponte Vista will all exist onto Western Avenue. Pete Lacombe stated at the last public hearing on this topic there were several speakers in the audience giving their opinions on the proposed project, and the Planning Commission heard these concerns. He stated that the audience was very happy with the Planning Commission for listening to the public and their concerns. He felt that this project was a solution to a non-existent problem and the residents were not asking for this to be done. He stated that he does not want bike lanes on Western Avenue, explaining every day he drives to work on Pacific Coast Highway and there are no bike lanes because it is a major thoroughfare. He would hate to think what would happen if the various cities were having similar discussions to put bike lanes on Pacific Coast Highway. He stated that government exists for the public and it doesn't exist so that government officials can get more funding. He stated he does not want to be impeded by extra bike lanes that are going to slow down his progress while driving down Western Avenue. Jeanne Lacombe stated she is the Director of the Rolling Hills Riviera HOA, which consists of 721 homes along Western Avenue. She urged the Commissioners to vote no on all of the options and the plan in its entirety, as she felt it fails to meet the initial goals and directions from 2011 and it fails to meet the directions given by the Planning Commission on April 28th, as Option D. She stated in 2011 the work began on a Western Avenue Vision Plan to revitalize Western Avenue, including public and private properties through aesthetic improvements, traffic improvements, and business incentives. She stated the directions were not to transform Western Avenue into Pine Avenue in Long Beach, however that is what happened. She stated that looking at the plans, the vision of the buildings right up to the street are still there, there are no specifics on what the signs or lighting should be, or even the landscaping. She noted the Traffic Safety Committee chose Option A, but with bike lanes. She stated that this meeting was not announced to the public on the Listserve. She questioned why so much time is being spent on discussions of the bike lanes when the entire plan is so poorly done, noting there are no specifics, no theme, no design, and no real information. She felt that in order to move forward with a real plan, the current plans need to be rejected. Commissioner Cruikshank asked staff what the next step would be after these Guidelines are approved or approved in principle. Director Rojas explained that the City Council would first have to approve these Guidelines. Then, as the Guidelines state, different follow-up plans must be prepared to implement the Guidelines. Commissioner Cruikshank felt that one of the goals of this plan was to get Rancho Palos Verdes, Los Angeles, and Cal Trans together to create something that is uniform and will improve the look of the street and attract people to the area. He felt that was currently Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 11 seen in the document is vague at best, and asked how this will all come together to be more specific. Director Rojas answered that the next step would be to get approval and direction from the City Council to expend money to work with these agencies to create a streetscape plan. He explained the streetscape plan addresses the roadway, the street furniture, the lighting, the landscaping, and the signage. David Cohen stated he is surprised at the amount of time and the number of meetings that have been spent discussing bike lanes. He stated that what he has heard is that before the City can get any money from Measure R, they will have to implement bike lanes. He questioned why the City needs money from Measure R and how much money is needed to go some of these improvements. He also questioned where the City could get money to make improvements on Western Avenue if bike lanes are not included. He asked how the public will get input on what will happen next, and how the public will have the opportunity to give input on what will happen next. Chairman Nelson asked staff to explain what will happen after this meeting. Director Rojas explained that this evening staff is hoping the Planning Commission makes some type of recommendation, which will then be presented to the City Council, tentatively on September 15, 2015. If approved by the City Council, we will then have to wait for the City of Los Angeles to go through their similar approval process. Vice Chairman Tomblin asked Ms. Pallini-Tipton to return to the podium. He asked her, hypothetically, if the City of Rancho Palos Verdes were to tell the City of Los Angeles that they did not want bike lanes, but instead preferred a six lane highway for traffic, what the City of Los Angeles would do. Director Rojas reminded the Commission that neither City has any control over the number of lanes on Western Avenue, as Western Avenue is under the jurisdiction of Cal Trans. Vice Chairman Tomblin understood, but asked Ms. Pallini-Tipton what the Councilman's position might be with such a proposal. Ms. Pallini-Tipton stated she could not speak for the Councilman, however from the Planning perspective she felt there might really be a stalemate. She explained that nothing could move forward with two separate recommendations for Western Avenue. She noted a six lane highway with no bike lanes would not be consistent with any of the City's planning documents, explaining all of the documents have plans indicating bikeways in the improvements to Western Avenue. Therefore, taking forward a recommendation that was contrary to all of those adopted plans would not be something the Planning Department could do. Commissioner Leon asked if the residents of San Pedro have asked for bike lanes. Planning Commission Minutes August 11,2015 Page 12 Ms. Pallini-Tipton responded that there was an array of opinions on the subject. Again, she noted that when looking at all of the City of Los Angeles' documents, the vision does include bikeways. Here we are talking about how to implement the bikeways in a way that is safe and does not hinder traffic and it's not an easy task. David Roberts added that in the Commission's packet there is a letter from the Northwest San Pedro Neighborhood Council, which represents a large portion of this stretch of Western Avenue. He explained that this neighborhood took an official position supporting the bike lanes and removing the on street parking. He also added that the City of Los Angeles has budget concerns and constraints, and the opportunity for the City to spend General Fund money to do significant improvements to Western Avenue was, in his opinion, less than nil. The City of Los Angeles typically funds streetscape improvements, signage, street furniture, and bike lanes from various grant opportunities. He added that for Western Avenue improvements we are talking about millions of dollars needed in funding. Chairman Nelson closed the public hearing. Commissioner Leon felt the Commission was being steamrolled by people who want to impose bike lanes in places where they probably don't belong. He stated the only way he would support a bike lane on Western Avenue was if it was in-lieu of parking and curb cuts. He could see a motion making bike lanes contingent on this, but could agree to just support Option B. Commissioner Gerstner stated he was proud of the City of Los Angeles for taking the steps they have taken relative to complete streets. He noted that this is a huge step that is very hard to do, and with that in place they have set a path to become a better place. He stated that those complete streets are sometimes the most appropriate thing in a given neighborhood and sometimes not the most appropriate thing in that neighborhood, but the consistency and continuity of those streets is very important to make them work. He felt the funding was incredibly important in this case, and if bike lanes are a component that adds to the success to gaining the monies necessary to do this improvement, then he felt it was incumbent upon the Planning Commission to find a way to work with that component. He referred to the earlier discussion regarding the reduction of lane width, and was probably something that Cal Trans would resist, as he felt they would want to keep their lanes wider. Therefore, that may make Option B problematic. However, if eliminating on street parking, including a bike lane, and maintaining the twelve foot wide traffic lanes would help to maintain the existing status of the street as a bike thoroughfare and afford a better opportunity for the funding, then he would suggest the Commission seriously consider that option. He was also in favor of reducing the number of curb cuts. He realized that some people were not in favor of a bike lane, however if adding a bike lane does not slow down the traffic, doesn't make the traffic worse, and gives an opportunity to improve Western Avenue, then he would take it. He stated it is a fact that things change, and Western Avenue will change, but this is an opportunity for the City to have some say in how that change will take place. He also felt it was very important to Planning Commission Minutes August 11,2015 Page 13 have those power lines undergrounded and the poles removed before going too far in designing plans for the aesthetic look of Western Avenue. He felt this was a priority to push on Cal Trans, and now is the time to do it since nobody will want it done after all of the other improvements are made. Commissioner Cruikshank stated he was still having difficultly trying to make a final determination without having all of the information in front of him. He felt that eliminating on street parking or adding a bike lane should be contingent upon a traffic study being done first to prove that it will not affect the level of service. He stated he was leaning towards Option A or a modified Option B with the elimination of on street parking and bike lanes, but reiterated this should be contingent upon a traffic study. He was in favor of reducing or eliminating curb cuts along Western Avenue and having more access on the side streets. He felt this would be a huge improvement, especially for pedestrian safety. Commissioner Emenhiser stated that Option A is the option recommended by the Traffic Safety Committee and what he felt the public has repeatedly said they want. Option B is what the experts have told the Commission the City needs, what the political leadership of both cities have told the Commission the City needs, and what the consultants have kept throwing at the Commission, even when the Commission says not to. Given this deep conflict, he felt the Planning Commission should move forward both Options A and B to the City Council, knowing that on one hand it makes no one happy and knowing on the other hand that it gives the opportunity to live another day and fight the battle. He felt that Option A would allow Western Avenue to remain status quo as a thoroughfare. He would recommend a modified Option B by removing the on street parking, keeping the traffic lanes at a twelve foot width, and installing a physical separation between the bike lanes and the traffic lanes. He felt this would give the City the opportunity to change Western Avenue for the better. Vice Chairman Tomblin stated that on a personal note, he agrees with everything said by the other Commissioners, and if he were to vote personally on this he would vote for a modified Option B. He also supported Commissioner Gerstner's comments about undergrounding the utilities. However, he noted there are 721 homes along Western Avenue in Rancho Palos Verdes, and the leadership of this HOA is not in supportive of this, he felt it was his duty as a Planning Commissioner to vote no so that there is something in the record. Chairman Nelson felt the Commission has the benefit to some great information and input. However, he felt the elephant in the room is Ponte Vista, noting there is no traffic study involving Ponte Vista, and no idea how it will impact Western Avenue. However, he was fully aware of the current traffic situation on Western Avenue. He agreed with Commissioner Gerstner that placing the utilities underground should be a priority. He also agreed with removing the on street parking, and stated he was neutral on the inclusion of bike lanes. He stated that one of the first things that should be on the table is a traffic study that includes Ponte Vista and its 1,400 cars, and what that will do to Western Avenue. Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 14 Senior Planner Mikhail noted that in the Guidelines there is discussion regarding undergrounding the utilities. Commissioner Emenhiser moved that the Planning Commission forward to the City Council a recommendation of both Options A as well as a modified Option B. The modification would be to eliminate one or both parking lanes, the traffic lanes remain at 12 '/z feet in width, and the bicycle lane be separated by a physical barrier. In addition, the Planning Commission recommends that the power lines be relocated underground with the approval of either option, seconded by Vice Chairman Tomblin. Commissioner Leon stated he was reasonably convinced that a physical barrier is not of utmost importance. He noted the absence of a physical barrier will allow buses access to the curb, and would recommend removal of the physical barrier. He felt that the Planning Commission should make a decision in its recommendation, as opposed to just handing the decision over to the City Council. He would be in support of the motion if the recommendation were a modified Option B without Option A. Commissioner Gerstner referred to the rendering of the northern segment of Option B, which showed 12 foot wide traffic lanes, a protected bike lane, and no on street parking, which is basically the Commission's modified Option B. For simplicity, he felt the Commission could say what they are in support of is northern segment of Option B for the entirety of Western Avenue. He then noted the rendering for the middle segment and felt wording could be added that the Commission was in support of modified Option B as shown in the northern segment, except for where it works to have the middle segment. He noted that the middle segment shows limited street parking. He added that in the Guidelines for the development of the adjacent private properties, that parking then could be addressed to make up for the loss of street parking. Commissioner Emenhiser agreed. Commissioner Cruikshank supported Commissioner Gerstner's comments but would like a traffic study component added. He suggested language that would say remove street parking and remove driveways and add bike lanes contingent upon a traffic study supporting that traffic flow and capacity is not reduced. Commissioner Emenhiser agreed to this as an amendment to his motion. Chairman Nelson asked staff to read back the current motion on the table. Senior Planner Mikhail stated the current motion is for the Planning Commission to recommend to the City Council Option A and a modified Option B, with Option B modified to eliminate one or both of the parking lanes, the traffic lanes are to remain at twelve feet in width, bike lanes are to include a physical barrier, include the necessity for underground utilities, and bike lanes are to be added with the support of a traffic study supporting that negative traffic impacts would not occur. Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 15 Commissioner Emenhiser clarified his motion in that when he says physical separation for the bike lanes he meant something other than paint, and felt that should be part of the motion. Commissioner Leon moved to amend the motion to include the language suggested by Commissioner Gerstner regarding the north and middle segments of Western Avenue as descriptors. Commissioner Emenhiser did not accept the amendment. The motion failed, (2-4) with Commissioners Gerstner, Leon, Vice Chairman Tomblin, and Chairman Nelson dissenting. Commissioner Gerstner moved to recommend Option B, northern segment, for the entirety of the Western Avenue Plan, to be modified only in the places where the lane widths can be maintained with a single parking lane added similar to Option B middle segment. Additionally, there be language that helps limit curb cuts, that power communication lines and poles be undergrounded, and that traffic and bike studies be done to support these improvements in terms of traffic flow and volume capacity, seconded by Commissioner Leon. Commissioner Emenhiser asked Commissioner Gerstner if his motion included a physical barrier for the bike lanes. Commissioner Gerstner responded that it did not, explaining that he felt a painted line is not only adequate, but preferable. He felt that adding a physical barrier, such as bumps, makes it difficult for the bike riders in addition to vehicles that, for whatever reason, need to get out of the traffic lane. He stated that he would rather see a vehicle have the opportunity to reasonably get out of traffic as opposed to blocking traffic. He felt that physical barriers, although convenient in some places, would inhibit activity in a way that would be worse than that which they protect. Commissioner Emenhiser asked Commissioner Gerstner if his motion contains any nod to the people that don't want any bike lanes. Commissioner Gerstner recognized there are those who don't want bike lanes, and understood their concern. However, if bike lanes are removed there is not the room to put in a drive lane, and nothing has really been accomplished except reducing the probability of receiving funding. In addition, this would force anyone riding a bike to ride in the traffic lane, and he didn't see any upside to that option from anyone's point of view. Commissioner Emenhiser referred to page 22 of the Western Avenue Plan, noting there is a big con at the top of the page, which says it does not safely protect bicycles from vehicular traffic. Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 16 Commissioner Gerstner felt that it came down to one's definition of "safely" and to what level. He would disagree in the level of what is safe. He felt bike lanes were safer than having bikes in the vehicle lanes, and given there is almost 8 to 10 feet in width in these proposed bike lanes, there is a nice buffer. He stated that if a two or three foot wide painted stripe does not safely protect bikes from vehicles, then there are an awful lot of places in the Country where bicycles are not protected safely from vehicular traffic. He felt there are very few places where there are raised bumpers separating the bike lanes. He stated he was happy being silent on this issue in the motion. Commissioner Leon added that those bumps will tend to catch the front wheel of a bicycle, and then there will be a prone bicyclist in the lane. The motion was approved, (4-2), with Commissioner Emenhiser and Vice Chairman Tomblin dissenting. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. Site Plan Review (Case No. ZON2015-00249): 28500 Western Avenue Associate Planner Seeraty presented a brief staff report, explaining the scope of the project and the two findings that the Commission must make. She noted that staff made site visits to surrounding properties to assess the view impacts and determined the proposed equipment will not cause significant view impairment to the adjacent properties. She noted that this determination was made because the adjacent properties are either too low in elevation to have a view over the building, they have no protected view over the roof of the building, or the proposed equipment will be blocked by existing equipment on the roof. She stated staff received several letters of concern, and these issues are addressed in the staff report. As such, staff believes both findings can be made and the resident's concerns have been addressed and recommends the Planning Commission approve the proposed project. Commissioner Cruikshank stated that in the public correspondence there is mention that the proposed fan is not per the City's Municipal Code. He asked staff to address this concern. Associate Planner Seeraty explained that this type of equipment is against the code unless the proposed equipment is reviewed by the Planning Commission at a Site Plan Review, and the Commission is able to make the two required findings. Commissioner Leon asked if the screening will help with block some of the noise that the equipment will emit. Associate Planner Seeraty answered that she has not received any studies from the applicant, but felt that blocking the equipment with a wall will assist in any noise issues. Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 17 Director Rojas added that the applicant submitted information to illustrate that the decibel level would be below 65. Additionally, staff added a condition that the fan could only be in operation between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. Commissioner Cruikshank asked staff if any type of silhouette was required for this project, or if was only required at staff's discretion. Director Rojas answered a silhouette was at staff's discretion as to whether or not one was needed. In this case, he noted that there is already equipment on the roof and staff was able to visualize what this new equipment would look like in terms of height. Chairman Nelson moved to approve the project as recommended and conditioned by staff, seconded by Commissioner Emenhiser. The motion was approved and PC Resolution 2015-13 was adopted, (6-0). 3. Ordinance — Small solar systems (Case No. ZON2015-00349) Director Rojas presented a brief staff report, explaining that current Federal restrictions state that the City cannot deny solar panels because they block a view or for aesthetic reasons. Because of these restrictions, the Planning Department currently approves these applications over the counter. Therefore, staff is taking this opportunity to amend the Zoning Code to state Planning Department approval is not required for these types of solar panels, only permits from Building and Safety. He noted that Title 15 of the Municipal Code will dictate the streamline review taken by Building and Safety. Commissioner Cruikshank asked if solar systems placed on slopes is included in this recommendation. Director Rojas answered that the hillside installation is not included in this Ordinance, only rooftop solar panels. Commissioner Cruikshank asked if this new Ordinance will affect staffing. Director Rojas answered that staff has been streamling these small solar systems for approximately three years, and this Ordinance will not create any type of staffing issue. Commissioner Leon moved staff's recommendation, seconded by Commissioner Cruikshank. The motion was approved and PC Resolution 2015-14 was adopted, (6-0). 4. Final draft General Plan document and Land Use Map Director Rojas explained that staff is recommending continuing this public hearing to the September 22, 2015 meeting. He stated this recommendation comes about because staff is giving the entire document to an outside firm to perform all necessary editing before presenting the final version to the Commission. He noted that there is Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 18 correspondence from York Point View properties, objecting to the General Plan including verbatim copies of portions of the City's NCCP that the City Council approved in 2004. In reviewing the section in question, staff felt there really was no need for the section to be included in the General Plan, and staff is proposing to delete that section of the NCCP from the General Plan. Commissioner Emenhiser moved to continue the public hearing to September 22, 2015 along with the proposed amendments recommended by staff, seconded by Commissioner Leon. Approved, (6-0). Senior Planner Kim noted that when this item comes before the Commission it will not only include the final version, but also a red-lined version showing all of the new edits. ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS 5. Pre-Agenda for the meeting on August 25, 2015 The pre-agenda was reviewed and approved as presented. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 p.m. Planning Commission Minutes August 11, 2015 Page 19