RPVCCA_SR_2010_05_04_03_Border_IssuesGrrvOF
MEMORANDUM
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
REVIEWED:
Project Manager:
HONORABLE MAYOR &CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
JOEL ROJAS,AICP,C~.UNffV DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR lJ""V·_...
MAY 4,2010
BORDER ISSUES STATUS REPORT
CAROLYN LEHR,CITY MANAGER ~
Kit Fox,AICP,Associate Planner@
RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file the current report on the status of Border Issues.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This month's report includes:
• A report on the latest,revised proposal for the 11-home Butcher Ranch subdivision
at the northeast corner of Palos Verdes Drive North and Palos Verdes Drive East in
Rolling Hills Estates;and,
• A brief report on the recent change in the ownership of the Ponte Vista project at
the former Navy housing complex on Western Avenue in San Pedro.
BACKGROUND
The following is the regular bi-monthly report to the City Council on various "Border Issues"
potentially affecting the residents of Rancho Palos Verdes.The complete text of the
current status report is available for review on the City's website at:
http://palosverdes.com/rpv/planninglborder issues/201 0/201 00504 Borderlssues StatusRpt.cfm
3 - 1
MEMORANDUM:Border Issues Status Report
May 4,2010
Page 2
DISCUSSION
Current Border Issues
Butcher Ranch Subdivision,Rolling Hills Estates
On February 16,2010,the City of Rolling Hills Estates released the revised Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND)for the Butcher Ranch project.The project
has now been revised to propose only eleven (11)new,detached single-family residences;
to provide a mini-park and equestrian trail;and to fully conform to the site's existing zoning
and land use designations.The 30-day public comment period on the revised IS/MND
ended on March 18,2010.On March 8,2010,Staff forwarded the attached comments to
the City of Rolling Hills Estates,indicating that Staff has no concerns with the revised
proposal.On April 5,2010,and April 19,2010,the Rolling Hills Estates Planning
Commission considered the revised project.However,jurisdictional conflicts with the
Department of Fish and Game regarding the biological impacts of site grading and the
placement of fill in the ravine remain unresolved.As these issues are resolved,the Rolling
Hills Estates Planning Commission is expected to consider the revised project again in the
near future.Staff will continue to monitor this project in future Border Issues reports.
Ponte Vista Project at Former Navy Housing Site,Los Angeles (San Pedro)
On April 2,2010,the Ponte Vista development team announced that the ownership ofthe
property had been assumed by iStar Financial,Inc.,which has been the primary lender for
the project since 2005 (see attachments).The iStar subsidiary "SFI Bridgeview,LLC"will
continue to pursue entitlements to redevelop the 62-acre former Navy housing site located
at 26900 South Western Avenue in San Pedro.According to a report in the Daily Breeze
on April 6,2010,a revised project proposal for the site may be announced by the new
developer by this summer.Staffwill continue to monitor this project in future Border Issues
reports.
New Border Issues
There are no new Border Issues on which to report at this time.
Attachments:
•Staff comment letter on the Butcher Ranch project (dated 3/8/10)
•RHE Planning Commission Agendas and Staff reports for the Butcher Ranch
project (dated 4/5/10 &4/19/10)
•Press release regarding the change in ownership of the Ponte Vista project
(released 4/2/10)
•Daily Breeze article regarding the Ponte Vista ownership change (published 4/6/10)
M:\Border Issues\Staff Reports\20100504_Borderlssues_StaffRpt.doc
3 - 2
CllY OF
PLANNING,BUILDING,&CODE ENFORCEMENT
8 March 2010
Kelley Thorn,Associate Planner
City of Rolling Hills Estates
4045 Palos Verdes Dr.N.
Rolling Hills Estates.CA 90274
SUBJECT:Comments in Response to the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated
Negative Declaration for the Butcher Ranch Subdivision at 2483
Palos Verdes Drive North (PA No.33.04)
Dea~:
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes appreciates the opportunity to comment upon the
proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND)for the above-mentioned project.We
have reviewed the MND and project exhibits,and are pleased to see the extensive
revisions made to the project since it was last considered by the Rolling Hills Estates
Planning Commission and City Council in 2006.These revisions appear to have
substantially reduced the scope and environmental impacts of the project.Accordingly,
we have no comments to offer on the revised project at this time.
Again,thank you for the opportunity to comment upon this important project.If you
have any questions or need additional information,please feel free to contact me at
(310)544-5228 or via e-mail atkitf@rpv.com.
Kit Fa CP
Associate Planner
cc:Mayor Wolowicz and City Council
Carolyn Lehr,City Manager
Joel Rojas,Community Development Director
M:\Border Issues\Butcher Ranch Subdivision\20100308-.MNDComments.doc
30940 H.\\\f110"""1 BM)./1;:1\1\(110 P"lO~VI r~)l~.CA 90275-5391
PI lINN/I\(./com I NI Of«H'lENI (310)544·52281 RUII D/N(,(310)265-7800 /DII'I I AX (310)544·5293 /E-MAil PlANNlN('@I~PV.LOM
3 - 3
Apr 05 2010 7:47AM Rolling Hills Estates 3103774468
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES
4045 Palos Verdes Drive North
Rolling Hills Estates.CA 90274
Telephone-(310)377-1577'Fax-(310)377-4468
WNW .RollingHillsEstates-Ca.g ov
page 2
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
April 5,2010,7:30 pm Regular Meeting
Note:Reports and documents relating to each agenda Item are on file In the Planning Department and are
available for public inspection.
1.CALL MEETING TO ORDER.
2.SALUTE TO THE FLAG.
3.ROLL CALL.
4.APPROVAL OF MINUTES (March 1,2010).
5.AUDIENCE ITEMS.
6.CONSENT CALENDAR.The foll<Jwlng routine matters will be approved in a single motion with the
unanimous consent of !he Planning Commission.There wUI be no separate discussion of these items
unless good cause is shown by a member of the Commission or the public expressed under audience items
pfior to the roU call vote.(Items removed will be considered under Business Items.)
A.WaNe reading in full of all resolutions that are presented for Planning Commission
consideration on tonight's agenda and all such resolutions shall be read by title only.
7.BUSINESS ITEMS.
A.PLANNING APPLICATION NO.08-10;APPLICANT:Morgan Stanley Smith Barney;
LOCATION:609 Deep Valley Drive;A Precise Plan of Design to amend the master sign
plell to allow for larger tenant Identification signs for P.V.Twin Towers.(KT)
8.PLANNING APPLICATION NO.09-10;APPLICANT:Silver Center;LOCATION:449 Sliver
Spur Road;A Precise Plan of Design for a new master sign plan and for proposed signage
for "HSBC".(KT)
8.PUBLIC HEARINGS.
A.PLANNING APPLICATION NO.33-04;APPLICANT:Butcher Ranch SubdiVision;
LOCATION:NIE corner PVDN and PVDE.A request for a Tentative Tract Map to
subdivide an 8.55 acre slle into 14 lots,consisting of 11 residential lots two landscape lots,
and one zoned for Commercial-Recreation,and the vacation of the Casaba Road right-ot-
way.(KT)
B.PLANNING APPLICATION NO.06-10;APPLICANT:City of Roiling .Hills Es1ates;
LOCATION:City-wide.Recommending that the City Council adopt Chapter 17.51 of the
Municipal Code to establish procedures for reasonable accommodation to reduce housing
barriers for persons with disabilities.(NC)
9.COMMISSION ITEMS.
10.DIRECTOR'S ITEMS.
11.MATTERS OF INFORMATION.
A.Park and Activities Minutes (March 2.2010).
B.Park and Activities Minutes (March 16,2010).
C.City CouncH Actions (March 23,2010).
D.EqueslrianCommltlee Minutes (February 22,2010).
12.ADJOURNMENT.
3 - 4
Apr 05 2010 7:47AM Rolling Hills Estates 3103774468 page 3
Staff Repor
City of Rolling Hills Estat
DATE:APRIL5,2010
TO:PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
APR 1-2010
fTEM NO.<6'A
FROM:KELLEY THOM,ASSOCIATE PLANNER
SUBJECT:PLANNING APPLICATION 33-04
APPLICANT:GARY BUTCHER
LOCATION:NORTHEAST CORNER OF PALOS VERDES DRIVE NORTH AND
PALOS VERDES DRIVE EAST
OVERVIEW
The subject request is for approval of Tentative Tract Map No.52214,Neighborhood Compatibility
Determination and Grading Plan to establish a subdivision including 11 residential lots,two
landscape lots,and one Commercial Recreation (C-R)designated lot in the RA-20.000 and e-R
Zones,.and a Mitigated Negative Declaration under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA).finding that the project,with mitigation measures,will not have a significant impact on the
environ·ment.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Application Filed:
Applicstion Deemed Complete:
Public Notices Mailed:
Public t'Jotices Posted:
Public Notices Published:
4.30.09
5.14.09
2.17.10
2.17.10
2.25.10
The applicant verbally notified staff requesting to have their application continued to the next
Commi~sion meeting on April 19,2010,due to family commitments.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission:
1.Open the Public Hearing;
2.Take no public .testimony;and
3.Continue PA-33-04 to the Planning Commission meeting on April 19.2010.
3 - 5
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ESTATES
4045 Palos Verdes Drive North
Rolling Hills Estates,CA 90274
Telephone-(310)377-1577·Fax-(310)377-4468
www.Rollin HillsEstates-Ca.ov
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
April 19,2010,7:30 pm Regular Meeting
Note:Reports and documents relating to each agenda item are on file in the Planning Department and are
available for public inspection.
1.CALL MEETING TO ORDER.
2.SALUTE TO THE FLAG.
3.ROLL CALL.
4.APPROVAL OF MINUTES (AprilS,2010).
5.AUDIENCE ITEMS.
6.CONSENT CALENDAR.The following routine matters will be approved in a single motion with the
unanimous consent of the Planning Commission.There will be no separate discussion of these
items unless good cause is shown by a member of the Commission or the public expressed under
audience items prior to the roll call vote.(Items removed will be considered under Business
Items.)
A.Waive reading in full of all resolutions that are presented for Planning Commission
consideration on tonight's agenda and all such resolutions shall be read by title only.
7.BUSINESS ITEMS.
A.PLANNING APPLICATION NO.10-10;APPLICANT:Mr.&Mrs.Mario Ramirez;LOCATION:
4629 Marloma Drive;A Neighborhood Compatibility Determination for single story additions
and a Minor Deviation to decrease the required front yard area by not more than 10%.
(JM)
8.PUBLIC HEARINGS.
A.PLANNING APPLICATION NO.33-04;APPLICANT:Butcher Ranch Subdivision;
LOCATION:N/E corner PVDN and PVDE.A request for a Tentative Tract Map to
subdivide an 8.55 acre site into 14 lots,consisting of 11 residential lots,two landscape lots,
and one zoned for Commercial-Recreation,and the vacation of the Casaba Road right-of-
way.(KT)
B.PLANNING APPLICATION NO.05-10;APPLICANT:City of Rolling Hills Estates;
LOCATION:City-wide;Proposed revisions to Chapter 17.59 (Water Efficient Landscaping)
of the Rolling Hills Estates Municipal Code.(NC)
9.COMMISSION ITEMS.
10.DIRECTOR'S ITEMS.
11.MATTERS OF INFORMATION.
A.Park and Activities Minutes (April 6,2010).
B.City Council Actions (April 13,2010).
12.ADJOURNMENT.
3 - 6
Staff Report
City of Rolling Hills Estates
DATE:April 19,2010
TO:PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM:KELLEY THOM,ASSOCIATE PLANNER
SUBJECT:PLANNING APPLICATION 33-04
APPLICANT:GARY BUTCHER
LOCATION:NORTHEAST CORNER OF PALOS VERDES DRIVE NORTH AND
PALOS VERDES DRIVE EAST
OVERVIEW
The subject request is for approval of a Tentative Tract Map No.52214,a Neighborhood
Compatibility Determination and a Grading Plan to establish a subdivision including 11 residential
lots,two landscape lots,and one Commercial Recreation (C-R)designated lot in the RA-20,000
and C-R Zones,and a Mitigated Negative Declaration under the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA),finding that the project,with mitigation measures,will not have a significant impact on
the environment.
BACKGROUND
Revised Application Filed:
Application Deemed Complete:
Public Notices Mailed:
Public Notices Posted:
Public Notices Published:
4.30.09
5.14.09
2.17.10
2.17.10
2.25.10
On August 15,2005 and September 19,2005,public hearings for the project were held before
the Planning Commission.As noted in the staff report and minutes (attached)the Planning
Commission continued the project to allow time for a further comment review period of 30 days
beginning on August 16,2005 and ending on September 15,2005,and for preparation of the
final Response to Comments document and distribution of the document to the California
Department of Fish and Game (DFG).
On November 1,2005,a public hearing for the project was held before the Planning
Commission.As noted in the staff report and minutes (attached)the Planning Commission
continued the project to allow time for the applicant to further review the project in consideration
of the comments received from the Planning Commission.In general,the Planning Commission
requested a reduction of site grading,grading modifications to more closely following natural
site contours,and a reduction or alteration to the lots in the cul-de-sac area.Furthermore,the
Planning Commission directed staff to investigate the cost of mitigation for the loss of the ravine
area.
3 - 7
On December 5,2005,a public hearing for the project was held before the Planning
Commission.As noted in the staff report and minutes (attached)the Planning Commission
directed staff to prepare a resolution to the City Council recommending denial of the project and
the associated Mitigated Negative Declaration.
At the January 17,2006 Planning Commission meeting,the Planning Commission approved
Resolution No.PA-33-04 recommending denial of the proposed application and associated
Mitigated Negative Declaration to the City Council.In general,the Planning Commission felt
that the project should be denied because the proposed grading of a balanced cut and fill of
41,600 cubic yards is excessive and does not retain the natural topography of the existing site,
the project proposes undesirably small lot widths in the westerly portion of the proposed tract,
the project design should avoid filling of the ravine area in the westerly portion of the project site
or include offsite mitigation for the loss of the ravine area,and additional environmental review
should be performed specifically related to the loss of the ravine area which may warrant
preparation of a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
On February 14,2006,a public hearing was held before the City Council as a response to the
applicant's request for a continuation of this project to a date uncertain in order to work with staff
to revise the project pursuant to the direction of the Planning Commission.
On April 5,2010,the Planning Commission opened the public hearing,took no public testimony,
and continued the application to April 19,2010,at the applicant's request.
Approval of a Tentative Tract Map is required under Section 66426 of the California
Government Code and Chapter 16.12 of the Municipal Code.
Approval of a Grading application is required under Section 15.04.040 of the Municipal Code for
any importation onto or exportation from any site in the City which exceeds 20 cubic yards of
earth or any vertical change in the grade of any site which is 3'or more.
Approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is required under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA),finding that the project,with appropriate mitigation measures as stated in
the Initial Study,will not have a significant impact on the environment.
The subject property is located on the northeast corner of Palos Verdes Drive North (PVDN)
and Palos Verdes Drive East (PVDE)and is zoned RA-20,OOO and Commercial Recreation (C-
R).The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is Low Density Residential and
Commercial Recreation,and the property is located in General Plan Land Use Planning Area
Number 1.As discussed further below,the project site is subject to the Horse,Cultural
Resource,Scenic Corridor,and Ecological Resource Overlay designations in the General Plan.
The subject property is 7.55 acres in size and presently vacant except the southwesterly corner
which is developed with a small office building (formerly used by ReMax).
The site is generally surrounded by residential,commercial recreation,and open space uses.
To the north is the Rolling Hills Country Club and Jack Kramer Tennis Club zoned C-R.To the
east,across Montecillo Drive,is the Montecillo residential community zoned RA-20,000 and a
portion of Rolling Hills Covenant Church zoned Institutional.To the south,across PVDN,is the
Palos Verdes Reservoir zoned Open Space/Recreation (OS-R)as well as a portion of Rolling
Hills Covenant Church zoned Institutional.To the west,across PVDE,is Dapplegray Park and
the Dapplegray residential community zoned RA-20,OOO.
2
3 - 8
The following is a list of past discretionary permits for the subject property that are relevant to
the subject request:
•P-156-77:Approved a General Plan Amendment from Commercial Recreation to Low
Density Residential;
•ZC-102-78:Approved a Zone Change from Commercial Recreation to RA-20,000;
•P-176-81/Tentative Tract Map No.35558:Denied a request for approval of a Tentative
Tract Map;
•V-103-84:Denied a request for a Variance to permit a lesser lot depth than required by
Code for Tentative Tract Map No.35558;
•PA-13-98:Request for a Tentative Tract Map,Grading Permit and General Plan
Amendments to:1)to remove the Horse Overlay zone;and 2)rezone a portion of the
property from Commercial Recreation to RA-20,000 (Withdrawn).
DISCUSSION
Revised Plans
Based on the previous comments from the Planning Commission as reasons for recommending
denial of PA-33-04,the applicant has revised the project to address those issues.Pursuant to
comments received at the Planning Commission public hearing on January 17,2006,the
Commission felt that the project should be denied because:
•The proposed grading of a balanced cut and fill of 41,600 cubic yards is excessive and
does not retain the natural topography of the existing site;
•The project proposes undesirably small lot widths in the westerly portion of the proposed
tract;
•The project design should avoid filling of the ravine area in the westerly portion of the
project site or include offsite mitigation for the loss of the ravine area,and additional
environmental review should be performed specifically related to the loss of the ravine
area which may warrant preparation of a full EIR.
In addition,staff previously recommended conditions of approval for the project which are as
follows:
•That the nine Pepper trees surveyed by the applicant (as previously provided to the
Planning Commission)be saved in place or relocated onsite;
•That a tree survey of the entire site be conducted to determine if additional existing trees
can be saved in place or relocated onsite;
•That a white three-rail fence be required along PVDN and PVDE subject to review of the
Park and Activities Commission during final landscape plan review;and
•That any subdivision walls or berms proposed should also be reviewed in conjunction
with final landscape plan review.
3
3 - 9
Under the current proposal,the project revisions include:
•Reducing the amount of grading on the site;
•Reducing the number of proposed residences from 13 to 11 homes;
•Increasing lot widths for the westerly lots;
•Limiting development of the existing ravine "greenbelt"area;
•As a result of a tree survey of the entire site,26 existing trees will not be disturbed
during grading;
•67 trees would be replanted on native slope and at the proposed mini-park;and
•Providing white three-rail fences along Palos Verdes Drive North;
As proposed,the subject property would be subdivided into 11 residential lots zoned RA-
20,000,two landscape lots and one C-R designated lot.The project would also include the
demolition of the existing vacant single-story commercial building (the former ReMax building)
and associated parking lot located on the corner of PVDN and PVDE.The proposed residential
lots would have a minimum size of 20,000 sq.ft.All of the residential lots (Lots 2-12)would be
developed with single-family residences,which range in size from 3,500-4,700 sq.ft.,with
opportunities for private equestrian facilities (horse arenas)of a minimum of 800 sq.ft.Along
the rear of Lots 2-8 and a portion of Lot 9,the proposed site plan identifies a "greenbelf'area
which would not be a dedicated open space,but would rather be a feature within the proposed
lots.As proposed,the residential lots would be located along the northwestern edge of Casaba
Road,which is accessed from Montecillo Drive and would terminate in a cul-de-sac at its
westerly end.According to Tentative Tract Map No.52214,Casaba Road would be a private
street and would not be gated.
In addition to the residential lots,the project includes two landscape lots.At the northeast corner
of PVDN and PVDE,an 11,187 sq.ft mini-park (Lot 1)is proposed for passive recreational use
and would be dedicated to the City.Adjacent to PVDN,a landscape buffer (Lot A)which
includes Casaba Road,would be maintained by the future homeowner's association.In the
northeasterly corner of the property,adjacent to the Jack Kramer Tennis Club,(Lot 13)a vacant
25,526 sq.ft.lot would remain zoned for Commercial Recreation (C-R).
It should be noted that as part of the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration,the
proposed residences have been reviewed for Neighborhood Compatibility by the City's
environmental consultant,John Bellas (Willdan)and the applicant has provided project plans
which are included separately.
In the project presented to the Planning Commission in November 2005,a balanced cut and fill
of 41 ,600 cubic yards was proposed and included the filling of the approximately 65,000 square
foot ravine.Under this proposal,the site grading would consist of 16,815 cubic yards for cut,
12,795 cubic yards for fill,and a net of 4,020 cubic yards for export.It should be noted that the
proposed grading would result in the partial filling of the existing ravine along the easterly
portion of PVDE (Lots 2-4)with the direct loss of approximately 1/3 of the riparian area.As
identified as a "greenbelt"on the proposed site plan,the remaining riparian habitat would be a
component of 8 of the residential lots (Lots 2-9).While the vegetation in the greenbelt would not
be removed for project grading or construction,future homeowners could choose to remove
vegetation from the greenbelt area for property improvements or maintenance purposes if not
4
3 - 10
otherwise restricted.In addition,the proposed grading would result in pad elevations of 338'at
the highest point for Lot 2 (nearest the corner of PVDN and PVDE)gradually decreasing to 325'
for Lot 12 (nearest Montecillo Drive).Lots 2 and 3 are approximately 12'and 23'lower than the
intersection of PVDN/PVDE respectively.Grading would also result in the gradual downward
slope of the site from PVDN northerly toward the Rolling Hills Country Club property.The site
would drain northerly toward the Rolling Hills Country Club property,and the Country Club has
indicated that drainage will be accepted.In addition,retaining walls are proposed along a
portion of the southerly and westerly property boundary,adjacent to PVDN and PVDE.
To accommodate the proposed building pads and street,large trees on-site are proposed to be
removed.Prevjously,staff recommended a condition of approval for the project requiring that
certain trees be saved or relocated.Furthermore,consistent with requirements of other
Tentative Tract Maps (Le.,Vantage Point and Peppertree Lane),staff recommended as a
condition of approval requiring a survey of all remaining trees on-site to determine if they can be
preserved in place or relocated on site in conjunction with the subject application.In the current
proposal,the plans indicate that 26 existing trees will not be disturbed during grading,and 67
trees would be replanted on native slope and at the proposed mini-park.In addition,many of
the existing trees on Lot 2,adjacent to PVDN,will be preserved in-place.
The property is within a Horse Overlay designation in the General Plan.Accordingly,a 15'-wide
bridle trail is proposed along the western and northern edges of the project site.
Project Overview
General Plan Applicability
The purpose of the General Plan is to provide a comprehensive,long-range plan designed to
serve as a guide for the physical development of the City.The General Plan consists of an
integrated and internally consistent set of goals,policies,and implementation measures.The
Municipal Code is a tool to implement the General Plan's goals,policies,and implementation
measures.The City's present General Plan was adopted on August 18,1992 (Housing Element
-June 23,2009)in accordance with Title 7,Chapter 3,Article 5 of the Government Code.
The subject site is primarily designated for Low Density Residential Uses in the General Plan.
This designation is implemented by the RA-20,000 and RPD zone designations and permits
single-family detached residential units with a maximum density of two units per acres and a
population density of six persons per acre.Accordingly,15 residential units and 45 persons
would be permitted for the 7.55-acre property.Given that 11 lots are proposed (which would
accommodate one home each),the project conforms to General Plan requirements for units per
acre,and according to the City's Public Facilities Impact Fee Report,the average household
size for the City's single-family units is 2.77 persons per household.Using this household site,
the project would increase the City's population by 31 residents,which represents a 0.38%
increase in the City's population.
The site is further subject to four General Plan Overlay designations as described below.A
discussion of the applicability of the overlay designation to the subject project is also provided.
Horse Overlay -This designation identifies areas where the keeping of horses is permitted
and requires the preservation of these areas.The project design anticipates equestrian use
of the lots in addition to single-family homes.A 15'-wide bridle trail is proposed along PVDE
at the western edge of the subject property and along the northerly property line to the rear
of lots 1-12.The proposed trail would provide access from each of the proposed residential
lots,along the northerly and westerly edges of the development,and into the City's larger
bridle trail system.
5
3 - 11
Cultural Resources Overlay -This designation applies to those areas that have been
designated as having a high sensitivity for cultural resources and where future development
may affect these resources.The Conservation Element of the General Plan details
appropriate actions that must be followed when property is included within this designation.
Given that the subject property is within an area designated as high sensitivity for cultural
resource,a Phase 1 Cultural Survey was completed in 1998 by John Minch and Associates,
Inc.as required by General Plan Policy 3.1 and Implementation Policy 3.1.1 of the
Conservation Element.Three items of prehistoric data were located on the parcel during
the survey.Although Minch and Associates believed that the items found were isolated,
they recommended that a qualified archaeologist supervise the monitoring of the parcel
while it is graded for development and that if any archaeological sites,features,or burials
are found during the grading operations,work should be stopped until proper cultural
resource monitoring recommendations and notifications can be made and implemented.
This item is discussed further in the project Initial Study (previously provided to the Planning
Commission)which includes a Mitigation Measure requiring grading and excavation
activities to be supervised by qualified archeological/paleontological monitors and indicates
subsequent procedures if artifacts are found.
Scenic Corridor Overlay -This designation applies to all properties on major roadways,
where scenic vistas,as designated in the Conservation Element of the General Plan are
located.PVDN and PVDE are designated scenic corridors.The Conservation Element of
the General Plan (pages 5-19 and 5-20)indicates standards that must be adhered to in
future development along scenic corridors.Generally,these standards strive to ensure that
street views will not be diminished by future development.Several standards are indicated
for lighting,utilities,and structures which will be reviewed in conjunction with any proposed
homes on the subject site in the future.With regard to grading,which is applicable to the
subject request,standards require that site preparation or cutting of hillsides will be
conducted in a manner where it is least visible from designated scenic corridors.No major
hillsides are proposed to be cut as part of this application.Staff believes graded pads will
not be largely visible from the street or detract from the street scene given that they are
slightly lower than street elevation.Furthermore,the applicant proposes a private linear
landscape area along the majority of PVDN which will enhance the street view.Finally,the
addition of the public landscape area at the immediate corner of PVDN and PVDE will
enhance the appearance of northeast corner of this intersection.Standards for the Scenic
Corridor Overlay also encourage equestrian and bicycle routes where feasible.It can be
noted that the addition of the equestrian trail along PVDN will comply with this standard.
Ecological Resource Overlay -This designation applies to those portions of the City where
sensitive habitats are located.The Conservation Element of the General Plan indicates
specific guidelines that must be adhered to when planning and developing these areas.
Given that the subject property is within an area designated as high sensitivity for ecological
resources,a biological assessment was conducted by Frank Hovore Associates in
conformance with requirements indicated on Page 5-17 of the Conservation Element.The
assessment concludes that the project is not anticipated to result in any direct or indirect
adverse impacts to any agency-listed sensitive plant or animal species.No threatened,
endangered or otherwise listed species are known to occur within the zone of direct or
indirect project effects.The ravine along PVDE was the source of a Department of Fish and
Game (DFG)arbitration decision in 1979 which concluded that the project site is not subject
of DFG jurisdiction.T,he applicant contacted DFG in February of 2005,and DFG did not
indicate a need to change the 1979 decision.However,in response to a comment letter
received from the California Department of Fish and Game (dated March 11,2010)on the
proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,additional biological investigations will be
6
3 - 12
conducted at the project site which is discussed further discussion in the Initial Study and
Negative Declaration section of this report.
As previously discussed,one lot within the subject subdivision is designated Commercial
Recreation in the General Plan.The Commercial Recreation designation provides for archery
ranges,tennis courts,equestrian facilities,riding clubs,golf courses,and country clubs with a
maximum floor area ratio of .25 to 1.The establishment of this lot in conjunction with the
subject application would reflect the existing Commercial Recreation designation in the General
Plan and C-R designation in the Zoning Code.Thus,establishment of the lot is consistent with
General Plan requirements.No use of the lot is proposed with this application,and future use
would be subject to further review when proposed.
Zoning Applicability
RA-20,OOO Zone
Requirements of the RA-20,000 zoning designation are set forth in Chapter 17.10 of the
Municipal Code.This zone designation,in part,requires that each lot be a minimum of 20,000
square feet in size.The following table provides the area of each proposed RA-20,000 zoned
lot:
Lot Land-Use Lot
A Casaba Rd and Landscape Buffer 21,360 sJ.
1 Mini-Park 11,187 sJ.
2 Residential 32,177 sJ.
3 Residential 32,177 sJ.
4 Residential 21,821 sJ.
5 Residential 20,032 sJ.
6 Residential 20,060 sJ.
7 Residential 20,060 sJ.
8 Residential 20,060 sJ.
9 Residential 20,060 sJ.
10 Residential 20,000 sJ.
11 Residential 20,047 sJ.
12 Residential 28,830 sJ.
13 Vacant 25,526 sJ.
As indicated above,all proposed residential lots comply with the minimum required area of
20,000 square feet.Furthermore,the RA-20,OOO zone requires a minimum lot width of 85'and
a minimum depth of 150'.As indicated on the Tentative Tract Map,lot depths vary between
approximately 165'for Lot 12 to approximately 273.55'for Lot 2 (exclusive of the private street)
in compliance with depth requirements.With regard to required lot width,Lots 5 through 12
provide a minimum width of 85', while Lots 2 though 4 provide less than 85'along the street
frontage.It can be noted,however,that these lots are located on the cul-de-sac and that
previous Tentative Tract Maps (Le.,Vantage Point,Hillcrest Manor)have been approved with
less than required width dimensions in cul-de-sac situations.Each lot does provide at least 85'
in width at some point moving back from the street.
Neighborhood Compatibility
In addition to complying with the residential development standards for the RA-20,OOO Zone,the
proposed residences were reviewed under the Neighborhood Compatibility Ordinance,as set
forth in Chapter 17.62 of the Municipal Code.The Neighborhood Compatibility Ordinance sets
performance standards requiring new construction to be "compatible"with the surrounding
7
3 - 13
neighborhoods.The project site is surrounded by the Rolling Hills Country Club and Kramer
Tennis Club to the north,PVDN to the south,Montecillo Drive to the east,which is the closest
residential neighborhood to the site,and PVDE to the west.As a result,the proposed
development would function as its own neighborhood,and would include eight different
residential models which include single-story,two-story,and split-level homes (for tiered lots).
These homes are planned with varying architectural styles classified by the project architect as
Traditional,Craftsman,and French Country.
Given that the existing architectural style of the homes in the adjacent Montecillo neighborhood
is primarily California Ranch,with occasional Craftsman units/elements and include one-and
two-story structures,the proposed residences would be reasonably consistent with the
architectural themes,scale and development density in the Montecillo neighborhood.In
addition,since the closest residential property is more than 300 feet away from the project site,
the proposed residences meet all setback requirements and orient the front porches,rear
patios,and balconies to not face into the neighboring properties,and the location of the homes
is in a slightly depressed area in the landscape,the proposed development would appear to
comply with the Neighborhood Compatibility Ordinance.
C-R Zone
Requirements of the C-R Zone are set forth in Chapter 17.22 of the Municipal Code.Lot 13 of
the subject application is proposed to be zoned C-R in conformance with existing zoning for the
area.The C-R zone requires a minimum lot area of two acres for any lot created after June 30,
1975.Lot 13 is .58-acre in size and,thus,does not meet this requirement.As indicated in the
Background section of this report,the zoning designation was changed from C-R to RA-20,000
in 1978 for the majority of the Butcher property.Given that the Lot 13 area was not included in
that zone change application,the substandard lot area with a C-R zone designation was
established at that time.Given that the subject request is in conformance with the existing zone
designation for the lot and that the substandard lot area is not being created by the subject
request,staff supports the establishment of the lot as proposed.
As discussed in previous staff reports,the Jack Kramer Tennis Club representatives have
expressed potential interest in purchasing Lot 13 (formerly known as Lot 14)for incorporation
into its facilities.Incorporation of the lot into this larger facility would result in an overall
development of over two acres for the entire Jack Kramer Tennis Club in conformance with
zoning requirements.It can also be noted that Butcher representatives expressed interest in
purchasing a property located at the southwest corner of Montecillo Drive and Casaba Road
(immediately adjacent to the subject subdivision)which is owned by the Jack Kramer Club and
zoned RA-20,OOO.However,this property is not part of the current entitlement request and the
Initial Study only analyzed the development of the proposed 11 residential lots.It is possible
that said RA-20,000 zoned property may be incorporated into the subject development at a
future time.To date,the applicant has met with the Kramer Club and it appears that there is
genuine interest moving the project forward to facilitate a land swap.
Grading
Requirements for grading in residential districts are set forth in Chapter 17.07 of the Municipal
Code.The purpose of the chapter is to preserve and promote the City's rural character through
development that protects the hillsides and topography and the public health,safety and general
welfare of the residents of the city.Staff believes that the grading of the property,as discussed
in the Project Overview section of this report,is appropriate for the site and would not be
detrimental to the public health,safety,and general welfare.
8
3 - 14
Tentative Tract Map
Regarding tract maps,Chapter 16.12 of the Municipal Code requires that the plan must be
prepared by a registered civil engineer for all public works improvements to be constructed as a
condition of the subdivision and for all site development including (but not limited)to grading,
drainage facilities,and structures in accordance with the City standards.Furthermore,plans for
all irrigation and landscaping subject to the approval of the Planning Director and a plot plan
showing details of the entire development and all improvements to be constructed are required.
Pursuant to Chapter 16.04 of the Municipal Code,the Planning Commission's actions shall be
as an advisory agency only,and all actions of the Planning Commission with reference to tract
maps shall be reported to the City Council who shall act approve,deny or conditionally approve
the map.Thus,the Planning Commission's action on the subject request shall serve only as a
recommendation to the City Council.
The Tentative Tract Map was routed to other affected public agencies and service providers for
review.The City Engineer,City Traffic Engineer,and Fire Department provided conditions of
approval for the map.These conditions generally involve requirements pursuant to the
Subdivision Map Act as well as project level requirements such as requirements for stop signs
and fire hydrants.Staff supports approval of the Tentative Tract Map subject to these
conditions which will appear in the resolution recommending approval of the project to the City
Council for review by the Planning Commission.
Landscaping and Irrigation
Chapter 17.59 sets forth requirements for developer-installed landscaping in excess of 5,000
square feet in residential subdivisions.The chapter requires that final landscape plans be
reviewed by the Park and Activities Commission for said projects.Given that each home will
have at least a 5,000 square foot private landscaped area,compliance to the City's Water
Efficiency Ordinance and a final landscape plan review will be required.
Staff believes that a white three-rail fence should be installed along the boundaries of the
subdivision on PVDN and PVDE in conjunction with the project to provide compatibility in
appearance of this and other properties along these streets.Staff recommends that the Park
and Activities Commission review said fences in conjunction with the final landscape plan.
Furthermore,staff believes that any walls or berms proposed for the project should be also be
reviewed at that time.A condition of approval for the project will require review by the Park and
Activities Commission of the final landscape plan,white three-rail fences,and any proposed
walls or berms.
Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
The proposed development has been defined as a project under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA),which requires completion of an Initial Study to determine if the project
would have significant impacts on the environment.The City contracted with Willdan
Associates to perform the Initial Study which was provided to the Planning Commission under
separate cover on March 18,2010 accompanied by a Mitigated Negative Declaration and
associated Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration.
As required by CEQA,a 30-day public comment period beginning on February 16,2010 and
ending on March 18,2010.The Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration,
Negative Declaration,and Initial Study were routed to the State Clearinghouse,adjacent cities,
all property owners within 500'of the project site,and other interested parties.The notice
provides a brief description of the project,the Planning Commission public hearing
date/time/location,how to obtain detailed information about the project (including the Initial
9
3 - 15
Study document),and the Planning Commission's intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative
Declaration.The Initial Study was posted on the City's website and provided at the public
counter for review.Copies of the Initial Study,Mitigated Negative Declaration and Notice were
also provided to the adjacent Peninsula cities and the County of Los Angeles.
Mitigation Measures are included in the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
categories of Land Use/Planning,Aesthetics,including Neighborhood Compatibility Analysis,
Transportation/Traffic,Air Quality,including Greenhouse Gas (GHG)Emissions, Biological
Resources,Cultural Resources,Geology and Soils,Hydrology,and Utilities and Service
Systems.
Response to Comments
Currently,four letters were received on the proposed Initial Study and Mitigated Negative
Declaration during the public review period.The comment letters,which are accompanied by
staff's response in the Response to Comments document (attached),include discussion of the
project's wastewater discharge issues and project impacts on potential biological resources.
As a result of the concerns raised by the California Department of Fish and Game,additional
biological investigations will be conducted at the project site,including surveys for Western
Spadefoot and Least Bell's Vireo,conducting an updated vegetation survey and preparing an
updated vegetation mapping of the site,and preparing a report of the findings.
John Bellas of Willdan Associates,who prepared the Initial Study,will be at the public hearing to
answer any related questions.
FINDINGS &RECOMMENDATION
In response to the California Department of Fish and Game comments on the proposed Initial
Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration,additional biological investigations will be conducted
at the project site,and as such,staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue PA-
33-04 to a date uncertain.
Staff recommends the Planning Commission
1.Open the Public Hearing;
2.Take public testimony;
3.Discuss the issues;and
4.Continue PA-33-04 to a date uncertain.
Exhibits
Attached
1.Response to Comments
2.Minutes and Staff Reports dated August 15,2005,September 19,2005,November 1,2005
and December 5,2005
Separate
Plans
PA·33·04 pm -4.19.10
10
3 - 16
FIGURE 3:PROPOSED SITE PLAN
~
1]
~<io'ia!_1"-40'
:~.""""''-----Etc =::.t..,,:;,o;:.210_co.107"--
Janu:uy 8.2010
ill--...._-,p".~or l Of ,6':;:;;::-"'J:""'''-''----~"",~~
.-".'X .....~\~__u ~-_-.,:;,~~
=.-0 '$:0 I 2T!iZ~::---UtiItfJ6bIfI#1UMJlJt:lWBU,"=z..............
".....~...=-':=f'~
BUTCHER RANCH
Tentative T",ct Map No.52214
Rolt'll9 tms EslalH.Calilomia
""""'"""r<--::::::-;~1El'IIV"'"
ED.."....,_......"""
c:::::J-"~
8
3 - 17
For Immediate Release
MEDIA STATEMENT
Contact:Elise Swanson
(310)241-0699 or
(310)590 -6311 (cell)
SFI Bridgeview,LLC Announces Ownership of Ponte Vista at San Pedro
April 2,2010 (San Pedro,CA).SFI Bridgeview,LLC,a subsidiary of iStar Financial Inc.,
a leading publicly traded finance company focused on the real estate industry,
announced today that it has taken ownership of Ponte Vista,a 62-acre residential
property located on Western Avenue in the community of San Pedro,in a negotiated
transfer of the property.
iStar Financial was the primary lender for the Ponte Vista project since 2005,and will
lead the development as it moves through the entitlement process in the City of Los
Angeles.
'We look forward to working with Harbor Area residents to build a high-quality,
sustainable community that we can all be proud of and enjoy,"said Michael Dorsch,
Executive Vice-President at iStar Financial.'We plan to work with the community,
Councilwoman Hahn,and the Planning Commission to move the development forward
as expeditiously as possible."
With an asset base in excess of $15 billion,iStar is one of the country's largest publicly
traded commercial real estate finance companies,managing nearly 40 million square
feet of high-quality real estate located across the country.iStar,headquartered in New
York City with offices in Santa Monica and Irvine,has extensive experience in the
Southern California real estate market.Currently,approximately $1.3 billion of the
Company's total assets are located in the Southern California region.
"iStar has closely followed the Ponte Vista development process and understands the
concerns that have been raised by area residents over the past several years,"stated
Dorsch."We ask the community for patience while we work to develop a revised plan
that reflects the valuable community input that has been voiced in the various hearings
and open houses held on the project."
For more information,please contact the Ponte Vista Community Outreach Office at
(310)241-0699.
###
3 - 18
Ponte Vista back to square one;project returns to investor -The Daily Breeze Page 1 of2
Ponte Vista back to
square one;project
returns to investor
By Donna Littlejohn Staff Writer
Posted:04/05/2010 05:43:30 PM PDT
The slow economy has led to San Pedro's long planned Ponte Vista project
being turned over to primary investor iStar.The company will now have to
revise plans for the project.(Robert Casillas/Staff Photographer)
For good or ill,few projects get done quickly in
San Pedro.
And Ponte Vista -the large-scale housing
development planned on 62.5 acres of surplus
Navy property -surely is no exception.
Mired in controversy since it was first proposed
in 2005,Ponte Vista now has been hit hard by
the plunging economy.It has already been
through a few incarnations and now is about to
Advertisement
present yet another.
Last week,it was announced that the project
has been turned back over to its chief investor,
iStar Financial Inc.,which will again re-evaluate
building and density plans for the site on
Western Avenue.
"Unfortunately,Ponte Vista has been subjected
to the current economic ills affecting the country
and because of that,there's been an orderly
transferring of the property back to the (primary)
lender,"said Elise Swanson,who is serving as a
consultant to the newest team taking over the
development.
Gone is DLJ Real Estate Capital Partners,a
subsidiary of Credit Suisse that took over the
project after Bisno Development was bumped in
December 2008.
Taking over is SFI Bridgeview,LLC,a subsidiary
of iStar Financial Inc.
"iStar has just begun an assessment of the
status of the project and they're reviewing all the c
ommunity input from the past,"Swanson said,
adding the company is putting together yet
another new project team for Ponte Vista.
"They've just taken title to the property They
want to take some time before they come back
to the community to make sure there's a
thoughtful approach."
The primary disagreement remains over density
and traffic impacts.As first laid out in 2005,the
IF YOUfRE NOT PRINTING ON A KODAK ESP ALl-IN-ONE PRINTER,CHANCES ARE
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR INK.
FIND OUT HOW MUCH YOU"RE OVERPAYING FOR INK AT PRJNTAND PROSPER.COM
(~~~a~"'~.,~~w.".,.~..«.,,__,"
Print Powered By ,,[~J..E2rnJ9tJ;?)!.~~!:D.!£~.'J
http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_14823629 4/6/20103 - 19
Ponte Vista back to square one;project returns to investor -The Daily Breeze Page 2 of2
project called for 2,300 homes to be built.That
was later reduced to 1,950,a number turned
down by the Los Angeles Planning Commission.
Before talks were suspended,housing numbers
had been bumped down to between 500 and
1,395.
"It's just got to be recognized that we're
transportation corridor poor being on a
peninsula,"said Jerry Gaines of San Pedro who
served on the community's Ponte Vista task
force.
"The community's been very clear that they want
somebody who will address the traffic needs,"
said John Greenwood of San Pedro,who was
chairman of the committee."I don't think
anybody has done that yet."
Vacant Navy homes still sit on the property
across from Green Hills Memorial Park.A herd of
about 80 sheep and goats graze the property to
keep the weeds down and Ponte Vista still
maintains an open office in a trailer on the site.
"I would like to see something built,those
places are getting worse and worse,"Greenwood
said."I'd like to see the right kind of
development there."
While the debate over density and traffic has yet
to be resolved,Gaines agreed that the property
shouldn't continue to sit vacant.
"I'm sure that at some point people realize they
don't want a continuous eyesore there,"Gaines
said."The community does need housing This is
a working asset and it would be ridiculous to
watch the sheep out there graze for the next 15
or 20 years."
Swanson said it is anticipated that the new team
will be ready to go public with some of their
ideas in two to four months.
"They are committed to working with this
community to determine what development at
Ponte Vista is a 'fit,'"she said."They're very
interested in doing a high quality project."
"I keep hoping someone will get it right,"
Greenwood said of the plans."We're still
waiting."
Gaines noted that the economic climate is vastly
different from that in 2005 when developer Bob
Bisno purchased the land for $125 million.
The city union members targeted to purchase
the future homes have also since fallen on hard
times of their own.
Developers have to look at "what's affordable
and what's achievable in today's market,"Gaines
said."Most of the existing (new housing)stock is
leasing rather than selling.But at some point
that property needs to be utilized."
donna.littlejohn@dailybreeze.com
http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_14823629 4/6/20103 - 20