Loading...
PC RES 2002-005P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2002-5 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING WITH CONDITIONS A HEIGHT VARIATION, VARIANCE, AND COASTAL PERMIT (CASE NO. ZON2001- 00032) FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF AN EXISTING CARPORT WITH A NEW 480 SQUARE FOOT GARAGE AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 526 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION LOCATED ABOVE THE NEW GARAGE, AT 120 SPINDRIFT LANE, WHICH IS LOCATED WITHIN THE APPEALABLE AREA OF THE CITY'S COASTAL ZONE. WHEREAS, on August 21, 2001, the City Council approved Landslide Moratorium Exception Permit No. 42 (LME No. 42) for a 1,179 square foot addition The approval thereby allowed the applicant to submit the required Variance, Site Plan Review and Coastal Permit applications for consideration and, WHEREAS, on August 23, 2001, the applicant, Miles Pritskat, representing property owners Jim and Susan Maniscalco, submitted applications for Variance, Coastal Permit and Site Plan Review (Case No ZON2001-00019), requesting approval for a 644 square foot garage and storage addition to the front of the residence, abutting the side and front property lines, and a 535 square foot addition to the residence over the proposed garage for property located within the Appealable portion of the City's Coastal Zone at 120 Spindrift Lane; and, WHEREAS, on January 28, 2002, the applicants submitted revised plans to the City, requesting approval for a 470 square foot carport, a 103 square foot crawl space, and a 526 square foot addition to the residence over the proposed carport; and, WHEREAS, on February 7, 2002, the applications were deemed complete by Staff; and, WHEREAS, on February 7, 2002 the required public notices for the February 26, 2002 Planning Commission meeting were mailed to property owners within a 500 foot radius of the subject property, and a notice was published in the Peninsula News on February 9, 2002; and, WHEREAS, on February 21, 2002, the applicants requested that the public hearing be continued from the February 26, 2002 Planning Commission meeting to the March 26, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, and, WHEREAS, on February 26, 2002, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing to the March 26, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, and, WHEREAS, on March 26, 2002, the Planning Commission directed the applicant to file for an Height Variation application and continued the public hearing to the May 14, 2002 Planning Commission meeting; and WHEREAS, on April 3, 2002, Staff conducted a site inspection and determined that the silhouette required as part of the Height Variation approval has been correctly erected; and WHEREAS, on April 4, 2002, a new notice informed the property owners of the required Height Variation application and the modification of the plans was mailed to 55 property owners within a 500 -foot radius from the subject property, the Portuguese Bend Club Homeowner's Association, and the California Coastal Commission, and WHEREAS, on April 6, 2002, the notice of public hearing was published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq. ("CEQA"), the State's CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulation, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq , the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, and Government Code Section 65962.5(f) (Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), Staff found no evidence that the Variance, Coastal Permit, and Site Plan Review (Case No. ZON2001-00032) would have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, the proposed project has been found to be categorically exempt under Class 1 (Existing Structures) since the project involves an addition to an existing residential structure, and, WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on May 14, 2002, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: That the applicant successfully completed the Early Neighborhood Consultation process by obtaining 22 of the 55 properties within the 500' radius, which is 40%, and 4 of the 5 properties within the 100' radius, which is 80%. Section 2: The subject lot is not located in an area designated by the City's General Plan and the City's Coastal Specific Plan as a viewing area and therefore the proposed structure does not impair any public views. Section 3: The subject lot not located on a ridge, which is defined as an elongated crest or linear series of crest of hills, bluffs or highlands. In addition, the subject property is not located on a promontory, which is defined as a prominent mass of land that overlooks or projects onto a lowland or body of water on at least two sides. Section 4: The proposed project will not create a view impairment from surrounding properties the because properties located up the street from the subject P.C. Resolution No. 2002-5 Page 2 of 7 NI property are located on a much higher elevation than the subject property. Additionally, the proposed second story addition will only be 1.29' higher than the existing residence, and below the line of sight of the property located to the east (108 Spindrift Lane), which is upslope from the subject property Section 5: The proposed addition will not cause a cumulative view impairment because the proposed addition is only 1 29' higher than the existing residence, and any future additions to surrounding existing structures will not cumulatively cause a view impairment in the neighborhood. Section 6: The proposed structure has been designed to minimize the impairment of views from surrounding properties because the second story addition is only 1.29' higher than the existing residence, and because the proposed garage and addition are proposed on the lower portion of the property, which minimizes the impairment of view from adjacent properties. Section 7: The proposed structure does not comply with the front, side and rear setback requirements, as well as the lot coverage and height requirement. However, with the approval of the Variances and the Height Variation, the proposed addition will be constructed in accordance with the residential development guidelines of the City's Municipal Code. Furthermore, in addition to obtaining Planning approval, building permits must also be obtained for compliance with the Uniform Budding Code, the Development Code and the City's Municipal Code. Section 8: The proposed project is compatible with the scale of surrounding residences because an analysis of the surrounding residences shows that although the proposed project will be larger than the 10 closest homes, the surrounding lots are downslope and upslope lots, which contains split level homes, many of which are two stories along the street of access As such, the apparent bulk and mass of the proposed addition above the garage will be compatible with the apparent bulk and mass of the split level homes found in the neighborhood. Therefore, although the proposed home will be larger than the surrounding homes, the design of the proposed project creates an apparent bulk, mass and scale that are in keeping with the scale of the surrounding residences Section 9: The proposed project is compatible with the architectural style and material of the surrounding residences because the surrounding homes are developed as beach cottages composed of flat roof and stucco with wood siding. The proposed project incorporates similar beach cottage architecture, such as the flat roof and plastered concrete, which is similar to stucco. Section 10: The proposed project is compatible with the front yard setbacks of the surrounding residences because none of the homes in the surrounding neighborhood appears to comply with the required 20' front yard setback Although the surrounding residences do not appear to be built up to the front property line, many homes have high fences near the front property line, which has a similar effect as the proposed addition located along the front property line According to the layout of the proposed addition in P.G. Resolution No. 2002-5 Page 3 of 7 relation to the surrounding neighboring, the proposed project will not result in an unreasonable infringement of privacy since the proposed master bedroom addition is located toward the front of the subject property which will be abutting the front yard of surrounding properties, which are not used as gathering areas Section 11: The requested Variance is warranted to exceed the maximum allowed lot coverage because the subject lot is much smaller than the minimum 20,040 square foot lot required by the RS -2 zoning district standards, the current lot coverage of the subject property already exceeds the allowable lot coverage, and the proposed addition and the proposed carport will not significantly increase the lot coverage These factors constitute exceptional or extraordinary circumstances that do not generally apply to other RS -2 zoned properties in the City. Section 12: The requested Variance is warranted to exceed the maximum allowed lot coverage because the majority of the residences within the Portuguese Bend Club do not respect the maximum allowed lot coverage requirements, as such the Variance will not provide the landowners a special privilege currently not enjoyed by other property owners under like conditions. Section 13: The requested Variance is warranted to exceed the maximum lot coverage because the current lot on the subject property already exceeds the allowable lot coverage and the current lot coverage is not detrimental to the public's welfare or properties in the area, as such, the proposed lot coverage will also not be detrimental to the public's welfare or properties in the area Section 14: The requested Variance is warranted to encroach into the required front, side and rear setback areas since the tract was developed with small lot sizes that limit the side, front and rear yard areas Section 15: The requested Variance is warranted to encroach into the required front, side and rear setback areas since the subject property and the majority of the lots within the Portuguese Bend Club do not meet the minimum setback requirements, and the requested Variance will not provide a special privilege currently enjoyed by the property owners and other property owners in the area Section 16: The requested Variance is warranted to encroach into the required front and side setback areas since the proposed addition will not adversely impact the ocean view of the surrounding properties, as such, the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the properties and improvements in the area. Section 17: The requested Variance is warranted to exceed the 250 square foot addition threshold in the City's Coastal Area because the entire property is located within the Coastal Zone and there is no flexibility to allow additions that are not subject to the 250 square foot threshold P.C. Resolution No 2002-5 Page 4 of 7 Section 18: The requested Variance is warranted to exceed the 250 square foot addition threshold in the City's Coastal Area because the size of the addition is within the range of other Variances granted by the City in the Portuguese Bend Club Area, therefore, the Variance will not provide the landowners a special privilege currently not enjoyed by other property owners Section 19: The requested Variance is warranted to exceed the 250 square foot addition threshold in the City's Coastal Area because the portion of the addition which exceeds the 250 square foot threshold does not impair the ocean view of the surrounding neighbors, and therefore, the addition which exceeds the 250 square foot threshold will not be detrimental to the public welfare and injurious to the properties in the area Section 20: The requested Variance is warranted to waive the requirement for a 20' setback for direct access driveway because the size and configuration of the property, the proposed location for the carport is the most feasible location to locate the garage and the small lot sizes limit front yard setback areas Section 21: The requested Variance is warranted to waive the requirement for a 20' setback for direct access driveway because the majority of the residences in the Portuguese Bend Club do not meet the setback requirements, including the required 20' setback for the direct access driveways, and the current carport does not meet the required 20' front setback for direct access driveways, as such, the requested Variance will not provide a special privilege currently enjoyed by the property owners and other property owners in the area Section 22: The requested Variance is warranted to waive the requirement for a 20' setback for direct access driveway because the required 20' setback for direct access driveways is to allow parking on the driveway and because the subject property and the majority of the properties in Portuguese Bend Club are not able to accommodate a 20' long driveway due to the small sizes of the lots, by providing the required two car garage to accommodate off street parking, the granting of the Variance to waive the 20' driveway will not be detrimental to the public's welfare and injurious to properties in the area Section 23: The requested Variance is warranted to reduce the size of a garage space because the location of the existing residence and the 2'-0" front setback to address the Homeowner's Association's concern, one of the parking spaces will not maintain a 20'- 0" depth at its entire length, as such the subject property contains an exceptional condition, which does not generally apply to other properties Section 24. The requested Variance is warranted to reduce the size of a garage space because the majority of the homes in the Portuguese Bend Club contain carports or substandard parking spaces due to the small lot sizes in the neighborhood, and the Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property owners, under like conditions P C. Resolution No. 2002-5 Page 5 of 7 w Section 25: The requested Variance is warranted to reduce the size of a parking space because the reduction constitutes approximately a 3 square feet reduction to the rear corner of the garage space, such that the reduction is not substantial and that the parking space will still be able to accommodate a car, therefore providing the required two car spaces, and eliminating on -street parking. Section 26: The requested Variance is warranted because is not contrary to the objectives of the General Plan or the policies and requirements of the Coastal Specific Plan in that the addition does not significantly impact the ocean views from the surrounding properties, therefore, complying with the General Plan's goal to "prohibit encroachment on existing scenic views reasonably expected by neighboring residences" (General Plan p 78). Section 27: The proposal is consistent with the City's Coastal Specific Plan since the addition will not alter the existing primary use or density of the property, and will be consistent with the residential uses in the area Section 28: The subject property, which is located between the sea and the first public road, is consistent with applicable public access and recreation policies of the Coastal Act because, although the proposed project meets the definition of "new development" under Section 30212(b) of the Coastal Act, no provisions of public access are required of this project since adequate nearby public coastal access exists at the City's nearby Abalone Cove Beach Park and at Ocean Trails project. The project site is a developed, single-family residence and is unsuitable for water oriented recreational activities Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the applicable public access and recreation policies of Article 2 and 3 of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. Section 29: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings included in the Staff Report, Minutes and other records of proceedings, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby approves with conditions Height Variation, Variance, and Coastal Permit (Case No 2001-00032) for the replacement of an existing carport with a new 480 square foot garage, and the construction of a 526 square foot addition to the existing residence, located above the proposed garage Section 30: Any interested person aggrieved by this decision or by any portion of this decision may appeal to the City Council Pursuant to Section 17.80 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, any such appeal must be filed with the City, in writing and with the appropriate appeal fee, no later than fifteen (15) days following May 14, 2002, the date of the Planning Commission's final action P.G. Resolution No. 2002-5 Page 6 of 7 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 14th day of May 2002, by the following vote AYES. Commissioners Cote, Duran Reed, Lyon, Mueller, Tomblin, Vice Chairman Long, Chairman Cartwright NOES None ABSTENTIONS: None ABSENT: None 4oejHpjas,AICP, 'p I [krecpr of P[a ning Building and Coe Enforcem ; and, Secretary to the Planning Commission ,Jon S. Cartwright Planning Commission Chairman P.C. Resolution No. 2002- 5 Page 7 of 7 EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL HEIGHT VARIATION, VARIANCE, COASTAL PERMIT, & SITE PLAN REVIEW (CASE NO. ZON2001-00032) The approval shall become null and void after one (1) year from the date of approval unless the approved plans are submitted to the Building and Safety Division in initiate the "plan check" review process, pursuant to Section 17.86.070 of the City's Development Code This approval shall become null and void if, after initiating the plan check process or receiving a building permit to begin construction, said plan check or permit is allowed to expire or is withdrawn by the applicant. 2. The abandonment or non-use of this approval after a period of one (1) year shall terminate the approval and any privileges hereunder shall become null and void 3. The Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement is authorized to make minor modifications to the approved plans or any of the conditions if such modifications shall achieve substantially the same results as would stnct compliance with said plans and conditions. 4. In the event that a Planning requirement and a Building & Safety requirement are in conflict with one another, the stricter standard shall apply 5 The hours of construction shall be limited to 7:00 a.rn to 7 00 p m , Monday through Saturday. No construction shall be permitted on Sundays or on legal holidays. 6. The construction site and adjoining public and private properties shall be kept free of all loose materials resembling trash and debris in excess of that material used for immediate construction purposes. Such excess material may include, but is not limited to. the accumulation of debris, garbage, lumber, scrap metal, concrete, asphalt, piles of earth, salvage materials, abandoned or discarded furniture, appliances or other household fixtures. 7 Approval of Variance, Coastal Permit, and Site Plan Review (Case No ZON2001- 00032) allow for the construction of a 480 square foot garage at the same location as the existing carport, the construction of a 91 square foot crawl space to the east side of the garage, the construction of a 60 square foot laundry room to the rear of the garage, the construction of a 526 square foot addition to the existing residence located above the proposed garage and partially (180 sq. ft.) over the existing front deck, and the construction of a bay window addition to the dining area (over the existing rear deck) In order to correct the encroachment into the neighboring PC Resolution No. 2002-5 Exhibit "A" -Conditions of Approval Page 1 property to the north, the applicant is proposing to remove the portion of the deck which is encroaching into the neighboring property In addition, the applicant is proposing to expand the deck by 31 square feet, in an area located between the existing deck and the proposed addition PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, BUILDING, AND CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, A STRUCTURE SIZE CERTIFICATION BY A CERTIFIED CIVIL ENGINEER OR SURVEYOR SHALL BE SUBMITTED. 8 The proposed garage is proposed to be located 2'-6" from the side property line and 2'-0" from the front property line The proposed master bedroom addition shall be located 4'-0" from the side property line and 4'-0" from the front property line The master bathroom addition shall be located 2'-0" from the front property line The proposed bay window is proposed to be located 5'-8" from the rear property line PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, BUILDING, AND CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, A SETBACK CERTIFICATION BY A CERTIFIED CIVIL ENGINEER OR SURVEYOR SHALL BE SUBMITTED. 9 The proposed addition shall not exceed a height of 18 08', as measured from the point where the lowest foundation meets finished grade (102 51') to the top of the highest ridge (120 59'), and 11.27', as measured from the highest elevation of the existing pad covered by structure (109 32') to the highest ridge PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, BUILDING, AND CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, A HEIGHT CERTIFICATION BY A CERTIFIED CIVIL ENGINEER OR SURVEYOR SHALL BE SUBMITTED. 10 The proposed garage shall permanently maintain two parking spaces One space shall have a minimum unobstructed ground space of no less than nine feet in width by twenty feet in depth The other space shall have a minimum unobstructed space of no less than nine feet in width by eighteen feet and six inches in depth Both spaces shall have a minimum of seven feet of vertical clearance over the space 11 The Variance application is to allow the proposed lot coverage to exceed the maximum allowed lot coverage thus increasing the lot coverage to 77 6% 12. No grading is permitted with this approval 13 Construction of the project shall substantially conform to the plans stamped as approved by the Planning Department with the effective date of this approval PC Resolution No. 2002-5 Exhibit "A" -Conditions of Approval Page 2 14 Pursuant to a foliage analysis conducted by Staff in February 2002, there is no foliage on the subject property that significantly impairs a view from the viewing area of another parcel 15 If lot drainage deficiencies are identified by the director of public works as part of subsequent approvals, all such deficiencies shall be corrected by the applicant. 16 Roof runoff from all buildings and structures on the site shall be contained and directed to the streets or an approved drainage course 17 If required by the city geotechnical staff, the applicant shall submit a soils report, and/or a geotechnical report, for the review and approval of the city geotechnical staff, prior to issuance of any future building permits 18 A hold harmless agreement satisfactory to the city attorney promising to defend, indemnify and hold the city harmless from any claims or damages resulting from the requested project. Such agreement shall be submitted to the director prior to the issuance of a building permit. 19 The applicant shall submit for recordation a covenant agreeing to construct the project strictly in accordance with the approved plans, and agreeing to prohibit further projects on the subject site without first filing an application with the director pursuant to the terms of this chapter Such covenant shall be submitted to the director for recordation prior to the issuance of a building permit. 20 All landscaping irrigation systems shall be part of a water management system approved by the director of public works Irrigation for landscaping shall be permitted only as necessary to maintain the yard and garden 21 All other necessary permits and approvals required pursuant to this code or any other applicable statute, law or ordinance shall be obtained PC Resolution No. 2002-5 Exhibit "A" -Conditions of Approval Page 3