Loading...
PC RES 2004-047A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES CONDITIONALLY APPROVING CASE NO. ZON2004-00402 FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 51 REVISION `D' AND A COASTAL PERMIT, THEREBY AMENDING CONDITION NO. 5 OF THE CUP TO ALLOW EXPANSIONS TO EXISTING BALCONIES AND ALLOW FOR TRELLIS COVERINGS, FOR PROPERTIES IN THE SEA BLUFF TRACT LOCATED AT 6503, 6505, 6507, 6509, 6515, 6517, 6519, 6521, 6525, & 6527 SANDY POINT COURT, AND 6603 & 6605 CHANNELVIEW COURT (LOTS 15,16, 43 THROUGH 52, OF TRACT 35040). WHEREAS, in 1980, the Planning Commission approved Tract No. 35040, and Conditional Use Permit No. 51, establishing a residential planned development (RPD) known as Sea Bluff and establishing development criteria for the development of the Sea Bluff tract; and, WHEREAS, on July 26, 2004, John Wright, representing the Sea Bluff Homeowners Association, submitted a Conditional Use Permit application (hereinafter referred to as Case No. ZON2004-00402) to amend condition no. 5 of Conditional Use Permit No. 51 for 12 properties in the Sea Bluff tract; and, WHEREAS, on August 19, 2004, Case No ZON2004-00402 was deemed incomplete by Staff pending the submittal of additional information; and, WHEREAS, after the submittal of the Coastal Permit application, Case No ZON2004- 00402 was deemed complete on September 23, 2004, 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 Regulations, 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 Case No. ZON2004-00402 would have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, the proposed project has been found to be categorically exempt (Class 1, Section 15301); and, WHEREAS, on November 9, 2004, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider Case No. ZON2004-00402. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS Section 1: The site 3s adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use and for all the features required by Tale 17 and by conditions imposed to ensure that the proposal P.0 Resolution No. 2004-47 s.i- does not negatively impact abutting land uses and those within the neighborhood. The properties are adequate in size since the resulting rear setback would not be less than 20 - feet, which is the minimum rear yard setback required by the City's Development Code for City -created lots, and will not project any closer towards the rear than what the existing staircases are currently located at. Lastly, the amendment will not introduce a new feature to the Sea Bluff development and is consistent and compatible with the residential uses of the tract Section 2: The site for the proposed use relates to streets and highways sufficient to carry the type and quantity of traffic generated by the subject use. The amendment will not impact the vehicular patterns within or around the Sea Bluff community since no additional traffic is expected, and the project will not change the residential nature of the area and will not result in any change to the existing level of service Section 3: There will be no significant adverse effect on adjacent property or the permitted use resulting from expansions to the balconies and trellis coverings on the specified properties. The Sea Bluff Homeowners Association selected the 12 specified properties because they back up to Palos Verdes Drive South and to Seawolf Drive, which are streets that are at higher elevations than the subject properties Further, these properties do not back up to the common open space areas of the Sea Bluff community, which minimizes the appearance of structures from the open space areas. Section 4: The proposed use is not contrary to the General Plan because, as proposed and conditioned, the project implements the policy of the General Plan to "Encourage and assist in the maintenance and improvement of all existing residential neighborhoods, so as to maintain optimum local standards of housing quality and design", and is consistent with the intent and purpose of the Residential Development Section of the Development Code. Section 5: The proposal complies with the performance criteria of the Socio/Cultural and Urban Overlay Control Districts (OC -2 and OC -3, respectively) There is no land and water areas, or improvements within or around the Sea Bluff community with a scientific or educational value, and will not be visible from the public right-of-way, so the features will not create a visual or view impact, as seen from public property Section 6: Conditions have been imposed to protect the health, safety and general welfare, which includes standards for setbacks, height and design, and other conditions as will make possible development of the City in an orderly and efficient manner and in conformity with the intent and purposes set forth in the City's Development Code, as identified in Exhibit "A" hereto. Section 7: The Coastal Permit is justified since the project will not affect nor be inconsistent with the intent of the City's Coastal Specific Plan since the project will not alter the existing land use pattern nor affect access to the coastal areas. The subject property is P C Resolution No. 2004-47 Page 2 not located between the sea and the first public road, and is in a non -appealable area of the Coastal Specific Plan Section 8: Any interested person aggrieved by this decision or by any portion of this decision may appeal to the City Council. Pursuant to Section 17.60 060 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 November 9, 2004, the date of the Planning Commission's action. Section 9: For the foregoing reasons and based on information and findings contained in the Staff Reports, minutes, and records of the proceedings, the Planning Commission hereby approves Case No. ZON2004-00402, subject to the conditions of approval contained in the attached Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof, which are necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 9th day of November 2004 by the following roll call vote AYES: Gerstner, Karp, Knight, Perestam, Tetrault ABSTENTIONS: o ABSENT Cote, Mueller A---� Joel' s 3, AICP 0' Dire Planni Building and Code;o)rnof rcement; and, Secretary to the Planning Commission ?e" � f, .............. Craig Mueller Chairman P.C. Resolution No. 2004-A7 Page 3 EXHIBIT 'A' CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. ZON2004-00402 Condition No. 5 regarding patio covers is hereby amended to read as follows (language to be removed is shown as s#Fikethreo , and language to be added is shown in italics): A Patio Covers 1. Maximum 12 -feet in height. 2 Maximum 50% shade cover (at least 50% open to sky) 3. Constructed of wood, stained to match or be compatible with wood trim on the houses. 4 May not encroach into existing side yard setbacks established by house. 5 Rear setback shall be 50% of the minimum dimension of the rear yard measured perpendicularly from the rear of the residence to the rear property line. Unless regulated by the standards above, the following standards shall apply only to the 12 properties located at 6503, 6505, 6507, 6509, 6515, 6517, 6519, 6521, 6525, & 6527 Sandy Point Court, and 6603 & 6605 Channelview Court (lots 15, 16, 43 through 52: a. The second story balcony shall be allowed to project towards the rear a maximum of 12 -feet, or no more than the farthest extension of the existing staircase, whichever is greater However, in no case shall the balcony extension result in less than a 20 -foot rear yard setback b. The maximum width of the second story balcony shall be limited to 17 -feet C. The second story balcony shall maintain a minimum 5 -foot side yard setback. d. Any shade cover over the extended second story balcony shall be of a trellis type, with at least 50% open to the sky e. Any shade cover over the extended balcony shall be limited to 18 -feet in height, or the height of the lowest point of the roof eave, whichever is lower. P.C. Resolution No. 2004-47 Page 4