CC RES 1996-078RESOLUTION NO. 96 -78
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES UPHOLDING THE APPEAL OF
MINOR EXCEPTION PERMIT NO. 501, THEREBY
OVERTURNING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION
AND DENYING AN INCREASE IN THE MAXIMUM 50%
COVERAGE REQUIREMENT WITHIN THE FRONT YARD
SETBACK AREA FOR AN AFTER - THE -FACT
INSTALLATION OF ASEMI- CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY AND
OTHER HARDSCAPE AT 54 OCEANAIRE DRIVE.
WHEREAS, on August 25, 1995, Robert and Shirley Lie applied for, and were
granted, Site Plan Review Permit No. 7212 for the construction of a new semi - circular
driveway and other hardscape not to exceed 50% coverage within the required front yard
setback area on the property located at 54 Oceanaire Drive; and,
WHEREAS, in early December 1995, the City Staff received a code enforcement
complaint that the semi - circular driveway and other hardscape on the subject property may
have been constructed in excess of the area allowed by Site Plan Review Permit No. 7212.
In response, City Staff investigated and determined that the coverage within the required
front yard setback area exceeded the 50% allowable area, as set forth in the conditions
of approval for Site Plan Review Permit No. 7212 and the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal
Code; and,
WHEREAS, on December 20, 1995, Robert and Shirley Lie submitted an
application for Minor Exception Permit No. 501, to allow a increase in the maximum 50%
coverage requirement within the required front yard setback area at 54 Oceanaire Drive;
and,
WHEREAS, on March 26, 1996, Minor Exception Permit No. 501 was conditionally
approved by the Director, thereby granting after- the -fact approval of the existing semi-
circular driveway and other hardscape improvements in the required front yard setback
area of the subject property; and,
WHEREAS, on April 15, 1996, Teng Li -Ann Lee and Tai -Shon Lee submitted an
appeal of the Director's decision to approve Minor Exception Permit No. 501 within the
appeal period, as extended by the Director; and,
WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions of Rancho Palos Verdes
Municipal Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on June 25,
1996, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and
present evidence; and,
WHEREAS, after conducting the public hearing and considering all of the evidence,
the Planning Commission adopted P.C. Resolution No. 96 -17 on June 25, 1996, thereby
denying the appeal of Minor Exception Permit No. 501 and upholding the Director's
approval of the request; and,
WHEREAS, July 10, 1996, within fifteen days after the Planning Commission's
decision, Teng Li -Ann Lee and Tai -Shon Lee, submitted an appeal of the Planning
Commissions decision to City Council; and,
WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions of Rancho Palos Verdes
Municipal Code, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on August 6, 1996, at
which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present
evidence; and,
WHEREAS, after conducting a public hearing and considering all of the evidence
on August 6, 1996, the City Council upheld that appeal, thereby overturning the decision
of the Planning Commission on the project, and directed Staff to prepare the appropriate
Resolution for adoption by the City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOW:
Section 1: That Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code Section 17.40.030(D) states:
"Except for driveways and parking areas in RS districts, all of the required front and street -
side setback areas shall be landscaped, unless otherwise provided in the zoning district
standards. Drives and parking areas in RS districts shall not cover more than fifty percent
of the required front or street -side setback areas."
Section 2: That all of the paved areas within the required front yard setback area
constitute coverage; and,
Section 3: That the City Council found that there was insufficient evidence that the
additional coverage is warranted by practical difficulties, unnecessary hardships or results
that, without the Minor Exception Permit may be inconsistent with the general intent of
Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, Title 17 (Zoning), since:
1. The subject property has relatively flat topography and a regular, rectangular
shape. In addition, the subject lot is 90 feet wide, which is the lot width found on
most existing lots in the RS -2 zoning district and is the minimum width required for
newly created lots in the RS -2 zoning district. As a result, the configuration,
topography and square footage of the required front yard setback area on the
subject lot is similar to other lots in the RS -2 zoning district. Therefore, there is no
Resolution No. 96 -78
Page 2 of 4
practical difficultly associated with the physical configuration of the property that
would justify a reduction in the amount of landscaped area required in the front yard
setback area.
2. Adequate access to the existing three car garage on the property is provided by a
paved, direct - access driveway with a similar width as the garage. As a result, the
additional coverage in excess of 50% created by the semi - circular driveway is not
necessary to provide access to the off- street parking facility. In addition, the direct -
access driveway provides an unenclosed off- street parking area on the property,
similar to, if not larger than, most other properties in the RS -2 zoning district.
Further, Oceanaire Drive is a dedicated public street, where parking along the curb
in front of the subject property is allowed. Therefore, no unnecessary hardship
would be caused by limiting the amount of coverage in the required front yard
setback area to 50 %, since there would still be adequate access to the off- street
parking facility (i.e. enclosed garage), as well as adequate unenclosed off- street
and on- street parking areas available for guests and other visitors to the property.
Section 4: That the amount of additional coverage in excess of the Municipal Code
and Minor Exception Permit requirements would result in a lack of landscaping in the front
yard setback area would create an adverse visual affect, which would be inconsistent with
the semi -rural character of this predominantly single- family residential city. The proposed
project would provide only 32.1 % landscaped area in the front yard setback area, versus
the,50% or 40% required by the Municipal Code or allowed through the Minor Exception
Permit, respectively. Further, the additional coverage would encourage a proliferation and
crowding of vehicles parked within the front yard setback area, which would also be
inconsistent with the single - family residential character of the community. Therefore,
rather than creating results that, without the additional coverage would be inconsistent with
the general intent of Municipal Code, the proposed project itself would be inconsistent with
the general intent of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, Title 17 (Zoning)
Section 5: The time within which the judicial review of the decision reflected in this
Resolution, if available, must be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California
Code of Civil Procedure.
Section 6: For the foregoing reasons, and based on the evidence contained in the
Staff Reports, Minutes, and other records of the proceedings, the City Council of the City
of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby upholds the appeal of Minor Exception Permit No. 501,
thereby overturning the Planning Commission's action to approve the project, and requiring
the landowner to remove the amount of driveway and /or parking area necessary in order
to not exceed the 50% coverage requirement of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code
for the property located at 54 Oceanaire Drive. The subject property shall be brought into
compliance with the Municipal Code within sixty (60) days of this action becoming final.
Resolution No. 96 -78
Page 3 of 4
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on this 3rd day of September 1996.
ATTEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY RANCHO PALOS VERDES
)ss
I, Jo Purcell, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, do hereby certify that the
above Resolution No. 96 -78 was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City
Council at a regular meeting held on September 3, 1996.
M:I USERSICAROLYNNIWPWIN60 1RESOS\MEP501.CC
Resolution No. 96 -78
Page 4 of 4