Loading...
CC RES 1995-067RESOLUTION NO. 95 -67 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES TAKING NO ACTION WITH RESPECT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION REGARDING COASTAL PERMIT NO. 124 ASSOCIATED WITH VARIANCE NO. 378 FOR INSTALLATION OF AFTER -THE FACT LIGHTING SEAWARD OF THE BUILDING SETBACK LINE AND CONSTRUCTION OF A BAR AND BARBECUE AREA WITHIN THE SIDEYARD SETBACK AREA; AND DENYING THE APPEAL AND VACATING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL OF COASTAL PERMIT NO. 124 REGARDING VARIANCE NO. 378 FOR AFTER -THE -FACT CONSTRUCTION OF A FOUNTAIN THAT EXCEEDS 42 INCHES IN THE REQUIRED FIFTY (50) FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK AREA ON PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN COASTAL SUBREGION NO* 3 AT 6470 SEACOVE DRIVE WHEREAS, in 1980, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted P.C. Resolution No. 80 -21, conditionally approving Conditional Use Permit No. 71 in association with Tract 39672 for a Residential Planned Development consisting of eleven (11) single family residential lots, within which the subject property is located. Condition No, 3(D) of this approval established a fifty ( foot front yard setback area, within which no structures are permitted to exceed a maximum height of forty -two (42) inches without prior written approval by the City; and, WHEREAS, in 1989, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes ministerially approved Site Plan Review No. 5162 to allow construction of a fountain within the fifty (50) foot minimum front yard setback area. Said approval for construction of the fountain within the front yard setback area was granted with the condition that the fountain not exceed a maximum height of forty -two (42) inches; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, no Coastal Permit is required for construction and /or installation of improvements on properties located within the appealable area of the Coastal Zone, when said improvements do not add more than ten (10) percent of the total living area, and which do not require a Variance. Therefore, no Coastal Permit was required in association with Site Plan Review No. 5162, since it was a ministerial decision, and the fountain did not require a Variance as depicted and approved on the plans submitted to the City, since the Conditions of Approval restricted the f ountain to a maximum of height of f orty -two (42) inches . WHEREAS, sometime following the approval of Site Plan Review No. 5162 for the construction of the fountain, changes were made to the City's copy of the Planning Clearance Form and to the approved plans relating to the approval of the fountain, which were kept in the public address file for the property at City Hall, The minimum front yard setback dimension on both documents was changed from fifty (50) feet to twenty (20) feet. While it cannot be conclusively determined when or how the changes were made, the Conditions of Approval for Tract 39672 require that a fifty (50) foot minimum front yard setback area be maintained for each lot within the tract. The Tract Conditions of Approval establish the minimum dimensions and maximum height restrictions for structures and /or other improvements located within the front yard setback area, unless an approval is granted by the City to modify these requirements through a discretionary action, such as an amendment to the Tract Conditions, or through approval of a Variance application. WHEREAS, notwithstanding the Conditions of Approval imposed on Site Plan Review Nos 5162 which limited the fountain to a maximum height of forty -two (42) inches, the fountain, as built, is approximately eighty -eight (88) inches in height; and, WHEREAS, on July 7, 1994, as a result of long standing Code Enforcement activity against the subject property, the landowners, Dr. and Mrs. Robert Hunt, submitted Coastal Permit No. 124 and Variance No. 378 to the Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department of the City. On August 5, 1994, the applications were deemed complete for consideration of the after-the-fact requests to allow a fountain that exceeds a maximum height of forty -two ( 4 2 ) inches within the required f if ty (50) f oot f ront yard setback area , an outdoor bar and barbecue area which is partially located within the required sideyard setback area, and for the installation of exterior lighting seaward of the Building Setback Line on property located within Coastal Subregion No. 3; 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 65952,5(e) (Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), there was no substantial evidence that Variance No. 378 would have any effect on the environment, Accordingly, the proposed project has been found to be categorically exempt (Class I); and, Resolution No. 95 -67 Page 2 of 5 WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes held a public hearing on September 27, 1994 and October 25, 1994, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and, WHEREAS, on November 9, 1994, the Planning Commission continued consideration of the Draft P.C. Resolution to December 13, 1994; and, WHEREAS, on December 13, 1994, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes adopted P.C. Resolution Nos. 94 -56 and 94 -57, thereby memorializing the following actions: 1. Approval of Coastal Permit No. 124 and Variance No. 378 for an after -the -fact fountain over forty -two (42) inches in height located within the front yard setback area, with the requirement that the existing seven (7) foot f our (4) inch high fountain be reduced to a maximum of six (6) f eet in height. 2. Tabling the review Coastal Permit No. 124 and Variance No. 378 for after-the-fact construction of an outdoor bar and barbecue area located in the sideyard setback area until pending revisions to the Development Code which, if adopted, would allow this improvement to be approved at the .Staff level, are reviewed and adopted by the City Council. 3* Denial of Coastal Permit No. 124 and Variance No. 378 for after - the -fact - installation of an exterior lighting pole standard located seaward of the Building Setback Line, and requiring it to be relocated to an alternative location on the property which complies with all required setbacks; and, WHEREAS, on January 3, 1995, the landowners appealed the Planning Commission's decision with respect to only the existing after-the-fact fountain located in the front yard setback area, and in particular the requirement that the fountain must be reduced in height to a maximum of six (6) feet. The landowner did not appeal the Planning Commission's decisions with respect to the existing after - the -fact bar and barbecue area, or the existing after -the- fact exterior lighting located seaward of the Building Setback Line. Due to City Hall offices being closed for the winter holidays, the fifteen (15) day appeal period for all decisions which would have otherwise expired during the closure, was extended to January 3, 19950 Therefore, the letter of appeal and appropriate appeal fees were filed in a timely manner; and, Resolution No. 95 -67 Page 3 of 5 WHEREAS, at the time the appeal letter was filed, the appellant did not specify which aspects of the Planning Commission's decision were being appealed, nor were project plans submitted for review by the City Council. Therefore, although the appeal had been filed in a timely manner, it was determined to be incomplete pending submittal of the necessary plans and additional clarifying information. On February 15, 1995, the landowner submitted revised (complete) plans and a supplemental letter detailing which aspects of the Planning Commission's decision were being appealed to the City Council. The appeal was subsequently deemed complete for processing by City Staff on March 1, 1995; and, WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the City Council held a public hearing on April 4, 1995 and June 6, 1995, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and, WHEREAS, prior to continuing the public hearing from April 4, 1995 to June 6, 1995, the City Council directed the landowners to bring the subject property into full compliance with all previous actions of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and California Coastal Commission, within sixty (60) days, prior to the City Council taking action on the subject appeal. Said previous actions include, but are not limited to, removal, modification, or permitting of various structures and improvements which are primarily located in the rear yard area of the property, as well as removal of an excessive number of queen palm trees on the entire property which exceed the ridgeline of the structure and /or which impair views from neighboring properties; and, WHEREAS, on June 6, 1995, it was reported to the City Council that Staff was unable to identify that the landowner had initiated or completed any of the required actions within the previous sixty (60) days, as directed by the City Council to bring the subject property into compliance with all prior decisions of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and California Coastal Commission; and, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES HEREBY FINDS, DETERMINES AND RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The time within which 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. Resolution No, 95 -67 Page 4 of 5 Section 2: The City Council hereby takes no action with respect to the Planning Commission's denial of Variance No, 378 and Coastal Permit No. 124 for after - the -fact installation of a lighting pole standard seaward of the Building Setback Line and with respect to the Planning Commission's tabling the decision regarding after - the -fact construction of a bar and barbecue within the s ideyard setback area, as described in P.C. Resolution Nos, 94- 56 and 94 -57, since no appeal for these improvements was filed by the applicant and /or landowner during the appeal period. Section 3: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings contained in the Staff Report, Minutes, and other records of the proceedings, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby denies the Appeal and vacates the Planning Commission's approval of Coastal Permit No. 124 for the f ountain located in the required f if ty (50) f oot f ront yard setback area, since the Appeal of Variance No. 378 for the fountain has also been denied by the City Council, thereby eliminating the need for an accompanying Coastal Permit. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of July 1995. 1�-� A MAYO ATTEST: CITY CL STME OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES I, Jo Purcell, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 95 -67 was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting held on July 5, 1995, CITY CLERK TS #17: RESCP124.CC . Resolution No© 95 -67 Page 5 of 5