CC RES 1995-068RESOLUTION NO. 95 -68
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DENYING THE APPEAL AND
OVERTURNING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S APPROVAL
OF VARIANCE NO. 378 FOR AFTER -THE -FACT
CONSTRUCTION OF A FOUNTAIN THAT EXCEEDS A
MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 42 INCHES IN THE REQUIRED
FRONT YARD SETBACK AREA; AND TARING NO ACTION
WITH RESPECT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
DECISION WITH RESPECT TO 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 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 f ifty (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, 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 No. 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 (42)
inches within the required f ifty (50) foot front 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,
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
f or an after -the -f act f ountain over f orty -two (42) inches
in height located within the front yard setback area,
with the requirement that the existing seven (7) foot
four (4) inch high fountain be reduced to a maximum of
six (6) feet in height.
Resolution No, 95 -68
Page 2 of 5
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,
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
Resolution No. 95 -68
Page 3 of 5
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 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 sideyard 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 2: That there are no exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved, or
to the intended use of the property, which do not apply generally
to other property in the same zoning district, since the subject
property is approximately 30,860 square foot in area, and is
rectangular - shaped lot with a large, level building pad area. The
subject property is significantly larger than other single family
residential lots that have been approved in the RS -1 /RPD zoning
district. Accordingly, although the lot is developed with a single
family residential structure, the property would easily accommodate
the subject fountain without encroaching into any required setback
area, Therefore,, there is no physical hardship caused by the size,
shape or configuration of the lot that would warrant placement of
the subj ect f ounta in within the required f if ty (50) f oot f ront yard
setback area in excess of the forty -two (42) inch maximum height
limit. In fact, numerous improvements to the property have
resulted in a self- imposed hardship by limiting the amount of
remaining developable area on the property.
Section 3: That such Variance is not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the
applicant, which right is possessed by other property owners under
like conditions in the same zoning district, since other than
wrought iron fences and pilasters that were approved through the
issuance of Minor Exception Permits, no other properties in the RS-
1 /RPD zoning district have installed permanent structures in excess
of forty -two (42) inches in height located within the required
Resolution No. 95 -68
Page 4 of 5
front yard setback area. Therefore, granting the Variance is not
necessary to preserve a substantial right of the property owner and
would, in fact, grant the property owner a special privilege which
is not currently being enjoyed by other properties in the same
zoning district.
Section 4: That the granting of the Variance will be
materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
property and improvements in the area in which the property is
located, since no Building Permits were obtained for the
installation of the fountain, as built, and the City has therefore
been unable to verify the integrity and method of its construction
pursuant to the requirements of the Uniform Building Code.
Section 5: 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.
Section 6: 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 Overturns the
Planning Commission's approval of Variance No. 378, thereby
requiring the existing eighty -eight (88) inch high fountain located
in the required f if ty (50) f oot f ront yard setback area to either
be removed or reduced to a maximum height of forty -two (42) inches
within sixty (60) days of this action becoming f inal on the
property located within Coastal Subregion 3 at 6470 Seacove Drive.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 5th day of July 1995.
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
SATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
I, Jo Purcell, City Clerk of
hereby certify that the above
regularly passed and adopted by
meeting held on July 5, 19950
TS##17:REVAR378.CC
Z� Y
the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,
Resolution No. 5 -68 was duly and
the said ity uncil at a regular
CITY CLERK
Resolution No. 95 -68
Page 5 of 5