Loading...
CC RES 1994-092 RESOLUTION NO. 94-92 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISIONS REGARDING VARIANCE NO. 367-REVISION AND GRADING PERMIT NO. 1714-REVISION, THEREBY DENYING THE APPLICATION FOR A REDESIGNED PROJECT FOR A 2 ,729 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION TO AN EXISTING RESIDENCE AT 5503 GRAYLOG STREET AND THE PROPOSED GRADING OF 435 CUBIC YARDS IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED ADDITION, PORTIONS OF WHICH WOULD OCCUR IN AN EXTREME SLOPE WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Milan Veteska, hereinafter referred to as "the applicants",, submitted a request for a variance and a grading permit to allow a 3,823 square foot addition to an existing 2600 square foot, three story single family residence and accompanying grading over an extreme slope at the property located at 5503 Graylog Street; and WHEREAS, on January 11, 1994, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed project and the applications for the variance and the grading permit, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; following the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 94-3 denying the applications for the proposed project; and WHEREAS, on January 21, 1994, the applicants timely filed a written appeal of the Planning Commission's actions along with the appropriate filing fee; and WHEREAS, on June 28, 1994, the applicants submitted plans for a modified addition, which had been substantially revised from the plans which had been considered by the Planning Commission, for review by the City Council; the project would now involve the addition of 2,729 square feet of new habitable area and 435 cubic yards of grading, with some of the grading and construction occurring on portions of the lot that exceed thirty- five percent (35%) in grade; and WHEREAS, on September 6, 1994, the City Council referred the revised project to the Planning Commission because the revised plans were substantially different from the plans which had been reviewed and considered previously by the Planning Commission and, accordingly, the Planning Commission had not considered the revised project; and WHEREAS, on October 11, 1994, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the revised project and the revised applications for the variance and the grading permit, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; following the conclusion of the public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 94-50 denying the applications for the revised project; and WHEREAS, the applicants timely filed a written appeal of the Planning Commission's denial of the revised project; and WHEREAS, on November 15 1994, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the appeal of the Planning Commission's decisions regarding the revised project and the revised applications for the variance and the grading permit, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Section 17. 60. 020 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code sets forth the findings which are required to be made before a variance can be granted by the City. One of the requirements of that Section is: 114. That such variance is 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; . . " In this case, the City Council is unable to make the above finding because the property currently is developed with a three story house with a 1,419 square foot footprint and a home of approximately 2600 square feet which is comparable to the size of the homes in the surrounding neighborhood, which generally contain approximately 1700 to 2200 square feet. Thus, the applicants already enjoy a property right which is similar to the rights of owners of other properties in the area; absent the granting of the requested variance, the applicants are not being deprived of a right enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity. Accordingly, the granting of this variance would be in violation of the provisions of Section 17.60. 020 because one of the findings required by that Section cannot be made. Section 2 : Section 65906 of the California Government Code prevents local entities from granting variances which would confer a special benefit or privilege upon a property owner which is not enjoyed by owners of other properties in the vicinity. Because the existing house already is of a size similar to other homes in the immediate neighborhood, the granting of this variance would confer a special privilege or benefit, a much larger home, on the applicants; this privilege is not enjoyed by other property owners in the surrounding area who have smaller homes than the proposed enlarged home due to physical constraints present on -the other properties. Resolution No, 94-92 Page 2 of 4 Section 3 : Another finding required by Section 17. 60.020 is "that the granting of such a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the general plan" . The City's General Plan encourages development that maintains and enhances the visual qualities of existing neighborhoods and which does not create adverse impacts to the surrounding area. In addition, this property is within two of the Resource Management Districts, R-3 High Slope and RM-9 Natural Vegetation, designated by the General Plan. The City Council hereby finds that the proposed addition is inconsistent with the policies and objectives of the General Plan because of the intrusion into the extreme slopes of the lot, which are within the RM-3 and RM-9 Resource Management Districts and are subject to the provisions of Section 17.40. 060 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code. The intrusion into the extreme slopes of the subject property is not warranted in this case as the property already is developed with a single family residence which is comparable in size to other homes in the area. Thus, for this additional reason, the findings discussed in Sections 1 and 2 above and the finding of consistency with the General Plan cannot be made in this case with respect to the intrusion of the proposed addition into the extreme slope areas of the lot. The City Council also finds that the revised project is inconsistent with the General Plan due to the exposed caissons which would be required to support the proposed expansion of the existing residence and the adverse visual and aesthetic effects which the exposed caissons, and therefore the architectural style of the home, will have upon the surrounding neighborhood. Thus, another finding required by Section 17. 60.020 cannot be made in this case. Section 4: Section 17. 06.020 also requires that the City Council find "that the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property and improvements in the area in which the property is P Y located" . Due to the adverse visual and aesthetic impacts of the exposed caissons which would be graded into an extreme slope, as well as the impacts upon the slope caused by the proposed addition, the City Council hereby finds that the proposed addition will be materially detrimental to the public welfare and to other properties in the area. For this additional reason, the City Council hereby finds that the variance requested by the applicants cannot be granted. Section 5: Section 17.50. 070 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code requires that certain criteria must be satisfied before a grading permit can be granted. One of those criteria is that: "the grading and/or construction does not significantly adversely affect the visual relationships with, nor the views from, neighboring sites" . As discussed above, the exposed caissons which would be required to support the proposed Resolution No. 94-92 Page 3 of 4 expansion of the existing residence and would further disrupt the sloping topography (extreme slope) of the lot, will have an P g P adverse visual and aesthetic effect upon the surrounding neighborhood, Thus, one of the criteria required by Section 17..50. 070 to issue a grading permit cannot be satisfied in this case. Section 6: For the foregoing reasons, and based on the evidence presented to the City Council at the public hearing, including the Staff Reports and the oral and written testimony, the City Council hereby denies the appeal of Variance No. 367- Revision and the appeal of Grading Permit No. 1714-Revision, thereby affirming the Planning Commission's decision to deny the variance and grading permit to construct the proposed addition to the single family residence located at 5503 Graylog Street. However, this action is without prejudice to the applicants' right to file a revised application at any time, notwithstanding the provisions of Section 17.60. 030 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 29th day of November, 1994. MA R ATTEST: n CITY CLERK STATE 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. 94-92 was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting held on November 29, 1994 . CIt Y CLERK Resolution No. 94-92 Page 4 of 4