CC RES 1992-071RESOLUTION NO. 92 - 71
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
PALOS VERDES DENYING THE APPEAL OF GRADING PERMIT NO.
1625 THEREBY UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL
FOR A CAISSON WALL WHICH ENCROACHES 6 FEET BEYOND THE
BUILDING GRADING RESTRICTION LINE AND RELOCATION OF THE
3' -6" RETAINING WALL TO ONE FOOT INSIDE THE BGR LINE AT
32032 PACIFICA DRIVE.
WHEREAS, Mr. Lorenzo Young has submitted Grading Permit
No. 1625 on to allow an existing 4' downslope retaining wall
and a caisson wall one foot above grade to encroach 6' beyond
the BGR line; and
WHEREAS, after notice pursuant to the provisions of the
development Code, the Planning Commission held a public
hearing on May 26, 1992 and approved the request, subject to
conditions of approval; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Ulysses Gatdula, the applicant's
representative, submitted a written appeal of the Planning
Commission decision on June 9, 1992 within the fifteen day
appeal period; and
WHEREAS, after notice pursuant to the provisions of the
Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the City Council held a
public hearing 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: The grading which has taken place for the
construction of the retaining wall and caisson wall is
considered excessive because the primary use of the lot is
for a single family residence with a tract requirement for
a maximum of 20 cu. yds. of grading permitted outside the
building footprint. The approved plans indicate that the
retaining wall would'be located at the Building Grading
Restriction (BGR) Line for each lot in Tract No, 316170
However, the retaining wall exceeds the top of the slope
(BGR line) by a maximum of six feet and the area between
the residence and the retaining has been filled to create
additional level area in the rear yard.
Section 2: That the height and placement of the caisson
wall and retaining wall beyond the BGR line in the rear yard
extends further int' the slope than the adjacent properties
and creates a negative visual impact when viewed from
neighboring properties and the public pedestrian Trail below.
Section 3: That the grading which has occurred for the
construction of the caisson wall and the retaining wall
beyond the BGR line, has altered the natural contours of the
rear yard slope. The area between the residence under
construction and retaining wall has been backf filled to extend
the level area in the rear yard. The top of the slope which
was originally at the elevation of 1068' has been moved four
feet to the elevation of 1064' and the existing retaining
wall encroaches an additional one foot beyond the BGR line on
the northwest end of the rear yard and an additional six feet
on the northeast end.
Section 4: For the foregoing reasons and based on
information and findings included in the staff report, and
evidence presented at the public hearing, the City Council of
the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby denies the appeal
Grading Permit No. 1625 thereby upholding the Planning
Commission's decision to reduce the caisson wall, which
encroaches beyond the BGR line to one foot below grade,
relocate the downslope retaining wall to one foot inside the
BGR line and screen the retaining wall with vegetation.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 7th day of July 1992.
�IrwM 4
Mayor
ATTEST:
ty 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. 92 -71 was
duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City
Council at a regular meeting held on July 7, 19929
City C1` rk 1, -4 ,,6 /(2 0.
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Resolution NO. 92 -71
Page 2
Exhibit "A"
32032 Pacifica
1. Remove and replace the retaining wall in the rear property
so that it is a minimum of one foot inside the Building
Grading Restriction Line.
2. The rear yard retaining wall shall be stuccoed and shall
not exceed a maximum height of V-611.
3. Landscaping material shall be installed to screen-the
retaining wall and a landscape plan shall be reviewed by
the Director of Environmental Services.
4. Any fencing placed above the retaining wall shall not
exceed a combined height of 61.
5. The existing caissons are subject to the review and
approval of the Division of Building and Safety.
6. The landowner shall comply with all recommendations and
requirements, if any, of the Division of Building and
Safety.
7. The existing caissons shall be reduced to one foot below
grade so they would not be visible from the McBride Trail.
8. The property owner shall complete the above mentioned
conditions of Grading No. 1625 Appeal within 90 days of
the adoption of the City Council Resolution.
Resolution No. 92 -71
Page 3