PC RES 2006-019 P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2006-1
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING IS I
THE CITY OF RANCHOPALOS VERDES APPROVING
GRADING IT (CASE NO. 2006-00056) FOR 2,30
CUBIC YARDS OF GRADINGELT RETAINING
WALLS TO ACCOMMODATE A NE IV AY,
PARTIALLY SU TE EAN GARAGE AND
BASEMENT FOR 31990 EMERALD VIEWDRIVE (LOT
NO. 25 OF TRACT NO. 5 6 7)
WHEREAS, on January 24, 2006 an application for a Grading Permit (Case No.
2006-00056) was submitted to the Planning Department to allow 2,300 cubic yards of
grading and related retaining walls to accommodate a new driveway, partially
subterranean garage and basement for a new single-family residence; and,
WHEREAS, on March 2, 2006 the subject a_PiOcation was deemed complete for
processing; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provision of the California Quality Act, Public
Resources Code Section 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 65962.5(F) (Hazardous Waste and
Substances Statement), Staff found no evidence that Grading Permit (Case No. 2006-
00056) would have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore the proposed
project has been found to be categorically exempt (Class 3, Section 15303); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public meeting on March 28, 2006,
at which all interested parties were given the opportunity to be heard and present
evidence.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The grading does not exceed that which is necessary for the
.permitted primary use of the lot, because the primary use of the lot is residential, and
the proposed grading is to accommodate a driveway, partially subterranean garage and
basement, which is part of the residential use of the lot. Although the main reason for
the basement area is to increase the size of the subject residence, the proposed
grading and related basement does not exceed that which is necessary for the
permitted primary use of the lot because the proposed project will comply with the
maximum habitable area established for this specific lot. Further, the garage, basement
and retaining walls will not be readily noticeable from surrounding public and/or private
property, as the retaining walls will be aesthetically treated.
P.C. Resolution No. 2006-19
Page 1 of 4
Section 2: The grading and/or related construction does not significantly
adversely affect the visual relationships with, nor the views from, neighboring properties
because the proposed grading will accommodate a subterranean structure and will not
raise the ridgeline of the proposed structure as originally approved.
Section 3: The nature of the grading minimizes disturbance to the natural
contours and finished contours are reasonably natural because the subject site (Lot
#25) was part of a mass grading operation to develop building pads to accommodate
future residential homes. The subject site is a flat pad. As such, there will be no
disturbance to natural contours because the proposed project will occur entirely below
existing grade.
Section 4: While the proposed project involves substantial modifications to
existing manufactured slopes, these modifications will include terracing of the retaining
walls with an aesthetic and landscape treatment that will blend the manufactured slope
into a more natural appearance.
Section 5: The grading would not cause excessive and unnecessary
disturbance of the natural landscape or wildlife habitat through removal of vegetation
because the proposed grading will occur on Lot#25, which is a vacant building pad that
contains little vegetation, no natural landscape and no wildlife habitat.
Section 6: The proposed project does not conform to the following grading
criteria of Section 17.76.040.E.9:
* 11c. Except for the excavation of a basement or cellar, a fill or cut shall not exceed a depth of
five feet at any point except where the Director or Planning Commission determines that unusual
topography, soil conditions, previous grading or other circumstances make such grading
reasonable and necessary."
The project does not conform to this criterion, as there will be a cut that varies up
to 11.5' high to accommodate access to the subterranean garage.
* He.iv. Retaining walls may be allowed up to five feet in height, adjacent to driveways, only if
required for access or slope stabilization."
The project does not conform to this criteria as there are retaining walls on both
sides of the driveway that when combined vary in height from 6' to 11.5' high.
However, as per Section 17.76.040(E)(10), the Planning Commission hereby grants a
grading permit for development in excess of the two criterion listed above because the
Commission finds that
a) Criteria (E)(1) through (E)(8) can be satisfied.
b) The project is consistent with the purposes set forth in subsection A of the
Grading Section in that it permits the reasonable development of land,
ensures preservation of the scenic character of the area consistent with
P.C. Resolution No. 2006-19
Page 2 of 4
reasonable economic use of the property, and ensures that the development
occurs in a manner harmonious with adjacent lands.
c) Departure from these standards will not constitute a grant of special privileges
inconsistent with limitations upon other properties in the vicinity as this is an
RPD, which "provide greater flexibility in the design of residential
developments by encouraging:A) A more creative and imaginative approach
to the design of residential developments". Additionally, there are other
subterranean and partially subterranean structures within other surrounding
neighborhoods, a similar driveway access to a subterranean garage has
already been approved by the City Council on Lot#2 of the same tract, and
the Council has reviewed this specific proposal and supports the proposed
project; and,
d) The proposed retaining walls will require a building permit and geological
review, which will ensure their structural integrity. Additionally, the retaining
walls and driveway will not be readily visible from the neighboring residence
or the public right of way.
Section 7: Any interested party may appeal this decision or any portion of this
decision to the City Council. Pursuant to Section 17.02.040.C.1.j of the Rancho Palos
Verdes Municipal Code, any such appeal must be filed with the City, in writing, and with
the appropriate appeal fee, no later than fifteen (15) days following the date of the
Planning Commission's adoption of this resolution.
Section w For the foregoing reasons, and based on the information and
findings included in the Staff Report, Minutes, and other records of proceedings, the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby approves Grading
Permit (Case No. 2006-00056), thereby approving the grading of 2,300 cubic yards and
related retaining walls to accommodate a new driveway, partially subterranean garage
and basement for a new one-story, single-family residence, subject to the conditions of
approval in Exhibit "A".
P.C. Resolution No. 2006-19
Page 3 of 4
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 28th day of March 2006, by the
following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Karp, Lewis, Perestam, Ruttenberg, Tetreault, Vice Chairman
Gerstner, Chairman Knight
NOES: None
ABSTENTIONS: None
ABSENT: None l
''
/i
iml .or
Chairma
.arillk,
Joel - .jas, A R P
Dire« or of 'tanning, B/ding
and i ode forcement; and,
Secre : • o the Planning Commission
P.C. Resolution No. 2006- 19
Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT"A"
P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2006-19
GRADING PERMIT(CASE NO.ZON2006-00056)
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR GRADING OF LOT#25/TRACT NO. 50667
(31990 Emerald View Drive)
1. Within 90 days of this approval, the owner shall submit a statement in writing that they have read,
understand and agree to all the conditions of approval listed below. Failure to provide said written
statement shall render this approval null and void.
2. Approval of this project does not, in any way, cause any changes to any of the conditions of approval
or mitigation measures previously adopted for the Trump National Golf Club project. All previously
adopted conditions of approval and mitigation measures shall remain in effect and are to be satisfied.
3. The Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement is authorized to make minor modifications
to the approved preliminary plans or any of the conditions if such modifications shall achieve
substantially the same results as would strict compliance with said plans and conditions.
4. Failure to adhere to any of these conditions shall result in the Planning, Building and Code
Enforcement Department's suspension of this permit, and a stop on all construction work. Planning,
Building and Code Enforcement Staff and/or the City's Geologist will be visiting the site during
construction to verify compliance with these conditions.
5. The developer shall obtain a building permit for the proposed basement. The permit shall be subject
to review and approval by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement, the Building
Official, and the City Geologist.
6. This Grading Permit applies to Lot#25 of Tract No. 50667 only. Specifically, it is to accommodate
a driveway, partially subterranean garage and basement on Lot#25. The total amount of grading
shall be no greater than 2,300 cubic yards.
7. Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, the developer shall show on the plans a sump pump
system that includes a back-up sump pump and back-up generator, subject to review and
approval by the City's Building Official. Said sump pump system shall be installed prior to
issuance of a Certificate of Use and Occupancy for the residence.