PC RES 2009-031 P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-3'1
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VE DES DENYING THE
APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE HEARINGS OFFICER'S
CONDITIONAL AP V! G OF A COASTAL PERMIT AND
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT (PLANNING CASE NOS.
O 2008-00326 & SUB2008-00004) FOR A LOT LINE
ADJUSTMENT ET EE AND AMONG FOU (4)
EXISTING DEVELOPED D UNDEVELOPED PARCELS
LOCATED IN THE APPEALABLE PORTION OF THE CI 'S
COASTAL ZONE, LOCATED AT 3 YACHT HARBOR DRIVE
AND 4194 MARITIME ROAD
WHEREAS,on June 20, 2008,the applicants, Eric Johnson and Stephen and Diane
Stewart, submitted an application for a Coastal Permit and Lot Line Adjustment (Planning
Case Nos. ZON2008-00326 & SUB2008-00004)to allow the adjustment of the boundaries
between and among four (4) existing developed and- undeveloped parcels located in the
appealable portion of the City's coastal zone; and,
WHEREAS, on March 9, 2009, the application for Planning Case
Nos. ZON2008-00326 & SUB2008-00004 was deemed complete by Staff; 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 Regulations, 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 the approval of the requested Coastal Permit and
Lot Line Adjustment would have a significant effect on the environment and,therefore,the
proposed project has been found to be categorically exempt (Section 15305); and,
WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos
Verdes Development Code, the Rancho Palos Verdes Hearings Officer held a duly-noticed
public hearing on April 6, 2009, and April 21, 2009, at which time all interested parties were
given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence; and,
WHEREAS, on April 21, 2009,the Rancho Palos Verdes Hearings Officer reviewed
the applicants' proposal, the required findings for the Coastal Permit and Lot Line
Adjustment, Staff's responses to numerous questions raised by concerned residents and
Staff's recommendation of conditional approval; and conditionally approved the requested
Coastal Permit and Lot Line Adjustment, via Minute Order; and,
WHEREAS, on May 5, 2009, a timely appeal of the Rancho Palos Verdes Hearings
Officer's action to the Planning Commission was filed by Joe and Mary Lindorfer, Poul
Gamsgaard, Steven and Debbie Hansen, Robert and Marsha Exley, Lori Meistrell, Michael
and Teresa Carman, Lenee Bilski and Edward Stevens; and,
WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos
Verdes Development Code,the Planning Commission held a duly-noticed public hearing to
consider the appeal of the Rancho Palos Verdes Hearings Officer's action on June 23,
2009, July 14, 2009, and July 28, 2009, at which time all interested parties were given an
opportunity to be heard and present evidence.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES HEREBY FIND,
DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: The Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact with
respect to the appeal letter and addendum filed timely on May 5, 2009, requesting that the
Planning Commission overturn the Rancho Palos Verdes Hearings Officer's conditional
approval of the requested Coastal Permit and Lot Line Adjustment:
A. The basis of the main appeal is that the requested action is not, in fact, a lot line
adjustment, but rather a parcel map, which should be subject to the provisions of
the Subdivision Map Act(SMA)and the City's Subdivision Ordinance. Government
Code Section 66412(d) states that the SMA "shall be inapplicable to...[a] lot line
adjustment between four or fewer existing adjoining parcels, where the land taken
from one parcel is added to an adjoining parcel, and where a greater number of
parcels than originally existed is not thereby created, if the lot line adjustment is
approved by the local agency, or advisory agency." In this case, there are four (4)
existing lots prior to the adjustment and there will be four (4) resulting lots after the
adjustment. Although not quoted in the main appeal letter, Section 66412(d) goes
on to state:
"A local agency or advisory agency shall limit its review and approval
to a determination of whether or not the parcels resulting from the lot
line adjustment will conform to the local general plan, any applicable
specific plan, any applicable coastal plan, and zoning and building
ordinances. An advisory agency or local agency shall not impose
conditions or exactions on its approval of a lot line adjustment except
to conform to the local general plan, any applicable specific plan, any
applicable coastal plan, and zoning and building ordinances, to
require the prepayment of real property taxes prior to the approval of
the lot line adjustment, or to facilitate the relocation of existing utilities,
infrastructure, or easements. No tentative map, parcel map, or final
map shall be required as a condition to the approval of a lot line
adjustment. The lot line adjustment shall be reflected in a deed,
which shall be recorded. No record of survey shall be required for a
lot line adjustment unless required by Section 8762 of the Business
and Professions Code."
P.C. Resolution No. 2009-31
Page 2 of 10
The appellants argue that the nature of the adjustment of the existing lot lines does
not arise from a situation "where the land taken from one parcel is added to an
adjacent parcel." The appeal letter goes on to lay out the appellants' argument that
the creation of the proposed Parcels `A', 'B', `C' and 'D' violates this provision,
thereby requiring a parcel map so as to provide "due process"for the"subdivision."
However, the Planning Commission finds that if the requirement that "land taken
from one parcel is added to an adjacent parcel" [emphasis added] is taken to its
logical extreme, any proposal to adjust lot lines between more than two (2) parcels
would be subject to the SMA. However, this is directly contradicted by the opening
sentence of Section 66412(d),which explicitly provides an exemption for"[a]lot line
adjustment between four or fewer existing adjoining parcels."
B. The appellants also object to the fact that proposed parcels are "carved out" of the
current Johnson Residence property as a result of this application. The appellants
"believe that establishing two parcels, one (Parcel `C') of which is a new, buildable,
saleable parcel from an original single parcel is subdivision and not [a] lot line
adjustment..." The appellants go on to suggest that the Planning Commission
"overturn or perhaps amend the lot line [adjustment] decision by leaving the lands
allocated for Parcels 'C' and `A' as the single parcel that they [currently]comprise."
However, the Planning Commission disagrees with the appellants' interpretation of
Section 66412(d) and believes that the creation of Parcel 'C'—or any of the four(4)
resulting parcels—is not a subdivision, but a Lot Line Adjustment. As mentioned
above, there are four (4) existing lots prior to the adjustment and there will be four
(4) resulting lots after the adjustment. Furthermore, the types of development
restrictions that the appellants desire to impose, particularly on Parcel 'C', exceed
the limited authority to impose conditions upon a Lot Line Adjustment that is granted
to the City under Section 66412(4).
C. The appellants' addendum states that "[the] proposed project does not include
providing public coastal access from Palos Verdes [Drive South]to the beach [that
is] necessary for meeting the requirements for the Coastal Permit, the state code
and the California Coastal Act. There is no public coastal access in close proximity
to these properties." The appellants are correct in pointing out that no new access
to coastal resources is proposed or provided as a part of this application. However,
Section 30211 of the Coastal Act states that"[development] shall not interfere with
the public's right of access to the sea where acquired through use or legislative
authorization." The discussion of path and trail networks in Subregion 6 of the City's
Coastal Specific Plan (p. S6-11) states that "[the] area affords private coastal
access of excellent quality to both residents and [Portuguese Bend Club] members.
This private access is a positive measure in controlling human exposure to the
sensitive intertidal habitat in the area." As such, the City's Coastal Specific Plan
envisioned that additional vertical coastal access in Subregion 6 would be
detrimental to both the quality of life for area residents and the preservation of
sensitive marine resources. Furthermore, pursuant to Government Code Section
P.C. Resolution No. 2009-31
Page 3 of 10
66412(4), the City cannot impose a requirement for public coastal access as a
condition of approval on this lot line adjustment unless such a requirement is
supported by the City's Coastal Specific Plan. There is currently no public coastal
access through the project site, which is a private, gated community with private
streets and common areas owned.and maintained for the benefit of its residents by
a homeowners' association. The private Portuguese Bend Club community was
established prior to the adoption of the Coastal Act, the formation of the California
Coastal Commission and the certification of the City's Coastal Specific Plan as a
certified local coastal program. As such, the approval of the proposed project has
no impact upon existing coastal access.
Although the proposed project meets the definition of "new development" as
specified in 30212(b)of the Coastal Act,the Hearings Officer found that the project
should not be required to provide additional public access from Palos Verdes Drive
South to the shoreline because there exists adequate public access nearby(Coastal
Act, Section 30212(a)(2)). Specifically, Abalone Cove Shoreline Park(in Subregion
5) and the Trump National Golf Club (in Subregion 7) each provide public parking
areas and networks of public trails, including trails down the bluff face to the
shoreline. Furthermore, the Hearings Officer found that if public coastal access
were to be provided as a part of this proposal, vehicles would need to use Yacht
Harbor Drive to access the shoreline. At the westerly edge of the Portuguese Bend
Club community, Yacht Harbor Drive traverses the easterly edge of the active
Portuguese Bend landslide. As a result of constant land movement and the normal
wear-and-tear of residents', members' and guests' vehicles, the roadway requires
on-going repair and maintenance by the homeowners' association in order to keep it
passable. Allowing public coastal access along Yacht Harbor Drive would expose
the general public to increased risks associated with constant land movement and
would place an unreasonable financial burden on the homeowners' association in
the form of substantially increased road maintenance costs, thereby making the
provision of additional public coastal access as a part of the proposed project
infeasible.
D. With respect to zoning and the potential for future development of the resulting
parcels, the appellants' addendum states that"there remains [a question]about the
issue of dual zoning of the properties and the future development standards on
these properties since increasing the size of Lot 41 [i.e., proposed Parcel 'D'] in
PBC East to 20,000 sq. ft. provides for a maximum of 8,000 sq ft. lot coverage
[under the current RS-2 zoning], whereas PBC East is primarily [zoned] RS-5 and
the average property consists of a 1,700-square-foot home on a 7,100 sq. ft. lot."
The Planning Commission has recently recommended approval of a Zone Change
that would change the zoning of the property at 4194 Maritime Road (i.e., Lot No.41
of Tract 16540) from RS-2 to RS-5, although this change would not necessarily
include the area to be added to Lot No. 41 as a result of the proposed lot line
adjustment. The Planning Commission concurs with Staff's recommendation to limit
P.C. Resolution No. 2009-31
Page 4 of 10
the size of Parcel `D' to less than 16,000 square feet. The increased lot size might
allow for the development of a larger single-family residence on the property than
currently exists, but limiting the size of Parcel `D'to less than 16,000 square feet will
result in less potential lot coverage and will preclude future subdivision of Parcel `D'.
Any such future proposal to expand the existing Stewart Residence would be
subject to compliance with the underlying zoning and the coastal setback limitations,
and would be subject to City approval through a duly-noticed public review process.
E. In summary and based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission finds
that the appeal is without merit and should be denied.
Section 2: The Planning Commission hereby concurs with and upholds the
following findings of fact made by the Rancho Palos Verdes Hearings Officer with respect
to the application for a Coastal Permit associated with a Lot Line Adjustment involving the
subject properties:
A. The proposed development is consistent with the Coastal Specific Plan. The
project site lies within an appealable portion of Subregion 6 of the City's Coastal
Specific Plan. The Coastal Specific Plan lana use designations for the subject
properties are Residential 1-2 DU/acre, Residential 4-6 DU/acre and Hazard Area.
The Hazard Area designation corresponds to the steep bluff face of the developed
property at 3 Yacht Harbor Drive. The approval of the requested Lot Line
Adjustment itself will permit no additional physical development of any of the subject
properties, and any future development proposal would continue to be regulated by
the provisions of the City's Development Code, Coastal Specific Plan and Landslide
Moratorium Ordinance. The approval of the requested Lot Line Adjustment does
not create additional lots beyond those that currently exist, nor does it change the
single-family residential character of the Portuguese Bend Club and Portuguese
Bend Club East communities.
B. The proposed development, when located between the sea and the first public road,
is consistent with applicable public access and recreation policies of the Coastal
Act. As discussed above, the project site lies within an appealable portion of
Subregion 6 of the City's Coastal Specific Plan and is located between the sea and
the first public road (i.e., Palos Verdes Drive South). Section 30211 of the Coastal
Act states that"[development] shall not interfere with the public's right of access to
the sea where acquired through use or legislative authorization." The discussion of
path and trail networks in Subregion 6 of the Coastal Specific Plan (p. S6-11)states
that "[the] area affords private coastal access of excellent quality to both residents
and [Portuguese Bend Club] members. This private access is a positive measure in
controlling human exposure to the sensitive intertidal habitat in the area." As such,
the City's Coastal Specific Plan envisioned that additional vertical coastal access in
Subregion 6 would be detrimental to both the quality of life for area residents and
P.C. Resolution No. 2009-31
Page 5 of 10
the preservation of sensitive marine resources. Although the proposed project
meets the definition of"new development" as specified in 30212(b) of the Coastal
Act, the project should not be required to provide public access from Palos Verdes
Drive South to the shoreline because there exists adequate public access nearby
(Coastal Act, Section 30212(a)(2)).. Specifically, Abalone Cove Shoreline Park (in
Subregion 5)and the Trump National Golf Club(in Subregion 7)each provide public
parking areas and networks of public trails, including trails down the bluff face to the
shoreline. Furthermore, if public coastal access were to be provided as a part of
this proposal, vehicles would need to use Yacht Harbor Drive to access the
shoreline. At the westerly edge of the Portuguese Bend Club community, Yacht
Harbor Drive traverses the easterly edge of the active Portuguese Bend landslide.
As a result of constant land movement and the normal wear-and-tear of residents',
members' and guests' vehicles, the roadway requires on-going repair and
maintenance by the homeowners' association in order to keep it passable. Allowing
public coastal access along Yacht Harbor Drive would expose the general public to
increased risks associated with constant land movement and would place an
unreasonable financial burden on the homeowners' association in the form of
substantially increased road maintenance costs, thereby making the provision of
additional public coastal access as a part of the proposed project infeasible.
The policies in Article 3 of the Coastal Act deal with the preservation and
enhancement of water-oriented recreational facilities. The Portuguese Bend Club
provides coastal access and recreational facilities to its residents and members and
their guests, and the general public is served by nearby trails and recreational
facilities in Abalone Cove Shoreline Park and at the Trump National Golf Club. The
proposed project will have no impact upon these existing private and public
recreational facilities.
Section 3: The Planning Commission hereby concurs with and upholds the
following findings of fact made by the Rancho Palos Verdes Hearings Officer with respect
to the application for a Lot Line Adjustment involving the subject properties:
A. Three (3)of the resulting lots comply with all applicable Zoning and Building Codes
of the City, while the magnitude of the non-conformity of the fourth lot will be
reduced by virtue of its increased size with the approval of this Lot Line Adjustment.
Pursuant to Section 66412(d) of the Government Code, this proposal is exempt
from the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act. The City Engineer reviewed and
approved the lot line adjustment exhibits and legal descriptions as to form and
technical accuracy. Since portions of the existing lots are zoned RS-2, RS-5 and.
OH, the RS-2 development standards for lot area and lot dimensions are applied
since they are the most restrictive. With respect to the consistency of the resulting
lots with City codes:
P.C. Resolution No. 2009-31
Page 6 of 10
i. Three (3) of the resulting lots will be at least 20,000 square feet in area (the
minimum area allowed in the RS-2 zoning district);
ii. Three (3)of the resulting lots will meet the average 90-foot lot width and 120-
foot lot depth requirements,of the RS-2 zoning district;
iii. The non-conforming lot at 4194 Maritime Road will not be made smaller in
area, width or depth; rather, it will be made up to 6,847 square feet larger
than its current size, thereby reducing the magnitude of its non-conformity
under the current RS-2 zoning.
iv. There are four (4) existing lots prior to the adjustment and there will be four
(4)resulting lots after the adjustment; no additional lots will be created by the
approval of the requested lot line adjustment;
V. The adjusted Parcel `B'will allow the private street, maintenance building and
parking lot maintained by the Portuguese Bend Club homeowners
association (HOA) to be conveyed in fee to the HOA; and,
vi. The adjusted Parcel `D' will correct the encroachment of a portion of the
residence at 4194 Maritime Road upon the abutting property at 3 Yacht
Harbor Drive.
B. No additional physical development of any of the subject properties would result
from the approval of the requested Lot Line Adjustment, nor would any of the
underlying zoning change for any of the subject properties. In addition, the future
use and/or development of those portions of proposed Parcels `A', `6' and `C' that
fall within the City's Landslide Moratorium Area would continue to be limited
pursuant to the City's Landslide Moratorium Ordinance.
Section 4: Any interested person aggrieved by this decision or by any portion of
this decision may appeal to the City Council. Pursuant to Sections 16.08.020(6) and
17.72.100(13)of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, any such appeal must be filed
with the City, in writing, no later than fifteen (15) days following July 28, 2009, the date of
the Planning Commission's final action. Pursuant to Section 17.72.100(E)of the Rancho
Palos Verdes Municipal Code, the fee for such appeal shall be waived.
Section 5: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings
included in the Staff Report, Minutes and other records of proceedings of the Rancho
Palos Verdes Hearings Officer and the Planning Commission,the Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby denies the appeal and upholds the Hearings
Officer's conditional approving of a Coastal Permit and Lot Line Adjustment (Planning
Case Nos. ZON2008-00326 & SUB2008-00004) for a Lot Line Adjustment between and
among four (4) existing developed and undeveloped parcels located in the appealable
P.C. Resolution No. 2009-31
Page 7 of 10
portion of the City's Coastal Zone, located at 3 Yacht Harbor Drive and 4194 Maritime
Road, subject to the conditions of approval in the attached Exhibit W.
PASSED,APPROVED,AND ADOPTED this 28th
day of July 2009, by the following
vote,
AYES: Commissioners Perestam, Ruttenberg and Tetreault, Vice
Chairman Gerstner
NOES: Chairman Lewis
ABSTENTIONS: Commissioner Tomblin
ABSENT: Commissioner Knight
RECUSALS: none
r'ey LeAfs'
Chairman
U.
Joel �qras, 1CP
'o
D
Direct t( 0� lanning, u" ing
and C de forcement; and,
oi
Secretodo the Planning Commission
P.C. Resolution No. 2009- 31
Page 8 of 10
EXHI IT W
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
PLANNING CASE NOS. Z 2008-00326 & SU 2008-00004
(Johnson-Stewart, 3 Yacht Harbor Drive & 4194 MaritimeRoad)
General Conditions:
1. Prior to the submittal of final plans and exhibits for review prior to recordation, the
applicant and the property owners shall submit to the City a statement, in writing,
that they have read, understand, and agree to all conditions of approval contained
in this Resolution. Failure to provide said written statement within ninety(90) days
following date of this approval shall render this approval null and void.
2. Approval of this permit shall not be construed as a waiver of applicable and
appropriate zoning regulations, or any Federal, State, County and/or City laws and
regulations. Unless otherwise expressly specified, all other requirements of the City
of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code shall apply.
3. This approval to allow a Lot Line Adjustment between and among four (4) existing
developed and undeveloped parcels located in the appealable portion of the City's
coastal zone, namely the developed properties commonly known as 3 Yacht Harbor
Drive and 4194 Maritime Road and two (2)undeveloped parcels(Assessor's Parcel
Nos. 7572-022-048 and 7572-022-051). The Director of Planning, Building and
Code Enforcement is authorized to make minor modifications to the approved plans
and any of the conditions of approval if such modifications will achieve substantially
the same results as would strict compliance with the approved plans and conditions.
Otherwise, any substantive change to the project shall require approval of a revision
to the Coastal Permit and/or Lot Line Adjustment by the Planning Commission and
shall require new and separate environmental review.
4. All project development on the site shall conform to the specific standards contained
in these conditions of approval or, if not addressed herein, in the RS-2 district
development standards of the City's Municipal Code and the City's Coastal Specific
Plan.
5. Failure to comply with and adhere to all of these conditions of approval may be
cause to revoke the approval of the project by the Planning Commission after
conducting a public hearing on the matter.
6. If the project has not been established (i.e., final plans and exhibits have not been
submitted for recordation) within one (1) year of the final effective date of the
Planning Commission's decision, approval of the lot fine adjustment and coastal
P.C. Resolution No. 2009-31
Page 9 of 10
permit shall expire and be of no further effect unless, prior to expiration, a written
request for extension is filed with the Department of Planning, Building and Code
Enforcement and approved by the Planning Commission. Otherwise, a new
application for a Coastal Permit and/or Lot Line Adjustment must be approved prior
to recordation of the necessary legal instruments to effectuate this transfer of
property.
7. In the event that any of these conditions conflict with the recommendations and/or
requirements of another permitting agency or City department, the stricter standard
shall apply.
8. Unless otherwise designated in these conditions, all construction shall be completed
in substantial conformance with the plans stamped APPROVED by the City with the
effective date of this approval.
Coastal Permit Conditions:
9. The approval, execution and recordation of this Lot Line Adjustment shall not
interfere with the public's right to use the portion of the public right-of-way of Palos
Verdes Drive South that abuts the subject properties, including the existing trail
located within the parkway of Palos Verdes Drive South between the existing
perimeter fence and the eastbound travel lane of Palos Verdes Drive South.
Lot Line Adjustment Conditions:
10. The adjusted lot sizes approved pursuant to this Lot Line Adjustment shall be as
follows:
Lard Area
Before After
Parcel 1 Parcel 3, PM 17161 798,658 SF Parcel 'A' >580,785 SF
Parcel 2 Lot 2, TR 22635 4,650 SF Parcel 'B' 109,616 SF
Parcel 3 Lot 5, TR 22635 7,573 SF Parcel 'C' 125,632 SF
Parcel 4 Lot 41, TR 16540 9,152 SF Parcel `D' <16,000 SF
Total 820,033 SF Total 820,033 SF
11. Concurrent with the execution and recordation of this Lot Line Adjustment, the
applicant shall execute and record covenants to the titles of Parcels 'B' and 'C' so
as to ensure that the applicable conditions of approval forthe landscape plan forthe
residence at 3 Yacht Harbor Drive—related specifically to the perimeter fence along
Palos Verdes Drive South, the maintenance of landscaping and quarterly brush
clearance on the so-called "rock mesa" area—shall be binding upon subsequent
owners and/or successors in interest to said Parcels 'B' and 'C'.
M:\Projects\SUB2008-00004(Johnson-Stewart,3 Yacht Harbor Dr-4194 Maritime Dr)\PC Resolution 2009-31.doc
P.C. Resolution No. 2009-31
Page 10 of 10