Loading...
PC RES 1990-045r: P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 90-45 r: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING THE APPEAL OF HEIGHT VARIATION NO. 677 THEREBY APPROVING THE PROJECT AT 1959 JAYBROOK DRIVE. WHEREAS, on June 11, 1990, the Director of Environmental Services denied Height Variation No. 677 for a two story addition to a maximum height of 2416" at 1959 Jaybrook Drive. WHEREAS, on June 20 1990, the applicant, Ms. Rebecca Sayson filed an appeal of the Director's decision to the Planning Commission within 15 days of the decision of the Director of Environmental Services; and WHEREAS, on June 26, 1990, the applicant submitted revised plans which provided for a reduction of the maximum height of the proposed project from 2416" to 22'0"; and WHEREAS, after notice pursuant to the City's Development Code, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 14, 1990, at which time all interested parties were given an 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: That pursuant to Section 17.02.040 of the Development Code guidelines, the applicant has complied with the provisions set for early neighborhood consultation, in that she has discussed the proposed project with the residents of each of the immediately adjacent lots and written notice of the application was mailed to the 119 residences within a 500 foot radius of the site on April 30, 1990, with six of the notices being returned. There is no Homeowners Association on file with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes for this area of the City. Section 2: That the applicant constructed a temporary space frame of the outline of the proposed addition, the height and location of which were verified by staff. Section 3: That the structure does not significantly impair a view or vista from public property (parks, major thoroughfare, bikeway, walkway, equestrian trial, etc.) which has been identified in the City's General Plan, Coastal Specific Plan, or City -approved viewing area. Section 4: That the proposed structure is not located on a ridge or promontory. • Section 5: That the proposed structure is designed and situated In such a manner as.to minimize view obstruction in that there is no significant view impairment. Section 6: That there would not be significant cumulative impact caused by granting the application when considering the amount of view impairment caused by the proposed structure; and when considering the amount of view impairment that would be caused by the construction on other parcels of structures similar to the proposed structure. Section 7: That the portion of the proposed addition over 16 feet in height, when considered exclusive of existing foliage, does not significantly impair the view from the viewing area of other properties. Section 8: That based upon photographic analysis of the vicinity, the proposed structure is compatible with the character of the immediate neighborhood with respect to required setbacks and the architectural style and materials are consistent with the surrounding neighborhood. Section 9: For the foregoing reasons and based on information and findings included in the staff report, minutes, and evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby approves the appeal of Height Variation No. 661, thereby overturning the Director of Environmental Services decision to deny the second story addition to the residence subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof, which are necessary to preserve the public health, safety, and general welfare in the area. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 28th day of 4Afgust/'1990. ber't enar , Director of Evir nonmental Services an Secretary to the Commisszfon c Robert MNuVAy Chairman 7 P.C. Resolution No. 90-45 Page 2 EXHIBIT "A" 1. The plans as submitted shall be revised to prohibit exterior access from the property to the second story addition or upper balcony. Access from the existing deck/spa area is permitted only if the existing stairs are removed and that future access from the exterior to the second story addition or the balcony and deck areas is prohibited. 2. Landowner shall submit to the City a Covenant to Maintain Property to protect views prior to issuance of building permits. 3. Maximum height of structure shall not exceed 2210". CRITICAL. RIDGE CERTIFICATION REQUIRED 4. All minimum setbacks shall be maintained: Front -20 feet; Side -5 feet; Rear -15 feet. 5. No grading is permitted with this approval. P.C. Resolution No. 90-45 Page 3