PC RES 1992-035 4110 4110
P.C. Resolution No. 92- 35
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES DENYING THE APPEAL OF HEIGHT
VARIATION NO. 730 THEREBY UPHOLDING THE ACTING
DIRECTOR'S APPROVAL OF A SECOND STORY ADDITION AT 3502
VIA CAMPESINA DRIVE.
WHEREAS, on September 27, 1991 the applicants, Paul and
Barbara Weber submitted Height Variation No. 730 to allow a
second story addition at 3502 Via Campesina; and
WHEREAS, on February 18, 1992 the Acting Director on
Environmental Services approved with conditions Height
Variation No. 730 for a second story addition with a maximum
height of 24 feet 9 inches; and
WHEREAS, on March 5, 1992 the Acting Director's decision
was appealed by Mr Douglas Trowbridge property owners of 5333
Rolling Ridge Road; and
WHEREAS, after notice pursuant to the provisions of the
Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, a public hearing was
held on April 28, 1992, 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 the applicant has complied with the Early
Neighbor Consultation process established by the city by
submitting an early neighbor consultation form with
signatures of 70 percent of the residents within a 100 foot
radius and 25 percent of the residents within a 100 foot
radius.
Section 2: That the proposed structure would not
significantly impair a view from public property, (parks,
major thoroughfares, bikeways, walkways, equestrian trails)
which has been identified in the City's General Plan or a
City designated viewing area.
Section 3 : That the structure is not located on a proposed
ridge or promontory.
Section 4: That the structure would be designed and situated
in such a manner as to minimize impairment of a view in that
the structure would be located at a lower elevation than the
properties from which view impairment would be expected
4111 4111
Section 5: That there is no significant cumulative view
impairment caused by granting the height variation since the
applicant's residence and other adjoining residences are
situated on pads at varying elevations below the view from
upslope properties from which the view impairment would be
expected
Section 6: That the proposed structure, when considered
exclusive of existing foliage does not significantly impair a
view from the viewing area of another parcel, located in a
portion of a structure which was constructed without a height
variation of variance, or which would not have required a
height variation or variance when originally constructed had
this section, as approved by voters on November 7, 1989 been
in effect at the time the structure was constructed.
Section 7: That the proposed structure, as presented to and
modified by the Planning Commission is compatible with the
immediate neighborhood character in that the articulation and
placement of the second story reduces the apparent bulk and
mass of the structure. The addition utilizes architectural
styles and materials predominant in the neighborhood and
respects all setbacks and open space requirements.
Section 8: For the foregoing reasons and based on the
information and findings included in the staff report,
minutes and records of the proceedings, the Planning
Commission hereby denies the appeal of this project, thereby
approving Height Variation No. 730 subject to conditions
contained in the attached Exhibit "A", which are necessary to
protect the public health safety and welfare.
PASSED APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12th day of May, 1—
"
Robert Katherman,
Chairman
CbcNNnerftrm.)
Dudley nder on , Di/rigor
of Environmental Services
P.C. Resolution No. 92-35
Page 2
4110 4110
EXHIBIT A
Conditions of approval
Height variation No 730
3502 Via Campesina
1. The landscape covenant adopted by the Planning
Commission on the meeting of May 12, 1992 shall be
filed prior to final building permit issuance. This
shall allow Staff to conduct a view analysis every 3 to
5 years to determine the extent of tree trimming
required. This process shall only be initiated after
the three to five year period from the date of this
approval, (May 12, 1992) , has been exhausted and a
request by any surrounding property owner has been
filed. The view analysis shall be conducted and
compared with the photographs taken at the first
analysis on January 13, 1992 . These pictures shall be
used as a standard for future view considerations and
to determine the amount of trimming to the existing
foliage needed.
2 . The following setbacks shall be maintained for the
upper and lower level addition: 20 feet in the front
yard, 5 feet in the side yard and 15 feet in the rear
yard.
3 . Maximum eave projection shall not exceed 4 inches for
every 1'0" of required setback distance.
4 . No grading has been approved with this application.
5. Maximum height shall not exceed 24' 9" feet measured
from the highest point of existing grade covered by the
structure to the ridge, and 27' 6" measured from the
finished grade adjacent to the lowest foundation to the
ridge. CRITICAL, RIDGE HEIGHT CERTIFICATION REQUIRED.
6. A second unit covenant shall be filed for the previous
garage conversion.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-35
Page 3