PC RES 1992-051 P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 92-51
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES UPHOLDING AN APPEAL OF HEIGHT
VARIATION NO. 734 THEREBY APPROVING A SECOND STORY
ADDITION, APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 314 TO ALLOW A THREE
CAR GARAGE IN THE REAR SETBACK AND APPROVING GRADING
APPLICATION NO. 1595 FOR A SINGLE STORY ADDITION AT THE
REAR OF THE EXISTING RESIDENCE, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS AT
29006 HIGHMORE AVENUE.
WHEREAS, on October 21, 1992, the applicant, Mr. Pero
Tepic, submitted Height Variation No. 734, Variance No. 314
and Grading Permit No. 1595 to allow a first and second story
addition and a new three car garage in the rear setback at
29006 Highmore Avenue; and
WHEREAS, on May 22, 1992, the Director of Environmental
Services denied Height Variation No. 734 to allow a second
story addition with a maximum height of 21'-3"; and
WHEREAS, on June 4, 1992, the Director's decision was
appealed by Mr. Pero Tepic within the fifteen day appeal
period; and
WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the provisions
of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, a public hearing
was held on July 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: Pursuant to Section 17. 02.040, in upholding
Height Variation No. 734 Appeal, the Planning Commission
finds as follows:
P.C. Resolution No. 92-51
Page 1
A. That the applicant has complied with the early
neighborhood consultation process established by the City by
submitting an early neighborhood consultation form with
signatures of 70 percent of the residence within a 100 foot
radius and 31 percent of the residents within a 300 foot
radius.
B. That the proposed structure would not
significantly impair a view from a public property, which has
been identified in the City's General Plan as City designated
viewing needs.
C. That the proposed structure is not located on a
ridge or promontory.
D. That the structure is designed and situated in
such a manner as to minimize impairment of a view.
E. That the proposed structure, when considered
exclusive of existing foliage, would not significantly impair
a view from the viewing area of the surrounding properties.
F. That there would be no significant cumulative view
impairment that would result by granting this application.
G. That the proposed structure, would be compatible
with the immediate neighborhood character in that the second
story addition would be articulated to provide visual relief
and reduce the bulk and mass of the structure.
H. That the proposed structure complies with all
other Development Code requirements.
Section 2: Pursuant to Section 17. 60. 020, in approving
Variance No. 314, the Planning Commission finds as follows:
A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances or conditions applicable to the property which
do not apply generally to other properties, in the same
zoning district, since the lot is smaller than the minimum
lot size required in the RS-4 zoning district and there is no
available area on the site outside of the required setback
area in which to construct a new garage.
B. That the Variance is necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the
landowner, since similar RS-4 properties have an enclosed
garage. The three car garage would bring the property into
compliance with the Development Code.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-51
Page 2
C. That the granting of the Variance will not be
materially detrimental to the public health,
safety and
welfare because the
enclosed parking area will provide off-
street parking, the vehicles will be screened
and adjacent properties from the street
p p ties and will not adversely impact the
privacy or primary views of the
surrounding properties.
D. The granting of the Variance will not be contrary
to the objectives or the policies and requirements
General Plan or the q rements of the
policies and requirements of the Coastal
Specific Plan because there is no change in the '
g residential
land use and the
property is not located within the Coastal
Zone.
Section 3: Pursuant to Section 17.50. 070 in
Grading No. 1595, the PlanningCommission . , approving
finds as follows:
A. The proposed 212 cubic yards of gradingis not
excessive beyond that necessary •
for the permitted primary use
of the lot as the majority of the grading (141 necessary tocubic yards)
is ny accommodate the construction of the
residential additions and new garage.
B. The proposed grading and/or construction does not
significantly affect visual relationships with, nor the
viewsfrom, neighboring sites, as the proposed
first story addition
and proposed garage would not impair views from surrounding
oundi
properties.
C. The nature of the grading minimizes disturbances
to the natural contours; finished grades are reasonably
natural. The grading will occur on slopes which are not
extreme (35% or greater) and which have been previously
graded and disturbed. p y
Section 4: For the foregoing reasons and based on
information contained in ' the
the Staff Report, minutes and
evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission at the City
of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby upholds
Height Variation No. 734 Appeal thereby allowing a second
story addition which would span across
the front facade and
approves Variance No. 314 and Grading Permit No. 1595 to
allow a three car garage in the rear setback and a single
story addition at the
rear of the existing structure, subject
P.C. Resolution No. 92-51
Page 3
to the conditions of approval required in the attached
Exhibit "A" which are necessary to protect the public health,
safety and welfare.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 11th day of August,
1992.
7 ///: ---
Robert Katherman
Chairman
/ / . /
Dudley 0 ierdonk, Director
of Environmental Services and
Secretary to the Commission
P.C. Resolution No. 92-51
Page 4
Exhibit "A"
Height Variation No. 734
Variance No. 314
Grading No. 1595
29006 Highmore
1. The applicant shall obtain all necessary Building Permits
from the City's Building and Safety Division.
2 . All construction shall be conducted in accordance with the
approved plan.
3 . The property owner must submit a notarized covenant to
protect views to the Department of Environmental Services
prior to submittal to plan check and/or issuance of
building permits.
4. The following minimum setbacks shall be maintained for the
first and second story additions:
front yard: 20 '- 0"
side yards: 5 '- 0"
rear yard: 15 '- 0"
5. Maximum eave projections shall not exceed 4" for each 1
foot of required setback.
6. The maximum height of the residence shall not exceed a
height of 21'-3", as measured from the finished grade at
the front property. Certification of the finished ridge
height is required priorissunace of final building permits.
7. The second story addition shall be modified in order to
provide visual relief and reduce the bulk and mass of the
front facade, subject to the review and approval of the
Director of Environmental Services prior to building plan
check.
8. The maximum height of the detached three car garage
addition, including the handrail for the deck, shall not
exceed 16 '- 6" .
9. The garage shall be equipped with articulated (roll up)
doors.
10. Grading shall not exceed 215 cu. yds. (including cut and
fill) .
P.C. Resolution No. 92-51
Page 5
11. The lot shall maintain a minimum of 50% open space.
12. The garage shall maintain a minimum 5 ' setback from the
rear property line.
13 . Hours of construction shall be limited 7: 00 a.m. to
7: 00 p.m. Monday through Saturday.
14. All debris on the property shall be removed and stored in
an enclosed area and shall not be visible from the public
right of way, including the alley at the rear of the
property.
P.C. Resolution No. 92-51
Exhibit A
Page 6