PC RES 1993-021 411
411
P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 93-21
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
NO. 172-REVISION "A" AND VARIANCE NO. 351, THEREBY
ALLOWING A FIFTEEN FOOT ENCROACHMENT INTO THE REQUIRED
TWENTY FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK TO ACCOMMODATE A NEW 2, 684
SQ. FT. OFFICE/STORAGE ADDITION AT 5837 CREST ROAD.
WHEREAS, the applicant, California Water Service, has
requested a revision to the original Conditional Use Permit and a
Variance to allow a new 2, 684 sq. ft. office/storage addition to
the existing office building that will encroach fifteen feet into
the twenty foot required front yard setback, and;
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA) , the proposed project is
categorically exempt, Class 3 and;
WHEREAS, after notice pursuant to the provisions of the Rancho
Palos Verdes Development Code, a duly noticed public hearing was
held on August 24, 1993, 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
DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1: That thefive acre site for the intended use is
adequate in size and shape to accommodate said use and the proposed
improvements for all of the yards, setbacks, walls or fences,
landscaping and other features required by this title or by
conditions imposed under this section to adjust said use with those
on abutting land and within the neighborhood The existing and
proposed structure will cover approximately 6% of the lot.
Although the new addition will encroach into the front yard
setback, the configuration of the lot and existing facilities
create a unique physical hardship, which is discussed further in
Section 5.
Section 2: That the site for the proposed use relates to
streets and highways properly designed to carry the type and
quantity of traffic generated by the subject use since the site
takes access from Crest Road, a fully improved arterial street and
the use is not being modified or expanded, in that the proposed
additions to the existing facility will not have any impact on the
amount of traffic generated by the utility company.
410
111
Section 3: That, in approving the subject use at the specific
location, there will be no significant adverse effect on adjacent
property or the permitted use thereof since due, to the physical,
topographical differences between the subject property and the
surrounding residential properties, the addition will not be
readily visible. The adjacent multi-family units immediately to
the west of the Water Company's property is currently screened and
buffered by vegetation and a considerable descending transitional
slope. The units are situated a significant horizontal distance
from the subject property as well as, and more importantly, being
significantly lower in elevation than the subject site. There
will be no significant impacts to the properties north of the
subject site due to the separation (Scotwood Drive) and
significant distance between the subject property and these
homes. The densely vegetated eastern side of the subject
property will act as a buffer between the single family
residences and the applicant's lot. The property immediately south
of the Water Service site is occupied by another utility company,
General Telephone, and again, because of the significant distance
from the proposed addition to the existing building on GTE's
property, there will be no adverse impacts.
Section 4: That the proposed use is not contrary to the
General Plan since it promotes improvements to the City's
infrastructure and the ability to provide adequate public
utilities throughout the City that maintain or improve the
quality and standards of existing neighborhoods without creating
adverse impacts to the surrounding area.
Section 5: That there are exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved, or
to the intended use of the property, which do not apply generally
to other property in the same zoning district in that although the
property is five (5) acres in area, with much of it reserved as
open space, there is limited area for improvements due to the space
necessary to store equipment and vehicles and the space that has
been reserved for the below grade reservoir. In order to maintain
the existing parking layout for the Water Service's vehicles, it is
more advantageous for the building addition to be located where it
has been proposed. Additionally, the proposal's new location is
better situated for pedestrian traffic, both for the staff, and
more importantly, the public since, the previous design for the
location of the public entrance and internal circulation was
somewhat awkward.
P.C. Resolution No. 93-21
Page 2 of 4
410
Section 6: That such a Variance is necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the
applicant, which right is possessed by other property owners under
like conditions in the same zoning district since uses such that as
the applicant's are permitted in any zoning district under the
Conditional Use Permit process. Although the subject property's
underlying zoning is RS-4, a single family residential designation,
the current use of the lot obviously differs from what is typically
permitted in such a zone. However, the applicant's request is not
uncommon to what owners of single family residences periodically
request, as a result of exceptional or extraordinary circumstances:
a Variance from the Code to allow for a proposed improvement to the
property. The right to improve the applicant's property is a
substantial property right enjoyed by other property owners in the
same zoning district, and in this case, is necessary to ensure
• proper infrastructure to support the community.
Section 7: For the foregoing reasons and based on the
information and findings included in the Staff Report, and records
of the proceedings, the Planning Commission hereby approves
Conditional Use Permit No. 172-Rev. "A" and Variance No. 351,
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 24th day of August 1993.
yr0Robert Karman
Chairman
//
f
Bret : . B- rnar• , AI CP
Direc or of En 'ironmental
Services and Secretary to
the Commission
P.C. Resolution No. 93-21
Page 3 of 4
410
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 172-REV. "A"
AND VARIANCE NO 351
1) The maximum encroachment for the addition shall not exceed
fifteen feet into the required twenty foot front yard
setback.
2) The minimum 5'-0" side yard setback shall be maintained.
3) The maximum height of the addition shall not exceed
sixteen feet or a ridge elevation of 1200. 0' , as measured
from pad elevation 1184. 0' .
4) The maximum eave projections into the required setbacks
shall not exceed 4 inches for each 1'-0" of required
setback.
5) The addition shall substantially conform to the set of
plans that were submitted to and stamped as received by
the Environmental Services Department on June 21, 1993 .
6) This approval is for the proposed office/storage addition
only (2 , 684 sq. ft. ) .
P.C. Resolution No. 93-21
Page 4 of 4