PC RES 1995-006P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 95- 06
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES UPHOLDING THE
APPEAL, THEREBY APPROVING HEIGHT VARIATION
NO. 797 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A 1,588 SQUARE
FOOT SECOND STORY ADDITION TO A MAXIMUM
HEIGHT or 26'- 011 AT 2139 SUMMERLAND STREET
WHEREAS, on April 28, 1994, the applicant, Mr. Cahill,
submitted Height Variation No. 797 to the Department of
Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement for a 1,633 square
foot second story addition to a maximum height of 261- 011, as
measured from existing grade adjacent to the structure, for
the property located at 2139 Summerland Street; and,
WHEREAS, on September 22, 1994, after the applicant and
his architect declined to re -design the proposed addition to
address the Staff's concerns regarding neighborhood
compatibility, the director of Planning, Building, and code
Enforcement Denied Height Variation No. 797; and,
WHEREAS, on October 7, 1994, the applicant filed a
written appeal to the Planning Commission within fifteen (15)
days of the Director's decision; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections
2100 et. seq. ("CEQA"), the State's CEQA guidelines,
California Code of Regulation, Title 14, Section 15000
et.seq., the City's Local CEQA Guidelines, and Government
Code Section 65952.5(e) (Hazardous Waste and Substances
Statement), the Staff found no evidence that Height Variation
No. 797 would have a significant effect on the environment.
Accordingly, the proposed project has been found to be
categorically exempt (Class I); and,
WHEREAS, after due notice issued pursuant to the
provisions of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the
Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 13,
1994, February 14, 1995 and March 14, 1995, 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 and the adopted Height Variation Guidelines,
the applicant has complied with the requirements for Early
Neighborhood Consultation, since they discussed the
proposed project with, and obtained the signatures from, 62%
of the property owners within a 500 foot radius of the
subject property. The Height Variation Guidelines require
that the applicant contact at least 60% of the property
owners within a 500 foot radius of the subject property.
Section 2: That the structure does not significantly
impair a view or vista from public property (parks, major
thoroughfares, bike ways, walk ways, equestrian trails) which
has been identified in the City's General Plan, Coastal
Specific Plan or City designated viewing areas, since
Summerland Street and the surrounding area are not identified
in the General Plan, or any other official City document, as
part of a view corridor and the property is not located in
the City's Coastal Zone.
Section 3: That the subject property is not located on
a ridge or promontory, since the subject property is located
on one of several graded terraces, which slope generally from
west to east in descending elevation, and were created to
accommodate the subdivision in which the lot is located.
Section 4: That the proposed structure, when considered
exclusive of existing foliage, does not significantly impair
a view from the viewing area of the residential properties
located on Enrose Avenue or Summerland Street, since either
the primary view from those properties is focused in a
different direction than the subject property or the pad
elevation of the lot is higher than the subject property,
thereby allowing the majority of the view to continue to be
available above or adjacent to the ridgeline of the proposed
second story addition.
Section 5: That the proposed structure is designed and
situated in such a manner as to minimize impairment of a
view, since the proposed addition is concentrated over the
existing footprint of the building and would respect all
minimum setback and open space requirements.
P.C. Resolution No. 95 -06
Page 2 of 6
Section 6: That the proposed structure would not result
in significant cumulative view impairment, since the
residences on Summerland Street do not have protected views
over the subject property and, because the subject property
is located near the top of Summerland Street and the other
lots on this street step down with the descending topography,
the ridgelines of any future second story additions on
Summerland Street would be below the view, as seen from the
properties on Enrose Avenue.
Section 7: That the proposed structure complies with
all other Development Code requirements, such as setbacks and
open space.
Section 8: That the proposed structure is compatible
with the immediate neighborhood character, since, although
the square footage of the proposed project would be larger
than other existing homes in the area, the project would
maintain a front yard setback and open space similar to the
other homes in the neighborhood. In addition, the
architectural style of the proposed project, including
facade treatments, structure height, number of levels, roof
design and building materials, is compatible with, the
surrounding neighborhood character, since the size of the
entry tower has been significantly reduced, the front facade
has been articulated by setting back portions of the second
story living areas and projecting forward a trellis and a
portion of the entry tower, and the metal roof has been
eliminated. Therefore, these changes to the design of the
project have the cumulative effect -of reducing and mitigating
the apparent bulk and mass of the project, as viewed from the
street.
Section 9: The time within which the judicial review of
the decision reflected in this Resolution, if available must
be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California
Code of Civil Procedure.
Section 10: For the foregoing reasons, and based on the
information and findings included in the Staff Report,
minutes, evidence presented at the public hearing and other
records of the proceedings, the Planning commission of the
City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby Upholds the Appeal of
Height Variation No. 797, thereby Overturning the Director's
denial of the project, and Approving a 1,588 square foot
second story addition for the property located at 2139
Summerland Street, subject to the conditions of approval
contained in the attached Exhibit "All, which are necessary to
protect the public health, safety and general welfare.
AYES: ALBERIO, FERRARO, VANNORSDALL, WANG, WHITENECK, HAYES, AND MOWLDS
NOES: NONE P.C. Resolution No. 95 - 06
ABSTENTIONS: NONE Page 3 of 6
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED thigh ayaotel a3lch 1995.
Bret. B¢rnar , AICP
Direc or f P1 nning, Building
and Code Enfo cement; and,
Secretary to the Planning Commission
Eugene Mowlds, III
Chairman
P.C. Resolution No. 95 - 06
Page 4 of 6
Exhibit "All
Conditions of Approval
for Height Variation No. 797 - Appeal
(2139 Summerland Avenue)
1. The second story addition shall not exceed a maximum of
twenty six feet (261-011) in height, as measured from the
highest point of existing grade covered by the structure
(elevation 99.751). THE CRITICAL RIDGELINE HEIGHT IS
ELEVATION 125.75 AND RIDGELINE HEIGHT CERTIFICATION
SHALL BE REQUIRED.
2. A minimum of 500 open space shall be maintained on the
lot.
3. The following minimum setbacks shall be maintained:
front: 20"- 011
rear: 151- 011
interior sides: 51-011
4. The portion of the second story addition located over
the southeast wing of the structure (living room) shall
be setback a minimum of 41- 011 from the facade of the
first story (kitchen) and the southwest wing shall be
setback 51-011 form the facade of the garage.
5. The octagonal skylight located on the entry tower shall
not exceed the maximum approved ridge height (elevation
125.751).
6. The walls and gates for the trash enclosure located on
the east side property line shall not exceed a maximum
height of 61- 011 and shall not be covered by a roof or
trellis.
7. The roof eaves shall not project into any required
setback area more than 411 per each one foot of required
setback.
8. The property owner shall submit a notarized Covenant to
Protect Views to the Department of Planning, Building,
and Code Enforcement, prior to submittal of plans to the
Building and Safety Division for plan check.
P.C. Resolution No. 95 -06
Page 5 of 6
•
9. The completed project shall substantially conform to the
revised plans stamped as received by the Planning
Division on January 23, 1995, with the exception of the
following: a) eliminate trellis or b) eliminate rear
balcony to maintain required open space.
10. In the event that a Planning Division requirement and a
Building and Safety Division requirement are in conflict
with one another, the stricter standard shall apply.
11. The construction site shall be kept free of all loose
materials resembling trash debris in excess of that
material used for immediate construction purposes. Such
excess material may include, but not be limited to: the
accumulation of debris, garbage, lumber, scrap metal,
concrete, asphalt, piles of earth salvaged materials,
abandoned or discarded furniture, appliances or other
household fixtures.
(DSK #14 [KKJ HV797.RES)
P.C. Resolution No. 95 - 06
Page 6 of 6