PC RES 1995-024 411 411
P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 95-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING
VARIANCE NO. 394 TO ALLOW A RIDGELINE
MODIFICATION AND CUPOLA TO A LEGAL NON-
CONFORMING STRUCTURE WHICH WOULD RESULT IN AN
OVERALL DOWNSLOPE HEIGHT OF 42'-3", AT 2866
CROWNVIEW DRIVE
WHEREAS, the property owner at 2866 Crownview Drive has
submitted an application for Variance No. 394 to allow a
ridgeline modification and 16 square foot cupola which would
result in increasing the overall downslope height of this
existing, non-conforming structure from 35'-3" to 42'-3"; 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) , Staff found no
evidence that Variance No. 394 would have a significant effect on
the environment. Accordingly, the proposed project has been
found to be categorically exempt (Class I) ; and,
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was held before the
Planning Commission at its regular meeting on June 27, 1995, at
which time all interested parties were given the 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 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,
the topography of the subject lot is such that it is at an
elevation which is approximately 31 feet below the level of the
street (Crownview Drive) , thereby screening the residence from
the street of access;
Section 2: That such a Variance is necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the
applicant since the current structure was built in a non-
conforming manner prior to the incorporation of the City, thereby
making it difficult to upgrade the exterior features of the
property without increasing the degree of non-conformity.
Similar properties, with similar land features, in the same
zoning district, would have (and have been granted) an equal
opportunity to construct features such as the requested gambrel
roof and small cupola.
!II 4111
Section 3 : That the granting of the Variance will not be
materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to
property and improvements in the area in which the property is
located, since the aesthetic improvements to the property would
improve the aesthetic quality of the residence, and would not
impair views from the neighboring properties. Therefore, this
project would not adversely impact the public welfare. As these
modifications will require Building and Safety Division review to
ensure that they meet the most recent standards of the City and
Uniform Building Code, the project would also not be injurious to
property and improvements in the area in which the property is
located.
Section 4: That the granting of such a Variance will not be
contrary to the policies and objectives of the General Plan since
the General Plan goals encourage development within the City that
maintains and enhances the visual qualities of existing
neighborhoods without creating adverse impacts to the surrounding
area. The roof modification and cupola would result in an
aesthetic improvement of the property without affecting views
from neighboring properties or the public right-of-way, and will
not result in the addition of habitable space or enlargement of
the existing building footprint. The project does not lie in the
Coastal Specific Plan, and therefore that portion of this
required finding does not apply.
Section 5: The time within which 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 6: For the foregoing reasons and based on the
information and findings included in the Staff Report, Minutes,
and all other records of the proceedings, the Planning Commission
hereby grants Variance No. 394, thereby approving the roof
modifications and cupola for the property at 2866 Crownview
Drive, subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit "A, " attached
hereto and made a part hereof, which are necessary to preserve
the public health, safety, and • - . - al welfa e in the area.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ' DO-TED ; ' • . • June 1995.
Air/ . ;#19,•,
_....-./4 -0 AR _441.1.__
':gen owlds' I,
airman
AYES : CommissionersF6rrar-o ,
/ 4111111, Wang, Whiteneck, Vice-Chair
t
Hayes , Chairman Mowlds
Bret : . B=rnari , AICP
Dire' or of P .nning, Building, NOES : Commissioner Alberio
and Code Enf• cement, and ABSTENTIONS : NONE
Secretary to the Planning Commission
ABSENT : Commissioner Vannorsdall
Resolution No. 95- 24
Page 2 of 3
t
411
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VARIANCE NO. 394
1. Modifications to the ridgelines and the addition of the
cupola shall substantially conform to the size and
elevations shown in the approved plans received by the
Planning Division on April 4, 1995. The maximum downslope
height of the residence shall not exceed 42'-3" as measured
from grade adjacent to the lowest foundation to the highest
ridgeline. New ridgeline elevations shall require ridgeline
certification.
2 . The applicant shall trim, and maintain therafter, the trees
and foliage on the slope between the front property line and
driveway to a maximum height of 15 feet above the curbline
on Crownview Drive. The initial trimming shall occur prior
to submittal of the plans to the Building and Safety
Division for plan check.
3 . This approval does not include any additions of habitable
space. Any future additions of habitable space, or future
ridgeline modifications, shall be subject to the review and
approval of the Director of Planning, Building, and Code
Enforcement to determine the proper application procedure.
DJ39:VAR394.RES
Resolution No. 95- 24
Page 3 of 3