PC RES 1995-034s �,
P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 95 - 34
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DENYING VARIANCE
NO. 399 FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES WITHIN AN
EXTREME SLOPE IN THE REAR YARD AT 30162
CARTIER DRIVE
WHEREAS, on August 3, 1995, the landowners, Mr. and Mrs.
Daniels, submitted an application for Variance No. 399 to the
Department of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement for the
property located at 30162 Cartier Drive; 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), there was no evidence that Variance No.
399 would have a significant effect on the environment.
Accordingly, the proposed project has been found to be
categorically exempt (Class III); and,
WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the requirements of
the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, a public hearing was held
on September 26, 1995, before the Planning Commission of the city
of Rancho Palos Verdes, 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 there are no exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances which apply to this property which do not apply
generally to other property in the same zoning district since the
overall lot size, the amount of level area available for
development, and the configuration of the slope in the rear yard is
similar to the other properties on Cartier Drive.
Section 2:. That the Variance is not necessary for the
preservation and en3oyment of the substantial property right of the
applicant, and that this right is not possessed by other property
owners under like conditions in the same zoning district, since,
the other properties in the area do not have similar, permitted
structures with the extreme slope areas in the rear yard.
Furthermore, the accessory structures create more useable rear yard
area than the adjoining properties, and granting the landowner a
Variance in this case would allow them a privilege that is not
currently enjoyed by the adjacent neighbors.
Section 3:, That the granting of the Variance would be
materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the
property and improvements in the area in which the property located
since the location and configuration of the project in the rear
yard slope would negatively impact privacy and create an adverse
visual impact to the adjacent property owners on Cartier Drive and
Mattisse Drive.
Section 4: That the granting of the Variance for construction
of the accessory structures in an extreme slope area would be
contrary to the objectives of the General Plan since the size and
appearance of the accessory structures would not be compatible with
the existing development patterns found in the area.
Section 5: That 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 6:. For the foregoing reasons and based on the
information and findings included in the Staff Report, minutes and
other records of proceedings, the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby denies Variance No. 399 for the
construction of accessory structures in the -extreme slope in the
rear yard of the property located at 30162 Cartier Drive.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this 26th day of September 1995,
by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners -AlbeHo, Farr --V ce Chair Hayes, Chairman Mowlds
NOES: Commissioner Wang
ABSTENTIONS: Commissioner Whiten Ck
ABSENT: Commissioner Vannorsdall
N
BretJ. Bj&rnarq, AICP
Dire or of PlAnning, Building,
and Code Enforcement; and,
Secretary to the Planning Commission
(DSK#16[KX]VAR399 RES)
Mhe Mowlds, II
irman
P.C. Resolution No. 95 - 34
Page 2 of 2