PC RES 1997-072-1 14
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DENYING THE
APPELLANTS' APPEAL, THEREBY APPROVING GRADING
PERMIT NO. 1950 FOR FOUR HUNDRED FORTY CUBIC
YARDS (440 YIQ') OF GRADING FOR A NEW, 5,800 -
SQUARE -FOOT, 1 -STORY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
ON A VACANT LOT IN THE CRESTMOUNT COMMUNITY,
LOCATED AT 3434 NEWRIDGE DRIVE.
WHEREAS, on May 30, 1997, the applicants, Gene and Leonna Price, submitted
an application for Grading Permit No. 1950 to allow the grading of an existing pad lot in
Crestmount community for the construction of a new, single-family residence; and,
WHEREAS, on August 6, 1997, the application for Grading Permit No. 1950 was
deemed complete by Staff, and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq. ("CEW), 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 65962 5(f) (Hazardous Waste and Substances
Statement), Staff found no evidence that Grading Permit No. 1950 would have a significant
effect on the environment and, therefore, the proposed protect has been found to be
categorically exempt (Class 3, Section 15303(a)); and,
WHEREAS, on September 29, 1997, the Director of Planning, Budding and Code
Enforcement reviewed and conditionally approved the application for Grading Permit No
1950, based upon the necessary findings of fact, to wit. 1) the grading does not exceed
that which is necessary for the permitted primary use of the lot, as defined in Section
17 96 2210 of the Development Code; 2) the grading and/or related construction does not
significantly adversely affect the visual relationships with, nor the views from, neighboring
properties; 3) the nature of the grading minimizes disturbance to the natural contours, and
finished contours are reasonably natural; and 4) the grading conforms with the minimum
standards for finished slope, depth of cut and/or fill, retaining wall location and height, and
driveway slope established under Section 17 76.040(E)(8) of the Development Code; and,
WHEREAS, on October 13, 1997, less than fifteen (15) days following the Director's
decision, the appellants, Tom and Francine Accetta, filed an appeal to the Planning
Commission, requesting that the Planning Commission overturn the Director's approval of
Grading Permit No 1950, and,
WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos
Verdes Development Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing
f
on November 25, 1997, 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: The grading does not exceed that which is necessary for the permitted
primary use of the lot, as defined in Section 17 96 2210 of the Development Code,
because most of the proposed grading is for excavation under the proposed residence and
driveway and patio areas, and there will be minimal disturbance of slope areas or other
portions of the lot beyond the existing building pad
Section 2: The grading and/or related construction does not significantly adversely
affect the visual relationships with, nor the views from, neighboring properties because the
proposed residence is at or below the maximum 16 foot height permitted by right for a pad
lot, and any views from adjacent sites which are affected by the proposed residence are
not protected views as defined in the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, and the
approval of this proposal is conditioned to use a lower benchmark elevation than proposed
by the applicant, thereby reducing some view impacts of the project.
Section 3: The nature of the grading minimizes disturbance to the natural contours,
and finished contours are reasonably natural because, with the exception of a permitted
encroachment for the pool equipment, none of the existing extreme slope area along
Newridge Drive will be disturbed by this project, the pad area will only be lowered about
two feet (2'0") from its existing elevation, and there is no creation of significant new slopes
or large retaining walls proposed as a part of the project
Section 4: The grading conforms with the minimum standards for finished slope,
depth of cut and/or fill, retaining wall location and height, and driveway slope established
under Section 17 76 040(E)(8) of the Development Code because no grading is proposed
on extreme slope areas nor are new slopes in excess of thirty-five percent (35%) slope
proposed, the maximum depth of cut proposed is less than the 5 -foot maximum depth
permitted and the maximum height of upslope retaining walls is less than the 8 -foot
maximum height permitted, and the maximum driveway slope proposed is less than the
maximum 20 -percent slope permitted
Section 5: Any interested person aggrieved by this decision or by any portion of
this decision may appeal to the City Council Pursuant to Section 17 76 040(H) of the
Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, any such appeal must be filed with the City, in
writing, and with the appropriate appeal fee, no later than fifteen (15) days following
November 25, 1997, the date of the Planning Commission's final action
P C. Resolution No 97-72
Page 2 of 6
•
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 the appellants' appeal,
thereby approving Grading Permit No 1950 for four hundred forty cubic yards (440 yd -1)
of grading for a new, 5,800 -square -foot, 1 -story single-family residence on a vacant lot in
the Crestmount community, located at 3434 Newridge Drive, subject to the conditions
contained in Exhibit 'A', attached hereto and made a part hereof, which are necessary to
protect the public health, safety and welfare in the area
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 25th day of November 1997, by the following
vote
AYES Chairman Vannorsdall, Vice Chairman Whiteneck, Commissioners
Alberio, Cartwright, Clark and Slayden
NOES none
ABSTENTIONS. none
ABSENT Commissioner Ng
Carolynn Ptitru, AICP
Director of Planning, Building and
Code Enforcement, and, Secretary
to the Planning Commission
Ar' - 'WINN
Donald E Vannorsdall
Chairman
P C Resolution No 97-12
Page 3 of 6
EXHIBIT 'A'
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
FOR GRADING PERMIT NO. 1950
(3434 Newridge Drive)
Within thirty (30) days following adoption of this Resolution, the applicant and the
property owner shall submit to the City a statement, in writing, that they have read,
understand, and agree to all conditions of approval contained in this Resolution
Failure to provide said written statement shall render this approval null and void.
2 This approval is to allow four hundred forty cubic yards (440 yd 3) of grading for a
new, 5,800 -square -foot, 1 -story single-family residence on a vacant pad lot in the
Crestmount community, located at 3434 Newridge Drive Any change shall require
approval of a revision to Grading Permit No. 1950 by the Planning Commission and
shall require a new and separate environmental review
3. All project development on the site shall conform to the specific standards
contained in these conditions of approval or, if not addressed herein, in the RS -2
district development standards of the City's Municipal Code
4 Failure to comply with and adhere to all of these conditions of approval may be
cause to revoke the approval of the project by the Planning Commission after
conducting a public hearing on the matter
5. If the project has not been established (i.e., grading and/or building permits
obtained) within one hundred eighty (180) days of the effective date of this
Resolution, or if construction has not been commenced within one hundred eighty
(180) days of the issuance of grading and/or building permits, approval of the
project shall expire and be of no further effect unless, prior to expiration, a written
request for extension is filed with the Department of Planning, Building and Code
Enforcement and approved by the Planning Commission. Otherwise, a grading
permit revision must be approved prior to further development.
6. In the event that any of these conditions conflict with the recommendations and/or
requirements of another permitting agency or City department, the stricter standard
shall apply
7. Unless otherwise designated in these conditions, all construction shall be
completed in substantial conformance with the plans submitted to the City on July
9, 1997, entitled "New Residence for Mr & Mrs Gene and Leonna Price, 3434
P C Resolution No 97-72
Page 4 of 6
0 0
Newndge Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275", prepared by Andrea Wakita of
Adyton Design and Construction and labelled "GR 1950 2ND SUB "
8 The structure shall comply with the following setbacks as indicated on the grading
plan -
Front* 20'0"
Sides, 8'0" West and 48'0" East
Rear 15'0"
The applicant shall provide certification of these setbacks at the time of foundation
form inspection by the Building and Safety Division
9 A total of four hundred forty cubic yards (440 yd3) of grading is allowed under this
permit, consisting entirely of cut and no fill The maximum depth of cut shall be
three feet six inches (36").
10 Notwithstanding the grading plan submitted to the City on July 9, 1997, building
height shall be measured from the following elevations
Upslope 1186 0'
Downslope 1183.0'
Maximum Ridge Height 1202 0'
RIDGE HEIGHT CRITICAL Ridge height certification shall be required prior to
building permit final inspection
11. The protect shall maintain a sixty-two percent (62%) open space coverage
12. Side- and rear -yard retaining walls shall not exceed an individual or combined
height of three feet six inches (3'6") There shall not be more than one retaining
wall per side- or rear -yard
13 The driveway shall maintain a slope of ten percent (10%)
14 No new slopes exceeding fifty percent (50%) may be created, except adjacent to
the driveway, where slopes up to sixty-seven percent (67%) may be created
15 Notwithstanding the grading plan submitted to the City on July 9, 1997.
P C. Resolution No 97-72
Page 5 of 6
a The pool, spa and related equipment and enclosure require separate review
of a site plan review by the Director of, Planning, Building and Code
Enforcement
b No walls, fences, gates or other structures in excess of forty-two Inches (42")
in height are permitted between the house and the front and street -side
property lines.
16 Prior to grading permit Issuance by the Building and Safety Division, a plan for haul
routes and staging of trucks and vehicles must be submitted to and approved by the
Director of Public Works
17 The hours of grading and construction shall be limited to 7 00 AM to 7 00 PM,
Monday through Saturday No grading or construction shall be permitted on
Sundays or on legal holidays
18 All grading activity, including compaction, shall be conducted in accordance with
the applicable requirements established by the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Building and Safety Division
19. In the event that any of these conditions conflict with the recommendations and/or
requirements of another permitting agency or City department, the stricter standard
shall apply.
20 The construction site shall be kept free of all loose materials resembling trash and
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, salvage materials,
abandoned or discarded furniture, appliance or other household fixtures
21 There is no existing foliage on the subject property that impairs views from any
nearby residences Therefore, none of the vegetation on the subject lot needs to
be trimmed or removed prior to Building permit issuance However, this
determination does not preclude or prevent a property owner from filing for a view
restoration permit against the subject property at a future date
M \USERS\KITF\WPWIN60\PROJECTS\GR1950\APPEAL\GR1950 RES
P C Resolution No 97-72
Page 6of6