Loading...
PC RES 1998-023P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 98-23 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DENYING THE APPELLANTS' APPEAL, THEREBY APPROVING WITH MODIFICATIONS HEIGHT VARIATION NO. 827 FOR A NEW, 7,333 -SQUARE -FOOT, 23.3 -FOOT -TALL SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ON A VACANT PAD LOT; AND APPROVING GRADING PERMIT NO. 1887 FOR FOUR HUNDRED SIXTY- ONE CUBIC YARDS (461 YD 3) OF GRADING FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE RESIDENCE, LOCATED AT 7455 ALIDA PLACE. WHEREAS, on July 9, 1996, the applicants, Leslie and Magda Kispal, submitted an application for Height Variation No 827 and Grading Permit No 1887 to allow the construction of a new, single-family residence on an existing pad lot on Alida Place, and, WHEREAS, on December 8, 1997, the application for Height Variation No 827 and Grading Permit No 1887 was deemed complete by Staff; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 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 65962.5(f) (Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement), Staff found no evidence that Height Variation No 827 and Grading Permit No 1887 would have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, the proposed project has been found to be categorically exempt (Class 3, Section 15303(a)), and, WHEREAS, on February 9, 1998, the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement reviewed and conditionally approved the application for Height Variation No 827, based upon the necessary findings of fact set forth in the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code Section 17 02.040(c)(1)(e), and a notice of the Director's decision was prepared and issued to the applicants and interested parties on February 11, 1998, and, WHEREAS, on February 23, 1998, less than fifteen (15) days following the issuance of the notice of the Director's decision, the appellants, Jane C Botello, Avery Knapp (subsequently replaced by Harold Reaves), Jimmy Naumovski and Ken Nishide, filed an appeal to the Planning Commission, requesting that the Planning Commission overturn the Director's approval of Height Variation No 827, 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 on March 24, May 12 and June 9, 1998, 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 applicant has complied with the Early Neighbor Consultation process established by the City because documentation has been provided which shows that plans of the proposed addition were provided to surrounding neighbors in compliance with the provisions of RPVDC Section 17 02 040(C)(1)(b) Section 2: The structure does not significantly impair a view from public property which has been identified in the City's General Plan or Coastal Specific Plan as a City - designated viewing area because there are no City -designated public viewing areas upslope from the subject property which would be affected by the proposed project; and the subject property is not located within the Coastal Specific Plan area. Section 3: The proposed structure is not located on a ridge or promontory because it is located at the west end of an existing tract of single-family homes which slopes uphill to the east Section 4: The proposed structure, when considered exclusive of foliage, does not significantly impair a view from the viewing area of another parcel because Staff conducted view analyses of the proposed residence from six residences surrounding the subject property (7400, 7401, 7420, 7435 and 7440 Alida Place and 30108 Palos Verdes Drive West), Staff determined that, in all instances, views (if any) of the distant ocean horizon, off -shore islands or near -shore whitewater and surf would be obstructed by a 16 -foot -tall structure on the subject property, and, since any view below the 16 -foot level is not considered a protected view under the provisions of the City's Development Code, none of the six properties inspected have protected views which are significantly impaired by the proposed residence. Section 5: There is no significant cumulative view impairment caused by granting the application because cumulative view impairment is determined by considering the degree of view impairment caused by the proposed project and the degree of view impairment that would be caused by similar development on other parcels, the most likely site for similar development is Lot 1 of Tract No. 46422 (the vacant, northeast corner of Alicia Place and Palos Verdes Drive West), and a height variation has already been approved for Lot 1 with the determination that protected views from the other properties on Alida Place are not significantly impaired by its development, Staffs view analysis determined that the proposed development of Lot 7 does not significantly impair protected views from these properties either; and Lots 1 and 7 are the only remaining undeveloped lots in Tract No 46422 and are the only properties likely to have any potential to significantly impair views from the other homes on Alida Place P C Resolution No 98-23 Page 2 of 9 Section 6: The structure is designed and situated in such a manner as to minimize impairment of a view because the proposed residence complies with the 20 -foot front -yard setback, thereby preserving the view corridor westward along Alida Place, the structure incorporates varied roof planes and a 3 12 -pitch roof which provide enhanced view opportunities for those properties above the subject property, the ridgelines of the wings which project toward Alida Place are lower than the main ridgeline, thereby providing the potential for additional view opportunities from above, and a generous, 26 -foot interior side -yard setback abutting 7435 Alida Place is provided, which may help to reduce some of its view impacts upon this abutting property. Section 7: The proposed structure complies with all other Code requirements because it complies with all the development standards of the RS -4 district Section 8: The proposed structure is compatible with the immediate neighborhood character because it is similar in height to the existing and approved residences on Alida Place, and is consistent with the mix of 2 -story and split-level homes on the street; the architectural style and colors and materials palette of the proposed residence is consistent with the architecture of the other homes on Alida Place; and, although the total square footage of the proposed residence is larger than the other existing and approved homes on Alida Place, the U -shape of the house and the lower side wings create deep articulation of the front facade and help to reduce and break up the bulk and mass of the house by setting the main living areas back more than fifty feet (50'0") from the curb. Section 9: The proposed structure does not result in an unreasonable infringement of the privacy of the occupants of abutting residences because the proposed residence will be twenty-six feet (260") from the side property line and approximately eighty feet (80'0") from the closest portion of the adjacent house at 7435 Alida Place; the east wing of the proposed residence (facing towards 7435 Alida Place) contains the garage, maid's quarters and secondary bedrooms and bathrooms, while the master bedroom and main living areas are located in the central section and west wing and are not visible from 7435 Alida Place, and an existing hedge along the westerly property line of 7435 Alida Place creates additional privacy for both properties Section 10: The grading is not excessive beyond that necessary for the permitted primary use of the lot because most of the proposed grading will be located within the footprint of the proposed residence or in the areas of the central motorcourt and driveway, the area of the building pad will not be significantly expanded; and only one new, 3'/s -foot - tall retaining wall will be constructed Section M. The grading and/or related construction does not significantly adversely affect the visual relationships with, nor the views from, neighboring sites because the overall effect of the proposed grading is to level the building site and lower P C Resolution No. 98-23 Page 3of9 the highest portions of the existing pad, which results in the proposed residence setting lower into the site and reducing the potential for negative visual impacts upon protected views and non -protected views from surrounding properties Section 12: The nature of the grading minimizes disturbance to the natural contours, and finished contours are reasonably natural because the existing "natural" contours are the result of previous grading of the site, most grading will occur within the area of the existing pad, no new slopes in excess of 2.1 will be created, and no grading is proposed within any existing extreme slope areas Section 13: Any interested person aggrieved by this decision or by any portion of this decision may appeal to the City Council Pursuant to Sections 17.02.040(C)(1)(t) and 17 76 040(E)(9)(e) 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 June 9, 1998, the date of the Planning Commission's final action Section 14: 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 with modifications Height Variation No 827 for a new, 7,333 -square - foot, 23 3 -foot -tall single-family residence on a vacant pad lot, and approving Grading Permit No. 1887 for four hundred sixty-one cubic yards (461 yd 3) of grading for the construction of the residence, located at 7455 Alida Place, 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 P C Resolution No 98-23 Page 4 of 9 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 9th day of June 1998, by the following vote, AYES: Chairman Clark, Vice Chairman Cartwright, Commissioners Lyon and Slayden NOES Commissioners Alberio, Paris and Vannorsdall ABSTENTIONS none ABSENT. none A, ) (-A� �/ Oel ojas, AICP Nrektor of Plan , Building and Code Enforcement, and, Secretary to the Planning Commission 'Ittfa. , ak Lawrence E Clark Chairman P.C. Resolution No 98- 23 Page 5 of—9 C n EXHIBIT 'A' CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR HEIGHT VARIATION NO. 827 AND GRADING PERMIT NO. 1887 (7455 Alida Place) 1. Prior to the submittal of plans into Building and Safety plan check, 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 within ninety (90) days following date of this approval shall render this approval null and void 2 This approval is for a 7,333 -square -foot, 2 -story single-family residence to be constructed at 7455 Alida Place The maximum height of the residence shall be twenty-three feet three -and -five-eighths inches (23'35/$") above the highest point of the existing pad to be covered by the structure The maximum ridgelme elevation of the residence shall be 305.2. Four hundred sixty-one cubic yards (461 yd 3) of grading are permitted by this approval, consisting of two hundred eighty-four cubic yards (284 yd 3) of cut and one hundred seventy-seven cubic yards (177 yd') of fill Any change shall require approval of a revision to Height Variation No 827 and Grading Permit No 1887 by the Planning Commission and shall require a new and separate environmental review 3. All protect development on the site shall conform to the specific standards contained in these conditions of approval or, if not addressed herein, in the RS -4 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 protect has not been established (i e, building permits obtained) within one hundred eighty (180) days of the final effective date of this Resolution, or if construction has not been completed within one hundred eighty (180) days of the issuance of 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 Director Otherwise, a height variation and 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 P.C. Resolution No 98-23 Page 6of9 7 Unless otherwise designated in these conditions, all construction shall be completed in substantial conformance with the plans originally submitted to the City on October 14, 1996, entitled "Single Family Residence, 7455 Alida Place, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275," prepared by Russell E Barto, AIA. 8 Notwithstanding Condition 7 above, the project shall be modified as described in the letter from Joseph DiMonda, dated June 2, 1998, to wit a The front portions of the ridgelines of the projecting side wings shall be lowered an additional two feet (2'0") to an elevation of approximately 301 2', or four feet (4'0") below the maximum ridgeline elevation of 305 2'. This shall be accomplished by lowering the ceiling heights on the first floor of these wings from ten feet (10'0") to eight feet (8'0") b The roof over the central portion of the house shall be changed from a gable roof to a hip roof. The maximum ridgeline of the hip roof shall remain at 305.2' as currently proposed, but the length of the ridgeline shall be shortened C. The garages shall be reversed to take access from the central motorcourt, and the area of the easterly motorcourt shall be reduced by fifty percent (50%) 9 The project shall comply with all conditions of approval of Resolution No 88-66 approving Tentative Tract Map No 46422 10 The structure shall comply with the following setbacks Front. 20'0" Sides 260" East and 29'6" West Rear 160" The applicant shall provide certification of these setbacks at the time of foundation form inspection by the Building and Safety Division 11 The maximum height of the residence shall not exceed 23 3' (as measured from the highest point of the existing pad to be covered by the structure (281 9')) and 26 4' (as measured from the finished grade adjacent to the lowest foundation (278 8')) to the highest point of the structure, including roofing materials The maximum ridgeline elevation shall be 305.2. Ridge height certification shall be required prior to building permit final inspection 12 The project shall maintain a minimum of 50% open space coverage. P C Resolution No. 98-23 Page 7 of 9 13. The grading approved by this permit consists of two hundred eighty-four cubic yards (284 yd 3) of cut and one hundred seventy-seven cubic yards (177 yd 3) of fill The maximum upslope retaining wall height permitted is three feet six inches (36") 14 The protect shall provide a 3 -car garage with minimum interior dimensions of 27'0" wide and 20'0" deep The maximum driveway slope permitted is twenty percent (20%) 15 Prior to the issuance of building permits by the Building and Safety Division, the applicant shall submit a landscape and irrigation plan for the review and approval of the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement. Said landscape and irrigation plan shall incorporate water -conserving features and shall utilize drought - tolerant and native plant species The plan shall also be consistent with the provisions of the Landscape Covenant and Agreement for Tract No. 46422, to wit a. Not less than five trees, at least two of which shall be 15 -gallon trees, two shall be 24 -inch -box trees and one shall be a 36 -inch -box tree b Not less than twenty-five shrubs, fifteen of which shall be 1 -gallon size and ten which shall be 5 -gallon size c All slopes shall be planted with drought -tolerant, erosion -controlling and low - maintenance groundcover. d All non -paved level areas shall be planted with groundcover e A complete irrigation system with timers shall be installed. The installation of all landscape materials shall be completed within ninety (90) days after building permit final inspection or issuance of a certificate of occupancy The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining all landscaping in a manner that does not significantly impair protected views from another property, as defined in Section 17 02 040 of the Development Code. 16 The applicant shall ensure that at least fifty percent (50%) of the 20 -foot front -yard setback area is maintained as landscaped area 17. 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. P C. Resolution No 98-23 Page 8 of 9 18 The hours of grading and/or construction shall be limited to 7 00 AM to 7 00 PM, Monday through Saturday No construction shall be permitted on Sundays or on legal holidays 19 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\WPWIN60XPROJECTS\HV827\APPEAL\HV827 RES P.C. Resolution No 98-23 Page 9 of 9