PC RES 1998-037P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 98-37
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 428
REVISION 'A' TO REDUCE THE HILLSIDE REAR YARD SETBACK
FROM TEN (10'0") FEET TO FOUR (4'0") FEET.
WHEREAS, on November 25, 1997 the Planning Commission adopted P C
Resolution No 97-70 and 97-71, approving a reduction of the rear yard hillside setback
from 160" to 10'0" and a total of 90 cubic yards of grading for the proposed retaining walls
WHEREAS, on August 17, 1998, the applicants, Tom Knsty and Lynn Comer
submitted revisions to the applications for Variance No. 428 Revision 'A' and Grading
Permit No. 1971 Revision'A' to reduce the hillside rear yard setback from ten (10'0") feet
(original approval) to four (40") feet, and reduce the total amount of cubic yards of grading
from 90 cubic yards to 75 cubic yards due to the relocation and reduction in size of the
proposed retaining wall
WHEREAS, on September 29, 1998 the application package was deemed
complete, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of California Environmental Quality Act,
Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq ("CEQA"), the State's CEQA Guidelines,
California Code 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 Variance No 428 Revision 'A' and Grading
Permit No 1971 Revision 'A' would have a significant effect on the environment and,
therefore the proposed project has been found to be categorically exempt (Class 1,
Section 15301 (e)(1)), and,
WHEREAS, after the notice issued pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho
Palos Verdes Development Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing on October 27, 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: That due to the existing hillside condition, and the existing non-
conforming setback to the existing structure, that there are exceptional and extraordinary
circumstances applicable to the property which do not apply generally to other property
in the same zoning district
Section
Section 2: That this specific variance is necessary since it allows the
preservation and enjoyment of the applicant's right to maintain a residential structure
adjacent to the toe of slope just like other properties that are presently developed along
the same street.
Section 3: That the granting of a variance will not be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the area in which the property
is located because the property does not currently meet the minimum rear yard setback
and the applicant will still provide a wall that will comply with the City's building code
requirements and will protect the residence in the event of the slope failure
Section 4: That the granting of such a variance will not be contrary to the
objectives of the General Plan or the policies and requirements of the Coastal Specific
Plans as the project is consistent with the following housing policies as indicated on page
78 of the General Plan, to "(require) suitable and adequate landscaping, open space and
other design amenities to meet community standards for environmental quality" for single-
family residences, and to "(encourage) improvement of all existing residential
neighborhoods so as to maintain optimum local standards of housing quality and design "
The proposed project is also consistent with the underlying Residential 2-4 DU/acre land
use designation in that the proposed reduction in setback will reduce the amounts of
grading to an extreme slope, which is consistent with General Plan policies which require
that disturbance to extreme slope be minimized The site is also not located within the
Coastal Specific Plan area.
Section 5: Staff believes that since the applicant is proposing to reduce the
amount of grading from 90 cubic yards to 75 cubic yards the impacts to the slope as a
result of the modified project will be less than the original proposal As such, Staff believes
that all previous findings for Grading Permit No 1971 that were part of the November 25,
1997 Staff Report are still valid
Section 6: Any interested person aggrieved of this decision or by any portion of
this decision may appeal to the City Council Pursuant to Section 17 56 070 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 October 27, 1998,
the date of the Planning Commission final action
Section 7: For the foregoing reasons and based on information and findings in
the Staff Report, Minutes and other records of proceeding, the Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby approved Variance No 428 Revision 'A' and
Grading Permit No 1971 Revision 'A' thereby approving a reduction of the hillside rear
yard setback from 10'0" to 40" and reduce the total amount of cubic yards of grading from
90 cubic yards to 75 cubic yards due to the relocation of the proposed retaining wall
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 98-37
Page 2 of 3
1
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 27th day of October, 1998, by the
following vote:
AYES: Clark, Cartwright, Lyon_, Paris,- S-l'ayden_ — -
NOES: Alberio
ABSENTATION:
ABSENT:
J el jas, AICP
D ec r of Planning, uilding
an ode Enforcement; and,
Secretary to the Planning Commission
Lawrence E Clark
Chairman
PC Resolution No 98-37
Page 3of3