Loading...
PC RES 1999-018A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING, WITH CONDITIONS, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 23 REVISION `EEE', VARIANCE NO. 442 AND GRADING PERMIT NO. 2112, TO ALLOW THE MODIFICATION OF THE ORIGINAL BUILDING FOOTPRINT WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 756 SQUARE FOOT ADDITION, CONSISTING OF 676 SQUARE FEET ON THE LOWER FLOOR AND 80 SQUARE FEET ON THE UPPER FLOOR, TO AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH 58 CUBIC YARDS OF ASSOCIATED GRADING, AT 2909 VISTA DEL MAR. WHEREAS, on July 12, 1977, the Planning Commission approved Conditional Use Permit No 23 establishing a residential planned development {RPD} comprising of Tracts 32547, 32991 and 34834, known as Seacliff Hills, with pre -approved building footprints; and, WHEREAS, on September 9, 1986, the Planning Commission adopted the Seacliff Hills Development Guidelines, later amended on August 23, 1989, establishing design standards for the aforementioned tracts that allow greater sensitivity and design flexibility with the construction of custom homes that reflect the unique location and character of the tracts; and, WHEREAS, on December 16, 1998, a request to modify the original building footprint, with the construction of a 756 square foot addition to a 5,520 square foot single-family residence, was submitted to the Planning Department under the applications of Conditional Use Permit No. 23 Revision 'EEE' and Variance No 442, and, WHEREAS, on April 22, 1999 an additional request was submitted to the Planning Department for 58 cubic yards of associated grading under Grading Permit No 2112; and, WHEREAS, on May 4, 1999 the subject applications were deemed complete by Staff, and, WHEREAS, on May 5, 1999 the required public notice was mailed out to property owners within a 500' foot radius of the subject property informing them of the proposed project and the scheduled public hearing Furthermore, a notice was published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News on May 8, 1999, and, P C Resolution No 99-18 Page 1 of 5 WHEREAS, pursuant to the provision of the California Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 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 Conditional Use Permit No. 23 Revision "EEE', Variance No. 442, and Grading Permit No 2112 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 notices issued pursuant to the requirements of Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on May 25, 1999, at which 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: The proposed 756 square foot addition complies with the development standards for the Seacliff Hills Tract as it relates to setbacks in that the proposed project will more than exceed the minimum requirements for the front, rear and side yard setbacks Section 2: The maximum height limit for up-sloping properties within Seacliff HMIs shall not exceed 16', as measured from the highest elevation where the structure meets grade to the top of the roof ridgeline and 30' from the lowest elevation, where the structure meets grade, to the top of the roof ridgeline As proposed, the roof height increase over the existing family room will not exceed 27' in height from the lowest elevation benchmark nor will it exceed the existing roof ridgeline. Section 3: The proposed addition will result in an increase in the lot coverage to a degree that exceeds the Seacliff Hills Development Guidelines. However, It has been determined that the existing unique condition of the property is an appropriate circumstance to exceed the open space guidelines in that the extensive area of the driveway is a significant portion of the lot coverage because of the depth of the lot and the rear location of the existing garage Section 4: The proposed roof height increase is pitched and follows the contours of the natural terrain and that no further improvements to the landscaping of the subject property is required as the existing improvements comply with the Seacliff Hills Development Guidelines. P.0 Resolution No. 99-18 Page 2 of 5 Section 5: There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other property in the same zoning district in that the existing residence maintains a balcony off of the upper floor and the only area to expand the bedroom on the lower floor is below the existing balcony, which will convert the balcony into a roof deck merely by definition Therefore, since the addition below the balcony is the cause of the roof deck classification and that the roof deck is not considered new construction, no adverse impacts will be created by the proposed project Section 6: The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant, which is a right possessed by other property owners under like conditions in the same zoning district in that the subject property is similar in size, shape and topography to that of surrounding properties within Seacliff Hills and that the lower level addition below an existing balcony will create a roof deck merely by definition Many other properties within the City and the Seacliff Hills Tracts have existing roof decks and that the development guidelines for the Seacliff Hills Tract encourages the use of decks and balconies as a means of alleviating flat facades. Furthermore, the addition to the lower level generally complies with the development requirements stated in the Development Code and the Seacliff Hills Development Guidelines Section 7: The granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public's welfare or injurious to property and improvements in the area in which the property is located in that the roof deck is not considered new construction, but rather a result of a lower level addition below an existing balcony Furthermore, the roof deck will not impair any views from surrounding properties nor drastically alter the character of the existing neighborhood in that it will remain in the same location. Section 8: The variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the General Plan or the policies and requirements of the Coastal Specific Plan in that the proposed improvements comply with the requirements of the Development Code and the Seacliff Hills Development Guidelines and are improvements that are routinely permitted by the City for RS -1 Zoning District Furthermore, the subject property is not located within the City's Coastal Specific Plan Section 9: The grading does not exceed that which is necessary for the permitted primary use of the lot in that the subject property is located within a RS -1 Zoning District and that the proposed grading is to accommodate an addition to an existing single-family residence that complies with the City's development guidelines Section 10: The grading does not significantly adversely affect the visual relationship nor the views from neighboring properties in that the proposed 58 •C ResolutionNo. 99-18 Page of cubic yards of earth excavation will be entirely below the existing building footprint and will not impact any outside contours. Section 11: The nature of grading minimizes disturbance to the natural contours, and finished contours are reasonably natural, in that the proposed grading will be on a slope that was previously graded to accommodate the existing residence and that the proposed grading will be entirely under the building footprint that will not alter the natural contours of the property Section 12: The grading takes into account the preservation of natural topographic features and appearances by means of land sculpturing so as to blend man-made or manufactured slopes into the natural topography in that the proposed excavation will not disturb any natural topographic features since the grading will be entirely below the existing building footprint and will not be visible from surrounding properties Section 13: The proposed grading is not for a new single-family residence or the creation of a subdivision Section 14: The grading would not cause excessive and unnecessary disturbance of natural landscape or wildlife habitat through removal of vegetation in that the grading requested is entirely under the building footprint which does not maintain any vegetation or wildlife habitat Furthermore, any wildlife or vegetation that may have existed on the subject property was disturbed at the time the structure was constructed. Section 1S: The subject grading will be located below the budding footprint on a slope that is approximately 5 1 The depth of the cut, as proposed, will exceed the permitted height limit of five (5) feet by one (1) foot Section 16. The Planning Commission finds that the proposed grading project complies with the required findings stated in the Development Code under Section 17 76 040 E 1 through Section 17 76 040 E 8, as discussed in Sections 9 through 14, and that approval of the proposed project will not constitute a special privilege in that the grading is to allow the expansion of a room addition to an existing single-family residence. Furthermore, the subject grading will not be detrimental to the public's safety in that the approvals will be obtained from the City's Geotechnical Consultant and the Division of Building and Safety Section 17: A Notice of Decision will be given to the applicant, all property owners adjacent to the subject property and any interested party informing them of the Planning Commission's decision Section 18: Any interested party may appeal this decision or any portion of this decision to the City Council Pursuant to Section 17 02 040 C 1 j of the Resolution io ft * 99-18 Page 4 of 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 the date of the Planning Commission's final action Section 19: 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 approves Conditional Use Permit No 23 Revision `EEE', Variance No 442 and Grading Permit No 2112, thereby approving a modification to the original building footprint to allow the construction of a 756 square foot addition and 58 cubic yards of associated grading, subject to the conditions of approval in Exhibit "A" PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 25th day of May, 1999, by the following vote: AYES: Chairman Cartwright, and Commissioners Alberio, Paris and Slayden NOES: None ABSENTATION: None ABSENT: Vice -Chairman Lyon, Commissioners ClaQanannor a Jon S Cartwright Chairman Joel R 'as, AICP irectoj of Plannin , uilding an ode Enforcement; and, Secretary to the Planning Commission P C Resolution No 99-18 Page 5 of 5 0 EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 23 REVISION 'EEE', VARIANCE NO. 442, AND GRADING PERMIT NO. 2112 GENERAL 1 Prior to the submittal of plans into Building and Safety plan check, the applicant and/or 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 approval Failure to provide said written statement within ninety (90) days following the date of this approval shall render this approval null and void 2 The approval shall become null and void after 180 days from the date of approval unless the approved plans are submitted to the Building and Safety Division to initiate the "plan check" review process. 3. The proposed project shall be constructed in substantial compliance with the plans dated and received by the Planning Department on April 9, 1999 by architect Russell E. Barto, A.I.A. 4 The Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement is authorized to make minor modifications to the approved plans or any of the conditions if such modifications achieve substantially the same results as would strict compliance with said plans and conditions. 5 In the event that a Planning requirement and a Building & Safety requirement are in conflict with one another, the stricter standard shall apply. 6 The hours of construction shall be limited to 7 00 am to 7.00 p m , Monday through Saturday. No construction shall be permitted on Sundays or on legal holidays. 7 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 is not limited to the accumulation of debris, garbage, lumber, scrap metal, concrete, asphalt, piles of earth, salvage materials, abandoned or discarded furniture, CONDITIONS OF APPAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 23 REVISION 'EEE' VARIANCE NO. 442 GRADING PERMIT NO. 2112 2909 VISTA DEL MAR APRIL 25, 1999 PAGE 2 appliances or other household fixtures CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REVISION 8 The proposed addition shall modify the original footprint approved under Conditional Use Permit No 23 to allow a 756 square foot addition, consisting of 80 square feet on the upper floor and 676 square feet on the lower level, to an existing single-family residence, as shown on the plans 9 The open space requirement for the subject property located in the RS -1 zoning district and within the Seacliff Hills Tract shall be no less than seventy (70) percent. The proposed open space is 70% 10 The upper floor footprint shall be at least twenty (20) percent less the lower level building footprint. Proposed forty-three (43) percent. 11 The following minimum setbacks shall be maintained for the proposed addition. Front Yard 20'-0" minimum (proposed 59') West Side Yard 10'-0" minimum (proposed 21') East Side Yard 10'-0" minimum (proposed 20') Total Side Yards- 25'-0" minimum (proposed 41') Rear Yard 20'-0" minimum (proposed 61') 12 The maximum structure size for the subject property shall not exceed 11,000 square feet (based on the Maximum Structure Size for the RS -1 zoning district) The proposed total structure size is 5,881 square feet (garage included) 13 The proposed roof height increase over the existing family room shall not exceed the existing roof ridge line and shall be 27' in height, as measured from the lowest elevation (887) of the pre -construction building pad for up- sloping lots VARIANCE 14 The proposed roof deck shall not exceed 400 square feet, as shown on the plans submitted to the Planning Department on April 9, 1999 CONDITIONS OF APR AL 1 'w 1. �, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 23 REVISION `EEE' VARIANCE NO. 442 GRADING PERMIT NO. 2112 2909 VISTA DEL MAR APRIL 25, 1999 PAGE 3 15 The proposed grading shall not exceed 58 cubic yards of earth excavation and shall be exclusively under the existing building footprint. 16 No grading shall be permitted outside the building footprint. 17 The maximum depth of cut shall not exceed 6' in height