PC RES 2000-010P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2000-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING HEIGHT
VARIATION NO. 897 AND GRADING PERMIT NO. 2170 FOR
A NEW TWO-STORY, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH
ATTACHED GARAGE MEASURING 6,252 SQUARE FEET,
MEASURING 23' HIGH AS MEASURED FROM THE
HIGHEST PRE -CONSTRUCTION (EXISTING) GRADE TO BE
COVERED BY THE STRUCTURE TO RIDGE, AND AN
OVERALL HEIGHT OF 26 -FEET, AND 1,714 CUBIC YARDS
OF GRADING, ON A VACANT PARCEL LOCATED ON LE
BLANC PLACE (LOT 75, TRACT 25160).
WHEREAS, on October 22, 1999, the applicant, Michael Todd, submitted Height
Variation No. 897, requesting approval for the construction of a new two-story residential
structure measuring 6,252 square feet, and 25 -feet high as measured from the highest pre -
construction grade covered by the structure with an overall height of 26 -feet for a vacant
parcel located on Le Blanc Place, described as Lot 75, of Tract 25160; and,
WHEREAS, on November 19, 2000, the application was deemed incomplete
pending the submittal of additional information; and,
WHEREAS, on December 23, 1999, Grading Permit No 2170 was submitted for the
1,777 cubic yards of grading for remediation and lowering the pad by one -foot to
accommodate the proposed structure; and,
WHEREAS, on January 21, 2000, the applications were deemed incomplete,
pending the construction of the temporary silhouette; and,
WHEREAS, upon verification of the temporary frame silhouette, Staff deemed the
applications generally complete for processing on February 11, 2000; and,
WHEREAS, on March 15, 2000, the applicant proposed to lower the building pad
by two additional feet to address the issue of the apparent height of the structure, thereby
lowering the pad elevation by 3 -feet, and establishing the height of the structure as 23 -feet
as measured from existing (preconstruction) grade and an overall height of 26 -feet, and
modifying the grading quantities to include 1,714 cubic yards; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Public Resources Code Sections 21000 of 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. 897 and Grading Permit no.
2170 would have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, the proposed
project has been found to be categorically exempt under Class 3 (Section 15303) since the
project involves the construction of a new single-family residential structure; 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 28, 2000, 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 Neighborhood Consultation
process established by the City by obtaining acknowledgement signatures from 90% of the
property owners within 100 -feet of the subject property and 36% of the property owners
within 500 -feet of the subject property, who have reviewed the plans.
Section 2: The proposed two-story single-family residence 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 such areas
that overlook the subject property.
Section 3: The property is not located on a ridge and promontory as there are
other parcels with varying pad elevations, and properties with differing characteristics, such
as pad lots and downward sloping lots
Section 4: The proposed two-story structure, when considered exclusive of
foliage, will not significantly impair a view from the viewing area of another parcel, due
primarily to the orientation of the lots within the neighborhood. The views from nearby lots
are not directed towards the subject parcel, while the property across the street does not
have a protected view since the view is through the 16720' building envelope.
Section 5: There is no significant cumulative view impairment caused by granting
the application since the view analysis of individual lots surrounding the project site
determined that the views from the adjacent properties are not in the direction of the
subject parcel and no protected views exist from the properties across the street
Section 6: Since the view analysis determined that no protected views exist from
the properties across the street, the issue as to whether the structure is designed and
situated in a manner to minimize view impacts is not applicable to this particular project
Section 7: The proposed structure complies with all other Code requirements in
that all the development standards of the RS -2 district are met and the minimum setback
requirements are exceeded.
PC Resolution No 2000-10
Page 2
Section 8: The proposed structure is compatible with the immediate
neighborhood character, and is consistent with the mix of one-story, two-story, and split-
level two-story homes in the neighborhood since there are other such residences; further,
the architectural style and roofing material will be consistent with other homes in the
neighborhood Furthermore, there are other residences in the immediate neighborhood
where the roof ridgeline elevation will be higher than the proposed residence, while the
facades will be articulated so that there are no straight planes, and the second story is
sufficiently stepped back from the first story fagade
Section 9: The proposed structure does not create an unreasonable infringement
on the privacy of the occupants of abutting residences because the adjacent property to
the north is oriented in a northwesterly direction. Further, the proposed structure will not
contain second story floor area on the southerly section of the structure, and the second
story balcony will be directed in a westerly direction such that direct observation upon the
adjacent property to the south does not result. Furthermore, the front yard areas of the
properties on Matisse Drive are not protected since these areas are visible from the street
and the new residence will not produce additional visibility of these areas that are above
and beyond the visibility from existing structures
Section 10: The proposed grading does not exceed that which is necessary for the
permitted primary use of the lot since the grading is being conducted to recompact the site
and lower the building pad to accommodate the construction of a single-family residence,
which is the primary use of the lot
Section 11: The grading will not significantly affect the visual relationships with, nor
the views from, neighboring properties since the properties in the immediate neighborhood
do not contain protected views over or in the direction of the subject property
Section 12: The nature of the grading minimizes disturbance to the natural
contours and finished contours are reasonable natural since the grading will be limited to
the level area of the property in order to recompact and lower the pad area.
Section 13: The construction of the new single-family residence, which is related
to the grading, is compatible with the immediate neighborhood character as evidenced by
the height variation finding that concluded that the new residence is compatible with the
immediate neighborhood.
Section 14: The grading complies with the applicable Development Code grading
standards, since the 5 -foot depth of cut is for over excavation and recompaction of the site
due to the sods conditions, and the grading will not be conducted on, nor create slopes that
are greater than 35%.
Section 15: Any interested person may appeal this decision or any portion of this
decision to the City Council Pursuant to Section 17.02.040.0 1.j of the Rancho Palos
P C. Resolution No. 2000-10
Page 3
0 0
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 16: 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 Height Variation No. 897
and Grading Permit No. 2170 for the construction of a new two-story residential structure
measuring 6,252 square feet, 23 -feet high as measured from the highest existing
(preconstruction) grade, up to an overall height of 26 -feet, with 1,714 cubic yards of
grading, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit "A".
AYES: Alberio, Cartwright, Clark, Lyon, Slayden, Vannorsdall
NOES: Paris
ABSTENTIONS: None
ABSENT: None
Joel Rpias, AICP
[Yirectfir of Planning, ildi ng and
6Q.da(Enforcement; and, Secretary
to the Planning Commission
- - " __.--...17.._
Planning Commission Chairman
P.C. Resolution No. 2000-10
Page4
EXHIBIT W
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
HEIGHT VARIATION NO. 897
GRADING PERMIT NO. 2170
General -
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 one year from the date of Planning
Commission approval, unless the approved plans are submitted to the Building and
Safety Division to initiate the "plan check" review process.
3. The structure shall maintain the setbacks illustrated on the plans, but in no way shall
be less than the following:
• Front yard- 20'-0" minimum (proposed: 20')
• Side yard: 5'-0" minimum (proposed- 67' south side / 13'2' north side)
• Rear yard. 15'-0" minimum (proposed- 52' minimum)
Height Vanation
4 The maximum height of the structure shall not exceed 23 -feet, or a ridge elevation
of 1091.7' as measured from the grade elevation 1068.7', which is the highest
existing (preconstruction) grade to be covered by the structure. The highest existing
grade is located at the northern area of the property at the location of the new
interior wall that will separate the family room and the one -car garage. Further, the
maximum height of the structure shall not exceed an overall height of 26 -feet, as
measured from a finished building pad elevation of 1065.7'. RIDGE HEIGHT
CERTIFICATION REQUIRED.
5 The proposed structure size of the residence approved with this permit is 6,252
square feet, which includes the attached 748 square foot three -car garage.
Specifically, 5,504 square feet of living area, which includes a 3,051 square foot first
story and a 2,453 square foot second story.
Exhibit "A"
P.G. Resolution No. 2000 -10
Page 1
6 At a minimum, the residence shall maintain a 3 -car garage, with each space
independently accessible and each measuring a minimum of 9 -feet wide by 20 -feet
deep, and maintain a minimum vertical clearance of 7 -feet.
7 Any future additions, conversions and modifications shall require separate Planning
Department review and approval.
8 Any fencing, walls or hedges shall require separate Planning Department review and
approval, prior to installation.
Grading:
9 The maximum amount of overall earth movement (grading) approved with this permit
is limited to 1,714 cubic yards, which includes over -excavation, removal and
recompaction.
10. The maximum depth of cut for the over -excavation and removal is limited to 5 -feet.
11. The maximum depth of recompacted fill is limited to 2 -feet
12. The pad area shall be reduced by 3 -feet, and shall maintain a finished pad elevation
of 1065.7'. FINISHED PAD ELEVATION CERTIFICATION IS REQUIRED PRIOR
TO CONSTRUCTION OF THE RESIDENCE
13. All earth material excavated to lower the pad shall be exported in a manner
consistent'with the standards established by the Building and Safety Division.
Miscellaneous,
14 Due to the RS -2 zoning of the subject property, a maximum lot coverage of 40% is
permitted (proposed: 33.2%), which includes the building footprint, driveways and
parking areas, covered patios and trellises, decks measuring 30 -inches or greater,
and courtyard areas
15. Within the required 20 -foot front yard setback area, a maximum of fifty (50%)
percent lot coverage is allowed, which includes driveways, paved walkways and
parking areas.
16. Foliage, acceptable to Staff, shall be planted along the top of slope to mitigate the
appearance of the structure from Matisse Drive.
17. In the event that a Planning requirement and a Building & Safety requirement are
in conflict with one another, the stricter standard shall apply
Exhibit "A"
P.C. Resolution No. 2000 -10
Page 2
18. All work, construction, repairs, etc , in the public right-of-way shall require separate
Public Works approval.
19. The hours of construction shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m, Monday through
Saturday No construction shall be permitted on Sundays or on legal holidays.
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 is not limited to the accumulation of debris,
garbage, lumber, scrap metal, concrete, asphalt, piles of earth, salvage materials,
abandoned or discarded furniture, appliances or other household fixtures.
21. The maximum eave projection allowed into the required setback areas shall not
exceed 6 -inches for each 1 -foot of required setback.
22. The property shall be temporarily enclosed with a six (6'-0") foot high chain-link
fence during the length of construction of the residential structure
23. 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 shall achieve substantially the same results as would strict compliance
with said plans and conditions.
Exhibit "A"
P.C. Resolution No. 2000 -10
Page 3