PC RES 2000-023A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING HEIGHT VARIATION NO. 896,
GRADING PERMIT NO. 2126, AND VARIANCE NO. 455 FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A 2,228 SQUARE FOOT TWO-STORY ADDITION TO
AN EXISTING ONE-STORY RESIDENCE AND A NEW 496 SQUARE
FOOT DETACHED GARAGE, ON AN EXTREME SLOPE, AT A HEIGHT
OF 24.58 -FEET AS MEASURED FROM THE HIGHEST (PRE -
CONSTRUCTION) PAD ELEVATION AND AN OVERALL HEIGHT OF 25 -
FEET; A TOTAL OF 67 CUBIC YARDS OF GRADING; AND AN EXISTING
DRIVEWAY WITH AN AVERAGE SLOPE OF TWENTY PERCENT AND A
PROPOSED LENGTH OF 52 -FEET WITHOUT A TWENTY-FIVE FOOT
TURNING RADIUS BETWEEN THE GARAGE AND THE STREET OF
ACCESS. SAID PROPOSAL AND APPLICATIONS ARE APPROVED FOR
A PARCEL LOCATED AT 29131 HIGHMORE AVENUE.
WHEREAS, on June 14, 1999, Emil Sunjara, representing property owner Roko and
Arlene Alaga, submitted Variance No 455 and Grading Permit No 2126, requesting
approval for the construction of a two-story addition and attached garage, measuring 4,059
square feet, for a total structure size of 4,884 square feet, with 67 cubic yards of grading,
to an existing residence located at 29131 Highmore Avenue; and,
WHEREAS, on July 8, 1999, the applications were deemed incomplete pending the
submittal of additional information and addressing Staff concerns regarding structure size,
height, construction on an extreme slope and noncompliance with the driveway turning
radius requirement, and,
WHEREAS, on July 21, 1999, a field investigation found that the existing one -car
garage had been demolished without the benefit of permits, for which the necessary
permits were obtained by the applicant on September 9, 1999, and,
WHEREAS, on August 4, 1999, a modified proposal was submitted, which included
the reduction in the height of the structure to a height of 24.58 -feet as measured from the
highest (pre -construction) pad elevation covered by the structure and an overall height of
26 -feet; and,
WHEREAS, on August 10, 1999, the applications were deemed incomplete pending
the submittal of a height variation application; and,
WHEREAS, on October 21, 1999, the applications were augmented with the
submittal of Height Variation No. 896 for the proposed two-story addition, at a height of
24 58 -feet as measured from the highest (pre -construction) pad elevation covered by the
structure and an overall height of 26 -feet; and,
9, 0
WHEREAS, on November 19, 1999, the applications were deemed incomplete
pending the submittal of revised variance and grading applications, and the construction
of the temporary silhouette, and,
WHEREAS, on December 1, 1999, a revised proposal was submitted that included
a reduction in the size of the addition, specifically, a 2,228 square foot two-story addition
and a 496 square foot detached garage, and,
WHEREAS, upon submittal of the necessary information, updated applications, and
verification of the temporary frame silhouette, Staff deemed the applications generally
complete for processing on June 6, 2000, 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 896, Grading Permit No
2126 and Variance No 455 would have a significant effect on the environment and,
therefore, the proposed project has been found to be categorically exempt under Class 1
(Section 15301) since the project involves an addition to an existing 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 July 25, 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 25 8% of
the property owners within 500 feet of the subject property, and 75% of the owners within
100 feet of the subject property who have reviewed the plans
Section 2: The proposed addition does not significantly impair a view from public
property that has been identified in the City's General Plan or Coastal Specific Plan as City -
designated viewing areas since there are no City -designated public viewing areas located
in this subdivision, 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 since the
property is located within an area with varying pad elevations Further, the property is not
located along the coastal bluffs
P C Resolution No 2000-23
Page 2
-0 0
Section 4: The proposed two-story addition, when considered exclusive of foliage,
does not significantly impair a view from the viewing area of another parcel. The adjacent
properties to the north and south sides do not overlook the subject property and do not
have views in the direction of the subject property Further, the adjacent property to the
rear is located 30 -feet higher than the subject property, which is sufficiently higher that the
two-story addition will not project into any portion of the view.
Section 5: There is no significant cumulative view impairment caused by granting
the application since no properties contain protected views over the subject property; while
the up slope property to the rear is sufficiently higher than the building pads along
Highmore, where other two-story structures will not project into the views of the harbor and
the Los Angeles basin
Section 6: The design of the proposed two-story addition will be situated in a
manner that minimizes view impairment since the addition will not project into any views.
Section 7: The proposed structure complies with all other Code requirements for
setbacks, lot coverage, and parking, and the variance findings can be made in a positive
manner to allow for the construction of the two-story addition over the extreme slope, and
without the required driveway turning radius.
Section 8: The proposed two-story addition will be compatible with the immediate
neighborhood character since the majority of the floor space will be located at the rear of
the structure, forty-five feet from the front property line, which will not be readily visible from
the street Further, the pad elevation of the residence is 15 -feet higher than the street
elevation and the addition will be situated behind the existing structure, thereby reducing
a massive appearance in close proximity to the public right-of-way. Thus, the front
elevation of the structure will continue to be consistent with the immediate neighborhood
since the existing one-story residence will remain as the main focal point from the street;
and the additional square footage will be concentrated at the rear of the structure, which
is not readily visible from the street.
Section 9: The proposed project will not infringe upon the privacy of abutting
residences since the proposed two-story addition will contain a balcony at the northeast
corner (front) of the structure that will overlook onto the roof and front yard area of the
adjacent property to the north Further, the new garage will obstruct direct observation
from the second -story window on the south elevation onto the pool and backyard area of
the adjacent property to the south.
Section 10: The grading does not exceed that which is necessary for the permitted
primary use of the lot, which is the maintenance of, and the improvement and additions to,
a single-family residential structure The grading will facilitate the construction of an
P C Resolution No 2000-23
Page 3
addition to the existing residence, and the construction of a new two -car garage, which are
permitted primary uses of the lot.
Section 11: The grading and related construction does not significantly affect the
views from neighboring properties The grading will not raise the pad elevation of the
subject property, and the related construction will not result in significant view impairment
as concluded in the related height variation application.
Section 12: The nature of the grading minimizes disturbance to the natural
contours and finished contours are reasonably natural as evidenced by the quantity of
grading. Further, the addition will cantilever over the transitional slope, thereby minimizing
the amount of cut into the slope Lastly, the rear portion of the subject property where the
addition is proposed and where the transitional slope is located, has not been and will
continue to not be readily visible from the street or from other residences.
Section 13: The grading takes into account the preservation of natural topographic
features since the grading is being conducted at the rear of the property, which is not
readily visible from the street or from other residences
Section 14: The grading conforms to the grading standards of the Development
Code since the subject property is within the Eastview area of the City and a legally
subdivided lot existing as of January 5, 1983, for which grading on slopes equal to or
greater than 35% is allowed Further, the existing 7 -foot -high retaining wall along the
driveway will be removed and realigned at the same height to allow for a 2 -foot wider
driveway, resulting in a driveway that complies with the minimum 10 -wide dimension
required by the Development Code
Section 15: The project is subject to exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
or conditions which do not apply generally to other properties in the RS -4 zoning. The
topographical conditions of the subject property include a small pad area upon which the
existing structure is located. Thus, there is limited pad area at the rear of the existing
structure that results in a necessity to construct over the extreme slope. The location of the
new garage is at an area that ensures compliance with the side yard setback requirement;
contains the minimum interior dimensions for a two -car garage; brings the residence into
compliance by providing a two -car garage, and allows the entry stairs from the driveway
to the structure to remain Lastly, the trapezoidal shape of the parcel, with the narrower
portion being along the street, and the topography of the subject property does not allow
for sufficient area to accommodate a 25 -foot turning radius between the garage and the
street of access; and,
Section 16: The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right since the parcel has limited pad area to accommodate an
addition; thus, construction over the extreme slope is the only feasible area to
accommodate such an addition Further, the new two -car garage will upgrade the property
P C Resolution No 2000-23
Page 4
0 0
to be in compliance with the minimum parking requirement of the Development Code
Lastly, the shape of the parcel (being narrower along the street) prevents the property from
installing and maintaining a 25 -foot turning radius between the garage and the street of
access
Section 17. The requested variance will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare because the two-story addition will be constructed in a manner that the addition will
largely cantilever over the transitional slope and grading into the slope will be minimal The
new garage will bring the property into compliance with the parking requirement of the
Development Code, and thereby allowing for enclosed parking spaces Further, the
construction will comply with the building and safety code requirements, which ensure safe
and proper construction Lastly, the subject property is near the end of the Highmore
Avenue cul-de-sac, which mitigates vehicular cross -traffic and does not present a threat
to the public welfare from a vehicle backing out onto the street from the driveway Thus,
the absence of a 25 -foot turning radius is not materially detrimental to the public welfare
Section 18: The requested variance will not be contrary to the goals and objectives
of the General Plan to "assist in the maintenance and improvement of all existing residential
neighborhoods so as to maintain optimum local standards of housing quality and design"
The addition will upgrade and enlarge the existing 825 square foot residence, and will
accommodate a two -car garage, thereby complying with the parking requirements
Section 19: Any interested person may appeal this decision or any portion of this
decision to the City Council Pursuant to Section 17 80 070 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 the date of the Planning
Commission's final action
Section 20 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 896,
Grading Permit No 2126, and Variance No 455, thereby approving a 2,724 square foot
two-story addition and a detached two -car garage addition to the existing one-story, single-
family residence, for property located at 29131 Highmore Avenue, 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 2000-23
Page 5
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 25th day of July 2000, by the following vote
AYES Cartwright, Long, Lyon, Paulson, Vannorsdall
NOES None
ABSTENTIONS None
ABSENT Clark, Mueller
"'A� C\'��
J00 Roj s, AICP
Dir ctor f PlanningBuil ing and
Code nforcement; an ,Secretary
to the Planning Commission
Frank Lyon
Planning Commission Chairman
P C Resolution No 2000-23
Page 6
EXHIBIT 'A'
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
HEIGHT VARIATION NO. 896,
GRADING PERMIT NO. 2126,
VARIANCE NO. 455
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 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
Hei-ght Variation
3. The setbacks illustrated on the approved plans shall be maintained for the second story
addition, but in no way shall be less than the following
Front yard 20'-0" minimum (proposed- 45 -feet)
Side yard. 5'-0" minimum (proposed, 7 -feet north side)
Rear yard- 15'-0" minimum (proposed: 50 -feet)
4. The maximum height of the structure shall not exceed 24 78 -feet, as measured from the
highest existing pad elevation located at the northwest corner of the existing one-story
residential structure, to top of ridge. The maximum overall height of the structure shall
not exceed 26 -feet as measured from the lowest pad elevation located at the southeast
(outside front) corner of the existing one-story residential structure, to top of ridge.
RIDGE HEIGHT CERTIFICATION REQUIRED.
5. Approval is for a 2,228 square foot two-story addition to the existing residence.
Specifically, a 664 square foot expansion at the rear of the existing structure, and
a1,564 square foot second story located over the new portion of the first story and
extending towards the rear of the lot and cantilevering over the transitional extreme
slope. Further, a 496 square foot detached two -car garage is also approved.
Grading Permit:
6. A total of sixty-seven cubic yards of grading is approved with this permit, which includes
a portion (approximately 35 cubic yards with a 7 54 -foot cut) that has already been
excavated into the transitional slope behind the former garage to accommodate the new
P.C. Resolution No. 2000-23
Exhibit "A" — Conditions of Approval
two -car garage, and excavated at the transitional extreme slope behind the existing
residential structure
General
7. The maximum overall height of the detached two -car garage is limited to 16 -feet
8. The garage shalt maintain the minimum setbacks as follows
• Front yard 20'-0" minimum (proposed: 52 -feet)
• Side yard: 5'-0" minimum (proposed. 5 -feet south side)
• Rear yard: 15'-0" minimum (proposed. 55 -feet)
9 Due to the RS -4 zoning of the subject property, a maximum of fifty (50%) percent lot
coverage is permitted (proposed: 35%)
10. In the event that a Planning requirement and a Building & Safety requirement are in
conflict with one another, the stricter standard shall apply
11 Geotechnical reports and the applicable review fees shall be submitted to the Building
and Safety Division prior to, or upon submittal of plans into, "plan check".
12. 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
13. 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
14. The maximum eave projection allowed into the required setback areas shall not exceed
6 -inches for each 1 -foot of required setback.
15. 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.
P.C. Resolution No. 2000-23
Exhibit "A" - Conditions of Approval
HV No. 896, GR No. 2126, & VAR No. 455
Page 2