PC RES 2002-032P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2002-32
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING WITH
CONDITIONS VARIANCE AND GRADING PERMIT (CASE NO.
ZON2001-00176), A REQUEST TO ALLOW TWO EXISTING
MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT UNITS AND RELATED DUCTING
ON THE ROOF TOP OF THE RESIDENCE TO REMAIN, AND A
REQUEST TO ALLOW A SERIES OF RETAINING WALLS AND
ASSOCIATED 201 CUBIC YARDS OF GRADING TO REMAIN AT
3340 PALOS VERDES DRIVE EAST.
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2000 the City received a complaint of an
alleged violation of the City's Municipal Code occurring on the subject property,
and a site inspection revealed two HVAC units and related ducting located on the
roof of the residence, and,
WHEREAS, on November 26, 2001, the subject application, Variance
Permit Case No ZON2001-00176 was submitted to the City to legalize the two
HVAC units and related ducting located on the roof of the existing residence;
and,
WHEREAS, on February 19, 2002, the City received another complaint of
an alleged violation of the City's Municipal Code occurring on the subject
property, and a site inspection revealed that a series of retaining walls and
concrete stairs were being constructed on the subject property without City
approval, and a Stop Work Order was issued, and,
WHEREAS, on February 22, 2002, Building Department Officials
conducted another site inspection which revealed that work continued on the
subject property, in violation of the first Stop Work Order, and a second Stop
Work Order was issued, and,
WHEREAS, on February 26, 2002, the applicant submitted an affidavit
stating that the second Stop Work Order was inappropriate since all work had
ceased on the 19th of February 2002; and
WHEREAS, on April 26, 2002, the subject application Grading Permit
Case No. ZON2001-00176 was submitted to the City to legalize the series of
retaining walls and the associated 201 cubic yards of grading, and to request
approval to construct a 387 square foot shed at a maximum height of 10'3"; and,
WHEREAS, on May 24, 2002, the subject applications were deemed
complete for processing, and,
P.0 Resolution No. 2002-32
VAR & GR (Case No. ZON2001-00176)
Page 1 of 5
WHEREAS, on June 6, 2002 a public notice was mailed to property
owners within a 500 foot radius of the subject property informing them of the
proposed project. Furthermore, a notice was published in the Palos Verdes
Peninsula News on June 8, 2002; and,
WHEREAS, at the applicant's request, on June 25, 2002, the Planning
Commission continued the public hearing to the July 9, 2002 Planning
Commission meeting, and,
WHEREAS, at the July 9, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, the
Planning Commission took testimony from the adjacent neighbors and continued
the item to the a date uncertain to allow the applicant to work with Staff and the
neighbors to address the concerns raised; and,
WHEREAS, on November 6, 2002, the applicant submitted a revised set
of plans, depicting the changes discussed with the neighbors and Staff, and,
WHEREAS, on November 7, 2002, the revised application was deemed
complete; and,
WHEREAS, on November 7, 2002 a public notice was mailed to property
owners within a 500 foot radius of the subject property informing them of the
proposed project Furthermore, a notice was published in the Palos Verdes
Peninsula News on November 9, 2002, and,
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 Variance and Grading
Permit (Case No ZON2001-00176) would have a significant effect on the
environment and, therefore the proposed project has been found to be
categorically exempt (Class 1, Section 15303(a)); 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 November 26, 2002, 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: That there are special circumstances or conditions
applicable to the property involved, or to the intended use of the property which
do not apply generally to other properties in the same zoning district, since 50%
PC Resolution No. 2002-32
VAR & GR (Case No. ZON2001-00176)
Page 2 of 5
of the subject property is an extreme slope and the majority of the building pad is
improved with the residence, the swimming pool, and driveway, and as such the
property has limited area to accommodate the mechanical equipment
Section 2: That there are special circumstances or conditions
applicable to the residence involved, which do not apply generally to other
properties in the same zoning district, since the residence contains an 8'-0"
interior ceiling height with a flat roof, and is built on caissons, and therefore the
required ducting for the heating system cannot be accommodated inside or
underneath the residence, and the only feasible location is on top of the roof
Section 3: That the Variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial right of the applicant, which right is possessed by
other property owners under like conditions in the same zoning district, because
a heating system is required by the Uniform Building Code, and the only feasible
location to locate the mechanical equipment and related ducting is on top of the
roof
Section 4: That approval of the Variance for the pyramid structures will
be materially detrimental to surrounding properties, because the proposed
pyramid structures are not compatible with the existing residence and
surrounding neighborhood character
Section 5: That approval of the Variance for the duct structure will not
cause materially detrimental effects on surrounding properties, since the ducts
have been modified to flat ducts within the view corridor of 3334 Palos Verdes
Drive East, and that the duct enclosures are designed in such a way that is
integrated to the existing residence and will obscure the ducts from the
surrounding properties
Section 6: That the Variance request for the pyramid structure is
contrary to the policy of the General Plan because it is a policy of the General
Plan to "make an effort through zoning to preserve the rural and open character
of the City" (General Plan Page 78 Policy 17), and the proposed pyramids do not
preserve the rural character of the City But as conditioned, a flat roof enclosure
will be more compatible with the existing residence, and the existing character of
the surrounding neighborhood, therefore, preserving the rural character
Section 7: That the revised grading does not exceed that which is
necessary for the permitted primary use of the lot since the walls required for the
additional parking and turn around area is not readily visible from the surrounding
properties, and that the additional parking area will serve as turn around area so
the cars do not have to back up the long narrow driveway onto the street of
access
P.C. Resolution No. 2002-32
VAR & GR {Case No. ZON2001-00176}
Page 3 of 5
Section 8: That the grading does significantly adversely affect the visual
relationship from neighboring properties since the grading and retaining walls
have been reduced in size and the eastern portion of the graded area has been
restored, and the railings have been modified from solid block railings to open
wrought iron railing. All of which integrates the proposed grading to the natural
contours of the canyons.
Section 9: That the grading minimizes disturbance to the natural
contours since by lowering the eastern walls to 64" high and 5'-8" and restoring
the slope behind the eastern wall, the proposed grading will be more integrated
into the natural contours of the canyons, will minimize disturbance to the natural
contours and the proposed grading and the finished contours are reasonably
more natural
Section 10: That the grading takes into account the preservation of the
natural topographic features since the applicant is lowering the height of the
retaining walls and restoring the eastern portion of the graded area, which would
increase the preservation of natural topography
Section 11: That the height of cut and fill does not comply with the
maximum depth of 5'-0" allowed by the City's Municipal Code, since the applicant
is proposing a cut at a maximum depth of 6'-0" and a fill at a maximum depth of
6-8".
Section 12: That the height and number of retaining walls exceed the
allowed one 3'-6" high retaining wall allowed by the City's Municipal Code
Section 13: That all eight criteria of Subsection (E)(1) through (E)(8) of
Section 17 76 040 are satisfied.
Section 14: That the approval is consistent with the purposes set forth in
Subsection A of the Section 17.76 040 because although the height of cut and fill
exceeds the maximum depth of 5'-0", and the height and number of retaining
walls exceeds the allowed one 3'-6" high downslope retaining wall, the grading
will maintain visual continuity of the hillsides and the grading is necessary for the
reasonable development of the land since the subject property contains a narrow
driveway and the grading and retaining wall is necessary for additional turn
around area
Section 15: That the deeper cut and fill, and the taller and the number of
retaining walls do not constitute a grant of a special privilege inconsistent with the
limitations upon other properties in the vicinity, since other properties in the
vicinity area also contain level areas on their properties, which could be used for
turn around purposes
P.C. Resolution No 2002-32
VAR & GR (Case No. ZON2001-00176)
Page 4 of 5
Section 16: That the deeper cut and fill, and the taller and the number of
retaining walls will not be detrimental to the public health since the City's
geologists have reviewed and approved the geology report for the grading and
retaining walls However, departure from the standards in Subsection (E)(9) of
Section 17 76 040 will significantly adversely affect the visual relationship from
neighboring properties because the grading, retaining walls and proposed shed
diminishes the natural appearance of the canyon and is a detriment to the public
welfare.
Section 17: 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
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 adoption of this resolution.
Section 18: 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 approved
with conditions Variance (Case No.ZON2001-00176), thereby approving the
request to allow two existing mechanical equipment units and related ducting
located on the roof of the residence located at 3340 Palos Verdes Drive East;
and approves with conditions Grading Permit (Case No ZON2001-00176),
thereby approving the request to maintain a series of non -permitted retaining
walls, the associated 201 cubic yards of grading conducted on the property, and
the construction of a 387 square foot shed at 3340 Palos Verdes Drive East
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 26 th day of November, 2002, by
the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Lyon, Tomblin, and Chairman Cartwright
NOES: Commissioners Duran Reed and Mueller
ABSTENTIONS: Vice Chair Long
ABSENT: Commissioner Cote
J el ojas,AI P
ire or of PI n ' g, Building
andCode Enforcement, and,
Secretary to the Planning Commission
�,
JqdS Cartwright
Chairman
PC Resolution No 2002.32
VAR & CR (Case No. ZON2001-00176)
Page 5 of 5