PC RES 2003-034P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2003-34
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING, WITH CONDITIONS, A
VARIANCE (CASE NO. ZON2003-00247) AND REVISION "A" TO THE
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED GRADING PERMIT (CASE NO. ZON2002-
00062), FOR TWO (2) AS BUILT RETAINING WALLS LOCATED
ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY LINE MEASURING 3'-6" AND 5' IN
HEIGHT LOCATED AT 30822 RUE DE LA PIERRE.
WHEREAS, on October 10, 2001, the applicant, Mr. & Mrs. Sartori, submitted a Grading
application (Case No 2002-00062), requesting approval for two (2) already built retaining walls
located along the rear property line parallel to Rue De La Pierre The retaining walls are built
within three (3) feet of each other, therefore, they are considered one (1) wall measuring 8'-6" in
total height from adjacent grade on the lower side to the top of the walls, and,
WHEREAS, on April 5, 2002, upon submittal of additional information, Staff deemed the
applications generally complete for processing, 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 Regulations, 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 Grading (Case No. 2002-00062) would have a
significant effect on the environment, therefore, the proposed project has been found to be
categorically exempt under Class 1 (Section 15301), and,
WHEREAS, on June 14, 2002, the Director denied, without prejudice, Grading permit
(Case No ZON2002-00062), and,
WHEREAS, on June 24, 2002, the applicant, Mrs Karen Sartori, appealed the Directors
decision of denial, without prejudice, to the Planning Commission, 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
August 13, 2002, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and
present evidence, and,
WHEREAS, at the August 13, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission
conceptually approved the project and retaining walls, given that the applicant lower the taller
retaining wall V-6", so as to bring the wall closer in comparison to what was originally approved.
The Commission then directed Staff to bring back a Resolution of approval for adoption at the
August 27, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, and,
WHEREAS, at the August 27, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission
reviewed new evidence presented by the applicant that the taller wall could not be lowered
without affecting the structural integrity of the pool. The Commission directed Staff to have a
structural engineer look at the retaining wall and plans so as to give their opinion on whether or
not the wall could be lowered The Commission then continued the item to a date uncertain,
and,
P C Resolution No 2003-34
Page 1 of 4
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
November 26, 2002, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard
and present additional evidence, and,
WHEREAS, at the November 26, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, Staff presented
the requested information, including the findings of the City's structural engineer, which
concluded, based on a letter, that there was not any structural reason that the top 18 inches of
the upper wall could not be removed since the pool and the planter box are not an integral part
to the retaining wall and, thus, could be saw cut, not jack hammered, to lower the wall.
WHEREAS, at the November 26, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, in accordance
with the City's structural Engineer's findings, the Commission upheld the appeal and overturned
the Director's decision, thereby approving the retaining wall, given that the applicant lower the
taller retaining wall V-6".
WHEREAS, at the December 10, 2002 Planning Commission meeting, the commission
adopted the corresponding Resolution of Approval (P C Resolution No. 2003-33), and,
WHEREAS, on May 19, 2003, the applicant, Mr. & Mrs. Sartori, submitted a Variance
request (Case No. ZON2003-00247) along with a revision to the previously approved Grading
application (Case No 2002-0062), requesting approval to vary from the City's Development
Code standard of measuring overall heights of walls and thus, allowing the two (2) already built
retaining walls located along the rear property line parallel to Rue De La Pierre be counted as
two separate retaining walls 2'-6" apart and measuring 3'-6" and 5', rather than as a single unit,
and,
WHEREAS, on July 2, 2003 upon submittal of additional information, Staff deemed the
applications generally complete for processing, and,
WHEREAS, on July 2, 2003, the City mailed a notice to all residents located within 500 -
feet of the subject property and published the necessary notice of application in the local
Peninsula News newspaper
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS.
Section 1: That the lot does contain exceptional or extraordinary circumstances,
which do not generally apply to other property in the same zoning district Specifically, that the
existing walls are the result of a good faith mistake in the part of the applicant, as the property
owner and the City had miscommunication in the past and the retaining walls were built under a
false assumption by the applicant that all the necessary steps were taken to achieve approval of
the walls. Further, that 2'-6" in distance between the two existing retaining walls will not create
the appearance of one (1) large retaining wall, due to the existing shrubbery and foliage that
exists between the walls and the attention paid to the overall design of the project.
Section 2: That the variance is necessary, since there are other properties in the
immediate vicinity that contain similar outdoor recreation facilities and walls as the subject
property The subject residential property is not able to support additional expansion at the front
of the property (north) given the existing garage and unbuildable extreme slopes There are no
other areas on the lot for the placement of recreation areas and swimming pools Nevertheless,
P.C. Resolution No 2003-34
Page 2 of 4
there are other properties in the same zoning district and under like conditions that contain
recreational outdoor areas on their respective lots. Residential properties located on the north
side of Rue De La Pierre are subject to stricter standards than are neighbors on the opposite
(south) side of the street and located east and west, due to the rear of the subject lot being
directly parallel with a street that gets traveled on daily by neighboring residents. This is an
unnecessary hardship on the property owner, and the only logical area to place a swimming
pool and related retaining walls is at the rear of the property adjacent to the street When
looking at other structures and residential properties in the neighborhood, the subject residential
property will not be the only one of its kind, as there are other properties nearby that contain
retaining walls and garden walls at a similar height and distance between There are a few
homes located just south of the subject property that contain swimming pools in their rear yard
that happen to be on similar slopes as the existing In addition, similar neighboring properties,
which contain very similar rear sloping yards, could construct walls and/or fences up to 6 -feet in
height directly parallel with Rue De La Pierre without City approval. These potential walls
and/or fences could be built to look very similar to the existing retaining walls and at the same
time, contain no foliage or shrubbery to soften the look of the walls when viewed from the street
Section 3• That granting the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to property and improvements in the area because the project is conditioned
to maintain proper shrubbery and foliage between the walls With these conditions set in place,
which will conceal the taller of the two retaining walls when viewed from the public right of way
and neighboring properties, will help the walls fit into the neighborhood and will not be injurious
to other properties in a visual or aesthetic manner That an additional 6 inches of separation,
thereby making the distance between the two walls 3 -feet, will not be necessary and does not
achieve a purpose if proper steps are taken to ensure aesthetics of the neighborhood are
upheld Thus, the variance will not be injurious to other properties in the area and this finding
can be adopted.
Section 4• That the General Plan land use designation for the neighborhood within
which the subject property is located is Residential, 1-2 DU/acre The development of
accessory structures and additions for single-family residences is consistent with this underlying
land use designation In addition, according to the Urban Environmental Element in the City's
General Plan (Page 78), the improvement of residential neighborhoods should maintain
optimum local standards of housing design. That the proposed walls at their existing heights
and with their exceptional landscape architectural design details help maintain optimum local
standards within the immediate neighborhood and are not contrary to the City's General Plan
Section 5: Any interested person 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 final
action.
Section 6• 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, with conditions, Variance
(Case No ZON2003-00247) and Revision "A" to Grading permit (Case No. ZON2002-00062) for
two (2) retaining walls located along the rear property line parallel to Rue De La Pierre
separated by 2'-6" as measured from their closest points and measuring 3'-6" and 5' in height
P C. Resolution No. 2003-34
Page 3 of 4
A
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day Of July 2003, by the following vote -
AYES Chairman Long, Commissioner Lyon, Cartwright, Duran Reed
Commissioner Tomblin
NOES. Commissioner Mueller
ABSTENTIONS
ABSENT Commissioner Cote
Joel Rojas, AACP I
Dir for of PI g, Building and Code Enforcement; and,
I
retary to t lanning Commission
Tom Long,
Chairman
P C Resolution No. 2003- 34
Page 4 of 4