PC RES 2004-005P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-05
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING HEIGHT VARIATION AND
SITE PLAN REVIEW (CASE NO. ZON2003-00253), FOR 911 SQUARE.
FEET OF ADDITIONAL TWO-STORY HABITABLE SPACE AND FOR A
165 SQUARE -FOOT EXPANSION OF THE FIRST STORY FOOTPRINT
AT THE REAR OF THE HOME, LOCATED AT 30758 GANADO DRIVE.
WHEREAS, on May 20, 2004, the applicant, Mr. Pete Galante, submitted a Height
Variation and Site Plan Review permit (Case No ZON2003-00253), requesting approval of a
one and two story expansion of the existing two-story residential structure at the front and rear
of the residential lot, and,
WHEREAS, on December 16, 2003, upon submittal of the necessary information and
verification of the temporary frame silhouette, 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 Height Variation and Site Plan Review permit (Case
No. ZON2003-00253) would have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, the
proposed protect has been found to be categorically exempt under Class 1 (Section 15301);
and,
WHEREAS, after notice issued on January 6, 2004, pursuant to the requirements of the
Ranchos Palos Verdes Development Code, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing on February 10, 2004, 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: That the approved project includes the construction of 911 square -feet of
two-story habitable space and 165 square -feet of additional one-story habitable space. The
two-story addition will maintain the existing height of the home and will be at a maximum height
of 22'-4" as measured from finished grade adjacent to the lowest foundation to the top of the
roof ridgeline
Section 2: The applicant has complied with the Early Neighborhood Consultation
process established by the City by obtaining acknowledgement signatures from 75% of the
property owners within 100 -feet of the subject property and 27% of the property owners within
500 -feet of the subject property, who have reviewed the plans
Section 3: The proposed two-story addition and rooflme modifications do 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
C Resolution No 2004-05
Page
Section 4: The property is not located on a ridge or promontory as there are other
neighboring parcels with varying pad elevations, the subject parcel is not located on a hilltop or
elongated crest, and it is not located on a mass of land which overlooks or projects onto a
lowland
Section 5: That the proposed two-story addition and roof ridgeline modifications are
designed and situated in a manner that minimizes view impairment, by proposing them in areas
that would eliminate the potential opportunity of said view impairment. Specifically, the
additions are shorter in overall height than the existing two-story structure and fits in nicely with
the existing roofline elevations of the home Further, the second story additions will minimally
encroach the structure V-6" closer to the street of access, which, if proposed at 10-15 feet
closer, would have potentially impaired a view from a neighboring parcel.
Section 6: That there is no significant cumulative view impairment caused by
granting of these applications. When considering the amount of significant view impairment
caused by the proposed structure, it would be considered inconsequential, as there is currently
no significant view impairment to any surrounding home due to the proposed second story
addition Further, a majority of homes in the immediate vicinity contain a design very similar to
what is approved and a majority of other homes contain views above the existing two story
homes in the immediate vicinity.
Section 7: The proposed two-story residential structure, when considered exclusive
of foliage, will not significantly impair a view from the viewing area of another parcel, due to its
location, design, and overall height Since the addition is proposed at a slightly shorter height
than the existing structure, and will expand only lineally, the chance of significant view
impairment is reduced The second story addition will be focused towards the front of the home
but will not encroach into, a view from a neighboring parcel, as many homes located above and
upslope from the subje t home contain views above the existing two-story structure while
homes located at similar bad elevation (east and west neighbor) contain no views or views in an
opposite direction away from the proposed second story expansion
I
Section 8: That the proposed two-story residential structure complies with all Code
requirements in that all the development standards of the RS -4 district are met and the
minimum setback and lot;coverage requirements are met.
Section 9: That the proposed structure is compatible with the immediate
neighborhood character given that the open space between structures will be kept at the same
distance to what exists currently on the subject lot; the architectural details and articulation are
similar to other structures on Ganado Drive, the approved structure will not be the only two-story
residence within the immediate twenty (20) closest homes; the approved structure is compatible
with the size of other structures in the immediate vicinity, the stucco finish, design and number
of windows, roof pitch and materials are similar to other structures in the neighboring
community; the apparent bulk and mass of the structure will be minimized due to the distance
the structure is setback from the street and due to the overall height of the structure, and, that
the approved front, side, and rear yard setbacks will remain similar as to what exists currently
on neighboring lots.
Section 10: The two-story addition will not create an unreasonable infringement on the
privacy of the occupants of abutting residences. Largely, because the addition will be very
similar to what exists currently on the subject lot The new second story space to the front of
the home will include mostly added bedroom areas, with associated closets. The new second
story space will include one (1) additional window to the east side of the proposed second story,
Page 2
while the area added to the western side of the home contains no additional windows of any
kind, so as to protect the owner and their neighbor's privacy The window to the eastern side of
the second story will be similar in design and size as the existing window and will not encroach
the home closer to any neighbors to the east.
Section II: 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 wnting, and with the appropriate
appeal fee, no later than fifteen (15) days following the date of the Planning Commission's final
action.
Section 12: 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, Height
Variation and Site Plan Review permit (Case No ZON2003-00253) for the construction of a one
and two story addition at the rear and front of the subject residential lot.
Approved and Adopted this 10th day of February 2004, by the following vote:
AYES Vice Chairman Mueller, Commissioner Tetreault, Van Wagner
Karp, Knight, Gerstner
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Cote
J I R jas, AI N
"
D rec r of PI nni g, Building and Code Enforcement; and,
S etary to tQhlanning Commission
Craig Mueller,
Vice -Chairman
P C Resolution No. 2004-_U
Page 3