PC RES 2004-023P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-23
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DENYING THE APPEAL,
THEREBY UPHOLDING THE DIRECTOR'S APPROVAL OF A
GRADING PERMIT (CASE NO. ZON2003-00088), WHICH
ALLOWS THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 4,507 SQUARE FOOT
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND 622 CUBIC YARDS OF
GRADING, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 491!4
ROCKINGHORSE ROAD.
WHEREAS, on November 27, 2000, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved
Lot Line Adjustment No. 67, which was between 49'/4 Rockinghorse and 51
Rockinghorse This Lot Line Adjustment moved the front property line of the subject
property from the northern edge of the ingress/egress easement to the northern edge of
pavement of the private road; and,
WHEREAS, on February 20, 2003, the applicant submitted an application for a
Grading Permit (Case No ZON2003-00088), a request to conduct 1,440 cubic yards of
grading and to construct a 4,449 square foot residence on an unimproved parcel. After
review of this application, staff deemed it incomplete on March 21, 2003, due to missing
information on the application and project plans. In response to issues staff raised, the
applicant subsequently revised the project to reduce the grading to 622 cubic yards and
increase the size of the proposed residence to 4,507 square feet; and,
WHEREAS, on July 16, 2003, the City's Geotechnical staff approved a geology
report for the construction of the new residence on the subject parcel; and,
WHEREAS, on October 30, 2003, the application for Grading Permit was
deemed complete by Staff, 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 Permit, will have a
significant effect on the environment and, therefore, the proposed project has been
found to be categorically exempt under Class 3 (Section 15303); and,
WHEREAS, on December 22, 2003, after a duly noticed public comment period,
the Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement approved the Grading Permit
(Case No ZON2003-00088). In accordance with the Municipal Code requirements, a
Notice of Decision for the approval was sent to all interested parties, and,
WHEREAS, on January 19, 2004, the appellants (Carol Falstrup and Donald
Dvorin) filed a timely appeal of the Director's decision, requesting that the Planning
P.C. Resolution No. 2004-23
Page 1 of 9
Commission reverse the approval of the Grading Permit. The basis of the appeal is that
the approved project causes access and safety issues, the project is not compatible
with the neighborhood, and the project creates privacy impacts; and,
WHEREAS, after notice issued pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho
Palos Verdes Development Code, the Planning Commission held duly noticed public
hearings on March 9, 2004, April 27, 2004, and May 25, 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 a 4,507
square foot single family residence and 622 cubic yards of grading
Section 2: The grading does not exceed that which is necessary for the
permitted primary use of the lot, as defined in Chapter 17.96 of the Municipal Code The
permitted primary use of the property is single-family residential The grading permit is
to allow the construction of a single-family residence. Furthermore, there are several
constraints on the property that have driven the location of the residence and the
resulting grading, which include the topography of the lot, a OH boundary line, and the
ingress/egress easement.
Section 3: The grading and/or related construction does not significantly
adversely affect the visual relationships with, or the views from, neighboring properties
The subject property is located along a canyon, in which other homes in the area can
view by looking across the site. Nevertheless, the site is a developable property and
the residence is being built within the allowable 16730' building envelope for
downsloping lots. Even though some fill is required to meet the height limitations, the
applicant cannot propose the residence any further downslope, without the need for a
variance to exceed the maximum allowable driveway gradient or without creating
excessive grading Furthermore, to mitigate headlights from cars driving up the
driveway of the proposed project shining into the neighbor's residence, a condition of
approval to require the applicant to construct a maximum 42" high solid wall along the
east property line, which shall extend 25' from the front property line, has been added.
Section 4: The nature of the grading minimizes disturbances to the natural
contours and finished contours are reasonably natural. The applicant has limited the
grading to areas under the building footprint, the driveway, a small terrace in the front
yard, and areas needed to stabilize the residence, thus leaving the majority of the lot in
a natural state. Furthermore, due to the constraints on the lot, the proposed grading
cannot be further reduced.
Section 5: The grading takes into account the preservation of natural
topographical features and appearances by means of land sculpturing so as to blend
any man-made or manufactured slope into natural topography. As noted in the previous
P.C. Resolution No 2004-23
Page 2 of 9
section, the applicant has limited the grading to areas under the building footprint, the
driveway, a small terrace in the front yard, and areas needed to stabilize the residence;
thus leaving the majority of the lot in a natural state
Section 6: The grading and all related construction is compatible with the
character of the immediate neighborhood. Based on an analysis of the area, it is found
that the proposed structure is consistent with the character of the immediate
neighborhood with respect to architectural style and materials, bulk and mass, number
of stories, structure size, front, side, and rear yard setbacks, and open space between
structures.
Section 7: The grading will not cause excessive and unnecessary disturbance
of the natural landscape or wildlife habitat through removal of vegetation. Natural
landscape is usually considered wild flowers, low coastal sage scrub, chaparral, and
grasslands. While there is heavy vegetation along the north side of the lot, the applicant
is not proposing grading or construction that will disturb this area Instead, the
vegetation that exists in the proposed grading area consists primarily of invasive weedy
vegetation. This type of vegetation is not considered part of the natural vegetation of
the area and does not serve as a wildlife habitat
Section 8: The grading conforms to the standards for grading heights of cut
and fill since the maximum depth of cut is 6', which is necessary because the existing
slope of the lot causes the need for the excessive depth of cut in order for the driveway
to meet the maximum allowable gradient Additionally, the project meets the standards
for height of retaining walls. However, portions of the proposed grading will occur on
slopes that exceed a 50% gradient, which exceed the Municipal Code allowances.
Although the proposed retaining walls and grading on slopes do not meet all of the
criteria required for approval of a Grading Permit, pursuant to Municipal Code Section
No. 17 76.040(E)(10) the deviation in the criteria is warranted and the project is
approved because
a) The first eight criteria of Municipal Code Section No. 17.76.040 have been
satisfied
b) The approval is consistent with the purpose of Municipal Code Section No.
17.76.040. The purpose of the chapter is to provide reasonable development of
land, ensure the maximum preservation of the scenic character of the area,
ensure that the development of properties occurs in a manner harmonious to
adjoining properties, and that the protect complies with the goals and polices of
the General Plan Due to the nature of the topography of the lot, any proposed
development would require grading in the areas that exceed a 50% gradient.
Nevertheless, the applicant has designed the project to minimize the quantity of
grading and the impacts to the surrounding properties.
P C Resolution No. 2004-23
Page 3 of 9
c) Departure of the standards will not constitute a special privilege with the
limitations upon other properties in the vicinity. The subject site has several
constraints, which include the nature of the topography of the lot, the OH
boundary line, and the ingress/egress easement, that do not apply to other
properties in the area. Furthermore, since the entire front portion of the lot
exceeds a 50% gradient, the deviation in the standard is necessary to provide
access to the residence. These site conditions do not apply to other properties in
the area and the deviation is required to develop the site.
d) Departure from the standards will not be detrimental to the public safety, nor to
other property. The primary concern raised in considering public safety is the
geology of the property. The applicant has submitted, and has received approval
of, a geology report, which demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City's
Geologist, that this project can be constructed without creating a hazard to public
safety This includes the proposed grading on the slope that exceeds a 50%
gradient.
Section 9: Any interested person aggrieved by this decision or any portion of
this decision may appeal to the City Council Pursuant to Sections 17.02.040,
17.70.030, 17.76.040(H) and 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 June 9, 2004
Section 10: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and
findings included in the Staff Reports (dated December 19, 2003, March 9, 2004, April
27, 2004, and May 25, 2004), Minutes and other records of proceedings, the Planning
Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby denies the appeal, thereby
upholding the Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement's approval of a
Grading Permit (Case No ZON2003-00088) which allows for the construction of a 4,507
square foot single family residence and 622 cubic yards of grading, 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 2004-23
Page 4 of 9
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of May 2004, by the following
vote
AYES GERSTNER, KARP, KNIGHT, COTE
NOES: TETREAnT, MUELLER
ABSTENTIONS. NONE
ABSENT' VAN WAGNER
raig Mbeiler,
Chairman
el oras, AIC
ire for of Pla ng, Building and Code Enforcement; and,
S etary to the Planning Commission
P.C. Resolution No 2004;2,3
Page 5 of 9
Exhibit "A"
Conditions of Approval
(Planning Commission Resolution No. 2004-23)
Grading Permit (Case No. ZON2003-00088)
The approval of this Grading Permit allows 622 cubic yards of grading, which
includes 149 cubic yards of cut and 473 cubic yards of fill Additionally, the
Grading Permit allows the construction of a 4,507 square foot single-family
residence on the site and construction of an 8' high upslope retaining wall on the
south side of the residence, two 30" high garden walls on the north side of the
residence, a 4' high and 5' high retaining wall adjacent to the driveway.
2 Approval of this Grading Permit shall not be construed to mean any waiver of
applicable and appropriate zoning regulations, or any Federal, State, County,
and City laws and regulations. Unless otherwise expressly specified, all other
requirements of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code shall apply
3. The applicant/property owner shall submit to the City a statement, in writing that
they have read, understand and agree to all conditions of approval listed below
Failure to provide said written statement within ninety (90) days of the effective
date of approval shall render this approval null and void.
4 The approval shall become null and void after 180 -days from the date of this
approval unless the approved plans are submitted to the Building and Safety
Division to initiate the "plan check" review process, pursuant to Section
17.86.070 of the City's Development Code This approval shall become null and
void if, after initiating the "plan check" review process, or receiving a building
permit to begin construction, said "plan check" or permit is allowed to expire or is
withdrawn by the applicant.
5. The Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement is authorized to make
minor modifications to the approved preliminary plans or any of the conditions if
such modifications shall achieve substantially the same results as would strict
compliance with said plans and conditions
6 Permitted hours of construction are 7 00 a m to 7 00 p m. Monday through
Saturday No work is permitted on Sundays or legal holidays
7 The project shall substantially conform to the plans stamped, and dated the
effective date of this approval, approved by the Planning Department.
8 The construction site, adjacent public and private properties 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 not be
limited to. the accumulation of debris, garbage, lumber, scrap metal, concrete
P C Resolution No 2004-23
Page 6 of 9
asphalt, piles of earth, salvage materials, abandoned or discarded furniture,
appliances or other household fixtures.
9 In the event that a Planning requirement and a Building & Safety requirement are
in conflict with one another, the stricter standard shall apply.
10. All applicable permits required by the Building and Safety Division shall be
obtained by the applicant prior to the commencement of construction.
11. The proposed structure shall maintain the following minimum setbacks:
10'-0" front (proposed 16')
15-0" rear (proposed- 124'-6")
5'-0" side (proposed: 5'-8" on east, 29'-8" on west)
SETBACK CERTIFICATION IS REQUIRED. A LICENSED CIVIL ENGINEER
OR SURVEYOR SHALL PREPARE THE CERTIFICATION. CERTIFICATION
SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY'S BUILDING OFFICIAL FOR REVIEW
AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO THE POURING OF FOUNDATIONS.
12. The proposed residence shall not exceed a height of 27'-2" from the lowest
elevation where the finished grade is adjacent to the building foundation/slab
(112') to the highest roof ndgeline (139'-2"), and highest ridgeline of the
residence (139'-2") shall be 6' below the average elevation of the front setback
line (148').
BUILDING HEIGHT CERTIFICATION IS REQUIRED. A LICENSED CIVIL
ENGINEER OR SURVEYOR SHALL PREPARE THE CERTIFICATION.
CERTIFICATION SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY'S BUILDING
OFFICIAL FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PRIOR TO ROOF
FRAMING/SHEETING INSPECTION.
13. Prior to building permit issuance and/or commencement of grading, whichever
occurs first, the applicant shall obtain approval of a haul route from the Director
of Public Works
14. In order to reduce the impacts of headlight glare onto the property at 49Y2
Rockinghorse, the applicant shall construct a 42" high solid wall along the east
property line, which shall extend a minimum of 25' from the front property line.
15. There shall be no window on the east side of the office, located on the upper
floor of the residence
16. No portion of the structure shall be located within the Open Space Hazard (OH)
Zone PRIOR TO THE POURING OF FOUNDATIONS, THE APPLICANT
SHALL SUBMIT, TO THE CITY'S BUILDING OFFICIAL FOR REVIEW AND
APPROVAL, A CERTIFICATION THAT IS PREPARED BY A LICENSED CIVIL
ENGINEER OR SURVEYOR STATING THAT NO PORTION OF THE
P.C. Resolution No 2004-23
Page 7of9
STRUCTURE OCCUPIES THE OH ZONE.
17. All provisions and conditions of Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan
(SUSMP), wet stamped and signed by Rick Morales and dated March 31, 2001,
shall by complied with at all times.
18. Inasmuch as the driveway is located within an ingress/egress easement, there
shall be no gates or other devices that limit access to the areas within said
easement
19. In order to reduce construction impacts to the residences on Rockinghorse Road,
the following provisions shall be adhered to:
a) Access to the residences on Rockinghorse Road shall not be blocked at
anytime
b) Prior to the issuance of building permits or the commencement of
grading, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall submit a plan to, and
obtain approval by, the Director Planning, Building, and Code
Enforcement, which demonstrates the location of all construction staging
areas The staging area shall not be located on "The Spur' portion of
Rockinghorse Road and shall be located in an area that minimizes
impacts to the neighboring residents.
c) Prior to the issuance of building permit final the applicant shall repair
any damage caused by the construction to the "The Spur' portion of
Rockinghorse road, to the satisfaction of the Building Official
20. Prior to the submittal of plans to Building and Safety Plan Check, the
applicant shall modify the plans to incorporate the conditions of approval #14 and
#15. Additionally, the site plan shall be modified to show the location of the new
ingress/egress easement.
21. Prior to the issuance of building permits or commencement of grading,
whichever occurs first, the applicant shall record an "irrevocable offer to
dedicate a trail" to the property. Said offer shall be for the portions of the Upper
Dodson Canyon trail that traverse the property, as noted in the Conceptual Trails
Plan (Section 5, Segment 1-11), which was adopted on September 7, 1993 Prior
to recording the "irrevocable offer to dedicate a trail," the irrevocable offer shall
be submitted to the Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement for
review and approval by the City Attorney.
22. Prior to submittal of plans to Building and Safety Plan Check the applicant
shall record a revised ingress/egress easement that extends across the property
frontage. The revised easement shall be in the location depicted on the Site Plan
submitted to the City on May 11, 2004, which was reviewed and approved by the
Planning Commission on May 25, 2004 The revised easement shall be
approved and signed by all property owners that are party to the current
ingress/egress easement, which shall include, but is not limited to, the property
owners of 49 Rockinghorse, 49% Rockinghorse, 49'12 Rockinghorse, 49314
P.C. Resolution No 2004-23
Page 8 of 9
Rockinghorse, and 51 Rockinghorse Prior to recording the revised easement,
the applicant shall submit the easement to the Director of Planning, Building, and
Code Enforcement for review and approval by the City Attorney. The applicant
also shall submit funds to be held in a City Trust Account to cover the City's
expense of reviewing the easement.
23. Prior to the submittal of plans to Building Plan Check, the applicant shall
submit to the Director of Planning Building, and Code Enforcement written
authorization from the property owner of 49 Rockinghorse for the improvement of
the roadway depicted on the site plan and written authorization from the property
owner of 51 Rockinghorse for the construction of the garden wall depicted on the
site plan. Said authorization shall give the applicant and his/her contractors
expressed and unfettered access to these areas of their properties for the sole
purpose of the aforementioned construction of the proposed improvements
Construction of these improvements shall be solely at the applicant's expense.
Should the applicant be unable to obtain written approval, these portions of the
approved project shall not be constructed.
24 Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a
landscape plan to the Director of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement for
review and approval More specifically, the landscape plan shall indicate the
location and number of the Benjamin Fig (Ficus benjamina), Indian Fig (Ficus
microcarpa) and Magnolia (Magnoliaceae) trees that are to be planted along the
east side of the residence. The applicant shall plant and planning staff shall
inspect the trees prior to the issuance of building permit final to ensure
that the trees provide adequate screening of the structure, as seen from
49'12 Rockinghorse.
25. Prior to the submittal of plans to Building Plan Check, the applicant shall
revise the plans to remove the retaining wall, which is adjacent to the driveway
and within the easement, in order to improve public safety. Said revisions are
subject to the review and approval of the Director of Planning, Building, and
Code Enforcement
P.0 Resolution No 2004-23
Page 9 of 9