Loading...
PC RES 2017-041 P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2017-41 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DENYING, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, A VARIANCE AND SITE PLAN REVIEW APPLICATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO AFTER-THE-FACT UNPERMITTED DECKS LOCATED OVER THE LOWER AND MID-SLOPE DRAINAGE SWALES AND ONE NEW DECK OVER THE UPPER-SLOPE DRAINAGE SWALE ALONG WITH AT- GRADE STEPS AND PLANTERS ALONG THE REAR YARD SLOPE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 30645 GANADO DRIVE (CASE NO. ZON2017-00362). WHEREAS, on August 21, 2017, the owners of the real property at 30645 Ganado Drive submitted an after-the-fact application for a Variance and Site Plan Review with respect to construction of two decks over the lower and mid-slope drainage swales located on their property, and an application for a Variance to construct a deck over the upper-slope drainage swale on their property, together with planter boxes and at-grade steps in the slope between the decks; and WHEREAS, after Staff deemed the application incomplete on September 12, 2017, the property owners submitted additional information, and the application was deemed complete for processing on October 13, 2017; and, WHEREAS, the proposed project was determined to be categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act; and, WHEREAS, on October 19, 2017, a public notice was sent to all property owners within a 500' radius of the subject property and published in the Peninsula News; and, WHEREAS, on November 14, 2017, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, 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: Section 17.56.060 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code provides that, "It is unlawful for any person owning property in which a slope drain (or swale) exists to interfere with, impede the flow of, or reduce the effectiveness in any manner of said slope drain. The construction of any structure over a slope drain...is prohibited." Each of the decks which are the subject of the current application is a "structure over a slope drain" within the meaning of this Section. 01203.0005/427308.3 P.C. Resolution No. 2017-41 Page 1 of 4 Section 2: Development Code Section 17.64.050 permits the Planning Commission to grant a Variance with respect to the above prohibition in limited circumstances. Subsection (A) allows for a Variance to be granted when practical difficulties, unnecessary hardships, or results inconsistent with the general intent and purpose of the title occur by reason of the strict interpretation of any of its provisions. Section (B) allows for a Variance to be granted if the property owner demonstrates significant error in any order, requirement, permit, decision, or determination made in the administration or enforcement of the Code and the property owner commenced construction in reliance upon the error. The property owners assert that a City Code Enforcement Officer made a significant mistake in determining that permits were not needed for the construction of the decks and that they relied on this mistake when constructing the lower two decks. Section 3: The evidence presented at the hearing and the statements offered by the property owners, their contractor, neighbors and the Code Enforcement Officer, support the following conclusions: (A) The property owners commenced construction of this project without seeking any prior approval from the City. The applicants' contractor stated that he had not previously done work in Rancho Palos Verdes, that he did not attempt to find out if there were any local ordinances applicable to the work to be done, and that he had relied on the owners' statements to him that no permits were needed. He further stated that he had witnessed torrential rainfall during the time he was doing his work and that his structures were sound, that he had been more concerned with whether the project made sense logically than the strict language of any code section, and that from his viewpoint, the decks built had actually strengthened the swales. (B) On February 14, 2017, the City's Code Enforcement Division received an inquiry with respect to construction occurring on the rear slope of the property located at 30645 Ganado Drive. After an on-site inspection and meeting with the property owner and contractor, the City's Code Enforcement Officer determined that the work being proposed on the property, which included the construction of a low level garden wall and the replacement of at-grade stairs did not require a permit from the Planning and Building and Safety Divisions. The Code Enforcement Officer stated that she did not see any construction going on over any of the swales during her visit to the property. (C) On April 4, 2017, the City's Code Enforcement Division received a follow-up complaint of alleged unpermitted work continuing to occur on the rear yard slope of the subject property. The Code Enforcement Officer again visited the property, determined that an unpermitted deck was being constructed on the rear yard slope, and issued a Stop Work Order to the property owners. Section 4: The property owners commenced construction of their project prior to any statement being made to them by the Code Enforcement Officer. The property owners and their contractor failed to comply with the requirements of the City's ordinances and their project was not commenced in reliance on any statement made to them by the 01203.0005/427308.3 P.C. Resolution No. 2017-41 Page 2 of 4 Code Enforcement Officer. The City did not make a significant error in any order, decision or determination within the meaning of Development Code Section 17.64.050. Section 5: There are no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property located at 30645 Ganado Drive that do not apply to similar properties. The size of the usable rear yard is similar to neighboring properties on the same side of Ganado Drive, which are all encumbered with an extreme slope for the remainder of their property. Section 6: The General Plan describes the City's flood control infrastructure system as a series of channels and drains that guide and control the flow of surface water in selected locations which result from natural or man-caused factors. To ensure that this system is maintained in working order, the City's Development Code restricts any person owning property in which a slope drain (or swale) exists to interfere with, impede the flow of, or reduce the effectiveness in any manner of said slope drain. Granting a variance to allow construction of one or more decks over drainage swales in this case would be inconsistent with the General Plan and potentially detrimental to the public welfare and injurious to other properties and improvements. A deck over a drainage swale could adversely impact storm drain flows resulting in potential runoff impacts and damage to both the applicant's property and neighboring properties, including but not limited to slope failure. Section 7: The proposed decks encroach into the required side yard setback and infringe upon the privacy of neighboring properties. Section 8: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information included in the Staff Report and the statements and documentary evidence presented at the hearing, the Planning Commission hereby denies, without prejudice, both (a) the after the fact application for a Variance and Site Plan Review with respect to the decks constructed over the applicant's lower and mid-slope drainage swales on the property at 30645 Ganado Drive and, (b) the application for a variance to construct a deck over the upper- slope drainage swale on such property. Section 9: Any interested person aggrieved by this decision or any portion of this decision may appeal to the City Council. The appeal shall set forth the grounds for appeal and any specific action being requested by the appellant. Any appeal letter must be filed within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of this decision. A $2,275.00 appeal fee must accompany any appeal letter. If no appeal is filed timely, the Planning Commission's decision will become final at 5:30 p.m. on December 13, 2017. 01203.0005/427308.3 P.C. Resolution No. 2017-41 Page 3 of 4 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 28th day of November, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners Leon, Nelson, Tomblin, and Vice-Chairman James NOES: None ABSTENTIONS: Commissioner Bradley RECUSALS: None ABSENT: Commissioner Emenhiser r William J. James, Vice Chairman Ara ' is , Director of Community Development Secretary of the Planning Commission 01203.0005/427308.3 P.C. Resolution No. 2017-41 Page 4 of 4