RPVCCA_CC_SR_2014_03_04_02_Coastal_Specific_PlanCITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERD ES
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
REVIEWED:
Prepared By:
HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
JOEL ROJAS, AICP, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR
MARCH 4, 2014
COASTAL SPECIFIC PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
CAROLYNN PETRU, ACTING CITY MANAGE ~
Ara Mihranian, Deputy Commun ~~~ve l opment Director
Leza Mikhail , Associate Planne rt/tV
RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file this informational report on the City's Coastal Specific Plan and the City's
practice in applying the Visual Corridor Element to development projects in the City's
Coastal District.
BACKGROUND
At the February 18, 2014 meeting, during the Council's discussion on future agenda items,
Mayor Duhovic requested Staff prepare a report on the City's Coastal Specific Plan (CSP).
The City Council agreed that this item should be placed on a future agenda.
Based upon recent concerns expressed by the public, Staff believes that the Mayor and
the Council are specifically interested in obtaining information on the CSP's Visual
Corridors Element and how it relates to the 2-degree downward arc for development
projects.
DISCUSSION
General Background of the Coastal Specific Plan
The State of California's Coastal Act, enacted in 1976, mandates that coastal jurisdictions
establish a local coastal plan that regulates local land use decisions within a defined
coastal district. It is through the Coastal Act that the City's Coastal Specific Plan (CSP)
2-1
COASTAL SPECIFIC PLAN
MARCH 4, 2014
PAGE2
was adopted by the City Council on December 19, 1978 thereby creating a Coastal District
located seaward of Palos Verdes Drive West and South, along the City's 7.5 miles of
coastline. The CSP is intended to protect the natural features, such as geology, shoreline
character, and biota of the coastline while controlling the character of development and
providing access to the coast. Within the CSP, the Coastal District is divided into eight
sub-regions that focus on each area's specific development pattern and carrying capacity.
Similar to the City's General Plan, the CSP is divided into the following five elements:
1. Natural Environment Element
This Element assesses the pertinent characteristics for each physical feature
(climate, geology, biota, etc.) that is essential to the planning process. Within this
Element, both hazard and preservation features are identified, such as the marine
environment, and are classified through a Resource Management Code that
corresponds to the General Plan and implemented through the Development Code,
through measures such as Overlay Control Districts.
2. Socio/Cultural Element
This Element lists the various governmental entities involved in coastal-related
issues, along with current actions that have a local impact. This Element is intended
to provide a resource base through which the City can monitor and effectively direct
communication with these entities, while voicing local concerns over both present
and future matters related to the Coastal District.
3. Urban Environment Element
This Element is divided into three general sections (Activity Areas, Infrastructure,
and Safety) intended to track trends associated with the extent and intensity of
development in order to assess build-out and proposed land use activity within the
Coastal District.
4. Corridor Element
This Element is intended to bring together components of the various physical
elements proposed by the CSP through the use, preservation, and enhancement of
access, edges, and visual and natural characteristics. The corridors described in
the CSP are linear, such as streets, paths, trails, which provide a direct or indirect
visual relationship. It is within this Element that the CSP discusses "view corridors"
taken from linear paths within the Coastal District which is the primary subject of this
report and discussed in greater detail below.
5. Fiscal Element
This Element provides a fiscal analysis based on development densities within the
coastal region along with fiscal projections to supplement the General Plan's Fiscal
Element.
2-2
COASTAL SPECIFIC PLAN
MARCH 4, 2014
PAGE3
Each of the above five Elements establish the City's policy related to future development in
each of the eight sub-regions. Section 17.72 (Coastal Permit) of the Rancho Palos Verdes
Municipal Code (RPVMC) establishes the City's Coastal Permit process, in which the
policies described in the CSP are implemented. Pursuant to Section 17.72, the Coastal
District comprises all land seaward of Palos Verdes Drive South and Palos Verdes Drive
West and is separated into three developable zones (see attached Coastal Zone Diagram):
the Coastal Zone, the Coastal Structure Setback Zone, and the Coastal Setback Zone.
Each of these zones permit specific types of development, some of which require approval
of a Coastal Permit and some of which are exempt.
The CSP also designates areas where decisions upon a Coastal Permit application are
either non-appealable or appealable to the California Coastal Commission. Generally,
appealable areas are those areas which are located between the mean high tide line and
the first public road; whereas, non-appealable areas are those areas which are located
landward of the first public road to Palos Verdes Drive South or Palos Verdes Drive West
(see attached map).
In processing a Coastal Permit for a development project, the following findings must be
made (Section 17.72.090 RPVMC):
A. That the proposed development is consistent with the Coastal Specific
Plan; and
B. That the proposed development, when located between the sea and the
first public road, is consistent with applicable public access and recreation
policies of the Coastal Act.
Pursuant to the above findings, one of the many areas analyzed by City Staff in processing
a Coastal Permit is a development project's consistency with the Visual Corridor Element
of the CSP. The following is a summary of the Visual Corridor Element taken from the
CSP and how it applies to both residential and non-residential development projects.
Visual Corridor Element
Development projects, including residential and non-residential projects, in the City's
Coastal District should be designed to minimize impacts to visual corridors established in
the Corridor Element of the CSP. According to the Corridor Element of the CSP, visual
corridors account for vistas and views. Vistas are defined as having a viewing station,
object or objects to be seen and an intermediate group (i.e. Point Vicente Light House).
Views have a viewing station but do not have a specific focus or object to be seen and
have a broad focal point which have an unlimited arc and depth (i.e. Pacific Ocean). The
specific visual corridors (see attached Figure 26) discussed in the CSP are similar to the
General Plan and have the greatest degree of visual value and interest to the greatest
number of viewers.
Specific visual corridors have both a horizontal and vertical dimension. For purposes of
calculating the angle used to define the horizontal dimension, the average speed of a
vehicle traveling along Palos Verdes Drive West and South was calculated at 45 mph and
2-3
COASTAL SPECIFIC PLAN
MARCH 4, 2014
PAGE4
the cone of vision for a driver and passenger (looking forward) was established at 65
degrees (32.5 degrees on either side). For determining the vertical boundary, a 2-degree
down-arc (see attached map) from the bottom edge of the viewing station elevation to the
focal point elevation (i.e. Malibu or Catalina Coastline) was used. Based on this, the CSP
defined the specific visual corridors which account for both horizontal and vertical
boundaries taken from Palos Verdes Drive West and South (see attached map).
As shown on Figure 26 (see attachment), within the specific visual corridors, the following
height zones have been established for development projects between the bottom of the
vertical arc and ground level:
• Zone 1: Less than 16-feet
• Zone 2: 16-feet to 30-feet
• Zone 3: Above 30-feet
As an example, the application of the above height zones as it relates to visual corridors
was applied to the Terranea Resort project, which has two view corridors that traverse the
property looking . towards Point Fermin and Catalina. As a result of applying the view
corridors on this proposed development, one of the villa buildings nearest to the entry
driveway was limited to one-story at a height not to exceed 16-feet because it fell within
Height Zone 1, while the main hotel building was permitted to exceed 30-feet because it fell
within Height Zone 3. Improvements located outside the above listed view corridors for the
Terranea Resort project were not subjected to the Height Zones but rather the height limits
established by the Commercial Recreation (CR) zoning district and the provisions of the
project's Conditional Use Permit findings.
For development projects that are not located in the CSP's specific visual corridors, the
CSP states that in order to protect the visual relationship between the drive and ocean, no
building should project into a 2-degree down arc zone, as measured along the shortest
distance between the viewing station and the coastline. It should be noted that this is not a
requirement for development projects outside specific view corridors but rather a
recommendation, and the Coastal Commission Staff concurs with this determination. Staff
believes this was not made a requirement, unlike the specific visual corridors, because of
physical constraints associated with topography that would make many properties
unbuildable or costly because of substantial grading and earth alteration to the topography,
which is discouraged by the City's General Plan, Coastal Specific Plan, Environmental
Overlay Control Districts, and Development Code. However, an attempt should be made
to comply with the 2-degree down-arc policy where reasonably feasible.
Although the City has applied specific view corridor requirements to applicable projects that
are within the specific view corridor, such as Terranea, Trump National or Oceanfront
Estates, the City has generally permitted structures that are not within a specific view
corridor and that comply with the "by-right" 16-foot height limit to encroach into the 2-
degree down-arc zone. These projects are rare as they tend to be limited to the few single-
family residential lots that are located along Palos Verdes Drive West and South.
Nonetheless, the City, and on occasion the California Coastal Commission, look at these
projects on a case-by-case basis to determine if a project has been designed to minimize
ocean view impacts from a viewing station. The City determines where the viewing station
2-4
COASTAL SPECIFIC PLAN
MARCH 4, 2014
PAGES
is located for these individual properties based on topography, roadway constraints and
trail locations. In some instances, the most beneficial view is seen from a seated position in
a vehicle, and in others, the most useable view is seen from a standing/walking position
along a City trail within the public right-of-way. In an effort to minimize view impacts, the
City generally looks to reduce ridge line elevations to maintain a portion of the ocean view
or horizon line depending on whether there is an ocean view to protect, or looks to other
ways to provide additional ocean views along the coast.
Therefore, as noted throughout the visual corridor discussion above, the City is required to
apply height limitations to projects that are located within a specific view corridor, as
defined by the CSP. For projects not located within a defined view corridor, the City should
make efforts to protect ocean views on a case-by-case basis depending on the topography,
geology, and viewing stations that apply to each individual project.
CONCLUSION
Based on the information contained herein, Staff recommends that the City Council receive
and file this informational Staff Report on the City's Coastal Specific Plan and the City's
practice in applying the Visual Corridor Element to development projects in the City's
Coastal District.
ALTERNATIVES
In addition to Staff's recommendation, the Council may identify other Elements of the CSP
that they would like information on and direct Staff to come back to a date specific meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
• Coastal Zone Diagram
• Coastal Appealable and Non-Appealable Map
• Figure No. 26 -Visual Corridor Map
• 2-degree down-arc exhibit
2-5
Coastal Zone Diagram
2-6
COASTAL ZONE DIAGRAM
• This diagram represents the localons of the <:oa&tlll !Setback .ame. Coa&tlll setback Une. Coa&tlll structute !Setback ZDne and Coa&tal
structute Setback Line wthin the Citys entire Coastal Zone as they relate to Palos Verdes Drive South and the Pa ate Ocean.
pa\os Verdes Drive
West and/or South
Coastal Structure Setback Line Coastal Structure Setback Zone Coastal Setback Zone
(25'-0" setback from Coastal Setback Line) (Area between the Coastal Structure (Area seaward of the Coastal Setback Line)
................. L ..................... =~~. ~-~ ~~-~~-~~~~·. ~~=: .L. ~: ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
__ T ____ _ -------------
Coastal Setback Line
(Established on Coastal Specific Plan Map)
PACIFIC OCEAN
2
-
7
Coastal Appealable and Non-appealable Map
2-8
Legend
-··-.. -Coastal Setback Line
Appealable Area
11 Non-aooealable Area
L___J (including P'Vow and PVDS)
D Coastal Zone Boundary
.-----Parcels
D City Boundary
~
Pacific Ocean
N
A City of Rancho Palos Verdes
2,600 1,300 0 2
,600Feet Coastal Zone
2
-
9
Figure No. 26 -Visual Corridor Map
2-10
C-10
DEGREES) AND INDIRECT (32.S-90 DEGREES).
A 90-DEGREE ANGLE TD THE SIDE WAS DETERMINED
TO BE OUT OF THE NORMAL RANGE OF VISION OF
DRIVER AND PASSENGER.
THE BOU~DARIES OF THE VISTAS IDENTIFIED ALONG
PALOS VERDES DRIVE ARE DEFINED BOTH VERTICALLY
AND HORIZONTALLY ON THE ACCOMPANYING PLANS AND
SECTIONS OF THE COASTAL AREA CFIGURES 26,
27, AND 28). THESE BOUNDARIES WERE ESTABLISHED
BY THE FOLLOWING METHOD:
0 HORIZONTAL BOUNDARIES
RIGHT EDGE FROM THE BEGINNING
POINT OF A CONTINUOUS VIEWING
STATION TO THE RIGHT EDGE OF THE
visual corridors
---catalina
catalina
0
VIEWING FOCUS.
LEFT EDGE -FROM THE ENDING POINT
OF A CONTINUOUS VIEWING STATION TO
THE LEFT EDGE OF THE VIEWING
FOCUS.
VERTICAL BOUNDARIES
BOTTOM EDGE - A VERTICAL ARC WAS
ESTABLISHED FOR THE BOTTOM EDGE
FROM THE VIEWING STATION ELEVATION
TO THE FOCAL POINT ELEVATION. FOR
DISTANT FOCAL POINTS (I.E. CATALINA
AND MALIBU COASTLINE) A MINIMUM
2-DEGREE DOWN-ARC FROM HORIZONTAL
WAS USED.
view corridors
horizontal boundaries
partial
& indirect vertical zones
e landmark ~ I zone 1
~ view corridor
horizontal edges Lil
&1P1
WI
t I I
z one 2
zo n e 3
THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES \~ lo 1aoo f1 soo )3200
2
-
1
1
2-degree down-arc exhibit
2-12
figure 28 typical sections
focal point
---~
arc -2' ~~o~n~ ______ -)
• viewing station
2
-
1
3