RPVCCA_CC_SR_2012_04_03_02_Code_Amendment_Residential_CommercialPUBLIC HEARING
Date:April 3,2012
Subject:Code Amendment to Allow Ancillary Residential Use Within the
Commercial Neighborhood (CN)Zoning Districts through
Discretionary Review of a Conditional Use Permit (Supports 2012
City Council Goal to support local businesses)
Location:Citywide
1.Declare the Hearing Open:Mayor Misetich
2.Report of Notice Given:City Clerk Morreale
3.Staff Report &Recommendation:Associate Planner Mikhail
4.Public Testimony:
Appellants:N/A
Applicants:City
5.Council Questions:
6.Rebuttal:
7.Declare Hearing Closed:Mayor Misetich
8.Council Deliberation:
9.Council Action:
2-1
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
HONORABLE MAYOR &CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
JOEL ROJAS,AICP,COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR~~~
APRIL 3,2012 W
SUBJECT:CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW ANCILLARY RESIDENTIAL USE
WITHIN THE COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD (CN)ZONING
DISTRICTS THROUGH DISCRETIONARY REVIEW OF A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT (Supports 2012 City Council Goal to support local
businesses)
REVIEWED:CAROLYN LEHR,CITY MANAGER c!2--
Project Manager:Leza Mikhail,Associate Planner ~
RECOMMENDATION ~v
Notwithstanding the Planning Commission's recommendation to not adopt an Ordinance that
allows ancillary residential units in commercially zoned properties,Staff is recommending that
the City Council:
1)Adopt Resolution No.2012-_,thereby adopting Addendum No.5 to the Negative
Declaration for Ordinance No.510,for a code amendment to amend Section 17.16.030
and add Section 17.16.040 of Title 17 (Zoning)of the City's Municipal Code;and,
2)Introduce Ordinance No._,an Ordinance of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,
amending Section 17.16.030 and adding a new Section 17.16.040 of Title 17 (Zoning)of
the City's Municipal Code to allow ancillary residential uses within the Commercial
Neighborhood Zoning Districts only through the discretionary review and approval of a
Conditional Use Permit,and establishing development standards for said ancillary
residential uses (Case No.ZON2011-00089).
BACKGROUND
In early March 2011,the property owner of the Golden Cove Center,Paris Zarrabian,
approached Staff with a request to convert two existing,vacant commercial tenant spaces to
residential units.The property owner informed the City that some tenants would like to rent
these spaces as apartments in order to reduce their daily commute from locations off the Palos
Verdes Peninsula.Furthermore,improving these tenant spaces for residential occupancy would
reduce the existing 7.8%vacancy rate for the Golden Cove Center.Staff notified the property
owner that permanent residential uses are not permitted in any commercial zoning district in the
2-2
notified the property owner that permanent residential uses are notpermitted in any
commercial zoning district in the City.Thus,he would have to initiate a code amendment to
be considered by the City Council in order to amend Title 17 (Zoning Code)of the PRVMC to
allow ancillary residential uses within commercial zones.Subsequently,on April 12,2011,
the property owner of the Golden Cove Center submitted a Code Amendment Initiation
Request.
On June 21,2011,at the recommendation of Staff,the City Council initiated a Code
Amendment and directed Staff and the Planning Commission to move forward with drafting
an Ordinance to allow residential uses within commercially zoned properties in the City
through the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP).In addition,the City Council
directed Staff and the Planning Commission to create development standards for said
residential uses to ensure that they are clearly ancillary to commercial uses,to ensure that
the residential units do not adversely affect the vitalityof the commercial developments,and
to minimize impacts to adjacent neighbors.Specifically,the City Council requested that the
development standards:1)limit the amount of ancillary residential use to 5 percent of the
total building square footage;2)include provisions for apartment housing,but not allow hotel
or transient use;3)include a provision for the units b be counted towards meeting the City's
Regional Housing Needs Assessment requirement within the General Plan Housing
Element;and,4)limit the ancillary residential use to locations not directly facing a street.The
June 21,2011 City Council Staff Report and associated Minutes for the Code Amendment
Initiation Request are attached to this report.
After publishing a duly noticed public hearing,on January 24,2012,the Planning
Commission reviewed and considered a request to allow ancillary residential uses within
commercially zoned properties throughout the City.After considering the request on
February 14,2012,the Planning Commission adopted P.C.Resolution No.2012-02
recommending that the City Council deny a request to amend the Development Code b
allow ancillary residential uses within commercially zoned properties.
On March 13,2012,a Public Notice was mailed to all owners of commercial property within
the commercial zones slated for the allowance of ancillary residential units.The public notice
was also published in the Peninsula News on March 15,2012 and mailed to all property
owners located within a 50D-foot radius of the all commercial properties.As a result of the
public notice,Staff received six (6)comment letters against the proposed code amendment.
These comment letters are attached to this report.
DISCUSSION
Planning Commission Recommendation
On January 24,2012,Staff presented the Planning Commission with a DraftOrdinance at a
duly noticed public hearing that would allow "ancillary residential uses"within the
Commercial Neighborhood (CN),Commercial Limited (CL),Commercial Professional (CP)
and Commercial General (CG)zoning districts.In addition,the Ordinance drafted by Staff
introduced a number of development standards to ensure that "ancillary residential uses"
would minimize impacts to adjacent neighbors and be ancillary to the primary commercial
use of the property.The draft Ordinance is described in the attached January 24,2012
2-3
Planning Commission Staff Report.
As noted in the attached January 24,2012 PC minutes,the Planning Commission raised a
number of concerns with the proposed Ordinance including,but not limited to,environmental
impacts related to noise,odor and circulation impacts,enforcement issues,potential low-
quality housing,loss of commercial revenue and the change in character of the City's
existing commercial centers.The Planning Commission was concerned with the "ancillary"
nature of the request,as this type of mixed-use is atypical and has not been tested before.
The Planning Commission noted tha~given the objective,the City may be better off pursuing
more traditional mixed-use development,whereby the City first identifies a development site
that would be conducive for mixed-use rather than allowing an atypical version of mixed-use
in all commercially zoned properties in the City through a Conditional Use Permit.
Furthermore,the Planning Commission noted a concern with applying the proposed code
amendment to most of the commercial property owners in the City when only one
commercial property owner requested the code amendment(see attached January 24,2012
P,C.Minutes).
As a result of the Planning Commission's concerns with the proposed code amendment,the
Planning Commission adopted attached Resolution No.2012-02 (on a 5-0 vote)
recommending that the City Council no longer pursue the proposal to allow ancillary
residential uses in commercial zones throughout the City.
Commercial Property Survey
At the January 24,2012 public hearing,the Planning Commission noted a lack of feedback
from commercial property owners within the City.To provide the City Council with this
feedback,Staff developed a brief survey (attached)that was mailed to commercial property
owners throughout the City in an effort to gauge their opinions on the proposed code
amendment.The survey was purposely designed to elicit straight forward responses.On
February 16,2012,Staff sent the surveys to commercial property owners representing a
total of 41 commercial properties in all commercial zones in the City,except the Commercial
Recreational Zone (Terranea Resort).The surveys were mailed to the addresses assigned
to commercial properties as noted in City records.A list of the commercial property owners is
attached.It should be noted that some property owners own multiple properties,and staff
only sent one survey to an ownerof multiple properties.
Staff received responses related to 21 of the 41 commercial properties (51%).All of the
responses are attached along with a table summarizing the results.Based on the responses
received,responses related to 11 commercial properties (52.3%)reported no opinion on the
proposal,responses related to 5 commercial properties (23.8%)were in favor of the
proposal and responses related to 5 commercial properties (23.8%)wereagainst the
proposal.Given the split survey results,the survey did notindicate an overwhelming position
for or against the proposed code amendment by commercial property owners.
Staffs Recommendation
While Staff agrees with some of the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission,the
2-4
current Development Code does not even allow a commercial property owner to submit an
application to see if a limited number of residential units could be accommodated within a
commercial property.As noted in the June 21,2011 City Council Staff Report(attached),a
very limited amount of commercial space conversion may be beneficial to commercial
property owners with little to no impact upon the existing conmercial centers.However,
given the survey results and the concerns expressed by the Planning Commission about
imposing the proposal on commercial properties city wide,Staff now believes that the
proposed code amendment should be limited in its scope.ThLS,notwithstanding the
Planning Commission's recommendation to not pursue any code amendment,Staff is
recommending that the code be amended to allow limited ancillary residential uses with
approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)or CUP Revision in only the Commercial
Neighborhood (CN)Zoning District.There are only four (4)properties within the City that are
zoned CN:the Golden Cove Center,Pt.Vicente Animal Hospita~the 7-11 shopping center
on the corner of Hawthorne Blvd and Grawia Altamira and a vacant property at the corner of
Crenshaw and Silver Spur.Staff did not receive any comments or surveys opposing the
ancillary residential code language from these property owners.However,Staff did receive a
survey response from the property owner ofthe Pt.Vicente Animal Hospital who noted that
she hoped that City would carefully consider the code language.
To implement these proposed changes,Staff is recommending that the City's Development
Code be amended to allow ancillary residential uses wil1in the CN zoning districts.Said
residential uses are proposed to be conditionally permitted,meaning that they will be allowed
provided a Conditional Use Permit is reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission.
In addition,Staff has identified a new section of the Code containing development standards
for said "ancillary residential uses".The proposed changes to the relevant code sections are
shown below with additional language shown in underlined text and deletions shown in
strike out text.
Commercial Neighborhood (CN)District
To allow ancillary residential uses in this district,Staff is proposing to amend the "uses and
development permitted by conditional use permit"section of the Commercial Neighborhood
District Chapter (Chapter 17.16 of the RPVMC)to allow ancillary residential uses within the
CN district through review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit as discussed below:
Section 17.16.030 Uses and development permitted by conditional use permit.
The following uses may be permitted in the commercial neighborhood (CN)zone if
it is found in each individual case by the planning commission that the criteria and
limitations imposed on such uses by other provisions of this title are satisfied,and if
specific conditions are imposed to carry out the intent and purpose set out in Section
17.16.010 of this chapter and Chapter 17.60 (Conditional Use Permits):
U.Ancillary Residential Uses,pursuant to Section 17.16.040 (Ancillary residential
uses);
.fd.:.V.Such uses as the director deems to be similar and no more intensive.Such a
2-5
determination may be appealed to the planning commission and the planning
commission's decision may be appealed to the city council pursuant to Chapter 17.80
(Hearing Notice and Appeal Procedures).If a proposed use or development is
located in the coastal specific plan district,the city's final decisions regarding such
other use may be appealed to the California Coastal Commission for a determination
that the uses are similar and compatible with the local coastal program.
Development Standards for Ancillary Residential Uses in the Commercial Neighborhood
District
Staff recommends adding a new Section 17.16.040 (Ancillary Residential Uses)to existing
Chapter 17.16 (Commercial Neighborhood)that establishes the purpose,application
process and development standards for ancillary residential uses.
17.16.40 Ancillary Residential Uses
A.Purpose.This section provides criteria for the use,development and
regulation of ancillary residential uses within the commercial neighborhood (CN)
zoning district within the city.These criteria ensure that ancillary residential uses
are developed and used on adequate sites,at proper and desirable locations with
respect to surrounding land uses,and are consistent with the goals and
objectives of the general plan and any applicable specific plans.These criteria
further ensure that if located in a commercial neighborhood district.ancillary
residential uses are compatible with the commercial environment and surrounding
neighboring properties.Permitted residential uses within commercial
neighborhood districts shall be clearly ancillary to the existing commercial uses so
that an entire commercial center is not converted to a residential use,thereby
protecting commercial uses in the City,including conveniently located retail,
restaurant and office space.
B.Application .
.L Conditional Use Permit Required.In commercial neighborhood zoning
districts where such conditional use is allowed by this title,the
development of new ancillary residential uses or the conversion of any
portion of an existing use or structure to an ancillary residential use
shall require the approval of a conditional use permit by the planning
commission pursuant to the requirements of this chapter and Chapter
17.60 (Conditional Use Permit)of this title.
C.Development Standards .
.L The lot on which an ancillary residential use is proposed shall contain a
commercial development.occupied by commercial tenant(s),which
shall be considered as the primary use.Commercial t61ants shall
include retail,office or restaurant uses,or other uses deemed to be
commercial in nature as determined by this Code and the director.
2.The total square footage of all ancillary residential uses on anyone (1)
property shall not exceed 5%of 1I1e existing total square footage on
said property that can be leased.In addition,the total number of
ancillary residential units on a commercial property shall not exceed
10%of the total number of existing individual units that can be leased
2-6
within the commercial property.
3.The proposed location of the ancillary residential units shall not
adversely impact the overall operation of the property as a commercial
center and shall not be located along a facade facing a street.
4.The ancillary residential use shall not be used for a hotel or transient
occupancy as defined within this Code.
5.The ancillary residential use shall be compatible with the architecture
and materials of the existing development.
6.Each ancillary residential unit shall comply with the residmtial
occupancy standards set forth in the most recently adopted California
Building Code,including,but not limited to,inclusion of one full
bathroom and one kitchen,the minimum required interior space
dimensions,light and ventilation requirements,the minimum rating for
fire-resistive walls and the minimum number of units available for
persons with disabilities.
1.A maximum of one (1)bedroom is permitted per ancillary residential
unit.
8.A minimum of one (1)parking space per approved unit shall be
designated on the commercial property for sole use by the occupant(s)
of the ancillary residential unit.Said parking space shall be depicted on
a site plan provided to the city and shall be located within 150 feet of
the proposed unit.Said distance shall be measured along a legal and
safe pedestrian path from the parking space to the nearest entrance of
the ancillary residential unit.
9.Each required parking space dedicated to an ancillary residential unit
shall be a minimum of 9 feet in width and 20 feet in Imgth and shall not
interfere with the vehicular circulation of the parking lot of the
commercial development.
10.Access to an ancillary residential unit shall be provided only from
common access areas such as hallways,corridors and central entry
way portions of the building.
1LAlllighting associated with an ancillary residential unit shall be
adequately shielded to prevent adverse impacts to other surrounding
properties.
12.The address of each ancillary residential unit shall clearly be identified
outside of each unit.near the front entrance of each unit.
13.The ancillary residential use shall be located entirely within a
permanent structure that is affixed to the property and shall not be
permitted through the use of a trailer,as defined in Chapter 17.96
(Definitions)or any other recreational vehicle.
14.Each ancillary residential unit shall remain under the same ownership
as the commercial development and shall not be sold as a separate
condominium.
15.The primary householder of an ancillary residential unit shalll:E
employed within the commercial development where the residential use
is located.In the event the primary householder is no longer employed
at that commercial development.the occupants shall vacate the unit at
the termination of the then-current lease,and no option to renew or
2-7
extend the lease shall be permitted.Termination of a residential lease
shall comply with applicable State Laws.
16.If five (5)or more ancillary residential units are located on a commercial
property,10%of all of the residential U1its shall be rented to
households whose income is at a level that does not exceed the "low
income"affordability level,pursuant to Chapter 17.11 (Affordable
Housing)of this Title.-
17.All ancillary residential uses shall comply with all applicable zoning
development standards in which the ancillary residential units will be
located.This shall include,but not be limited to,standards regarding
height.setbacks and lot coverage.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Environmental Assessment
On June 1,2010,the City Council certified a Negative Declaration (NO)in conjunction with
the adoption of the Residential Development Standards Steering Committee (RDSSC)Code
Amendment and Zone Change,Ordinance No.510 (Planning Case No.ZON2007-00377).
The RDSSC Code Amendment involved modifications to miscellaneous provisions of the
Development Code,which (with the certification of the NO)the City Council found to have no
significant impacts upon the environment.In addition,a total of four (4)addendums to the
Negative Declaration for Ordnance No.510 have been processed to date,including a
separate addendum that is being considered by the City Council on this agenda
The proposed code amendment is to add code language to Chapters 17.16 and 17.12 of the
Development Code to allow ancillary residential units within commercial properties zoned
Commercial Neighborhood (CN).Staff believes that the proposed code revisions are within
the scope of the miscellaneous Development Code revisions analyzed in the NO for the
RDSSC Code Amendment.Therefore,Staff has prepared Addendum NO.5 to the RDSSC
Code Amendment NO to address the compliance of the proposed code revisions with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).Addendum NO.5 is attached
to the Resolution presented for the City Council's consideration.
Public Comments
As noted in the Background section of this report,Staff mailed a public noticeon April 3,
2012 to all property owners located within a 50Q.foot radius of a commercially zoned
property in the City.As a result of the April 3,2012 City Council public hearing notice,Staff
received a total offive public comments.These comment letters relay concerns with the
proposed code amendment noting impacts related to noise,loss of commercial revenue and
land use inconsistency.These concerns are similar to the concerns addressed by Staff
under Additional Information in the January 24,2012 Planning Commission Staff Report
(attached).
Comments from Golden Cove Center (Paris Zarrabian)
Given that this issue was originally raised by Mr.Paris Zarrabian,owner of the Golden Cove
2-8
Shopping Center,Staff recently met with Mr.Zarrabian to confirm that Staff understands Mr.
Zarrabian's intent.Mr.Zarrabian confirmed that he would like to provide high quality housing
options only to the people who work at the Golden Cove Center.He noted that a few tenants
expressed their desire to be able to stay over night due to their working hours and the long
commute.Given the fact that Mr.Zarrabian only wisres to lease livable spaces to current
employees of the Golden Cove Shopping Center,Staff and Mr.Zarrabian agreed that
limiting the units to one (1)bedroom and studio options only,seemed most appropriate.
Western Avenue Specific Plan Update
Given the Planning Commission's discussion related to mixed-use development,it should be
noted that the City's Housing Element,adopted by the City Council in 2010,identifies
programs/actions that are to be undertaken by the City to help meet its Regional Housing
Needs Assessment (RHNA).One of these programs is the Western Avenue Specific Plan
Update,whereby the Housing Element states "the City will include standards and policies in
the document to allow and facilitate for residential uses,thereby allowing for rrixed-use
development opportunities that includes residential and commercial uses along Western
Avenue"(page 4-7,Rancho Palos Verdes Housing Element,certified March 24,2010).The
City was recently awarded a Compass Blueprint Grant to embark upon updatiry the Western
Avenue Specific Plan whereby mixed use development will be considered.
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the City Council review the Planning Commission's recommendation
to deny the proposed code amendment and considerthe request from the property owner of
Golden Cove Center (Paris Zarrabian).If the City Council feels that the proposed code
amendment has merit and should be approved within Commercial Neighborhood (CN)zones
only,Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Ordinance drafted by Staff.
ALTERNATIVES
The following alternatives are available for the City Council's consideration in addition to
Staff's recommendation:
1.Make no change to the existing Development Code as recommended by the
Planning Commission.
2.Adopt the code amendment presented to the Planning Commission on February
14,2012 which allows ancillary residential uses in more commercial districts in
the City.
[NOTE:This alternative differs from Staff's current recommendation,which is to
allow said use in only the Commercial Neighborhood (CN)zoning district.
Instead,this alternative would allow ancillary residential uses within all of the
following commercial zoning districts:Commercial Neighborhood (CN),
Commercial Limited (CL),Commercial Professional (CP)and Commercial
General (CG).Since this alternative would conditionally allow said uses within
2-9
more commercial zoning districts,this would afford approximately 41 commercial
developments the opportunity to apply for a CUP for this use,significantly more
than just the 4 properties that are zoned Commercial Neighborhood (CN).]
3.Direct Staff to draft a code amendment with different procedures and standards
than those presented by Staff.
ATTACHMENTS
o Resolution No.2012-_(Addendum NO.5 to Negative Declaration)
o Ordinance No.
o P.C.Resolution No.2012-02
o Public Comments
o Commercial Property Survey Results and Comments
o January 24,2012 P.C.Minutes
o January 24,2012 P.C.Staff Report
o February 14,2012 P.C.Staff Report
o City Council Staff Report -Code Amendment Initiation Request (June 21,2011 r
o Approved Minutes for June 21,2011 City Council meeting
*Some personal information was requested to be redacted from viewing on the internet.If
you wish to view this information,a fill copy of the record is available in the Community
Development Department.Please ask to speak with Leza Mikhail,if you wish to view this
information.
2-10
Resolution No.2012-
(Addendum No.5 to Negative Declaration)
2-11
RESOLUTION NO.__
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES ADOPTING ADDENDUM NO.5
TO THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR ORDINANCE NO.
510,FOR A CODE AMENDMENT TO AMEND SECTION
17.16.030 AND ADD A NEW SECTION 17.16.040 TO TITLE
17 (ZONING)OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE (CASE NO.
ZON2011-00089).
WHEREAS,on June 1,2010,the City Council adopted Resolution No.2010-43,
thereby adopting a Negative Declaration for miscellaneous amendments to Title 17 of the
City's Municipal Code to enact the Residential Development Steering Committee Code
Amendment and Zone Change (Ordinance No.510)and,
WHEREAS,on September 21,2010,the City Council adopted Addendum NO.1 to
the certified Negative Declaration for Ordinance No.510 and adopted Ordinance No.
513U,approving minor changes to Chapter 17.38 of the Development Code to correct the
omission of Specific Plan District VII,and to change the designation of specific plan
districts from numbered to descriptive titles;and,
WHEREAS,on November 15,2011,the City Council adopted Addendum NO.2 to
the certified Negative Declaration for Ordinance No.510 and adopted Ordinance No.529,
approving miscellaneous "clean-up"code amendments to Title 17 (Zoning)of the City's
Development Code which clarified code language,removed code language discrepancies,
and codified existing policy procedures and/or application requirements;and,
WHEREAS,on February 7,2012,the City Council adopted Addendum No.3 to the
certified Negative Declaration for Ordinance No.510 and adopted Ordinance No.532
approving a change in the allowable movement of an open space hazard boundary line
from thirty feet to one hundred feet through the interpretation procedure;and
WHEREAS,on April 3,2012,the City Council adopted Addendum NO.4 to the
certified Negative Declaration for Ordinance No.510 and adopted Ordinance No._
regulating the number of residential garage sales allowed within the City limits;and,
WHEREAS,on April 12,2011,the property owner of the Golden Cove Center
submitted a Code Amendment Initiation Request to allow residential uses within the
Golden Cove Center,a commercially zoned property;and,
WHEREAS,On June 21,2011,at the recommendation of Staff,the City Council
initiated a Code Amendment and directed Staff to move forward with drafting potential
development standards to allow residential uses within the Golden Cove Center and other
commercially-zoned properties in the City through the discretionary review of a Conditional
Use Permit (CUP).In addition,the City Council directed the Planning Commission to
2-12
consider the potential development standards for said residential uses to ensure that they
are clearly ancillary to commercial uses,to ensure that the residential units do not
adversely affect the vitality of the commercial developments and to minimize impacts to
adjacent neighbors.Specifically,the City Council requested that the development
standards:1)limit the amount of ancillary residential use to 5 percent of the total building
square footage;2)include provisions for apartment housing,but not allow hotel or transient
use;3)include a provision for the units to be counted towards meeting the City's Regional
Housing Needs Assessment requirement;and,4)limit the ancillary residential use to
locations not directly facing a street;and,
WHEREAS,after publishing a duly noticed public hearing,on January 24,2012,the
Planning Commission reviewed and considered a request to allow ancillary residential uses
within commercially zoned properties throughout the City and continued the public hearing
to February 14,2012.After considering the request,on February 14,2012,the Planning
Commission adopted P.C.Resolution No.2012-02 recommending that the City Council
deny a request to amend the Development Code to allow ancillary residential uses within
commercially zoned properties.
WHEREAS,on March 13,2012,a Public Notice was mailed to all owners of
commercial property within the commercial zones slated for the allowance of ancillary
residential units.The public notice was also published in the Peninsula News on March 15,
2012 and mailed to all property owners located within a 500-foot radius of the all
commercial properties.As a result of the public notice;and,
WHEREAS,pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,
Public Resources Code Sections 2100ef seq.("CEQA"),the State's CEQA Guidelines,
California Code Regulations,Title.14,Section 15000 ef seq.,the City's Local CEQA,and
Government Code Section 65962.5(f)(Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement),the
City determined that there is no substantial evidence that the code amendment would
result in a significant adverse effect on the environment.Accordingly,Addendum NO.5 to
the Negative Declaration for Ordinance No.510,has been prepared;and,
WHEREAS,on April 3,2012,the City Council held a public hearing,at which time all
interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence;and,
NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND,DETERMINE,AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1:Addendum NO.5 is for an environmental assessment in conjunction with
a code amendment to revise Section 17.16.030 (Uses and development permitted by
conditional use permit)and add new Section 17.16.040 (Ancillary Residential Uses)to Title
17 (Zoning)of the Municipal Code that would allow ancillary residential units within
commercial properties zoned Commercial Neighborhood (CN).
2-13
Section 2:In approving Addendum NO.5 to the Negative Declaration for Ordinance
No.510,the City Council has reviewed and considered the Addendum NO.5 document,
attached hereto and made a part thereof as Exhibit "A".
Section 3:The Addendum NO.5 identifies no new significant adverse environmental
impacts to the areas listed below:
1.Landform,Geology,and Soils
2.Hydrology and Drainage
3.Biological Resources
4.Cultural and Scientific Resources
5.Aesthetics
6.Land Use and Relevant Planning
7.Circulation and Traffic
8.Air Resources
9.Noise
10.Public Services and Utilities
11.Population,Employment and Housing
12.Fiscal Impacts
Section 4:The Addendum No.5 identifies that the proposed revisions will not result
in any significant environmental impacts,and the circumstances under which the code
amendment is being undertaken have not substantially changed since the CEQA
determination was made for the Negative Declaration adopted through Resolution No.
2010-43 for Ordinance No.510.
Section 5:No new information of substantial importance,which was not known and
could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the prior
Negative Declaration for Ordinance No.510 was adopted,identifies a significant
environmental effect.
Section 6:All findings and attachments contained in Resolution No.2010-43,as
adopted by the City Council on June 1,2010 are hereby incorporated by reference.
Section 7:The time within which the judicial review of the decision reflected in this
Resolution,if available,must be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California
Code of Civil Procedure or any other applicable short period of limitations.
Section 8:For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings
contained in the staff reports,minutes,and evidence presented at the public hearings,the
City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby approves Addendum NO.5 to the
Negative Declaration for Ordinance No.510,based on the City Council's determination that
the document was completed in compliance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act and State and local guidelines with respect thereto.
2-14
PASSED,APPROVED,and ADOPTED this 3rd day of April 2012.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )ss
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES )
I,Carla Morreale,City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,hereby certify that the
above Resolution No.2012-_was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City
Council at a regular meeting held on April 3,2012.
City Clerk
2-15
EXHIBIT "A"
(Addendum No.5 to Negative Declaration)
Project Background:On June 1,2010 the City Council adopted Resolution No.2010-
43,thereby adopting a Negative Declaration for miscellaneous amendments to Title 17
of the City's Municipal Code to enact the Residential Development Standards Steering
Committee Code amendment and Zone Change (Ordinance No.510).Prior to its
adoption,the Negative Declaration was circulated for public comment from April 1,
2010,through May 1,2010.In adopting the Negative Declaration,the City Council
found that:1)the Negative Declaration was prepared in the manner required by law
and that there was no substantial evidence that the approval of the Residential
Development Standards Steering Committee Code Amendment and Zone Change
(Case No.ZON2007 -00377)would result in a significant adverse effect upon the
environment;and 2)that the Residential Development Standards Steering Committee
Code Amendment and Zone Change were consistent with the Rancho Palos Verdes
General Plan and with the Coastal Specific Plan.On September 21,2010,the City
Council approved Addendum NO.1 to the certified Negative Declaration (ND)and
adopted Ordinance No.513U to make minor changes to Chapter 17.38 of the
Development Code to correct the omissions of Specific Plan District VII,and to change
the designation of specific plan districts from numbered to descriptive titles.On
November 15,2011,the City Council approved Addendum NO.2 to the certified ND and
adopted Ordinance No.529,approving miscellaneous "clean-up"code amendments to
Title 17 (Zoning)of the City's Development Code which clarified code language,
removed code language discrepancies,and codified existing policy procedures and/or
application requirements.On February 7,2012,the City Council approved Addendum
NO.3 to the certified ND and adopted Ordinance No.532 approving a change in the
allowable movement of an open space hazard boundary line from thirty feet to one
hundred feet through the interpretation procedure.Lastly,on April 3,2012,the City
Council approved Addendum NO.4 to the certified ND and adopted Ordinance No._
regulating the number of residential garage sales allowed within the City limits.
Proposed Amendments:The City is currently reviewing a code amendment to
revise Section 17.16.030 (Uses and development permitted by conditional use permit)and
adding new Section 17.16.040 (Ancillary Residential Uses)of Chapter 17.16 of Title 17
(Zoning)the Development Code to allow ancillary residential units within commercial
properties zoned Commercial Neighborhood (CN).
Purpose:This Addendum to the previously-certified Negative Declaration is being
prepared pursuant to Section 15164 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Guidelines,which allows for the lead agency to prepare an addendum to an adopted
Negative Declaration if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or
none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a
subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration have occurred.Pursuant to CEQA Section
15162,no subsequent Negative Declaration shall be prepared for the project unless the
lead agency determines,on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole
record,one or more of the follOWing:
2-16
1.Substantial changes are proposed in the project that will required major revisions
of the previous Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new,significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant effects;
2.Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the
project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous Negative
Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a
substantial increase in the severity or previously identified significant effects;or,
3.New information of substantial importance identifies one or more significant
effects not discussed in the previous Negative Declaration,significant effects
previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the
previous Negative Declaration,mitigation measures or alternatives previously
found not to be feasible or not analyzed in the Negative Declaration would be
feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects but the
project proponents decline to adopt a measure or alternative.
Findings Regarding the Proposed Project Revisions:
Staff analyzed the proposed code amendment to Section 17.16.030 and addition of
Section 17.16.040 of Chapter 17.16 to determine if any impacts would result.The City
Council has independently reviewed this item and has determined that,pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines Section 15162,a new Negative Declaration is not required for this
revision because the proposed amendments will not result in any new significant
environmental effects:
1.The proposed revisions do not result in any new significant environmental effects
and,like Ordinance No.510 and 513U,no significant impacts have been
identified.The revisions to Title 17 (Zoning)do not present new significant
environmental impacts because they will restrict the number of garage sales on
residential properties,which will prevent the corresponding problems of
disruption to residential neighborhoods due to noise and increased parking on
public streets.Therefore,the proposed revisions will not result in new significant
environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of any existing
impacts.
2.The proposed revisions will not result in any significant environmental impacts.
The scope of the proposed revisions relate to minor modifications in the code
language to restrict garage sales in residentially zoned districts.There are no
changes with respect to the circumstances under which the code revisions are
undertaken that will require major revisions of the previous Negative Declaration.
3.No new information of substantial importance,which was not known and could
not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the
2-17
prior Negative Declaration was adopted,identifies a significant environmental
effect.Because the proposed revisions would not result in any new or more
severe environmental impacts than those associated with Ordinance No.510,
there is no need for new or substantially modified mitigation measures.
Therefore,pursuant to CEQA,the City Council finds that no further environmental review is
necessary other than the City Council's adoption of this Addendum NO.5.
2-18
Draft Ordinance No.-
2-19
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
AMENDING SECTION 17.16.030 AND ADDING A NEW SECTION
17.16.040 OF TITLE 17 (ZONING)OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE
TO ALLOW ANCILLARY RESIDENTIAL USES WITHIN THE
COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING DISTRICTS ONLY
THROUGH THE DISCRETIONARY REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF A
CONDITOIANL USE PERMIT,AND ESTABLISHING DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS FOR SAID ANCILLARY RESIDENTIAL USES (CASE NO.
ZON2011-00089).
WHEREAS,on April 12,2011,the property owner of the Golden Cove Center
submitted a Code Amendment Initiation Request to allow residential uses within the
Golden Cove Center,a commercially zoned property;and,
WHEREAS,On June 21,2011,at the recommendation of Staff,the City Council
initiated a Code Amendment and directed Staff to move forward with drafting potential
development standards to allow residential uses within the Golden Cove Center and
other commercially-zoned properties in the City through the discretionary review of a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP).In addition,the City Council directed the Planning
Commission to consider the potential development standards for said residential uses to
ensure that they are clearly ancillary to commercial uses,to ensure that the residential
units do not adversely affect the vitality of the commercial developments and to
minimize impacts to adjacent neighbors.Specifically,the City Council requested that the
development standards:1)limit the amount of ancillary residential use to 5 percent of
the total building square footage;2)include provisions for apartment housing,but not
allow hotel or transient use;3)include a provision for the units to be counted towards
meeting the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment requirement;and,4)limit the
ancillary residential use to locations not directly facing a street;and,
WHEREAS,after publishing a duly noticed public hearing,on January 24,2012,
the Planning Commission reviewed and considered a request to allow ancillary
residential uses within commercially zoned properties throughout the City and continued
the public hearing to February 14,2012.After considering the request,on February 14,
2012,the Planning Commission adopted P.C.Resolution No.2012-02 recommending
that the City Council deny a request to amend the Development Code to allow ancillary
residential uses within commercially zoned properties;and,
WHEREAS,on March 13,2012,a Public Notice was mailed to all owners of
commercial property within the commercial zones slated for the allowance of ancillary
residential units.The public notice was also published in the Peninsula News on March
15,2012 and mailed to all property owners located within a 500-foot radius of the all
commercial properties.As a result of the public notice;and,
2-20
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 Regulations,Title 14,Section 1500 et seq.,the City's Local
CEQA Guidelines,and Government Code Section 65962.5(f)(Hazardous Waste and
Substances Statement),the City determined that there is no substantial evidence that
the approval of Planning Case No.ZON2011-00089 would result in a significant
adverse effect on the environment.Accordingly,Addendum No.5 to the Negative
Declaration,which was prepared in conjunction with the adoption of this Ordinance,was
adopted by the City Council on April 3,2011 via Resolution No.2012-_;and,
NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS
VERDES DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1:The City Council has reviewed and considered the amendments to
Title 17 (Zoning)of the City's Municipal Code.
Section 2:The City Council finds that the amendments to Title 17 of the
Municipal Code are consistent with California Government Code Section 65853,zoning
amendment procedures.
Section 3:The City Council finds that the amendments to Title 17 are
consistent with the Rancho Palos Verdes General Plan and Coastal Specific Plan in that
they uphold,and do not hinder,the goals and policies of those plans.
Section 4:The City Council finds that the amendments to Title 17 are
necessary to preserve the public health,safety,and general welfare in the area.
Section 5:Section 17.16.030 of Chapter 17.16 of Title 17 of the Rancho Palos
Verdes Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding new Paragraph U and
renumbering existing paragraph U as paragraph V to read as follows (the underlined
text represents new language):
1L.Ancillary Residential Uses,pursuant to Section 17.16.040 (Ancillary
residential uses);
-Y-:-V.Such uses as the director deems to be similar and no more intensive.Such a
determination may be appealed to the planning commission and the planning
commission's decision may be appealed to the city council pursuant to Chapter
17.80 (Hearing Notice and Appeal Procedures).If a proposed use or
development is located in the coastal specific plan district,the city's final
decisions regarding such other use may be appealed to the California Coastal
Commission for a determination that the uses are similar and compatible with the
local coastal program.
Ordinance No.
Page 2 of62-21
Section 6:Chapter 17.16 of Title 17 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal
Code is hereby amended to add a new Section 17.16.040 thereto to read as follows (the
underlined text represents new language):
17.12.100 Ancillary Residential Uses
A.Purpose.This section provides criteria for the use,development and
regulation of ancillary residential uses within the commercial neighborhood
(CN)zoning district within the city.These criteria ensure that ancillary
residential uses are developed and used on adequate sites,at proper and
desirable locations with respect to surrounding land uses,and are consistent
with the goals and objectives of the general plan and any applicable specific
plans.These criteria further ensure that if located in a commercial
neighborhood district.ancillary residential uses are compatible with the
commercial environment and surrounding neighboring properties.Permitted
residential uses within commercial neighborhood districts shall be clearly
ancillary to the existing commercial uses so that an entire commercial center
is not converted to a residential use,thereby protecting commercial uses in
the City,including conveniently located retail.restaurant and office space.
~Application .
.L Conditional Use Permit Required.In commercial neighborhood
zoning districts where such conditional use is allowed by this title,
the development of new ancillary residential uses or the conversion
of any portion of an existing use or structure to an ancillary
residential use shall require the approval of a conditional use permit
by the planning commission pursuant to the requirements of this
chapter and Chapter 17.60 (Conditional Use Permit)of this title.
C.Development Standards .
.L The lot on which an ancillary residential use is proposed shall
contain a commercial development.occupied by commercial
tenant(s),which shall be considered as the primary use.
Commercial tenants shall include retail.office or restaurant uses,or
other uses deemed to be commercial in nature as determined by
this Code and the director.
£.The total square footage of all ancillary residential uses on anyone
(1)property shall not exceed 5%of the existing total square footage
on said property that can be leased.In addition,the total number of
ancillary residential units on a commercial property shall not exceed
10%of the total number of existing individual units that can be
leased within the commercial property.
3.The proposed location of the ancillary residential units shall not
adversely impact the overall operation of the property as a
commercial center and shall not be located along a facade facing a
street.
4.The ancillary residential use shall not be used for a hotel or
transient occupancy as defined within this Code.
Ordinance No.
Page 3 of62-22
5.The ancillary residential use shall be compatible with the
architecture and materials of the existing development.
6.Each ancillary residential unit shall comply with the residential
occupancy standards set forth in the most recently adopted
California Building Code,including,but not limited to,inclusion of
one full bathroom and one kitchen,the minimum required interior
space dimensions,light and ventilation requirements,the minimum
rating for fire-resistive walls and the minimum number of units
available for persons with disabilities.
7.A maximum of one (1)bedroom is permitted per ancillary residential
unit.
~A minimum of one (1)parking space per approved unit shall be
designated on the commercial property for sole use by the
occupant(s)of the ancillary residential unit.Said parking space shall
be depicted on a site plan provided to the city and shall be located
within 150 feet of the proposed unit.Said distance shall be
measured along a legal and safe pedestrian path from the parking
space to the nearest entrance of the ancillary residential unit.
9.Each required parking space dedicated to an ancillary residential
unit shall be a minimum of 9 feet in width and 20 feet in length and
shall not interfere with the vehicular circulation of the parking lot of
the commercial development.
10.Access to an ancillary residential unit shall be provided only from
common access areas such as hallways,corridors and central entry
way portions of the building.
llAII lighting associated with an ancillary residential unit shall be
adequately shielded to prevent adverse impacts to other
surrounding properties.
12.The address of each ancillary residential unit shall clearly be
identified outside of each unit near the front entrance of each unit.
13.The ancillary residential use shall be located entirely within a
permanent structure that is affixed to the property and shall not be
permitted through the use of a trailer,as defined in Chapter 17.96
(Definitions)or any other recreational vehicle.
14.Each ancillary residential unit shall remain under the same
ownership as the commercial development and shall not be sold as
a separate condominium.
15.The primary householder of an ancillary residential unit shall be
employed within the commercial development where the residential
use is located.In the event the primary householder is no longer
employed at that commercial development the occupants shall
vacate the unit at the termination of the then-current lease,and no
option to renew or extend the lease shall be permitted.Termination
of a residential lease shall comply with applicable State Laws.
16.lf five (5)or more ancillary residential units are located on a
commercial property,10%of all of the residential units shall be
Ordinance No.
Page 4 of62-23
rented to households whose income is at a level that does not
exceed the "low income"affordability level,pursuant to Chapter
17.11 (Affordable Housing)of this Title.
17.AIl ancillary residential uses shall comply with all applicable zoning
development standards in which the ancillary residential units will be
located.This shall include.but not be limited to.standards regarding
height,setbacks and lot coverage.
Section 7:The amendments to Title 17 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal
Code as identified herein shall apply to all applications that are filed after the effective'
date this ordinance.
Section 8:Severability.If any section,subsection,subdivision,sentence,
clause,phrase,or portion of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or
place,is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court
of competent jurisdiction,such decision shall not affect the validity of the remainder of
this ordinance.The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this
ordinance,and each and every section,subsection,subdivision,sentence,clause,
phrase,or portion thereof,irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections,
subsections,subdivisions,sentences,clauses,phrases,or portions thereof be declared
invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 9:The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in three (3)
public places in the City within fifteen (15)days after its passage,in accordance with the
provisions of Section 36933 of the Government Code.The City Clerk shall further certify
to the adoption and posting of this Ordinance,and shall cause this Ordinance and its
certification,together with proof of posting,to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of
the Council of this City of Rancho Palos Verdes.
Section 10:This Ordinance shall go into effect and be in full force and effect at
12:01 AM on the 31 st day after its passage.
PASSED,APPROVED and ADOPTED this _day of April 2012.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Ordinance No.
Page 5 of 6
2-24
State of California )
County of Los Angeles )ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes )
I,Carla Morreale,City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,do hereby certify that
the whole number of members of the City Council of said City is five;that the foregoing
Ordinance No._passed first reading on April 3,2012,was duly and regularly
adopted by the City Council of said City at a regular meeting thereof held on _
2012,and that the same was passed and adopted by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
City Clerk
Ordinance No.
Page 6 of6
2-25
Planning Commission Resolution No.
2012-02
ATTACHMENT 2-1
P.C.RESOLUTION NO.2012-02
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL .DENY A REQUEST TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT CODE
TO ALLOW ANCILLARY RESIDENTIAL USES WITHIN
COMMERCIALLY 20NED PROPERTIES OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL
CODE (PLANNING CASE NO.ZON2011-00089)
WHEREAS,on April 12,2011,the property owner of the Golden Cove Center
sUbmitted a Code Amendment Initiation Request to allow residential uses within the
Golden Cove Center,a commercially zoned property;and,
WHEREAS,On June 21,2011,at the recommendation of Staff,the City Council
initiated a Code Amendment and directed Staff to move forward with drafting potential
development standards to allow residential uses within the Golden Cove Center and
other commercially-zoned properties in the City through the discretionary review of a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP).In addition,the City Council directed the Planning
Commission to consider the potential development standards for said residential uses to
ensure that they are clearly ancillary to commercial uses,to ensure that the residential
units do not adversely affect the vitautyof the commercial developments and to
minimize impacts to adjacent neighbors.Specifically,the City Council requested that the
development standards:1)limit the amount of ancillary residential use to 5 percent of
the total building square footage;2)include provisions for apartment housing,but not
allow hotel or transient use;3)include a provision for the units to be counted towards
meeting the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment requirement;and,4)limit the
ancillary residential use to locations not directly facing a street;and,
WHEREAS,on January 2,2012,a Public Notice was mailed to all owners of
commercial property within the commercial zones slated for the allowance of ancillary
residential units.In addition,a pUblic notice was mailed to all property owners who
reside within a 500-foot radi.us of commercial properties slated for the allowance of
ancillary residential units.The public notice was also published in the Peninsula News
on January 5,2012.A supplemental public notice was given to all property owners
noted above on January 9,2012 to prOVide some clarifying information on the proposal;
and,
WHEREAS,after notice was issued pursuant to the provisions of the Rancho
Palos Verdes Municipal Code,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on
January 24,2012,at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be
heard and present evidence regarding said amendments to Title 17 as set forth in the
January 24,2012 Planning Commission Staff report.
NOW,THEREFORE,THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND,DETERMINE,AND RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
ATTACHMENT 2-2
Section 1:The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the
proposed amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code to allow ancillary residential
units within the Commercial Limited (CL),Commercial Professional (CP),Commercial
Neighborhood (CN)and Commercial General (CG)zoning districts and recommends
that the City Council not pursue the proposed code amendment.
Section 2:The amendments to allow ancillary reSidential uses within
commercial developments would not preserve the public health,safety,and general
welfare of the community and its residents because it may change the character of the
City's commercial areas.
Section 3:The amendments to allow ancillary residential units could result in a
loss of available commercially leasable area and,consequently,reduce the amount of
sales tax revenue generated for the City.
Section 4:The amendment to aHow ancillary residential units,as proposed,
could create potential environmental impacts related to noise,odor and circulation
beyond what commercial uses would produce.
Section 5:Allowing ancillary residential uses within primarily commercial
developments could create a number of law enforcement and legal issues including how
residential leases would be terminated if the tenant were no longer employed within the
commercial center,nuisance issues related to dwelling units next to noisy commercial
uses,and issues related to potential age restrictions on residents.
Section 6:The operation of a predominately commercial center may not be
compatible with ancillary residential uses.
S~ction 1:The Planning Commission finds that it may be more appropriate to
research speCific commercial areas throughout the City where "mixed-use"development
may be more appropriate,instead of allowing ancillary residential uses in all commercial
zones,as proposed.In addition,creating a zoning district and development standards
that allow for "mixed-use"development may be beneficial to ensuring that the health,
safety and general welfare of the City's abutting residential uses and commercial
viability are maintained.
Section 8:For the foregoing reasons,the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes hereby recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution
denying the proposed code amendment to allow ancillary residential uses within
commercial zoning districts (Planning Case No.ZON2011-00089).
P.C.Resolution No.2012-02
Page 2 of 3
ATTACHMENT 2-3
PASSED,APPROVED,AND ADOPTED this 14th day of February 201.2,by the
following vote:
AYES:Commissioners Emenhiser,Gerstner,Leon and Chairman Tomblin
NOES:None
ABSTENTION:Commissioner Lewis
ABSENT:Commissioner Tetreault
RECUSALS:None
c:::-~-~
David L.Tomblin
Chairman
Joel Raja,lep
Communi y evelapment Director,and
Secretary 0 the Planning Commission
P.C.Resolution No.2012-02
Page 3 of 3
ATTACHMENT 2-4
Public Comments
(April 3,2012 C.C.Meeting)
ATTACHMENT 2-5
Page 1 of 1
leza Mikhail
From:Carolynn Petru [carolynn@rpv.com]
Sent:Tuesday,March 27,20128:41 AM
To:'Leza Mikhail'
Cc:'Joel Rojas'
Subject:FW:(no subject)
From:BJGleghorn@aol.com [mailto:BJGleghorn@aol.com]
Sent:Monday,March 26,20127:40 PM
To:cc@rpv.com;parks@rpv.com
Subject:(no subject)
To:Mayor Anthony Misetich and all Members of the Council and Staff:
Re:Ancillary Residential Units --Public Hearing on April 3,2012
Please deny ancillary residential units within commercially zones properties.
This has been well discussed by Dena Friedson in her message to you so we will not repeat the
rationale previously stated.
Rancho Palos Verdes has been able to maintain strong property values since incorporation because of
the strength of the original planners and the consistency in the General Plan.This has kept us different
from some of our neighboring cities and has proved to be financially advantageous,we believe.Please
help maintain this advantage for our City by your action.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully.
Barbara and George Gleghorn
3/27/2012 ATTACHMENT 2-6
Leza Mikhail
From:Jay Jones Uaykjones90275@yahoo.com]
Sent:Friday,March 16,201211:55 AM
To:lezam@rpv.com
Subject:Case NO:ZON2011-00089 -Comments Against!
Case NO:ZON2011-00089 -Comments Against
03-16-2012
Jones Family
1921 Upland Street
RPV CA 90275-0001
Ms Mikhail,
The Jones family has resided in this (same)location since 1957.Since the incorporation
of RPV,all too often,big business and (over)development has run amok,with no
consideration given to proper,or even merely adequate infrastructure planning and
deployment.
Enough is enough!
There is no conceivable reason that employees of commercial businesses need to reside
on site.This will only add to the (beyond)ridiculous traffic,and congestion that occurs at
all hours of the day on Western Avenue in the 'Eastview'area of SP/RPV.
We strongly urge you and the RPV CDR:DO NOT amend the code,nor allow any changes
which will (certainly)denude the quality of life,and promote further commercialization of
our neighborhoods.
Most Respectfully!
Anne H Jones
James A Jones Jr
Jay K Jones
3/26/2012
Page 1 of 1
ATTACHMENT 2-7
Page 1 of 1
Leza Mikhail
From:7pillarsofwisdom @dslextreme.com [7pillarsofwisdom@dslextreme.com]
Sent:Tuesday,February 21,20128:52 AM
To:lezam@rpv.com
Cc:planning@rpv.com
Subject:Feedback on Proposed Code Amendment (Case No.Zon2011-00089)
Dear Ms.Mikhail
As a resident of Strathmore Townehomes,adjacent to commercial general zone along Western
Avenue,I,among others,object to allowing employees of commercial businesses to live on
commercially zoned property.
There has always been far too much noise coming from that property,Smart and Final has taken
it upon themselves to ignore city ordinances and allow deliveries on Sundays,national holidays
and after 7 pm.During deliveries multiple tractor trailer engines and refrigeration units are left
running,air horns are blown,employee and driver shouting,combined with trash truck pick up.
Lately music from radios'from trailers and mobile homes parked there has been excessive.
Sincerely,
V.Paul Baligian
28542 Radbrook Court
RPV,CA 90275
3/26/2012 ATTACHMENT 2-8
To:Leza Mikhail
From:Barbara Kennard and Ralph Horowitz
Date:March 6,2012
Re:Change of Commercial zoning along Western Avenue
RECEIVED
COMMUNITVDEVElOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
Ralph Horowitz and I are responding to the R.P.V.information inquiry regarding allowing some
residential use within a commercial area.Presently,the property that we own in RPV is located
north of Caddington Avenue and is zoned Commercial General.Western Avenue is a
designated State Highway,and has a high speed rate in that area.In the last several years we
have experienced several drivers who could not control their car and drove into the stores,
obliterating the windows.We also find that there are nutty drivers who have had their pleasure
of putting bullet holes through windows that have lights inside....We can show you window
receipts to prove it!This is not a safety zone!
We wish to confirm the fact that we are NOT in favor of changing the designated zoning to
allow a residential mix.We have had other bad experiences in the past that opened our eyes.
Our example:A personable young tenant rented our upstairs office for commercial use.
Without notice to us nor to adjoining commercial tenants,the tenant,after normal business
hours,converted the usage to accommodate entertaining his'friends,holding barbeques in the
parking area (In the absence of a back yard).Any California driver pulling into the parking area
would unexpectedly find persons in their headlights,enjoying a drink or two around a BBQ.The
tenant was oblivious to the fact that drivers pull into a commercial parking lot,in the dark of
December,expecting anything like that.This commercial lot took on a 'backyard'social aura,
contrary to the lease usage terms.On other occasions,the janitorial service informed us that he
found those premises used by drunks sleeping on the floor in the early morning hours.And the
Chiropractor below reported smells of what could have been 'laced'cigarettes.
Inasmuch as there is adequate condo and rental housing elsewhere in the San Pedro/RPV area,
we do not feel that this side of the hill warrants converting a commercial zone to accommodate
housing.
Sincerely,
ATTACHMENT 2-9
leza Mikhail
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
dena friedson [dlfriedson@gmail.com]
Tuesday,March 27,20123:33 PM
CC@rpv.com;dena friedson;lezam@rpv.com;joelr@rpv.com
Ancillary Residential Units --Public Hearing on April 3,2012
To:Mayor Anthony Misetich and all Members of the City Council and
To:Leza Mikhail and Joel Rojas
From:Dena Friedson --(dlfriedson@gmail.com)
Re:Ancillary Residential Units --Public Hearing on April 3,2012
Please deny ancillary residential units within commercially zoned properties throughout Rancho Palos Verdes.
Please follow the Planning Commission's recommendation and do NOT adopt proposed amendments to the
Development Code to allow such uses.
The Planning Commission determined that many problems could be caused by this mixture of housing and
businesses.A problem that is not listed in the staff report is the State's requirement that zoning (and the
implementing Development Codes)be consistent with the City's General Plan.In no way are ancillary
residential rental units consistent with the 1975 General Plan Land Use Map and General Plan Text or with any
type of commercial zonings.Likewise,in no way would commercial buildings be consistent with single-family
homes in residential areas.Approval of residential units in commercial zones would establish an undesirable
precedent.
Initially,the Planning Staff indicated that these proposed ancillary projects could be granted with a Conditional
Use Permit.However,Municipal Code 17.60.050 shows the six findings that must ALL be met in order to issue
a Conditional Use Permit.One finding is consistency with the General Plan.Another finding would allow
discretionary approval for uses that are similar to designated commercial-type uses.Residential uses are not
similar to commercial uses.The fact that a category is not specifically prohibited does not mean that it could be
legally permitted.
Rancho Palos Verdes'1975 General Plan Land Use Map and General Plan Text do NOT include residential uses
in commercial zones.When amendments to the General Plan Map were first proposed to adjust property lines
to conform with those on the Assessor's maps,residents were assured that the essence of the General Plan would
be preserved.
Now MAJOR CHANGES are being considered.
The 1975 General Plan Land Use Map and General Plan Text have served Rancho Palos Verdes very well.
Please vote to protect this 1975 General Plan Map and Text and the beautiful environmental quality of your
City.Many people moved here to escape urbanization.Please REJECT ancillary residential units and the
proposed Development Code amendments.
Thank you.
1 ATTACHMENT 2-10
Leza Mikhail
From:
Sent:
To:
SUbject:
dena friedson [dlfriedson@gmail.com]
Monday,February 13,2012 3:27 PM
pc@rpv.com;Joel Rojas;lezam@rpv.com;dena friedson
Ancillary Residential Units and Multi-Use Resolution
To:Chairman David Tomblin and all Members of the Planning Commission and
To:Joel Rojas and Leza Mikhail
From:Dena Friedson --(dlfriedson@gmail.com)
Re:Ancillary Residential Units and Multi-Use Resolution --Planning Commission Meeting on February 14,
2012
Thank you for recommending denial of ancillary residential units at Golden Cove and other commercial areas.
Such a use would be inconsistent with the City's 1975 General Plan Land Use Map and the
1975 General Plan Text (which have served Rancho Palos Verdes very well).Therefore,ancillary housing can
not meet the six necessary findings of Municipal Code 17.60.050 that are all required for approval ofa
Conditional Use Permit.
A principal reason for writing this letter is to question the staffs interpretation of Development Codes 17.14
through 17.20.Correct understanding is important for future reference.Staffhas suggested that if a use is not
specifically prohibited by the Development Code,it may be permitted with a Conditional Use Permit.Uses that
are permitted with a Conditional Use Permit are listed under each commercial category.A final notation in each
category allows "such uses as the director deems to be similar and no more intensive"than those listed.The
particular uses that are named are all commercial types.Ancillary residentialtmits are not commercial and are
not similar.
The staff report contains reasons why ancillary uses in commercial districts "pose a number of concerns."A
letter dated January 16,2012,from an attorney representing a commercial business owner opposed to ancillary
residential units,offers many more negative reasons.The letter is attached to the staff report of your January
24 meeting.
The 1975 General Plan Land Use Map and the 1975 General Plan Text and the zoning map do not show
residential units of any kind in commercial zones.
Your recommendation and the proposed Resolution request the City Council to advise staff members if they
should conduct research to "potentially change the underlying zoning of certain commercial properties to allow
'mixed use'development.Staff has acknowledged that such changes would require a General Plan Amendment.
The reasons mentioned above for not amending the Development Codes with respect to ancillary residential
units are very good reasons for not amending the
1975 General Plan Land Use Map and the 1975 General Plan Text and the zoning map for multi-use.
Please withdraw the parts of the recommendation and the parts of the Resolution regarding multi-use.Please
protect the 1975 General Plan Land Use Map and the 1975 General Plan Text,which have preserved the flne
character of Rancho Palos Verdes.Thank you for all your work and attention to details.
1 ATTACHMENT 2-11
Commercial Property Survey Comments
ATTACHMENT 2-12
Commercial Zone Survey Results
•41 surveys sent to all parts of the City
•21 responses received (51.2%response rate)(includes known Golden Cove -Cl'N)
•11 No Opinion (52.3%of responses)
o 40 Miraleste Plaza (one tenant)~CI.D
o Point Vicente Animal Hospital (concerned about lease agreements vs.
entitlements)(CN)
o Western Ave (29019 -2922 7 Western)*one survey back,but represents 9
separate properties (CG)
•Denny's
•Asaka Express
•Marie Calendars
•Western Plaza
•Dentist/Chinese Food
•Health Food/Maui Chicken
•0'0' 0'O'Reily Autoparts
• 2 parking lots
5 Yes (23.8%ofresponses)
o 28619 Western (Carl's Jr.Building)(CG)
o 450 Silver Spur (CP)
o 550 Silver Spur ~CP)
o 29505 Western (Papa John's -across from new Chevron)(CG)
o Golden Cove (CN)
•5 No (23.8%of responses)
o Miraleste (address unknown)(et)
o 29643 Western (Vacuum and Sewing Repair Place)(CG)
o 29403 Western (I Hop)(CG)
o 4007 Miraleste (Mr.Lawrance Ross with the attorney)(eL)
o 29619 Western (CG)
Commercial Zone No Opinion Yes NoTypebyOpinion
Commercial 0 2 0Professional(CP)
Commercial Limited 1 0 2(CL)
Commercial 1 1 0Neighborhood(CN)
Commercial General 9 2 3(CG)
ATTACHMENT 2-13
List of Commercial Properties for Commercial Survey
1.La County Consolidated Fire /83 Miraleste Dr.
2.Lawrence A &Ruth 1.Ross /4007 Miraleste Dr.
3.Navigator West Trust /16 Miraleste Dr.
4.Allison Juliana Maxey /29 Miraleste Dr.
5.Randall /29501 Miraleste Dr.
6.WRG Associates /28500 S.Western Ave.
7.Caylor of Evans Holdings LLC /28326 S.Western Ave.
8.DMK Investment!28619 S.Western Ave.
9.Ralph Horowitz
a.28717 S.Western Ave.
b.28733 S.Western Ave.
10.InStorage Rancho Palos Verdes /28798 S.Western Ave.
11."The Terraces"/28821 S.Western Ave.
12.Michael M.McGowan /28900 S.Western Ave.
13.San Pedro Beach Properties
a.29019 S.Western Ave.
b.29023 S.Western Ave.
c.29035 S.Western Ave.
d.29051 S.Western Ave.
e.29105 S.Western Ave.
f.29125 S.Western Ave.
g.29211 S.Western Ave.
h.29215 S.Western Ave.
i.29229 S.Western Ave.
14.Checkerboard Properties /29317 S.Western Ave.
15.5MBD Investments /29403 S.Western Ave.
16.Phyllis &Lessor Mullenaux /29409 S.Western Ave.
17.John &Aneline Figlewicx Trust /29413 S.Western Ave.
18.William &Kirsten Williams /29421 S.Western Ave.
19.Song 2011 Family Trust!29505 S.Western Ave.
20.BigStream Exchange Co.LLC /29519 S.Western Ave.
21.Goodyear Tire &Rubber Co /29529 S.Western Ave.
22.BVIP Hospitality Group Inc./29601 S.Western Ave.
23.Voyager West Trust!29619 S.Western Ave.
24.Golden Cove Center /31244 PVDE
25.Point Vicente Properties LLC /31270 PVDE
26.Green Trees Properties /30019 Hawthorne Blvd.
27.29941 Hawthorne Eat 2011 LLC /29941 Hawthorne Blvd.
28.Rolling Hills Investments /430 Silver Spur
29.Sanders G W &SA 1998 Trust!450 Silver Spur
30.500 Silver Spur Road LLC /500 Silver Spur
31.Raleigh Group One LLC /550 Silver Spur
32.TPX /27580 Silver Spur
ATTACHMENT 2-14
February 16,2012
Dear Michael McGowan,
CITYOF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is currently considering a Zoning Code Amendment that would
allow owners of commercial properties to apply for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a limited
amount of ancillary residential units within commercially zoned properties.This proposal originated
from a commercial property owner in the City who felt that such and allowance would help reduce
vacancy rates and provide housing for persons who work on the commercial property.As a
commercial property owner in the City,we seek your assistance in filling out a brief survey to get
your feedback on this proposal.
To ensure that new residential uses in commercially zoned areas do not affect the City's sales tax
revenue,or the vitality and/or operation of commercial centers,the proposed code amendment
would 1)maintain the commercial development as the primary use,2)limit the percentage of
residential use to 5%of the total leasable area,and 3)restrict the location of the residential use to
areas not facing a major street.Furthermore,if five (5)or more units are proposed,they would be
subject to the City's Affordable Housing requirements.If the proposed Code Amendment were
approved by the City Council,a commercial property owner seeking permission to convert a
percentage of their leasable square footage to a residential use would be required to obtain the
discretionary approval of a Conditional Use Permit (application fee is currently $7,222)through a
duly noticed public hearing before the Planning Commission.This process would ensure that any
proposal meets the applicable development standards and that applicable conditions of approval be
imposed to minimize potential impacts upon the subject property or neighboring uses.
In an effort to obtain feedback on this proposal from commercial property owners in the City,City
Staff is requesting that you complete the attached survey form and return it to the City of Rancho
Palos Verdes,Attn:Leza Mikhail,30940 Hawthorne Blvd.,Rancho Palos Verdes,CA by March 1,
2012.The City has provided the attached self-addressed and stamped envelope for your
convenience.Please feel free to include additional comments on a separate page if desired.
For further information or background on this surveyor the proposed "Ancillary Residential Uses
within Commercial Zones"Code Amendme.nt,please contact the Project Planner,Leza Mikhail,at
(310)544-5228 or via email atlezam@rpv.com .In addition,all supporting documents,including
staff reports,comment letters and proposed code language pertaining to "Ancillary Residential Uses
in Commercial Zones"can be found on the City's website at
http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/planning/agenda videos/display/index.cfm?id=152
Thank you for taking this opportunity to provIde your comments.
Sincerely,
30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./RANCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275-5391
PLANNING &CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (310)544-5228/BUILDING &SAFETY DIVISION (310)265-7800/DEPT FAX (310)544-5293
E-MAIL:PLANNING@RPVCOM /WWWPALOSVERDESCOM/RPVATTACHMENT 2-15
CITYOF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Commercial Property Owner Survey
Please complete and return this survey to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at 30940 Hawthorne
Boulevard,Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 (Attn:Leza Mikhail)
Name:_
Commercial Property Address:_
1)Are you in favor of the proposed Code Amendment that would allow a limited amount of
residential uses in Commercial Zones
Yes No _No Opinion
2)If yes,what maximum percentage of leasable floor area should be dedicated to
residential use?
5%10%15%20%_Other
3)Do you feel there is a need to provide employees of your center on-site housing?
Yes No _No Opinion
4)What is the approximate square footage of leasable space in your development?
5)What is the number of units or tenant spaces available for lease in your development?
6)What is the current vacancy rate in your development:
Additional Comments or Concerns:
Please return this survey back to the City by February 24,2012.Thank you.
30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./RANCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275-5391
PLANNING &CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (310)544-5228/BUILDING &SAFETY DIVISION (310)265-7800/DEPT FAX (310)544-5293
E-MAIL PLANNING@RPVCOM/WWWPALOSVERDES.COM/RPVATTACHMENT 2-16
fE.B 2 7 20\1.
COtJIMUN\'f'{OEVEI..OPMe ITV OF
OEPAR'TN\ENT
RANCHO P-:::~~'0=l\~tSfl'~~j~,~1!
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT "1;;/'0.·
.:,';";-~:t;,~d1/"l>\~~;;:.Commercial Property Owner Survey ,"4{'~'.:}.';1',
Please complete and return this survey to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at 30940 Hawthg7~;~'·".u-,·,·;•.'.-...·,
Boulevard,Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 (Attn:Leza Mikhail)
Name:~Pebv B.etLcVt Pr~~"-t S'
Commercial Property Address:8QO(tt --~q d-:;t '7 S.()ltS!«n Ave:
1)Are you in favor of the proposed Code Amendment that would allow a limited amount of
residential uses in Commercial Zones
Yes No .£No Opinion
2)If yes,what maximum percentage of leasable floor area should be dedicated to
residential use?
5%10%;?S.15%20%_Other
w l<sf
3)Do you feel there is a need to provide employees of your center on-site housing?
Yes _No Opinion
4)What is the approximate square footage of leasable space in your development?
Lf3.0(;>()..
5)What is the number of units or tenant spaces available for lease in your development?
$
6)What is the current vacancy rate in your development:
IO'?a
Additional Comments or Concerns:
-~ht¥(h4al -to a.dtl..u~fi Wki~vvoU!t4vt fue-
~~e%)..Not-ctjtuh-rt "tho ~/)f1uJy=PC1!p~Y1)'(!5
Please return this survey back to the City by February 24,2012.Thank you.
30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD /RANCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275-5391
PLANNING &CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (310)544-5228/BUILDING &SAFETY DIVISION (310)265-7800/DEPT FAX (310)544-5293
E-MAIL PLANNING@RPVCOM /WWWPALOSVERDESCOM/RPVATTACHMENT 2-17
CITYOF
FEB 22 2012
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
RANCHO PALOS\!ERDES
COMMUNITY DEVELOP.MENfD~PARTMENT"'.-•..•.,..-......-:...,.....,..
Commercial Property Owner Survey f
Please complete and return this survey to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at 30940 Hawthorne
Boulevard,Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 (Attn:Leza Mikhail)
Name:@iWlV f~~{LLC
Commercial Property Address:31 d-'fd ~VI O-rv (..J ,
'VI ~1z>~(
Yes ~o _C_-.J No Opinion t&f~Ih fA:-
2)If yes,what maximum percentage of leasable floor area should be dedicated to ~
residential use?
1)Are you in favor of the proposed Code Amendment that would allow a limited amount of
residential uses in Commercial Zones
5%10%15%20%_Other
3)Do you feel there is a need to provide employees of your center on-site housing?
Yes r/..No _No Opinion
4)What is the approximate square footage of leasable space in your development?
'51g.;
5)What is the number of units or tenant spaces available for lease in your development?
/
6)What is the current vacancy rate in your development:az
Additional Comments or Concerns:
Please return th~s survey back to the City by February 24,20~2.Thankyou.....:se-
n/k l VF)lfoY51~~1L-«~~)~CJVlA1~.~~~5'~r;ye-30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./RA~HO PALOS VERDES,C;90275-5391
PLANNING &CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (310)544-5228/BUILDING &SAFETY DIVISION (310)265-7800/DEPT FAX (310)544-5293
E-MAIL:PLANNING@RPVCOM /WWW.PALOSVERDES.COM/RPV
r ~fil4U ~~tk.'~<.tr J~II ~~~.
~I'or h'~es ~(U~/0fJ ~~~~err tL£c!1-J1V'S'6 h ~
~,I cI'lh'f ~~~h be /~I-N ~f').d.ezOZJ q
L~tI,I ~tfJt'~4yp=II.~~~~>1
~.~t tu::1 '¥1YV1 ?b-,Lk-~jP~(cA-rA~1
~
ATTACHMENT 2-18
RECEIVED
CITYOF
FEB 22 2012
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
RANCHO PALO~\7tI<LJES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Commercial Property Owner Survey
Please complete and return this survey to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at 30940 Hawthorne
Boulevard,Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 (Attn:Leza Mikhail)
Name:--'iB,-+-A~N.~j)~A...l.'L=::;L=-_
Commercial Property Address:*ml~'ibf8,'11f.;.PLA''?tA7 f?Au.
1)Are you in favor of the proposed Code Amendment that would allow a limited amount of
residential uses in Commercial Zones
Yes No ~No Opinion
2)If yes,what maximum percentage of leasable floor area should be dedicated to
residential use?
5%10%15%20%_Other
3)Do you feel there is a need to provide employees of your center on-site housing?
Yes No /No Opinion
4)What is the approximate square footage of leasable space in your development?
-5;l.7'{kbsc
5)What is the number of units or tenant spaces available for lease in your development?
tONE:.
6)What is the current vacancy rate in your development:
Additional Comments or Concerns:
Please return this survey back to the City by February 24,2012.Thank you.
30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD /RANCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275-5391
PLANNING &CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (310)544-5228/BUILDING &SAFETY DIVISION (310)265-7800/DEPT FAX (310)544-5293
E-MAIL:PLANNING@RPVCOM /WWWPALOSVERDESCOM/RPVATTACHMENT 2-19
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
RECEIVED
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Commercial Property Owner Survey
FEB 212m2
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT C lTV OF
DEPARTMENT
Please complete and return this survey to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at 30940 Hawthorne
Boulevard,Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 (Attn:Leza Mikhail)
Name:__--','-'-"__..
J
Commercial Property Address:
1)Are you in favor of the proposed Code Amendment that would allow a limited amount of
/residential uses in Commercial ZC'nes
_V_\,Yes No _No Opinion
2)If yes,what maximum percentage of leasable floor area should be dedicated to
residential use?
5%10%15%V;O%_Other
3)Do you feel there is a need to provide employees of your center on-site housing?
./Yes No _No Opinion
4)What is the approximate square footage of leasable space in your development?
5=&,~sf
6)What is the current vacanc rate in your development:
/v ,A-
Additional Comments or Concerns:
Please return this survey back to the City by February 24,2012.Thank you.
30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./RANCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275-5391
PLANNING &CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (310)544-5228/BUILDING &SAFETY DIVISION (310)265-7800/DEPT FAX (310)544-5293
E-MAIL PLANNING@RPVCOM /WWWPALOSVERDESCOM/RPVATTACHMENT 2-20
RECEIVED
CITYOF
FEB 22 2012
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Commercial Property Owner Survey
Please complete and return this survey to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at 30940 Hawthorne
Boulevard,Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 (Attn:Leza Mikhail)
Name:_
Commercial Property Address:/I-~tJ Qif'~~)R Pt/
1)Are you in favor of the proposed Code Amendment that would allow a limited amount of
residential uses in Commercial Zones
$-Yes No _No Opinion
2)If yes,what maximum percentage of leasable floor area should be dedicated to
residential use?
5%10%15%20%_Other
3)Do you feel there is·a need to provide employees of your center on-site housing?
Yes _No Opinion
4)What is the approximate square footage of leasab e space in your development?
5)What is the number of units or tenant spaces available for lease in your development?
~
6)What is the current vacancy rate in your development:
~
Additional Comments or Concerns:
Please return this survey back to the City by February 24,2012.Thank you.
30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./RANCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275-5391
PLANNING &CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (310)544-5228/BUILDING &SAFETY DIVISION (310)265-7800/DEPT.FAX (310)544-5293
E-MAIL PLANNING@RPVCOM/WWWPALOSVERDES.COM/RPVATTACHMENT 2-21
ReCEIVED
CITYOF
FEB 22 2012
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
RANCHO PALOS m<ljf:t;
_NoOpinion
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Commercial Property Owner Survey
Please complete and return this survey to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at 30940 Hawthorne
Boulevarrl R::mc:ho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 (Attn:Leza Mikhail),
~/.VJ ~I /H G:,/A --J./O 0 J'-"'..J2-LL.c-Name:-.",'q v F-n ~j l:::>.,--()
Commercial Property Address:.r;ro Ii.-'f!UA..~/\....
1)Are you in favor of the proposed Code Amendment that would allow a limited amount of
residential uses in Commercial Zones
~No
2)If yes,what maximum percentage of leasable floor area should be dedicated to
residential use?
5%10%15%20%~~her
3}-00 you feel there is a need to provide employees of your center on-site housing?
~Yes _No _No Opinion
4)asable space in your development?
5)What is the number of units or tenan!~c available for lease in your development?____________..L(IJ_t'._~_
6)What is the current vacancy rate in your development:
Additional Comments or Concerns:
Please return this survey back to the City by February 24,2012.Thank you.
30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./RANCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275-5391
PLANNING &CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (310)544-5228/BUILDING &SAFETY DIVISION (310)265-7800/DEPT FAX (310)544-5293
E-MAIL PLANNING@RPVCOM /WWWPALOSVERDESCOM/RPVATTACHMENT 2-22
CITYOF
!FEB 22 l012)
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Commercial Property Owner Survey
Please complete and return this survey to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at 30940 Hawthorne
Boulevard,Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 (Attn:Leza Mikhail)
Name:__
v
Commercial Property Address:_......:J~1'-S::!.....::o_5"t--_-=5::....:._....:W=..::~::::::::-=-...::....:...:::...-_:::..~::::..:v::...:e=-=-._
1)Are you in favor of the proposed Code Amendment that would allow a limited amount of
residential uses in Commercial Zones
V Yes No _No Opinion
2)If yes,what maximum percentage of leasable floor area should be dedicated to
residential use?
V5%10%15%20%_Other
3)Do you feel there is a need to provide employees of your center on-site housing?
Yes _No Opinion
4)What is the approximate square footage of leasable space in your development?
fa,aoO
5)What is the number of units or tenant spaces available for lease in your development?
I
6)What is the current vacancy rate in your development:
1.Z rJ/D
Additional Comments or Concerns:
-~N~--------
Please return this survey back to the City by February 24,2012.Thank you.
30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./RANCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275-5391
PLANNING &CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (310)544-5228/BUILDING &SAFETY DIVISION (310)265-7800/DEPT FAX (310)544-5293
E-MAIL PLANNING@RPVCOM/WWWPALOSVERDES.COM/RPVATTACHMENT 2-23
CITYOF
FEB 23 2012
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Commercial Property Owner Survey
Please complete and return this survey to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at 30940 Hawthorne
Boulevard,Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 (Attn:Leza Mikhail)
Name:CL JM:)(t:tf-.-~~:,.t--l[~4 k~{b~O'vt:.....::'--"-'_
Commercial Property Address:l11/~/.I2\~11A:=~J-&..l,--_
1)Are you in favor of the proposed Code Amendment that would allow a limited amount of
residential uses in Commercial Zones
Yes No _No Opinion
2)If yes,what maximum percentage of leasable floor area should be dedicated to
residential use?
5%10%15%20%_Other
3)Do you feel there is a need to provide employees of your center on-site housing?
Yes No _No Opinion
4)What is the approximate square footage of leasable space in your development?
5)What is the number of units or tenant spaces available for lease in your development?
6)What is the current vacancy rate in your development:
Additional Comments or Concerns:--
Please return this survey back to the City by February 24,2012.Thank you.
30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./RANCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275-5391
PLANNING &CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (310)544-5228/BUILDING &SAFETY DIVISION (310)265-7800/DEPT FAX (310)544-5293
E-MAIL PLANNING@RPVCOM /WWWPALOSVERDESCOM/RPVATTACHMENT 2-24
RECEIVED
FEB 2 1 2G12
COMMUNITY DEVELOPME~lTV OF
DEPARTMEN"r COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Commercial Property Owner Survey
Please complete and return this survey to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at 30940 Hawthorne
Boulevard,Ranc~o Palo~ve?=ttn:Le]!l MikhaL
Name ~~--2~.
Commercial Property Address:~3 CAl~CLv--e..
1)Are you in favor of the proposed Code Amendment that would allow a limited amount of
residential uses in Commercial Zones
Yes ~NO _No Opinion
2)If yes,what maximum percentage of leasable floor area should be dedicated to
residential use?
5%10%15%20%_Other
3)Do you feel there is a need to provide employees of your center on-site housing?
Yes ~NO _No Opinion
4)What is the approximate square footage of leasa I space in your development?
000
5)What is the number of units or tenant spac s vailable for lease in your development?,
6)What is the current vacancy rate in your d~opment:
Additional Comments or Concerns:
Please return this survey back to the City by February 24,2012.Thank you.
30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./RANCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275-5391
PLANNING &CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (310)544-5228/BUILDING &SAFETY DIVISION (310)265-7800/DEPT FAX (310)544-5293
E-MAIL PLANNING@RPVCOM/WWWPALOSVERDES.COM/RPVATTACHMENT 2-25
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
RECEIVED
FEB 21 2~n
COMMUNITY OEVE ..o~'~m~t'l-e lTV OF
OEPARTMEl\l
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Commercial ProD~rty Owner Survey
Please complete and return this survey to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at 30940 Hawthorne
Boulevard,Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 (Attn:Leza Mikhail)
Name:
Commercial Property Address:
-v 5 H &tQ dJtt0/7M-{?'\1::;L Ltp
J q ':J~J S I (;0(!>TL.~/hJ6--,
_No Opinion
1)Are you in favor of the proposed Code Amendment that would allow a limited amount of
YeSresidential uses in C~:ial Zones
2)If yes,what maximum percentage of leasable floor area should be dedicated to
residential use?
5%10%15%20%_Other
3)Do you feel there is a need to provide employees of your center on-site housing?
Yes No _No Opinion
4)What is the approximate square footage of leasable space in your development?
5)What is the number of units or tenant spaces available for lease in your development?
6)What is the current vacancy rate in your development:
Additional Comments or Concerns:
Please return this survey back to the City by February 24,2012.Thank you.
30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./RANCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275-5391
PLANNING &CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION (310)544-5228/BUILDING &SAFETY DIVISION (310)265-7800/DEPT FAX (310)544-5293
E-MAIL PLANNING@RPVCOM /WWWPALOSVERDESCOM/RPVATTACHMENT 2-26
RECENEO
FEB 2 1 10\t
UN~OE"E\..Op~E~lTV OF
cotAtt'OEPAR1'tAEN1'
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Commercial Property Owner Survey
Please complete and return this survey to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at 30940 Hawthorne
Boulevard,Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 (Attn:Leza Mikhail)
Name:L.c:{'U;}-e,A/CC!!E?'~.J"J""'
Commercial Property Address:j--.....s-/h/:r-"f'I ~S'r P/er2.~
1)Are you in favor of the proposed Code Amendment that would allow a limited amount of
residential uses in Commercial Zones
Yes ~NO _No Opinion
2)If yes,what maximum percentage of leasable floor area should be dedicated to
residential use?
5%10%15%20%_Other
3)Do you feel there is a need to provide employees of your center on-site housing?
Yes _No Opinion
4)Wh?~b~ate square footage of leasable space in your development?
5)~t is ~t;~e~lnits ~nant spaces available for lease in your development?
7
6)W~iS the current vacancy rate in your development:e r.o
Additional Comments or Concerns:
ATTACHMENT 2-27
P.C.Minutes
(January 24,2012)
ATTACHMENT 2-28
COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (regarding non-agenda items):
None
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1.Ancillary residential zone text amendment (ZON2011-00345)
Associate Planner Mikhail presented the staff report,explaining this was a code
amendment request originally initiated by the City Council in June 2011.She stated
that staff proposes that ancillary residential uses be permitted within a commercially
zoned property with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit and explained the
development standards created for such use as detailed in the staff report.
Commissioner Gerstner referred to language that would allow the outside of the
commercial building to be changed with the addition of residential use.He asked staff if
he was interpreting this language correctly.
Associate Planner Mikhail explained that the requirement is that the architecture of the
commercial building be maintained,but that a residential addition would be permitted if
a Conditional Use Permit were approved.
Commissioner Gerstner questioned why any change to the architecture of the
commercial building would be allowed and why it wouldn't be required that the
architecture be maintained as approved in the original Conditional Use Permit.
Director Rojas noted that is an issue that may want to be clarified.
Commissioner Gerstner discussed the parking requirements,noting that it is not typical
for the City to change the parking requirements when an ancillary use is added to the
site.
Associate Planner Mikhail noted that the parking requirements would also depend on
the commercial site,as many of the commercial developments have a common shared
parking analysis that was done.She also noted that staff was intending there to be
designated parking for the residential units on the property.
Commissioner Gerstner referred to proposed language that the resident shall be
employed at the commercial property.He asked what provisions are included if the
person living in the residential portion of the property were to lose their job.
Associate Planner Mikhail explained that the intent is to have people employed within
the commercial development living at the site.She noted a provision was added that if
a resident of the property loses their job that they vacate the property when the
residential lease expires.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24,2012
Page 2ATTACHMENT 2-29
Commissioner Gerstner felt that mixed use properties have a great benefit,however he
felt that typically the City would determine where specifically the mixed use site would
work and be beneficial.However,in this case the City is proposing to take all
commercial properties and allowing them to be mixed use properties with approval of a
Conditional Use Permit.He noted that some will make more sense from a planning
point of view than others.
Director Rojas agreed,explaining that staff wrote this language in a way where the use
will clearly be ancillary and will not change the commercial use.Therefore,the intent
was not to create a traditional "mixed use"zone but simply a process for any property
owner who is interested in having some residential tenants can take advantage of the
allowance if they want.He also noted that the property will remain zoned for
commercial,as the language does not propose to change the zoning of the property.
Commissioner Gerstner stated that he has never seen in any other City residential use
as an ancillary use on commercially zoned property.
Vice Chairman Tetreault asked staff for clarification on the City Council direction.He
asked if the City Council has already decided that this is the direction they want to go,
and have given the Planning Commission direction to recommend a set of standards by
which this can be implemented.Or,did the City Council want the Planning Commission
to explore the issue and provide feedback to the Council on the issue.
Associate Planner Mikhail answered that the City Council was asking the Planning
Commission for feedback on this issue.
Vice Chairman Tetreault noted that staff had determined a revision to the Conditional
Use Permit,rather than a zone change,was a more appropriate route in regards to this
type of project,since this will be an ancillary use.He asked staff if there has been a
determination made as to what that threshold is when an ancillary use will become
inconsistent with the General Plan.
Director Rojas explained that the City Attorney determined that in this case,since the
primary use of the center will remain commercial and the zoning will not change,that
there would be no issue with inconsistency with the General Plan.
Vice Chairman Tetreault noted that the staff report discussed the health,safety,and
welfare of the community in regards to this proposal.He asked if staff had considered
the health,safety,and welfare of the possible residents who might be living in those
spaces.He used the example of tenants who might have children,noting the potential
safety issues with living in a busy commercial center.He asked if the City can regulate
who can actually live in these units,as he felt there were safety issues.
Director Rojas explained that before any units can be rented out the Building Official will
confirm that they meet all life safety requirements of the Building Code so that it can be
assured the units will be safe,habitable dwelling units.He stated he would have to
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24,2012
Page 3ATTACHMENT 2-30
check with the City Attorney on whether or not the City can prohibit children from living
in these units.
Vice Chairman Tetreault discussed the situation where a tenant moves into one of the
units and feels that the noise from one of the businesses is a nuisance,even though the
business is typical for a center such as Golden Cove and was there before the tenant
moved in.He questioned if the tenant would have a right to bring an action for
nuisance,even though the resident is new to the property.He felt that this type of
mixed use opens up a lot of issues and that maybe that is why it's not a typical use in a
shopping center.
Chairman Tomblin questioned if the deed restrictions on these units could be limited to
only employees of the Golden Cove Center.He felt that in doing so there could be a
discrimination issue.
Associate Planner Mikhail explained that the City Attorney reviewed the proposal and
felt that the units could be offered to employees only.
Chairman Tomblin noted that as part of their Conditional Use Permit,the businesses in
the Golden Cove Center have specific hours they can be open and operating.He didn't
think the City could ask any potential residents at Golden Cove to abide by these hours
of operation,and asked staff how that would be handled.
Director Rojas reminded the Commission that if an application is submitted for an
ancillary residential use,the property owner is opening up the entire Conditional Use
Permit for review whereby existing conditions can be modified and new conditions
imposed.He explained the Commission can put restrictions on what is allowed with any
proposed residential use of the property.
Commissioner Gerstner understood,but didn't think the City could amend the
Conditional Use Permit to say that one could not operate a residence between the
hours of 10 p.m.and 6 a.m.He felt that some reasonable residential use would be
appropriate and acceptable if the City allows the use.He also felt that enforcement
would be next to impossible,and in the end it would mean that the shopping center
almost has no hours of operation.
Director Rojas stated that in order to approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow an
ancillary residential use there are specific findings the Commission must make,which
include analyzing adverse impacts on adjacent neighbors.If the Commissioners cannot
make these findings they cannot approve the request.
Chairman Tomblin opened the public hearing.
John Wessel stated he was concerned with this proposal in terms of a conflict with the
General Plan and that converting this site to allow ancillary uses represents a slippery
slope in implementation of the General Plan as the governing document.He urged the
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24,2012
Page 4ATTACHMENT 2-31
Planning Commission to recommend that this proposal is inconsistent with the General
Plan and a revision to the General Plan would be required in order to allow this use.
Chairman Tomblin closed the public hearing.
Vice Chairman Tetreault felt this is a rather significant proposal,and he had his doubts
as to whether or not this would be good for the City.He felt that this proposal would
allow an ancillary use which would have the affect,in various places around the City,of
removing the cities stock of retail and commercial establishments.As the economy
improves these spaces might turn out to be spaces that could be used for their intended
primary use,and this would be a potential loss of revenue to the City.He also
commented that adding residents to a shopping center could change the whole
complexion of the area by changing the look and feel of the area and changing the use
to 24/7.He stated that the only location looked at in detail is Golden Cove,but noted
there are other shopping centers in the City this could affect.He felt that before making
a recommendation to the City Council that all shopping centers should be looked at and
how all the properties will be affected by this proposal.He didn't think he had nearly
enough information to make any recommendation to the City Council.
While Commissioner Emenhiser sympathized with the property owner,he questioned if
the Development Code should be changed to may not be the answer to the problem.
He agreed with the speaker that this might be a slippery slope and had a lot of
questions about how this borders the line between commercial and residential zoning.
Commissioner Gerstner noted that he is a big supporter of mixed use and that mixed
use may have some very good possibilities in the City.He stated he has never seen a
City with residential in a shopping center where it is called an ancillary use rather than a
mixed use.He did not think that residential is an ancillary use to commercial,even if
the people using the residential happen to be employed by the shopping center.He
added that at this point he was inclined to recommend against the use,but would
continue to listen to the idea.
Commissioner Leon stated he was also a supporter of mixed use,but not as an
ancillary use and felt this type of ancillary use will only create low quality housing.He
also felt there could be a lot of unintended consequences that come out of this type of
situation.He would therefore be generally opposed to having residential as an ancillary
use in a commercial zone.
Chairman Tomblin also noted he is a supporter of mixed use,however he was not in
favor of this proposal.He explained that the design and living conditions of the
apartment at the Golden Cove Center will dictate the pleasure of how that resident is
going to feel.He noted that the plans for the proposed apartment show that it will be a
unit that will result in grief for the resident and the people around it.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24,2012
Page 5ATTACHMENT 2-32
Commissioner Leon commented that it appeared most Commissioners are in favor of a
high quality mixed use in the City,and suggested that the Development Code be
amended to allow for a mixed use in the City.
Vice Chairman Tetreault noted that the original request for this use came from the
owner at Golden Cove and the City chose to look at this as a citywide proposal.He felt
that the Commissioners were a bit uneasy with this proposal.He stated that he was
only aware of one person ever asking to take their unused or unusable commercial
space and turn it into residential.He asked why the City is basically inviting everyone to
now make this request.He questioned why the City would want to do that rather than
looking at these requests on a case by case basis.He stated he was having a problem
looking at only this one shopping center when considering a policy change that would
affect all of the shopping centers,as well as the surrounding neighbors,in the City.
Director Rojas noted that Alternative No.1 in the staff report is to limit this code
amendment only to the CN district.
Commissioner Gerstner moved to send this back to the City Council with the
recommendation that,having reviewed this proposal,the Planning Commission
does not believe that residential as an ancillary use in commercial districts is an
appropriate change to make.However,the Commission does feel there is a place
for mixed use in the community and would be interested in investigating mixed
use in the commercial districts of the City,seconded by Commissioner
Emenhiser.
Director Rojas stated that several years ago the City looked at mixed use and found that
developers and others they spoke to wanted taller buildings.He explained that in every
commercial zone in the City staff identified that a taller building would significantly
impair views from adjacent residents.
Commissioner Gerstner amended his motion to state that the Planning
Commission recommends to the City Council that ancillary residential use in a
commercial space is not an appropriate use and the Commission recommends
that it not be pursued.However,the Planning Commission does feel mixed use
may have a place in the community and,if directed by the City Council,would like
to pursue,seconded by Commissioner Emenhiser.Approved,(5-0).
Director Rojas stated that staff will prepare a Resolution memorializing the decision and
bring it to the Commission for approval on the Consent Calendar at the next meeting.
2.Miscellaneous clean-up zone text amendment revision
Associate Planner Mikhail presented the staff report,explaining that at a previous
meeting staff presented a number of code clean-up items before the Planning
Commission.She noted that the wrong code section was inadvertently removed,and in
the staff report the Commission can see what was intended and what was actually
Planning Commission Minutes
January 24,2012
Page 6ATTACHMENT 2-33
P.c.Staff Report
(January 24,2012)
ATTACHMENT 2-34
CITY OF
MEMORANDUM
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS
JOEL ROJAS,AICP,COMMUNITJ
JANUARY 24,2012
ELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT:CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW ANCILLARY RESIDENTIAL USE
WITHIN CERTAIN COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS THROUGH
DISCRETIONARY REVIEW OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
(CASE NO.ZON2011-00089)
Project Manager:Leza Mikhail,Associate Planne&
RECOMMENDATION
1)Review and provide feedback on the City Council-initiated code amendment to the
City's Development Code to allow ancillary residential uses within certain
commercial zones through the discretionary review and approval of a Conditional
Use Permit and the establishment of development standards for said ancillary
residential uses;and,
2)Continue the public hearing to the February 14,2012 Planning Commission meeting
to allow Staff to bring back a follow-up staff report and a Draft Resolution
memorializing the Planning Commission's recommendation to the City Council on
the proposed code amendment.
BACKGROUND
In early March 2011,the property owner of the Golden Cove Center,Paris Zarrabian,
approached Staff with a request to convert two existing,vacant commercial tenant spaces
to residential units.Staff reviewed the uses allowed in the underlying zoning district
(Commercial Neighborhood)and noted that permanent residential uses are not permitted
in any commercial zoning district in the City.As such,Staff informed the property owner
that they would have to initiate a code amendment to be considered by the City Council in
order to amend Title 17 (Zoning Code)of the PRVMC to allow ancillary residential uses
within commercial zones.
On April 12,2011,the property owner of the Golden Cove Center submitted a Code
Amendment Initiation Request to allow residential uses within the Golden Cove Center,a
commercially zoned property.
ATTACHMENT 2-35
On June 21,2011,at the recommendation of Staff,the City Council initiated a Code
Amendment and directed Staff and the Planning Commission to move forward with drafting
an Ordinance to allow residential uses within the Golden Cove Center and other
commercially zoned properties in the City through the discretionary review of a Conditional
Use Permit (CUP).In addition,the City Council directed Staff and the Planning
Commission to create development standards for said residential uses to ensure that they
are clearly ancillary to commercial uses,to ensure that the residential units do not
adversely affect the vitality of the commercial developments and to minimize impacts to
adjacent neighbors. Specifically,the City Council requested that the development
standards:1)limit the amount of ancillary residential use to 5 percent of the total building
square footage;2)include provisions for apartment housing,but not allow hotel or transient
use;3)include a provision for the units to be counted towards meeting the City's Regional
Housing Needs Assessment requirement;and,4)limit the ancillary residential use to
locations not directly facing a street.The June 21,2011 City Council Staff Report and
associated Minutes for the Code Amendment Initiation Request are attached to this report.
On January 2,2012,a Public Notice was mailed to all owners of commercial property
within the commercial zones slated for the allowance of ancillary residential units.In
addition,a public notice was mailed to all property owners who reside within a 500-foot
radius of commercial properties slated for the allowance of ancillary residential units.The
public notice was also published in the Peninsula News on January 5,2012.A
supplemental public notice was given to all property owners noted above on January 9,
2012 to provide some clarifying information on the proposal.In response to some emails
received regarding the proposed code amendment,Staff responded by sending a copy of
the June 21,2011 City Council Staff Report for additional background on the topic.Both
notices and a copy of the June 21,2011 City Council Report are attached to this report.As
a result of the public notice,Staff received some inquiry phone calls,one written comment
letter,one comment letter with a petition,and two inquiry emails (attached).
DISCUSSION
Pursuant to Development Code Section 17.68.030(C),any person having an interest in
land may file an application with the City Council for a change of zone and/or amendment
to the any part of the Development Code upon submission to the Director of an initiation
application.As noted in the Background Section of this report,the property owner at the
Golden Cove Center,Paris Zarrabian,expressed a desire to convert two,existing vacant
commercial tenant spaces to residential apartments.The Golden Cove Center property
owner has been concerned with not being able to commercially lease the spaces along the
back side of two-story Building "A".The property owner is of the opinion that these tenant
spaces are not desirable to prospective commercial tenants due to the fact that the tenant
spaces cannot be seen from the public right-of-way or the Golden Cove parking lot.The
property owner has informed Staff and the City Council that some tenants would like to rent
these spaces as apartments in order to reduce their daily commute from locations off the
Palos Verdes Peninsula.The property owner is amenable to improving these tenant
spaces for residential occupancy as the existing 7.8%vacancy rate for Golden Cove
Center will likely be reduced as a result.
At the June 21,2011 City Council meeting,the City Council felt that the code amendmentATTACHMENT 2-36
request has merit for the Golden Cove Center,as well potentially for other commercially
zoned properties in the City.As such,the City Council approved the initiation request and
agreed that the opportunity to allow ancillary residential units in commercial zones be
extended to all properties located in the Commercial Limited,Commercial Neighborhood,
Commercial Professional and Commercial General Zoning Districts.According to City
Records,there are a total of 46 separate property ownerships in these commercially zoned
districts.Although the property owner of the Golden Cove Center made the original Code
Amendment request to City Council,the code amendment is being processed as the City
being the Applicant,given that the City Council agreed to extend the request Citywide.The
property owner of Golden Cove Center continues to be an advocate of this request.
In initiating the code amendment,the City Council agreed that the proposal would allow
commercial property owners to make up for lost revenue while providing housing for their
tenants.Providing housing to people who work within the commercial developments would
in effect minimize commutes of local workers who live off of the Palos Verdes Peninsula.In
order to prevent commercial property owners from converting their commercial properties
to predominately residential developments,the City Council agreed with Staff's
recommendation that "ancillary residential uses"within commercial developments be
limited to a specified percentage of the leasable area,while ensuring that the number of
units created is not excessive.In addition,as also noted in the June 21,2011 City Council
Staff Report,the City Council agreed with Staff's recommendation that the ancillary
residential units be required to be in compliance with Chapter 17.11 (Affordable Housing),
thereby helping the City meet the goals and policies of the General Plan Housing Element.
Proposed Code Amendments
Listed below are the proposed Code Amendments to allow "ancillary residential uses"
within the Commercial Limited,Commercial Neighborhood,Commercial Professional and
Commercial General zoning districts throughout the City.Said residential uses are
proposed to be conditionally permitted,meaning that they will be allowed provided a
Conditional Use Permit is reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission.In addition,
Staff has identified a new section of the Code containing development standards for said
"ancillary residential uses".The proposed changes to the relevant code sections are shown
below with additional language shown in underlined text and deletions shown in strike-out
text.
Commercial Limited (Cl)District
The Commercial Limited Districts in the City are located at 30019 Hawthorne Blvd.
(Ralphs)and within the Miraleste Plaza (see attached Supplemental Public Notice for
specific addresses).To allow ancillary residential uses in this district,Staff is proposing to
amend the "uses and development permitted by conditional use permit"section of the
Commercial Limited District Chapter (Chapter 17.14 of the RPVMC)to allow ancillary
residential uses within the Cl district through review and approval of a Conditional Use
Permit as discussed below:
Section 17.14.030 Uses and development permitted by conditional use permit.
The following uses may be permitted in the commercial limited (eL)zone,if it isATTACHMENT 2-37
found in each individual case by the planning commission that the criteria and
limitations imposed on such uses by other provisions of this title are satisfied,and if
specific conditions are imposed to carry out the intent and purpose set out in
Section 17.14.010 of this chapter and Chapter 17.60 (Conditional Use Permits):
Q.Ancillary Residential Uses,pursuant to Section 17.12.100 (Ancillary residential
uses in commercial districts);
Q.:R.Such uses as the director deems to be similar and no more intensive.Such a
determination may be appealed to the planning commission and the planning
commission's decision may be appealed to the city council pursuant to Chapter
17.80 (Hearing Notice and Appeal Procedures).If a proposed use or development is
located in the coastal specific plan district,the city's final decisions regarding such
other use may be appealed to the California Coastal Commission for a
determination that the uses are similar and compatible with the local coastal
program.
Commercial Neighborhood (CN)District
The Commercial Neighborhood Districts in the City are located at 31186 and 31100
Hawthorne Blvd.(7-Eleven),31098 Hawthorne Blvd.(Golden Cove Center),31270
Hawthorne Blvd.(Pt.Vicente Animal Hospital)and a vacant lot near the northwest corner
of Silver Spur Road and Crenshaw Blvd.(see attached Supplemental Public Notice for
specific addresses).To allow ancillary residential uses in this district,Staff is proposing to
amend the "uses and development permitted by conditional use permit"section of the
Commercial Neighborhood District Chapter (Chapter 17.16 of the RPVMC)to allow
ancillary residential uses within the CN district through review and approval of a Conditional
Use Permit as discussed below:
Section 17.16.030 Uses and development permitted by conditional use permit.
The following uses may be permitted in the commercial neighborhood (CN)zone
if it is found in each individual case by the planning commission that the criteria and
limitations imposed on such uses by other provisions of this title are satisfied,and if
specific conditions are imposed to carry out the intent and purpose set out in
Section 17.16.010 of this chapter and Chapter 17.60 (Conditional Use Permits):
U.Ancillary Residential Uses,pursuant to Section 17.12.100 (Ancillary residential
uses in commercial districts);
.fd-:.V.Such uses as the director deems to be similar and no more intensive.Such a
determination may be appealed to the planning commission and the planning
commission's decision may be appealed to the city council pursuant to Chapter
17.80 (Hearing Notice and Appeal Procedures).If a proposed use or development is
located in the coastal specific plan district,the city's final decisions regarding such
other use may be appealed to the California Coastal Commission for a
ATTACHMENT 2-38
determination that the uses are similar and compatible with the local coastal
program.
Commercial Professional (CP)District
The Commercial Professional Districts in the City are located at 29941 Hawthorne Blvd.
(vacant -approved Chase Bank),and a number of properties along the north side of Silver
Spur Road (see attached Supplemental Public Notice for specific addresses).To allow
ancillary residential uses in this district,Staff is proposing to amend the "uses and
development permitted by conditional use permit"section ofthe Commercial Professional
District Chapter (Chapter 17.18 of the RPVMC)to allow ancillary residential uses within the
CP district through review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit as discussed below:
Section 17.18.030 Uses and development permitted by conditional use permit.
The following uses may be permitted in the commercial professional (CP)zone,if
it is found in each individual case by the planning commission that the criteria and
limitations imposed on such uses by other provisions of this title are satisfied,and if
specific conditions are imposed to carry out the intent and purpose set out in
Section 17.18.010 of this chapter and Chapter 17.60 (Conditional Use Permits):
J.Ancillary Residential Uses,pursuant to Section 17.12.100 (Ancillary residential
uses in commercial districts);
J.:.K.Such uses as the director deems to be similar and no more intensive.Such a
determination may be appealed to the planning commission and the planning
commission's decision may be appealed to the city council pursuant to Chapter
17.80 (Hearing Notice and Appeal Procedures).If a proposed use or development is
located in the coastal specific plan district, the city's final decisions regarding such
other use may be appealed to the California Coastal Commission for a
determination that the uses are similar and compatible with the local coastal
program.
Commercial General (CG)District
The Commercial General District in the City is located along Western Blvd.(see attached
Supplemental Public Notice for specific addresses).To allow ancillary residential uses in
this district,Staff is proposing to amend the "uses and development permitted by
conditional use permit"section of the Commercial Professional District Chapter (Chapter
17.18 of the RPVMC)to allow ancillary residential uses within the CG district through
review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit as discussed below:
Section 17.20.030 Uses and development permitted by conditional use permit.
The following uses may be permitted in the commercial general (CG)zone,ifit is
found in each individual case by the planning commission that the criteria and
limitations imposed on such uses by other provisions of this title are satisfied,and ifATTACHMENT 2-39
specific conditions are imposed to carry out the intent and purpose set out in
Section 17.20.010 of this chapter and Chapter 17.60 (Conditional Use Permits):
Y.Ancillary Residential Uses,pursuant to Section 17.12.100 (Ancillary residential
uses in commercial districts);
¥-:-z.Such uses as the director deems to be similar and no more intensive.Such a
determination may be appealed to the planning commission and the planning
commission's decision may be appealed to the city council pursuant to Chapter
17.80 (Hearing Notice and Appeal Procedures).If a proposed use or development is
located in the coastal specific plan district, the city's final decisions regarding such
other use may be appealed to the California Coastal Commission for a
determination that the uses are similar and compatible with the local coastal
program.
Development Standards for Ancillary Residential Uses in Commercial Districts
Staff recommends adding a new Section 17.12.100 (Ancillary Residential Uses in
Commercial Districts)to existing Chapter 17.12 (Commercial Districts)that establishes the
purpose,application process and development standards for ancillary residential uses.
17.12.100 Ancillary Residential Uses in Commercial Districts
A.Purpose.This section provides criteria for the use,development and
regulation of ancillary residential uses within commercial zoned districts within
the city.These criteria ensure that ancillaryresidential uses are developed and
used on adequate sites.at proper and desirable locations with respect to
surrounding land uses,and are consistent with the goals and objectives of the
general plan and any applicable specific plans.These criteria further ensure that
if located in a commercial district,ancillary residential uses are compatible with
the commercial environment and surrounding neighboring properties.Permitted
residential uses within commercial districts shall be clearly ancillary to the
existing commercial uses so that an entire commercial center is not converted to
a residential use,thereby protecting commercial uses in the City.including
conveniently located retail,restaurant and office space.
B.Application.
.L Conditional Use Permit Required.In commercial zoning districts
where such conditional use is allowed by this title,the development of
new ancillary residential uses or the conversion of any portion of an
existing use or structure to an ancillary residential use shall require the
approval of a conditional use permit by the planning commission
pursuant to the requirements of this chapter and Chapter 17.60
(Conditional Use Permit)of this title.
C.Development Standards.
.L The lot on which an ancillary residential use is proposed shall contain
a commercial development,occupied by commercial tenants,which
shall be considered as the primary use.Commercial tenants shall
ATTACHMENT 2-40
include retail,office or restaurant uses.or other uses deemed to be
commercial in nature as determined by this Code and the director.
2.The total square footage of all ancillarvresidential uses on anyone (1)
property shall not exceed 5%of the total leasable square footage on
said property.In addition.the total number of ancillary residential units
on a commercial property shall not exceed 10%of the total number of
leasable units within the commercial property at the time an
application for a Conditional Use Permit to allow ancillary residential
uses is submitted to the City.
3.The proposed location of the ancillary residential units shall not
adversely impact the overall operation ofthe property as a commercial
center and shall not be located along a fayade facing a street.
4.The ancillary residential use shall not be used for a hotel or transient
occupancy as defined within this Code.
5.The ancillary residential use shall be compatible with the architecture
and materials of the existing development.
6.Each ancillary residential unit shall comply with the residential
occupancy standards set forth in the most recently adopted California
Building Code,including,but not limited to.inclusion of one full
bathroom and one kitchen,the minimum required interior space
dimensions.light and ventilation requirements.the minimum rating for
fire-resistive walls and the minimum number of units available for
persons with disabilities.
7.A maximum of two bedrooms is permitted per ancillary residential unit.
~A minimum of one (1)parking space per approved bedroom shall be
designated on the commercial property for sole use by the occupant(s)
of the ancillary residential unit.Said parking space shall be depicted
on a site plan provided to the city and shall be located within 150 feet
of the proposed unit.Said distance shall be measured along a legal
and safe pedestrian path from the parking space to the nearest
entrance of the ancillary residential unit.
9.Each required parking space dedicated to an ancillary residential unit
shall be a minimum of 9 feet in width and 20 feet in length and shall
not interfere with the vehicular circulation of the parking lot of the
commercial development.
10.Access to an ancillary residential unit shall be provided only from
common access areas such as hallways,corridors and central entry
way portions of the building.
11 .All lighting associated with an ancillary residential unit shall be
adequately shielded to prevent adverse impacts to other surrounding
properties.
12.The address of each ancillary residential unit shall clearly be identified
outside of each unit,near the front entrance of each unit.
13.The ancillary residential use shall be located entirely within a
permanent structure that is affixed to the property and shall not be
permitted through the use of a trailer,as defined in Chapter 17.96
(Definitions)or any other recreational vehicle.
14.Each ancillary residential unit shall remain under the same ownership
ATTACHMENT 2-41
as the commercial development and shall not be sold as a separate'
condominium.
15.The primary householder of an ancillary residential unit shall be
emploved within the commercial development where the residential
use is located.In the event the primary householder is no longer
employed at that commercial development,the occupants shall vacate
the unit at the end of the termination of the then-current lease,and no
option to renew or extend the lease shall be permitted.Termination of
a residential lease shall comply with applicable State Laws.
16./f five (5)or more ancillary residential units are located on a
commercial property,10%of all of the residential units shall be rented
to households whose income is at a level that does not exceed the
"low income"affordability level,pursuant to Chapter 17.11 (Affordable
Housing)of this Title.
17.All ancillary residential uses shall comply with all applicable zoning
development standards in which the ancillary residential units will be
located.This shall include,but not be limited to.standards regarding
height.setbacks and lot coverage.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Public Comments
As a result of the public notice that was sent to all commercial property owners and
residents located within a 500-foot radius of a commercially zoned property,Staff received
one comment letter from a commercial property owner,one petition from residents located
near Western Ave.and two inquiry emails regarding the meaning of the proposed code
amendment.The comment letters relay concerns with a loss of sales tax revenue,difficulty
implementing a conversion to ancillary residential use,and incompatible land uses.These
issues are discussed in more detail below with Staff's response.
The first comment letter was received from the Law Offices of Greenberg,Whitcombe &'
Takeuchi,LLP,on behalf of James P.Herrera,a commercial property owner and manager
at 29619 Western Avenue (small center with H.Salt Fish and Chips and other retailers)
and 16 Miraleste Plaza,stating that the property owner is opposed to the proposed code
amendment.In addition,a petition signed by 49 property owners near Western Ave.was
submitted in opposition to the proposed amendment.The property owners are of the
opinion that the proposed amendment will convert a proliferation of vacant commercial
spaces to residential,thereby resulting in a shortage of desirable commercial space and
corresponding tax revenue that is generated by a diverse mix of retail offerings in a single
geographic area.In addition,the commercial property owner and some residents noted
that the land uses are incompatible,the conditional use permit process is tedious and
expensive,and enforcement of proposed development standards will be too difficult.
Lastly,the commercial property owner also stressed a concern with restricting the tenants
to those who work on the property as tenants may not be able to afford the rents that are
required by the property owner to recover the costs associated with converting a
commercial space to residential,and property owner would have to face high turnover
rates.
ATTACHMENT 2-42
While Staff agrees that commercial tenant spaces may be lost to ancillary residential uses
if a CUP were approved to allow said residential use within a commercial zone,Staff is of
the opinion that the associated sales tax revenue would not be significantly altered.This is
due to the requirement that the residential uses remain clearly ancillary to the commercial
uses on a development and do not negatively impact the vitality or operation of a
commercial development.Staff has proposed a number of development standards to
ensure that ancillary residential uses do not negatively affect a commercial development or
neighboring properties.For example,although Staff originally recommended that 10%of
commercial leasable area be permitted for ancillary residential use based on current
vacancy rates,the City Council felt that this percent was too high and that 5%of leasable
"square footage"would be more appropriate.In addition to the 5%restriction for leasable
"square footage",Staff also added a requirement that no more than 10%of the total
commercial leasable "units"be converted to residential.Staff is of the opinion that these
restrictions will maintain the City's current sales tax revenue (which includes a high average
vacancy rate of 10%of leasable square footage),while helping commercial property
owners fill some of their vacant spaces.
In addition,through the establishment of appropriate development standards and the
requirement of a Conditional Use Permit,allowing a residential use that is strictly ancillary
to a commercial development will further ensure that ancillary residential uses are
compatible with an existing commercial development.As noted above,Staff has added a
number of development standards that require that the conversion of commercial space to
residential space ensure that the health,safety and general welfare of all tenants and
neighboring residents be maintained and not negatively affected.For example,Staff added
requirements that ancillary residential units be compatible with the existing architecture and
materials found on-site,comply with the California Building Code,meet specific parking
requirements,be limited to a maximum of two (2)bedrooms per unit,and not be permitted
to be used as a hotel or transient occupancy.Furthermore,Staff is of the opinion that
requiring a Conditional Use Permit is important due to the fact that there are six (6)specific
findings of fact that are required to be made in order to approve a permit.The purpose of
the Conditional Use Permit is to require a specific consideration of a use (ancillary
residential)in a zoning district (commercial)where by the proposed use cannot be readily
classified as a permitted use "by-right,"typically due to the scope or possible effect on
public facilities or surrounding uses.Requiring a Conditional Use Permit allows the City the
ability to review every proposal on a case-by-case basis and apply conditions of approval
that will run with the permit,if approved.For reference,Staff has included the six (6)
Conditional Use Permit findings below:
1)The site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use and for all of the
yards,setbacks,walls or fences,landscaping and other features required by this title [Title 17
"Zoning"]or by conditions imposed under this section to adjust said use to those on abutting
land and within the neighborhood;and,
2)The site for the proposed uses relates to streets and highways sufficient to carry the type and
quality of traffic generated by the subject use;and,
3)That,in approving the subject use at the specific location,there will be no significant adverse
effect on adjacent property or the permitted use thereof;and,
4)The proposed use is not contrary to the General Plan;and,
ATTACHMENT 2-43
5)That,if the site of the proposed use is within any of the overlay control districts established by
Chapter 17.40 (Overlay Control Districts)of this title,the proposed use complies with all
applicable requirements of that chapter;and,
6)Conditions regarding any of the requirements listed in this paragraph,which the City Council
finds to be necessary to protect the health,safety and general welfare,have been imposed
[including but not limited to]:setbacks and buffers;fences or walls;lighting;vehicular ingress
and egress;noise,vibration,odors and similar emissions;landscaping;maintenance of
structures,grounds or signs;service roads or alleys;and such other conditions as will make
possible development of the City in an orderly and efficient manner and in conformity with the
intent and purposes set forth in this title [Title 17 "Zoning"].
As such,Staff is of the opinion that the proposed development standards for ancillary
residential units in commercial zones and the Conditional Use Permit review process will
ensure that the public health,safety and general welfare of the commercial tenants,
occupants of the ancillary residential units and surrounding neighborhood will be
maintained.
CONCLUSION
Staff seeks the Planning Commission's feedback on the proposed code amendment.
Based on the feedback received,Staff will make any additional language modifications and
bring back a resolution with the proposed code amendment language for Planning
Commission adoption.
ALTERNATIVES
The following alternatives are available for the Planning Commission's consideration:
1.Limit the allowance of conditionally approved ancillary residential units only to the
Commercial Neighborhood (CN)District where Golden Cove Center is located;or
2.Direct Staff to draft a resolution recommending denial of the proposed code
amendment in all commercially zoned districts.
ATTACHMENTS
o City Council Staff Report -Code Amendment Initiation Request (June 21,2011)
o Approved Minutes for June 21,2011 City Council meeting
o Public Comments
o January 2,2012 Public Notice
o January 9,2012 Supplemental Public Notice
ATTACHMENT 2-44
City Council Staff Report
Code Amendment Initiation Request
(June 21,2011)
*LA Y\ut -tV'5e-PGtYCA-+t tit+I-et d1 Wl-eJ/t t-
ATTACHMENT 2-45
Minutes
(June 21 ,2011 City Council meeting)
ATTACHMENT 2-46
Public Comments
(January 24,2011 P.C.Meeting)
ATTACHMENT 2-47
LAW OFFICES ~.t .
GREENBERG,WHITCOMBE &TAKEUCHI,LLP
RICHARD C.GREENBERG
JOHN D.WHITCOMBEt
DERRICK K.TAKEUCm
MICHAEL J.GmSON
MARK K.WORTHGE
SAMANTHA F.LAMBERG
LEONARD GRAYVER
MICHAEL 1.WEINBERGER
21515 HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD,SUITE 450
TORRANCE,CALIFORNIA 90503-6531
(310)540-2000
FAX (310)540-6609·(310)316-0505
E-MAIL:GWTLLP@GWTLLP.COM
RECEIVED
JAN 16 2012
MICHAELE.ADLER'
'OF COUNSEL
~Also Member of District of Columbia Bar
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
RGREENBERG@GWTLLP.COM
January 16,2012
100-1860
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Community Development Department
Attention:Ms.Leza Mikail,Associate Planner
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard
Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275-5391
Re:Comments on Proposed Code Amendment Permitting Ancillary Residential
Uses on Commercially Zoned Parcels (Case No.ZON2011-00089),Set for
Hearing on January 24,2012
Dear Members of the Planning Commission:
This office represents James P.Herrera,trustee of the Voyager West Trust,which is the owner of
the commercial retail and office center located at 29619 South Western Avenue in Rancho Palos Verdes,
and as trustee of the Navigator West Trust,which is the owner of the commercial retail and office center
located at 16 Miraleste Plaza in Rancho Palos Verdes.
Our client is strongly opposed to the proposed amendment to the city's Zoning Code that would
permit ancillary residential uses on commercially zoned parcels by means of the conditional use permit
process,as well as establish development standards applicable to such uses.
From the perspective not only of our client,as an owner and manager of commercial retail and
office centers in the city,but as a matter of sound policy,the proposed amendment is undesirable for
reasons including,but not limited to,the following:
1.The proposed amendment is being promoted as creating a financial benefit for owners of
retail and office centers in the city,who will be able to reduce current vacancy rates by converting retail
and office space to residential use.In fact,current vacancy rates -estimated by the city staff to be about
10%--are not excessive in light of current economic conditions.When the demand for retail and office
space begins to rise once again -as it surely will -the converted space will be unavailable,the city will
be facing a shortage of such desirable space,and the corresponding commercial tax revenue will be lost to
the city.
2.Any reduction in available retail space in the city will reduce the synergy which currently
benefits the owners of all retail businesses in the city,whose sales are enhanced when customer traffic is
generated by a diverse mix of retail offerings in a single geographic area.These enhanced sales translate
into enhanced commercial tax revenue for the city.
ATTACHMENT 2-48
LAW OFFICES
GREENBERG,WHITCOMBE &TAKEUCHI,LLP
Members of the Planning Commission of
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes
January 16,2012
Page 2
3.The proposed amendment is also being promoted as creating affordable,convenient
housing for workers employed by businesses located within the retail and office centers where the new
residential units will be established.However,there is no evidence that such workers would be able to
afford the rents that owners would be required to charge in order to recover the costs of residential
conversion,fund ongoing maintenance,and earn a modest profit.Nor is there any evidence that workers
would desire to relocate "on site"from their current homes,despite the apparent "convenience"of doing
so.If the Zoning Code were to restrict the rental of residential units to "on site"workers,it seems
unlikely that owners would be able to find enough qualified tenants.Owners would also face high
"turnover"rates,as tenants who found new employment at other locations would be forced to vacate.
Owners would soon be seeking "hardship"exemptions from the city allowing them rent to tenants who do
not work in the centers.Since these other tenants might very well commute "off the Peninsula,"the
intended goals of reduced traffic and greenhouse gas emissions would not be achieved.
4.Commercial and residential uses,when placed in close proximity to one another,are
frequently incompatible.Combining these uses on a single parcel is a recipe for trouble.Many owners of
retail and office centers will choose not to implement residential conversions,anticipating the headaches
that will arise when their unhappy residential tenants begin complaining about their retail and office
tenants.And those headaches will not be limited to owners who choose to undertake residential
conversions on their own parcels.Owners of adjoining retail and office centers will now be faced with
residential "neighbors"where there were none before.Existing conditions at their centers which,
previously,were fully compatible with the similar conditions on adjoining parcels,will now become the
subject of complaints from their new residential "neighbors"objecting to noise,traffic,lighting,and
more.
5.The conditional use permit process can be expensive,time consuming,and contentious,
and it is certain to be all of these in this particular context.Moreover,overseeing the conversion of retail
and office space to residential use,even with the guidance of the new standards that are being proposed,
will place a heavy burden on the city's staff.But that will only be the beginning.Dissatisfied residential
tenants in retail and office centers will be coming to the Community Development Department with their
complaints,and the city will be called upon to become referee and arbiter of these disputes.
6.Housing activities are subject to regulation by a number of state and federal agencies in
addition to the city.The creation of new residential units in the midst of incompatible retail and office
uses will create fertile ground for disputes over habitability,discrimination,and more.Moreover,it takes
little imagination to envision the lawsuits that may be filed by private attorneys,alleging claims for
wrongful discrimination,on behalf of disappointed applicants for a variance.The expense to the city in
terms of attorneys'fees and court costs in defending against such claims (in addition to the burden on city
staff)can,and often is,overwhelming.
ATTACHMENT 2-49
LAW OFFICES
GREENBERG,WHITCOMBE &TAKEUCHI,LLP
Members of the Planning Commission of
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes
January 16,2012
Page 3
7.The proposed code amendment is somewhat akin to spot zoning.It represents a very
substantial change in the zoning of commercial areas,and should not be undertaken in this abbreviated
fashion.Certainly our client,and others,are entitled to review a considered study and report concerning
whether and how the proposed change aligns with the City's master plan,and future zoning.It appears to
be an excessive response to a request for relief that may,or may not be justified in a single setting.
For these reasons,and others,the proposed amendment is simply not good policy.The risks are
very real,while the predicted benefits are speculative.Because we are not at present privy to the staff
report,please be advised that all of our client's rights,remedies and grounds of objection are preserved,
including those that might be more readily apparent were our client provided further information.
Very truly yours,
~~
Richard C.Greenberg
For the firm.
ATTACHMENT 2-50
RECEIVED
JAN 172012
January 17,2012
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
Leeza Mikhail PLEASE DO NOT SHARE PERSONAL INFORMATION
Planning Associate
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Re:Case No.ZON2011-00089
Thank you for sending the information regarding the Planning Commission
hearing on the above-mentioned case.I am submitting with this letter a Petition
in Opposition to the establishment of Ancillary Residential Use Development
Standards in Commercial Zones Citywide.
The one outstanding statement from every person signing the Petition was "this is
fragmented zoning and not a quality of life residential use that we want in our
City of Rancho Palos Verdes'!
This Case deserves serious consideration as it has the potential to be a larger than
expected tax revenue loss to the City,complex and difficult to implement,
difficult to monitor,confusing Code Enforcement for the City,plus the
commercial property owner(s}will not have the luxury of obtaining loans from
banks and other lending institutions because of the mixed use and the "low
income housing"apartments.Banks and lending institutions today and in these
difficult economic times are not anxious to offer loans for mixed use and also not
anxious to foreclose and become the owner of commercial developments,strip
mall or otherwise.
Another very serious consideration is Renter's Insurance coverage for fire,
earthquake,storm damage,all damages from disasters,including vehicles that
often go out of control in strip malls.There isn't a strip mall in all of the world
that has not experienced leaks from public parking on the roof or suffered from
disastrous fires.Quality of life would be questionable.
This Case is risky to everyone:land owner/developer,lending institutions and to
the City in general.This is not a simple straight forward proposed Code
Amendment that can be efficiently enforced for the benefit of the property
owners in the City.
25
ATTACHMENT 2-51
The majority of the City's population will be unable to respond yea or nay at this
hearing as a Legal Notice in a newspaper of general circulation,for the most part,
goes unread and not many folks subscribe to or buy a newspaper these days.
The citizens of Rancho Palos Verdes want a simple life with straight forward
uncomplicated rules and regulations!Therefore,we respectfully request the
Planning Commission to communicate our opposition to this Case to the Mayor
and City Council.
We,the signers of the attached Petition,appreciate your valued and thoughtful
consideration of our opposition to Case No.ZON2011-o0089.
----
v
ATTACHMENT 2-52
LEEZA MIKHAIL:.PLEASE OMIT ALL PERSONAL INFORMATION
PETITION IN OPPOSITION TO PROPOSED RANCHO PALOS VERDES CODE
AMENDMENT (CASE NO.ZON2011-00089)TO ESTABLISH ANCILLARY
RESIDENTIAL USE DEVELOPMENt"STANDARDS IN COMMERCIAL ZONES
CITYWIDE
We,the following undersigned residential property owners and tenants
residing in the cui de sac area commonly known as Mira Costa Terrace,
located west of Western Avenue in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,
individually and collectively,are opposed to the proposed above-
referenced Code Amendment for the following reasons:
1.The residential communities located on the east and west of Western
Avenue within said city already have their allotment of low income
housing in their area:Park Western and Harbor Hills.
2.Residential land use in commercial zoning demands a higher quality of
building than retail/business/office land use,since you are essentially
walking by them,not driving by at 45 miles an hour.
3.Public transportation is inadequate and the widening of Western
Avenue is a futuristic problem.The entire area around Western Avenue
in our City is developed,thus it is imperative that potential health and
quality of life problems be addressed before contributing to more
congestion.
Therefore,to be as successful as anticipated,we believe the requested
Ancillary Residential Land Use would create a tim.e-consuming and
complicated land use zoning that is not clear,simple,flexible written rules
in ways that benefit the entire City of Rancho Palos Verdes.The proposed
Ancillary Residential Use would demand Strict Building Code regulations to
provide for each residential unit:
-Private outdoor spaces
-Private garage parking spaces
ATTACHMENT 2-53
1I
-Adequate ingress and egress
-Control of population densities
-Absolute minimum floor space,fire separations and sound proofing
for each unit
-Precautions to reduce fire hazards,installation of fire alarms
-Improve health standards i.e.fresh air,heating,air conditioning and
installation of carbon monoxide alarms
- A buffer between dry cleaners,shoe repair,restaurants,bakeries,
theaters,heating/air conditioning which contribute to intolerable
noise,emit toxic fumes or unpleasant odors.
-Not to overburden roads,(Western Avenue and cross streets),
water,sewage,and energy provisions
- A systematic property maintenance program,not complaint
generated,to deal directly with the appearance and cleanliness of
the Ancillary Residential Use
We believe the proposed Ancillary Residential Use would create a mixed land use
making taxation and government powers difficult to implement as this Use would
require special permits i.e.building,business,retail/professional,residential.
Name Property Address
(ArJcj \r-f S S ex no\
t 'f 0W clt..cA
7fD ?{(iIJ
s",c:J f\0\.1v\v-e-~
0\0 ')n+tA N t-
ATTACHMENT 2-54
projXY-hj OWYUG
rAJ.()re ss ('S LA Vl e\"3 i ~Vlut -fu N".3
0\ve ex C),»JJJ fA 0 n ~
Ir)-kJI Y'-e +
ATTACHMENT 2-55
p('0fXr~OW~~
(}{).(l)'rf sS (S 0 V1 0's i <3 no.-h1 N"3
CA v-e e"'l c)JJJ/J 0(0 n fk-e
)()tvtN+
ATTACHMENT 2-56
pY'ofXr-hj owvu~
0..0..(j re ss (S 0 VI 0'\s i:3 Vlet-Iu rf'S
o.\f£exe1MdJoC on ~
)t1kt1~+
ATTACHMENT 2-57
prop--er-hj OWtv~
()./)..cA y-ess.(S 0.Vl d si ']V\uttu H'5
av-e eXcMAdJo{on ~
In-tvt Nf
ATTACHMENT 2-58
prop-<r~owvu~
(J(}.,rJ rfSS (S 0 Vl 01 si tjVlO -fvt h".3
ave ex cJ.MdJ fA 0 n ~
)()MNf
ATTACHMENT 2-59
prop-eY+Lj owvu~
(}.l}..G-HsseS ond 'Si<jn~-fwH"'.s
CA v-e ex clvJ)J 0{0 n ~
)tlMY'-(+
ATTACHMENT 2-60
Page 1 of 1
leza Mikhail
From:Leza Mikhail [LezaM@rpv.com]
Sent:Tuesday,January 10,20122:18 PM
To:'Karen Lin'
Subject:RE:notice from city
Attachments:PC PUBLIC NOTICE supplemental.pdf;CC STAFF REPORT_2011_06_21.pdf
Hello Ms.Lin,
Thank you for responding to the public notice.Staff has attached a supplemental notice that is
going out which includes all the addresses that the code amendment will affect.In addition,for
your information,Staff has also attached the Staff Report that went before the City Council
which explains the intent behind the proposal.The Planning Commission meeting on January
24th is a meeting to gain feedback from the public and the Planning Commission so that a
recommendation can be made to the City Council.
If you should have any further questions,please do not hesitate to contact me.
Thank you,
Leza Mikhail
Associate Planner
City of(j(ancfio Pa{os 'Verdes
Planning Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/rpv/planning/planning-zoning/index.cfin
(310)544-5228 -(310)544-5293 f
lezam@rpv.com
From:Karen Lin [mailto:klin7777@yahoo.com]
Sent:Tuesday,January 10,2012 11:16 AM
To:lezam@rpv.com
Subject:notice from city
Dear Mr.Rojas,
I have received a notice from you from the City of RPV dated January 2nd about the code
amendment (case no.ZON2011-00089).I would like to know which streets do these code
amendments pertain to?Thank you.
Karen Lin
1835 Santa Rena Drive
RPV
1/18/2012 ATTACHMENT 2-61
Leza Mikhail
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
~..~:.··.1~
Leza Mikhail [LezaM@rpv.com]
Friday,January 06,2012 12:01 PM
'Ealy,Claire'
'Ed Shea';'Susan Greayer';'Philip Browning';'Joel Rojas'
RE:Code Amendment Case No.ZON2011-00089
I would be happy to discuss the proposed code amendment that was initiated by the City Council in June 2011.
In short,the City Council initiated a code amendment to consider allowing a percentage of leasable commercial
building area that could be occupied/used as residential units.This item was originally requested by a local
commercial property owner and the City Council requested that Staff look at allowing residential in commercial
zones throughout the City with the understanding that the residential use would be ancillary to the commercial
uses that exist on the property.
While a final Staff Report is not yet available for the January 24,2012 PC meeting (it will be available online
on the 19th),I have provided,as an attachment to this email,a copy of the initiation request that went before the
City Council on June 21.This staff report should give you some background on the topic.Also,the minutes
from the June 21st City Council meeting and the actual video are available online for your review.
It is important to note that the City Council's initiation was in no wayan actual approval.It was simply allowing
staff to look into/research potential code language and procedures/development standards if the City Council
were to approve this change in the Development Code.
Please feel free to contact me if you would like to discuss more about this code amendment.
Thank you for your comments.
Leza Mikhail
Associate Planner
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Planning Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275
www.palosverdes.comlrpv/planning/planning-zoning/index.cfm
(310)544-5228 -(310)544-5293 f
lezam@rpv.com
-----Original Message-----
From:Ealy,Claire [mailto:claire.ealy@lausd.net]
Sent:Thursday,January 05,20129:00 PM
To:lezam@rpv.com
1 ATTACHMENT 2-62
Cc:Ed Shea;Susan Greayer;Philip Browning;pc@rpv.com
Subject:Code Amendment Case No.ZON2011-00089
Hi Leza,
We just received the above-referenced notice in the mail.It is so cryptically worded that we are unable to
ascertain whether we have comments or not.The relevant materials are only available at city hall and since we
work downtown,it is not possible to come in to review them.Comments on this request are due by Jan.17 but
the staff report will not be available online until Jan.19,giving very limited time to prepare a response for the
Jan.24 public hearing.
I am requesting that citizens be given more specific information and that the information be either posted online
or summarized in an additional letter to citizens.We are concerned about the implications of residential use
within commercial property.This could be interpreted in a variety of ways and could have negative impacts on
nearby properties.
Can the Planning Commission delay this hearing until additional information can be provided?
Thank you for your consideration.
Claire Ealy
36 Via Capri
Rancho Palos Verdes
Sent from my iPad
2 ATTACHMENT 2-63
Page 1 of 1
Leza Mikhail
From:Leza Mikhail [LezaM@rpv.com]
Sent:Monday,January 16,20122:04 PM
To:'Jeannine/Jae Etcheverry'
Subject:RE:Panning Comm.
Hello Ms.Etcheverry,
Staff is aware that your property is currently developed with a residential development.The
underlying zoning (as it has been for some time now)is Commercial General.Although your
property is residential,it is considered legal,non-conforming.Your propeliy will not be affected
by this proposed code amendment.If you would like more information,please do not hesitate to
call me at (310)544-5228 and I can explain the situation on your property in further detail.
Leza Mikhail
Associate Planner
City of1{,ancfio Pa[os o/ercfes
Planning Department
30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275
www.palosverdes.com/mv/planning/planning-zoning/index.cfm
(310)544-5228 -(310)544-5293 f
lezam@rpv.com
From:JeanninejJae Etcheverry [mailto:jaeseal@sbcglobal.net]
Sent:Sunday,January 15,20123:45 PM
To:lezam@rpv.com
Subject:Panning Comm.
Hi Leza ,
We received the letter regarding the proposed Code Amendment from
Joel Rojas regarding the properties along 29641 So.Western
Avenue (not Blvd.as noted).
The address for 29641 So.Western Avenue is for our 70 unit condo
building.We are strictly residential and don't want any
commercial here.Can you explain what this might mean to us?I
am the Treasurer for the HOA and the Board of Directors will be
meeting this coming Thursday the 19th and would like to know what
it means for us at that time.
My e-mail is:jaeseal@sbcglobal.net and phone is:310-832-3755.
Thank you your help.
Jeannine Etcheverry Unit #313
1/19/2012 ATTACHMENT 2-64
Public Notice
(January 2,2012)
ATTACHMENT 2-65
January 2,2012
CITYOF
NOTICE
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes will
conduct a public hearing on Tuesday,January 24,2012,at 7:00 PM at Point Vicente Interpretive Center,
31501 Palos Verdes Drive West,Rancho Palos Verdes,to consider:
CODE AMENDMENT (CASE NO.ZON2011-00089):A request to establish Ancillary Residential
Use Development Standards under a new Section 17.76.200 of Chapter 17.76 (Miscellaneous
Permits and Standards)and amend Chapter '17.14 (Commercial Limited),Chapter 17.16
(Commercial Neighborhood),Chapter 17.18 (Commercial Professional)and Chapter 17.20
(Commercial General)to allow residential uses within commercially zoned properties through the
discretionary review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP).
LOCATION:CITYWIDE
APPLICANT:CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
All interested parties are invited to submit written comments and to attend and give testimony.If you
wish to submit written comments,please provide them to the attention of Ms.Leza Mikhail,
Associate Planner.Public Comments received by 5:30p.m.on Tuesday,January 17,2012 will be
included in the Planning Commission Staff Report.Written comments submitted after January 16th
will be given to the Planning Commission prior to the meeting.In addition,City meetings may be
televised and may be accessed through the City's website.Accordingly,you may wish to omit
personal information from your oral presentation or written materials as it may become part of the
public record regarding an agendized item.
A Copy of all relevant materials are on file with the Community Development Department at City
Hall,30940 Hawthorne Boulevard,Rancho Palos Verdes,and are available for review between the
hours of 7:30 am and 5:30 pm,Mondays through Thursdays,and 7:30 am and 4:30 pm on Fridays.
For additional information regarding the proposed project,please contact Associate Planner,Leza
Mikhail at (310)544-5228,or via email atlezam@rpv.com.The final staff report will be available on
the City's website,http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/.by 5:30 p.m.on January 19,2012,under
Current Planning Agenda.I
~mor
NOTE:STATE GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65009 NOTICE:If you challenge this
application in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else
raised at the public hearing described in this notice,or in written correspondence delivered
to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at,or prior to,the public hearing.
30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./r~NCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275-5391
I)LANNING &CODE ENFOI~C[MF:NT DIVISION (310)544-5228/I3lJlLDING &SAFE TY DIVISIClN (310)265-7800/DEPT FAX (310)544-[j293
[·MAII.:PLANNIN(,@r~I)V(;OM /WWWPAI()SVEI~DFS(X)M/RI'VATTACHMENT 2-66
Supplemental Public Notice
(January 9,2012)
ATTACHMENT 2-67
January 9,2012
CITYOF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPAr~TMENT
SUPPLEMENTAL NOTICE
On January 2,2012,a public notice was given informing the public about a proposed code
amendment that will be considered by the Planning Commission on January 24,2012 regarding the
allowance of residential uses in commercial zones.This supplemental notice is now being given to
provide some clarifying information on the proposal.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes will
conduct a public hearing on Tuesday,January 24,2012,at 7:00 PM at Point Vicente Interpretive
Center,31501 Palos Verdes Drive West,Rancho Palos Verdes,to consider:
CODE AMENDMENT (CASE NO.ZON2011-00089):A proposed code amendment by the City to
allow residential uses within certain commercially zoned properties in the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes.Specifically,the proposal is to allow employees of commercial businesses to live on
commercially zone9 properties.Said proposal would apply to the City's Commercial Limited Zone,
Commercial Neighborhood Zone,Commercial Professional Zone and Commercial General Zone
(specific properties listed below).The proposal would also create standards to ensure that said
residences are clearly ancillary to the commercial uses,do not adversely affect the vitality of the
commercial uses and minimize impacts to adjacent neighbors.
The proposed code amendment was initiated by the City Council on June 21,2011.No final decision
on this proposal will be made at the January 24 th Planning Commission meeting.The purpose of the
January 24 th meeting is to obtain feedback on the proposal from the public and the Planning
Commission so that a recommendation on the proposal can be made to the City Council.Based on
the feedback received on January 24 th ,a fOllow-up Staff Report and Draft Ordinance will be
presented to the Planning Commission on February 14,2012.
LOCATION:
•Properties Zoned Commercial Limited:30019 Hawthorne Blvd.(Ralphs),30019 Miraleste
Plaza,83 Miraleste Plaza,4007 Miraleste Plaza,28 Miraleste Plaza,29501 Miraleste Plaza,
and 16 Miraleste Plaza.
•Commercial Neighborhood Zone:31186 Hawthorne Blvd;(7-Eleven),31098 Hawthorne Blvd.
(Golden Cove Center),31100 Hawthorne Blvd.(Golden Cove Center),31270 Hawthorne Blvd.
(Pt.'Vicente Animal Hospital),vacant lot on Silver Spur Road [APN#7586022902].
•Commercial Professional Zone:29941 Hawthorne Blvd.(vacant -proposed Chase Bank),
430 Silver Spur Road,450 Silver Spur Road,500 Silver Spur Road,550 Silver Spur Road,
27580 Silver Spur Road.
•Commercial General Zone (along Western Blvd.):1450 Brett Place,28500 S.Western Ave.,
28619 S.Western Ave.,28717 S.Western Ave.,28733 S.Western Ave.,28798 S.Western
Ave.,28821 S.Western Ave.,28900 S.Western Ave.,29019 S.Western Ave.,29023 S.
Western Ave.,29035 S.Western Ave.,29051 S.Western Ave.,29105 S.Western Ave.,29125
S.Western Ave.,29211 S.Western Ave.,29215 S.Western Ave.,29229 S.Western Ave.,
29317 S.Western Ave.,29403 S.Western Ave.,29409 S.Western Ave.,29413 S.Western
30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD./RANCHO PALOS VERDES,CA 90275-5391
PLANNING &CODE ENFor~CEMENT DIVISION (310)544-5228/BUIl.DING &SAFETY DIVISION (310)265-7800 I DEPT FAX (310)544-5293
E-MAIL:Pl.ANNING@I~PV.COM/WWWPAl.OSVErmES.COM/r~PVATTACHMENT 2-68
Ave.,29421 S.Western Ave.,29505 S.Western Ave.,29519 S.Western Ave.,29529 S.
Western Ave.,29601 S.Western Ave.,29619 S.Western Ave.and 29641 S.Western Ave.
APPLICANT:CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
You are receiving this notice because records indicate that you reside within 500 feet of one of the
commercial zones listed above.All interested parties are invited to submit written comments and/or
to attend and give testimony on the proposal.If you wish to submit written comments,please provide
them to the attention of Ms.Leza Mikhail,Associate Planner.Public Comments received by 5:30p.m.
on Tuesday,January 17,2012 will be included in the Planning Commission Staff Report.Written
comments submitted after January 1i h will be given to the Planning Commission prior to the
meeting.In addition,City meetings may be televised and may be accessed through the City'S
website.Accordingly,you may wish to omit personal information from your oral presentation or
written materials as it may become part of the public r~cord regarding an agendized item.
A Copy of all relevant materials related to this proposal are on file with the Community Development
Department at City Hall,30940 Hawthorne Boulevard,Rancho Palos Verdes,and are available for
review between the hours of 7:30 am and 5:30 pm,Mondays through Thursdays,and 7:30 am and
4:30 pm on Fridays.
For additional information regarding the proposed project,please cont~ct Associate P.lanner,Leza
Mikhail at (310)544-5228,or via email atlezam@rpv.com.The final staff report will be available on
the City's website,http://www.palosverdes.com/rpv/.by 5:30 p·.m.on January 19,2012,under
Current Planning A enda.
NO STATE GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65009 NOTICE:If you challenge this
appli ion in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else
raised at the public hearing described in this notice,or in written correspondence delivered
to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes at,or prior to,the public hearing.
ATTACHMENT 2-69
P.C.Staff Report
(February 14,2012)
ATTACHMENT 2-70
CITY OF
MEMORANDUM
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
JOEL ROJAS,AICP,COMMUNITY DE
FEBRUARY 14,2012
SUBJECT:CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW ANCILLARY RESIDENTIAL USE
WITHIN CERTAIN COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS THROUGH
DISCRETIONARY REVIEW OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CASE
NO.ZON2011-00089)
Project Manager.Leza Mikhail,Associate Planner e
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt P.C.Resolution No.2012-_,thereby memorializing the Planning Commission's
recommendation that the City Council not adopt proposed amendments to the City's
Development Code which would allow ancillary residential uses within commercially zoned
properties throughout the City.
BACKGROUN
On January 24,2012,the Planning Commission reviewed a proposed code amendment,
initiated by the City Council in June 2011,to allow ancillary residential units in commercially
zoned properties.The Planning Commission provided Staff with its feedback on the proposed
amendments,closed the public hearing and directed Staff to return to the February 14,2012
Planning Commission meeting with a resolution recommending that the City Council not pursue
a code amendment that would allow ancillary residentially uses within commercial zoning
districts.
DISCUSSION
As noted above,the Planning Commission reviewed the ancillary residential development
standards prepared by Staff and considered the idea of allowing ancillary residential uses in
commercially zoned districts.The Planning Commission found that allowing ancillary residential
uses within commercial zoning districts posed a number of concerns.These concerns included
the following:
o Loss of retail use and,consequently,a loss of sales tax revenue
o Potential change in the character of the City's commercial areas
o Potential environmental impacts related to noise,odor and circulation beyond what
commercial uses would produce
ATTACHMENT 2-71
LI A number of law enforcement and legal issues including how residential leases would be
terminated if the tenant were no longer employed within the commercial center,nuisance
issues related to dwelling units next to noisy commercial uses,and issues related to
potential age restrictions on residents
LI The operation of a predominately commercial center may not be compatible with
ancillary residential uses
Ultimately,the Planning Commission unanimously agreed (5-0,with Commissioner Lewis
absent)that the City Council should not pursue the proposed code amendment that would allow
ancillary residential uses within commercial zoning districts.The Planning Commission did,
however,note that while they believe that ancillary residential uses are not appropriate in the
City's existing commercial centers,the Planning Commission would support researching specific
commercial centers in the City that may be appropriate locations for "mixed-use"development
and preparing an applicable zoning district for "mixed-use."
CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt P.C.Resolution No.2012-_,thereby
memorializing the Planning Commission's recommendation that the City Council not pursue a
the proposed code amendment to allow ancillary residential units within commercially zoned
properties,but noting that if the City Council desires to allow residential uses within commercial
zoning districts,then research should be conducted to potentially change the underlying zoning
of certain commercial properties to allow "mixed use"development
ATTACHMENTS
o Draft P.C.Resolution No.2012-_
ATTACHMENT 2-72
P.C.RESOLUTION NO.2012-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL DENY A REQUEST TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT CODE
TO ALLOW ANCILLARY RESIDENTIAL USES WITHIN
COMMERCIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES OF THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL
CODE (PLANNING CASE NO.ZON2011-00089)
WHEREAS,on April 12,2011,the property owner of the Golden Cove Center
submitted a Code Amendment Initiation Request to allow residential uses within the
Golden Cove Center,a commercially zoned property;and,
WHEREAS,On June 21,2011,at the recommendation of Staff,the City Council
initiated a Code Amendment and directed Staff to move forward with drafting potential
development standards to allow residential uses within the Golden Cove Center and
other commercially-zoned properties in the City through the discretionary review of a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP).In addition,the City Council directed the Planning
Commission to consider the potential development standards for said residential uses to
ensure that they are clearly ancillary to commercial uses,to ensure that the residential
units do not adversely affect the vitality of the commercial developments and to
minimize impacts to adjacent neighbors.Specifically,the City Council requested that the
development standards:1)limit the amount of ancillary residential use to 5 percent of
the total building square footage;2)include provisions for apartment housing,but not
allow hotel or transient use;3)include a provision for the units to be counted towards
meeting the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment requirement;and,4)limit the
ancillary residential use to locations not directly facing a street;and,
WHEREAS,on January 2,2012,a Public Notice was mailed to all owners of
commercial property within the commercial zones slated for the allowance of ancillary
residential units.In addition,a public notice was mailed to all property owners who
reside within a 500-foot radius of commercial properties slated for the allowance of
ancillary residential units.The public notice was also published in the Peninsula News
on January 5,2012.A supplemental public notice was given to all property owners
noted above on January 9,2012 to provide some clarifying information on the proposal;
and,
WHEREAS,after notice was issued pursuant to the provisions of the Rancho
Palos Verdes Municipal Code,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on
January 24,2012,at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be
heard and present evidence regarding said amendments to Title 17 as set forth in the
January 24,2012 Planning Commission Staff report.
NOW,THEREFORE,THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND,DETERMINE,AND RESOLVE AS
FOLLOWS:
ATTACHMENT 2-73
Section 1:The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the
proposed amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code to allow ancillary residential
units within the Commercial Limited (CL),Commercial Professional (CP),Commercial
Neighborhood (CN)and Commercial General (CG)zoning districts and recommends
that the City Council not pursue the proposed code amendment.
Section 2:The amendments to allow ancillary residential uses within
commercial developments would not preserve the public health,safety,and general
welfare of the community and its residents because it may change the character of the
City's commercial areas.
Section 3:The amendments to allow ancillary residential units could result in a
loss of available commercially leasable area and,consequently,reduce the amount of
sales tax revenue generated for the City.
Section 4:The amendment to allow ancillary residential units,as proposed,
could create potential environmental impacts related to noise,odor and circulation
beyond what commercial uses would produce.
Section 5:Allowing ancillary residential uses within primarily commercial
developments could create a number of law enforcement and legal issues including how
residential leases would be terminated if the tenant were no longer employed within the
commercial center,nuisance issues related to dwelling units next to noisy commercial
uses,and issues related to potential age restrictions on residents.
Section 6:The operation of a predominately commercial center may not be
compatible with ancillary residential uses.
Section 7:The Planning Commission finds that it may be more appropriate to
research specific commercial areas throughout the City where "mixed-use"development
may be more appropriate,instead of allowing ancillary residential uses in all commercial
zones,as proposed.In addition,creating a zoning district and development standards
that allow for "mixed-use"development may be beneficial to ensuring that the health,
safety and general welfare of the City's abutting residential uses and commercial
viability are maintained.
Section 8:For the foregoing reasons,the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Palos Verdes hereby recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution
denying the proposed code amendment to allow ancillary residential uses within
commercial zoning districts (Planning Case No.lON2011-00089).
P.C.Resolution No.2012-
Page 2 of 3
ATTACHMENT 2-74
PASSED,APPROVED,AND ADOPTED this 14th day of February 2012,by the
following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTION:
ABSENT:
RECUSALS:
David L.Tomblin
Chairman
Joel Rojas,AICP
Community Development Director,and
Secretary to the Planning Commission
P.C.Resolution No.2012-
Page 3 of 3
ATTACHMENT 2-75
City Council Staff Report
Code Amendment Initiation Request
(June 21,2011)
ATTACHMENT 2-76
CrTYOF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR &CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM:JOEL ROJAS,AICP,COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE:JUNE 21,2011
SUBJECT:CODE AMENDMENT INITIATION REQUEST TO ALLOW ANCILLARY
RESIDENTIAL USE WITHIN COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS (CASE
NO.ZON2011-00089);APPLICANT:PARIS ZARRABIAN (GOLDEN
COVE CENTER);PROPERTY ADDRESSES:CITYWIDE
REVIEWED:CAROLYN LEHR,CITY MANAGER
Project Manager:Leza Mikhail,Associate Planner
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council initiate the proposed Code Amendment Request by
directing Staff and the Planning Commission to draft an ordinance that would allow ancillary
residential uses within commercially zoned properties through the discretionary review and
approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP),and create the necessary Ancillary Residential
Development Standards within Title 17 (Zoning)of the RPV Municipal Code.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This item is before the City Council because Staff is seeking Council direction on whether to
initiate a Code Amendment to allow ancillary residential uses/housing at the Golden Cove
Shopping Center and within other commercially zoned properties throughout the City.If the City
Council is not supportive of the Code Amendment,the current code,which does not allow
residential uses within properties zoned for commercial use,will not be changed.If the City
Council is supportive of the proposed Code Amendment,Staff and the Planning Commission will
amend the commercial zone regulations of the Development Code to allow a specified
percentage of commercial space to be used for ancillary residential use through a discretionary
review and approval process.In addition,Staff and the Planning Commission would conduct the
necessary research to establish development standards to allow said ancillary residential uses
within commercial zoning districts throughout the City.
BACKGROUND
In early March 2011,the property owner of Golden Cove Center,Paris Zarrabian,approached
Staff with a request to convert two existing,vacant commercial tenant spaces within Building "A"
of the Golden Cove Center (the 2-story building)to residential apartments.After reviewing the
uses allowed in the underlying zoning district (Commercial Neighborhood -CN),Staff informed
the property owner that permanent residential uses are not permitted within the Commercial
Neighborhood Zoning District,or any other commercially zoned property in the City.TheATTACHMENT 2-77
property owner requested that the City consider allowing ancillary residential uses within the
Golden Cove Center due to the vacancy rate of the Center (currently 7.8%).Staff informed the
property owner that he would have to initiate a code amendment to be considered by the City
Council in order to amend Title 17 (Zoning Code)of the RPVMC to allow ancillary residential
uses within commercial zones.
On April 12,2011,the property owner of Golden Cove Center submitted a Code Amendment
Initiation Request to allow ancillary residential uses within the Golden Cove Center.Specifically,
the applicant is requesting a code amendment to allow two,2-bedroom,residential apartments
in the vacant,commercial tenant spaces of the Golden Cove Center.
DISCUSSION
Pursuant to Development Code Section 17.68.030.C,'~ny person having an interest in land
may file an application with the City Council for...an amendment to this title [Title 17 -Zoning]
upon submission to the director of an initiation application and payment of a filing fee,
established by the City Council ...The City Council shall review an accepted initiation application
to determine if the requested amendment...is necessary or desirable.If the initiation request is
approved by the City Council by a majority of affirmative votes,the proposed...code amendment
shall be reviewed in accordance with Section 17.68.040 of this chapter [17.68 -Code
Amendments)."
As noted in the Background section of this report,the property owner of Golden Cove Center
approached the City with a request to allow two,2-bedroom apartments on the second floor of
Building "A",facing the adjacent Villa Capri Condominiums.The applicant stressed their concern
with not being able to commercially lease the spaces along the back side of Building "A"due to
the fact that these tenant spaces cannot be seen from the public right-of-way or the Golden
Cove parking lot.As such,the property owner noted that these tenant spaces are not desirable
to prospective commercial tenants,and therefore have not been leased for an extended period
of time.The property owner further explained that they would like to offer housing to some of the
people who work throughout the Golden Cove Center in an effort to reduce their daily commute
from locates off the Palos Verdes Peninsula.Additionally,by improving the vacant spaces for
residential use and allowing Golden Cove tenants to live within the vacant tenant spaces,the
current 7.8%vacancy rate at Golden Cove Center will be reduced.
In reviewing the property owner's request to allow residential uses within the commercially
zoned Golden Cove Center,Staff believes that the proposal has merit in that the property owner
will be able to make up for lost revenue,and provide housing to the Center's tenants to minimize
commutes.In addition,if affordable housing restrictions are placed on the allowed housing,the
new housing units could help the City meet the goals and policies of the City's Housing Element.
However,at the same time,Staff believes that if some residential use is allowed at the Center,it
should clearly be ancillary to the commercial use so that the commercial center is not converted
to a residential use,thereby affecting the City's tax base.Furthermore,Staff believes that if the
City Council agrees with the concept of allowing some ancillary residential use at the Golden
Cove Shopping Center,that the opportunity should be extended to other commercial zoning
districts throughout the City.Lastly,Staff believes that if the Council is inclined to approve the
concept of allowing ancillary residential use in commercial districts citywide,that the allowance
be implemented via a code amendment to the City's commercial zoning district regulations,
rather than a zone change.Staff addresses all of these issues below.
ATTACHMENT 2-78
Allowing Residential Uses that are strictly ancillary to a Commercially Zoned Property
The City's commercially zoned properties offer convenient retail and restaurant uses that serve
residents of the surrounding area and visitors throughout the City.In addition,commercially
developed properties offer office space for residents and other businesses located on the
Peninsula.Furthermore,many of the retail and service businesses within these commercial
districts provide sales tax revenue to the City's General Fund.Staff believes that if a residential
use were permitted as a "primary use"at the Golden Cove Center,or at any other commercially
zoned property,property owners may be more inclined to redevelop their properties to offer all
or a larger percentage of residential square footage compared to commercial square footage.
Without restricting the quantity of area dedicated to residential use within a commercially zoned
property,the City could potentially lose retail,restaurant and office spaces that are conveniently
located throughout the City for local residents and visitors.The City's could also potentially lose
a substantial percentage of commercial tax revenues.
However,Staff believes that allowing residential uses that are strictly "ancillary"to commercial
uses could provide benefits to the City,neighboring residents,workers and commercial property
owners.The property owner of Golden Cove Center noted that the Center currently has a 7.8%
vacancy rate due to the undesirable location of some of the tenant spaces at the rear of the
property,facing Villa Capri,a residential development.The property owner is of the opinion that
these spaces would be more appropriately used as residential apartments due to the fact that
they are not really visible from public areas.Mr.Zarrabian believes that allowing the spaces at
the rear of Building "A"to be residential would be a more compatible use to the neighboring
residential property,and allow the unused space to be leased out.In addition,targeting the
apartments for people who work at the Center would allow additional housing on the Peninsula
while reducing the long commutes on and off the Peninsula.
Staff agrees that the property owner's request has merit provided the residential use is clearly
ancillary to the commercial use and the residences are occupied by employees of the Center.If
the City Council agrees,Staff is recommending that the City Council initiate a code amendment
to allow ancillary residential uses within the Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District (Golden
Cove Center Zoning)through the review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
Expand the Request to allow Ancillary Residential Uses Citywide to all Commercial Districts
Since Staff believes that allowing ancillary residential uses in commercial developments could
offer some benefits to the City and property owners,if the City Council agrees to initiate the
Golden Cove Center property owner's request,Staff would recommend that the concept be
applied to other commercial districts Citywide.This would allow the benefits of ancillary
residential uses within all commercially zoned properties throughout the City.Furthermore,Staff
would recommend that "ancillary residential uses"be specifically defined as a percentage of
total commercial leasable square footage within a development.
In an effort to understand the current vacancy rates that are found in local commercial
developments,Staff contacted the property managers offive (5)major retail/commercial centers
on the Palos Verdes Peninsula.Staff requested the total square footage of commercial space
within each development and the current vacancy rate.Table 1 below indicates the development
name,leasable square footage and current vacancy rate.
ATTACHMENT 2-79
Table 1:Palos Verdes Peninsula Vacancy Rates by %of Leasable Area
As noted in Table 1 above,the vacancy rate for the five (5)retail/commercial shopping centers
listed above ranges from 7.8%to 12%with an average rate of 10.14%.Based on this
information,Staff is of the opinion that limiting ancillary uses to 10%of a commercial center's
leasable area will ensure that residential uses remain ancillary,will avoid impacting the City's tax
base and would benefit the commercial property owner(s)by subsidizing lost income.In
addition,the opportunity to provide on-site housing would benefit tenant employees who at
commercially zoned properties by reducing long commutes on and off the peninsula.
Therefore,if the City Council agrees that the concept of allowing ancillary residential uses
should be applied to all commercial districts Citywide,Staff recommends that the City Council
direct Staff to create specific development standards for "ancillary residential uses within
commercial zoning districts."
Compatibility with Affordable Housing Goals
Staff believes that allowing ancillary residential uses in commercial districts and requiring all
ancillary residential units to function as worker housing (Le.affordable housing),would increase
the supply of available residential units for people who work within the City limits and earn a less
than moderate income.According to the Housing Element (adopted December 2009),allowing
ancillary residential uses within commercial zoning districts would meet Preservation GoaI4(a)
which states that the City should "remove existing governmental constraints to
the ...improvement and development ofhousing"."Additionally,Housing Element Preservation
Policy No.1 states that the City should "Continue to implement land use regulations that
facilitate meeting affordable housing needs."It is important to note that the City is required by
State Law to provide an Annual Report on the Implementation of the RPV Housing Element.
This report discusses measures that the City has taken each calendar year to implement the
goals and polices set forth in the adopted and certified Housing Element.The following table
illustrates the various goals and policies that ancillary residential uses (units)within
commercially zoned properties could potentially implement.
ATTACHMENT 2-80
Table 2:Implementation of RPV Housing Element Goals and Policies by allowing Ancillary
Residential Uses within Commercially Zoned Properties.
In addition to implementing the Goals and Policies of the City's Housing Element,by allowing
ancillary residential uses within commercially zoned properties,the City and property owner will
be making a concerted effort to reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions (G HG)throughout the City.
More specifically,SB 375 became law in 2009,and prompts California regions to work together
to reduce GHG's from cars and light trucks.The new law requires an integration of planning
processes for transportation,land use and housing.The City is currently working with the South
Bay Cities Council of Government (SBCCOG)to create a plan that helps reduce GHG's by 2020
and 2035.By allowing 10%of commercial square footage to be used for ancillary residential
uses,with specific development standards,the City will be making an effort in achieving
emission reduction target rates that are soon to be required for the Southern California Region
while also meeting affordable housing requirements.
Code Amendment vs.Zone Change
Currently,residential uses are not permitted within any commercially designated zoning district
throughout the City.In order to allow the applicant's request to allow some residential uses in
commercially zoned properties,the City has two options.One option is to re-zone the
commercial properties to have a dual commercial/residential or "mixed use"zoning designation.ATTACHMENT 2-81
The other option is to amend the existing commercial district regulations to allow limited
residential uses through a discretionary CUP review process and to create review criteria for
said uses.Staff is recommending that the latter approach be pursued to allow residential uses
that are "ancillary"to existing commercial developments.Staff believes that the better process to
allow this is through a Code Amendment that allows "ancillary residential uses"through review
and approval of a Conditional Use Permit,along with associated "Ancillary Residential
Development Standards."If the City Council agrees with the concept of allowing "ancillary
residential uses",Staffwould recommend moving forward with a Code Amendment to allow said
uses through review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Public Notice:
A Code Amendment Initiation Request does not require a public notice.If the City Council
initiates the Code Amendment,Staff will send a pubic notice to all property owners of
commercially zoned properties throughout the City as well as residents within a 500 foot radius
of each affected commercially zoned property.
Planning Commission Review
If the City Council initiates the Code Amendment,as recommended by Staff,the formal Code
Amendment will be presented to the Planning Commission for review and consideration at a
noticed public hearing.The Planning Commission's recommendation will then be forwarded to
the City council for a final decision.
FISCAL IMPACT
Due to the number of benefits that this Code Amendment would grant to the City and persons
who work within the City limits,should the City Council approve the initiation request,Staff would
process the request as a Citywide application.The Staff time associated with the processing of
this proposed Code Amendment is estimated to be approximately 40 hours.This process would
be considered an Advanced Planning Project and is accounted for in the Community
Development Department's budget.As such,no budget adjustment would be required.
ALTERNATIVE
The follOWing alternatives are available for the City Council's consideration:
1.Deny the CAIR,and direct Staff to take no further action on the matter.If this alternative is
chosen,private property owners of lots zoned for commercial use(s)will continue to be
prohibited from allowing permanent residential uses within a commercially zoned property.
2.Direct Staff to initiate a Zone Change that would create a dual zone or "mixed use"zoning
district to allow the proposed request.
Attachments:
•Letter from Golden Cove Property Owner,Paris Zarrabian
•Golden Cove Center Plan (preliminary proposal for ancillary residential units)
ATTACHMENT 2-82
Minutes
(June 21,2011 City Council meeting)
ATTACHMENT 2-83
Mayor Long offered a friendly amendment to adopt staff recommendation regardin he
height of the native habitat to be at 30 inches with a review of the condition a year.
The maker and'seconder of the motion accepted the friendly amendm
Mayor Pro Tem Misetich stated that he would like a split vote on e motion regarding
the height of the native habitat to be no higher than 24 inche maintain a better view
corridor.
Mayor Long declared the public hearing closed.
The motion passed on the folio
,Wolowicz,and Mayor Long
ing staff recommendation Nos.1 and 3 passed on the following roll
Campbell,St
Misetich
None
None
Campbell,Misetich,Stern,Wolowicz,and Mayor Long
None
None
None
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor Long reiterated the first motion as the option of staff recommendation NO.2
regarding the height of the native habitat teat 30 inches with a review of the
condition after 1 year.
AYES:
NOES:
ABS T:
AB AIN:
y Attorney Lynch added that a resolution commemorating Council's action will be
laced on the next Council agenda.
REGULAR BUSINESS:
Code Amendment Initiation Request to Allow Ancillary Residential Use
within Commercial Zoning Districts (Case No.ZON2011-00089);Applicant:Paris
Zarrabian (Golden Cove Center);Property Address:Citywide
City Clerk Morreale reported that there was one request to speak regarding this item.
Associate Planner Mikhail presented a staff report regarding the item.
City Council Minutes
June 21,2011
Page 13 of 18
ATTACHMENT 2-84
Discussion ensued between Council Members and staff.
Nelson Coronado,Property Manager,Golden Cove Center,LLC,Rancho Palos Verdes,
stated the owners have requested the ability to create the ancillary residential units due
to poor visibility of the spaces,concerns regarding vacant commercial space pertaining
to vandalism and safety at the area,and difficulty in staff finding affordable housing in
the area.
Ken Dyda,Rancho Palos Verdes,suggested that the Council consider the option of a
residential overlay district for a specific commercial area so that this use would not have
to apply citywide.
Discussion ensued between Council and staff.
Councilman Wolowicz moved,seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Misetich,directed staff to
initiate the proposed Code Amendment Request,as amended,to draft an ordinance
that would allow ancillary residential uses within commercially zoned properties through
the discretionary review and approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP),and create
the necessary Ancillary Residential Development Standards within Title 17 (Zoning)of
the RPV Municipal Code,including the following:1)limiting the amount of ancillary
residential use to 5 percent of the total building square footage;2)provisions included
for apartment housing,but not allowing hotel or transient use;3)provisions for the units
to be counted towards meeting the City's Regional Housing Needs Assessment
requirement;and,4)a provision to limit the ancillary residential use to locations not
directly facing a street.
The motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
A'BSTAIN:
Campbell,Misetich,Stern,Wolowicz,and Mayor Long
None
None
None
RECESS AND RECONVENE:
Mayor Long called a brief recess from 10:24 P.M.to 10:32 P.M.
Annenberg Project at Lower Point Vicente -Project Statu
City Clerk Morreale reported orrespondence was distributed prior to the
meeting and there requests to speak regarding this item.
City Council Minutes
June 21,2011
Page 14 of 18
ATTACHMENT 2-85