RPVCCA_CC_SR_2011_11_01_K_La_GaritaCrrvOF
MEMORANDUM
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR &CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM:
DATE:.
JOEL ROJAS,COMMUNITY DEVELOPME
NOVEMBER 1,2011
SUBJECT:APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF A HEIGHT
VARIATION AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A PROPOSED
SECOND STORY ADDITION TO THE EXISTING RESIDENCE
LOCATED AT 6530 LA GARITA (CASE NO.ZON2010-00331)
REVIEWED:CAROLYN LEHR,CITY MANAGERQ)-Par c:..\-
Project Manager:Leza Mikhail,Associate Plann@
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No.2011-_;overturning the Planning Commission's denial and thereby
approving,with conditions of approval,a new first and second floor addition for the property
located at 6530 La Garita Drive (Case No.ZON2010-00331).
DISCUSSION
On October 18,2011,the City Council conducted an appeal hearing to review the revised
design of a first and second story addition that was denied by the Planning Commission.
Specifically,the City Council reviewed the revisions associated with 131 square feet of
new,first-floor habitable area and a 1,139 square foot second story addition.After hearing
a mixture of public testimony for and against the project,a majority of the City Council
agreed that the revised design of the two-story residence was compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood through ample second-story setbacks,undulating facades and
multiple roof lines.In addition,a majority of the City Council agreed with Staff's
recommended condition of approval requiring the bottom of the transparent clerestory
windows along the west and south facing facades of the proposed second story to be a
minimum of 5'-6"in height from the finished floor level to reasonably protect neighboring
properties from privacy impacts.Furthermore,a majority of the City Council agreed that the
proposed project did not significantly impair the view from any surrounding residence.
Therefore,with a vote of 3-1,with Councilman Wolowicz dissenting and Councilman
Campbell absent,the City Council closed the public hearing and overturned the Planning
Commission's decision to deny a Height Variation and Site Plan Review,thereby approvingK-1
the proposed additions.The City Council also directed Staff to bring back a Resolution for
Council-approval on the next meeting's consent calendar.The attached Resolution of
approval has been prepared by Staff and is now being presented to the City Council for
adoption.
Attachments:
•Resolution No.2011-
K-2
RESOLUTION NO.2011-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING AN APPEAL AND
OVERTURNING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION
AND APPROVING SITE PLAN REVIEW AND HEIGHT
VARIATION (PLANNING CASE NO.ZON2010-00331)TO
CONSTRUCT A 131 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE STORY
ADDITION AND A 1,139 SQUARE FOOT SECOND STORY
ADDITION AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6530 LA GARITA.
WHEREAS,on September 20,2010,the property owners,Mr.and Mrs.Magalnic,
submitted a Height Variation and Site Plan Review Permit application to the Community
Development Department for review and processing requesting approval to construct a 131
square foot first-floor addition and a 1,467 square foot second story addition.On September 29,
2010,Staff completed the initial review of the application,at which time the application was
deemed incomplete due to missing information on the project plans;and,
WHEREAS,after the submittal of multiple revisions to the project,Staff deemed the
application complete on December 16,2010;and,
WHEREAS,pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,Public
Resources Code Sections 21000 et.seq.("CEQA"),the State's CEQA Guidelines,California
Code of Regulations,Title 14,Section 15000 et.seq.,the City's Local CEQA Guidelines,and
Government Code Section 65962.5(f)(Hazardous Waste and Substances Statement),Staff
found no evidence that the approval of the requested Height Variation and Site Plan Review
applications would have a significant effect on the environment and,therefore,the proposed
project has been found to be categorically exempt (Section 15303(e)(2));and,
WHEREAS,On February 8,2011,the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing to consider the submitted application,at which time all interested parties were given an
opportunity to be heard and present evidence.Based on the design originally presented to the
Planning Commission,Staff was recommending denial of the project due to bulk and mass
issues,view impairment to nearby residents along Santona Drive and potential privacy impacts
to the abutting neighbors to the east and west of the subject property.Staff indicated that some
minor modifications to the design of the project would likely mitigate the compatibility,view and
privacy impacts to a less than significant level.The Planning Commission agreed with Staff's
analysis,and continued the public hearing to April 26,2011 to allow the applicant additional time
to re-design the project;and,
WHEREAS,on April 26,2011,a revised design was presented to the Planning
Commission based on direction from the Planning Commission on February 8,2011 to lower the
roofline 4'_0",reduce the second story setback from the front,sides and rear,and reduce
potential privacy impacts to adjacent neighbors.Staff presented the revised design to the
Planning Commission with a recommendation of approval.After considering the revised design
and additional information presented by neighbors at the April 26,2011 meeting,the Planning
Commission voted to deny the project on a 4-1-1 vote (with Chairman Tomblin dissenting,
Commissioner Gerstner abstaining and Commissioner Knight absent)and directed Staff to
return to the May 10,2011 Planning Commission meeting with the appropriate resolution;and,
K-3
WHEREAS,on May 10,2011,the Planning Commission adopted P.C.Resolution No.
2011-21;thereby formally denying,without prejudice,Height Variation and Site Plan Review
(Case No.ZON201 0-00331)to construct a 1,250 square foot second story addition and 131
square foot first story addition to the existing single-story residence on a 2-0-2 vote (with
Commissioners Gerstner and Knight abstaining,and Commissioners Emenhiser,Leon and
Lewis absent);and,
WHEREAS,on May 24,2011,a representative for the property owner at 6530 La Garita,
David Moss,submitted a timely appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to deny the
proposed second story addition.The appeal letter stated the grounds of the appeal;and,
WHEREAS,on july 14,2011 Staff mailed notices for a City Council appeal hearing to
107 property owners within a 500-foot radius from the subject property,providing a 30-day time
period for the submittal of comments and concerns.In addition,a Public Notice was published in
the Peninsula News on July 14,2011;and,
WHEREAS,on August 16,2011,the City Council opened the public hearing and
approved the Appellant's request to continue the public hearing to October 18,2011;and,
NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY FIND,DETERMINE AND
RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1:The Height Variation is warranted since the applicant has complied with
the Early Neighbor Consultation process established by the City by obtaining signatures from a
minimum of 70%(72%obtained)of the property owners within a 100 foot radius and the
signatures from a minimum of 25%(29%obtained)of the property owners within a 500 foot
radius.
Section 2:The Height Variation is warranted since the proposed two-story residence,
which exceeds sixteen feet in height,does not significantly impair a view from public property
(parks,major thoroughfares,bike ways,walkways or equestrian trails),which have been
identified in the City's General Plan or Coastal Specific Plan,as City-designated viewing areas.
No City-designated viewing areas overlook the sUbject property due to the topography in the
area and the location of the subject property.
Section 3:The Height Variation is warranted since the proposed two-story addition
that exceeds sixteen feet in height is not located on a ridge or promontory.The subject property
is located within a fully developed single-family residential neighborhood,on an existing pad lot
and does not overlook any other single-family residences.The residence is not located on a
ridge or a promontory,as defined in the Municipal Code.
Section 4:The Height Variation is warranted because the portions of the new
residence which exceed sixteen feet in height,when considered exclusive of existing foliage,do
not significantly impair views of the Pacific Ocean,coastline views,distant mountain views or
distant city light views from the viewing area of another parcel due to the location of the
Resolution No.2011-
Page 2 of 9
K-4
proposed residence,orientation of the neighboring homes and topography in the surrounding
neighborhood.Furthermore,the proposed revised project does not cause a significant view
impairment to the property located at 6517 Certa Drive.A view analysis was conducted from a
standing position in the primary viewing area of the residence (the dining room)just inside the
sliding glass doors,facing the direction of the ocean,and the ocean was not easily visible.More
specifically,the evidence presented in the record regarding an alleged view impairment as seen
from the 'viewing area'was not easily discernable because the ocean could only be seen when
standing in the far corner of the dining room and turning one's head 90 degrees to the left to
catch a glimpse of the ocean view.
Section 5:The Height Variation is warranted because the proposed project that is
above 16'-0"in height is designed in a manner as to reasonably minimize the impairment of a
view.Specifically,the properties located at 28070 and 28063 Santona incurred view impairment
as a result of the originally designed project presented at the February 8,2011 Planning
Commissiqn meeting,albeit not significant.The applicant redesigned the project by reducing the
overall height from 25'~0"to 21'-0",as measured from highest existing grade adjacent to the
foundation/slab to the highest point of the structure,to further reduce the insignificant view
impairment caused by the project.
Section 6:The Height Variation is warranted because no significant cumulative view
impairment would be caused by granting the application.More specifically,an analysis was
conducted assessing the amount of cumulative view impairment that would be caused to
neighboring properties if a similar addition,such as the proposed project,were constructed on
the following adjacent properties:6538 La Garita,6529 La Garita,6525 La Garita and 28073
Acana.It was determined that an addition to one of the other residences listed above (in
addition to the project proposed at the subject property)would create some minor view
impairment.However,the impairment would not be significant because the additions would be
located at the lower portion of the view frame and would not project above the horizon line which
allows a majority of the ocean view to remain unobstructed.As such,the cumulative impairment
would not be significant.
Section 7:The Height Variation is warranted as the proposed addition complies with
all other Code requirements,including the RS~4 zoning district development standards with
respect to lot coverage and setbacks,and the off-street parking requirements for single-family
residences.Furthermore,due to the fact that the applicant is not proposing to demolish more
than 50%of the existing interior and exterior walls,the existing 14'-8"front yard setback may be
maintained.
Section 8:The Height Variation is warranted because,as redesigned,the proposed
fayade treatments,structure height,open space between structures,roof design,and
appearance of bulk and mass of the second story is compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood.While a majority of the homes located within the immediate neighborhood are
single-story,there is one existing 3,497 square foot,two-story home located within the 20
closest analyzed homes,at 28070 Ella Road.With respect to the proposed second story
addition,the applicant has reduced the square footage of the structure and provided a number
of setbacks along the second story fayade to provide articulation from all sides ofthe structure,
Resolution No.2011-
Page 3 of 9
K-5
thereby increasing the open space between structures and reducing the appearance of bulk and
mass.
Section 9:The Height Variation is warranted because the proposed structure that is
above 16'-0"in height does not result in an unreasonable infringement of the privacy of the
occupants of abutting residences.More specifically,windows are not proposed along the
second-story east facing fa9ade;one transparent clerestory window is proposed along the west
facing fa9ade;the windows along south facing fa9ade will have a transparent clerestory window
with a "hopper"tilt-in opening on the top portion ofthe window,and a fixed and opaque pane on
the bottom portion of the window.To ensure reasonable protection of the privacy of abutting
neighbors,a Condition of Approval was added to require the bottom of the transparent
clerestory windows along the south and west second-story facades to be a minimum of 5'_6",as
measured from the bottom of the window to the adjacent finished second floor.In addition,the
sliding windows that are required for emergency egress will be opaque and will face the interior
of the project as opposed to the rear yard of the subject property,thereby limiting the visibility
into neighboring properties if the windows were open.
Section 10:The requested Site Plan Review application for 131 square feet of first
floor addition meets the appropriate development code standards related to lot coverage,
building height and setbacks for the RS-2 zoning district.
Section 11:The time within which judicial review of the decision reflected in this
Resolution must be sought is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil
Procedure and other applicable short periods of limitation.
PASSED,APPROVED,AND ADOPTED this 18th day of October 2011.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
State of California )
County of Los Angeles )ss
City or Rancho Palos Verdes )
I,Carla Morreale,the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes,do hereby certify
that the above Resolution No.2011-_was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said
City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on October 18,2011.
Resolution No.2011-
Page 4 of 9
K-6
City Clerk
Resolution No.2011-
Page 5 of 9
K-7
EXHIBIT 'A'
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
PLANNING CASE NO.ZON2010-00331
(Magalnic,6530 La Garita)
General Conditions:
1.Prior to the submittal of plans into Building and Safety plan check,the applicant and the
property owner shall submit to the City a statement,in writing,that they have read,
understand and agree to all conditions of approval listed below.Failure to provide said
written statement within ninety (90)days following the date of this approval shall render
this approval null and void.
2.Prior to any construction work in the Public Right-of-Way,such as for curb cuts,
dumpsters,temporary improvements and/or permanent improvements,the applicant
shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Director of Public Works.
3.Approval of this permit shall not be construed as a waiver of applicable and appropriate
zoning regulations,or any Federal,State,County and/or City laws and regulations.
Unless otherwise expressly specified,all other requirements of the City of Rancho Palos
Verdes Municipal Code shall apply.
4.The Community Development Director is authorized to make minor modifications to the
approved plans and any of the conditions of approval if such modifications will achieve
sUbstantially the same results as would strict compliance with the approved plans and
conditions.Otherwise,any substantive change to the project shall require approval of a
revision by the final body that approved the original project,which may require new and
separate environmental review.
4.The project development on the site shall conform to the specific standards contained in
these conditions of approval or,if not addressed herein,shall conform to the residential
development standards of the City's Municipal Code,including but not limited to height,
setback and lot coverage standards.
5.Failure to comply with and adhere to all of these conditions of approval may be cause to
revoke the approval of the project pursuant to the revocation procedures contained in
Section 17.86.060 of the City's Municipal Code.
6.If the applicant has not submitted an application for a building permit for the approved
project or not commenced the approved project as described in Section 17.86.070 of the
City's Municipal Code within one year of the final effective date ofthe Notice of Decision,
approval of the project shall expire and be of no further effect unless,prior to expiration,
a written request for extension is filed with the Community Development Director and
approved by the Director.
Resolution No.2011-
Page 6 of 9
K-8
7.In the event that any of these conditions conflict with the recommendations and/or
requirements of another permitting agency or City department,the stricter standard shall
apply.
8.Unless otherwise designated in these conditions,all construction shall be completed in
substantial conformance with the plans stamped APPROVED by the City with the
effective date of the Notice of Decision.
10.This approval is only for the items described within these conditions and identified on the
stamped APPROVED plans and is not an approval of any existing illegal or legal non-
conforming structures on the property,unless the approval of such illegal or legal non-
conforming structure is specifically identified within these conditions or the stamped
APPROVED plans.
9.The construction site and adjacent public and private properties and streets shall be kept
free of all loose materials resembling trash and debris in excess of that material used for
immediate construction purposes.Such excess material may include,but not be limited
to:the accumulation of debris,garbage,lumber,scrap metal,concrete asphalt,piles of
earth,salvage materials,abandoned or discarded furniture,appliances or other
household fixtures.
10.No more than 50%of any existing interior and exterior walls or existing square footage
may be removed or demolished.Residential buildings that are remodeled or renovated
such that 50%or greater of any existing interior or exterior walls or existing square
footage is demolished or removed within a two-year period shall be considered a new
residence and shall then conform to all current development standards for that zoning
district and the most recently adopted version of the Uniform Building Code.
10.Permitted hours and days for construction activity are 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM,Monday
through Saturday,with no construction activity permitted on Sundays or on the legal
holidays specified in Section 17.96.920 ofthe Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code.
Trucks shall not park,queue and/or idle at the project site or in the adjoining public
rights-of-way before 7:00 AM,Monday through Saturday,in accordance with the
permitted hours of construction stated in this condition.
11.Unless modified by the approval of future planning applications,the approved project
shall maintain a maximum of 50%lot coverage (39%proposed)and the following
setbacks from the applicable property lines:
First Floor Setbacks
Front
East Side
West Side
Rear
20'-0"feet (14'-8"existing,no change)
5'-0"feet (8'-6"existing,no change)
5'-0"feet (7'-0"existing,no change)
15'-0"feet (36'-7"existing,no change)
Resolution No.2011-
Page 7 of 9
K-9
Second Floor Setbacks
Front
East Side
West Side
Rear
42'-7"
10'_6"
11'_1"
23':'3"
BUILDING SETBACK CERTIFICATION REQUIRED,to be provided by a licensed land
surveyor or civil engineer prior to foundation forms inspection.
12.Maximum hardscape coverage within the 20-foot front-yard setback area shall not
exceed 50%.
13.A minimum 2-car garage shall be provided,with each required parking space being
individually accessible and maintaining minimum unobstructed dimensions of 9 feet in
width and 20 feet in depth,with a minimum of 7 feet of vertical clearance.
14.Exterior residential lighting shall be in compliance with the standards of Section
17.56.030 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code.No outdoor lighting is
permitted where the light source is directed toward or results in direct illumination of a
parcel of property or properties other than that upon which such light source is physically
located.
15.All landscaping and construction activities shall exercise effective dust control
techniques,either through screening and/or watering.
16.All construction sites shall be maintained in a secure,safe,neat and orderly manner.
Temporary portable bathrooms shall be provided on a construction site if required by the
City's Building Official.Said portable bathrooms shall be subject to the approval of the
City's Building Official and shall be placed in a location that will minimize disturbance to
the surrounding property owners.
17.All applicable permits required by the Building and Safety Division shall be obtained by
the applicant prior to the commencement of construction.
18.Prior to issuance of building permits,the applicant shall demonstrate the project's
compliance with the South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 445 and the City
Municipal code requirements regarding WOOd-burning devices.
Height Variation Conditions:
19.This approval is for the construction of a 131 square foot first floor addition and a 1,139
square foot second floor addition to the existing 1,807 square foot single-story residence
and garage.Upon completion of the proposed addition,the square footage of the
residence would be 3,077 square feet,including the garage.
BUILDING AREA CERTIFICATION REQUIRED,to be provided by a licensed land
surveyor or civil engineer prior to building permit final.
Resolution No.2011-
Page 8 of 9
K-10
20.The new residence shall maintain a maximum height of 21'-4",as measured from the
highest existing grade (elevation 99'-8")adjacent to the structure to the highest ridgeline
of the new second floor addition.
BUILDING HEIGHT CERTIFICATION IS REQUIRED.A LICENSED CIVIL ENGINEER
OR SURVEYOR SHALL PREPARE THE CERTIFICATION.CERTIFICATION SHALL
BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY'S BUILDING OFFICIAL FOR REVIEW AND
APPROVAL PRIOR TO ROOF FRAMING/SHEETING INSPECTION.
21.The chimney shall not exceed the minimum height required for compliance with the
Uniform Building Code.
22.The east side of the second story shall not have windows.
23.The one (1)window that is proposed along the west side of the second story shall be
clerestory with a "hopper"tilt-in opening.The bottom of the clerestory window shall not
be less than 5'_6"as measured from the interior second story floor.
24.The second story windows located along the south facing fa9ade of the second story
shall be fixed and opaque.Directly above each fixed window,a clerestorywindow with a
"hopper"tilt-in opening is permitted.The bottom of the clerestory windows shall not be
less than 5'-6"as measured from the interior second story interior floor.
25.The windows required for emergency egress near the south side of the residence shall
face the interior of the residence,as depicted on the plans that were presented to and
approved by the City Council..
26.The Applicant shall submit revised plans incorporating all of these conditions of approval
prior to submission of an application for a Building Permit.
Resolution No.2011-
Page 9 of 9
K-11