Loading...
20170418 Late CorrespondenceCity of RANCHO PALOS VERDES Community Development Department GRADING PERMIT The purpose of a grading permit is lo ensure that ear1h movement associated with the development of a property preserves the natural scenic character of the area and occurs in a manor harmonious with adjacent land so as to minimize adverse impacts and maintain the visual continujjy_Qi.lb_e ar~g_ without unsightly continuous _ benching of building sit~s AC'tording to 1Section 17.76.940.of the City's Development Code, there are three types of grading permits that may be issued with this application. These are described below . I. QOjpgr Gca£1jpg Permj~ required for all earthwork projects which involv~ny of the following: 1. An excavation. fill, or combination thereof, in excess of twenty (20) cubic yards l exclusive of footing and foundation wall excavations) in any two (2) year period on a slope of less than 35%. 2. An excavation three (3) feet or more, but less than five (5) feet below natural grade. or a fill three (3) feet or more. but less than five (5) feet above naturai grade on a slope less than 35%. II. Major Grading Permit~required for all earthwork projects which involve any of the following: 1. An excavation or fill, or combination thereof, in excess of fifty (50) cubic yards in any two (2) year period; 2 . An excavation five (5) feet or more below natural grade or fill five (5) feet or more above natural grade; 3. Any excavation or fill which encroaches on or alters a natural drainage channel or water cour · and 4 . Unless otherwise exempted, an excavation or fill on an extreme slope (i.e . 35% or great). Ill. t)emedial Gradins Permi~ required for excavations, fill or any redistribution o·f earth matenals for the purpose of enhancing soil stability and/or reducing geotechnical hazards due to natural land movement or the presence of natural hazards. Grading Applications for remedial grading shall be accompanied by geological and/or soils reports which justify the need for the remedial grading and indicate that the grading will not aggravate the existing soils and/or geologic conditions . Required Application Filing Fees -·-$190 for a Minor Grading Permit __ $2,345 for a Major Grading Permit -Director level Review _ $3,31?. for a Major Grading Permit -Planning Commission level Review __ $4 for Data Entry Fee __ $18 for Historic Data Input (one time fee per properly) -------~ ---------,-:-;::··-\ ~7.76.040 -Gradi:~~~~~S--j ~~----A. Purpose. The city finds and declares that it is necessary to adopt this section to promote the public health, safety and general welfare. Where this section is in conflict with other cit)'. (j) /7 prdin~nces, the ;tricter shall appl.Specifically, this section provides for: 1. Permitting reasonable development of land and minimizing fire hazards, ensuring the maximum retention of groundcover to aid in protection against flooding, erosion, earth movement, siltation and other similar hazards; 2. Ensuring the maximum preservation of the natural scenic character of the area consistent with reasonable economic use of such property; 3. Ensuring that the development of each parcel of land, as well as watercourses, streets and other public lands and places, occurs in a manner harmonious with adjacent lands so as to minimize problems of flooding, drainage, erosion, earth movement and similar hazards, and to maintain the visual continuity of hill and valley without unsightly continuous benching of buildable sites; and 4. Ensuring that each project complies with all goals and policies of the general plan, any specific plan and any amendments. ID • ' J .~'\'-:J ~._~ 'to ·1~ ,~~p-#:.~~ r~~~( ~'.(~ .. .. ·'··~· / ,.../."' ,. >;. ,_,. ./ ::::::: V) ;z lL ~ ::I: a 0 0 0 \-y -:::{ <X:j ~ <lL '0 3 <:t: .__J ::±:. LL. kJJ I ~I llj I t..L ~ . \ THE CITY IS INCORRECT WITH SOME FACTS PAGE 4 OF Tm: COUNCIL REPORT SAYS: 4f Accotdingly, the Applicant submitted a revised survey that reMOVed ail nonwre!evant mformation about the Appe!!ants' property No othe!" changes have been made to the survey THERE ARE SEVERAL CHANGES IN nm SURVEY. FOR EXAMPLE FOLLOWING ADDITION AFFECTS BOTH SIDES OF THE PROPERTY "' ;, :: lOT IS?. ~ . I, 1-t~ .. 6 JO..... \ LO.L!J2 Jl;yh VulfuJe 'VrtPll TJ etii I "13' -f'/e Jct.le. ·-· SINCE PROPERTY LINE DISPUTE IS A CIVIL ISSUE, THE CITY SHOULD NOT ALLOW THESE DISPUTED NUMBERS ON THE SURVEY TO BE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL DELIBERATIONS AND CITY RECORDS. 1..VI J;Jt.. ( Ex1sfin7 Cone. 1:eki""'S "•1J,(8"W,J•) i'::I ) '-j !Sy KADOWAkLS t . l i0o//%JZ;;/'.//%J ;,;-I :;, +~--·..1.----· ,~·-1-£Z'.7"u7Z?:2) 17t "' ~· l • . Propof"1i .l:fe.w. .. C=::...;y,,JI, ;:-,J,J,. LOT 133 Def.a. ii "11" .. .NtJ SCiJ<t ... PROPERTY LINE-·-, EXIST CONC. RETAINING SCALE VS. NO SCALE 0.1' = 1.2" 6" vs. l .T = 5 FOLD ERROR 180.'33· SCALE: l/8if=l'-0il CA]) sft<--:"··fut- ui l"JQN:~QMI'.J,,I~NCE QE 7 TITI,E 16 &lI PROVISIONS 6 l. Section 17.86.060 (B): Incorrect information supplied by Applicant. 5 times more inaccurate "'No Scale~ drawing was used to grant Pem1it. 2. Section 17.86.060 (C): The Permit was issued SOLELY on view and Foliage considerations -Page 5 of Planning Commission Minutes). Contrary to provisions of the Municipal Code 3. Section 17.76.040: !fin conflict, stricter shall apply. Subsection (I) requires a Minor Grading Permit for 3-5' excavation. 4. Section I 7.76.040(ll): Requires Major Grading Permit for altering the water course. 'Ibis code is non compliant. 5. Section 17. 76.040 (Ill): Required Remedial Grading permit for any distribution of earth to contain hawrds to property (Our Geotech Report addresses hazards). 6. Section 17.86.080: Requires doubling fees/penalties for work without permits. Totally non compliant by City. ?. Section 17.76.030 (3 c): For fences, requires compliance with all Mini Codes. Above Non-Compliances contributed to severe damage to property. Additional damages will occur if the Fence processes are restarted. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY CLERK APRIL 18, 2017 ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material presented for tonight's meeting Item No. Description of Material F Email from John Ek **PLEASE NOTE: Materials attached after the color page(s) were submitted through Monday, April 17, 2017**. Respectfully submitted, W:\01 City Clerk\LATE CORRESPONDENCE\2017 Cover Sheets\20170418 additions revisions to agenda.doc From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: FYI Doug Willmore Monday, April 17, 2017 6:03 PM cc FW: RPV City Council: Draft Cover Letter and Counterpoint Letter VZ_Rancho_Palos_ Verdes_ Cover _Letter.pdf; VZ_RPV _Counterpoint_Letter.pdf From: Ek, John [mailto:john@ek-ek.com] Sent: Monday, April 17, 2017 3:15 PM To: Doug Willmore <DWillmore@rpvca.gov> Subject: FW: RPV City Council: Draft Cover Letter and Counterpoint Letter Dear Mr. Willmore, On behalf of my client Verizon, please find the attached letter asking that you please postpone taking any action on Item Fon your Consent Calander until we have had a chance to meet with you on the Item. In addition to the attached letter we have also included some information regarding a recent communication you received from the League of California Cities. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me at 310-947-6406. Thank you in advance for your consideration. Sincerely, John Ek 1 F verizonJ AprH 1 7, 201 7 Mayor Brian of Rancho Palos Verdes 29301 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, California 90275 Dear Mayor Campbell, It has come to our attention that City Staff has requested the Rancho Palos Verdes Council take a formal position opposing Senate Bill 649 (Hueso) to the !ocal permitting process for small wireless facility installation ("small cell sh) in California, We respectfully ask that you re -consider this reque~~t at least until you and the Council have an opportunity to review the attached materials and consider our invitation to discuss your concerns directly with UfL This issue is too important for California not to get For several months, Verizon has led a campaign to reach out directly to local government leaders throughout the state, including Long Beach and Los to discuss the critical need to modernize the process for wireless infrastructure deployment We have found many city leaders intrinsically recognize this need and some have taken proactive action to update their own city's processes to kei1p pace with advancements, The policy and technical briefings we have had and continue lo have with iocal leaders has helped inform the legislative process so that together we can expand local best practices to the state level and communities across California benefit this same lime, Verizon reprerrnntatives have traveled across the state to meet with any stakeholder willing to discuss this legislation in good faith. As a direct result of these discussions, we've made several amendments to this legislation and secured the support of over 100 business, community and public safety groups throughout the state. Through active collaboration, the wireless industry has recently agreed to addit]QDill amendments specifically to address locnl government concerns. As these amendments to SB 649 arc not reflected in the Rancho Palos Verdes Staff Report for Agenda item F, we would appreciate the opportunity to share and discuss them with you in advance of a vote by the City Council. Ttle attached materials include a document wrth counterpcirits to each of the assertions the League of California Cities makes in their Sample Letter of Opposition, a background paper on SG technology, a fact sheet on SB 649, a case study on Verizon's strong commitment to public safety, and a memo from a nationally-recognized public opinion research firm. Voters, taxpayers and residents agree this legislation strikes an appropriate ba!ance between wireless providers arid local governments and encourages ongoing investment in California's wireless infrastructure while protecting municipal interests. Most importantly, Californians view this legislation as serving a compelling public interest as they increasingly use wireless services to talk, text, access Hm Internet and connect with public safety services. verizonJ April 17. 2017 Mayor Brian Campbell of nancho Palos Verdes Wireleo>s infrastructure providers are ready to invest in and expand California's network through small cell deployment. Small cells. and 50 hold tremenck>us promise to help communities improve civic services, public transportation, heal!h care, education. energy and the convenience oi residents. W~l respnctfully ask that you consider all viewpoints in ordH to rnake a more-informed decision. t<~ U(. R-er.u- fiudolph M fieyes President. Public Policy & Legal Affairs Pacific and North Contra! cc: Mayor Pro Tern Jerry V. Duhovic Councilwoman Susan M. Bmo)rn Councilman Ken Dyda Councilman /\nthony M, Misetich Doug Wi!lmorn, City Manager Gabriella Yap, Deputy City Manager !<it Fox, 8enior 1\dministrative Analyst verizon April 18, 2017 The Honorable Ben Hueso California State Senate, District 40 State Capitol Building, Room 4035 Sacramento, CA 95814 SUBJECT: SB 649 as Proposed to be Amended by RN 17 0894 l (Hueso). Wireless and Small Cell Telecommunications Facilities. Notice of Opposition Via Facsimile: (916) 651-4940 Verizon remains committed to meet with any stakeholder willing to negotiate in good faith and discuss improving SB 649 and make the legislation more workable for all parties. This issue is too important not to get right and solve for the benefit of all Californians. Dear Senator Hueso: The City of Rancho Palos Verdes respectfully opposes your SB 649 and proposed amendments related to the permitting of wireless and small cell telecommunications facilities. This proposal unnecessarily and unconstitutionally strips local authority over public property and shuts out public input and local discretion by eliminating consideration of the aesthetic and environmental impacts of "small cells." SB 649 updates the local permitting process for the small cell installations that are necessary to meet current demand for wireless data and to lay the foundation for the 5G networks of tomorrow. The bill confirms that the placement of small antenna equipment within FCC size limitations can be attached to utility poles through an administrative process. The bill provides for the use of City-owned light standards and similar right-of-way facilities as well as other commercially available properties on fair, reasonable, nondiscriminatory terms and expressly preserves reasonable and feasible local control over aesthetics and design of small cells on locally-owned poles and structures. Small cells remain subject to all state health and safety requirements. A-1 verizon This proposal would prohibit local discretionary review of"small cell" wireless antennas, including equipment collocated on existing structures or located on new "poles, structures, or non-pole structures," including those within the public right-of-way and buildings. The proposal preempts adopted local land use plans by mandating that "small cells" be allowed in all zones as a use by-right, including all residential zones. State and local government regulations control the type of equipment that may be attached to utility poles, including structural, wind load, height, placement and separation requirements. This bill does not change that. Utilities and telecommunications companies adhere to all rules and regulations pertaining to pole attachments, and SB 649 maintains and enforces these rules while permitting the addition of small cell equipment of limited size as determined by the FCC. State law already grants telephone corporations the right to place telephone facilities in public rights-of-way, including residential zones. As such, the proposal provides a de facto exemption to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the installation of such facilities and precludes consideration by the public of the aesthetic, nuisance, and environmental impacts of these facilities, all of which are of particular importance when the proposed location of facilities is within a residential zone. SB 649 does not amend the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in any way. Instead, the bill affirms that a small cell should be approved administratively, subject to state and local health and safety requirements. SB 649's use of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) definition ofa "small cell" includes other "small cell" equipment such as electric meters, concealments, telecom demarcation boxes, ground-based enclosures, battery backup power systems, grounding equipment, power transfer switches, cutoff switches, cables, or conduits. The proposal allows for an unlimited number of antennas of less than three cubic feet each or six cubic feet for all antennas, while placing no height restrictions on the pole. While proponents argue that an individual "small cell" has very little impact, the cumulative size specifications of all the small cells and associated equipment far exceed the perceived impacts from a single small cell. The limitation of six cubic feet for all antennas effectively precludes the deployment of "an unlimited number of antennas" within any particular site. Small cells that adhere to these size and volume limitations already are deployed in California without any negative impacts. The wireless industry is open to reasonable height restrictions on poles used for small cells. If the League of Cities actually has an issue with the definition itself or the dimensions contained therein, as opposed to simply raising it as a strawman, they should offer a feasible alternative. To date, they have not. A-1 verizon The proposal also unconstitutionally preempts local authority by requiring local governments to make available sites they own for the installation of a "small cell." While a city may place "fair and reasonable terms and conditions" on the use of city property, the proposal does not provide a city with any discretion to deny a "small cell" to be located on city property, except for fire department sites. In effect, this measure unconstitutionally gives control of public property to private telecommunications companies, while also precluding local governments from leasing or licensing publicly-owned property. The proposed measure doesn't give control of public property to wireless providers. It grants fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory access to attach small cells to locally-owned utility poles, street lights and other suitable infrastructure within the public rights-of-way and in other public places such as stadiums, campuses, transit stations and public buildings. A state policy in favor of using existing structures in a non-discriminatory way rather than building more poles is congruent with California's historic commitment to sustainability and aesthetics. And it provides municipalities full recovery of all costs associated with small cell attachment. Indeed, SB 649 does not preclude local governments from leasing or licensing publicly owned property. This bill strips local government of the authority to protect the quality oflife of our residents, and to protect public property and the public right-of-way from relatively unconstrained access by small cells. In 2015, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes undertook a comprehensive initiative to develop a new wireless telecommunications permitting process for small cells and other installations in the City's public rights-of-way, particularly in residential neighborhoods. This initiative, which undertaken as a result of increasing resident concerns about the proliferation of cell sites in the City's public rights-of-way, involved the participation of City leaders, residents and telecommunications service providers, culminating in the adoption of the City's Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Ordinance in March 2016. The City is currently processing more than two dozen permit applications under this ordinance. California has now had several years of experience attempting, city by city, to adapt to meet the growing demands for wireless broadband using small cells. What that experience has demonstrated is that the regulatory paradigm designed for macro towers over 20+ years is insufficient. California cannot afford to wait the many years it would take every city to modernize its approach, and there is no reason it should. Wireless and small cell telecommunications facilities are critical pieces of a network infrastructure that supports advanced technology, civic participation and 9-1-1 services to homes, businesses and schools. Wireless data usage is growing at a compound annual rate of 35%. Carriers can't build enough large "macro" towers to meet this demand, and communities wouldn't want them to even if it were possible. Small cells provide the needed network capacity in an unobtrusive manner. These deployments are designed to blend into the existing environment as much as possible. Customers and residents use their smartphones and other devices for a growing number of purposes, including public safety, and in order to ensure that they have access to the services they want, providers have to be able to deploy the network infrastructure that makes those services work. A-2 verizon Local governments typically encourage new technology into their boundaries because of its potential to dramatically improve the quality of life for their residents. However, SB 649 goes too far by requiring local governments to approve "small cells" In all land use zones, including residential zones, through a ministerial permit, thereby shutting the public out of decisions that could affect the aesthetics of their community and the quality of their environment. For these reasons, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes opposes your SB 649. This bill does not shut the public out of aesthetic decisions or environmental quality. Instead, what it requires only is that those decisions be made up front, and objectively, rather than by unelected city planning staff arbitrarily and after the fact. This bill strikes the right balance in encouraging ongoing investment in wireless broadband data technology that consumers, business and government increasingly demand, while maintaining local governments' oversight of the public rights-of-way and public infrastructure. SB 649 gives wireless providers the transparency and uniformity necessary for long-range strategic planning of capital investment. Wireless providers would still be required to obtain permits -including requirements that pertain to health and safety -but they would be approvied or denied in a programmatic ministerial-type fashion focused on compliance with local codes. Sincerely, Brian Campbell Mayor cc: Rancho Palos Verdes City Council Senator Ben Allen, 26th State Senate District Al Muratsuchi, 66th State Assembly District Nidia Bautista, Consultant, Senate Energy, Utilities and Commerce Committee Kerry Yoshida, Principal Consultant, Senate Republican Caucus Jeff Kiernan, League Regional Public Affairs Manager Meg Desmond, League of California Cities Doug Willmore, City Manager Gabriella Yap, Deputy City Manager Ara Mihranian, Director of Community Development Terry Rodrigue, Interim Director of Public Works A-2 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: CITY OF Rt\NCHO PALOS VERDES HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS CITY CLERK APRIL 17, 2017 ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material received through Monday afternoon for the Tuesday, April 18, 2017 City Council meeting: Item No. Description of Material 1 Email from Marshall, Crystal, Collin, and Elyse Lyau 2 Updated Resolution 3 Letter from Shigeo and Mieko Kadowaki Respectfully submitted, W:\01 City Clerk\LATE CORRESPONDENCE\2017 Cover Sheets\20170418 additions revisions to agenda thru Monday.doc From: Daniel Trautner Sent: To: Monday, April 17, 2017 1:12 PM CityClerk Subject: FW: Proposed Lower Point Vicente Park Plan FYI. Late Correspondence for April 18th Public Hearing Item# 1: Consideration and possible action to modify the Parks Master Plan to include outdoor interactive exhibits at Lower Point Vicente Park. Daniel Trautner Deputy Director City of Rancho Palos Verdes Recreation and Parks (310) 544-5264 From: Daniel Trautner Sent: Monday, April 17, 2017 12:17 PM To: c lyou <cel1125@gmail.com> Subject: RE: Proposed Lower Point Vicente Park Plan Got it. I will make sure to include this draft in the late correspondence. Thank you for following up. Regards, Daniel Trautner Deputy Director City of Rancho Palos Verdes 310-544-5264 --------Original message -------- From: c lyou <cell 125@gmail.com> Date: 4/17/17 12:05 PM (GMT-08:00) To: Daniel Trautner <DanielT@rpvca.gov> Subject: Fwd: Proposed Lower Point Vicente Park Plan Hello Daniel, This is the letter I would like for you to forward. The first draft was not complete. Thank you, Crystal Lyou ----------Forwarded message---------- From: c lyou <cell 125@gmail.com> Date: Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 11 :23 PM Subject: Proposed Lower Point Vicente Park Plan To: danielt@rpvca.gov 1 To members of the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council, This letter is to voice our opposition to the proposed park plan put forth by Los Serenos de Point Vicente Docents. We are opposed due to the following reasons: l. We strongly believe lower Point Vicente Park must be maintained as natural, undeveloped open space where local residents and visitors can enjoy the unspoiled beauty of our coastline and the Pacific Ocean. 2. The plan proposed by Los Serenos de Point Vicente Docents is an unnecessary tourist attraction the community does not need or want. 3. The cost of building and maintaining such an endeavor will inevitably become a monetary burden upon the taxpayers of Rancho Palos Verdes, not to mention an ongoing liability with the attendant costs attached to such a project. 4. Traffic and noise in the neighborhood, which already attracts increasing numbers of cars and people, will only worsen if this plan is adopted. We respectfully ask the city council not to approve the plan of Los Serenos de Point Vicente Docents. The attraction is not what our community wants or needs. Please act to protect the open and undeveloped areas of our peninsula, and please protect the peace, quiet, and safety of our neighborhoods. Thank you, Marshall Lyou Crystal Lyou Collin Lyou Elyse Lyou 19 Calle Viento, Rancho Palos Verdes 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2017-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL LARGE DOMESTIC ANIMAL PERMIT NO. 2 FOR THE RIDE-TO-FLY THERAPEUTIC PROGRAM, 1) EXTENDING THE EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS FOR 7 ADDITIONAL YEARS TO DECEMBER 19, 2023; AND 2) EXTENDING THE OPERATING HOURS ON TUESDAYS THROUGH FRIDAYS TO 9:00 AM TO 5:00 PM OR SUNSET, WHICHEVER IS EARLIER, FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 50 NARCISSA DRIVE (CASE NO. ZON2016-00465). WHEREAS, on October 17, 2000, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2000- 70, approving Conditional Large Domestic Animal Permit (CLDAP) No. 2 for the keeping of 4 horses and the operation of the "Ride-to-Fly" therapeutic riding program on a 1.16- acre property located at 50 Narcissa Drive; and, WHEREAS, on August 8, 2002, the Equestrian Committee recommended that the City Council grant a two-year extension to CLDAP No. 2 and modify certain conditions of approval; and, WHEREAS, on October 1, 2002, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2002- 85, granting a two-year extension to Conditional Large Domestic Animal Permit (CLDAP) No. 2 with modified conditions of approval; and, WHEREAS, on October 14, 2004, the Equestrian Committee recommended that the City Council grant a two-year extension to CLDAP No. 2; and, WHEREAS, on December 7, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2004-106, granting a two-year extension to Conditional Large Domestic Animal Permit No. 2; and, WHEREAS, on November 9, 2006, the Equestrian Committee, based on the then-operations, recommended that the City Council grant a five-year extension to CLDAP No. 2 and modify certain conditions of approval; and, WHEREAS, on December 19, 2006, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2006-98, granting a five-year extension to Conditional Large Domestic Animal Permit No. 2; and, WHEREAS, on November 22, 2011, the Planning Commission adopted P.C. Resolution No. 2011-38, recommending that the City Council grant a five-year extension to CLDAP No. 2; and, WHEREAS, on December 20, 2011, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2011-95, granting a five-year extension to the CLDAP No. 2 to December 19, 2016; and, WHEREAS, on the September 30, 2016, the Applicant submitted a request to revise CLDAP No. 2 to extend the entitlement by 5 additional years and to extend its operating hours on Tuesdays through Fridays; and, WHEREAS, on November 16, 2016, the application was deemed incomplete pending submittal of additional information; and, WHEREAS, on February 6, 2017, the application was deemed complete for processing; and, WHEREAS, on March 14, 2017, the Planning Commission, adopted P.C. Resolution No. 2017-10, recommending that the City Council approve a revision to CLDAP No. 2 for the Ride-to-Fly therapeutic program to: 1) extend the existing entitlements for 7 additional years, and 2) extend the operating hours on Tuesdays through Fridays to 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM or sunset, whichever is earlier; and, WHEREAS, On March 23, 2017, a public notice was mailed to all property owners within a 500-foot radius of the subject site in accordance with Rancho Palos Verdes Code Section 17.80.090 and published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News pursuant to the requirements of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code; 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), the City Council found no evidence that the revision to CLDAP No. 2 will have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, the review has been found to be categorically exempt under Class 1 (Section 15301); and, WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on April 18, 2017, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The proposed revision to CLDAP No. 2 is warranted because: A The project Applicant (Ride-to-Fly) is a registered non-profit 501 (c)(3) corporation, operating at 50 Narcissa Drive, City of Rancho Palos Verdes (the Property). The Applicant has been operating at the Property since 2000 pursuant to a valid Conditional Large Domestic Animal Permit. Resolution No. 2017-_ Page 2 of 9 B. The permit will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare. Specifically, the Ride-to-Fly organization has operated a therapeutic riding program and maintained 4 horses at the property since 2000. Pursuant to Council-adopted Condition No. 14 of Resolution No. 2011-95, the existing operation hours for the facility are 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM or sunset, whichever is earlier, on Tuesdays through Fridays, and 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM or sunset, whichever is earlier, on Saturdays. The proposed extended operating hours on Tuesday through Friday will match the existing Saturday operating hours of 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM or sunset, whichever is earlier. In the summer, the afternoon heat is not good for many of the rider's disabilities and the proposed time change would allow sessions to begin an hour earlier to avoid the summer heat. The premises are in good sanitary condition with proper fly control and frequent waste disposal, with no excessive smell from the manure composting. The perimeter fencing is properly maintained and buildings and corrals are kept in a clean manner. C. Any increase in the number of animals, that would otherwise be allowed by the provisions of Chapter 17.46 of this title to be kept or boarded on the property and/or the operation of an active outdoor recreational facility or program which provides a benefit to youth or the physically or mentally challenged or has a similar philanthropic purpose, will not have significant adverse effects upon other properties in the vicinity of the site. The Ride-to-Fly organization is currently permitted to board 4 horses on the Property and is not proposing to increase the number of horses. D. The cumulative impact upon the properties in the vicinity of the site or the community as a whole, shall not, in the aggregate, constitute a significant adverse impact upon the area. Section 2: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings included in the Staff Report, Minutes, and other records of proceedings, the City Council of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby adopts Resolution No. 2017-_, approving a revision to Conditional Large Domestic Animal Permit No. 2 for the Ride-to-fly therapeutic program, thereby: 1) extending the existing entitlements by 7 additional years to December 19, 2023, and 2) extending the operating hours on Tuesdays through Fridays to 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM or sunset, whichever is earlier, subject to the conditions of approval set forth in the attached Exhibit 'A.' Section 3: That the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. Resolution No. 2017- Page 3 of 9 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _th day of April 2017. Brian Campbell, Mayor Attest: Emily Colborn, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )ss CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ) I, Emily Colborn, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2017-_ was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting held on April_, 2017. City Clerk Resolution No. 2017- Page 4 of 9 EXHIBIT 'A' CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. ZON2016-00465 REVISION TO CONDITIONAL LARGE DOMESTIC ANIMAL PERMIT NO. 2 50 NARCISSA DRIVE (RIDE-TO-FLY) 1. This approval supersedes all Conditions of Approval that were a part of the original City Council approval under Resolution No. 2000-70 and any subsequent amendments. ADDED ON APRIL 18, 2017 PER RESOLUTION NO. 2017-_ 2. Prior to the commencement of the use permitted by this approval, 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 contained in this Resolution. Failure to provide said written statement within ninety (90) days following date of this approval shall render this approval null and void. 3. The Applicant shall indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless, the City, and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, writs of mandamus, and other actions and proceedings (whether legal, equitable, declaratory, administrative or adjudicatory in nature), and alternative dispute resolutions procedures (including, but not limited to arbitrations, mediations, and other such procedures) (collectively "Actions"), brought against the City, and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof, that challenge, attack, or seek to modify, set aside, void, or annul, the action of, or any permit or approval issued by, the City and/or any of its officials, officers, employees, agents, departments, agencies, and instrumentalities thereof (including actions approved by the voters of the City), for or concerning the project. ADDED ON APRIL 18, 2017 PER RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 4. Approval of this permit shall not be construed to mean any waiver of applicable and appropriate zoning regulations, or any Federal, State, County, and City laws and regulations. Unless otherwise expressly specified, all other requirements of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal code shall apply. AMENDED ON APRIL 18, 2017 PER RESOLUTION NO. 2017-_ 5. Pursuant to Section 17.78.040, 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. Substantial changes to the project shall be considered a revision and require Resolution No. 2017- Page 5 of 9 approval by the final body that approved the original project, which may require new and separate environmental review and public notification. AMENDED ON APRIL 18, 2017 PER RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 6. 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 RS-2 residential development standards and Equestrian Overlay (Q) district standards of the City's Municipal Code, including but not limited to height, setback and lot coverage standards. AMENDED ON APRIL 18, 2017 PER RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 7. 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 or administrative citations as described in Section 1.16 of the City's Municipal Code. AMENDED ON APRIL 18, 2017 PER RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 8. 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. 9. 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 this Resolution. 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 on the stamped APPROVED plans. Project Specific Conditions: 11. This approval is for the keeping of four (4) horses and the operation of a therapeutic riding program on a 1.16-acre vacant, contiguous property in the Portuguese Bend Equestrian Overlay (Q) District, located at 50 Narcissa Drive. AMENDED ON APRIL 18, 2017 PER RESOLUTION NO. 2017- 12. If the use approved by this permit has not been established within one year of the final effective date of this Resolution, 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 Department, and is reviewed by the Resolution No. 2017- Page 6 of 9 Planning Commission and approved by the City Council. Otherwise, a new Conditional Large Domestic Animal Permit must be approved prior to the commencement of the approved use. AMENDED ON APRIL 18, 2017 PER RESOLUTION NO. 2017-_ 13. The approval of the Conditional Large Domestic Animal Permit No. 2 is granted to the Applicant ("Ride-to-Fly") and not to the owner of the subject property (George and Leanne Twidwell). The extension of this permit shall be valid for a period of seven (7) years, with an expiration date of December 19, 2023, and for as long as the Applicant continues to utilize the property where the program is conducted in accordance with the terms of this Resolution. The permit may be extended beyond this date provided a written request for an extension is submitted to the City prior to the expiration date and approved by the City Council. AMENDED ON APRIL 18, 2017 PER RESOLUTION 2017- 14. If the Applicant discontinues, vacates or abandons the use of the property where the facility or program is conducted, the rights, privileges and obligations granted by Conditional Large Domestic Animal Permit No. 2 shall terminate and shall not revert to the property owners. The permit shall also be terminated upon the occurrence of any of the following: a. The subject lot or parcel is subdivided, reduced in size or is combined with one or more other lots or parcels; b. A violation of any of the conditions upon which the permit was granted, after a duly-noticed public hearing before the Planning Commission and City Council; c. The Applicant discontinues, vacates or abandons the use of the subject lot or parcel in accordance with the terms of the approved permit for a period of more than one hundred eighty (180) days; d. The property owners rescind the authorization for the use of the property by the Applicant; or, e. The Applicant no longer qualifies for registered non-profit 501 (c)(3) status, as described in Section 17.78.010 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code. 15. Proof of the registered non-profit 501 (C)(3) status of the Applicant must be provided to the Director of Community Development on an annual basis. In addition, the Applicant shall notify the Director in writing within thirty (30) days of any change in non-profit status. Resolution No. 2017- Page 7 of 9 16. No additional structures are permitted by this approval and the existing structures and facilities on the site shall maintain the minimum 35-foot sanitary setback specified in Section 17.46.060(A)(1) of the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code. Any future relocation of the structures and facilities on the site shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Community Development or, at his/her discretion, the Planning Commission and/or City Council. 17. The Applicant shall be responsible for completing the following tasks, to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development: a. Maintain the existing perimeter fencing around the corrals; b. Maintain landscape screening along the perimeter of the corrals, especially along the Narcissa Drive frontage of the property; and, c. Maintain the "soft" paving such as decomposed granite in the off-street parking area along Narcissa Drive, subject to the authorization of the Portuguese Bend Community Association. 18. The approved days and hours of operation for the therapeutic riding program are limited as follows: Tuesday through Saturdays: 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM or sunset, whichever is earlier Any proposal to change the days and/or hours of operation requires the review of the Planning Commission and the approval of the City Council. AMENDED ON APRIL 18, 2017 PER RESOLUTION NO. 2017-_ 19. Off-street parking shall only be provided along Narcissa Drive frontage of the subject property. No more than ten (10) vehicles may be parked on the site at any time. All vehicles must be parked so as not to infringe upon the paved roadway of Narcissa Drive or to otherwise interfere with the passage of motorists, pedestrians or equestrians by the site. 20. The Applicant shall ensure that the site is visited daily to feed and water the horses, verify the status of the horses' condition and health, and inspect the condition and integrity of the horses' enclosure. 21. A weatherproof notice setting forth the name of the person(s) responsible for the horses and a phone number(s) to be called in the event of an emergency shall be displayed on, or in the vicinity of, the enclosure in which the horses are kept. 22. The Applicant is responsible for the continuous maintenance of sanitary conditions, including, but not limited to, the cleaning of corrals, stables, barns and Resolution No. 2017- Page 8 of 9 other areas to which animals have access; and the proper disposal of manure, offal, soiled straw and other refuse. Animal waste shall not be allowed to accumulate, run off or leach so as to create a nuisance or be offensive to other persons in the vicinity. Manure may be disposed of by removal from the lot or parcel by a city-licensed waste disposal company, or by composting. If waste or manure is to be composted, the composting material shall be kept in a composting bin, and the composting shall be performed in accordance with City- approved composting procedures. Proper procedures must be used to control insects and minimize offensive odors. 23. Animal waste, manure, offal, soiled straw and other refuse shall not be allowed to accumulate in any regular, intermittent or seasonal watercourse. 24. The property shall be maintained so that there is no standing surface water or ponding within areas in which horses are kept. 25. All buildings used for the keeping of animals and all corral or enclosure fences shall be constructed and maintained in a neat and orderly condition and kept in good repair. Landscaping, or other screening techniques, shall be provided as appropriate to assist in screening of stables, barns, corrals, composting bins and stored hay from public view and from adjacent properties. 26. The Applicant shall carry out a program of fly control through such means as traps, pesticides or natural predators. 27. No structure or enclosure for the keeping of the horses shall be constructed or maintained in any regular, intermittent or seasonal watercourse. Resolution No. 2017- Page 9 of 9 Shigeo and Mieko Kadowaki 30931 Cartier Drive Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 April 14,2017 RECEIVED APR 14 2017 Members of the City Council The City Staff COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, Ca 90275 Re: Changing of.Fence/Wall Material at 30931 Cartier Dr. Dear Honorable Members of the City Council and the City Staff: We, Shigeo and .Mieko Kadowaki would like to request that the City approved block wall located at 30931 Cartier Drive will be changed to solid vinyl material wall. All the requirements and the measurement including height and length remain the same but the material. We rcspectfulJy request the City Council and the City Staff this offer /be allowed to constrnct. Sincerely, ,d-;;:_-.. ~;o /:. ,, -·Co~ 1 Shigeo and Mieko Kadowaki Applicant 3