PC MINS 20200811 APPROVED 8/24/2020
CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
AUGUST 11, 2020
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Leon called the virtual meeting to order at 7:04 p.m.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION OPTIONS
Director Rukavina provided information related to participation options available to the public .
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chair Leon led the assembly in the Pledge of Allegiance.
ATTENDANCE
Present: Commissioners Chura, Hamill, James, Santarosa, Vice Chair Perestam and Chair Leon.
Absent: Commissioner Saadatnejadi
Also present were Director of Community Development Rukavina, Senior Planner Seeraty, Associate
Planner Nemeth, Associate Planner Yoon, and City Attorneys Gerli and Ash.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Approved as presented
COMMUNICATIONS
City Council Items: Director Rukavina indicated that the City Council requested information on a
possible code amendment initiation related to large-scale treehouse regulations. Director Rukavina
indicated that this item is tentatively scheduled to be considered by the City Council on November 4 th.
Staff: Director Rukavina reminded the Planning Commission and the public of the City’s temporary
special use permit to allow local businesses to conduct limited outdoor activities during the Covid -19
pandemic. Director Rukavina also indicated that there are no application fees associated with the
Planning Commission Minutes
August 11, 2020
Page 2
permit.
Commission: None
Comments from the audience (regarding non -agenda items): None
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF THE JULY 28, 2020 P.C. MINUTES
APPROVED AS PRESENTED
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS:
2. HEIGHT VARIATION, MAJOR GRADING PERMIT, MINOR EXCEPTION PERMIT & SITE PLAN REVIEW
(CASE NO. PLHV 2018-0003): 3015 Crest Road (RN)
Vice Chair Perestam recused himself as he lives within 500 feet of the project site.
Associate Planner Nemeth presented the staff report with a request to demolish two existing accessory
structures, and the construction of a new 5,344 ft2 (garage and basement included) two-story
residence with 538 yd3 of associated grading and ancillary site improvements.
Discussion ensued between the Planning Commission and staff that the proposed project was revised
to meet the lot coverage, a sewer easement condition of approval was added and the Resolution was
revised to comply with current State ADU statutes and the City’s proposed ADU ordinance in reference
to accessory dwelling unit (ADU).
Chair Leon opened the public hearing.
Ying Mou – The Co-Applicant stated that she and Skye Zhang, co-Applicant, were present to answer
any Planning Commission questions.
Chair Leon closed the public hearing.
Discussion ensued between the Planning Commission and staff revising the language in Condition of
Approval No. 24, so that if the existing space of the accessory game room structure is not used as an
ADU, the entire accessory game room structure shall be demolished. Furthermore, if th e entire
accessory game room structure is demolished, the non -permeable hardscape under the entire
accessory game room structure shall be removed and planted with landscaping.
COMMISSIONER SANTAROSA MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER JAMES TO 1) REVIEW THE
APPLICANT’S PROJECT REVISIONS IN RESPONSE TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION’S REVIEW OF THE
Planning Commission Minutes
August 11, 2020
Page 3
PROPOSED PROJECT AT THE JULY 14, 2020 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING; AND, 2) ADOPT P.C.
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-10; APPROVING, WITH CONDITIONS, A HEIGHT VARIATION, MAJOR GRADING
PERMIT, MINOR EXCEPTION PERMIT & SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEMOLISH TWO EXISTING ACCESSORY
STRUCTURES, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 5,344 FT2 (GARAGE AND BASEMENT INCLUDED),
TWO-STORY RESIDENCE WITH 538 YD3 OF ASSOCIATED GRADING AND ANCILLARY SITE
IMPROVEMENTS. THE MOTION PASSED ON A VOTE OF 5-0, WITH COMMISSIONER SAADATNEJADI
ABSENT AND COMMISSIONER PERESTAM RECUSED.
3. SITE PLAN REVIEW, MAJOR GRADING PERMIT, AND VARIANCE (CASE NO. PLSR2019-0065): 48
Rockinghorse Road (JY)
Associate Planner Yoon presented the staff report with the applicants request to allow the
construction of a new 4,594 ft² (garage included) two-story residence and ancillary site improvements
with 1,037 yd³ of associated grading on a vacant lot.
Discussion ensued between the Planning Commission and staff regarding the artificial fill and if it is
defined in the municipal code; where the natural grade has been taken from; the stability of the
artificial fill, and the difference between the original and revised plans.
Chair Leon opened the public hearing.
Rob Simonson- the Applicant stated that he is in support of the findings made by staff.
David Rentz- the Property Owner thanked staff for working with the Applicant.
Chair Leon closed the public hearing.
Discussion ensued between the Planning Commission and staff regarding the two exterior stairway
configurations and the Variance for the combination wall height.
Chair Leon reopened the public hearing.
Rob Simonson- responded to questions from the Planning Commission on the height of the proposed
combination wall as it relates to the configuration of the lot and compliance with other development
standards that needed to be met.
Chair Leon closed the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER SANTAROSA MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAMILL TO ADOPT STAFF’S
RECOMMENDATION TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 4,594 FT² (GARAGE INCLUDED) TWO-
STORY RESIDENCE AND ANCILLARY SITE IMPROVEMENTS WITH 1,037 YD³ OF ASSOCIATED GRADING
ON A VACANT LOT. THE MOTIONED TIED 3-3; MOTION DOES NOT CARRY.
Discussion ensued between the Planning Commission regarding revising the project for further
consideration to address the extreme slope issues and continuing the item.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 11, 2020
Page 4
Chair Leon opened the public hearing.
Applicant agreed to extend the decision deadline and continue the item.
Chair Leon closed the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER SANTAROSA MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAMI LL TO CONTINUE THE
PUBLIC HEARING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ON AUGUST 25, 2020, IN ORDER TO
PROVIDE THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK WITH STAFF TO REVISE THE PROJECT FOR
FURTHER CONSIDERATION. THE MOTION PASSED ON A VOTE OF 6-0, WITH COMMISSIONER
SAADATNEJADI ABSENT.
4. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS - CODE AMENDMENT TO CHAPTERS 17.02 (SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL (RS) DISTRICTS), 17.04 (MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RM) DISTRICTS), 17.10
(SECOND UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS), AND 17.96 (DEFINITIONS) OF TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF
THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES MUNICIPAL CODE (CASE NO. PLCA2020-0001): Citywide (AS)
Senior Planner Seeraty presented the staff report outlining proposed amendments to Chapters 17.02
(Single-Family Residential (RS) Districts), 17.04 (Multiple-Family Residential (RM) Districts), and 17.96
(Definitions), and repeal and replace Chapter 17.10 (Accessory Dwelling Unit Development Standards)
of Title 17 (Zoning) of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code to update the development standards
for accessory dwelling units and to create development standards for junior accessory dwelling units.
Discussion ensued between the Planning Commission and staff regarding the updates presented. The
Planning Commission raised issues about the proposed requirement to locate an accessory dwelling
unit (ADU) in the rear yard. Director Rukavina suggested some additional language , which the Planning
Commission was amenable to. The Commission also discussed the proposed requirement for
landscaping and fencing, and determined that those requirements should simply be eliminated.
The Planning Commission then discussed the proposed required for replacing garage spaces for the
main residence, when the garage is converted to an ADU. The Planning Commission agreed that the
main goal is to prevent too many cars from parking on the street, to maintain emergency vehicle
access. The Planning Commission recommended the proposed ordinance only require unenclosed
parking spaces onsite instead of enclosed garage spaces for the replacement spaces for the main
residence. The Planning Commission recommended the requirement for two streets of access only be
applied to ADUs, and not junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs). The Planning Commission also
discussed and recommended the separation requirement between a detached ADU and any other
structures. Additional discussion ensued regarding Los Angeles County Fire Department or Cal Fire
input, which Staff was not able to obtain prior to this meeting.
Chair Leon opened the public hearing and staff read a prepared statement by Mr. Matthew Gelfand, of
Californians for Homeownership. Chair Leon then closed the public hearing.
Planning Commission Minutes
August 11, 2020
Page 5
COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAMILL TO ADOPT P.C.
RESOLUTION NO. 2020-11 WITH CHANGES THAT WERE DISCUSSED DURING THE MEETING,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT AN ORDINANCE BE ADOPTED AMENDING CHAPTERS
17.02 (SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS) DISTRICTS), 17.04 (MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RM)
DISTRICTS), AND 17.96 (DEFINITIONS), AND REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER 17.10 (ACCESSORY
DWELLING UNIT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS) OF TITLE 17 (ZONING) OF THE RANCHO PALOS VERDES
MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
AND TO CREATE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR JUNIOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS. THE
MOTION PASSED ON A VOTE OF 6-0, WITH COMMISSIONER SAADATNEJADI ABSENT.
NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS:
5. VARIANCE, COASTAL PERMIT, GRADING PERMIT, AND SITE PLAN REVIEW (CASE NO. PLVA2019-
0002): 36 Sea Cove Drive (AS)
Senior Planner Seeraty presented the staff report with a request to demolish an existing residence and
detached garage and construct a new 8,977 ft2 single-story residence with basement (8,039 ft2
residence and 938 ft2 garages) at 19.95 feet in height, with a 490ft² covered patio, swimming pool and
spa partially located within the City’s Coastal Setback Zone and Coastal Structure Setback Zone, and to
conduct 1,547 yd3 of grading (970 yd3 of cut and 577 yd3 of fill) with retaining walls to accommodate
the improvements.
Discussion ensued between the Planning Commission and staff regarding the Coastal Setback Line and
the Coastal Setback Zone. Commissioner Santarosa and Chair Leon asked questions of staff about how
the findings were made to support the Variance. Staff explained that because of the existing non-
conforming layout of the existing residence, and the existing non-conforming adjacent residences, staff
felt this was an extraordinary circumstance, which could allow the proposed residence to be located
similarly to the adjacent residences.
Commissioner James asked staff if moving the house would eliminate need for the Variance to allow 4
feet of grading within the Coastal Setback Zone, and staff replied yes. Commissioner Hamill asked staff
about the purpose of the coastal setback, and Commissioner Chura inquired about what is the Coastal
Commission’s role in the project.
Chair Leon opened the public hearing.
Louis Tomaro – The architect for the project answered questions from the Planning Commission, and
explained that they had reached out to the Home Owners Association early on, and based on their
input, had shortened the building and removed some previously proposed covered patio areas in the
rear yard. He stated that he believed the Coastal Setback Line map is vague, and that there was some
ambiguity in regards to the exact location of the line. He stated he was not aware of the exact location
Planning Commission Minutes
August 11, 2020
Page 6
of the line until the third planner started the project, which was Senior Planner Seeraty. He also stated
that he was not aware of the other properties located on the seaward side of Sea Cove that had Zone
Change applications approved by the City Council in the past to move the Coastal Setback Line. Mr.
Tomaro also stated that they had a geology report that had been approved by the City.
Suresh & Venna- The property owners commented on their project.
Chair Leon closed the public hearing.
Discussion ensued between the Planning Commission and staff that while the project looked nice and
was well designed, the Planning Commission could not make the findings for the Variance. They
discussed either denying the project or continuing the matter for the architect to consider moving the
house and all improvements completely out of the Coastal Setback Zone and the Coastal Str ucture
Setback Zone, or to explore moving the Coastal Setback Line.
Chair Leon reopened the public hearing and asked the architect if he would be willing to come back
with a different plan, or investigate moving the Coastal Setback line, if the project w as continued. Mr.
Tomaro agreed to bring the project back and Director Rukavina informed the Planning Commission
that staff could report on the direction selected by the project architect if they chose to investigate
moving the Coastal Setback Line at the September 8th meeting, or if the project is redesigned, the
Commission could make a decision at the September 8th meeting.
Chair Leon closed the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER JAMES MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HAMILL TO CONTINUE THE REVIEW
OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT, PROVIDED THE APPLICANT WITH INPUT, AND CONTINUED THE PUBLIC
HEARING TO SEPTEMBER 8, 2020. THE MOTION PASSED ON A VOTE OF 6-0, WITH COMMISSIONER
SAADATNEJADI ABSENT.
NEW BUSINESS:
NONE
ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON FUTURE AGENDAS:
6. PRE-AGENDA FOR THE MEETING ON AUGUST 25, 2020
APPROVED AS PRESENTED
7. PRE-AGENDA FOR THE MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 8, 2020
Planning Commission Minutes
August 11, 2020
Page 7
APPROVED AS PRESENTED
ADJOURNMENT: 11:46 P.M.
For the complete video archive of this Planning Commission meeting go to
https://rpv.granicus.com/player/clip/3714?view_id=5