Loading...
PC RES 2025-001 P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2025-01 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES THEREBY DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'S DETERMINATION OF AN INCOMPLETE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR PROPOSED REVISIONS TO A PLANNING COMMISSION-APPROVED PROJECT AT 3015 CREST ROAD (CASE NO. PLHV2018-0003). WHEREAS, Dr. Ying Mou and Chunxiao Zhang (herein referred to as the "Appellants"), own 3015 Crest Road. As documented in Parcel Map No. 19424, a 10-foot- wide sanitary sewer easement traverses their property in an east to west direction; and, WHEREAS, the legal holder of the sewer easement is Mrs. Sylvia Soong who owns 3027 Crest Road; and, WHEREAS, on June 12, 2018, the Appellants submitted applications to construct a new two-story residence over portions of the 10-foot-wide sewer easement at 3015 Crest Road and related site improvements; and, WHEREAS, Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (RPVMC) section 17.49.030.f states the following requirement: "Easements. Setbacks from legal easements, other than q g street right-of-way easements, shall not be required. In addition to the appropriate review and approval by the city, no construction of any structure or improvement is allowed within a legal easement without written authorization from the legal holder of the easement. Such authorization shall be in a form that can be recorded and shall be reviewed by the city attorney."; and, WHEREAS, on July 11, 2018, City Staff issued an Incomplete Letter to the Appellants informing them of application deficiencies related to their June 12, 2018 application submittal. The letter stated that because the project involved construction of a house over a sewer easement, an easement holder authorization form would be requiredto deem the application complete for further processing; and, on F br 26, 2 2 theAppellants a signed Construction WHEREAS, February 0 0, submitted and Encroachment Agreement (herein referred to as the "easement agreement) between themselves and Mrs. Soong to the City's Community Development Department as part of their development application. Section No. 2 on Page No 2 of the Agreement (Page No. 2) further describes the provisions of the easement by stating the following: "Construction and Encroachment Agreement. Grantor, for themselves and for their successors and assigns, hereby convey and grant to Grantee, its successors and assigns, an encroachment as described in Exhibit C (the "Project Plans") and non-exclusive easement (the "Construction and Encroachment Agreement") over, under, in, along, across and upon the property described on the attached and incorporated Exhibit D (the "Easement Area")..." Therefore, the signed agreement defined the easement area as P C Resolution No 2025-01 Page 1 of 5 over, under, in, along, across and upon the 10-foot-wide sewer easement. The easement agreement also included a diagram, as outlined in Figure No. 3 on the next page, which illustrated with text a minimum 10-foot-high clearance above the 10-foot-wide sewer easement; and, WHEREAS, on August 11, 2020, the Planning Commission considered the merits of the Appellants' project, reviewed the easement agreement and adopted P.C. Resolution No. 2020-10, allowing for the construction of a new two-story residence and related site improvements including 538 yd3 of associated grading on the Appellants' property. The Appellant designed the project residence to accommodate the easement area with an open corridor feature on the ground level of the residence as highlighted on the site plans approved by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission's approval of the project included Condition of Approval No. 33 requiring all improvements within the 10-foot-wide sewer easement be temporary except for two semi-permanent staircases; and, WHEREAS, on August 27, 2021, the City's Building & Safety Division issued permits for the construction of the project residence (Case No. RES2020-00299) and construction of the project subsequently began; and, WHEREAS, on January 25, 2024, City Staff received a complaint that the Appellants constructed unpermitted improvements over the 10-foot-wide easement, reducing the vertical clearance from 10 feet to 8 feet in height. Upon inspection by City Staff, it was found that the unpermitted improvements included a drop-down ceiling that encloses electrical wiring for the project residence. In response to the unpermitted improvement, City Staff issued a "Stop-Work" notice to the Appellants advising them to either remove the unpermitted improvement or seek permits to legalize the unpermitted construction; and, WHEREAS, on March 12, 2024, the Appellants submitted amended project plans and application materials, proposing to legalize the unpermitted construction within the easement area. The project plans also proposed additional design features within the easement area including the addition of doors to the east and west elevations of the project residence, to enclose the easement corridor and the addition of paving stones within the easement area. The unpermitted drop-down ceiling is at 8 feet clearance above the sewer easement, which conflicts with the 10 feet clearance above the sewer easement shown on diagrams on the signed easement agreement submitted to City Staff on February 26, 2020 and the site plans approved by the Planning Commission on August 11, 2020; and, WHEREAS, on April 11, 2024 and June 19, 2024, City Staff issued incomplete letters, which deemed the project application incomplete for processing, citing amongst other application deficiencies, that the application required written authorization from the P C Resolution No 2025-01 Page 2 of 5 easement holder for the unpermitted improvement and proposed improvements within the sewer easement pursuant to RPVMC Section 17.49.030.F.; and, WHEREAS, on August 18, 2024, the Appellants submitted a revised application, site plan, and letter which included amending the previously-approved Major Grading Permit to legalize grading for an unpermitted cellar and retaining wall outside of the 10- foot-wide easement; and, WHEREAS, on September 18, 2024, City Staff issued an incomplete letter, which continues to deem the project application incomplete for processing, citing amongst other application deficiencies, that the application requires written authorization from the easement holder; and, WHEREAS, on November 15, 2024, pursuant to RPVMC Section 17.80.050.B, the Appellants filed an appeal of the Director of Community Development's determination that the submitted project application was incomplete for processing; and, WHEREAS, on January 16, 2025, a public notice announcing the Planning Commission's consideration of the appeal on February 11, 2025, was provided to the Appellants, property owners within a 500-foot radius of the project site, interested parties and published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News; and, WHEREAS, on February 11, 2025, the Planning Commission held a duly-noticed public hearing to consider the appeal, at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The above recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by reference. Section 2: The Planning Commission has considered the basis for the appeal offered by the Appellants. The essence of the Appellants' appeal advances the notion that construction, including the unpermitted improvement and other proposed improvements, above ground and over the sewer easement are not within the easement. Therefore, RPVMC Section 17.49.030.F, requiring written authorization from the legal holder of the easement, is inapplicable. The Appellants' arguments stem from counsel Afriyie's legal analysis of easements, where it is believed that the sewer easement, in this case, only pertains to a "maximum of 10-foot-wide subsurface land (between 18 and 30 inches below ground level)..." The appeal contends that the Appellants have a right, unrestricted by the easement holder, to "use the surface land and airspace above the easement area." P C Resolution No 2025-01 Page 3 of 5 The Planning Commission's analysis of the appeal request finds that the Appellants' position is inconsistent with the language of the easement and inconsistent with the fact the Appellants previously entered into an easement encroachment agreement with the holder of the easement related to the originally approved project. Based upon the plain language of the easement description and the prior actions of the Appellants, it appears to the City that part of the Appellants' proposed construction project would be within a legal easement which, therefore requires the written authorization from the legal holder of the easement, pursuant to RPV Municipal Code, Section 17.49.030.F. Section 3: For the foregoing reasons and based on the information and findings included in the Staff Report, and other records of proceedings, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes hereby adopts P.C. Resolution No. 2025-01, denying an appeal and upholding the Director of Community Development's determination of an incomplete application for proposed revisions to a Planning Commission-approved project at 3015 Crest Road (Case No. PLHV2018-0003). Section 4: Any interested person aggrieved by this decision or by any portion of this decision may appeal to the City Council. The appeal shall set forth in writing the grounds for appeal and any specific action being requested by the appellant. Any appeal letter must be filed within 15 calendar days of the date of this decision, or by 5:30 PM on Wednesday, February 26, 2025. A $3,100.00 appeal fee must accompany an appeal letter. If no appeal is filed timely, the Planning Commission's decision will be final at 5:30 PM on Wednesday, February 26, 2025. P C Resolution No 2025-01 Page 4 of 5 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 11th day of February 2025, by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS CHRISTEN, CHURA, GEORGE, O'CONNOR, VICE-CHAIR NULMAN, AND CHAIR SANTAROSA NOES: NONE ABSTENTIONS: NONE RECUSALS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONER BRACH 1. ..d10111111111111111.1/, 111" rir PEP 'on antarosa Chair Brandy bes, Director of Community Development; and, Secretary of the Planning Commission P C Resolution No 2025-01 Page 5 of 5