Rancho Palos Verdes City Council

Back To Agenda			Print Page

TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT
DATE: FEBRUARY 17, 2004
SUBJECT: ZON2003-00417 (16-FOOT HEIGHT CODE AMENDMENT).

Staff Coordinator: Ara Michael Mihranian, Senior Planner

RECOMMENDATION

1. Introduce Ordinance No. ___, a City initiated proposal to amend Title 17 of the City’s Municipal Code affirming the City’s historical interpretation of the 16-foot height requirement and clarifying the “view” finding as it relates to the Height Variation and Grading applications.

2. Adopt Resolution No. 2004-__ , thereby amending the Height Variation Guidelines and the Neighborhood Compatibility Handbook to make the language consistent with the proposed code amendments.

3. Adopt Urgency Ordinance No. ___U, as recommended by the City Attorney, making the proposed amendments effective immediately.

BACKGROUND

In the course of reviewing Height Variation Permit applications for new residences, or additions to existing residences, that exceed the City’s 16-foot height limit, the Planning Commission that was appointed in March 2002 found itself, at times, divided on the interpretation of the Height Variation Permit findings involving the protection of residents’ views. As a result, the Planning Commission agreed to take up the matter as an agenda item in an attempt to reach consensus on the issue. However, recognizing that the City Council may have an opinion on the issue, the Commission agreed to seek City Council guidance on the issue as part of the City Council/Planning Commission joint workshop held on February 8, 2003.

At the joint workshop, there was discussion by Council members and Commissioners on the specific code language that was creating the differences in interpretation (see attached minutes). As such, the Council agreed to let Staff bring forward ideas to the Council at a future meeting on how to clarify or resolve the issues. The Council also encouraged the Planning Commission to attend the future meeting to provide its input and participate in the discussion.

On July 15, 2003, the City Council, after hearing testimony from several Planning Commissioners and members of the community, unanimously affirmed the historical application of the 16-foot height limit as being a “by-right” height limit for all citywide residential properties, provided that there is no associated grading and all applicable residential development standards are being met. Furthermore, the Council initiated a Code Amendment to clarify this position in the Municipal Code. The Council also initiated a Code Amendment to modify the appropriate Height Variation findings to allow the Planning Director or Planning Commission to consider the view impacts of new construction below the 16-foot height limit when a Height Variation Permit is applied for (minutes attached).

Pursuant to Section 17.68.040 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (RPVMC), the Planning Commission is required to conduct a public hearing on proposed code amendments and forward a recommendation for City Council consideration. On September 23, 2003, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the code amendment initiated by the City Council. At the meeting, the Commission was presented with draft language prepared by City Staff and the City Attorney based on their interpretation of the Council’s July 15th direction affirming the application of the 16-foot height limit. Additionally, Staff also sought Commission clarification on matters not addressed by the Council on July 15th and as to whether additional code amendments should be considered under the same proceedings. These matters consisted of clarifying the word “view” in Height Variation Finding No. iv and clarifying the view analysis finding (No. 2) for grading applications. The Commission provided Staff with possible draft language on these matters and directed Staff to bring back precise draft language at a subsequent meeting.

On December 11, 2003, the Planning Commission adopted P.C. Resolution No. 2003-62 recommending that the City Council consider adopting code amendment language as it relates to the affirmation of the historical interpretation of the 16-foot height limit, clarifying the word “view” in Height Variation Finding No. iv and clarifying the intent of Grading Permit Finding No. 2, as it relates to view protection (see attached Resolution). This Staff Report summarizes the Planning Commission’s recommended code amendments, which include minor editorial changes made by the City Attorney.

For detailed information regarding the background summarized in this Staff Report, Staff has attached the December 11, 2003 Planning Commission Staff Report which contains minutes and public comments from past City Council and Planning Commission proceedings on this matter.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

In accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Staff has determined that the proposed code amendments to the Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code will require an addendum to the Environmental Assessment and Negative Declaration prepared and approved by the City Council under Resolution No. 97-25 for amendments to Titles 16 and 17 of the City’s Municipal Code. At the time the City Council adopted the Negative Declaration, it found: 1) that there would be no significant adverse environmental impacts resulting from the adoption of the amendments; 2) that many of the amendments were clarifications and minor non-substantive revisions; and 3) that the substantive amendments would reduce impacts on the environment since the requirements and regulations governing development in the City would generally be strengthened, thereby further reducing any adverse impacts to adjacent properties and the environment.

Staff believes that the proposed amendments clarify the existing Code requirements and provide the decision makers, Staff and the public with direction on how to process residential development applications. As such, Staff is of the opinion that said amendments to the Code will not result in any new significant environmental effects, but rather serve to reduce impacts upon the environment. As a result, no further environmental review will be is necessary other than the adoption of Addendum No. 10 to Environmental Assessment No. 694 and Negative Declaration.

DISCUSSION

In order to clarify the affirmation of the 16-foot height limit, as discussed at the July 15th City Council meeting, and to clarify the word “view” in Height Variation Finding No. iv and the intent of Grading Permit Finding No. 2, the following amendments to Title 17 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (RPVMC) are proposed:

1. Building Height Regulations (Chapter 17.02.040)
2. Height Variation Findings Numbers 4 and 6 (Chapter 17.02.040(C))
3. Clarification of Height Variation Finding No. IV (Chapter 17.02.040(C))
4. Table 02-A: Single-Family Residential Development Standards (Chapter 17.02)
5. Clarification of Grading Application Finding No. 2 (Chapter 17.76.040)
Furthermore, in order to remain consistent with the proposed changes listed above, amendments must also be made to the existing Height Variation Guidelines and the Neighborhood Compatibility Handbook (see Attached Resolution Exhibit ‘B’).

DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENTS

The following discussion describes the Planning Commission’s recommended amendments to the Development Code, as stated above. Furthermore, for consistency purposes, the following section will also discuss the proposed amendments to the existing Height Variation Guidelines and Neighborhood Compatibility Handbook. The underlined text represents added language, while the strike through text represents deleted language. Staff seeks the Council’s direction on the respective code amendments.

Building Height Regulations

As a result of the Council’s affirmation of the 16-foot height limit, the building height regulation portion of the Development Code (17.02.040.B.1) is being slightly modified to clarify that a property owner has a right to build up to 16-feet in height, “by-right” provided that no grading and all other residential development standards are being met. The City Attorney recommends that the term “by-right” not be codified to prevent potential misunderstandings with the Code’s intent. However, she does recommend that the Height Variation Guidelines explain that the 16-foot height limit is commonly referred to as a “by-right” height limit.

17.02.040 View Preservation and Restoration.
B. Regulations.
1. Building Height. Any individual or persons desiring to build a new structure or an addition to an existing structure shall be permitted to build up to sixteen feet in height pursuant to Section 17.02.040(B) of this Chapter provided there is no grading, as defined in Section 17.76.040 of this chapter, to be performed in connection with the proposed construction and all applicable residential development standards are or will be met. All Approval for proposed structures or additions to existing structures exceeding sixteen feet in height, may apply be sought through application for a height variation permit, which, if granted pursuant to the procedures contained herein, will permit the individual to build a structure not exceeding twenty-six feet in height, except as provided in Section 17.02.040(B)(1)(d) of this chapter, or such lower height as approved by the city, measured as follows.

Height Variation Findings

On July 15th, after clarifying the application of the 16-foot height limit, the City Council also directed that the Development Code be amended to clarify that the City may consider the impact of new construction below the 16-foot height level when a Height Variation is sought. Specifically, when considering a Height Variation application, the City should have the ability to consider the entire proposed project, consisting of the area above and the area below 16-feet, when assessing potential view impacts under a Height Variation application. To implement this direction, Height Variation Findings iv and vi are proposed to be amended. The following text represents the proposed amended language to Section 17.02.040(C)(1)(e)(iv) and (vi) of the RPVMC:
e. A Height Variation application to build a new structure or an addition to an existing structure at a height that exceeds the sixteen foot height limit up to the maximum height permitted in Section 17.02.040(B)(1) of this chapter may be granted, with or without conditions, if the following findings can be made:

vi. iv. The area of a proposed new structure or addition to an existing structure that is above sixteen feet, as defined in Section 17.02.040(B) of this Chapter, when considered exclusive of existing foliage, does not significantly impair a view from the viewing area of another parcel. This finding shall also apply to the proposed portions of a new structure or proposed additions to an existing structure that are below 16-feet in height if said new portions are attached to and directly below the new portions that exceed above 16-feet. If the viewing area is located in a structure, the viewing area shall be located in a portion of a structure which was constructed without a height variation permit or variance, or which would not have required a height variation or variance when originally constructed had this section, as approved by the voters on November 7, 1989, been in effect at the time the structure was constructed, unless the viewing area located in the portion of the existing structure which required a height variation permit or variance constitutes the primary living area (living room, family room, dining room or kitchen) of the residence;

iv. v. If view impairment exists but it is determined not to be significant, as described in Finding No. iv, is the proposed new structure or proposed addition to an existing structure that is above sixteen feet in height designed and situated in such a manner as to reasonably minimize the impairment of a view. This finding shall also apply to the proposed portions of a new structure or proposed addition to an existing structure that are below 16-feet in height if said new portions are attached to and directly below the new portions that exceed above 16-feet;

At the July 15th City Council meeting, the Council felt that the City should be able to review new portions of a proposed structure that are below 16-feet in height when assessing potential view impacts, if they are proposed as part of a related Height Variation application. Although the Council stated that such a review should occur at the discretion of the decision makers, the City Attorney believes that in order to avoid ambiguity in the development process, an applicant should know up front whether the City will or will not be reviewing new portions below 16-feet, when directly below portions above 16-feet. Therefore, Findings iv and vi, as presented above, have been drafted so that the City will review new portions of a project below 16-feet when “attached” and “directly below” new portions of a project above 16-feet in height. Although the Commission questioned whether this was consistent with the Council’s direction on July 15, 2003, the Commission approved the proposed language.
Clarification of the Intent of Height Variation Finding No. IV

In addition to the proposed text amendments pertaining to the 16-foot height limit, as discussed in the previous sub-section, Height Variation Finding No. iv. is proposed to be further modified by adding the word “reasonably” prior to the phrase “minimize an impairment of a view.” This amendment was directed by the Commission so that the City, in its analysis of whether a project has been designed to minimize an impairment of a view, would be allowed to evaluate an entire project (as defined in the amended finding) without being too restrictive.

The Commission also felt that Height Variation Finding No. iv is difficult to understand because the language is unclear for how to proceed in situations where no significant view impact exists (Finding No. vi), but there is still some view impairment which should be minimized. Therefore, in order to further clarify the intent of Finding No. iv and its relationship with Finding No. vi, the Commission recommends adding some introductory language to the finding and to reorder the findings so that current Finding No. vi precedes current Finding No. iv. The Commission believes that reversing the order of these two findings, as well as adding language to the finding (see above), would better clarify the intent of the finding.

These Planning Commission proposed changes to clarify the intent of these findings are included in the language presented on the previous page.

Table 02-A: Single-Family Residential Development Standards

Table 02-A of the RPVMC is proposed to be amended accordingly, as depicted in the attached draft Ordinance. In addition to the text amendment, as an administration “clean-up” item that was overlooked at the time the Development Code was updated in 1997, Footnote No. 8 is proposed to be deleted. At the time the Council considered updating the Development Code, the second story 25-foot setback requirement was replaced with a trigger that requires the Planning Commission’s review of projects that are closer than 25-feet from the front or street-side property line. Furthermore, the trigger for new single-family residences exceeding 16-feet in height was inadvertently left off the table and is now proposed to be added.

Use and Development Standards (Chapter 17.48)

According to P.C. Resolution No. 2003-62, the Commission recommends that the City Council consider amending Section 17.48.050(A) of Title 17 as follows:

A. No portion of any building or structure shall exceed the maximum building height of sixteen feet listed in the district development standards except as follows:

However, after further review, the City Attorney believes that this specific amendment is not necessary since the original language refers to various sections within Title 17 that specify the maximum building height based on criteria for each zoning district. Therefore, the attached Ordinance for the Council’s consideration does not include the above amendment originally recommended by the Planning Commission.

Clarification of the Intent of Grading Application Finding No. 2

Pursuant to the Commission’s adopted motion, Section 17.76.040(E)(2) is proposed to be amended so that an applicant with a developable lot, proposing to grade down so that the proposed structure results in less view impairment than a structure built in the same location at grade, up to 16 feet, would not be subject to the view protection finding. The following reflects the Commission recommended text amendment to Grading Finding No. 2:

17.76.040(E)(2) Grading Findings

The proposed grading and/or related construction does not significantly adversely affect the visual relationships with, nor the views from the “viewing area” of neighboring properties. This finding shall not apply when the proposed grading will lower the grade of the lot and will result in a structure that will create less view impairment than a structure that could have been built in the same location on the lot to the maximum building heights described in Section 17.02.040(B) of this Title;

AMENDMENTS TO THE HEIGHT VARIATION GUIDELINES

In order to ensure that the Height Variation Guidelines emulate the code amendments being considered by the Council, the Height Variation Guidelines will also have to be amended. The proposed code changes discussed in this Staff Report have been incorporated into the City’s Height Variation Guidelines and are summarized as follows:

? The “Purpose” section is proposed to be amended to reiterate the Code’s 16-foot height limit requirement.
? The “Building Height” and “Criteria for Review” sections are proposed to be amended to reflect the respective language amendments to Title 17.
? The “Mandatory Findings” section is proposed to be amended to clarify the intent of Finding No. iv (above or below 16-feet) so as to reasonably minimize an impairment of a view.
? Amending the order of Findings iv and vi.

For further review of the proposed changes, Staff has attached the respective pages of the Height Variation Guidelines to this Staff Report for review.

AMENDMENTS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY HANDBOOK

In order to ensure that the Neighborhood Compatibility Handbook remains consistent with the proposed code amendments, certain amendments to the Handbook are proposed that emulate the code amendment language discussed in this Staff Report. In summary, the proposed changes are as follows:

? The text in the Mass and Scale section pertaining to “Neighbor’s Views” and the Height of Structures section of the Handbook is proposed to be amended to clarify the City’s 16-foot “by-right” height limit.

For further review of the proposed changes, Staff has attached the respective pages of the Neighborhood Compatibility Handbook to this Staff Report for review.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Effective Date of New Process

In the event the City Council finds the proposed amendments acceptable and the proposed code amendment is introduced this evening, the ordinance will be brought back to the City Council for a second reading and adoption at its March 2nd meeting. The ordinance would then go into effect on April 2, 2004, thirty (30) days from the March 2nd adoption date.

Urgency Ordinance

In order for the proposed code amendment language to become effective immediately, the City Attorney is recommending that the Council adopt an Urgency Ordinance this evening. The language contained in the attached Urgency Ordinance mirrors the attached draft Ordinance. The adoption of the Urgency Ordinance will mean that the new code requirements will be applicable to all project applications where a final decision has not been rendered by February 17, 2004.

Notification

Pursuant to the Development Code, a public notice was published in the Peninsula News on January 31, 2004 inviting public comments on the proposed code amendment. To date, no written or verbal comments have been submitted to the City. In the event the City receives public comments after the transmittal of this Staff Report, Staff will present the comments at the February 17th public hearing.

Real Estate Disclosure

At the June 24th Planning Commission meeting and the July 15th City Council meeting, a concern was raised by members of the City Council, Planning Commission, and the public that real estate professionals practicing in the City are not always informing potential buyers of the City’s residential development standards, specifically pertaining to “by-right” height limits. As such, the Council directed the City Attorney to research the possibility of requiring all practicing realtors in the City to disclose such information. The City Attorney has completed her investigation on this matter and is preparing an ordinance that will codify this requirement, that will be brought back to the City Council at a later date.

ALTERNATIVES

The following alternatives are available for the City Council’s consideration in addition to Staff’s recommendation:

1. Identify any issues of concern with the proposed amendments, and provide Staff with modifications, and continue the public hearing to a date certain; or,

2. Direct Staff that no modifications be made to Title 17 of the Municipal Code.

FISCAL IMPACT

If the City Council approves the proposed code amendment, Staff anticipates that there will be no direct impact to the City’s General Fund nor will it have a fiscal impact to the City.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing analysis and discussion, Staff recommends that the City Council consider amending Title 17 of the Municipal Code affirming the historical interpretation and application of the 16-foot height requirement, clarifying the “view” finding as it relates to the Height Variation and Grading applications, and amending the Height Variation Guidelines and the Neighborhood Compatibility Handbook.

Respectfully submitted,

Joel Rojas, AICP
Director of Planning, Building and
Code Enforcement
Reviewed by:
Les Evans
City Manager

ATTACHMENTS (some attachment are not available electronically. The view attachment please contact the Planning Department at City Hall)

? Draft Ordinance No. ____
? Exhibit ‘A’ – Addendum No. 10 to Environmental Assessment No. 694
? Exhibit ‘B’ – Amended Table 02-A – Residential Development Standards Table
? Draft Resolution No. 2004-___
? Exhibit ‘A’ – Amended Excerpts from the Height Variation Guidelines and Neighborhood Compatibility Handbook
? Draft Urgency Ordinance No. ____-U
? Exhibit ‘A’ – Addendum No. 10 to Environmental Assessment No. 694
? Exhibit ‘B’ – Amended Table 02-A – Residential Development Standards Table
? P.C. Resolution No. 2003-62 (Including Exhibits ‘A’ and ‘B’)
? December 11, 2003 Planning Commission Minutes
? December 11, 2003 Planning Commission Staff Report – includes the following:
? February 8, 2003 Joint Workshop Minutes
? June 24, 2003 P.C. Minutes
? July 15, 2003 City Council Staff Report
? July 15, 2003 City Council Minutes
? September 23, 2003 Planning Commission minutes
? Proposition M
? Proposed Code Language submitted by Commissioner Duran-Reed on 6/24/03 and on September 9, 2003
? Comments from Chairman Long dated September 22, 2003
? August 7, 2003 Public Notice
? Public Comments (1 letter)

ORDINANCE NO. _______

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE CITY’S MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE 16-FOOT HEIGHT LIMITATION FOR RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES AND CLARIFYING THE FINDINGS REQUIRED FOR HEIGHT VARIATION AND GRADING PERMIT APPLICATIONS

WHEREAS, on November 25, 1975, the City’s first Municipal Code was adopted establishing the City’s 16-foot height limit and establishing a discretionary review process for any individuals seeking to construct a residence exceeding 16-feet (Height Variation Permit process); and,

WHEREAS, in 1979, the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code (the “Municipal Code”) was amended to clarify that the Height Variation Permit process applies to both new residences and additions to existing residences; and,

WHEREAS, on November 7, 1989, the voters of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes approved Proposition M (Cooperative Preservation and Restoration Ordinance) which was incorporated into the Municipal Code; and,

WHEREAS, between 1996 and 1997, the City approved a major update and overhaul Title 17 (Zoning) of the Municipal Code, which among other things, clarified how to measure the 16-foot height limit on pad lots; and,

WHEREAS, on February 8, 2003 the City Council held a joint workshop with the Planning Commission to discuss, among other things, the interpretation of existing codes and the Height Variation Permit Findings involving the protection of residents’ views from proposed construction. At the meeting, the City Council directed Staff to bring forward ideas to the Council at a future meeting to clarify or resolve the issues; and,

WHEREAS, on June 24, 2003, the Planning Commission was asked to review and provide feedback on the content and format of a draft Staff Report to the City Council regarding the clarification and interpretation of existing codes and the Height Variation Permit findings. The Planning Commission continued the discussion and directed Staff to come back with more information regarding the historical interpretation and application of the 16-foot height limit and the Height Variation Permit findings; and,

WHEREAS, on July 15, 2003, the City Council, at the request of a Council member, discussed the issues pertaining to the existing Municipal Code and the Height Variation Permit findings. At the meeting, the City Council unanimously reaffirmed the historic interpretation and application of the 16-foot height, measured as set forth in the Municipal Code based on the type of lot involved, as being a “by-right” height limit for all residential properties in the City and clarified the interpretation of specific Height Variation Permit Findings; and,

WHEREAS, at its July 15th meeting, the City Council initiated code amendment proceedings in order to codify its interpretation and clarification of the 16-foot height limit and the Height Variation Permit Findings; and,

WHEREAS, on August 9, 2003 a notice of an August 26, 2003 public hearing to be held by the Planning Commission regarding proposed amendment of the Municipal Code regarding height issues was published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News; and,

WHEREAS, on August 26, 2003, the Planning Commission, without discussion, continued the public hearing to its September 9, 2003 meeting, at which time the item was again continued to its September 23, 2003 meeting; and,

WHEREAS, after notices issued pursuant to the provisions of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on September 23, 2003 at which time all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard and present evidence regarding said amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code as set forth in the Planning Commission Staff Report of that date; and,

WHEREAS, after reviewing the proposed text amendments, the Commission directed Staff to prepare precise language for consideration at its October 28, 2003 meeting and continued the public hearing; and,

WHEREAS, at its October 28, 2003, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing, without discussion, and again on November 25, 2003, continued the hearing to its December 9, 2003 meeting; and,

WHEREAS, on December 11, 2003 the Planning Commission continued the public hearing proceedings, and reviewed and considered the proposed code amendments to Title 17, and adopted P.C. Resolution No. 2003-62 forwarding its recommendations to the City Council for its consideration, and;

WHEREAS, on January 31, 2004, a notice of a public hearing on the code amendment was published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News; and

WHEREAS, after notices issued pursuant to the requirements of Rancho Palos Verdes Development Code, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on February 17, 2004, at which time all interested parties were given the opportunity to be heard and present evidence.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1: The City Council has reviewed and considered the amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code.

Section 2: 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 of the Municipal Code 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, in particular to carefully control and direct future growth towards making a positive contribution to all elements of the community.

Section 5: The City Council further finds that there is no substantial evidence that the amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code would result in new significant environmental effects, or a substantial increase in the severity of the effects, as previously identified in Environmental Assessment No. 694 and the Negative Declaration, adopted through Resolution No. 97-25 in conjunction with Ordinance No. 320 for amendments to Titles 16 and 17 of the Municipal Code, since the new amendments reaffirm the historic interpretation and application of the 16-foot height requirement and clarify the Height Variation Findings. An Addendum (No. 10) to the prior Negative Declaration has been prepared and is attached hereto as Exhibit ‘A’. The City Council hereby finds, based on its own independent judgment, that the facts stated in the Addendum are true because the minor revisions to Title 17 of the Municipal Code will strengthen the Code and will not result in greater environmental impacts in the City.

Section 6: The City Council finds that the amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code are necessary to preserve the public health, safety, and general welfare in the area.

Section 7: The first paragraph of Paragraph B of Section 17.02.040 of Chapter 17.02 of Title 17 of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with all remaining portions of Paragraph B of Section 17.02.040 of Chapter 17.02 of Title 17 of the Municipal Code retained without amendment:

17.02.040 View Preservation and Restoration.
B. Regulations.
1. Building Height. Any individual or persons desiring to build a new structure or an addition to an existing structure shall be permitted to build up to sixteen feet in height pursuant to Section 17.02.040(B) of this Chapter provided there is no grading, as defined in Section 17.76.040 of this Chapter, to be performed in connection with the proposed construction and all applicable residential development standards are or will be met. Approval for proposed structures or additions to existing structures exceeding sixteen feet in height, may be sought through application for a height variation permit, which, if granted pursuant to the procedures contained herein, will permit the individual to build a structure not exceeding twenty-six feet in height, except as provided in Section 17.02.040(B)(1)(d) of this chapter, or such lower height as approved by the city, measured as follows:

Section 8: Paragraph C subsection (1)(e) of Section 17.02.040 of Chapter 17.02 of Title 17 of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

C. Procedures and Requirements
1. Preservation of Views Where Structures are Involved
e. A Height Variation application to build a new structure or an addition to an existing structure at a height that exceeds the sixteen foot height limit up to the maximum height permitted in Section 17.02.040(B)(1) of this chapter may be granted, with or without conditions, if the following findings can be made:
i. The applicant has complied with the early neighbor consultation process established by the city;
ii. The structure does not significantly impair a view from public property (parks, major thoroughfares, bike ways, walkways or equestrian trails) which has been identified in the city’s general plan or coastal specific plan, as city-designated viewing areas;
iii. The proposed structure is not located on a ridge or a promontory;
iv. The area of a proposed new structure or addition to an existing structure that is above sixteen feet, as defined in Section 17.02.040(B) of this Chapter, when considered exclusive of existing foliage, does not significantly impair a view from the viewing area of another parcel. This finding shall also apply to the proposed portions of a new structure or proposed additions to an existing structure that are below 16-feet in height if said new portions are attached to and directly below the new portions that exceed 16-feet. If the viewing area is located in a structure, the viewing area shall be located in a portion of a structure which was constructed without a height variation permit or variance, or which would not have required a height variation or variance when originally constructed had this section, as approved by the voters on November 7, 1989, been in effect at the time the structure was constructed, unless the viewing area located in the portion of the existing structure which required a height variation permit or variance constitutes the primary living area (living room, family room, dining room or kitchen) of the residence;

v. If view impairment exists but it is determined not to be significant, as described in Finding No. iv, is the proposed new structure or proposed addition to an existing structure that is above sixteen feet in height designed and situated in such a manner as to reasonably minimize the impairment of a view. This finding shall also apply to the proposed portions of a new structure or proposed addition to an existing structure that are below 16-feet in height if said new portions are attached to and directly below the new portions that exceed 16-feet;

vi. There is no significant cumulative view impairment caused by granting the application. Cumulative view impairment shall be determined by: (a) considering the amount of view impairment caused by the proposed structure; and (b) considering the amount of view impairment that would be caused by the construction on other parcels of structures similar to the proposed structure;
vii. The proposed structure complies with all other code requirements;
viii. The proposed structure is compatible with the immediate neighborhood character;
ix. The proposed structure does not result in an unreasonable infringement of the privacy of the occupants of abutting residences.

Section 9: Table 02-A: Single-Family Residential Development Standards of Section 17.02.040 of Chapter 17.02 of Title 17 of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to delete footnote number 8, which currently reads “8. The front and side setback for those portions of structures over sixteen feet in height shall be a minimum of twenty –five feet in all residential zoned districts.”, as shown in the amended Table 02-A attached hereto as Exhibit ‘B’.

Section 10: Subparagraph 2 of paragraph E of Section 17.76.040 of chapter 17.76 of Title 17 of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

Section 11: The rights given by any approval granted under the terms of Title 17 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code prior to the effective date of the adoption of said ordinance shall not be affected by the amendments to Title 17 by this ordinance and shall continue in effect until and unless they are modified, revoked, expired or are otherwise terminated according to the terms of the approval or the terms of Title 17 as they existed prior to the effective date of this ordinance.

Section 12: The amendments to Title 17 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code as identified herein shall apply to all development applications that have not been finally acted upon as of the effective date of this ordinance.

Section 13: 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 t he foregoing amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code.

Section 14: The City Clerk is directed to certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance and to cause the full text of this ordinance to be published as required by law.

PASSED, APPROVED, ADOPTED, and ORDERED this 17th day of February, 2004, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTION:

ABSENT:

_____________________
Peter C. Gardiner
Mayor

ATTEST:

_________________________________
City Clerk

State of California )
County of Los Angeles ) ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes )

I, JO PURCELL, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, hereby certify that the above Ordinance No. ___ was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on __________, 2004.

__________________________
City Clerk

RESOLUTION NO. 2004-__

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING THE HEIGHT VARIATION GUIDELINES AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY HANDBOOK IN CONNECTION WITH THE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. ___ AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE CITY’S MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE 16-FOOT HEIGHT LIMITATION FOR RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES AND CLARIFYING THE HEIGHT VARIATION AND GRADING FINDINGS

WHEREAS, at its October 28, 2003, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing, without discussion, and again on November 25, 2003, continued the hearing to its December 9, 2003 meeting; and,

WHEREAS, on January 31, 2004, a notice of a public hearing on the code amendment was published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News; and

WHEREAS, after receiving public testimony at the public hearing, on February 17, 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. ___ amending Title 17 of the Municipal Code re-affirming the City’s historical interpretation and application of the 16-foot height requirement and clarifying the Height Variation and Grading findings for Citywide residential zoned neighborhoods; and,

WHEREAS, in the adoption of Ordinance No. ___, the City Council further found that there is no substantial evidence that the amendments to Title 17 would result in new significant environmental effects, or a substantial increase in the severity of the effects, as previously identified in Environmental Assessment No. 694 and the Negative Declaration, adopted through Resolution No. 97-25 in conjunction with Ordinance No. 320 for amendments to Titles 16 and 17 of the Municipal Code, since the new amendments are clarifications and minor non-substantive revisions to the Development Code. As such, an Addendum (No. 10) to the prior Negative Declaration was prepared and attached as Exhibit ‘A’ to Ordinance No. ___. The City Council hereby finds, based on its own independent review, that the facts stated in the Addendum are true because the minor revisions to the Development Code will strengthen the Code and lessen potential environmental impacts of future development in the City.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE, AND RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1: The City Council finds that the Height Variation Guidelines and the Neighborhood Compatibility Handbook, as set forth in Exhibit ‘A’ hereto, shall be amended to reflect the amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code adopted under Ordinance No. 389.

Section 2: The City Council finds that the amendments to the Height Variation Guidelines, as set forth in Exhibit ‘A’ attached hereto, results in substantially the same intent as the document adopted by the City Council on June 3, 1996, which was developed in response to the November 17, 1989 voter approval of Proposition M.

Section 3: The City Council finds that the amendments to the Neighborhood Compatibility Handbook, as set forth in Exhibit ‘A’ attached hereto, results in substantially the same intent as the document adopted by the City Council on May 6, 2003.

Section 4: The amendments to the Height Variation Guidelines and the Neighborhood Compatibility Handbook shall be effective immediately from the date of the adoption of Ordinance No. ___.

PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this 17th day of February, 2004.

________________________________
Peter C. Gardiner
Mayor

ATTEST:

_________________________________
City Clerk

State of California )
County of Los Angeles ) ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes )

I, JO PURCELL, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, do hereby certify that the above Resolution No. 2004-__ was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the said City Council at regular meeting thereof held on February 17, 2004.

__________________________
City Clerk

ORDINANCE NO. _______-U

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE CITY’S MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE 16-FOOT HEIGHT LIMITATION FOR RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTIES, CLARIFYING THE FINDINGS REQUIRED FOR HEIGHT VARIATION AND GRADING PERMIT APPLICATIONS, AND DECLARING THE URGENCY THEREOF

WHEREAS, at its October 28, 2003, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing, without discussion, and again on November 25, 2003, continued the hearing to its December 9, 2003 meeting; and,

WHEREAS, on January 31, 2004, a notice of a public hearing on the code amendment was published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News; and

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES DOES HEREBY FIND, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1: The City Council has reviewed and considered the amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code.

Section 4: The City Council finds that the amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code are substantially the same as previous provisions of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code or any other ordinance repealed, amended or superseded upon the enactment of this ordinance and that the amendments to Title 17 shall be construed as a restatement and continuation of the previous provisions and as new enactment. As such, to ensure certainty regarding standards applicable to current and future applications for new structures or additions thereto, the amendments must become effective as quickly as possible.

Section 6: The City Council finds that the amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code are necessary to preserve the public health, safety, and general welfare in the area.

17.02.040 View Preservation and Restoration.
B. Regulations.
1. Building Height. Any individual or persons desiring to build a new structure or an addition to an existing structure shall be permitted to build up to sixteen feet in height pursuant to Section 17.02.040(B) of this Chapter provided there is no grading, as defined in Section 17.76.040 of this Chapter, to be performed in connection with the proposed construction and all applicable residential development standards are or will be met. Approval for proposed structures or additions to existing structures exceeding sixteen feet in height, may be sought through application for a height variation permit, which, if granted pursuant to the procedures contained herein, will permit the individual to build a structure not exceeding twenty-six feet in height, except as provided in Section 17.02.040(B)(1)(d) of this chapter, or such lower height as approved by the city, measured as follows:

Section 8: Paragraph C subsection (1)(e) of Section 17.02.040 of Chapter 17.02 of Title 17 of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

Section 10: Subparagraph 2 of paragraph E of Section 17.76.040 of chapter 17.76 of Title 17 of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:

Section 13: The City Council finds and determines that the immediate preservation of the public health, safety and welfare requires that this ordinance be enacted as an urgency ordinance pursuant to Government Code Section 36937 and shall take effect immediately upon adoption. Said finding and determination is based upon the recitals set forth above and the following:

A. Clarifications proposed by this ordinance are necessary to ensure that the provisions for structure height and view preservation consistently protect the health, safety and welfare of the City and its residents and that disparate treatment of applicants could result if the ordinance does not take immediate effect.
B. The amendments are declaratory of existing policy and practice, and if the amendments did not take immediate effect, proposals for projects that fail to meet the criteria, and which could adversely impact the pubic health, safety and welfare, could be sought in order to evade the clarifying amendments, and therefore the ordinance must be adopted to apply to all projects presently on file on for which final actions have not been taken by the City, as well as any applications for development may be filed in the future.
C. Height and view impact issue regulation is consistent with the efforts of the City to preserve the unique aesthetic values and characteristics of the City and the individual properties within the City.

Section 14: 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 the foregoing amendments to Title 17 of the Municipal Code.

Section 15: The City Clerk is directed to certify to the passage and adoption of this ordinance and to cause the full text of this ordinance to be published as required by law.

PASSED, APPROVED, ADOPTED, and ORDERED this 17th day of February, 2004, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTENTION:

ABSENT:

_____________________
Peter C. Gardiner
Mayor

ATTEST:

_________________________________
City Clerk

State of California )
County of Los Angeles ) ss
City of Rancho Palos Verdes )

__________________________
City Clerk