ENCROACHMENT PERMIT (CASE NO.ZON2009-00145)
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
STAFF REPORT
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT
TO:
I I I
,-. .... FROM:
:~
,
...
I
'-4. 31 .......
DEL
Subject lot
NOVEMBER 10, 2009
SUBJECT:
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT (CASE NO. ZON2009-00145)
17 COVEVIEW DRIVE
APPLICANT:
MARLENE BREEN DESIGN 2325 PALOS VERDES DRIVE WEST SUITE 212 PALOS VERDES ESTATES, CA 90274
LANDOWNER:
DORINA BALLIN 17 COVEVIEW DRIVE RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275
P,
THOMAS GUIDE PAGE 823 – B2
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT
DATE:
PROJECT ADDRESS:
CERRO
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF COORDINATOR: ABIGAIL HARWELL ASSISTANT PLANNER
REQUESTED ACTION: AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR AFTER-THE-FACT STRUCTURES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, CONSISTING OF A PLANTER AREA, 44.5” TALL PILASTER, A 50.5” TALL MAILBOX PILASTER, AND A 54” TALL PILASTER CONNECTED TO A 36” TALL WALL. ADOPT P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-___; APPROVING, WITH CONDITIONS, THE RECOMMENDATION: ENCROACHMENT PERMIT (CASE NO. ZON2009-00145). REFERENCES: ZONING:
RS-2
LAND USE:
RESIDENTIAL – SINGLE FAMILY / PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
CODE SECTIONS:
CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO. 31 (ENCROACHMENTS)
GENERAL PLAN:
N/A
TRAILS PLAN:
N/A
SPECIFIC PLAN:
N/A
CEQA:
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 3)
ACTION DEADLINE:
DECEMBER 19, 2009
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard / Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275-5391 Planning & Code Enforcement Divisions: (310) 544-5228 / Building Division: (310) 265-7800 / Department FAX: (310) 544-5293 www.palosverdes.com/rpv
1
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT – (CASE NO. ZON2009-00145) NOVEMBER 10, 2009 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS RESIDING WITHIN 500’ OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: NONE
BACKGROUND On March 20, 2009, the City’s Code Enforcement Division received a complaint regarding unpermitted structures located at 17 Coveview Drive. Upon a site inspection by Code Enforcement Staff, it was found that there are existing structures built into the public right-of-way without approval, and the front setback area appeared to exceed the 50% maximum hardscape Development Code Requirement. In response to a Code Enforcement letter sent to the homeowner, an application for an encroachment permit was submitted to the Planning Division on April 21, 2009. The application requests after-the-fact approval for existing planter areas with 8” tall planter walls on either side of the driveway and along the street, an existing 44.5” tall pilaster, an existing 50.5” tall mailbox pilaster, and an existing 36” to 54” tall wall, all extending a maximum of 10 feet into the public right-of-way of Coveview Drive. While not part of the application, the submitted plans also address the 50% minimum landscape requirement for the front setback. The application was deemed incomplete on April 28, 2009, pending submittal of additional information. After additional information was submitted on June 29, 2009, Staff forwarded a copy of the plans to the Public Works Department for review on July 6, 2009. In response, the Public Works Department responded with a memo dated July 17, 2009, listing additional items of concern that would need to be addressed by the applicant. After the submittal of additional information in response to the Public Works’ memo on September 18, 2009, and receiving information from Southern California Edison on October 19, 2009, Staff subsequently deemed the application complete for processing on October 20, 2009. As the City Council Policy No. 31 does not require any public notification of Encroachment Permit requests, no notices were sent regarding this application. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject property is a rectangular-shaped, 18,382 square-foot pad lot in the Del Cerro community. Currently the property is developed with a 3,000 square foot residence and 600 square foot garage, according to the building permits on file with the City. The site’s zoning designation is residential, single-family (RS-2), and is surrounded on three sides by singlefamily residences of the same zoning designation. The north side of the property borders the City’s boundary line with the City of Rolling Hills. The encroachment permit request is for after-the-fact approval of structures already constructed into the public right-of-way. According to the Public Works Department, the front property line for properties along Coveview Drive measure 25 feet from the center line of the street, with a 10 foot parkway area between the paved street and front property lines. All of the requested afterthe-fact construction is built adjacent to Coveview Drive, within the 10 foot wide area between the edge of the street pavement and the front property line. These improvements include 8” tall planter walls running along the street on either side of the existing driveway; a 44.5” tall pilaster in the eastern corner of the planter area; a 50.5” tall mail-box pilaster on the east side of the driveway in the planter area; and a 54” tall pilaster connected to a 36” tall wall along the western side of the existing driveway. Pursuant to City Council Policy No. 31, since the application requests approval of structures built more than 6 feet into the public right-of-way, Planning Commission review and approval is required.
2
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT – (CASE NO. ZON2009-00145) NOVEMBER 10, 2009 PAGE 3 POLICY CONSIDERATIONS AND ANALYSIS Encroachment Permit The review criteria for this matter is established by City Council Policy No. 31, which was first adopted in 1996 and most recently amended in 2000 (see attachments). The purpose of the policy is to set forth the review procedure and criteria for allowing certain structures, such as walls and pilasters, to be constructed within the public right-of-way. According to the policy, an application for an encroachment permit for a fence or wall extending more than six feet (6’-0”) into the public right-of-way must be reviewed by the Planning Commission for compliance with the following five (5) findings (City Council Policy language in bold, followed by Staff’s analysis in normal text): 1. The encroachment is not detrimental to the public health/welfare, and that the Public Works Director has made a written determination that the encroachment does not pose a hazard to vehicular traffic, pedestrians, or equestrians; and further that all other requirements for issuance of a Public Works Department encroachment permit are met. The Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Department review shall be concurrent with the Public Works Department review to the greatest degree possible. On July 6, 2009, Planning Staff forwarded a copy of the applicant’s plans to the Director of Public Works. The Director of Public Works prepared a written determination, dated July 17, 2009 (attached), that required several conditions that must be met. Outside of these requirements, Public Works did state that the existing construction “has no apparent traffic or pedestrian safety hazard.” Staff forwarded the Public Works requirements to the applicant who has either addressed these items by obtaining the necessary information or revising the project plans, as necessary. As such, Staff believes the encroachment will not be detrimental to the public health and safety because the Director of Public Works has made a written determination that the encroachment does not pose a hazard. Additionally, a condition of approval has been added requiring the applicant to obtain an Encroachment Permit from the Public Works Department as well as requiring all the conditions listed in the Public Works memo to be met. Therefore, this finding can be made and adopted. 2. The encroaching structure can not be reconfigured or relocated due to practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship, including economic hardship, so as to either: a) locate the structure on the applicant’s property in accordance with [the] provisions of the Municipal Code; or, b) adhere to the criteria set forth for a Planning Director Level Review. Staff believes that it would be an unnecessary hardship to locate the existing construction onto the subject property. According to the homeowner, the structures were built with the intent to beautify the property in a manner consistent with that of other properties along Coveview Drive and within the Del Cerro community. Staff visited the neighborhood and found that there are similar existing structures in front of multiple properties along Coveview Drive and in the neighborhood. In comparing the requested application with that of the other existing structures, Staff believes that the proposed project is compatible in both appearance and location. Specifically, the after-the-fact structures are built with materials that match the residence facade of 17 Coveview Drive and, like all other similar structures, are built adjacent to the street. Furthermore, the area between the street and the front of the residence is mostly flat, and if the
3
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT – (CASE NO. ZON2009-00145) NOVEMBER 10, 2009 PAGE 4 homeowner were to move the structures closer or onto the private property, Staff believes the resulting configuration of the property would look at odds from what exists in the neighborhood. Additionally, the Public Works Department finds no harm in where the planter currently exists as the existing planters, pilasters and wall do not pose an issue to public health or safety. As conditions of approval have been added to address any concerns as required by the Public Works Department, as well as obtaining an Encroachment Permit from the Public Works Department, Staff believes that there would be an unnecessary hardship to reconfigure or relocate the existing structures. Therefore, this finding can be made and adopted. 3. The encroaching structure is not inconsistent with the general intent of the Development Code. The general intent of the City’s Development Code is to provide standards for safe and orderly development to protect the public health and welfare. As mentioned earlier, the homeowner built the structures in an effort to beautify the property in a similar manner to other structures found along the public street of Coveview Drive as well as within the Del Cerro community. The structures were approved in the existing location by the Director of Public Works. As the existing planter is found to not be detrimental to the public health and welfare, Staff finds the encroaching structure to be consistent with the general intent of the Development Code. Therefore, this finding can be made and adopted. 4. Illuminating elements of the encroaching structure are configured in a manner that minimizes impact to neighboring properties or vehicular traffic, and prevents direct or indirect illumination of a property other than the applicant’s, as determined by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement. There are no illuminating elements as part of the existing structures. Therefore, this finding can be made and adopted. 5. The encroaching structure does not significantly impair a protected view from any surrounding property. In Staff’s opinion, the encroaching structure will not significantly impair a protected view. All the properties along Coveview Drive are level with the street, and none of the surrounding properties have views that would be impacted by the requested after-the-fact structures. As such, this finding can be made and adopted. As all the required findings can be made, Staff is recommending approval of the Encroachment Permit for existing planters, pilasters and wall encroaching 10 feet into the public right-of-way. CONCLUSION Based upon the discussion and evidence above, Staff believes that the necessary findings for an encroachment permit can be made. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt P.C. Resolution No. 2009-__, approving Case No. ZON2009-00145, for an Encroachment Permit, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit “A”.
4
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT – (CASE NO. ZON2009-00145) NOVEMBER 10, 2009 PAGE 5 ALTERNATIVES The following alternatives are available for the Planning Commission to consider: 1) Identify any issues of concern and direct the applicant to re-design and resubmit the application; or 2) Deny Case No. ZON2009-00145 for an Encroachment Permit.
Attachments: • P.C. Resolution No. 2009 - __ • Confirmation from Public Works Director (dated July 17, 2009) • Letter from Southern California Edison (dated October 19, 2009) • City Council Policy No. 31 • Plans
5
MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT:
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
Abigail Harwell, Assistant Planner !
Bindu Vaish, Associate Engineer ~J July 17, 2009 Encroachment Permit Request for after-the-fact construction in front of 17 Coveview Drive (Case No. ZON2009-00145)
The Public Works Department has received an Encroachment Permit application for an after-the-fact construction of planters and pilasters, Per Planning Department's memo "measuring 5 feet into public right-of-way"(per plans provided by the property owner) from the front property line of 17 Coveview Drive. The two pilasters currently measure 54" tall and 44.5" tall. There is also third pilaster that works as the mailbox for the residence, measuring 50.5" taiL" The tract map for the subject area confirmed that the existing public right-of-way (PROW) is 50 feet, which measures, 25 feet from the roadway centerline and approximate 10 feet from the existing edge of pavement. So per the plans that were submitted by the applicant, I offer the following preliminary comments: 1) The submitted plan should be signed/stamped by a licensed professional who takes responsibility for the accuracy of the information depicted. 2) Upon confirmation per Tract Map 24817, the private improvements are encroaching approximately 10 feet into the PROW 3) There are several utilities (Southern California Edison's Vault, Cox TV and California Water Meter) within the PROW. The newly constructed private improvement in the PROW prohibits access to the utilities. A copy of this memo and corresponding photos will be forwarded to the appropriate utility agencies for their review and corrective suggestions. 4) Substandard drainage facility (drain outlet) needs to be removed and relocated out side the edge of the asphalt pavement. 5) Exposed steel rebar in PROW is a safety hazard and must be removed. The above-stated encroachment violations will be remedied at the homeowner's expense. The homeowner needs to apply for a Public Works Encroachment permit for all private improvements allowed in the PROW.
6
The construction has no apparent traffic or pedestrian safety hazard. There is no sidewalk along Coveview Drive which forces pedestrians to walk in the street. Thank you. If you have any questions, please contact me at ext. 254. cc:
Nicole Jules, Senior Engineer -r'J~
7
10/19/2009
TO: Abigail Harwell, Bindu Vash RE: 17 Coveview Dr., RPV - Encroachment
Southern California Edison requires clear working space around the lids ofour subsurface structures in order to work safely. Currently, there are walls constructed on all four sides of the vault lid at the subject address. The short wall along the driveway and the higher waH parallel to the driveway may remain in place. However, the two short walls must be removed or relocated at least three feet away from the edge ofthe vault lid (see attached photo and note). This proposed configuration is not preferred, but has been deemed to be acceptable and does not serve as precedent for future construction projects. Please contact me when the work to remove or relocate the walls has been completed. Respectfully, ..
~~
....
Vince Cichoski Planning Supervisor Southern California Edison (310)783-9302
8
oR Z LL~~
lJitk FLM"M'
AWA~pI-r.~
•
~ vtt"l-~ LZi) ...
J
I
•...5·"3l.
'
. '\'
17 Coveview Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes
Ca 90274
9
CITY COUNCil POLICY
)
NUMBER: 31
OAk ADOPTED/AMENDED:
APRil 18, 2000
SUBJECT: Encroachments into the Public Right--of~Way.
fOliCY: It shall be the policy of the City Council to follow the procedures outlined in the attached Policy Statement for encroachments in the public right~of-way, as adopted on April 16, 1996, revised on January 21,1997, and revised on April 18, 2000.
On April 19, 1996, the City Council reviewed and approved an update of the City policy pertaining to encroachments of structures In the public right-of-way. The changes consisted of augmentation of the then current policy which was approved by the City Council on May 15, 1984, with language pertaining to the encroachment of tract entrance observation structures into the pUblic right--of-way. The City Council has directed that this policy relating to encroachments into the public right-of-way be placed into the City Council Policy Manual. Amendments were made on April 18, 2000 to streamline the review process for certain types of encroachments into the right-ot-way especially for unpermitted structure for which legalization is sought.
Attachment:
April 16, 1996 (Revised January 21, 1997, and April 18, 2000) Policy Statement for Encroachments into the Public Right-of-Way
W:\Code Enforcemenl\Projects\Encroachments\FINAL polley 31cover.doc
10
POLlCY STATEMENT FOR iN THE PUBLIC RIGHT..QF..WAY ADOPTED APRil 16, 1996 AND REViSED ON APRil 18, 2000. The City Council approved this policy at its April 16, 1996 meeting, and amended it on January 21, 1997 and April 18, 2000. It should be noted that this policy replaces and supersedes the one adopted by the City Council on May 15, 1984. The City may permit encroachments of'wE!lIs, fences, pilasters, and/or observation booths, or similar structures on an individual basis, based on the follOWing criteria:
I. .
FENCES. WAllS. PilAJ;t-r:i;~~,ANDOTHER SIM&~6..~.JRUGJURES IN THE RIGHTgOf...WAY
1) All requests for construction of f~nces, walls, pilasters and other similar structures in within the public right-of-way shall be submitted to the Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement, and shall include the following materials. a) A letter from the applicanfand/or adjacent property owner(s) describing the proposed encroachment request and the reason for the request. b) A processing fee as established by resolution of the City Council. c) Twelve (12) copies of plans which clearly show the following: i)
A site plan which shows the accurate lot dimensions, property lines, location and dimension of the adjacent public right-of-way, and the location of all easements, if applicable.
ii) A site plan indicating the -location and dimensions of all existing and/or proposed encroaching walls and/or fences, as well as the distance of all existing and/or proposed encroachments from the adjacent property lines.
iii) Section and/or elevation drawings representing the total height of the proposed project, as measured from both the highest and lowest existing adjacent grade. d) Documentation to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, that demonstrates the location of the structure relative to the edge of the public rightof-way. 2) Fences, walls, pilasters, and other similar structures which meet the following criteria shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement: a) Th,e encroachment is located no more than six feet (6') within the public right-ofway (Note that it is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate the location of the structure to the Director of PUblic Works' satisfaction. which may entail preparation of a survey for some projects);
11
Encroachment Permit Policy Statement Revised: April 18~ 2000 b) The base of the encroachment, for each individual pilaster or similar structure, does not exceed two (2) square feet with no single dimension exceeding 24 inches; c) The height of the encroachment does not exceed 72 inches including any decorative features and the main structure (excluding decorative features) does not exceed sixty inches (60"), unless it is within a visibility triangle as determined by the Director of Public Works in which case the overall height including any decorative features may not exceed 30 inches;
i)
If the decorative features are lanterns or some other kind of light source, then the property owner must demonstrate that adequate screening is provided to ensure that there is no direct or indirect illumination of another property other than where the light source is located, that there is no adverse traffic/ped~strian impact, and that all conditions of residential outdoor lighting pursuant to Municipal Code Section 17.56.030 are met.
The Director's decision shall be appealable pursuant to the Appeal procedures of section 17.80 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code. 3) Fences, walls, pilasters, and other similar structures which meet the following criteria shall be SUbject to review and approval by the Planning Commission: a) Encroachments of structures more than six feet (6') into the pUblic right-of-way (Note that it is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate the location of the structure to the Director of Public Works' satisfaction which maY,entaii preparation of a survey for some projects);
b) Encroachments of structures, such as pilasters and other similar structures, having a base that exceeds 24" in width or exceeds 2 square feet in footprint area; c) Encroachments serving as bases for decorative features with a combined height that is greater than 72", or a base which exceeds sixty inches (60") exclusive of decorative features. d) Encroachments serving as bases for decorative features (Le. statuary) that are more than 60" in height, andlor the combined height of a decorative feature and its base that is greater than 72". e) Encroachments of structures with decorative features measuring more than 18" in height;
Page 2 ofa
12
Encroachme~t
Permit Polley Statement Revised: AprU 18 9 ~OOO
f) Encroachments of structures (including decorative features) or decorative feature/base combinations,measuring greater than 30" in height within a visibility triangle. The Planning Commission may refer a request to the Traffic Committee for recommendation. if traffic safety is IQvolved. The Planning Commission may grant the encroachment, subject to the conditions stated below in Section 5, and any other conditions which the Commission may impose, or deny the encroachment if it fails to meet the criteria stated below in Sections 3 and 4. The Planning Commission decision may be appealed to the City Council, pursuant to the appeal procedures of section 17.80 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code. 4) In granting an Encroachment Permit for fences and/or walls, the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Planning Commission must find the following:
a) The encroachment is not detrimental to the public health/safety, and that the Public Works Director has made a written determination that the encroachment does not pose a hazard to vehicular traffic, pedestrians, or equestrians; and further that all other requirements for issuance of a Public Works Department encroachment permit are met. The Planning, BUilding and Code Enforcement Department review shall be concurrent with the Public Works Department review to the greatest degree possible. b) The encroaching structure can not be reconfigured or relocated due to practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship, including economic hardship, so as to either: i) locate the structure on the applicant's property in accordance with provisions of the Municipal Code; or. ii) adhere to the criteria set forth for a Planning Director Level Review. c) The encroaching structure is not inconsistent with the genera! intent of the Development Code. d) Illuminating elements of the encroaching structure are configured in a manner that minimizes impact to neighboring properties or vehicular traffic, and prevents direct or indirect illumination of a property other than the applicant's, as determined by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement. e) The encroaching structure does not significantly impair a protected view from any surrounding property.
Page 3 of 8
13
Encroachment PermIt Fancy Statement Revised: AprU 18, 2000 5) Approval of an Encroachment Permit for a fence and/or wall shall be subject 'to the following conditions, and any other appropriate conditions necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare: a) Prior to construction of the fence and/or wall, the owner shall submit to the City an II Indemnification and Hold H~rmless" agreement for recordation, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. . b) Prior to construction of the fence and/or wall, the owner shall submit to the City a Use Restriction Covenant for recordation, agreeing to remove the encroachment within ten (10) days of notice given by the Director of Public Works, except in case of an emergency where less notice may be required. The owner shall also acknowledge that failure to remove the encroachment within the specified time will result in removal of the structure by the City, and that the owner shall be billed by the City for the costs of removal of the encroaching structure. c) Prior to construction of the fence and/or wall, the owner shan obtain an Encroachment Permit from the Department of Public Works. The owner shall be responsible for any fees associated with the issuance of said permit. d) The encroachment shall be constructed and installed in accordance with the approved plans, and the owner shall comply with all conditions and requirements that are imposed on the project. e) Prior to construction of the encroachment, the applicant shall submit to the City a covenant, subject to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, which records these requirements as conditions running with the land. and binding all future owners of the property which is benefited by the encroachment (I.e., underlying right-ofway, adjacent property, or common area owned by a homeowners association, if any), until such time as the encroaching structure is removed from the right-ofway. f) The applicant shail comply with all recommendations and requirements, if any, required by the City's Planning Commission, Traffic Committee, or Traffic Engineer.
ii.
OBSERVATION BOOTHS AND SIMILAR STR.UCTURES WITHIN THE PUBUC RIGH1'.:9..f:,VYAY., . • - .-
1)
All requests for construction of observation booths or similar structures within the public right-of-way are to be submitted to the Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement, and shall include the following materiais. a)
A letter from the applicant and/or adjacent property owner(s) describing the proposed encroachment request and the reason for the request.
Page 4 of 8
14
Encroachmerat Permit poncy Statement Rev§sed~ AprU 18, 2000 b)
Any application for construction of an observation booth or similar structure, shall first be approved by the local Homeowners Association, if any, in accordance with the recorded CC & R'g for the Homeowners Association.
c}
The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with the application, A minimum Trust Deposit of $1,000.00 shall be established to cover costs associated with the application. Additional deposits may be required if the costs for processing the application exceed the minimum required deposit.
d)
Twelve (12) copies of plans which clearly show the following:
i)
A site plan which shows the accurate lot dimensions, property lines, location and dimension of the adjacent public right-of-way, and the location of all easements, if applicable.
iI)
A site plan indicating the location and dimensions of all existing and/or proposed observation booths or similar structures, as well as the distance of all existing and/or proposed encroachments from the adjacent property lines.
iii)
Section and/or elevation drawings representing the total height of the proposed project, as measured from both the highest and lowest existing adjacent grades.
e)
Two copies of a "vicinity map", prepared to scale, which shows all properties located within the tract for which the proposed observation booth will serve, as well as all properties located within 500 feet of the tract boundaries. All lots shown. on the "vicinity mapll shall be numbered consecutively, beginning with the number "one". The "vicinity map" must be prepared exactlv as described in the attached instruction sheet.
f)
Two (2) sets of selfaadhesive mailing labels and one (1) photocopy of the labels which list the property owner of each parcel which falls within the boundaries shown on the "vicinity mapll. The name and address of every property owner (including the applicant) and the local Homeowners Association (if any), must be typed on 8-1/2 X 11 sheets of self-adhesive labels (33 labels per sheet). The labels shall be keyed to the consecutive numbers shown on the "vicinity map" as described above. The propert~ owners mailill9 list must be prepared exactly as described in the attached instruction sheet.
Page 50f8
15
Encrloachmeflt Permit Policy Statement
Revibed: April 18, 2000 2)
All requests shall be sUbject to review first by the Traffic Committee and then by the Planning Commission. Upon a favorable recommendation by the Traffic Committee, the Planning Commission shall grant the encroachment, sUbject to the conditions stated below in Section 16, or deny the encroachment if it fails to meet the criteria stated below in Sections '3 through 15. inclusive. The Planning Commission decision may be appeaied to the City Council. within fifteen (15) calendar days follOWing the Commissionis decision.
3) , In granting an Encroachment Permit for an observation booth or similar structure, the Planning Commission must find that each of the following conditions exist: a)
The encroachment is in the best interest of the City.
b)
The encroachment is not detrimental to the public health and safety.
c)
There is no alternative location on private property to accommodate the proposed improvements without encroaching into the City's right-of-way.
d)
The encroachment has been designed in the safest manner possible.
e)
The encroachment does not significantly impair the view from the viewing area of any private property as defined in the City1s Development Code, nor from an area designated by the General Plan or Coastal Specific Pian to be protected.
4)
The maximum height limit of observation booths or similar structures located within the pUblic right-of-way shall not exceed twelve (12) feet.
5)
The observation booth or similar structure shall not exceed a maximum of 120 square feet in ares.
6)
For structures which are attended by an operator, restroom facilities shall be provided within the observation booth.
7)
Ali necessary utilities (Le.• cable, electric) shall be located underground.
8)
AI! minimum sight distances and turning radii shall be maintained, subject to review and approval by the City's Traffic Committee and engineering consultant. IIll
9)
All observation booths or similar structures shall be located on a separate, curbed, and landscaped median,
Page 6 of 8
16
Encroachme"t Permit PoUcy Statement Revised: AprU 18,2000 10)
No portion of any eave and/or overhang shall extend beyond the edge of the curb of the landscape median, or into any travel lanes. The structure shall be designed to maintain appropriate lateral and overhead clearance to ensure that large and/or high profile vehicles or trucks will not hit the overhangs on the building.
11)
Protective boliards shall be installed at each corner of the structure to reduce the potential for accidental damage caused by vehicles.
12)
The observation booth or similar structure shall be compatible with the character and architectural styles of surrounding residences.
13)
Directional signage only shall be permitted in association with construction of the obselVation booth or similar structure. Installation of any signs shall be SUbject to separate review and approval of a Sign Permit. Installation of signs with changeable copy intended to provide general information regarding upcoming events, meetings, etc., shall not be permitted within the public right-of-way.
14)
Any proposed exterior lighting shall be located on the facade of the building, at a maximum height of ten (10) feet All exterior lighting shan be shielded and directed downwards to prevent direct illumination of or towards surrounding properties.
15)
Ingress/Egress vehicle lanes shall be a minimum of eighteen (18) feet wide at the Observation Booth to allow vehicles to pass a stopped vehicle. Wider travel lanes may be required at the discretion of the City.
16)
Approval of an Encroachment Permit shall be subject to the follOWing conditions: a)
The applicant shall comply with all recommendations and requirements, if any, required by the City's Planning Commission, Traffic Committee, or Tra'ffic Engineer.
b)
Prior to construction of the observation booth or similar structure, the owner shall submit to the City a "Hold Harmless" agreement for recordation~ to the satisfaction of the City Attorney.
c)
Prior to construction of the observation booth or similar structure, the owner shail submit to the City a Use Restriction Covenant for recordation, agreeing to remove the encroachment within sixty (60) days of notice given by the Director of Public Works, except in case of an emergency where less notice may be required. The owner shall also acknOWledge Page 7 of 8
17
Encroachme~t Permit Policy Statement Revised: April 18, 2000
that failure to remove the encroachment within the specified time will result in removal ofttle structure by the City, and that the owner shall be billed by the City for the costs of removal of the encroaching structure. d)
Prior to construction of the observation booth or similar structure, the owner shall obtain a minimum of one million (1,000.000) dollars liability insurance. naming the City.as an additional insured, sUbject to review and acceptance by the City Attorney. Proof of said insurance shall be provided to the City annually.
e)
Prior to construction of the observation booth or similar structure. the owner shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from the Department of Public Works. The owner shall be responsible for any fees associated with the issuance of said permit.
f)
The encroachment shall be constructed and installed in accordance with the approved plans, and the owner shall comply with all conditions and requirements that are imposed on the project.
g)
Prior to construction of the encroachment, the applicant shall submit to the City a covenant. subject to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, which records these requirements as conditions running with the land, and binding all future owners of the property which is benefited by the encroachment (i.e., underlying right-of-way, adjacent property, or common area owned by a homeowners association, if any), until such time as the encroaching structure is removed from the right..()f-way.
h)
No person and/or vehicle shall be required to present identification nor othelWise be restricted. prohibited, or denied access to any pUblic right-ofway, Including but not limited to streets, sidewalks. parks. and/or public trails as a result of construction ofoany attended or unattended observation booth or similar structure.
i)
Prior to construction of the encroachment, the owner and/or applicant shall submit to the City a Covenant agreeing to assume all responsibility for maintenance and upkeep of the structure.
W:ICODE ENFORCEMENnPROJECTS\ENCROACHMENTSIFINAL REVISED POLICY 31.00C
Page 6 of 8
18
~;
/
'!?i,fi./yn::r:;-;;;. £tZ\~
l!
~I' ~d ~:;) \1\\1 "
0 \J \ '\J
F
11~:: foB
r'
{'j :.£/
I.
"~ ~
(J /)
l'r>
(P)(ft?
EJ/l::.-pN 'JMJ!-i 'JMJt-i 1::) y A\:.e la""1'"
-(HA-l -4l:7o"e. -4l:7o"F-.
17&>~uJJ\~..N-re:O 17&>~uJJ\ ~..N-re:O
C1~'7.:7\~;·jCNT Wrn-~ DiHtr::iZ.SIM II-A \'Z,
ft''S:>f;;;. ).,JO
1G. )?'l"AN"'lc;;:.a"~,,,
ENlZoAc..M ~1;gr~~t'C?
Sj'\'Z.I)(..'!vra.e..'S> 1M
"'lH~ N~t~~t ~;;';".::::J!~f"I.~~""'V
HA~,A-~:::"P~ ~Oa- Pt:> i}-I~"f 1G'f'-)fe,.(;.:>,'\
STAFF REPORT
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT
TO:
I I I
,-. .... FROM:
:~
,
...
I
'-4. 31 .......
DEL
Subject lot
NOVEMBER 10, 2009
SUBJECT:
ENCROACHMENT PERMIT (CASE NO. ZON2009-00145)
17 COVEVIEW DRIVE
APPLICANT:
MARLENE BREEN DESIGN 2325 PALOS VERDES DRIVE WEST SUITE 212 PALOS VERDES ESTATES, CA 90274
LANDOWNER:
DORINA BALLIN 17 COVEVIEW DRIVE RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275
P,
THOMAS GUIDE PAGE 823 – B2
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT
DATE:
PROJECT ADDRESS:
CERRO
CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF COORDINATOR: ABIGAIL HARWELL ASSISTANT PLANNER
REQUESTED ACTION: AN ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FOR AFTER-THE-FACT STRUCTURES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, CONSISTING OF A PLANTER AREA, 44.5” TALL PILASTER, A 50.5” TALL MAILBOX PILASTER, AND A 54” TALL PILASTER CONNECTED TO A 36” TALL WALL. ADOPT P.C. RESOLUTION NO. 2009-___; APPROVING, WITH CONDITIONS, THE RECOMMENDATION: ENCROACHMENT PERMIT (CASE NO. ZON2009-00145). REFERENCES: ZONING:
RS-2
LAND USE:
RESIDENTIAL – SINGLE FAMILY / PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
CODE SECTIONS:
CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO. 31 (ENCROACHMENTS)
GENERAL PLAN:
N/A
TRAILS PLAN:
N/A
SPECIFIC PLAN:
N/A
CEQA:
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 3)
ACTION DEADLINE:
DECEMBER 19, 2009
30940 Hawthorne Boulevard / Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275-5391 Planning & Code Enforcement Divisions: (310) 544-5228 / Building Division: (310) 265-7800 / Department FAX: (310) 544-5293 www.palosverdes.com/rpv
1
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT – (CASE NO. ZON2009-00145) NOVEMBER 10, 2009 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSIONERS RESIDING WITHIN 500’ OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: NONE
BACKGROUND On March 20, 2009, the City’s Code Enforcement Division received a complaint regarding unpermitted structures located at 17 Coveview Drive. Upon a site inspection by Code Enforcement Staff, it was found that there are existing structures built into the public right-of-way without approval, and the front setback area appeared to exceed the 50% maximum hardscape Development Code Requirement. In response to a Code Enforcement letter sent to the homeowner, an application for an encroachment permit was submitted to the Planning Division on April 21, 2009. The application requests after-the-fact approval for existing planter areas with 8” tall planter walls on either side of the driveway and along the street, an existing 44.5” tall pilaster, an existing 50.5” tall mailbox pilaster, and an existing 36” to 54” tall wall, all extending a maximum of 10 feet into the public right-of-way of Coveview Drive. While not part of the application, the submitted plans also address the 50% minimum landscape requirement for the front setback. The application was deemed incomplete on April 28, 2009, pending submittal of additional information. After additional information was submitted on June 29, 2009, Staff forwarded a copy of the plans to the Public Works Department for review on July 6, 2009. In response, the Public Works Department responded with a memo dated July 17, 2009, listing additional items of concern that would need to be addressed by the applicant. After the submittal of additional information in response to the Public Works’ memo on September 18, 2009, and receiving information from Southern California Edison on October 19, 2009, Staff subsequently deemed the application complete for processing on October 20, 2009. As the City Council Policy No. 31 does not require any public notification of Encroachment Permit requests, no notices were sent regarding this application. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject property is a rectangular-shaped, 18,382 square-foot pad lot in the Del Cerro community. Currently the property is developed with a 3,000 square foot residence and 600 square foot garage, according to the building permits on file with the City. The site’s zoning designation is residential, single-family (RS-2), and is surrounded on three sides by singlefamily residences of the same zoning designation. The north side of the property borders the City’s boundary line with the City of Rolling Hills. The encroachment permit request is for after-the-fact approval of structures already constructed into the public right-of-way. According to the Public Works Department, the front property line for properties along Coveview Drive measure 25 feet from the center line of the street, with a 10 foot parkway area between the paved street and front property lines. All of the requested afterthe-fact construction is built adjacent to Coveview Drive, within the 10 foot wide area between the edge of the street pavement and the front property line. These improvements include 8” tall planter walls running along the street on either side of the existing driveway; a 44.5” tall pilaster in the eastern corner of the planter area; a 50.5” tall mail-box pilaster on the east side of the driveway in the planter area; and a 54” tall pilaster connected to a 36” tall wall along the western side of the existing driveway. Pursuant to City Council Policy No. 31, since the application requests approval of structures built more than 6 feet into the public right-of-way, Planning Commission review and approval is required.
2
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT – (CASE NO. ZON2009-00145) NOVEMBER 10, 2009 PAGE 3 POLICY CONSIDERATIONS AND ANALYSIS Encroachment Permit The review criteria for this matter is established by City Council Policy No. 31, which was first adopted in 1996 and most recently amended in 2000 (see attachments). The purpose of the policy is to set forth the review procedure and criteria for allowing certain structures, such as walls and pilasters, to be constructed within the public right-of-way. According to the policy, an application for an encroachment permit for a fence or wall extending more than six feet (6’-0”) into the public right-of-way must be reviewed by the Planning Commission for compliance with the following five (5) findings (City Council Policy language in bold, followed by Staff’s analysis in normal text): 1. The encroachment is not detrimental to the public health/welfare, and that the Public Works Director has made a written determination that the encroachment does not pose a hazard to vehicular traffic, pedestrians, or equestrians; and further that all other requirements for issuance of a Public Works Department encroachment permit are met. The Planning, Building and Code Enforcement Department review shall be concurrent with the Public Works Department review to the greatest degree possible. On July 6, 2009, Planning Staff forwarded a copy of the applicant’s plans to the Director of Public Works. The Director of Public Works prepared a written determination, dated July 17, 2009 (attached), that required several conditions that must be met. Outside of these requirements, Public Works did state that the existing construction “has no apparent traffic or pedestrian safety hazard.” Staff forwarded the Public Works requirements to the applicant who has either addressed these items by obtaining the necessary information or revising the project plans, as necessary. As such, Staff believes the encroachment will not be detrimental to the public health and safety because the Director of Public Works has made a written determination that the encroachment does not pose a hazard. Additionally, a condition of approval has been added requiring the applicant to obtain an Encroachment Permit from the Public Works Department as well as requiring all the conditions listed in the Public Works memo to be met. Therefore, this finding can be made and adopted. 2. The encroaching structure can not be reconfigured or relocated due to practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship, including economic hardship, so as to either: a) locate the structure on the applicant’s property in accordance with [the] provisions of the Municipal Code; or, b) adhere to the criteria set forth for a Planning Director Level Review. Staff believes that it would be an unnecessary hardship to locate the existing construction onto the subject property. According to the homeowner, the structures were built with the intent to beautify the property in a manner consistent with that of other properties along Coveview Drive and within the Del Cerro community. Staff visited the neighborhood and found that there are similar existing structures in front of multiple properties along Coveview Drive and in the neighborhood. In comparing the requested application with that of the other existing structures, Staff believes that the proposed project is compatible in both appearance and location. Specifically, the after-the-fact structures are built with materials that match the residence facade of 17 Coveview Drive and, like all other similar structures, are built adjacent to the street. Furthermore, the area between the street and the front of the residence is mostly flat, and if the
3
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT – (CASE NO. ZON2009-00145) NOVEMBER 10, 2009 PAGE 4 homeowner were to move the structures closer or onto the private property, Staff believes the resulting configuration of the property would look at odds from what exists in the neighborhood. Additionally, the Public Works Department finds no harm in where the planter currently exists as the existing planters, pilasters and wall do not pose an issue to public health or safety. As conditions of approval have been added to address any concerns as required by the Public Works Department, as well as obtaining an Encroachment Permit from the Public Works Department, Staff believes that there would be an unnecessary hardship to reconfigure or relocate the existing structures. Therefore, this finding can be made and adopted. 3. The encroaching structure is not inconsistent with the general intent of the Development Code. The general intent of the City’s Development Code is to provide standards for safe and orderly development to protect the public health and welfare. As mentioned earlier, the homeowner built the structures in an effort to beautify the property in a similar manner to other structures found along the public street of Coveview Drive as well as within the Del Cerro community. The structures were approved in the existing location by the Director of Public Works. As the existing planter is found to not be detrimental to the public health and welfare, Staff finds the encroaching structure to be consistent with the general intent of the Development Code. Therefore, this finding can be made and adopted. 4. Illuminating elements of the encroaching structure are configured in a manner that minimizes impact to neighboring properties or vehicular traffic, and prevents direct or indirect illumination of a property other than the applicant’s, as determined by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement. There are no illuminating elements as part of the existing structures. Therefore, this finding can be made and adopted. 5. The encroaching structure does not significantly impair a protected view from any surrounding property. In Staff’s opinion, the encroaching structure will not significantly impair a protected view. All the properties along Coveview Drive are level with the street, and none of the surrounding properties have views that would be impacted by the requested after-the-fact structures. As such, this finding can be made and adopted. As all the required findings can be made, Staff is recommending approval of the Encroachment Permit for existing planters, pilasters and wall encroaching 10 feet into the public right-of-way. CONCLUSION Based upon the discussion and evidence above, Staff believes that the necessary findings for an encroachment permit can be made. Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt P.C. Resolution No. 2009-__, approving Case No. ZON2009-00145, for an Encroachment Permit, subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit “A”.
4
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT – (CASE NO. ZON2009-00145) NOVEMBER 10, 2009 PAGE 5 ALTERNATIVES The following alternatives are available for the Planning Commission to consider: 1) Identify any issues of concern and direct the applicant to re-design and resubmit the application; or 2) Deny Case No. ZON2009-00145 for an Encroachment Permit.
Attachments: • P.C. Resolution No. 2009 - __ • Confirmation from Public Works Director (dated July 17, 2009) • Letter from Southern California Edison (dated October 19, 2009) • City Council Policy No. 31 • Plans
5
MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT:
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
Abigail Harwell, Assistant Planner !
Bindu Vaish, Associate Engineer ~J July 17, 2009 Encroachment Permit Request for after-the-fact construction in front of 17 Coveview Drive (Case No. ZON2009-00145)
The Public Works Department has received an Encroachment Permit application for an after-the-fact construction of planters and pilasters, Per Planning Department's memo "measuring 5 feet into public right-of-way"(per plans provided by the property owner) from the front property line of 17 Coveview Drive. The two pilasters currently measure 54" tall and 44.5" tall. There is also third pilaster that works as the mailbox for the residence, measuring 50.5" taiL" The tract map for the subject area confirmed that the existing public right-of-way (PROW) is 50 feet, which measures, 25 feet from the roadway centerline and approximate 10 feet from the existing edge of pavement. So per the plans that were submitted by the applicant, I offer the following preliminary comments: 1) The submitted plan should be signed/stamped by a licensed professional who takes responsibility for the accuracy of the information depicted. 2) Upon confirmation per Tract Map 24817, the private improvements are encroaching approximately 10 feet into the PROW 3) There are several utilities (Southern California Edison's Vault, Cox TV and California Water Meter) within the PROW. The newly constructed private improvement in the PROW prohibits access to the utilities. A copy of this memo and corresponding photos will be forwarded to the appropriate utility agencies for their review and corrective suggestions. 4) Substandard drainage facility (drain outlet) needs to be removed and relocated out side the edge of the asphalt pavement. 5) Exposed steel rebar in PROW is a safety hazard and must be removed. The above-stated encroachment violations will be remedied at the homeowner's expense. The homeowner needs to apply for a Public Works Encroachment permit for all private improvements allowed in the PROW.
6
The construction has no apparent traffic or pedestrian safety hazard. There is no sidewalk along Coveview Drive which forces pedestrians to walk in the street. Thank you. If you have any questions, please contact me at ext. 254. cc:
Nicole Jules, Senior Engineer -r'J~
7
10/19/2009
TO: Abigail Harwell, Bindu Vash RE: 17 Coveview Dr., RPV - Encroachment
Southern California Edison requires clear working space around the lids ofour subsurface structures in order to work safely. Currently, there are walls constructed on all four sides of the vault lid at the subject address. The short wall along the driveway and the higher waH parallel to the driveway may remain in place. However, the two short walls must be removed or relocated at least three feet away from the edge ofthe vault lid (see attached photo and note). This proposed configuration is not preferred, but has been deemed to be acceptable and does not serve as precedent for future construction projects. Please contact me when the work to remove or relocate the walls has been completed. Respectfully, ..
~~
....
Vince Cichoski Planning Supervisor Southern California Edison (310)783-9302
8
oR Z LL~~
lJitk FLM"M'
AWA~pI-r.~
•
~ vtt"l-~ LZi) ...
J
I
•...5·"3l.
'
. '\'
17 Coveview Drive, Rancho Palos Verdes
Ca 90274
9
CITY COUNCil POLICY
)
NUMBER: 31
OAk ADOPTED/AMENDED:
APRil 18, 2000
SUBJECT: Encroachments into the Public Right--of~Way.
fOliCY: It shall be the policy of the City Council to follow the procedures outlined in the attached Policy Statement for encroachments in the public right~of-way, as adopted on April 16, 1996, revised on January 21,1997, and revised on April 18, 2000.
On April 19, 1996, the City Council reviewed and approved an update of the City policy pertaining to encroachments of structures In the public right-of-way. The changes consisted of augmentation of the then current policy which was approved by the City Council on May 15, 1984, with language pertaining to the encroachment of tract entrance observation structures into the pUblic right--of-way. The City Council has directed that this policy relating to encroachments into the public right-of-way be placed into the City Council Policy Manual. Amendments were made on April 18, 2000 to streamline the review process for certain types of encroachments into the right-ot-way especially for unpermitted structure for which legalization is sought.
Attachment:
April 16, 1996 (Revised January 21, 1997, and April 18, 2000) Policy Statement for Encroachments into the Public Right-of-Way
W:\Code Enforcemenl\Projects\Encroachments\FINAL polley 31cover.doc
10
POLlCY STATEMENT FOR iN THE PUBLIC RIGHT..QF..WAY ADOPTED APRil 16, 1996 AND REViSED ON APRil 18, 2000. The City Council approved this policy at its April 16, 1996 meeting, and amended it on January 21, 1997 and April 18, 2000. It should be noted that this policy replaces and supersedes the one adopted by the City Council on May 15, 1984. The City may permit encroachments of'wE!lIs, fences, pilasters, and/or observation booths, or similar structures on an individual basis, based on the follOWing criteria:
I. .
FENCES. WAllS. PilAJ;t-r:i;~~,ANDOTHER SIM&~6..~.JRUGJURES IN THE RIGHTgOf...WAY
1) All requests for construction of f~nces, walls, pilasters and other similar structures in within the public right-of-way shall be submitted to the Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement, and shall include the following materials. a) A letter from the applicanfand/or adjacent property owner(s) describing the proposed encroachment request and the reason for the request. b) A processing fee as established by resolution of the City Council. c) Twelve (12) copies of plans which clearly show the following: i)
A site plan which shows the accurate lot dimensions, property lines, location and dimension of the adjacent public right-of-way, and the location of all easements, if applicable.
ii) A site plan indicating the -location and dimensions of all existing and/or proposed encroaching walls and/or fences, as well as the distance of all existing and/or proposed encroachments from the adjacent property lines.
iii) Section and/or elevation drawings representing the total height of the proposed project, as measured from both the highest and lowest existing adjacent grade. d) Documentation to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, that demonstrates the location of the structure relative to the edge of the public rightof-way. 2) Fences, walls, pilasters, and other similar structures which meet the following criteria shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement: a) Th,e encroachment is located no more than six feet (6') within the public right-ofway (Note that it is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate the location of the structure to the Director of PUblic Works' satisfaction. which may entail preparation of a survey for some projects);
11
Encroachment Permit Policy Statement Revised: April 18~ 2000 b) The base of the encroachment, for each individual pilaster or similar structure, does not exceed two (2) square feet with no single dimension exceeding 24 inches; c) The height of the encroachment does not exceed 72 inches including any decorative features and the main structure (excluding decorative features) does not exceed sixty inches (60"), unless it is within a visibility triangle as determined by the Director of Public Works in which case the overall height including any decorative features may not exceed 30 inches;
i)
If the decorative features are lanterns or some other kind of light source, then the property owner must demonstrate that adequate screening is provided to ensure that there is no direct or indirect illumination of another property other than where the light source is located, that there is no adverse traffic/ped~strian impact, and that all conditions of residential outdoor lighting pursuant to Municipal Code Section 17.56.030 are met.
The Director's decision shall be appealable pursuant to the Appeal procedures of section 17.80 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code. 3) Fences, walls, pilasters, and other similar structures which meet the following criteria shall be SUbject to review and approval by the Planning Commission: a) Encroachments of structures more than six feet (6') into the pUblic right-of-way (Note that it is the applicant's responsibility to demonstrate the location of the structure to the Director of Public Works' satisfaction which maY,entaii preparation of a survey for some projects);
b) Encroachments of structures, such as pilasters and other similar structures, having a base that exceeds 24" in width or exceeds 2 square feet in footprint area; c) Encroachments serving as bases for decorative features with a combined height that is greater than 72", or a base which exceeds sixty inches (60") exclusive of decorative features. d) Encroachments serving as bases for decorative features (Le. statuary) that are more than 60" in height, andlor the combined height of a decorative feature and its base that is greater than 72". e) Encroachments of structures with decorative features measuring more than 18" in height;
Page 2 ofa
12
Encroachme~t
Permit Polley Statement Revised: AprU 18 9 ~OOO
f) Encroachments of structures (including decorative features) or decorative feature/base combinations,measuring greater than 30" in height within a visibility triangle. The Planning Commission may refer a request to the Traffic Committee for recommendation. if traffic safety is IQvolved. The Planning Commission may grant the encroachment, subject to the conditions stated below in Section 5, and any other conditions which the Commission may impose, or deny the encroachment if it fails to meet the criteria stated below in Sections 3 and 4. The Planning Commission decision may be appealed to the City Council, pursuant to the appeal procedures of section 17.80 of the Rancho Palos Verdes Municipal Code. 4) In granting an Encroachment Permit for fences and/or walls, the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement or the Planning Commission must find the following:
a) The encroachment is not detrimental to the public health/safety, and that the Public Works Director has made a written determination that the encroachment does not pose a hazard to vehicular traffic, pedestrians, or equestrians; and further that all other requirements for issuance of a Public Works Department encroachment permit are met. The Planning, BUilding and Code Enforcement Department review shall be concurrent with the Public Works Department review to the greatest degree possible. b) The encroaching structure can not be reconfigured or relocated due to practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship, including economic hardship, so as to either: i) locate the structure on the applicant's property in accordance with provisions of the Municipal Code; or. ii) adhere to the criteria set forth for a Planning Director Level Review. c) The encroaching structure is not inconsistent with the genera! intent of the Development Code. d) Illuminating elements of the encroaching structure are configured in a manner that minimizes impact to neighboring properties or vehicular traffic, and prevents direct or indirect illumination of a property other than the applicant's, as determined by the Director of Planning, Building and Code Enforcement. e) The encroaching structure does not significantly impair a protected view from any surrounding property.
Page 3 of 8
13
Encroachment PermIt Fancy Statement Revised: AprU 18, 2000 5) Approval of an Encroachment Permit for a fence and/or wall shall be subject 'to the following conditions, and any other appropriate conditions necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare: a) Prior to construction of the fence and/or wall, the owner shall submit to the City an II Indemnification and Hold H~rmless" agreement for recordation, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney. . b) Prior to construction of the fence and/or wall, the owner shall submit to the City a Use Restriction Covenant for recordation, agreeing to remove the encroachment within ten (10) days of notice given by the Director of Public Works, except in case of an emergency where less notice may be required. The owner shall also acknowledge that failure to remove the encroachment within the specified time will result in removal of the structure by the City, and that the owner shall be billed by the City for the costs of removal of the encroaching structure. c) Prior to construction of the fence and/or wall, the owner shan obtain an Encroachment Permit from the Department of Public Works. The owner shall be responsible for any fees associated with the issuance of said permit. d) The encroachment shall be constructed and installed in accordance with the approved plans, and the owner shall comply with all conditions and requirements that are imposed on the project. e) Prior to construction of the encroachment, the applicant shall submit to the City a covenant, subject to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, which records these requirements as conditions running with the land. and binding all future owners of the property which is benefited by the encroachment (I.e., underlying right-ofway, adjacent property, or common area owned by a homeowners association, if any), until such time as the encroaching structure is removed from the right-ofway. f) The applicant shail comply with all recommendations and requirements, if any, required by the City's Planning Commission, Traffic Committee, or Traffic Engineer.
ii.
OBSERVATION BOOTHS AND SIMILAR STR.UCTURES WITHIN THE PUBUC RIGH1'.:9..f:,VYAY., . • - .-
1)
All requests for construction of observation booths or similar structures within the public right-of-way are to be submitted to the Department of Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement, and shall include the following materiais. a)
A letter from the applicant and/or adjacent property owner(s) describing the proposed encroachment request and the reason for the request.
Page 4 of 8
14
Encroachmerat Permit poncy Statement Rev§sed~ AprU 18, 2000 b)
Any application for construction of an observation booth or similar structure, shall first be approved by the local Homeowners Association, if any, in accordance with the recorded CC & R'g for the Homeowners Association.
c}
The applicant shall be responsible for all costs associated with the application, A minimum Trust Deposit of $1,000.00 shall be established to cover costs associated with the application. Additional deposits may be required if the costs for processing the application exceed the minimum required deposit.
d)
Twelve (12) copies of plans which clearly show the following:
i)
A site plan which shows the accurate lot dimensions, property lines, location and dimension of the adjacent public right-of-way, and the location of all easements, if applicable.
iI)
A site plan indicating the location and dimensions of all existing and/or proposed observation booths or similar structures, as well as the distance of all existing and/or proposed encroachments from the adjacent property lines.
iii)
Section and/or elevation drawings representing the total height of the proposed project, as measured from both the highest and lowest existing adjacent grades.
e)
Two copies of a "vicinity map", prepared to scale, which shows all properties located within the tract for which the proposed observation booth will serve, as well as all properties located within 500 feet of the tract boundaries. All lots shown. on the "vicinity mapll shall be numbered consecutively, beginning with the number "one". The "vicinity map" must be prepared exactlv as described in the attached instruction sheet.
f)
Two (2) sets of selfaadhesive mailing labels and one (1) photocopy of the labels which list the property owner of each parcel which falls within the boundaries shown on the "vicinity mapll. The name and address of every property owner (including the applicant) and the local Homeowners Association (if any), must be typed on 8-1/2 X 11 sheets of self-adhesive labels (33 labels per sheet). The labels shall be keyed to the consecutive numbers shown on the "vicinity map" as described above. The propert~ owners mailill9 list must be prepared exactly as described in the attached instruction sheet.
Page 50f8
15
Encrloachmeflt Permit Policy Statement
Revibed: April 18, 2000 2)
All requests shall be sUbject to review first by the Traffic Committee and then by the Planning Commission. Upon a favorable recommendation by the Traffic Committee, the Planning Commission shall grant the encroachment, sUbject to the conditions stated below in Section 16, or deny the encroachment if it fails to meet the criteria stated below in Sections '3 through 15. inclusive. The Planning Commission decision may be appeaied to the City Council. within fifteen (15) calendar days follOWing the Commissionis decision.
3) , In granting an Encroachment Permit for an observation booth or similar structure, the Planning Commission must find that each of the following conditions exist: a)
The encroachment is in the best interest of the City.
b)
The encroachment is not detrimental to the public health and safety.
c)
There is no alternative location on private property to accommodate the proposed improvements without encroaching into the City's right-of-way.
d)
The encroachment has been designed in the safest manner possible.
e)
The encroachment does not significantly impair the view from the viewing area of any private property as defined in the City1s Development Code, nor from an area designated by the General Plan or Coastal Specific Pian to be protected.
4)
The maximum height limit of observation booths or similar structures located within the pUblic right-of-way shall not exceed twelve (12) feet.
5)
The observation booth or similar structure shall not exceed a maximum of 120 square feet in ares.
6)
For structures which are attended by an operator, restroom facilities shall be provided within the observation booth.
7)
Ali necessary utilities (Le.• cable, electric) shall be located underground.
8)
AI! minimum sight distances and turning radii shall be maintained, subject to review and approval by the City's Traffic Committee and engineering consultant. IIll
9)
All observation booths or similar structures shall be located on a separate, curbed, and landscaped median,
Page 6 of 8
16
Encroachme"t Permit PoUcy Statement Revised: AprU 18,2000 10)
No portion of any eave and/or overhang shall extend beyond the edge of the curb of the landscape median, or into any travel lanes. The structure shall be designed to maintain appropriate lateral and overhead clearance to ensure that large and/or high profile vehicles or trucks will not hit the overhangs on the building.
11)
Protective boliards shall be installed at each corner of the structure to reduce the potential for accidental damage caused by vehicles.
12)
The observation booth or similar structure shall be compatible with the character and architectural styles of surrounding residences.
13)
Directional signage only shall be permitted in association with construction of the obselVation booth or similar structure. Installation of any signs shall be SUbject to separate review and approval of a Sign Permit. Installation of signs with changeable copy intended to provide general information regarding upcoming events, meetings, etc., shall not be permitted within the public right-of-way.
14)
Any proposed exterior lighting shall be located on the facade of the building, at a maximum height of ten (10) feet All exterior lighting shan be shielded and directed downwards to prevent direct illumination of or towards surrounding properties.
15)
Ingress/Egress vehicle lanes shall be a minimum of eighteen (18) feet wide at the Observation Booth to allow vehicles to pass a stopped vehicle. Wider travel lanes may be required at the discretion of the City.
16)
Approval of an Encroachment Permit shall be subject to the follOWing conditions: a)
The applicant shall comply with all recommendations and requirements, if any, required by the City's Planning Commission, Traffic Committee, or Tra'ffic Engineer.
b)
Prior to construction of the observation booth or similar structure, the owner shall submit to the City a "Hold Harmless" agreement for recordation~ to the satisfaction of the City Attorney.
c)
Prior to construction of the observation booth or similar structure, the owner shail submit to the City a Use Restriction Covenant for recordation, agreeing to remove the encroachment within sixty (60) days of notice given by the Director of Public Works, except in case of an emergency where less notice may be required. The owner shall also acknOWledge Page 7 of 8
17
Encroachme~t Permit Policy Statement Revised: April 18, 2000
that failure to remove the encroachment within the specified time will result in removal ofttle structure by the City, and that the owner shall be billed by the City for the costs of removal of the encroaching structure. d)
Prior to construction of the observation booth or similar structure, the owner shall obtain a minimum of one million (1,000.000) dollars liability insurance. naming the City.as an additional insured, sUbject to review and acceptance by the City Attorney. Proof of said insurance shall be provided to the City annually.
e)
Prior to construction of the observation booth or similar structure. the owner shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from the Department of Public Works. The owner shall be responsible for any fees associated with the issuance of said permit.
f)
The encroachment shall be constructed and installed in accordance with the approved plans, and the owner shall comply with all conditions and requirements that are imposed on the project.
g)
Prior to construction of the encroachment, the applicant shall submit to the City a covenant. subject to the satisfaction of the City Attorney, which records these requirements as conditions running with the land, and binding all future owners of the property which is benefited by the encroachment (i.e., underlying right-of-way, adjacent property, or common area owned by a homeowners association, if any), until such time as the encroaching structure is removed from the right..()f-way.
h)
No person and/or vehicle shall be required to present identification nor othelWise be restricted. prohibited, or denied access to any pUblic right-ofway, Including but not limited to streets, sidewalks. parks. and/or public trails as a result of construction ofoany attended or unattended observation booth or similar structure.
i)
Prior to construction of the encroachment, the owner and/or applicant shall submit to the City a Covenant agreeing to assume all responsibility for maintenance and upkeep of the structure.
W:ICODE ENFORCEMENnPROJECTS\ENCROACHMENTSIFINAL REVISED POLICY 31.00C
Page 6 of 8
18
~;
/
'!?i,fi./yn::r:;-;;;. £tZ\~
l!
~I' ~d ~:;) \1\\1 "
0 \J \ '\J
F
11~:: foB
r'
{'j :.£/
I.
"~ ~
(J /)
l'r>
(P)(ft?
EJ/l::.-pN 'JMJ!-i 'JMJt-i 1::) y A\:.e la""1'"
-(HA-l -4l:7o"e. -4l:7o"F-.
17&>~uJJ\~..N-re:O 17&>~uJJ\ ~..N-re:O
C1~'7.:7\~;·jCNT Wrn-~ DiHtr::iZ.SIM II-A \'Z,
ft''S:>f;;;. ).,JO
1G. )?'l"AN"'lc;;:.a"~,,,
ENlZoAc..M ~1;gr~~t'C?
Sj'\'Z.I)(..'!vra.e..'S> 1M
"'lH~ N~t~~t ~;;';".::::J!~f"I.~~""'V
HA~,A-~:::"P~ ~Oa- Pt:> i}-I~"f 1G'f'-)fe,.(;.:>,'\
