master appeal form

104 Pages·2016·41.64 MB·English

MASTER APPEAL FORM
WITH ATTACHMENTS
APPLICATIONS:
This application is to be used for any appeals authorized by the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) for discretionary
actions administered by the Department of City Planning.
1. APPELLANT BODY/CASE INFORMATION
Appellant Body:
Ill Area Planning Commission D City Planning Commission D City Council D Director of Planning
Regarding Case Number: ZA-2016-94(ZAD); ENV-2016-95-CE
Project Address: 1655 N. Gilcrest Dr., Los Angeles, CA 90210
Final Date to Appeal: ....::0;..::9.:...;/0::....1'"'-'/2::..:0:....1;..::6:...__ __________________
Type of Appeal: 0 Appeal by Applicant/Owner
IZl Appeal by a person, other than the Applicant/Owner, claiming to be aggrieved
0 Appeal from a determination made by the Department of Building and Safety
2. APPELLANT INFORMATION
Appellant's name (print): ..:..:la::.:.n.:....W.:....:...:::a:..L:...:.ne=----------------------------
Company: --------------------------------------
Mailing Address: 1416 Bluebird Avenue
City: Los Angeles State: -=C"-A'------ Zip: 90069
Telephone: ---------- E-mail: --------------------
• Is the appeal being filed on your behalf or on behalf of another party, organization or company?
Ill Self 0 Other: --------------------------
• Is the appeal being filed to support the original applicant's position? DYes 0 No
3. REPRESENTATIVE/AGENT INFORMATION
Representative/Agent name (if applicable): ....:..R.:..::o:..:::b:.:::e.:...:rtc...:L::..:.. .. ;:G::.:..:IU::..::S:..:..:h:.:::o.:..:.n __________________
Company: Luna & Glushon
Mailing Address: 16255 Ventura Blvd.
City: Encino State: _C_A_ ____ Zip: 91436
Telephone: [phone] E-mail: [email protected]
CP-7769 appeal (revised 5/25/2016) Page 1 of 2
4. JUSTIFICATION/REASON FOR APPEAL
Is the entire decision, or only parts of it being appealed? Ill Entire 0 Part
Are specific conditions of approval being appealed? DYes IZI No
If Yes, list the condition number(s) here: --------------
Attach a separate sheet providing your reasons for the appeal. Your reason must state:
• The reason for the appeal • How you are aggrieved by the decision
• Specifically the points at issue • Why you believe the decision-maker erred or abused their discretion
5. APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT
I certify that the statements
Date: ---------
6. FILING REQUIREMENTS/ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
• Eight (8) sets of the following documents are required for each appeal filed (1 original and 7 duplicates):
o Appeal Application (form CP-7769)
o Justification/Reason for Appeal
o Copies of Original Determination Letter
• A Filing Fee must be paid at the time of filing the appeal per LAMC Section 19.01 B.
o Original applicants must provide a copy of the original application receipt(s) (required to calculate
their 85% appeal filing fee).
• All appeals require noticing per the applicable LAMC section(s). Original Applicants must provide noticing per
the LAMC, pay mailing fees to City Planning's mailing contractor (BTC) and submit a copy of the receipt.
• Appellants filing an appeal from a determination made by the Department of Building and Safety per LAMC
12.26 K are considered Original Applicants and must provide noticing per LAMC 12.26 K.7, pay mailing fees
to City Planning's mailing contractor (BTC) and submit a copy of receipt.
• A Certified Neighborhood CounCil (CNC) or a person identified as a member of a CNC or as representing the
CNC may not file an appeal on behalf of the Neighborhood Council; persons affiliated with a CNC may only
file as an individual on behalf of self.
• Appeals of Density Bonus cases can only be filed by adjacent owners or tenants (must have documentation).
• Appeals to the City Council from a determination on a Tentative Tract (TT or VTT) by the Area or City
Planning Commission must be filed within 10 days of the date of the written determination of said
Commission.
• A CEQA document can only be appealed if a non-elected decision-making body (ZA, APC, CPC, etc.) makes
a determination for a project that is not further appealable. [CA Public Resources Code ' 21151 (c)].
" Th.is Sec;:tion for City PJannirig Staff U!i, Only '
Base Fee: Reviewed & Accepted by (DSC Planner): Date:
, ....: . .. } 5
-/ 3'1. t2 ~ k. I r'"lt._ ~/'1..9 / lb
o4
Receipt No: Deemed Complete by (Project Planner): '1/'2.. '/It"
.. /
C1 J- t:l ~ ~ Lf ,, >1 V~~v~ S/t.J-._ k. Date:
I
fd'Determination authority notified D Original receipt and BTC receipt (if original applicant)
CP-7769 appeal (revised 5/25/2016) Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT TO APPEAL
ZA-2016-94-ZAD
ENV-2016-95-CE
Appellants: Concerned Residents of Gilcrest Drive, the residents in the
immediate vicinity of 1655 Gilcrest Drive and thus directly impacted by the
Zoning Administrator's Determination to allow the construction of an addition to
an existing single-family dwelling fronting on a Substandard Hillside Street that
does not provide a minimum 20-foot continuous paved roadway from the
driveway apron to the boundary of the Hillside Area as otherwise required by Los
Angeles Municipal Code ("LAMC") §12.21.C.10(i)(3) ("Project").
lan Wayne is the the owner of properties located at 1649 and 1641
Gilcrest Drive, where members of his family reside, immediately adjacent to the
Project and most impacted thereby.
In approving the Project, the Zoning Administrator erred and abused its
discretion for the following reasons:
1. The required findings pursuant to Los Angeles Municipal Code
§12.24.X.28 cannot be made with substantial supporting evidence.
a. The Project will not enhance the built environment in the
surrounding neighborhood or will perform a function or provide a service that is
essential or beneficial to the community, city or region.
The Zoning Administrator's findings summarily state that the Project will
"enhance the built environment in the Brentwood neighborhood." But, there is no
evidence, let alone substantial evidence, to support this finding. Certainly, the
Zoning Administrator does not cite to or provide any evidence.
To the contrary, the finding that the Project (i.e. the deviation from LAMC
§12.21.C.1 O(i)(3)) will enhance the built environment or perform a function or
provide a service that is essential or beneficial to the community cannot be made
with substantial evidence. The purpose/intent of the requirements under LAMC
§12.21.C.1 O(i) is to ensure that new development is built with adequate
infrastructure to support it and does not pose further dangers to the community
existing in the vicinity of inadequate roadways. In order to guarantee such public
services and safety for the residents surrounding the Project, the requirements
under LAMC §12.21.C.1 O(i)(3) should not be waived. Absent substantial
evidence to contrary, as required, the Project will only enhance the built
environment if the roadway is widened to provide adequate public safety for
vehicles, pedestrians and emergency responders as required under LAMC
§12.21.C.1 O(i)(3).
1
b. The Project's location, size. height. operations and other significant
features will not be compatible with and will adversely affect or further degrade
adjacent properties. the surrounding neighborhood, or the public health, welfare
and safety.
Again, there is no evidence whatsoever that the Project will not adversely
affect or further degrade adjacent properties, the surrounding neighborhood, or
the public health, welfare and safety. In fact, the deviation from LAMC
§12.21.C.10(i)(3) in and of itself poses a threat to the safety of the residents in
the vicinity of the Project. Without ensuring that the Project is built with adequate
infrastructure to support it and the adjacent properties, it will only adversely affect
and further degrade the already inadequate and dangerous access to and from
adjacent properties.
c. The Project does not substantially conform with the purpose, intent
and provisions of the General Plan. the applicable community plan, and any
specific plan.
The Bel Air-Beverly Crest Community Plan provides for the following goals
and purposes:
The intensity of land use in the mountain and hillside areas and the
density of the population which can be accommodated thereon, should be limited
in accordance with the following:
o The adequacy of the existing and assured street circulation system,
both within the area and in peripheral areas, to accommodate
traffic; and
o The availability of sewers, drainage facilities, fire protection
services and facilities, and other public facilities (seep. 111-1 ).
Highways and local streets within the Bel Air-Beverly Crest Community
should generally be developed in accordance with standards and criteria
contained in the Highways and Freeways Element of the General Plan and the
City's Standard Street Dimensions, except where environmental issues and
planning considerations would warrant alternate standards (seep. 111-6).
Here, the Project seeks to avoid compliance with the requirement to
provide a minimum 20-foot continuous paved roadway under LAMC
§12.21.C.1 O(i)(3), in direct contravention of the above goals and purposes of the
Bel Air-Beverly Crest Community Plan which promotes development with an
adequate and assured street circulation system and developed local streets. The
deviation will inhibit the adequate availability of fire and other emergency
services to the immediate neighborhood.
2
d. The subject use is not in conformity with the public necessity,
convenience. general welfare, and good zoning practice and that the action will
be in substantial conformance with the various elements and objectives of the
General Plan.
Good zoning practice emphasizes compliance with Code requirements,
not deviations therefrom. As expressly noted by the Zoning Administrator, the
intent behind the Hillside regulations, including LAMC §12.21.C.1 O(i)(3), is to
provide for safe vehicular access for residents, visitors, and most critical, for
emergency vehicles in case of fire or other emergency. Without providing any
evidence, the Zoning Administrator simply concludes that applicant does not
have access to property rights at other, unidentified, locations, where some of the
road widening would have to occur, therefore "approval of the relief sought by the
applicant can be deemed to be in conformity with the public necessity,
convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice."
Again, this is not supported by substantial (or any) actual evidence.
Without such evidence, public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good
zoning practice require compliance with LAMC §12.21.C.1 O(i)(3).
e. The vehicular traffic associated with the building or structure will
create an adverse impact on street access or circulation in the surrounding
neighborhood.
In support for this finding, the Zoning Administrator cites to nothing more
but an outdated 2011 finding by the Department of Transportation of "no impacts"
identified in connection with Case No. ZA 2011-0142(ZAD). There is absolutely
no evidence provided that the vehicular traffic associated with the instant, 2016,
Project will not create an adverse impact on street access or circulation in the
surrounding neighborhood.
f. The building or structure will be materially detrimental or injurious to
the adjacent property or improvements.
Again, the intent behind LAMC §12.21.C.1O (i)(3) is to provide for safe
vehicular access for residents, visitors, and most critical, for emergency vehicles
in case of fire or other emergency and to ensure that new development is built
with adequate infrastructure to support it. Without adequate infrastructure, further
development is materially detrimental and injurious to the adjacent properties and
improvements because it will adversely affect and further degrade the already
poor and dangerous access to and from such adjacent properties. Inevitably, the
deviation will inhibit the adequate availability of fire and other emergency
services to the immediate neighborhood.
3
g. The site and/or existing improvements do not make strict
adherence to Section 12.21.C.1 0(i)(3) of the Municipal Code impractical or
infeasible.
The Zoning Administrator states, but does not provide any evidence to
support, that there are a "number" of features that would need to be removed by
the Applicant which they have no access or property rights to. Absent such actual
evidence, as required, the finding cannot be made that the site and/or existing
improvements make strict adherence to Section 12.21.C.1 O(i)(3) of the Municipal
Code impractical or infeasible.
2. A Categorical Exemption is inadequate
CEQA prohibits use of a categorical exemption when "there is a
reasonable possibility that the activity will have a significant effect on the
environment due to unusual circumstances." (CEQA Guidelines § 15300.2(c)).
The "unusual circumstances" exception is established without evidence of an
environmental effect upon a showing that the project has some feature that
distinguishes it from others in the exempt class, such as its size or location. In
such a case, to render the exception applicable, the party need only show a
reasonable possibility of a significant effect due to that unusual circumstance.
Alternatively, the "unusual circumstances" exception is established with evidence
that the project will have a significant environmental effect.
Here, the fact that the Project is located on a Substandard Hillside Street
that does not provide a minimum 20-foot continuous paved roadway from the
driveway apron to the boundary of the Hillside Area as otherwise required by
LAMC §12.21.C.1 O(i)(3) constitutes an "unusual circumstance" rendering a
Categorical Exemption inapplicable. Moreover, the Project will have a significant
environmental effect on traffic/transportation and on public services (fire and
other emergency services). Therefore, a Categorical Exemption may not be
used.
3. The five findings for a Variance are required to deviate from
LAMC§12.24.X.28
In the recent Los Angeles Superior Court action entitled Kottler v. City of
Los Angeles (BS 154184 ), the Court determined that any action taken by the City
which approves development otherwise not permitted by the City's Zoning
Ordinance (i.e., any deviation from the Zoning Ordinance) can only be approved
if the five findings for a "variance" under City Charter section 562(c) are made.
Here, the Zoning Administrator failed to make the five findings for a
"variance" under City Charter section 562(c). Therefore, the Zoning
Administrator's Determination is in violation of the City Charter.
4
DETERMINATION
LETTER
DEPARTMENT OF
UNNK.WYATT CITY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY PLANNING
CHIEF ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
CALIFORNIA
VINCENT P. BERTONI, AICP
ASSOCIATE ZONING ADMINISTRATORS
DIRECTOR
JACK CHIANG
HENRYCHU
OFFICE OF
LOURDES GREEN
THEODORE IRVING ZONING ADMINISTRATION
ALETA D. JAMES 200 N. SPRING STREET, 7"' FLOOR
CHARLES J. RAUSCH, JR. Los ANGELES, CA 90012
FERNANDO TOVAR [phone]
DAVIDS. WEINTRAUB FAX: [phone]
MAYA E. ZAITZEVSKY ERIC GARCETTI www.planning.Jacity.org
MAYOR
August 17, 2016
Grace Clements, Esq. (A)(O) CASE NO. ZA 2016-94(ZAD)
Pacific Metro (PTC) Ltd. ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S
96 Robinson Road #16-04 SIF DETERMINATION
Singapore 068899 1655 N. Gilcrest Dr.
Bel Air-Beverly Crest
Tony Russo (R) Planning Area
Crest Real Estate Zone RE40-1-H
11150 W. Olympic Blvd. #700 D. M. : 147B165
Los Angeles, CA 90064 C. D. : 4
CEQA: ENV 2016-95-CE
Legal Description: Lot 6 Arb 2, Tract TR
10050
Pursuant to Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 12.24-X,28, I hereby APPROVE:
a Zoning Administrator's Determination to allow the construction of an addition to an
existing single-family dwelling fronting on a Substandard Hillside Street that does
not provide a minimum 20-foot continuous paved roadway from the driveway apron
to the boundary of the Hillside Area as otherwise required by Los Angeles Municipal
Code Section 12.21-C, 1O (i)(3),
upon the following additional terms and conditions:
1. All other use, height and area regulations of the Municipal Code and all other
applicable government/regulatory agencies shall be strictly complied with in the
development and use of the property, except as such regulations are herein
specifically varied or required.
2. The use and development of the property shall be in substantial conformance with
the plot plan submitted with the application and marked Exhibit "A", except as may
be revised as a result of this action.
3. The authorized use shall be conducted at all times with due regard for the character
of the surrounding district, and the right is reserved to the Zoning Administrator to
impose additional corrective Conditions, if, in the Administrator's opinion, such
Conditions are proven necessary for the protection of persons in the neighborhood
or occupants of adjacent property.
4. All graffiti on the site shall be removed or painted over to match the color of the
surface to which it is applied within 24 hours of its occurrence.
CASE NO. ZA 2016-94(ZAD) PAGE2
5. A copy of the first page of this grant and all Conditions and/or any subsequent
appeal of this grant and its resultant Conditions and/or letters of clarification shall be
printed on the building plans submitted to the Development Services Center and the
Department of Building and Safety for purposes of having a building permit issued.
6. The square footage for the proposed project shall not exceed 18,436 square feet,
which includes the current dwelling at 9,873 square feet and 9, 794-square-foot
addition, a maximum building height of 30 feet and a prevailing front yard setback in
substantial conformance with the plot plan submitted with the application and
marked Exhibit "A", except as may be revised as a result of this action. The
maximum Residential Floor Area shall comply with the provisions of the Baseline
Hillside Ordinance, including any bonus provisions.
7. No other deviations have been requested or approved herein from any provisions of
the Hillside regulations (Section 12.21-C, 10 of the Municipal Code) or any other
zoning provisions, unless stated.
8. The applicant shall submit landscape and irrigation plans to the satisfaction of the
Department of City Planning Development Services Center.
9. Prior to any sign-off of plans by the Development Services Center, the landscape
and irrigation plans shall be reviewed by the Los Angeles Fire Department Brush
Clearance Unit for compliance with fuel load standards. The plan shall include, at a
minimum, the following components: a map showing the type, size, and location of
all plant materials, the topography of the site, all other landscape features, and a
schedule for installation of plants. Native, drought-tolerant plant species shall be
used. The landscaping and irrigation shall be properly maintained at all times and
diseased landscaping shall be replaced in a timely manner. The plans shall be
designed consistent with the City's Water Conservation Ordinance and should limit
water consumption, minimize soil saturation, promote soil stability, and preclude soil
erosion.
10. The project shall comply with all of the conditions required in the Department of
Building and Safety Grading Division's Geology and Soils Report approval letter
dated January 24, 2014. A copy of the conditions shall be incorporated on the plans
submitted to the Department of City Planning Development Services Center prior to
issuance of any permits.
11. No street improvements have been required by the Department of Public Works'
Bureau of Engineering directly adjacent to the property's frontage along Gilcrest
Drive and none are required by this action.
12. All exterior lighting shall be shielded and directed onto the site. This condition shall
not preclude the installation of low-level security lighting.
13. No construction equipment or material shall be stored on the street.
14. The hours of construction activity shall be limited to 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday
through Friday, and 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. on Saturday. No construction activity is