246, Construct a tennis court, 2-Resolutions & Conditions• •
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In the Matter of the Application
of
Mr. Thomas Cipolla
Lot 3-BW
Zoning Case No. 246
FINDINGS AND REPORT
The application of Mr. Thomas Cipolla, Lot 3-BW, Buggy Whip
Tract, for a Conditional Use Permit under Section 3.01 (D), Paragraph 3
of Ordinance No. 170 came on for hearing on the l8th day of March, 1980
in the Council Chambers of the Administration Building, 2 Portuguese
Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California, andthe applicant, having sub-
mitted evidence in support of the application, the Planning Commission,
being advised, now makes its Findings and Report as required by the
Ordinances of the City of Rolling Hills, California.
I•
The Commission finds that the applicant, Mr. Thomas Cipolla,
is the owner of that certain real property described as Lot 3-BW,
located at 14 Buggy Whip Drive in the City of Rolling Hills, and
that notice of the public hearing in connection with said application
was given as required by Sections 8.06 and 8.07 of Ordinance No. 33
of the City of Rolling Hills, California. The Commission finds that
no comment, written or verbal, was received in favor of or in oppo-
sition to the request.
II.
The Commission finds that a previous application for a Con-
ditional Use Permit for construction of a tennis court, Zoning Case
No. 240, was denied on December 18, 1979, with findings that although
a tennis court is a permitted use, and the court was planned for con-
struction away from the road, it would have a ten foot high fence on
top of a five foot high wall, so there would be a fifteen foot high
face adjacent to the bridle trail; that construction of a tennis court
approximately 65 feet below the level of the residence would be contrary
to the intent of the General Plan to protect the canyons and to preserve
ridge tops and canyon bottoms; .and construction of a tennis court in a
canyon would be contrary to the general welfare of the Community. The
• •
Commission finds, further, that a new application, Zoning Case No. 246,
was submitted for a tennis court designed to be sunken four feet into
the ground with an earth berm surrounding the entire court, so only
four feet of the proposed eight foot high fence would show above the
berm, and the court would be screened by landscaping, using existing
trees. The Commission, having made 'a second field trip to the site,
finds that adjacent properties would be substantially affected by
construction of a tennis court as proposed, that substantial grading
would be required in a water course and canyon area of ecological
significance; that the proposed construction is inconsistent with the
General Plan; and that, there are no other tennis courts or construction
in canyons in the vicinity of the property for which the Conditional
Use Permit is requested.
III.
From the foregoing it is concluded that a Conditional Use
Permit should not be granted to Mr. Thomas Cipolla, Lot 3-BW, 14 Buggy
Whip Drive for construction of a tennis court because of the impact on
the community, the proposed location with relation to the canyon bottom,
the amount of grading that would be required, and it is, therefore,
so ordered.
The applicant is further advised that the time within
which to seek judicial review of the action of the Planning Commission
is governed by Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the
State of California.
Chairman, Planning Commission
Secretary, Planning Commission