2500 Planning - Architectural, Landscape & Easement Reviews, HedgesITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
COORDINATION OF PLANNING, ARCHITECTURAL, LANDSCAPE AND
EASEMENT REVIEWS.
City Manager Nealis presented the staff report. In response to RHCA Board Vice President
Black, City Manager Nealis reported that the Planning Commission has the discretion to add
landscaping conditions as part of their approval of a residential development and that this
condition is usually imposed for screening of the development, revegetation of a graded areas
or for erosion control connected with the project. He explained that the Commission usually
requires the applicant to provide a financial bond to guarantee the installation of the required
landscaping and irrigation. He further explained that the landscaping that is imposed by the
Commission must relate specifically to the development project and that the Commission
does not have the authority to impose specific introduction or deletion of existing landscaping
that is not directly connected to the land use application.
RHCA Board Vice President Black questioned whether the Commission delineates the type of
tree that may obstruct a view in the future. City Manager Nealis explained that during
Commission review, it is very common for the Commission to impose conditions to ensure
that no new trees, at maturity, grow above the roof height of the structure, but that it is up to
the discretion of the Commission.
Councilmember Lay explained that he is a former member of the Planning Commission and
provided background regarding the Commission's previous course of action of paying
attention to not imposing encroachments on easements or clearing of vegetation as part of
their deliberation on development applications. He indicated that the RHCA had objected to
this practice because it preempted their authority over easements. Councilmember Lay
explained that the Planning Commission may, but is not required, to ask for a landscape plan
and that requiring a plan usually depends upon the magnitude of the development. He said
that as the City Manager reported, the Commission may stipulate the types or heights of trees
required in a landscape plan and that the Commission almost always requires landscape plans
where a large amount of grading is involved. He explained that the Commission usually
Minutes
City Council/RHCA Board of Directors
Joint Meeting
06/11/03 -1-
• •
requires that the applicant use native plants. Councilmember Lay explained that staff
completes the review of landscape plans and that in the last year a staff level landscape review
committee had been established which includes the Planning Director and the Chair of the
RHCA Landscape Committee.
Councilmember Lay commented on the architectural review by the Community Association
and indicated that it is his understanding that the Architectural Review Committee does not
require a landscape plan. He also commented on the RHCA Landscape Review Committee
and the RHCA Easement Committee and indicated that he feels that there should be a way for
the City's Planning Commission and Landscape Committee work more closely together with
the RHCA Committees. In response to RHCA Board Vice President Black, Mayor Hill
explained that the Commission has been increasingly concerned about the long-term effects of
landscaping.
RHCA Board President Crocker commented on future view obstructions. City Manager
Nealis explained that Planning Commission resolutions are recorded against the property
thereby putting future owners of a particular property on notice regarding any landscape
requirements. RHCA Board President Crocker indicated that he feels that the Planning
Commission is in a better position to impose these types of conditions on properties because
the RHCA does not have the means to record such conditions against properties.
Board Member Moen indicated that he feels that problems may occur if residents feel that they
are being ping-ponged between the two bodies. He commented on the RHCA's policy of
keeping easements open. He also commented on the Commission's granting of Variances for
setbacks which may encroach into an easement causing the applicant to come to the RHCA for
a license agreement which may be denied, causing the applicant to return to the Planning
Commission. City Manager Nealis reported that if anyone comes to City staff with a setback
encroachment request that involves an easement, that staff does not process the application
unless it is first approved by the RHCA. Councilmember Lay stated that he feels that
Caballeros attendance at Planning Commission field trips is very helpful in addressing the
usefulness of easements.
Discussion ensued regarding landscape plans and view corridors. RHCA Board President
Crocker commented on the agony that is associated with view impairment issues by all parties
involved and indicated that a detailed landscape plan in the beginning which looks to solve
future view issues could alleviate this. In response to RHCA Board Vice President Black,
Councilmember Lay explained that sometimes it does not make sense for the Commission to
require a landscape plan for small projects such as for a 200 sq. ft. residential addition.
Further discussion ensued regarding the Planning Commission's review of residential
developments and landscape conditions relative to the height of certain trees that have a nexus
to the proposed development. Mayor Hill commented on the sensitivity level of the view
issue and stated that he feels that both entities are moving in the right direction to maintain
views in the City. RHCA Board President Crocker commented on a trees and views flyer
created by Planning Commissioner Arvel Witte. Planning Director Schwartz indicated that
this document could be revisited since the RHCA had completed their policy on views.
Councilmember Pernell commented on the issue of view preservation in the City and City's
and RHCA's view preservation processes that are available to residents. RHCA Board
President Crocker indicated that Board Members Schnabel and Moen are working on the
easement issue for the RHCA. Councilmembers and Board Members discussed how to best
maintain the views in the City. It was agreed that at the time of the inception of a residential
development project through the Planning Commission would be the best time to ensure that
landscaping will not become a view issue in the future. RHCA Board Member Schnabel
indicated that she feels the Planning Commission, Landscape and the Easement Committees
could be involved in making sure that future view impairments do not become an issue.
After discussion, both the City Council and the RHCA $oard agreed to be cognizant of each
other's policies and procedures. The RHCA indicated that the Easement Committee will
review easement license agreements very carefully. Councilmember Lay suggested that both
Landscape Committees work together and coordinate the review of landscape plans. RHCA
Board Member Moen reported that the Easement Committee will be recommending that the
RHCA not grant easement licenses unless there is an absolute, compelling reason.
In response to Mayor Hill, City Attorney Jenkins explained that the City may enforce
landscaping conditions that have been imposed by the Commission should the applicant be
out of compliance with that condition in the future.
Minutes
City Council/RHCA Board of Directors
Joint Meeting
06/11/03
-2-
•
•
S?o Ling olliff6. Community 7'J Woeiation
of of a►zefzo Palos `VEu%1
NO. 1 PORTUGUESE BEND RD. • ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 544-6222 ROLLING HILLS
August 20, 2009
Anton Dahlerbruch, City Manager
City of Rolling Hills
2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
CALIFORNIA
(310) 544-6766 FAX
AUG 21 2069
City of Roiling Hiiis
Dear Mr. Dahlerbruch:
This letter is in response to the letter from the Planning Commission and recent article in
the City newsletter discouraging the use of hedges in the community. I understand the
Commission's position is that they do not want the City's open space and rural ambiance
changed by the appearance of manicured walls of foliage around the perimeter of each
property. However, I believe that the Commission's position may be too too strong.
I believe that hedges and proper screening for privacy and for aesthetics do have their
place in Rolling Hills, and if we discourage or prohibit such screening with foliage, what
alternatives do we leave homeowners? While the Community zoning requires large
parcels, due to the topography of some areas, some homes have been built fairly close to
one another. In the past, homeowners have remedied this inconvenience by planting
between the homes to shield a bathroom window from the neighbor's bedroom or
kitchen. The RHCA also requires that certain items, like pool equipment and tennis court
fences be screened with planting for the aesthetic benefit of the property owners as well
as for the benefit of the neighbors. Surely we prefer the look of a row of healthy green
bushes to screen Rancho del Mar's chain link fence on Crest Road West or to protect the
privacy of a backyard swimming in their pool that abuts a street.
Screening with plants also gives the Architectural Committee a reasonable alternative to
homeowners who request permission to install a solid fence for privacy reasons.
I recommend that we work together to put a clearer definition on the appearance of
hedges and identify conditions that the Commission finds objectionable. I agree that the
appeal of Rolling Hills is in the rural character of the Community, and that no one wants
to see every inch of a property landscaped and manicured like an English garden or have
vistas blocked by a row of bushes. I believe this is achieved in the same way the City and
Association have approached most of the development in the community with general
guidelines crafted with a general principal in mind and with the understanding that every
property in the community is unique and must be considered on an individual basis.
KR/City/AD-Hedges 08-20-09
• •
Last year the Association recognized a need for the RHCA to be more involved in the
landscaping in the community and appointed a Landscape Consultant to review landscape
plans for new homes. The Architectural Committee is also reviewing and revising the
RHCA's guidelines and requirements for landscaping, and intends to have a draft to the
Board of Directors in the Fall. The Council and Commission's concerns about hedges
blocking vistas and limiting open space in the community will be taken into consideration
as well.
I would be happy to meet with the Commission to discuss this matter in more detail.
Sincerely,
Kristen Raig
Manager
cc: RHCA Architectural Committee
Julie Heinsheimer, RHCA Landscape Consultant
KR/City/AD-Hedges 08-20-09
•
cry °beer g.,�r�
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
July 8, 2009
Kristen Raig, Manager
Rolling Hills Community Association
1 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Dear
I
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377.1521
FAX: (310) 377.7288
At a recent meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission, it was recognized that
hedges (or closely planted densely growing plants) have value for the screening of structures
such as walls or fences and for the privacy of residents. However, the generic use of hedging to
block open vistas is in conflict with the City's General Plan. The General Plan calls for
"facilitating the preservation and restoration of viewscapes" and "the use of landscaping which
is compatible with the City's rural character".
The Planning Commission during site plan review requires landscaping plans for only the
graded areas of properties. In cases where the grading is close to the perimeter of the property,
the Planning Commission will in turn impose a condition that the new landscaping in this area
be limited to a specified height and not be planted in a manner that would result in hedge -like
screening.
With the RHCA having oversight of community architecture, inclusive of landscaping, this
letter is to convey the General Plan's goals for viewscapes and express the desire that the
Architectural Committee be judicious in its approval of hedge -like landscaping.
We appreciate you sharing this correspondence with members of the Architectural Committee.
If you or any member of the Architectural Committee has any questions, please do not hesitate
to call me.
Sincere
ahlerbruch
City Manager
AD:hl
Letter to RHCA-hedges.doc
cc:
Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director
City Council
Planning Commission
Printed on Recycled Paper
aCity
•
OY R011inV INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
Agenda Item No: 3-D
Mtg. Date: 6/11/03
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
HONORABLE BOARD PRESIDENT AND MEMBERS OF THE
ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION BOARD OF
DIRECTORS
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: COORDINATION OF PLANNING, ARCHITECTURAL, LANDSCAPE
AND EASEMENT REVIEWS.
DATE: JUNE 11, 2003
•Councilmember Allen Lay requested that this item be placed on this agenda for
discussion.
Currently, the City of Rolling Hills Planning Commission reviews development projects
under Site Plan Review, Variance or Conditional Use Permit applications. Additionally,
subdivisions are also reviewed by the Planning Commission and the RHCA. The
Rolling Hills Community Association maintains architectural authority.
Generally, applicants desiring to construct a home in Rolling Hills receive approval
from the Planning Commission and then seek architectural review from the Rolling
Hills Community Association.
The Planning Commission can include specific landscape requirements on discretionary
approvals. Generally, the landscaping requirement relates to the type of landscaping
required (usually native plants), limitations in an effort to avoid future view
obstructions, or requirements to screen a project from view. There are also landscaping
requirements imposed by the County of Los Angeles from time to time relating to slope
stability.
Responsibility for easements rests with the Rolling Hills Community Association.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that members of the City Council and the Community Association
Board discuss this matter and provide appropriate direction to staff.
CRN:mlk
05/02/03coordination.sta
Printed or: Rec:yclea Paper