2500 Planning - Consideration of Report Relative to Addressing Existing Perimeter Fences within EasementsITEMS FROM STAFF
Sl•
y fot o (o
e G.
sit6(0(0
�. G
5(t6(°6
CONSIDERATION OF A STAFF REPORT RELATIVE TO FENCES LOCATED WITHIN
EASEMENTS DURING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
PROCESS.
This item was held on the agenda.
CONSIDERATION OF A STAFF REPORT RELATIVE TO DELINEATION OF
EASEMENTS DURING THE PLANNING COMMISSION DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
PROCESS AND DURING CONSTRUCTION.
This item was held on the agenda.
CONSIDERATION OF A STAFF REPORT RELATIVE TO RANCH STYLE HOMES.
This item was held on the agenda.
CONSIDERATION OF A STAFF REPORT RELATIVE TO PROCEDURES FOR
ENSURING THAT NEW CONSTRUCTION AND GRADING DO NOT ENCROACH
INTO SETBACKS AND EASEMENTS.
This item was held on the agenda.
NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS
None.
Chairwoman DeRoy indicated that if there were no objections, she would like to hold the
policy consideration items on the balance of the agenda until the Commission's June meeting.
She indicated that she feels that all Commissioners should be present to consider these items.
Commissioner Henke reported that he would not be in attendance at the June meeting. He
indicated that he feels that the staff reports were well put together and were very helpful to
him. Following a brief discussion and there being no objection, Commissioners concurred that
they would consider these items at their meeting to be held on July 18, 2006 when a full
compliment of Commissioners would be present.
c.c. /PC.
Joist
3121106
CONSIDERATION OF REPORT RELATIVE TO ADDRESSING EXISTING PERIMETER
FENCES WITHIN EASEMENTS DURING THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY
DEVELPOMENT REVIEW PROCESS.
Councilmember Black commented on recent development applications where fencing has
been identified as being located in easements. He indicated that he feels that the planning
phase of projects would be a good time to correct these situation. He stated that he is also
concerned about hardscape fencing versus landscape hedges being used as soft fencing. He
commented on the concept of open space in the City and that he feels that certain types of
hedges detract from this feeling and have the appearance of a solid fence. He indicated that he
feels that privacy of homes can be accomplished in other ways than solid hedges.
Councilmembers and Planning Commissioners reviewed the information provided by staff
and comments offered by Councilmember Black and concurred that the Planning Commission
would further review this information and make a recommendation to the City Council, if
necessary.
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
•
Grp 0/ ie0ii J�?7
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
HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR
CONSIDERATION OF A STAFF REPORT RELATIVE TO FENCES
LOCATED WITHIN EASEMENTS DURING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS
DATE: MAY 16, 2006
BACKGROUND
1. At the April 18, 2006 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission
reviewed this topic and after discussion agreed that when fences that appear to
be in the easements are identified on plans or in the field, that it may be noted in
the resolution of approval as a potential easement encroachment and forwarded
to the RHCA for consideration of appropriate action.
2. Therefore, when a fence is identified on a plot plan or during a field trip
that encroaches into easements, Commissioners can direct staff, on a case by case
basis, to include a condition in the Resolution of Approval requiring that prior to
finaling the project or prior to obtaining a building permit, the applicant submit
the plan to RHCA for review of the encroachment and that the applicant comply
with any RHCA decision. A written determination from the RHCA would act as
guidance to the Planning Commission whether the fence constitutes an
encroachment.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve this report as
presented or provide direction to staff.
Printed on Recycled Paper.
•
Ci4 a/eeo fen9 �ae�
•
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
DATE: JULY 18, 2006
TO: HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A STAFF REPORT RELATIVE TO FENCES
LOCATED WITHIN EASEMENTS DURING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS.
BACKGROUND
1. At the April 18, 2006 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission
reviewed this topic and after discussion agreed that when fences that appear to
be in the easements are identified on plans or in the field, that it may be noted in
the resolution of approval as a potential easement encroachment and forwarded
to the RHCA for consideration of appropriate action.
2. At the May 16, 2006 Planning Commission meeting the Commission held
this item on the agenda to tonight's meeting.
3. Based on the April 18, 2006 Planning Commission discussion staff
recommends that when a fence is identified on a plot plan or during a field trip
that encroaches into easements, Commission members can direct staff, on a case
by case basis, to include a condition in the Resolution of Approval requiring that
prior to finaling the project or prior to obtaining a building permit, the applicant
submit the plan to RHCA for review of the encroachment and that the applicant
comply with any RHCA decision. A written determination from the RHCA
would act as guidance to staff whether the fence constitutes an encroachment
and should be removed/relocated before finaling the project or before issuing a
building permit.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission direct staff to obtain input
from the Rolling Hills Community Association regarding this policy.
®Printed on Recycled Paper.
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
0
cE� //fi _uP�
is:CC i (DR TED j.NUA cat 24, i%5:
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377.7288
E-mail: cilyofrh@aol.com
HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR
CONSIDERATION OF A STAFF REPORT RELATIVE TO FENCES
LOCATED WITHIN EASEMENTS DURING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS
DATE: APRIL 18, 2006
BACKGROUND
1. At the March 27, 2006 City Council and Planning Commission Joint
Meeting, this attached staff report was included for discussion as requested by
Councilmember James Black.
2. At that meeting the City Council directed Planning Commission to review
this subject.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission discuss this subject and
provide appropriate direction to staff.
@Prnn(::Iwi Pc( yrp•,_f i ...•a
4-
• •
City o IofinV Jh/ (_. _.-.--, , .. .
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377.1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityolih@aol.com
Agenda Item No: 3-C
Mtg. Date: 03-27-06
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
HONORABLE CHARIRWOMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF REPORT RELATIVE TO ADDRESSING
EXISTING PERIMETER FENCES WITHIN EASEMENTS DURING
THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY DEVELPOMENT REVIEW PROCESS.
DATE: MARCH 27, 2006
BACKGROUND
At the regular Rolling Hills City Council Meeting held Monday, February 27, 2006,
Councilmernber James Black expressed concern over an existing fence on a developed
residential property that was located within an easement. On that specific case, the City
Attorney ruled that the fence in question was pre-existing non -conforming and
therefore the City did not have the authority to order the relocation of that fence in
connection with the Site Plan Review/Variance approval. As a result, the City Council
directed that this topic be included on this evening's agenda for discussion.
Currently, Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 17.16.150 A regulates perimeter fencing
in relation to easements and setbacks. That Code Section is described below:
17.16.150 Structures and driveways permitted in setbacks.
Setbacks shall be maintained unoccupied and unobstructed
by any structures except as listed below. Such structures are also subject to
approval by the Association.
A. A boundary fence is permitted, provided the fence is
located either on the perimeter easement line or not more than five feet
outside of (that is, toward the structure) and parallel to the perimeter
easement line. In the absence of an easement line, a boundary fence may
be located on the property line.
Members of the City Council and Planning Commission may wish to consider the
following options when discussing this subject:
Direct the Planning Commission to consider a draft ordinance to require legal
non -conforming fences to be brought into legal compliance during discretionary
land use approvals.
• Direct the Planning Commission to request input from Caballeros and/or the
RHCA relative to fencing in easements during the discretionary land use process.
• Require discretionary land use applicants to provide approval from the RI-ICA
for a fence that encroaches into an easement during the discretionary land use
application process.
• Direct the Planning Commission to review fence encroachments on a case by case
basis and forward any identified easement encroachment fence instances to the
RHCA for consideration and include a condition in the resolution of approval of
the discretionary land use application that prior to finaling of the project or prior
to obtaining building permits the applicant comply with any RHCA decision.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that members of the City Council and Planning Commission discuss
this subject and provide appropriate direction to staff.
CRN:mlk
03-27-0tifcnce->ln.dnr
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
•
City 0/ leoffin9. _AVE,
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityotrh@aol.com
HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR
CONSIDERATION OF A STAFF REPORT RELATIVE TO
DELINEATION OF EASEMENTS DURING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS AND
DURING CONSTRUCTION
DATE: MAY 16, 2006
BACKGROUND
1. At the April 18, 2006 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission
reviewed this topic and after discussion agreed that in order to assist equestrian
activity, that a condition be included in all resolutions of approval that reinforce
the requirement that easements are to be maintained clear during all phases of
the construction process.
2. Therefore, staff proposes that the following condition be included in all
resolutions:
"During construction all easements shall remain clear and free of debris,
vehicles, building material, building equipment and all other construction
objects, except when it is necessary to park during working hours in the roadway
easement".
3. In addition, it was agreed that depending on the location and usability of
an easement, the Planning Commission can include a condition in the resolution
of approval, on a case -by -case basis, that would require that an easement be
delineated during the entire duration of the construction.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve this report as
presented or provide direction to staff.
@Printed on Recycled Pape,
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
•
City olleolP S�r��
•
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
HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR
CONSIDERATION OF A STAFF REPORT RELATIVE TO FENCES
LOCATED WITHIN EASEMENTS DURING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS
DATE: APRIL 18, 2006
BACKGROUND
1. At the March 27, 2006 City Council and Planning Commission Joint
Meeting, this attached staff report was included for discussion as requested by
Councilmember James Black.
2. At that meeting the City Council directed Planning Commission to review
this subject.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission discuss this subject and
provide appropriate direction to staff.
®Printed on Recycled Paper.
• •
attin _AM
i;'2 CORPORATED Je't:;):.rt:' :4; i557
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-C
Mtg. Date: 03-27-06
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
HONORABLE CHARIRWOMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF REPORT RELATIVE TO ADDRESSING
EXISTING PERIMETER FENCES WITHIN EASEMENTS DURING
THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY DEVELPOMENT REVIEW PROCESS.
DATE: MARCH 27, 2006
BACKGROUND
At the regular Rolling Hills City Council Meeting held Monday, February 27, 2006,
Councilmember James Black expressed concern over an existing fence on a developed
residential property that was located within an easement. On that specific case, the City
Attorney ruled that the fence in question was pre-existing non -conforming and
therefore the City did not have the authority to order the relocation of that fence in
connection with the Site Plan Review/Variance approval. As a result, the City Council
directed that this topic be included on this evening's agenda for discussion.
Currently, Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 17.16.150 A regulates perimeter fencing
in relation to easements and setbacks. That Code Section is described below:
17.16.150 Structures and driveways permitted in setbacks.
Setbacks shall be maintained unoccupied and unobstructed
by any structures except as listed below. Such structures are also subject to
approval by the Association.
A. A boundary fence is permitted, provided the fence is
located either on the perimeter easement line or not more than five feet
outside of (that is, toward the structure) and parallel to the perimeter
easement line. In the absence of an easement line, a boundary fence may
be located on the property line.
Members of the City Council and Planning Commission may wish to consider the
following options when discussing this subject:
•
• Direct the Planning Commission to consider a draft ordinance to require legal
non -conforming fences to be brought into legal compliance during discretionary
land use approvals.
• Direct the Planning Commission to request input from Caballeros and/or the
RHCA relative to fencing in easements during the discretionary land use process.
• Require discretionary land use applicants to provide approval from the RHCA
for a fence that encroaches into an easement during the discretionary land use
application process.
• Direct the Planning Commission to review fence encroachments on a case by case
basis and forward any identified easement encroachment fence instances to the
RHCA for consideration and include a condition in the resolution of approval of
the discretionary land use application that prior to finaling of the project or prior
to obtaining building permits the applicant comply with any RHCA decision.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that members of the City Council and Planning Commission discuss
this subject and provide appropriate direction to staff.
CRN:mlk
03-27-06fcnce-s►a.doc
-2-
•
City �a�e S JUL
•
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-C
Mtg. Date: 03-27-06
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
HONORABLE CHARIRWOMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF REPORT RELATIVE TO ADDRESSING
EXISTING PERIMETER FENCES WITHIN EASEMENTS DURING
THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY DEVELPOMENT REVIEW PROCESS.
DATE: MARCH 27, 2006
BACKGROUND
At the regular Rolling Hills City Council Meeting held Monday, February 27, 2006,
Councilmember James Black expressed concern over an existing fence on a developed
residential property that was located within an easement. On that specific case, the City
Attorney ruled that the fence in question was pre-existing non -conforming and
therefore the City did not have the authority to order the relocation of that fence in
connection with the Site Plan Review/Variance approval. As a result, the City Council
directed that this topic be included on this evening's agenda for discussion.
Currently, Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 17.16.150 A regulates perimeter fencing
in relation to easements and setbacks. That Code Section is described below:
17.16.150 Structures and driveways permitted in setbacks.
Setbacks shall be maintained unoccupied and unobstructed
by any structures except as listed below. Such structures are also subject to
approval by the Association.
A. A boundary fence is permitted, provided the fence is
located either on the perimeter easement line or not more than five feet
outside of (that is, toward the structure) and parallel to the perimeter
easement line. In the absence of an easement line, a boundary fence may
be located on the property line.
Members of the City Council and Planning Commission may wish to consider the
following options when discussing this subject:
®Printed or Recycled Paper.
•
• Direct the Planning Commission to consider a draft ordinance to require legal
non -conforming fences to be brought into legal compliance during discretionary
land use approvals.
• Direct the Planning Commission to request input from Caballeros and/or the
RHCA relative to fencing in easements during the discretionary land use process.
• Require discretionary land use applicants to provide approval from the RHCA
for a fence that encroaches into an easement during the discretionary land use
application process.
• Direct the Planning Commission to review fence encroachments on a case by case
basis and forward any identified easement encroachment fence instances to the
RHCA for consideration and include a condition in the resolution of approval of
the discretionary land use application that prior to finaling of the project or prior
to obtaining building permits the applicant comply with any RHCA decision.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that members of the City Council and Planning Commission discuss
this subject and provide appropriate direction to staff.
CRN:mlk
03-27-06fence-sta.doc
-2-