Loading...
593 MON., Request to allow the tennis co, Resolutions & Approval Conditions• i RESOLUTION NO. 2003-06 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-10 AND APPROVING A MODIFICATION OF CERTAIN CONDITION OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A TENNIS COURT IN ZONING CASE NO. 593MOD. (NAGELHOUT). THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A. An application has been filed by Mr. and Mrs. Nagelhout with respect to real property located at 16 Crest Road West, Rolling Hills, requesting a modification to a condition imposed for a previously approved Conditional Use Permit to construct a tennis court. B. On March 16, 1999 the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 99-10 allowing the construction of a 7,000 square foot tennis court. Condition "M" of the resolution requires that "tennis court fencing shall not exceed 4 feet in height above the four -foot high retaining wall for a total of eight feet". C. The applicants request modification to allow the construction of a six-foot high fence surrounding the tennis court, instead of the four -foot fence approved previously, for a total height of ten feet. Section 2. The Commission considered this item at a duly noticed public hearing on February 18, 2003, at which time information was presented indicating the necessity for the modification. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project to modify Zoning Case No. 593 qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 4. Sections 17.42.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code require the Planning Commission to make certain findings to lawfully grant a request for a Conditional Use Permit. When the Planning Commission previously granted Conditional Use Permit the required findings were set forth in Section 6 of Resolution No. 99-10. The Planning Commission hereby determines that the findings contained in that prior resolution are applicable to and can be made again in their entirety as the findings for the project as modified and are, accordingly, incorporated herein by this reference. In addition, with respect to the request for modification to allow a higher than previously approved tennis court fence, the Planning Commission finds as follows: • • A. This modification applies specifically to subject property and is not design to set a precedence for any future tennis court fencing, and is based on the following findings: (i) The playing surface of the tennis court is located between 34 feet to 40 feet below the elevation of Crest Road West (ii) The tennis court is not visible from any other Rolling Hills residential property and is adjacent to a recreational area of a PVPUSD site utilized for educational purposes. Section 5. Based upon information and evidence submitted, the Planning Commission does hereby amend Resolution No. 99-10, dated March 16, 1999 as follows: A. Paragraph "M" of Section 8 is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: "Tennis court fencing shall not exceed 6 feet in height above the 4 foot high retaining walls for a total of 10 feet." B. Paragraph D of Section 8 is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: • "The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit "A," dated January 5, 1999, except as otherwise provided in these conditions, and with the site plan on file marked MODIFIED Exhibit "A" dated February 7, 2003." Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves the modification subject to the following condition: A. The trees located immediately adjacent to the tennis court on the subject property, which were required to be planted by Resolution No. 99-10, shall be at all times trimmed so as not to block the ocean view and vistas from the walking path along Crest Road West. Section 7. Except as herein amended, the provisions of Resolution No. 99-10 shall continue to be in full force and effect. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED THIS 18th DAY OF MARCH 2003. EVIE HANkINS, CHAIRWOMAN ATTEST: MARILYN K , DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2003-06 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-10 AND APPROVING A MODIFICATION OF CERTAIN CONDITION OF PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A TENNIS COURT IN ZONING CASE NO. 593MOD. (NAGELHOUT). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on March 18, 2003 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners DeRoy, Margeta, Sommer, Witte and Chairwoman Hankins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. n,j--)- V DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 99-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF . .ROLLING HILLS . APPROVING A ,REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION 'OF A TENNIS COURT AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 593. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND'ORDER AS FOLLOWS: ' Section :1. An application was duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Robert Nagelhout with respect to real property located at 16 Crest Road West (Lot 74-A-MS), Rolling Hills, requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a tennis court at an existing single family residence. Section 2. On March 9, 1991, the Planning Commission approved a Variance to the front yard setback and Site Plan Review for the construction of a new single family residence to replace an existing residence, and denial of a Conditional Use Permit for a pool house at the site in Zoning Case No. 438 by Resolution No. 91- 3, dated March 9, 1991. Building permits were issued to Mr. Hussain Shaikh for the new residence on February 12, 1993. Since that time, construction at the site has been sporadic. Most recently, the Nagelhouts bought the property and acquired building permits'on July 2, 1998 to complete the 7,742 square foot residence. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a • duly noticed public. hearing to consider the application for the Conditional Use Permit on January 19, 1999 and February 16, 1999, and at a field trip visit on February 6, 1999. The applicants were. notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter.' Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal, from all persons protesting the same, and from members of the City staff and the Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The applicants were in attendance at the hearing. The Commission expressed concerns about further development on the lot and retention of the existing horse trail across the southwestern portion of the property which was conditioned by the previous approval of the Planning Commission to be relocated along the interior of the south and westerly property line. Members of Caballeros were present at the field trip. Section 4. On January 5, 1999, Planning staff prepared an initial study for the project. The initial study found that the project would not have a significant effect on the environment if certain measures were included in the project. The Negative Declaration was prepared with those mitigation measures and was circulated to the applicant and other interested parties in accordance with State of California CEQA Guidelines. The public notice of the Planning Commission's intent to recommend , approval of the Negative Declaration was published on January 9, 1999. Copies of the Negative Declaration were sent to adjacent cities and RESOLUTION NO. 99-10 PAGE 1 OF 6 other government agencies. No comments on the Negative Declaration were received. Section 5. The Planning Commission has ,reviewed the proposed Negative Declaration and finds that it represents 'the independent judgment of the City and that it was prepared in compliance with CEQA. ° Therefore, the Commission finds that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in, this -case because mitigation measures have been added to the project, and are incorporated herein by reference. Based upon these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the mitigated Negative Declaration in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 6. • Section 17.16.210(A)(7) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code allows for the construction of an inset tennis court with certain conditions provided a Conditional Use Permit for such use is approved by the Rolling Hills Planning Commission. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of an inset tennis court would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan and will be desirable for the public convenience and welfare because the use is consistent with similar and appropriately located uses in the community,and. the area proposed for the tennis court would be located in an area on the property that is near property used_forthe. La Cresta School and will not have .a material impact on that property:.... , B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures 'have been considered,.and the construction of a tennis court will not • adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these . adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed tennis court will be constructed on a portion of the secondary building pad, will be the least intrusive to surrounding properties as it will be inset, will be located near a public school district complex and playing field, and is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the tennis court will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding• residences because the tennis court will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and is located on a 2.624 acre parcel of property that is adequate in size, shape and topography to accommodate such use. D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district because the graded area will not exceed maximum graded areas of 10,000 square feet and does not exceed maximum • cubic yardage of 750 cubic yards. The applicants propose a graded area of 9,120 square feet and a balanced cut of 360 cubic ,yards and 360 cubic yards of fill. RESOLUTION NO. 99-10 PAGE 2 OF 6 • E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of. the Los Angeles County Hazardous.: Waste Management. Plan related tositing and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project .site. is not ,listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. • F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit ,and -intent of Title 17 of the Zoning Code because a future stable structure and corral is proposed forthe project. Section- 8., Based upon 'the foregoing findings, the Planning . Commission hereby.'approves the request for a Conditional Use. Permit in Zoning Case No. 593 for a proposed. 7,000 .square foot tennis court, as shown on -the Development Plan dated January 5, 1999 and marked ,Exhibit A, is subject to the .following conditions: A. The Conditional Use Permit approval shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as ' defined.„ in Section 17.42.070(A) unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of that section. ' B. It is declared and made a condition of the Conditional Use Permit approval, that if any conditions thereof are violated; this approval shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation, the opportunity for a hearing has been provided, and if requested, .has. been held, and . thereafter the applicant fails to correct the violation within a period of thirty. (30) days from the date of the City's determination. . C All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the • Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject . property is located must be complied with unless otherwise approved by Variance. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained . in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A dated January 5, 1999, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The property on which .the project is located shall contain an area of sufficient size to also provide an area meeting all standards for a stable and corral with vehicular access thereto. F. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 17,518 square feet or 19.75% and total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 29,046 square feet or 32.75%. G. All grading required for the construction of the tennis court shall be balanced on site, as regards cutting and filling and shall not exceed 720 cubic yards. RESOLUTION NO. 99-10 PAGE 3 OF 6 • H. The area graded for the tennis court shall not exceed 9,120 square feet. I. Any grading shall preserve the existing topography,,flora, and natural features to the greatest extent possible. J. A drainage system approved by the City Engineer shall be incorporated into ,the overall plan of the tennis court and landscaping. K. In the event that subsurface material of an • archaeological, paleontological or other cultural resource is encountered during project grading or development; All grading and construction shall cease in the immediate area, and the find shall be left untouched until a qualified professional archaeologist or paleontologist, whichever is appropriate, is contacted and called in to evaluate the find and makes recommendations as to disposition, mitigation or salvage. The developer shall incur the cost of such professional investigation. The developer shall comply with the mitigation measures recommended and approved by the City for the disposition, mitigation or salvage of such material.. L. All retaining walls incorporated into the court shall not be greater than four feet in height at any • point. Exposed exterior retaining walls shall not be permitted. M. Tennis court fencing shall not exceed 4 feet in height above .the 4 foot • high retaining .• walls fora .total -of 8 feet. • . N. Court lighting shall not be permitted. O. !:J.:^MiY. gYZir if ii" `. ' C t taping -shall" be;, desi&ned ,;,,s . as:-. not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but, to obscure residential`" structures and tennis court • fencing. Yari41 4Pb 13.latrt', halrinCludgp: water efficient irrigation, to the maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a low gallonage irrigation system, utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using "hydrozones," considers slope factors and climate conditions in design, and utilizes meansto reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray in accordance with Section 17.27.020 (Water efficient landscaping requirements) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. -i`` ''M rVo►' ;copies 'tif- mina rldndscaa plan must be submitted for . -P a�prelm fir'' P review -by W tythe Planning Department and include native drought -resistant vegetation that will not disrupt the impact of the views of neighboring properties prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. The landscaping plan RESOLUTION NO. 99-10 PAGE 4 OF 6 • • • I3 submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of . the Site, Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the community. A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation , of the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a grading and building .permit:and shall be retained with the City for not less than two ...years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. S. Noise from tennis court use shall not create a nuisanceto owners of surrounding properties. T. The equestrian trail at the southwest portion of the lot shall be relocated along the interior of the south and westerly property line and connected to the trail on Crest Road West. U. The provisions of Resolution No. 91-3, dated March 9, 1991 in Zoning Case No. 438 along with this resolution shall remain in full force. and effect and any modifications to the project which • would constitute additional structural development on the lot shall require thefiling of a new application for Site Plan Review approval by the Planning Commission. • V. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. • W. The working . drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan described in Condition A. X. Building permits shall be obtained for the retaining walls and tennis court. Y. An Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 1996 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be prepared to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control stormwater pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles. Z. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to .the Rolling Hills RESOLUTION NO. 99-10 PAGE 5 OF 6 • • • Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes must conform to the City of Rolling Hills standard of 2 to 1 slope ratio. AA. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review, pursuant to Section 17.42.060, or the approval shall not be effective. BB. All conditions of this Conditional Use Permit approval must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 16TH DAY OF MARCH, 1999. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: r De . 1� MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK, • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) . 0 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ • • . CITY OF ROLLING HILLS , ) • I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 99-10 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE, PERN1T FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TENNIS COURT AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 593. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission an March 16,1999 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer, Witte and Chairman Roberts. NOES: None. ABSENT: None . ABSTAIN: None . • and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. RESOLUTION NO. 99-10 PAGE 6 OF 6 �•k.4i MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK '