Loading...
593 MOD, Request to allow the tennis co, CorrespondenceCity March 25, 2003 Mr. and Mrs. Robert Nagelhout 16 Crest Road West Rolling Hills, CA 90274 O/ Rollin9t ri. .1 ).Nl.,: (d`i NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 Email: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 593 Modification. Request to modify the height of tennis court fencing. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Nagelhout: This letter is to clarify the condition that the Planning Commission included in the Resolution of Approval for higher than previously approved tennis court fence in Zoning Case No. 593 Modification. During the March 18, 2003 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission deliberated the request and the Resolution of Approval prepared by staff. In their final analysis, the Commission found that the following conditions should be added to the approval: "The trees located immediately adjacent to the tennis court on the subject property, which were required to be planted by Resolution 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". The intent of this condition is that only those trees adjacent to the tennis court are affected. Those trees include the trees around the westerly and south westerly side of the tennis court (between the trail and the tennis court) indicated on the Landscaping Plan on file with the City, dated as approved on 3-28-01, as circle T, H and 0 which include Princess Flower, Heather "Pink Joy" and Sweet Olive respectively. Most of these plants are shrubs and would not grow much higher than 8-15 feet, which is substantially below the walking path on Crest Road West. I am enclosing a copy of that part of the Landscaping Plan for your files. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely c:A4,40k Y.b1anta Schwartz lanning Director Cc: Craig R. Nealis, City Manager • s -n • Sc- EP ARBOR 216 sq. ft- TENNIS STORAGE ft. 1 6" CURB, VENEE11-0,-, iTO1E 1; • N tip tb) C 11 • • I • . • - • t• „1 t• 6 ; • City o/ Roffing March 25, 2003 Mr. and Mrs. Robert Nagelhout 16 Crest Road West Rolling Hills, CA 90274 :hiCtJrPC.T�a.?El:' 4'ILA,'ri4. .Y:7. NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 Email: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 593 Modification, Request for a modification to a previously approved -Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit for a tennis court. The applicant is seeking modification in regards to the height of the fencing surrounding the tennis court at an existing single family residence at 16 Crest Road West, (Lot 74-A-MS), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Nagelhout: This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission adopted a resolution on March 18, 2003 granting a request in the above case. That action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission was reported to the City Council on March 24, 2003. The City Council received and filed the report. A copy of RESOLUTION NO. 2003-06, specifying the conditions of approval set forth by the Planning Commission was mailed to you previously. As I have reported to you, the Commission added a condition, that the trees adiacent to the tennis court will be kept trimmed, so that they do not obstruct the ocean view from the walking path on Crest Road. The Planning Commission's decision in this matter shall become effective thirty days after the adoption of the resolution by the Commission, unless an appeal has been filed or the City Council takes jurisdiction of the case. Should there be an appeal, the Commission's decision will be stayed until the Council completes its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. If no appeals are filed within the thirty (30) day period after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution, the Planning Commission's action will become final. Since this is such a minor modification you will not be required to record the Resolution of Approval, however, keep it safe in your files. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Siryer,rly, Yolanta Schwartz .Planning Director i • ei,y al ie0ii4 Jh// March 20, 2003 Mr. and Mrs. Robert Nagelhout 16 Crest Road West. Rolling Hills, CA 90274 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 E•mall: cltyofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 593 Modification, Request for a modification to a previously approved Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit for a tennis court. The applicant is seeking modification in regards to the height of the fencing surrounding the tennis court at an existing single family residence at 16 Crest Road West, (Lot 74-A-MS), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Nagelhout: This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission adopted a resolution on March 18, 2003 granting a request in the above case. That action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission will be reported to the City Council on March 24, 2003. I have enclosed a copy of RESOLUTION NO. 2003-06, specifying the conditions of approval set forth by the Planning Commission. As I have reported to you, the Commission added a condition, that the trees adiacent to the tennis court will be kept trimmed, so that they do not obstruct the ocean view from the walking path on Crest Road. These are not the trees, which you planted on the bank of the slope below Crest Road West. Please come to the office to review the location of the trees which are subject to this condition and I will mark them on the Landscaping Plan that we have on file. The Planning Commission's decision in this matter shall become effective thirty days after the adoption of the resolution by the Commission, unless an appeal has been filed or the City Council takes jurisdiction of the case within that thirty (30) day appeal period. (Section 17.54.010(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code). Should there be an appeal, the Commission's decision will be stayed until the Council completes its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. If no appeals are filed within the thirty (30) day period after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution, the Planning Commission's action will become final and you will be required to cause to be recorded an Affidavit of Acceptance Form together with the subject resolution in the Office of the County Recorder before the Commission's action takes effect. We will mail you the instructions after the City Council's meeting. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. ingerely, olanta Schwartz Planning Director ®Printed on Recycled Paper. • • City 0/ leoffin9. JUL February 19, 2003 Mr. and Mrs. Robert Nagelhout 16 Crest Road West Rolling Hills, CA 90274 L'JC:L;p.cci .trtJ J?,NIUAR'i n, : ;' NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cltyofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 593 Modification. Request to modify the height of tennis court fencing. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Nagelhout: This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission voted at their regular meeting on February 18, 2003 to direct staff to prepare a resolution to approve your request in increase the tennis court fencing from the previously approved 4 feet to 6 feet. The Planning Commission will review and consider the draft resolution, together with conditions of approval, at an upcoming meeting and make its final decision on your application at that meeting. The findings and conditions of approval of the draft resolution will be forwarded to you before being signed by the Planning Commission Chairman and City Clerk. The decision shall become effective thirty days after the adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution unless an appeal has been filed or the City Council takes jurisdiction of the case within that thirty (30) day appeal period, (Section 17.54.010(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code). Should there be an appeal, the Commission's decision will be stayed until the Council completes its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. The Planning Commission's action taken by resolution approving the development application is scheduled for Tuesday, March 18, 2003. That action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission, is tentatively scheduled to be placed as a report item on the City Council's agenda at the Council's regular meeting on Monday, March 24, 2003. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, .1V/it (Lk .. Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director • • Ci1 o/ Roiling STATUS OF APPLICATION & NOTIFICATION OF MEETING February 3, 2003 Mr. and Mrs. Robert Nagelhout 16 Crest Road West Rolling Hills, CA 90274 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aof.com SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 593 Modification, Request for a modification, in regards to the height of a fence surrounding a tennis court, of a previously approved Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit for a tennis court, at an existing single- family residence at 16 Crest Road West, (Lot 74-A-MS), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Nagelhout: Pursuant to state law the City's staff has completed a preliminary review of the application noted above and finds that the information submitted is: X Sufficiently complete as of the date indicated above to allow the application to be processed. Please note that the City may require further information in order to clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise supplement the application. If the City requires such additional information, it is strongly suggested that you supply that information promptly to avoid any delay in the processing of the application. Your application for Zoning Case No. 593 Modification has been set for public hearing before the Planning Commission at their meeting on Tuesday. February 18. 2003. The meeting will begin at 7:30 PM in the Council Chambers, Rolling Hills City Hall Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills. You or your designated representative must attend to present your project and to answer questions. The staff report for this project will be available at the City Hall after 3:00 PM on Friday, February 14, 2003. We will forward the report to you by mail. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sin rely, anta Schwartz anning Director 1 • • Planning Commission No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road City of Rolling Hills, CA 90274 January 12, 2003 Dear Members: Robert & Julie Nagelhout 16 Crest Road W Rolling Hills, CA 90274 We are requesting a minor modification to the previously approved Conditional Use Permit which approved the building of a tennis court on the west side of our property. Specifically we are requesting that the height of the eight (8) foot barrier surrounding the tennis court be increased by two (2) feet to a total of ten (10) feet. The current permit calls for an eight (8) foot barrier (consisting of four (4) feet of retaining wall below ground level and four (4) feet of fence above ground level). Our request would modify this to having a ten (10) foot barrier consisting of four (4) feet of retaining wall below ground level and six (6) feet of fence above ground level. The reason for this request is that the eight (8) foot barrier called for in the original permit is insufficient for practical use of the tennis court. Essentially, this height is not sufficient to keep the tennis balls from leaving the court during play. This is confirmed from our own experience and from the expertise of Richard Zaino (our tennis court contractor). He has been building tennis courts for several decades and is unaware of any courts where the fence has been built to be less than 10 feet in height (the standard for residential courts according to Mr. Zaino is 10' — 12' in height). The tennis court development is almost complete but we have halted construction until the planning commission rules on our request. The pictures included with our request show the fence posts above the retaining wall. They are currently set at 6 (six) feet because we failed to inform Mr. Zaino of the four (4) foot restriction. Without specific instructions he presumed that we were interested in a standard six (6) foot fence. There was no intent on our part to deviate from the plan without approval from the planning commission. In fact, several years ago when we discovered the height issue we discussed it with Craig Nealis but he was unwilling to allow a variance from the permit without approval from the planning commission. So much time had elapsed from the time we spoke with Craig before we began construction on the court that we forgot to inform Mr. Zaino, and to re -address the issue with the planning commission. The variance was discovered when Yolanta Schwartz inspected the tennis court site. The upside of the 6' posts is that we are able to clearly show the impact of the two (2) foot variance in the fence. We have taped off the posts at the four (4) foot level (the top of the tape is 4') so that the impact of the variance can be easily visualized. We plan to include pictures with our modification request, and if anyone is interested in seeing it for themselves we have left the tape on the fence so that the difference between the 4' and 6' height can be observed. • • We understand that it is the desire of the planning commission to minimize the exposure of sport courts in the city so that we can preserve and maintain a natural and rural atmosphere. We believe that our request supports this and should be approved by the planning commission for the following reasons: 1. Regardless of the height at 4' or 6' the landscaping surrounding our property is going to completely disguise the tennis court. We have planted trees that will grow well above 30' in height all around the west side of our property where the tennis court resides. This includes the portion on Crest Road in the easement for which we have a previously approved permit from the community to plant trees. 2. The tennis court surface is 35' below Crest Road making it impossible to see the court at this time except for individuals walking on the trail in the direct proximity around the court. And as previously mentioned, the exposure from the trail will also be eliminated once the trees grow a few more feet. We believe the attached pictures demonstrate this. 3. This side of our property does not border any homes in Rolling Hills. It borders either Rancho Palos Verdes, or the Rancho Del Mar school property, which means that there is no impact on any neighbors in Rolling Hills. We thank you in advance for your time and consideration, and hope you will look favorably upon our request. We look forward to meeting with you to answer any questions you may have. ?itl2ely, Robert & Julie Nagelhout