Loading...
156, Construct retaining wall in si, Resolutions & Approval ConditionsBEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA In the Matter of the Application ) ) of ) ) Mr. Dudley Gray ) ) Lot 32-GF ) FINDINGS AND REPORT ZONING CASE NO. 156 The application of Mr. Dudley Gray, Lot 32-GF, for a conditional use permit under ARTICLE III, Section 3.06, Front Yard Requirements and Section 3.07, Side Yard Requirements, Ordinance No. 33 for construction of a retaining wall came on for hearing on the 20th day of July, 1976 in the Council Chambers of the Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California, and the applicant, having submitted 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. Dudley Gray, is the owner of that certain real property described as Lot 32-GF, located at 9 Goergeff Road 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, further, that no objection, written or verbal, was received, and that Mr. John Downing, 7 Georgeff Road, came to the office and inspected the plan submitted by Mr. Gray. Mr. Downing stated that he had no objection to the retaining wall in the side and front yards, but requested that Mr. Gray be required to continue the storm drain across his property, and suggested that a fence be required on the trail along the easement line on the Gray property, since use of the trail is increasing, especially by young riders, and Mr. Downing was concerned that an unsafe condition could result from grading and building a wall without appropriate fencing of the trail as a safety measure. II. The Commission finds that the applicant requests the conditional use permit for construction of a retaining wall in the front yard and r • side yard of his.property,' that the maximum height of the wall would be five feet, tapering to ground level at both ends, and would not be visible from Georgeff Road, which is above the property. Further, the applicant advised that he had discussed the matter of drainage with his neighbors, and stated it is his intention to keep the contours in as natural a state as possible, while extending the existing drain from the Downing property to his property. The applicant said further, that he would agree to the condition of providing a fence along the easement on his property. The Commission finds that a conditional use permit should be granted in order to preserve substantial property rights possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, and that the granting of such conditional use permit would not be materially detri- mental to the public welfare nor injurious to property in the same vicinity and zone. Further, the Commission requires that a covered drain be provided to extend across the easterly easement to the satisfaction of the City, and that fences be provided to the satisfaction of the City along the southerly property line to a minimum point easterly of Georgeff Road. III. From the foregoing it is concluded that a conditional use permit should be granted, subject to conditions imposed by the Planning Commission, under ARTICLE III, Section 3.06, Front Yard Requirements and Section 3.07, Side Yard Requirements, Ordinance No. 33 to Mr. Dudley Gray, Lot 32-GF, and it is, therefore, so ordered. /s/ Forrest Riegel Chairman, Planning Commission ecretary, Planning commission