166, Construct pool & tennis court., Resolutions & Approval Conditions•
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In the Matter of the Application
of
Mrs. Adrienne Burke
Lot 70-1-MS
ZONING CASES NO. 165 and 166
FINDINGS AND REPORT
The application of Mrs. Adrienne Burke, Lot 70-1-MS,
Miscellaneous Tract, for conditional use permits under Section 3.01,
Paragraph 3 (c) of Ordinance No. 112 for construction of a tennis
court and swimming pool as part of the total development of property
at 33 Crest Road East came on for hearing on the 19th day of October,
1976 in the Council Chambers of the Administration Building, 2 Portu-
guese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California, and at the request of the
applicant, were heard together. Mr. Dan Burke, representing the
applicant, having requested and received permission to submit new
applications followingdenial of requests for conditional use permits
for said improvements on September 21, 1976, and having submitted new
drawings in support of the applications, 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, Mrs. Adrienne Burke,
is the owner of that certain real property described as Lot 70-1-MS,
Miscellaneous Tract, located in the City of Rolling Hills, California,
and that notice of the public hearing in connection with said appli-
cations 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 communication, written or oral, had been received in
favor of the request, and that Mr. and Mrs. Cosimo Occhipinti and Mr.
and Mrs. Thomas Wachtell appeared at the hearings to express concerns
regarding the proposed development of the property, specifically
possible obstruction of the ocean view from the Occhipinti property
at 34 Crest Road East and the proximity of the proposed tennis court
to the Wachtell residence at 35 Crest Road East.
II.
The Commission finds that the applicant requests conditional
use permits for construction of a tennis court and swimming pool on
the property and has submitted computations which indicate that 20.96%
of the total lot area as defined in Ordinance No. 137 would be covered
by construction and 34.48% would be covered by construction plus other
improvements as defined in the ordinance which requires that construction
not exceed 25% of the total lot area, and construction plus other im-
provements not exceed 50% of the total lot area, as defined in the
ordinance. The Commission finds further that Mr. Michael Roberts,
attorney for Mrs. Burke, has stated that the proposed development of
the property would be compatible with both larger and smaller lots in
the vicinity, that computation of percentage of lot coverage meets the
requirements of Ordinance No. 137, and that since the plan submitted in
support of the requests satisfies both the technical and esthetic
requirements, to deny the applications for conditional use permits would
violate the ordinance unless the Planning Commission finds that the
applicant has failed to meet the standards necessary to obtain a condi-
tional use permit.
III.
The Commission finds that conditional usepermits should not
be granted where the development would detract from surrounding pro-
perties; because of concerns expressed by residents in the area;
because of view obstruction from Southfield Drive northbound which
would result from construction of a tennis court, and because the
over all development of the property as proposed is not in keeping with
the rural atmosphere of Rolling Hills.
IV.
The Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills,
Commissioner Stern abstaining and Commissioner Field being absent,
denied Zoning Cases 165 and 166 on the basis that the proposed
development would detract from the use of surrounding properties and
obstruct views, that the over all development of the subject property
was not in keeping with the rural atmosphere of Rolling Hills, and
there was substantial opposition to the granting of the proposed
conditional use permits.
V.
From the foregoing it is concluded that conditional use
permits for construction of a swimming pool and tennis courts as
required by Section 3.01, Paragraph 3 (c) of Ordinance No. 112 on
Lot 70-1-MS, 33 Crest Road East, should not be granted to Mrs.
Adrienne Burke as requested at meetings of the Planning Commission on
September 21, 1976 and October 19, 1976, and it is, therefore, so
ordered.
/s/ Forrest Riegel
Chairman, Planning Commission
eretary, Planning Commission