Loading...
47, Construct a retaining wall alo, Staff Reports7 9�, Ci1O ol Rolling Jhff17; INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF, 90274 (213) 377-1521 FAX: (213) 377-7288 Agenda Item No. 5A Meeting Date 4/22/91 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTENTION: CRAIG NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER SUBJECT: REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS RESOLUTION NO. 91-4 ZONING CASE NO. 434, MR. JOHN RICH 20 OUTRIDER ROAD (LOTS 78-EF & 95-B-EF) Attached find the revised resolution for the subject zoning case. The Planning Commission approved the proposed project on April 6, 1991 for Variances to develop a driveway in the side yard setback exceeding the 20% lot coverage requirement and encroaching into the front and side yards to construct a retaining wall. We have added to the Resolution, the fact that the driveway exceeds the requirement by 56.7%, totalling 76.7% for a 6,480 square foot driveway to gain access to a proposed new residence at 24 Outrider Road. The recommended action of the City Council is to receive and file: Resolution No. 91-4 ZONING CASE NO. 434. Mr. John Rich, 20 Outrider Road. (Lot 78-EF & 95-B-EF A Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills granting a Variance to develop a driveway in the side yard setback exceeding the 20% lot coverage requirement; a Variance to encroach into the front yard to construct a retaining wall; and a Variance to encroach within the side yard setback to construct a retaining wall. April 10, 1991 TO: CRAIG NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER 0"w" SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 434 20 OUTRIDER ROAD CALCULATION OF 20% YARD COVERAGE REQUIREMENT Site Plan Review approval for 152,378 square foot net lot area at the subject address on April 18, 1989 shows that the structures (residence, swimming pool, aviary and future stable) comprise 8,592 square feet which represents 5.64% structural lot coverage (20% permitted) and the total lot coverage is approximately 15,986 square feet which represents a. total lot coverage of 10.49% (35% permitted). The building pad approved was 27,730 square feet with structures on the building pad totaling 8,057 square feet or 29%. The additional driveway to access 24 Outrider Road adds 6,480 square feet of hardscape which would change the total lot coverage to 14.7% which is still under the 35% permitted. However, the additional driveway does comprise.76.7% of the 20-foot side yard setback (20% permitted) and that is why the variance was necessary. V April 7, 1991 TO: CRAIG NEALIS, CITY MANAGER ����� t FROM: LOLA UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNERO,�' SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 434 20 OUTRIDER ROAD CALCULATION OF 20o YARD COVERAGE REQUIREMENT Site Plan Review approval for 152,178 square foot net lot area at the subject address on April 18, 1989 shows that the structures (residence, swimming pool, aviary and future stable) comprise 8,592 square feet which represents 5.64% structural lot coverage (20% permitted) and the total lot coverage is approximately 15,986 square feet which represents a total lot coverage of 10.49% (35% permitted). The additional driveway to access 24 Outrider Road adds 6,480 square feet of hardscape which would change the total lot coverage to 14.7% which is still under the 35% permitted. However, the additional driveway does comprise 76.7% of the 20-foot side yard setback (20o permitted) and that is why the variance was necessary. HEARING DATE: MARCH 19, 1991 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: LOLA UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 434 MR. HOWARD WALLACE, 24 OUTRIDER ROAD (LOT 96-SK) MR. JOHN RICH, 20 OUTRIDER ROAD (LOTS 78-EF & 95-B- EF) This item was continued from the February 19, 1991 Planning Commission meeting to allow the applicant time to prepare new plans that reduce the size of the residence in relation to the building pad. 56' • C1454. Cry 0p2 P?,.9 JUL INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (213) 377-1521 FAX: (213) 377-7288 Agenda Item No: 5.D Mtg. Date: 12-18-90 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: ANNE PALATINO, INTERIM PRINCIPAL PLANNER SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. j54 APPLICANT: MR. HOWARD WALLACE, 24 OUTRIDER ROAD (LOT 96-SK); AND MR. JOHN RICH, 20 OUTRIDER ROAD 78-EF AND 95-B-EF) DATE: DECEMBER 18, 1990 Please find attached correspondence from requesting a time extension in the Site pertaining to the subject application information from the County. :ds (LOTS Mr. Douglas McHattie Plan Review process pending receipt of (213) 375-2556 FROM L. A. 772-1555 FAX (213) 376-3616 SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING CORPORATION 304 TEJON PLACE PALOS VERDES ESTATES, CALIFORNIA 90274 December 13, 1990 Allan Roberts, Chairman Rolling Hills Planning Commission #2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Dear Mr. Roberts: RAYMOND L. OUIGLEY DONALD E. DAWSON ROSS N. BOLTON CONSULTING ENGINEERS I herewith respectfully request a time extension in the site plan review process for Mr. & Mrs. Howard Wallaces property at 24 Outrider Road. This extension is required in order to fulfill the requirements of Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. Douglas K. McHattie DKMc:gh • C14 op eelinS JUL December 11, 1990 Mr. Douglas McHattie South Bay Engineering 304 Tejon Place Palos Verdes Estates, Ca. 90274 Dear Mr. McHattie: INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (213) 377-1521 FAX: (213) 377.7288 Please be advised that the stamp approval given on the three sets of plans on December loth, depicting a retaining wall along the unpaved driveway for the properties at 20 Outrider and 24 Outrider in no way constitutes approval from the Planning Commission for any portion of Zoning Case No. 434, applied for by Mr. Howard Wallace of 24 Outrider. If you have any questions please call me at (213) 377-1521. Sincerely, Anne Palatino, Interim Principal Planner •*** STAFF REPORT * * * * • DATE: June 11, 1990 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: STAFF SUBJECT: INCOMPLETE APPLICATION RECEIVED FROM MR. HOWARD WALLACE FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCE REQUESTS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT EASTFIELD DRIVE, LOT 96-EF (REF: ZONING CASE NO. 434) DISCUSSION On May 29, 1990, the City received an application for Site Plan Review and Variance requests from Mr. Howard Wallace, property owner of Lot 96-EF located off of Eastfield Drive and in proximity of the terminus of Outrider Road. Upon reviewing said application, staff wrote two letters, dated June 4 and June 8, 1990, to the property owner and representative indicating that the application was deem incomplete, and submittal requirements were itemized. Specifically, the applicant was directed to submit an additional application for variance to request relief from the code to permit construction of retaining walls within the side yard setback of an abutting property for the development of a driveway access with inadequate frontage to a roadway. The additional application was not officially submitted prior to the prescribed City filing deadline and the public notification of hearing deadline set forth by the State Code. A portion of the original application was inadvertently published for public hearing, but should not be acted upon until the complete request is properly noticed for public hearing. The City should be receiving the rest of the application, and will be able to schedule the item for your July meeting. zc434rh DATE: OCTOBER 11, 1990 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: STAFF SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 434; 20 and 24 Outrider Road; Owner: Rich/Wallace DISCUSSION This application was continued from the last regular meeting to allow the applicant time to receive the geological and soils comments from the County. As of this writing, the applicant does not have an official report of approval. The applicant's representative has submitted the County review sheets, and will provide further comment at the next meeting. Further, a scaled model of the project will be presented to the Commission. A revised site plan has been submitted to the City which addresses a pad coverage of now less than 40 percent. The applicant's engineer must elaborate on this matter in relation to an unchanged figure of 4,075 cubic yards of cut/fill grading. RECOMMENDATION Since the request has been continued awaiting a favorable report from the County, and said report has not been received, it is recommended that the Commission receive any further public testimony and continue the matter. The Commission should direct the applicant that all required information must be received for the next regular meeting, otherwise staff would recommend that the matter be denied for insufficient evidence. zc434#5 STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 18, 1990 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: STAFF SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 434; 20 and 24 Outrider Road, Lots 78-EF/95-B-EF and Lot 96-EF; Owners: Rich/Wallace DISCUSSION The subject application was continued from the regular meeting of August 21, 1990 to allow the applicant time to receive comments from the County regarding grading, soils ,and geology. Staff has discussed this matter with the applicant's representative, and was informed that the County has corrections on the documents that the applicant must address. Since, the final County approval will not be received by the regular meeting, the applicant's representative is requesting a continuance on the matter. The requested information may be received in time for the next field meeting. zc434#4 STAFF REPORT **** • DATE: AUGUST 16, 1990 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: STAFF SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 434; Request for Variances and Site Plan Review for a new residence at 24 Outrider Road with access through 20 Outrider Road; Owners: Wallace, Rich DISCUSSION The subject application was continued from the regular meeting of July 17, 1990 to conduct a field trip to the site and surrounding properties. Since the first meeting on the matter on June 19, the City has not received any further correspondence from the attorney, Mr. Walter Taylor, who submitted a letter outlining concerns of the project. Additionally, at the Commission's request, the applicant has submitted the technical reports and grading plan to the appropriate County offices for preliminary checking. Comments from the County have not been received, and the applicant's representative does not anticipate completion by your next meeting. At the field inspection, it was noted that some grading had taken place, and there was question of authority to proceed with such. Issues to be addressed from the previous meetings are as follows: 1. Adherence to City policy regarding the coverage of the buildable pad area. 2. Development of the access driveway on an abutting property. A roadway has been graded without authorization and left in an unreinforced condition. 3. Modifications to drainage on the site. New drainage structures are proposed. 4. Location of a future stable complying with code requirements. The applicant's representative has consented that, since the preliminary County comments on grading have not been received, the matter should be continued to your next meeting. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue the application to your next regular meeting to allow time for the applicant to receive comments from the County regarding the grading plan. zc434#3 **** STAFF REPORT DATE: JULY 10, 1990 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: STAFF SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 434; Request for Variances and Site Plan Review for a new residence at 24 Outrider Road with access through 20 Outrider Road; Owners: Wallace, Rich DISCUSSION The above -stated application was continued from the regular meeting of June 19, 1990 so as to allow time for the applicant to submit required documents for a complete application submittal, and for the City to complete noticing for public hearing of an expanded request, as indicated on the attached notice. The Commission will recall from the last meeting a letter from an attorney, Mr. Walter Taylor, was read into the record. The letter identifed Mr. Taylor as the representative to residents of the neighborhood, and outlined concerns regarding the proposed project. Since the last meeting, staff has met with the applicant and his representative to discuss the project and react to the content of the correspondence. Staff indicated to the applicant that it would be the discretion of the Commission to require additional studies of the geology, soils and hydrology. Further, it was agreed to send documents to Mr. Taylor for his review and comment. As of this writing, staff has not received further correspondence from Mr. Taylor. In reviewing the applicant's expanded request under Titles 15 and 17 (Buildings/Construction and Zoning), staff would identify the following issues for evaluation: 1. Adherence to City policy regarding the coverage of the buildable pad area. According to the applicant's plans, that figure is slightly exceeded, based upon the listed structures including a 6,077 square foot residence with 753 square foot attached garage. On the other hand, lot coverage figures comply for this RAS-1 zoned parcel. 2. Grading impacts to the natural terrain, vegetation and drainage resulting from a proposed earth movement quantity of 4,075 cubic yards of cut/fill. The applicant is requesting a variance to exceed the maximum fill slope standard of 30 feet by 25 feet. It would be the discretion of the Planning Commission to require of the applicant additional studies addressing geology, soils and hydrology. The applicant's current submittal of documents include a geologist's report indicating favorable conditions. Additional drainage structures are proposed. The applicant's representative has indicated that the technical reports are being preliminarily checked by the appropriate County offices, and comments should be received by your field inspection on this matter. 3. Provision of driveway access requiring retaining walls and utilizing an abutting property and 15 foot easement. This portion of the request requires variances to encroach into the side yard setback to construct the walls and to exceed the coverage of said yard setback by more than 20 percent. A roadway has been graded without authorization, according to City and County records, at the location of the proposed driveway. **** STAFF REPORT Zoning Case No. 434 page 2 4. The proposed driveway is subject for review by the City's Traffic Commission. 5. Landscaping requirements should be addressed regarding the retention and/or replacement of vegetation. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the evidence submitted, the Commission must decide if the project is required of additional geotechnical studies. As set forth in the ordinance, before a variance and site plan review can be approved, the required findings must be determined by the Commission. Staff would recommend that the Commission receive public testimony and continue the matterto an adjourned meeting so as to inspect the site and surrounding properties. zc434#2 6** STAFF REPORT • DATE: June 11, 1990 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: STAFF SUBJECT: INCOMPLETE APPLICATION RECEIVED FROM MR. HOWARD WALLACE FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCE REQUESTS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT EASTFIELD DRIVE, LOT 96-EF (REF: ZONING CASE NO. 434) DISCUSSION On May 29, 1990, the City received an application for Site Plan Review and Variance requests from Mr. Howard Wallace, property owner of Lot 96-EF located off of Eastfield Drive and in proximity of the terminus of Outrider Road. Upon reviewing said application, staff wrote two letters, dated June 4 and June 8, 1990, to the property owner and representative indicating that the application was deem incomplete, and submittal requirements were itemized. Specifically, the applicant was directed to submit an additional application for variance to request relief from the code to permit construction of retaining walls within the side yard setback of an abutting property for the development of a driveway access with inadequate frontage to a roadway. The additional application was not officially submitted prior to the prescribed City filing deadline and the public notification of hearing deadline set forth by the State Code. A portion of the original application was inadvertantly published for public hearing, but should not be acted upon until the complete request is properly noticed for public hearing. The City should be receiving the rest of the application, and will be able to schedule the item for your July meeting. zc434rh