487, Relocate stable, Staff Reports•
HEARING DATE:
TO:
FROM:
APPLICATION NO.
SITE LOCATION:
ZONING & SIZE:
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PUBLISHED:
REOUEST
•
Ci1f oy /e0f/4
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
JANUARY 19, 1993
PLANNING COMMISSION
LOLA UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
ZONING CASE NO. 487
4 OPEN BRAND ROAD (LOT 111-EF)
RAS-1, 1.476 ACRES
DR. AND MRS. YANG WEN LEE
MR. DOUGLAS MCHATTIE, SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING
NOVEMBER 23, 1992
The applicants request a Conditional Use Permit to construct a
tennis court and request Site Plan Review for the relocation of a
stable and corral.
BACKGROUND
1. Members of the Planning Commission separately inspected the
staking of the proposed tennis court and relocated stable on
December 18, 1992. Since that time, the applicants revised
their plans. The applicants reduced the size of the tennis
court and also reduced the amount of grading for the proposed
project.
2. The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to
construct a 5,665 square foot tennis court (formerly 6,832
square feet) . The tennis court will be located a minimum of 20
feet from the westerly property line and a minimum of 53 feet
from the front easement line off Open Brand Road. The tennis
court maximum dimensions will be 52' by 113.5' (formerly 60' by
120') with the rectangle's corners cut off. Plans show that
the court will be inset below the surface of the hillside and
surrounded by 2 to 4 foot retaining walls. The zoning code
requires that these walls not be exposed. The grading required
for the project has been reduced to 575 cubic yards of cut soil
and 575 cubic yards of fill soil.
3. The applicants are also requesting Site Plan Review for the
relocation of the existing 680 square foot stable from the
south end of the proposed tennis court and reconstructing it as
a 450 square foot stable in the rear setback area at the
northern portion of the irregular pie -shaped lot. The stable
will be 29 feet from the easterly property line, 57 feet from
the northerly property line, 56 feet from the westerly
property line, 69 feet from the tennis court, and 50 feet from
the swimming pool. Plans show that stable access will be from
Printed on Recycled
ZONING CASE NO. 487
PAGE 2
the easement at the westerly property line which has an 8%
grade.
4. Building permits show that the existing 2,300 square foot house
and 600 square foot attached garage were built in 1952. In
1960, a 720 square foot swimming pool was constructed. In
1961, 3 bedrooms and a bath (760 square feet) was added to the
residence. Then, in 1975, a 512 square foot barn and stalls
was constructed.
5. Grading for the project site will require a 630 cubic yard cut
for the tennis court, a 550 cubic yard cut for the corral, a
570 cubic yard fill for the tennis court, and 610 cubic
yard fill for the corral. The total cut will be 1,180 cubic
yards and the total fill will be 1,180 cubic yards.
6. The structural lot coverage proposed is 10,999 square feet or
19.95% (20% permitted) and the total lot coverage proposed is
14,989 square feet or 27.19% (35% permitted).
7. The building pad coverage proposed is 21.52% for the
residential pad and 36.40% for the tennis court and stable pad.
The overall pad coverage is 28.12%.
8. Plans show an existing 7,340 square foot tennis court on
adjacent property at 2 Open Brand Road, a minimum of 30 feet
from the westerly property line.
9. After reviewing the Initial Study for the project, staff has
determined that this project will not have a significant effect
on the environment. Accordingly, a Negative Declaration has
been prepared.
10. Attached are letters regarding the initial project from Mr. and
Mrs. William Dumble, 3 Open Brand Road; and Dr. John Eugene, 1
Open Brand Road.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed
plans and take public testimony.
377 r'.TO
DEC 0 4 1992
CITY OF ROLUNG HILLS / Z 1-7/
Z
8Y
47-6
T §
----....
c,, -tt--L-bof.Q Qom-, 6,�--. .._,:�. .
CatJ-Zr (( et.))Z_ Ccti) -4-71
tA0 pe-2-4- air e-Lia--e_ a-E4_Pk
OY ct",-, 41- 9
w
C)* dh49 oyot,p- CrtA. e
Ck-ik ,,: -4La t 6{
-c„�
12, e„. (),0 ,
th,„
ck,),
1- 2
John Eugene, M.4
CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY
LASER SURGERY
THORACIC SURGERY
December 14, 1992
XCIEVY'q
DEC 151992
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
By
Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills
#2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, California 90274
RE: ZONING CASE NUMBER 487
Dear Commissioners:
I have had the opportunity to review the subject
application and plans for Zoning Case Number 487. This
is a request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a
tennis court and request Site Plan Review for the
relocation of a stable and corral for the property at
#4 Open Brand Road, Rolling Hills, California, lot
111-EF.
Open Brand Road is a quiet dead-end street with modest
sized homes (average size less than 3,500 square feet).
There is a calm country atmosphere to this street and one
of the most strategic sites for that serenity is the
canyon between #2 Open Brand Road and #4 Open Brand Road.
This canyon serves as runoff for the street. The canyon
is home to many animals and birds. I find it strange
that the initial study has not shown that further
construction in this canyon will not have a significant
effect on the environment. I have studied these plans
and a great deal of cut and fill must be undertaken in
order to construct a tennis court in that location and
this will certainly have the effect of possibly under-
mining Open Brand Road and certainly interfering with the
runoff, to say nothing of the habitat for the animals.
In reviewing the plans, I was struck with the absurd
relationship of the tennis court to the rest of the
property. It doesn't make sense that a 7,000 square foot
tennis court can coexist with a 3,500 square foot house.
23451 Madison St.
Suite 300
Torrance, CA 90505
(310) 378-9429
FAX (3I0) 378-4808
December 14, 1992
Page Two
Certainly tennis courts are not unwelcome, but they
belong on large properties (multiple acreage properties)
with a house at least as large as the court. To do
anything less, as is the case at #4 Open Brand Road, is
architecturally and aesthetically inharmonious with the
neighborhood. It is true that there is already a tennis
court on Open Brand Road. It is on the north, side of the
canyon at #2 Open Brand Road. This court at #2 Open
Brand Road is smaller than the one proposed for #4 Open
Brand Road and it is largely hidden from view. The
tennis court proposed for #4 Open Brand Road is larger
than the one at #2 Open Brand Road and it is immediately
adjacent to the street and will never be obscured by any
amount of landscaping or counter -sinking. It will
completely eliminate the pastoral attitude of Open Brand
Road and it will practically touch the tennis court at #2
Open Brand Road which will give a book -end tennis court
appearance to the street that will be absolutely silly.
This is Rolling Hills, not Beverly Hills.
Throughout the City of Rolling Hills, when tennis courts
are built, they are built in a sheltered private location
where they will not be visible from the road or from
other properties. The proposal for #4 Open Brand Road
places a tennis court in full view of the street and even
from Eastfield Road. It will destroy the serenity of
Open Brand Road.
The canyon is the predominant view for #1 Open Brand Road
and #3 Open Brand Road. My family and I have always
enjoyed the view through the canyon to the distant harbor
and we do not want the pastoral aspect of the view
destroyed by a tennis court. There is no way that anyone
in my household wishes to have the view altered, changed,
violated, vilified or desecrated by a tennis court. In
summary, I find that the proposal for construction at #4
Open Brand Road will cause a situation which is
unharmonious with the character of the neighborhood and
detrimental to the charm of the neighborhood.
I appreciate the opportunity that the commissioners have
given me to be able to respond to Zoning Case Number 487.
Respectfully submitted,
Jo6YE6gene(M.D.
#1 Open $hand Road
Rollin ills, California 90274
•
eity °I R0//t, Jh/i,
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
(To Be Completed By Applicant)
Date Filed G c i, 'j, ‘cvq t
e
GENERAL INFORMATION
NO 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROA:.
ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 9027i
(213) 377.1521
FAX (213) 377.7288
Zoning Case No. 4-8 7
1. Applicant, address and telephone no. V. trer 40PA Z D
12.4. Q6 Lt-tM0' 1.1tl.t5 2.74 ti`41 2,1Id.
2. Legal Owner, address and telephone no. (if different from
above)
3. Address of project 45 13 e u 6
Assessor's Book, Page, Parcel No. 7 9 6 7 / 4 / 7 etLot No. { 1 /
4. List and describe any other related permits and other public
approvals required for this project,including those required
by city, regional, state and federal agencies: R. u.c. i�•s.,n c
- LC) M rra ASa"'5 VULAC too"4K S
5. Existing zoning district 1 A ' -
6. Proposed use of site (project for which this form is filed):
"t'c10, 4.J1i r,avair
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
7. Site size 1• 474 t(C.,
8. Net lot area Sri . l 2'? S d. CA-.
9. Total square footage of structures 6 5 2. 4
10. Number of floors of construction U
-1-
JU.141992
11. Basement square footage
12. Total combined flatwork and structural lot coverage 1Ot t 4
13.' Will any exterior walls be removed or relocated?
14. Will any interior walls be removed or relocated?
Which walls? NO
Which walls? 0
15. Will the entire building structure require a new roof? V4O
16. Will the existing roof remain
square feet added? y 6"3
17. Will cut and fill be balanced?
18. If residential, include the unit
and household size. expected.
19. If commercial, indicate the
neighborhood, city or regionally
sales area, estimated employment
facilities.
intact, with less than 200
Amount cut 12 O Co
Amount fill L � q c
size, approximate sale price
type of project, whether
oriented, square footage of
per shift and loading
20. If this is industrial project indicate the type of project,
estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities.
21. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated
employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities,
and community benefits to be derived from the project.
22. Attach plans.
23. Proposed scheduling. A 97›. n, {7.
24. If the project involves a variance, conditional use or
rezoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the
application is required. G.O.P. 1 'S (.L E Q v i P.EA VOA A
"re NNty CoOPT
Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects?
Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as
necessary).
25. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands,
beaches, lakes or hills, or substantial alteration
of ground contours.
26. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing
residential areas or public lands or roads.
- 2-
x
27. Change in pattern, scale or character of general
area of project.
28. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter.
29. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes, or odors in
vicinity.
30. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or
quality or quantity, or alteration
draining patterns.
31. Substantial change in existing noise
levels in the vicinity,.
32. Site on filled land or on slope of 10 percent or
more. 1-l4I' iS o► NILI-.sAe. coiwrtcniir�
ground water
of existing
or vibration
33. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials,'
such as toxic substances, flammable or explosives.
34. Substantial change in demand for municipal services
(police, fire, water, sewage, etc.).
35. Substantially increased fossil fuel consumption
(electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.).
36. Relationship to a larger project or series of
projects.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
37. Describe the. project site as it exists before the project,
including information on topography, soil stability, plants
and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects.
Describe any existing structures on the site, and the use of
the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots
or polaroid photos will be accepted.
Lot is partially developed within a developed gently rolling hillside.
This lot has a minor drainage area on one side. There is a view
corridor to the northeast.
38. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on
plants and animals and any cultural, historical or scenic
aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential,
commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one -family, guest
house, office use, etc.) and scale of development (height,
frontage, set -back, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of
the vicinity. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted.
The neighborhood has the usual animals, indigenous to the area, skunks,
racoons, mice, domestic varieties. Minor landscaping exists at the front
of the lot, majority of remainder is wild grass. There is a house,
detached garage, swimming pool and stable existing on the site. ine area
is qie of single family residences, one unit per acre. The homes are
all one story, most with pools and or stables.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT$
(Please explain all "yes" and "maybe" answers on separate
sheets.)
39. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, com-
paction or overcovering of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground
surface relief features?
YES MAYBE li
d. The destruction, covering or
modification of any unique geologic
or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water
erosion of soils, either on or off
the site?
f. Changes in deposition.or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in siltation,
deposition or erosion which may modify
the channel of a river or stream or the
bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or
lake?
g. Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth-
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
-4-
40. ?ir. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air qaulity?
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
c. Alteration of air movement,
moisture or temperature, or any change,
in climate, either locally or
regionally?
41. Water. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents, or the
course or direction of water move-
ments, in either marine or fresh
waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface water runoff?
X. MAYBE H2
c. Alterations to the course or
flow of flood waters? X
d. Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters,
or in any alteration of surface
water quality, including but not
limited to temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or
rate of flow of ground waters?
g. Change in the.quantity of ground
waters, either through direct additions
or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h., Substantial reduction in the
amount of water otherwise available
for public water supplies?
i. Exposure of people or property
to water -related hazards such as
flooding or tidal waves?
-5-
j. Significant changes in the
temperature, flow, or chemical
content of surface thermal springs?
42. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any species of plants
(including trees, shrubs, grass, crops,
microflora and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species of
plants?
c. Introduction of new species of
plants into an area, or in a barrier
to the normal replenishment of
existing species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any
agricultural crop?
43. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of
species, or numbers of any species of
animals (birds, land animals
including reptiles, fish and shellfish,
benthic organisms, insects or micro -
fauna)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species of
animals?
c. Introduction of new species of
animals into an area, or result in a
barrier to the migration or move-
ment of animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish
or wildlife habitat?
44. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise
levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe
noise levels?
-6-
45. Light and glare,. Will the proposal
produce new light or glare?
46. Land Use.Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
47. natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of
any natural resources?
b. Substantial depletion of any
nonrenewable natural resource?
48. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of an explosion or the
release of hazardous sustances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemical or radiation)
in the event of an accident or upset
conditions?
Xi& MAYBE HQ
x_
b. Possible interference with an
emergency response plan or an emer-
gency evacuation plan? �(
49. Population. Will the proposal alter the
location, distribution, density, or growth
rate of the human population of an area?
50. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing
housing, or create a demand for additional
housing? 7(
51. Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
a. Generation of substantial
additional vehicular movement?
b. Effects on existing parking
facilities, or demand for new
parking?
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
-7-
d. Alterations to present patterns
of circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail •
or air traffic?
% Maybe i4
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
52. Public Services. Will the proposal have
an effect upon, or result in a need for
new or altered governmental services in
any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services?
53. Eneray. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of
fuel or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources,of energy, or
require the development of new sources
of energy?
54. Utilities. Will the'proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? .�
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks? X
e. Storm water drainage? %1(
-8-
f. Solid waste and disposal?
55. Human Health. Will the proposal result
in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
b. Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
56. Aesthetics. Will.the proposal result in
the obstruction of any scenic vista or
view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
57. Recreation. Will the proposal result
in an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing receational opportunities?
YES MAYBE NO
_x
58. Cultural Resources.
a. Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction of a
prehistoric or historic archeological
site?
b. Will the proposal result in
adverse physical or aesthetic effects
to a prehistoric or historic
building, structure, or object?
c. Does the proposal have the poten-
tial to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values? NC
d. Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? Ni(
-9-
59. Mandatory F$ndinas of Sianificance.
a. Does the project have the poten-
tial to degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal commun-
ity, reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major
periods of California history or
prehistory?
b. Does the project have the poten-
tial to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short term impact on
the environment is one which occurs
in a relatively brief, definitive
period of time while long-term
impacts will endure well into the
future.)
c. Does the project have impacts
which are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (A
project may affect two or more separate
resources where the impact is relatively
small, but where the effect of the total
of those impacts on the environment is
significant.)
d. Does the project have environ-
mental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effect on human
beings, either directly or
indirectly?
YES MAYBE NO
►ALOS VCAOC$ CITATL$
(XIO) 375'11$5l
/AOM L. A. (tu) 77a•Isss
FAX (a►o) 57S 3SN
WsstLA4s V►LLAOC
(OO1) 414.4411
FAX Nos) 414'4111
SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING CORPORATION
304 TEJON PLACE
PALOS VERGES ESTATES, CALIFORNIA 00274
'ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
Y. Lee
4 Open Brand Road
RAYMONO L. OUIOLE'
OONALO E. DAWSON
CONSIATINO CNG N(CAs
39.b. The tennis court andstable relocation will result in grading of the
northwestern portion of the property.
39.c. The northeastern area will be flattened to make room for the tennis court
and corral.
41.b. The hard surface of the tennis court will result in an infitesimal
decrease in the absorbtion rate but it is inconsequential as the natural
drainage at the rear of the court.
•
E: Before the Lea:. cy' accept this application as
complete, the applicant must consult the lists prepared pursuant to
Section 65962.5 of the Government Code and submit a signet
statement indicating whether the project and any alternatives are
located on a site which is included on any such list, and shall
specify any list.
HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES STATEMENT
The development project and any alternatives proposed in this
application are contained on the lists compiled pursuant to Section
65962.5 of the Government Code. Accordingly, the project applicant
is required to submit a signed statement which contains tte
following information:
1. Name of applicant:
2. Address:
3. Phone Number:
4. Address of Site (street namend number if available, and ZIP
code):
5. Local Agency (c}Ey/county):
6. Assessor' book, page, and parcel number:
7. cify any list pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government
Code
Regulatory identification number:
9. Date of List:
Date
-11-
For
(Signature)
(Applicant)
•
TE: In the event traWne ject site amt any alternative:
are not listed on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of
the Government Code, then the applicant must certify that fact as
provided below.
I have consulted the lists compiled pursuant to Section
65962.5 of the Government Code and hereby certify that the
development project and any alternatives proposed in this
application are pot contained on these lists.
Cate
For
(Signature)
(Applicant)
SERTiFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information
required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and
that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Date C OGT, 4-1 9 2
1
For
Las
(Applicant)
•
•
DATE:
City oi leolling
APPLICATION NO.
SITE LOCATION:
ZONING & SIZE:
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
AND CHECKLIST FORM (INITIAL STUDY)
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
NOVEMBER 23, 1992
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377.7288
ZONING CASE NO. 487
4 OPEN BRAND ROAD (LOT 111-EF)
RAS-1, 1.476 ACRES
DR. AND MRS. YANG WEN LEE
MR. DOUGLAS MCHATTIE, SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING
REQUEST: Request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a
tennis court and request for Site Plan Review for the relocation of
a stable and corral.
The following analysis is a description of the findings contained
in the Environmental Information and Checklist Form which preceded
this page. A detailed discussion of all potential environmental
impacts checked "Yes" or "Maybe" is provided, along with
appropriate mitigation measures.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The City of Rolling Hills is a residential community with single
family dwellings on estate -size lots. The project site has an
existing single family dwelling, garage, swimming pool, and stable.
The project site has an undulating topography.
Item 39. Earth.
a-d. Although approval of the subject project will not result in
unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures,
it should be noted that portions of the City exhibit unstable earth
conditions, including active landslides and soil creep. Because
the City is located in seismically active southern California, all
development is exposed to potential groundshaking in the event of
an earthquake. The Palos Verdes fault, considered potentially
active, is located approximately one mile northeast of the City.
Approval of the subject project will result in disruptions,
displacements, compaction, or overcrowding of the soil that require
a grading permit. The displacement and recompaction of the soil
will be required to conform with local ordinances and engineering
practices requiring balanced cut and fill and should not cause a
significant environmental impact.
e-g. Although there will be removal of some natural vegetative
cover, it will be replaced by landscape screening and vegetation
and plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the
rural character of the community. Related erosion impacts will be
Printed on Recycled Paper.
PAGE 2
less than significant.
Item 41. Water
b. Although there will be changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff, these
amounts should not cause a significant environmental impact.
Item 44. Noise
a. Although there will be an increase in existing noise levels by
the construction of a tennis court, it is a common recreational
sound heard within the community. There is an existing tennis
court on adjacent property 30 feet from the shared northwest
property line. The proposed tennis court will be 26 feet from the
northwest property line and 165 feet from the adjacent northwest
property owner's residence.
On the basis of this initial evaluation: (check one)
X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect on the environment, there will not be
a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added
to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find the project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
Date November 23, 1992
LOLA M. UNGAR U
For the'City of Rolling Hills
(Lead Agency)
•
Cuy ova erns
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 487
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
Application has been filed with the City of Rolling Hills for
approval of the project known as Zoning Case No. 487 to be located
at Lot 111-EF and currently, 4 Open Brand Road, Rolling Hills, CA
and to be implemented by Dr. and Mrs. Yang Wen Lee.
The request is briefly described as:
A request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a tennis court
and request for Site Plan Review for the relocation of a stable and,
corral.
Pursuant to the authority and criteria contained in the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines of the
City of Rolling Hills, the Lead Agency has analyzed the project and
determined that the project will not have a significant impact on
the environment. Based on this finding, the Lead Agency prepared
this NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
FINDINGS OF NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECT:
BASED ON THE ATTACHED INITIAL STUDY, AND CONDITION(S) (IF
APPLICABLE), IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE
A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
A period of at least 21 days from the date of publication of the
notice of this NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be provided to enable
public review of the project specifications, the Initial Study and
this document prior to the final adoption of the NEGATIVE
DECLARATION by the Lead Agency. A copy of the project
specifications is on file in the offices of The City of Rolling
Hills, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills. CA 90274.
Date: November 23, 1992 By:
Lola Ungar, Prii e/ipal Planner
Printed on Recycled Paper.
HEARING DATE:
TO:
FROM:
APPLICATION NO.
SITE LOCATION:
ZONING & SIZE:
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PUBLISHED:
REQUEST
•
0/ le.M.9.
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, I957
DECEMBER 15, 1992
PLANNING COMMISSION
LOLA UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
ZONING CASE NO. 487
4 OPEN BRAND ROAD (LOT 111-EF)
RAS-1, 1.476 ACRES
DR. AND MRS. YANG WEN LEE
MR. DOUGLAS MCHATTIE, SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING
NOVEMBER 23, 1992
The applicants request a Conditional Use Permit to construct a
tennis court and request Site Plan Review for the relocation of a
stable and corral.
DISCUSSION
In reviewing the applicants' request under Title 17 (Zoning),. staff
would identify the following issues for evaluation:
1. The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to
construct a 6,832 square foot tennis court. The tennis court
will be located a minimum of 20 feet from the westerly
property line and a minimum of 50 feet from the front easement
line off Open Brand Road. The tennis court maximum dimensions
will be 120' by 60' with the rectangle's corners cut off.
Plans show that the court will be inset below the surface of
the hillside and surrounded by 2 to 4 foot retaining walls.
The zoning code requires that these walls not be exposed.
During evaluation of revised plans, staff noted that grading
for the tennis court appears to exceed the 10,000 square foot
maximum required by Section 17.16.012.E(8) of the Municipal
Code. In addition, plans show a 22.53% structural lot coverage
which exceeds the 20% structural lot coverage required by
Section 17.16.040.A of the Municipal Code. The applicants will
need to file for a Variance for each of these items that do not
conform or reduce the size of the grading and structural lot
coverage.
2. The applicants are also requesting Site Plan Review for the
relocation of the existing 680 square foot stable from the
south end of the proposed tennis court to the rear setback area
at the northern portion of the irregular pie -shaped lot. The
stable will be 33 feet from the easterly property line, 47 feet
from the northerly property line, and 60 feet from the westerly
Pear'
Printed on Recycled Pap
•
ZONING CASE NO. 487
PAGE 2
property line, 55 feet from the tennis court, and 50 feet from
the swimming pool. Plans show that stable access will be from
the easement at the westerly property line which has an 8%
grade.
3. Building permits show that the existing 2,300 square foot house
and 600 square foot attached garage were built in 1952. In
1960, a 720 square foot swimming pool was constructed. In
1961, 3 bedrooms and a bath (760 square feet) was added to the
residence. Then, in 1975, a 512 square foot barn and stalls
was constructed.
4. Grading for the project site will require a 630 cubic yard cut
for the tennis court, a 550 cubic yard cut for the corral, a
570 cubic yard fill for the tennis court, and 610 cubic
yard fill for the corral. The total cut will be 1,180 cubic
yards and the total fill will be 1,180 cubic yards.
5. The structural lot coverage proposed is 12,423 square feet or
22.53% (20o permitted) and the total lot coverage proposed is
16,413 square feet or 29.7% (35% permitted). Within the past
one year and eleven months, staff has not come across any
zoning cases in which the maximum structural lot coverage has
been exceeded.
6. The building pad coverage proposed is 21.64% for the
residential pad and 44. 72 o for the tennis court and stable pad.
The overall pad coverage is 31.760.
7. Plans show an existing 2,769 square foot tennis court on
adjacent property at 2 Open Brand Road, a minimum of 30 feet
from the westerly property line.
8. After reviewing the Initial Study for the project, staff has
determined that this project will not have a significant effect
on the environment. Accordingly, a Negative Declaration has
been prepared.
9. Attached is a letter regarding the project from Mr. and Mrs.
William Dumble, 3 Open Brand Road.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed
plans and take public testimony.
i •
VE
DEC 0 41992
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
8Y
10.011111111•11
-& /Jo . 4"?7
477) aZ42_ t,tw ak-5
c5L
zi,24 -
S. c c .e t `° SS- ;
�., - -Q_A cti-426-2-1 �...,e.� .
Cau,-rt- (( Cc' f?thy--
tie,e
GL"-04 / CL/Lv%
\Z--L•-. GL--vt-A
- 1 (/)-
to, a off.
(r-,-A OCIJ1 CL--e,f 12e/ 6,-4-A-• (2‘ ° 4 ,l7---. I
ff-'2(
u 3_ v-ci, (3Gct.61.e k_=er-i--\-1.0„c_4__„_,-;, --1,1_0-,-14.
exf- c3 e-L t cam.-/ _.07.4 c: a
-y ,ck-9-7 __-c--T-r ,?-1,tt-lvc.a, .-7.t:. &_.ef-Le.t_
v Z:c1c,/^;v..- `a'1-1 t-d-/-< -dta-g-‘„ae_g-,-
it,e,„__?4-e7 ctia4)? -ae-vt_e , ,._‘,,,II
r Pi l -c.
f 4 -- 3 77 / .Psa -3 _ 6�-°-4,i a ! el,
41/
Cii o/ R0M Jh/t,
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROA:
ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90274
(213) 377-1521
FAX: (213) 377-7288
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
(To Be Completed By Applicant)
Date Filed C cT, Zoning Case No. 48 7
GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Applicant, address and telephone no. V, LA?.
aN>• Q.QLt-lla 0. tb 7.74
2. Legal Owner, address and telephone no. (if
above)
3. Address of project AS k 13 e u E,
Assessor's Book, Page, Parcel No.7 45 (, 7 / 4-! Z 8
r
Lot No. %l
4. List and describe any other related permits and other public
approvals required for this project,including those required
by city, regional, state and federal agencies: it,. td.c. Qrs�n c
4. LoCnAL(_‘r5 I'u8Lte 06444
5. Existing zoning district p. A ' -
6. Proposed use of site (project for which this form is filed):
'T ...,ALA) 14 r. Qua -r
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
7. Site size t. 4- 7 4 I� G
8. Net lot area
55.t2? St
9. Total square footage of structures 6 $ 2. 4 S .r,
C; 4.OPet3 t3DAr D
4;4 - Z. 4.
different from
10. Number of floors of construction
-1-
VN
JO_ 141992
11. Basement square footage
12 . Total combined flatwork and structural lot coverage t0. 4k t 4
13. Will any exterior walls be removed or relocated? Which walls? pl
14. Will any interior walls be removed or relocated? Which walls? tom b
15. Will the entire building structure require a new roof? 4 O
16. Will the existing roof remain intact, with less than 200
square feet added?
17. Will cut and fill be balanced? Amount cut 1 2 0 d
Amount fill L Z Q O
size, approximate sale price
18. If residential, include the unit
and household size. expected.
19. If commercial, indicate the
neighborhood, city or regionally
sales area, estimated employment
facilities.
type of project, whether
oriented, square footage of
per shift and loading
20. If this is industrial project indicate the type of project,
estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities.
21. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated
employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities,
and community benefits to be derived from the project.
22. Attach plans.
23. Proposed scheduling. A ,Z. (A. P-
24. If the project involves a variance, conditional use or
rezoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the
application is required. G.O.P. 1 b £-eQJIP.W Fe R a
1.4N t C 01,1:Cr
Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects?
Discuss below all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as
necessary).
Yes No
25. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands,
beaches, lakes or hills, or substantial alteration
of ground contours.
26. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing
residential areas or public lands or roads.
- 2-
71e
r
27. Change in pattern, scale or character of general
area of project.
28. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter.
29. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes, or odors in
vicinity.
30. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground water
quality or quantity, or alteration of existing
draining patterns.
31. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration
levels in the vicinity.
32. Site on filled land or on sloye of 10 perce t or
more. T1410 i0y a Wit-t-s.t)e. COt4fit NIr
33. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials,
such as toxic substances, flammable or explosives.
34. Substantial change in demand for municipal services
(police, fire, water, sewage, etc.).
35. Substantially increased fossil fuel consumption
(electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.).
36. Relationship to a larger project or series of
projects.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
37. Describe the project site as it exists before the project,
including information on topography, soil stability, plants
and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects.
Describe any existing structures on the site, and the use of
the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots
or polaroid photos will be accepted.
Lot is partially developed within a developed gently rolling hillside.
This lot has a minor drainage area on one side. There is a view
corridor to the northeast.
• •
38. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on
plants and animals and any cultural, historical or scenic
aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential,
commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one -family, guest
house, office use, etc.) and scale of development (height,
frontage, set -back, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of
the vicinity. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted.
The neighborhood has the usual animals, indigenous to the area, skunks,
racoons, mice, domestic varieties. Minor landscaping exists at the front
of the lot, majority of remainder is wild grass. There is a house,
detached garage, swimming pool and stable existing on the site. 'me area
is one of single family residences, one unit per acre. The homes are
all one story, most with pools and or stables.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Please explain all "yes" and "maybe" answers on separate
sheets.)
39. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in
changes in geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, com-
paction or overcovering of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground
surface relief features?
d. The destruction, covering or
modification of any unique geologic
or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water
erosion of soils, either on or off
the site?
f. Changes in deposition.or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in siltation,
deposition or erosion which may modify
the channel of a river or stream or the
bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or
lake?
g. Exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards such as earth-
quakes, landslides, mudslides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
-4-
YES MAYBE No
• •
40. Air. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or
deterioration of ambient air qaulity?
b. The creation of objectionable
odors?
c. Alteration of air movement,
moisture or temperature, or any change
in climate, either locally or
regionally?
41. Water. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents, or the
course or direction of water move-
ments, in either marine or fresh
waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates,
drainage patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface water runoff?
Ira MAYBE HQ
c. Alterations to the course or
flow of flood waters? X
d. Change in the amount of surface
water in any water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters,
or in any alteration of surface
water quality, including but not
limited to temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity?
f. Alteration of the direction or
rate of flow of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground
waters, either through direct additions
or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h. Substantial reduction in the
amount of water otherwise available
for public water supplies?
i. Exposure of people or property
to water -related hazards such as
flooding or tidal waves?
-5-
X
j. Significant changes in the
temperature, flow, or chemical
content of surface thermal springs?
42. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species,
or number of any species of plants
(including trees, shrubs, grass, crops,
microflora and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species of
plants?
c. Introduction of new species of
plants into an area, or in a barrier
to the normal replenishment of
existing species?
YES MAYBE Ng
d. Reduction in acreage of any
agricultural crop? X
43. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of
species, or numbers of any species of
animals (birds, land animals
including reptiles, fish and shellfish,
benthic organisms, insects or micro -
fauna)? �(
b. Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or+ endangered species of
animals?
c. Introduction of new species of
animals into an area, or result in a
barrier to the migration or move-
ment of animals?
d. Deterioration to.existing fish
or wildlife habitat?
44. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise
levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe
noise levels?
-6-
.
X
X
45. Liaht and alare. Will the proposal
produce new light or glare?
46. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
47. Natural Resources. Will the proposal
result in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of
any natural resources?
b. Substantial depletion of any
nonrenewable natural resource?
48. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of an explosion or the
release of hazardous sustances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemical or radiation)
in the event of an accident or upset
conditions?
b. Possible interference with an
emergency response plan or an emer-
gency evacuation plan?
49. Population. Will the proposal alter the
location, distribution, density, or, growth
rate of the human population of an/area?
50. Housina. Will the proposal affect existing
housing, or create a demand for additional
housing?
51. Transportation/Circulation. Will the
proposal result in:
a. Generation of substantial
additional vehicular movement?
b. Effects on existing parking
facilities, or demand for new
parking?
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems?
-7-
YES j4AYBE HO
d. Alterations to present patterns
of circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail
or air traffic?
Ika Maybe N2
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
52. Public Services. Will the proposal have
an effect upon, or result in a need for
new or altered governmental services in
any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
f. Other governmental services?
53. Eneray. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of
fuel or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand
upon existing sources of energy, or
require the development of new sources
of energy?
54. Utilities. Will the proposal result in
a need for new systems, or substantial
alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas? �C
b. Communications systems?
c. Water? ><
d. Sewer or septic tanks? 1C
e. Storm water drainage? X
JL
-8-
f. Solid waste and disposal?
55. Human Health. Will the proposal result
in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or
potential health hazard (excluding
mental health)?
b. Exposure of people to potential
health hazards?
YES MAYBE NO
56. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in
the obstruction of any scenic vista or
view open to the public, or will the
proposal result in the creation of an
aesthetically offensive site open to
public view? �C
57. Recreation. Will the proposal result
in an impact upon the quality or quantity
of existing receational opportunities? �C
58. Cultural Resources.
a. Will the proposal result in the
alteration of or the destruction of a
prehistoric or historic archeological
site?
b. Will the proposal result in
adverse physical/or aesthetic effects
• to a prehistoric or historic
building, structure, or object? �C
c. Does the proposal have the poten-
tial to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural
values?
d. Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? �C
-9-
59. Mandatory Findings of Significance.;
a. Does the project have the poten-
tial to degrade the quality of the(
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal commun-
ity, reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major
periods of California history or
prehistory?
b. Does the project have the poten-
tial to achieve short-term, to the
disadvantage of long-term, environ-
mental goals? (A short term impact on
the environment is one which occurs
in a relatively brief, definitive
period of time while long-term
impacts will endure well into the
future.)
c. Does the project have impacts
which are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (A
projectmay affect two or more separate
resoures where the impact is relatively
small, but where the effect of the total
of those impacts on the environment is
significant.)
d. Does the project have environ-
mental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effect on human
beings, either directly or
indirectly?
YES MAYBE NO
PALOS VERDLS ESTATES
(310) 375•ZSSe
FROM L. A. (213) 772-15SS
PAX (310) 376•3S1$
WESTLAIC VILLAOC
(SOS) 404.4400
rAx (SOS) 404-4/31
SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING CORPORATION
304 TEJON PLACE
PALOS VEROCS ESTATES. CALIFORNIA 90274
'ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
Y. Lee
4 Open Brand Road
RAYMOND L. OLIIOL£Y
DONALO E. DAWSON
CONSULTING CNG!NEERS
39.b. The tennis court and stable relocation will result in grading of the
northwestern portion of the property.
39.c. The northeastern area will be flattened to make room for the tennis court
and corral.
41.b. The hard surface of the tennis court will result in an infitesimal
decrease in the absorbtion rate but it is inconsequential as the natural
drainage at the rear of the court.
E: Before the Lea.: Agency ; accept this application as
c.vmplete, the applicant must consult. the lists prepared pursuant to
Section 65962.5 of the Government Code and submit a signed
statement indicating whether the project and any alternatives are
located on a site which is included on any such list, and shall
specify any list.
$AZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES STATEMENT
The development project and any alternatives proposed in this
application are contained on the lists compiled pursuant to Section
65962.5 of the Government Code. Accordingly, the project applicant
is required to submit a signed statement which contains t::e
following information:
1. Name of applicant:
2. Address:
3. Phone Number:
4. Address of Site (street name 41 number if available, and ZIP
code):
5. Local Agency (cy/county):
6. Assessor' book, page, and parcel number:
7. S �cify any list pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government
Code
8. Regulatory identification number:
9. Date of List:
Date
For
(Signature)
(Applicant)
-11-
• TE: In the event tn3: the •ject site and and alternative_
are not listed on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of
the Government Code, then the applicant must certify that fact as
provided below.
I have consulted the lists compiled pursuant to Section
65962.5 of the Government Code and hereby certify that the
development project and any alternatives proposed in this
application are pot contained on these lists.
Date
For
(Signature)
(Applicant)
CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished
above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information
required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and
that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Date OCT. 4/ 9 2
For
(Signature)
v LEC
(Applicant)
• •
Ci4 0/ ie0iii4 -Wee,
DATE:
APPLICATION NO.
SITE LOCATION:
ZONING & SIZE:
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377.7288
AND CHECKLIST FORM (INITIAL STUDY)
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
NOVEMBER 23, 1992
ZONING CASE NO. 487
4 OPEN BRAND ROAD (LOT 111-EF)
RAS-1, 1.476 ACRES
DR. AND MRS. YANG WEN LEE
MR. DOUGLAS MCHATTIE, SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING
REQUEST: Request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a
tennis court and request for Site Plan Review for the relocation of
a stable and corral.
The following analysis is a description of the findings contained
in the Environmental Information and Checklist Form which preceded
this page. A detailed discussion of all potential environmental
impacts checked "Yes" or "Maybe" is provided, along with
appropriate mitigation measures.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The City of Rolling Hills is a residential community with single
family dwellings on estate -size lots. The project site has an
existing single family dwelling, garage, swimming pool, and stable.
The project site has an undulating topography.
Item 39. Earth.
a-d. Although approval of the subject project will not result in
unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures,
it should be noted that portions of the City exhibit unstable earth
conditions, including active landslides and soil creep. Because
the City is located in seismically active southern California, all
development is exposed to potential groundshaking in the event of
an earthquake. The Palos Verdes fault, considered potentially
active, is located approximately one mile northeast of the City.
Approval of the subject project will result in disruptions,
displacements, compaction, or overcrowding of the soil that require
a grading permit. The displacement and recompaction of the soil
will be required to conform with local ordinances and engineering
practices requiring balanced cut and fill and should not cause a
significant environmental impact.
e-g. Although there will be removal of some natural vegetative
cover, it will be replaced by landscape screening and vegetation
and plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the
rural character of the community. Related erosion impacts will be
Printed on Recycled Paper.
• •
PAGE 2
less than significant.
Item 41. Water
b. Although there will be changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff, these
amounts should not cause a significant environmental impact.
Item 44. Noise
a. Although there will be an increase in existing noise levels by
the construction of a tennis court, it is a common recreational
sound heard within the community. There is an existing tennis
court on adjacent property 30 feet from the shared northwest
property line. The proposed tennis court will be 26 feet from the
northwest property line and 165 feet from the adjacent northwest
property owner's residence.
On the basis of this initial evaluation: (check one)
X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant
effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION
will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect on the environment, there will not be
a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added
to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.,
I find the project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required.
Date November 23. 1992
LOLA M. UNGAR
For the City of Rolling Hills
(Lead Agency)
•
0/ ailing L/16 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 487
Application has been filed with the City of Rolling Hills for
approval of the project known as Zoning Case No. 487 to be located
at Lot 111-EF and currently. 4 Open Brand Road, Rolling Hills, CA,
and to be implemented by Dr. and Mrs. Yang Wen Lee.
The request is briefly described as:
A request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a tennis court
and request for Site Plan Review for the relocation of a stable and.
corral.
Pursuant to the authority and criteria contained in the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines of the
City of Rolling Hills. the Lead Agency has analyzed the project and
determined that the project will not have a significant impact on
the environment. Based on this finding, the Lead Agency prepared
this NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
FINDINGS OF NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECT:
BASED ON THE ATTACHED INITIAL STUDY, AND CONDITION(S) (IF
APPLICABLE), IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE
A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
A period of at least 21 days from the date of publication of the
notice of this NEGATIVE DECLARATION will beprovided to enable
public review of the project specifications, the Initial Study and
this document prior to the final adoption of the NEGATIVE
DECLARATION by the Lead Agency. A copy of the project
specifications is on file in the offices of The City of Rolling
Hills, 2 Portuguese Bend Road. Rolling Hills, CA 90274.
Date: November 23. 1992 By:
Lola Ungar, Pripal Planner
Pa 011
Printed on Recycled Paper.
• •
City 0/ I?Ot/ifl c// INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
AGENDA ITEM 3-A (310)377.1521
MEETING DATE 2122/ 93 FAX: (310) 377-7288
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 487
Mr. and Mrs. Yang Wen Lee, 4 Open Brand Road, Rolling
Hills (Lot 111-EF)
RESOLUTION NO. 93-6: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DENYING A REQUEST
FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A TENNIS COURT
AND DENYING A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO
RELOCATE A STABLE AND CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 487.
1. The Planning Commission denied the project in the subject
case on February 16, 1993.
2. The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to
construct a 5,665 square foot tennis court and requesting Site
Plan Review for the relocation of a stable and corral.
3. The structural lot coverage proposed is 19.95% and the total
lot coverage proposed is 27.34% within the limits of the Zoning
Code. The building pad coverage proposed is 21.52% for the
residential building pad and 36.4% for the building pad
reserved for the tennis court, stable and corral. Overall
building pad coverage is 28.12%.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council receive and file Resolution
No. 93-6.
Printed on Recycled Paper.
RESOLUTION NO. 93-6
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS DENYING A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A TENNIS COURT AND DENYING A
REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO RELOCATE A
STABLE AND CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 487.
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. Yang
Wen Lee with respect to real property located at 4 Open Brand Road,
Rolling Hills (Lot 111-EF), requesting a Conditional Use Permit to
construct a tennis court and requesting Site Plan Review for the
relocation of a stable and corral.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
public hearing to consider the applications for the Conditional Use
Permit and the Site Plan Review on December 15, 1992 and January
19, 1993. Members of the Commission inspected the site
individually on December 18, 1993 and December 19, 1993.
Section 3. The applicant has submitted plans for the
construction of a 5,665 square foot tennis court as shown in
Exhibit A. Section 17.16.012.E of the Municipal Code provides for
the discretion of the Planning Commission to grant a Conditional
Use Permit for a tennis court under certain conditions.
Section 4. With respect to the request for a Conditional Use
Permit for a tennis court, the Planning Commission makes the
following findings:
A. The project proposed is a 5,665 square foot tennis court
surrounded by a retaining wall that will not exceed 4 feet in
height. The residence is 3,465 square feet, the attached garage is
630 square feet, the relocated stable is 450 square feet, and the
service yard is 96 square feet. The structural lot coverage
proposed is 10,999 square feet or 19.95% and the total lot coverage
proposed is 14,989 square feet or 27.34% within the limits of the
Zoning Code. The building pad coverage proposed is 21.52% for the
residential building pad and 36.4% for the building pad reserved
for the tennis court, stable and corral. Overall building pad
coverage is 28.12%.
B. The granting of the request for the Conditional Use
Permit would not be consistent with the purposes and objectives of
the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. The tennis court would be
located at the western portion of this pie -shaped lot, 20 feet from
the property line and 46 feet from a tennis court on an adjacent
property, thereby creating an additional prominent large expanse of
concrete structural improvement on this hillside lot, which is not
compatible with the General Plan goals of maintaining low -profile
residential development patterns in the community.
• •
RESOLUTION NO. 93-6
PAGE 2
C. The proposed project does not minimize structural coverage
on the pad and leaves little open space between property lines. An
existing tennis court is 46 feet away from the proposed court
thereby making the court structure more visually prominent on the
building pad than appropriate for the existing development pattern
of the City.
D. The proposed tennis court project is not consistent with
the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan and would not be desirable to
the public convenience, safety, and welfare because the proposed
site is at the bottom of a canyon and within the path of a natural
drainage course.
E. The structural lot coverage proposed is 19.95% and the
maximum structural lot coverage permitted by the Zoning Code is 20%
thereby maximizing the permitted .structural development and
restricting any future structural development on the lot.
F. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit would not be
consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance
and General Plan, because the tennis court will impact the view and
the privacy of neighbors because it will be visible from Open Brand
Road and neighboring properties. The proposed court would be
located on the western portion of the pie -shaped lot and would be
situated 20 feet from the side property line, 53 feet from the
front property line, 58 feet from the existing residence, and 120
feet from the nearest neighbor's residence. The area -proposed for
the court will be located in an area of the property where such use
will be most intrusive to surrounding properties and would
interfere with the viewscape of Los Angeles harbor of property
•owners on the south side of Open Brand Road. The presence of the
existing 527 square foot stable near Open Brand Road is appropriate
to the rural atmosphere of the community.
Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the• Planning
Commission hereby denies the request for a Conditional Use Permit
in Zoning Case No. 487 for a proposed 5,665 square foot tennis
court, as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as
Exhibit A.
Section 6. Section 17.34.010 requires a development plan to
be submitted for site plan review and approval before any building
or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition,
alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which
involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the
building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any
thirty-six month period.
RESOLUTION NO. 93-6
PAGE 3
Section 7. With respect to the Site Plan Review application
to relocate an existing"527 square foot stable and corral to
construct a 450.square foot stable and 550 square foot corral and
5,665 square foot tennis court, the Planning Commission makes the
following findings of fact:
A. The granting of the request for the Site Plan Review would
not be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning
Ordinance and General Plan. The relocation of the stable and
corral from the southwest to the northwestern portion of the lot
and the construction of an inset tennis court near the southwestern
boundary of this pie -shaped lot, creates maximum structural lot
coverage which is not compatible with the General Plan goals of
maintaining low -profile residential development patterns in the
community. As noted in Section 4, Paragraph E above, future
structural development on the lot will be limited. Further, the
building pad coverage where the tennis court, stable, and corral
will be located will be 36.4% which is exceeds the building pad
coverage on several properties in the vicinity.
B. The proposed development does not preserve and integrate
into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing
natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding
native vegetation, mature trees, .drainage courses, and land forms
(such as hillsides and knolls) because the proposed project will
require increased grading that will be done in a natural canyon and
drainage course that may impinge on the safety and welfare of other
residents and properties along Open Brand Road. The development
plan does not follow the natural contours of the site as the
proposed relocated stable and inset tennis court will be located in
a natural canyon, that will not minimize grading and will interfere
with the natural drainage courses in the canyon at the western
portion of this lot.
C. The proposed development is not harmonious in scale and
mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences.
As indicated in Paragraph A, the structural lot coverage will
almost meet the maximum permitted and the proposed project is not
consistent with the scale of the neighborhood. The ratio of the
proposed structures to lot coverage is not similar to the ratio
found on several properties in the vicinity.
D. Significant portions of the lot will be overdeveloped and
scenic vistas across the western portion of the property will be
blocked by tennis court screening as well as landscape screening.
The viewscapes of adjacent neighbors as well as community easements
will be obstructed along Open Brand Road.
RESOLUTION NO. 93-6
PAGE 4
Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby denies the Site Plan Review application for
Zoning Case No. 487 for the relocation of a stable and corral and
the construction of a tennis court on the development plan
incorporated herein as Exhibit A.
Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby denies the request for Conditional Use Permit
approval for the construction of a tennis court described in
Section 5 and denies a request for Site Plan Review approval 'to
relocate a stable and corral described in Section 8 in Zoning Case
No. 487.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED IS 16 'D )OF FEBRUARY, 1993.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
The foregoing Resolution No. 93-6 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS DENYING A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A TENNIS COURT AND DENYING A
REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO RELOCATE A
STABLE AND CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 487.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission on February 16, 1993 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
DEPUTY CITY CLERK