Loading...
09-16-14 FT.pdf MYNUTES OF THE AD�OURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 16,2014 PRESENT: • Vice-Chairperson Smith,Cominissioners Gray, Mirsch and Kirkpaixick, Chairman Che1f was excused Yolanta Schwartz,Planning Director ALSO PRESENT FOR THE VARIOUS PROPERTIES VISITED WERE: Nicholas Tonsich, Applicant Douglas Moore, Con�ractor James Aichele, resident Mr. and Mrs. Baer, residents Art Becicler, RHCA Maintenance Supezvisor Kristen Raig, RHCA Manager Rodger Hawkins, Resident Dan Bolfon, Bolton Engineering FTELD TRIPS ' A. ZONING CASE NO. 8G2 Request for modificatians to a previously approved projecf consistin� of a Site Plan Review #or additior�al grading, Variances to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot and to reconstruct slopes that would be steeper than �he maximum permi�tted and request for other vaxious modi€ications to the residence, garage and driveway in Zoning Case No. $62 at 40 East�ield Ihive, (Lot 91-EF}, Rolling Hil.ls, CA, (Tonsich). ). It has been determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). Vice-Chairperson Smith called the meeting to order at 7:30 a.m. at 4Q Eastfield. Planning Director Schwartz stated that Chairman Chelf visi�ed the site on September�1 with staff, the property owner and contractor. She gave a bzie� ovexview of the configuration of the lot and stated that the properfy gains access across another praperty from a driveway that also serves 42 Eastfield Drive but which is iocafed on the properiy at 38 Eastfield Drive, arid that a new driveway approach fo 42 Eastfield was approved previously, thus separating the driveway approaches to 40 and 42 Eastfield. She stated that the entire driveway and the parking area by the hov.se wou�d be surfaced with pavers. She a�so stated that in the staff report she grouped the various requests listed on the site plan, as they appear on the property starting at the top of the lot off of EastEield Drive and that she would review those requests in that order. A. #4, #5, #2, #3, & #21. Plaruung Director Schwartz explained that thase requests include piacing pavers on the driveway, re-grading of the driveway, which will result Minutes 1 Adjourned Regu�ar Meeting in a steeper driveway than previously approved, additional retazning wall along the driveway (not to exceed 3'), Iowering the garage by two feet, and additional grading of the up slope (west) of the garage. With Iowering of the garage it is necessary to grade the up slope (west) of the garage, in order for the previously approved 5' retauung wall along the building pad to rexnain at 5'. She stated that these modifications would require additional grading of 162 cubic yards. Comrnissioner Mirsch expressed concern with the proposed steeper driveway and in response Ms. Schwartz stated that the code calls for up #0 129'o slopes for driveways, wi�h some exceptions, and that the Plarming Commission may, without a Variance, approve steeper driveways. Tn response to Com�nissioner Gray, Doug Morris stated that there would be two or three steps into the residence and that the rendering is not correct. Commissianers discussed the elevation of the house in relationship to the proposed elevation of the garage and asked that the applicant and contractor reconcile it, since from the plans and rendering it does not seem that it could be accomplished as proposed. B #11,�#19, #2Q, #10 & #12. Planning Director Schwartz stated that the applicant proposes two additional covered porches. A 75 square foot covered porch adjacent to fhe entryway, which was not staked in the fie1d, and 57 square foot covered porch between the entryway and the garage, which was staked. Mr. Tansich stated �hat the porches were always part of the project and were shown on architectural plans but were omitted from calculations and Plan,,;r,g Commission plans. The Cammissioners discussed the reason for the porches, especially the one to the north of the main entrance over the proposed stairs, and stated that they would have Iiked to see both porches staked. Mrs. Baer stated that she feels that the construction and �he additional porches appear to be locafed closer and closer to her and her husband's house, as their house at 38 Eastfield is close to the property line and their bedroom window faces the Tonsich's house. She stated that she feels that there is not adequate distance between the homes. Planr,;,,g Director Schwartz stated that the applicant proposes to reduce the size of the swimming pool to 458 square feet in order to keep the structurai coverage at or below 20°�, and that the pool deck will be eniarged. C. #b, #8, #9 & 18 Planning Director Schwaxtz stated that the applicant would like �o construct a 48 square foot electrical room under the loggia, which wo�a.Id extend beyond the footprint of the residence, to construct 3' wide stairs from �he front of the residence, (around the corner from the entryway) for access to the electrical room and the basement, and to open up the middle light well to the basement to construct a staircase to the lower area of the lot. She stated that the area underneath the Ioggia was approved to be enclosed on all sides and not contain any uses or access and that upon completion, the exterior walls af the basement were to be not higher than 5' above the top of grade. A 6' high reta�ining wall, which requixes a variance, is proposed along a short portion of the stairs (for 3'}. The Commission then viewed the excavated 252 Minutes 2 Adjourned Regula.r Meeting square feet of the basement which was graded 3-feet deeper thaxi previously approved for a wine cellar. The Commission discussed fhe �ocation of the proposed electrical roam noting that there already is an area in the basement for the electrical equipment. The applicant stated that the Edison Company requested that access to the electrical room be outside the residence and that there is no other area to mount the meter. The Commissioners then di.scussed the outside walls of the basement and determined that more uiformation shouZd be provided on how the applicant proposes to meet the 5' height requirement previously approved, after the grad�ng is completed. They asked that the height of the wa11s be delineated. D. #14. Plarming Director Schwartz stated that the applicant is requesting to extend the wall in the side yard setback approximately 15 feet to be able to gain more flat area and be able to access the loggia from the side yard. The additional. wall requires a variance. E. #1� & #1b, Planning Director Schwartz stated that the applicant requesfs additional grad'zng of the area below the residence, which previously was not considered or included in the disturbed area calculations. She stated that the �adang quantities and disturbed area would i.ricrease. She also stated that the current condition of this area requires it to be re-�aded for stability of the structure above and requires a keyway and additional cornpaction, and that the slope could only be restored to 1.�: 1 grade, which requires a Variance. She stated that the geological report supports this requirement. Mr. Moore stated that the proposed 1.5:1 slope is not a new slope but will rep�ace the slope to the original condition. Commissioners discussed the slope and asked that it be clearly staked, and especially in the area of the outside wa11 of the basement, so that it could be verified that the exposed portion of the wa11 would not exceed 5' in height. F. #7, #27& #22. Planning Director Schwartz stated that prior to the start of construction City and RHCA staf� approved a temparary construction road off of Outrider Drive with a condition that the road be restored to pre-construction candi�ion after comp�etion of the proJect. The applicant proposes to restore the road, but designate it for a future access to stable and corral. She also stated that approval from the RHCA for this access wouid be required as portion of the access would be located in easements. Furrher, she stated that the applicant is also proposing to �ocate the set aside area for a future stable and corral in a different location than previously approved. The new Iocation would be closer to �he northerly property line, where at one point itn the past a flat a�ea was created and used as play area. The applicant stated thaf the axea where�he original set-aside for a stable and corral was desi�ated proved to be fihe only area suitable £or a septic tank for the property and therefore the set aside needs to be moved. Members of the Commission discussed the area of the set aside and the temporary road. There being no �ux�ther discussion the public hearing was continued to the evening meeting. Minutes 3 Adjourned Regular Meeting B. ZONING CASE NO. 864. Request £ar a Site Plan Review for grading to create a parking area adjacent to the existing Crest Road W. gate house drzve-in-Iane, at 38 Crest Road West and request for Variances to locate a retaining wall in the frant setback, to exporr dirt and to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance on the Iot, (Rolling Hi�Is Community Association, RHCA). The projecf has been determined to be categorical�.y exempt pursuant to the Cali£ornia Enviroxunental Quality Act{CEQA). Planning Director Schwartz stated that Chairman Chelf visited the site with staff on September 11, 2014. She provided background information on the request and pointed out the prvposed turn out area and the walls. She stated that this is a revised plan from the one �he Commission considered in January 20I4 and that the Traffi.c Engineer finds the design problematic. She stated that the Traffic Commission would review the request at a Iater date. RHCA Manager explained the need for this turn out and stated that this proposal takes into consideration the Commissioners concerns expressed while reviewing the previous proposa�. where they felt that too many trees would be lost at an entrance to the Cify. She pointed out the trees that will remain. Mr. Hawkins, a neighbor, questioned the need for this parking area and whether the Association conducted a study to determine such need. Commissioners discussed several options and in response to Commiss�oner Gray, requested that the RHCA Manager submit a pIan at the evening meeting with less angled spaces. There being no fiix�her discussian the public hearing was continued to the evening meeting. C. ZQNING CASE NO. 863. Site Plan Review and a Variance to retain as graded and as built stairs, walls and water feature, constructio� of which exceed the scope of work app�oved administratively, at 38 Portuguese Bend Road (Lot 118-RH, Wheeler}. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pwrsuant to the Califomia Environmental Q�ality Act(CEQA). Plannulg Director Schwartz stated�hat Chairman Che1f visited the site with staff on SeptembEr 11, 2Q14. Planning Director Schwartz reviewed the applicant's request to retain the as built stairs, walls, and water feature and to construct new walls and a pad for a hose bib. She explained the scope of the project approved administratively and how this proposal differs and that staff has no authority under the Site Plan Review pracess to approve the "as built" p�aject. Coxnmissioners viewed the project walking from the bottom to the top and discussed each level of the project and noted the difference in elevatio�befween the :residential pad and the pool pad, in between which the stairs and walls were constructed. Dan Bolton, Engineer, explained the grading that woald be required�a provide a pad for the hose bib. There being no further discussion the public hearing was continued to the evening meeting. Minutes 4 Adjourned Regular Meeting D. Z�NING CASE N4.861. Request for a Szte Plan Review and a Variance for grading to construct a pool, spa and associa�ed planters, stairs, walls and decking and to exceed the maximurn permitted disfurbance of the 1ot as a result af the grading at 2 Middleridge Lane S., (Lot 168-RH), (Johnson). It has been determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA}. Planning Director Schwartz stated that Chairma„ Chelf visited the site with staff on September 11, 2014. Planning Director Schwartz reviewed the applicant's request to construct a pool and spa at 2 Middleridge Lane South. She noted that a letter in support of this project was received. She stated that grading is proposed at 235 cu. yds. of cut and 235 cu. yds. of fill and the approximately 93 cu. yds. of dirt will be exported from the swimming poo1. She further reviewed the deck configura�.on stating that the deck wi11 step down to the poo1. She noted that the distu.rbance is proposed at 41.6°� and a Variance has been requested to exceed the maximum disturbance o� 40%. In response to Vice-Chairperson Smith, she stated that the applicant would need to �emove 1,1�4 square foot area of grading #or the deck in order to meet 40°� net lot area disturbance. Dan Bolton, Engineer, stated that the applxcant praposes to move the pool away from the rear setback Iine to allow more space between the setback and the pool and be in line with the Ieading edge af the covered porch af the house. The Commissioners discussed the con�iguration af the lot and that it is encumbered by wide roadway easements and setbacks. There being no �urther discusszon the public hearing was cor�tinued to the evening meeting. Respectfully submitted by: � Yol hwartz Pl g Director Approved: �� v .. �� � � � J� V. Smith,Vice-Chairperson Dat Minutes 5 Adjourned Regular Meeting