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