Loading...
12-15-15FT MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 15, 201� PRESENT: Cha;rman Chelf, Commissioners Smith, Kirkpatrick, Gray and Cardenas Raymond Cruz, Cify Manager Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director Leah Mirsch, resident Tavisha Nicholson,Engineer Tom Thomas, p:roperty owner FIELD TRIP Chairman Chelf called fihe meeting to arder at 8:00 a.m. at 66 Eastfield Drive. Z4NING CASE NO. 893. Request for a Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan Review and Variances for a new 47� square foot cabana, grading, above grade deck, walls, pool and related struct�.res and for encroachment with a partion of the raised deck, walls, pool equipment area and fire place into the rear yard setback; to retain two existing sheds, irellis and barbeque in the rear yard setback; to exceed the maxunum permitted disturbance of the lot; to exceed the maximum perrrtitted total coverage of the lot and to set aside an area f or a fuiure stable and corral in the front yard area of the lot in Zoning Case No. 893, at 66 Easifield Dxive, {Lot 107-EF}, Rolling Hills, CA, (Thomas). The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) puxsuant to Section 15303, Qass 3 exemption Guide�ines. Planning Director Schwartz reviewed the applrcant's request and pointed aut the proposed set aside area for a future stabie and corral in the front yard. She stated that due to the location of the hause in the rear of the lot,there is no other location an the propErty ta provide a set aside for equestrian uses. All presen� proceeded to the side of the house to view the remaining o£ the requests. Planning Director Schwartz exp�ained that the proposed 475 square �oot cabana would be open on one side, £acing the proposed b32 square foot pool and 300 square foot spa. She reviewed the proposed encroachments into the rear setback with the deck, retaining wall, pool equipxnent area and fireplace and the existing structures that encroach into setbacks, such as two sheds, portion of a trellis and a barbeque, which the applicant would like to �retain. She reviewed the 1 requested variances for distnrbed area and total lot coverage. She sfated that �.h.e non-pe�nitted exis�ing structures would require building permifs. In response to Cornmissioner Gray, the project engineer stated that they may be able to Iower the cabana a few feet, however it may require grading out into the Association easement. Commissioner Gray also inquired if the ridgeline could be changed in the same direc�ion as the residence, to reduce the massing effect of the structure. Commissioners Kirkpatrick and Cardenas conunented on t11e proximity of the cabana to the house and noted that the adjacent homes are lower than the subject lot and �hat no windows would face this project. However, they also noted that it might be possible that the cabana could be seen from a house in a distance. Commissioner Smith expressed concern that the natural terrain of the side of the lot will be affected by the proposed construction and that because a11 of the proposed and existing structures, including the house, are located in the side and rear,that porkion of the Iot feels overdeveloped. Commissioners then viewed the existing sheds in the rea� setback and were informed that the RHCA Board granted a license agreement to the owner fo retain the sheds in their current location in the easernent. There being no further discussion on this proJect, the public hearing was continued to the evening meeting of the Plannulg Commission at 6:30 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Yo1 a Sch artz Date Pl 'ng Dxrector Approv a elf, 'r Date 2