Loading...
02-21-17 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING QF THE PLANNING CQMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS FEBRUARY 21, 2Q17 � CALL MEETING TO ORDER _ A regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hilis was called to order by Chairman Chelf at 6:32 p.m. on Tuesday, February 21, 2017 in the City Council Chamber, at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road,Roliing Hills, California. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Cardenas, Cooley,Kirkpatrick, Seaburn and Chairman Cheif. Commissioners Absent: None. Others Present: Yolanta Schwartz,Planning Director. Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager. Natalie Karpeles,Assistant City Attorney. Ju1ia Stewart,Assistant Planner. Heidi Luce, City Clerk. Tony Fan, 1 Sagebrush Lane. Martin Waters, 4 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road. Jeff Manquen, 2b Middleridge Lane South. Alan McGregor,Landscape Architect. Louie Tomaro, Tomara Design Group. Dave Breiholz, 6 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road. Dan Bolton, Bolton Engineering. Subir Chowdhury, 11 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road. Shane Lamb, Lamb Construction. David McKinnie, 3 E1 Concho Lane. Lauren Sharng, 5 Pine Tree Lane. Keith Murphy, 3 Pine Tree Lane. Tavisha Nicholson,Bolton Engineering. Bob Gaudenti, Gaudenti & Sons. Lynn Gill, 31 Chuckwagon Road. Spencer Karpf, 8 Maverick Lane. Debi Fournier, 30 Crest Road East. Marcia Schoettle, 24 Eastfield Drive. Tina Greenberg, 32 Porluguese Bend Road. Arvel Witte, 5 Quail Ridge Road South. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Approved as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS �N MINUTES AND ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES January 17 2017, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commissian Commissioner Seaburn moved that the Planning Commissian approve the minut�s of the regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on January 17, 2017 as presented. Commissioner Kirkpatrick seconded the motion, which carried without objection. November 1, 201b Joint Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission Minutes- Planning Commission Regular Meeting 02-21-17 - 1 - Commissioner Kirkpatrick mo�ed that the Planning Commission approve the minutes of the Joint Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission held an November 1, 2016 as presented. Chairtnan Chelf seconded the monon, which carried wi#h Cammissioners Cardenas and Cooley abstaining because they were not at the meeting of November 1,2016. � RES�LUTIONS None. PUBLIC HEARiNGS ON ITEMS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS MEETING ZONING CASE NO. 914. Request £or a Site Plan Review to construct 11,052 square foot new residence with a 1,446 square foot garage and 6,620 square foot basement, 1,336 square foot '� swimming pool and grading of 24,900 cubic yards of cut and fill, (including excavation and s compaction); and Conditional Use Perrnit for a 744 square �oot two-story stable with a 504 sc}uare foot ground floor and 240 square foot laft, a 1,491 squaxe foot corral, a 6,985 square foot tennis court, and a 804 squaxe foot guesthouse with 195 square feet of attached covered porches. Also proposed axe variaus outdoor amenities and a new driveway. The subject property is located at 11 : Upper Blackwater Canyon Road (Lot 99�B-RH) Rolling Hills, CA, (Author Homes, LLC). The � project has been determined to be ca#egorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA), Section 15303. Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for stat�s comments. Assistant Planner Stewart reviewed the applicant's request to construct a new residence, basement, garage and other amenities in Zoning Case No. 9�4 at 11 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road. She stated tha� disturbance is proposed a� 34.7% with 25,000 cu. yds. of cut and 25,000 cu. yds. oF fill with export of approximately 15,000 cu. yds. from the basement excavation. She further sta.ted that there was a previously appro�ed project at this location and reviewed the differences between this proposal and�he previous project stating that the height is approximately the same and the applicant proposes to lawer the building pad by 2 ft. as in the previausly approved project. Ms. Stewart fitrther reviewed the proposed stable and guesthouse. She stated that at the field#rip earlier in the day, a neighbor requested that the stable and corra� be relocated and the applicant has since submitted a revised plan maving the stable and corral approximately b3 ft. further into the interior of the subject property in order to address the neighbor's concerns. Ms. Stewart reviewed the concerns addressed by neighbors and other residents staxing that the concerns primarily involve screening of the stable and tennis court and placement of the sta.ble. She reviewed the proposed landscape plan,which addresses the screening of the tennis court and stable. Brief discussion ensued cancerning the basement, wa11s and location of the stable. Chairrnan Chelf called for public comment. Tony Fan, 1 Sagebrush Lane addressed the Planning Commission ta express concern regarding noise from the tennis court. In response to Chairman Chel�, Ms. Schwartz stated that normally the City does nat regulate noise from tennis courts, but there are measures that can be taken witt; regard to the surface of the court and screening that rnay address noise issues. Martin Waters, 9 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road addressed the P�anning Cornmission stating that he does not want his property to be averlooked by this project and he would like to see a landscaping plan showing how the project will be screened. He further expressed continued concern rega�rding the lacation of the stable and asked that it be moved further away frarn his property. Jeff Manquen, 2b Middleridge Lane Soufh addressed the Planning Cornmission to express concem regarding the visibility of the stable and guest house frorn across the canyon and asked that they be screened. Alan McCrregor, Landscape Architect addressed the Planning Commission to review the landscape plan and the revised location of the stable. In response to Commissioner Kirkpatrick, staff confirmed that the stable was moved 63 ft. further away frarn Mr. Waters' house. Mr. McGregor stated that it could be rnoved an additionai 50 ft. further and will be screened to address the concerns raised regarding visibility. With regard to the noise from the tennxs court, Mr. McGregor commented that there is a Minutes- Planning Commission Regular Meeting 02-21-17 -2 - cushioned surface that could be placed over the asphalt or concrete to attenuate the noise and they would be wiliing to incorporate such a surface. Loui� Tomaro, Tomaro Design Group addressed the Planning Commission to explain the configuration of the basement and the proposed exit as amended based on the Rolling Hills Communi�y Association's requiremer�ts. With regard to the tennis court he stated that it will be surfaced with a rubberized surface, as well as lowered by 3-4 ft. and screened with landscaping to further address the concerns regarding sound. Discussion ensued cancerning the location of the stable. Dave Breiholz, 6 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road addressed the Planning Commission to inquire about the drainage plan given that his property is down stream fram this property. In response to Mr. Breiholz's inquiry, Ms. Stewart reviewed the proposed drainage p�an. Dan Bolton, Bolton Engineering further explained the proposed drainage plan to address Mr. Breiholz's concern. Commissioner �irkpatrick expressed general support for the projEct stating that he appreciates that the applicant is working with the neighbors to address the concerns raised. Commissioner Seabu�n concurred. Corntnissioner Cardenas also expressed support for the project and suggested that the project be fiu-�her modified to move the stable further away from Mr. Waters' property and to address tYie issues raised regarding screeriing. Commissioner Cooley conc�arred. Subir Chowdhury, 11 Upper Blackwate�r Canyon Road addressed the Planning CommissiQn to express concem that moving the stable too far will put it in the �iew of the guesthouse. Mr. McGregor commented that mov�ing it 50 ft. won't put it the guesthouse view. Following discussion, Commissioner Cardenas moved that the Planning Cornmissian direct staff to prepare a Resolution granting approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 914 at 11 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road as amended to mave the stable an addztional 50 ft. to address the neigl�bors' concerns with the standard fmdings of fact and conditions of approva�plus additional conditians that the applicant submit a landscaping plan to show screening of the stable from all sides; that the tennis court be of such a surface to minimize naise; and that the tennis court be screezied appropriately from view and sound. Cammissianer Kirkpatrick seconded the motian,which canried without objection. ZONING CASE NO. 916. Request for a Site Plan Review and Vaxiances to retain a partially excavated area for a proposed 1,322 square foot basement, a partion of which would be located in the front setback and to retain unpermitted patio with an outdoor barbeque area supported by a 5' high retaining wa�l; grading for dirt pathways that are buttressed by 3' high railroad tie wa11s and a 3'S"high concrete block retaining wall in the side and front setback. The applicant also requests a Site Plan Review and Variances for a new 76.3' long, 4'6" high retaining wall, a portion of which would be located in the side setback, far refiaining walls that do not average out to 2.5' in height and ta exceed the max�imum permitted disturbance (48.8%) of the net lot area, including for the set aside area for a future stable and corra�. Project is located at 5 El Concho Lane, {Lot 10-GF), Rolling Hills, CA, (de Miranda). Project has been determined to be exempt froxn the California Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA). Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for stafPs comments. Planning Director Schwartz reviewed the applicant's request stating that the Planning Commission visited this site earlier in#he day. She stated that the applicant proposes to retain conditions �1�.at were pxeviously constructed without permits and to add some other ameruties. She further reviewed the applicant's request ta construct a 1,322 sq. ft. basement under the existing footprint of the residence to be partially located in the frant yard setback. She stated that the applicant a�so proposes additional walls, grading for pathways and to retain an unpermitted patio with an outdoor barbeque area supported by a 5' high retaining wall. She stated that a 3.5 ft. wall was constructed in the side se#back as an emergency measure to retain a pipe that ruptured and the app�icant proposes to keep that wall. She stated that the applicant also needs to remediate damage further down on the praperty, a result of runoff from#1�e recent rains, but that it needs to be designed and submitted to the County. Chaurnan Chelf called for public comrnent. Minutes- Planning Commission Regular Meeting 02-21-t7 -3 - Shane Lamb, Lamb Canstruction addressed the Planning Commission to introduce himself to offer to answer any questions. Cammissioner Seaburn expressed concem regarding the amount of work that was done on the property without permits, specifically the outdoor barbeque area. Commissioner Kirkpatrick expressed concern regarding the drainage issue that was visible on the property today. Mr. Larnb commented that it was#he ruptured pipe that caused a11 of the erosion and the reason the wa11 was constructed in the side setback was to address an emergency situation. Commissioner Kirkpatrick commented that he understand the need to address the emergency situation, but expresse� concern r�garding the location of the outdoor barbeque axea. Commissioner Cardenas expressed concern regarding the walls and suggested that the applicant consult an engineer ta determine what is minimally necessary to retain the slope, He also expressed concern regarding the outdoor barbeque area. Commissioner Cooley concurred. Discussian ensued concerning the ways to address the drainage issue. The Planning Commission expressed general support fo:r the walls necessary to address the drainage issues but suggested that they be engineered properly so that future problems do not arise. David McKinnie, 3 El Concha Road addressed the Planning Commission to express cancern regarding the drainage and its affect on the stability of the adjacent properties. Mr. Lamb addressed the Planning Commission stating that the applicant is warking with an engineer to address the drainage issue; but, all of the water draining from Gerogeff Road and Ei Cancho Lane ends up an this property and the property owner does nat feel it should be his responsibility solely. Further discussion ensued concerning the drainage issues, ways to address the issues and who is responsible for addressing such issues. Mr, McKinnie suggested that Mr. Lamb approach the Rolling Hills Community Association to place this matter on an agenda before the RHCA Board of Du�ectors. Fallowing discussion, the Planning Commission asked the applicant to present plans to address the drainage issue and ha�e an engineer present at the next meefing to present a plan of action for the drainage and ascertain that the short walls along the paths are adequate to support the slope between the paths. The Planning Commission expressed general suppart for #he area exca�ated for the proposed basement, paths, and the as bi.�ilt retaining wa11 in the side setback, if it is determined that this wall is necessary for the drainage device; and did not expressed support for the unpermitted patio and outdoor barbecue area. The public hearing was continued. ZO1vING CASE NQ. 915. Request for a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Variance at 1 Middleridge Lane North {Lot 15, i6, 17-MR), Rolling Hills, CA, (Cipolla). APPLICANT REQUESTED CONTINUANCE TO MARCH 21, 2017 FIELD TRIP MEETING. Plannxng Director Schwartz reported that at the request of the applicant, consideration of this matter was continued to a field trip scheduled to be held on Tuesday, March 21, 2017 beginning at 7:30 a.m. at 1 Middleridge Lane North. The public hearing was continued. NEW PUSLIC HEARINGS ZQNING CASE NO. 917. Request for a Site Plan Review to construct a new residence additian of 2,065 square feet, a new 2,065 square foot basement, 7Q0 square foot swimming pool, and grading of 3�,920 cubic yards of dirt, (which includes excavation and compaction) and construction of various miscellaneous accessory structures; Conditional Use Permits for a new 1,100 square foat detached garage, 7,000 square foot tennis court, 1,200 square faot stable, 9,150 square foot corral and a n.ew second driveway; and Variances to exceed�he maximum permitted disturbance of the lot and to grade more than 750 cubic yards of dirt and over 10,00D square feet surface area for the tennis court. The subject properiy is located at 5 Pine Tree Lane (Lot 94-RI� Rolling Hills, CA, (Sharng). The project has been determined to be categorically exempt(Class 3) purstxant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15303. Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Assistant Planner Stewark revievved the applicant's request to construct a new residential addition, basem�nt and other accessory Minutes- Planning Commission Regular Meeting 02-21-17 -4 - + structures an'd amenities including a tennis court and stable in Zoning Case Na. 917 at 5 Pine Tree Lane. She stated that the applicant proposes to retain the exisdng driveway and to construct a second driveway to serve the house as well as a pathway to serve the stable. She stated that this proposal will replace the previousty approved project, which the applicant has since abandoned. She further reviewed the grading plan and the proposed stable. She sta.ted that a variance is requested for grading/disturbance associated with the tennis court. Ms. Stewart further stated that one neighbor at 3 Pine Tree Lane, who shares a driveway with the subject property inquired about the project. Lauren Sharng, 5 Pine Tree Lane addressed the Planning Commission to further expiain the project and why the original proposal was abandoned. She sta.ted that with the revised proposal they attempted to minimize the impact on the neighboring property as much as possible. Keith Murphy, 3 Pine Tree Lane addressed the Planning Commission to further explain his concerns associated with the previous project. He stated tha# he supports the project as currently proposed. He asked the Planning Commission to consider a conditian that ailows his continued use of the current shared driveway as was placed in the previous approval. In response to Mr. Murphy's request regarding the driveway, Ms. Sharng sta.ted that the driveway is entirely on her properiy and it is at her discretion whether or not to grant an easement. Tavisha Nich.olson, Bolton Engineez�ing addressed the Planning Commission ta further explain the pxoject as compared to the previously approved project. Following staff's presentation and public testimony, ttxe members of the P�anning Commission detcrmined that a site visit should be scheduled to provide the members of the Planning Commission with further understanding of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 917 at 5 Pine Tree Lane. The public hearing was continued. ZONING CASE NO. 896-R. Request for a Major Madification to Zoning Case No. 896 requiring 5ite Plan Review, Conditiona� Use Permit, and Variances to make changes to a previously approved project, which entails grading totaling 7,484 cubic yards af dirt, for a 13,93Q square foot dressage arena, a 1,736 square foot residential addition wi#h 1,056 square foot basement azid 480 square foot attached garage; fo retain but reduce in size to 8G3 square feet an existing detached garage, constnxct a new 2,430 square foot sta.ble and wash area with 1,350 squar� feet of fenced open turnout paddocks, and a new 480 square �oot infimity pool; to construct a retaining wall in the side setback(not to exceed five feet in height), and to exceed the maximurn permitted disturbance of the lot. Tlie subject property is located at 11 Saddleback Road (Laf 48- 1-RH 48-2-RH)Ro�l�ixig Hills, CA, (Warren). The project has been dete�nined�o be ca�egorically exempt {Class 3} pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15303. Chairman Chel� introduced the item and asked for staffls comments. Assistant Planner Stewart reviewed the applicant's revised request in Zoning Case No. 896-R at 11 Saddleba.ck Road. She stated that this request is a rnajor rnodificatian to a previous approval, which will result in a house remodel and addition,basement,new pool,new stable and less grading than the previous approval. She further stated that the detached garage is now proposed to remain and not be converted to a stable. She stated that if the modifications are denied, the applicant will still be able to construct what was previously approved but the applicant feeis that the modification have a lesser impact on the averall property. She further reviewed the previously approved project stating that the proposed modifications would keep the proposed arena at grade which �requires a retaining wall in one area but eliminates all of the exterior retaining walls associated with the previous project; include a new stable,modifications to the house and a new infinity paol. She reviewed the p�ans showing the previously proposed project as compared to �he revised proposal. In response to Commissioner Cardenas' inquiry, Planning Directar Schwartz stated that the 1ot merge was approved but sill needs to be recarded, so the applicant would not be able to pu11 any permits for this project until the dacuments are recorded. Chairman Chelf called for public comment. Hearing none, the Planning Commission determined that a site �isit should be scheduled to provide the members of the Planning Commission with further understanding of the appiicant's request in Zaning Case No. 89b-R at 11 Saddleback Road. Minutes- Planning Commission Regular Meeting 02-21-17 - 5 - Bob Gaudenti, Gaudenti & Sons addressed the Planning Commission to ask if the Planning Commission would consider having a site�isit befoxe the next Planning Commission in oxder to expedite the project. Following discussion concerning the scope of the project, the noticxng required for the field trip and the time�ine far reviewing and approving the project, the members of the Planning Cammission determined tha.t it was not feasible to hold the field trip any sooner than the next meeting. The public hearing was continued. SCHEDULE OF FIELD TRIPS The Planning Commission scheduled a field trip to the �ollowing properties to be held on Tuesday, March 21, 2017 beginning at 7:30 a.m. 5 Pine Tree Lane 11 Saddleback 1 Mic�dleridge Lane N. OLD BUSINESS CONTINUED PUBLIC FORUM ON VIEW PRESERVATION ORDINANCE Chairman Chelf introduced the itern and asked for staf�s comments. Planning Director Schwarfz reviewed the background on this matter and stated that the Planning Commissian's task i� to review the cancepts discussed in the ad hoc committee and focus on ga.ining consensus as to the concepts rather than the actual language of the ordinance. She stated that once the concepts are agreed on, staff will prepare the actual ordinance Ianguage for the Planning Commissian's consideration. Ms. Schwartz further reviewed the staff report, which includes the ardinance language prepared by Spencer Karpf, the informa�ion prepared and submitted by Lynn Gill. She stated�hat also,placed on the dais is an additional correspondence from Mr. Gill regarding the initiative petition�hat was submitted to the City Clerk. City Clerk Luce stated that the petition was verified and a Certificate of Sufficiency will be presented to the City Council at its meeting af February 27,2017 for consideration. Planning Director Schwartz stated that at its last meeting, the Planning Commission asked staff to do further research regarding the proposed definitions related to the arborist terms. She stated that staff was unable ta fmd industry standard definitions, but the proposed defmitions appear to be appropriate based on staff research of other ordinances. She further reviewed what was discussed and decided at the �ast meeting on this subject and stated that there are otl�er terms relatec� to views that the Planning Commission will need to decide how to define — including established view and other terfns relafive to views. The Plar�ning Commission began taking public testimony and discussing the concepts starting with"Established View." Chairman Chelf called for public comment. Lynn Gill, 31 Chuckwagon Road addressed the Planning Commissian stating that the measure was submitted as an insurance policy with the understanding that it could be withdrawn from the ballot if requested by the pro�onents in sufficient nme before the March 2Q19 election. He urged the Planning Commission tfl continue its careful deliberation of this matter and take its time ta ensure that a fair ordinance is ultimate�y adopted. Spencer Karpf, 8 Maverick Lane addressed the Planning Commissian to further explain how the sample ordinance he wrote was created stating that it involved significant input from the ad hoc committee. He stated that it is designed to protect both views and vegetation. He urged the Planning Commission to not write the ordinance,but rather come up with concepts that the Commission agrees with within the context of what has been draft�d, the opinions of the members of the Planning Commission and with input from members af the community. Planning Director Schwartz sta�ed that the concept of"Established View" means that a property owner shauld be eligible for the view that existed when the property was purchased but the question is should it be expanded to include "any other specific point in time following purchase." Chairman Chelf called for public comment on the concept of"Established View." Minutes - Planning Commission Regular Meeting 02-21-17 - 6 - Established View Debi Fournier, 30 Crest Road East addressed the Planning Commission in support of protecting established views and expanding the scope of the concept. She expressed cancern regarding views that are diminished overtime. Marcia Schoettle, 24 Eastfield Drive addressed the Pla�zting Commission stating that it is important that established views be documented. She agreed with the cancept of protecting established views. Tina Greenberg, 32 Portuguese Bend Road addressed the PIanning Commission concwrring with Mrs. Schoettle. Commissioner Cardenas commented tha# there is one school of�tb.ought that says a properry owner is entitled to a view they had at any point in time, presumably tha# can be documented, and asked if there are any member of the public that would like to speak in opposition to that concept. Arvel Witte, 5 Quail Ridge Road South addressed the Planning Commission to express concern regarding the cancept of view corridors and enforcemer�t autho�ity. Mr. Gill suggested that the Planning Commission consider the proposed definition as provided an circle page 47 of the staff report and expressed support of that concept. The Planning Commission concuired with the concept that an established view is the view that existed when the properry was purchased or some later date. Planning Director Schwartz stated that the next concept for consideration is should the vegeta.tion owners also have rights allawing for the protection of�egetation that existed when a property owner purchased the property. Discussion ensued cancerning documenting the established vegetaxion and areas where this may pose conflict. Established Vegetation Mr. Gill referred to circle page 48 of the staff report where Mr. Karpf's sample ordinance defnes established view. Ms. Schwartz commented that established means existing regardless of its size. Mr. Gill noted that the intent is for the vegetation owner to mainta.in their vegetation so that it doesn'# grow into a view. N1.�s. Schoettle cornrnented that it is important for both parties to maintain documentation of the view and the vegetation. Planning Director Schwartz stated that Commissioner Cairdenas has referenced the Tiburan ordinance se�eral times and provided a copy for the Commission's reference. Discussion ensued conce�ning the responsibilities associated rvath the rights of both vegetation owners and view seekers. With regard to concept of a �ight to established vegeta#ion, the Planning Commission concurred that the concept is worfhwhile. Consideration of this matter was continued. NEW BUSINESS None. ITEMS FROM STAFF Status an Ad Hoc Committee, including members of Caballeros far the purpose of reviewing construction of stables, (oral). Planning Director Schwartz reported that Caballeros appointed JiII Smith, Dave Breiholz and 7ack Srnith to serve on the ad hoc committee with Commissioners Cardenas and Cooley to review and discuss sta.ble construction; and staff is working with the ad hac committee to schedule a meeting. Minutes - Planning Commission Regular Meeting 02-21-17 - 7 - ITEMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION None. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the Commission, Chairman Chelf adjourned the meeting at I0:00 p.m. to an adjourned regular meering of the Planr�ing Cornmission scheduled to be held on Tuesday, March 21, 2017 beginning at 7:30 a.m. for the purpose of canducting a site visit to S Pine Tree Lane, 11 Saddleback Road and 1 Middleridge Lane North. The next regulaz meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled to be heid on Tuesday, March 21, 2017 beginning at b:30 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling Hills Ciry Hall,2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. Respectfully submitted, Heidi Luce City Clerk Approved, � Br C irman Minutes - Planning Commission Regvlar Meeting 02-2I-17 - 8 -