The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1415 . . . RESOLUTION NO. 1415 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AN APPEAL OF THE MODIFICATION COMMITTEE'S CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF MC 89-041 FOR THE 10'-0" HEIGHT IN LIEU OF 6'-0" FOR A PROPERTY LINE WALL AT 1440 SAN CARLOS ROAD. WHEREAS, on April 26, 1989, an application was filed by Mur-Sol, Inc. on behalf of Christopher and Linda Carr for a ten foot high wall along the southerly property line, Planning Department Case No. MC 89-041, on property commonly known as 1440 San Carlos Road, more particularly described as follows: Lot 25, Tract 14656 in the City of Arcadia, County of Los Angeles, State of California as per Map recorded in Map Book 333, Pages 48 and 49 in the County Recorder's office. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on May 23, 1989 by the Modification Committee at which time all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS. the Committee continued the hearing to June 13, 1989 to allow time for the Committee to physically inspect the site; and WHEREAS, on June 13, 1989 the Committee determined that a conditional approval for a wall height of ten feet would secure an appropriate improvement and relieve a hardship, and imposed the following condtions: A. That the concrete driveway. slab be cut back, B. That three, 24-inch box size trees be planted in cut outs in the driveway along the wall, C. That these changes shall be made and maintained consistent with the plan depicting the Committee's conditions of approval, and D. That the type of trees be subject to approval by the Planning Department. WHEREAS, on June 20, 1989 an appeal of the condtions of approval was filed by the property owner Christopher Carr; and WHEREAS, on July 11 and 25, 1989 the Planning Commission heard . . . the appeal, and all interested persons were given full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the Commisssion upheld the Modification Committee's conditional approval with the amendment that the landscaping along the wall may be placed in planters on the driveway surface, and added the conditions that the landscaping grow and be maintained at a minimum height of ten feet above the driveway surface, and that the landscaping pain be reviewed and appproved by the Planning Department. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PlANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARCADIA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. That the factual data submitted by the Planning Depart- ment in the attached report is true and correct. SECTION 2. This Commission finds: A. That the granting of MC 89-041, subject to the following enumerated conditions, will not be detrimental to the public health or welfare, or injurious to the property or improvements in such zone or vicinity: 1. That the concrete driveway slab be cut back, 2. That landscaping be planted in cut outs, or in planters, on the driveway surface, along the wall, 3. That the landscaping grow and be maintained at a minimum height of ten feet above the driveway surface, 4. That these changes shall be made and maintained consistent with the plan depicting the Modification Committee's conditions of approval, and, 5. That the proposed landscaping be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department. B. That the requested modification, subject to the enumerated conditions, will not have an adverse impact on the adjoining property to the south. C. That the conditional approval of MC 89-041 will secure an approporiate improvement and relieve a hardship. SECTION 3. That for the foregoing reasons this Commission denies the appeal, and amends the conditons of approval of MC 89-041. -2- 1371 . . . SECTION 4. The decision and findings contained in this Resolution reflect the Commission's action of July 25, 1989 and the following vote: AYES: Amato, Clark, Papay, and Szany I\OES: Hedlund ABSENT: None SECTION 5. The Sectretary shall certify to the adoption of this Res- olution and shall cause a copy to be forwarded to the City Council of the City of Arcadia. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 8th day of August, 1989 by the following vote: AYES: Amato, Clark, Hedlund, Szany, Papay I\OES: None ABSENT: None w~ 1:1' an, Planning Comm" i City of Arcadia ATTEST: JJ~~ Secretary, Planning Commission City of Arcadia - 3- 1371 . July 11, 1989 TO: ARCADIA CITY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT James M. Kasama, Assistant Planner CASE NO.: MC 89-041: 1440 San Carlos Road Appeal of Modification Committee's Decision INTRODUCTION This application was filed by the contractor, Mur-Sol Incorporated, for a 10 foot high wall along a portion of the southerly property line. The Modification Committee initially heard this request on May 23, 1989 and decided that they needed to physi- cally inspect the site before rendering a decision and continued this application to June 13, 1989. The Committee visited the site on May 24, 1989 and at the June 13th hearing conditionally approved the request. The conditions of approval are being appealed by the property owner. . GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: APPELLANT: LOCATION: Mur-Sol Incorporated - contractor Christopher Carr - property owner 1440 San Carlos Road . REQUEST: 10'-0" height from the lowest adjacent grade in lieu of 6'-0" for a masonry wall along the southerly property line (9283.8.7 & 9283.8.8) LOT AREA: 19,770 square feet / 0.454 acre FRONTAGE: 110 feet along San Carlos Road EXISTING LAND USE & ZONING: The property has been improved with a new two-story residence with an attached three car garage and is zoned R-O / 15,000 GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: SF-4 / 0 to 4 dwelling units per acre SURROUNDING LAND USE & ZONING: The surrounding area is improved with single family residences and is zoned R-o / 15,000 . . . PROPOSAL The subject wall is located along the southerly property line. It TUns from a point in line with the front of the house towards the rear of the property. There is a change in grade level of 3 to 4 feet from the subject property to the adjacent southerly prop- erty. Due to this change in grade, the forward, 80 feet of this wall measures approx- imately 10 feet above the neighboring driveway. The wall provides privacy as well as serving as the required safety barrier along the new driveway which runs along the edge of the change in grade. However, this driveway was extended beyond the length of the wall, and therefore, the applicant wishes to extend the wall to maintain the required safety barrier. Mr. and Mrs. Clark, the neighbors to the south, are primarily concerned about the loss of privacy due to the second floor of the new house. But, they explained, they do not like the imposing appearance of the tall wall and certainly do not want to see it extended any further. MODIFICATION COMMnTl:i1:i ACTION OF JUNE 13. 1989 The Committee (Amato, McIntyre and Woolard) felt that the wall should not be extended any further, and that the driveway extension was not necessary and should be cut back. They also felt that trees along the driveway would provide greenery above the wall and would soften its appearance as well as that of the structure beyond it. The Committee determined that approval of the wall height would secure an appropriate improvement and relieve a hardship provided that the concrete drive- way slab be cut back, and that three (3) twenty-four (24") inch box size trees be planted in cut outs in the driveway along the wall. These conditions were depicted in a plan which was attached to the Findings. The type of trees are subject to approval by the Planning Department. APPEAL The appellant states that in extending the the driveway, a substantial subterranean retaining wall and footing was placed adjacent to the garden wall at the end of the driveway and he contends that cutting the driveway slab back requires the removal of an unnecessary amount of concrete and will make the easterlymost parking space very difficult to use because of the reduced backout. He also does not think that it will be possible to plant trees along the wall because of the footings. Appeal of Me 89..()41 July 11, 1989 Page 2 . . . PLANNING COMMISSION'S FINDINGS Approval If the Planning Commission intends to take action to sustain this appeal, the Com- mission should find that approval of MC 89-041 would secure an appropriate improvement, prevent an unreasonable hardship, or promote uniformity of devel- opment, and move to sustain the appeal and amend or delete the Modification Committee's conditions of approval upon this application and direct Staff to prepare the appropriate resolution incorporating the Commission's action and findings. Denial If the Planning Commission intends to take action to deny this appeal, the Commis- sion should find that approval of MC 89-041 would secure an appropriate improve- ment, prevent an unreasonable hardship, or promote uniformity of development, and move to reject the appeal and uphold the Modification Committee's conditions of approval upon this application and direct Staff to prepare the appropriate resolu- tion incorporating the Commission's action and findings. Attached for your review and consideration are a vicinity map, a plan showing the driveway situation as constructed, the Modification Committee Findings (and plan) of June 13, 1989, and the appellant's letter of June 20, 1989. Appeal of Me 89..()41 July 11,1989 Page 3 , . CITY OF SIERRA M~O~E I l J ~ r:. Rn\IF' - -- tlr., ,., "~"" .... ., -.''''*'i . :~ t~\~: .' ~"J , ... " .. Y, O' ... . ~ ! lS II' '" ~ ; PART or ~ ~ ,. @ " ~ ~ 1 ~ f. , ..0'1 I !. a.. - c . -: , )00 ~ ... . : = . . , U' '1 .. . . . , "- 'i'RA c~"t -NO~ i 11 H . . -i 944 l. 14 . ;U Ii ~ 1;!'~1Q . . . , i 0'" i!~ S ...... If-ill ..:::.-; . .. 2: S 1.'.7 l IJIl.__ .c: . 1\I .. 10 . " ~ 1> '! . ~! l-t .. " : , . ,. '< ,1' 11:, l . " l- n ~a " . )00 ~ .! 17 .. " -l 11 -"- G ~ III '1:T.' ,. - . VICINITY MAP Me 8"-0+' . SC..4l..e: /U= zoo' ~ ifi' ~I I ~; t . ClI; i ~I ~ . I J! ~ ~ ~ , \9i ". l :x: ~ ... ~ '!: -' III ~ r ~ ~ ~ I ... .j ~ ~ ot III ~ ~- -: ~:~:!;;r.~ ";'~':. r'.....,.i.\. '. -I- 'I,'. .... .,'.:;.,..~..... .~O(':"'~:'i...l''''~~ I -,' ..._I~''''''''~\1 ~~,-'~'l:""" ;."'f.;~~~"!i ,~.'} \\\. '.....'....'~,.. '-~:'..i"":..JLi~w;f.j .:.....i: " fill ,'t I:"~~., r:/' ' rr,~,'~~ II~ . ...~, . 1:-' .. I, :~", ,,' "...-.- ';:". ~ l1~ "i. '. , ~' ." .. t"tl~." .'.:1:':,', ,i.I>lf. - . / <:::c:>1I.(;. ~IV~\lfA'(. ~ ~ . o ~ ! e.y.\..."'t,~ 4~ O"~ 104 ~~Qc:.~ l1..Q..,.. PLAN OF EX'~TIN6- SITUATION Ii l(. \ 't-r \ ~G. C) ~ 0"" .Q OholC,. tal. IL. Me eQ-04/ . FINDINGS ARCADIA CITY MODIFICATION COMMI1TEE 8: 15 a.m.. Tuesday. June 13. 1989 CONFERENCE ROOM CONTINUED PUBUC HEARING MC 89-041 Address: 1440 San Carlos Road Applicant: Mur-Sol. Incorporated Request: 10'-0" height from the lowest adjacent grade In lieu of 6'-0" for a masonry wall along the southerly property line (9283.8.7 & 9283.8.8) . FINDINGS The subject property IS being Improved with a two story residence and an attached three car garage. The subject wallis approximately 80 feet long and Is located along the southerly property line. Due to the 3 to 4 foot change In grade. It IS as much as 10 feet tall when measured from the lower side. The wall provides privacy as well as serving as the required safety bamer along the drtveway which runs along the edge of the change In grade. However. the driveway has been extended beyond the length of the wall and therefore the applicant wishes to extend the wall to maintain the required safety barrter. The wall has been approved by the Santa AnIta Oaks Architectural Review Board. Mr. and Mrs. Clark. the neighbors to the south. are primarily concerned about the loss of prtvacy due to the second noor. but. they explained that they do not like the imposing appearance of the tall wall and certainly do not want to see It extended any further. After the initial hearing on May 23. 1989. the Committee vtslted the site on the following day. They felt that the wall should not be extended any further. and that the driveway extension was not neces- sary and should be cut back. They also felt that trees along the driveway would provide greenery above the wall and would soften Its appearance as well as that of the structure beyond It. The Committee determlned that a conditional approval of MC 89-041 wOuld secure an appropriate Improvement and relieve a hardshIp. ACTION Approved. subject to the concrete driveway slab being cut back, and three (3) twenty-four (24") Inch box size trees being planted In cut outs In the drtveway along the wall. These changes shall be made and matntalned consistent with the attached plan. The type of trees are subject to approval by the Planning Department This Modification shall not take effect until the owner and appUcant have executed a fonn avallable at the Planning Department Indicating awareness and acceptance of the conditions of approval. The BuUdlngPermlt for the wall must be "flnaled" within twelve months (June 13. 1990) to Implement the modification granted by this application or It shall become null and void. The project shall be maintained In substantial compllance wtth the plan approved by the Modification Committee. Any alteration made to said plan shall be subject to the review and approval of the Planning Department and may necessitate a new hearing. There Is a five working day appeal pertod for this application. Appeals of the Modification Committee's decision shall be made to the Planning Commission In writing and delivered to the Planning Department within five (5) working days (Tuesday. June 20. 1989) of the Modification CommIttee's decISion and shall be accompanied by an appeal fee of $242.00. Upon an appeal. the applicant shall provide and deliver to the Planning Department a set of 8"xlO" transparenCies. and twelve (12) sets of plans. of the proposal. . COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVE: Amato. Mcintyre and Woolard Kasama . . . Q-A1<'A6-~ 7"M:5N eNCL.. BACKYARD PtAHTISIf / DRIVEWAY .".-- * 1 (3' 1 PtANT~ EN" OF pRfVE.,WAY ~NTLR CUT Glu"T5 fOil z:tt" ~ TR:a.s. L.OCATto"'~. ~tf;.~. EJ</!iTIfo/<r s'-{," H. ~RO~"'" WALL. 57EPPEr> /N 'Tlf15 AREA ,,~ uP 'To IO"O..~.... ............. ..... ... ..... . ............... ......................................................... ~II?I>CL.~ 3'~'" Ac.o~ ..".s_ 4' H. RETAIN/Nt; WALL.. f)<1$t"'NtO- PLA~ PEP'CT'N~ COMM'TT6f,,~ C()ND/-nON~ OF ApPROVAL. l+fO SAN CARI-DS RI>. Me 8Q-04-1 PE-R. CQNOrTION5 F V L. 5CAL.~: '": 10' (",,,.8 . . . ROSl!:t:n DAPI't(l!:q MlI..LS. .JOroN 9CtooqOe;.OE:Q"r ""11.1..1"""'" R, I"RANCIS MILLS & SCHROEDER .. ~.w CO~.OA''''''O''' COuNSItL.L.ORS AT \"AW 'il'H EAST eOL-ORAOO eOuLtvARO CPolQI8TOP""Cj;f A, CARR VINCENT ~ OCMA,",ZO VICTORIA S. El..CER ..sAMES l.. Lt:8E.5ItT...ON T....qo ll'\"OOR PASADENA.. CALIFORNIA 9110649930 -"1.10 il IIoIEMIEIl 0' """S"IWOiTO"'. O.C:. ...... '''\'&0 ... "'CMoeR 0" ~cw VOAIt SUfi ...." June 20, 1989 Planning Commission City of Arcadia Re: 1440 San Carlos Road Owners Christopher and Linda Carr Applicant: Mur-Sol Inc. File MC 89-041 Gentlemen: TEI,.EP"'ONC ISISI 3!!U5-i1is"'e (2131 ee'.0452 "AX: ~e181 3l!lie.oeS5 0' COUNtsEI.. R1CMAqQ L. "ARTMAN .~. ~: .." "'. i ;1 l'. I' ...,. '-. '- . )1,31-' 2:) 1989 ;.. :\' :::~1" ,,~..:.: " :;~,; t"~.~\"""''''fi 'J~lr.' (?1I'k<f (l'l'k I am hereby appealing the June 13, 1989 decision of Modification Committee. Attached is/,my. check fo~ the appeal in the amount of $242.00. ; - ~/. I'll! : 11/) ~/. It; /1 CHRI~TOk~/A. 'b~cf" CAc/pal Enclosure p.s. Please send Cortez Road, Arcadia. the fee correspondence to my home, which My home telephone is 818/445-5074. 611 is