BEVERLY HILLS AGENDA REPORT. Honorable Mayor & City Council

Transcription

1 BEVERLY HILLS Meeting Date: February 7, 2017 Item Number: 0 9 To: From: Subject: AGENDA REPORT Honorable Mayor & City Council Attachments: 1. Resolution Ryan Gohlich, AICP, Assistant Director of Community Development I City Planner RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS DENYING A CENTRAL R-1 PERMIT FOR ADDITIONS TO A RESIDENCE ON A CORNER PROPERTY IN THE CENTRAL AREA OF THE CITY LOCATED AT 9570 VIRGINIA PLACE RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the provided Resolution denying a Central RI Permit for a reduced rear setback for the property located at 9570 Virginia Place. INTRODUCTION At its hearing on April 28, 2016, the Planning Commission approved a Central R-1 Permit to allow a reduced rear setback on a corner property located at 9570 Virginia Place. On May 10, 2016, Stan Kahan, property owner of the residence directly to the west, filed a timely appeal of the Planning Commission s decision. At its formal hearing on December 6, 2016, the City Council voted to uphold the appeal of the project, denying the Central RI Permit, and directed staff to prepare a resolution memorializing the Council s findings. DISCUSSION The City Council held a de novo hearing on December 6, 2016 regarding an application for a Central R-1 Permit to allow a reduced rear setback on the corner property located at 9570 Virginia Place. After holding a public hearing and considering oral and written testimony, the City Council voted 4-0 to overturn the Planning Commission s approval and deny the requested entitlement (Vice Mayor Krasne absent). Based on City Council direction, staff has prepared a resolution memorializing the City Council s findings (Attachment 1). Page 1 of 2

2 Meeting Date: February 7, 2017 FISCAL IMPACT The recommendation in this report does not have significant budget or fiscal impacts for the City. Susan Healy Keene, AICP Director of Community Development Approved IJ Page 2 of 2

3 ATTACHMENT 1 RESOLUTION

4 RESOLUTION NO. 17-R- RESOLUTION Of THE COUNCIL Of THE CITY Of BEVERLY HILLS DENYING A CENTRAL R-1 PERMIT FOR ADDITIONS TO A RESIDENCE ON A CORNER PROPERTY IN THE CENTRAL AREA Of THE CITY LOCATED AT 9570 VIRGINIA PLACE determines as follows: The City Council of the City of Beverly Hills hereby finds, resolves and Section 1. On April 2$, 2016, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider an application for the Project filed by Dane Twichell, on behalf of the property owners, Lawrence and Meryl Stern (the Applicants). Evidence, both written and oral, was presented at said hearing. Based upon the evidence contained in the record on this matter, the Planning Commission determined that all required findings could be made in support of the Project and approved the requested Central R-l Permit. Section 2. The Planning Commission approved a Central R-1 Permit for a project consisting of: Addition of approximately 345 square feet to the existing 2-car garage to allow for the parking of 4 cars within the garage. Addition of approximately 104 square feet of new floor area to the kitchen. Approximately 90 square feet of the new kitchen floor area is proposed to be located at the functional rear of the residence (south side) and 14 square feet located at the functional front (street-facing north side).

5 Addition of approximately 262 square feet to the existing 92 square foot deck above the garage (not considered floor area). The enlarged deck would be accessed through the renovated kitchen, which is considered to be located at the first floor level of the residence. Demolition and replacement of the stairs at the north side of the property, which would reduce the existing 8 rear setback to approximately 6 s. A Central R-1 Permit is required for the following elements: 1. To establish a reduced rear setback for the property. The requested new, reduced rear setback would align with new steps for a new rear setback of 6 8 ; and 2. To allow construction of the proposed three new additions to the residence to be built within the project site s required 31 rear setback. The Planning Commission voted 3-2 to approve the Project (Commissioners Fischer, Block, and Chair Shooshani voted to approve the Project, and Vice Chair Gordon and Commissioners Corman voted to deny the project), and Project-specific findings and conditions were adopted by the Planning Commission pursuant to Resolution No Section 3. Dr. Stan Kahan, owner of 462 Daniels Drive and neighbor of the subject property, hereafter the Appellant, submitted a timely appeal of the Planning Commission s decision approving the Central R-1 Permit. The appeal asserted, contrary to the Planning Commission s findings, that the Project would have a substantial adverse impact on: 1) neighbors privacy and 2) the scale and mass of the streetscape

6 Section 4. On December 6, 2016, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the appeal. The City Council reviewed the matter de novo, and considered evidence, both written and oral, including staff reports and supporting documentation, Applicant and Appellant presentations, and public comment that was presented at the hearing. Notice of the Project and appeal hearing was mailed on November 23, 2016 to the Appellant, Applicant, and all parties originally required to be noticed for the Central R- 1 Permit. Section 5. In reviewing the request for a Central R-1 Permit, the City Council considered whether it could make the following findings in support of the Project: A. That the structure will not have a substantial adverse impact on the scale and massing of the streetscape, B. That the structure will not have a substantial adverse impact on the neighbors access to light and air, C. That the structure will not have a substantial adverse impact on the neighbors privacy, and D. That the structure will not have a substantial adverse impact on the garden quality of the city

7 Section 6. Based upon the evidence presented in the record on this matter, including the staff report and oral and written testimony, the City Council hereby finds as follows with respect to the request for the Central R-l Permit request: A. The proposed structure expansions will have a substantial adverse impact on the scale and massing of the streetscape in that the proposed design appears large and looming over the street and sidewalk because of the proximity of the façade to Virginia Place, the lack of modulation, and incompatibility with the development patterns contributing to the streetscape in the area. Removal or reduction of the deck element, while retaining the proposed garage, would not adequately reduce the bulk and mass. Further, based on Applicant testimony, it is not feasible to independently construct the kitchen additions as designed. B. The proposed structure expansions will have a substantial adverse impact on the neighbors privacy because of the proximity to and visibility into the rear yard areas of neighboring property, which is further exacerbated by the size and potential use of the deck area. Incorporation of any screening techniques that may be available to reduce privacy impacts of the proposed deck or to provide privacy on the deck as viewed from the public rights of way, would further exacerbate the bulky and massive appearance of the garage and deck features of the proposed project. C. The proposed structure expansions will have a substantial adverse impact on the garden quality of the City because the proposed design appears large and looming over the street and sidewalk because of the proximity of the façade to

8 Virginia Place, the lack of modulation, and incompatibility with the development patterns contributing to the garden quality of the area. Incorporation of additional landscape treatments on the deck would increase the bulky and massive appearance of the proposed garage and deck and would not significantly contribute to the garden quality of the area. Section 7. Based on the findings set forth in Section 6 above, and the Applicant s testimony that construction the kitchen additions as designed in the proposed Project would be infeasible, the City Council hereby denies the proposed Central R- 1 Permit. Section 8. The Project has been environmentally reviewed pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000, et seq.( CEQA ), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000, et seq.), and the environmental regulations of the City. Based on its review of the proposed Project, and based on the findings set forth above, the City Council could not make the necessary findings required in order to grant the requested entitlements, and therefore denies the requested Central R-1 Permit. Pursuant to CEQA, a project that is denied or rejected is exempt from the requirements of CEQA pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(5) and CEQA Guidelines Section Therefore, the City Council hereby finds the Project, and the City Council s denial thereof, to be exempt from further environmental review

9 Section 9. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and shall cause this resolution and her certification to be entered in the Book of Resolutions of the Council of this City. Adopted: ATTEST: JOHN A. MIRISCH Mayor of the City of Beverly Hills, California BYRON POPE City Clerk (SEAL) Approved as to form: Approved as to content: LAURENCE S. WIE ER MAHDI ALUZRI City Attorney City Manager )?t/7lt thsan HEALY E, AICP Director of Community Development