My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item 3.1
LOSALTOSHILLS
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2008
>
June 5, 2008
>
Item 3.1
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/19/2016 2:33:36 PM
Creation date
12/1/2014 3:23:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Staff Report
Date
2008-06-05
Item Number
Item 3.1
Description
A Site Development Permit for a New Residence with a Basement, Attached Secondary Dwelling Unit, Cabana, Swimming Pools and Spa. (Continued from May 1, 2008)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
89
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Staff Report to the Planning Commission <br />Lands of Ascension Development LLC <br />26491 Ascension Drive <br />June 5, 2008 <br />Page 7 of 18 <br />reviewing the proposal, staff does not recommend approval of the excessive grading for <br />the following reasons: <br />1) Compliance to the grading policy would not prevent the property owner from <br />constructing a compliant swimming pool or establishing useable outdoor living space. <br />The swimming pool can be relocated and/or redesigned and the flat lawn area can be <br />reduced to minimize the amount of proposed cut or designed to step up from the <br />sunken patio. Terracing is a common technique used by property owners to create <br />outdoor living space that confomvs to the Grading Policy. <br />2) In reviewing similar proposals, staff has consistently directed applicants to redesign <br />their projects to adhere to the Town's grading limits. This property is not unique in <br />that many other sites in the Town are similarly constrained similar terrain, access, and <br />existing vegetation. <br />3) The applicant is proposing up to 16'6" cut for an access ramp that leads to the <br />secondary dwelling unit in the basement. According to the applicant, the ramp will <br />provide ADA access to the second unit. Although there are no ADA requirements on <br />maximum slopes for ramps constructed for single family residential projects, the <br />maximum slope for applicable buildings and facilities is 5%. The slope of the <br />proposed ramp is 9%. Since there is no requirement for exterior access to the second <br />unit and the ramp does not appear to comply with ADA guidelines, staff recommends <br />elimination of the access ramp by moving the retaining wall to the eastern edge of the <br />garage and reducing the required cut to 10'6". <br />16'6" cut with access ramp <br />The Planning Commission has generally approved exceptions to the grading policy for <br />necessary improvements such as driveways or main residences. The Planning Commission <br />has determined that the installation of amenities such as pools, decks, and lawns should <br />16'6" cut 6r <br />��romD <br />t. <br />1` <br />s . <br />16'6" cut with access ramp <br />The Planning Commission has generally approved exceptions to the grading policy for <br />necessary improvements such as driveways or main residences. The Planning Commission <br />has determined that the installation of amenities such as pools, decks, and lawns should <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.