HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2002 0918 CC REG ITEM 11JTO:
07V 9
DATE:
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
Honorable City Council
Barry K. Hogan, Community Development
Tv-
Cm' or mooRPARK. CAT,TroR -,;TA
City Coaneil Meeting
ACTTON: at) Lc,V -eS 2 C C
rec esmmer�da��s,_ Doty' Aire l�n tG
Rv:
Direct2V11f_1
September 10, 2002 (CC Meeting of 9/18/02)
SUBJECT: Review and Consideration of Issues Relating to 323
Casey Road Regarding Grading, Retaining Walls and
Driveway Installation
BACKGROUND
At the September 4, 2002 City Council meeting Mr. Andrade, of
the Los Angeles City- County Native American Indian Commission,
spoke to the City Council regarding problems that the residents
at 323 Casey Road were having relative to improvements which
they wish to make to their property. Specifically, concern was
raised relative to the construction of a retaining wall and to
the installation of a replacement driveway. The City Council
directed staff to prepare a report regarding this issue.
The 27,250 square foot property is located on the north side of
Casey Road in the RE -5acre zone (minimum 5 acre single family
lots) . There is one single family home on the site. On July
19, 1999, the Community Development Department issued a Zone
Clearance to construct a 1 to 7 -foot high wall. The plans
submitted as part of the Zone Clearance indicate that
approximately 90 cubic yards of soil would be moved and the fill
would be less than 36- inches. The Zone Clearance was issued
subject to the requirement of a building permit and other
permits which may be necessary, i.e. electrical, plumbing,
grading, etc. The applicant submitted plans to the Building
Division, which were plan checked and a grading plan was
requested since the proposed grading exceeded 50 cubic yards.
The applicant met with the City Engineer to discuss the grading
permit requirement. No building permit or grading permit has
ever been issued. Approximately one year later the retaining
wall and the grading work have been completed and still there is
3;-z' SZI
Honorable City Council
September 18, 2002
Page 2
no building permit or grading permit. A plan check is good for
180 days, after which it expires and the plans, following
standard procedure at the time, were purged.
Subsequently, the applicant decided to remove the existing
driveway to the residence. Since there was still an open code
violation case on the subject property the applicant was told to
clear the violation before the City would consider approving
additional improvements on the subject property. While a permit
for paving or repaving a driveway is not required on private
property an encroachment permit is required for work in the
public right -of -way. Additionally, it appears that additional
grading, without the benefit of a grading permit was done in the
removal of the driveway.
DISCUSSION
Following a meeting with the City Engineer, the applicant's
engineer submitted a grading plan for City review. The grading
plan was submitted on September 4, 2002, more than two years
after it was required. The plans were returned to the applicant
on September 9, 2002, since it only showed the existing
conditions of the site and was not a grading plan.
Additionally, the applicant was informed that the plans were not
on the correct size sheets (22 -inch x 36- inches).
What our investigation has found is that the necessary plans
have not been filed with the City in order to resolve the
outstanding issues.
What needs to be done to resolve the outstanding issues? The
following items need to be provided to the City:
1. A grading plan, prepared on 22 -inch x 36 -inch sheet size
showing the grading proposed. This plan needs to be
submitted to the City Engineer and the double plan check
fee paid. (Double fees are required when work is done
without permits.)
2. A structural plan for the retaining wall needs to be
submitted to the Building Division showing, in sufficient
detail, in accordance with the building code, how the
existing retaining wall was constructed and the double
plan check fee paid.
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COUNCIL \Misc Reports \Tessier cc Agenda Report.doc
Honorable City Council
September 18, 2002
Page 3
3. Once the plan checks for both item 1 and 2 have been
completed and the plans have been changed to meet code
requirements, the grading permit, encroachment permit and
building permit can be issued.
4. After the issuance of a grading permit, encroachment
permit and building permit any grading and /or
construction shown on the plans that remains to be done
can be performed and inspected by Building and /or
Engineering staff.
5. Upon satisfactory completion of the work permitted the
City will sign off on the permit.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Receive and file.
S: \Community Development \ADMIN \COUNCIL \Misc Reports \Tessier cc Agenda Report.doc
:..$