Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Zoning Variance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission continues variance request for deck at 8 Buggy Whip Drive

Rolling Hills Planning Commission · May 19, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The commission continued zoning case 26-35 for a proposed 1,650-square-foot deck that would encroach about eight feet into the rear setback, asking the applicant to explore lower-impact alternatives while staff confirmed no additional submission fees would be charged for a re-notice.

City planning staff presented zoning case 26-35 for 8 Buggy Whip Drive and said the applicant proposes "a new 1,650 square foot deck that encroaches approximately 8 feet into the rear setback." The property is zoned RAS-2, and staff said the application requires site-plan review and a variance because the deck would be located in the rear-yard setback. Staff also said three people attended the morning field trip and that no written public comments had been received.

Homeowner Doris Sung told the commission she expects to use the space for family events — "I have 3 daughters, and this is the 1st of my 3 daughters who are probably gonna get married" — and described drainage features under the former riding ring, stressing the need to keep access to the trough for maintenance and to allow for animals to nest. Commissioners and staff questioned whether the proposed deck would be removable and how it would affect drainage; they suggested alternatives such as permeable pavers, DG surfacing or temporary event flooring that could preserve access and reduce impervious surface.

Several commissioners said they were reluctant to convert a space associated with equestrian use into a permanent structure, warning of a potential "slippery slope" that could change the character of the property. Staff clarified the history of on-site structures, noting permits for the barn (1981), riding ring (1982) and other features. After deliberation, the commission voted to continue the item to the next scheduled planning meeting so the applicant can evaluate alternatives and return with modifications or justification for the variance. Staff said re-noticing the item would not incur additional submission fees: "it's not gonna incur any new submission fees," staff said, and the applicant will work with staff before the next meeting.