A. 
Authority. Modifications to setback development standards for single-family residential structures, accessory structures, and/or swimming pool/spa mechanical equipment may be allowed and are classified as follows:
1. 
Director's Review Setback Modifications. A director's review setback modification is a modification that is subject to approval by the director of community development or designee.
2. 
Setback Modifications. A setback modification is a modification that is subject to approval by the planning commission.
B. 
Review Criteria.
1. 
Director's Review Setback Modifications. The director or designee may grant director's review setback modifications to the front, side, and rear yard setback requirements, subject to the following conditions a, b, c, d, and e and findings f and g:
a. 
The modification is to allow an encroaching building addition to an existing and legally established residential or accessory structure, to allow encroaching accessory structure, or to allow encroaching swimming pool/spa mechanical equipment.
b. 
The building addition will not encroach into a required front, side, or rear yard beyond the limits already established by the existing structure to which the addition will be attached, or result in less than a five-foot setback.
c. 
If the building addition is a second floor, it will not create additional encroaching floor area that is more than 50% of the amount of overall encroaching floor area on the same side and story as the request, existing prior to the request.
d. 
Within the required setback, the exterior walls and roofs of the structure establishing an existing setback encroachment shall be retained to qualify for a director's review setback modification. Additionally, any project involving demolition of more than 30% of the existing floor area shall comprise a new house for the purposes of this section, and shall not be eligible for a director's review setback modification.
e. 
The swimming pool/spa mechanical equipment will not be located in front of the subject residence or within the front yard setback and will not result in a side and/or rear yard setback less than the applicable building code requirements.
f. 
Topographic features, lot configurations or other conditions make it impractical to require compliance with the yard setback requirements.
g. 
The proposed project preserves the existing scale and character of the surrounding neighborhood, and protects public views, and aesthetic and other property values in such neighborhoods in a manner which is compatible with reasonable development of the subject lot and is consistent with the residential design guidelines as adopted by resolution of the city council.
2. 
Setback Modifications. The planning commission may grant setback modifications to the front, side, and rear yard setback requirements, including fence height standards, subject to the following findings:
a. 
The proposed project is compatible with existing development on the site, and is consistent with other development in the immediate vicinity.
b. 
The modification authorized will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated.
c. 
Strict application of zoning regulations as they apply to such property will result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the general purpose of such regulations and standards.
d. 
The modification will not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or to the use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity.
e. 
The proposed project preserves the existing scale and character of the surrounding neighborhood and protects public views, and aesthetics and other property values in such neighborhoods in a manner which is consistent with the residential design guidelines as adopted by resolution of the city council and compatible with development of the subject lot.
(Ord. 356 § 3, 2006; Ord. 404 § 1, 2011)
A. 
Authority. A director's review approval shall be required per threshold criteria contained in Section 11.11.050(D)(4).
B. 
Review Criteria. The director of community development may grant director's review approval no less than ten calendar days after adjacent property owners are notified by the city that such application is under review and appeal procedures contained in Section 11.45.060 are disclosed. The director shall determine the lot type of the subject property as part of the action. The director may grant recreational vehicle parking or storage review approval subject to the following findings:
1. 
The proposed recreational vehicle parking or storage does not adversely impact the existing scale and character of the surrounding neighborhood and does not adversely impact views and aesthetics in a manner which is incompatible with the development on the subject lot and neighboring properties.
2. 
The proposed recreational vehicle parking or storage would not be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, access, or general welfare, or to the use, enjoyment, or valuation of property of other persons located in the vicinity.
C. 
Revocation. A recreational vehicle parking or storage director's review approval may be revoked by the planning commission through a public hearing process if one or more of the following conditions exist:
1. 
Circumstances have changed or negative impacts have arisen to such a degree that one or more of the findings of fact contained in subsection B can no longer be made;
2. 
The director's review approval was obtained in a false, misleading, or fraudulent manner;
3. 
One or more conditions of the director's review approval have not been fulfilled;
4. 
The director of community development determines that the recreational vehicle parking or storage is or has become a nuisance.
(Ord. 410 § 1, 2013)
A. 
Authority. Planning commission approval shall be required per threshold criteria contained in Section 11.11.050(D)(3).
B. 
Review Criteria. The planning commission may grant large garage review approvals, subject to the following finding: The proposed project preserves the existing scale and character of the surrounding neighborhood, and protects public views, and aesthetics and other property values in such neighborhoods in a manner which is compatible with reasonable development of the subject lot and is consistent with the residential design guidelines as adopted by resolution of the city council.
(Ord. 356 § 3, 2006)
A. 
Authority. The planning commission may approve a floor area review per qualifying criteria established in Section 11.11.050(B)(1)(b).
B. 
Review Criteria. The planning commission may approve a floor area review subject to the following finding: Through its siting, screening, and/or massing effects, the project is compatible with its neighborhood setting and is consistent with the residential design guidelines as adopted by resolution of the city council.
(Ord. 356 § 3, 2006)
A. 
Authority. Excess height as stipulated in Section 11.11.050(A)(1)(d) may be allowed, provided that a director's review height modification is obtained, pursuant to requirements for the director's review height modification. A director's review height modification is subject to approval by the director of community development or designee.
B. 
Review Criteria. The director or designee may grant director's review height modifications for excess height subject to the following criteria:
1. 
Neighbor Notification. The director of community development may grant director's review height review approvals no less than ten calendar days after notification by the city to adjacent property owners that the development request is under review and stating appeal procedures contained in Section 11.45.060.
2. 
Required Findings. A director's review height modification shall not be approved unless the approval authority makes the following findings:
a. 
The excess height accommodates an architectural objective, as dictated by style, scale, and/or architectural consistency with the subject structure or other structures in visual proximity.
b. 
The proposed project preserves the existing scale and character of the surrounding neighborhood and protects public views, aesthetics and other property values in such neighborhoods in a manner which is compatible with reasonable development of the subject lot and is consistent with the residential design guidelines as adopted by resolution of the city council.
(Ord. 356 § 3, 2006)
A. 
Authority. Director's review or planning commission approval shall be required per threshold criteria contained in Section 11.11.050(A)(3).
B. 
Review Criteria.
1. 
Director's Review. The director of community development may grant second floor review approvals no less than ten calendar days after notification by the city of adjacent property owners that such development request is under review and stating appeal procedures contained in Section 11.45.060. The director of community development may grant second floor review approvals, subject to the finding contained in subsection (B)(2) of this section.
2. 
Planning Commission. The planning commission may grant second floor review approvals, subject to the following finding:
a. 
The two-story design includes adequate setbacks, screening and modulation.
b. 
The two-story design preserves the existing scale and character of the surrounding neighborhood.
c. 
The two-story design protects public views, aesthetics, privacy and property values of the neighbors.
d. 
The two-story design is consistent with the residential design guidelines as adopted by resolution of the city council.
(Ord. 356 § 3, 2006)
A. 
Applicability. All director's review and modifications are subject to the following procedures and requirements.
B. 
Application. Any property owner or any individual with the property owner's authorization may submit an application to the director of community development. Application materials shall include the following:
1. 
A completed application form as provided by the city, including a written statement signed by the applicant and property owner describing the proposed project, identifying the specific request, and describing how the request meets the required findings of this chapter;
2. 
A completed environmental assessment questionnaire form, as provided by the city;
3. 
One copy of a map depicting the properties within 100 feet of the boundaries of the project site;
4. 
Project drawings: 13 copies for planning commission projects, or three copies for administrative projects, consisting of the following:
a. 
A site plan: scale of one inch equals 20 feet or larger (or as otherwise approved by the director) including the following information:
i. 
Location of lot lines, easements, and all structures, existing and proposed,
ii. 
Identification of street names,
iii. 
All slopes, contours, and other topographical considerations pertinent to the project,
iv. 
All exterior building dimensions; average lot width determination (where project is to be constructed within 20 feet of a side property line); dimensions of all setbacks, and the location of the nearest building wall on all abutting lots,
v. 
All trees with a trunk diameter of six inches or more, measured four feet above grade, unless waived by the director;
b. 
Building elevation drawings, at a scale of one-eighth inch equals one foot or greater, including the following information:
i. 
Overall building height,
ii. 
Height of significant component masses, and
iii. 
Material and color callouts;
5. 
An application fee in an amount established by the current fee schedule adopted by the city council. Checks shall be made payable to the city of La Cañada Flintridge.
C. 
Review and Notification. Applications for discretionary approvals which have been deemed complete for filing shall be reviewed as follows:
1. 
Review.
a. 
Review Process. The director or designee shall review all application materials and may contact property owners abutting the project site, and conduct negotiations to resolve matters related to the project.
b. 
Conditions. The decision making authority may impose reasonable conditions which would alleviate the effect of an approval upon other public or private property.
2. 
Notification.
a. 
Director's Review. The director or designee shall notify the applicant, the abutting property owners, and all others whose names appear on the application, petition or other correspondence of the decision upon the request.
b. 
Planning Commission. Planning commission review requires a public hearing notice.
D. 
Call-Up and Appeals.
1. 
Call-Up by the Planning Commission.
a. 
All decisions by the director of community development shall be reported to the planning commission at the commission's next regular meeting.
b. 
In addition to any appeal procedures otherwise established by law, the planning commission may cause any such decision to be heard de novo by a majority vote conducted at a meeting at which the decision is reported. In the event that the planning commission does not so vote, the decision of the director of community development shall be final.
c. 
Notification of a hearing on the call-up shall be provided to the applicant and all others whose name appears on the application, petition, or other correspondence, and others expressing interest in such notification by means of written communication to the city.
d. 
The planning commission shall review all application materials, shall conduct a de novo hearing, and shall render a decision according to the required conditions and findings applicable to the case.
e. 
The director or designee shall notify the applicant and all others whose name appears on the application, petition or other correspondence, of the planning commission action on the project.
2. 
Appeal to the Planning Commission. A decision of the director may be appealed to the planning commission, as provided in subsection (D)(4) of this section.
3. 
Appeal to the City Council. A decision of the planning commission may be appealed to the city council, as provided in subsection (D)(4) of this section.
4. 
Appeal Procedure. The following procedure shall be used when a decision on a modification is appealed:
a. 
Appeals shall be submitted in writing within 15 days of the mailing date (as shown on the declaration of service by mail by the city), which mailing shall occur in a timely manner following the decision of the director's review or modification and shall specify whether the appeal is being made on the decision to approve or deny a project, or on a condition imposed upon the project. Reasons for the appeal shall be clearly stated. Appeals to the planning commission shall be submitted to the planning department. Appeals to the city council shall be submitted to the city clerk.
b. 
If the appeal is filed by the applicant, it shall also be accompanied by 13 sets of the documents required in subsection (B)(4) of this section.
c. 
The appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in an amount established by the current fee schedule adopted by the city council. Checks shall be made payable to the city of La Cañada Flintridge.
d. 
Notification of a hearing on the appeal shall be provided to the applicant and all others whose name appears on the application, petition, or other correspondence, and others expressing interest in such notification by means of written communication to the city.
e. 
The reviewing body shall review all application materials, shall conduct a de novo hearing, and shall render a decision according to the required conditions and findings applicable to the case.
f. 
The director or designee shall notify the applicant and all others whose name appears on the application, petition or other correspondence, of the decision on the appeal request.
g. 
In the event of an appeal before the city council, the decision of the city council shall be final.
(Ord. 356 § 3, 2006; Ord. 413 §§ 15, 16, 2013)