Rolling Hills Studies Putting Limits on the Size of Homes

By GERALD FARIS

July 24, 1988 12 AM PT

Times Staff Writer

As in nearby Palos Verdes Estates, some people in Rolling Hills are getting riled up about big houses.

“Historically, properties in Rolling Hills were developed on a moderate scale, with only a very few exceptions,” City Manager Terrence L. Belanger said in a report to the City Council. “However, recent development of properties has been more extravagant in design and scale.”

According to Belanger, the city was developed as a rustic community with ranch homes that traditionally have been about 3,000 square feet. But in the last five years, as land values have risen, new residents have been pushing those dimensions to more than 15,000 square feet by enlarging existing homes or demolishing them and starting over. The new homes come with such amenities as swimming pools, tennis or racquetball courts and guest houses.

‘They Buy Land’

“People don’t buy houses here any more,” the city manager said. “They buy land.”

Councilwoman Ginny Leeuwenburgh, a resident for 12 years, said some of the new development is “far from the equestrian, rural feel of the community” and something people didn’t expect to see.

Even though this kind of construction is legal under building ordinances, some see it as contrary to goals of the city’s General Plan to preserve the rural character of Rolling Hills and maintain scenic quality.

The city Planning Commission has started work on a development review ordinance that would, among other things, establish a mechanism to determine how much lot area a house can cover, based on the size and topography of individual properties.

The City Council on Monday will consider a Planning Commission recommendation for a 45-day moratorium on construction of homes larger than 6,500 square feet while the large-home issue is studied. A second moratorium would prevent construction in front yards without specific council approval.

Maximum Limit Too Low

But some residents say the city is acting on the large-home issue before listening to what residents want. At a council session two weeks ago, critics said the maximum limit was too low and would devalue Rolling Hills properties. They did not want urgency moratoriums.

The moratoriums will probably be dropped or postponed because passage of the urgency measures would require the vote of all four council members expected to attend. (One council member is out of the country.)

Councilman Godfrey Pernell said that although he is concerned about the adverse impact of some large homes on the city, a moratorium is unpopular and may not be needed. He said he does not expect prospective builders of large homes to rush in with plans while the commission study is under way.

Currently, property owners may cover up to 20% of a lot with a house and an additional 15% with “flatwork,” such as paving and decking. But in a city where lots can be as large as 4 acres, owners who wish to build to the maximum extent of the code can put up very large homes.

After an outcry by some Palos Verdes Estates residents against a proliferation of large homes that block views and shut out light, the City Council there enacted a zoning regulation tying the floor area of homes to lot sizes. Floor area of living space is limited to 30% of the lot area plus 1,750 square feet.

The council also created a neighborhood compatibility review for homes of more than than 12,000 square feet to determine whether they fit into the neighborhood or infringe on the privacy and views of neighbors.

No 2nd Stories Allowed

Belanger said the Rolling Hills situation differs from the one in Palos Verdes Estates because Rolling Hills permits no second stories, which accentuate the bulk of buildings and contribute to view problems in Palos Verdes Estates. In addition, Rolling Hills’ terrain of hills and canyons tends to limit the developable portion of property.

“Maybe you have two acres, but half an acre of building site, and you put all that is allowable,” he said. “It gets concentrated.”

He said the issue is not view impairment but erosion of a “sense of openness and a rural community, especially when viewed from the street.”

Belanger said it will take the commission 60 days to complete its work, which will include public hearings.

Times Community Correspondent Ann Johnson contributed to this story.