466, Roadway repair and replacement, Resolutions & Approval Conditions• �T ./9'
/.6'r / •
RESOLUTION NO. 91-30
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE
FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING WALL, AND
GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH WITHIN THE SIDE YARD
SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING WALL AT AN EXISTING
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING IN ZONING CASE NO. 466.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES
HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Dr. Roberto Unguez
with respect to real property located at 48 Saddleback Road,
Rolling Hills (Lot 9-4-RH) requesting a Variance to encroach into
the front yard setback to construct a retaining wall, and a
Variance to encroach into the side yard setback to construct two
stepped retaining walls.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
public hearing to consider the application on October 22, 1991 and
November 19, 1991 and at a field trip visit on November 2, 1991.
Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project is
categorically exempt from environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act.
Section 4. Sections 17.32.010 through 17.32.030 permit
approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the
Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar
properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a
parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar
properties. A Variance to Section 17.16.060 is requested to
construct a 58 foot curvilinear retaining wall that will not be
more than 5 feet in height that will encroach up to a maximum of 40
feet into the front yard setback. With regard to this request, the
Planning Commission makes the following findings:
A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and
conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do
not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and
zone. The sloping topography of the subject site and the existing
location of the driveway necessitate construction of a retaining
wall within the front yard setback in order to support existing
hillside cuts and slopes.
RESOLUTION NO. 91-30
PAGE 2
B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other
property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied the
property in question. The Variance is necessary because the
existing development pattern on the lot and the topograp!-.y of tl'.e
life require a retaining wal i . Construction of such wall _n the
front yard setback will create a safer accessway and that will also
improve the appearance of the existing driveway.
C. The granting of the Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is
located. The Variance will help to improve the geologic stability
of the slope and will not be visible to surrounding
properties due to the distances between the driveway and other
adjacent residences.
Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves the Variance to encroach up to a maximum
of 40 feet into the front yard setback to construct a retaining
wall not to exceed 5 feet in height at any one point along the
driveway as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto as
Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 8 below.
Section 6. The applicant is also requesting a Variance to
encroach up to 10 feet into the 20 foot side yard setback to
construct two "stepped" 233 foot long retaining walls that will not
be more than 5 feet in height in connection with the existing
driveway leading to 48 Saddleback Road and the residences beyond.
The Planning Commission finds as follows:
A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and
conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do
not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and
zone. The Variance is necessary because access to the property at
48 Saddleback Road already exists. The Variance is necessary to
support the existing slope, to improve the geologic stability of
the site, and to allow the repair of the roadway and provide a
suitable backup space for a garage.
B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other
property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied the
property in question. The Variance is necessary because
replacement of the existing retaining wall will provide stability
and support for the hillside as well as support for the driveway
serving the subject lot at 48 Saddleback and the residences beyond.
• •
RESOLUTION NO. 91-30
PAGE 3
C. The granting of the Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is
located. The Variance will help to improve the geologic stability
of the slope and w:11 not be visible to surrounding properties due
to the distances between the driveway and other adjacent
residences.
Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves the Variance to encroach up to a maximum
of 10 feet into the side yard setback to construct a retaining wall
not to exceed 5 feet in height at any one point as indicated on the
Development Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A, subject to the
conditions specified in Section 8.
Section 8. The approvals specified in Sections 5 and 7 shall
be subject to the following conditions:
A. The Variance shall expire unless used within one year
from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.32.110
of the Municipal Code.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance
approvals that if any conditions are violated, the Permit shall be
suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse,
provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease
such violation and has failed to do so for a period of thirty (30)
days.
C. All requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and of the zone
in which the subject property is located must be complied with
unless otherwise set forth in the Permit •or shown otherwise on an
approved plan.
D. The retaining wall incorporated into the front and side
yard setbacks shall not be greater than five (5) feet in height at
any point along the driveway.
E. The driveway and retaining walls shall be screened and
and shielded from view with native drought -resistant vegetation to
minimize the view from the residence at the North property line.
F. No scraping of terrain shall be permitted.
G. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling
Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to
the issuance of any building or grading permit.
H. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance
of all conditions of this Variance, pursuant to Section 17.32.087,
or the approval shall not be effective.
• •
RESOLUTION NO. 91-30
PAGE 4
I. The working drawings submitted to the County Department
of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the
Development Plan approved with this application.
J. All conditions of this Variance approval, except fcr
Paragraphs (D), (E), and (F) must he complied with prior to the
issuance of a building permit. from the County cf Los Angeles.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 7TH DAY OF DECEMEER, 1991.
ATTEST:
OL.a3 ex-
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
DIANE SANYER, DEPUTY"\CITY CLERK
The foregoing Resolution No. 91-30 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE
FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A F.FTAINING WALL, AND
GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH WITHIN THE SIDE YARD
SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING WALL AT AN EXISTING
SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING IN ZONING CASE NO. 466.
was approved and adopted at a regular adjourned meeting of the
Planning Commission on December 7, 1991 by•the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Commissioners Frost, Hankins, Lay, Raine and
Chairman Roberts
NOES: None
ABSENT:None
ABSTAIN: None
3
i
DEPUTY ITY CLERK