Loading...
499, Addition to existing SFR at so, Resolutions & Approval Conditions• RESOLUTION NO. 94-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION NO. 93-23 AND APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 499. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A request has been filed by Mr. and Mrs. Donald A. Kazarian with respect to real property located at 10 Southfield Drive (Lot 36-SF), Rolling Hills, requesting an extension to a previously approved Site Plan Review for substantial residential additions. Section 2. The Commission considered this item at a meeting on June 21, 1994 at which time information was presented indicating that the extension of time is necessary due to the Plan Check process that requires Geology approval and that is expected within 60 days. Section 3. Based upon information and evidence submitted, the Planning Commission does hereby amend Paragraph A, Section 6 of Resolution No. 93-23, dated July 20, 1993, to read as follows: "A. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within two years of the approval of this Resolution." • Section 4. Except as herein amended, the provisions of Resolution No. 93-23 shall continue to be in full force and effect. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 21ST DAY OF JUNE, 1994. �l�LLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: YloZ� . MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK • RESOLUTION NO. 94-16 PAGE 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) ) SS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 94-16 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION NO. 93-23 AND APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 499. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on June 21, 1994 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Frost, Hankins, Raine and Chairman Roberts NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices 1')'O -1. ,T, . \- ..�J-vvJ DEPUTY CITY CLERK • • City • • „I a/kn J9h1{.:S INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: JUNE 21, 1994 &te; NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521. FAX: (310) 377-7288 TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: LOLA UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 499 MR. AND MRS. DONALD A. KAZARIAN, 10 SOUTHFIELD DRIVE (LOT 36-SF) REQUEST FOR A TIME EXTENSION OF ONE YEAR. BACKGROUND Attached is a request from Mr. Don A. Kazarian requesting a one year time extension for a previously approved Site Plan Review approval for substantial additions to an existing single family residence in Zoning Case No. 499. Planning Commission Resolution No. 93-23 was approved on July 20, 1993 (attached). Mr.Kazarian says that the extension of time is necessary to complete the Plan Check process that still needs Geology approval that is expected within 60 days. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the request. ©Printed on Recycled Paper. •• •• Don A. Kazarian 10 Southfield Drive Rolling Hills, California 90274 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS (310) 544-0669 June 10, 1994 Ms. Lola M. Ungar Principal Planner City of Rolling Hills No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274-7288 J U N 1 3 1994 ............ ............ <.,„.,,.,.0 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 499, 10 SOUTHFIELD DRIVE (LOT 36-SF EXPIRATION OF APPROVALS RESOLUTION NO. 93-23 Dear Ms. Ungar: This letter is in reply to your letter of May 27, 1994. At the present time, we are currently in "Plan Check" with the only issue to be resolved is with the Geologist. We expect to have all permits within 45 to 60 days. I have enclosed a check for $200 to cover the filing fee for the time extension payable to the City of Rolling Hills. Please call me if you should have any questions regarding this. Sincerely, Don A. Kazarian MFE4.11.4 OCT 0 81993 23 16.007G CITY OF ROLLING HILLS RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL' TO: By CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 RECORDED!FILED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS RECORDER'S OFFICE LOS AWGELES COUNTY CALIFORNIA (1`11`T AUG ) ' 1993 Please record this form with the Regist1__ return to: City of Rolling Hills, 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 (The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be notarized before recordation). ACCEPTANCE FORM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss ZONING CASE NO. 499 SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT I (We) the undersigned state: I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real follows: 10 Southfield Drive (Lot 36-SF) property described This property is the subject of the above numbered cases. I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions said ZONING CASE NO. 499 SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT X as in I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Print Owner ITh2-lAAl-lu c Sign �� Signature// %%��/� Address 7u✓7/1-Z--"L1) Dell//f_ Ci ty/State Rv//n ///s 902-7�I Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public. Owner 13-PAW- /114/7-1)4/4?-2Wti Name Signature‘ Print Address State of SS. County of City/State On this the day of the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared ❑ personally known to me ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) within instrument, and acknowledged that WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary's Signature 19_, before me, subscribed to the executed it. See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT 1/ No. 5193 `,`"`",-\\`t' -�- :`` `\\l�'�t` '\'�l�'L'\'`1-\\t'�111'�1111t'`�1\ti1"�'�\1'�'\titll'\: �t1\1�\'�Lti'�1\\1'\1-_�11'.,'.1...... �_ ,f .. Sfat"e of 1 �,Pu7 ainL('-.67—) r County of (-)f / PrtiJo_iO,-.J ') J� O`u'7 �i ti On �y� � before me A*-4-%iiL/ //i % ��- U.ujJ`c, , DATE s / JUAME, TITLE OF OFFICER - E.G., JANE DOE, NO7, A�1Y PUBLIC" ) personally appeared U NAME(S) OF SIGNER(S) (J personally known to me - OR - ❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and ac- knowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in -h-i-sfh-e-r-/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by-his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the (1) r,...._.: 4f..L..$ yM.ot �.,1, >.-... ,Oa...,�rs....,,� ,.46.:�,.,, ,......� ..„ OPTIONAL SECTION w.- -,-:x H:..-:..,, ---4.—R_�.u2t..:.. --- --,,, -,-., I:t id r (•: I 4 \`��11\\\ti1"`'�tt1\111'�1\ ' \L`\ti'�t\ \ll\-`ti. 1ti11t1Z. \\11ti\-Ott'`t\1'�1�1\��\'\\`L11t111'�\�"`t-�'�\\'t111t"—t ©1993 NATIONAL NOTARY ASSOCIATION • 8236 Remmet Ave., P.O. Box 7184 • Canoga Park, CA 91309-7184 A JACAUELINE $METH COMM. X 9S2374 Piotcry Pubic — Cclifcnia LOSA GELESCOUNP! N y Ccnm. Ep?rr JAN 24.1597 person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WI--T ESS my hand and official seal. /(/.7`i // SIGNATURE OF NOTARY OPTIONAL SECTION 1-- CAPACITY CLAIMED BY SIGNER Though statute does not require the Notary. to fill in the data below, doing so may prove invaluable to persons relying on the document. INDIVIDUALS ❑ CORPORATE OFFICER(S) TITLE(S) ❑ PARTNER(S) ❑ LIMITED ❑ GENERAL ❑ ATTORNEY -IN -FACT ❑ TRUSTEE(S) ❑ GUARDIAN/CONSERVATOR ❑ OTHER: SIGNER IS REPRESENTING: NAME OF PERSON(S) OR ENTITY(IES) THIS CERTIFICATE MUST BE ATTACHED TO THE DOCUMENT DESCRIBED AT RIGHT: Though the data requested here is not required by law, it could prevent fraudulent reattachment of this form. TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT NUMBER OF PAGES DATE OF DOCUMENT SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVF RESOLUTION NO. 93-23 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 499. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Donald A. Kazarian with respect to real property located at 10 Southfield Drive, Rolling Hills (Lot 36-SF) requesting Site Plan Review for substantial residential additions. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application for Site Plan Review on May 18, 1993 and June 15, 1993 and at a field trip visit on June 3, 1993. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to a Class 3 exemption provided by Section 15303 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Section 4. Section 17.46.020 requires a development plan to be submitted for Site Plan Review and approval before any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period. Section 5. The Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net square foot area of 42,692 square feet. The proposed residence (4,640 sq.ft.), garage (630 sq.ft.), swimming pool/spa (511 sq.ft.), stable (450 sq.ft.), and service yard (126 sq.ft.), will have 6,429 square feet which constitutes 15.1% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 10,916 square feet which equals 25.57% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is on a relatively large lot with most of the proposed additions located away from the road so as to reduce the visual so• oio RESOLUTION NO. 93-23 PAGE 2 impact of the development and is similar and compatible with several neighboring developments. B. The proposed development preserves and integrates into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls) and grading will be minimized to the maximum extent practicable. C. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to Southfield Drive and the southwest portion of the lot. D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible and supplements it with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. E. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to minimize the impact of development. F. The proposed development is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences because as indicated in Paragraph A, lot coverage maximums will not be exceeded and the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood. The ratio of the proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. G. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize the existing vehicular access off Southfield Drive, thereby having no further impact on the roadway. H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review for residential additions as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A subject to the following conditions: •• .• RESOLUTION NO. 93-23 PAGE 3 A. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.46.080(A). B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan Review approval, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval 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 Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in these approvals, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. All retaining walls incorporated into the project shall not be greater than 5 feet in height at any one point. F. All glazed windows in the stable shall be removed and all window openings shall remain unglazed. G. The landscaping plan shall provide for replacement of existing vegetation which is intended to be removed with similar native drought -resistant vegetation that is compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community. H. To minimize the prominence of the building on the pad, the structures, driveway, graded slopes and retaining walls shall be screened and shielded from view with native drought -resistant vegetation that is compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community. I. The landscape plan shall provide for the use of native drought -resistant vegetation along Ringbit Road. J. A landscape plan must be submitted to and approved by the City of Rolling Hills Planning Department staff prior to the issuance of any grading and building permit. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the community. RESOLUTION NO. 93-23 PAGE 4 A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a grading and building permit and shall be retained with the City for not less than two years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. K. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes must conform to the City of Rolling Hills standard of 2 to 1 slope ratio. L. 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. M. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 32.23% and overall building pad coverage shall not exceed 28.62%. N. Grading for the proposed project shall not exceed 730 cubic yards of cut soil and 730 cubic yards of fill soil. O. Any modifications to the project which would constitute a modification to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission shall require the filing of an application for modification of the Zoning Case pursuant to Section 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. P. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Site Plan Review or the approval shall not be effective. Q. Conditions A, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, 0 and P of this Site Plan Review approval must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS2STH D Y OF JULY, 1993. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN RESOLUTION NO. 93-23 PAGE 5 ATTEST: o' A_Af -ate .� MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK The foregoing Resolution No. 93-23 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 499. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on July 20, 1993 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Frost, Hankins, Lay, Raine and Chairman Roberts None None ABSTAIN: None DEPUTY CITY CLERK