The URL can be used to link to this page

Planning Commission Meeting 08-16-2016CITY OF ROLLING HILLS PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL AND POSTING STATE OF CALIFORNIA ss COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES I am a citizen of the United States. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within proceeding; my business address is 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. On the 12'" day of Auugst, 2016, I serve the within Planning Commission Meeting Agenda Regular Meeting - 08/16/2016 a copy of which is annexed hereto and made a part hereof, on the person, or persons, named below by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in the United States mail at Rolling Hills, California addressed as follows: Emailed MAILED DROPBOX DELIVERED Assistant RH ListSery Interested City Attorney Parties Also posted at City Hall and at www.Rolling-Hills.org City Manager Planning Commission 1 certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on the I2'1 day of August, 2016 at Rolling Hills, California. Ewa Nikodem Administrative Assistant 1 c!I R:�� gWLa INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 6:30 PM TUESDAY, AUGUST 16, 2016 ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD, ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON MINUTES AND ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. July 19, 2016, Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission B. July 19, 2016, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission 6. RESOLUTIONS A. RESOLUTION NO. 2016-19. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A STABLE WITH COVERED PORCHES, CORRAL, AND A RIDING RING, TO ENCROACH WITH THE RIDING RING INTO THE FRONT SETBACK, AND TO EXCEED THE PERMITTED DISTURBANCE OF THE LOT IN ZONING CASE NO. 904 AT 34 SADDLEBACK ROAD, (DELGADO). THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, (CEQA) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303 OF THE CEQA GUIDELINES. B. RESOLUTION NO. 2016-20. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW -1- RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT, GARAGES, COVERED PORCHES, SWIMMING POOL WITH A SPA, RETAINING WALLS AND NEW DRIVEWAY; AND REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A GUEST HOUSE AND STABLE WITH LOFT AND CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 902 AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, (LOT 132A -MS), (HYNES). THE PROJECT IS EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303, CLASS 3 EXEMPTION GUIDELINES. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON ITEMS CONTINUED FROM A PREVIOUS MEETING A. ZONING CASE NO. 909. Request for a Site Plan Review to construct a 630 square foot covered porch with an out -of -grade condition, with a trellis and accessory structures, and a Variance from the requirement to provide a set -aside area for a stable and corral at 7 Southfield Drive (Lot 4 -SF) Rolling Hills, CA, (Klerman). The project has been determined to be categorically exempt (Class 3) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15303. 8. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ZONING CASE NO. 910. Request for a Site Plan Review for room addition and to reconstruct an existing garage, for a swimming pool, new driveway and grading and request for a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot in Zoning Case No. 910, at 85 Crest Road East, (Lot 69 C -1 -MS), Rolling Hills, CA (Zee). The project has been determined to be categorically exempt (Class 3) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15303. 9. SCHEDULE OF FIELD TRIPS (September 20, 2016) 85 Crest Rd E. 3 Poppy Trail (porch addition in setback) 10 Pine Tree Lane + 2 vacant lots (Lot line adjustment/grading) -TENTATIVE 10. ITEMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION 11. ITEMS FROM STAFF 12. ADJOURNMENT In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting due to your disability, please contact the City Clerk at (310) 377-1521 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and accommodation for your review of this agenda and attendance at this meeting. Documents pertaining to an agenda item received after the posting of the agenda are available for review in the City Clerk's office or at the meeting at which the item will be considered. -2- Agenda Item No: 5A Mtg. Date: 08-16-16 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 19, 2016 FIELD TRIP PRESENT: Chairman Chelf, Commissioners Cardenas, Gray, and Kirkpatrick Raymond Cruz, City Manager . Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director Wendy Starks, Associate Planner A. ZONING CASE NO. 902. Request for a Site Plan Review for the construction of a new 11,100 square foot residence, with 11,100 square foot basement, 1,540 square feet attached garages, 2,654 square feet covered porches, 864 square foot swimming pool and spa, trellises, a new driveway and an outdoor kitchen and grading for a total of 51,625 cubic yards of dirt, which includes over -excavation and re -compaction, of which 785 cubic yards will be exported; Conditional Use Permits to construct an 800 square foot guest house, and a 1,300 square foot stable with a 792 square foot loft in Zoning Case No. 902, at 23 Crest Road East, (Lot 132A -MS), Rolling Hills, CA (Hynes). Also present at this field trip were: Tavisha Nicholson, Engineer Anthony Inferrera, Architect Mr. and Mrs. Hynes, Property Owners Mr. and Mrs. Mackenbach, residents 56 Portuguese Bend Road Carmen Schaye, resident 58 Portuguese Bend Road Charles Raine, resident 2 Pinto Road William Hadley, resident 26 Crest Road East Lucy Agid, resident 60 Portuguese Bend Road Brenda Akuma, resident 2 Buckboard Lane Linda Loo, visitor Chairman Chelf called the meeting to order at 7:30 a.m. at 23 Crest Road East. Planning Director Schwartz reviewed the applicant's revised project, advised a letter was received from an attorney representing a collective of residents, and explained that Tavisha Nicholson will present information about how the drainage will be contained at the evening meeting, although the information is included in the staff report for the field trip meeting. Commissioner Gray asked questions regarding cut/fill and export of dirt and asked if the City can require that the County engineers be the reviewing agency for this project. Commissioner Kirkpatrick asked about the cut on the bottom pad and Tavisha Nicholson and Director Schwartz responded to their questions that there is no fill proposed on that pad. In response to Commissioner Chelf, Tavisha Nicholson addressed the key and benching method of grading. Director Schwartz advised that the applicant's soils engineer will be present on -site for the duration of the grading and will prepare daily reports which will be submitted to City's building department engineers for review. In response to Charlie Raine why a dissipater and not a cistern is proposed on the lower pad, Ms. Nicholson stated that is something they can look at if directed to by the Planning Commissioners. Lucy Agid voiced her strong objections to the project. Ms. Nicholson walked the group through the site and in particular pointed out the two new cisterns that will be 4' below finished grade. In response to Mr. Raine, Ms. Nicholson explained that the cisterns would hold 66,000 gallons of water, 33,000 gallons each. Commissioner Gray asked if there are other projects in the City that have cisterns and City Staff explained that the project next door at 29 Crest Road East has a cistern. Charlie Raine asked if the proposed drainage catches all of the run-off from impervious surfaces including roofs and Tavisha Nicholson stated that it does. Discussion ensued about calculations of impervious surface of the proposed project. The group toured the lower pad and Tavisha Nicholson pointed out the proposed structures, the guest house, stable, corral and the dissipater, which has been relocated away from homes below. Tavisha Nicholson pointed out the access to the stable and will be permeable and per zoning code. Hearing no other comments, Chairman Chelf adjourned the public hearing to the evening meeting. B. ZONING CASE NO. 904 -REVISED. Request for a Site Plan Review, a Conditional Use Permit and a Variance for grading and construction of an 1,140 square foot stable with 1,032 square feet of covered porches, 1,950 square foot corral and 5,500 square foot riding ring, to encroach with the riding ring into the front and side setbacks and to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot at 34 Saddleback Road (Lot 102- RH) Rolling Hills, CA, (Delgado). Also present at this field trip were: Ms. Eddy Delgado, Property Owner Russ Barto, Architect Mark Walters, construction project manager for property owner Carole Hoffman, resident 3 Hillside Lane Associate Planner Wendy Starks reviewed the applicant's revised project which includes a Variance to locate the 5,500 square foot riding ring in the front yard and in the front setback and advised that disturbance of the lot will increase from 63.3% to 68.8%. Director Schwartz stated that a neighbor inquired about the grading and whether or not a retaining wall is required. Mark Walters explained that a retraining wall is not needed. Some discussion about grading ensued and the group proceeded to 0 the stable where Associate Planner Starks stated the stable is now at least 35' from the guesthouse. Mark Walters and Russ Barto explained the ridgeline is coming down by 1' to 14' in height to accommodate views from the guesthouse. There being no further questions Commissioner Gray made a motion for staff to bring a Resolution of Approval for August, Commissioner Cardenas seconded. There being no further discussion, the public hearing was continued to the evening meeting of the Planning Commission beginning at 6:30 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Yolanta Schwartz Date Planning Director Approved: Brad Chelf, Chairman Date DRAFT Agenda Item No. 5-B Meeting Date: 08-16-16 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS JULY 19, 2016 CALL MEETING TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Chairman Chelf at 6:36 p.m. on Tuesday, July 19, 2016 in the City Council Chamber, at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Commissioners Absent: Others Present: Cardenas, Kirkpatrick, Gray and Chairman Chelf. None. Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager. Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director. Natalie Karpeles, Assistant City Attorney. Wendy Starks, Associate Planner. Heidi Luce, City Clerk. Criss Gunderson, Architect. Tavisha Nicholson, Bolton Engineering. Charlie Raine, 4 Pinto Road. Carole Hoffman, 3 Hillside Lane. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Approved as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON MINUTES AND ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES June 21, 2016, Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting 07-19-16 0 DRAFT Commissioner Cardenas moved that the Planning Commission approve the minutes of the adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on June 21, 2016 as presented. Commissioner Kirkpatrick seconded the motion, which carried without objection. June 21, 2016, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission Vice Chairman Gray moved that the Planning Commission approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on June 21, 2016 as presented. Commissioner Kirkpatrick seconded the motion, which carried without objection. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 2016-17. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR A SWIMMING POOL, SPA AND POOL EQUIPMENT, AND A VARIANCE TO EXCEED 2.5' HIGH AVERAGE FOR ASSOCIATED WALLS IN ZONING CASE NO. 906 AT 27 CREST ROAD WEST, (LOT 174 -B -MS), ROLLING HILLS, CA (GOLDENBERG). IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) GUIDELINES. Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Associate Planner Starks briefly reviewed the applicant's request stating that last month the Planning Commission visited the proposed project in the field and following the public hearing, directed staff to prepare a Resolution granting approval of the applicant's request. Chairman Chelf called for public comment. Hearing none, he asked for comments from the members of the Planning Commission. Vice Chairman Gray moved that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2016-17 granting approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 906 at 27 Crest Road West. Commissioner Cardenas seconded the motion, which carried without objection and with Commissioner Kirkpatrick abstaining due to an excused absence from last month's meeting when this project was discussed. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON ITEMS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS MEETING ZONING CASE NO. 895 -REVISED. Request for a Site Plan Review to construct a new 5,270 square foot single family residence, 848 square foot garage, 6,000 square foot basement, swimming pool, several not to exceed 5' high retaining walls, a new driveway and grading of 8,946 cubic yards of dirt which includes excavation from basement and pool; Variances are requested to encroach with the residence, retaining walls and basement light wells into setbacks, to locate the set aside area for a future stable and portion of the corral, the swimming pool and pool equipment in front yard and a portion of the corral within front setback, to exceed the maximum permitted total lot coverage and disturbed area of the lot, to construct retaining walls that do not average out to 2.5' in height, exceed the maximum permitted coverage with a driveway of the front setback and to export dirt off site, in Zoning Case No. 895, at 10 Bowie Road, (Lot 4-CRA), Rolling Hills, CA (Pang Jui Yiu). Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting 07-19-16 DRAFT AND CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL RESOLUTION NO. 2016-18. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, GARAGE AND A BASEMENT, SWIMMING POOL, VARIOUS OUTDOOR AMENITIES AND VARIOUS RETAINING WALLS, A NEW DRIVEWAY AND GRADING; REQUEST FOR VARIANCES TO ENCROACH WITH THE RESIDENCE, BASEMENT, LIGHT WELLS AND SEVERAL WALLS INTO SETBACKS, OF WHICH SOME DO NOT AVERAGE OUT TO 2.5' IN HEIGHT, TO LOCATE THE POOL, POOL EQUIPMNENT AND FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL IN FRONT YARD AREA, TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED TOTAL LOT COVERAGE AND DISTURBED AREA, TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED COVERAGE OF FRONT SETBACK WITH THE DRIVEWAY AND TO EXPORT DIRT IN ZONING CASE NO. 895, AT 10 BOWIE ROAD, (LOT 4- CRA), ROLLING HILLS, CA (PANG JUI YIU). IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) GUIDELINES. Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Planning Director Schwartz reviewed the applicant's revised request stating that since the last meeting, the applicant has revised the request in response to comments and suggestions from the Planning Commission and as such, the project has been readvertised for public hearing. She further stated that based on direction from the Planning Commission, staff has prepared a Resolution granting approval of the applicant's revised request for the Planning Commission's consideration upon the conclusion of the public hearing. She stated that the changes from the original application include reducing the house size by almost 1,000 sq. ft.; lowering the house by 5-6 ft.; and variances requested to export 8,360 cu. yds. of soil and to locate the pool equipment in the front yard area of the lot. Ms. Schwartz stated that since the last meeting a letter was received from the residents at 19 Bowie Road expressing objection to the project and that letter is included with the staff report. In response to Vice Chairman Gray, Ms. Schwartz stated that the applicant will be required to submit a landscaping plan to staff as a part of the grading permit application. Vice Chairman Gray commented that doing so may address the concems raised in the letter. Chairman Chelf called for public comment. Criss Gunderson addressed the Planning Commission to further explain the revisions that were made in response to the concerns raised by the neighbors and the Planning Commission. Commissioner Kirkpatrick commented that he reviewed the previous staff report and listened to the audio record of this previous meeting and is prepared to act on this matter. Following brief discussion, Vice Chairman Gray moved that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2016-18 granting approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 895 -REVISED at 10 Bowie Road. Commissioner Cardenas seconded the motion, which carried without objection. Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting 07-19-16 DRAFT ZONING CASE NO. 902. Request for a Site Plan Review for the construction of a new 11,100 square foot residence, with 11,100 square foot basement, 1,540 square feet attached garages, 2,654 square feet covered porches, 864 square foot swimming pool and spa, trellises, a new driveway and an outdoor kitchen and grading for a total of 51,625 cubic yards of dirt, which includes over -excavation and re -compaction, of which 785 cubic yards will be exported; Conditional Use Permits to construct an 800 square foot guest house, and a 1,300 square foot stable with a 792 square foot loft; in Zoning Case No. 902, at 23 Crest Road East, (Lot 132A - MS), Rolling Hills, CA (Hynes). The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 exemption Guidelines. Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Planning Director Schwartz reviewed the applicant's request stating that there have been several public hearing, including a site visit in the Planning Commission's review of this project. She stated that the request was modified in response to recommendation and suggestions from the Planning Commission to address the concerns raised previously and there was an additional site visit earlier today. She stated that there are no variances requested with this application. She further stated that concern has been previously raised regarding drainage because this property is adjacent to the geotechnically hazardous area of the City. She further reviewed the concerns raised regarding drainage stating that the City's Drainage Engineer was present at a previous meeting to further explain the drainage requirements and how the proposed drainage plan will work. She stated that included with the staff report is an additional report form Bolton Engineering which further explains the proposed drainage plan. She commented that as of earlier today, the applicant has submitted a drainage plan, which proposes additional cisterns to capture the water from the impervious surfaces on the lower pad as well. She stated that included with the staff report is letter from an attorney representing the residents below the proposed development; and a second letter received today from the applicant's attorney has been placed on the dais. Ms. Schwartz further reviewed the proposed grading stating that the bedrock ranges from 3 ft. to 6 ft. below the natural grade. She stated that based on previous discussion if the project is approved, the Planning Commission may suggest as a condition of approval that the plans be submitted to Los Angeles County for plan check rather than the City's other consulting building and safety officials. Chairman Chelf called for public comment. Tavisha Nicholson addressed the Planning Commission to further review the modifications to the project including the size of the house, the reduced grading and the revised drainage plan which includes additional cisterns on the lower pad. She further reviewed and explained the hydrology stating that the cisterns are designed for the 25 year storm. Discussion ensued concerning the drainage plan and the proposed cisterns and the location of the septic system. In response to Chairman Chelf, Ms. Nicholson explained how the cisterns work. Charlie Raine, 4 Pinto Road addressed the Planning Commission to express concern regarding the drainage and its impact on the properties below in the landslide area. He expressed further concern regarding the size of the house and the amount of hardscape. He further suggested that there be an independent review of the hydrology study. Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting 07-19-16 DRAFT Carole Hoffman, 3 Hillside Lane addressed the Planning Commission to express concern regarding the size of the proposed house and the impact the project, including the septic system will have on the properties below. Discussion ensued concerning the drainage plan and the revisions that were made to the applicant's request. The Planning Commission expressed appreciation to the applicant for their efforts in revising the project to address the concerns raised. Following discussion, Vice Chairman Gray moved that the Planning Commission direct staff to prepare a Resolution granting approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 902 at 23 Crest Road East with the standard findings of fact and conditions of approval plus a condition that the County of Los Angeles be engaged to provide building and safety related services for this project. Commissioner Kirkpatrick seconded the motion, which carried without objection. ZONING CASE NO. 904 -REVISED. Request for a Site Plan Review, a Conditional Use Permit and a Variance for grading and construction of an 1,140 square foot stable with 1,032 square feet of covered porches, 1,950 square foot corral and 5,500 square foot riding ring, to encroach with the riding ring into the front and side setbacks and to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot at 34 Saddleback Road (Lot 102-RH) Rolling Hills, CA, (Delgado). The project has been determined to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 of the CEQA Guidelines. Associate Planner Starks reviewed the applicant's request and reported that at the field trip earlier in the day, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a Resolution granting approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 904 -REVISED at 34 Saddleback Road with the standard findings of fact and conditions of approval for the Planning Commission's consideration at its next meeting. Chairman Chelf called for public comments. Carole Hoffman, 3 Hillside Lane addressed the Planning Commission in support of the project. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS None. SCHEDULE OF FIELD TRIPS The Planning Commission scheduled a field trip to the following properties to be conducted on Tuesday, August 16, 2016 beginning at 7:30 a.m. 7 Southfield (deck) 10 Pine Tree Lane'(Lot Lines Adjustment/grading) 10 Middleridge Lane South (reconfiguration of driveways) Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting 07-19-16 DRAFT ITEMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION None. ITEMS FROM STAFF None. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the Commission, Chairman Chelf adjourned the meeting at 7:49 p.m. to an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled to be held on Tuesday, August 16, 2016 beginning at 7:30 a.m.. for the purpose of conducting field trips to 7 Southfield (deck); 10 Pine Tree Lane (Lot Lines Adjustment/grading) and 10 Middleridge Lane South (reconfiguration of driveways). The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled to be held on Tuesday, August 16, 2016 beginning at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. Respectfully submitted, Heidi Luce City Clerk Approved, Brad Chelf Chairman Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting 07-19-16 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 TO: FROM: APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: NOTICE PUBLISHED: NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item: 6-A Mtg. Date: 8/16/16 HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR WENDY STARKS, AICP, ASSOCIATE PLANNER ZONING CASE NO. 904 -REVISED 34 SADDLEBACK ROAD (Lot 13-RH) RAS-1 - 2.71 ACRES (EXCL. ROAD EASEMENT) MS. DELGADO RUSS BARTO, ARCHITECT MAY 5, 2016 JULY 7, 2016 REQUEST AND RECOMMENDATION 1. The applicant, Ms. Delgado, revised the project and is requesting a Site Plan Review, a Conditional Use Permit and Variances for a 1,140 square foot single story stable with 1,032 square feet of covered porches with 1,950 square foot adjacent corral, and 5,500 square feet riding ring, 400 cubic yards of grading for the ring, to encroach with the riding ring into the front setback by 2,150 square feet, and to exceed the already non -conforming disturbance of the net lot area to 68.8% (max. permitted disturbance is 40% and existing is at 63.3%). 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application in their regular meeting on May 17, 2016, in the field and at their regular meeting on June 21, 2016, and again in the field and at their regular meetings on July 19, 2016. Following their review and discussion of the project, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a Resolution of Approval. 3. It is recommended that the Planning Commission review and consider the attached Resolution 2016-19 for adoption. Other than the standard conditions of ZC NO. 904 approval, the Planning Commission did not require any other conditions specific to this case be included. ZC NO. 904 o RESOLUTION NO. 2016-19 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A STABLE WITH COVERED PORCHES, CORRAL, AND A RIDING RING, TO ENCROACH WITH THE RIDING RING INTO THE FRONT SETBACK, AND TO EXCEED THE PERMITTED DISTURBANCE OF THE LOT IN ZONING CASE NO. 904 AT 34 SADDLEBACK ROAD, (DELGADO). THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A revised application was duly filed by Ms. Eddy Delgado, to request a Site Plan Review, a Conditional Use Permit and Variances for a 1,140 square foot single story stable with 1,032 square feet of covered porches with 1,950 square foot adjacent corral, and 5,500 square foot riding ring, 400 cubic yards of grading for the ring, to encroach with the riding ring into the front setback by 2,150 square feet, and to exceed the already non -conforming disturbance of the net lot area to 68.8% (max. permitted disturbance is 40% and existing is at 63.3%). Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at their regular meeting on May 17, 2016, in the field and at their regular meeting on June 21, 2016, and again in the field and at their regular meeting on July 19, 2016. Neighbors within 1,000 -foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Peninsula News on May 5, 2016 and in the Daily Breeze on July 8, 2016. The applicants and their agents were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail and the applicants and their agents were in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal, and from members of the City staff. Three residents visited the site during the noticed field trip on June 21, 2016 and one resident on July 19, 2016. One resident attended the public hearing during the evening of July 19, 2016 to express her support for the project as it supports equestrian uses in the City. During the first field trip, Commissioners expressed concerns about the proposed stable and it's proximity to the guesthouse. The applicant's responded with a revised plan to relocate and reconfigure the stable and to request a 5,500 square foot riding ring that partially encroaches into the front setback. The Planning Commission has reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. Section 3. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the gross lot area is 2.71 acres. The net lot area is 2.32 acres or 101,040 square feet. The property is currently developed with a 3,420 square foot residence, a 640 square foot garage, a 780 square foot swimming pool/spa, 50 square foot pool equipment, 663 square foot guest house, 510 square feet of attached covered porches, 600 square feet of sheds (a 500 square foot Reso. 2016-19 1 g 34 Saddleback Rd. storage shed and a 100 square foot shed), and a 350 square foot service yard. A 959 square foot addition to the residence and a 35 square foot barbecue were approved administratively in October, 2015 and the addition is currently under construction. With the addition, the residence will be 4,379 square feet. All existing structures are legal and permitted. In 1989 a Conditional Use Permit was granted to convert the then existing stable into a guest house (Resolution 89-30) and area was set aside for the stable at that time adjacent to the 6,200 square foot riding ring that exists today. The existing 500 sq.ft. storage shed was approved and permitted in 1969 as a detached garage. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA) pursuant to section 15303 (new construction of single family residence and accessory structures), and section 15061(b)(3) (common sense exemption) of the CEQA guidelines. Section 5. Section 17.18.040E of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a stable over 200 square feet, a corral over 550 square feet, and a riding ring with a Conditional Use Permit provided the uses are not located in the front yard or in any setbacks. A portion of the riding ring is proposed to be located in the front yard area of the lot. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. Conditionally permitted uses are not outright permitted by the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. The Commission must consider applications for conditional use permit and may, with such conditions as are deemed necessary, approve a conditional use which will not jeopardize, adversely affect, endanger or to otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare or be materially detrimental to the property of other persons located in the vicinity of such use. B. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the stable, corral, and riding ring would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because the uses are consistent with similar uses in the community, and except for the location of the riding ring, meet all the applicable code development standards for a stable, corral, and riding ring, and the proposed uses are located on areas on the property that are adequately sized to accommodate such uses. The proposed uses are appropriately located in that they will be sufficiently separated from nearby structures used for habitation or containing sleeping quarters. The development would be constructed in furtherance of the General Plan goal of promoting and encouraging equestrian uses. C. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent structures have been considered, and the project will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed stable/corral, and riding ring orientation are not towards neighbors and their general location is of Reso. 2016-19 2 34 Saddleback Rd. sufficient distance from nearby residences so as to not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. The proposed stable is to be located next to the corral and a path designated for equestrian uses runs from the stable/corral to the driveway. The riding ring would be located in an area of the lot that is not in proximity to any residents. D. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the stable/corral, and riding ring complies with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and will not give the property an over -built look, and areas will remain open and unobstructed. The lot is 2.32 acres net in size and is sufficiently large to accommodate the proposed uses. E. The proposed conditional use, other than the riding ring being proposed in the front yard area, complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district and requires a Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Sections 17.18.090 and 17.18.100 of the Zoning Ordinance. F. The proposed conditional uses are consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. Section 6. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for Site Plan Review and approval before any grading requiring a grading permit or any new 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 not more than 999 square feet in any thirty-six (36) month period. With respect to the Site Plan grading and the proposed structures 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 structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures and maintaining sufficient setbacks to provide buffers between residential uses. Although the disturbed area exceeds the maximum permitted amount of 40%, it was already legal non -conforming at 63.3% and it will increase to 68.8%. The configuration of the lot is narrow and long and a horse trail is located on the rear portion of the lot, accessible by the public with the property owner's consent, making this portion of the lot unusable by the property owner. The stable, corral, and riding ring promote the rural, equestrian aesthetic of Rolling Hills. While 2,150 square feet of the riding ring is in the front setback, the equestrian use is promoted in the City. Reso. 2016-19 3 34 Saddleback Rd. The project conforms with Zoning Code lot coverage requirements, except for disturbance. The net lot area of the lot is 101,040 square feet. The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 10.07%, which includes all of the structures, with allowance for permitted deductions, (20% max. permitted); and the total lot coverage proposed, including the stable would be 23.4%, (35% max. permitted). The disturbed area of the lot is proposed to increase from 63.3% which already exceeds the maximum permitted of 40% and is legal nonconforming, to 68.8% due to the 400 cubic yards of grading required for the riding ring (200 cubic yards of cut and 200 cubic yards of fill). B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. The topography and the configuration of the lot, have been considered, and it was determined that the proposed development will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent uses, buildings, or structures, because the proposed stable/corral will be constructed entirely on an existing building pad of the currently developed lot where the corral currently is and will be the least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped with trees and shrubs, is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that it will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will permit the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners. The stable, corral, and riding ring will be developed on areas of the lot that do not currently have structures. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, and is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to other equestrian uses in the vicinity of said lot. The proposed stable is 1,140 square feet and the average size of the last 15 stables approved since 2011 is 1,583 square feet. D. The development plan will introduce additional landscaping, which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. E. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the applicants will continue to utilize the existing driveway to the residence and the stable, and the riding ring will be accessed from the main driveway for heavier vehicles ingress/egress. The stable access from the driveway will be entirely decomposed granite. F. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to section 15303 of the CEQA guidelines. Section 7. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Code permit approval of a variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when, due to exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone, strict application of the Code would deny the property owner substantial property rights enjoyed by other properties in the same Reso. 2016-19 4 34 Saddleback Rd. vicinity and zone. The applicant seeks a variance from the requirement 17.18.100.3. that a riding ring not be located in the front yard, and from 17.16.070B. that disturbance is limited to 40% of the net lot area. The 5,500 square foot riding ring is being proposed in the front yard, 2,150 square feet is in the front setback and the disturbance of the lot will be 68.8%. With respect to this request for Variances, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because a horse trail used by the public crosses the rear of property making a portion of the lot unusable by the property owner. The disturbance of the lot already exceeds the maximum permitted and in order to locate the riding ring it is necessary to slightly grade an area that is currently undulated. This will cause the disturbed area to increase to 68.8%. 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 to the property in question because of the long and narrow lot, and Saddleback Trail being located on the rear of the property. The residential building pad is largely developed already, and there is no other option for locating the riding ring other than the front yard area. There were no concerns voiced by neighbors about where the proposed stable/corral and riding ring will be located. The exceedance of the disturbance is due to the riding ring. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed riding ring enhances the equestrian aesthetic and therefore would not affect property values. The riding ring will remain as open space, therefore not causing the lot to be overdeveloped. D. The variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. E. The variance request is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and will uphold the City's goals to protect and promote construction that is rural in nature. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves Zoning Case No. 904 a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permits and Variances to construct a 1,140 square foot single story stable with 1,032 square feet of covered porches with 1,950 square foot adjacent corral, and 5,500 square feet riding ring, 400 cubic yards of grading for the ring (200 cubic yards of cut and 200 cubic yards of fill), to encroach with the riding ring into the front setback by 2,150 square feet, and to exceed Reso. 2016-19 5 "fi/ I 34 Saddleback Rd. •J the already non -conforming disturbance of the net lot area to 68.8% (max. permitted disturbance is 40% and existing is at 63.3%) subject to the following conditions: A. The Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan and Variances approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.46.080, 17.42.070 and 17.38.070, unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of these sections. B. It is declared and made a condition of this 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, the opportunity for a hearing has been provided, and if requested, has been held, and thereafter the applicant fails to correct the violation within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of the City's determination. C. All requirements of the Buildings 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 this permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated July 13, 2016 except as otherwise provided in these conditions. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the approved development plan. All conditions of the Conditional Use Permit, Site Plan Review, and Variance approvals shall be incorporated into the building permit working drawings, and where applicable complied with prior to issuance of a grading or building permit from the building department. The conditions of approval of this Resolution shall be printedonto building plans submitted to the Building Department for review and shall be kept on site at all times. E. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to the Building and Safety Department for issuance of building permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission. F. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and all of the conditions set forth therein and the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Further, the person obtaining a building and/or grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. Reso. 2016-19 34 Saddleback Rd. 6 (1 G. Structural lot coverage of the lot shall not exceed 10,179 square feet or 10.07% of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (20% maximum). The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork shall not exceed 23,599 square feet or 23.4%, of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (35% max). H. Grading for this project shall consist of 200 cubic yards of cut and 200 cubic yards of fill. The disturbed area of the lot, including the approved stable and corral shall not exceed 68.8%. I. The residential building pad shall remain 28,000 square feet and has coverage of 28.6%. The stable pad shall be 11,640 square feet and will have coverage of 18.7%. J. The riding may not have lights anywhere within it or around it. Should a mirror be installed in the future in the ring, and if reflection of the sun off the mirror causes glare on adjoining properties, it shall be the responsibility of the property owner or installer to mitigate this problem in a timely manner. K. A minimum of four -foot level path and/or walkway, which does not have to be paved, shall be provided around the entire perimeter of all of the proposed structures, or as is otherwise required by the Fire Department. L. At any time there are horses on the property, Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be applied for manure control, including but not be limited to removal of the manure on a daily basis or provision of a receptacle with a tight closing lid that is constructed of brick, stone, concrete, metal or wood lined with metal or other sound material and that is safeguarded against access by flies. The contents of said receptacles shall be removed once a week. It is prohibited to dispose of manure or any animal waste into the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4), into natural drainage course or spread on the property. M. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Lighting Ordinance of the City of Rolling Hills (RHMC 17.16.190 E), pertaining to lighting on said property, roofing and material requirements of properties in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. N. All utility lines to stable shall be placed underground, subject to all applicable standards and requirements. O. A drainage plan, as required by the Building Department shall be prepared and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of a construction permit. Such plan shall be subject to LA County Code requirements. Reso. 2016-19 7 %n1 34 Saddleback Rd. �� P. All graded slopes outside of the riding ring shall be landscaped. A landscaping plan shall be submitted to the City in conformance with Fire Department Fuel Modification requirements and graded slopes. Prior to finaling the project, trees and shrubs shall be planted to screen the project from the neighbors. The landscaping shall not form a hedge like screen but he offset The height of the trees and shnihs shall not at any time exceed the ridgeline of the roof of the structure. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and are consistent with the rural character of the community. If landscaping of 5,000 square foot area or greater is introduced or redeveloped, the landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Q. A three rail fence is required around the riding ring. R. The setback lines and roadway easement line in the vicinity of the construction for this project shall remain staked throughout the construction. A construction fence may be required. S. Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and clear of any improvements including, but not be limited to fences - including construction fences, any hardscape, driveways, landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, except as otherwise approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association. T. Minimum of 50% of any construction materials must be recycled and diverted from landfills. The hauler of the materials shall obtain City's Construction and Demolition permits for waste hauling prior to start of work and provide proper documentation to the City. U. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, stormwater pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors shall be required. V. During construction, all parking shall take place on the project site, on the driveway or motorcourt, and, if necessary, any overflow parking shall take place within the unimproved roadway easements on the east side of Saddleback adjacent to project site only, and shall not obstruct neighboring driveways. During construction, to the maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car-pool into the City. W. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical Reso. 2016-19 8 e 34 Saddleback Rd. equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills. X. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at: http;//www.wrh.noaa.gov/Imc/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard definitions#FIR E. It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions. Should a red flag warning be declared and if work is to be conducted on the property, the contractor shall have readily available fire distinguisher. Y. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) requirements related to solid waste, drainage and storm water drainage facilities management and to the City's Low Impact development Ordinance (LID), if applicable. Further the property owners shall be required to conform to the County Health Department requirements for a septic system. Z. Prior to finaling of the project an "as graded" and an "as constructed" plans and certifications, including certifications of ridgelines of the stable shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Department to ascertain that the completed project is in compliance with the approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the project during construction, shall be depicted on the "as built/as graded" plan. AA. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this permit pursuant to Zoning Ordinance, or the approval shall not be effective. The affidavit shall be recorded together with the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 16TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016. BRAD CHELF, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Reso. 2016-19 9 34 Saddleback Rd. equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills. X. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at: http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/Iox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard definitions#FIR E. It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions. Should a red flag warning be declared and if work is to be conducted on the property, the contractor shall have readily available fire distinguisher. Y. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) requirements related to solid waste, drainage and storm water drainage facilities management and to the City's Low Impact development Ordinance (LID), if applicable. Further the property owners shall be required to conform to the County Health Department requirements for a septic system. Z. Prior to finaling of the project an "as graded" and an "as constructed" plans and certifications, including certifications of ridgelines of the stable shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Department to ascertain that the completed project is in compliance with the approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the project during construction, shall be depicted on the "as built/as graded" plan. AA. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this permit pursuant to Zoning Ordinance, or the approval shall not be effective. The affidavit shall be recorded together with the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 16TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016. BRAD CHELF, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. Reso. 2016-19 9 t2 34 Saddleback Rd. STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2016-19 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A STABLE WITH COVERED PORCHES, CORRAL, AND A RIDING RING, TO ENCROACH WITH THE RIDING RING INTO THE FRONT SETBACK, AND TO EXCEED THE PERMITTED DISTURBANCE OF THE LOT IN ZONING CASE NO. 904 AT 34 SADDLEBACK ROAD, (DELGADO). was approved and adopted at regular meeting of the Planning Commission on August 16, 2016 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices HEIDI LUCE, Reso. 2016-19 10 34 Saddleback Rd. INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 TO: FROM: APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: DATE PUBLISHED: NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No.: 6B Mtg. Date: 08-16-16 HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR ZONING CASE NO. 902 23 CREST ROAD EAST (LOT 132A -MS) RA -S-2, 6.02 ACRES (EXCL. ROADWAY EASEMENT) MR. JAMES HYNES TAVISHA NICHOLSON, BOLTON ENGINEERING APRIL 7, 2016 JUNE 9, 2016 REQUEST AND PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 1. The applicants, James and Lore Hynes, request a Site Plan Review for the construction of a new 11,100 square foot residence and 11,100 square foot basement, two attached garages totaling 1,540 square feet, 2,654 square feet of covered porches including for the stable (264 sq.ft.) and guest house (105 sq.ft.), a new pool and spa totaling 864 square feet with a 50 square foot pool equipment area, a 96 square foot service yard, a 270 square foot outdoor kitchen, a 400 square foot trellis near the 800 square foot guesthouse, a two-story stable with 1,300 square foot on the first level and a 792 square foot loft, a new driveway and turnaround access. Grading will entail a total of 51,625 cubic yards of dirt (12,455 c.y. cut and 11,670 c.y. fill; and 13,750 c.y. over - excavation and 13,750 c.y. recompaction) with 785 cubic yards to be exported. A new driveway apron is also requested, and it was reviewed and recommended for approval by the Traffic Commission on July 28, 2016. 2. The Planning Commission held several public hearings including two field trips. During the course of the review the applicants made several changed and modifications to the project and prepared hydrology calculations. ZC NO. 902, 23 Crest E. a 3. During the review process concerns were expressed by the neighbors regarding soils, geology and mostly hydrology and drainage for this project and potential effect the proposed development would have on the downslope properties. The Planning Commission having considered and analyzed the project and neighbors' concerns, following review and discussion of the project at the July 19, 2016 meeting, directed staff to prepare a Resolution of approval. Together with standard findings of facts and conditions of approval, conditions specific to this project have been included in the draft Resolution, such as: • The LA County Department of Building and Safety, LA County GMED Division, and other LA County divisions as required, shall be the reviewing agency for this project • All utility lines to be placed underground • Provide landscaping and irrigation plan prior to obtaining a grading permit • Trees/shrubs not to grow into a hedge like screen, be no higher than the ridge of structures and not to block the view from Crest Rd. • The project is subject to the City's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and Low Impact Development Ordinance 4. It is recommended that the Planning Commission review and consider the attached Resolution No. 2016-20 for adoption. ZC No. 902 The Weinberg Law Croup RECEIVED JUL 19 2016 City of Rolling Hills By July 19, 2016 Via Email Members of the Planning Commission City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Re: Zoning Case 902; Site Plan Review for construction of a new 11,100 square foot residence 23 Crest Road East (the "Project") Ladies and Gentlemen: Our firm represents the James Hynes and the Hynes Family Trust, the owners of 23 Crest Road East and the applicant for approval of the Project. The Project was last reviewed by the Planning Commission at the hearing on June 21, 2016. At that time, the Planning Commission directed staff to arrange for a site visit to the Hynes property and a further hearing before the Planning Commission. We have received a letter dated July 14, 2016 from Steven Spierer of Spierer, Woodward, Crobalis and Goldberg. Apparently, this letter was also delivered to the Planning Commission. In his letter, Mr. Spierer states that he represents a number of land owners (the "Neighbors") who live westerly and downhill of the 23 Crest Road property. Although the Spierer letter does not contain any substantial evidence upon which the Planning Commission can rely, we thought it important to provide a formal response to the Spierer letter, because it contains allegations of liability and threats of litigation. As the Planning Commission well knows, when considering a discretionary approval such as the application submitted by the Hynes family for approval of the Project, the Planning Commission acts in a quasi-adjudicatory role and accepts evidence during the public hearing process to determine whether the requested Project meets the requirements of the zoning code. In this case, the proposed Hynes Project fits squarely within all of the applicable development standards for a single family home, the Project does not require any variances or administrative waivers, and the Project has been designed with keen attention to the two sensitive issues in this matter —namely hydrology and geology. 2550 Via Tejon 1 Suite 28 1 Palos Verdes 1 CA 1 90274 1 310.:363.77751 howard@necinherglaw.la 1 Planning Commission City of Rolling Hills July 19, 2016 Page 2 In the extensive file in this matter, the Planning Commission has received numerous expert reports, maps, graphs, charts, and testimony of experts. In particular, we would ask that the Commissioners review the following expert evidence in the file: 1. The Geotechnical and Geological Report prepared by Hamilton Associates, that reviews the proposed cut and fill grading that will be required to construct the Project on the Hynes' property. This report concludes that the proposed grading activity will comply with all applicable codes and will result in safe and stable building pads on which may be constructed the proposed home and related out buildings. 2. The Hydrology Reports by Bolton Engineering Corp. that review and analyze the proposed cistern system to be installed as part of the Project to capture storm water runoff and hold it to be dissipated after the storm period. Importantly, these reports conclude that construction of the proposed home will result in NO additional storm water runoff from the property down Little Klondike Canyon that would be in excess of the water runoff that now flows from the property during storms, while the property is in an undeveloped state. 3. Wildan Engineering (the City's contracted, independent, and highly regarded _ engineering firm) has testified that they reviewed in detail the proposed water containment and management system for the prior Hynes lot -split project. Wildan found the cistern water -capture system to be more than adequate to protect all down- hill properties from excess storm water runoff. 4. In addition, to the foregoing, Tavisha Nicholson of Bolton Engineering will, during the site visit and subsequent public hearing on July 19, 2016, provide additional explanation and clarification of the hydrology information, confirming again, and in a different format, that the water retention system to be installed as part of the Project will result in NO ADDITIONAL STORM WATER RUNOFF from the Hynes property into Little Klondike Canyon (or anywhere else for that matter). All of the foregoing reports and testimony are expert testimony and so-called "substantial evidence" upon which the Planning Commission can and should rely to conclude that the Project complies with the development standards in the City's zoning code and that the proposed Project can and should be approved. As a challenge to all of this expert evidence before the Planning Commission, Charlie Raine has spoken at prior hearings and has suggested, opined, and speculated, that the Project, if constructed, could create a catastrophic flow of water downhill toward his property. However, Mr. Raine's opinions and speculation cannot be considered "substantial evidence" of any problem or of a valid challenge to the expert evidence provided by the Hynes. Planning Commission City of Rolling Hills July 19, 2016 Page 3 Now, in a final attempt to derail the approval of the Hynes Project, Mr. Raine (and the other Neighbors) have hired an attorney, Steven Spierer, to press their case. In the July 14, 2016 letter from Steven Spierer, the Planning Commission receives an attorney's opinions and speculation about the potential effect of grading and water flow from the Project. Although Mr. Spierer expresses dramatic concern that the construction of the Hynes Project will result in catastrophic failure of the Flying Triangle slide area, his anxiety is not based on science or expert opinion. To the contrary, Mr. Spierer's speculation about the effect of grading activity and storm water flow are the exact opposite of the expert opinions of certified geologists and hydrologists. Moreover, the County's own independent experts have peer reviewed the work of the Hynes' geologists and hydrologists and the County's experts have testified that they agree with the conclusion reached by the geologists and hydrologists. While we are sympathetic to the uneasy state in which the downhill Neighbors live, due to their extraordinary unfortunate experience with the prior Flying Triangle slide problem, we do not agree that their fear of the future (not based in evidence) should guide the conclusion of the Planning Commission. The Neighbors, Mr. Raine, and Mr. Spierer are asking the Planning Commission to speculate along with them that some undefinable bad thing may happen if the Project is approved. This is not the job of the Planning Commission, and would be wholly inappropriate as a conclusion to this zoning matter. The tens of thousands of dollars paid by the Hynes family to its experts resulted in strong expert evidence — all of which points to a conclusion that the Project will not have a substantial negative effect, either from grading or water flows. The conclusions of those experts, that the Project should be approved as designed, are not diminished or countered by any of the speculation or opinions of the Neighbors or Mr. Spierer. Also, we are always disappointed when an attorney includes in his challenge letter a threat that the Neighbors intend to sue the City if the Project is approved and then some further slide activity occurs. We fully expect that Mr. Raine would sue everyone in sight if a further slide occurred, regardless of whether the Hynes Project is constructed or not. The threat of litigation against a city for exercising their zoning powers is the most cynical kind of argument that can be made. The Planning Commission and the City are not exposed to liability for fulfilling their duties to consider zoning cases and approve those that meet the criteria for approval. "A public entity is not liable for an injury caused by the issuance, denial, suspension or revocation of, or by the failure or refusal to issue, deny, suspend or revoke, any permit, license, certificate, approval, order, or similar authorization where the public entity or an employee of the public entity is authorized by enactment to determine whether or not such authorization should be issued, denied, suspended or revoked." (Government Code §818.4). Moreover, when the City makes the findings that the Hynes' proposed Project meets the Site Plan Review requirements, it is axiomatic that the City will have been deliberate and careful in their consideration of the potential impacts of the Project. Planning Commission City of Rolling Hills July 19, 2016 Page 4 In this case, the Hynes' proposed Project meets all of the required development standards for a single family home on their property. They have provided substantial evidence that the Planning Commission can comfortably rely upon to make all of the findings required to approve their Site Plan Review and the Conditional Use Permits. In summary, we request that the City approve the Project based on the existing evidence in the file, the site visit that will occur, and the further deliberation of the Planning Commission that will occur at the hearing scheduled for July 19, 2016. Sincerely, The Weinberg Law Group C: James and Lore Hynes Yolanta Schwartz Michael Jenkins, City Attorney RECEIVED Water 23 Crest Road East July 19, 2016 JUL 192016 Cit of RollOg• Hills By minim From iii -}a f•Ird Pere/ Water generated from Crest Road itself and attributed to 23 Crest- 6,000sf impermeable Water generated on site: 37,000sf of impermeable coverage 43,000sf directs flow to two 33,000 gallon cisterns Calculations assume saturated soil/hardscape and soil retention of 1/6th inch of rain per hour. The cisterns are designed to hold a 25 year storm calculation of 5 inches of rain in a 24 hour period. 5 inches of rain (per calculations below) generates 134,000 gallons of water. After capacity is reached, additional water is then directed to a discharge pipe. Capacity of the two tanks: 66,000 gallons 43,000sf /12 equals 3,583 cubic feet of water. Each cubic foot of water is 7.48 gallons. 3,583cu x 7.48= 26,800 gallons of water captured per inch of rain and a total of 134,000 for 5 inches of rain. Storage capacity of the cisterns is reached with 2.5 inches of rain or in other words, 40 percent utilization with each inch of rain. The "other" 66,000 gallons goes where? Little Klondike Canyon and directly into the slide plane. Barn and Guest House: 3,000sf/ 12 equals 250 cubic feet of water. Each cubic foot of water is 7.48 gallons. 250 cu x 7.48= 1,870 gallons discharged per inch of rain. In a 25 year storm calculation assuming 5 inches of rain in 24 hours the total discharged is 9,350 gallons of water. The destination? Little Klondike Canyon and into the slide plane. The Problem: ANY discharge that adds to the flow into Little Klondike Canyon is too much. The utilized 25 Year Storm calculations project approximately 75,000 gallons of water directed, across already saturated surfaces, into Little Klondike Canyon and the active Flying Triangle landslide area. Page 1 of 2 ED- The Solution: Less captured water achieved by significantly smaller impermeable surfaces via smaller footprints of living area, outbuildings and hardscape. Water from ALL impermeable surfaces must be contained on site and percolated as far as possible from the landslide below, including runoff generated from the barn and guest house, should they be approved. Additionally: We request an independent hydrology report and analysis by appropriate entities and experts determining that the disturbance and redistribution of such vast quantities of soil and redistribution and addition of huge quantities of water will have NO negative affect on the active landslide or residents below, as well as the time for us to have our own experts review and approve or challenge such reports. Page 2 of 2 Charlie Raine RESOLUTION NO. 2016-20 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT, GARAGES, COVERED PORCHES, SWIMMING POOL WITH A SPA, RETAINING WALLS AND NEW DRIVEWAY; AND REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A GUEST HOUSE AND STABLE WITH LOFT AND CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 902 AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, (LOT 132A -MS), (HYNES). THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. James Hynes to request a Site Plan Review for the construction of a new 11,100 square foot residence and 11,100 square foot basement, two attached garages totaling 1,540 square feet, 2,654 square feet of covered porches including for the stable (264 sq.ft.) and guest house (105 sq.ft.), a new pool and spa totaling 864 square feet with a 50 square foot pool equipment area, a 96 square foot service yard, a 270 square foot outdoor kitchen, a 400 square foot trellis near the 800 square foot guesthouse, a two-story stable with 1,300 square foot on the first level and a 792 square foot loft, a new driveway and turnaround access. Grading will entail a total of 51,625 cubic yards of dirt (12,455 c.y. cut and 11,670 c.y. fill; and 13,750 c.y. over -excavation and 13,750 c.y. recompaction) with 785 cubic yards to be exported. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at their regular meeting on April 19, 2016, May 17, 2016, June 21, 2016 and July 19, 2016 and in the field on May 17, 2016 and July 19, 2016. Neighbors within 1,000 -foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Peninsula News on April 7, 2016 and June 9, 2016. The applicants and their agents were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail and the applicants and agents were in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal, and from members of the City staff. Section 3. During the proceedings the Planning Commission and several neighbors expressed concerns regarding drainage and water run-off from the proposed project and its impact on the downhill properties, the length and massing of the residence, the long driveway, the grading required for the project, the fill required for the tennis court on a lower level of the lot and the impact and aesthetics of the overall development on Crest Road East properties. The applicants revised the project and decreased the size of the residence and length of the development by attaching the two garages to the residence, reduced the driveway and moved a portion of the driveway out of the front setback, removed all variances previously requested and construction of a tennis court, reduced limits of grading, Reso. 2016-20 23 Crest Rd. E. eliminated all slope fill on the lower pad and made other reductions to several small, amenities. Section 4. The property is zoned RAS-2 and the gross lot area is 7.05 acres. The net lot area for development purposes is 6.02 acres or 262,368 square feet. The existing property is currently vacant. A natural drainage course is located along the western portion of the lot and a blue line stream, which is a part of the Klondike Canyon System, is located approximately 200 feet south of the southern property line of the lot. The lot is also located in proximity to the Geotechnical Hazardous area of the City, known as the Flying Triangle. A geotechnical and geological report prepared for the lot states that the crown of a landslide (Flying Triangle) is about 230 feet west of the southwestern portion of the lot. Section 5. The Planning Commission finds that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 (new construction of single family residence and accessory structures), and Section 15061(b)(3) (common sense exemption) of the CEQA guidelines. Section 6. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for Site Plan Review and approval before any grading requiring a grading permit or any new 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 not more than 999 square feet in any thirty-six (36) month period. The grading for the development and the new structures require Site Plan Review. The pool/spa requires a Site Plan Review due to the grading and the size (over 800 sq.ft. surface water area), and the dissipater retaining wall require a Site Plan Review due to its height of 5'. With respect to the Site Plan for the development 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 structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures and maintaining sufficient setbacks to provide buffers between residential uses. The net lot area of the lot is over 6 acres and the lot is adjacent to other large lots along Crest Road East, where most of the development will take place. The stable and corral promote the rural, equestrian character of Rolling Hills. None of the structures are in setbacks. The project conforms to Zoning Code lot coverage requirements, including lot disturbance. The net lot area of the lot is 262,368 square feet. The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 18,554 square feet or 7.1%, which includes all of the structures, with allowance for permitted deductions, (20% max. permitted); and the total lot coverage proposed, including the driveway would be 36,684 square feet or 14.0%, (35% max. permitted). The disturbed area of the lot is proposed to be 38.5%. Reso. 2016-20 2 lO 23 Crest Rd. E. B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. The topography and the configuration of the lot have been considered, and it was determined that the proposed development will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent uses, buildings, or structures, because the proposed project will be constructed partially on the existing undulated (not steep) area of the lot, will be the least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped with trees and shrubs, is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that it will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will allow the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners. The proposed project would be located on a gentler slope of the property and leaving the steeper and more densely vegetated areas in their natural state to the south, along with the natural drainage course. The project promotes equestrian uses, therefore furthering the City's goal to remain an equestrian community. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, and is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to new residences in the vicinity of said lot. The development plan takes into consideration the views from Crest Road East and the development will be sunk and moved back from Crest Road East, so that views from the road will not be blocked. The residence is proposed on the shallowest sloped area with a basement being added to increase the residence size while reducing the footprint. The slopes being created have been rounded and it was attempted to mimic the existing slope in the area. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped. The project will be screened from the road and all neighbors. During the review process, at suggestions from the Planning Commission and addressing the neighbors' concerns, the applicant scaled down the grading areas and the project in general to retain as much of the natural terrain as possible and not greatly affect the lower building pad. D. The development plan will introduce additional landscaping, which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and the landscaping will provide a buffer or transition area between private and public areas. There will be some clearing of existing landscaping due to overgrowth and improper maintenance that has become a fire hazard. E. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the new 20' driveway will be safe to drive on as two cars can safely pass one another. There is ample parking in the garages and there is a proposed parking pad at the front of the house, outside of all setbacks, so all visitor parking will be contained on site. An adequate driveway is proposed to safely accommodate horse trailers to the stable and corral area. Reso. 2016-20 23 Crest Rd. E. 3 F. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 7. Sections 17.18.060 and 17.18.090 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a stable over 200 square feet and corral over 550 square feet with a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed 1,300 square foot stable with 792 square foot loft and corral comply with all requirements of these sections. An 800 square foot guesthouse is proposed. Section 17.16.210 (A)(5) of the Zoning Ordinance contains conditions for a guesthouse, subject to approval of a conditional use permit. All of the detached structures comply with the provisions and conditions for such structures. With respect to this request for Conditional Use Permits, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. Conditionally permitted uses are not outright permitted by the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. The Commission must consider applications for a Conditional Use Permit and may, with such conditions as are deemed necessary, approve a conditional use which will not jeopardize, adversely affect, endanger or to otherwise constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare or be materially detrimental to the property of other persons located in the vicinity of such use. B. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the stable, corral and guest house would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because the uses are consistent with similar uses in the community, and meet all the applicable code development standards for such uses and they are located in areas on the property that are adequately sized to accommodate such uses. The proposed uses are appropriately located in that they will be sufficiently separated from nearby structures used for habitation or containing sleeping quarters. The stable/corral would be constructed in furtherance of the General Plan goal of promoting and encouraging equestrian uses. The proposed guesthouse is a common amenity to Rolling Hills. C. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent structures have been considered, and the project will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed uses (stable/corral, and guest house) are located in the middle of a 6.0 acre lot and their general location is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so as to not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. The proposed stable is to be located adjacent to the corral and a path designated for equestrian uses that runs from the stable to the road above is separate from the other outdoor living areas on the property and will be comprised of decomposed granite. D. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the proposed uses comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and will not give the property an over -built look, and areas will remain open and unobstructed. The lot is 6.0 acres net in size and is sufficiently large to accommodate the proposed uses. Reso. 2016-20 4 1Z 23 Crest Rd. E. The stable will be compatible with the uses in the surrounding area because Rolling Hills is an equestrian community and stables are encouraged. The stable will look like a stable and with the corral will promote open space on the pad. The guest house will be compatible with the uses in the surrounding area because it will have the same architectural design as the house and is in the rear yard and is an amenity other residences in Rolling Hills enjoy. E. The proposed conditional uses comply with all applicable development standards of the zone district and requires Conditional Use Permits pursuant to Sections 17.18.060, 17.18.090, and 17.16.210(A)(5) of the Zoning Ordinance. F. The proposed conditional uses are consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves Zoning Case No. 901 request for a Site Plan Review for the construction of a new 11,100 square foot residence and 11,100 square foot basement, two attached garages totaling 1,540 square feet, 2,654 square feet of covered porches including for the stable (264 sq.ft.) and guest house (105 sq.ft.), a new pool and spa totaling 864 square feet with a 50 square foot pool equipment area, a 96 square foot service yard, a 270 square foot outdoor kitchen, a 400 square foot trellis near the 800 square foot guesthouse, a two- story stable with 1,300 square foot on the first level and a 792 square foot loft, a new driveway and turnaround access and access to the stable. Grading will entail a total of 51,625 cubic yards of dirt (12,455 c.y. cut and 11,670 c.y. fill; and 13,750 c.y. over - excavation and 13,750 c.y. recompaction) with 785 cubic yards to be exported, subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan and Conditional Use Permits approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.46.080, 17.42.070, and 17.38.070 unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of these sections. B. It is declared and made a condition of this 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, the opportunity for a hearing has been provided, and if requested, has been held, and thereafter the applicant fails to correct the violation within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of the City's determination. 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 this permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. Reso. 2016-20 23 Crest Rd. E. 5 13 D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated July 11, 2016 except as otherwise provided in these conditions. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the approved development plan. All conditions of the Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit approvals shall be incorporated into the building permit working drawings, and where applicable complied with prior to issuance of a grading or building permit from the building department. The conditions of approval of this Resolution shall be printed onto building plans submitted to the Building Department for review and shall be kept on site at all times. Any modifications and/or changes to the approved project, including resulting from field conditions, shall be discussed and approved by staff prior to implementing the changes. E. The Plans shall be submitted to the LA County Building and Safety Department for review, issuance of permits and inspections. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to Building and Safety Department for issuance of building permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission. F. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and all of the conditions set forth therein and the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Further, the person obtaining a building and/or grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. G. Structural lot coverage of the lot shall not exceed 19,074 square feet or 7.3% of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations, and with the permitted allowances 7.1% coverage, (20% maximum). The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork, shall not exceed 36,684 square feet or 14.0%, of the net lot area, with allowable deductions, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (35% maximum). H. The disturbed area of the lot, including the approved stable and corral shall not exceed 38.5%; over 101,090 square feet surface area. Grading for this project shall not exceed 12,455 cubic yards of cut and 11,670 cubic yards of fill, 13,750 cubic yards of over - excavation, and 13,750 cubic yards of recompaction with 785 cubic yards exported. I. The residential building pad is proposed at 47,325 square feet and shall not exceed coverage of 15,405 square feet or 32.5% with allowed deductions. The stable pad is proposed at 11,100 square feet and shall not exceed 2,389 square feet of coverage or 21.5%. Reso. 2016-20 23 Crest Rd. E. J. A new driveway shall be provided per the Fire Department requirements and the apron of the driveway shall be roughened and the first 20 feet of the driveway shall not exceed 7% in slope. K. Access to the stable and to the corral shall be decomposed granite or like 100% pervious roughened material. L. Per Section 17.16.210(A)(5)(c) of the zoning ordinance, only one sanitary facility consisting of a shower, sink, and a toilet and a kitchenette is permitted in the guesthouse; there shall be no parking area within 50 -feet of the guest house; no renting of the guest house is permitted. M. A minimum of five-foot level path and/ or walkway, which does not have to be paved, shall be provided around the entire perimeter of all of the proposed structures, or as otherwise required by the Fire Department. N. At any time there are horses on the property, Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be applied for manure control, including but not be limited to removal of the manure on a daily basis or provision of a receptacle with a tight closing lid that is constructed of brick, stone, concrete, metal or wood lined with metal or other sound material and that is safeguarded against access by flies. The contents of said receptacles shall be removed once a week. It is prohibited to dispose of manure or any animal waste into the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4), into natural drainage course or spread on the property. O. The pool equipment area shall be enclosed and screened with landscaping. Per LA County Building Code, pool barrier/fencing shall be required. P. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Lighting Ordinance of the City of Rolling Hills (RHMC 17.16.190 E), pertaining to lighting on said property; roofing and material requirements of properties in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Q. All utility lines to the residence, guesthouse, and stable shall be placed underground, subject to all applicable standards and requirements. R. Hydrology, soils, geology and other reports, as required by the LA County Building and Public Works Departments, and as may be required by the Building Official, shall be prepared. S. Prior to issuance of a final construction approval of the project, all graded slopes shall be landscaped. Prior to issuance of building permit, a landscaping plan shall be submitted to the City in conformance with Fire Department Fuel Modification requirements and graded slopes. The landscaping shall not form a hedge like screen but be offset. The height of any new trees and shrubs to be planted in conjunction with this project shall not at any time exceed the ridgeline of the roof of the structures, which they Reso. 2016-20 7 23 Crest Rd. E. are screening. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area, are water -wise and are consistent with the rural character of the community. The landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, (Chapter 13.18 of the RHMC). T. The dissipaters and pool equipment area shall be screened with landscaping. Sound attenuating equipment shall be installed to dampen the sound from the pool equipment area and the pool pump. The project shall utilize the most quiet and technologically advanced equipment to dampen the sound. U. The setback lines and roadway easement lines in the vicinity of the construction for this project shall remain staked throughout the construction. A construction fence may be required. V. Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and clear of any improvements including, but not be limited to fences - including construction fences, any hardscape, driveways, landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, except as otherwise approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association. W. Minimum of 50% of any construction materials must be recycled or diverted from landfills. The hauler of the materials shall obtain City's Construction and Demolition permits for waste hauling prior to start of work and provide proper documentation to the City. X. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, stormwater pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors shall be required. Y. During construction, all parking shall take place on the project site, on the new driveway and, if necessary, any overflow parking shall take place within the unimproved roadway easement on the south side of Crest Road East adjacent to project site only, and shall not obstruct neighboring driveways or pedestrian and equestrian passage. During construction, to the maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car-pool into the City. Z. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills. Reso. 2016-20 23 Crest Rd. E. AA. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at: http//www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard definitions#FIRE. It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions. Should a red flag warning be declared and if work is to be conducted on the property, the contractor shall have readily available fire distinguisher. AB. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) requirements related to solid waste, drainage, cisterns, and storm water drainage facilities management and to the City's Low Impact development Ordinance (LID). Further the property owners shall be required to conform to the County Health Department requirements for a septic system. AC. Prior to finaling of the project an "as graded" and an "as constructed" plans and certifications, including certifications of ridgelines of the structures, shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Department to ascertain that the completed project is in compliance with the approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the project during construction, shall be depicted on the "as built/as graded" plan. AD. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this permit pursuant to Zoning Ordinance, or the approval shall not be effective. The affidavit shall be recorded together with the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 16th DAY OF AUGUST 2016. BRAD CHELF, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed. within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. Reso. 2016-20 9 23 Crest Rd. E. STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2016-20 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT, GARAGES, COVERED PORCHES, SWIMMING POOL WITH A SPA, RETAINING WALLS AND NEW DRIVEWAY; AND REQUEST FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A GUEST HOUSE AND STABLE WITH LOFT AND CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 902 AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, (LOT 132A -MS), (HYNES). was approved and adopted at regular meeting of the Planning Commission on August 16, 2016 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Reso. 2016-20 23 Crest Rd. E. Agenda Item No: 7-A Mtg. Date: 08/16/16 MEMORANDUM TO RECUSE TO: Honorable Chair and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Heidi Luce, City Clerk SUBJECT: Zoning Case No. 909 - 7 Southfield Drive DATE: August 16, 2016 Due to the proximity of his property to the subject property, Commissioner Kirkpatrick should recuse himself from consideration of Zoning Case No. 909 at 7 Southfield Drive. He may however, take a seat in the audience -and participate as a resident. INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No.: 7-A Mtg. Date: 8-16-16 TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR WENDY STARKS, AICP, ASSOCIATE PLANNER APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: DATE PUBLISHED: ZONING CASE NO. 909 7 SOUTHFIELD DRIVE (4 -SF) RA -54, 2.6 ACRES (GROSS) MR. & MRS. KLERMAN CRISS GUNDERSON, ARCHITECT AUGUST 4, 2016 REQUEST AND RECOMMENDATION 1. The Planning Commission visited the project in the field in the morning of August 16, 2016. 2. It is recommended that the Planning Commission continue the public hearing, take public testimony, and provide direction to staff. 3. The applicant requests a Site Plan Review to construct a 630 square foot deck, 380 square feet of which would be above ground by 2.5' in height. The applicant also requests a variance from the requirement to provide a set aside area for a 450 square foot stable and a 550 square foot corral. In addition, a 232 square foot attached trellis, 34 square foot barbecue, and a 36 square foot water feature will be constructed which could be approved administratively. BACKGROUND Z.C. No. 906 4. The property is zoned RAS-1 and consists of 2.6 acres gross (113,256 sq. ft.) and 100,726 sq.ft. net lot area for development purposes. The property is accessed through a property on Ringbit Road W., and has a long steep driveway that bisects the lot, and overall steep topography that does not lend itself easily to equestrian amenities. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance from the requirement to provide a stable and corral. The property slopes downwards from Southfield Drive from 1,100 -foot elevation to 970 elevation at the building pad, and then to 920 elevation at the rear property line. 5. In August 2010, the applicant was approved for a lot line adjustment to move the common property line between 7 Southfield and 5 Ringbit West where 11,168 square feet of northerly portion of 5 Ringbit Road was transferred to 7 Southfield Drive increasing the size of the lot from 90,912 square feet to 102,080 square feet, 2.34 acres net (100,726 square feet for development purposes). 6. Currently the property is developed with a 3,113 square foot residence, 440 square foot garage, a 60 square foot spa, 850 square feet of breezeway, and a 96 square foot service yard on an 11,924 square foot building pad area, and the disturbed area is 17.3% of the net lot, (40% max.). 7. No changes are proposed to the existing configuration of the lot or the structures, except for the 630 square foot deck, 380 square feet of which would be above ground by 2.5' in height. No grading is proposed. 8. Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, any addition, new residence or construction of a pool or other accessory structure, or when a discretionary review of a project is required a stable/corral must be either constructed or an area for a future stable/corral set -aside on the property. Due to the location of the residence, in the rear of the lot, if not for the steep slope, the only area for a future stable/corral that could be set aside is in the front yard area, which would require a Variance approval as well. However, the front yard area of the lot is very steep and without tall retaining walls and a lot of grading, the area is not suitable for a structure. The applicant requests a Variance from the requirement that an area for a stable and corral be set aside. The applicant has no plans to construct a stable, nor wishes to grade the natural terrain of the lot to create a pad for a future stable. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE 9. The net lot area of the lot is 100,726 square feet. The structural lot coverage is proposed at 5,491 square feet or 5.46% of the net lot area, which includes all of the structures, (20% permitted). The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork is 15,206 square feet or 15.1% of the net lot area, (35% permitted). The driveway is over 7,770 square feet in area, which contributes to the total lot coverage. The applicant proposes to add approximately 790 square foot of hardscape. Z.C. No. 909 7 Southfield Dr. 10. The residential building pad is 11,924 square feet. Coverage on this building pad will be 5,776 square feet or 48.4%. Currently the building pad coverage is 39.8%. The building pad will be enlarged by 474 square feet for the out -of -grade porch. 11. The property slopes in a westerly direction and all of the drainage is carried down - slope. No change to the drainage pattern is proposed. 12. All of the development standards are being met except for the requirement to either construct or set aside area for a stable/corral. 13. In response for justification for the Variance request to be exempt from the requirement for a set aside area for the stable and corral, the applicant's agent states that due to the slope and configuration of the lot and the location of the building pad towards the rear of the lot, there is no available reasonably sloped area to set aside or construct a stable and corral. CONCLUSION 14. This is a unique lot in that it has a driveway that is very long on steep topography. The building pad and the residence sits in the rear, with no area further back for a stable and corral. The front of the lot is undisturbed, other than for the driveway and if a stable was to be constructed, it would have to be constructed in the front, which requires a Variance and the front is too steep to accommodate equestrian facilities. 15. When reviewing a development application the Planning Commission should consider whether the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. In addition, the Commission must determine if the project meets the Variance criteria enclosed with this report. 16. In reviewing this application, the Commission should consider the topography of the property, the previously graded pad located at the rear of the property, which necessitated a very long driveway and the general size of the lot. 17. This Variance, if granted, it would apply to the current proposal, with a condition that if in the future, if additional grading is proposed to enlarge the building pad or when other improvements are proposed, then the stable issue should be re -visited. This approval, if granted, would not prevent someone to apply for a stable and corral in the future. Z.C. No. 909 7 Southfield Dr. 18. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 19. The Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Committee will review the project for architectural elements and design at a later date. ZONING CASE NO. 909 SITE PLAN REVIEW EXISTING PROPOSED Covered porch, attached trellis, BBQ, water feature RA -S-1 ZONE SETBACKS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ABOVE GRADE DECK VARIANCE FROM REQUIRING STABLE/CORRAL Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line STRUCTURES Residence Garage Spa Breezeway Service yd Cov. porch BBQ Att. Trellis Water feat. 3113 sq.ft 440 sq.ft. 60 sq.ft 850 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft 0 sq.ft 0 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 0 sq. ft Residence Garage Spa Breezeway Service yd Cov. porch BBQ Att. Trellis Water feat. 3113 sq.ft 440 sq.ft 60 sq.ft. 850 sq.ft 96 sq.ft. 630 sq.ft. 34 sq.ft 232 sq.ft. 36 sq. ft. (Site Plan Review required for new structures and if size of structure increases by more than 999 sq. ft. in a 36 -month period), swimming pool, out of grade deck and others). TOTAL • 4,559 sq.ft. TOTAL 5,491 sq.ft STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE 4.5% 5.46% of 100 726 sq.ft. net lot area (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE 13.4% 15.1% of 100,726 sq.ft. net lot area (35% maximum) BUILDING PAD COVERAGE 39.8% of 11,450 sq.ft. pad 48.4% of 11,924 sq.ft. pad RESIDENTIAL (30% maximum guideline) GRADING N/A NONE Site plan review required if excavation and/or fill or combination thereof is more than 3 feet in depth and covers more than 2,000 sq. ft., must be balanced on site DISTURBED AREA 17,250 sq.ft. — 17.1% of lot was previously disturbed 17,450 sq.ft. — 17.3% of lot was previously disturbed (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, and any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist.) STABLE (minimum 450 sq. ft.) and CORRAL (minimum 550 sq. ft.) REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE Z.C. No. 909 7 Southfield Dr. STABLE ACCESS N/A ACCESSWAY Existing from Ringbit W. Existing from Ringbit W. VIEWS N/A Planning Commission review PLANTS AND ANIMALS N/A Planning Commission review SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 17.46.010 Purpose. The site plan review process is established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects in the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. 17.46.050 Required findings. A. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review application. B. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal, unless the following findings can be made: 1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; 2. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; 3. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; 4. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls); 5. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; 6. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 7. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas; 8. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 9. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES Z.C. No. 909 7 Southfield Dr. 17.38.050 Required findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings: A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. Z.C. No. 909 7 Southfield Dr. Agenda Item No: 8-A Mtg. Date: 08/16/16 MEMORANDUM TO RECUSE TO: Honorable Chair and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Wendy Starks, Associate Planner, AICP SUBJECT: Zoning Case No. 910 - 85 Crest Road East DATE: August 16, 2016 Due to the proximity of his property to the subject property, Chairman Chelf should recuse himself from consideration of Zoning Case No. 910 at 85 Crest Road East. He may however, take a seat in the audience and participate as a resident. INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 TO: FROM: APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310)377-7288 Agenda Item No.:8-A Mtg. Date: 8-16-16 HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR WENDY STARKS, AICP, ASSOCIATE PLANNER ZONING CASE NO. 910 85 CREST ROAD E. (LOT 69 -C -1 -MS) RA -S-2, 3.13 (EXCL. ROAD EASEMENT) MR. ZEE ALAN MCGREGOR, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AUGUST 4, 2016 REQUEST AND RECOMMENDATION 1. The applicant, Mr. Zee requests a Site Plan Review to construct a 1,500 square foot swimming pool that would replace an existing 586 square foot swimming pool, pool equipment area, 135 square foot attached trellis, a 383 square foot room addition, to demolish an existing 792 square foot garage and construct a new 960 square foot garage attached to the main residence by a 510 square foot breezeway, and associated structures, a new driveway that requires grading and 1,024 square feet of pool decking. Grading, including for the new driveway, is proposed at 2,296 cubic yards of dirt, of which 388 cubic yards will be exported, and portion used in the rear to enlarge the existing building pad. A Variance is requested to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the net lot, from the existing 32.7% to 55.1%. 2. The applicant proposes to abandon the existing driveway and construct a new one off of Crest Road East. Currently access to the property is taken from a common driveway apron mostly located on the adjacent property at 63 Crest Rd. E. and partially on 85 Crest Rd. E., which also serves several properties to the south. The driveway to the subject property turns to the east of the common apron and is then located entirely on 85 Crest E. The existing driveway ranges in width from 10'-15' and it goes along and around the entire rear property before accessing the existing garage. The new driveway will be ZC NO. 910 constructed on the subject property, adjacent to the common apron, and will follow along the front (north) and east side of the lot. The new driveway will have a 30' wide apron where it meets the improved roadway and will then narrow down to 20' in width. The apron must be roughened and the first 20' of the apron/driveway must be no steeper than 70/0. The existing driveway will be closed off at the property line, leaving the shared apron of off Crest Road East intact for use by the properties to the south. The applicant proposes to retain the existing driveway but demolish the asphalt and cover it with decomposed granite, which is considered softscape surface (pervious). Concerns were expressed by the resident at 63 Crest Road East regarding the shared driveway and the existing driveway which is proposed to be abandoned and the portion of the driveway that exists on the applicant's property that will be converted to decomposed granite. The specific concern is erosion from the decomposed granite. The Traffic Commission reviewed the new driveway apron at their July 28, 2016 meeting and recommended approval. A letter was received from the neighbor at 87 Crest Road East expressing concerns about the proximity of the proposed driveway to their residence. The applicants have responded by presenting an alternative driveway configuration, further from the eastern property line, if desired by the Planning Commission. However, the applicant's representatives met with the resident at 87 Crest Road and they state that his concerns were adequately addressed and the alternate driveway is no longer needed. 3. It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the staff report, open the public hearing, take public testimony and schedule a field visit to the site. BACKGROUND 4. The property is zoned RAS-2 and the gross lot area is 3.13 acres. The net lot area is 2.82. acres, as calculated for development purposes. 5. The property is currently developed with a 4,685 square foot residence, a 792 square foot garage, a 586 square foot swimming pool, a 32 square foot pool equipment area, a 458 square foot stable, a 492 square foot breezeway, a 408 square foot shed, 22 square foot shed and a 418 square foot service yard. The garage and swimming pool will be demolished and replaced with a 960 square foot garage, and a 1,500 square foot swimming pool. A 383 square foot addition to the residence is also being proposed. 6. Records indicate that in 1969 a variance was approved to build a stable in the front yard. ZC NO. 910 MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE 7. The project's disturbed area is currently 32.7%. The proposed disturbed area will increase due to the disturbance for the new driveway, the pool, and yard areas to 67,694 square feet or 55.1% of the net lot area, which requires a variance. The cut for the driveway will be 968 cubic yards, and 374 cubic yards will be generated from the pool/spa excavation; 954 cubic yards of the fill will be used to flatten out a portion of the rear slope, with 388 cubic yards to be exported. The applicant's agents advise that the proposed residential addition and garage demolition/construction will be on a previously constructed pad where little to no grading will be required. The existing pool will be demolished and will be filled in and become a grass and landscaped area. The proposed pool will be located partially on a previously disturbed area and partially on a newly disturbed area and will require some grading and excavation for the pool. A 3' high wall to enclose a 45 square foot pool equipment area is also proposed in hillside near the pool. 8. The structural coverage on the lot will be 8,937 square feet or 7.3% and the total coverage (structures and hardscape) will be 24,196 square feet or 19.7%, both in compliance with the code. 9. The 383 square foot addition to the existing 4,685 square foot residence will result in a 5,068 square foot house. The residential building pad will increase by 1,908 square feet and with the addition the coverage on this pad will be 8,937 square feet or 21.5%. 10. The 1,500 square foot pool, 383 square foot addition to the residence, 960 square foot new garage, 45 square foot pool equipment, 18 square foot addition to the breezeway for a 510 square foot breezeway, 135 square foot attached trellis, 96 square foot service yard, and 165 square foot covered porch are all proposed outside of setbacks. As disturbance exceeds 40%, a variance is needed but otherwise all are compliant with the Municipal Code. 11. The existing driveway will be relocated and the new driveway will be 20' wide to comply with Fire Department requirements. 3' high maximum retaining wall is proposed along the perimeter of the driveway leading to a 3,000 square foot motor court area. The Traffic Commission recommended approval of the driveway apron on July 28, 2016. 12. An existing 458 square foot stable with a 698 square foot corral was approved with a Variance in 1969 to be located in the front yard. 13. Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date. ZC NO. 910 14. When reviewing a development application the Planning Commission must consider whether the proposed project meets the criteria for a Site Plan Review, and Variance and must find that the proposed uses are consistent with the General Plan and development standards of the City, including provision for open space and maintaining a rural environment and that the uses will not adversely affect adjacent properties. 15. In justifying the variance, the applicant's agent states that much of the grading and disturbance is for the driveway, which will be much safer than what is there now. The existing driveway does not meet Fire Dept. requirements and is very long and winding. In order to minimize export of dirt, thus limit the number of trucks on site and in the City, some of the dirt will be placed in the rear on an existing gently sloping area to create a slightly larger flat area for use by the pool. The resulting slope will not exceed 6:1 gradient. 16. This project will be required to comply with all zoning requirements, including undergrounding of utility lines, Health Department requirements for a septic system, Fire Department for access and fuel modification and others 17. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Class 3. ZC 910 NEARBY PROPERTIES Address .,, House size in sq.ft. (built/add or remodel) Lot Area sq.ft. (excl. roadway easements) 83 Crest Road East 5,920 (11)* 87,832 87 Crest Road East 4,222 (03)* 83,200 17 Wideloop Road 3,576 (01)* 47,045 86 Crest Road East 3,191 (13)* 26,015 62 Crest Road East 7,905 (91)* 122,360 63 Crest Road East 6,058 (82) 252,648 67 Crest Road East 4,289 (90) 169,448 Average 5,023 112,650 85 Crest Proposed 5,068 122,743 NOTE: The above do not include garages, basements and other accessory structures. SOURCES: Assessors' records * City Records ZC NO. 910 SITE PLAN REVIEW/CUP/VR EXISTING PROPOSED RA -S- 2 ZONE SETBACKS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, GARAGE, STABLE, SHED ADDITION TO RESIDENCE, NEW GARAGE, POOL, POOL EQUIPMENT, SERVICE YARD, ADDITION TO BREEZEWAY, COVERED PORCH & DRWY Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 35 ft. from side property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear property line SPR required for grading, pool, and Residence Garage Swimming Pool Pool equip. Stable Service yard Breezeway Attch porches Attached trellis Shed Shed 4,685 sq.ft. 792 sq.ft. 586 sq.ft.. 32 sq.ft 458 sq.ft. 418 sq.ft 492 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 22 sq.ft. 408 sq. ft. Residence Garage Swimming Pool Pool equip. Stable Service yard Breezeway Attch porches Attached trellis Shed Shed 5,068 sq.ft. 960 sq.ft. 1,500 sq.ft. 45 sq.ft. 458 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft 510 sq.ft. 165 sq.ft. 135 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. driveway. Variance is required for exceeding disturbed area. TOTAL 7,893 sq.ft. TOTAL 8,937 sq.ft GRADING N/A 1,342 c.y. cut & 954 c.y. fill 388 c.y. to be exported Site Plan Review required if excavation and/or fill or combination thereof that is more than 3 feet in depth and covers more than 2,000 sf. STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE 6.08% 7.3% of 122,743 s.f. net lot area (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE 21.6 % 19.7% of 122,743 s.f. net lot area (35% maximum) BUILDING PAD COVERAGE (30% 18.83% of 39,630.ft. pad 21.5% of 41,538 sq.ft. pad maximum -guideline) Residential DISTURBED AREA 27.06% or 40,178 sq. ft. (122,743 sq. ft. net lot area) 55.1% or 67,694 sq.ft. (122,743 sq. ft. net lot area) (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading any graded slopes and building pad areas, and any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist.) STABLE (min. 450 SQ.FT. 458 sq.ft. existing w/corral 458 sq.ft. existing w/corral & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS Existing Existing ROADWAY ACCESS Existing driveway approach New 20' wide drwy VIEWS N/A Planning Commission review PLANTS AND ANIMALS N/A Planning Commission review ZC NO. 910 SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 11.46.010 Purpose. The site plan review process is established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects in the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. 11.46.050 Required findings. A. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review application. B. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal, unless the following findings can be made: 1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; 2. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; 3. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; 4. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls); 5. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; 6. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 7. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas; 8. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 9. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES 17.38.050 Required findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings: A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; ZC NO. 910 C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills.. SOURCE: City of Rolling Hills Zoning Ordinance ZC NO. 910 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK RECE VED JUL 2 5 2016 City of Rolling Hills By /0 / ue V - e v2LactX 7-7 07 3 42A5, etg arok 604 y-fath.dieviin s,4 Airei4 72r -44t1, of 8' 7 1/4ge/i/e-le, fig, ho-7)+a-zr fre( aRTE_S- car yteraz per°' N "- you :/1 eTs(ix /frac, S a 444-1'1/4A evii- A a . ti # is ___ Crala- OWL 14/Z- 8)Adkt Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 9:18:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time Subject: 85 Crest East Date: Tuesday, August 9, 2016 at 9:00:52 AM Pacific Daylight Time From: Nina Ritter To: Wendy Starks CC: Yolanta Schwartz, Rhca Kristen Raig - Wendy, Yolanta asked me to address my letter to the Planning Commission and said she would be out of the office today but that my letter needed to be received today and to send it to you. In addition to this letter there are several attachments I would ask that you include: i) Zee's plans which I was sent ii) color coded copy of my survey showing the corner where 63 Crest and 85 crest meet iii) 3 aerial photographs of area under discussion Dear Planning Commission: I am writing to you about the proposed project at 85 Crest Rd. East. I have been out of town since mid - June and was not aware of this project (though I am sent all my mail) until the beginning of this week. It's taken me a few days to attempt to educate myself so excuse me if I've not properly understood something. I will not be back in town until Sept. so cannot attend any of the meetings myself. I will try to make my concerns brief. 1) as I understand it, the Stringbergs (87 Crest E.) objected to the new proposed driveway at 85 Crest E. being close to their property so the Zees moved the entrance to the west side of the property. While I sympathize with the Strindberg's concerns (and appreciate the Zee's cooperation) we currently have 8 families (and all the attendant cars and trucks) entering and exiting from the access road situated at the western side of the Zees' property at an angle that can be dangerous enough as it is. Currently, these cars are funneled onto one road before entering onto the faster flowing Crest Rd. Adding yet a separate driveway onto Crest Rd.-- right next to this access road exit for 7 homes-- is questionable in my mind. Has the Commission considering asking the Zees to more appropriately move the driveway to the center of their property to maximize safety for all the neighbors concerned? This is an unusual situation where there are not just 2 neighbors flanking a third, but in fact in the present case, 8 homes total flank 85 Crest Rd. E. This unusual situation deserves more than the usual scrutiny as to safety. 2) Another important concern is the original driveway. Neither the original driveway nor the topographical aspects appear on the plan I was given (see below). In my experience plans submitted for approval always include proposed improvements superimposed on the current "as builts" with topographical references included. The Zees appear to propose the removal from the site of tons of asphalt currently used to pave the present, steep driveway and replace it with decomposed granite. While I appreciate this will lower their hardscape numbers I find the details of how this is to be achieved, crucial to both my property and the access road of my neighbors. The (original & present) 85 Crest E. asphalt driveway is very long. It's on steep grade leading down onto an asphalt apron at the property line of 85 Crest E. & 63 Crest E. and then onto the asphalt access road which runs along the 63 Crest Rd. property and which is used as a common entrance and exit for all the properties to the south of us, out onto Crest Rd. Without retaining walls or asphalt to hold it back, that prevents thousands of tons of new decomposed granite from running down the hillside onto the access road/apron, and/or down my own driveway/hillside and/or into Crest Rd: - Page 1 of2 either when it starts raining or settling over the years? While Yolanta explained that engineering issues come after the Planning Commission process, in this particular case why would that would be so? For example, the safety issues involved in moving the driveway were examined before the Planning Commission vote of approval, I am not clear why such an important issue as removing tons of asphalt from a site and the question of the retainment and drainage of an entire hillside affecting many neighbors would not also be part of Planning Commission's consideration of safety before approval? Furthermore, I assume your approval of this project rests on consideration of the balance of hardscape/improvement on the property. How can you approve a new motor court and larger pool area (i.e. increase the hardscape elsewhere on the property) without considering that the Zee's may be seriously ignoring a vital part of the equation they are proposing to you? How can you safely consider this project without considering the realities and practicalities of how it is actually going to be achieved on the property since it's not addressed on the plans? This is a long driveway which circles the steepest grade of the property which is at the highest point of Rolling Hills. I'm not an engineer but I have to assume this asphalt driveway girdles the hillside to some important extent. The wisdom of replacing it with sand on a steep hillside in an area such as ours —without further investigation-- would appear to defy common sense. Even aside from asking for engineering at this stage: Where is the decomposed granite beginning and ending exactly both in length and width? Retaining walls? Aprons? needed to hold in the decomposed granite to keep it from liquifying flowing downwards? Would these structures be considered hardscape were they to be properly included in your consideration? Moreover,if you approve this plan and it is later decided due to engineering -issues -the driveway/asphalt - should not be removed, then what happens to the increased hardscape you have already approved on the property? Do the Zee's get to proceed even though they will have doubly maxed the hardscape on their property? Do they have to go back to the drawing board and completely redo their plans for a Motorcourt and larger pool area? Wouldn't it be better for all involved to tackle this issue head on, now? That is a very long driveway. That is a steep, large hillside important to several RH homes. That is a lot of asphalt. That could be a lot of grading, drainage, soils engineering. I don't see the wisdom of pretending it will go away somewhere between Planning Commission and the Building Department. I thank you for your consideration, and as always, the great staff of Rolling Hills who are helping us puzzle this all out. Respectfully, Nina Ritter 63 Crest E. 310-283-5125 Page 2 of 2 �i r F �% .�. 6q 2016 Mirau:wli Curpuraiion � FiulcmhB9briti% cy0'h2ii16 FP- uutetorrnitre Map Satellite ri%e/ 1 lY'Eisry nr` i 85 Crest East Proposed driveway ti WlryrmoJmo_"row i sarlo_eaPte. drivewaJW the center-bpappfa hero) 85•Crest _EestPmpusegdrWoway :,,r.:• .r� ter. j Why not more safely locate new driveway to the center of approx. I here? 7 families use this Access Road & have to turn out here. They are coming up a grade and cannot see oncoming traffic