8D6.9
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX (310) 377-7288
Agenda Item No.81)
Mtg. Date: 3/17/15
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR
APPLICATION NO. ZONING CASE NO. 877
SITE LOCATION: 6 SADDLEBACK ROAD (LOT 18-RH)
ZONING AND SIZE: RA -S-1, 3.44 ACRES GROSS
APPLICANT: MR. TERRY REITER
PUBLISHED: MARCH 5, 2015
RECOMMENDATION AND REOUEST
1. The Planning Commission viewed the project in the field earlier in the day on
March 17, 2015. It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the staff report,
take public testimony and provide direction to staff.
2. The applicant requests a Site Plan Review to retain 155 square feet of partially
completed addition to a previously approved garage. The Site Plan is necessary due to
the fact that the previously approved garage addition of 2,145 square feet exceeds the
maximum allowed for an administrative approval and the fact that the property has a
condition imposed on it from previous cases that any further development on the
property be subject to Planning Commission review and approval.
BACKGROUND
3. In July, 2008 the Planning Commission approved the construction of a 2,000
square foot garage and grading consisting of 170 cubic yards of cut and 170 cubic yards
of fill (total 340 c.y.) at 6 Saddleback Road. The garage was to be attached by a corner of
a wall to the main residence. The existing 700 square foot garage was to be converted to
living space. The new garage was to be constructed no more than 4 feet out of grade
with the area below used for storage. During the review by the RH Architectural
Committee, and due to the topography and bedrock location, the applicant proposed a
full basement under that portion of the garage where the storage area was approved. No
basement is proposed under the portion of the garage closest to the house.
ZC. No. 877 1
In June 2010 an extension to commence construction was granted to the applicant by the
Planning Commission, and building permits were pulled on January 5, 2011 to
construct a 2,000 square foot garage with basement.
4. During construction it was observed that the applicant has poured additional
concrete pad and walls to enlarge the previously approved 2,000 square foot garage, by
approximately 300 square feet. A stop work order was issued and in September 2012
the applicant submitted an application to the Planning Commission requesting
permission to keep the partially constructed 300 square foot extension to the garage.
5. In November 20121, the Planning Commission by a vote of 3-1 (then
Commissioner Pieper was recused and Commissioner Henke voted against the project)
partially approved and partially denied the request; approving 145 square feet (side) of
the proposed addition but denied the front addition of 155 square feet. In December of
2012 the applicant appealed the decision to the City Council.
6. Following several continuances of the hearings, the City Council in June 2013
deadlocked on the decision (2-2), and therefore the Planning Commission's decision
became the final action. The Planning Commission and the City Council expressed
concerns regarding the size and scale of the garage and the additional square footage
that was constructed without permission, as well as the massing of the roof line of the
structure, particularly in the front of the garage.
7. The approval was valid until June 2014, at which time the applicant would have
to demolish the partially constructed front extension to the garage and continue
construction of the side extension.
8. In July 2014, following several reminder letters from the City and inaction by
the applicant, staff referred the case to the City Attorney's office. The applicant
requested to go back before the City Council to see if they would change their decision.
Staff explained that because, in this case, the Planning Commission's action was the
final decision, the case would have to go back to the Planning Commission.
9. In September 2014 an office meeting was held with the Assistant City Attorney,
Mr. Reiter and staff. Several options were outlined to Mr. Reiter, including prosecution
if a resolution in this case is not attained.
10. After further review and conversations with staff, the applicant requested to
come back before the Planning Commission to ask that he be allowed to keep the 155
square foot front extension of the garage. The applicant is proposing to lower the roof
line of the front extension to reduce the massing of the roof line of the structure.
11. In February 2015, the applicant submitted an application and plans to be placed
on the Planning Commission agenda.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
12. The property is currently developed with a 3,920 square foot residence, 700
square foot attached garage at the east side of the residence, 720 square foot swimming
Z.C. No. 877 a2
pool, 48 square foot pool equipment area, service yard and a 432 square foot stable with
a loft, located in the front yard area. The previously approved 2,000 square foot
storage/ garage structure is nearly completed. In the original application the applicant
stated that the existing 700 square foot attached garage located on the eastern side of the
house will be converted to living area. Other than 300 square feet, the garage is mostly
completed.
13. The property is zoned RAS -1 and the gross lot area is 3.44 acres. The net lot area
for construction purposes is 2.66 acres or 116,000 square feet. The lot is located along a
large bend on Saddleback Road and has a frontage along Saddleback Road of over 619
feet, but generally the lot is narrow. The lot backs up to Palos Verdes Drive North.
14. Approximately 50% of the residence is located in the rear setback. The garage
does not encroach into setbacks.
15. The residential building pad was approved and enlarged to 14,963 square feet
and will have coverage of 7,784 square feet or 52.07o, (with the additional 155 sq.ft.
requested) The existing stable pad is 2,300 square feet and has coverage of 19.670. The
building pad does not include the level area in the rear setback where half of the
residence is located. However, the entire house is included in the calculations for pad
coverage.
16. The structural lot coverage will be 8,234 square feet or 7.1 %, in conformance with
structural lot coverage limitations. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas will
be 14,311 square feet or 12.3%, in conformance with lot coverage limitations.
17. The disturbance of the net lot will be 26,000 square feet or 22.4%. No additional
disturbance is required for the additional 155 square foot addition to the garage.
18. Utility lines will be placed underground.
19. The previous approvals of this project included conditions of no further
development without Planning Commission review and approval; that a garage door is
not permitted on the rear wall; that the garage not be used as habitable space and that
no kitchen facilities be allowed, except for a work bench and a sink.
20. In the application for the modification, the applicant states that the addition is
minimal; that the project conforms to the General Plan and meets all zoning code
requirements and is not in setbacks; that the project is compatible with adjacent
developments; that most of the grading (excavation) was under the structure and that
the location of the garage was to minimized the grading and maximum amount of
natural terrain is retained, as other areas of the lot are more steep.
21. The RHCA Architectural Committee also approved the side portion of the
addition, (145 sq.ft.), but not the front.
CONCLUSION
22. When reviewing an application the Planning Commission should consider
whether the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates
Z.C. No. 877 0
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.
23. The lot is irregular in shape, has steep slopes in the rear and has a long frontage
along Saddleback Road. The front of the lot slopes downwards in a northerly direction
and has a large open space area between the road and the residence. The residence and
accessory structures are located in the rear of the property on a level pad and encroach
into the rear setback. The proposed addition will be located in the rear of the lot, (not in
setback.
24. The project meets the City's development standards, except that the building pad
coverage exceeds the guidelines. Approximately 50% of the residence is located outside
the building pad area but is included in the calculations as if it was located on the
building pad.
25. The project site is developed with a stable, corral and access. The stable is 432
square feet and there is adequate area to add in the future to the stable to conform to the
450 sq.ft. requirement.
26. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
27. Mr. Reiter states that the small addition with the reduced roof height will solve
the massing concern the Planning Commission and City Council expressed. He also
states that the project meets all City's requirements, is not in setbacks and is compatible
with other structures in the vicinity.
Zoning Case No. 877
SITE PLAN REVIEWli
EXISTING b foro
�I APPROVED
II CURRENT PROPOSAL
I
j
RA -S- 1 ZONE SETBACKS
Front: 50 ft. from front
SINGLE FAMILY
GARAGE ADDITION TO
GARAGE ADDITION TO
easement line
RESIDENCE
SINGLE FAMILY
SINGLE FAMILY
Side: 20 ft. from side
RESIDENCE
RESIDENCE
property line
Rear: 50 ft. from rear
property line
STRUCTURES
Residence 3920 sq.ft
Residence 4620 sq.ft.
Residence 4620 sq.ft.
(Site Plan Review required if
Garage 700 sq.ft
Garage 2145 sq.ft.
Garage 2300 sq.ft.
size of structure increases by
Stable 432 sq.ft
Stable 450 sq.ft.
Stable 450 sq.ft.
at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has
Service yd. 96 sq.ft
Service yd 96 sq.ft.
Service yd. 96 sq.ft.
the effect of increasing the
Pool 720 sq.ft
Pool 720 sq.ft
Pool 720 sq.ft
size of the structure by more
Pool eq. 48 sq.ft.
Pool eq. 48 sq.ft
Pool eq. 48 sq.ft
than 25% in a 36 -month
period).
Total 5,916 sq.ft.
Total 8,079 sq.ft
Total 8,234 sq.ft.
STRUCTURAL LOT
5.1%
6.96% of 116,000 sq.ft.
7.18% of 116 000 sq.ft.
COVERAGE
net lot area
net lot area
(20% maximum)
TOTAL LOT COVERAGE
10.3%
12.2% (14,156 s.f.) of
12.3% (14,311 s.f.) of
(35% ma)imum)
116,000 s.f. net lot area
116,000 s.f. net lot area
Z.C. No. 877 4
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
12,170 sq.ft-45.5%
14,963 sq.ft.- 51%
14,963 sq.ft.-52%
PAD
COVERAGE (30%
maximum -guideline)
2,300 sq.ft. — 18.8%
2,300 sq.ft. —19.5%
2,300 sq.ft. — 19.6%
STABLE PAD
GRADING
NIA
170 cubic yards of cut and
170 cubic yards of cut
Site Plan Review required if
170 cubic yards of fill
and 170 cubic yards of
excavation and/or fill or
fill
combination thereof that is
more than 3 feet in depth and
covers more than 2,000
sq.ft.) must be balanced on
site.
DISTURBED AREA
16.4%
22.4% (26,000 square
22.4% (26,000 square
(40% maximum; any graded
feet)
feet)
building pad area, any
remedial grading (temporary
disturbance), any graded
slopes and building pad
areas, and any nongraded
area where impervious
surfaces exist.)
STABLE (min. 450 SQ.FT.
Existing 432 sq.ft.with
450 sq.ft. stable and 550
450 sq.ft. stable and 550
& 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL)
loft
sq.ft. corral
sq.ft. corral
STABLE ACCESS
Existing
Existing
Existing
ROADWAY ACCESS
Existinq drivewav
Existinq drivewav
Existinq drivewav
VIEWS
NIA
Planning Commission
Planning Commission
condition
review
PLANTS AND ANIMALS
NIA
Planning Commission
Planning Commission
condition
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
Z.C. No. 877 5
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.
SOURCE: City of Rolling Hills Zoning Ordinance
Z.C. No. 877 G