Loading...
622, Extension to previously approv, Staff Reports• ek-6 City 0/ eoff•ng INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2001 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityoirh@aol.com TO: HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PRINCIPAL PLANNER SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 622 Mr. Edmund Talbot, 7 Packsaddle Road West Request for a one-year extension of time BACKGROUND Attached is a letter from Mr. Talbot requesting a one-year time extension for a previously approved Site Plan to permit additions and grading and a Variance to encroach into the south side yard setback with retaining walls at an existing single family residence at 7 Packsaddle Road West. The applicant submitted grading plans for the project to the Los Angeles County Building Department. The plans are currently being corrected. The Planning Commission approved the Site Plan and Variance request by Resolution No. 2000-24 on October 17, 2000. If granted, the new expiration date will be November 17, 2002. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the request. Resolution No. 2001-22 is enclosed for Commission's consideration for the time extension. ®Printed on Recycled Paper. RESOLUTION NO. 2001-22 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS WHICH WILL ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONS THAT WILL REQUIRE RETAINING WALLS AND GRADING AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 7 PACKSADDLE ROAD WEST IN ZONING CASE NO. 622. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A request has been filed by Mr. Edmund Talbot with respect to real property located at 7 Packsaddle Road West (Lot 19-SF), Rolling Hills, requesting a one year time extension for a previously approved Variance to encroach into the side yard setback with retaining walls, and a Site Plan Review to permit the construction of additions and retaining walls that require grading at a single family residence that was approved by the Planning Commission by Resolution No. 2000-24 on October 17, 2000. Section 2. The Commission considered this item at a meeting on October 16, 2001, at which time information was presented indicating that the extension of time is necessary because the review of the grading plans was delayed at the Building and Safety Department of Los Angeles County. Section 3. Based on information and evidence submitted, the Planning Commission does hereby amend Paragraph A, Section 8 of Resolution No. 2000- 24, adopted by the City Council, dated October 17, 2000, to read as follows: "The Variance and Site Plan approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval, as defined in Sections 17.38.070 (A) and 17.46.080 (A), of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code unless construction on the applicable structures have commenced within that time period." Section 4. Except as herein amended, the provisions of Resolution No. 2000-24 shall continue to be in full force and effect. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 16' DAY OF OCTOBER 2001. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ALLEST: MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) ) ) §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2001-22 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS WHICH WILL ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONS THAT WILL REQUIRE RETAINING WALLS AND GRADING AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 7 PACKSADDLE ROAD WEST IN ZONING CASE NO. 622. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on October 16, 2001 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. DEPUTY CITY CLERK • E.T. Surfboards 09/,/ r� /'''Ze)/e6f 65,5-- /vv AC65JD ofr-76 "‘'/11 tcA.)," Y/e) 79-.997(5'V 904 Aviation Blvd. • Hermosa Beach, California 90254 • (310) 379-1813 • Fax (310) 372-9877 • • City ol Roiling -AIL INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cltyofrh@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 4.A. Mtg. Date: 11/13/2000 DATE: NOVEMBER 13, 2000 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24: ' A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT ENCROACHMENTS INTO THE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONS TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT WILL REQUIRE RETAINING WALLS AND GRADING IN ZONING CASE NO. 622. Mr Edmund Talbot, 7 Packsaddle Road West (Lot 19-SF) BACKGROUND 1. On October 23, 2000, the City Council continued review of Resolution No. 2000-24 to this evening's meeting. Prior to acceptance of the Planning Commission's action, the Council requested the review and approval of the Rolling Hills Community Association regarding the proposed average retaining wall height. On November 7, 2000, the Community Association reviewed plans of the proposed additions that included a retaining wall that had been reduced from 4 feet 6 inches (4'6") to 2 feet 8 inches (2'8"). The Architectural Committee is requiring that amended plans be prepared regarding other architectural issues but, Rolling Hills Community Association Manager Peggy Minor does not feel the reduced retaining wall height would ultimately be an issue. Grading will not be changed. The revised plans are attached., 2. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2000-24 that is attached on October 17, 2000 at their regular meeting granting a Variance to permit encroachments into the south side yard setback to construct retaining walls and granting Site Plan Review approval for the construction of additions to a single family residence that will require retaining walls and grading in Zoning Case No. 622. The vote was 5-0. 3. The applicant is requesting a Variance to permit the construction of retaining walls that will encroach into the south side yard setback. The applicant proposes a 153- foot long 2 foot 8 inch (2'8") high retaining wall at the west side or rear of the building pad that will encroach up to 19 feet into the 20 foot south side yard setback. There are also certain existing retaining walls at the rear of the residence that will be removed and others to remain. ®Printed on Recycled Paper. • • Responding to the Criteria to be satisfied for grant of a Variance, the applicant states that, "The retaining wall request at the south property line is a natural continuation of an existing wall, and will continue from the end of that wall." He also says, "This request for the retaining wall will not impact the site or neighboring properties negatively." The applicant is also requesting Site Plan Review to construct 963 square feet of residential additions to the existing 1,815 square foot residence for a total of 2,778 square feet. The applicant also proposes to construct a 963 square foot basement at the northwestern portion of the residence. The project requires a cut of 285 cubic yards of basement soil, filling the rear of the building pad with 239 cubic yards of soil, the remaining 46 cubic yards to be spread below the building pad on the site, and extending the building pad by 120 square feet at the northwest. The size of the residential addition would ordinarily be permitted without Planning Commission review were it not for the basement cut, graded area and retaining wall encroachment. 4. Criteria for Site Plan Review is attached. 5. The existing residence was constructed in 1952. In 1975, a request for a Conditional Use Permit by Mr. Thomas J. Roba for construction of a retaining wall projecting into the side yard on each side of the property was denied by the Planning Commission. In 1976, the case was rejected by the Deputy District Attorney after retaining walls were constructed without permits because there was an attempt by the owner to correct the matter. In 1981, a grading permit was issued to Mr. Talbot to return the slope to its natural state. - 6. The existing driveway access off Packsaddle Road West will remain. 7. A 450 square foot stable is proposed along with a 550 square foot corral on a lower level at the western portion of the property that will be accessed by an existing road that has a maximum slope of 20%. The road begins at Packsadddle Road West and crosses the northern portion of the property to the western side of the property. 8. The structural lot coverage proposed is 3,178 square feet or 1.8% (20% permitted) and the total lot coverage proposed is 6,160 square feet or 3.5% (35% permitted). 9. The 4,102 square foot residential building pad beyond required setbacks will have proposed coverage of 3,178 square feet or 56.5%. Much of the existing residence encroaches into the front yard setback. The proposed stable pad will have a minimum dimension of 1,000 square feet and a proposed coverage of 450 square feet or 45%. Total pad coverage will be 71.1%. The Planning Commission's guideline is 30%. 10. The disturbed area of the lot will be 11,240 square feet or 6.4% (40% maximum permitted; 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. 11. The project halteen determined to be categoric exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council receive and file Resolution No. 2000-24. 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; and 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; and 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; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; 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. SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S-2 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 35 ft. from property line Rear. 50 ft. from property line STRUCTURES Site Plan Review required for grading requiring a grading permit, any new structure or if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period. STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (35% maximum) RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PAD COVERAGE (Guideline maximum of 30%) STABLE BUILDING PAD COVERAGE TOTAL BUILDING PAD COVERAGE GRADING 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 sq.ft. must be balanced on site. DISTURBED AREA 40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, and any nonaraded area where Impervious surfaces exist. STABLE (450 SQ.FT. & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS EXISTING Existing retaining wall encroachments. Residence Garage Stable Total 1.3% 12.7% PROPOSED Retaining walls incorporated In — proposed project encroach into south side yard setback. 1,815 sq.ft. Residence 400 sq.ft. Garage 2,778 sq.ft. 400 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. Stable 450 so.ft. 2,215 sq.ft. Total 1 2.1% 13.7% 3,628 sq.ft. 155.6% of 3,982 sq.ft. building pad 177.4% of 4,102 sq.ft. building pad 1 N/A ' 45.0% of 1,000 sq.ft. building pad 155.6% of 3,982 sq.ft. building pad 71.1% of 5,102 sq.ft. building pads N/A 285 cu. yds of cut soil 285 cu. yds of fill soil 7,263 sq.ft. or 4.1 % N/A Existing accessway from the northern side of the lot with a slope access of 20%. ' Existing access from the end of the cul-de-sac off Packsaddle Road West IN/A IN/A 11,240 sq.ft. or 6.4% 1450 sq.ft. stable 550 sq.ft. coral No change INo change Planning Commission review Planning Commission review 4 RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT ENCROACHMENTS INTO THE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONS TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT WILL REQUIRE RETAINING WALLS AND GRADING IN ZONING CASE NO. 622. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr Edmund Talbot with respect to real property located at 7 Packsaddle Road West (Lot 19-SF), Rolling Hills, requesting a Variance to permit encroachment into the south side yard setback to construct retaining wails and requesting Site Plan Review to permit the construction of room additions, a basement, and retaining walls ' that will require grading at an existing single family residence. • Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on August 15, 2000, September 19, 2000, and October 17, 2000, and at a field trip visit on September 9, 2000. The applicants were notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City staff and the Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The applicant was in attendance at the hearings. During the hearing process, the Commission was informed of the history of the site. The existing residence was constructed in 1952. In 1975, a request for a Conditional Use Permit by Mr. Thomas J. Roba for construction of a retaining wall projecting into the side yard on each side of the property was denied by the Planning Commission. In 1976, the case was rejected by the Deputy District Attorney after retaining walls were constructed without permits because there was an attempt by the owner to correct the matter. In 1981, a grading permit was issued to Mr. Talbot to return the slope to its natural state. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption (The State CA Guidelines, Section 15301(e)) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 4. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills . . Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar • properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of aparcel of 3 • • property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. Section 17.16.110 requires the side yard setback for every residential parcel in the RA- S-1 Zone to be twenty (20) feet. The applicant is requesting to encroach up to a maximum 19 feet into the 20 foot south side yard setback to construct 153-foot long, 4.5 foot high retaining walls at the rear or west of the residence. With respect to this request for a Variance, 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 of the irregular shape of the lot. The existing legal nonconforming residence was built within the front yard and side yard setbacks atop a steep slope. The retaining walls will encroach beyond existing encroachments but are limited in area so as to preserve the safety and integrity of the slope and leave nearly all of the existing open space near the south side of the residence unaffected. 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. The Variance will permit the development of the property in a manner similar to development patterns on surrounding properties. The location of the building pad dictates that the proposed retaining walls be set in the south side yard setback because the existing structure was not constructed under current setback standards and the building pad is situated close to the edge of a steep slope, C. The granting of the Variance will 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. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped and is consistent in scale and mass with adjacent development. Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 622 to permit the construction of retaining walls that will encroach a maximum of nineteen (19) feet into the south side yard setback, as indicated on the development plan dated August 9, 2000, submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 8 of this Resolution. 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 building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six (36) month period. With respect to the Site Plan Review RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 PAGE2OF7 • • application to add 963 square feet to the proposed residence with a 963 square foot basement, 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. The proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential development and maintain sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements with the Variance approved in Sections 5 of this Resolution. The lot has a net square foot area of 176,629 square feet. The proposed residence (2,778 sq.ft.), garage (400 sq.ft.), and future stable (450 sq.ft.) will have 3,178 square feet which constitutes 1.8% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 6,160 square feet which equals 3.5% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is screened from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development on adjacent uses. B. The proposed development preserves and integrates into the site design, 'to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls). The lot slopes downward at the rear and most of the mature trees will not be removed. Grading will be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the proposed residence and existing neighboring residences. C. The proposed development, as' conditioned, is harmonious in scale. and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded and the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to this irregular -shaped lot. The ratio of the proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, the development plan preserves several mature trees and shrubs and supplements it with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. E. The development plan 'substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Although the building structure is located within the front and side yard setbacks, the additions will not effect a major change to the existing residence. The development plans as proposed will minimize impact on Packsaddle Road West. Most of the additions proposed will notbe visible from Packsaddle .Road West. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain scenic vistas across portions of the property. RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 PAGE 3 OF 7 F. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at the west side (rear) of this lot. G. The development plan preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible withand enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas. H. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize an existing driveway at the eastern portion of the property off Packsaddle Road West for access. I. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 622 for proposed residential additions as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A and subject to the conditions contained in Section 8. Section 8. The Variance to the side yard setback approved in Section 5 and the Site Plan Review approved in Section 7 of this resolution are subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070(A) and 17.46.080(A) unless the applicant has acquired building permits or otherwise extended the Variance pursuant to the requirements of those sections. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance and Site Plan Review approvals, 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 the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 PAGE 4 OF 7 1 D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A and dated August 9, 2000, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. F. Any retaining walls incorporated into the project shall not exceed 4.5 feet in height, averaging no more than 2-1/2 feet. G. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 77.4%, the stable pad shall not exceed 45.0%, and total building pad coverage shall not exceed 71.1%. H. Maximum disturbed area shall not exceed 6.4% of the net lot area. I. Grading shall not exceed 285 cubic yards of cut soil and 285 cubic yards of fill soil and shall be balanced on site. J. Any grading shall preserve the existing topography, flora, and natural features to the greatest extent possible. K. An Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 1996 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be prepared to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control stormwater pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles. L. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to the maximum extent feasible, the existing mature trees and shrubs and the natural landscape screening surrounding the proposed building pad. M. Landscaping shall include water efficient irrigation, to the maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a low . gallonage irrigation system, utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using . "hydrozones," considers slope factors and climate conditions in design, and 'utilizes means . to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray in accordance with Section 17.27.020 (Water efficient landscaping requirements) of the Rolling Hills • Municipal Code. N. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission. must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes must conform to the City. of Rolling Hills standard of 2 to 1 slope ratio. RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 PAGE5OF7 • • O. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. P. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional structural development shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. Q. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Variance and Site Plan Review, pursuant to Section 17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective. S. All conditions of these Variance and Site Plan Review approvals must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 17TH DA�CT9BER, 2000. ALIIN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: MARILYN I RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 PAGE 6 OF 7 • i AYES: NOES: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2000-24 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT ENCROACHMENTS INTO THE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONS TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT WILL REQUIRE RETAINING WALLS AND GRADING IN ZONING CASE NO. 622. was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission on October 17, 2000 by the following roll call vote: Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer, Witte and Chairman Roberts. None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. DEPUTY CI CLERK • RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 PAGE 7 OF 7 DATE: TO: ATTJ: FROM: SUBJECT: • • Cay 0/ AM" INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mait ity rrh@ao m Agenda Item o.: 4.B. Mtg. Date: 10/23/2000 OCTOBER 23, 2000 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT ENCROACHMENTS INTO THE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONS TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT WILL REQUIRE RETAINING WALLS AND GRADING IN ZONING CASE NO. 622. Mr Edmund Talbot, 7 Packsaddle Road West (Lot 19-SF) BACKGROUND 1. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2000-24 that is attached on October 17, 2000 at their regular meeting granting a Variance to permit encroachments into the south side yard setback to construct retaining walls and granting Site Plan Review approval for the construction of additions to a single family residence that will require retaining walls and grading in Zoning Case No. 622. The vote was 5-0. 2. The applicant is requesting a Variance to permit the construction of retaining walls that will encroach into the south side yard setback. The applicant proposes a 153- foot long 4.5-foot high retaining wall at the west side or rear of the building pad that will encroach up to 19 feet into the 20 foot south side yard setback. There are also certain existing retaining walls at the rear of the residence that will be removed and others to remain. Responding to the Criteria to be satisfied for grant of a Variance, the applicant states that, "The retaining wall request at the south property line is a natural continuation of an existing wall, and will continue from the end of that wall." He also says, "This request for the retaining wall will not impact the site or neighboring properties negatively." The applicant is also requesting Site Plan Review to construct 963 square feet of residential additions to the existing 1,815 square foot residence for a total of 2,778 square feet. The applicant also proposes to construct a 963 square foot basement at the northwestern portion of the residence. Pnnted on Recycled Paper. The project req�ires a cut of 285 cubic yards of base/Pent soil, filling the rear of the building pad with 239 cubic yards of soil, the remaining 46 cubic yards to be spread below the building pad on the site, and extending the building pad by 120 square feet at the northwest. The residential addition would ordinarily be permitted without Planning Commission review were it not for the basement cut, graded area and retaining wall encroachment. 4. Criteria for Site Plan Review is attached. 5. The existing residence was constructed in 1952. In 1975, a request for a Conditional Use Permit by Mr. Thomas J. Roba for construction of a retaining wall projecting into the side yard on each side of the property was denied by the Planning Commission. In 1976, the case was rejected by the Deputy District Attorney after retaining walls were constructed without permits because there was an attempt by the owner to correct the matter. In 1981, a grading permit was issued to Mr. Talbot to return the slope to its natural state. 6. The existing driveway access off Packsaddle Road West will remain. 7. A 450 square foot stable is proposed along with a 550 square foot corral on a lower level at the western portion of the property that will be accessed by an existing road that has a maximum slope of 20%. The road begins at Packsadddle Road West and crosses the northern portion of the property to the western side of the property. 8. The structural lot coverage proposed is 3,178 square feet or 1.8% (20% permitted) and the total lot coverage proposed is 6,160 square feet or 3.5% (35% permitted). 9. The 4,102 square foot residential building pad beyond required setbacks will have proposed coverage of 3,178 square feet or 56.5%. Much of the existing residence encroaches into the front yard setback. The proposed stable pad will have a minimum dimension of 1,000 square feet and a proposed coverage of 450 square feet or 45%. Total pad coverage will be 71.1%. The Planning Commission's guideline is 30%. 10. The disturbed area of the lot will be 11,240 square feet or 6.4% (40% maximum permitted; 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. 11. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council receive and file Resolution No. 2000-24. 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; and 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; and 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; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; 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. • • 4 RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS • GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT ENCROACHMENTS INTO THE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONS TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT WILL REQUIRE RETAINING WALLS AND GRADING IN ZONING CASE NO. 622. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr Edmund Talbot with respect to real property located at 7 Packsaddle Road West (Lot 19-SF), Rolling Hills, requesting a Variance to permit encroachment into the south side yard setback to construct retaining walls and requesting Site Plan Review to permit the construction of room additions, a basement, and retaining walls that will require grading at an existing single family residence. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on August 15, 2000, September 19, 2000, and October 17, 2000, and at a field trip visit on September 9, 2000. The applicants were notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City staff and the Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The applicant was in attendance at the hearings. During the hearing process, the Commission was informed of the history of the site. The existing residence was constructed in 1952. In 1975, a request for a Conditional Use Permit by Mr. Thomas J. Roba for construction of a retaining wall projecting into the side yard on each side of the property was denied by the Planning Commission. In 1976, the case was rejected by the Deputy District Attorney after retaining walls were constructed without permits because there was an attempt by the owner to correct the matter. In 1981, a grading permit was issued to Mr. Talbot to return the slope to its natural state. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption (The State CA Guidelines, Section 15301(e)) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 4. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of • • property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. Section 17.16.110 requires the side yard setback for every residential parcel in the RA- S-1 Zone to be twenty (20) feet. The applicant is requesting to encroach up to a maximum 19 feet into the 20 foot south side yard setback to construct 153-foot long, 4.5 foot high retaining walls at the rear or west of the residence. With respect to this request for a Variance, 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 of the irregular shape of the lot. The existing legal nonconforming residence was built within the front yard and side yard setbacks atop a steep slope. The retaining walls will encroach beyond existing encroachments but are limited in area so as to preserve the safety and integrity of the slope and leave nearly all of the existing open space near the south side of the residence unaffected. 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. The Variance will permit the development. of the property in a manner similar to development patterns on surrounding properties. The location of the building pad dictates that the proposed retaining walls be set in the south side yard setback because the existing structure was not constructed under current setback standards and the building pad is situated close toy the edge of a steep slope, C. The granting of the Variance will 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. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped and is consistent in scale and mass with adjacent development. Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 622 to permit the construction of retaining walls that will encroach a maximum of nineteen (19) feet into the south side yard setback, as indicated on the development plan dated August 9, 2000, submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 8 of this Resolution. 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 building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six (36) month period. With respect to the Site Plan Review RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 PAGE2OF7 • • application to add 963 square feet to the proposed residence with a 963 square foot basement, 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. The proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential development and maintain sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements with the Variance approved in Sections 5 of this Resolution. The lot has a net square foot area of 176,629 square feet. The proposed residence (2,778 sq.ft.), garage (400 sq.ft.), and future stable (450 sq.ft.) will have 3,178 square feet which constitutes 1.8% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 6,160 square feet which equals 3.5% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is screened from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development on adjacent uses. B. The proposed development preserves and integrates into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls). The lot slopes downward at the rear and most of the mature trees will not be removed. Grading will be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the proposed residence and existing neighboring residences. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded and the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to this irregular -shaped lot. The ratio of, the proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, the development plan preserves several mature trees and shrubs and supplements it with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. E. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Although the building. structure is located within the front and side yard setbacks, the additions will not effect a major change to the existing residence. The development plans as proposed will minimize impact on Packsaddle Road West. Most of the additions proposed will not be visible from Packsaddle Road West. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain scenic vistas across portions of the property. RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 PAGE3OF7 • • F. The development plan follows natural. contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at the west side (rear) of this lot. G. The development plan 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. H. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize an existing driveway at the eastern portion of the property off Packsaddle Road West for access. I. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 622 for proposed residential additions as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A and subject to the conditions contained in Section 8. Section 8. The Variance to the side yard setback approved in Section 5 and the Site Plan Review approved in Section 7 of this resolution are subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070(A) and 17.46.080(A) unless the applicant has acquired building permits or otherwise extended the Variance pursuant to the requirements of those sections. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance and Site Plan Review approvals, 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 the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 PAGE 4 OF 7 • • D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A and dated August 9, 2000, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. F. Any retaining walls incorporated into the project shall not exceed 4.5 feet in height, averaging no more than 2-1/2 feet. G. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 77.4%, the stable pad shall not exceed 45.0%, and total building pad coverage shall not exceed 71.1%. H. Maximum disturbed area shall not exceed 6.4% of the net lot area. I. Grading shall not exceed 285 cubic yards of cut soil and 285 cubic yards of fill soil and shall be balanced on site. J. Any grading shall preserve the existing topography, flora, and natural features to the greatest extent possible. K. An Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 1996 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be prepared to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control stormwater pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles. L. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to the maximum extent feasible, the existing mature trees and shrubs and the natural landscape screening surrounding the proposed building pad. M. Landscaping shall include water efficient irrigation, to the maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a low gallonage irrigation system, utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using "hydrozones," considers slope factors and climate conditions in design, and utilizes means to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray in accordance with Section 17.27.020 (Water efficient landscaping requirements) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. N. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes must conform to the City of Rolling Hills standard of 2 to 1 slope ratio. RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 PAGE 5 OF 7 • • O. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. P. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional structural development shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. Q. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Variance and Site Plan Review, pursuant to Section 17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective. S. All conditions of these Variance and Site Plan Review approvals must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 17TH DA) GF-C O $ER, 2000. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: aiveti r f.k MARILYN I RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 PAGE6OF7 • • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2000-24 entitled: was AYES: NOES: ABSENT: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT ENCROACHMENTS INTO THE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONS TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT WILL REQUIRE RETAINING WALLS AND GRADING IN ZONING CASE NO. 622. approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission on October 17, 2000 by the following roll call vote: Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer, Witte and Chairman Roberts. None. None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. • . K..t. DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 2000-24 PAGE 7 OF 7 1 DATE: TO: FROM: a • fof £'i4i O/ Alli.9. _JUL INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR APPLICATION NO. S1'1'E LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REOUEST NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com ZONING CASE NO. 622 7 PACKSADDLE ROAD WEST (LOT 19-SF) RA-S-1, 4.48 ACRES MR. EDMUND TALBOT MR. R.J. TAVASCI, R.J. TAVASCI DESIGN. CONSTRUCTION CO. AUGUST 26, 2000 Request for a Variance to permit the construction of retaining walls that will encroach into the south side yard setback and a request for Site Plan Review to construct residential additions that require retaining walls and grading at an existing single family residence. BACKGROUND 1. The Planning Commission viewed the site on September 9, 2000. 2. The applicant is requesting a Variance to permit the construction of retaining walls that will encroach into the south side yard setback. The applicant proposes a 153-foot long 4.5-foot high retaining wall at the west side or rear of the building pad that will encroach up to 19 feet into the 20 foot south side yard setback. There are also certain existing retaining walls at the rear of the residence that will be removed and others to remain. Responding to the Criteria to be satisfied for grant of a Variance, the applicant states that, "The retaining wall request at the south property line is a natural continuation of an existing wall, and will continue from the end of that wall." He also says, "This request for the retaining wall will not impact the site o r neighboring properties negatively." The applicant is also requesting Site Plan Review to construct 963 square feet of residential additions to the existing 1,815 square foot residence for a total of ZONING CASE NO. 622 PAGE 1 ®Printed on Recycled Paper. • • 2,778 square feet. The applicant also proposes to construct a 963 square foot basement at the northwestern portion of the residence. The project requires a cut of 285 cubic yards of basement soil, filling the rear of the building pad with 239 cubic yards of soil, the remaining 46 cubic yards to be spread below the building pad on the site, and extending the building pad by 120 square feet at the northwest. The residential addition would ordinarily be permitted without Planning Commission review were it not for the basement cut, graded area and retaining wall encroachment. 4. Criteria for Site Plan Review is attached. 5. The existing residence was constructed in 1952. In 1975, a request for a Conditional Use Permit by Mr. Thomas J. Roba for construction of a retaining wall projecting into the side yard on each side of the property was denied by the Planning Commission. Work was done without permits, retaining walls were constructed, there was an attempt by the owner to correct the matter and the case was rejected by the Deputy District Attorney in 1976. In 1981, a grading permit was issued to Mr. Talbot to return the slope to its natural state. 6. The existing driveway access off Packsaddle Road West will remain. 7. A 450 square foot stable is proposed along with a 550 square foot corral on a lower level at the western portion of the property that will be accessed by an existing road that has a maximum slope of 20%. The road begins at Packsadddle Road West and crosses the northern portion of the property to the western side of the property. 8. The structural lot coverage proposed is 3,178 square feet or 1.8% (20% permitted) and the total lot coverage proposed is 6,160 square feet or 3.5% (35% permitted). 9. The 4,102 square foot residential building pad beyond required setbacks will have proposed coverage of 3,178 square feet or 56.5%. Much of the existing residence encroaches into the front yard setback. The proposed stable pad will have a minimum dimension of 1,000 square feet and a proposed coverage of 450 square feet or 45%. Total pad coverage will be 71.1%. The Planning Commission's guideline is 30%. 10. The disturbed area of the lot will be 11,240 square feet or 6.4% (40% maximum permitted; 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. ZONING CASE NO. 622 PAGE 2 • • 11. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the plan and take public testimony. VARIANCE REQUIRED 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; and 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; and 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; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; 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. ZONING CASE NO. 622 PAGE 3 • • SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S-2 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 35 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line STRUCTURES Site Plan Review required for grading requiring a grading permit, any new structure or if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period. STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (35% maximum) RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PAD COVERAGE (Guideline maximum of 30%) STABLE BUILDING PAD COVERAGE TOTAL BUILDING PAD COVERAGE GRADING 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 sq.ft. must be balanced on site. DISTURBED AREA 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 (450 SQ.FT. & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS EXISTING Existing retaining wall encroachments. Residence Garage Stable Total 1.3% 2.7% PROPOSED Retaining walls incorporated in proposed project encroach into south side yard setback. 1,815 sq.ft. Residence 2,778 sq.ft. 400 sq.ft. Garage 400 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft, Stable 450 sq.ft. 2,215 sq.ft. Total 3,628 sq.ft. 2.1% 3.7% 55.6% of 3,982 sq.ft. building pad N/A 55.6% of 3,982 sq.ft. building pad N/A 7,263 sq.ft. or 4.1% N/A Existing accessway from the northern side of the lot with a slope access of 20%. Existing access from the end of the cul-de-sac off Packsaddle Road West N/A N/A 77.4% of 4,102 sq.ft. building pad 45.0% of 1,000 sq.ft. building pad 71.1% of 5,102 sq.ft. building pads 285 cu. yds of cut soil 285 cu. yds of fill soil 11,240 sq.ft. or 6.4% 450 sq.ft. stable 550 sq.ft. corral No change No change Planning Commission review Planning Commission review ZONING CASE NO. 622 PAGE 4 DATE: TO: FROM: • ol /0fftfl4 .LL>L_ INCORPORATED JA36 NUARY 24, 1957 SEPTEMBER 9, 2000 HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cltyofrh@aol.com APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REOUEST ZONING CASE NO. 622 7 PACKSADDLE ROAD WEST (LOT 19-SF) RA-S-1, 4.48 ACRES MR. EDMUND TALBOT MR. R.J. TAVASCI, R.J. TAVASCI DESIGN. CONSTRUCTION CO. AUGUST 26, 2000 Request for a Variance to permit the construction of retaining walls that will encroach into the south side yard setback and a request for Site Plan Review to construct residential additions that require retaining walls and grading at an existing single family residence. BACKGROUND 1. The Planning Commission will view the site on Saturday, September 9, 2000 following a visit to 12 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road at 8 AM. 2. The applicant is requesting a Variance to permit the construction of retaining walls that will encroach into the south side yard setback. The applicant proposes a 153-foot long 4.5-foot high retaining wall at the west side or rear of the building pad that will encroach up to 19 feet into the 20 foot south side yard setback. There are also certain existing retaining walls at the rear of the residence that will be removed and others to remain. Responding to the Criteria to be satisfied for grant of a Variance, the applicant states that, "The retaining wall request at the south property line is a natural continuation of an existing wall, and will continue from the end of that wall." He also says, "This request for the retaining wall will not impact the site or neighboring properties negatively." ZONING CASE NO. 622 PAGE 1 ®Printed on Recycled Paper. • • The applicant is also requesting Site Plan Review to construct 963 square feet of residential additions to the existing 1,815 square foot residence for a total of 2,778 square feet. The applicant .also proposes to construct a 963 square foot basement at the northwestern portion of the residence. The project requires a cut of 285 cubic yards of basement soil, filling the rear of the building pad with 239 cubic yards of soil, the remaining 46 cubic yards to be spread below the building pad on the site, and extending the building pad by 120 square feet at the northwest. The residential addition would ordinarily be permitted without Planning Commission review were it not for the basement cut, graded area and retaining wall encroachment. 4. Criteria for Site Plan Review is attached. 5. The existing residence was constructed in 1952. In 1975, a request for a Conditional Use Permit by Mr. Thomas J. Roba for construction of a retaining wall projecting into the side yard on each side of the property was denied by the Planning Commission. Work was done without permits, retaining walls were constructed, there was an attempt by the owner to correct the matter and the case was rejected by the Deputy District Attorney in 1976. In 1981, a grading permit was issued to Mr. Talbot to return the slope to its natural state. 6. The existing driveway access off Packsaddle Road West will remain. 7. A 450 square foot stable is proposed along with a 550 square foot corral on a lower level at the western portion of the property that will be accessed by an existing road that has a maximum slope of 20%. The road begins at Packsadddle Road West and crosses the northern portion of the property to the western side of the property. 8. The structural lot coverage proposed is 3,178 square feet or 1.8% (20% permitted) and the total lot coverage proposed is 6,160 square feet or 3.5% (35% permitted). 9. The 4,102 square foot residential building pad beyond required setbacks will have proposed coverage of 3,178 square feet or 56.5%. Much of the existing residence encroaches into the front yard setback. The proposed stable pad will have a minimum dimension of 1,000 square feet and a proposed coverage of 456 square feet or 45%. Total pad coverage will be 71.1%. The Planning Commission's guideline is 30%. 10. The disturbed area of the lot will be 11,240 square feet or 6.4% (40% maximum permitted; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary ZONING CASE NO. 622 PAGE 2 • disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, and any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist. 11. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the plan and take public testimony. VARIANCE REQUIRED 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; and 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; and 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; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; 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. ZONING CASE NO. 622 PAGE 3 • SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S-2 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 35 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line STRUCTURES Site Plan Review required for grading requiring a grading permit, any new structure or if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period. STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (35% maximum) RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PAD COVERAGE (Guideline maximum of 30%) STABLE BUILDING PAD COVERAGE TOTAL BUILDING PAD COVERAGE GRADING 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 sq.ft. must be balanced on site. DISTURBED AREA 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 (450 SQ.FT. & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS EXISTING I PROPOSED Existing retaining wall encroachments. Residence Garage Stable Total 1.3% 2.7% Retaining walls incorporated in proposed project encroach into south side yard setback. 1,815 sq.ft. Residence 400 sq.ft. Garage 0 sq.ft. Stable 2,215 sq.ft. Total 2.1 % 3.7% 55.6% of 3,982 sq.ft. building pad N/A 55.6% of 3,982 sq.ft. building pad N/A 7,263 sq.ft. or 4.1% N/A Existing accessway from the northern side of the lot with a slope access of 20%. Existing access from the end of the cul-de-sac off Packsaddle Road West N/A N/A 2,778 sq.ft. 400 sq.ft. 450 sa.ft. 3,628 sq.ft. 77.4% of 4,102 sq.ft. building pad 45.0% of 1,000 sq.ft. building pad 71.1% of 5,102 sq.ft. building pads 285 cu. yds of cut soil 285 cu. yds of fill soil 11,240 sq.ft. or 6.4% 450 sq.ft. stable 550 sq.ft. corral No change No change Planning Commission review Planning Commission review ZONING CASE NO. 622 PAGE 4 DATE: TO: FROM: • city oileoffing AUGUST 15, 2000 HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REOUEST NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com ZONING CASE NO. 622 7 PACKSADDLE ROAD WEST (LOT 19-SF) RA-S-1, 4.48 ACRES MR. EDMUND TALBOT MR. R.J. TAVASCI, R.J. TAVASCI DESIGN. CONSTRUCTION CO. AUGUST 5, 2000 Request for Site Plan Review to construct retaining walls and residential additions that require grading at an existing single family residence. BACKGROUND 1. The applicant is requesting Site Plan Review to construct 963 square feet of residential additions to the existing 1,815 square foot residence for a total of 2,778 square feet. The applicant also proposes to construct a 963 square foot basement at the northwestern portion of the residence. The project entails a cut of 285 cubic yards of basement soil, filling the rear of the building pad with 239 cubic yards of soil, the remaining 46 cubic yards to be spread below the building pad on the site, and extending the building pad by 120 square feet at the northwest. A retaining wall incorporated into the proposed project that will be located within the south side yard setback came to the attention of staff during plan revisions and staff report preparation. The retaining wall will require a Variance application, which has been submitted, along with required noticing. The applicant proposes a 153- foot long 4.5-foot high retaining wall at the west side or rear of the building pad that will encroach up to 19 feet into the 20 foot south side yard setback. There are certain existing retaining walls at the rear of the residence that will be removed and others to remain. ZONING CASE NO. 619 PAGE 1 ®Printed on Recycled Paper. • • The residential addition would ordinarily be permitted without Planning Commission review were it not for the basement cut, graded area and retaining wall encroachment. 2. Criteria for Site Plan Review is attached. 3. The existing residence was constructed in 1952. In 1975, a request for a Conditional Use Permit by Mr. Thomas J. Roba for construction of a retaining wall projecting into the side yard on each side of the property was denied by the Planning Commission. Work was done without permits, retaining walls were constructed, there was an attempt by the owner to correct the matter and the case was rejected by the Deputy District Attorney in 1976. In 1981, a grading permit was issued to Mr. Talbot to return the slope to its natural state. 4. The existing driveway access off Packsaddle Road West will remain. 5. A 450 square foot stable is proposed along with a 550 square foot corral on a lower level at the western portion of the property that will be accessed by an existing road that has a maximum slope of 20%. The road begins at Packsadddle Road West and crosses the northern portion of the property to the western side of the property. 6. The structural lot coverage proposed is 3,178 square feet or 1.8% (20% permitted) and the total lot coverage proposed is 6,160 square feet or 3.5% (35% permitted). 7. The 4,102 square foot residential building pad beyond required setbacks will have proposed coverage of 3,178 square feet or 56.5%. Much of the existing residence encroaches into the front yard setback. The proposed stable pad will have a minimum dimension of 1,000 square feet and a proposed coverage of 450 square feet or 45%. Total pad coverage will be 71.1%. The Planning Commission's guideline is 30%. 8. The disturbed area of the lot will be 11,240 square feet or 6.4% (40% maximum permitted; 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. 9. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the plan and take public testimony. ZONING CASE NO. 619 PAGE 2 ti SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S-2 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 35 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line STRUCTURES Site Plan Review required for grading requiring a grading permit, any new structure or if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period. STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (35% maximum) RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PAD COVERAGE (Guideline maximum of 30%) STABLE BUILDING PAD COVERAGE TOTAL BUILDING PAD COVERAGE GRADING 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 sq.ft. must be balanced on site. DISTURBED AREA 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 (450 SQ.FT. & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS. PLANTS AND ANIMALS EXISTING Existing retaining wall encroachments. Residence Garage Stable Total 1.3% 2.7% PROPOSED Retaining walls incorporated in proposed project encroach into south side yard setback. 1,815 sq.ft. Residence 400 sq.ft. Garage 0 sq.ft. Stable 2,215 sq.ft. Total 2.1% 3.7% 55.6% of 3,982 sq.ft. building pad N/A 55.6% of 3,982 sq.ft. building pad N/A 7,263 sq.ft. or 4.1% N/A Existing accessway from the northern side of the lot with a slope access of 20%. Existing access from the end of the cul-de-sac off Packsaddle Road West N/A N/A 2,778 sq.ft. 400 sq.ft. 450 sq.ft. 3,628 sq.ft. 77.4% of 4,102 sq.ft. building pad 45.0% of 1,000 sq.ft. building pad 71.1% of 5,102 sq.ft. building pads 285 cu. yds of cut soil 285 cu. yds of fill soil 11,240 sq.ft. or 6.4% 450 sq.ft. stable 550 sq.ft. corral No change No change Planning Commission review Planning Commission review ZONING CASE NO. 619 PAGE 3