379, An addition to existing SFR wi, Resolutions & Approval Conditionsatni DY;xerox ieiecopier Iucu ; a-11—UV ; 3;42PM ; 2136260078.0 3777288;1 2
RESOLUTION NO. 8 9 - 2L„-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A
VARIANCE TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK AND
DENYING A VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK
IN ZONING CASE NO. 379
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
section 1. Applications were duly filed by Dr. and
Mrs. Mansoor Mirsaid with respect to real property located at
1 Maverick Lane, Rolling Hills (Lot 31-SX) requesting a variance
to the side yard setback requirement and a variance to the front
yard setback requirement to construct additions to the existing
structure.
Section g. The Planning Commission conducted a duly
noticed public hearing to consider the application on January 17,
1989, February 21, 1989, March 21, 1989, May 16, 1989, June 20,
1989 and August 15, 1989.
gegtion 3. Sections 17.32.010 through 17.32.030
permit approval of a variance from the standards and requirements
of the Zoning ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to
other similar properties in the same zone prevent the ownerfrom
making use of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar
properties.
action 4. Pursuant to the Sections of the Municipal
code referred to in Section 3 of this Resolution, the Planning
Commission finds with respect to the request for a variance to
the side yard variance:
A. The existing residential structure already
encroaches into the side yard setback. The proposed
encroachment involves an expansion of the northeast
portion of the residence so that it will encroach five
(5) feet into the side yard setback, which is less
than the existing nonconforming encroachment of ten
(10) feet.
B. Due. to the shape and topography of the lot
and the existing developmental pattern, the residence
can not be expanded except in a southwesterly
direction. The proposed expansion would not extend the
new addition beyond the point at which the nonconform-
ing residential structure presently exists, meaning
that there will be no greater incursion into the side
yard than already exists on the property at this time.
SENT BY;Xerox lelecopier lulu ; 3-11-UV ; 3;43PM
•
113U1UUU rfi» 311 ZUU iS 4
• •
C. Tn view of the topographical situation and
the presence of an existing incursion in the side
yard, there exists unique circumstances not generally
applicable to other properties in the same zone that
justify the continued encroachment.
D. The �granti f a variance under these
circumstances w3.11 not be detrimental to the public
health, safety and welfare and will be compatible with
surrounding properties and will be consistent with the
goals of the Zoning ordinance.
section 5. Pursuant to the Sections of the Municipal
Code referred to in Section 3 of this Resolution, the Planning
commission finds with respect to the request for a variance to
the front yard setback:
A. The proposed encroachment involves an expansion of
the southwest portion of the garage so that it
will encroach thirty (30) feet into the front yard
setback. Although the existing garage already
encroaches thirty (30) feet into the front yard
setback, the proposed addition will add
approximately 242 quare feet of structural area
into a front yard that already contains a
substantial encroachment.
B. In view of the presence of the existing incursion
into the front yard, and the proposed additional
incursion, unique circumstances do not exist to
justify iTy further encroachment.
C. The rant' --of a variance under these circumstances
will • detrimental to the public health, safety
and welfare and Will be inconsistent with the
goals of the Zoning Ordinance.
Section A. Based on the foregoing findings, the
Planning Commission hereby approves the 'request for a side yard
variance for Case No. 379 with respect to real property located
at 1 Maverick Lane to permit an encroachment of five (5) feet
into the side yard setback as indicated in the Development Plan
submitted with this application and incorporated herein by
reference as Exhibit A and denies a variance to the front yard
setback. The grant of the variance to the side yard setback is
subject to the following conditions:
A. The variance to the side yard setback as
indicated on the Development Plan shall not be
effective if the existing residential structure is
demolished.
B. The variance to the side yard setback shall
expire if not used in one year from the affective
09O911 M 1M0037 1 1 2
SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 9-11-09 ; 3:44PM ;
2136260076y 37772e6;8 4
• •
date of approval as defined and specified in
Section 17.32.110 of the Municipal Code.
C. The proposed building plan must be approved by the
Rolling Hills community Association Architectural
Committee before the applicant receives a grading
permit from the County of Los Angeles.
D. Prior to the submittal of a final grading
plan to the County of Los Angeles, the
grading plan shall be submitted to the
Rolling Hills Planning Department Staff for
their review, along with related geology,
soils and hydrology reports. This grading
plan must conform to the development plan as
approved by the Planning Commission.
E. A landscape plan must be submitted to the City of
Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for
approval. The landscaping plan submitted must
comply with the purpose and intent of the Site
Plan Review Ordinance. The landscaping plan shall
incorporate existing mature tress and native
vegetation. A bond in the amount of the cost
e stimate for the landscaping plus 15% shall be
posted and retained with the City for not less
than two years after landscape installation. The
retained bond will be released by the City after
the City Manager determines that the landscaping
was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as
approved, and that such landscaping is properly
e stablished and in good condition.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of
SPPt- ,mher , 1989.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Chairman
890911 .1 1680037 1
.3.