501, Addition to SFR w/Encroachment, Resolutions & Approval Conditions'cor.e......-
State of
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL"TO: Recorder's Use
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
Please record this form with the Registrar -Recorder's Office and
return to: City of Rolling Hills, 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
(The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be
notarized before recordation).
ACCEPTANCE FORM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
ZONING CASE NO. 501 SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
I (We) the undersigned state:
I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as
follows:
10 Crest Road West (Lot 2-CH)
Rolling Hills, CA
This property is the subject of the above numbered cases.
I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in
said
ZONING CASE NO. 501 SITE PLAN REVIEW X
VARIANCE X
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Print
Owner
Name
Signature
Address
City/State
Print
Owner
Name
Signature
Address
City/State
Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public.
County of
On this the day of 19_, before me,
the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared
0 personally known to me
0 proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence
to be the person(s) whose name(s)
within instrument, and acknowledged that
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary's Signature
subscribed to the
Rxecuted it.
See Exhibit "A" attached
hereto and made a part hereof
RESOLUTION NO. 93-31
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE TO THE REAR YARD SETBACK FOR THE
ENCROACHMENT OF ROOM ADDITIONS, APPROVING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT
AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE AND
CORRAL, AND APPROVING SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR SUBSTANTIAL
ADDITIONS IN ZONING CASE NO. 501.
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. and Mrs. Karl
Frykman with respect to real property located at 10 Crest Road
West, Rolling Hills (Lot 2-CH) requesting a Variance to permit the
encroachment of room additions into the rear yard setback,
requesting a variance to permit the encroachment into the front
yard to construct a future stable and corral, and requesting Site
Plan Review for substantial additions.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
public hearing to consider the applications for a modification to
a previously approved Site Plan Review and for a Variance to the
rear yard setback on May 21, 1991 and June 25, 1991, and at a field
trip visit on May 30, 1991.
Section 3. The Commission approved Resolution No. 91-16 in
Zoning Case No. 436 on July 13, 1991. The Commission approved
Resolution No. 92-24 to extend the approval for a second year on
July 21, 1992.
Section 4. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
public hearing to consider the further extension of applications on
August 17, 1993 and September 21, 1993.
Section 5. The Planning Commission finds that the project is
categorically exempt from environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act pursuant to a Class 3 exemption provided
by Section 15303 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Section 6. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 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. A Variance to Section 17.16.130(1) is required to
construct a living room addition in the fifty (50) foot rear yard
setback. The applicant is requesting two separate residential
additions, one at the southwest wing and one at the southeast wing
of the residence. The southwest wing will encroach a maximum of 15
feet and the southeast wing will encroach a maximum of 16 feet into
the 50 foot rear yard setback. The Planning Commission finds:
RESOLUTION NO. 93-31
PAGE 2
A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and
conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do
not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and
zone. The Variance is necessary because of the unique typography
of the lot which .is very steep at the front but gently sloping at
the rear. The residence is set well back from the street and there
is a spacious open feel to the property. There are no residences
close by to be affected.
B. This 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 is necessary because the
existing development pattern on the lot precludes the requested
additions from being built into the front yard.
C. The granting of this Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity or zone in which the property is
located. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion
of the lot to remain undeveloped.
Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves the Variance to encroach into the rear
yard setback for room additions to a maximum of 16 feet as
indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A
subject to the conditions contained in Section 13.
Section 8. A Variance to Section 17.16.170(B)(2) is required
because this section states that corrals or pens may not be located
in the front yard. The applicant is requesting a Variance to
encroach to a maximum of 53 feet into the front yard to construct
a.450 square foot stable and a 550 square foot corral. With
respect to this request, the Planning Commission finds as follows:
A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and
conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do
not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and
zone. The Variance for the stable and corral is necessary because
the topography of the site prevents the construction of a stable
and corral in the rear yard. The proper and logical location for
the stable and corral is below the proposed building pad because of
the topographical nature of the lot. The existing building pad for
the residence is located at the southern portion of the lot where
the ground is mostly level. The residence is built close to side
yard setbacks to the west and to the east which precludes the
creation of a flat area for a stable and corral in the rear yard.
The area proposed for the stable and corral is the only place
available on this property.
• •
RESOLUTION NO. 93-31
PAGE 3
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 the
property in question. The Variance is necessary because the
General Plan encourages and the Zoning Ordinance requires the
delineation of stables and corrals on properties in the City of
Rolling Hills and a stable and corral could not be feasibly located
in the rear yard.
C. The granting of the Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is
located. The Variance will permit the construction of a stable and
corral which will not impact the street or neighboring properties
because other properties in the vicinity have corrals in the front
yard.
Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves the Variance to permit the construction
of a 450 square foot stable and a 550 square foot corral, subject
to the conditions specified in Section 13.
Section 10. Section 17.46.010 requires a development plan to
be submitted for site plan review and approval before any building
or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition,
alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which
.involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the
building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any
thirty-six month period. Section 17.46.080(B)(3) requires that no
extension period for Site Plan Review be granted for a period of
more than one year unless a new public hearing is held. Any
extension granted beyond the second anniversary of original
approval may only be granted or denied in the same manner and based
upon the same criteria as required for approval of the original
project.
fact:
Section 11. The Commission makes the following findings of
A. The proposed development is compatible with the General
Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the
proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of
low profile, low density residential development with sufficient
open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to
lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net square foot area of
45,196 square feet. The residential structure, garage, and future
stable will have 5,078 square feet which constitutes 13.3% of the
lot, which is within the maximum 20o structural lot requirement.
The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be
12,485 square feet which equals 27.8% of the lot, which is within
the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed
• •
RESOLUTION NO. 93-31
PAGE 4
project is similar and compatible with neighboring development
patterns.
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) because minimal grading for the project is
required, thereby preserving most of the existing slope and mature
vegetation.
C. The development plan follows natural contours of the site
to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue
to the canyons at the rear of this lot.
D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees
and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible and
supplements it with landscaping that is compatible with and
enhances the rural character of the community.
E. The development plan substantially preserves the natural
and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage
because the new structures will not cause the structural and total
lot coverage to be exceeded. Further, although the proposed
project will have a buildable pad coverage of 37.2% the pad is
contiguous to gently sloping areas and significant portions of the
lot will be left undeveloped.
F. The proposed development is harmonious in scale and mass
with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences
because as indicated in Paragraph A, lot coverage maximum will not
be exceeded and the proposed project is of consistent scale with
the neighborhood, thereby grading will be required only to restore
the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the proposed
structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several
properties in the vicinity.
G. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental
to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and
vehicles because the proposed project will utilize the existing
vehicular access, thereby having no further impact on the roadway.
H. The project conforms with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt
from environmental review.
Section 12. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review for residential
additions, as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto as
Exhibit A subject to the conditions contained in Section 13.
• •
RESOLUTION NO. 93-31
PAGE 5
Section 13. The Variance to the rear yard setback approved in
Section 6,.the Variance to the front yard approved in Section 8,
and Site Plan Review for residential additions approved in Section
11 as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto and
incorporated herein as Exhibit A, are subject to the following
conditions:
A. The Variances shall expire unless used within one year
from the effective date of approval as defined in Section
17.38.070(A)(1) of the Municipal Code. The Site Plan Review
approval shall expire within one year from the effective date of
approval as defined in Section 17.46.080.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variances and
the Site Plan Review approval, that if any conditions thereof are
violated, the Permit shall be suspended and the privileges granted
thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been given
written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for
a period of thirty (30) days.
C. All requirements of the Building and Construction
Ordinance, ,the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the
subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise
approved by Variance.
D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial
conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A except as
otherwise provided in these conditions.
E. The building pad coverage shall not exceed 37.2%.
F. A landscape plan must be submitted to and approved by the
City of Rolling Hills Planning Department staff prior to the
issuance of any grading and building permit. The landscaping plan
submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan
Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and
native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent
feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with
the rural character of the community.
A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of
the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior
to issuance of a grading and building permit and shall be retained
with the City for not less than two years after landscape
installation. The retained bond will be released by the City
Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was
installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that
such landscaping is properly established and in good condition.
RESOLUTION NO. 93-31
PAGE 6
G. 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.
J. 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.
H. 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.
I. Any modifications to the project which would constitute a
modification to the development plan as approved by the Planning
Commission shall require the filing of an application for
modification of the Zoning Case pursuant to Section 17.46.070 of
the Rolling Hills Municipal Code.
K. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance
of all conditions of these Variances and Site Plan Review or the
approvals shall not be effective.
L. All conditions of these Variances 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
ATTEST:
H-DAY OF OCTOBER, 1993.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
I<Vry
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 93-31
PAGE 7
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
ss
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 93-31 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE TO THE REAR YARD SETBACK FOR THE
ENCROACHMENT OF ROOM ADDITIONS, APPROVING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT
AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE AND
CORRAL, AND APPROVING SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR SUBSTANTIAL
ADDITIONS IN ZONING CASE NO. 501.
was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the
Planning Commission on October 26, 1993 by the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Commissioners Frost, Raine and Chairman Roberts
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Lay
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Hankins
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the
following:
Administrative Offices
DEPUTY CITY CLERK