938, Rebuild a 5 ft high retaining , Resolutions & Approval Conditions• •
T
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
MAIL TO:
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
2 PORTUGUESE BEND RD.
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
(310) 377-1521
(310) 377-7288 FAX
ir 041 _'/201II
IIqI, '�I:! /'1
'II it 1!I; II1i
*201130155247*
T RECORDER'S USE ONLY
THE REGISTRAR -RECORDER'S OFFICE REQUIRES THAT THE FORM BE NOTARIZED BEFORE
RECORDATION.
AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
ZONING CASE NO. 938 (SEE EXHIBIT A -ATTACHED)
XX SITE PLAN REVIEW XX VARIANCE
1 (We) the undersigned state
I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows:
2910 Palos Verdes Drive North, ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (LOT 993-3-RH)
This property is the subject of the above numbered case and conditions of approval
I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said ZONING CASE NO. 938
XX SITE PLAN REVIEW XX VARIANCE
I, (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of Eerjury that the foregoing Is true and correct.
Siaiature Signature
IV
Name typed or printed Name typed or printed
°2 `// d fkios t 04 5 2,- kh,
Address Address
City/State ' City/State
Notary P •lic See Attached
• Notary P •li See Attached Date
. Date Zol. Initial
Initial
• •
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who
signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of
that document.
STATE OF (T /17401 t q )
COUNTY OF Zo s ,4-40 PIPS ?
On , Apr/ ifs';Za1 , before me,ia5 t Ccr/dwell vd n , a
Notary' ublic, personally appeared
who proved to me on the basis of sat factory evidence to be the persons
whose na e)Wesubscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to
me that i / /t executed the same in /th? authorized capacityf,
and that by / e /teir signatureon the ins rument the persons; or the entity
upon behal of w ich the person acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California
that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official. seal.
Signature: _ '"/ • f �/�,��
Name of Notary: (a/a(a/cl(PV'odun
Date Commission Expires ,Q A--J /57 2.0Z
Commission No. ' . l' f 23
JUSTIN CALDWELL PRODAN
Notary Public —California
Los Angeles County
Commission g 2189236
MyComm. Expires Apr 1, 2021
a •r
•
RESOLUTION NO. 2018-04
• r ,
g X141 fr
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A SITE PLAN REVIEW
AND VARIANCE TO RECONSTRUCT AN EXISTING 5' HIGH,
112' LONG RETAINING WALL WHICH ENCROACHES INTO
THE SIDE YARD SETBACK AND WHICH WOULD NOT
AVERAGE OUT TO 2 2/2 FEET, IN ZONING CASE NO. 938, AT
2910 PALOS VERDES DRIVE NORTH, (LOT 993-3-RH) (WONG).
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. An application was duly filed by Ms. Jean Wong with respect to
real property located at 2910 Palos Verdes Drive North, Rolling Hills, requesting a Site
Plan Review and Variance to reconstruct an existing 5' high, 112' long retaining wall.
A Site Plan Review is required to allow the wall to exceed 3' in height and a Variance is
required to keep the reconstructed wall in the side yard setback, 6' from the side
property line (14' encroachment), and to allow the wa11 not to average out to 2 2/2 feet.
The new wall would be in the same location as the existing wall. No grading, except
for excavation of the old wall is proposed.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings
to consider the application on March 20, 2018 in the field and at an evening meeting on
March 20, 2018, at which the Resolution of Approval was reviewed by the Planning
Commission, and following discussion was adopted. 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's representative was in attendance at the hearings. No
one from the public came forward to address this project.
Section 3, The Planning Commission finds that the project is categorically
exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 4. Subject property is located in the RA-S-1 Zone and the existing
retaining wall is in very poor condition. There are no records on file permitting the
existing wall, which is located in the side setback. The applicant requests to reconstruct
the wall in its original location.
Section 5. 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. In the subject application, the Applicant
Reso. 2018-04 2910 PV DR. N 1
• •
requested variances to exempt them from strict compliance with Section
17.16.120, requiring a side -yard setback of 20 feet in 'the RAS-1 zone; and section
17.16.190(F), requiring that walls shall average out to two and one-half 'feet as
measured from the finished grade to the top of the wall. With respect to these
requests for Variances, the Planning Commission finds as follows:
A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions
applicable to this property that do not generally apply to the other properties in the
same vicinity and zone. The existing retaining wall encroaches into the side setback
and does not average out to 21/2 feet and the proposed wall will be located in the same
location and be of the same height as the existing wall. There is a 2:1 slope behind the
wall that needs to be retained; otherwise' the slope would slough off and cause
damage to the nearby residence. The existing wall was constructed without building
permits or to current code standards. The wall is in a very poor condition and is
leaning away from the slope, and is therefore in danger of falling down. Its
reconstruction is a sound solution to retain the dirt behind it.
B. The Variances are necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone,
but which would be denied to the property in question absent such variances. With
the constraint of the lots' topography and the configuration of the existing residence
in close proximity to the retaining wall, it is a challenge to move the wall outside the
setback and still leave room for a Fire Department required walkway. around the
residence. Furthermore, the retaining wall is necessary in order to preserve the
ascending slope, which is of even height across the entire length of the existing wall
and cannot be averaged out. A variance from the requirements of section 17.16.190(F)
would preserve the enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other
properties by minimizing the amount of construction necessary to achieve an average
wall height of 2.5 feet and would help preserve the aesthetics of the property;
C. The granting of the Variances would 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 side -yard encroachments 14 feet already
existing and rio further encroachment is proposed. The wall is not visible from any
neighbor, as the face of the wall faces the house on subject property, and it supports a
vegetated slope behind it. The encroaching portion of the wall, being located on the
south side of the property, will not impair views of neighbors to the north.
Furthermore, a five-foot retaining wall is necessary in order to preserve a four -foot
walkway around the perimeter of the home and ensure adequate access to all corners
of the property by emergency access vehicles;
D. In granting the Variances, the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance
will be observed. The proposed improvements will be orderly, attractive, and will
not affect the rural character of the community due to their relatively small scope and
size.
Reso. 2018-04 2910 PV DR. N 2
• •
E. The Variances requested are consistent with the General Plan of the
City of Rolling Hills. The proposed improvements will comply with the General Plan
requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open
space between surrounding structures. The structural lot coverage and the total
impervious lot coverage are within the requirements of the City.
Section 6. Findings for Approval of Site Plan review for a retaining wall ,
that exceeds three feet in height, as required by Section 17.16.190(F). With respect to
the modified Site Plan review application, the City Council finds as follows:
A. The proposed retaining wall complies with and is consistent with the
goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance.
A five-foot wide walkway is required by the Fire Department in order to provide
sufficient access to the perimeter of the home. The wall serves that function.
Furthermore, the wall already exists and is necessary to be reconstructed to continue
to support a slope behind it. The slope behind the wall is more than 3 feet and
therefore a five-foot wall is necessary;
B. The retaining wall substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped
state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. The nature, condition, and
development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the topography of the lot
have been considered, and the re -construction of a five-foot high retaining wall will
not adversely affect or be detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings or structures
because the proposed improvement will be constructed on a portion of the lot which
is least intrusive to surrounding properties;
C. The Retaining Wall is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the
natural terrain and surrounding residences. The proposed project is consistent with
the scale of the home because the Iength of the proposed retaining wall will not
exceed 112 feet and will not exceed'5 in height and is not massive or causes the Iot to
be overdeveloped;
D. The Retaining Wall preserves and integrates into the site design, to the
greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including
surrounding vegetation, draining courses and land£orms. The proposed height and
length of the retaining wall are at the minimum threshold required in order to retain
the size of the slope adjacent to the property and allow for a five-foot wide walkway;
E. The proposed project will not modify existing drainage channels nor •
redirect the drainage flow and;
F. The construction of the proposed retaining wall conforms to the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 7. Based on the foregoing findings and evidence contained within
the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves a siteplan review for
Reso. 2018-04 2910 PV DR. N • 3
retaining wall greater than three feet in height and variances to encroach into the
required 20-foot side -yard setback with a 5'high retaining wall that does not average
out to 2.5 feet in height subject to the following conditions:
A. The approval shall expire within one year from the effective date of
approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070(A) of the Zoning Ordinance unless
otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of this section.
B. If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by
this resolution shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse
and upon receipt of written notice from the City, all construction work being
performed on the subject property shall immediately cease, other than work
determined by the City Manager or his/her designee required to cure the
violation. The suspension and stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant
cures the violation to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his/her designee. In
the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her designee's
determination that a violation exists or disputes how the violation must be cured,
the Applicant may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be
scheduled at the next regular meeting of the City Council for which the agenda has
not yet been posted; the Applicant shall be provided written notice of the
hearing. The stop work order shall remain in effect during the pendency of the
hearing. The City Council shall make a determination as to whether a violation of
this Resolution has occurred. If the Council determines that a violation has not
occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the Council will lift the
suspension and the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has
occurred and has not yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a
deadline to cure the violation; no construction work shall be performed on the
property other than work designated by the City Council to accoinplish the cure,
unless and until the violation is cured by the deadline, as determined by the City
Manger or his/her designee. If the violation is not cured by the deadline, the
Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant's request or schedule a
hearing for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant
to Chapter 17.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC).
C. All requirements of the Building Code and the Zoning Ordinance must
be complied with, unless otherwise set forth in this approval.
D. The project shall be developed and maintained in conformance with the
site plan on file in the City PIanning Department dated March 7, 2018. The conditions
of this approval shall be printed onto building and construction plans and be
available on. site at all times.
E. The Applicants shall obtain the required building permits for the
retaining wall.
Reso. 2018-04 2910 PV DR. N 4
F. This project shall be reviewed and approved by the RHCA. Any
deviations to this project shall be submitted for reviewed by the Planning
Department. A drainage plan, if required by the Building Department shall
be prepared and approved by the grading and drainage engineer.
G. The property owners and/or their contractor shall be responsible for
compliance with the no -smoking provisions in the Municipal Code. The contractor
shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing,
during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at:
http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.p hn_ ?suite=safetv&p age hazard definition
s#FIRE
It is the sole responsibility of the property owners and/or their contractor to monitor
the red flag warning conditions. Should a red -flag warning be declared, and if work
is to be conducted on the property, the contractor shall have readily available fire
extinguisher.
H. During construction, conformance with Local ordinances and
engineering practices so that people or property is not exposed to landslides,
mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required and all excavated area for the
wall shall be stabilized.
I. During construction, conformance with the air quality management
district requirements, storm water pollution prevention practices, county and local
ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to
undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, objectionable odors, landslides, mudflows, erosion, or
land subsidence shall be required.
J. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project
site. There shall not be parking on the shared driveway and access to PV DR. North
must be available at all time. Flagmen shall be present when the common driveway
approach is planned to be obstructed
K. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule
and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the
hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and
mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet
residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills.
L. Perimeter easements and trails, if any, including roadway easements
shall remain free and clear of any improvements including, but not be limited to,
driveways, fences -including construction fences, landscaping, irrigation and drainage
devices, play equipment, parked vehicles, building materials, debris and equipment,
except that the Rolling Hills Community Association may approve certain
encroachments.
Reso. 2018-04 2910 PV DR. N 5
M. Minimum of 65% of the wall materials must be recycled or diverted
from landfills. The hauler of the materials shall obtain City's Construction and
Demolition permits for waste hauling prior to start of work and provide proper
documentation to the City.
N. The licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project
for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans
conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and all of the
conditions set forth therein and the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance.
Further, the person obtaining a building permit for this project shall execute a
Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to
this Resolution and any plans approved therewith.
O. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions
of the Site Plan Review and Variances approval, or the approval shall not be effective.
The Affidavit and the Resolution shall be recorded.
P. All conditions, when applicable, must be complied with prior to the
issuance of a grading or building permit from the Building and Safety Department.
2018.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20th DAY OF MARCH
YNiette Hall
City Clerk
7
Brad thel , hairm2n
Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the
public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in
section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil
Procedure Section 1094.6.
Reso. 2018-04 2910 PV DR. N 6
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
}
} §§
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2018-04 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A SITE PLAN REVIEW
AND VARIANCE TO RECONSTRUCT AN EXISTING 5' HIGH,
112' LONG RETAINING WALL WHICH ENCROACHES INTO
THE SIDE YARD SETBACK AND WHICH WOULD NOT
AVERAGE OUT TO 2 1/2 FEET, IN ZONING CASE NO. 938, AT
2910 PALOS VERDES DRIVE NORTH, (LOT 993-3-RH) (WONG).
Was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on
March 20, 2018 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Cardenas, Cooley, Seaburn, and Chair Chelf.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Kirkpatrick.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices.
YVk I-f.J HAL
CITY CLERK
Reso. 2018-04 2910 PV DR. N 7
•
•
This is a true and eel -lied copy of the record
if it bears the seal, imprinted in purple ink,
of the Registrar-Recordor/County Clerk
APR 1 2 2018
z r REGISTRAR-RECORDERICOUNTYCLERK
LOS ' Q4. LES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA