646, Construct a new SFR with modif, Resolutions & Approval ConditionsRESOLUTION NO. 2003-13
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A
MODIFICATION TO PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-06 AND APPROVING AN
EXTENSION TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE PLAN
REVIEW TO PERMIT GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION
OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 56
EASTFIELD DRIVE, IN ZONING CASE NO. 646 (COSER).
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 Dr. and Mrs. Russell Coser with
respect to real property located at 56 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills, requesting an
extension to previously approved Site Plan to construct a new single family
residence to replace an existing residence
Section 2. The Commission considered this item at a meeting on July 15,
2003, at which time information was presented indicating that additional time is
needed to process the development application through the County departments.
Section 3. Based upon information and evidence submitted, the Planning
Commission does hereby amend Paragraph A, Section 7 of Resolution No. 2002-06,
dated June 18, 2003, to read as follows:
"A. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within two years from the
effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.46.080(A) of the Zoning Code,
unless construction of the structure have commenced within that time period."
Section 4. Except as herein amended, the provisions of Resolution No.
2002-06 shall continue to be in full force and effect.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 15th DAY OF JULY 2003.
EVIE HA
ATTEST:
MARILYN I< RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
NS, CHAIRWOMAN
• •
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2003-13 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A
MODIFICATION TO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION
NO. 2002-06 AND APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE PLAN REVIEW TO PERMIT
GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE AT 56 EASTFIELD DRIVE, IN ZONING CASE NO.
646 (COSER).
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission on July 15, 2003 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners DeRoy, Margeta, Witte, Sommer
and Chairwoman Hankins.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
411
02 1449451
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
MAIL TO
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
(310) 377-1521
(310) 377-7288 FAX
The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be notarized before recordation.
AFFIDAVIT O F ACCEPTANCE FORM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
§§
ZONING CASE NO. 646
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
I (We) the undersigned state:
I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows:
56 EASTFIELD DRIVE, ROLLING HILLS, CA (LOT 102-EF)
This property is the subject of the above numbered case.
I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said
ZONING CASE NO.646.
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
I (We certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoi a -d corre
tl F. Cor--
Name ypedefi.or pri e .atLel Dry
Addres 1074_
City/State
Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public.
Signa
4 Recorder's Use Only
XX
XX
cat(: e. E Cam'
Name typed or •nnte.
�.r��,►t� de/ Or,
Address
City/State
State of California )
County of Los Angeles )
On JNut✓ 7 i ?1002. before me, NIPI/CC- AN, &oTf t ? QK6t-( C-
personally appeared 1214S5fit,L 1. CoS€72 /17' b SUCoS�12.
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s).i6lare
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that be/she/they executed the same in Marker/their authorized
capacity(ies) and that byLis/tTer/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the
person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
OFFICIAL SEAL.
DANIEL AN
NOTARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA
COMMISSION # 1269842
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
My Commission Exp. July 8, 2004
Witness by hand and official seal.
Signature of Notary
SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-06
E'('i air
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO
PERMIT GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
IN ZONING CASE NO. 646 AT 56 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 102-EF)
(COSER).
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 Dr. and Mrs. Russell Coser with
respect to real property located at 56 Eastfield Drive, (Lot 102-EF), Rolling Hills, CA
requesting a Site Plan Review to permit grading and construction of a new 5,147 square
foot single family residence with 803 square foot garage to replace an existing residence.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings
to consider the application on February 26, 2002, March 19, 2002, and May 21, 2002 and
at a field trip visit on March 11, 2002. The applicant was notified of the public hearings
in writing by first class mail. 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
applicants were in attendance at the hearings.
Section 3. The property is located along a loop of Eastfield Drive.
Pursuant to Sections 17.12.250(Y) and 17.16.110 Front Yards, of the City of Rolling
Hills Zoning Ordinance the front yard setback is measured 50 feet from the
roadway easement. The rear yard setback is measured 50 feet form the rear lot line,
except when a rear yard abuts a street, it shall be considered a front yard, therefore
it is measured 50 feet from the roadway easement.
Due to the provision in the Zoning Ordinance, which requires that a rear yard
which abuts a street be treated like a front yard, the proposed stable would be located in
the front yard, and would therefore, require a Variance when constructed. Due to the
size, location, topography and configuration of the lot the proposed location of the
stable is most reasonable. The proposed placement of the residence and the stable
would minimize grading on the lot.
Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class
3 Exemption (The State of CA Guidelines, Section 15303) and is therefore categorically
exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 5. 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 application
requesting construction of the new house, 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 because the proposed structures comply with
the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with
sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to Zoning
Code setback and lot coverage requirements. The net lot area of the lot is 42,240 square
feet. The proposed residence (5,147 sq.ft.), garage (803 sq.ft.), service yard (96 sq.ft.) and
a future stable will have 6,496 square feet of structures, which constitutes 15.4% of the
net lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. A 3,400
square foot basement is proposed for this development The total lot coverage including
paved areas and driveway will be 10,656 square feet, which constitutes 25.3% of the net
lot which is within the 35% maximum overall net lot coverage requirement. The
proposed project is screened from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the
development. The disturbed area of the lot will be 36.0%, which is within the 40%
maximum permitted, and includes the future stable.
B. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and
undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new
structure will not cause the lot to look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the lot will
be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space on the property. The existing bushes
and trees along Eastfield Drive will remain and will screen the residence from the street.
The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and
the topography of the lot have been considered, and the construction of the new house
will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings, or
structures because the proposed structure will be constructed on a portion of the lot
which is the least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped
with trees and shrubs which at maturity will not exceed 25 feet in height, is a sufficient
distance from nearby residences so that the proposed structure will not impact the view
or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will substantially utilize the existing building
pad for the new construction.
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 set forth in the Zoning Code will not be •
exceeded and the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood.
D. The development plan incorporates existing trees and native vegetation to
the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, the development plan preserves dense brush
and shrubs and supplements it with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances
the rural character of the community.
E. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize
grading and retain the natural drainage courses. Grading for this project will involve
1,070 cubic yards of cut and 1,070 cubic yards of fill and will be balanced on site.
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-06
PAGE 2
• •
F. 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 driveway approach at Eastfield Drive.
G. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act and is exempt.
Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby
approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 646 for grading and for
construction of a new residence as shown on the Development Plan dated May 15, 2002,
and marked Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 7 of this
Resolution.
Section 7. The Site Plan Review approved in Section 6 of this Resolution is
subject to the following conditions:
A. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within one year from the
effective date of, approval if construction pursuant to this approval has not commenced
within that time period, as required by Section 17.46.080(A) of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code, or the approval granted is otherwise extended pursuant to the
requirements of that section.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan Review approval, that
if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended and the
privileges granted hereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicants have 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.
D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance
with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A and dated May 15, 2002, 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. Grading shall not exceed 1,070 cubic yards of cut and 1,070 cubic yards of
fill and shall be balanced on site.
G. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 6,496 square feet or 15.4%.
H. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 10,656
square feet or 25.3% in conformance with lot coverage limitations.
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-06
PAGE 3
•
I. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 15,234 square feet or 36.0% of
the net lot area in conformance with lot disturbance limitations.
J. Residential building pad coverage on the 21,280 square foot residential
building pad shall not exceed 6,046 square feet or 28.4%; coverage on the proposed 1,000
square foot pad shall not exceed 450 square feet or 45.0%.
K. The proposed basement shall not exceed 3,400 square feet and shall meet
all requirements of the Los Angeles County Building Code and City Zoning Ordinance
for basements.
L. Landscaping shall include water efficient irrigation, to the maximum
extent feasible, that incorporates 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.
M. A landscaping plan for the graded areas must be submitted for review by
the Planning Department prior to issuing grading or building permits. To the maximum
extend practicable, native trees and other native plants shall be utilized. If trees are to be
used in the landscaping scheme for this project, they shall be mature when planted and
which at full maturity shall not exceed 25 feet in height; shrubs shall be planted so as
not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but, to obscure the residential structure
on site.
N. The existing driveway shall serve the new residence.
O. The proposed wall along the graded pad shall not exceed an average of
21/2 feet in height.
P. During construction, any soil disturbance shall preserve the existing
topography, flora, and natural features to the greatest extent possible.
Q. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district
requirements, stormwater pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances
and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle
trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors shall be required.
R. During construction, the Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set
forth in Section 7010 of the 1998 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be
followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control stormwater
pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles.
S. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site
and, if necessary, any overflow parking shall take place within nearby roadway
easements.
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-06
PAGE 4
• •
T. 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.
U. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water
Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation
and maintenance of septic tanks.
V. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water
Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation
and maintenance of stormwater drainage facilities.
W. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water
Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management
Practices (BMP's) related to solid waste.
X. The property owners shall be required to conform to the City of Rolling
Hills Outdoor Lighting Standards Ordinance, (Ordinance No. 287).
Y. A drainage plan shall be approved by the Planning Department and
County District Engineer, to include any water from any site irrigation systems and that
all drainage from the site shall be conveyed in an approved manner.
Z. All utility lines shall be placed underground. The roof material for the
new residence and future stable shall comply with the City of Rolling Hills Building
Code requirements.
AA. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final building plan to the County of
Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed drainage plan with related geology, soils and
hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the Planning
Commission shall be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their
review and approval.
AB. 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.
AC. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills
Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any
grading or building permit.
AD. The applicant shall pay all of the applicable Los Angeles County Building
and Safety and Public Works Department fees, including Parks and Recreation Fees for
new residence.
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-06
PAGE 5
• •
AE. Until the applicants execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of
this Site Plan Review approval, as required by Section 17.42.070 the approvals shall not
be effective.
AF. All conditions of the Site Plan approval, that apply, shall be complied with
prior to the issuance of a building permit from the County of Los Angeles.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 18th DAY OF JUNE 2002.
EVIE INKIN4,'VICE-CHAIR
ATTEST:
•
�K tilL,� J
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-06
PAGE 6
•
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2002-06 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO
PERMIT GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENCE TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 646 AT 56 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT
102-EF) (COSER).
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on June
18, 2002 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Margeta, Sommer and Chairwoman Hankins.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Witte.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices.
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-06
PAGE 7
diN210 rmo'AINfiooS3139NVSO1
XU310 dlh(1031ii30110338tM1S1931 fie"'IRizt4P
CZ00 '9 •Nnr'
NigiO dlunoopapnoali ae. leu map
'>>ui eidmd u! paluiadw! yeas NI smog l! j!
paooaa aij jo Ado° paigpea pue anal e si siq j