Loading...
785, Construct a stable in front ya, Staff Reportseeev Rae, qief,4 DATE: JULY 26, 2010 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR THROUGH: ANTON DAHLERBRUCH, CITY MANAGER iV SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2010-10. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE TO SET ASIDE AN AREA FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 785, AT 67 EASTFIELD DRIVE, (LOT 20-EF), (BRANDMEYER). PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FORM CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 RECOMMENDATION Agenda Item No.: 4A Mtg. Date: 7-26-10 1. It is recommended that the City Council receive and file this report or provide other direction to staff. REQUEST AND PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 2. The applicants requested a variance to set aside a 1,000 square foot area for a future stable and corral in the front yard setback of the property. The Planning Commission unanimously adopted the attached Resolution, granting the request with conditions that • Future construction of a stable and corral be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. • This approval does not preclude this or any other property owner from applying to the Planning Commission for an alternate location of a stable and corral. The Planning Commission found that due to the location of the existing residence, (at the rear of the property) and the proximity of the top of slope to the residence in the rear, there is no other area suitable for a stable and corral. In addition, the rear slope past the building pad is very steep and would require major leveling and grading for construction -1- • • of a stable. Although neighbors within 1000-foot radius were notified of the project, no one objected to the project. BACKGROUND 3. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the gross lot area is 1.29 acres, (excluding roadway easement). The net lot area, as calculated for development purposes, is 41,239 square feet (0.95 acres). The lot has a narrow frontage along Eastfield Drive (140 feet) and is over 423 feet long. The front of the property, for about the first 210 feet distance from the roadway easement line, is relatively flat after which it slopes significantly towards a canyon. 4. The property is developed with a 2,648 square foot residence with 451 square foot attached garage, 189 covered porch, service yard and 542 square foot raised deck. The applicants are planning to construct a swimming pool. For calculation purposes they are proposing 799 sq.ft. pool, however, they stated, that a 600 sq.ft. swimming pool would most likely be constructed. In the future, they are considering an addition of less than 1,000 square feet. Less than 800 square foot pool and less than 1,000 sq.ft. addition could be approved administratively (over-the-counter). 5. Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, in order to construct a swimming pool or an addition to the residence a stable and corral must either be constructed or an area set aside for a future stable and corral. The applicants are not planning to construct a stable and corral at this time, and are setting aside an area for a future construction. 6. The configuration and location of the existing residence on the lot, is such that there is not an adequate area in the rear of the residence to construct a stable and corral on the existing building pad, which would meet the size and distance requirement (35 feet from a residential structure). The lot behind the building pad slopes significantly towards the rear at 2:1 and greater slopes. Such slopes are problematic for construction of stable and corral. Therefore, the applicants request that an area be set aside in the front setback. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE 7. The net lot area of the lot for development purposes is 41,239 square feet, (0.95 acres). The structural coverage, including the future stable (450 s.f.), swimming pool (799 s.f.), swimming pool equipment area (50 s.f.) and the existing structures is 5,225 square feet or 12.7% of the net lot area. The applicants indicated that the swimming pool they would like to construct would be less than 799 square feet, however, for the purpose of this variance request would like to keep the numbers at the maximum permitted for an over- the-counter approval. 8. The structural coverage of the lot, including the future pool would be 1.2.7%. The total coverage, including all structures and paved areas would be 9,006 square feet (including future pool decking) or 21.8% of the net lot area. (With 999 sq.ft. future addition the structural coverage would be 15.1% and total coverage 24.2%). J • • 9. The disturbed area of the lot is currently 16,280 square feet or 39.5%, which includes the future stable and corral area. No additional grading or disturbance will be necessary for the pool, future addition or the stable. 10. The residential building pad for the property is 12,880 square feet. With the proposed pool, pool equipment structures and the future stable, the total residential pad coverage will be 39.1%, which exceeds the 30% guideline. (With a 600 sq.ft. pool the coverage would be 37.5%). Currently the coverage on the existing building pad is 29%. 11. The applicants provided the following justification for the request for a variance. They state that given the setback requirements for a stable from the residence (35 ft), there is not sufficient space in the back yard to locate such use, and there would be no access to the rear. Given the slope into the canyon past the building pad, there is no ability to place a stable and corral there. Therefore, due to the topography and current configuration of the existing structures on the lot, the only feasible area for a stable and corral would be in the front. 12. The project will meet the City s development standards for pool and addition and if the variance is granted will provide for future construction of a stable, corral and access. 13. No additional grading is proposed. OTHER AGENCIES REVIEW 14. The future swimming pool and addition will require review and approval by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Committee. 15. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES 17.38.050 Required findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following 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; 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; 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; D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; -3- • • F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting andsiting 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. 785 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS RA -S-1 Zone Setbacks: Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line Structures (Site Plan Review required 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 (20% maximum) Total Lot Coverage (35% maximum) Building Pad Coverage (30% maximum -guideline) Grading 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. Roadway Access Stable and Corral Access to Stable Preserve Views Preserve Plants and Animals EXISTING Residence Residence Garage Covered Porch Swim Pool /spa Stable Service Yard Pool eqp. Deck 2648 sq.ft. 451 sq.ft. 189 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 542 sa.ft. TOTAL 3926 sq.ft. 9.5% of 41,239 sq,ft. net lot area 15.8% of 41,239 sq.ft. net lot area 29.0% of 12,880 sq.ft. residential building pad N/A 39.5% Existing from Eastfield PROPOSED Variance for future stable and corral to be located in front setback Residence Garage Covered porch Swim Pool /spa Stable Service Yard Pool eqp. Raised deck TOTAL 2648 sq.ft. 451 sq.ft. 189 sq.ft. 799 sq.ft. 450 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 50 sq.ft. 542 sa.ft. 5225 sq.ft. 12.7% of 41,239 sq,ft. net lot area 21.8% of 41,239 sq.ft. net lot area 39.1% of 12,880 sq.ft. residential building pad (incl. pool and stable) NONE 39.5% or 16,280 sq.ft. of net lot area Existing from Eastfield Future Future from Eastfield Planning Commission conditions Planning Commission conditions Ot • • RESOLUTION NO. 2010-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE TO SET ASIDE AN AREA FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 785, AT 67 EASTFIELD DRIVE, (LOT 20-EF), (BRANDMEYER). PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). 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 Mr. and Mrs. Michael Brandmeyer with respect to real property located at 67 Eastfield Drive (Lot 20- EF), Rolling Hills, CA requesting a Variance to permit to set aside an area for a future stable and corral in the front yard setback. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearing to consider the application at a field trip on June 14, 2010. The applicants and neighbors within 1,000-foot radius of subject property were notified of the public hearing 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. No public comments were received at the meeting or in writing to staff or the Planning Commission. Section 3. The property is developed with a 2,648 square foot residence with 451 square foot attached garage, 189 covered porch, service yard and 542 square foot raised deck. The applicants are planning to construct less than 800 square foot swimming pool and less than 1,000 square foot addition. Both projects require administrative approval only, (over-the-counter). Section 4. Pursuant to the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, in order to construct a swimming pool or an addition to a residence a stable and corral must either be constructed or an area set aside for a future stable and corral. Section 5. The configuration of the lot and location of the existing residence on the lot is such that there is not a sufficient area in the rear of the residence to construct a stable and corral on the existing building pad, which would meet the size and distance requirement (35 feet from a residential structure). The lot behind the building pad slopes significantly towards the rear at 2:1 and greater slopes. Such slopes are problematic for construction of stable and corral. Therefore, the applicants requested that an area be set -aside in the front of the residence. Section 6. The Planning Commission finds that the project is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Reso. 2010-10 67 Eastfield los • • Section 7. 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 that the front yard setback be fifty (50) feet from the roadway easement line, and be unobstructed from the ground upwards. In order to set aside a 1000 square foot area for a future stable and corral in the front setback, the applicants are seeking a Variance. 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 this property that justify the request: 1. The existing residence has been developed towards the rear of the lot to garner the extraordinary views from the rear of the lot. The applicants are not proposing major changes to the existing residence, other than a small addition. There is not an adequate area in the rear of the residence on the existing building pad to construct a future stable and corral without impairing the view. 2. The lot was graded previously to create a pad for construction in a manner that the structure was placed towards the rear of the building pad. The topography of the lot together with the fact that the existing pad and residence are located in the rear create difficulty in setting aside the area for a future stable and corral elsewhere on the property. 3. The configuration of the lot and location of the existing residence on the lot is such that there is not a sufficient area in the rear of the residence to construct a stable and corral on the existing building pad, which would meet the size and distance requirement (35 feet from a residential structure). The lot behind the building pad slopes significantly towards the rear at 2:1 and greater slopes. Such slopes are problematic for construction of stable and corral. 4. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the gross lot area is 1.29 acres, (excluding roadway easement). The net lot area, as calculated for development purposes, is 41,239 square feet (0.95 acres). The lot has a narrow frontage along Eastfield Drive (140 feet) and is over 423 feet long. The front of the property, for about the first 210 feet distance from the roadway easement line, is relatively flat after which it significantly slopes towards a canyon. It is in the rear of the flat portion that the residence is located. 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 because due to the existing grade, narrow lot configuration it would be a hardship to located the stable in the rear yard. The expansive open space in the front yard comfortably supports future stable. The narrow nature of the property places a hardship on locating the stable in the side or rear areas. Further, due to the steepness of the slope behind the residential building pad it would be infeasible to construct a stable in the rear. Without the Variance, the applicants would not be able to construct a pool and small addition, and therefore their property right or enjoyment of the Reso. 2010-10 67 Eastfield 2 I property would be affected. The property is developed with a 2,648 square foot residence with 451 square foot attached garage, which are relatively small as compared to other similar homes in the area and the future addition would not make the lot look overbuilt or out of character with the neighborhood. The area of the proposed pool is not feasible for the set aside for a stable and corral, as it would be too close to the residence. C. The granting of the Variance would 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 because a stable, if ever built in the front setback, would not affect any neighbor's views and therefore property value and would be screened from the street. D. In granting of the Variance the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will be observed in that it is required by the Zoning Ordinance to set aside an area for a stable and corral in order to improve the property, in this case the front yard set aside area is suitable area for a future stable and corral. E. The Variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills because the proposed structures comply with . the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures and a set aside area for a future stable and corral. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings in Section 7, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance in Zoning Case No. 785 to set aside an area for a future stable and corral in the front yard setback, subject to the following conditions: A. The set aside area in the front setback does not preclude another party from applying to the Planning Commission for an alternate location of a stable and corral. B. The property on which the project is located contains a set aside area for a future stable and corral in the front yard. However, the Planning Commission shall review any proposed development in the future for a stable and corral. The Variance granted in this application for front yard setback set aside area for equestrian uses does not guarantee future approval in that location. C. It is declared and made a condition of the 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. Reso. 2010-10 67 Eastfield • • D. 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 set forth in this approval, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. E. All administrative approvals, permitted pursuant to Chapter 1.7.44. ZONE CLEARANCE, for a swimming pool, addition and other construction, shall be subject to the project meeting all Zoning Code requirements for coverage and all other development standards and the L.A. County Building Code standards. F. 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 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20th DAY OF JULY 2010. Reso. 2010-10 67 Eastfield LOREN DEROY, PERSON 4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2010-10 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE TO SET ASIDE AN AREA FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 785, AT 67 EASTFIELD DRIVE, (LOT 20-EF), (BRANDMEYER). PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on July 20, 2010 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Chelf, Henke, Pieper, Vice Chairperson Smith and Chairperson DeRoy. NOES: None. ABSENT:. None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. Reso. 2010-10 67 Eastfield CITY CLERK (9) VoA( DATE: TO: FROM: eire, 06 Rosy gqieee4 • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 JULY 20, 2010 HONORABLE CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: ZONING CASE NO. 785 67 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 1-FT) RA-S-1, 1.29 ACRES (GROSS) MR. AND MRS. MICHAEL BRANDMEYER DOUG MCHATTIE, BOLTON ENGINEERING JUNE 3, 2010 REQUEST AND RECOMMENDATION, The applicants request a variance to set aside a 1,000 square foot area for a future stable and corral in the front yard setback of the property. It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2010-10, which is attached. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission held a public hearing and a site visit to the property on June 14, 2010 and directed staff to prepare a resolution approving the project. The Planning Commission recommended that the location of the future stable and corral be moved to the southern corner of the property, in the front setback, and that future construction of stable and corral be reviewed by the Planning Commission. A revised plan showing the stable and coral in the recommended location has been submitted. The attached resolution contains standard findings of facts and conditions recommended by the Planning Commission, including: • Future construction of a stable and corral shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. • This approval does not preclude this or any other property owner from applying to the Planning Commission for an alternate location of a stable and corral. n i • This page is intentionally blank. r • RESOLUTION NO. 2010-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE TO SET ASIDE AN AREA FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL IN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 785, AT 67 EASTFIELD DRIVE, (LOT 20-EF), (BRANDMEYER). PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). 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 Mr. and Mrs. Michael Brandmeyer with respect to real property located at 67 Eastfield Drive (Lot 20- EF), Rolling Hills, CA requesting a Variance to permit to set aside an area for a future stable and corral in the front yard setback. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearing to consider the application at a field trip on June 14, 2010. The applicants and neighbors within 1,000-foot radius of subject property were notified of the public hearing 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. No public comments were received at the meeting or in writing to staff or the Planning Commission. Section 3. The property is developed with a 2,648 square foot residence with 451 square foot attached garage, 189 covered porch, service yard and 542 square foot raised deck. The applicants are planning to construct less than 800 square foot swimming pool and less than 1,000 square foot addition. Both projects require administrative. approval only, (over-the-counter). Section 4. Pursuant to the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, in order to construct a swimming pool or an addition to a residence a stable and corral must either be constructed or an area set aside for a future stable and corral. Section 5. The configuration of the lot and location of the existing residence on the lot is such that there is not a sufficient area in the rear of the residence to construct a stable and corral on the existing building pad, which would meet the size and distance requirement (35 . feet from a residential structure). The lot behind the building pad slopes significantly towards the rear at 2:1 and greater slopes. Such slopes are problematic for construction of stable and corral. Therefore, the applicants requested that an area be set -aside in the front of the residence. Section 6. The Planning Commission finds that the project is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Reso. 2010-10 67 Eastfield 0 • • Section 7. 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 that the front yard setback be fifty (50) feet from the roadway easement line, and be unobstructed from the ground upwards. In order to set aside a 1000 square foot area for a future stable and corral in the front setback, the applicants are seeking a Variance. 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 this property that justify the request: 1. The existing residence has been developed towards the rear of the lot to garner the extraordinary views from the rear of the lot. The applicants are not proposing major changes to the existing residence, other than a small addition. There is not an adequate area in the rear of the residence on the existing building pad to construct a future stable and corral without impairing the view. 2. The lot was graded previously to create a pad for construction in a manner that the structure was placed towards the rear of the building pad. The topography of the lot together with the fact that the existing pad and residence are located in the rear create difficulty in setting aside the area for a future stable and corral elsewhere on the property. 3. The configuration of the lot and location of the existing residence on the lot is such that there is not a sufficient area in the rear of the residence to construct a stable and corral on the existing building pad, which would meet the size and distance requirement (35 feet from a residential structure). The lot behind the building pad slopes significantly towards the rear at 2:1 and greater slopes. Such slopes are problematic for construction of stable and corral. 4. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the gross lot area is 1.29 acres, (excluding roadway easement). The net lot area, as calculated for development purposes, is 41,239 square feet (0.95 acres). The lot has a narrow frontage along Eastfield Drive (140 feet) and is over 423 feet long. The front of the property, for about the first 210 feet distance from the roadway easement line, is relatively .flat after which it significantly slopes towards a canyon. It is in the rear of the flat portion that the residence is located. 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 because due to the existing grade, narrow lot configuration it would be a hardship to located the stable in the rear yard. The expansive open space in the front yard comfortably supports future stable. The narrow nature of the property places a hardship on locating the stable in the side or rear areas. Further, due to the steepness of the slope behind the residential building pad it would be infeasible to construct a stable in the rear. Without the Variance, the applicants would not be able to construct a pool and small addition, and therefore their property right or enjoyment of the Reso. 2010-10 67 Eastfield • • property would be affected. The property is developed with a 2,648 square foot residence with 451 square foot attached garage, which are relatively small as compared to other similar homes in the area and the future addition would not make the lot look overbuilt or out of character with the neighborhood. The area of the proposed pool is not feasible for the set aside for a stable and corral, as it would be too close to the residence. C. The granting of the Variance would 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 because a stable, if ever built in the front setback, would not affect any neighbor's views and therefore property value and would be screened from the street. D. In granting of the Variance the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will be observed in that it is required by the Zoning Ordinance to set aside an area for a stable and corral in order to improve the property, in this case the front yard set aside area is suitable area for a future stable and corral. E. The Variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures and a set aside area for a future stable and corral. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings in Section 7, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance in Zoning Case No. 785 to set aside an area for a future stable and corral in the front yard setback, subject to the following conditions: A. The set aside area in the front setback does not preclude another party from applying to the Planning Commission for an alternate location of a stable and corral. B. The property on which the project is located contains a set aside area for a future stable and corral in the front yard. However, the Planning Commission shall review any proposed development in the future for a stable and corral. The Variance granted in this application for front yard setback set aside area for equestrian uses does not guarantee future approval in that location. C. It is declared and made a condition of the 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. Reso. 2010-10 67 Eastfield. • • D. 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 set forth in this approval, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. E. All administrative approvals, permitted pursuant to Chapter 17.44. ZONE CLEARANCE, for a swimming pool, addition and other construction, shall be subject to the project meeting all Zoning Code requirements for coverage and all other development standards and the L.A. County Building Code standards. F. 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 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20th DAY OF JULY 2010. LOREN DEROY, CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: HEIDI LUCE, DEPUTY CITY CLERK Reso. 2010-10 67 Eastfield STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2010-10 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE TO SET ASIDE AN AREA FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL IN THE FRONT YARD SE [BACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 785, AT 67 EASTFIELD DRIVE, (LOT 20-EF), (BRANDMEYER). PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on July 20, 2010 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 Reso. 2010-10 67 Eastfield • • This page is intentionally blank. 6 • etre, Rae" gee/4 • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item 4B on 6/14 field trip mtg Agenda Item 6B on 6/15 regular PC mtg TO: HONORABLE CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR DATE: JUNE 14, 2010-FIELD TRIP AND JUNE 15, 2010 REGULAR MEETING APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: RECOMMENDATION ZONING CASE NO. 785 67 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 1-FT) RA-S-1, 1.29 ACRES (GROSS) MR. AND MRS. MICHAEL BRANDMEYER DOUG MCHATTIE, BOLTON ENGINEERING JUNE 3, 2010 It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the staff report, view the project, open the public hearing, take public testimony and continue the hearing to the evening meeting of June 15, 2010 beginning at 6:30 PM. REQUEST The applicants request a variance to set aside an 1,000 square foot area for a future stable and corral in the front yard of the property. BACKGROUND 1. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the gross lot area is 1.29 acres, (excluding roadway easement). The net lot area, as calculated for development purposes, is 41,239 square feet (0.95 acres). The lot has a narrow frontage along Eastfield Drive (140 feet) and is over 423 feet long. The front of the property, for about the first 210 feet distance from the ZC NO.785 1 67 Eastfield • • roadway easement line, is relatively flat after which it significantly slopes towards a canyon. 2. The property is developed with a 2,648 square foot residence with 451 square foot attached garage, 189 covered porch, service yard and 542 square foot raised deck. The applicants are planning to construct a swimming pool. For calculation purposes they are proposing 799 sq.ft. pool, however, they stated, that a 600 sq.ft. swimming pool would most likely be constructed. In the future, they are considering an addition of less than 1,000 square feet. Both, less than 800 square foot pool and less than 1,000 sq.ft. addition could be approved administratively (over-the-counter). 3. Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, in order to construct a swimming pool or an addition to the residence a stable and corral must either be constructed or an area set aside for a future stable and corral. The applicants are not planning to construct a stable and corral at this time, but are setting aside an area for a future construction. 4. The configuration and location of the existing residence on the lot, is such that there is not adequate area in the rear of the residence to construct a stable and corral on the existing building pad, which would meet the size and distance requirement (35 feet from a residential structure). The lot behind the building pad slopes significantly towards the rear at 2:1 and greater slopes. Such slopes are problematic for construction of stable and corral. Therefore, the applicants request that an area be set aside in the front of the residence, but not in setbacks. 5. Residents within a 1,000 foot radius of the property have been notified of this public hearing. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE 6. The net lot area of the lot for development purposes is 41,239 square feet, (0.95 acres). The structural coverage, including the future stable (450 s.f.), swimming pool (799 s.f.), swimming pool equipment area (50 s.f.) and the existing structures is 5,225 square feet or 12.7% of the net lot area. The applicants indicated that the swimming pool they would like to construct would be less than 799 square feet, however, for the purpose of this variance request would like to keep the numbers at the maximum permitted for an over-the-counter approval. 7. The total coverage, including all structures and paved areas would be 9,006 square feet (including future pool decking) or 21.8% of the net lot area. 8. The .disturbed area of the lot is currently 16,280 square feet or 39.5%, which includes the future stable and corral area. No additional grading or disturbance will be necessary for the pool, future addition or the stable. -2- • • 9. The residential building pad for the property contains is 12,880 square feet. With the proposed pool, pool equipment structures and the future stable, the total residential pad coverage will be 39.1%, which exceeds the 30% guideline. (With a 600 sq.ft. pool the coverage would be 37.5%). Currently the coverage on the existing building pad is 29%. 10. The applicants provided the following justification for the request for a variance. They state that given the setback requirements for a stable from the residence (35 ft), there is not sufficient space in the back yard to locate such use, and there would be no access to the rear. Given the slope into the canyon past the building pad, there is no ability to place a stable and corral there. Therefore, due to the topography and current configuration of the existing structures on the lot, the only feasible area for a stable and corral would be in the front. 11. The project will meet the City's development standards for pool and addition and if the variance is granted will provide for future construction of a stable, corral and access. 12. No additional grading is proposed. OTHER AGENCIES REVIEW 13. The future swimming pool and addition will require review and approval by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Committee. 14. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES 17.38.050 Required findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following 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; 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; 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; D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; 3 ( • • F. That the variance Hazardous Waste Managem waste facilities; and G. That the variance Rolling Hills. ZONING CASE NO. 785 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS RA -S-1 Zone Setbacks: Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line Structures (Site Plan Review required 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 (20% maximum) Total Lot Coverage (35% maximum) Building Pad Coverage (30% maximum -guideline) Pool pad Grading 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. Roadway Access Stable and Corral Access to Stable Preserve Views Preserve Plants and Animals is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles ent Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous request is consistent with the general plan of the City of EXISTING Residence Residence Garage Covered Porch Swim Pool /spa Stable Service Yard Pool eqp. Deck TOTAL 2648 sq.ft. 451 sq.ft. 189 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 542 sa.ft. 3926 sq.ft. 9.5% of 41,239 sq,ft. net lot area 15.8% of 41,239 sq.ft. net lot area 29.0% of 12,880 sq.ft. residential building pad N/A 39.5% II Existing from Eastfield -4- PROPOSED Variance for future stable and corral to be located in front yard area Residence 2648 sq.ft. Garage 451 sq.ft. Covered porch 189 sq.ft. Swim Pool /spa 799 sq.ft. Stable 450 sq.ft. Service Yard 96 sq.ft. Pool eqp. 50 sq.ft. Raised deck 542 sa.ft. TOTAL 5225 sq.ft. 12.7% of 41,239 sq,ft. net lot area 21.8% of 41,239 sq.ft. net lot area 39.1 % of 12,880 sq.ft. residential building pad NONE 39.5% or 16,280 sq.ft. of net lot area Existing from Eastfield Future Future from Eastfield Planning Commission review Planning Commission review • • Backyard - flat area ends at white fence and then the drastic slope begins 1 • photo taken WO Northern p oint °fi the propel before the slope That() fiOoKr9 4rastc slopein •rd the write fin° • • Potential site for a future stable/corral. Photo taken looking towards the house (facing North).