Loading...
596A, Lot line adjustment. To merge, CorrespondenceCity ofielin July 24, 2000 Mr. Robert T. Wolfenden 846 Watson Avenue, Suite "C" Wilmington, CA 90744 V 13 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: EXPIRATION OF APPROVALS FOR ZONING CASE NO. 596B 60 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOTS 104-A-EF & 105-EF) RESOLUTION NO. 99-15 Dear Mr. Wolfenden: This letter is to inform you that it has been almost one year since the approval of Zoning Case No. 596B. Approvals will expire on September 21, 2000. You can extend approvals for one year only if you apply to the Planning Commission in writing to request an extension prior to the expiration date. The filing fee for the time extension is $200 to be paid to the City of Rolling Hills. In addition, prior to acquiring building permits, the Lot Line Adjustment approved in Zoning Case No. 596A by Resolution No. 99-14 is required to concurrently have the Certificate of Compliance and the deeds effectuating the transfer recorded and you are required to submit proof of such recordation to the City of Rolling Hills. Proof of payment of current taxes is also required. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, iii. Lola Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Douglas McHattie, Bolton Engineering Corporation Ponied on Recycled Paper. • Cry `!2lf:nS JJ.•fG CERTIFIED MAIL September 28,1999 Mr. Robert T. Wolfenden 846 Watson Avenue, Suite "C" Wilmington, CA 90744 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: APPEAL PERIOD AND AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM ZONING CASE NOS. 596A & 596B, 60 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOTS 105-EF AND 104-A-EF), ROLLING HILLS RESOLUTION NOS. 99-14 AND 99-15 Dear Mr. Wolfenden: This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission adopted two resolutions on September 21, 1999 (1) authorizing the issuance of a Conditional Certificate of Compliance for a Lot Line Adjustment to merge two existing lots into one lot for property at 60 Eastfield Drive (Lot 105-EF) and an adjacent vacant lot to the north (Lot 104-A-EF) in Zoning Case No. 596A and (2) granting Site Plan Review approval to construct a stable with loft and adjacent corral and substantial one-story additions to an existing two-story single family residence that will require grading in Zoning Case No. 596B. That action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission was reported to the City Council on September 27, 1999. The Planning Commission's decision in this matter shall become effective thirty days after the adoption of the resolution by the Commission, unless an appeal has been filed or the City Council takes jurisdiction of the case within that thirty (301 day appeal period.. (Section 17.54.010(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code). Should there be an appeal, the Commission's decision will be stayed until the Council completes its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. If no appeals are filed within the thirty (30) day period after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution, the Planning Commission's action will become final and you will be required to cause to be recorded an Affidavit of Acceptance Form together with the subject resolutions in the Office of the . County Recorder before the Commission's action takes effect. We have enclosed a copy of RESOLUTION NOS. 99-14 and 99-15, specifying the conditions of approval set forth by the Planning Commission and the approved Printed on Recycled Paper. • • Development Plans to keep for your files. Once you have reviewed the Resolutions, please complete the enclosed AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM, have the signature(s) notarized, and forward, the completed form and a copy of the Resolutions to: Los Angeles County Registrar -Recorder Real Estate Records Section 12400 East Imperial Highway Norwalk, CA 90650 Include a check in the amount of $9.00 for the first page and $3.00 for each additional page. The City will notify the Los Angeles County Building & Safety Division to issue permits only when the Affidavit of Acceptance is received by us and any conditions of the Resolutions required prior to issuance of building permits are met. Please feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Zh762/0 Lola Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Douglas McHattie, Bolton Engineering Corp. Enclosures: AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM RESOLUTION NOS. 99-14 & 99-15 DEVELOPMENT PLANS APPEAL SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE. RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL 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. T Recorders Use Only AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 1§§ ZONING CASE NOS. 596A & 596B SITE PLAN REVIEW LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT �[ I (We) the undersigned state: am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows: 60 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOTS 105-EF AND 104-A-EF), ROLLING HILLS, CA This property is the subject of the above numbered case. am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said ZONING CASE NOS. 596A & 596B SITE PLAN REVIEW L LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT L I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature Signature Name typed or printed Name typed or printed Address Address City/State City/State Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public. State of Califomia ) County of Los Angeles ) On before me. personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies) and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted,, executed the instrument. Witness by hand and official seal. Signature of Notary SEE EXHIBIT "A" & EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF • ",//- /6/7 ' RESOLUTION NO. 99-14 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT TO MERGE TWO EXISTING LOTS INTO ONE LOT FOR PROPERTY AT 60 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 105-EF) AND A N ADJACENT VACANT LOT TO THE NORTH (LOT 104-A-EF) IN ZONING CASE NO. 596A. 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. Robert T. Wolfenden with respect to real property located at 60 Eastfield Drive (Lot 105-EF) that is 2.082 acres and- an adjacent vacant lot to the north (Lot 104-A-EF) that is 1.42 acres, requesting a Certificate of Compliance for a Lot Line Adjustment to remove the common side lot line dividing the two parcels so that one 3.502 acre irregular lot is created by the merger of the two existing lots. Section 2. California Government Code Subsection 66412(d) authorizes lot line adjustments without requiring a tentative map, parcel map or final map if: (A) the lot line adjustment involves two or more existing adjacent parcels, where land is proposed to be taken from one parcel and added to an adjacent parcel; (B) a greater number of parcels than originally existed is not thereby created; (C) the lot line adjustment will create parcels that conform to local zoning and building ordinances; and (D) the lot line adjustment is approved by the City. The City may impose conditions on the Lot Line Adjustment in order to make the lot conform to local zoning and building ordinances, to require the prepayment of real property taxes prior to the approval of the Lot Line Adjustment or to facilitate the relocation of existing infrastructure or easements. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application at a regular meeting on July 20, 1999, August 17, 1999, and at a field trip visit on July 27, 1999. During the hearing process, the applicant separately requested Site Plan Review under Zoning Case No. 596B for the construction of residential additions to the existing residence at 60 Eastfield Drive proposed to span the existing side lot line dividing the two parcels at the south side of Lot 104-A-EF and the north side of Lot 105-EF and that will require grading. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to a Class 5 exemption provided by Section 15305 of the State CEQA Guidelines. RESOLUTION NO. 99-14 PAGE 1 OF 4 • • Section 5. The Planning Commission has considered the evidence, both written and oral, presented in connection with this application and finds as follows: A. Section 16.16.010(B) of the Rolling Hills Subdivision Ordinance and Section 17.16.060(A) of the Rolling Hills Zoning Ordinance requires that each lot in any subdivision in the RA-S-1 Zone shall have a net area of not less forty-three thousand, five hundred sixty square feet (1.0 acre). The proposed lot line adjustment will result in the combined new lot being 3.502 net acres exclusive of: (a) any and all perimeter easements measured to a minimum lineal distance of ten feet perpendicular to the property lines; (b) any portion of the lot or parcel of land used for roadway purposes; and (c) any private drive or driveway which provides access to any other lot or parcel of land. B. Section 16.16.020 of the . Rolling Hills Subdivision Ordinance and Section 17.16.060(B)(3) of the Rolling Hills Zoning Ordinance require that in all cases where practicable, the sidelines of lots shall be at approximate right angles or radial to the street upon which such lot fronts. The existing sidelines of both lots are. approximately at right angles or radial to Eastfield Drive. The proposed adjustment will allow the northerly side 'lot line of the combined Lots 104-A-EF and 105-EF to be at right angles or radial to Eastfield Drive. The proposed adjustment will allow the southerly side lot line of the combined Lots 104-A-EF and 105-EF to be at right angles or radial to Eastfield Drive. C. Section 16.20.230 of the Rolling Hills Subdivision Ordinance requires that ten (10) foot wide easements be dedicated for bridle trail and utility purposes over the strips and portions of land withinand abutting upon the sidelines and rear lines of each lot. The proposed lot line adjustment to combine Lots 104-A-EF and 105-EF, an irregular lot, shall continue ten (10) foot easements along the northerly side lot line, twenty-five (25) foot easements along the easterly side lot line for 133.42 feet, ten (10) foot easements along the northerly side lot line for 80 feet, twenty-five (25) foot easements along the easterly rear lot line, and twenty-five (25) foot easements along the southerly side lot line. D. Conditions have been attached to this approval which provide that it will not impair or limit the City's application of the Site Plan Review Ordinance to any future development of the combined Lots 104-A-EF and 105-EF. Section 6. In accordance with the foregoing findings, a Conditional Certificate of Compliance for .lot line adjustment sought in Zoning Case No 596A as indicated on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is hereby approved as a Conditional Certificate of Compliance subject to the following conditions: A. There shall continue to be ten (10) foot easements along the northerly side lot line, twenty-five (25) foot easements along the easterly side lot line for 133.42 feet, ten (10) foot easements along the northerly side lot line for 80 feet, twenty-five (25) foot easements along the easterly rear lot line, and twenty-five (25) foot RESOLUTION NO. 99-14 PAGE 2 OF 4 • • easements along the southerly side lot line within the adjusted boundary of the combined Lots 104-A-EF and 105-EF. The map attached to the Conditional Certificate of Compliance, referred hereto as Exhibit "A" shall delineate and note the easements specified in this paragraph. B. The lot line adjustment shall not in any way constitute any representation that the adjusted combined Lots 104-A-EF and 105-EF can be developed in compliance with current zoning and building ordinance standards. No development shall occur on the property without first complying with all applicable City Building and Zoning requirements and other applicable rules and regulations. C. The lot line adjustment shall not in any respect limit or impair the City's application of the Site Plan Review Ordinance (Ordinance No 221, 1988) to the combined Lots 104-A-EF and 105-EF at such time as an application is made for development. D. The Certificate of Lot Line Adjustment shall not be issued until a legal description complying with the delineation of adjustment and the required easements as specified in Paragraph A of Section 6 are submitted to, and approved by the City. Upon the City's approval of the legal description, the Conditional Certificate. of Compliance shall be issued by the City, shall be recorded by the property owner in the offices of the Los Angeles County Recorder, and evidence of the recordation shall be returned to the City. E. The applicant shall record the deeds effectuating the transfer concurrently with the Certificate of Compliance for the Lot Line Adjustment and shall submit proof of such recordation to the City of Rolling Hills. F. The applicant shall submit proof of payment of 1998-1999 property taxes. G. The applicant shall not be required to record the Certificate of Compliance and deeds if the site plan review application in Zoning Case No. 596B is not approved. H. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions or this Lot Line Adjustment shall not be effective. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE ?f1ST DAY PTEMBER, 1999. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN RESOLUTION NO. 99-14 PAGE 3 OF 4 • ATTEST: MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 99-14 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF A CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR A LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT TO MERGE TWO EXISTING LOTS INTO ONE LOT FOR PROPERTY AT 60 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 105-EF) AND AN ADJACENT VACANT LOT TO THE NORTH (LOT 104-A-EF) IN ZONING CASE NO. 596A. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on September 21, 1999 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Margeta,Sommer, Witte and Chairman Roberts. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices L DENY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 99-14 PAGE 4 OF 4 • RESOLUTION NO. 99-15 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE WITH LOFT AND ADJACENT CORRAL AND SUBSTANTIAL ONE-STORY ADDITIONS TO A N EXISTING TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT WILL REQUIRE GRADING IN ZONING CASE NO. 596B. 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. Robert T. Wolfenden with respect to real property located at 60 Eastfield Drive (Lots 104-A-EF & 105-EF), Rolling Hills, requesting Site Plan Review to permit the construction of stable with loft and adjacent corral and substantial one-story additions to an existing two-story single family residence that will require grading. During the hearing process, typographical errors in the size of the addition were corrected to show a reduction in size of the proposed addition and the request was revised to include. a basement beneath the one-story addition,, previously described without a basement. As a consequence of the basement addition, the grading quantities were reduced, the building pad sizes were reduced, the maximum disturbed area was reduced, and the slope access to the stable and corral was made more gradual. Separately, a request for a Lot Line Adjustment to merge two legal lots at 60 Eastfield Drive (Lot 105-EF) and an adjacent vacant lot to the north (Lot 104-A-EF) in Zoning Case No. 596A was approved by the Planning Commission by Resolution No. 99-14. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application on July 20, 1999, August 17, 1999, and September 21, 1999, and at a field trip visit on July 27, 1999. The applicant were notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. 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 was in attendance at the hearing. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption (State CA Guidelines, Section 15301(e)) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 4. 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 RESOLUTION NO. 99-15 Page 1 of 7 • • 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, 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 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 Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net square foot area of 133,520 square feet. The proposed residence (4,260 sq.ft.), garage (480 sq.ft.), swimming pool (578 sq.ft.), stable (1,200 sq.ft.), and service yard (96 sq.ft.) will have 6,614 square feet which constitutes 4.95% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 17,048 square feet which equals 12.77% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is screened from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. The residential building pad coverage will not exceed 28.98%, the stable and recreation court pad will not exceed 14.7%, and total building pad coverage will not exceed 24.6%. 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). The lot slopes downward and most of the mature trees will not be removed. Grading will be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the proposed residence and existing neighboring residences. 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 will not be exceeded and the proposed project is consistent with the scale of residences in the neighborhood when compared to the large size of this irregular -shaped lot. The ratio of the proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. D. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at the east side (rear) of this lot., E. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, the development plan preserves several mature trees and shrubs and supplements it with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. RESOLUTION NO. 99-15 Page 2 of 7 • • F. The development plan incorporates grading that will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course. G. 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. The development plans as proposed will minimize impact on Eastfield Drive. Most of the additions proposed will not be visible from Eastfield Drive. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain scenic vistas across portions of the property. H. 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 existing driveways at the western portion of the property off Eastfield Drive for access. I. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 596B for proposed residential additions as indicated onthe development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A and is subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.38.070(A) unless 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 thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has 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 August 26, 1999, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. RESOLUTION NO. 99-15 Page 3 of 7 • • 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. Any retaining walls incorporated into the project shall not exceed 5 feet in height, averaging no more than 2-1/2 feet. G. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 28.98%, the stable and recreation court pad shall not exceed 14.7%, and total building pad coverage shall not exceed 24.6%. H. Maximum disturbed area shall not exceed 35.1% of the net lot area. I. Grading shall not exceed 3,215 cubic yards of cut soil and 3,215 cubic yards of fill soil and shall be balanced on site. J. The loft area of the proposed stable shall have no glazed windows. K. The proposed stable with loft shall be used for the exclusive purpose of keeping permitted domestic animals by the occupants of the property. Commercial uses are not permitted. L. Any grading shall preserve the existing topography, flora, and, natural features to the greatest extent possible. M. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to the maximum extent feasible, the existing mature trees and shrubs and the natural landscape screening surrounding the proposed building pad. N. Landscaping shall include water efficient irrigation, to the maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a 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. O. Two copies of a preliminary landscape plan must be submitted for review by the Planning Department and include native drought -resistant vegetation that will not disrupt the impact of the views of neighboring properties prior to the issuance of any building or grading 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. RESOLUTION NO. 99-15 Page 4 of 7 • • 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 drainage, 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. P. The property owners shall be required to conform 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, objectionable odors, landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence. Q. 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. R. All parking, during and after construction, shall take place on the project site. S. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and maintenance of septic tanks. T. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and maintenance of stormwater drainage facilities. U. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) related to solid waste. V. An Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 1996 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be prepared to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control stormwater pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles. W. 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 RESOLUTION NO. 99-15 Page 5 of 7 • • 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. X. 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. Y. If the portion of the existing residence that is two-story is demolished, reconstruction to that portion of the residence shall not be two-story in design. Should reconstruction be required to that portion of the residence, the reconstructed one-story residence may include a basement in Section 17.12.0120 ("B" words, terms and phrases.) defined as a space wholly or partly underground which does not exceed a height of five feet above finished grade at any point immediately adjacent to the basement exterior. A basement shall have an average exterior height no greater than two and one-half feet across the entire structure. Basements may have one standard door opening with a solid door not to exceed three feet by six feet, eight inches for ingress/egress to the exterior. The accessway to the door opening shall not exceed four feet in width and shall be incorporated into the overall design of the building but shall not have any other exterior openings, sun lights or similar devices. The new basement exit door shall be solid. Z. There shall be no door or accessway linking the basement under the new addition of the structure to the first floor of the existing structure. The applicant shall comply with all requirements and limitations of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code regarding basements. AA. 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. AB. This Site Plan Review approval shall not be effective until the' Certificate of Compliance for a Lot Line Adjustment and accompanying deeds as specified in Resolution No. 99-14 are recorded. AC. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Site Plan Review or the approval shall not be effective. AD. All conditions of this Site Plan Review approval 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 21ST/DAY OF,SEPj1 EN(Ij3ER, 1999. �Y ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN RESOLUTION NO. 99-15 Page 6 of 7 • ATTEST: ____Inzi2AALyt. MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 99-15 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO , CONSTRUCT A STABLE WITH LOFT AND ADJACENT CORRAL AND SUBSTANTIAL ONE-STORY ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THAT WILL REQUIRE GRADING IN ZONING CASE NO. 596B. was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission on September 21,1999 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Hankins,. Sommer, Witte.and Chairman Roberts. NOES: Commissioner Margeta. ABSENT None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following. Administrative Offices. J. l� -e^-- DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 99-15 Page 7 of 7 • 07.50.050--17.54.010 17.54, or unless the City Council sets the matter for Coun- cil hearing. All such hearings shall be noticed and con- ducted as provided for in Section 17.34. B. Upon receipt of the resolution of the Planning Commission recommending approval of a zone change or amend- ment, the City Clerk shall set the matter for hearing be- fore the City Council as provided for in Section 17.34. C. The City Council shall hear and take action upon the application or resolution pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 17.34. The Commission may adjourn or continue the hearing, as provided for in Section 17.34.080. D. The Council shall act to approve or deny the ap- plication or resolution for a zone change or amendment. E. Within thirty days following its decision, the City Council shall adopt an ordinance setting forth its action. The Council's action shall be considered final. (Ord. 239 511(part), 1993). 17.50.050 Consistency with hazardous waste management elan. All zone change and zoning ordinance amendment deci- sions shall be consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993). Chapter 17.54 APPEALS Sections: 17.54.010 Time for filing appeals. 17.54.020 Persons authorized to file an appeal. 17.54.030 Form, content and deficiencies in an appeal application. 17.54.040 Request for information. 17.54.050 Scheduling of appeal hearing. 17.54.060 Proceedings. 17.54.070 Statute of limitations. 17.54.010 Time for filing appeals. A. All actions of the Planning Commission authorized by this title may be appealed to the City Council. All appeals shall be filed in writing with the City Clerk. B. All appeals must be filed on or before the thirtieth calendar day after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution on the project or application. Application fees shall be paid as required by Section 17.30.030. 218-40 (Rolling Hills 5/94) •754.O20--17.54.O50 C. Within thirty days after the Planning Commission adopts a resolution which approves or denies a development application, the City Clerk shall place the resolution as a report item on the City Council's agenda. The City Council may, by an affirmative vote of three members, take juris- diction over the application. In the event the City Coun- cil takes jurisdiction over the application, the Planning Commission's decision will be stayed until the City Council completes its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993). 17.54.920 Perponsauthorized to file an anneal. Any person, including the City Manager, may appeal a decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council, in accor- dance with the terms of this Chapter. (Ord. 239-§11(part), 1993) . • 17.54.030 Form4 content and deficiencies in an appeal application. A. All appeals shall be filed in writing with the City Clerk on a form or forms provided by the City Clerk.. No appeal shall be considered filed until the re- quired appeal fee has been received by the City. Clerk. B. The appeal application shall state, at a minimum, the name and address of the appellant, the project and ac- tion being appealed, and the reasons why the appellant believes that the Planning Commission erred or abused its discretion, or why the Planning Commission's decision is not supported by evidence in the record. C. If the appeal application is found to be defi- cient, the City Clerk shall deliver or mail (by certified mail), to the appellant a notice specifying the reasons why the appeal is deficient. The appellant shall correct the deficiency with an amendment to the appeal form within seven calendar days of receiving the deficiency notice. Otherwise, the appeal application will be deemed withdrawn, and the appeal fee will be returned to the applicant. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993). 17.54.040 Reauest for information. Upon receipt of a written and complete appeal application and fee, the City Clerk shall direct the Planning Commission Secretary to transmit to the City Council the complete record of the entire proceeding before the Planning Commission. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993). 17.54.050 Scheduling of appeal hearina. Upon receiv- ing an appeal, the City Clerk shall set the appeal for a hearing before the City Council to occur within twenty days of the filing of the appeal. In the event that more than one appeal is filed for the same project, the Clerk shall schedule all appeals to be heard at the same time. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993). 218-41 (Rolling Hills 5/94) s .17.54.060--17.54.070 17.54.060 Proceedings. A. Noticing. The hearing shall be noticed as required by Section 17.30.030. In addition, the following parties shall be noticed: 1. The applicant of the proposal being appealed; 2. The appellant; and 3. Any person who provided oral testimony or writ- ten comments to the Planning Commission during or as part of the public hearing on the project. B. Hearing. The City Council shall conduct a public hearing pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 17.34. The Council shall consider all information in the record, as well as additional information presented at the appeal hearing, before taking action on the appeal. C. Action. The Council may act to uphold, overturn or otherwise modify the Planning Commission's original action on the proposal, or the Council may remand the ap- plication back to the Planning Commission for further re- view and direction. The Council shall make findings to support its decision. D. Finality of Decision. The action of the City Council to approve, conditionally approve, or deny an ap- plication shall be final and conclusive. E. Record of Proceedings. The decision of the City Council shall be set forth in full in a resolution or ordi- nance. A copy of the decision shall be sent to the appli- cant or the appellant. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993). 17.54.070 Statute of limitations. Any action chal- lenging a final administrative order or decision by the City made as a result of a proceeding in which by law a hearing is required to be given, evidence is required to be taken, and discretion regarding a final and nonappealable determination of facts is vested in the City of Rolling Hills, the City Council or in any of its Commissions, offi- cers or employees, must be filed within the time limits set forth in the California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993). Chanter 17.58 REVOCATIONS Sections: 17.58.010 Authority. 17.58.020 Proceedings. 17.58.030 Effective date. 17.58.040 Right of appeal. 218-42 (Rolling Hills 5/94) P. 8.52 865 309 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) tt �o1-74-/-7 Mn lciJo- m C. P.O. State and ZIP Code Ith/mt.-73i- C4 9.075`Y Postage S Certified Fee Special Delivery Fee IRestricted Delivery Fee Return Receipt showing to whom and Date Delivered N co Return Receipt showing to whom, Date, and Address of Delivery a) TOTAL Postage and Fees o Postmark or Date co E 0 tL N S/174, ;; SENDER: ' • ■Complete items 1 and/or 2 for additional services. N •Complete items 3, 4a, and 4b. O ■ Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can return this d card to you. y ■ Attach this form to the front of the mailpiece, or on the back if space does not :) permit. a, ■Write"Return Receipt Requested" on the mailpiece below the article number. ■The Retum Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date delivered. O v 3. Article Addressed to: a Mr. //obi1 loot % g ‘"?'6 li)G C77`1 �}veceJJ dier�r c' C Anth59.0.7y4/ Z z. c, 4/o5. 596A 52'613 cc 5. Received By: (Print Name) w cc 6. Sign (Addressee orAgerl c. X PS Form 3811, December 1994 oar . I also wish to receive the following services (for an extra fee): 1. ❑ Addressee's Address 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery Consult postmaster for fee. 4a. Article Number 4b. Service Type ❑ Registered Certified ❑ Express Mail 0 Insured ❑ Retum Receipt for Merchandise 0 COD 7. Date of DeliTi_1q g 8. Addressee's Address (Only if requested and fee is paid) Domestic Return Receipt • 40 e `� August 18, 1999 Mr. Robert T. Wolfenden 846 Watson Avenue, Suite "C" Wilmington, CA 90744 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 596A, Request for a Certificate of Compliance for Lot Line Adjustment to merge two legal lots and determine compliance with provisions of the Subdivision Map Act for property at 60 Eastfield Drive and an adjacent Vacant Lot (Lots 105-EF and 104-A-EF), Rolling Hills, CA, and ZONING CASE NO. 596B, Request for Site Plan Review to permit the construction of a stable with loft and adjacent corral and substantial additions to an existing single family residence that will require grading at 60 Eastfield Drive and an adjacent Vacant Lot (Lots 105-EF and 104-A-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. Wolfenden: This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission voted at their regular meeting on August 17,1999 to direct staff to prepare two resolutions to approve your requests for the subject projects in Zoning Case Nos. 596A and 596B and shall be confirmed in the draft resolutions that are being prepared. The Planning Commission will review and consider the draft resolutions, together with conditions of approval, at an upcoming meeting and make its final decision on your applications at that subsequent meeting. The findings and conditions of approval of the draft resolutions will be forwarded to you before being signed by the Planning Commission Chairman and City Clerk. The decision shall become effective thirty days after the adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution unless an appeal has been filed or the City Council takes jurisdiction of the case within that thirty (30) day anneal Period. (Section 17.54.010(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code). Should there be an appeal, the Commission's decision will be stayed until the Council completes its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. The Planning Commission's action taken by resolution approving the development applications is tentatively scheduled for September 21,1999. That action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission, is tentatively scheduled to be placed as a report item on the City Council's agenda at the Council's regular meeting on September 27,1999. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, afredi,/ 4r- Lola M. Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Douglas McHattie, Bolton Engineering Printed on Recycled Paper. July 21, 1999 Mrs. Lenora Thomas 66 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 • Ci1 ofi2 ff,.y JUL FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION Mr. Raymond Ferris 60 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 596A, Request for a Certificate of Compliance for Lot Line Adjustment to merge two legal lots and determine compliance with provisions of the Subdivision Map Act for property at 60 Eastfield Drive and an adjacent Vacant Lot (Lots 105-EF and 104-A-EF), Rolling Hills, CA, and ZONING CASE NO. 596B, Request for Site Plan Review to permit the construction of a stable with loft and adjacent corral and substantial additions to an existing single family residence that will require grading at 60 Eastfield Drive and an adjacent Vacant Lot (Lots 105-EF and 104-A-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mrs. Thomas and Mr. Ferris: We have arranged for the Planning Commission to conduct a field inspection of the subject property to view the proposed project on Tuesday. July 27. 1999. The Planning Commission's timetable is to meet at 5:30 PM at 60 Eastfield Drive. The owner and/or representative will be present to answer any questions regarding the proposal. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, tee, Lola M. Ungar Planning Director Printed on Recycled Paper. • City 0/ kik" _AA FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION July 21, 1999 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Mr. Robert T. Wolfenden 846 Watson Avenue, Suite "C" Wilmington, CA 90744 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 596A, Request for a Certificate of Compliance for Lot Line Adjustment to merge two legal lots and determine compliance with provisions of the Subdivision Map Act for property at 60 Fastfield Drive and an adjacent Vacant Lot (Lots 105-EF and 104-A-EF), Rolling Hills, CA, and ZONING CASE NO. 596B, Request for Site Plan Review to permit the construction of a stable with loft and adjacent corral and substantial additions to an existing single family residence that will require grading at 60 Eastfield Drive and an adjacent Vacant Lot (Lots 105-EF and 104-A-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. Wolfenden: We have arranged for the Planning Commission to conduct a field inspection of your property to view a silhouette of the proposed project on Tuesday, July 27, 1999. The Planning Commission's timetable is to meet at 5:30 PM at 60 Eastfield Drive. The site must be prepared according to the enclosed Silhouette Construction Guidelines and the following requirements: • Stake the existing common property line; • A full-size silhouette in conformance with the attached guidelines must be prepared for ALL STRUCTURES of the project showing the footprints, roof ridges and bearing w alls; • Stake the limits of the building pads; and • Show the height of the finished floor of the proposed building pads, areas to be graded and driveway grade elevations. The owner and/or representative should be present to answer any questions regarding the proposal. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Lola Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Douglas McHattie, Bolton Engineering Pnrited on Recycled Paper. • • Cry oRotting JUL NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1621 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SILHOUETTE CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES When required by the Planning Commission or City Council, a silhouette of proposed construction should be erected for the week preceding the designated Planning Commission or City Council meeting. Silhouettes should be constructed with 2" x 4" lumber. Printed boards are not acceptable. Bracing should be provided where possible. Wire, twine or other suitable material should be used to delineate roof ridges and eaves. Small pieces of cloth or flags should be attached to the wire or twine to aid i n the visualization of the proposed construction. The application may be delayed if inaccurate or incomplete silhouettes are constructed. If you have any further questions contact the Planning Department Staff at (310) 377-1521. III 4 • i 1 P . • 4 .• 4 P • 4. M M •t M • M !1 4 V r t SECTION PLAN 6)Pnnff:rf on Hecvr:1ed Paper July 8, 1999 Ci4f oll? INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 STATUS OF APPLICATION & NOTIFICATION OF MEETING (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Mr. Robert T. Wolfenden 846 Watson Avenue, Suite "C" Wilmington, CA 90744 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 596A, Request for a Certificate of Compliance for Lot Line Adjustment to merge two legal lots and determine compliance with provisions of the Subdivision Map Act for property at 60 Eastfield Drive and an adjacent Vacant Lot (Lots 105-EF and 104-A-EF), Rolling Hills, CA, and ZONING CASE NO. 596B, Request for Site Plan Review to permit the construction of a stable with loft and adjacent corral and substantial additions to an existing single family residence that will require grading at 60 Eastfield Drive and an adjacent Vacant Lot (Lots 105-EF and 104-A-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. Wolfenden: Pursuant to state law, the City's staff has completed a preliminary review of the application noted above and finds that the information submitted is: X Sufficiently complete as of the date indicated above to allow the application to be processed. Please note that the City may require further information in order to clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise supplement the application. If the City requires such additional information, it is strongly suggested that you supply that information promptly to avoid any delay in the processing of the application. Your application for Zoning Case Nos. 596A and 596B has been set for public hearing consideration by the Planning Commission at their meeting on Tuesday, July 20, 1999. The meeting will begin at 7:30 PM in the Council Chambers, Rolling Hills City Hall, Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills. You or your designated representative must attend to present your project and to answer questions. The staff report for this project will be available at the City Hall after 3:00 PM on Friday, July 16, 1999. We will forward a copy to you. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Since ly, Lola Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Douglas McHattie, Bolton Engineering Printed on Recycled Paper.