640, Enlarge garage with encroachme, Resolutions & Approval ConditionsAP 2212645
'-7
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-Recorde(s Office, requires that the form be notarized before recordation., . •T Recorders Use Only
AFFIDAVIT-0 i- ACCEP I-ANCE FORM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
ZONING CASE NO. 640
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:
3 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 3A-EF), ROLLING HILLS, CA.
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. 640
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
I (We) ce.of perjury that the foregoin
Si
4441
t e rpri d//lire N rp�`�,7_/
zrz
State
Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public.
Is rue and correct.
I /9 D1� t/n/
Name typed or printed
c /,) �.e, A/v,F_'rc/
Address
/PA/././vi /-24LLc , CA
City/State
XX
XX
State of California )
County of Los Angeles )
On / 'evnferaD,_1vol before me, Lo ua LIcii-a , A/a) -v
personally appeared /an 4- A- ar- lvn
personally known to me (or-pxeued-to-rae-erg-the-basis-of-satigfactory-evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s)-is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he1shetthey executed the same in-hisAlier/their authorized
capacity(ies) and that by-Ws/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the
person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
LETICIA LLAMAS
Commission # 1304002 1
Notary Public - California
Los Angeles County
Vvcorrrn Expires Mav 10, 2005p
Witnessy hand and offigiaJ,'eal.
Signature of Notary
1
— ° '"s! °nHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF
•
0I 2212.
E1461,4"A"
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-23
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT
ENCROACHMENT INTO THE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO
CONSTRUCT A GARAGE ADDITION AT AN EXISTING SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 3 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH IN
ZONING CASE NO. 640.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS.DOES HEREBY
FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Mr. and Mrs. Ian MacLeod duly filed an application with respect to
real property located at 3 Middleridge Lane South, Rolling Hills, (Lot 253-B-UR)
requesting a Variance to permit encroachment into the south side yard setback to
construct a garage addition at an existing single family residence in Zoning Case No.
640.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing
to consider this application on October 16, 2001. The applicants were notified of the
hearing in writing by first class mail. The applicant's representative was in attendance at
the hearing.
Section 3. The Planning Commission found that a field trip to view the
proposed project was not necessary due to the fact that a similar application for a side
yard encroachment and a Site Plan review for subject site was approved by the Planning
Commission on August 21, 2001 by Resolution No. 2001-16, and the Commission
conducted a visit to the site on July 18, 2001.
Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class
1 Exemption (State of CA Guidelines, Section 15301(e) and is therefore categorically
exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 5. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal
Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property
and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from
making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in
the same vicinity. Section 17.16.120 requires the side yard setback for every residential
parcel in the RA-S-2 Zone to be thirty-five (35) feet. The applicant is requesting to
encroach up to a maximum of 6 feet into the 35-foot south side yard setback to permit
the encroachment of 116 square feet of a 156 square foot addition. 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 the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other
property or class of use in the same zone because the lot is located above the main road
and is not visible from the street. The proposed encroachment will follow a line of an
Ping. Comm.
Reso. 2001-23 1
• 0102126145
existing 120 square foot encroachment into the south side yard setback and a recently
approved 120 square foot encroachment along the same building line and will not be
visible from the roadway.
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. The Variance is necessary because the
development and use of the subject property in a manner consistent with the shape of
the lot and development of other property on this street justifies this additional small
incursion into the side yard setback. There will not be any greater incursion into the side
yard setback than already exists.
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. Allowing the proposed incursion into the south side yard
setback will not allow any greater incursion than already exists. In addition,
development on this portion of the pad will allow a substantial portion of the more
environmentally significant rear portions of the lot to remain undeveloped.
Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 640 to permit the encroachment of a
156 square foot addition that will encroach a maximum of 6 feet into the thirty-five (35')
south side yard setback, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this
application, dated October 9, 2001 and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A,
subject to the conditions specified in Section 7 of this Resolution.
Section 7. The Variance to the side yard setback approved in Section 5 of this
Resolution is subject to the following conditions:
A. The Variance approval shall expire within one year from the effective date
of approval as defined in Section 17.38.070(A), unless construction on the applicable
portions of the structure have commenced within that time period.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variances and Site Plan Review
approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, the approval shall be suspended
and the privileges granted thereunder shall be subject to revocation; provided that the
applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for
a.period of thirty (30) days and has been provided additional notice and a hearing prior
to the revocation of the Permit.
C. All requirements of the. Buildings Code of the City of Rolling Hills and the
Rolling Hills Zoning Ordinance 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, dated October 9, 2001, except as otherwise
provided in these conditions.
Ping. Comm.
Reso. 2001-23
2
• 01 2212645
E. There shall be no grading for this project. The proposed retaining wall
along the perimeter of the building pad in the front and side yard areas of the site shall
be constructed without requiring any additional grading than what was approved
previously and memorialized in Resolution No. 2001-16 and shall not exceed 35-inches
in height at any point. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 38.3%.
F. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to the maximum extent
feasible, the existing mature trees and shrubs and the natural landscape screening
surrounding the building pad and driveway. The applicant is encouraged to retain the
existing native vegetation, to the maximum extent feasible, in the area of the relocated
driveway and to replant with like vegetation, should the existing vegetation be removed.
G. 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.
H. Residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 30.3%. The structural
lot coverage shall not exceed 5.6% of the net lot area and the total structural lot coverage
(including all structures and paved areas) shall not exceed 20.4% of the net lot area.
I. 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.
J. 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.
K. All parking, during and after construction, shall take place on the project
site.
L. 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.
M. 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.
Ping. Comm.
Reso. 2001-23
3
•
• 01 2212645
N. 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 and stormwater pollution prevention.
O. An Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010
of the 1998 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.
P. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final building plan to the County of
Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology,
soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the
Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff
for their review.
Q. 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.
R. All utility lines shall be placed underground.
S. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code, any modifications to this approval, which would constitute additional
structural development, shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the
Planning Commission.
T. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of
the Variances and Site Plan approval, or the approvals shall not be effective.
U. All conditions of this Variance approval that apply must be complied with
prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles.
W. Except as herein specified, the provisions of Resolution No. 2001-16 shall
continue to be in full force and effect.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 24TH DAY F,QCTOBER, 2001.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
Ping. Comm.
Reso. 2001-23
� 01 2212645
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2001-23 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT
ENCROACHMENT INTO THE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO
CONSTRUCT A GARAGE ADDITION AT AN EXISTING SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 3 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH IN
ZONING CASE NO. 640.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on October
24, 2001 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer, Witte and
Chairman Roberts.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance withthe laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices.
Ping. Comm.
Reso. 2001-23
DE TY CITY CLERK
5
;1-"A
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-16
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT
ENCROACHMENT INTO THE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO
CONSTRUCT A RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, GRANTING A.
VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A POOL IN THE
FRONT YARD AREA AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW
APPROVAL FOR GRADING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF
SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
LOCATED AT 3 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH IN ZONING CASE
NO. 634. (MACLEOD).
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Mr. and Mrs. Ian MacLeod duly filed applications. with respect to
real property located at 3 Middleridge Lane South, Rolling Hills, (Lot 253-B-UR)
requesting a Variance to permit encroachment into the south side yard setback to
construct a residential addition, a Variance to permit construction of a pool in the front
yard area, and Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial additions and grading
at an existing single family residence in Zoning Case No. 634.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings
to consider these applications on June 16, 2001, July 17, 2001 and at a field trip on June
28, 2001. The applicants were notified of the hearings in writing by first class mail. The
applicants were in attendance at the hearings.
Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class
1 Exemption (State of CA Guidelines, Section 15301(e). and is therefore categorically
exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 4. 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 17.16.120 requires the side yard setback for every residential
parcel in the RA-S-2 Zone to be thirty-five (35) feet. The applicant is requesting to
encroach up to a maximum of 6 feet into the 35-foot south side yard setback to permit
the. encroachment_ of a 120 square foot addition. 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 the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other
property or class of use in the same zone because the lot is located above the main road
and is not visible from the street. The proposed encroachment will follow a line of an
Ping. Comm.
Reso. 2001-16
1
existing 120 square foot encroachment into the south side yard setback and will not be
visible from the roadway.
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. The Variance is necessary because the
development and use of the subject property in a manner consistent with the shape of
the lot and development of other property on this street justifies this additional small
incursion into the side yard setback. There will not be any greater incursion into the side
yard setback than already exists.
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. Allowing the proposed incursion into the south side yard
setback will not allow any greater incursion than already exists. In addition,
development on this portion of the pad will allow a substantial portion of the more
environmentally significant rear portions of the lot to remain undeveloped.
Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 634 to permit the encroachment of a
120 square foot addition that will encroach a maximum of 6 feet into the thirty-five (35')
south side yard setback, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this
application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions
specified in Section 10 of this Resolution.
Section 6. The Zoning Ordinance prohibits the placement of accessory
structures in the front yard. The applicants are requesting Variance to construct a pool
that will be located in the front yard. 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 the property that do not apply generally to the other property or class of
use in the same zone. The lot topography and configuration, together with the existing
development on the lot creates a difficulty in placing the proposed pool elsewhere on the
property.
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. The Variance is necessary because the
existing terrain and development on the lot creates a difficulty in placing the pool
elsewhere. A greater amount of grading would be required in order to place the pool in
the side or the rear of the residence. The pool will be at least 65-70 feet from the required
front yard setback line, and the residence is located approximately 110 feet from the
front yard setback line.
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. The pool will not be visible from other properties and the
Ping. Comm.
Reso. 2001-16
2
proposed location will mitigate the necessity for large amount of grading on the hillside.
Further, a substantial portion of the lot will remain undeveloped.
Section 7 Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 634 to permit a pool to be located in
the front yard, subject to the conditions specified in Section 10 of this Resolution. .
Section 8 Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for
site plan review and approval before any building or structure may be constructed or
any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which
involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by 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, 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 with the Variance approved in Section 5 of
this Resolution. The lot has a net square foot area of 133,699 square feet. The applicants
propose a 1,303 square feet of additions, (of which 120 square feet would encroach into
the south side yard setback), to an existing 3,887 square foot residence; a 638 square foot
addition to an existing 400 square foot garage; a 680 square foot pool; a service yard and
a future 450 square foot stable, for a total of 7,358 square feet of structures, which
constitute 5.5% of the net lot area, which is within the maximum 20% structural lot
coverage requirement. The proposed project is located on a relatively large lot with most
of the proposed structures located above the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the
development.
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 portion of the lot where the proposed additions will take place
is relatively flat, however grading will be required for the location of the pool and the
relocation of the existing driveway. The relocation of a portion of the existing driveway
is necessary to allow access to the garage addition. Most of the mature trees will not be
removed.
C. 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.
D. 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. Although
Ping. Comm.
Reso. 2001-16
3
the project will have residential building pad coverage of 30.5%, the project will be
located on a relatively large lot where significant portions of the lot will be left
undeveloped. The total lot coverage of the net lot area will be 20.3%, which is within the
35% total lot coverage requirement.
E. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and
mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in
Paragraphs A and C, the lot coverage maximums will not be exceeded and the proposed
project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood. The ratio of the proposed
structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity.
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 use the existing driveway. The entrance to the garages is via a long driveway
and not visible from the roadway.
G. The project conforms with the requirement of the California Environmental
Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review.
Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 634 for a
proposed residential development as indicated on the development plan incorporated
herein as Exhibit A, and subject to the conditions contained in Section 10.
Section 10. The Variance to the side yard setback approved in Section 5, the
Variance approval, for the front yard area encroachment with a pool, in Section 7, and
the Site Plan Review approved in Section 9 of this Resolution are subject to the following
conditions:
A. The Variances and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within one year
from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070(A) and 17.46.080(A),
unless construction on the applicable portions of the structure have commenced within
that time period.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variances and Site Plan Review
approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, the approval shall be suspended
and the privileges granted thereunder shall be subject to revocation; provided that the
applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for
a period of thirty (30) days and has been provided additional notice and a hearing prior
to the revocation of the Permit.
C. All requirements of the Buildings Code of the City of Rolling Hills and the
Rolling Hills Zoning"Ordinance must be complied withunless 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, except as otherwise provided in these conditions.
Ping. Comm.
Reso. 2001-16
4
E. Grading for the proposed project shall not exceed 2,330 cubic yards of cut
and 2,330 cubic yards of fill and shall be balanced on site. Cut and fill slopes shall not
exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed
38.3%.
F. Landscaping shall be designed so. as not to obstruct views of neighboring
properties but to obscure structures. Tall trees such as Eucalyptus and Sequoia shall not
be planted.
G. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to the maximum extent
feasible, the existing mature trees and shrubs and the natural landscape screening
surrounding the building pad and driveway. The applicant is encouraged to retain the
existing native vegetation, to the maximum extent feasible, in the area of the relocated
driveway and to replant with like vegetation, should the existing vegetation be removed.
H. 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_ con1litions 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.
I. Residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 30.5% and the
structural net lot coverage (including all structures and paved areas) shall not exceed
20.3%.
J. 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.
K. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule
and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours
of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical
equipment noise is permitted so as not to interfere with the quiet residential
environment of the City of Rolling Hills.
L. All parking, during and after construction, shall take place on the project
site.
M. 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.
N. 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.
Ping. Comm.
Reso. 2001-16
5
• •
O. 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 and stormwater pollution prevention.
P. An Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010
of the 1998 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.
Q. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final building plan to the County of
Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology,
soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the
Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff
for their review.
R. 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.
S. All utility lines shall be placed underground.
T. The proposed retaining walls along the new portion of the driveway shall
not exceed 4 feet in height.
U. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code, any modifications to this approval, which would constitute additional
structural development, shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the
Planning Commission.
V. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of
the Variances and Site Plan approval, or the approvals shall not be effective.
W. All conditions of these Variances and Site Plan approvals that apply 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 21S -D Q AL UST 21, 2001.
ATTEST:
ry,r,t k.P P. I�._,
Ping. Comm.
Reso.2001-16 •
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
6
41 •
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2001-16 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT
ENCROACHMENT INTO THE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO
CONSTRUCT A RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, GRANTING A
VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A POOL IN THE
FRONT YARD AREA AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW
APPROVAL FOR GRADING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF
SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
LOCATED AT 3 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH IN ZONING CASE
NO. 634.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on August
21, 2001 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.
Ping. Comm.
Reso. 2001-16
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
7