Loading...
847, Demo and reconstruction of 361, Staff Reports• • st Ra INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No: 4B Mtg. Date: 2/10/14 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR THROUGH: RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE, AND VARIANCES TO ENCROACH WITH A PORTION OF THE RESIDENCE INTO THE REAR SETBACK WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING ENCROACHMENT AND TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE SETBACK WITH THE SET ASIDE AREA FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 847, AT 2 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, LOT 168-RH, (JOHNSON). THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). REQUEST AND PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 1. It is recommended that the City Council receive and file this report or provide other direction to staff. 2. The applicant, Mr. Kenneth Johnson is requesting a Site Plan Review for a new residence and a Variance to encroach with 361 square feet into the rear setback within the footprint of the existing house encroachment; and Variance to encroach into the side setback with a set aside area for a future stable and corral. The proposed residence would be 4,980 square feet with 980 square foot garage. The existing residence would be demolished. 3. The Planning Commission unanimously approved the project and adopted the enclosed Resolution, finding that the project is compatible with the area and location, that it minimizes grading and takes advantage of the existing building pad, that it is not obtrusive or massive and that the existing encroachment is not visible from other properties or the street; that given the configuration of the lot the Variances are not capricious, and that the expansive open space and sloping topography allow said • • construction without negatively impacting the lot or adjacent owners. In addition, the adjacent property owners were present at all meetings and provided input as to the location of the future stable and corral and had no objections to the residence encroachment, (correspondence enclosed). Attached is a Resolution with standard findings and facts, including: • That the future stable set aside be screened from the adjacent property as part of the house construction and the area be screened at all times • If trees or shrubs are planted, their height shall not at any time exceed the ridgeline of the roof of the residence and not be in hedge like configuration • That no basement or "story" shall be permitted in the area of encroachment BACKGROUND 4. Originally, the applicant proposed to add over 2,100 square foot to the existing residence and retain the encroachment condition with several walls. The Planning Commission reviewed this case at three public hearings and in the field and suggested that the applicant revise the project and request a Variance to reconstruct the residence within the existing encroachment into the rear setback and an out of grade condition for a small portion of the corner of the residence, rather than try to retain that portion of the house. The existing house was built in 1948, and both staff and the Planning Commission recognized that it would be difficult to retain a portion of the house, just so that a Variance would not have to be requested during the Planning Commission review process. Working with the adjacent neighbors and with the concurrence of the applicant, the Planning Commission suggested that the applicant move the stable and corral set aside further southeast, which also requires a Variance. 5. The new residence will utilize the existing building pad. The driveway is proposed to be widened by few feet but the apron will remain. A trash enclosure area will be added. The grading for the project will consist of a total of 144 cubic yards of cut and fill and will be balanced on site. The disturbed lot area is 33.7% and the proposed disturbance will be 27,750 square feet or 39.5% (40% max. permitted). This includes disturbance for the future stable, corral and access. 6. The current encroachment and configuration of the rear wall will be the same with the new construction. No basement is proposed or would be allowed in that portion of the house. The out of grade portion of the residence would not bet considered a "story" and is proposed to be used for storage of mechanical equipment. 7. Utility lines to the residence will be placed underground. 8. The residential building pad is proposed at 21,150 square feet and will have coverage of 6,067 square feet or 28.7%. The future stable pad will be 2,955 square feet (portion not in setback) and will have coverage of 15.2%. ZC NO. 848 • • 9. The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 6,909 square feet or 9.9%, (20% max. permitted); and the total lot coverage proposed will be 15,012 square feet or 21.4%, (35% max. permitted). 10. Rolling Hills Community Association approval is required. 11. When reviewing a development application the Planning Commission considers whether the proposed project meets the criteria for a Site Plan Review and Variances listed below. 12. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ZC NO. 847 NEARBY PROPERTIES (For information only) Address House size in sq.ft. Lot Area (excl. (built/add or roadway easements) remodel) 1 Middleridge N. 2,100 (1953) 3.2 6 Middleridge N *5,513(1953/2002) 2.85 4 Middleridge S. *3,240 (1958/1990) 1.44 6 Middleridge S. *3,880 (1952/1980) 3.46 1 Middleridge S. 4,541 (1954/61) 5.75 AVERAGE 3,855 3.34 Existing 2,830 1.88 (1948/55) 4,980 Proposed NOTE: The above do not include garages and other accessory structures. SOURCES: Assessors' records * City records ZC NO. 848 • ZONING CASE NO. 847 REVISED SITE PLAN REVIEW EXISTING RA-S- 2 ZONE SETBACKS SINGLE. FAMILY Front: 50 ft. from front easement RESIDENCE line Side: 35 ft. from side property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear property line STRUCTURES Residence (Site Plan Review required for Garage grading, new structures and if Stable size of house increases by more Trellis than 999 sq.ft. in a 36-month Service yard period). Fountain STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (35% maximum) BUILDING PADS (30% guideline) Residential Future Stable GRADING Site Plan Review required if excavation and/or fill or combination thereof that is more than 3 feet in depth and covers more than 2,000 sq.ft.) must be balanced on site. DISTURBED AREA (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded slopes, and any non - graded area where impervious surfaces exist. Exceptions apply.) STABLE (min. 450 SQ.FT. N/A & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS N/A Existing driveway N/ A N/A TOTAL 5.1% 15.2% 16.5% N/A 2830 sq.ft. 460 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 200 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 11 sq.ft. 3,597 sq.ft. PROPOSED NEW RESIDENCE, DEMOLISH EXISTING Residence Garage Stable -future Service yard. Trellis BBQ Fountain TOTAL 4980 sq.ft. 980 sq.ft. 450 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 388 sq.ft. 15 sq.ft. 11 sq.ft. 6,920 sq.ft 9.9% (w/allowances) of 70,015 sq.ft. net lot area 21.4% of 70,015 sq.ft. net lot area 28.7% on 21,150 sq.ft. pad 15.2% on 2,955 sq.ft. pad 144 c.y. total 33.7% 27,650 sq.ft. or 39.5% including future stable and corral Future -set aside -requires variance Future from Middleridge Existing driveway approach Planning Commission condition Planning Commission condition SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 17.46.010 Purpose. The site plan review process is established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects in the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is ZC NO. 848 • • consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. 17.46.050 Required findings. A. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review application. B. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal, unless the following findings can be made: 1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; 2. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; 3. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; 4. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls); 5. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; 6. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 7. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas; 8. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 9. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. 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 whichis 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; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. ZC NO. 848 • • To: The Planning Commission Fr: Ralph (Graduate Engineer) and Nancy Schmoller Residence: 4 Middleridge Lane South -property contiguous to parcel under discussion Re. Zoning Case No. 847 Since we have opened up the discussion of Variances to encroach on setbacks, easements, I respectfully submit a scenario considering equal opportunity giving. The discussion suggested a 10 foot encroachment on a 35 foot side setback between two residences. My suggestion is to encroach at the least the same amount on a larger rear setback; thus improving all considerations such as poisonous plants, prevailing winds, and proximity to swimming pools? Sincerely Yours D1(0?) RECEIVED JAN L 1 • City of Rolling Hills By • • To: The Planning Commission Fr: Ralph (Graduate Engineer) and Nancy Schmoller Residence: 4 Middleridge Lane South -property contiguous to parcel under discussion Zoning Case No. 847 Just another quick note, as an extension to our discussion. We have lived in our residence since 1975, and as a consequence, are able to bring history to the discussion. Prevailing winds are consistent throughout the seasons. ( Please see attachments ) We have had horses in the past. The stable was near our mailbox on Middleridge Lane South. If we missed correct Stable Management by just a few hours, prevailing winds always from the West would make the residence, unpleasant. Pursuant to the Planning Commission field visit to the site --- problems regarding prevailing winds and poisonous plantings in the vicinity are solved by moving the barn east and closer to Middleridge Lane. Sincerely Yours RECE WED cg o Roiiin NiUs By Pe, ��W ;jn PORTERVILLE MUNI AP, CA (KPT 1 E E ESE NW NW NW NW S S ESE E E 1 NW RAMONA AIRPORT, CA (KRNM). 1 W W W W W W W W W W WNW E 1 W RED BLUFF AP, CA (KRBL). WI 1 NNW SSE N NNW SSE N S S NNW NNW NNW NNW 1 NNW REDDING AIRPORT, CA (KRDD). 1 NNNNNNS SNNNN 1 N RIVERSIDE MUNI AP, CA (KRAL) 1 WNW WNW WNW W WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW N 1 WNW RIVERSIDE -MARCH AFB, CA (KRI 1 NW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW NW 1 WNW SACRAMENTO EXECUTIVE AP, CA 1 SE SSE S SSW S S S S S S SSE SSE I S SACRAMENTO INT'L AP, CA (KSM 1 SSE SSE S S S S S S S S NW SSE 1 S SACRAMENTO-MATHER AP, CA (KM 1 SE SE SE S S S S S S SE SE SE 1 S SALINAS MUNI AP, CA (KSNS). 1 SE SE W W W W WNW WNW WNW WNW SE SE 1 W SAN CARLOS AP, CA (KSQL) . W 1 N W WWWWWWNNNN 1 W SAN DIEGO-BROWN FIELD, CA (K I WWWWWWWWWWW SE 1 W SAN DIEGO-GILLESPIE FIELD, C 1 WWWWWWWWWWWW 1 W SAN DIEGO-LINDBERGH FIELD, C 1 WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW 1 WNW W1N DIEGO-MONTGOMERY FIELD, 1 W W W W WSW WSW WSW WSW WNW W W W 1 W N DIEGO—NORTH ISLAND NAS, 1 NW W WWWW W NW NW NW NW NW 1 W SAN FRANCISCO INT'L'AP, CA ( 1 WWWWWWWWWWWW I W SAN JOSE INT'L AP, CA (KSJC) 1 SSE SSE NNW NNW NNW NNW NW NNW NW NW NW SE 1 NNW SAN JOSE-REID HILLVIEW AP, C 1 SE NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW 1 NW SAN LUIS OBISPO AP, CA (KSBP 1 NW NW NW NW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW NW NW 1 WNW SAN NICHOLAS ISLAND WOLF, CA 1 WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW NW WNW NW WNW WNW NW NW 1 WNW SANDBURG, CA (KSDB). WIND R 1 NE S NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NE NE 1 NW SANTA ANA-JOHN WAYNE AP, CA 1 S S S S S SSW SSW SSW SW SW SW S 1 SSW SANTA BARBARA AP, CA (KSBA). 1 WSW W WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW 1 WSW SANTA MARIA AP, CA (KSMX). 1 WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW 1 WNW SANTA MONICA AIRPORT, CA (KS 1 SW SW SW SW SW SW SW SW SW SW SW N 1 SW SANTA ROSA AIRPORT, CA (KSTS 1 S SE S S S S S S S S S SE 1 S SISKIYOU COUNTY AP-MONTAGUE, 1 S S N N N N N N_ N N S S 1 N SOUTH LAKE TAHOE AP, CA (KTV 1 S S S S S SSW S S S S S S 1 S STOCKTON AIRPORT, CA (KSCK). 1 SE SE WWWWWWWWW SE 1 W •ERMAL AIRPORT, CA (KTRM). 1 N N NNW NNW NW NW NW NW NNW NNW NW NW 1 NW 'ORRANCE AIRPORT,_ CA (KTOA) . 1 W W W W W W WNW WNW W W W W 1 W TRAVIS AFB-FAIRFIELD, CA (KS 1 N WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW N N 1 WSW TRUCKEE AIRPORT, CA (KIRK). 1 S S S SSW SW SSW SW SSW SSW N S S 1 S TUSTIN MCAS, CA (KNTK). WIN 1 WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW W 1 WSW TWENTYNINE PALMS EAF, CA (KN 1 • W W WNW WNW WNW NW W W W W WNW NW 1 WNW UKIAH AIRPORT, CA (KUKI). W 1 S SSE WNW WNW N N N N N W SSE SSE 1 N VACAVILLE AIRPORT, CA (KVCB) 1 NNW S SSW SSW SSW SSW S SSW SSW SSW SSW NNW 1 SSW VAN NUYS AP, CA (KVNY). WIN 1 N N SE SE ESE ESE ESE ESE ESE ESE N N 1 ESE VISALIA AIRPORT, CA (KVIS). 1 SE SE NW NW NW NW NW WNW NW NW ESE ESE 1 NW WATSONVILLE MUNI AP, CA (KWV 1 N NNW W W W SW W SW WSW W NNW NNW I W mii*r,wrcc.dri.eduihtmlfiles/westwinddir.html 16 WORLD • Pressure, Winds / Seasonal Rainfall COMPARATIVE PRESSURE SCALE 1035 1032 1029 1026 - 1023 1020 - 1011 • 1014 - 1011 - 1008 - 1005- 1002 - 999 - 30.5 - 30.3 - 30.2 - 30.1 • 30.0 -29.9 - 29.8 - 29.7 - 29.6 - 29.5 in 996 - 29,4 ur Co 9y3- tu 29.3 U 2 _ S I I. 20 017'• g)4 •�f� •. 20 e0 60 • kUGH• - Coonishc by Rand McN.1Iy 6. Co. Made in U.S.A.20 A 4-2.2 LOW HIGH PRESSURES. PRESSURES 990 mb. 1014 _ 996 1020 1002 , 1026 1008 ' 1032 1014 1038 Isobars on map at intervals of 3 millibars -tom?- - ,� ..n% 5:_a • -•KF ��-47 %, / P ,;-rY 1-1-:) \ \ J �G%L ot{ .if W rti, _ _ �. .•�_ 1 \�A.. C'c3 •r LOW "'4"4"Westerl — (-+ ..—. — ,F - ' —i ICJ 4 1020; 017' 130 00 20 l lac' • -- -�140 -101 JANUARY: PRESSURE AND PREDOMINANT WINDS Arrows fly with the wind. Wind di- rection determined by the quarter of the compass having highest wind frequency. Length of arrow indicates the steadi• ness of the wind. Thickness of shaft indicates wind force. r l�l Arctic •• ' uU MILLER CYLINDRICAL PROJECTION Courtesy of the American Geographical Society. DOMINANT WIND FORCES Beaufort Scale Miles per hour (approx) 0-3 •- 0-10 3-4 -- — 10-15 4-5M 15-25 Over 53,4 Over 25 Couydeln byit.nd McNally &Col Made In U.S.A.As t.22.2-2 60 • 1 • • • • • — • •15o1-6- • r,. . * -f ccie, • I ! Crk - . _ • • _ "7. 4.: , • *r•'-•-• - "t- • •Lr e • Pt -3 J • N" , • • : •,•;!! ' JJ 1! 44.0. JULY : PRESSURE AND PREDOMINANT WINDS ....!••••-•6" -I • 'el,'•••1s67 D. 11 .•1 ••••••• • uT 101 60 COMPARATIVE PRESSURE SCALE ! 40 I -1,4171-1 20 '1014 eS —1011 • -- - - - • ' —101.1 • ! . 1 / 'A 1035 - 1032 - - 776 - 774 1029 - - 772 1026 - 1023 - 1020 - 1017 - 1014 - 1011 - 1008 - 1005 - 1002 - 999 - -mil 40 966 - • 1.0 • J a3993- M ' ggo - ' MILLER CYLINDRICAL PROJECTION courtesy of the American Geographical Society. DOMINANT WIND FORCES Beaufort Scale 0-3 • L. _ m "••$•s>.• . • ")•-•••• • •-• •- • !• • r"--"` • v Miles per hour (approx) • 0-10 - 10-15 ----- 15-25 0er 25 . . C49..ne.h1 it Rana MVMally C.,. 1.1.04 In 60 - 770 - 768 - 766 - 764 - 762 - 760 - 758 - 756. - 754 - 752 - 750 - 748 ,62 - 2 - 744 -,I • • Forwarded Message From: Ralph Schmoller <ralphschmo@verizon.net> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:12:58 -0800 To: Ewa Nikodem <enikodem@citvofrh.net>, Nancy Schmoller <nischmo@verizon.net>, <ralphschmo@verizon.net> Subject: Fwd: Zoning Case No. 847 RECE l` �/[E D NOV 1 4 2013 City of Rolling Hills B" Original -recipient: rfc822„ralphschmo@verizon.net Ewa,Thank you for routing this appropriately. In reviewing the subject application and plans, on Nov.12,2013, with Yolanta Schwartz -Planning Director,the issue of the property line entered into the discussion. It was disclosed that the property line has been in dispute since 1977.No action was taken in that Chuck and Marion Aylesbury were good friends; --- No building was planned . Now that building is being considered, it is time that this issue was addressed thus reducing any future problems. As a side note, my family, friends and neighbors found it curious to have a stable and corral; Upwind from a residence.Just an observation. Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. Sincerely yours; Ralph and Nancy Schmoller • THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK • • RESOLUTION NO. 2014-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE, AND VARIANCES TO ENCROACH WITH A PORTION OF THE RESIDENCE INTO THE REAR SETBACK WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING ENCROACHMENT AND TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE SETBACK WITH THE SET ASIDE AREA FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 847, AT 2 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, LOT 168-RH, (JOHNSON). THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT PURSUANT TO 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. Application was duly filed by Mr. Kenneth Johnson with respect to real property located at 2 Middleridge Lane South (Lot 168-RH) requesting a Site Plan Review and a Variance to demolish existing residence and construct a new residence, a portion of which would encroach into the rear setback within the footprint of the existing house encroachment and Variance to encroach into the side setback with a set aside area for a future stable and corral. The proposed residence would be 4,980 square feet with 980 square foot garage. The rear yard encroachment would be 361 square feet. Section 2 The property is zoned RAS-2 and is located on the corner of Middleridge Lane North and Middleridge Lane South. Not including the roadway easements, the lot is 1.88 acres. For development purposes the net lot area of the lot is 70,015 square feet or 1.6 acres. Records show that the house and garage were constructed in 1948 and the house was remodeled in 1955. The lot is irregular in shape as it narrows where the two streets converge. The lot is encumbered by wide easements and front and rear setbacks. Section 3. The property is developed with a 2,830 square foot single family residence, 460 square foot garage, a fountain and 200 square foot attached trellis. 361 square feet of the existing residence encroaches into the rear yard setback and is proposed to be reconstructed within that setback. Section 4. An area for a future stable and corral is proposed to the south of the residence, 25-feet from the south property line, with future access from Middleridge Lane South. This area is relatively flat and minimal grading will be required. A Variance is requested to encroach 10-feet into the required 35-foot side setback with the set aside area. Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 1 Section 5. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings on the subject application on November 19, 2013, December 17, 2013 and in the field on December 17, 2013. The applicant was notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City staff and the Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The applicant and applicant's representative were in attendance at the hearings. Adjacent property owners expressed concerns with the location of the set aside for the stable and requested that it be moved. Based on the neighbors' request and review of the area by the Planning Commission, the Commission is hereby granting the Variance to move the stable and corral area into the side setback Section 6. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a categorical exemption from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 7. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Code permit approval of a variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when, due to exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable' to other similar properties in the same , zone, strict application of the Code would deny the property owner substantial property rights enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The applicant seeks a variance from the requirement that side yard setbacks be free of structures and wishes to set aside an area for a future stable and corral that would encroach a maximum 10 feet into the 35 foot side yard setback. 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 existing lot is irregular in shape and has two very long frontages along Middleridge Lane South and Middleridge Lane North, and less than average depth. The set aside will be located further south and east than originally proposed to allow open space near the front of the lot, be further away from the neighbors' pool and entertaining areas, and meet the distance requirement between the residence and the set aside area. The topography of the lot, the shape of the lot with wide and long front and rear setbacks, due to the convergence of two streets at the northern tip of the property, together with the fact that the stable and corral pad is mostly existing and very limited grading would be required, if constructed, create difficulty in constructing a stable and corral 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 because due to the existing graded Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 • • pad, irregular lot configuration it would be a hardship to locate the stable in the rear. The expansive open space in the side yard comfortably supports a stable. The limited depth of the property and slopes in the rear places a hardship on locating the stable in the rear. The proposed stable is to be located on an already graded area, therefore preserving the natural terrain of the remaining of the property. The proposed location was recommended by the neighbors and concurred by the Planning Commission. 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 would not affect any neighbor's views and therefore property value and would be screened from the street. Development of the stable in the front yard setback will allow substantial portion of the rear of the lot to remain undeveloped. D. The variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. E. The variance request is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and will uphold the City's goals to protect and promote construction of equestrian facilities. Section 8. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Code permit approval of a variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when, due to exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone, strict application of the Code would deny the property owner substantial property rights enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The applicant seeks a variance from the requirement that rear yard setbacks be free of structures and wishes to encroach with a portion of the reconstructed residence into the rear setback. 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 existing lot is irregular in shape and has two very long frontages along Middleridge Lane South and Middleridge Lane North, and less than average depth towards the northern portion of the lot where the two streets converge. The existing residence encroaches 361 square feet into the rear setback and the applicant wishes to encroach the same amount and in the same footprint with the new residence. The topography of the lot, the shape of the lot with wide and long front and rear setbacks, due to the convergence of two streets at the northern tip of the property create difficulty in constructing the house within the required rear setback. The applicant will utilize the same footprint as the Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 3 existing house, plus added square footage, and therefore very limited grading is required. 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 graded area and availability of the building pad, irregular lot configuration it would be a hardship to locate the house elsewhere on the lot. The shape and configuration of the house with the minimal encroachment into the rear setback comfortably supports the encroachment. The limited depth of the property and slopes in the rear places a hardship on locating it elsewhere. The proposed encroachment is to be located on an already graded area, therefore preserving the natural terrain of the remaining of the property. 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 the encroachment is already existing and will not be greater, the neighbors have not objected to the encroachment in the past and it would not affect any neighbor's views and therefore property value and would be screened from the street. Development of the encroachment will allow substantial portion of the rear of the lot to remain undeveloped. D. The variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. E. The variance request is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and will uphold the City's goals of low density, low profile developments. Section 9. 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 new 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 tothe size of the building or structure by not more than 999 square feet in any thirty-six (36) month period. With respect to the Site Plan Review application requesting grading and construction of a new residence, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low • profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The lot size Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 • • is adequate to accommodate the new residence and not look overdeveloped. The proposed residence is modest insize as compared with the newer homes on similar lots. The project conforms to Zoning Code lot coverage requirements. The net lot area of the lot is 70,015 square feet The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 9.9%, which includes all the structures, with allowance for permitted deductions, (20% max. permitted); and the total lot coverage proposed, including the future 450 square foot stable would be 21.4%, (35% max. permitted). The disturbed area of the lot is proposed at 39.5%, which includes disturbance for a future stable and corral. B. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structure will not cause the lot to look overdeveloped and would be located in the same footprint as the existing residence, with additional square footage in an already disturbed area. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space on the property. The rear of the lot is steep and the natural topography of the sloped areas will remain. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the topography of the lot have been considered, and the construction of the new house will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed structure will be constructed on a portion of the lot which is least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped with trees and shrubs, is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the proposed structures will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will utilize the existing building pad. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. The proposed house is not excessive for the size of the lot. The project takes advantage of the existing building pad and eliminates additional grading, therefore preserving the natural terrain in the rear and front of the lot. D. The development plan incorporates existing trees and is screened from other properties, which will be preserved. The project will be further screened from the adjacent property owner to the south. E. The development plan follows to the maximum extent practicable contours of the site to minimize grading and retain the natural drainage courses. The project utilizes the existing building pad area, and minimal grading is required. F. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the existing driveway will be utilized and a larger than existing garage will be constructed to house more cars. Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 G. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is exempt. Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves Zoning Case No. 847 a Site Plan Review for a new residence and Variances to encroach with a portion of the residence into the rear setback and to encroach with the stable and corral set aside area into the side setback subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan and Variance approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.46.070 and 17.38.080, unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of this section. B. It is declared and made a condition of this 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 this 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 dated December 30, 2013 except as otherwise provided in these conditions. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the approved development plan. All conditions of the Variances and SPR approvals, herein as applicable, shall be incorporated into the building permit working drawings and complied with prior to issuance of a building permit from the building department. E. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to the Building and Safety Department for issuance of building permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission. The conditions of this approval shall be printed on the plans. F. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and all of the conditions set forth therein and the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 Further, the person obtaining a building and/ or grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. G. Structural lot coverage of the lot shall not exceed 6,909 square feet or 9.9% of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (20% maximum). The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork shall not exceed 15,012 square feet or 21.4%, of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (35% max). H. Grading for this project shall consist of 144 cubic yards of cut and 144 cubic yards of fill, mostly for the widened driveway. The disturbed area of the lot, including the future stable and corral shall not exceed 39.5%. I. The set aside for stable and corral may encroach no more than 10 feet into the side yard setback. J. The residential building pad shall be 21,150 square feet and will have coverage of 28.7%. K. The new residence may encroach 361 square feet into the rear setback, within the same footprint as the existing residence. No basement or "story" may be constructed under the area of encroachment. Mechanical equipment may be stored in that space. L. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Lighting Ordinance of the City of Rolling Hills (RHMC 17.16.190 E), pertaining to lighting on said property, roofing and material requirements of properties in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. M. All utility lines to the residence shall be placed underground, subject to all applicable standards and requirements. N. A drainage plan, if required by the Building Department shall be prepared and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of a construction permit. Such plan shall be subject to County Code requirements. O. A landscaping plan shall be submitted to the City in conformance with Fire Department Fuel Modification requirements. Prior to finaling the project, trees and shrubs shall be planted to screen the project from the neighbors, including the area of the future stable and corral. The landscaping shall not form a hedge like screen but be offset. The height of the trees and shrubs shall not at any time exceed the ridgeline of the roof of the structures. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 • • feasible, plants that are native to the area and are consistent with the rural character of the community. If landscaping of 5,000 square foot area or greater is introduced or redevelop, the landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. P. Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and clear of any improvements including, but not be limited to fences -including construction fences, any hardscape, driveways, landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, except as otherwise approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association. Q. 50% of any construction materials must be recycled or diverted from landfills. The hauler of the materials shall obtain City's Construction and Demolition permit for waste hauling prior to start of work. R. 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. S. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site and, if necessary, any overflow parking shall take place within nearby roadway easements. T. 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) requirements related to solid waste, drainage and storm water drainage facilities management and to the City's Low Impact development Ordinance (LID). U. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this permit pursuant to Zoning Ordinance, or the approval shall not be effective. V. Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 I PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 21st DAY OF JANUARY 2014. E'RAD CHJ LF, HAII)IAN ATTEST: , b&4LL1Lk HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 9 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2014-02 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE, AND VARIANCES TO ENCROACH WITH A PORTION OF THE RESIDENCE INTO THE REAR SETBACK WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING ENCROACHMENT AND TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE SETBACK WITH THE SET ASIDE AREA FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 847, AT 2 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, LOT 168-RH, (JOHNSON). THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). was approved and adopted at regular meeting of the Planning Commission on January 21, 2014 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Gray, Kirkpatrick, Mirsch, Smith and Chairman Chelf. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices Waco, HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 10 • ef. Ra <if gad INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No: 7A Mtg. Date: 01-21-14 TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: ZONING CASE NO. 847 2 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, (LOT 168-RH) RA-S-2, 1.88 ACRES (EXCL. ROADWAY EASEMENT) MR. KEN JOHNSON BOLTON ENGINEERING NOVEMBER 7, 2013 PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION, REQUEST AND RECOMMENDATION 1. The Planning Commission reviewed this case at two public hearings and in the field on December 17, 2013 and suggested that the applicant revise the project to request a variance to reconstruct the residence within the existing encroachment into the rear setback, rather than try to retain that portion of the house and move the stable and corral set aside further south east, which also requires a variance. The house was built in 1945 and it would be difficult to retain a portion of the house. 2. At the regular meeting of the Planning Commission on December 17, 2013, the Commission continued the public hearing to allow the applicant to submit a revised application and for proper noticing of the revised project. The Planning Commission also directed staff to prepare a resolution of approval for the revised project, for their consideration at the January meeting. The applicant submitted a revised application requesting a Variance to encroach with a portion of the new residence into the rear setback, within the footprint of the existing encroachment, and a Variance to encroach 10-feet into the required 35-foot side setback with the stable and corral set aside area. 3. Therefore, Mr. Johnson requests a Site Plan Review for construction of a new 4,980 square foot house with 980 square foot garage. 361 square feet of the new house would encroach into the rear setback, which requires a Variance. No basement is proposed. A ZC No. 847 388 square foot attached trellis, fountain and a barbeque are also proposed. An area for a future stable and corral has been designated on the property, which requires a variance. Grading will consist of 144 cubic yards of dirt, to be balanced on site. 4. It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the revised project, take public testimony and consider adoption of the Resolution of approval, which is attached. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE 5. The new residence will utilize the existing building pad. The driveway is proposed to be widened by few feet but the apron will remain. A trash enclosure area will be added. The grading for the project will consist of a total of 144 cubic yards of cut and fill and will be balanced on site. The disturbed lot area is 33.7% and the proposed disturbance will be 27,750 square feet or 39.5% (40% max. permitted). This includes disturbance for the future stable, corral and access. 6. Once completed the roof ridge height of the residence will be approximately 18 inches higher than the existing condition. With the encroachment of the rear corner of the residence an out of grade condition will result, as the building pad is lower in that area of the lot. However, no basement is proposed or would be allowed in that portion of the house. The out of grade portion of the residence would not bet considered a "story" and is proposed to be used for storage of mechanical equipment and will be 4'9" in height at the highest point. 7. Utility lines to the residence will be placed underground. 8. The residential building pad is proposed at 21,150 square feet and will have coverage of 6,067 square feet or 28.7%. The future stable pad will be 2,955 square feet (that portion not in setback) and will have coverage of 15.2%. 9. The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 6,909 square feet or 9.9%, (20% max. permitted); and the total lot coverage proposed will be 15,012 square feet or 21.4%, (35% max. permitted). 10. Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date. 11. When reviewing a development application the Planning Commission must consider whether the proposed project meets the criteria for a Site Plan Review and Variances listed below. 12. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ZC No. 847. e2) ZC NO. 847 NEARBY PROPERTIES (For information only) Address House size in sq.ft. Lot Area (excl. (built/add or remodel) I 1 Middleridge N. 2,100 (1953) 3.2 6 Middleridge N *5,513(1953/2002) 2.85 I 4 Middleridge S. *3,240 (1958/1990) 1.44 6 Middleridge S. *3,880 (1952/1980) 3.46 1 Middleridge S. 4,541 (1954/61) 5.75 AVERAGE 3,855 3.34 1.88 Existing 2,830 (1948/55) 4,980 Proposed roadway easements) NOTE: The above do not include garages and other accessory structures. SOURCES: Assessors' records * City records ZONING CASE NO. 847 REVISED SITE PLAN REVIEW II EXISTING RA-S- 2 ZONE SETBACKS SINGLE FAMILY Front: 50 ft. from front easement RESIDENCE line Side: 35 ft. from side property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear property line STRUCTURES Residence (Site Plan Review required for grading, new structures and if size of house increases by more than 999 sq.ft. in a 36-month period). STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (35% maximum) BUILDING PADS (30% guideline) Residential Future Stable GRADING Site Plan Review required if excavation and/or fill or ZC No. 847. Garage Stable Trellis Service yard Fountain TOTAL 5.1% 15.2% 16.5% N/A 2830 sq.ft. 460 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 200 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 11 sq.ft. 3,597 sq.ft. !I PROPOSED LARGE ADDITION & MAJOR REMODEL Residence Garage Stable -future Service yard. Trellis BBQ Fountain 4980 sq.ft. 980 sq.ft. 450 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 388 sq.ft. 15 sq.ft. 11 sq.ft. TOTAL 6,920 sq.ft 9.9% (w/allowances) of 70,015 sq.ft. net lot area 21.4% of 70,015 sq.ft. net lot area 28.7% on 21,150 sq.ft. pad 15.2% on 2,955 sq.ft. pad 144 c.y. total combination thereof that is more than 3 feet in depth and covers more than 2,000 sq.ft.) must be balanced on site. DISTURBED AREA (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, and any non -graded area where impervious surfaces exist. Exceptions apply.) STABLE (min. 450 SQ.FT. N/A & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS 33.7% N/A Existing driveway approach N/A N/A 27,650 sq.ft. or 39.5% including future stable and corral Future -set aside -requires variance Future from Middleridge Existing driveway approach Planning Commission review Planning Commission review SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 17.46.010 Purpose. The site plan review process is established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects in the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. 17.46.050 Required findings. A. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review application. B. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal, unless the following findings can be made: 1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; 2. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; 3. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; ZC No. 847. 4. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls); 5. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; 6. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 7. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas; 8. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 9. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. 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; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. ZC No. 847. 0 • • THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK • • To: The Planning Commission Fr: Ralph (Graduate Engineer) and Nancy Schmoller Residence: 4 Middleridge Lane South -property contiguous to parcel under discussion Zoning Case No. 847 Just another quick note, as an extension to our discussion. We have lived in our residence since 1975, and as a consequence, are able to bring history to the discussion. Prevailing winds are consistent throughout the seasons. ( Please see attachments ) We have had horses in the past. The stable was near our mailbox on Middleridge Lane South. If we missed correct Stable Management by just a few hours, prevailing winds always from the West would make the residence, unpleasant. Pursuant to the Planning Commission field visit to the site --- problems regarding prevailing winds and poisonous plantings in the vicinity are solved by moving the barn east and closer to Middleridge Lane. Sincerely Yours RECEVED DEC 1 7 2013 cg o Rollin Hills By(.!JPe'IJ1O3JOP t✓ 1r4•iris Mw.wrcc.an.eawntnvnies,wesI Mnaafir.nuru PORTERVILLE MUNI AP, CA (KPT I E E ESE NW NW NW NW S S ESE E E I NW RAMONA AIRPORT, CA (KRNM). I WWWWWWWWWWWNW E I W RED BLUFF AP, CA (KRBL). WI I NNW SSE N NNW SSE N S S NNW NNW NNW NNW I NNW REDDING AIRPORT, CA (KRDD). I NNNNNNS SNNNN I N RIVERSIDE MUNI AP, CA (KRAL) I WNW WNW WNW W WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW N I WNW RIVERSIDE —MARCH AFB, CA (KRI I NW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW NW I WNW SACRAMENTO EXECUTIVE AP, CA I SE SSE S SSW S S S S S S SSE SSE I S SACRAMENTO INT'L AP, CA (KSM I SSE SSE S S S S S S S S NW SSE I S SACRAMENTO—MATHER AP, CA (KM I SE SE SE S S S S S S SE SE SE I S SALINAS MUNI AP, CA (KSNS). i SE SE W W W W WNW WNW WNW WNW SE SE I W SAN CARLOS AP, CA (KSQL). W I NWWWWWWWNNNN I W SAN DIEGO—BROWN FIELD, CA (K I WWWWWWWWWWW SE I W SAN DIEGO—GILLESPIE FIELD, C I WWWWWWWWWWWW I W SAN DIEGO—LINDBERGH FIELD, C I WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW I WNW SAN DIEGO—MONTGOMERY FIELD, I W W W W WSW WSW WSW WSW WNW W W W I W SAN DIEGO—NORTH ISLAND NAS, I NWWWWWWWNW NW NW NW NW I W SAN FRANCISCO INT'L AP, CA ( I WWWWWWWWWWWW I W SAN JOSE INT'L AP, CA (KSJC) I SSE SSE NNW NNW NNW NNW NW NNW NW NW NW SE I NNW SAN JOSE—REID HILLVIEW AP, C I SE NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW - NW NW NW I NW SAN LUIS Oi3ISPO AP, CA (KSEP I NW NW NW NW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW NW NW I WNW SAN NICHOLAS ISLAND NOLF, CA I WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW NW WNW NW WNW WNW NW NW I WNW SANDBURG, CA (KSDB). WIND R I NE S NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NW NE NE I NW SANTA ANA—JOHN WAYNE AP, CA I S S S S S SSW SSW SSW SW SW SW S I SSW SANTA BARBARA AP, CA (KSBA). I WSW W WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW I WSW ANTA MARIA AP, CA (KSMX). I WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW WNW I WNW �.ANTA MONICA AIRPORT, CA (KS I SW SW SW SW SW SW SW SW SW SW SW N I SW ANTA ROSA AIRPORT, CA (KSTS I S SE S S S S S S S S S SE I S SISKIYOU COUNTY AP—MONTAGUE, I SSNNNNNNNNSS I N SOUTH LAKE TAHOE AP, CA (KTV I S S S S S SSW S S S S S S I S STOCKTON AIRPORT, CA (KSCK). I SE SEWWWWWWWWW SE I W THERMAL AIRPORT, CA (KTRM). I N N NNW NNW NW NW NW NW NNW NNW NW NW I NW TORRANCE AIRPORT, CA (KTOA) . I W W W W W W WNW WNW . W� W W W I W TRAVIS AFB—FAIRFIELD, CA (KS I N WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW N N I WSW TRUCKEE AIRPORT, CA (KIRK). I S S S SSW SW SSW SW SSW SSW N S S I S TUSTIN MCAS, CA (KNTK). WIN I WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW WSW W I WSW TWENTYNINE PALMS EAF, CA (KN I W W WNW WNW WNW NW W W W W WNW NW I WNW UKIAH AIRPORT, CA (KUKI). W I S SSE WNW WNW N N N N N W SSE SSE I N VACAVILLE AIRPORT, CA (KVCB). I NNW S SSW SSW SSW SSW S SSW SSW SSW SSW NNW I SSW VAN NUYS AP, CA (KVNY). WIN I N N SE SE ESE ESE ESE ESE ESE ESE N N I ESE VISALIA AIRPORT, CA (KVIS). I SE SE NW NW NW NW NW WNW NW NW ESE ESE I NW WATSONVILLE MUNI AP, CA (KWV I N NNW W W W SW W SW WSW W NNW NNW I W wftw.wrce.dri.edu/htmlfiles/westwinddir.html 16 WORLD • Pressure, Winds / Seasonal Rainfall COMPARATIVE PRESSURE SCALE - 30.5 1032- 1�_ -30.4 1026 - - 30.3 1023 - - 30.2 1020 - 1017 - 1014 - 1011 - 1008 - 1005 1002 - 999 - 30.0 -29.9 - 29.8 -29.7 - 29.6 - 29.5 60 201�1,v 10J4 20.. 29.4 ,mR West dies_ a) ' 0Y3' -`• 15 993 - 29.3E3 E3 002 ^++-► 90 2 29.2 ' Copyright by R.nd M0N.IIy C Co stade in USA A 444 LOW PRESSURES. 99 0 mb. 1002 1008 1014 N- , HIGH PRESSURES .1014 1020 1026 1032 1038 Isobars on map at intervals of 3 millibars s• r-t_ 1• yam\ / � \ • i.� , JANUARY: PRESSURE AND PREDOMINANT WINDS Acir.- 60/ 7L Arrows fly with the wind. Wind di- rection determined by the quarter of the compass having highest wind frequency. Length of arrow indicates the steadi- ness of the wind. Thickness of shaft indicates wind force. 60 023: 10201 017 20 --,c`<es_�✓+eta "1011 MILLER CYLINDRICAL PROJECTION Courtesy of the American Geographical Society. DOMINANT WIND FORCES Beaufort Scale Miles per hour (approx) 0-3 - 0-10 3-4 --- --- 10-15 15-25 Over 514 Over 25 — -1 Copyright byA.nd M0Nelly G Col Made U.S.A. e::as • -.- • 4 •••••••".. ! ••••••••• P4C.. ",.4: • . J.1- • • r _ • . > • • JULY : PRESSURE AND PREDOMINANT WINDS ea- •ai ' • . - • -1- 7 Tr c•..7"•"-- 7; 1 • • t • 70 7. s„,. • • 20 A 1 101 60 COMPARATIVE PRESSURE SCALE 90 20 es. .701 _ •••• ,TV• • . • • • 77 '112.1..";"1-6. _ MILLER CYLINDRICAL PROJECTION Courtesy of the American Geographical Society. DOMINANT WIND FORCES Beaufort Scale 0-3 •ver: Cs!, 1- • • ,e Ar., `‘.'t Miles per hour (approx) 0-10 • 10-15 15-25 Over 25 — _ Cauddiht Rutd AVNally & Cut Mutt Itt U.S.A 1035 - 1032 - - 776 - 774 1029 - - 772 1026 - 1023 - 1020 - 1017 - 1014 - 1011 - - 758 1008 - - 756 - 770 - 768 - 766 110 1005 - - 760 - 754 1002 - - 752 999 - a) 995 - cc co 993 - M 990 - - 750 - 748 ") cc - 746 1A, - 744 • • RESOLUTION NO. 2014-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE, AND VARIANCES TO ENCROACH WITH A PORTION OF THE RESIDENCE INTO THE REAR SETBACK WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING ENCROACHMENT AND TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE SETBACK WITH THE SET ASIDE AREA FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 847, AT 2 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, LOT 168-RH, (JOHNSON). THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT PURSUANT TO 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. Application was duly filed by Mr. Kenneth Johnson with respect to real property located at 2 Middleridge Lane South (Lot 168-RH) requesting a Site Plan Review and a Variance to demolish existing residence and construct a new residence, a portion of which would encroach into the rear setback within the footprint of the existing house encroachment and Variance to encroach into the side setback with a set aside area for a future stable and corral. The proposed residence would be 4,980 square feet with 980 square foot garage. The rear yard encroachment would be 361 square feet. Section 2 The property is zoned RAS-2 and is located on the corner of Middleridge Lane North and Middleridge Lane South. Not including the roadway easements, the lot is 1.88 acres. For development purposes the net lot area of the lot is 70,015 square feet or 1.6 acres. Records show that the house and garage were constructed in 1948 and the house was remodeled in 1955. The lot is irregular in shape as it narrows where the two streets converge. The lot is encumbered by wide easements and front and rear setbacks. Section 3. The property is developed with a 2,830 square foot single family residence, 460 square foot garage, a fountain and 200 square foot attached trellis. 361 square feet of the existing residence encroaches into the rear yard setback and is proposed to be reconstructed within that setback. Section 4. An area for a future stable and corral is proposed to the south of the residence, 25-feet from the south property line, with future access from Middleridge Lane South. This area is relatively flat and minimal grading will be required. A Variance is requested to encroach 10-feet into the required 35-foot side setback with the set aside area. �i Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 1 • Section 5. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings on the subject application on November 19, 2013, December 17, 2013 and in the field on December 17, 2013. The applicant was notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City staff and the Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The applicant and applicant's representative were in attendance at the hearings. Adjacent property owners expressed concerns with the location of the set aside for the stable and requested that it be moved. Based on the neighbors' request and review of the area by the Planning Commission, the Commission is hereby granting the Variance to move the stable and corral area into the side setback Section 6. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a categorical exemption from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 7. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Code permit approval of a variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when, due to exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone, strict application of the Code would deny the property owner substantial property rights enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The applicant seeks a variance from the requirement that side yard setbacks be free of structures and wishes to set aside an area for a future stable and corral that would encroach a maximum 10 feet into the 35 foot side yard setback. 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 existing lot is irregular in shape and has two very long frontages along Middleridge Lane South and Middleridge Lane North, and less than average depth. The set aside will be located further south and east than originally proposed to allow open space near the front of the lot, be further away from the neighbors' pool and entertaining areas, and meet the distance requirement between the residence and the set aside area. The topography of the lot, the shape of the lot with wide and long front and rear setbacks, due to the convergence of two streets at the northern tip of the property, together with the fact that the stable and corral pad is mostly existing and very limited grading would be required, if constructed, create difficulty in constructing a stable and corral 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 because due to the existing graded Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 2 @ • • pad, irregular lot configuration it would be a hardship to locate the stable in the rear. The expansive open space in the side yard comfortably supports a stable. The limited depth of the property and slopes in the rear places a hardship on locating the stable in the rear. The proposed stable is to be located on an already graded area, therefore preserving the natural terrain of the remaining of the property. The proposed location was recommended by the neighbors and concurred by the Planning Commission. 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 would not affect any neighbor's views and therefore property value and would be screened from the street. Development of the stable in the front yard setback will allow substantial portion of the rear of the lot to remain undeveloped. D. The variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. E. The variance request is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and will uphold the City's goals to protect and promote construction of equestrian facilities. Section 8. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Code permit approval of a variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when, due to exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone, strict application of the Code would deny the property owner substantial property rights enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The applicant seeks a variance from the requirement that rear yard setbacks be free of structures and wishes to encroach with a portion of the reconstructed residence into the rear setback. 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 existing lot is irregular in shape and has two very long frontages along Middleridge Lane South and Middleridge Lane North, and less than average depth towards the northern portion of the lot where the two streets converge. The existing residence encroaches 361 square feet into the rear setback and the applicant wishes to encroach the same amount and in the same footprint with the new residence. The topography of the lot, the shape of the lot with wide and long front and rear setbacks, due to the convergence of two streets at the northern tip of the property create difficulty in constructing the house within the required rear setback. The applicant will utilize the same footprint as the Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 3 existing house, plus added square footage, and therefore very limited grading is required. 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 graded area and availability of the building pad, irregular lot configuration it would be a hardship to locate the house elsewhere on the lot. The shape and configuration of the house with the minimal encroachment into the rear setback comfortably supports the encroachment. The limited depth of the property and slopes in the rear places a hardship on locating it elsewhere. The proposed encroachment is to be located on an already graded area, therefore preserving the natural terrain of the remaining of the property. 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 the encroachment is already existing and will not be greater, the neighbors have not objected to the encroachment in the past and it would not affect any neighbor's views and therefore property value and would be screened from the street. Development of the encroachment will allow substantial portion of the rear of the lot to remain undeveloped. D. The variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. E. The variance request is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and will uphold the City's goals of low density, low profile developments. Section 9. 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 new 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 not more than 999 square feet in any thirty-six (36) month period. With respect to the Site Plan Review application requesting grading and construction of a new residence, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The lot size Reso. 2014-02 4 ZC No. 847 • • is adequate to accommodate the new residence and not look overdeveloped. The proposed residence is modest in size as compared with the newer homes on similar lots. The project conforms to Zoning Code lot coverage requirements. The net lot area of the lot is 70,015 square feet. The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 9.9%, which includes all the structures, with allowance for permitted deductions, (20% max. permitted); and the total lot coverage proposed, including the future 450 square foot stable would be 21.4%, (35% max. permitted). The disturbed area of the lot is proposed at 39.5%, which includes disturbance for a future stable and corral. B. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structure will not cause the lot to look overdeveloped and would be located in the same footprint as the existing residence, with additional square footage in an already disturbed area. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space on the property. The rear of the lot is steep and the natural topography of the sloped areas will remain. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the topography of the lot have been considered, and the construction of the new house will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed structure will be constructed on a portion of the lot which is least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped with trees and shrubs, is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the proposed structures will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will utilize the existing building pad. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. The proposed house is not excessive for the size of the lot. The project takes advantage of the existing building pad and eliminates additional grading, therefore preserving the natural terrain in the rear and front of the lot. D. The development plan incorporates existing trees and is screened from other properties, which will be preserved. The project will be further screened from the adjacent property owner to the south. E. The development plan follows to the maximum extent practicable contours of the site to minimize grading and retain the natural drainage courses. The project utilizes the existing building pad area, and minimal grading is required. F. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the existing driveway will be utilized and a larger than existing garage will be constructed to house more cars. Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 • • G. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is exempt. Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves Zoning Case No. 847 a Site Plan Review for a new residence and Variances to encroach with a portion of the residence into the rear setback and to encroach with the stable and corral set aside area into the side setback subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan and Variance approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.46.070 and 17.38.080, unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of this section. B. It is declared and made a condition of this 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 this 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 dated December 30, 2013 except as otherwise provided in these conditions. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the approved development plan. All conditions of the Variances and SPR approvals, herein as applicable, shall be incorporated into the building permit working drawings and complied with prior to issuance of a building permit from the building department. E. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to the Building and Safety Department for issuance of building permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission. The conditions of this approval shall be printed on the plans. F. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and all of the conditions set forth therein and the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 6 S • • Further, the person obtaining a building and/ or grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. G. Structural lot coverage of the lot shall not exceed 6,909 square feet or 9.9% of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (20% maximum). The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork shall not exceed 15,012 square feet or 21.4%, of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (35% max). H. Grading for this project shall consist of 144 cubic yards of cut and 144 cubic yards of fill, mostly for the widened driveway. The disturbed area of the lot, including the future stable and corral shall not exceed 39.5%. I. The set aside for stable and corral may encroach no more than 10 feet into the side yard setback. J. The residential building pad, shall be 21,150 square feet and will have coverage of 28.7%. K. The new residence may encroach 361 square feet into the rear setback, within the same footprint as the existing residence. No basement or "story" may be constructed under the area of encroachment. Mechanical equipment may be stored in that space. L. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Lighting Ordinance of the City of Rolling Hills (RHMC 17.16.190 E), pertaining to lighting on said property, roofing and material requirements of properties in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. M. All utility lines to the residence shall be placed underground, subject to all applicable standards and requirements. N. A drainage plan, if required by the Building Department shall be prepared and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of a construction permit. Such plan shall be subject to County Code requirements. O. A landscaping plan shall be submitted to the City in conformance with Fire Department Fuel Modification requirements. Trees and shrubs shall be planted to screen the project from the neighbors. However, the landscaping shall not form a hedge like screen but be offset. The height of the trees and shrubs shall not at any time exceed the ridgeline of the roof of the structure. The landscaping plan shall utilize to Reso. 2014-02 7 ZC No. 847 • • the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and are consistent with the rural character of the community. If landscaping of 5,000 square foot area or greater is introduced or redevelop, the landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. P. Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and clear of any improvements including, but not be limited to fences -including construction fences, any hardscape, driveways, landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, except as otherwise approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association. Q. 50% of any construction materials must be recycled or diverted from landfills. The hauler of the materials shall obtain City's Construction and Demolition permit for waste hauling prior to start of work. R. 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. S. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site and, if necessary, any overflow parking shall take place within nearby roadway easements. T. 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) requirements related to solid waste, drainage and storm water drainage facilities management and to the City's Low Impact development Ordinance (LID). U. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this permit pursuant to Zoning Ordinance, or the approval shall not be effective. V. Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 g63 • • PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 21st DAY OF JANUARY 2014. BRAD CHELF, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 9 • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2014-02 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE, AND VARIANCES TO ENCROACH WITH A PORTION OF THE RESIDENCE INTO THE REAR SETBACK WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING ENCROACHMENT AND TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE SETBACK WITH THE SET ASIDE AREA FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 847, AT 2 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, LOT 168-RH, (JOHNSON). THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). was approved and adopted at regular meeting of the Planning Commission on January 21, 2014 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 HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Reso. 2014-02 ZC No. 847 10 TO: • al Rollo/9 getid • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No: 4C Mtg. Date: 12-17-13 HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: ZONING CASE NO. 847 2 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, (LOT 168-RH) RA-S-2, 1.88 ACRES (EXCL. ROADWAY EASEMENT) MR. KEN JOHNSON BOLTON ENGINEERING NOVEMBER 7, 2013 REQUEST AND RECOMMENDATION 1. At the November 19, 2013 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission scheduled a field visit to the property for December 17, 2013. 2. The applicant Mr. Johnson requests a Site Plan Review for major remodel and to add 2,150 square feet to the existing residence for a total of 4,980 square foot house. The existing garage will be demolished and a new 980 square foot garage will be constructed. No basement is proposed. A trellis and a barbeque are also proposed. An area for a future stable and corral has been designated on the property. Grading will consist of 144 cubic yards of dirt, to be balanced onsite. 3. It is recommended that the Planning Commission view the project, take public testimony and continue the meeting to the evening meeting of December 17, or provide other direction to staff. BACKGROUND 4. The property is zoned RAS-2 and is located on the corner of Middleridge Lane North and Middleridge Lane South. Not including the roadway easement, the lot is 1.88 acres. For development purposes the net lot area of the lot is 70,015 square feet or 1.6 ZC No. 847 o • • acres. Records show that the house and garage were constructed in 1948 and the house was remodeled in 1955. The lot is irregular in shape as it narrows where the streets converge. The lot is encumbered by large setbacks. 5. The property is developed with a 2,830 square foot single family residence, 460 square foot garage, a fountain and 200 square foot attached trellis. 400 square feet of the existing residence encroaches into the rear yard setback and will remain. Majority of the house will be demolished, except for the north eastern portion of the house, a portion of which encroaches into the rear setback. The reconstructed portion of the house and the addition will observe the current setback requirements. 6. The driveway will be widened by 253 square feet, but the approach will remain as is, and therefore Traffic Commission review is not required. 7. An area for a future stable and corral is proposed to the south of the residence with future access from Middleridge Lane South. This area is relatively flat and minimal grading will be required. 8. Adjacent property owners testified regarding the project. They had no objections to the addition, but questioned the southern property line as well as the proposed location of the stable. They stated that in the past there was a dispute over the property line and they just wanted to be assured that it is marked correctly. According to the applicant's civil engineer a topographic survey was done for this property and is certified. The engineer stated that the property line is correctly demarcated. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE 9. The addition will utilize the existing building pad. The driveway is proposed to be slightly widened but the apron will remain. A trash enclosure area will be added. The grading for the project will consist of 35 cubic yards of cut for the addition and 37 cubic yards of cut for the driveway and filling of the same amount. No other grading is currently proposed. The disturbed lot area is 33.7% and the proposed disturbance will be 26,070 square feet or 37.2% (40% max. permitted). This includes disturbance for the future stable, corral and access. 10. Once completed the ridge height of the residence will be approximately 18 inches higher than the existing condition. The out of grade condition of the residence at the northeast elevation is proposed to remain. This is also the area of encroachment into the rear setback. There is a crawl space in that area of the house. To bring the floor elevation of that side of the house to match the remaining house's floor elevation, much filling and grading would be required, which the applicant is trying to avoid. (Import of dirt would be required). ZC No. 847. U 11. Utility lines to the residence will be placed underground. 12. The residential building pad is proposed at 21,150 square feet and will have coverage of 6,056 square feet or 28.7%. The future stable pad will be 2,405 square feet and will have coverage of 18.7%. 13. The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 6,894 square feet or 9.8%, (20% max. permitted); and the total lot coverage proposed will be 14,997 square feet or 21.4%, (35% max. permitted). 14. Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date. 15. When reviewing a development application the Planning Commission must consider whether the proposed project meets the criteria for a Site Plan Review listed below. 16. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ZC NO. 847 NEARBY PROPERTIES (For information only) Address House size in sq.ft. Lot Area (excl. (built/add or roadway easements) remodel) 1 Middleridge N. 2,100 (1953) 3.2 6 Middleridge N *5,513(1953/2002) 2.85 4 Middleridge S. I *3,240 (1958/1990) 1.44 6 Middleridge S. *3,880 (1952/1980) 3.46 1 Middleridge S. 4,541 (1954/61) 5.75 AVERAGE 3,855 3.34 Existing 2,830 1.88 (1948/55) 4,980 Proposed NOTE: The above do not include garages and other accessory structures. SOURCES: Assessors' records * City records ZC No. 847. • • ZONING CASE NO. 847 SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S- 2 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 35 ft. from side property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear property line STRUCTURES (Site Plan Review required for grading, new structures and if size of house increases by more than 999 sq.ft. in a 36-month period). STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (35% maximum) BUILDING PADS (30% guideline) Residential Future Stable GRADING Site Plan Review required if excavation and/or fill or combination thereof that is more than 3 feet in depth and covers more than 2,000 sq.ft.) must be balanced on site. DISTURBED AREA (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, and any non -graded area where impervious surfaces exist. Exceptions apply.) STABLE (min. 450 SQ.FT. & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS ZC No. 847. EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE Residence Garage Stable Trellis Service yard Fountain TOTAL 5.1 % 15.2% 16.5% N/A 33.7% PROPOSED LARGE ADDITION & MAJOR REMODEL 2830 sq.ft. Residence 4980 sq.ft. 460 sq.ft. Garage 980 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. Stable -future 450 sq.ft. 200 sq.ft. Service yard. 96 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. Trellis 388 sq.ft. 11 sq.ft. BBQ 15 sq.ft. Fountain 11 sq.ft. 3,597 sq.ft. I TOTAL 6,920 sq.ft 9.8% (w/allowances) of 70,015 sq.ft. net lot area 21.4% of 70,015 sq.ft. net lot area IN/A N/A I Existing driveway approach IN/A IN/A 28.7% on 21,150 sq.ft. pad 18.7% on 2,405 sq.ft. pad 144 c.y. total 26,070 sq.ft. or 37.2% including future stable and corral Future -set aside Future from Middleridge Existing driveway approach Planning Commission review Planning Commission review • • SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 17.46.010 Purpose. The site plan review process is established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects in the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. 17.46.050 Required findings. A. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review application. B. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal, unless the following findings can be made: 1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; 2. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; 3. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; 4. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls); 5. Grading has been designed to follow' natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; 6. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 7. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas; 8. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 9. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. ZC No. 847. TO: • ge4 al Ra ff4/9 qe eid • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No: 9A Mtg. Date: 11-19-13 HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: ZONING CASE NO. 847 2 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, (LOT 168-RH) RA-S-2, 1.88 ACRES (EXCL. ROADWAY EASEMENT) MR. KEN JOHNSON BOLTON ENGINEERING NOVEMBER 7, 2013 REQUEST AND RECOMMENDATION 1. The applicant Mr. Johnson requests a Site Plan Review for major remodel and to add 2,150 square feet to the existing residence for a total of 4,980 square foot house. The existing garage will be demolished and a new 980 square foot garage will be constructed. No basement is proposed. A trellis and a barbeque are also proposed. An area for a future stable and corral has been designated on the property. Grading will consist of 144 cubic yards of dirt, to be balanced onsite. 2. It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the staff report, open the public hearing, take public testimony and schedule a field trip to the property. BACKGROUND 3. The property is zoned RAS-2 and is located on the corner of Middleridge Lane North and Middleridge Lane South. Not including the roadway easement, the lot is 1.88 acres. For development purposes the net lot area of the lot is 70,015 square feet or 1.6 acres. Records show that the house and garage were constructed in 1948 and the house was remodeled in 1955. The lot is irregular in shape as it narrows to almost a point where the streets converge. The lot is encumbered by large setbacks. ZC No. 847 • • 4. The property is developed with a 2,830 square foot single family residence, 460 square foot garage, a fountain and 200 square foot attached trellis. 400 square feet of the existing residence encroaches into the rear yard setback and will remain. Majority of the house will be demolished, except for the north eastern portion of the house, a portion of which encroaches into the rear setback. The addition will observe the current setback requirements. 5. The driveway will be widened by 253 square feet, but the approach will remain as is, and therefore Traffic Commission review is not required. 6. An area for a future stable and corral is proposed to the south of the residence with future access from Middleridge Lane South. This area is relatively flat and minimal grading will be required. 7. Adjacent property owners visited City Hal and reviewed the project. They had no objections to the project, but questioned the southern property line. They stated that in the past there was a dispute over the property line and they just wanted to be assured that it is correctly marked. See the enclosed email. According to the applicant's civil engineer a topographic survey was done for this property and is certified. The engineer stated that the property line is correctly demarcated on the plan. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE 8. The addition will utilize the existing building pad. The driveway is proposed to be slightly widened but the apron will remain. A trash enclosure area is proposed to be added. The grading for the project will consist of 35 cubic yards of cut for the addition and 37 cubic yards of cut for the driveway and filling of the same amount. No other grading is currently proposed. The disturbed lot area is 33.7% and the proposed disturbance will be 26,070 square feet or 37.2% (40% max. permitted). This includes disturbance for the future stable, corral and access. 9. Once completed the ridge height of the residence will be approximately 18 inches higher than the existing condition. The out of grade condition of the residence at the north east elevation will remain. There is a crawl space in that area of the house. To bring the floor elevation of that side of the house to match the remaining house's floor elevation, much filling and grading would be required, which the applicant is trying to avoid. (Import of dirt would be required). 10. Utility lines to the residence will be placed underground. 11. The residential building pad is proposed at 21,150 square feet and will have coverage of 6,056 square feet or 28.7%. The future stable pad will be 2,405 square feet and will have coverage of 18.7%. ZC No. 847. / 12. The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 6,894 square feet or 9.8%, (20% max. permitted); and the total lot coverage proposed will be 14,997 square feet or 21.4%, (35% max. permitted). 13. Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date. 14. A landscaping plan will be required to determine if this project is subject to the City's Water Efficient Landscape ordinance. 15. When reviewing a development application the Planning Commission must consider whether the proposed project meets the criteria for a Site Plan Review listed below. 16. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ZC NO. 847 NEARBY PROPERTIES (For information only) Address House size in sq.ft. Lot Area (excl. (built/add or roadway easements) remodel) 1 Middleridge N. 2,100 (1953) 3.2 6 Middleridge N *5,513(1953/2002) 2.85 4 Middleridge S. *3,240 (1958/1990) 1.44 6 Middleridge S. I *3,880 (1952/1980) 3.46 1 Middleridge S. 4,541 (1954/61) 5.75 AVERAGE 3,855 3.34 Existing 2,830 (1948) 1.88 4,980 Proposed NOTE: The above do not include garages and other accessory structures. SOURCES: Assessors' records * City records ZC No. 847. C� ZONING CASE NO. 847 SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S- 2 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 35 ft. from side property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear property line STRUCTURES (Site Plan Review required for grading, new structures and if size of house increases by more than 999 sq.ft. in a 36-month period). STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (35% maximum) BUILDING PADS (30% guideline) Residential Future Stable GRADING Site Plan Review required if excavation and/or fill or combination thereof that is more than 3 feet in depth and covers more than 2,000 sq.ft.) must be balanced on site. DISTURBED AREA (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, and any non -graded area where impervious surfaces exist. Exceptions apply.) STABLE (min. 450 SQ.FT. & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS ZC No. 847. EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE Residence Garage Stable Trellis Service yard Fountain TOTAL 5.1% 15.2% 16.5% N/A 33.7% N/A 2830 sq.ft. 460 sq.ft. 0 sq.ft. 200 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 11 sq.ft. 3,597 sq.ft. N/A Existing driveway approach N/A N/A PROPOSED LARGE ADDITION & MAJOR REMODEL Residence 4980 sq.ft. Garage 980 sq.ft. Stable -future 450 sq.ft. Service yard. 96 sq.ft. Trellis 388 sq.ft. BBQ 15 sq.ft. Fountain 11 sq.ft. TOTAL 6,920 sq.ft 9.8% (w/allowances) of 70,015 sq.ft. net lot area 21.4% of 70,015 sq.ft. net lot area 28.7% on 21,150 sq.ft. pad 18.7% on 2,405 sq.ft. pad 144 c.y. total 26,070 sq.ft. or 37.2% including future stable and corral Future -set aside Future from Middleridge Existing driveway approach Planning Commission review Planning Commission review e • SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 17.46.010 Purpose. The site plan review process is established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects in the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. 17.46.050 Required findings. A. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review application. B. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal, unless the following findings can be made: 1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; 2. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; 3. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; 4. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls); 5. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; 6. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 7. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas; 8. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 9. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. ZC No. 847. Forwarded Message From: Ralph Schmoller <ralphschmo@verizon.net> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 12:12:58 -0800 To: Ewa Nikodem <enikodem@citvofrh.net>, Nancy Schmoller <nischmo@verizon.net>, <ralphschmo@verizon.net> Subject: Fwd: Zoning Case No. 847 RECEIVED NOV 1 4 2013 City of Rolling Hills By Original -recipient: rfc822;ralphschmo@verizon.net Ewa,Thank you for routing this appropriately. In reviewing the subject application and plans, on Nov.12,2013, with Yolanta Schwartz -Planning Director,the issue of the property line entered into the discussion. It was disclosed that the property line has been in dispute since 1977.No action was taken in that Chuck and Marion Aylesbury were good friends; --- No building was planned . Now that building is being considered, it is time that this issue was addressed thus reducing any future problems. As a side note, my family, friends and neighbors found it curious to have a stable and corral; Upwind from a residence.Just an observation. Thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. Sincerely yours; Ralph and Nancy Schmoller