505A, Demo existing SFR & Guest hous, Resolutions & Approval ConditionsNOTICE OF DETERMINATION
TO:
•
ZONING CASE NO. 505A
Project Title
/f
0 o�� 11
Cii O/ ROLL`•%t�} JhIL INCORPORAT7 t �JACLJ2RY1995 I957
v[0�. 2i3bRTUGbiBtNDO
�J gy ROLLi1VG HILLS, CALIF. 90274
X County Clerk FROM: City of RollingHills (310) 377-1521
County of Los Angeles 2 Portuguese Bend Road FAX: (310) 377 728s
12400 East Imperial Highway Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Norwalk, CA 90650
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in coriMuMtittitEeiry and 21152 of the
Public Resources Code.
FEB 2 8 1995
NONE LOLA UNGAR . COUNTY CLERK (3101377-1521
State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency BYD E P UM Code/Phone
(If submitted to Clearinghouse) Contact Person
1 BUGGY WHIP DRIVE, ROLLING HILLS (LOT 176-A-MS AND A PORTION OF LOT 176-MS), ROLLING
HILLS. CA 90274, LOS ANGELES COUNTY
Project Location (include county)
Project Description: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A TENNIS
COURT AND REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF
A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS TO
REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND AN EXISTING TENNIS
COURT.
lihis is to advise that the CITY COUNCIL has approved the above described project on
FEBRUARY 14, 1995 and has made the following determinations regarding the above described
project:
1. The project [ will X will not] have a significant effect on the environment.
2. An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the
provisions of CEQA.
X A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of
CEQA.
3. Mitigation measures [ X were were not] made a condition of the approval of the
project.
4. A statement of Overriding Considerations [ was X was not] adopted for this project.
5. Findings [ X were were not] made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
This document is being filed in duplicate. Please acknowledge the filing date and return
acknowledged copy in the enclosed stamped,..self-addressed envelope.
Signature (Public A ecy)
Date received for filing:
February 14. 1995
Date
THIS NOTICE WAS POSTED
ON
FEB 2 8 1995
UNTIL 1 AR 3 01995
REGISTRAR-RECORD5R/CCit1t3 'Y CLERK
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
Title
95040529
Printed on Recycled Paper.
•
C•4 ey RJ/� AIL
,INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME (310) 377-1521
CERTIFICATE OF FEE EXEMPTION FAX: (310) 377-7288
De Minimus Impact Finding
Project Title/Location Name and Address of Project Proponent (include county):
Project Title: ZONING CASE NO. 505A
ocation: 1 BUGGY WHIP DRIVE, ROLLING HILLS (LOT 176-A-MS AND A PORTION
OF LOT 176-MS), ROLLING HILLS. CA 90274, LOS ANGELES COUNTY
Proponents: MR. JOHN Z. BLAZEVICH, P.O. BOX 1660, SAN PEDRO, CA 90733
Project Description: REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A TENNIS
COURT AND REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS TO REPLACE AN EXISTING
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND AN EXISTING TENNIS COURT.
Findings of Exemption (Attach Required Findings):
The City Council finds that there is no evidence that the construction of a single family residence, a tennis
court and other improvements to replace an existing single family residence and an existing tennis court on a
7.43 acre lot will have an effect on endangered or threatened species of plants and animals.
•he City Council finds that the construction of a single family residence, a tennis court and other
improvements to replace an existing single family residence and an existing tennis court will not have an effect
on wetlands and that water courses will not be eliminated or converted.
The City Council has determined that the proposed construction project will not have a significant adverse
impact on the environment and has adopted a Negative Declaration consistent with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Certification:,
I hereby certify that the lead agency has made the above findings of fact and that based upon the initial study
and hearing record the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on wildlife
resource, as in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
Jed. (./bA
OLA UNGA
(Chief Planning Official)
Title: Principal Planner
Lead Agency: City of Rolling Hills
Date: February 14, 1995
95040529
Printed on Recycled Paper.
EXHIBIT "A"
RESOLUTION NO. 754
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TENNIS COURT
AND APPROVING A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND
OTHER IMPROVEMENTS TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENCE AND AN EXISTING TENNIS COURT IN
ZONING CASE NO. 505A.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND,
RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. John Z. Blazevich with
respect to real property located at 1 Buggy Whip Drive, Rolling Hills (Lot 176-A-MS
and a portion of Lot 176-MS), requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a
tennis court and requesting Site Plan Review for the construction of a new single
family residence and other improvements to replace an existing single family
residence and an existing tennis court.
;section 2. The project as proposed includes the construction of the
following structures: (i) a 7,060 square foot inset tennis court surrounded by a
retaining wall that will not exceed 4 feet in height (ii) a residence of 10,278 square
feet (w) an attached semisubterranean garage of 1,320 square feet (iv) a swimming
pool of 1,125 square feet; (v) a future stable of 450 square feet; and (vi) a service yard
of 96 square feet. The subject property consists of 7.43 acres. The structural lot
coverage proposed is 20,029 square feet or 6.7% and the total lot coverage proposed is
37,387 square feet or 12.8% within the limits of the Zoning Code. The building pad
coverage proposed is 22.5%. .
Section 3. The Planning Commission had previously denied an earlier
version of the project on May 7, 1994 (Resolution No. 94-9). The applicant appealed
that denial to the City Council. During that appeal, the applicant submitted revised
plans showing . a reduction in the size of the residence. On June 23, 1994, the
Council remanded the subject case back to the Planning Commission for review of
the modified application. The revised application was then assigned a new case
number and submitted to the Planning Commission as a new application.
Section 4. The Commission approved Resolution No. 94-21 in Zoning
Case No. 505A on November 22, 1994.
Section 5. The City Council took the subject zoning case under jurisdiction
on December 19, 1994 and conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the
appeal of the applications on January 9, 1995, January 23, 1995, and at a field trip visit
on January 20, 1995. At the hearings, the City Council considered the amount of
grading, restoration of the slope, the reason for constructing a semisubterranean
garage, comparisons of grading of various large projects and their pad size creation
and lot line adjustment information regarding the creation of the existing lot on
October 26,1993.
Section 6; The Planning Commission found that the project will not have
a significant effect on the environment and adopted a mitigated Negative
Declaration in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 7. Section 17.16.210(A)(7) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code
allows for the construction of a tennis court with an approved Conditional Use
Permit.
Section 8. With respect to the request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
tennis court, the City Council makes the following findings:
RESOLUTION NO. 754
PAGE 1 of 6
•
A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for a tennis court would be
consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General
Plan and will be desirable for the public convenience and welfare because the use is
consistent with similar recreational uses in the community and the court will be
located in an area of the property where such use will be the least intrusive to
surrounding properties.
B. The granting of the Conditional Use Permit would be consistent with
the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because the
tennis court will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of
the community and is located on a 7.43 acre parcel of property that is adequate in
size, shape and topography to accommodate such use.
C. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit would be consistent with the
purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because the
tennis court will not impact the view or the privacy of neighbors. The tennis court
will be inset 4 feet below grade and will be screened by landscaping.
• Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby
approves the request for a Conditional Use Permit in Zoning Case No. 505A for a
proposed 7,060 square foot tennis court, as shown on the Development Plan dated
January 3, 1995 and marked Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section
13.
Section 10. Section 17.46.010 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a
development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any
building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or
repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an
increase to the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has
the effect of increasing the size of the building or structure by more than twenty-five
percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period.
Section 11. The City Council makes the following findings of fact:
A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the
Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structure complies
with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential
development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The
project conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements. The lot has
a net square foot area of 291,758 square feet (6.7 acres). The residence (10,278 sq. ft.),
semisubterranean garage (1,320 sq. ft.), swimming pool (1,125 sq. ft.), inset tennis
court (7,060 sq.ft.), stable (450 sq. ft.), and service yard (96 sq.ft.) will have 20,329
square feet which constitutes 6.9% of the lot which is within the maximum 20%
structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas
and driveway will be 37,165 square feet which equals 12.7% of the lot, which is
within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project
is on a relatively large lot with the proposed structures located away from the road
so as to reduce the visual impact of the development and is similar and compatible
with several neighboring developments. The building pad is 89,193 square feet and
structural coverage on the building pad is 22.8%.
B. The proposed development preserves and integrates into the site
design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the
lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and
land forms (such as hillsides and knolls). Much of the lot will remain in its natural
state and most of the development will occur on the portion of the lot previously
graded for the existing residence and existing tennis court. While the area to be
graded seems to be extremely large, grading for the project will vastly improve
drainage and restore the slope of the site.
RESOLUTION NO. 754
PAGE 2 of 6
• •
C. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to
minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the eastern
canyon at the rear of the lot.
D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native
vegetation to the maximum extent feasible and supplements it with landscaping
that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. As
stated previously, grading for the project will improve drainage and restore some of
the natural drainage of the site.
E. The development plan, as conditioned, substantially preserves the
natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because
the new structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded.
Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to minimize the impact
of development. Further, the proposed project will have a buildable pad coverage of
22.5%. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain
scenic vistas across the northerly portions of the property.
F. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale
and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated
in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded and the proposed
project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to this very
large lot. Grading shall be permitted only to restore the natural slope of the property.
The ratio of the proposed structure to lot size is similar to the ratio found on several
properties in the vicinity. The applicant's latest proposal submitted on January 3,
1995, includes a residential structure of 10,278 square feet. The City Council finds
that a structure of this size on this lot and as proposed would comply with the
requirements of the City's Site Plan Review Ordinance. Specifically, a residence of
this size would be consistent with the low profile, low -density residential
development pattern of the existing community. The size of this structure in
conjunction with other proposed improvements on the property would not crowd
the building pad or create a visually obtrusive development inconsistent with the
development on other properties along Buggy Whip Drive.
G. The proposed development is sensitive to and not detrimental to the
convenience and safety of circulation of pedestrians and vehicles because the
proposed project will utilize Buggy Whip Drive for access and has been conditioned
to provide adequate sight distance between the driveway and approaching vehides
along Buggy Whip Drive.
H. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment and
the Planning Commission adopted a mitigated Negative Declaration in accordance
with the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 12. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby
approves the Site Plan for construction of a new single family residence, an attached
semisubterranean garage, pool, inset tennis court, stable, and service yard to replace
an existing single family residence and existing tennis court, as indicated on the
Development Plan dated January 3, 1995 and marked Exhibit A, subject to the
conditions specified in Section 13.
Section 13. The Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a tennis
court approved in Section 9 and the Site Plan for a new single family residence, an
attached semisubterranean garage, pool, inset tennis court, stable, and service yard,
approved in Section 12 as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto and
incorporated herein as Exhibit A dated January 3, 1995, are subject to the following
conditions:
A. The Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals shall
expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections
17.42.070(A) and 17.46.080(A).
RESOLUTION NO. 754
PAGE 3 of 6
• •
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Conditional Use Permit and
Site Plan Review approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, the Permit
shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that
the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to
do so for a period of thirty (30) days.
C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the
Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be
complied with unless otherwise approved by Variance.
D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance
with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A dated January 3, 1995 except as otherwise
provided in these conditions.
E. The property on which the project is located shall contain an area of
sufficient size to also provide an area meeting all standards for a stable and corral
with vehicular access thereto.
F. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 20,329 square feet or 6.9% and
total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 37,165 square feet or
12.7%.
G. All grading required for the construction of the tennis court shall be
balanced on site, as regards cutting and filling and shall not exceed seven hundred
fifty (750) cubic yards.
H. The area graded for the tennis court shall not exceed 10,000 square feet.
I. Any grading shall preserve the existing topography, flora, and natural
features to the greatest extent possible.
J. A drainage system approved by the City Engineer shall be incorporated
into the overall plan of the tennis court and landscaping.
K. The landscape plan must be submitted for review by the Planning
Department and include native drought -resistant vegetation that will not disrupt
the impact of the views of neighboring properties prior to the issuance of any
building or grading permit. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the
purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing
mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent
feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character
of the community.
A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the
landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a
grading and building permit and shall be retained with the City for not less than two
years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City
Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed
pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly
established and in good condition.
L Landscaping shall be designed so as not to obstruct views of
neighboring properties but, to obscure structures and tennis court fencing.
M. Tennis court lighting shall not be permitted.
N. All retaining walls incorporated into the tennis court shall not be
greater than four feet in height at any point. Exposed exterior retaining walls shall
not be permitted.
RESOLUTION NO. 754
PAGE 4 of 6
• •
O. Tennis court fencing shall not exceed 4 feet in height above the 4 foot
high retaining walls for a total of 8 feet.
P. Noise from tennis court use shall not create a nuisance to owners of
surrounding properties.
Q. Building permits shall be obtained for each structure including
residence, attached garage, pool, stable, retaining walls and tennis court.
R. The garage shall abut, but not provide access to the residential structure
on the site by way of a doorway or other passageway.
S. There shall be only a single driveway access to Buggy Whip Drive
which shall be located so that its southerly edge is 43 feet north of the southerly
property line on Buggy Whip Drive.
T. The driveway apron shall be 26 feet in width for at least 24 feet inward
from Buggy Whip Drive.
U. The portion of the driveway that parallels Buggy Whip Drive shall not
be less than 16 feet nor more than 20 feet in width.
V. The trees within the driveway access area along Buggy Whip Drive
shall be trimmed and maintained to accommodate sight distance for ingress and
egress to the property.
W . During the construction phase, the currently configured driveway
entrance near the southerly boundary may be utilized.
X. The modifications to the driveway described in Conditions S, T, U,
and V shall be implemented within six months of the approval of this resolution.
Y. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County
of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related
geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as
approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills
Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes must conform to the
City of Rolling Hills standard of 2 to 1 slope ratio.
Z. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills
Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of
any building or grading permit.
AA. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of
Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan
described in Condition A.
BB. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions
of this Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review, pursuant to Section 17.42.060,
or the approval shall not be effective.
CC. In the event that subsurface material of an archaeological,
paleontological or other cultural resource is encountered during project grading or
development, all grading and construction shall cease in the immediate area, and
the find shall be left untouched until a qualified professional archaeologist or
paleontologist, whichever is appropriate, is contacted and called in to evaluate the
find and makes recommendations as to disposition, mitigation or salvage. The
developer shall incur the cost of such professional investigation. The developer
shall comply with the mitigation measures recommended and approved by the City
for the disposition, mitigation or salvage of such material.
RESOLUTION NO. 754
PAGE 5of6
• •
DD. Further subdivision of the property shall not be permitted.
EE. Notwithstanding Section 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code,
any modifications to the project which would constitute additional structural
development shall require the filing of a new application for Site Plan Review
approval by the Planning Commission.
FF. All conditions of these Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review
approvals must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading
permit from the County of Los Angeles.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 14TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1995.
JODYVAUIfpOC OUNCILMEMBER
ATTEST:
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 754 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TENNIS COURT
AND APPROVING A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND
OTHER IMPROVEMENTS TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENCE AND AN EXISTING TENNIS COURT IN
ZONING CASE NO. 505A.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on February 14,
1995 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers Hill; Lay and Murdock.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Heinsheimer and Mayor Pro Tem Pernell.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
MARILYN ERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 754
PAGE 6 of 6
RESOLUTION NO. 94-21
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND
RELOCATION OF AN EXISTING TENNIS COURT AND
APPROVING A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND
OTHER IMPROVEMENTS TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 505A.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY
FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. John Z. Blazevich with
respect to real property located at 1 Buggy Whip Drive, Rolling Hills (Lot 176-A-MS
and a portion of Lot 176-MS), requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct and
relocate an existing tennis court and requesting Site Plan Review for the
construction of a new single family residence and other improvements to replace an
existing single family residence.
Section 2. The project as proposed includes the construction of the
following structures: (i) a 7,060 square foot inset tennis court surrounded by a
retaining wall that will not exceed 4 feet in height; (ii) a residence of 10,278 square
feet; (iii) an attached semisubterranean garage of 1,320 square feet; (iv) a swimming
pool of 1,125 square feet; (v) a future stable of 450 square feet; and (vi) a service yard
of 96 square feet. The structural lot coverage proposed is 20,029 square feet or 6.7%
and the total lot coverage proposed is 37,387 square feet or 12.8% within the limits of
the Zoning Code. The building pad coverage proposed is 22.5%.
Section 3. The Planning Commission had previously denied an earlier
version of the project on May 7, 1994 (Resolution No. 94-9). The applicant appealed
that denial to the City Council. During that appeal, the applicant submitted revised
plans showing a reduction in the size of the residence. On June 23, 1994, the
Council remanded the subject case back to the Planning Commission for review of
the modified application. The revised application was then assigned a new case
number and submitted to the Planning Commission as a new application.
Section 4. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing to consider the applications for the Conditional Use Permit and the Site
Plan Review on July 19, 1994, August 16, 1994, September 20, 1994, October 18, 1994,
and November 22, 1994, and at a field trip visit on August 11, 1994.
Section 5. The Planning Commission finds that the project will not have a
significant effect on the environment and adopted a mitigated Negative Declaration
in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
RESOLUTION -NO. 94-21
PAGE 1
Section 6. Section 17.16.210(A)(7) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code
allows for the construction of a tennis court provided a Conditional Use Permit for
such use is approved by the Rolling Hills Planning Commission.
Section 7. With respect to the request for a Conditional Use Permit for a
tennis court, the Planning Commission makes the following findings:
A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for a tennis court would be
consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General
Plan and will be desirable for the public convenience and welfare because the use is
consistent with similar recreational uses in the community and the court will be
located in an area of the property where such use will be the least intrusive to
surrounding properties.
B. The granting of the Conditional Use Permit would be consistent with
the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because the
tennis court will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of
the community and is located on a 7.43 acre parcel of property that is adequate in
size, shape and topography to accommodate such use.
C. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit would be consistent with the
purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because the
tennis court will not impact the view or the privacy of neighbors. The tennis court
will be inset 4 feet below grade and will be screened by landscaping.
Section S. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the request for a Conditional Use Permit in Zoning' Case No. 505A
for a proposed 7,060 square foot tennis court, as shown on the Development Plan
dated November 22, 1994 and marked REVISED Exhibit A, subject to the conditions
specified in Section 12.
Section 9. Section 17.46.010 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a
development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any
building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or
repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an
increase to the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has
the effect of increasing the size of the building or structure by more than twenty-five
percent (25%) in any thirty-six month, period.
Section 10. The Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact:
A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the
Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structure complies
with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential
development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The
RESOLUTION NO. 94-21
PAGE 2
•
project conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements. The lot has
a net square foot area of 291,758 square feet (6.7 acres). The residence (10,278 sq. ft.),
semisubterranean garage (1,320 sq. ft.), swimming pool (1,125 sq. ft.), inset tennis
court (7,060 sq.ft.), stable (450 sq. ft.), and service yard (96 sq.ft.) will have 20,329
square feet which constitutes 6.9% of the lot which is within the maximum 20%
structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas
and driveway will be 37,165 square feet which equals 12.7% of the lot, which is
within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project
is on a relatively large lot with the proposed structures located away from the road
so as to reduce the visual impact of the development and is similar and compatible
with several neighboring developments.
B. The proposed development preserves and integrates into the site
design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the
lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and
land forms (such as hillsides and knolls) and grading will be minimal to minimize
building coverage on the building pad itself.
C. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to
minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the eastern
canyon at the rear of the lot.
D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native
vegetation to the maximum extent feasible and supplements it with landscaping
that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community.
E. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and
undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new
structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded.
Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to minimize the impact
of development. Further, the proposed project will have a buildable pad coverage of
22.5%.. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain
scenic vistas across the northerly portions of the property.
F. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and
mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in
Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded and the proposed
project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to this very
large lot. Grading shall be permitted only to restore the natural slope of the property.
The ratio of the proposed structure to lot size is similar to the ratio found on several
properties in the vicinity.
G. The applicant's latest proposal submitted on November 22, 1994,
includes a residential structure of 10,278 square feet. The Planning Commission
finds that a structure of this size on this lot and as proposed would comply with the
requirements of the City's Site Plan Review Ordinance. Specifically, a residence of
RESOLUTION NO. 94-21
PAGE 3
this size would be consistent with the low profile, low -density residential
development pattern of the existing community. The size of this structure in
conjunction with other proposed improvements on the property would not crowd
the building pad or create a visually obtrusive development inconsistent with the
development on other properties along Buggy Whip Drive.
H. The proposed development is sensitive to and not detrimental to the
convenience and safety of circulation of pedestrians and vehicles because the
proposed project will utilize Buggy Whip Drive for access and has been conditioned
to provide adequate sight distance between the driveway and approaching vehicles
along Buggy Whip Drive.
I. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment and
the Planning Commission adopted a mitigated Negative Declaration in accordance
with the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 11. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Site Plan Review for construction of a new single family
residence, an attached semisubterranean garage, pool, inset tennis court, stable, and
service yard to replace an existing single family residence, as indicated on the
Development Plan dated November 22, 1994 and marked REVISED Exhibit A,
subject to the conditions specified in Section 12.
Section 12. The Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a tennis
court approved in Section 8 and the Site Plan Review for a new single family
residence, an attached semisubterranean garage, pool, inset tennis court, stable, and
service yard approved in Section 11 as indicated on the Development Plan attached
hereto and incorporated herein as REVISED Exhibit A dated November 22, 1994, are
subject to the following conditions:
A. The Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals shall
expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections
17.42.070(A) and 17.46.080(A).
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Conditional Use Permit and
Site Plan Review approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, the Permit
shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that
the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to
do so for a period of thirty (30) days.
C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the
Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be
complied with unless otherwise approved by Variance.
RESOLUTION NO. 94-21
PAGE 4
•
D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance
with the site plan on file marked REVISED Exhibit A dated November 22, 1994
except as otherwise provided in these conditions.
E. The property on which the project is located shall contain an area of
sufficient size to also provide an area meeting all standards for a stable and corral
with vehicular access thereto.
F. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 20,329 square feet or 6.9% and
total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 37,165 square feet or
12.7 %.
G. All grading required for the construction of the tennis court shall be
balanced on site, as regards cutting and filling and shall not exceed seven hundred
fifty (750) cubic yards.
H. The area graded for the tennis court shall not exceed 10,000 square feet.
I. Any grading shall preserve the existing topography, flora, and natural
features to the greatest extent possible. j,...
J. A drainage system approved by the City Engineer shall be incorporated
into the overall plan of the tennis court and landscaping.
K. The landscape plan must be submitted for review by the Planning
Department and include native drought -resistant vegetation that will not disrupt
the impact of the views of neighboring properties prior to the issuance of any
building or grading permit. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the
purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing
mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent
feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character
of the community.
A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the
landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a
grading and building permit and shall be retained with the City for not less than two
years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City
Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed
pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly
established and in good condition.
L. Landscaping shall be designed so as not to obstruct views of
neighboring properties but, to obscure structures and tennis court fencing.
M. Court lighting shall not be permitted.
• RESOLUTION NO. 94-21
PAGE 5
•
N. All retaining walls incorporated into the court shall not be greater than
four feet in height at any point. Exposed exterior retaining walls shall not be
permitted.
O. Tennis court fencing shall not exceed 4 feet in height above the 4 foot
high retaining walls for a total of 8 feet.
P. Noise from tennis court use shall not create a nuisance to owners of
surrounding properties.
Q. Building permits shall be obtained for each structure including
residence, attached semisubterranean garage, pool, stable, retaining walls and tennis
court.
R. The semisubterranean garage shall abut, but not provide access to the
residential structure on the site by way of a doorway or other passageway.
S. There shall be only a single driveway access to Buggy Whip Drive
which shall be located so that its southerly edge is 43 feet north of the southerly
property line on Buggy Whip Drive.
T. The driveway apron shall be 26 feet in width for at least 24 feet inward
from Buggy Whip Drive.
U. The portion of the driveway that parallels Buggy Whip Drive shall not
be less than 16 feet in width.
V. Trees shall be trimmed and maintained within the driveway access
area along Buggy Whip Drive to accommodate sight distance for ingress and egress
to the property.
W . During the construction phase, the currently configured driveway
entrance near the southerly boundary may be utilized.
X. The modifications to the driveway described in Conditions S, T, U,
and V shall be implemented within six months of the approval of this resolution.
Y. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County
of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related
geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as
approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills
Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes must conform to the
City of Rolling Hills standard of 2 to 1 slope ratio.
RESOLUTION NO. 94-21
PAGE 6
c
• •
Z. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills
Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of
any building or grading permit.
AA. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of
Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan
described in Condition A.
BB. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions
of this Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review, pursuant to Section 17.42.060,
or the approval shall not be effective.
CC. In the event that subsurface material of an archaeological,
paleontological or other cultural resource is encountered during project grading or
development, all grading and construction shall cease in the immediate area, and
the find shall be left untouched until a qualified professional archaeologist or
paleontologist, whichever is appropriate, is contacted and called in to evaluate the
find and makes recommendations as to disposition, mitigation or salvage. The
developer shall incur the cost of such professional investigation. The developer
shall comply with the mitigation measures recommended and approved by the City
for the disposition, mitigation or salvage of such material.
DD. Further subdivision of the property shall not be permitted.
EE. Notwithstanding Section 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code,
any modifications to the project which would constitute additional structural
development shall require the filing of a new application for Site Plan Review
approval by the Planning Commission.
FF. All conditions of this Conditional Use Permit approval must be
complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County
of Los Angeles.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 22Nt�YQP. NOVEMBER, 1994.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
MARILYN K
RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 94-21
PAGE 7
• •
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
SS
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No.94-21 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND
RELOCATION OF AN EXISTING TENNIS COURT AND
APPROVING A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND
OTHER IMPROVEMENTS TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 505A.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission on November 22, 1994 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Witte and Chairman Roberts
NOES: Commissioners Frost and Raine
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
r; r r14-P- a. ..OJ
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 94-21
PAGE 8
• •
RESOLUTION NO., 94-9
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS DENYING A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND RELOCATION OF AN EXISTING
TENNIS COURT AND DENYING A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO
REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING
CASE NO. 505.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY
FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. John Z.
Blazevich with respect to real property located at 1 Buggy Whip
Drive, Rolling Hills (Lot 176-A-MS and a portion of Lot 176-MS),
requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct and relocate an
existing tennis court and requesting Site Plan Review for the
construction of a new single family residence to replace an
existing single family residence.
Section 2. The project as proposed includes the construction
of the following structures: (i) a 7,060 square foot tennis court
surrounded by a retaining wall that will not exceed 4 feet in
height; (ii) a residence of 15,950 square feet; (iii) an attached
garage of 900 square feet; (iv) a future stable of 450 square feet;
and (v) a service yard of 96 square feet. The structural lot
coverage proposed is 25,581 square feet or 8.7% and the total lot
coverage proposed is 42,417 square feet or 14.5% within the limits
of the Zoning Code. The building pad coverage proposed is 320.
Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
public hearing to consider the applications for the Conditional Use
Permit and the Site Plan Review on January 18, 1994, February 15,
1994, March 15, 1994, and April 18, 1994, and at field trip visits
on February 5, 1994 and February 26, 1994.
Section 4. Section 17.16.210(A)(7) of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code allows for the construction of a tennis court
provided a Conditional Use Permit for such use is approved by the
Rolling Hills Planning Commission.
Section 5. With respect to the request for a Conditional Use
Permit for a tennis court, the Planning Commission makes the
following findings:
A. Section 17.16.210(A)(7)(g) of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code requires that when grading is required for a game
court, cutting and filling shall be balanced on site and shall
not exceed 750 cubic yards.. Grading for the proposed tennis
court will require approximately 583 cubic yards of cut soil and
583 cubic yards of fill soil for a total soil displacement of
• •
RESOLUTION NO. 94-9
PAGE 2
1,166 cubic yards. This amount of soil displacement exceeds the
Code required maximum of 750 cubic yards for the construction of
a tennis court.
B. Section 17.16.210(A)(7)(h) of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code requires that the area graded for a game court
shall not exceed 10,000 square feet. According to testimony and
analysis presented to the Planning Commission, grading for the
proposed tennis court will require approximately 15,000 square
feet. This amount of grading exceeds the Code required maximum
of 10,000 square feet for a tennis court.
C. Paragraph A of Section 17.42.050 of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code requires the Planning Commission to find that the
proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan.
The General Plan provides in Goals 1 and 2 of the Land Use
Element that Rolling Hills' distinctive rural residential
character be maintained and that development that is compatible
with and complements existing land uses shall be accommodated.
The tennis court in addition to the other proposed structures on
the building pad would result in a large and relatively dense
development which is inconsistent with the existing rural
residential character of the community.
D. Paragraph B of Section 17.42.050 of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code requires the Planning Commission to find that the
proposed use will not adversely affect or be materially
detrimental to adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. The
tennis court would be located adjacent to a steep sloping
hillside below a barn that is 100 feet from the court, below a
guest house that is 150 feet from the court and below a tennis
court that is 190 feet from the proposed court on an adjacent
property to the east, thereby creating an additional prominent
large expanse of concrete structural improvement on this hillside
lot, which is not compatible with the General Plan goals of
maintaining low -profile, low -density residential development
patterns in the community.
E. Paragraph C of Section 17.42.050 of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code requires the Planning Commission to find that the
site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and
shape to accommodate the, use and buildings proposed. The tennis
court would be located approximately 40 feet below a barn, guest
house and tennis court on an adjacent property to the east
thereby making the court structure more visually prominent on the
building pad than appropriate for the existing development
pattern of the City. The visibility of the tennis court is
obtrusive and close to structures located on adjacent properties
on the hillsides above the subject property. Also, the tennis
court would expand the coverage on the existing building pad to
structurally cover the entire width of the building pad from
RESOLUTION NO. 94-9
PAGE 3
front to rear thereby leaving little open space on the building
pad between property lines. The tennis court will impact the
view and the privacy of neighbors because it will be visible from
neighboring properties. The proposed court would be located on
the southeastern portion of the irregular -shaped lot and would be
situated 50 feet from the rear or east property line and 50 feet
from the side or southernmost property line, 34 feet from the
proposed residence, and 270 feet from the nearest neighbor's
residence.
Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby denies the request for a Conditional Use Permit
in Zoning Case No. 505 for a proposed 7,060 square foot tennis
court, as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein
as Exhibit A.
Section 7. Section 17.46.010 requires a development plan to
be submitted for site plan review and approval before any
building or structure may be constructed or any expansion,
addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made
which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of
the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has
the effect of increasing the size of the building or structure by
more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any 36-month period.
Section 8. With respect to the Site Plan Review application
to construct a new 15,950 square foot single family residence to
replace an existing single family residence, a 900 square foot
attached garage, a 7,060 square foot tennis court, a 450 square
foot future stable and a 96 square foot service yard, the
Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact:
A. The granting of the request for the Site Plan Review
would not be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the
Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. The construction of a 15,950
square foot residence with attached 900 square foot garage, 1,125
square foot pool, 450 square foot future stable, and 96 square
foot service yard on the lot and the construction of an inset
tennis court near the southeastern boundary of this irregular -
shaped lot, creates maximum structural lot coverage which is not
compatible with the General Plan goals of maintaining low -
profile, low -density residential development patterns in the
community. In fact, the size of the house substantially exceeds
the sizes of other homes on Buggy Whip Drive.
B. The project does not substantially preserve 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. The project will establish maximum
RESOLUTION NO. 94-9
PAGE 4
structural coverage on a building pad that will be created so
that coverage on the building pad will be 32%.
C. The proposed development is not harmonious in scale and
mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding
residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the proposed project is
not consistent nor compatible with the scale and size of
residences found on several properties on Buggy Whip Drive.
D. The proposed development does not preserve and integrate
into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing
natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding
native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms
(such as hillsides and knolls). Grading for the proposed project
will require 9,700 cubic yards of cut soil and 9,700 cubic yards
of fill soil that is excessive and the disturbed area of the lot
will be close to the permitted maximum of 400.
E. Although grading has been designed to follow natural
contours of the site, the amount of grading required to create
the building area is not minimized and instead, excessive grading
will be required to create the building pad and recessed tennis
court.
F. The project does not preserve surrounding native
vegetation and mature trees because significant portions of the
lot will be developed and scenic vistas across the eastern
portion of the property will be blocked by tennis court screening
as well as landscape screening. Portions of the viewscapes from
adjacent property as well as from Community Association easements
will be obstructed along Buggy Whip Drive and Crest Road.
Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby denies the Site Plan Review application for
Zoning Case No. 505 for the construction of a new single family
residence on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit
A.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 0 AY, 1994.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
MARILYN KB N, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 94-9
PAGE 5
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
ss
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No.94-9 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS DENYING A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND RELOCATION OF AN
EXISTING TENNIS COURT AND DENYING A REQUEST FOR SITE
PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 505.
was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the
Planning Commission on May 7, 1994 by the following roll call
vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Frost, Hankins, Raine and Chairman Roberts
None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the
following:
Administrative Offices
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO: Recorder's Use
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
Please record this form with the Registrar -Recorder's Office and
return to: City of Rolling Hills, 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
(The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be
notarized before recordation).
ACCEPTANCE FORM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
ZONING CASE NO. 505A
I (We) the undersigned state:
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as
follows:
1 Buggy Whip Drive (Lot 176-A-MS and a portion of
Rolling Hills, CA Lot 176-MS)
This property is the subject of the above numbered cases.
I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in
said
ZONING CASE NO. 505A SITE PLAN REVIEW X
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT X
I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Print
Owner
Name
Signature
Address
City/State
Print
Owner
Name
Signature
Address
City/State
Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public.
State of
County of
SS.
On this the day of 19_, before me,
the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared
❑ personally known to me
❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence
to be the person(s) whose name(s) subscribed to the
within instrument, and acknowledged that executed it.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary's Signature
�►�..�i�.sit.�t.�te��tl�r�.+.+�Gi�!'.Crt�lrl"'l.►��G+le� � �.�.� r �.►
See Exhibit "A" attached
hereto and made a part hereof