Loading...
648, SFR addition of approx. 1175 s, Staff ReportsDATE: TO: ATTN: FROM: SUBJECT: • - • City oi Roiling -AIL Agenda Item No.: 6A Mtg.Date: 7/8/02 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com JULY 8, 2002 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS AND DETACHED GARAGE, A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA, A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE, AND A VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE DETACHED GARAGE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, AT 1 JOHNS CANYON ROAD. APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: BACKGROUND ZONING CASE NO. 648 1 JOHNS CANYON ROAD, (LOT 174-C-MS) RA-S-2, 2.18 ACRES MR. CRAIG HOFMAN BRYANT, PALMER, SOTO, INC. JUNE 29, 2002 1. The applicant is requesting, and the Planning Commission granted an approval, for a 1,175 square foot addition with a 770 square foot garage, a Conditional Use Permit to construct a detached garage, a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot and a Variance to permit the detached garage to be located in the front yard area at an existing single family residence. 2. At the June 28, 2002 City Council meeting the Council took jurisdiction of Zoning Case No. 648. Due to concerns pertaining to the existing tennis court lights, the City Attorney was directed to research options available to the City Council regarding the existing, legal non -conforming, tennis court lights, which were originally permitted in 1969. 3. Pursuant to City requirements, this public hearing has been noticed in the Peninsula News and notifications were mailed to property owners within a 1000-foot • • radius of the subject property. Attached is the staff report that was presented to the City Council at the June 28, 2002 meeting. 4. The City Attorney has determined that the provisions of Ordinance 287, (City's Outdoor Lighting Standards), apply in this situation as the ordinance states in part, "Outdoor lighting is prohibited except as provided below." The list of permitted lights does not include tennis court lights. 5. After informing the applicant that the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance would apply in this case, the applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Hofman, submitted a letter to the City, which is attached, stating that they will comply with the ordinance and will deactivate the lights. 6. Due to the applicability of the existing Municipal Code in this case, and not being aware of any other issues, we have taken the liberty of preparing a Resolution that the City Council may wish to consider approving this case. The Resolution includes condition "AD" requiring compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council open the public hearing, consider the staff report and take public testimony. Upon closing of the public hearing, it is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 919 approving Zoning Case No. 648. JU 1 —U1 —UZ 10: 17A 4 P_02 • July 1, 2002 Mr. Craig Nealis City Manager City of Rolling Hills No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 • 4lefb 41i* SrAe05HW 1951 LONG BEACH Belmont Shore Los Altos Bixby Knolls Marina L.A. COUNTY Via Fax: 310-377-7288 Torrance RE: Zoning Case No. 648 1 Johns Canyon Road, Roiling Hills Dear Mr. Nealis: ORANGE COUNTY Westminster Orange Buena Park Irvine Los Alamitos Tustin This letter shall confirm in writing our intention as residents of Rolling Hills to comply with the outdoor lighting ordinance No. 287. The tennis court lights will be electrically deactivated. Yours Truly, Cra IV Mari Hofman CORPORATE OFFICE 10900 Los Alamitos Blvd. Suite 160 Los Alamitos, CA 90/20 (562) 596-0200 15621 430-04e0 • FAX • • i RESOLUTION NO. 919 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVALS FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS; A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA; A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE; AND A VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE DETACHED GARAGE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 1 JOHNS CANYON ROAD, IN ZONING CASE NO. 648 (HOFMAN). THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Craig Hofman with respect to real property located at 1 Johns Canyon Road, Rolling Hills (Lot 174-C-MS) requesting. 1) Site Plan Review approval for the construction of 1,175 square foot addition, 770 square foot detached garage and 475 cubic yards of grading; (2) a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area, (3) a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 770 square foot detached garage, and (4) a Variance to permit the detached garage to be located in the front yard area. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the applications on April 16, 2002, May 21, 2002 and at a field trip visit on April 30, 2002. The applicants were 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 applicants and their representative were in attendance at the hearings. One letter of objection of this project was received from a neighbor. Section 3. Initially the applicants submitted a request to construct a new garage, which would be attached to the main residence via a breezeway, and which would require removal of several mature trees. In addition, the height of the ridgeline of the proposed garage would be 2-3 feet higher than the ridgeline of the existing residence. Section 4. At the field trip the Planning Commission expressed concerns about the necessity to remove the mature trees and the height of the proposed garage. Subsequently, the architect submitted a revised site plan, which was considered by the Planning Commission at the May 21, 2002 meeting. The revised project includes a detached garage, which would be lower than the originally proposed garage, and be located in the front yard area, which requires a Conditional Use Permit and a Variance. Section 5. The property is developed with an existing 4,486 square foot house, a 558 square foot stable, a 976 square foot swimming pool and a 7,264 square foot tennis court. Currently there is no garage on the property. A previously existing garage was converted to living area without City approval or a building permit. Pursuant to Section • 17.16.160 of the Zoning Code, every single-family dwelling shall have an above ground garage with a minimum capacity of two cars. Portions of the existing structures encroach into the required setbacks and are legal non -conforming. Section 6. In order to meet the City's requirement of 35% total net lot coverage and 20% structural lot coverage, the applicants proposed to reduce the tennis court by 234 square feet and return said area to natural, landscaped state. Small portions of existing walkways and driveway will also be returned to a natural state to reduce the impervious areas on the lot. Section 7. After discussion, deliberation and consideration of all evidence presented, the Planning Commission found that the structural, the disturbed and impervious areas of the property are pre-existing, and that the proposed project will only minimally affect the existing conditions. The Planning Commission further found that the corrective measures proposed to reduce the size of the tennis court by 234 square feet is not feasible, and suggested that an area of an existing parking pad be reduced by the same amount instead. The Commission found that the spirit and intent of the proposal meets the goals of the City's General Plan and will not negatively affect the subject property or adjacent areas. Section 8. On June 18, 2002, the Planning Commission approved the application by Resolution No. 2002-07. Section 9. On June 28, 2002, the City Council took jurisdiction of Zoning Case No. 648. Due to concerns pertaining to the existing tennis court lights, the City Attorney was directed to research options available to the City Council regarding the lights that were originally permitted in 1969 and are, therefore, considered legal non -conforming. The City Attorney has determined that the provisions of Ordinance 287, (Outdoor Lighting Standards), apply in this case, as the ordinance states in part, " Outdoor lighting is prohibited except as provided below." The list of permitted lights does not include tennis court lights. The applicants submitted a letter July 1, 2002 stating that they will comply with the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance and will deactivate the tennis court lights. Section 10. The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the case on July 8, 2002. The applicants were notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail and were in attendance. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal, and from members of the City staff and the City Council having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. Section 11. The City Council finds that the project qualifies as a Class 4 Exemption, and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 12. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any development requiring a grading permit or any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or RESOLUTION NO. 919 ZC No.648 • • repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building by more than• twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six (36) month period. With respect to the Site Plan Review application requesting 1,175 square foot addition, 770 square foot new detached garage and 475 cubic yards of grading at an existing single-family residence, 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 structures comply 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 setbacks, except for the existing structures, and lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net area of 75,496 square feet. The residence (5,661 sq.ft.), proposed garage (770 sq.ft.), existing swimming pool (976 sq.ft.), existing tennis court (7,264 sq.ft.), and existing stable (558 sq.ft.) will have 15,229 square feet which constitutes 20% of the net lot area which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage permitted. With the reduction in impervious surfaces, which will be returned to a natural, landscaped condition, the total lot coverage including paved areas and driveways will be 26,368 square feet which equals 35.0% of the net lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage permitted. The proposed project is screened from the road by mature trees so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot. The proposed additions will be constructed on an existing building pad and will utilize already existing impervious surfaces. The project will be screened and landscaped with mature trees and shrubs, is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the detached garage will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will permit the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site. Although the disturbed area will exceed the 40% permitted, the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to properties in the vicinity. The site was previously disturbed and no additional disturbance will result from the proposed project. D. The development plan incorporates existing trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. 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 lot to look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space. E. Approximately 1,216 square feet of the existing impervious areas will be restored to original natural condition of the site to minimize paved areas, and will reduce the disturbed area by one percent. F. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed RESOLUTION NO. 919 ZC No.648 3 COD • • project will not change the existing circulation pattern and will utilize an existing driveway. G. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act Section 13. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the City Council hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 648 for proposed structures as shown on the Development Plan dated June 10, 2002 and marked Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 20 of this Resolution. Section 14. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. A Variance to Section 17.16.070 (B) is required because it states that the lot disturbance shall be limited to 40% of the net lot area. With respect to this request for a Variance for lot disturbance of 50.8%, the City Council 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. The Variance for the total disturbance is necessary because it already exists. The existing disturbed area of the lot is at 51.8%. The applicant will reduce the disturbed area to 50.8% by returning certain impervious areas to natural, landscaped condition. A tennis court, which is included in the disturbed area calculations, exists on the site and pre dates City of Rolling Hills and Rolling Hills Community Association's requirements for tennis courts. The existing development, which includes the tennis court, on the lot creates a difficulty in meeting this Code requirement. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question. The Variance is necessary because of the existing conditions of the lot. A very small portion of the lot will be disturbed to allow for the construction of the detached garage, but 1,216 square feet of existing disturbed area will be undisturbed. 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. All development will occur within required setbacks, and will be adequately screened to prevent adverse visual impact to surrounding properties. Section 15. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the City Council hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 648 to permit a disturbed area of 38,395 square feet or 50.8%, subject to the conditions specified in Section 20 of this Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 919 ZC No.648 • • Section 16. Section 17.16.210(A)(4) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a detached garage under certain conditions, provided a Conditional Use Permit for such use is approved. The applicants are requesting to construct a 770 square foot detached garage. Such garage will be located in the front yard area of the lot. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the City Council finds as follows: A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a detached garage 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 uses in the community, and the area proposed for the garage would be located in an area on the property where such use will not change the existing configuration of structures on the lot. B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and the construction of a detached garage will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed garage will take place of an already existing paved driveway and is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the garage will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the detached garage will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community. D. The' proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district and does not encroach into any setback areas. E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of Title 17 of the Zoning Code because a stable already exists on the lot. Section 17. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the City Council hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a detached garage in accordance with the development plan dated June 10, 2002 and marked Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 648 subject to the conditions contained in Section 20 of this Resolution. Section 18. Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, conditionally permitted uses may not be located in the front yard area. The applicant is requesting permission to allow the detached garage to be constructed in the front yard area. With respect to this request for a Variance, the City Council finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone. The proposed structure will be located on an existing building RESOLUTION NO. 919 ZC No.648 • • pad in the front yard. The existing development on the lot creates a difficulty in relocating the proposed structure. B. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. The detached garage will be located on an already existing building pad and will mitigate the necessity for any additional substantial grading of the lot. The proposed location is desirous because several mature trees will be saved and the height of the garage will be lower by 2-3 feet than if the garage was attached to the house, which would not require a Variance or a Conditional Use Permit. Section 19. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the City Council hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 648 to permit a detached garage to be located in the front yard, subject to the conditions specified in Section 19 of this Resolution. Section 20. The Site Plan Review approved in Section 13 of this Resolution, the Variances regarding the maximum permitted disturbed area, and the location of the proposed detached garage in the front yard area approved in Sections 15 and 19 of this Resolution, and the Conditional Use Permit regarding the construction of a detached garage approved in Section 17 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan Review, Variances, and Conditional Use Permit approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070(A), 17.42.070(A), and 17.46.080(A) unless work commences prior to said expiration or otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of those sections. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan, Variances and Conditional Use Permit approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicants have been given written notice to cease such violation, the opportunity for a hearing has been provided, and if requested, has been held, and thereafter the applicant fails to correct the violation within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of the City's determination. C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Codes, 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 marked Exhibit A and dated June 10, 2002, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. F. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 15,229 square feet or 20% in conformance with lot coverage limitations. RESOLUTION NO. 919 ZC No.648 6 (45) G. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 26,368 square feet or 35.0% in conformance with total lot coverage limitations. H. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 38,395 square feet or 50.8% in conformance with lot coverage limitations approved in Section 12 of this Resolution. I. Residential building pad coverage on the 23,094 square foot residential building pad shall not exceed 6,431 square feet or 27.85%; coverage on all of the other existing building pads shall not be increased. J. • The detached garage shall not exceed 770 square feet. K. Grading shall not exceed 475 cubic yards of cut soil and 475 cubic yards of fill soil. Grading shall be balanced on site and shall preserve the existing vegetation to the greatest extent possible. L. A portion of the existing driveway, west of the proposed garage and several existing walkways shall be returned to a natural state and be landscaped in order to decrease the amount of impervious surfaces on the lot, as indicated on the site plan on file in the Planning Department dated June 10, 2002 and marked Exhibit A. In addition, 234 square feet of the existing parking pad located behind the house, (east of the house) shall be returned to natural state to match the adjacent area and shall be landscaped. Such area shall serve as substitution for the 234 square feet of impervious area proposed to be removed from the tennis court. Those areas shall be planted, to the maximum extent possible, with native vegetation. M. An inspection by Los Angeles County Building Official shall be made to ascertain that the unauthorized conversion of the area previously used for a garage was made in a manner that meets the requirements of Building Codes. Should building code deficiencies be found, the applicants shall correct all deficiencies, prior to the issuance of a final inspection for the project. The applicants shall be responsible for all fees, including the "as built" fees for said inspection. N. A landscape plan for the areas to be returned to natural state and the areas surrounding the proposed additions, including the detached garage, shall be submitted for review and approval to the Planning staff. The landscaping plan shall include water efficient irrigation, to the maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a low gallonage irrigation system, utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using "hydrozones," considers slope factors and climate conditions in design, and utilizes means to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray in accordance with Section 17.27.020 (Water Efficient Landscaping Requirements) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. O. Landscaping shall be designed using mature trees and shrubs so as not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but to obscure the detached garage. If any new trees will be planted, such tree(s) shall be of native variety and when grown to maturity shall not exceed the height of the ridgeline of the residence and the garage. RESOLUTION NO. 919 ZC No.648 • • P. During construction, dust control measures shall be used to stabilize the soil from wind erosion and reduce dust and objectionable odors generated by construction activities in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District, Los Angeles County and local ordinances and engineering practices. Q. During construction, conformance with local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property is not exposed to landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required. R. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, storm water pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, objectionable odors, landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required. S. During construction, the Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 1998 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control storm water pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles. T. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site. U. 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. V. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and maintenance of storm water drainage facilities. W. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) related to solid waste. X. All utility lines to the residence and the proposed garage shall be placed underground. The roofing material shall conform to the requirements of the City of Rolling Hills Building Code. Y. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of building or grading permit. Z. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the development plan described in Condition D. AA. 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 shall be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. RESOLUTION NO. 919 ZC No.648 • • AB. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these Variances, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals, pursuant to Section 17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective. AC. All conditions of the Variances, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals, which apply, must be complied with prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit from the County of Los Angeles. AD. The property owners shall be required to conform to the City of Rolling Hills Outdoor Lighting Standards Ordinance, (Ordinance No. 287). The applicants shall deactivate the tennis court lights by no later than August 8, 2002. AE. Notwithstanding sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project, which would constitute additional structural development, shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8th DAY OF JULY 2002. ALLEN LAY, MAYOR ATTEST: MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 919 ZC No.648 • • City ol /2 �Pna JJ,FP, lAt-il1Ar Y 74, ;y i 7 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 1310) 377.1521 FAX: (3101 377.728B Email rityolrhgao$ corn Agenda Item No.: 5B Mtg.Date: 6/24/02 DATE: JUNE 24, 2002 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING THE FOLLOWING: (1) SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITION, DETACHED GARAGE AND GRADING; (2) A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA, (3) A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE, AND (4) A VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE DETACHED GARAGE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 648. (HOFMAN). BACKGROUND 1. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-07, which is attached, on June 18, 2002 at their regular meeting granting a request for a Site Plan Review for the construction of 1,175 square foot addition with a 770 square foot garage, a Conditional Use Permit to construct a detached garage, a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot and a Variance to permit the detached garage to be located in the front yard area at an existing single family residence. The vote was 3-0. Commissioner Witte was absent and excused. 2. The Planning Commission considered this request on April 16, 2002, May 21, 2002 public hearings and at a field trip on April 30, 2002. At the field trip the Commissioners expressed concern about the trees that would have to be removed and the height of the proposed garage. The architect explained that several of the pine trees will be removed and that the height of the ridgeline of the proposed garage will be 16.5 feet and 14 feet at the plate line, which is higher than the existing house. 3. The lot is developed with a 4,486 square foot residence, a 558 square foot stable, a 976 square foot swimming pool and a 7,264 square foot tennis court with lights. Records indicate that the tennis court lights were approved and installed when the tennis court was constructed in 1969, which pre -dates the City requirements for tennis courts. Records in the Los Angeles County Building and Safety Department show that an electrical permit was issued for tennis court lights in 1969. Therefore, the tennis court and the lights are legal non -conforming and are allowed to remain. 4. Subsequent to the field trip, the applicants submitted a request to construct a detached garage, instead of the originally proposed attached garage. The origina 1 garage was to be attached to the main house via a breezeway. A Conditional Use Permit is required for a detached garage and a Variance is required to construct a detached structure in the front yard area. 5. The applicants' representative states that detaching the garage will allow two existing pine trees to remain and the garage roof will be lower (11' at the plate line and 14' at the ridge) than the previously proposed garage. The proposed detached garage will be located 12 feet south from the original proposal but consistent with the setback requirements. The applicants' representative further states, in part, that the request for the Variance to locate the garage in the front yard will not be detrimental because "its appearance will be substantially the same as the previously proposed attached garage, but will be lower and two mature pine trees will be retained Additionally, there will be 390 square feet less driveway (more planting) in the front yard. The existing property already has a stable and a pool in the front yard" 6. Portions of existing structures encroach into the required setbacks. One of the existing rooms, partially located in the side yard setback, is attached to the main house via a solid roof. 7. There are four building pads on the property. The existing residence and the proposed detached garage are located on a pad measuring 23,094 square feet, for a coverage of 20.3%. With the additions, the structural pad coverage on the residential building pad will be 27.8%, which is within the 30% Planning Commission guideline. The 976 square foot pool is located on a 1,879 square foot pad, for a coverage of 51.9%. The 7,264 square foot tennis court is located on a pad of which 4,646 square feet is located outside the setback, for a pad coverage of 156.3%. The 558 square foot stable is located on a 1,371 square foot pad for a coverage of 40.7%. The existing combined average pad coverage is 42.86%. 8. In order to meet the City's requirement of 35% total net lot coverage, the applicants originally proposed to reduce the tennis court by 234 square feet and return said area to natural, landscaped state. In addition, portions of existing walkways and driveway will be returned to a natural state to reduce the impervious areas on the lot. The Planning Commission found that the measure proposed to reduce the size of the tennis court by 234 square feet is not feasible and that it would create an awkward court, and suggested that an area of an existing parking pad, located in the rear of the house, be reduced by the same amount instead. 9. The applicant is seeking a Variance from the 40% maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot. The net lot area of the subject lot is 75,496 square feet. The existing disturbed area is 51.8%. No additional disturbed area will be created, as the addition will be placed on an already disturbed portion of the lot. The applicant is proposing to reduce the disturbed (impervious) areas by 1,216 square feet and landscape those areas. The proposed disturbed area will be at 50.85% of the net lot area. Responding to the Criteria to be satisfied for grant of a Variance for the request to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed areas, the applicant states in part that, the project does not increase the disturbed area, as the addition will occupy previously • • disturbed area of the lot. The site's character will remain with attractive mature landscaping. The applicant's representative further states that the variance is required for a pre-existing condition, which was permitted previously. 10. The proposed structural net lot coverage will be 15,229 square feet or 20.0%, which is within the maximum 20% permitted and includes the residence, garage, stable, tennis court and the pool. The total structural and flatwork net lot coverage is proposed at 26,368 square feet or 35.0 %, which is the maximum permitted. 11. Grading for the project is required for the proposed garage and will be 475 cubic yards of cut and 475 cubic yards of fill, and will be balanced on site. 12. The original residence was constructed in 1948. A substantial addition to the house was completed in 1964. The pool was constructed in 1966, the tennis court in 1969, the stable in 1970 and in 1987 a bathroom was added and other alterations and repairs were done. In 1989 the Commission approved a CUP for a 741 square foot cabana, which was not constructed. 13. There are two existing driveways serving the property located off of Johns Canyon Road. One of the driveways serves the stable and the other the existing motor court. 14. Currently, there is no garage on the property. Records indicate that as late as 1989, a garage existed on the lot. Sometime between 1989 and 2002, the garage was converted to living space. Pursuant to Section 17.16.160 of the Zoning Code, every single-family dwelling shall have an above ground garage with a minimum capacity of two cars. A condition of approval is included in the Resolution stating that an inspection by the L.A. County Building and Safety Building Official be conducted to determine if the conversion of the previous garage to living area meets the Building Code requirements and an "as built" building permit is required. 15. It will be required that all utility lines be placed underground, and that the new and existing roof comply with the City and RHCA requirements for Class "A" material and Class "A' assembly, pursuant to Sections 17.27.030 and 17.16.190 respectively. 16. Criteria for Site Plan Review and Variance are attached. A list of properties in the vicinity is also enclosed. 17. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 18. One letter objecting to the Variance request has been submitted to staff and is attached. No specific reasons are enumerated for the objection, however the writer states that in general she is against granting variances from the City's Codes. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council receive and file Resolution No. 2002-07. VARIANCE REQUIRED 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; and 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; and 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; and 1 D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; 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 1G. That the variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills. NEARBY PROPERTIES: ZC NO. 648. 1 Johns Canyon Road RESIDENCE LOT SIZE ADDRESS OWNER (SQ.FI,) SQ. FT. (NET) 2 Johns Canyon Ghormley 2,611 161,172 3 Johns Canyon Norris 4,592 95,832 4 Johns Canyon Dalcin 5,424 62,726 5 Johns Canyon Kamen 3,604 114,998 27 Crest Rd. W. Helford 7,767 182,952 29 Crest Rd. W. Yu 6,059 76,230 33 Crest Rd. W. Saks 3,882 174,240 AVERAGE 4,848 124,021 1 Johns Canyon Hofman Existing 4,496 87,556 Proposed 5,661 i ZONING CASE NO. 648 SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S-2 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 35 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line STRUCTURES Site Plan Review required for grading requiring a grading permit, any new structure or if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period. STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (Structures and flatwork) (35% maximum) RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PAD COVERAGE (Guideline maximum of 30%) Combined (all pads) coverage STABLE BUILDING PAD COVERAGE TENNIS COURT BUILDING PAD COVERAGE POOUSPA BUILDING PAD COVERAGE 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 nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist. STABLE (450 SQ.FT. & 550 SO.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS EXISTING PROPOSED Existing residence, pool, stable & tennis court. Existing structures encroach into setbacks Residence Garage Pool Tennis court Stable Total 17.59% 33.46% 4486 sq.ft. 0 976 sq.ft. 7264 sq.ft. 558 soft. 20.3% of building pad 42.86% 40.7% 156.3% 51.94% N/A 51.8% 558 sq.ft. existing Addition to residence and a new detached garage which requires a CUP and a Variance Residence Garage Pool Tennis court Stable 13,284sq.ft. Total 20.0% 34.92% Existing access from Johns Canyon Road Existing access from Johns Canyon Road N/A N/A 5661 sq.ft. 770 sq. ft. 976 sq.ft 7264 sq.ft. 558 so. at 15,229. ft. 27.85% of 23,094 sq.ft. building pad 48.9% 40.7% 156.3% 51.94% 475 cu. yds. of cut soil 475 cu. yds. of fill soil 50.8% or 38,395 sq.ft. 1558 sq.ft.existing 550 sq.ft. future corral No change No change Planning Commission review Planning Commission review OF 1-100. tt,1`'t r;v )0,,f,kA--), gostP-'4 c}.±.4-( u ca,to Jam„' '�`' d 1coi 0A4 6cugh 9fr WAA/1 0-0 owl z 3 o, -4(7--4)11 ha „ey ext- eoaa-t--- 0 • RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING THE FOLLOWING: (1) SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITION, DETACHED GARAGE AND GRADING; (2) A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA, (3) A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE, AND (4) A VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE DETACHED GARAGE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 648 (HOFMAN). THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Craig Holman with respect to real property located at 1 Johns Canyon Road, Rolling Hills (Lot 174-C-MS) requesting 1) Site Plan Review approval for the construction of 1,175 square foot addition, 770 square foot detached garage and 475 cubic yards of grading; (2) a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area, (3) a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 770 square foot detached garage, and (4) a Variance to permit the detached garage to be located in the front yard area. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the applications on April 16, 2002, May 21, 2002 and at a field trip visit on April 30, 2002. The applicants were 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 applicants and their representative were in attendance at the hearings. One letter of objection of this project was received from a neighbor. Section 3. Initially the applicants submitted a request to construct a new garage, which would be attached to the main residence via a breezeway, and which would require removal of several mature trees. In addition, the height of the ridgeline of the proposed garage would be 2-3 feet higher than the ridgeline of the existing residence. Section 4. At the field trip the Planning Commission expressed concerns about the necessity to remove the mature trees and the height of the proposed garage. Subsequently, the architect submitted a revised site plan, which was considered by the Planning Commission at the May 21, 2002 meeting. The revised project consists of a detached garage, which would be lower than the originally proposed garage, and be located in the front yard area, which requires a Conditional Use Permit and a Variance. Section 5. The property is developed with an existing 4,486 square foot house, a 558 square foot stable, a 976 square foot swimming pool and a 7,264 square foot tennis court. Currently there is no garage on the property. A previously existing garage was converted to living area without City approval or a building permit. Pursuant to Section • • 17.16.160 of the Zoning Code, every single-family dwelling shall have an above ground garage with a minimum capacity of two cars. Portions of the existing structures encroach into the required setbacks and are legal non -conforming. The tennis court lights and the fence surrounding the tennis court pre date City and Rolling Hills Community Association's requirements for tennis courts. One of. the existing rooms, partially located in the side yard setback, is attached to the main house via a solid roof. Section 6. In order to meet the City's requirement of 35% total net lot coverage and 20% structural lot coverage, the applicants proposed to reduce the tennis court by 234 square feet and return said area to natural, landscaped state. Small portions of existing walkways and driveway will also be returned to a natural state to reduce the impervious areas on the lot. Section 7. After discussion, deliberation and consideration of all evidence presented, the Planning Commission found that the structural, the disturbed and impervious areas of the property are pre-existing, and that the proposed project will only minimally affect the existing conditions. The Planning Commission further found that the corrective measures proposed to reduce the size of the tennis court by 234 square feet is not feasible, and suggested that an area of an existing parking pad be reduced by the same amount instead. The Commission found that the spirit and intent of the proposal meets the goals of the City's General Plan and will not negatively affect the subject property or adjacent areas. Section 8. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 4 Exemption (State of CA Guidelines, Section 15304 - Minor Land Alteration) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 9. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any development requiring a grading permit or any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six (36) month period. With respect to the Site Plan Review application requesting 1,175 square foot addition, 770 square foot new detached garage and 475 cubic yards of grading at an existing single-family 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 project conforms to Zoning Code setbacks, except for the existing structures, and lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net area of 75,496 square feet. The residence (5,661 sq.ft.), proposed garage (770 sq.ft.), existing swimming pool (976 sq.ft.), existing tennis court (7,264 sq.ft.), and existing stable (558 sq.ft.) will have 15,229 square feet which constitutes 20% of the net lot area which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage permitted. With the reduction in impervious surfaces, which will be returned to a natural, landscaped RESOl_L'i ION NO 2002.07 LC' Nu n.7M • • condition, the total lot coverage including paved areas and driveways will be 26,368 square feet which equals 35.0% of the net lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage permitted. The proposed project is screened from the road by mature trees so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot. The proposed additions will be constructed on an existing building pad and will utilize already existing impervious surfaces. The project will be screened and landscaped with mature trees and shrubs, is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the detached garage will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and -will permit the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site. Although the disturbed area will exceed the 40% permitted, the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to properties in the vicinity. The site was previously disturbed and no additional disturbance will result from the proposed project. D. The development plan incorporates existing trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. 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 lot to look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space. E. Approximately 1,216 square feet of the existing impervious areas will be restored to original natural condition of the site to minimize paved areas, and will reduce the disturbed area by one percent. F. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will not change the existing circulation pattern and will utilize an existing driveway. G. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 648 for proposed structures as shown on the Development Plan dated June 10, 2002 and marked Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 17 of this Resolution. Section 11. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. A Variance to Section 17.16.070 (B) is required because it states that RESOLUTION NO 2002-07 1C \(+h0 • • the lot disturbance shall be limited to 40% of the net lot area. With respect to this request for a Variance for lot disturbance of 50.8%, 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. The Variance for the total disturbance is necessary because it already exists. The existing disturbed area of the lot is at 51.8%. The applicant will reduce the disturbed area to 50.8% by returning certain impervious areas to natural, landscaped condition. A tennis court, which is included in the disturbed 'area calculations, exists on the site and pre dates City of Rolling Hills and Rolling Hills Community Association's requirements for tennis courts. The existing development, which includes the tennis court, on the lot creates a difficulty in meeting this Code requirement. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question. The Variance is necessary because of the existing conditions of the lot. A very small portion of the lot will be disturbed to allow for the construction of the detached garage, but 1,216 square feet of existing disturbed area will be undisturbed. 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. All development will occur within required setbacks, and 'will be adequately screened to prevent adverse visual impact to surrounding properties. Section 12. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 648 to permit a disturbed area of 38,395 square feet or 50.8%, subject to the conditions specified in Section 17 of this Resolution. Section 13. Section 17.16.210(A)(4) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a detached garage under certain conditions, provided a Conditional Use Permit for such use is approved by the Planning Commission. The applicants are requesting to construct a 770 square foot detached garage. Such garage will be located in the front yard area of the lot. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a detached garage 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 uses in the community, and the area proposed for the garage would be located in an area on the property where such use will not change the existing configuration of structures on the lot. B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and the construction of a detached garage will not RESOLL HON NO 21rn2 07 iC. No t-48 • • adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed garage will take place of an already existing paved driveway and is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the garage will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the detached garage will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community. D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district and does not encroach into any setback areas. E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of Title 17 of the Zoning Code because a stable already exists on the lot. Section 14. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a detached garage in accordance with the development plan dated June 10, 2002 and marked Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 648 subject to the conditions contained in Section 17 of this Resolution. Section 15. Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, conditionally permitted uses may not be located in the front yard area. The applicant is requesting permission to allow the detached garage to be constructed in the front yard area. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone. The proposed structure will be located on an existing building pad in the front yard. The existing development on the lot creates a difficulty in relocating the proposed structure. B. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. The detached garage will be located on an already existing building pad and will mitigate the necessity for any additional substantial grading of the lot. The proposed location is desirous because several mature trees will be saved and the height of the garage will be lower by 2-3 feet than if the garage was attached to the house, which would not require a Variance or a Conditional Use Permit. Section 16. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 648 to permit a detached garage to be located in the front yard, subject to the conditions specified in Section 17 of this Resolution. RESOLUTION NO 2002•f17 7.0 No 648 • • Section 17. The Site Plan Review approved in Section 10 of this Resolution, the Variances regarding the maximum permitted disturbed area, and the location of the proposed detached garage in the front yard area approved in Sections 12 and 16 of this Resolution, and the Conditional Use Permit regarding the construction of a detached garage approved in Section 14 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan Review, Variances, and Conditional Use Permit approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date.of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070(A), 17.42.070(A), and 17.46.080(A) unless work commences prior to said expiration or otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of those sections. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan, Variances and Conditional Use Permit approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicants have been given written notice to cease such violation, the opportunity for a hearing has been provided, and if requested, has been held, and thereafter the applicant fails to correct the violation within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of the City's determination. • C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Codes, 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 marked Exhibit A and dated June 10, 2002, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. F. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 15,229 square feet or 20% in conformance with lot coverage limitations. G. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 26,368 square feet or 35.0% in conformance with total lot coverage limitations. H. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 38,395 square feet or 50.8% in conformance with lot coverage limitations approved in Section 12 of this Resolution. I. Residential building pad coverage on the 23,094 square foot residential building pad shall not exceed 6,431 square feet or 27.85%; coverage on all of the other existing building pads shall not be increased. J. The detached garage shall not exceed 770 square feet. RESOLUTION NO 2002.07 ZC No h45 h • K. Grading shall not exceed 475 cubic yards of cut soil and 475 cubic yards of fill soil. Grading shall be balanced on site and shall preserve the existing vegetation to the greatest extent possible. L. A portion of the existing driveway, west of the proposed garage and several existing walkways shall be returned to a natural state and be landscaped in order to decrease the amount of impervious surfaces on the lot, as indicated on the site plan on file in the Planning Department dated June 10, 2002 and marked Exhibit A. In addition, 234 square feet of the existing parking pad located behind the house, (east of the house) shall be returned to natural state to match the adjacent area and shall be landscaped. Such area shall serve as substitution for the 234 square feet of impervious area proposed to be removed from the tennis court. Those areas shall be planted, to the maximum extent possible, with native vegetation. M. An inspection by Los Angeles County Building Official shall be made to ascertain that the unauthorized conversion of the area previously used for a garage was made in a manner that meets the requirements of Building Codes. Should building code deficiencies be found, the applicants shall correct all deficiencies, prior to the issuance of a final inspection for the project. The applicants shall be responsible for all fees, including the "as built" fees for said inspection. N. A landscape plan for the areas to be returned to natural state and the areas surrounding the proposed additions, including the detached garage, shall be submitted for review and approval to the Planning staff. The landscaping plan shall include water efficient irrigation, to the maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a low gallonage irrigation system, utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using "hydrozones," considers slope factors. and climate conditions in design, and utilizes means to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray in accordance with Section 17.27.020 (Water Efficient Landscaping Requirements) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. O. Landscaping shall be designed using mature trees and shrubs so as not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but to obscure the detached garage. If any new trees will be planted, such tree(s) shall be of native variety and when grown to maturity shall not exceed the height of the ridgeline of the residence and the garage. P. During construction, dust control measures shall be used to stabilize the soil from wind erosion and reduce dust and objectionable odors generated by construction activities in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District, Los Angeles County and local ordinances and engineering practices. Q. During construction, conformance with local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property is not exposed to landslides, mud flows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required. R. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, storm water pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle RESOLUTION NO 2002-07 /.0 No MMH 7 • • trips, noise, dust, objectionable odors, landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required. S. During construction, the Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 1998 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control storm water pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles. T. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site. U. 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. V. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and maintenance of storm water drainage facilities. W. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) related to solid waste. X. All utility lines to the residence and the proposed garage shall be placed underground. The roofing material shall conform to the requirements of the City of Rolling Hills Building Code. Y. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of building or grading permit. Z. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the development plan described in Condition D. AA. 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 shall be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. AB. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these Variances, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals, pursuant to Section 17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective. AC. All conditions of the Variances, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals, which apply, must be complied with prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit from the County of Los Angeles. AD. The property owners shall be required to conform to the City of Rolling Hills Outdoor Lighting Standards Ordinance, (Ordinance No. 287). RESOLUTION NC) 20(12.07 /C' NJ') f,-4 ti • • AE. Notwithstanding sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project, which would constitute additional structural development, shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 18th DAY OF JUNE 2002. ATTEST: MARILYN KE EVIE HANKII.JS VICE- CHAIRMAN . :` DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO 201)2.07 4 • • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) § CITY OF ROLLING HILLS) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2002-07 entitled: A. RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING THE FOLLOWING: (1) SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITION, DETACHED GARAGE AND GRADING; (2) A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA; (3) A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE, AND (4) A VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE DETACHED GARAGE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 648 (HOFMAN). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on June 18, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Margeta, Sommer and Chairwoman Hankins. ' NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Witte. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. KESOLUIION NO 2002•07 7C.• No 648 d DEPUTY CITY CLERK 10 city 0/!2?fps JUL a !NCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 5B Mtg.Date: 6/24/02 DATE: JUNE 24, 2002 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING THE FOLLOWING: (1) SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITION, DETACHED GARAGE AND GRADING; (2) A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA, (3) A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE, AND (4) A VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE DETACHED GARAGE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 648. (HOFMAN). BACKGROUND 1. The Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2002-07, which is attached, on June 18, 2002 at their regular meeting granting a request for a Site Plan Review for the construction of 1,175 square foot addition with a 770 square foot garage, a Conditional Use Permit to construct a detached garage, a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot and a Variance to permit the detached garage to be located in the front yard area at an existing single family residence. The vote was 3-0. Commissioner Witte was absent and excused. 2. The Planning Commission considered this request on April 16, 2002, May 21, 2002 public hearings and at a field trip on April 30, 2002. At the field trip the Commissioners expressed concern about the trees that would have to be removed and the height of the proposed garage. The architect explained that several of the pine trees will be removed and that the height of the ridgeline of the proposed garage will be 16.5 feet and 14 feet at the plate line, which is higher than the existing house. 3. The lot is developed with a 4,486 square foot residence, a 558 square foot stable, a 976 square foot swimming pool and a 7,264 square foot tennis court with lights. Records indicate that the tennis court lights were approved and installed when the tennis court was constructed in 1969, which pre -dates the City requirements for tennis courts. Records in the Los Angeles County Building and Safety Department show that an electrical permit was issued for tennis court lights in 1969. Therefore, the tennis court and the lights are legal non -conforming and are allowed to remain. 4. Subsequent to the field trip, the applicants submitted a request to construct a detached garage, instead of the originally proposed attached garage. The original garage was to be attached to the main house via a breezeway. A Conditional Use Permit is required for a detached garage and a Variance is required to construct a detached structure in the front yard area. 5. The applicants' representative states that detaching the garage will allow two existing pine trees to remain and the garage roof will be lower (11' at the plate line and 14' at the ridge) than the previously proposed garage. The proposed detached garage will be located 12 feet south from the original proposal but consistent with the setback requirements. The applicants' representative further states, in part, that the request for the Variance to locate the garage in the front yard will not be detrimental because "its appearance will be substantially the same as the previously proposed attached garage, but will be lower and two mature pine trees will be retained Additionally, there will be 390 square feet less driveway (more planting) in the front yard. The existing property already has a stable and a pool in the front yard" 6. Portions of existing structures encroach into the required setbacks. One of the existing rooms, partially located in the side yard setback, is attached to the main house via a solid roof. 7. There are four building pads on the property. The existing residence and the proposed detached garage are located on' a pad measuring 23,094 square feet, for a coverage of 20.3%. With the additions, the structural pad coverage on the residential building pad will be 27.8%, which is within the 30% Planning Commission guideline. The 976 square foot pool is located on a 1,879 square foot pad, for a coverage of 51.9%. The 7,264 square foot, tennis court is located on a pad of which 4,646 square feet is located outside the setback, for a pad coverage of 156.3%. The 558 square foot stable is located on a 1,371 square foot pad for a coverage of 40.7%. The existing combined average pad coverage is 42.86%. 8. In order to meet the City's requirement of 35% total net lot coverage, the applicants originally proposed to reduce the tennis court by 234 square feet and return said area to natural, landscaped state. In addition, portions of existing walkways and driveway will be returned to a natural state to reduce the impervious areas on the lot. The Planning Commission found that the measure proposed to reduce the size of the tennis court by 234 square feet is not feasible and that it would create an awkward court, and suggested that an area of an existing parking pad, located in the rear of the house, be reduced by the same amount instead. 9. The applicant is seeking a Variance from the 40% maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot. The net lot area of the subject lot is 75,496 square feet. The existing disturbed area is 51.8%. No additional disturbed area will be created, as the addition will be placed on an already disturbed portion of the lot. The applicant is proposing to reduce the disturbed (impervious) areas by 1,216 square feet and landscape those areas. The proposed disturbed area will be at 50.85% of the net lot area. Responding to the Criteria to be satisfied for grant of a Variance for the request to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed areas, the applicant states in part that, the project does not increase the disturbed area, as the addition will occupy previously • • disturbed area of the lot. The site's character will remain with attractive mature landscaping. The applicant's representative further states that the variance is required for a pre-existing condition, which was permitted previously. 10. The proposed structural net lot coverage will be 15,229 square feet or 20.0%, which is within the maximum 20% permitted and includes the residence, garage, stable, tennis court and the pool. The total structural and flatwork net lot coverage is proposed at 26,368 square feet or 35.0 %, which is the maximum permitted. 11. Grading for the project is required for the proposed garage and will be 475 cubic yards of cut and 475 cubic yards of fill, and will be balanced on site. 12. The original residence was constructed in 1948. A substantial addition to the house was completed in 1964. The pool was constructed in 1966, the tennis court in 1969, the stable in 1970 and in 1987 a bathroom was added and other alterations and repairs were done. In 1989 the Commission approved a CUP for a 741 square foot cabana, which was not constructed. 13. There are two existing driveways serving the property located off of Johns Canyon Road. One of the driveways serves the stable and the other the existing motor court. 14. Currently, there is no garage on the property. Records indicate that as late as 1989, a garage existed on the lot. Sometime between 1989 and 2002, the garage was converted to living space. Pursuant to Section 17.16.160 of the Zoning Code, every single-family dwelling shall have an above ground garage with a minimum capacity of two cars. A condition of approval is included in the Resolution stating that an inspection by the L.A. County Building and Safety Building Official be conducted to determine if the conversion of the previous garage to living area meets the Building Code requirements and an "as built" building permit is required. 15. It will be required that all utility lines be placed underground, and that the new and existing roof comply with the City and RHCA requirements for Class "A" material and Class "A' assembly, pursuant to Sections 17.27.030 and 17.16.190 respectively. 16. Criteria for Site Plan Review and Variance are attached. A list of properties in the vicinity is also enclosed. 17. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 18. One letter objecting to the Variance request has been submitted to staff and is attached. No specific reasons are enumerated for the objection, however the writer states that in general she is against granting variances from the City's Codes. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council receive and file Resolution No. 2002-07. • • d. VARIANCE REQUIRED 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; and 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; and 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; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; 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. NEARBY PROPERTIES: • ZC NO. 648, 1 Johns Canyon Road RESIDENCE LOT SIZE ADDRESS OWNER (SQ.FT.) SQ. FT. (NET) 2 Johns Canyon Ghormley 2,611 161,172 3 Johns Canyon Norris 4,592 95,832 4 Johns Canyon Dalcin 5,424 62,726 5 Johns Canyon Kamen 3,604 114,998 27 Crest Rd. W. Helford 7,767 182,952 29 Crest Rd. W. Yu 6,059 76,230 33 Crest Rd. W. Saks 3,882 174,240 AVERAGE 4,848 124,021 1 Johns Canyon Hofman Existing 4,496 87,556 Proposed 5,661 ZONING CASE NO. 648 SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S-2 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 35 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line STRUCTURES Site Plan Review required for grading requiring a grading permit, any new structure or if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period. STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (Structures and flatwork) (35% maximum) RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PAD COVERAGE (Guideline maximum of 30%) Combined (all pads) coverage STABLE BUILDING PAD COVERAGE TENNIS COURT BUILDING PAD COVERAGE POOUSPA BUILDING PAD COVERAGE 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 nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist. STABLE (450 SQ.FT. & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS EXISTING PROPOSED Existing residence, pool, stable & tennis court. Existing structures encroach into setbacks Residence Garage Pool Tennis court Stable Total 17.59% 33.46% Addition to residence and a new detached garage which requires a CUP and a Variance 4486 sq.ft. Residence 0 Garage 976 sq.ft. Pool 7264 sq.ft. Tennis court 558 sa.ft. Stable 20.3% of building pad 42.86% 40.7% 156.3% 51.94% N/A 51.8% 558 sq.ft. existing 13,284sq.ft. Total 20.0% 34.92% Existing access from Johns Canyon Road Existing access from Johns Canyon Road N/A N/A 5661 sq.ft. 770 sq.ft. 976 sq.ft 7264 sq.ft. 558 sa.at 15,229.ft. 27.85% of 23,094 sq.ft. building pad 48.9% 40.7% 156.3% 51.94% 475 cu. yds. of cut soil 475 cu. yds. of fill soil 50.8% or 38,395 sq.ft. 558 sq.ft.existing 550 sq.ft. future corral No change No change Planning Commission review Planning Commission review Ofo A/1511; 6 )wv1(76' 9fr ik,e) ° 4/ C D 3a- vrAlIA- cer Chfivr%411'11: goiP-'4% 944' il'ffi c0 iAll- vej- 6 I,' 4j%A)-1 / Iva -At 1 I ' . • Aka/ ite ejlf- 947' 4tit t4fr-e Aav aftmd- Ooacti • • RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING THE FOLLOWING: (1) SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITION, DETACHED GARAGE AND GRADING; (2) A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA, (3) A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE, AND (4) A VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE DETACHED GARAGE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 648 (HOFMAN). THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Craig Hofman with respect to real property located at 1 Johns Canyon Road, Rolling Hills (Lot 174-C-MS) requesting 1) Site Plan Review approval for the construction of 1,175 square foot addition, 770 square foot detached garage and 475 cubic yards of grading; (2) a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area, (3) a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 770 square foot detached garage, and (4) a Variance to permit the detached garage to be located in the front yard area. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the applications on April 16, 2002, May 21, 2002 and at a field trip visit on April 30, 2002. The applicants were 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 applicants and their representative were in attendance at the hearings. One letter of objection of this project was received from a neighbor. Section 3. Initially the applicants submitted a request to construct a new garage, which would be attached to the main residence via a breezeway, and which would require removal of several mature trees. In addition, the height of the ridgeline of the proposed garage would be 2-3 feet higher than the ridgeline of the existing residence. Section 4. At the field trip the Planning Commission expressed concerns about the necessity to remove the mature trees and the height of the proposed garage. Subsequently, the architect submitted a revised site plan, which was considered by the Planning Commission at the May 21, 2002 meeting. The revised project consists of a detached garage, which would be lower than the originally proposed garage, and be located in the front yard area, which requires a Conditional Use Permit and a Variance. Section 5. The property is developed with an existing 4,486 square foot house, a 558 square foot stable, a 976 square foot swimming pool and a 7,264 square foot tennis court. Currently there is no garage on the property. A previously existing garage was converted to living area without City approval or a building permit. Pursuant to Section 17.16.160 of the Zoning Code, every single-family dwelling shall have an above ground garage with a minimum capacity of two cars. Portions of the existing structures encroach into the required setbacks and are legal non -conforming. The tennis court lights and the fence surrounding the tennis court pre date City and Rolling Hills Community Association's requirements for tennis courts. One of the existing rooms, partially located in the side yard setback, is attached to the main house via a solid roof. Section 6. In order to meet the City's requirement of 35% total net lot coverage and 20% structural lot coverage, the applicants proposed to reduce the tennis court by 234 square feet and return said area to natural, landscaped state. Small portions of existing walkways and driveway will also be returned to a natural state to reduce the impervious areas on the lot. Section 7. After discussion, deliberation and consideration of all evidence presented, the Planning Commission found that the structural, the disturbed and impervious areas of the property are pre-existing, and that the proposed project will only minimally affect the existing conditions. The Planning Commission further found that the corrective measures proposed to reduce the size of the tennis court by 234 square feet is not feasible, and suggested that an area of an existing parking pad be reduced by the same amount instead. The Commission found that the spirit and intent of the proposal meets the goals of the City's General Plan and will not negatively affect the subject property or adjacent areas. Section 8. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 4 Exemption (State of CA Guidelines, Section 15304 - Minor Land Alteration) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 9. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any development requiring a grading permit or any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six (36) month period. With respect to the Site Plan Review application requesting 1,175 square foot addition, 770 square foot new detached garage and 475 cubic yards of grading at an existing single-family 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 project conforms to Zoning Code setbacks, except for the existing structures, and lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net area of 75,496 square feet. The residence (5,661 sq.ft.), proposed garage (770 sq.ft.), existing swimming pool (976 sq.ft.), existing tennis court (7,264 sq.ft.), and existing stable (558 sq.ft.) will have 15,229 square feet which constitutes 20% of the net lot area which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage permitted. With the reduction in impervious surfaces, which will be returned to a natural, landscaped RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 2 • • condition, the total lot coverage including paved areas and driveways will be 26,368 square feet which equals 35.0% of the net lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage permitted. The proposed project is screened from the road by mature trees so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot. The proposed additions will be constructed on an existing building pad and will utilize already existing impervious surfaces. The project will be screened and landscaped with mature trees and shrubs, is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the detached garage will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will permit the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site. Although the disturbed area will exceed the 40% permitted, the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to properties in the vicinity. The site was previously disturbed and no additional disturbance will result from the proposed project. D. The development plan incorporates existing trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. 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 lot to look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space. E. Approximately 1,216 square feet of the existing impervious areas will be restored to original natural condition of the site to minimize paved areas, and will reduce the disturbed area by one percent. F. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will not change the existing circulation pattern and will utilize an existing driveway. G. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 648 for proposed structures as shown on the Development Plan dated June 10, 2002 and marked Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 17 of this Resolution. Section 11. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. A Variance to Section 17.16.070 (B) is required because it states that RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 • • the lot disturbance shall be limited to 40% of the net lot area. With respect to this request for a Variance for lot disturbance of 50.8%, 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. The Variance for the total disturbance is necessary because it already exists. The existing disturbed area of the lot is at 51.8%. The applicant will reduce the disturbed area to 50.8% by returning certain impervious areas to natural, landscaped condition. A tennis court, which is included in the disturbed area calculations, exists on the site and pre dates City of Rolling Hills and Rolling Hills Community Association's requirements for tennis courts. The existing development, which includes the tennis court, on the lot creates a difficulty in meeting this Code requirement. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question. The Variance is necessary because of the existing conditions of the lot. A very small portion of the lot will be disturbed to allow for the construction of the detached garage, but 1,216 square feet of existing disturbed area will be undisturbed. 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. All development will occur within required setbacks, and will be adequately screened to prevent adverse visual impact to surrounding properties. Section 12. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 648 to permit a disturbed area of 38,395 square feet or 50.8%, subject to the conditions specified in Section 17 of this Resolution. Section 13. Section 17.16.210(A)(4) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a detached garage under certain conditions, provided a Conditional Use Permit for such use is approved by the Planning Commission. The applicants are requesting to construct a 770 square foot detached garage. Such garage will be located in the front yard area of the lot. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a detached garage 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 uses in the community, and the area proposed for the garage would be located in an area on the property where such use will not change the existing configuration of structures on the lot. B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and the construction of a detached garage will not RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed garage will take place of an already existing paved driveway and is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the garage will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the detached garage will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community. D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district and does not encroach into any setback areas. E. The proposed conditional use 'is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of Title 17 of the Zoning Code because a stable already exists on the lot. Section 14. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a detached garage in accordance with the development plan dated June 10, 2002 and marked Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 648 subject to the conditions contained in Section 17 of this Resolution. Section 15. Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, conditionally permitted uses may not be located in the front yard area. The applicant is requesting permission to allow the detached garage to be constructed in the front yard area. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone. The proposed structure will be located on an existing building pad in the front yard. The existing development on the lot creates a difficulty in relocating the proposed structure. B. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. The detached garage will be located on an already existing building pad and will mitigate the necessity for any additional substantial grading of the lot. The proposed location is desirous because several mature trees will be saved and the height of the garage will be lower by 2-3 feet than if the garage was attached to the house, which would not require a Variance or a Conditional Use Permit. Section 16. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 648 to permit a detached garage to be located in the front yard, subject to the conditions specified in Section 17 of this Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 • • Section 17. The Site Plan Review approved in Section 10 of this Resolution, the Variances regarding the maximum permitted disturbed area, and the location of the proposed detached garage in the front yard area approved in Sections 12 and 16 of this Resolution, and the Conditional Use Permit regarding the construction of a detached garage approved in Section 14 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan Review, Variances, and Conditional Use Permit approvals shall expire 'within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070(A), 17.42.070(A), and 17.46.080(A) unless work commences prior to said expiration or otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of those sections. B. It is declared and made 'a condition of the Site Plan, Variances and Conditional Use Permit approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicants have been given written notice to cease such violation, the opportunity for a hearing has been provided, and if requested, has been held, and thereafter the applicant fails to correct the violation within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of the City's determination. C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Codes, 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 marked Exhibit A and dated June 10, 2002, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. F. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 15,229 square feet or 20% in conformance with lot coverage limitations. G. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 26,368 square feet or 35.0% in conformance with total lot coverage limitations. H. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 38,395 square feet or 50.8% in conformance with lot coverage limitations approved in Section 12 of this Resolution. I. Residential building pad coverage on the 23,094 square foot residential building pad shall not exceed 6,431 square feet or 27.85%; coverage on all of the other existing building pads shall not be increased. J. The detached garage shall not exceed 770 square feet. RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 • • K. Grading shall not exceed 475 cubic yards of cut soil and 475 cubic yards of fill soil. Grading shall be balanced on site and, shall preserve the existing vegetation to the greatest extent possible. L. A portion of the existing driveway, west of the proposed garage and several existing walkways shall be returned to a natural state and be landscaped in order to decrease the amount of impervious surfaces on the lot, as indicated on the site plan on file in the Planning Department dated June 10, 2002 and marked Exhibit A. In addition, 234 square feet of the existing parking pad located behind the house, (east of the house) shall be returned to natural state to match the adjacent area and shall be landscaped. Such area shall serve as substitution for the 234 square feet of impervious area proposed to be removed from the tennis court. Those areas shall be planted, to the maximum extent possible, with native vegetation. M. An inspection by Los Angeles County Building Official shall be made to ascertain that the unauthorized conversion of the area previously used for a garage was made in a manner that meets the requirements of Building Codes. Should building code deficiencies be found, the applicants shall correct all deficiencies, prior to the issuance of a final inspection for the project. The applicants shall be responsible for all fees, including the "as built" fees for said inspection. N. A landscape plan for the areas to be returned to natural state and the areas surrounding the proposed additions, including the detached garage, shall be submitted for review and approval to the Planning staff. The landscaping plan shall include water efficient irrigation, to the maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a low gallonage irrigation system, utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using "hydrozones," considers slope factors and climate conditions in design, and utilizes means to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray in accordance with Section 17.27.020 (Water Efficient Landscaping Requirements) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. O. Landscaping shall be designed using mature trees and shrubs so as not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but to obscure the detached garage. If any new trees will be planted, such tree(s) shall be of native variety and when grown to maturity shall not exceed the height of the ridgeline of the residence and the garage. P. During construction, dust control measures shall be used to stabilize the soil from wind erosion and reduce dust and objectionable odors generated by construction activities in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District, Los Angeles County and local ordinances and engineering practices. Q. During construction, conformance with local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property is not exposed to landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required. R. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, storm water pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 7 • • trips, noise, dust, objectionable odors, landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required. S. During construction, the Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 1998 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control storm water pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles. T. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site. U. 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. V. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and maintenance of storm water drainage facilities. W. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department. Best Management Practices (BMP's) related to solid waste. X. All utility lines to the residence and the proposed garage shall be placed underground. The roofing material shall conform to the requirements of the City of Rolling Hills Building Code. Y. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of building or grading permit. Z. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the development plan described in Condition D. AA. 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 shall be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. AB. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these Variances, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals, pursuant to Section 17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective. AC. All conditions of the Variances, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals, which apply, must be complied with prior to. the issuance of a grading or building permit from the County of Los Angeles. AD. The property owners shall be required to conform to the City of Rolling Hills Outdoor Lighting Standards Ordinance, (Ordinance No. 287). RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 • • AE. Notwithstanding sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project, which would constitute additional structural development, shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 18th DAY OF JUNE 2002. pj ( 1CA EVIE HANKINS VICE- CHAIRMAN A 1'1'hST: ry MARILYN KERN', DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 • • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2002-07 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING THE FOLLOWING: (1) SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITION, DETACHED GARAGE AND GRADING; (2) A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA; (3) A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE, AND (4) A VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE DETACHED GARAGE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 648 (HOFMAN). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on June 18, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Margeta, Sommer and Chairwoman Hankins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Witte. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. ) DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 70OD) DATE: TO: FROM: i • C oll2QF..y J/df JUNE 18, 2002 HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REQUEST NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com ZONING CASE NO. 648(REVISED) 1 JOHNS CANYON ROAD, (LOT 174-C-MS) RA-S-2, 2.18 ACRES MR. CRAIG HOFMAN BRYANT, PALMER, SOTO, INC. APRIL 6, 2002 MAY 11, 2002 Request for a Site Plan Review to permit construction of an addition, a request for a Conditional Use permit to construct a new detached garage, a request for a Variance to construct the garage in the front yard area and request for a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot at an existing single- family residence. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission at the May 21, 2002, meeting directed staff to prepare a Resolution of approval regarding a Site Plan Review for substantial additions at an existing single family residence, a Conditional Use Permit to construct a detached two -car garage and Variances to construct the garage in the front yard area and to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot in Zoning Case No. 648-Revised. The vote was 5-0. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2002-07, which is attached, approving Zoning Case No. 648. ®Printed on Recycled Paper. • • RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING THE FOLLOWING: (1) SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITION, DETACHED GARAGE AND GRADING; (2) A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA, (3) A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE, AND (4) 'A VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE DETACHED GARAGE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 648 (HOFMAN). THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Craig Hofman with respect to real property located at 1 Johns Canyon Road, Rolling Hills (Lot 174-C-MS) requesting 1) Site Plan Review approval for the construction of 1,175 square foot addition, 770 square foot detached garage and 475 cubic yards of grading; (2) a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area, (3) a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 770 square foot detached garage, and (4) a Variance to permit the detached garage to be located in the front yard area. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the applications on April 16, 2002, May 21, 2002 and at a field trip visit on April 30, 2002. The applicants were 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 applicants and their representative were in attendance at the hearings. One letter of objection of this project was received from a neighbor. Section 3. Initially the applicants submitted a request to construct a new garage, which would be attached to the main residence via a breezeway, and which would require removal of several mature trees. In addition, the height of the ridgeline of the proposed garage would be 2-3 feet higher than the ridgeline of the existing residence. Section 4. At the field trip the Planning Commission expressed concerns about the necessity to remove the mature trees and the height of the proposed garage. Subsequently, the architect submitted a revised site plan, which was considered by the Planning Commission at the May 21, 2002 meeting. The revised project consists of a detached garage, which would be lower than the originally proposed garage, and be located in the front yard area, which requires a Conditional Use Permit and a Variance. Section 5. The property is developed with an existing 4,486 square foot house, a 558 square foot stable, a 976 square foot swimming pool and a 7,264 square foot tennis court. Currently there is no garage on the property. A previously existing garage was converted to living area without City approval or a building permit. Pursuant to Section • • • 17.16.160 of the Zoning Code, every single-family dwelling shall have an above ground garage with a minimum capacity of two cars. Portions of the existing structures encroach into the required setbacks and are legal non -conforming. The tennis court lights and the fence surrounding the tennis court pre date City and Rolling Hills Community Association's requirements for tennis courts. One of the existing rooms, partially located in the side yard setback, is attached to the main house via a solid roof. Section 6. In order to meet the City's requirement of 35% total net lot coverage and 20% structural lot coverage, the applicants proposed to reduce the tennis court by 234 square feet and return said area to natural, landscaped state. Small portions of existing walkways and driveway will also be returned to a natural state to reduce the impervious areas on the lot. Section 7. After discussion, deliberation and consideration of all evidence presented, the Planning Commission found that the structural, the disturbed and impervious areas of the property are pre-existing, and that the proposed project will only minimally affect the existing conditions. The Planning Commission further found that the corrective measures proposed to reduce the size of the tennis court by 234 square feet is not feasible, and suggested that an area of an existing parking pad be reduced by the same amount instead. The Commission found that the spirit and intent of the proposal meets the goals of the City's General Plan and will not negatively affect the subject property or adjacent areas. Section 8. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 4 Exemption (State of CA Guidelines, Section 15304 - Minor Land Alteration) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 9. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any development requiring a grading permit or any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six (36) month period. With respect to the Site Plan Review application requesting 1,175 square foot addition, 770 square foot new detached garage and 475 cubic yards of grading at an existing single-family 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 project conforms to Zoning Code setbacks, except for the existing structures, and lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net area of 75,496 square feet. The residence (5,661 sq.ft.), proposed garage (770 sq.ft.), existing swimming pool (976 sq.ft.), existing tennis court (7,264 sq.ft.), and existing stable (558 sq.ft.) will have 15,229 square feet which constitutes 20% of the net lot area which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage permitted. With the reduction in impervious surfaces, which will be returned to a natural, landscaped RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 2 • • • condition, the total lot coverage including paved areas and driveways will be 26,368 square feet which equals 35.0% of the net lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage permitted. The proposed project is screened from the road by mature trees so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot. The proposed additions will be constructed on an existing building pad and will utilize already existing impervious surfaces. The project will be screened and landscaped with mature trees and shrubs, is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the detached garage will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will permit the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site. Although the disturbed area will exceed the 40% permitted, the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to properties in the vicinity. The site was previously disturbed and no additional disturbance will result from the proposed project. D. The development plan incorporates existing trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. 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 lot to look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space. E. Approximately 1,216 square feet of the existing impervious areas will be restored to original natural condition of the site to minimize paved areas, and will reduce the disturbed area by one percent. F. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will not change the existing circulation pattern and will utilize an existing driveway. G. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 648 for proposed structures as shown on the Development Plan dated June 10, 2002 and marked Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 17 of this Resolution. Section 11. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. A Variance to Section 17.16.070 (B) is required because it states that RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 3 • • the lot disturbance shall be limited to 40% of the net lot area. With respect to this request for a Variance for lot disturbance of 50.8%, 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. The Variance for the total disturbance is necessary because it already exists. The existing disturbed area of the lot is at 51.8%. The applicant will reduce the disturbed area to 50.8% by returning certain impervious areas to natural, landscaped condition. A tennis court, which is included in the disturbed area calculations, exists on the site and pre dates City of Rolling Hills and Rolling Hills Community Association's requirements for tennis courts. The existing development, which includes the tennis court, on the lot creates a difficulty in meeting this Code requirement. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question. The Variance is necessary because of the existing conditions of the lot. A very small portion of the lot will be disturbed to allow for the construction of the detached garage, but 1,216 square feet of existing disturbed area will be undisturbed. 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. All development will occur within required setbacks, and will be adequately screened to prevent adverse visual impact to surrounding properties. Section 12. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 648 to permit a disturbed area of 38,395 square feet or 50.8%, subject to the conditions specified in Section 17 of this Resolution. Section 13. Section 17.16.210(A)(4) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a detached garage under certain conditions, provided a Conditional Use Permit for such use is approved by the Planning Commission. The applicants are requesting to construct a 770 square foot detached garage. Such garage will be located in the front yard area of the lot. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a detached garage 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 uses in the community, and the area proposed for the garage would be located in an area on the property where such use will not change the existing configuration of structures on the lot. B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and the construction of a detached garage will not RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 4 • • adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed garage will take place of an already existing paved driveway and is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the garage will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the detached garage will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community. D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district and does not encroach into any setback areas. E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of Title 17 of the Zoning Code because a stable already exists on the lot. Section 14. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a detached garage in accordance with the development plan dated June 10, 2002 and marked Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 648 subject to the conditions contained in Section 17 of this Resolution. Section 15. Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, conditionally permitted uses may not be located in the front yard area. The applicant is requesting permission to allow the detached garage to be constructed in the front yard area. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone. The proposed structure will be located on an existing building pad in the front yard. The existing development on the lot creates a difficulty in relocating the proposed structure. B. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. The detached garage will be located on an already existing building pad and will mitigate the necessity for any additional substantial grading of the lot. The proposed location is desirous because several mature trees will be saved and the height of the garage will be lower by 2-3 feet than if the garage was attached to the house, which would not require a Variance or a Conditional Use Permit. Section 16. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 648 to permit a detached garage to be located in the front yard, subject to the conditions specified in Section 17 of this Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 5 Section 17. The Site Plan Review approved in Section 10 of this Resolution, the Variances regarding the maximum permitted disturbed area, and the location of the proposed detached garage in the front yard area approved in Sections 12 and 16 of this Resolution, and the Conditional Use Permit regarding the construction of a detached garage approved in Section 14 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan Review, Variances, and Conditional Use Permit approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070(A), 17.42.070(A), and 17.46.080(A) unless work commences prior to said expiration or otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of those sections. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan, Variances and Conditional Use Permit approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicants have been given written notice to cease such violation, the opportunity for a hearing has been provided, and if requested, has been held, and thereafter the applicant fails to correct the violation within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of the City's determination. C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Codes, 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 marked Exhibit A and dated June 10, 2002, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. F. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 15,229 square feet or 20% in conformance with lot coverage limitations. G. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 26,368 square feet or 35.0% in conformance with total lot coverage limitations. H. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 38,395 square feet or 50.8% in conformance with lot coverage limitations approved in Section 12 of this Resolution. I. Residential building pad coverage on the 23,094 square foot residential building pad shall not exceed 6,431 square feet or 27.85%; coverage on all of the other existing building pads shall not be increased. J. The detached garage shall not exceed 770 square feet. RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 6 • • K. Grading shall not exceed 475 cubic yards of cut soil and 475 cubic yards of fill soil. Grading shall be balanced on site and shall preserve the existing vegetation to the greatest extent possible. L. A portion of the existing driveway, west of the proposed garage and several existing walkways shall be returned to a natural state and be landscaped in order to decrease the amount of impervious surfaces on the lot, as indicated on the site plan on file in the Planning Department dated June 10, 2002 and marked Exhibit A. In addition, 234 square feet of the existing parking pad located behind the house, (east of the house) shall be returned to natural state to match the adjacent area and shall be landscaped. Such area shall serve as substitution for the 234 square feet of impervious area proposed to be removed from the tennis court. Those areas shall be planted, to the maximum extent possible, with native vegetation. M. An inspection by Los Angeles County Building Official shall be made to ascertain that the unauthorized conversion of the area previously used for a garage was made in a manner that meets the requirements of Building Codes. Should building code deficiencies be found, the applicants shall correct all deficiencies, prior to the issuance of a final inspection for the project. The applicants shall be responsible for all fees, including the "as built" fees for said inspection. N. A landscape plan for the areas to be returned to natural state and the areas surrounding the proposed additions, including the detached garage, shall be submitted for review and approval to the Planning staff. The landscaping plan shall include water efficient irrigation, to the maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a low gallonage irrigation system, utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using "hydrozones," considers slope factors and climate conditions in design, and utilizes means to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray in accordance with Section 17.27.020 (Water Efficient Landscaping Requirements) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. O. Landscaping shall be designed using mature trees and shrubs so as not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but to obscure the detached garage. If any new trees will be planted, such tree(s) shall be of native variety and when grown to maturity shall not exceed the height of the ridgeline of the residence and the garage. P. During construction, dust control measures shall be used to stabilize the soil from wind erosion and reduce dust and objectionable odors generated by construction activities in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District, Los Angeles County and local ordinances and engineering practices. Q. During construction, conformance with local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property is not exposed to landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required. R. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, storm water pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 7 • trips, noise, dust, objectionable odors, landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required. S. During construction, the Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 1998 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control storm water pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles. T. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site. U. 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. V. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and maintenance of storm water drainage facilities. W. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) related to solid waste. X. All utility lines to the residence and the proposed garage shall be placed underground. The roofing material shall conform to the requirements of the City of Rolling Hills Building Code. Y. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of building or grading permit. Z. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the development plan described in Condition D. AA. 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 shall be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. AB. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these Variances, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals, pursuant to Section 17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective. AC. All conditions of the Variances, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals, which apply, must be complied with prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit from the County of Los Angeles. AD. The property owners shall be required to conform to the City of Rolling Hills Outdoor Lighting Standards Ordinance, (Ordinance No. 287). RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 8 • • AE. Notwithstanding sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project, which would constitute additional structural development, shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 18th DAY OF JUNE 2002. EVIE HANKINS VICE- CHAIRMAN A'1"PEST: MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 9 • • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2002-07 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING THE FOLLOWING: (1) SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITION, DETACHED GARAGE AND GRADING; (2) A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA; (3) A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE, AND (4) A VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE DETACHED GARAGE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 648 (HOFMAN). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on June 18, 2002 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 2002-07 ZC No.648 10 DATE: TO: FROM: • • cm, 0/ Roiling _fa MAY 21, 2002 HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REOUEST NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com ZONING CASE NO. 648(REVISED) 1 JOHNS CANYON ROAD, (LOT 174-C-MS) RA-S-2, 2.18 ACRES MR. CRAIG HOFMAN BRYANT, PALMER, SOTO, INC. APRIL 6, 2002 MAY 11, 2002 Request for a Site Plan Review to permit construction of an addition, a request for a Conditional Use permit to construct a new detached garage, a request for a Variance to construct the garage in the front yard area and request for a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot at an existing single- family residence. BACKGROUND 1. The Planning Commission viewed the proposed project on April 30, 2002. At the field trip the Commissioners inquired about the trees that have to be removed and the height of the proposed garage. The architect explained that several of the pine trees will be removed and that the height of the ridgeline of the proposed garage will be 16.5 feet and 11 feet at the plate line. 2. Discussion ensued concerning the size of the tennis court and tennis court lights, and whether the fence would have to be moved. The applicant is proposing to reduce the size of the tennis court and return the area to natural state, to allow for reduction in the disturbed lot area and total lot coverage calculations. According to Rolling Hills Community Association records, the tennis court lights were approved and installed when the tennis court was constructed in 1969, which pre -dates the City requirements for tennis courts. Records in the Los Angeles County Building and Safety Department show that an electrical permit was issued for tennis court lights in 1969. Therefore, the tennis court lights are legal non -conforming and are allowed to remain. The fence surrounding the tennis court is also legal non -conforming. The fence will not need to be moved to encompass the new dimensions of the court, as the City's definition of a court is, in ZC No.648Revised P1ng.Comm. 5/21/02 1 ®Printed on Recycled Paper. • • part, an area paved or hard -surfaced used for private recreational purposes. Once an area is returned to pervious material, it is no longer considered a court. 3. Since the field trip, the applicants submitted a request to construct a detached garage, instead of the originally proposed attached garage. The original garage was proposed to be attached to the main house via a breezeway. A Conditional Use Permit is required for a detached garage and a Variance is required to construct a detached structure in the front yard area. 4. The applicants' representative states that detaching the garage will allow two existing pine trees to remain and the garage roof will be lower (9' at the plate line and 14' at the ridge) than the previously proposed garage. The proposed detached garage will be located 12 feet south from the original proposal but consistent with the setback requirements. The applicants' representative further states, in part, that the request for the Variance to locate the garage in the front yard will not be detrimental because "its appearance will be substantially the same as the previously proposed attached garage, but will be lower and two mature pine trees will be retained Additionally, there will be 390 square feet less driveway (more planting) in the front yard. The existing property already has a stable and a pool in the front yard" 5. The proposed addition to the house remains at 1,175 square feet to the existing 4,486 square foot house for a total of 5,661 square feet residence and the proposed detached garage will be 770 square feet. 6. In addition to the residence, the lot is developed with a 558 square foot stable, a 976 square foot swimming pool and a 7,264 square foot tennis court. 7. Portions of existing structures encroach into the required setbacks. One of the existing rooms, partially located in the side yard setback, is attached to the main house via a solid roof. 8. There are four building pads on the property. The existing residence and the proposed detached garage are located on a pad measuring 23,094 square feet, for a coverage of 20.3%. With the additions, the structural pad coverage on the residential building pad will be 27.8%, which is within the 30% Planning Commission guideline. The 976 square foot pool is located on a 1,879 square foot pad, for a coverage of 51.9%. The 7,264 square foot tennis court is located on a pad of which 4,646 square feet is located outside the setback, for a pad coverage of 156.3%. The 558 square foot stable is located on a 1,371 square foot pad for a coverage of 40.7%. The existing combined average pad coverage is 42.86%. The building pads extend into the setbacks, however those buildable areas located in the setbacks are not included in the pad coverage calculations. 9. The applicant is proposing to reduce the size of the tennis court by 234 square feet, from 7,264 square feet to 7,030 square feet, and return the 234 square feet to natural landscaped state. This will reduce the tennis pad coverage to 151.3%. With the reduction in the tennis court coverage and the increase in the residential pad ZC No.648Revised P1ng.Comm. 5/21/02 2 coverage, due to the proposed addition, the combined pads coverage will be 48.38%. 10. The applicant is seeking a Variance from the 40% maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot. The net lot area of the subject lot is 75,496 square feet. The existing disturbed area is 51.8%. No additional disturbed area will be created, as the addition will be placed on an already disturbed portion of the lot. The applicant is proposing to reduce the disturbed area, by reducing the tennis court and bringing the reduced portion to a natural state. The proposed disturbed area will be at 50.85% of the net lot area. Responding to the Criteria to be satisfied for grant of a Variance for the request to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed areas, the applicant states in part that, the project does not increase the disturbed area, as the addition will occupy previously disturbed area of the lot. The site's character will remain with attractive mature landscaping. The applicant's representative further states that the variance is required for a pre-existing condition, which was permitted previously. 11. The net lot area of the lot is 75,496 square feet. The applicant is proposing to reduce the existing impervious surfaces, (structures and flatwork), on the property. In addition to the 234 square feet reduction in the tennis court, 744 square feet of the existing driveway/motor court and 238 square feet of walkways will be brought back to natural state and landscaped, a total of 1,216 square feet. 12. The proposed structural net lot coverage will be 14,995 square feet or 19.86%, which is within the 20% maximum permitted, and includes the reduced tennis court, the residence, garage the pool and the existing stable. The total structural and flatwork net lot coverage is proposed to be 26,368 square feet or 34.92%, which is within the 35% maximum permitted total net lot coverage, and includes all structures, driveways, walkways, patios and decks. The existing total net lot coverage is 34.0%. 13. Grading for the project is required for the proposed garage and will be 475 cubic yards of cut and 475 cubic yards of fill, and will be balanced on site. 14. The original residence was constructed in 1948. A substantial addition to the house was completed in 1964. The pool was constructed in 1966, the tennis court in 1969, the stable in 1970 and in 1987 a bathroom was added and other alterations and repairs were done. In 1989 the Commission approved a CUP for a 741 square foot cabana, which was not constructed. 15. There are two existing driveways serving the property located off of Johns Canyon Road. One of the driveways serves the stable and the other the existing motor court. 16. Currently, there is no garage on the property. Records indicate that as late as 1989, a garage existed on the lot. Sometime between 1989 and 2002, the garage was converted to living space. Pursuant to Section 17.16.160 of the Zoning Code, every ZC No.648Revised Plng.Comm. 5/21/02 3 • • single-family dwelling shall have an above ground garage with a minimum capacity of two cars. A condition of approval will be added, if the project is approved, that an inspection be conducted to determine if the conversion of the previous garage to living area meets the Building Code requirements and an "as built" building permit will be required. If the project is not approved, it will be required that the applicant revert the area previously used as a garage to its original use. 17. It will be required that all utility lines be placed underground, and that the new and existing roof comply with the City and RHCA requirements for Class "A" material and assembly, pursuant to Sections 17.27.030 and 17.16.190 respectively. 18. Criteria for Site Plan Review and Variance are attached. A list of properties in the vicinity is also enclosed. 19. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 20. A letter objecting to the Variance request has been submitted to staff and is enclosed. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the staff report, take public testimony and direct staff as appropriate. ZC No.648Revised P1ng.Comm. 5/21/02 4 • • VARIANCE REQUIRED 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; and 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; and 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; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; 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. NEARBY PROPERTIES: ZC NO. 648. 1 Johns Canyon Road RESIDENCE LOT SIZE ADDRESS OWNER (SQ.,.) SQ. FT. (NET) 2 Johns Canyon Ghormley 2,611 161,172 3 Johns Canyon Norris 4,592 95,832 4 Johns Canyon Dalcin 5,424 62,726 5 Johns Canyon Kamen 3,604 114,998 27 Crest Rd. W. Helford 7,767 182,952 29 Crest Rd. W. Yu 6,059 76,230 33 Crest Rd. W. Saks 3,882 174,240 AVERAGE 4,848 124,021 1 Johns Canyon Hofman Existing 4,496 87,556 Proposed 5,661 ZC No.648Revised P1ng.Comm. 5/21/02 5 ZONING CASE NO. 648 SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S-2 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 35 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line STRUCTURES Site Plan Review required for grading requiring a grading permit, any new structure or if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period. STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (Structures and flatwork) (35% maximum) RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PAD COVERAGE (Guideline maximum of 30%) Combined (all pads) coverage STABLE BUILDING PAD COVERAGE TENNIS COURT BUILDING PAD COVERAGE POOUSPA BUILDING PAD COVERAGE 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 nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist. STABLE (450 SQ.FT. & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS EXISTING Existing residence, pool, stable & tennis court. Existing structures encroach into setbacks Residence Garage Pool Tennis court Stable PROPOSED Addition to residence and a new detached garage which requires a CUP and a Variance 4486 sq.ft. Residence 5661 sq.ft. 0 Garage 770 sq.ft. 976 sq.ft. Pool 976 sq.ft 7264 sq.ft. Tennis court 7030 sq.ft. 558 sq.ft. Stable 558 sa.at Total 13,284sq.ft. Total 14,995sq.ft. 17.59% 19.86% 33.46% 34.92% 20.3% of building pad 42.86% 40.7% 156.3% 51.94% N/A 51.8% 558 sq.ft. existing Existing access from Johns Canyon Road Existing access from Johns Canyon Road N/A N/A 27.85% of 23,094 sq.ft. building pad 48.38% 40.7% 151.3% 51.94% 475 cu. yds. of cut soil 475 cu. yds. of fill soil 50.8% or 38,395 sq.ft. 558 sq.ft.existing 550 sq.ft. future corral No change No change Planning Commission review Planning Commission review ZC No.648Revised Plng.Comm. 5/21/02 6 t�v •6r& i pk,�~'b'7 `f altAAY 3 0, Z cepoir ofivr-‘)"11: )-1-:101' A � ged/P-.1 PeS-,�� 9oye)0,0JA. a%u�' reae- bify et- DATE: TO: FROM: i • Cu, p Ro/&n INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com APRIL 30, 2002 HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REOUEST ZONING CASE NO. 648 1 JOHNS CANYON ROAD, (LOT 174-C-MS) RA-S-2, 2.18 ACRES MR. CRAIG HOFMAN BRYANT, PALMER, SOTO, INC. APRIL 6, 2002 Request for a Site Plan Review to permit construction of an addition and a new garage and request for a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot at an existing single-family residence. BACKGROUND 1. The Planning Commission scheduled a field trip to the site on April 30, 2002. The property owners within 1000-foot radius were notified of the field trip. 2 The applicant is requesting a Site Plan Review to permit construction of an 1,175 square foot addition to an existing 4,486 square foot house for a total of 5,661 square feet residence and a new 770 square foot garage and a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot. 3. In addition to the residence, the lot is developed with a 558 square foot stable, a 976 square foot swimming pool and a 7,264 square foot tennis court. According to the RHCA records the tennis court pre -dates the City's requirements for Site Plan Review or CUP. 4. Portions of existing structures encroach into the required setbacks. One of the existing rooms, partially located in the side yard setback, is attached to the main house via a solid roof. The proposed garage is also planned to be attached to the main house by a solid roof structure. 5. There are four building pads on the property. The existing residence is located on a pad measuring 23,094 square feet, for a coverage of 20.3%. With the additions, the structural pad coverage on the residential building pad will be ZC No.648 P1ng.Comm. 4/30/02FT 1 ®Printed on Recycled Paper. • • 27.8%, which is within the 30% Planning Commission guideline. The 976 square foot pool is located on a 1,879 square foot pad, for a coverage of 51.9%. The 7,264 square foot tennis court is located on a pad of which 4,646 square feet is located outside the setback, for a pad coverage of 156.3%. The 558 square foot stable is located on a 1,371 square foot pad for a coverage of 40.7%. The existing combined average pad coverage is 42.86%. The building pads extend into the setbacks, however those buildable pad areas located in the setbacks are not included in the pad coverage calculations. 6. The applicant is proposing to reduce the size of the tennis court by 234 square feet, from 7,264 square feet to 7,030 square feet, and return the 234 square feet to natural landscaped state. This will reduce the tennis pad coverage to 151.3%. With the reduction in the tennis court coverage and the increase in the residential pad coverage, due to the proposed addition, the combined pads coverage will be 48.38%. 7. The applicant is seeking a Variance from the 40% maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot. The net lot area of the subject lot is 75,496 square feet. The existing disturbed area is 51.8%. No additional disturbed area will be created, as the addition will be placed on an already disturbed portion of the lot. The applicant is proposing to reduce the disturbed area, by reducing the tennis court and bringing the reduced portion to a natural state. The proposed disturbed area will be at 50.85% of the net lot area. Responding to the Criteria to be satisfied for grant of a Variance for the request to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed areas, the applicant states in part that, the project does not increase the disturbed area, as the addition will occupy previously disturbed area of the lot. The site's character will remain with attractive mature landscaping. The applicant's representative further states that the variance is required for a pre-existing condition, which was permitted previously. 8. The net lot area of the lot is 75,496 square feet. The applicant is proposing to reduce the existing impervious surfaces, (structures and flatwork), on the property. As stated earlier, 234 square feet of the tennis court will be converted to natural state and landscaped. In addition, 744 square feet of the existing motor court and 238 square feet of walkways will be brought back to natural state and landscaped. 9. The proposed structural net lot coverage will be 14,995 square feet or 19.86%, which is within the 20% maximum permitted, and includes the tennis court, the residence, garage the pool and the existing stable. The total structural and flatwork net lot coverage is proposed to be 26,368 square feet or 34.92%, which is within the 35% maximum permitted total net lot coverage, and includes all structures, driveways, walkways, patios and decks. The existing total net lot coverage is 33.96%. 10. Grading for the project is required for the proposed garage and will be 475 cubic yards of cut and 475 cubic yards of fill, and will be balanced on site. ZC No.648 Ping.Comm. 4/30/02FT 2 • • 11. The original residence was constructed in 1948. A substantial addition to the house was completed in 1964. The pool was constructed in 1966, the stable in 1970 and in 1987 a bathroom was added and other alterations and repairs were done. In 1989 the Commission approved a CUP for a 741 square foot cabana, which was not constructed. 12. There are two existing driveways serving the property located off of Johns Canyon Road. One of the driveways serves the stable and the other the existing motor court. 13. Currently, there is no garage on the property. Records indicate that as late as 1989, a garage existed on the lot. Sometime between 1989 and 2002, the garage was converted into another use. Pursuant to Section 17.16.160 of the Zoning Code, every single family dwelling shall have an above ground garage with a minimum capacity of two cars. A condition of approval will be added, if the project is approved, that an inspection be conducted to determine if the conversion of the previous garage to living area meets the Building Code requirements and an "as built" building permit will be required. If the project is not approved, it will be required that the applicant convert into a garage the area previously used as a garage. 14. All utilities will be placed underground. 15. Criteria for Site Plan Review and Variance are attached. A list of properties in the vicinity is also enclosed. 16. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission view the site and review the proposal. ZC No.648 Ping.Comm. 4/30/02FT 3 VARIANCE REQUIRED 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; and 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; and 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; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; 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. NEARBY PROPERTIES: ZC NO. 648. 1 Johns Canyon Road RESIDENCE LOT SIZE ADDRESS OWNER (SQ.FT.) SQ. FT. (NET) 2 Johns Canyon Ghormley 2,611 161,172 3 Johns Canyon Norris 4,592 95,832 4 Johns Canyon Dalcin 5,424 62,726 5 Johns Canyon Kamen 3,604 114,998 27 Crest Rd. W. Helford 7,767 182,952 29 Crest Rd. W. Yu 6,059 76,230 33 Crest Rd. W. Saks 3,882 174,240 AVERAGE 4,848 124,021 1 Johns Canyon Hofman Existing 4,496 87,556 Proposed 5,661 ZC No.648 Ping.Comm. 4/30/02FT 4 ZONING CASE NO: 648 SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S-2 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 35 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line STRUCTURES Site Plan Review required for grading requiring a grading permit, any new structure or if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period. STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (Structures and flatwork) (35% maximum) RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PAD COVERAGE (Guideline maximum of 30%) Combined (all pads) coverage STABLE BUILDING PAD COVERAGE TENNIS COURT BUILDING PAD COVERAGE POOUSPA BUILDING PAD COVERAGE 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 nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist. STABLE (450 SQ.FT. & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS ZC No.648 Plng.Comm. 4/30/02FT EXISTING Existing residence, pool, stable & tennis court. Existing structures encroach into setbacks Residence Garage Pool Tennis court Stable PROPOSED Addition to residence and a new garage 4486 sq.ft. Residence 5661 sq.ft. 0 Garage 770 sq.ft. 976 sq.ft. Pool 976 sq.ft 7264 sq.ft. Tennis court 7030 sq.ft. 558 sq.ft. Stable 558 sa.at Total 13,284sq.ft. Total 14,995sq.ft. 17.59% 19.86% 33.46% 34.92% 20.3% of building pad 42.86% 40.7% 156.3% 51.94% N/A 51.8% 558 sq.ft. existing Existing access from Johns Canyon Road Existing access from Johns Canyon Road N/A N/A 5 27.85% of 23,094 sq.ft. building pad 48.38% 40.7% 151.3% 51.94% 475 cu. yds. of cut soil 475 cu. yds. of fill soil 50.8% or 38,395 sq.ft. 558 sq.ft.existing 550 sq.ft. future corral No change No change Planning Commission review Planning Commission review DATE: TO: FROM: • • 3A City 0/ leoffing INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cltyofrh@aol.com APRIL 16, 2002 HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REOUEST ZONING CASE NO. 648 1 JOHNS CANYON ROAD, (LOT 174-C-MS) RA-S-2, 2.18 ACRES MR. CRAIG HOFMAN BRYANT, PALMER, SOTO INC. APRIL 6, 2002 Request for a Site Plan Review to permit construction of an addition and a new garage and request for a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot at an existing single family residence. BACKGROUND 1. The applicant is requesting a Site Plan Review to permit construction of an 1,175 square foot addition to an existing 4,486 square foot house for a total of 5,661 square feet residence and a new 770 square foot garage and a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot. 2. In addition to the residence, the lot is developed with a 558 square foot stable, a 976 square foot swimming pool and a 7,264 square foot tennis court. According to the RHCA records the tennis court pre -dates the City's requirements for Site Plan Review or CUP. 3. Portions of existing structures encroach into the required setbacks. One of the existing rooms, partially located in the side yard setback, is attached to the main house via a solid roof. The proposed garage is also planned to be attached to the main house by a solid roof structure. 4. There are four building pads on the property. The existing residence is located on a pad measuring 23,094 square feet, for a coverage of 20.3%. With the additions, the structural pad coverage on the residential building pad will be 27.8%, which is within the 30% Planning Commission guideline. The 976 square foot pool is located on a 1,879 square foot pad, for a coverage of 51.9%. The 7,264 square foot tennis court is located on a pad of which 4,646 square feet is located ZC No.648 Ping.Comm. 4/16/02 1 ®Printed on Recycled Paper. 1 • • outside the setback, for a pad coverage of 156.3%. The 558 square foot stable is located on a 1,371 square foot pad for a coverage of 40.7%. The, existing combined average pad coverage is 42.86%. The building pads extend into the setbacks, however those buildable areas located in the setbacks are not included in the pad coverage calculations. 5. The applicant is proposing to reduce the size of the tennis court by 234 square feet, from 7,264 square feet to 7,030 square feet, and return the 234 square feet to natural landscaped state. This will reduce the tennis pad coverage to 151.3%. With the reduction in the tennis court coverage and the increase in the residential pad coverage, due to the proposed addition, the combined pads coverage will be 48.38%. 6. The applicant is seeking a Variance from the 40% maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot. The net lot area of the subject lot is 75,496 square feet. The existing disturbed area is 51.8%. No additional disturbed area will be created, as the addition will be placed on an already disturbed portion of the lot. The applicant is proposing to reduce the disturbed area, by reducing the tennis court and bringing the reduced portion to a natural, state. The proposed disturbed area will be at 50.85% of the net lot area. Responding to the Criteria to be satisfied for grant of a Variance for the request to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed areas, the applicant states in part that, the project does not increase the disturbed area, as the addition will occupy previously disturbed area of the lot. The site's character will remain with attractive mature landscaping. The applicant's representative further states that the variance is required for a pre-existing condition, which was permitted previously. 7. The net lot area of the lot is 75,496 square feet. The applicant is proposing to reduce the existing impervious surfaces, (structures and flatwork), on the property. As stated earlier, 234 square feet of the tennis court will be converted to natural state and landscaped. In addition, 744 square feet of the existing motor court and 238 square feet of walkways will be brought back to natural state and landscaped. 8. The proposed structural net lot coverage will be 14,995 square feet or 19.86%, which is within the 20% maximum permitted, and includes the tennis court, the residence, garage the pool and the existing stable. The total structural and flatwork net lot coverage is proposed to be 26,368 square feet or 34.92%, which is within the 35% maximum permitted total net lot coverage, and includes all structures, driveways, walkways, patios and decks. The existing total net lot coverage is 33.96%. 9. Grading for the project is required for the proposed garage and will be 475 cubic yards of cut and 475 cubic yards of fill, and will be balanced on site. 10. The original residence was constructed in 1948. A substantial addition to the house was completed in 1964. The pool was constructed in 1966, the stable in 1970 and in 1987 a bathroom was added and other alterations and repairs were done. In ZC No.648 Plng.Comm. 4/16/02 2 '4 1989 the Commission approved a CUP for a 741 square foot cabana, which was not constructed. 11. There are two existing driveways serving the property located off of Johns Canyon Road. One of the driveways serves the stable and the other the existing motor court. 12. Currently, there is no garage on the property. Records indicate that as late as 1989, a garage existed on the lot. Sometime between 1989 and 2002, the garage was converted into another use. Pursuant to Section 17.16.160 of the Zoning Code, every single family dwelling shall have an above ground garage with a minimum capacity of two cars. A condition of approval will be added, if the project is approved, that an inspection be conducted to determine if the conversion of the previous garage to living area meets the Building Code requirements and an "as built" building permit will be required. If the project is not approved, it will be required that the applicant convert into a garage the area previously used as a garage. 13. All utilities will be placed underground. 14. Criteria for Site Plan Review and Variance are attached. A list of properties in the vicinity is also enclosed. 15. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the staff report, take public testimony and schedule a field visit, if appropriate. ZC No.648 Plng.Comm. 4/16/02 3 • • VARIANCE REQUIRED 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; and 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; and 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; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; 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. NEARBY PROPERTIES: ZC NO. 648. 1 Johns Canyon Road RESIDENCE LOT SIZE ADDRESS OWNER (SQ.,.) SQ. FT. (NET) 2 Johns Canyon Ghormley 2,611 161,172 3 Johns Canyon Norris 4,592 95,832 4 Johns Canyon Dalcin 5,424 62,726 5 Johns Canyon Kamen 3,604 114,998 27 Crest Rd. W. Helford 7,767 182,952 29 Crest Rd. W. Yu 6,059 76,230 33 Crest Rd. W. Saks 3,882 174,240 AVERAGE 4,848 124,021 1 Johns Canyon Hofman Existing 4,496 87,556 Proposed 5,661 ZC No.648 Ping.Comm. 4/16/02 4 ZONING CASE NO 648 SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S-2 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 35 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line STRUCTURES Site Plan Review required for grading requiring a grading permit, any new structure or if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% In a 36-month period. STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (Structures and flatwork) (35% maximum) RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PAD COVERAGE (Guideline maximum of 30%) Combined (all pads) coverage STABLE BUILDING PAD COVERAGE TENNIS COURT BUILDING PAD COVERAGE POOUSPA BUILDING PAD COVERAGE 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 nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist. STABLE (450 SQ.FT. & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS ZC No.648 PIng.Comm. 4/16/02 EXISTING Existing residence, pool, stable & tennis court. Existing structures encroach into setbacks Residence Garage Pool Tennis court Stable PROPOSED Addition to residence and a new garage 4486 sq.ft. Residence 5661 sq.ft. 0 Garage 770 sq.ft. 976 sq.ft. Pool 976 sq.ft 7264 sq.ft. Tennis court 7030 sq.ft. 558 sa.ft. Stable 558 sa.at Total 13284sq.ft. Total 14995sa.ft. 17.59% 19.86% 33.46% 34.92% 20.3% of building pad 42.86% 40.7% 156.3% 51.94% N/A 51.8% 558 sq.ft. existing Existing access from Johns Canyon Road Existing access from Johns Canyon Road N/A N/A 5 27.85% of 23,094 sq.ft. building pad, 48.38% 40.7% 151.3% 51.94% 475 cu. yds. of cut soil 475 cu. yds. of fill soil 50.8% or 38,395 sq.ft. 558 sq.ft.existing 550 sq.ft. future corral No change No change Planning Commission review Planning Commission review