Loading...
455, 12 foot garage addition at the, Staff ReportsTO: ATTENTION: FROM: City op2 PP,.q JUL AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE 8/26/91 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (213) 377-1521 FAX: (213) 377-7288 HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL NO. 91-20, ZONING CASE NO. 455 Request for a Variance to encroach into the front yard setback for the construction of a bay window addition and a garage addition to an existing single family dwelling. Mr. and Mrs. August Rihaczek, 10 Flying Mane Road (Lot 60-B-SF) BACKGROUND The Planning Commission granted a Variance to encroach 24 feet into the front yard setback for the construction of a 16 square foot bay window and a 120 square foot garage addition in attached Resolution No. 91-20 on August 20, 1991. The existing house and attached garage presently encroach up to 24 feet into the front yard and there will not be any further incursion into the front yard. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council receive and file Resolution No. 91-20. RESOLUTION NO. 91-20 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE. TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO PERMIT A BAY WINDOW ADDITION AND AN ADDITION TO THE GARAGE IN ZONING CASE NO. 455. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. August Rihaczek with respect to real property located at 10 Flying Mane Road, Rolling Hills (Lot 60-B-SF) requesting a Variance to the front yard setback to permit a bay window addition and an addition to the garage to encroach into the front yard setback. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application for Variances on June 25, 1991 and July 16, 1991, and at a field trip visit on July 13, 1991. Section 3. Sections 17.32.010 through 17.32.030 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. A Variance to Section 17.16.060 is required to construct a bay window addition and an addition to the garage in the fifty (50) foot front yard setback. The applicant is requesting additions that.will encroach a maximum of twenty-four (24) feet into the front yard setback. The Planning Commission finds: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and zone. The Variance is necessary because the existing legal nonconforming residence was built within the front yard setback and the building pad is located close to the street and adjacent residences. B. This Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property 'in question. The Variance is necessary because the existing development pattern on the lot precludes, the requested additions from being built into the rear yard. C. The granting of this Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity or zone in which the property is located. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped. • • RESOLUTION NO. 91-20 PAGE 2 Section 4. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance to encroach into the front yard setback to permit an encroachment to a maximum of 24 feet into the front yard to construct a bay window addition (16 square feet) and an addition to the garage (120 square feet) as indicated on the Development Plan. attached hereto as Exhibit A subject to the conditions contained in Section 5. The Planning Commission also finds that the project conforms withthe requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 5. The Variance to the front yard setback approved in Section 4, as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A, is subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance shall expire unless used within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.32.110 of the Municipal Code. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance approval, that if any conditions thereof are violated, the Permit shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for a period of thirty (30) days. C. All requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed andmaintained in substantial conformance with the Development Plan on file marked Exhibit A except as otherwiseprovided in these conditions. E. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. F. 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. G. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Variance, pursuant to Section 17.32.087, or the approval shall not be effective. RESOLUTION NO. 91-20 PAGE 3 H. All conditions of this Variance approval, except for the maintenance requirement of Paragraph D, must be complied with prior 'to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20TH DAY OF AUGUST, 1991. ATTEST: ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN /i� DIANE SAWYER, DEPUTY CICLERK The foregoing Resolution No. 91-20 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO PERMIT A BAY WINDOW ADDITION AND AN ADDITION TO THE GARAGE IN ZONING CASE NO. 455. was approved and adopted at a regular adjourned meeting of the Planning Commission on August 20, 1991 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Frost, Hankins, Lay, Raine; Chairman Roberts None None ABSTAIN: None I..A or — DEPUTY CIT CLERK �� HEARING DATE: TO: FROM: APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING & SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: �Rolling. wee INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 JULY 16, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION LOLA UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (213) 377-1521 FAX: (213) 377-7288 ZONING CASE NO. 455 10 FLYING MANE ROAD (LOT 60-B-SF) RAS-1, 1.17 ACRES, IRREGULAR SHAPE MR. AND MRS. AUGUST RIHACZEK MR. DON THURSBY, EDWARD CARSON BEALL AND ASSOCIATES JUNE 15, 1991 REQUEST: The applicant requests a Variance to encroach into the front yard setback to permit a bay window addition and a garage addition. BACKGROUND The Planning Commission conducted a field trip on July 13, 1991 to view a silhouette of the proposed bay window and garage addition. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed plans and take public testimony. HEARING DATE: TO: FROM: APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING & SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REQUEST: BACKGROUND • ei4' • OY /EOffi,l INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 JUNE 25, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION LOLA UNGAR. PRINCIPAL PLANNER NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (213) 377-1521 FAX: (213) 377-7288 ZONING CASE NO. 455 10 FLYING MANE ROAD (LOT 60-B-SF) RAS-1, 1.17 ACRES, IRREGULAR SHAPE MR. AND MRS. AUGUST RIHACZEK MR. DON THURSBY, EDWARD CARSON BEALL AND ASSOCIATES JUNE 15, 1991 The applicant requests a Variance to encroach into the front yard setback to permit a bay window addition and a garage addition. In reviewing the applicant's request under Title 17 (Zoning), staff would identify the following issues for evaluation: 1. The applicant is requesting a variance to front yard setback to permit a bay window square feet and an addition to the garage encroach into the addition of 16 of 120 sq.ft. 2. The existing house and attached garage (built in 1951) encroach up to 24 feet into the front yard setback. The new additions will not encroach any further than the existing structure. The adjacent structure to the southeast encroaches 18 feet into the front yard setback, while the adjacent structure to the northwest encroaches 19 feet into the front yard setback. 3. There will not be any grading for the proposed additions. 4. The structural lot coverage proposed is 12.63% (20% permitted) and the total lot coverage proposed is 24. 58 0 (35% permitted) . 5. The existing building pad coverage as proposed is 38.67%. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed plans and take public testimony. Criteria toe satisfied for grant of Varce 1. Original development at the upper end of Flying Mane was done with front yard setbacks varying from 26 feet to 32 feet. The current 50 foot front yard setback creates a unique situation in that all houses in the area are encroaching into the setback. The applicants house is currently setback 26 fee. The proposed garage addition will be setback 30 feet and the breakfast room addition 39'. This is consistent with the neighbor on either side that have setbacks of 31 and 31 feet. The houses on the opposite side of Flying Mane are setback 26'. 2. The proposed additions do not project beyond the existing building setback of 26 feet. The proposed additions are consistent with both the character and scale of the existing development on Flying Mane. The visual impact of the additions are minor due to the existing building pad being substantially lower than the elevation of the street; making the majority of the house non visible from the street.