588, for development and grading fo, Resolutions & Approval Conditions•
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-5 AND
APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE
PLAN REVIEW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A BARN AND TO
AUTHORIZE PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONDUCTED AND LIMITED
GRADING FOR A CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 588.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY
FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. A request has been filed by Mrs. Tamara Torino with respect to
real property located at 6 Middleridge Lane South (Lot 255-UR), Rolling Hills,
requesting an extension to a previously approved Site Plan Review for the
development of a barn and to authorize previously illegally conducted and limited
grading for a corral.
Section 2. The Commission considered this item at a meeting on
February 15, 2000 at which time information was presented indicating that the
extension of time is necessary is necessary in order to comply with Los Angeles
County requirements.
Section 3. Based upon information and evidence submitted, the Planning
Commission does hereby amend Paragraph A, Section 5 of Resolution No. 99-5,
dated February 16, 1999, to read as follows:
"A. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within two years of
the approval of this Resolution."
Section 4. Except as herein amended, the provisions of Resolution No. 99-5
shall continue to be in full force and effect.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 15TH DAY O - U RX 2000.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
MARILYN KE ,DEPUTY CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2000-03 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-5 AND
APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE
PLAN REVIEW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A BARN AND TO
AUTHORIZE PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONDUCTED AND LIMITED
GRADING FOR A CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 588.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission
on February 15, 2000 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer, Witte and
Chairman Roberts.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None .
ABSTAIN: None .
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
• e
RESOLUTION NO. 99-5
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN
REVIEW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A BARN AND TO
AUTHORIZE PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONDUCTED AND LIMITED
GRADING FOR A CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 588.
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 Mrs. Tamara Torino with
respect to real property located at 6 Middleridge Lane South (Lot 255-UR), Rolling
Hills requesting a Variance to permit a previously constructed illegal trellis to
encroach into the south side yard setback and Site Plan Review Modification to
permit the construction of a proposed barn that requires grading at the north side of
the property, a portion of which had been illegally graded, at a single family
residence. During the hearing process, the Planning Commission denied the
request for a Variance to authorize the retention of a previously illegally constructed
trellis that encroaches into the south side yard setback.
Section 2. A. On September 30, 1998, staff was informed that the hillside
on the north side of the subject property was being graded. Upon inspection by
Senior Building Engineering Inspector Rafael Bernal and staff, it was observed that
there was a cut in the hillside and a wood, railroad tie retaining wall had been
constructed in that area.
B. On October 1, 1998, staff discussed the illegal grading and construction
that took place without the benefit of permits with Mr. Richard Huddleson,
Architect, and forwarded a letter to Mrs. Torino. The letter stated that all grading
work must be stopped immediately until appropriate permits/Planning
Commission approvals have been obtained. Required applications were filed on
October 20,1998.
C. Previously, on June 16, 1998, the Planning Commission granted Site
Plan Review approval to authorize previous illegally conducted and limited grading
for an on -site guest driveway and parking area at the residence. A permit to legally
grade the guest driveway and parking area was issued on November 6, 1998.
Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
public hearing to consider the applications on November 17, 1998, December 15,
1998, and January 19, 1999, and at a field trip visit on December 12, 1998. Concerns
expressed by neighbors involving the proposed barn included grading, drainage,
proximity to the northern neighbors' residence, and odors.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-5
PAGE 1 OF 6
• e
Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a
Class 3 Exemption [State CA Guidelines, Section 15303 (e)] and is therefore
categorically exempt from environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act.
Section 4. Section 17.46.020 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a
development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any
grading requiring a grading permit and any building or structure may be constructed
or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made
which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or
structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the
building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six
month period. The applicant requests Site Plan Review for the construction of a
barn and corral that requires grading at the north side of the property, a portion of
which had been illegally graded on a lot developed with an existing single family
residence, an attached garage, guest house, swimming pool, and trellises. With
respect to the Site Plan Review application, the Planning Commission makes the
following findings of fact:
A. The proposed development of a barn and corral is compatible with the
General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed
structurecomplies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density
residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures.
The project conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements with
the conditions approved in Section 5 of this Resolution. The lot has a net square
foot area of 154,899 square feet. The residence (3,878 sq.ft.), attached garage (806 sq.ft.),
swimming pool (800 sq.ft.), guest house (450 sq.ft.), future barn (450 sq.ft.), and
trellises (689 square feet) will total 7,073 square feet which constitutes 4.7% of the lot
which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total
lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 14,715 square feet which
equals 9.5% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage
requirement.
The proposed project is on a relatively large lot with most of the proposed structure
located above and away from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the
development. The 950 square foot building pad proposed for the new barn and
corral will be 450 square feet or 47.4%. The total building pad coverage will be 33.5%.
B. The proposed development preserves and integrates into the site
design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the
lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and
land forms (such as hillsides and knolls) because a minimum amount of grading is
proposed and will only be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away
from the proposed barn, residence and existing neighboring residences.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-5
PAGE2OF6
• e
C. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to
minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at
the northeastern side (rear) of this lot.
D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native
vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, the development plan
preserves several mature trees and shrubs.
E. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and
undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new
structure will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Further,
the proposed project is designed to minimize grading. Significant portions of the lot
will be left undeveloped so as to maintain scenic vistas across the northeasterly
portions of the property.
F. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale
and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As
indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded and the
proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to
this irregular -shaped lot. Grading shall be permitted only to restore the natural
slope of the property.
G. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the
convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the
proposed project will utilize an existing driveway at the southwestern portion of the
property off Middleridge Lane South for access.
H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental
review.
Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for the development of a barn
that requires grading and to authorize previously illegally conducted and limited
grading for a corral, as indicated on the Development Plan dated January 12, 1999
and marked Exhibit A, that is subject to the following conditions:
A. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within one year from the
effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.46.080.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan Review approval,
that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended and the
privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been
given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for a period of
thirty (30) days.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-5
PAGE 3 OF 6
•
C. All requirements of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance, the
Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be
complied with unless otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an
approved plan.
D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance
with the site plan on file dated January 12, 1999 and marked Exhibit A, except as
otherwise provided in these conditions.
E. The 3-rail fence at the northern property line shall be relocated to the
25-foot easement line.
F. Any garden or retaining walls shall not exceed 3 feet in height.
G. Any structures within required setbacks require a Variance and
Planning Commission review and approval.
H. The 262 square foot trellis within the southern side yard setback shall
be removed within 60 days of the approval of this resolution if the denial of the
Variance in Zoning Case No. 588 becomes effective.
I. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 4.7% and total lot coverage
shall not exceed 9.5%.
J. Disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 27,484 square feet or 17.7%.
K. Completion of grading for the proposed barn and corral shall not
exceed 45 cubic yards of cut soil and 45 cubic yards of fill soil and shall not be
permitted unless and until barn plans are approved and a permit is issued by the
County of Los Angeles.
L. Residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 33.8%, pool pad
coverage shall not exceed 24.0%%, guest house pad coverage shall not exceed 59.3%,
and the building pad coverage for the barn shall not exceed 47.4%. The total
building pad coverage shall not exceed 33.5%.
M. The existing topography, flora and natural features of the lot shall be
retained to the greatest extent possible.
N. Landscaping with rye grass or other suitable native vegetation shall be
provided in a 7± foot wide strip to attempt to contain loose material within the
corral area following the 3-rail fence relocation to the 25-foot easement line as
shown on the site plan on file dated January 12, 1999 and marked Exhibit A.
O. Landscaping to obscure any garden walls, retaining walls, or residence
shall be maintained so as not to block views in the northeastern and western
corridors of the lot.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-5
PAGE4OF6
•
P. Landscaping to obscure retaining walls and residence shall be
maintained so as not to exceed the ridge line of the residence.
Q. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to the maximum extent
feasible, the existing mature trees and shrubs and the natural landscape screening
surrounding the proposed barn and corral building pad.
R. Plans to be submitted for grading and drainage plan check shall include
Los Angeles County Flood Control District Plan No. 6650-RW2, dated 5/21/73, this
Resolution No. 99-5, and shall take into consideration improvement of grading and
drainage and that includes effects on property at 4 Middleridge Lane South (Lot 256-
UR) as well as the Middleridge Lane South roadway between Lots 255-UR and 256-
UR.
S. Prior to submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County of
Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related
geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as
approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills
Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a
steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio.
T. 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.
U. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions
of this Site Plan Review or the approval shall not be effective.
V. All conditions of this Site Plan Review approval must be complied
with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los
Angeles.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 16TWDAY F` FEijRUARY, 1999.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
d QJLv
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 99-5
PAGE5OF6
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
§§
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 99-5 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN
REVIEW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A BARN AND TO
AUTHORIZE PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONDUCTED AND LIMITED
GRADING FOR A CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 588.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on
February 16, 1999 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer, Witte and
Chairman Roberts.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 99-5
PAGE6OF6
•
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO:
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROPED
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
(310) 377-1521
(310) 377-7288 FAX
APR 0 5 1999
CITY OF ROt.LING HILLS
Sy
• 98 2367e92
J ` RECORD RECILE DIN OFS FICi L ECORDSI
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
CALIFORNIA
8:04 AM DEC' 30 1998
The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be notarized before recordation.
AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
ZONING CASE NO. 573
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
RBnnniAr'c Ilco
FEE $22
DAF $2
C-20 6
I (We) the undersigned state:
I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows:
6 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 255-UR), ROLLING HILLS
This property is the subject of the above numbered case.
I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said
ZONING CASE NO. 573 SITE PLAN REVIEW ,C
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
gnature TQ.ma,vu. Tor/ Ito
Name typed,o�r_attdr/� lta So -
Add� s/K�{f,G�(X LG .l �
of f�i / .(;/
Cit /State
Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary oublic.
Signature
Name typed or printed
Address
City/State
State of California )
County of Los/Angeles) /
On /`11( before me, /�/ /" /P4J�1. J�o7L641
personally 7'4444a/Ya_ / ol-) appeared
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(*) whose name(*)
is/arc subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that hiefshe/t#ey executed the same in
p+,s/her/t#e+r authorized capacity(40 and that by I9+s/her/t. ear signature(.$) on the instrument the person(e), or the
entity upon behalf of•which the persons) acted, executed the instrument.
-,-! --
Commission # 1154377 t
R. FRIEDLY Witness by h , j'. a ficial seal.
Commission # 1154377
Notary Public - California
Los Angeles County / („ )- Signature of NMary
My Comm. Expires Sep 5, 2001
See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof
• •
RESOLUTION NO. 98-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL
TO AUTHORIZE PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONDUCTED AND
LIMITED GRADING FOR AN ON -SITE GUEST DRIVEWAY AND
PARKING AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING
CASE NO. 573.
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 Mrs. Tamara Torino with
respect to real property located at 6 Middleridge Lane South (Lot 255-UR), Rolling
Hills, requesting a Site Plan Review to authorize the maintenance of previously
conducted and illegal grading to reconfigure an on -site guest driveway and parking
area along with retaining walls at an existing single family residence. During the
hearing process, the amount of grading was reduced.
Section 2. On August 19, 1997, Mrs. Tamara Torino, applicant, was issued a
building permit by the City and the County to construct a 277 square foot residential
addition at the property at 6 Middleridge Lane South. Mrs. Torino was also
replacing her existing driveway when the City was informed of grade changes taking
place at the building site at the eastern leg of the Y-shaped driveway.
On November 5, 1997, Mr. Rafael Bernal, District Engineering Associate,
issued a "Stop Work Order" because grading was taking place without benefit of a
grading permit. Because of the winter rains, the City allowed Mrs. Torino to
continue work on the residential addition, replace the existing southwestern leg of
the Y-shaped driveway to access the residence and requested that Mrs. Torino
provide engineering information about the City's requirement for a grading permit.
On November 12, 1997, Inspector Bernal issued a second "Stop Work Order"
notice when he discovered further grading work was being done. On December 19,
1997, Mr. Keith W. Ehlert, Engineering Geologist, informed Mrs. Torino that the
eastern leg of the Y-shaped driveway had been widened and filled with 288 cubic
yards of soil. The City needed further information from Mrs. Torino. On January 14,
1998, Mr. Ehlert informed Mrs. Torino that 1,870 square feet was affected by the
driveway modifications. From this information, staff calculated and verified with
Mr. Ehlert by telephone that 4.16 feet of fill soil was used to reorient and widen the
driveway and determined that a grading permit was required for the grading work.
Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing to consider the application on March 17, 1998, April 21, 1998, and May 19,
1998, and at a field trip visit on March 28, 1998. The applicant was notified of the
public hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-11 .
PAGE 1 OF 5
98 2367892
• .
Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in the project, from
all persons protesting the same, and from . members of the City staff and the
Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied the project.
Concerns expressed by Commissioners, concerned residents and the applicants
focused on the unauthorized grading, the possible obstruction of neighbors' views
by recent planting of Pine and other trees, and parking at the building site.
Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a
Class 4 Exemption [State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15304 (Minor Alterations to
Land)] and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the
California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 5. Section 17.46.020 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a
development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any
grading that requires a grading permit or any new building or structure may be
constructed. The applicant requests Site Plan Review to authorize the maintenance
of previously conducted and illegal grading to reconfigure an on -site guest driveway
and parking area along with retaining walls at an existing single family residence.
With respect to the Site Plan Review application, the Planning Commission makes
the following findings of fact:
A. The illegal development is compatible with the General Plan, the
Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed grading, as
conditioned, complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low
density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding
structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage
requirements. The lot has a net square foot area of 154,899 square feet. The residence
(3,878 sq.ft.), attached garage (474 sq.ft.), pool (800 sq.ft.), future stable (450 sq.ft.), and
guest house (450 sq.ft.) will have 6,052 square feet which constitutes 3.9% of the lot
which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total
lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 13,517 square feet which
equals 8.7% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage
requirement. The proposed project is on a relatively large lot with the parking area
area and proposed retaining wall structures located above and away from the road so
as to reduce the visual impact of the development.
B. The illegal development preserves and integrates into the site design,
to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the lot
including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land
forms (such as hillsides and knolls) because a minimum amount of grading is
proposed and will only be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away
from the graded area and proposed retaining walls, the existing residence, and
neighboring residences.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-11
PAGE 2 OF 5
98 2367892
• i
C. The development plan follows the natural contours of the site to
minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at
the north and east sides of this lot.
D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native
vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, the development plan
preserves several mature trees and shrubs.
E. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and
undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new
structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Further,
the proposed project is designed to minimize grading. Significant portions of the lot
will be left undeveloped so as to maintain scenic vistas across the northeasterly
portions of the property.
F. The illegal development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and
mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in
Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded and the proposed
project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to this
irregular -shaped lot. Grading shall be permitted only to restore the natural slope of
the property.
G. The illegal development is sensitive and not detrimental to the
convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the
proposed project will utilize the same driveway to Caballeros Road for access.
H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental
review.
Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Site Plan Review request to authorize the maintenance of
previously conducted and illegal grading to reconfigure an on -site guest driveway
and parking area along with retaining walls at an existing single family residence, as
indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as
Exhibit A dated April 9, 1998, that is subject to the following conditions:
A. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within one year from the
effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.46.080.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan Review 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.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-11
PAGE 3 OF 5
98 2367892
• •
C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the
Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be
complied with unless otherwise approved by Variance.
D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance
with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A dated April 9, 1998, except as otherwise
provided in these conditions.
E. Any retaining walls shall not exceed 3 feet in height.
F. The top upper edge of all retaining walls shall be a continuous smooth
line and without jagged inclines or declines along the length of the wall.
G. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 3.9% and total lot coverage of
structures and paved areas shall not exceed 8.7%.
H. Disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 14.1%.
I. Grading to repair the eastern driveway parking area shall not exceed
286 cubic yards of cut soil and 286 cubic yards of fill soil.
J. Grading of the eastern leg of the driveway shall not exceed 5,520 square
feet of ground surface area.
K. The existing topography, flora and natural features of the lot shall be
retained to the greatest extent feasible.
L. Additional landscape screening shall be planted to obscure the
southern faces of the retaining walls and the residence but not block views in the
northeastern and western corridors of the lot.
M. Landscaping to obscure the retaining walls and residence shall be
maintained so as not to exceed the ridge line of the residence.
N. Review and approval of a site drainage plan by the City Engineer shall
be obtained for the existing and proposed grading and the retaining walls.
O. A plan that conforms to the development plan as approved by the
Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department
staff for their review prior to the submittal of an applicable site drainage plan to the
County of Los Angeles for plan check.
P. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills
Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to approval of the
drainage plan.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-11
PAGE 4 OF 5
98 2367892
•
•
Q. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of
Building and Safety for site drainage plan review and building permits must
conform to the development plan described at the beginning of this section (Section
11).
R. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions
of these Variance and Conditional Use Permit approvals pursuant to Section
17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective.
S. All conditions of this Site Plan Review approvals must be complied
with prior to approval of the site drainage plan by the County of Los Angeles.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 16TH�A'�f-QF�TUN 1998.
ATTEST:
MARILYN I RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITYOF ROLLING HILLS
) §§
AL V ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 98-11 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CM OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO AUTHORIZE
PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONDUCTED AND LIMITED GRADING FOR AN ON -
SITE GUEST DRIVEWAY AND PARKING AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
IN ZONING CASE NO. 573.
was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission a-t June 16, 1998
by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer and
Chairman Roberts.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Witte.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
MARILYN RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 98-11
PAGE 5 OF 5
98 2367892
• •
RESOLUTION NO. 99-4
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS DENYING A VARIANCE TO AUTHORIZE THE
RETENTION OF A PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED
TRELLIS THAT ENCROACHES INTO THE SOUTH SIDE YARD
SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 588.
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 Mrs. Tamara Torino with
respect to real property located at 6 Middleridge Lane South (Lot 255-UR), Rolling
Hills requesting a Variance to permit a previously constructed illegal trellis to
encroach into the south side yard setback.
Section 2. On September 30, 1998, staff was informed that the hillside on
the north side of the subject property was being graded. Upon inspection by Senior
Building Engineering Inspector Rafael Bernal and staff, it was observed that there
was a cut in the hillside and a wood, railroad tie retaining wall had been constructed
in that area. The application was submitted after staff determined that a new trellis
was observed attached to the south side of the residence within the side yard setback.
Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing to consider the application on November 17, 1998, December 15, 1998, and
January 19, 1999, and at a field trip visit on December 12, 1998.
Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a
Class 3 Exemption [State CA Guidelines, Section 15303 (e)] and is therefore
categorically exempt from environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act.
Section 4. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar
properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of
property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity.
Section 17.16.120(B) requires a side yard setback for every residential parcel in the
RA-S-2 zone to be thirty-five (35) feet. The applicant is requesting to maintain a 262
square foot trellis that encroaches a maximum of twenty-eight (28) feet into the
south side yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning
Commission finds as follows:
A. There are no exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and
conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply
RESOLUTION NO. 99-4
PAGE 1 OF 3
• •
generally to the other property in the same vicinity and zone. The variance is not
necessary because authorization of the illegally constructed trellis would not allow
sufficient setbacks and easements to provide buffers between residential uses. In
addition, the building pad coverage for this project would be 35.3% which the
Commission finds excessive and exceeds the building pad coverage of most
properties in the vicinity so that the proposed expansion is not appropriate for the
property.
B. The Variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone,
but which is denied to the property in question because a portion of the residence,
garden walls and a water feature already encroach into the south side yard setback,
and additional encroachments would exacerbate the amount of residential structure
within setback areas, and further construction within setbacks is not required to use
the site for residential uses.
C. The granting of the Variance will be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and
zone in which the property is located because the proposed project does not
minimize structural coverage on the pad, leaves little open space between property
lines, would result in further overdevelopment of the building pad and exceeds the
recommended coverage of 30%. The encroachment also makes the illegally
constructed trellis more visually prominent on the building pad than appropriate
for the existing development pattern of the City.
Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby denies the request for a Variance to authorize the retention of a previously
constructed illegal trellis to encroach into the south side yard setback in Zoning Case
No. 588.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 16 DAY; F : RUARY, 1999.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 99-4
PAGE2OF3
• •
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 99-4 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS DENYING A VARIANCE TO AUTHORIZE THE
RETENTION OF A PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED
TRELLIS THAT ENCROACHES INTO THE SOUTH SIDE YARD
SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 588.
was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning
Commission on February 16, 1999 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer, Witte and
Chairman Roberts.
None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
MARILYNt-RN DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 99-4
PAGE 3 OF 3