Loading...
797, Extension previously approved , Resolutions & Approval Conditions• RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO: CITY OF ROLLING HILLS PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2 PORTUGUESE BEND RD. ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 (310) 377-7288 FAX •I2Or *20110712717* I RECORDER'S USE ONLY 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. 797 XX SITE PLAN REVIEW; XX CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT; XX VARIANCE I (We) the undersigned state I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows: 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (LOT 248-A-1-UR) This property is the subject of the above numbered case and conditions of approval I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said ZONING CASE NO. 797 XX SITE PLAN REVIEW; XX CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT; XX VARIANCE e) c= - ify (or declare) under the pence of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. ature J ` \ sz.\v`. L`J frjo 1�1 Name typed or printed Name typed or printed Signature Address Zct V4ic141I J__ L 5)4-_Address Ll s GA clo rt.:14 City/S City/State Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public. See Attached Exhibit "A", RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL NO. 2011-02 State of California ) County of Los Angeles ) On NiA./ .2O . 20// before me, i H YU K ,TA- L (A4 iL ny Personally �` appeared Vwx.2 UNCo who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose narne(s) is/ are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/ she/ they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies) and that by his/ her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS by hand and official seal. Signature of Nota ( Seal) z 01, HYUK JAE LEE Commission 0 1883761 Notary Public - California Orange County M Comm. Expires Mar 21, 2014 •E=4; RESOLUTION NO. 2011-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE AND CORRAL AND GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE STABLE AND CORRAL IN THE FRONT YARD SETBCK AT A PROPERTY DEVELOPED WITH A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 797, AT 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, LOT 248-A-1-UR, (JOHNSON). THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). THE PLANNING . COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING . HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Application was duly filed by Mr. Kenneth Johnson with respect to real property located at 29 Middleridge Lane South (lot 248-A-1-UR) requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a stable with a loft and corral and a Variance to allow the stable and corral to be located in the front yard setback. The first story of the stable is proposed to be 2,160 square feet and the loft is proposed to be 800 square feet including a 160 square foot catwalk, for a total building area of 2,960 square feet. The proposed loft area would be 27% of the building area. The corral area is proposed to be 1,880 square feet. Section 2 This proposal is subject to the recently adopted stable ordinance, which requires that all new stables over 200 square feet and corrals over 550 square feet be reviewed under the Conditional Use Permit process. A Variance is required due to the proposed location of the stable and corral. All but 50 square feet of the stable is proposed to be located in the front setback and will encroach between 38 feet 25 feet into the required front setback. Section 3. In 1996 a Site Plan Review and Variance approval was granted to the applicant for a 1,200 square foot addition to the residence and for a 3,200 square foot new stable with a loft and corral, both encroaching into the front yard setback. At some point prior to 1996, the area where the then stable was proposed was graded. Section 4. In 1997, the applicant obtained a grading permit for house addition and remediation of land around the residence. The remediation and grading for the addition were completed. The improvements were not constructed. In 2000 a modification to the original request was granted to construct the residential addition and a 2,600 square foot stable with a loft. Permission to retain an unauthorized graded area below the residential building pad was also granted. The grading was reviewed and approved by the County and final inspection was granted in 2002. The applicant has not constructed the addition or the stable. Reso. 2011-02 ZC No. 797 1 Section 5. The property is currently developed with a 3,784 square foot residence, 704 square foot garage, 260 square feet of trellises, 130 square foot entryway, 472 square foot swimming pool, service yard and pool equipment area. The applicant is not proposing to add tothe residence and no additional grading is required for construction of the stable and corral. Section 6. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearings on the subject application on December 21, 2010 January 18 and in the field on January 18, 2011. The applicant was notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City staff and the Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The Planning Commission upon request from a neighbor viewed the project from 26 Middleridge Lane S. The applicant and applicant's representative were in attendance at the hearings. Section 7. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a categorical exemption from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 8. Section 17.18 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a stable over 200 square feet and a corral over 550 square feet, provided the Planning Commission approves a Conditional Use Permit. 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 the stable would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because the use is consistent with similar uses in the community, meets all the applicable code development standards for a stable, and the area is located in an area on the property that is adequately sized to accommodate the stable and adjoining corral. The proposed structure is appropriately located in that it will be sufficiently separated from nearby structures used for habitation or containing sleeping quarters both on and off the project site. B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent structures have been considered, and the project will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed stable and corral orientation is not towards neighbors and its general location is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so as to not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. Additional trees will be added to further screen the project from adjacent properties. The proposed stable is to be located on an already graded area, therefore preserving the natural terrain of the remaining of the property. The proposed location will not require any greater incursion into the front yard than already exists on the property and similar properties in the vicinity. Reso. 2011-02 ZC No. 797 2 C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the stable complies with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and will not give the property an over -built look. The lot is 2.84 acres in size and is sufficiently large to accommodate the proposed structure. The stable will be screened from neighbors view by trees that will be retained and additional trees will be planted. D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district and requires a Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Section 17.18 of the Zoning Ordinance. 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. Section 9. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Code permit approval of a variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when, due to exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone, strict application of the Code would deny the property owner substantial property rights enjoyed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone. The applicant seeks a variance from the requirement that front yard setbacks be free of structures and wishes to construct a stable and corral that would encroach a maximum 38 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the existing lot is irregular in shape and has a very long frontage along Middleridge Lane, and less than average depth. The existing residence was built within the front yard setback and the existing building pad for the stable is also located close to the street. The new stable will be constructed further down the street to allow open space near the front of the residence. The topography of the lot together with the fact that the. existing pad and residence are located in the front create difficulty in constructing a stable and corral elsewhere on the property. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because due to the existing grade, irregular lot. configuration it would be a hardship to locate the stable in the rear. The expansive open space in the front yard comfortably supports a stable. The limited depth of the property and slopes in the rear places a hardship on locating the stable in the side or rear areas. The proposed stable is to be located on an already graded area, therefore preserving the natural terrain of the remaining of the property. The Reso. 2011-02 ZC No. 797 3 proposed location will not require any greater incursion into the front yard than already exists on the property and similar properties in the vicinity. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because a stable would not affect any neighbor's views and therefore property value and would be screened from the street. Development of the stable in the front yard setback will allow substantial portion of the rear of the lot to remain undeveloped. E. 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. F. The variance request is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and will uphold the City's goals to protect and promote construction of equestrian facilities. Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves Zoning Case No. 797 a Conditional Use Permit for a stable and corral and a Variance to locate the stable and corral in the front yard setback subject to the following conditions: A. The Conditional Use Permit and Variance approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.080 and 17.42.070, unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of this section. B. It is declared and made a condition of this approval that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that theapplicant has been given written notice to cease such violation, the opportunity for a hearing has been provided, and if requested, has been held, and thereafter the applicant fails to correct the violation within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of the City's determination. C. All requirements of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in this permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated December 3, 2010 except as otherwise provided in these conditions. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the approved development plan. All conditions of the Variance and CUP approvals, herein as applicable, shall be Reso. 2011-02 ZC No. 797 4 incorporated into the building permit working drawings and complied with prior to issuance of a building permit from the building department. E. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to the Building and Safety Department for issuance of building permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission. F. Structural lot coverage of the lot shall not exceed 7,646 square feet or 7.0% of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (20% maximum). G. The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork shall not exceed 12,429 square feet or 11.5%, of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (35% max). H. There shall be no grading for this project. The disturbed area of the lot shall remain as currently graded, 41,294 square feet, and shall not exceed 40% of the net lot area. I. The existing stable and corral pad shall not be enlarged and shall remain at 3,110 square feet, outside of the setbacks. The building pad coverage on this pad shall not exceed 69.5%. J. No structures shall be permitted on the pad area below the residence. However, this area may be used for a corral and may be encircled or otherwise delineated by the applicant by installing a three rail fence, subject to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. K. The . applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Lighting Ordinance of the City of Rolling Hills (RHMC 17.16.190 E), pertaining to lighting on said property. L. All utility lines to the stable shall be placed underground, subject to all applicable standards and requirements. M. A drainage plan, if required by the Building Department shall be prepared and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of a construction permit. Such plan shall be subject to County Code requirements. N. The property owners shall comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance pertaining to roof covering (RHMC 17.16.190). O. The stable uses are subject to the requirements of Section 17.18 of the RH Zoning Ordinance. The surface of the corral and paddock must remain permeable. Reso. 2011-02 ZC No. 797 5 The access to the stable and the lower corral area may have a D.G. surface. Access may not exceed a slope of 25%. P. Prior to issuance of building permits, two copies of a landscape plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Department and shall include native drought -resistant vegetation. The existing trees along Middleridge Lane S. shall remain and additional trees shall be planted to screen the stable from the residences above. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and are consistent with the rural character of the community. The trees, when planted, shall be of substantial size and height so that the stable is sufficiently screened from the homes above. Plants and trees shall be planted in an offset manner so that not to result in a hedge like screen. If landscaping of 5,000 square foot area or greater, other than the trees, is introduced for the stable and corral area, the landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Q. Perimeter easements and trails, if any, including roadway easements shall remain free and clear of any improvements including, but not be limited to, fences -including construction fences, landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, except as otherwise approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association. R. 50% of any construction materials must be recycled or diverted from landfills. The hauler of the materials shall obtain City's Construction and Demolition permit prior ' to start of work. No final inspection shall be granted until all documentation is filed with the City. S. 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. T. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site and, if necessary, any overflow parking shall take place within' nearby roadway easements. U. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) requirements related to solid waste, drainage and storm water drainage facilities management. V. The conditions of approval specified herein shall be printed on the construction plans submitted to the RHCA and buidling department for plan check and permitting. Reso. 2011-02 ZC No. 797 6 W. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the property, which would constitute additional grading or structural development shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. X. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this permit pursuant to Zoning Ordinance, or the approval shall not be effective. Y. Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 15th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2011. J L� . SMITH, C AIRPERSON ATTEST: . al, ,wciD HEIDI LUCE, DEPUTY CITY CLERK Reso. 2011-02 ZC No. 797 7 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2011-02 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE AND CORRAL AND GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE STABLE AND CORRAL IN THE FRONT YARD SETBCK AT A PROPERTY DEVELOPED WITH A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 797, AT 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, LOT 248-A-1-UR, (JOHNSON). THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). was approved and adopted at regular meeting of the Planning Commission on February 15, 2011 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioner Henke, Vice Chairman Pieper and Chairperson Smith. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: Commissioners Chelf and DeRoy. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices clietialfr6 HEIDI LUCE, DEPUTY CITY CLERK Reso. 2011-02 ZC No. 797 8 • 00-19 O Ex %4 idd- A 1, RESOLUTION NO. 889 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A RESIDENTIAL ADDITION TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO AUTHORIZE GRADING AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH IN ZONING CASE NO. 616. 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. Kenneth J. Johnson with respect to real property located at 29 Middleridge Lane South (Lot 248-A-1-UR), Rolling Hills, requesting the following: (1) modify a previously approved Variance for the construction of a residential addition to encroach into the front yard setback, (2) modify a previously approved Variance for the construction of a stable to encroach into the front yard setback, and (3) modify a previously approved Site Plan Review to authorize grading at a single family residence. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on June 20, 2000, July 18, 2000, and at a field trip visit on July 15, 2000. The applicants were notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. 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 were in attendance at the hearing. Section 3. On August 15, 2000, the Planning Commission approved the application by Resolution No. 2000-18 in Zoning Case No. 616. Section 4. On August 28, 2000, the City Council took jurisdiction of Zoning Case No. 616. Section 5. The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the case on September 11, 2000, September 25, 2000, and at a field trip visit on September 25, 2000. The applicants were notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal, from all persons protesting the same, and from members of the City staff and the City Council having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The applicants were in attendance at the hearings. The following concerns were expressed by the Council: the ability to maintain the pad area below the house for equestrian use only, the need for a fence establishing the equestrian area, that no structures shall be permitted on the graded pad, that the graded pad shall be smoothed to a more natural condition, that slopes adjacent to the canyon be returned to a 2:1 slope ratio, the need for a landscape plan incorporating California Native vegetation similar to that in the adjacent canyon, and the need for a drainage plan to be approved by the County. Section 6. The Planning Commission found that the project qualifies as a Class 1, 3, and 4 Exemption [State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(e), 15303(e) and 153041 and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 7. 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 17.16.110 requires a front yard of fifty feet (50') from the front easement line. The applicant is requesting to add a 1,200 square foot residential addition at the southwest corner of the residence attached by a breezeway that will encroach twenty-five (25) feet into the fifty (50) foot front yard setback. 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 lot is an irregular -shaped lot. The existing legal nonconforming residence was built within the front yard setback and the existing building pad is located close to the street. The Resolution No. 889 -1- • .00 1950213 residential addition will be constructed to align with the existing structure. Due to the irregular shape of the lot and the siting of the existing house on the lot, it would be infeasible to construct the addition without encroaching into the required setback. 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 grading was minimized to increase the building pad on this irregular shaped lot and there will not be any greater incursion into the front yard setback than already exists at the site and at other property in the same vicinity. The Variance will permit the development of the property in a manner similar to development patterns on surrounding properties. The location of the building pad dictates that the proposed addition be set forward on the lot because the existing structure was not constructed under current setback standards and the building pad is situated close to the street. C. The granting of the Variance will 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. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves the request for a Variance in conjunction with Zoning Case No. 616 to permit the proposed project to encroach a maximum of twenty-five feet (25') into the fifty foot (50') front yard setback, subject to the conditions specified in Section 13. Section 9. Section 17.16.200 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires that stables and corrals not be constructed in the front yard. The applicant is requesting to construct a 2,600 square foot stable in the front yard. 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 lot is an irregular shaped lot. The existing legal nonconforming residence was built within the front yard setback and the existing building pad for the stable is located close to the street. The required stable cannot be physically located anywhere other than the proposed location in the required setback due to the topography and irregular shape of the site. 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 grading will not be required to increase the building pad for the stable on this irregular shaped lot and there will not be any greater incursion into the front yard setback than already exists at the existing site and at other property in the same vicinity. Also, granting of the Variance will permit the development of the property in a manner similar to development patterns on surrounding properties. The Variance is necessary because the Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires that every lot have a site that is readily accessible and suitable for a stable and corral, and the only site on the property for a stable and corral requires encroachment into the front yard. C. The granting of the Variance will 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. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped. Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves the request for a Variance in conjunction with Zoning Case No. 616 to permit the construction of a 2,600 square foot stable in the front yard, subject to the conditions specified in Section 13. Section 11. 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 applicants request Site Plan Review to authorize the maintenance of grading at a single family residence. With respect to the Site Plan Review application, 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. The grading, as conditioned, complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. With the Variances approved in Sections 7 and 9, the project conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net Resolution No. 889 -2- • '9-1950213 • square foot area of 103,237 square feet. The residence (4,984 sq.ft.), attached garage (704 sq.ft.), pool (472 sq.ft.), stable (2,600 sq.ft.), and service yard (96 sq.ft.) will have 8,856 square feet which constitutes 8.6% of the lot which is within the maximum 20°1° structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot, coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 13,784 square feet which equals 13.4% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is on a relatively large irregular -shaped lot with most of the structures located at or below and away from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. 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). A minimum amount of grading will be required and will only be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the proposed structures, the existing residence, and neighboring residences. 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 west side 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 northwesterly 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. Any additional grading shall be permitted only to restore the natural 2:1 slope of the property as it meets the canyons. G. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles. The proposed project will utilize the same driveway to 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 12. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves the Site Plan Review request to allow grading, allow proposed limited grading and to allow the construction of residential additions and a stable at an existing single family residence, as indicated on the Development Plan reviewed by the City Council on September 25, 2000 and dated June 14, 2000 and marked Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 10-13. Section 13. The Variances regarding encroachments approved in Sections 7 and 9 of this Resolution and the Site Plan Review approved in Section 11 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval if applicants have not pulled the appropriate building permits and commenced work as defined in Sections 17.38.070(A) and 17.46.080(A) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of these sections. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance and Site Plan Review approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder 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 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 (In. an approved pl?n. Resolution No. 889 -3- • 0-1950213 D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A and dated June 14, 2000, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The property on which the project is located shall contain an area of sufficient size to also provide an area meeting all standards for a stable and corral with vehicular access thereto in conformance with site plan review limitations. F. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 8,856 square feet or 8.6% in conformance with lot coverage limitations. G. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 13,784 square feet or 13.4% in conformance with lot coverage limitations. H. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 41,294 square feet or 40.0% in conformance with lot coverage limitations. 1. Building pad coverage shall not exceed 55.2%. J. There shall be no further grading for the project beyond the 4,650 cubic yards of cut soil and the 4,650 cubic yards of fill soil that has already taken place, other than is necessary to restore the slopes adjacent to the canyons to a 2:1 slope. K. The stable loft shall not have glazed openings but, may have usable shutters. L. Any stable loft shall be limited in use to the storage of feed, tack and stable equipment. M. The stable shall be used for the exclusive purpose of keeping permitted domestic animals. Commercial uses are not permitted. N. Landscaping shall be designed to incorporate mature trees and shrubs so as not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but to obscure the residence. O. Landscaping 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. P. The landscape plan shall include appropriate planting of the hillsides and lower created pad which has been denuded by periodic discing and grading with low growing ground cover. The landscaping plan shall include California native plants similar to the existing natural vegetation in the canyon adjacent to the pad area below the house. Q. Two copies of a landscape plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Department and shall include native drought -resistant vegetation that will not disrupt the impact of the views of neighboring properties prior to the issuance of any building permit. The landscaping plan submitted shall comply with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the community. A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be posted prior to issuance of a grading and building permit and shall be retained with the City for not less than two years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City Manager after the City Manager determines (i) that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved and (ii) that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. R. The pad area below the home shall be maintained for equestrian use only; S. No structures shall be permitted in the pad area below the home; T. The pad area below the home may be encircled or otherwise delineated by the applicant installing a white three rail fence. Resolution No. 889 -4- • • 00--1950213 U. The graded pad area shall be smoothed out to a more natural state and slopes adjacent to the pad area and canyons on the property shall be returned to a 2:1 slope. V. The applicant shall provide a drainage plan for the lower pad area subject to County approval. W. 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. X. During construction, conformance with local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required. Y. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, stormwater 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. Z. During and after construction, all soil preparation, drainage, and landscape sprinklers shall protect the building pad from erosion and direct surface water to the rear of the lot at the northwest. AA. During construction, an applicant prepared Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 1996 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control stormwater pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles. AB. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site and, if necessary, any overflow parking shall take place within nearby roadway easements. AC. 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. AD. The drainage plan system shall be modified, subject to review and approval by the Planning Department and City Engineer, to include any water from any site irrigation systems. All drainage from the site shall be conveyed in an approved manner to the rear or northeast of the lot. AE. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and maintenance of stormwater drainage facilities. AF. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's) related to solid waste. AG. A detailed drainage plan that conforms to the development plan as approved by the City, Council shall be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review and approval. AH. The project shall be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any drainage, building or grading permit. AL 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. AJ. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional grading or structural development shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. AK. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final building plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology Resolution No. 889 5- Or-1950213 • reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the City Council must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review and approval. AL. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these Variance and Site Plan Review approvals, pursuant to Section 17.38.060, or the approvals shall not be effective. AM. All conditions of these Variance and Site Plan Review approvals shall be complied with prior to the issuance of a building permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF OC 00. EY P ELL, MAYOR ATTEST: MARILYN-KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 889 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A RESIDENTIAL ADDITION TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO AUTHORIZE GRADING AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH IN ZONING CASE NO. 616. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on October 9, 2000 by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Hill, Lay, Mayor Pro Tem Murdock AYES: and Mayor Pernell. 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. 889 -6- p RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT A STABLE TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN THE FRONT YARD, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A RESIDENTIAL ADDITION THAT REQUIRES GRADING IN ZONING CASE NO. 544. 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. Kenneth J. Johnson with respect to real property located at 29 Middleridge Lane South, Rolling Hills (Lot 248-A-1-UR) requesting a Variance to permit encroachment into the front yard setback to construct a residential addition, requesting a Variance to permit encroachment into the front yard setback to construct a stable, and requesting Site Plan Review for the construction of a residential addition that requires grading. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on August 20, 1996 and September 17, 1996, and at a field trip visit on September 7, 1996. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 and Class 3 Exemption (State CA Guidelines, Sections 15301(e) and 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 17.16.110 requires the front yard setback for every residential parcel to be fifty (50) feet. The applicant is requesting to encroach up to a maximum 27 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback to construct a single family residence. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the lot is an irregular -shaped lot. The existing legal nonconforming residence was built within the front yard setback and the existing building pad is located close to the street. The new residence will be constructed to allow open space near the front of the residence. 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 grading will be minimized to increase the building pad on this irregular shaped lot and there will not be any greater incursion into the front setback than already exists at the existing site and at .other property in the same vicinity. Also, the Variance will permit the development of the property in a manner similar to development patterns on surrounding properties. 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. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped. Section 5. Based upon . the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 544 to permit the construction of a residential addition that will encroach a maximum of twenty-seven (27) feet into the front yard setback, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 12 of this Resolution. Section 6. Section 17.16.200 requires that stables and corrals not be constructed in the front yard. The applicant is requesting to construct a stable in the front yard. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the lot is an irregular -shaped lot. The existing legal nonconforming residence was built within the front yard setback and the existing building pad for the stable is located close to the street. The new stable will be constructed below and away from the residence. 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 grading will not be required to increase the building pad for the stable on this irregular shaped lot and there will not be any greater incursion into the front setback than already exists at the existing site and at other property in the same vicinity. Also, the Variance will permit the development of the property in a manner similar to development patterns on surrounding properties. 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 RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 2 OF 8 • • in which the property is located. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion of the Jot to remain undeveloped. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 544 to permit the construction of a stable in the front yard, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 12 of this Resolution. Section 8. Section 17.16.110 requires the front yard setback for every residential parcel to be fifty (50) feet. The applicant is requesting to encroach up to a maximum of 28 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback to construct a stable. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the lot is an irregular -shaped lot. The existing legal nonconforming residence was built within the front yard setback and the existing stable building pad is also located close to the street. The new stable will be constructed further down the street to allow open space near the front of the residence. 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 the irregular shaped lot and sloping backyard precludes construction of a stable in the rear yard. The proposed location will not require any greater incursion into the front yard setback than already exists at the existing site and at other property in the same vicinity. Also, the Variance willpermit the development of the property in a manner similar to development patterns on surrounding properties. 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. Development of the stable in the front yard setback will allow a substantial portion of the rear lot to remain undeveloped. Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 544 to permit the construction of a stable that will encroach a maximumof twenty-seven (28) feet into the front yard setback, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 12 of this Resolution. Section 10. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by at RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 3 OF 8 • • 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, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net square foot area of 103,237 square feet (2.37 acres). The proposed residence (4,865 sq.ft.), garage (704 sq.ft.), swimming pool (472 sq.ft.), stable (3,200 sq.ft.), and service yard (96 sq.ft.) will have 9,241 square feet which constitutes 8.95% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 14.209 square feet which equals 13.8% 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 structures located below the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. 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). Grading to enlarge the building pad area for the residential addition will be required, but most of the mature trees will not be removed. L11 Ulilll� YY 111 U1JV Vl. JUJU- lU J. Ylbl1. 1.lU LJ1V Y l..a al�.l llluLl, lllu� YY 111 flu YV UVV Uy 11 Vll L proposed residence and existing neighboring residences. 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 west 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 and supplements it with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. E. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain scenic vistas across the northwesterly 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 - RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 4 OF 8 shaped lot. The ratio of the proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. 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 the same driveway to 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 11. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 544 for a proposed residential development as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A and subject to the conditions contained in Section 12. Section 12. The Variance to the front yard setback for the residential addition approved in Section 5, the Variance to permit a stable in the front yard, approved in Section 7, the Variance for the stable in the front yard setback approved in Section 9, and the Site Plan Review approved in Section 11 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070(A) and 17.46.080(A). B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance and Site Plan Review approvals, 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. 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 marked Exhibit A, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. A preliminary landscape plan must be submitted for review by the Planning Department and include native drought -resistant vegetation that will not disrupt the impact of_ the views of neighboring properties prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 5OF8 plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the community. A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a grading and building permit and shall be retained with the City for not less than two years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. F. Landscaping shall be designed so as not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but, to obscure structures. G. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to the maximum extent feasible, the existing mature trees and shrubs and the natural landscape screening surrounding the proposed residential building pad. H. The landscape plan shall include appropriate planting of the hillsides which have been denuded by periodic discing. I. The stable loft shall not have glazed openings but, may have usable shutters. J. Any stable loft area shall be limited in use to the storage of feed, tack and stable equipment. K. The stable shall be used for the exclusive purpose of keeping permitted domestic animals. Commercial uses are not permitted. L. Residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 40.9%. M. Grading quantities shall not exceed 4,980 cubic yards of cut soil and 4,980 cubic yards of fill soil. N. • Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. O. 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. RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 6 OF 8 • • 1 P. Notwithstanding Section 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional development shall require the filing of a new application for Site Plan Review approval by the Planning Commission. Q. All conditions of these Variance and Site Plan Review approvals must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. R. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these Variance and Site Plan Review approvals or the approvals shall not be effective. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 15TH DAY ATTEST: f , MARILYN RN DEPUTY CITY CLERK F OCTOBER, 1996. EWE HANk1NS, ACTING CHAIR RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 7 OF 8 • • STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 96-20 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT A STABLE TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN THE FRONT YARD, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A RESIDENTIAL ADDITION THAT REQUIRES GRADING IN ZONING CASE NO. 544. was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission on October 15, 1996 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Sommer, Witte and Acting Chair Hankins. NOES: Commissioner Margeta. ABSENT: Chairman Roberts. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. DEPUTY CITY ERK RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 8 OF 8