Loading...
544, Construct stable, partially in, Staff Reports•City ol _WA INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com MEMORANDUM TO: FILE FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: JOHNSON PROPERTY, 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH DATE: FEBRUARY 2, 2000 Due to inactivity at the RHCA Architectural Committee on this case, I contacted Ken Johnson, 29 Middleridge Lane South on 2/2/00 to query the status of his RHCA Architectural approval for his barn. Mr. Johnson indicated that his architect has had the job since August, 1999 and should be completing it within 10 days for him to submit to the Architectural Committee for review. He indicated that he is aware of his need to correct the grading and the unauthorized pad on the lower portion of his property and that the redesigned barn did not change the location, previous approved grading plan or cause in further encroachments on the property. CRN:mlk johnsonfile.mem Pririted on Recycled Paper. • aiy INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 21,1997 TO: HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: LOLA UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 544 Mr. Kenneth J. Johnson, 29 Middleridge Lane South (Lot 248-A-1-UR) Request for a one-year time extension. BACKGROUND Attached is a request from Mr. Kenneth J. Johnson requesting a one year time extension for the following previously approved requests: a Variance to permit an encroachment into the front yard setback to construct a residential addition, a Variance to permit a stable to be constructed in the front yard, a Variance to permit encroachment into the front yard setback to construct a stable, and Site Plan Review approval for the construction of a residential addition that requires grading in Zoning Case No. 544 that was approved by the Commission on October 15, 1996 by Resolution No. 96-20 attached. Mr. Johnson says the time extension is necessary in order to complete the grading review process with the County. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the request. Printed on Recycled Paper. KENNETH J JOHNSON Principal • Cypress Capital Partners (310) 265-9308 Fax (310) 265-9318 OCT 1 4 1997 CITY OF ROLLING HILL. By Q-0u41.-5 41-iu,-3 eatt. t-t s. V w 6 AR.- - 2785 Pacific Coast Hwy #E-301 Torrance, California 90505 -0c.To3at 14, IR et 1 (Z £.: ; o P ?v v C• ArS a N o. S 104 INYv+ og. Po tt, 'tom WC3 (L o ear i 3 r, cdb.S rc . 'lekts G 0-1•6 0 1,3 6 (LE u L L .S SiNer -pat. c IDS - t. L. -nA prO pce-r i c. - ,p + T O r>p A-o L.Q VAIN 4 .>v k - * L '- So Zihw 'RiE C-• -TWiS 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 lot 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 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 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 maximum. of 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 •5 .. • 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. Grading will also be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the 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 PAGE5OF8 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 • • 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: MARILYN K RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 7 OF 8 F OCTOBER, 1996. 011,1 EWE HANkINS, ACTING CHAIR • 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. Yl(ain . I*< 4 DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 8 OF 8 • DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 97-25 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 AND 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. A request has been 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 an extension to a previously approved Variance to permit an encroachment into the front yard setback to construct a residential addition, a previously approved Variance to permit a stable to be constructed in the front yard, a previously approved Variance to permit encroachment into the front yard setback to construct a stable, and a previously approved Site Plan Review approval for the construction of a residential addition that requires grading. Section 2. The Commission considered this item at a meeting on October 21, 1997 at which time information was presented indicating that the extension of time is necessary in order to complete the grading review process with the County. Section 3. Based upon information and evidence submitted, the Planning Commission does hereby amend Paragraph A, Section 12 of Resolution No. 96-20, dated October 15, 1996, to read as follows: "A. The Variance and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070(A) and 17.46.080(A)." Section 4. Except as herein amended, the provisions of Resolution No. 96- 20 shall continue to be in full force and effect. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 1997. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN RESOLUTION NO. 97-5 PAGE 1 OF 2 • - DRAFT ATTEST: MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 97-25 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 AND 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 a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on October 21, 1997 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 97-5 PAGE 2 OF 2 • • City 0/ leolling fidid INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 Agendam 1: cityofr�@ aol.cor� Item NO.: 4.B. Mtg. Date: 10/28/96 DATE: OCTOBER 28,1996 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTENTION: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER - SUBJECT: 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 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. Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth J. Johnson, 29 Middleridge Lane South (Lot 248-A-1-UR) BACKGROUND 1. The Planning Commission approved the attached subject resolution on October 15, 1996 at their regular meeting. 2. • The applicants are requesting a Variance to construct a residential addition at the southwest corner of the residence that will encroach 27 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback. The addition will not encroach any further than the existing residence into the setback. The existing 3,665 square foot residence plus the addition will be 4,865 square feet. RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 1 Printed on Recycled Paper. • • • The applicants are requesting a Variance to construct a 3,200 square foot stable, 68 feet west of the residence that will encroach 28 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback. • The applicants are requesting Site Plan Review for two reasons: the size of the residential addition exceeds 25% of the existing structure and a grading permit is required for the project. Site Plan Review is required for any grading requiring a grading permit, any new building or structure except a barn or stable without grading, and any additions that increase the size of the structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in any 36-month period. The applicants propose to construct a 1,200 square foot residential addition at the southwest, corner of the existing residence. The size of the residence and garage structure . will be increased by 27.5%. The residential addition will require grading of 4,980 cubic yards of cut soil and 4,980 cubic yards of fill soil. The soil will be removed from the southeast portion of the lot and relocated to the northwest side of the residence to enlarge the residential building pad. 2. Structural lot coverage will be 9,337 square feet and 9.0% of the net lot area (20% maximum permitted). Total lot coverage will be 14,305 square feet and 13.9% of the net lot area (35% maximum permitted). 3. The 14,786 square foot residential building pad that is beyond allowable setbacks will have 6,041 square feet or 40.9% coverage and exceeds the Planning Commission's guideline maximum of 30%. The 1,072 square foot stable pad that is beyond allowable setbacks will have 3,200 square feet of coverage or 298.5% Coverage on both pads will be 58.3%. 4. The disturbed area of the lot will be 24,960 square feet or 24.2% of the net lot area (40% maximum). 5. The existing driveway access at the southern portion of the lot off Middleridge Lane South will not be disturbed. 6. An 11 foot wide trail that has a grade of 20% or less will be constructed 92 feet west of the existing driveway to access the proposed stable. 7. Building permits show that the original residence was built in 1979. The swimming pool was constructed in 1986. 8. A letter in support and approval of the project from Kent M. Phillips, Western Brass Development Corporation, is attached. RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 2 • 8. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council receive and file Resolution No. 96-20. RA -S-1 Zone Setbacks: Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line Existing residence encroaches 27 feet into front yard setback. Structures Residence (Site Plan Review required if Garage size of structure increases by at Swim Pool least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of Service Yard the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period). TOTAL Grading Disturbed Area (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist and any planned landscaped areas) Structural Lot Coverage (20% maximum) Total Lot Coverage (35% maximum) RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 3 N/A N/A 4.8% 9.6% 3,665 sq.ft. 704 sq.ft. 472 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 4,937 sq.ft. Requesting Variance to encroach 27 feet into front setback for residential addition. Requesting Variance to encroach 28 feet into the front yard setback for stable. Residence Garage Swim Pool Stable Service Yard TOTAL 4,865 sq.ft. 704 sq.ft. 472 sq.ft. 3,200 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 9,337 sq.ft. 4,980 cubic yards of cut soil 4,980 cubic yards of fill soil 24.2% 9.0% 13.9% • • Residential Building Pad 36.4% 40.9% Coverage (Guideline maximum of 30%) Stable Building Pad Coverage N/A 298.5% Total Building Pad Coverage 36.4% 58.3% Roadway Access Existing off Middleridge Lane Existing off Middleridge Lane South South Access to Stable and Corral [Accessibility and maximum 4:1 N/A (25%) slope required ONLY for new residence or additions that require Site Plan Review]. Preserve Views N/A Preserve Plants and Animals N/A Proposed w/a slope of 20% or less from driveway off Middleridge Lane Planning Commission reviewed Planning Commission reviewed VARIANCE, -REQUIRED FINDINGS A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; and B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; and C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills. RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 4 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 lot 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 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 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 ison 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. Grading will also be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the 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 5 OF 8 • • 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 afterlandscape 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 • • 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 OCTOBER, 1996. EWE HANkkNS, ACTING CHAIR ATTEST: MARILYN K RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK 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. DEYPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 8 OF 8 •City ol Rolling HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 17,1996 TO: • 63'e INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REOUEST ZONING CASE NO. 544 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 248-A-1-UR) RAS-2, 3.36 ACRES MR. AND MRS. KENNETH J. JOHNSON MR. DOUGLAS MCHATTIE, SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING AUGUST 10, 1996 Request for a Variance for the construction of a residential addition to encroach into the front yard, setback, request for a Variance for the construction of a stable to encroach into the front yard setback, and request for Site Plan Review for the construction of a residential addition that requires grading. BACKGROUND 1. The Planning Commission viewed a silhouette of the proposed project at a field trip visit on September 7, 1996. 2. • The applicants are requesting a Variance to construct a residential addition at the southwest corner of the residence that will encroach 27 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback. The addition will not encroach any further than the existing residence into the setback. The existing 3,665 square foot residence plus the addition will be 4,865 square feet. • The applicants are requesting a Variance to construct a 3,200 square foot stable, 68 feet west of the residence that will encroach 28 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback. • The applicants are requesting Site Plan Review for two reasons: the size of the residential addition exceeds 25% of the existing structure and a grading permit is required for the project. Site Plan Review is required for any grading requiring a grading permit, any new building or structure except a barn or stable without grading, and any additions that increase the size of ZONING CASE NO. 544 PAGE 1 Printed on Recycled Paper. o • the structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in any 36-month period. The applicants propose to construct a 1,200 square foot residential addition at the southwest corner of the existing residence. The size of the residence and garage structure will be increased by 27.5%. The residential addition will require grading of 4,980 cubic yards of cut soil and 4,980 cubic yards of fill soil. The soil will be removed from the southeast portion of the lot and relocated to the northwest side of the residence to enlarge the residential building pad. 2. Structural lot coverage will be 9,337 square feet and 9.0% of the net lot area (20% maximum permitted). Total lot coverage will be 14,305 square feet and 13.9% of the net lot area (35% maximum permitted). 3. The 14,786 square foot residential building pad that is beyond allowable setbacks will have 6,041 square feet or 40.9% coverage and exceeds the Planning Commission's guideline maximum of 30%. The 1,072 square foot stable pad that is beyond allowable setbacks will have 3,200 square feet of coverage or 298.5% Coverage on both pads will be 58.3%. 4. The disturbed area of the lot will be 24,960 square feet or 24.2% of the net lot area (40% maximum). 5. The existing driveway access at the southern portion of the lot off Middleridge Lane South will not be disturbed. 6. An 11 foot wide trail that has a grade of 20% or less will be constructed 92 feet west of the existing driveway to access the proposed stable. 7. Building permits show that the original residence was built in 1979. The swimming pool was constructed in 1986. 8. A letter in support and approval of the project from Kent M. Phillips, Western Brass Development Corporation, is attached. 8. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed plans and take public testimony. ZONING CASE NO. 544 PAGE 2 CRITERIA & MAJOR IMPACTS RA -S-1 Zone Setbacks: Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line Structures (Site Plan Review required if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period). Grading EXISTING No encroachments Residence Garage Swim Pool Service Yard TOTAL N/A Disturbed Area (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded N/A slopes and building pad areas, any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist and any planned landscaped areas) Structural Lot Coverage (20% maximum) Total Lot Coverage (35% maximum) 4.8% 9.6% Residential Building Pad Coverage 36.4% (Guideline maximum of 30%) Stable Building Pad Coverage Total Building Pad Coverage Roadway Access Access to Stable and Corral [Accessibility and maximum 4:1 (25%) slope required ONLY for new residence or additions that require Site Plan Review]. Preserve Views Preserve Plants and Animals N/A 36.4% 3,665 sq. ft. 704 sq.ft. 472 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 4,937 sq.ft. PROPOSED Requesting Variance to encroach 27 feet into front setback for residential addition. Requesting Variance to encroach 28 feet into the front yard setback for stable. Residence Garage Swim Pool Stable Service Yard TOTAL 4,865 sq.ft. 704 sq.ft. 472 sq.ft. 3,200 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 9,337 sq.ft. 4,980 cubic yards of cut soil 4,980 cubic yards of fill soil 24.2% 9.0% 13.9% 40.9% 298a5% 58.3% Existing off Middleridge Lane South Existing off Middleridge Lane South N/A N/A N/A Proposed w/a slope of 20% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive Planning Commission will review Planning Commission will review ZONING CASE NO. 544 PAGE 3 VARIANCE REQUIRED FINDINGS A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; and B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; and C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills. ZONING CASE NO. 544 PAGE 4 INDUSTRIES INC. August 19, 1996 Planning Commission CITY OF ROLLING HILLS No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 E q AUG 2 0 1996 CITY OF By Subject: Zoning Case No. 544/29 Middleridge Lane South Honorable Chairperson; 1309 W. SEPULVEDA BLVD. TORRANCE, CA., 90501 (310) 534-5232 FAX (310) 530-3967 Western Brass Development Corporation, the owners of Lot 169A and 169B located in the City of Rolling Hills, adjacent to the subject property, 29 Middleridge Lane South, supports the application submitted for approval. Western Brass Development Corporation has reviewed the application and plans that were submitted to the City of Rolling Hills for review and consideration with regards to Zoning Case No. 544. Western Brass Development Corporation supports for approval the following items that are part of Zoning Case No. 544; Variance for the construction of a residential addition to encroach into the front yard setback, Variance for the construction of a stable to encroach into the front yard setback and Plan Review for the construction of a residential addition that requires grading. Western Brass Development Corporation submits this letter to the City of Rolling Hills and the Planning Commission and requests that it be made part of the public record with regards to Zoning Case No. 544. If you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at (310) 325- 9806. Kent M. Phillips Western Brass Development Corporation WESTERN BRASS WORKS + F.C. KINGSTON ♦ WESTERN RAINTROL CORP. ♦ STORM -WESTERN DEVELOPMENT CORP. IPD + REED VALLEY RANCH ♦ PROVEN PUMPS CORP. + WESTERN BRASS DEVELOPMENT CORP. • Cuy ol Jhf/d HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 7,1996 TO: FROM: • 2 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REOUEST ZONING CASE NO. 544 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 248-A-1-UR) RAS-2, 3.36 ACRES MR. AND MRS. KENNETH J. JOHNSON MR. DOUGLAS MCHATTIE, SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING AUGUST 10, 1996 Request for a Variance for the construction of a residential addition to encroach into the front yard setback, request for a Variance for the construction of a stable to encroach into the front yard setback, and request for Site Plan Review for the construction of a residential addition that requires grading. BACKGROUND 1. • The applicants are requesting a Variance to, construct a 1,200 square foot residential addition at the southwest corner of the residence that will encroach 27 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback. The existing 3,665 square foot residence plus the addition will be 4,865 square feet. • The applicants are requesting a Variance to construct a 3,200 square foot stable, 68 feet west of the residence that will encroach 28 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback. • The applicants are requesting Site Plan Review for two reasons: the size of the residential addition exceeds 25% of the existing structure and a grading permit is required for the project. Site Plan Review is required for any grading requiring a grading permit, any new building or structure except a barn or stable without grading, and any additions that increase the size of the structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in any 36-month period. ZONING CASE NO. 544 PAGE 1 ."d Printed on Recycled Paper. • The applicants propose to construct a 1,200 square foot residential addition at the southwest corner of the existing residence. The size of the residence and garage structure will be increased by 27.5%. The residential addition will require grading of 4,980 cubic yards of cut soil and 4,980 cubic yards of fill soil. The soil will be removed from the southeast portion of the lot and relocated to the northwest side of the residence to enlarge the residential building pad. 2. Structural lot coverage will be 9,337 square feet and 9.0% of the net lot area (20% maximum permitted). Total lot coverage will be 14,305 square feet and 13.9% of the net lot area (35% maximum permitted). 3. The 14,786 square foot residential building pad that is beyond allowable setbacks will have 6,041 square feet or 40.9% coverage and exceeds the Planning Commission's guideline maximum of 30%. The 1,072 square foot stable pad that is beyond allowable setbacks will have 3,200 square feet of coverage\ or 298.5% Coverage on both pads will be 58.3%. 4. The disturbed area of the lot will be 24,960 square feet or 24.2% of the net lot area (40% maximum). 5. The existing driveway access at the southern portion of the lot off Middleridge Lane South will not be disturbed. 6. An 11 foot wide trail that has a grade of 20% or less will be constructed 92 feet west of the existing driveway to access the proposed stable. 7. Building permits show that the original residence was built in 1979. The swimming pool was constructed in 1986. 8. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed plans and take public testimony. ZONING CASE NO. 544 PAGE 2 CRITERIA MAJOR IMPACTS RA -S-1 Zone Setbacks: Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line Structures (Site Plan Review required if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period). Grading EXISTING No encroachments Residence Garage Swim Pool Service Yard TOTAL N/A Disturbed Area (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading temporary disturbance), graded N/A slopes and building pad areas, any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist and any planned landscaped areas) Structural Lot Coverage (20% maximum) Total Lot Coverage (35% maximum) 4.8% 9.6% Residential Building Pad Coverage 36.4% (Guideline maximum of 30%) Stable Building Pad Coverage Total Building Pad Coverage Roadway Access N/A 36.4% 3,665 sq. ft. 704 sq.ft. 472 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 4,937 sq.ft. PROPOSED Requesting Variance to encroach 27 feet into front setback for residential addition. Requesting Variance to encroach 28 feet into the front yard setback for stable. Residence Garage Swim Pool Stable Service Yard TOTAL 4,865 sq.ft. 704 sq.ft. 472 sq.ft. 3,200 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 9,337 sq.ft. 4,980 cubic yards of cut soil 4,980 cubic yards of fill soil 24.2% 9.0% 13.9% 40.9% 298,5% 58.3% Existing off Middleridge Lane South Existing off Middleridge Lane South Access to Stable and Corral [Accessibility and maximum 4:1 N/A (25%) slope required ONLY for new residence or additions that require Site Plan Review]. Preserve Views Preserve Plants and Animals N/A N/A Proposed w/a slope of 20% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive Planning Commission will review Planning Commission will review ZONING CASE NO. 544 PAGE 3 VARIANCE REQUIRED FINDINGS A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; and B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; and C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills. ZONING CASE NO. 544 PAGE 4 ,... r NO Mix 0 0 '.r z 1e� i ai aiy ol Rolling HEARING DATE: AUGUST 20,1996 TO: FROM: INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REOUEST ZONING CASE NO. 544 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 248-A-1-UR) RAS-2, 3.36 ACRES MR. AND MRS. KENNETH J. JOHNSON MR. DOUGLAS MCHATTIE, SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING AUGUST 10, 1996 Request for a Variance for the construction of a residential addition to encroach into the front yard setback, request for a Variance for the construction of a stable to encroach into the front yard setback, and request for Site Plan Review for the construction of a residential addition that requires grading. BACKGROUND 1. • . The applicants are requesting a Variance to construct a 1,200 square foot residential addition at the southwest corner of the residence that will encroach 27 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback. The existing 3,665 square foot residence plus the addition will be 4,865 square feet. • The applicants are requesting a Variance to construct a 3,200 square foot stable, 68 feet west of the residence that will encroach 28 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback. • The applicants are requesting Site Plan Review for two reasons: the size of the residential addition exceeds 25% of the existing structure and a grading permit is ,required for the project. Site Plan Review is required for any grading requiring a grading permit, any new building or structure except a barn or stable without grading, and any additions that increase the size of the structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in any 36-month period. ZONING CASE NO. 544 PAGE 1 Printed on Recycled Paper. • The applicants propose to construct a 1,200 square foot residential addition at the southwest corner of the existing residence. The size of the residence and garage structure will be increased by 27.5%. The residential addition will require grading of 4,980 cubic yards of cut soil and 4,980 cubic yards of fill soil. The soil will be removed from the southeast portion of the lot and relocated to the northwest side of the residence to enlarge the residential building pad. 2. Structural lot coverage will be 9,337 square feet and 9.0% of the net lot area (20% maximum permitted). Total lot coverage will be 14,305 square feet and 13.9% of the net lot area (35% maximum permitted). 3. The 14,786 square foot residential building pad that is beyond allowable setbacks will have 6,041 square feet or 40.9% coverage and exceeds the Planning Commission's guideline maximum of 30%. The 1,072 square foot stable pad that is beyond allowable setbacks will have 3,200 square feet of coverage or 335% Coverage on both pads will be 58.9%. 4. The disturbed area of the lot will be 24,960 square feet or 24.2% of the net lot area (40% maximum). 5. The existing driveway access at the southern portion of the lot off Middleridge Lane South will not be disturbed. 6. An 11 foot wide trail that has a grade of 20% or less will be constructed 92 feet west of the existing driveway to access the proposed stable. 6. Building permits show that the original residence was built in 1979. The swimming pool was constructed in 1986. 7. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed plans and take public testimony. ZONING CASE NO. 544 PAGE 2 1 CRITERIA & MAJOR IMPACTS RA -S-1 Zone Setbacks: Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line Structures (Site Plan Review required if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period). TOTAL EXISTING No encroachments Grading Residence Garage Swim Pool Service Yard N/A Disturbed Area (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded N/A slopes and building pad areas, any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist and any planned landscaped areas) Structural Lot Coverage (20% maximum) Total Lot Coverage (35% maximum) 4.8% 9.6% Residential Building Pad Coverage 36.4% (Guideline maximum of 30%) Stable Building Pad Coverage Total Building Pad Coverage Roadway Access N/A 36.4% 3,665 sq. ft. 704 sq.ft. 472 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 4,937 sq.ft. PROPOSED Requesting Variance to encroach 27 feet into front setback for addition. Requesting Variance to encroach 28 feet into the front yard setback for stable. Residence Garage Swim Pool Stable Service Yard TOTAL 4,865 sq.ft. 704 sq.ft. 472 sq.ft. 3,200 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 9,337 sq.ft. 4,980 cubic yards of cut soil 4,980 cubic yards of fill soil 24.2% 9.0% 13.9% 40.9% 335% 58.9% Existing off Middleridge Lane South Existing off Middleridge Lane South Access to Stable and Corral [Accessibility and maximum 4:1 N/A (25%) slope required ONLY for new residence or additions that require Site Plan Review]. Preserve Views Preserve Plants and Animals N/A N/A Proposed w/a slope of 20% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive Planning Commission will review Planning Commission will review ZONING CASE NO. 544 PAGE 3 • VARIANCE REQUIRED FINDINGS A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; and B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; and C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills. ZONING CASE NO. 544 PAGE 4