Loading...
544, Construct stable, partially in, CorrespondenceCuID y .1) May 2, 2000 Mr. Kenneth J. Johnson 29 Middleridge Lane South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 544 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 248-A-1-UR) Dear Mr. Johnson: NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com We understand that you plan on submitting appropriate applications to the Planning Commission and City staff regarding modifications of the previously approved grading/site plan and perhaps, an application related to any increased encroachment of the proposed barn into the front or side yard setbacks. This letter is to inform you that the June Planning Commission meeting deadline is getting close at hand. Four months ago, we gave you until Tune 7. 2000, to correct the grading and bring your property into compliance with the approved grading plan dated October 15, 1996 or submit appropriate applications to initiate the public hearing process. Although you can still submit any appropriate applications to correct the grading by June 7, in order for us to process your applications for the June 20, 2000 Planning Commission meeting, your applications must be submitted by May 29, 2000. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call us at City Hall at (310) 377-1521. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Lola M. Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Craig Nealis, City Manager ®Panted on Recycled Paper. • • cly < Roiling J/i116 February 8, 2000 Mr. Kenneth J. Johnson 29 Middleridge Lane South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 544 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 248-A-1-UR) INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 E-mafh. cltyotrh@aol.com Dear Mr. Johnson: We understand that you spoke with City Manager Craig Nealis by telephone on Wednesday, February 2, 2000, regarding the unauthorized lower flat soil area on your property, 29 Middleridge Lane, where remedial grading took place after City and County permits were issued in preparation for residential additions and a new barn in the subject zoning .case approved by the Planning Commission on October 15,1996. 'Your conversation with Mr. Nealis centered: around the fact that your architect who has had the job to design a barn since August, 1999, would be completing, the barn design within 10 days forsubmittal to- the ' Rolling Hills Community. Association Architectural Committee. You also indicated that you are aware of 'the need to correct the grading and the unauthorized pad on the lower portion of your property and that the redesigned barn will not change the location, . will not change the previously approved grading plan, and will not cause any further encroachments on the property. Therefore, we have determined that you must implement one of the following four options to repair your property and bring it into conformance with the approved grading plan: 1. Repair and return the slopes to the original approved grading plan dated October 15,1996; or 2. Build the barn at its approved location and return the slopes to the original approved grading plan dated October 15, 1996; or 3. Submit appropriate applications to the Planning Commission and City staff should there be any increased encroachment of the barn into the front or side yard setbacks; or Printed on Recycled Paper. • a 4. Submit appropriate applications to the Planning Commission and City staff should there be any major modifications of previously approved grading and/or site plan. At this time, to show that you are pursuing . the renovation of your property with due diligence, we are going to give you 120 days. by Tune 7. 2000, to correct the grading and bring your property into compliance with the approved grading plan dated October 15, 1996 or submit appropriate applications to initiate the public hearing process. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call us at City Hall at (310) 377-1521. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Lola M. Ungar Planning Direct cc: Mr. Craig Nealis, City Manager pleted on the reverse side? P 852 865 319 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) ent to Street and No. a9 /? /`/Y Pf� State and ZIP Code I /n3 /7,f //s ,,; So,?> SO, 33 Postage Certified Fee II Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee IReturn Receipt showing /, to whom and Date Delivered rn IReturn ReceiptVowing to whom, Date, and Adslressvf,Delivery m TOTAL,gbt_ aiFb�s T� 1. P• ao§trnar rtd to\, ' E I' J'e, O. USr / SENDER: • Complete items 1 and/or 2 for additional services. ■ Complete items 3, 4a, and 4b. ■ Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can return this card to you. • • Attach this form to the front of the mailpiece, or on the back if space does not permit. ■ Write'Return Receipt Requested' on the mailpiece below the article number. • The Return Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date delivered. I also wish to receive the following services (for an extra fee): 1. 0 Addressee's Address 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery Consult postmaster for fee. 4a_,. Article Number /� 8.5.2 86E 3/9 r. leh�e-1G� S 3'ohh' n 9.9 i'17;ei P-c.e,&.� /� o� e 3. Article Addressed to: 4b. Service Type ❑ Registered ,(Certified N c `7 //5Cy9 y ❑ Express Mail 0 Insured cc Oa 7 ❑ Retum Receipt for Merchandise 51/e/ cc (('rint Name) ure: ressee or Agent) 5 0 T 0 PS Form 38f1, December 1994 7. Date Delivery 0 COD 8. Addressee's Address (Only if requested and fee is paid) Domestic Return Receipt ai cc cc to O. u 0 d rn 0 0 0 Y ' m r H • • City ofieoffinl 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 August 19, 1998 Mr. Kenneth J. Johnson 29 Middleridge Lane South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 544 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 248-A-1-UR) Dear Mr. Johnson: Thank you for meeting with City Manager Craig Nealis, Mr. Douglas McHattie and me on Tuesday, August 18, 1998, regarding the flat soil area at your property, 29 Middleridge Lane, where remedial grading took place after City and County permits were issued in preparation for residential additions and a new barn in the subject zoning case. We also appreciate your letter of August 17, 1998 that describes the progress of your project. Since meeting with you, we have learned: 1. The flat soil area is actually a temporary stockpile of unusable bentonite clay and rock material; 2. You are preparing final architectural plans for the Community Association Architectural Committee and the County to construct the approved residential addition and a new barn; 3. The Architectural Committee may recommend that the approved barn be. relocated further southwest and that you will return to the Planning Commission and/or City staff should there be any increased encroachment of the barn into the front or side yards; and 4. Before the project is finalled, you will remove the temporary stockpile of unusable materials to fill in a washed out canyon trail, request permission from the City to haul the unusable materials to an approved landfill site, or incorporate it into your approved grading plan without expanding the permitted size as previously approved by the Planning Commission and return the area to its natural slope. Printed on Recycled Paper. • • We appreciate your cooperation thus far to offer to do whatever is necessary to comply with City requirements. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call us at City Hall at (310) 377-1521. Sincerely, At, LOLA M. UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR cc: Mr. Craig Nealis, City Manager Mr. Douglas McHattie August 18, 1998 Mr. Craig Nealis, City Manager City of Rolling Hilis No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, Ca. 90274 Dear Craig, Kenneth J Johnson 29 Middleridge Lane South Rolling Hilis, Ca. 90274 lE@EOVE1) AUG 2 5 1998 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ¢v Subject: Zoning Case NO. 544 (29 Middleridge Lane South) Thank you for our meeting today with Lola Ungar and Doug McHattie. Per a request last week from Lola, I sent her a letter describing the status of this project. I apologize if it was not in sufficient detail to address your questions and will attempt to clarify the issues discussed in our site meeting this afternoon. GRADING STATUS Prior to commencement of grading, extensive site analysis was undertaken by Keith Ehlert (project geologist) and Steve Ing (project soil engineer). This analysis involved review of previous reports and investigations that were undertaken when the house was originally built in addition to considerable new pit excavations and deep borings. The grading plan prepared by "Southbay Engineering under the direction of Doug McHattie adhered to the geologic and soil report recommendations. The grading plan was subsequently approved by the county and the city prior to commencement of grading. Grading began on 12-29-97 and was completed 4-9-98 by Gary Phillips (grading contractor). The job was under constant review by both Keith Ehlert's office and Steve Ing personally. Compaction tests were taken almost daily by Steve and a final report will be prepared when the rough grading plan is completed. During the grading process, certain materials were rejected by the geologist and soil engineer as unsuitable for the engineered fill. This material consisted primarily of bentonitic clay, large boulders and miscellaneous top soil materials that were deposited down slope during the original house construction. This rejected material was pushed out of the way (to the north) during the grading process. At the end of the job, we ended up with a pile of it. The decision, with the concurrence of Steve and Keith was to spread it out below the compaction area. That is what I instructed Gary Phillips to do. As I mentioned to you today, we are a long way from completion and I am using the area in the back as a staging area. The house addition will require temporary removal of dirt during foundation work, I am also going to utilize some of the material you saw today to repair the erosion that has occurred on the trail easement in the rear of my property. The dark soil down slope is part of the top soil I had imported with your permission in May. I am using that location as a temporary storage site until the pool repairs are completed, at which time that material will be brought back to the top as a base for the grass area. BUILDING APPROVAL STATUS We have been working with the architectural committee on the plans for the house addition and bam. Hopefully we are close to resolving their issues so that working drawings can be completed and construction can finally begin. With regards to the bam pad, the architectural committee is suggesting a smaller structure than the entitlements provide, and a slightly different location. Once resolution is reached, we will submit that to you for your review before proceeding if the location or size changes. I appreciate your willingness to be helpful if a modification is required. When we are in a position to know what the net dirt situation is, I will review the options with Keith Ehlert, Steve Ing, and Doug McHattie and discuss them with you before proceeding. I hope this explanation answered the questions that were raised at our meeting today. Please let me know if anything further is required at this point. Sincerely, Ke►fn6t 'Johnson KJ /CLH G C:Doug McHattie Keith Ehlert Steve Ing Gary Phillips Kenneth J Johnson 29 Middleridge Lane South Rolling Hills, Ca. 90274 August 14,1998 Ms Lola Ungar Planning Director City of Rolling Hills No 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, Ca. 90274 Dear Ms Ungar: i AUG 1 7 1998 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS Sy Pursuant to our meeting yesterday and our follow-up phone conversation, I have contacted Doug McHattie and requested that he complete the rough grading plan which I will forward to you. The grading component of this project started in January and was completed in April by Mr. Gary Phillips. This work was under constant review by both the geologist (Keith Ehlert) and the soil engineer (Steve Ing). Daily compaction tests were taken and sent to the lab for results. The final report will be available after Doug completes his work. Since April, we have begun installing the requisite sprinkler system and some planting materials while continuing to work with the Architectural Committee on the plans for the addition and barn. The original design suggestions from members of the planning commission during their site review were incorporated into the drawings for the addition. To date the Architectural Committee has rejected that concept and we continue to work with them to find an acceptable alternative. I am in the process of engaging additional architectural services per their recommendation. The barn plans also met resistance with the Architectural Committee due to the size. Per their request, I am having the size and height components reviewed in order to reach an acceptable solution. It is my hope to complete the approval process and move into the working drawing and construction phase shortly. If you have any further questions or would like a personal tour, please let me know. Sincerely, • Cuy olRoiling JUL December 17, 1997 Mr. Kenneth J. Johnson 29 Middleridge Lane South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 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 SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR BOND APPROVAL 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 248-A-1-UR) Dear Mr. Johnson: This letter shall serve as official notification that the Preliminary Landscape Plan for bond calculation for Zoning Case No. 544 has been APPROVED and we are in receipt of your Certificate of Deposit in the amount of $60,200 for the landscape bond. In accordance with Resolution No. 96-20, the bond 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. Please come in at any time between the hours of 7:30 AM and 5:00 PM any weekday to have your building plans stamped for plan check. We have attached a copy of the proposed Landscape Plan for your records. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, /4, z LOLA M. UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR Printed on Recycled Paper. • City O/ /EO/4fl _Will, INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 December 17,1997 Mr. Kenneth J. Johnson 29 Middleridge Lane South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 544 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 248-A-1-UR) Dear Mr. Johnson: NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Thank you for meeting with City Manager Craig Nealis and me on Tuesday, December 2, 1997, regarding the construction of residential additions and a barn at your property at 29 Middleridge Lane. At the meeting, we discussed the size, uses, and grading for the proposed bam for the project. We learned from you that the barn will be used exclusively for the purpose of keeping horses or other permitted animals, that you do not propose to do any grading at the site where the barn is to be located, and no other uses are proposed in the barn that would be inconsistent with the uses permitted under the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (i.e., mixed uses). The Zoning Code defines a bam or stable as a building or portion of a building used to shelter and feed permitted domestic animals which are used exclusively by the occupants of the property on which the stable is situated. Should there be any cause to change the use of the barn, you should note that any mixed use structure requires a Conditional Use Permit that must be approved by the Planning Commission in accordance with Section 17.42 of the Zoning Code of the City of Rolling Hills. A mixed use means a structure detached from the primary building and used or designed to be used for a garage or for two or more of the following uses: garage, keeping of horses or other permitted animals, recreational purposes, an office, a study or any other uses not related to the keeping of animals. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding your project. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, 06,6eet LOLA M. UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR cc: Mr. Craig Nealis, City Manager Printed on Recycled Paper. • • City o`aetins Jhfh December 4, 1997 Ms. Julie Heinsheimer 7 Johns Canyon Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 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 SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN for property 29 Middleridge South (Lot 248-A-1-UR, Rolling Hills Mr. Ken Johnson, Owner Dear Julie: Attached is the preliminary landscape plan for 29 Middleridge South for your review that was presented to us to be in compliance with Resolution No. 96-20 (attached). Please let me know if there is anything else that you need from the City or the property owner. LOLA M. UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR Printed on Recycled Paper. 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 • .eL 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 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 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 DAYF OCTOBER, 1996. lw EWE HANtINS, ACTING CHAIR ATTEST: 2 . P,., J MARILYN RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 7 OF 8 s 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. Nrv.,r1 . DEPUTY CITY ERK RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 8 OF 8 • • olleollin9. JUL October 22,1997 Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth J. Johnson 29 Middleridge Lane South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 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 SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION APPROVAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 544 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 248-A-1-UR) RESOLUTION NO. 97-25 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Johnson: This letter shall serve as official notification that a one year time extension was APPROVED by the Planning Commission at their regular meeting on October 21, 1997 for the subject case. We have enclosed a copy of RESOLUTION NO. 97-25, specifying the conditions of approval set forth by the Planning Commission. Note that this approval will expire on October 15, 1998 and unless you acquire permits before then, under Section 17.46.080(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code you must refile based upon the same criteria as for the issuance of a new permit. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. SINCERELY, J LOLA UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR Enclosure: Resolution No. 97-25 Printed on Recycled Paper. • • 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 TO GRANT AN EXTENSION TO THE EXPIRATION DATE OF A VARIANCE THAT PERMITS A N ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, A VARIANCE THAT PERMITS A STABLE TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN THE FRONT YARD, A VARIANCE THAT PERMITS ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE, AND A 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 21S RESOLUTION NO. 97-25 PAGE 1 OF 2 AY OF ER, 1997. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN • • 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 TO GRANT AN EXTENSION TO THE EXPIRATION DATE OF A VARIANCE THAT PERMITS A N ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, A VARIANCE THAT PERMITS A STABLE TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN THE FRONT YARD, A VARIANCE THAT PERMITS ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE, AND A 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: Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer, Witte and Chairman Roberts. NOES: None. ABSENT: None . ABSTAIN: None . and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 97-25 PAGE 2 OF 2 • • 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 TO GRANT AN EXTENSION TO THE EXPIRATION DATE OF A VARIANCE THAT PERMITS A N ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, A VARIANCE THAT PERMITS A STABLE TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN THE FRONT YARD, A VARIANCE THAT PERMITS ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE, AND A 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 AY OF ER, 1997. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN RESOLUTION NO. 97-25 PAGE 1 OF 2 • • 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 TO GRANT AN EXTENSION TO THE EXPIRATION DATE OF A VARIANCE THAT PERMITS AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, A VARIANCE THAT PERMITS A STABLE TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN THE FRONT YARD, A VARIANCE THAT PERMITS ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE, AND A 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: Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer, Witte and Chairman Roberts. NOES: None. ABSENT: None . ABSTAIN: None . and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices (: „4„) DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 97-25 PAGE 2 OF 2 • Ci ofi2 Qliny J✓'�Q August 29, 1997 Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth J. Johnson 29 Middleridge Lane South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 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 SUBJECT: EXPIRATION OF APPROVALS FOR ZONING CASE NO. 544 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 248-A-1-UR) RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Johnson: This letter is to inform you that it has been almost one year since the approval of Zoning Case No. 544. Approvals will expire on October 15, 1997. You can extend approvals for one year only if you apply to the Planning Commission in writing to request an extension prior to the expiration date. The filing fee for the time extension is $200 to be paid to the City of Rolling Hills. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, LOLA UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR s« Printed on Recycled Paper. S?otL Jf ift . Community 4iSiation of cRaneizo JnaL'os (147c%a NO. 1 PORTUGUESE BEND RD. • ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 544-6222 ROLLING HILLS July 23, 1997 Los Angeles County Offices 24320 South Narbonne Lomita, California 90717 • CALIFORNIA TO: PLAN CHECKERS, COUNTY GRADING OFFICIALS For your information in reviewing grading plans for the City of Rolling Hills, the Rolling Hills Community Association controls the easements throughout the community. These ease- ments were established at the time the community was formed by "Declaration Number 150 of establishment of Basic Restric- tions, Conditions, Covenants, Reservations, Liens " This document is dated May 14, 1936 and recorded in the office of the County Recorder on May 14,. 1936, Book 14065, Page 345. The Association does not prohibit grading in areas other than easements such as front or side yard setback areas. The grading plan for the Ken Johnson property improvement at 29 Middleridge Lane South has no grading in Association easements and meets with Association requirements. Please let me know if you have any questions or need additional clarification regarding this plan. Very truly yours, eggy R. Minor Association Manager prm L,ed: Lola Ungar, Principal Planner, City of Rolling Hills cc: South Bay Engineering Company Kenneth J. Johnson 29 Middleridge Lane South Rolling Hills, CA 90650 (310)544-4117 October 28, 1996 Los Angeles County Register Recorder Real Estate Records Section 12400 East Imperial Highway Norwalk, CA 90650 ) cri?..•:-E J lw1 OCT 2 9 1996 CITY OF By RE: Zoning Case #544, 29 Middleridge Lane South, Rolling Hills, CA 90274, Resolution #96-20 Dear Sir/Madame: Enclosed please find the fully executed and notarized Affidavit of the Resolution as requested. Per the instruction of Lola Ungar, the Principal Planner, I have included a check in the amount of $28.00 to cover the required fee ($7.00 1st page + $3.00 per additional 7 pages). Please let me know if you need anything else. Sincerely, Kennet Johnson c: Lola Ungar • s City ofieoffing CERTIFIED MAIL October 17,1996 Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth J. Johnson 29 Middleridge Lane South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 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 SUBJECT: APPEAL PERIOD AND AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM ZONING CASE NO. 544, 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 248-A-1-UR) RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Johnson: This letter shall serve as official notification that Zoning Case No. 544 was APPROVED by the Planning Commission and the enclosed resolution was approved on October 15, 1996 at a regular meeting. The Planning Commission's decision will be reported to the City Council at their regular meeting on October 28, 1996. The approval will become effective: (1) Thirty (30) days after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution if no appeals are filed within that time period (Section 17.54.010(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code attached), AND (2) An Affidavit of Acceptance Form and the subject resolution must be filed by you with the County Recorder. We have enclosed a copy of RESOLUTION NO. 96-20, specifying the conditions of approval set forth by the Planning Commission and the approved Exhibit A Development Plan to keep for your files. Once you have reviewed the Resolution, please complete the enclosed AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM, have the signature(s) notarized, and forward the completed form and a copy of the Resolution to: Los Angeles County Registrar -Recorder Real Estate Records Section 12400 East Imperial Highway Norwalk, CA 90650 Include a check in the amount of $7.00 for the first page and $3.00 for each additional page. rrik Printed on Recycled Paper. PAGE 2 The City will notify the Los Angeles County Building & Safety Division to issue permits only when the Affidavit of Acceptance and the Landscape bond are received by us, the Landscape Plan is approved and any other conditions of the Resolution required prior to issuance of building permits are met. Please feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincere Y, o-ee- OLA UNGA PRINCIPAL PLANNER ENC: RESOLUTION NO.96-20 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM APPEAL SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE. cc: Mr. Douglas McHattie RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO: CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 Recorder's Use Please record this form with the Registrar -Recorder's Office and return to: City of Rolling Hills, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA 90274 (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. 544 SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT I (We) the undersigned state: I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows: 29 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 248-A-1-UR), ROLLING HILLS This property is the subject of the above numbered case. I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said ZONING CASE NO. 544 SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 0 I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Print Print Owner Owner Name Name Signature Signature Address Address City/State City/State Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public. State of California ) County of Los Angeles ) On before me, personally appeared [ ] Personally known to me -OR- [ ] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(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. Witness by hand and official seal. Signature of Notary See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof 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 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 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 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 EWE HAN KtNS, ACTING CHAIR F OCTOBER, 1996. ATTEST: MARILYN 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. n JF. ' \ ..0A/K2 DEPUTY' CITY CtERIZ RESOLUTION NO. 96-20 PAGE 8 OF 8 v • P 852 865 204 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL INSURACE COVERAGE ED INTERNATIONAL MAIL NOT (See Reverse) State and ZIPode `n0. Certified Fee Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee IReturn Receipt showing to whom and Date Delivered i a) Ln °o Return Recei. _ ••� 19 whom, m I • Date, and. ���e{o :-livery -, I • TOTA/PO i o Pos co el E 0 LL N 0. /, l Sr71 n. �▪ ' SENDER: ▪ • Complete items 1 and/or 2 for additional services. • • Complete items 3, and 4a & b. cn • Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can 0 return this card to you. ID • Attach this form to the front of the mailpiece, or on the back if space does not permit. s • -Write "Return Receipt Requested" on the mailpiece below the article number. " • The Return Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date Cdelivered. " ", v 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number m 1 also wish to receive the following services (for an extra fee): 1. ❑ Addressee's Address 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery Consult postmaster for fee. Ssa R; a© / E /f /f r. • / l rn,e2/, C D /rnSC� 4b. Service Type o ` ❑ Registered El Insured cg Certified El COD to ❑ Express Mail ❑ Return Receipt for C1 Merchandise a9 7huddi't,u14 �c•e�h Ro/%`''c3 ALS %h� t/9 9o,27y 7.7e6 Delivery ai 0 3. to r a 0 0 0 a CC y 0 0 E5. Si 1gtae (A dressee) Ei`. Addressee's Address (Only if requested Y /�\ � �� and fee is paid) c(a / 6. Signature (Agent) I- F _ 0 • PS Form 3811, December 1991 irU.S.GPO: 1993-352-714 DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT Cu, oy leo Pins JUL September 18, 1996 Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth J. Johnson 29 Middleridge Lane South • Rolling Hills, CA 90274 • 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 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 544, a request for a Variance for the construction of a residential addition to encroach into the front yard setback, a request for a Variance for the construction of a stable to encroach into the front yard setback, and a request for Site Plan Review for the construction of a residential addition that requires grading for property at 29 Middleridge Lane South, Rolling Hills, CA; more precisely, Lot 248-A- 1-UR. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Johnson: This letter shall serve as official notification that Zoning Case No. 544 was APPROVED by the Planning Commission at their regular meeting on September 17,1996. The final Resolution and conditions of APPROVAL will be forwarded to you after they are signed by the Planning Commission Chairman and City Clerk. The Planning Commission's decision will be reported to the City Council at their regular meeting on October 21, 1996. You should also be aware that the decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed within thirty (30) days after adoption of the Planning Commission's Resolution (Section 17.54.010(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code). Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. LOLA M. UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER cc: Mr. Douglas,McHattie •.a Printed on Recycled Paper. i City 0/Rolling FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION August 21, 1996 Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth J. Johnson 29 Middleridge Lane South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 • 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, SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 544, a request for a Variance for the construction of a residential addition to encroach into the front yard setback, a request for a Variance for the construction of a stable to encroach into the front yard setback, and a request for Site Plan Review for the construction of a residential addition that requires grading for property at 29 Middleridge Lane South, Rolling Hills, CA; more precisely, Lot 248-A- 1-UR. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Johnson: We have arranged for the Planning Commission to conduct a field inspection of your property to view a silhouette of the proposed project on Saturday, September 7, 1996. The Planning Commission's timetable is to meet at 7:30 AM at 50 Eastfield Drive, proceed to 40 Portuguese Bend Road, and then to 29 Middleridge Lane South. Do not expect the Commission at 7:30 AM but, be assured that the field trip will take place before 9:30 AM. The site must be prepared according to the enclosed Silhouette Construction Guidelines and the following requirements: • A full-size silhouette must be prepared for ALL STRUCTURES of the project showing the footprints, roof ridges and bearing walls; • Stake the limits of the building pad; and • Delineate areas to be graded showing finished floor or grade elevations. The owner and/or representative should be present to answer any questions regarding the proposal. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, LOLA M. UNGA PRINCIPAL PLANNER Enclosure: Silhouette Construction Guidelines cc: Mr. Douglas McHattie Printed on Recycled Paper. .n 1. = '` Ai �r s City ofieo eting INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (213) 377.1521 FAX (213) 377.7288 SILHOUETTE CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES, 1. When required by the Planning Commission or City Council, a silhouette of proposed construction should be erected for the week preceding the designated Planning Commission or City Council meeting. The Silhouette shall not remain erected for a period longer than one week unless directed by the Planning Commission or City Council. 2. Silhouettes should be constructed with 2" x 4" lumber. Printed boards are not acceptable. 3. Bracing should be provided where possible. 4. Wire, twine or other suitable material should be used to delineate roof ridges and eaves. 5. Small pieces of cloth or flags should be attached to the wire or twine to aid in the visualization of the proposed construction. 6. The application may be delayed if inaccurate or incomplete silhouettes are constructed. 7. If you have any futher questions contact the Planning Department Staff at (213) 377-1521. PLAN SECTION 4 ESTER4 INDUSTRIES INC. August 19, 1996 Planning Commission CITY OF ROLLING HILLS No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 AUG 2 0 1996 CITY OF f- Jer..L:.: ;r,;LLS 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. lloo.� City Q/ ailing L INCORPORATED JANUnRY 24, 1957 �v! NOTIFICATION LETTER August 6, 1996 Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth J. Johnson 29 Middleridge Lane South Rolling Hills, CA 90274 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 544, a request for a Variance for the construction of a residential addition to encroach into the front yard setback, a request for a Variance for the construction of a stable to encroach into the front yard setback, and a request for Site Plan Review for the construction of a residential addition that requires grading for property at 29 Middleridge Lane South, Rolling Hills, CA; more precisely, Lot 248-A- 1-UR. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Johnson: Pursuant to state law the City's staff has completed a preliminary review of the application noted above and finds that the information submitted is: X Sufficiently complete as of the date indicated above to allow the application to be processed. Please note that the City may require further information in order to clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise supplement the application, If the City requires such additional information, it is strongly suggested that you supply that information promptly to avoid any_ delay in the processing of the application. Your application for Zoning Case No. 544 has been set for public hearing consideration by the Planning Commission at their meeting on Tuesday. August 20. 1996. The meeting will begin at 7:30 PM in the Council Chambers, Rolling Hills City Hall Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills. You or your designated representative must attend to present your project and to answer questions. The staff report for this project will be available at the City Hall after 3:00 PM on Friday, August 16,1996. Please arrange to pick up the staff report to preview it prior to the hearing. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. LOLA UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER cc: Mr. Douglas McHattie Printed on Recycled Paper.