Loading...
640A, Variance for encroachment in , Resolutions & Approval ConditionsRESOLUTION NO. 92-27 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE AND CORRAL, APPROVING A SITE PLAN REVIEW, AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 92-10 IN ZONING CASE NO. 460A. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Dr. James Scharffenberger with respect to real property located at 3 Appaloosa Lane, Rolling Hills (Lot 106-D-RH) requesting: (1) A Variance to permit encroachment into the front yard to construct a stable and corral, and (2) Site Plan Review of a proposed new residence. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on December 17, 1991 and January 21, 1992, and at a field trip visit on January 11, 1992. Section 2. The Commission approved Resolution No. 92-10 in Zoning Case No. 460 on February 1, 1992. The City Council took the subject zoning case under jurisdiction on February 10, 1992 and conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the appeal of the applications on February 24, 1992. The City Council remanded the subject case back to the Planning Commission to address the two issues of: (1,) The necessity to provide a title report for 3 Appaloosa Lane (Lot 106-D-RH) which shows that there is an easement for roadway p rposes across property known as 2 Appaloosa Lane (Lot 106-C-RH) and across Lot 246-MS, and (2) The approval by the Traffic Commission of the proposed accessway to the subject site. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on March 17, 1992, April 28, 1992, May 19, 1992, June 16, 1992, and July 21, 1992 while awaiting the title report. Under Section 65957 of the Government Code the applicant requested an 90 day extension of time on August 17, 1992 and the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on August 18, 1992, September 15, 1992, and October 20, 1992. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to a Class 3 exemption provided by Section 15303 of the State CEQA Guidelines. • • RESOLUTION NO. 92-27 PAGE 2 Section 5. Sections 17.32.010 through 17.32.030 permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties. A Variance to Sections 17.16.011.H is required because this section states that corrals or pens may not be located in the front yard. The applicant is requesting a Variance to encroach up to 110 feet into the 230 foot irregular front yard setback to construct a 450 square foot stable and a 550 square foot corral. With respect to this request, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and zone: The Variance for the stable and corral is necessary because the topography of the site prevents the construction of a stable. corral, and retaining walls in the rear yard. The proper and logical location for the stable and corral is below the proposed building pad because of the topographical nature of the lot. The proposed building pad for the residence will be located at the southwest portion of the lot where the ground is mostly level. The northwest side yard slopes down to the canyon which precludes the cr6ation of a flat area for a stable and corral in the rear yard. The area proposed for the stable and corral is the only place available on this property. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied the property in question. The Variance is necessary because the General Plan encourages and the Zoning Ordinance requires the delineation of stables and corrals on properties in the City of Rolling Hills and a stable and corral could not be feasibly located in the rear yard. C. The granting of the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located. The Variance will permit the construction of a stable and corral which will not impact the street or neighboring properties because they will be nestled into the hillside. Also, the building pad for the stable is located down a long driveway so that it will not be visible from the street. RESOLUTION NO. 92-27 PAGE 3 Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance to permit the construction of a 450 square foot stable and a 550 square foot corral, subject to the conditions specified in Section 10. Section 7. Section 17.34.010 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 more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period. Section 8. 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 87,152 square feet. The proposed residence (4,550 sq.ft.), garage (600 sq.ft.), swimming pool (450 sq.ft.), and future stable (450 sq.ft.) will have 6,050 square feet which constitutes 6.9% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 16,010 square feet which equals 18.3% 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 away from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. The pad is similar in size to several neighboring developments. B. The proposed development preserves and integrates into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls) because a minimum amount of grading is proposed and will only be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the proposed residence and existing neighboring residences. C. The proposed development preserves and integrates into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls) because grading will only be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the proposed residence and existing neighboring residences. } RESOLUTION NO.. 92-27 PAGE 4 D. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at the north side of this lot. E. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible and, with the conditions attached to this approval, supplements it with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. F. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Further, the proposed project will have a buildable pad coverage of 28.6%. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain trail access near the western property line and scenic vistas across the northerly portions of the property. G. The proposed development 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. Grading shall be permitted only to restore the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. H. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize Appaloosa Lane for access. Also, the proposed driveway is near the end of a cul-de-sac street which will therefore create little interference with traffic. I. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves ,the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 460A for a proposed residential development as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A and subject to the conditions contained in Section 9. Section 10. The Variance to permit the construction of a stable, corral, and retaining walls that will encroach into the front yard approved in Section 5, and the Site Plan Review for residential development approved in Section 8 are subject to the following conditions: RESOLUTION NO.-27 PAGE 5 A. The Variance shall expire unless used within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.32.110 of the Municipal Code. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.34.080.A. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance and the Site Plan Review approval, that if any conditions thereof are violated, the Permit shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for a period of thirty (30) days. C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise approved by Variance. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. All retaining walls incorporated into the project shall not be greater than 5 feet in height at any one point. F. The driveway access apron shall be twenty-four (24) feet wide. G. The driveway access apron shall be roughened to assist equestrian crossing. H. To minimize the visibility of buildings on the pad, the structures, driveway, graded slopes and retaining walls shall be screened and shielded from view with native drought -resistant vegetation and other vegetation that i•s compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community. Special emphasis shall be incorporated into the landscaping plan to obscure the house from riders on the Glory Trail at the western property line by way of large native plants or plants that are compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community. I. A landscape plan must be submitted to and approved by the City of Rolling Hills Planning Department staff prior to the issuance of any grading and building 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, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the community. • • RESOLUTION NO. 92-27 PAGE 6 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. H. 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 must conform to the City of Rolling Hills standard of 2 to 1 slope ratio. I. 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. J. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review and must conform to the development plan approved with this application. K. The building pad coverage shall not exceed 30.9%. L. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Variance, pursuant to Section 17.32.087, or the approval shall not be effective. M. All conditions of this Variance and Site Plan Review approval must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 2A N DAY OF 1-1 .4J Alt, 1992. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: MARILYN KEI , DEPUTY CITY CLERK 4 h, • RESOLUTION NO. 92-27 PAGE 7 The foregoing Resolution No. 92-27 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE AND CORRAL, APPROVING A SITE PLAN REVIEW, AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 92-10 IN ZONING CASE NO. 460A. was approved and adopted at a regular adjourned meeting of the Planning Commission on November 21, following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Frost, Lay, Raine and Chairman Roberts NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Hankins ABSTAIN: None 1992 by the DEPUTY I4Y CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 92-10 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE AND CORRAL, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 460. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES,. HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Dr. James Scharffenberger with respect to real property located at 3 Appaloosa Lane, Rolling Hills (Lot 106-D-RH) requesting: (1) A Variance to permit encroachment into the front yard to construct a stable and corral, and (2) Site Plan Review of a proposed new residence. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on December 17, 1991 and January 21, 1992, and at a field trip visit on January 11, 1992. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to a Class 3 exemption provided by Section 15303 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Section 4. Sections 17.32.010 through 17.32.030 permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties. A Variance to Sections 17.16.011.H is required because this section states that corrals or pens may not be located in the front yard. The applicant is requesting a Variance to encroach up to 110 feet into the 230 foot irregular front yard setback to construct a 450 square foot stable and a 550 square foot corral. With respect to these requests, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and zone. The Variance for the stable and corral is necessary because the topography of the site prevents the construction of a stable. corral, and retaining walls in the rear yard. The proper and logical location for the stable and corral is below the proposed building pad because of the topographical nature of the lot. The proposed building pad for the residence will be located at the southwest portion of the lot where the ground is most level and the northwest side yard slopes down to the canyon, thereby precluding the creation of a flat area for a stable and corral in the rear yard. RESOLUTION NO. 92-10 PAGE 2 The area proposed for the stable and corral is the only place available on this property. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied the property in question. The Variance is necessary because the General Plan encourages and the Zoning Ordinance requires the delineation of stables and corrals on properties in the City of Rolling Hills and a stable and corral could not be feasibly located in the rear yard. C. The granting of the Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located. The Variance will permit the construction of a stable and corral which will not impact the street or neighboring properties because they will be nestled into the hillside. Also, the building pad for the stable is located down a long driveway so that it will not be visible from the street. Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance to permit the construction of a 450 square foot stable and a 550 square foot corral, subject to the conditions specified in Section 9. Section 6. Section 17.34.010 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 more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period. Section 7. 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 87,152 square feet. The proposed residence (4,550 sq.ft.), garage (600 sq.ft.), swimming pool (450 sq.ft.), and future stable (450 sq.ft.) will have 6,050 square feet which constitutes 6.9% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 16,010 square feet which equals 18.3% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is on a relatively 4,0 RESOLUTION NO. 92-10 PAGE 3 large lot with most of the proposed structures located away from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. The pad is similar in size to several neighboring developments. B. The proposed development preserves and integrates into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls) because a minimum amount of grading is proposed and will only be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the proposed residence and existing neighboring residences. C. The proposed development preserves and integrates into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls) because grading will only be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the proposed residence and existing neighboring residences. D. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at the north side of this lot. E. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible and, with the conditions attached to this approval, supplements it with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. F. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Further, the proposed project will have a buildable pad coverage of 28.6%. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain trail access near the western property line and scenic vistas across the northerly portions of the property. G. The proposed development 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. Grading shall be permitted only to restore the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. RESOLUTION NO. 92-10 PAGE 4 H. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize the existing vehicular access, thereby having no further impact on the roadway. Also, the driveway is near the end of a cul-de-sac which will therefore create little interference with traffic. I. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 460 for a proposed residential development as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A and subject to the conditions contained in Section 9. Section 9. The Variance to permit the construction of a stable, corral, and retaining walls that will encroach into the front yard approved in Section 5, and the Site Plan Review for residential development approved in Section 8 are subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance shall expire unless used within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.32.110 of the Municipal Code. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.34.080.A. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance and the Site Plan Review approval, that if any conditions thereof are violated, the Permit shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for a period of thirty (30) days. 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. All retaining walls incorporated into the project shall pot be greater than 5 feet in height at any one point. • RESOLUTION NO. 92-10 PAGE 5 F. To minimize the visibility of buildings on the pad, the structures, driveway, graded slopes and retaining walls shall be screened and shielded from view with native drought -resistant vegetation that is compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community. Special emphasis shall be incorporated into the landscaping plan to obscure the house from riders on the Glory Trail at the western property line by way of large native plants. G. A landscape plan must be submitted to and approved by the City of Rolling Hills Planning Department staff prior to the issuance of any grading and building 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, 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. H. 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 must conform to the City of Rolling Hills standard of 2 to 1 slope ratio. I. 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. J. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review and must conform to the development plan approved with this application. K. The building pad coverage shall not exceed 28.6%. L. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of. Acceptance of all conditions of this Variance, pursuant to Section 17.32.087, or the approval shall not be effective. • RESOLUTION NO. 92-10 PAGE 6 M. All conditions of this Variance and Site Plan Review approval must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. N. This Site Plan Review approval shall not be effective until the applicant has provided the City a title report for the property known as 3 Appaloosa Lane (Assessor's Parcel Map No. 106-D) which shows that 3 Appaloosa Lane has an easement for roadway purposes across property known as 2 Appaloosa Lane (the Raydon property) and across lot D.R. 150 (the 9.198 acre parcel of property to the north of 3 Appaloosa Lane). If a title report for 3 Appaloosa Lane does not show ownership of a'roadway easement across 2 Appaloosa Lane and the 9.198 acre parcel to the north of 3 Appaloosa Lane (D.R. 150-AC), then the applicant shall take the necessary steps to obtain and record title to the roadway easement across such properties for the benefit of the 3 Appaloosa Lane parcel. This condition shall be satisfied by the applicant within six (6) months of the approval of this Resolution. In the event such condition has not been complied with to the satisfaction of the City Manager within this six (6) month period, this Site Plan Review approval shall require subsequent review and approval by the Planning Commission. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS DAY OF FEBRUARY, 1992. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: DIANE SAWYER, DEPU'V2 CITY CLERK • RESOLUTION NO. 92-10 PAGE 7 The foregoing Resolution No. 92-10 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE. TO PERMIT AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE AND CORRAL, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 460. was approved and adopted at a regular adjourned meeting of the Planning Commission on February 1, 1992 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Lay, Raine & Chairman Roberts NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Commissioner Frost &AAA, DEPUTY CITY CLER*/