Loading...
779, Extension modification to comm, Resolutions & Approval ConditionsRESOLUTION NO. 2012-08 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A TIME EXTENSION MODIFICATION TO COMMENCE CONSTRUCTION OF A PROJECT APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION BY RESOLUTION NO. 2010-08, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, IN ZONING CASE NO. 779, AT 3 MEADOWLARK LANE, (LOT 19-RH) (WEINSTEIN). THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. Dana H. Graham on behalf of Mr. Albert Weinstein with respect to real property located at 3 Meadowlark Lane requesting a 2-year time extension for previously approved Site Plan Review and Variances for construction of a new single family residence, approved by Resolution No. 2010-08, on April 27, 2010. Section 2. The Commission considered this item at a meeting on May 15, 2012 at which time information was presented indicating that additional time is needed to commence the project. Section 3. Based upon information and evidence submitted, the Planning Commission does hereby amend Paragraph B, Section 9 of Resolution No. 2010-08, dated April 27, 2010 to read as follows: B. The Variances and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within four years from the effective date of approval if construction pursuant to this approval has not commenced within that time period, as required by Sections 17.46.080(A) and 17.38.070(A) of the Zoning Ordinance. No further extension to commence the project shall be granted. Section 4. Except as herein amended, the provisions and conditions of Resolution No. 2010-08 shall continue to be in full force and effect. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 15th DAY OF MAY 2012. ATTEST: JJEFF PIER,FFIAIRMAN HEIDI LUCE, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2012-08 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A TIME EXTENSION MODIFICATION TO COMMENCE CONSTRUCTION OF A PROJECT APPROVED BY PLANNING COMMISSION BY RESOLUTION NO. 2010-08, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES, IN ZONING CASE NO. 779, AT 3 MEADOWLARK LANE, (LOT 19-RH) (WEINSTEIN). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on May 15, 2012 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Chelf, Henke, Mirsch, Smith and Chairman Pieper. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices W�ddOutt) DEPUTY CITY CLERK , RECORDING REQUEST BY NAME P 4 A- HQ 1,061 7a c /D,4 A zMErO 7" MAILING 2 pop. rUCKuE-sE (3C0b RD, ADDRESS WHEN RECORDED MA io C. LTJ pt 2oLL / \)Gi 1.1 (C.L6 CITY, STATE 20L-LII C--i I-1tLL5, C Z, ZIP CODE c1 O r TITLE(S) /IrJ=1rJ/tt.)1i Oi` /IcL67P7 -)4CL 11115'Q11. *20100814504* SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO: CITY OF ROLLING HILLS PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2 PORTUGUESE BEND RD. ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 (310) 377-7288 FAX 4 RECORDER'S USE ONLY THE REGISTRAR -RECORDER'S OFFICE REQUIRES THAT THE FORM BE NOTARIZED BEFORE RECORDATION. AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) ZONING CASE NO. 779 XX SITE PLAN REVIEW XX VARIANCES I (We) the undersigned state I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows: 3 MEADOWLARK LANE, ROLLING HILLS, (LOT 19-RH), CA 90274 This property is the subject of the above numbered case and conditions of approval I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said ZONING CASE NO. 779 XX SITE PLAN REVIEW I (We) certify : ' are) U.. Signature Or AL13C ? 4fg. ilk-1105felt) Name typed or printed XX VARIANCES er the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature Name typed or printed Address Z e 7 / 0 %A i/)140 17l1, Address PiA%a(') l 24 S//,�'R9 r-5 %a 90274 City/State City/State • • Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public. See Attached Exhibit "A", RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL NO. 2010-08 State of California ) County of Los Angeles ) On c) v r1 Z,, before me, I/r7r_A5 V1`%1-1 i i 1/ 3A)774 PrL-IG Personally appeared lf rer/-.))Al who 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. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS by hand and official seal. Signature of Notary 4/ DOUGLAS K. MCHATTE CommIsston # 1833934 Notary Public -California Los Angelo: County Comm. Exams Feb 252Q13 • RESOLUTION NO. 2010-08 Call BST A A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE ON A VACANT LOT; GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIREMENT THAT A STABLE AND CORRAL BE CONSTRUCTED OR AN AREA FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL BE SET ASIDE, AND GRANTING VARIANCES TO ALLOW THE MOTOR COURT TO COVER MORE THAN THE ALLOWED AREA OF THE FRONT SE I"BACK AND TO CONSTRUCT A NOT TO EXCEED 5-FOOT HIGH WALL ALONG A PORTION OF THE MOTOR COURT IN THE FRONT SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 779, AT 3 MEADOWLARK LANE, (LOT 19-RH), (WEINSTEIN). PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CTIY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Albert Weinstein with respect to real property located at 3 Meadowlark Lane, Rolling Hills (Lot 19-RH) requesting a Site Plan Review to construct a .new 3,045 square foot residence with 410 square foot garage, 324 square feet of attached porches, 410 square foot swimming pool, including spa, pool equipment area, service yard, and 2,106 square foot basement. Grading for this project will consist of total of 2,314 cubic yards of cut and fill, which includes excavation for the basement. The applicants also seek Variances to waive the requirement to construct or to set aside an area for a stable and corral, to cover 19% of the front setback by the motor court and to construct not to exceed 5-foot high wall along a portion of the motor court in the front setback. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at a regular meeting on April 20, 2010 and at a field trip to the property on April 20, 2010. Several neighbors were present at the field trip and provided testimony regarding this project. The applicants were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City staff and the Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The applicants and their representatives were in attendance at the hearings. Section 3. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the gross lot area is 1.56 acres, (excluding roadway easement). The net lot area, as calculated for development purposes, is 56,013 square feet (1.29 acres). The lot is located along a cul-de-sac with a narrow and irregular roadway easement frontage. The rear of the property consists of a steep slope into the canyon that is visible from Palos Verdes Drive North, east of City Hall. The property is currently vacant. In 2007, the previous property owners demolished the then existing house, which was built in the early 1950's. The house was 2,143 square feet with a 468 square foot garage. Approximately 25% of the house was located in the front setback and the entire garage was located in the front and side setbacks. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 3 Exemption, and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 5. The Planning Commission considered the request for the Variances and reviewed the size and shape of the lot and the size of the previous structures on the lot. The Planning Commission, after consideration and discussion, came to the conclusion that the size and configuration of the lot could not support the construction of a stable and corral. By granting this Variance the City is not setting a precedent for similar requests in the future because it makes its determination on the unique characteristics of this property and the current circumstances. Granting the Variance so as to relieve the property owner from the obligation to identify and set aside an area for a stable and corral does not preclude the current or future property owners from applying to the City for approval to construct a stable and corral at a future date if a suitable location or construction plan is later identified. Reso. 2010-08 3 Meadowlark Lane 1 110 11111 Section 6. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for Site Plan Review and approval before any grading requiring a grading permit or any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six (36) month period. With respect to the Site Plan Review application requesting grading and construction of a new residence, 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 structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project is not excessive at 3,045 square foot residence with a two car garage and a pool. The homes in the neighborhood are very similar in size to the proposed home. The project conforms to Zoning Code lot coverage requirements, and specifically the coverage of the lot by .structures is much less than the maximum permitted. The net lot area of the lot is 56,013 square feet, (1.28 acres). The structural lot coverage of the net lot is proposed to be 4,318 sq.ft. or 7.7%, which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including all structures, paved areas and driveway, including two motor courts will be 8,777 sq.ft. or 15.7% of the net lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall net lot coverage requirement. The proposed project will be screened from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. Several residences in the vicinity have testified in support of this project. B. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structure will not cause the lot to look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space on the property. The applicants propose utilize the majority of the existing building pad in addition to grading for an extended building pad. The lot is steep and the natural topography of the sloped areas will remain. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the topography of the lot have been considered, and the construction of the new house will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to , the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed structure will be constructed on a portion of the lot which is least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped with trees and shrubs, is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so thatthe proposed structures will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, andwill substantially utilize the existing building pad. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. The lot is similar in size to the lots along Meadowlark Lane, and the proposed house is not excessive for the size of the lot. The project observes all of the setback requirements, whereas all, but one, of the homes on the street encroaches into the front setback. The previous house on subject site also encroached into the front setback. The structure is proposed to be located behind the required setbacks with a large open courtyard in the front of the house so that the structure is not going to make the lot look overdeveloped. As indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum set forth in the Zoning Code will not be exceeded. The project exceeds the 30% guideline coverage of the building pad. The Planning Commission considered the exceedance and determined that the request is warranted due to the difficulty of the lot to create larger pad, the fact that a portion of the level area located in setbacks may not be counted towards the size of the building pad for new residence and the fact that the proposed home is smaller than most new homes in the City, is not much larger than the home that was located on the lot previously, (except for the basement), which was demolished. All of the homes on Meadowlark Lane have a small building pad area, and therefore large coverage. D. The development plan incorporates existing trees and is screened from other properties and the road by existing mature vegetation, which will be preserved. Several trees will be removed, thus creating a view towards the canyon for the applicant and opening up a view for a neighbor. E. The development plan does not create large amounts of grading. The development plan follows to the maximum extent practicable contours of the site to minimize grading and retain the natural drainage courses. The project utilizes most of the existing building pad area for the residence, however, due to the setback requirements the house is being moved to the rear, behind the setbacks. Grading for this project will involve 1,157 cubic yards of cut and 1,157 cubic yards of fill of dirt, including excavation from the basement. It is Reso. 2010-08 3 Meadowlark Lane 2 • • anticipated that all dirt will be used on site and no export of dirt is planned. The graded areas will be landscaped. F. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because parking court is proposed on site, so that more vehicles can be taken off Meadowlark Lane. Meadowlark Lane is very unique in that it is very narrow. The roadway easement on that street is 25 feet with paved area for vehicular travel varying from 18 feet to 16 feet in width. Several of the garages front on the street and are located very close thereto, creating hazardous conditions when backing out onto the street. Consideration for this condition was given by the Planning Commission in allowing a motor court to encroach into the front setback on the project site, so that fewer cars are parked on Meadowlark Lane. G. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is exempt. Section 7. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. A Variance from Section 17.16.170 is required because it states that every lot or parcel for which an administrative or discretionary approval is required shall have an area developed with or set aside for a combination stable and corral of a minimum of 1,000 square feet, and access way thereto that does not exceed a slope of 25%. The applicant is requesting a Variance to not to set aside an area for a stable and corral. 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 that do not apply generally to the other properties or class of use in the same vicinity and zone. The property was subdivided in 1968 in a manner that did not leave room for a future stable and corral. The lot is narrow at the front and slopes steeply in the rear. The parcel cannot support construction of a stable and corral without it being constructed in the canyon, which would require tremendous grading and disruption of the natural terrain. These circumstances currently exist and the proposed project does riot create the inability nor contribute to these circumstances that necessitate this Variance. B. The Planning Commission considered the request for this Variance and reviewed the size and shape of the lot and the size of the previous structures on the lot. The Planning Commission, after consideration and discussion, came to the conclusion that the size and configuration of the lot could not support the construction of a stable and corral. By granting this Variance the City is not setting a precedent for similar requests in the future because it makes its determination on the unique characteristics of this property and the current circumstances. Granting the Variance so as to relieve the property owner from the obligation to identify and set aside an area for a stable and corral does not preclude the current or future property owners from applying to the City for approval to construct a stable and corral at a future date if a suitable location or construction plan is later identified. C. 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. When the previous house was constructed, although smaller by approximately 900 square feet and had no basement a requirement for a set aside area for a stable and corral was not required, and the pad was developed in such a manner as not to be conducive to a stable and corral. The application for the residence triggers the requirement that an area for a stable and corral be set aside. The proposed project is not the cause for the inability to set aside an area for a stable and corral on the lot because the existing lot could not accommodate a stable and corral that would meet the Health Department's and City's requirement that a stable and corral be located not less than 35 feet to residential structure and 25 feet to side property line. D. 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. There is no suitable area on the property to construct a stable and corral. The views and vistas from adjacent properties will be retained, as there will be no structure placed on the slopes of subject property. The variance will permit the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners. Reso. 2010-08 3 Meadowlark Lane 3 • • E. In granting of the Variance the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will be observed in that no additional grading will occur in the future and the natural terrain and vistas will be preserved. F. The Variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills because in order to construct a stable and corral substantial grading would have to be undertaken and importation of soil would be required, which is not in keeping with the goal of the General Plan. G. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. Section 8. 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. A Variance to Section 17.16.150 is required because it states that a motor court may not exceed 10% of the area of the setback in which it is located. Further, Section 17.16.150 F and G state that walls not to exceed 3-feet, under certain circumstances, may be located in setbacks. The applicants request Variance to allow for the motor court to cover 19% of the front setback and to construct a 5-foot high wall along a portion of the motor court in the front setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to the other properties or class of use in the same vicinity and zone. The subject property, together with the adjoining properties, was developed on a small building pad with steep slopes descending towards Palos Verdes Drive North. The slopes beyond the existing building pad descend to a canyon at a gradient of over 35%. In orderto accommodate a medium size residence and keep within the setback requirements, only a two car garage may fit on the property. The applicants requested a motor court in the front setback to remove spill over cars from the street. Meadowlark Lane is a short and narrow street, where the roadway pavement varies between 16 and 18 feet in width. The cul-de-sac is substandard and difficult to maneuver, especially when there are cars parked on the street. The Planning Commission found that removing cars from the street, by allowing a motor court and a necessary wall in the front setback would protect the health and safety of all residents on the street. These circumstances currently exist and the proposed project does not create the inability nor contribute to these circumstances that necessitate this Variance. 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 PIanning Commission considered the request for this Variance and reviewed the size and shape of the lot and the size of the previous structures on the lot. The Planning Commission, after consideration and discussion, came to the conclusion that the size and configuration of the lot together with the length and width of Meadowlark Lane support the granting of the Variance. By granting this Variance the City is not setting a precedent for similar requests in the future because it makes its determination on the unique characteristics of this property and the current circumstances. 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. There are circumstances related to this property that are beyond the applicants' control, such as the size and configuration of the lot and the nature of the street that warrant granting of the variance. The variance will permit the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners in regards to street parking. D. In granting of the Variance the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will be observed in that the wall will be screened and the motor court will be of pervious surface, which will aid in storm water management measures and will reduce number of parked vehicles on the narrow street and substandard cul-de-sac. E. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan. Reso. 2010-08 3 Meadowlark Lane 4 a • Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings in Sections 6, 7 and 8, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application and Variances in Zoning Case No. 779 for grading and construction of a new residence, garage, basement and pool; variances for the motor court and wall in front setback, and to waive the requirement for a stable and corral as shown on the Site Plan dated April 21, 2010 subject to the following conditions: A. The conditions of approval specified herein shall be printed on all construction plans and shall be at all times available at the construction site. B. The Site Plan Review and Variances approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval if construction pursuant to this approval has not commenced within that time period, as required by Sections 17.46.080(A) and 17.38.070(A) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, or the approval granted is otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of those sections. C. It is declared and made a condition of the approval, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicants have been given written notice to cease such violation, the opportunity for a hearing has been provided, and if requested, has been held, and thereafter the applicant fails to correct the violation within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of the City's determination. D. 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 set forth in this approval, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. E. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the revised site plan on file dated APRIL 21, 2010 and elevation plans dated March 10, 2010, except for the third car garage in the front setback. F. The Variance from the requirement to construct a stable and corral or set aside an area for a future stable and corral is hereby approved. However, this approval does not preclude the current or future property owners from applying to the City for approval to construct a stable and corral at a future date if a suitable location or construction plan is later identified. G. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety (either County or Engineering consultants), for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. In addition, prior to submittal of final plans to the Building Department for issuance of building permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to staff for verification that the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission. H. Grading shall not exceed a total of 2,314 cubic yard of cut and fill total, which includes excavation of the basement, and shall be balanced on site. If needed, only excavated material may be hauled away. I. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 4,318 square feet or 7.7%. J Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 8,777 square feet (including both motor courts) or 15.7% in conformance with lot coverage limitations. K. The motor court in the front setback shall have a pervious surface to be approved by staff. 35.1%. Y(, % M. Residen 'a1 building pad coverage on the 7,600 square feet residential building pad shall not exceed 4 % (not including portion of the covered porches). The pool pad shall be 1,159 square feet and have coverage of 37.4%. N. A minimum of four -foot level path and/or walkway, which does not have to be paved, shall be provided around the entire perimeter of the residence and garage. O. The project shall be reviewed by the RHCA Architectural Committee. L. The disturbance of the lot shall not exceed 19,661 square feet of surface area or Reso. 2010-08 3 Meadowlark Lane 5 • P. The proposed garage back up area, shown on the site plan as located in the asement, shall be approved by RHCA. Q. The applicant shall be required to conform to the City of Rolling Hills Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. The applicant shall submit to the City two copies of a landscaping and irrigation plan and water usage certification prior to obtaining grading or building permits. Within 90-days of completion of the construction of the project, the applicant shall submit a landscaping compliance certification. Review and approval of the landscaping plan from the Fire Department shall be required. R. The property shall be landscaped and screened from adjacent properties. The graded areas shall be landscaped with low growing deep rooted plants The two Eucalyptus trees on the south east side of the property, below the building pad, shall be removed. The trees located where the grading will take place shall be removed. If new shrubs or trees are planted, they at maturity shall not exceed the roof line of the residence, and shall be maintained in such a manner as not to block neighbors' views. In addition, such shrubs and trees shall he planted in an offset manner, and in a sufficient distance from each other so that when mature would not create a hedge, but a see through screen. S. All utility lines to the residence shall be placed underground. T. The pool equipment shall be screened from view. A sound attenuating material shall be installed to limit the noise from the equipment area. U. The proposed basement shall not exceed 2,106 square feet and shall meet all requirements of the Los Angeles County Building Code for basements, including exit doors and provision for light and ventilation. The basement light well walls shall be screened from view from the neighbors. V. The proposed wall along the motor court in the front setback may not exceed 5 feet at any one point and shall vary in height, from a 6 inch curb to five feet and shall be screened with landscaping to maximum extent practicable. W. The property owners shall be required to conform to the City of Rolling Hills and RHCA roofing material standards, Outdoor Lighting Standards, undergrounding of utility lines requirements, as well as all other requirements of the Municipal Code. X. Minimum of 50% of the construction material spoils shall be recycled and diverted. The hauler must be licensed by the City, must have the appropriate insurance and must provide the appropriate documentation to the City. Y. There shall be no dumping of any debris, trash, soil spoils, construction materials or any other matter into the canyon. Z. Any increase in grading quantities, limits of grading or disturbed area on the property that varies from this approval and is within the purview of staff's approval, shall be reviewed and approved by staff and reported to the Planning Commission. AA. The property lines, easement lines and setbacks shall be delineated. during the entire duration of the construction and no grading or construction shall take place in the easement, unless approved by the R ICA. AB. During and after construction perimeter easements and trails shall remain free and clear of encroachments including, but not be limited to, site development, driveways, motor court, fences -including construction fences, grading, landscaping, irrigation, drainage devices, play equipment, parked vehicles, building materials, debris and other equipment, unless otherwise approved by the RI-ICA. AC. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills. Reso. 2010-08 3 Meadowlark Lane 6 't • • AD. During grading and construction operations, trucks shall not park, queue and/or idle at the project site or in the adjoining right-of-way before or after the permitted hours of operations. To the maximum extent possible, staging of equipment and parking of vehicles during construction shall be on site. AE. The contractors and subcontractors are to encourage their employees to car-pool into the City. AF. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed steepness as shown on the development plan dated April 21, 2010. To the greatest extent practicable, effort should be made to create gentler slopes than 2:1, without exceeding disturbance of the lot. AG. As part of the soils and geology report, location for a future septic tank to serve the new single family residence will be established. All applicable State and County requirements, including County Health Department, pertaining to septic tanks construction and maintenance shall be complied with. The applicant may explore the feasibility of connecting to a sewer system located along Palos Verde Drive North right of way and shall contact the appropriate agencies, including the City of Rolling Hills Estates Public Works Department. AH. The applicant shall comply with grading requirements relative to submitting grading and construction reports on a bi-weekly basis, or as otherwise required by the Building and Grading Code. AI. The applicant shall comply with requirements for bonding for grading and all other requirements resulting from the review of the soils and geology reports. AJ. The applicant shall submit and obtain approval of a drainage plan from the Building Official. Prior to issuance of any grading permits and/or a building permit for new construction such approved plan shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and filing. AK. No drainage device may be located in such a manner as to contribute to erosion or in any way affect an easement, trail or adjacent properties. The energy dissipaters shall be designed in such a manner as to not cross over any equestrian trails or easements. The drainage system(s) shall not discharge water onto a trail, shall incorporate earth tone colors, including in the design of the dissipater and shall be screened from any trail and neighbors views to the maximum extent practicable, without impairing the function of the drainage system. The drainage plan shall address the water flow from the street. AL. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department requirements for the installation and post construction maintenance of stormwater drainage facilities. AM. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements shall be complied with, so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors. The grading activities shall be watered on a daily basis, or more often, if necessary. AN. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMPs) related to solid waste and storm management. AO. An Erosion Control Plan per County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code requirements shall be prepared to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control storm water pollution as required by the Code. AP. Until the applicants execute and record an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Site Plan Review and Variances approvals, as required by the Municipal Code, the approvals shall not be effective. AQ. All conditions of the Site Plan and Variances approvals, that apply, shall be complied with prior to the issuance of grading or building permit. Reso. 2010-08 3 Meadowlark Lane 7 • PtR. During the entire construction process, the property lines, easement lines and setback lines shall be staked in the vicinity of the construction, and the stakes shall be kept in good condition. AS. The applicant shall pay all of the applicable Building and Safety and Public Works Department fees, including City's Parks and Recreation Fees and Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District fees for new residence. AT. Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADO1'1 LD THIS 27th DAY OF APRIL 2010. ATTEjS�T: 6111- LtiU� J HEIDI LUCE, DEPUTY CITY CLERK jI SMITH, VICE -CHAIRPERSON Reso. 2010-08 3 Meadowlark Lane 8 I STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2010-08 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW RESIDENCE ON A VACANT LOT; GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIREMENT THAT A STABLE AND CORRAL BE CONSTRUCTED OR AN AREA FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL BE SET ASIDE, AND GRANTING VARIANCES TO ALLOW THE MOTOR COURT TO COVER MORE THAN THE ALLOWED AREA OF THE FRONT SETBACK AND TO CONSTRUCT A NOT To EXCEED 5-FOOT HIGH WALL ALONG A PORTION OF THE MOTOR COURT IN THE FRONT SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 779, AT 3 MEADOWLARK LANE, (LOT 19-RH), (WEINSTEIN). PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on April 27, 2010 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Henke, Witte and Vice Chairperson Smith. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Pieper and Chairperson DeRoy. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. 4ed.169/1.,e)J HEIDI LUCE DEPUTY CITY CLERK Reso. 2010-08 3 Meadowlark Lane 9