Loading...
935, To legalize and retain a previ, Staff Reportsai Re giatf qey6 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No. 5-A Mtg. Date: 03-12-18 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, INTERIM CITY MANAGER y SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 2018-02. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCE TO LEGALIZE AND RETAIN PREVIOUSLY GRADED PATH AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBANCE OF THE LOT IN ZONING CASE NO. 935, 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH. (LOT 15, 16, 17-MR), ROLLING HILLS, CA. (CIPOLLA). DATE: March 12, 2018 PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION 1. It is recommended that the City Council receive and file this report or provide other direction to staff. 2. The applicants, Chaz and Emily Cipolla, 1 Middleridge Lane North, request a Site Plan Review and Variance as follows: Site Plan Review SPR is required for grading for the previously graded unpermitted 15,250 sq.ft. path, which required 3,500 cubic yards of grading. The applicants would like to retain the graded path and legalize it. Variance Variance is requested to exceed the disturbance of the lot to 49.7%, which includes the disturbance, (12.4% of the net lot area) for the unpermitted path, (40% maximum allowed). 37.3% of the lot would be disturbed, if the path were not approved, (of which 1.86% is for the house additions). ZC NO. 935 1 Middleridge Lane North 1/13 1 • • 3. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the gross lot area is 4.19 acres. The net lot area, as calculated by the City for development purposes, is 2.82 acres or 122,943 square feet and is irregular in shape with very long frontage (over 670 lineal feet), and is mostly steep. The lot has a significant drop in elevation of 95 feet from the house to the rear lot line. 4. The Planning Commission held several public hearings on this matter and on February 20, 2018 adopted a resolution to approve this project. The Planning Commission found that the topography of the parcel is such that a path to access the lower portion of the lot in order to keep it clear of fallen or dead brush and trees is warranted. The applicant received a clearance letter from the Department of Fish and Wildlife for the grading in the vicinity of the watercourse, and therefore no environmental issues were found. Further, the Planning Commission found that the requirements in the resolution regarding landscaping and keeping the animals in corrals would improve the conditions on the lot and would provide adequate assurance that no soil erosion would occur. The applicant submitted a landscaping plan to the Planning Commission to their satisfaction. The Resolution of approval contains standard finding and conditions; plus additional as follows: • The approved winterization/erosion control plan shall be implemented and work commenced by February 20, 2018 • Landscaping to be completed within 6-mos of approval of the Resolution • Animals to be kept in the corrals • Landscaping financial instrument in the amount of labor and material, including irrigation, to be submitted to City and kept for a minimum of two years after planting or until such time as staff determines that the planting substantially meets the condition of approval. • Remove all debris, leftovers from construction of three -rail and fences, silhouette and other material from the property within two weeks of the Resolution. BACKGROUND 5. Code Enforcement The applicant graded the path several years ago without obtaining approvals or grading permit, and this matter became an active code enforcement case. The property has an existing disturbed area of 47.84%, which includes 12.4% and 15,250 square feet of the graded path. (Additional 1.86% disturbance was approved for the house additions). The applicants are asking to legalize the unauthorized grading. According to the applicant the path was created when he was clearing the property from trees and vegetation, which included many dead ones. No retaining walls were constructed. Following lengthy code enforcement proceedings, the applicants submitted a request to retain the path at the same time they submitted for other improvements on their property. 6. Previous requests and approvals ZC No. 9351 Middleridge Ln. North • 2 2/13 • • In January 2017, the applicants submitted an application to the Planning Commission for a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit and Variances for an addition to the residence, series of retaining walls, widening of an existing driveway, construction of a 10-stall two story stable, new driveway to the stable, related grading for the project, including grading foran unauthorized path at the lower portion of the lot and to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot. The Planning Commission held several public hearings on this larger project including a site visit on 3/21/17. At the time of the 3/21/17 field trip, the Planning Commission did not observe the previously graded path located along the northern and north/easterly portion of the property, which the applicants wished to retain. At the March 21, 2017 evening Planning Commission public hearing, following discussion and input from several residents, the applicants requested that the project be separated into two phases; phase one would include the new addition, several of the retaining walls, widening of the residential driveway, retention of the "as graded" path and the exceedance of the disturbed area of the lot; and phase two would entail a new stable, corral, driveway to the stable, related walls and grading, as needed, and would be submitted at a later time. Following discussion relative to the phase one proposal, at the March 21, 2017 evening meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a Resolution of approval for phase one proposal, subject to their viewing the previously graded path. Members of the Commission stated that following the field trip they would make a decision whether or not to consider the path with the first phase of the development, or at some other time. A field trip to viewthe path was scheduled for April 18, 2017. Following the 4/18/17 field trip, the Planning Commission decided not to include the path in their decision for the house addition and remodel, but consider it later, and adopted a Resolution of approval for the house only. They indicated that the grading for the future stable, corral and related walls could have an impact on the as graded path, and that these items should be considered together, (phase two of the development). In September 2017, the applicants submitted a revised application for 3,600 sq.ft. stable, including 2,450 sq.ft. first story and 1,150 sq.ft. loft with 250 sq.ft. covered porch, a 2,850 square foot corral, an 800 square foot guest house and a pool with related walls. This application also included the request to retain the unpermitted path. Following the first public hearing the applicants held meetings with neighbors and ultimately withdrew the application for phase two development. That left the question of the unpermitted path unresolved. 7. Grading and disturbance The path is 15,250 square feet and required 3,500 cubic yards of grading. The property has an existing disturbed area of 47.84%, which includes 12.4%, 15,250 square feet of area, (additional 1.86% disturbance was approved for the house additions). The resulting ZC No. 9351 Middleridge Ln. North 3 3/13 • • graded slopes are not greater than 2:1 gradient. The project of this magnitude cannot be approved administratively and require a Site Plan Review before the Planning Commission. The grading for the path caused the disturbance of the lot to exceed the maximum permitted by over nine percent. The applicants will be required to submit an erosion control plan and a landscaping plan for the graded areas, which must be approved by the building department. A landscaping plan has been submitted for the graded areas to the City. 8. Environmental Review/CEQA The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a Class 3, Section 15303 exemption. During the code enforcement proceedings, staff had concerns about how, and if, the grading of the path affected the intermittent stream which meanders on and off the property near the rear and side property lines. Staff required that the applicant submit a determination from the Department of Fish and Wildlife if any permit would be required under their jurisdiction. The agencies, (Army Corps of Engineers at the Federal level and Department of Fish and Wildlife at the State level) determined that the stream is not classified as a water body that falls under their jurisdiction. 9. Planning Commission Review When reviewing a development application the Planning Commission considers whether the project is consistent with the criteria for Site Plan Review and Variance. Zoning Case No. 935 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS RA-S- 1 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear property line STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) _ TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (35 % maximum) BUILDING PADS (30% guideline) Residential Stable APPROVED 4-18-17 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ADDITION Residence *Basement Garages attached Stable - Future Att. Cov. Porches Entry porch Service yard Outdoor Kitchen Tree House Sheds 4,650 sq.ft. 1,750 sq.ft. 909 sq.ft. 450 sq.ft 380 sq.ft. 350 sq.ft 96 sq.ft 155 sq.ft 75 sq ft 162 sqft TOTAL 7,227 sq.ft 7,092 sf. or 5.9% of 122,943 sq.ft. net lot area (excl/allowances) 14,147 sq.ft. or 11.6% (excl/allowances) of 122,943 sq.ft. net lot area 84.54% of 7,215 sf. pad Future PROPOSED LEGALIZE GRADED PATH Residence *Basement Garages attached Stable Att. Cov. Porches Entry porch Service yard Outdoor Kitchen 4,650 sq.ft. 1,750 sq.ft. 909 sq.ft. 450 sq.ft. 380 sq.ft. 350 sq.ft 96 sq.ft 155 sq.ft Tree House 75 sq ft Sheds (demo) 162 sqft TOTAL 7,227 sq.ft 7,092 sf. or 5.9%, excl allowances, of 122,943 sq.ft. net_lot area - - 14,147 sq.ft. or 11.6%, excl allowances, of 122,943 sq.ft. net lot area 84.54% of 7,215 sf. pad Future ZC No. 9351 Middleridge Ln. North 4/13 4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS GRADING Site Plan Review required if excavation and/or fill or combination thereof that is more than 3 feet in depth and covers more than 2,000 sq.ft.) must be balanced on site. DISTURBED AREA (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, and any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist.) STABLE (min. 450 SQ.FT. & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS APPROVED 4-18-17 1,300 c.y. cut, 1,210 c.y. fill; 600 c.y. to be used for recompaction for a total of 2,510 c.y. dirt 37.2% or 45,825 sq.ft. area (no variance is required) Future Future from Middleridge Ln. N Two Driveway aprons -CUP Planning Commission condition Planning Commission condition *Basements are not included in the calculations for coverage PROPOSED 3,500 cubic yards; previously graded (for a total with the addition & driveway of 6,010 c.y.) 49.7% total lot (variance required) 12.4% as graded path Future Future from Middleridge Ln. N Existing from Middleridge Ln. N. Planning Commission condition Planning Commission condition SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 11.46.010 Purpose. The site plan review process is established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects in the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. 11.46.050 Required findings. A. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review application. B. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal, unless the following findings can be made: 1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; 2. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; 3. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; 4. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls); 5. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; ZC No. 9351 Middleridge Ln. North 5/13 5 • • 6. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 7. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas; 8. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 9. The project conforms tothe requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES 17.38.050 Required findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings: A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; B. That such . variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. SOURCE: City of Rolling Hills Zoning Ordinance ZC No. 9351 Middleridge Ln. North 6/13 6 • • RESOLUTION NO. 2018-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCE TO LEGALIZE AND RETAIN PREVIOUSLY GRADED PATH AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBANCE OF THE LOT IN ZONING CASE NO. 935, 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH (LOT 15, 16, 17-MR), ROLLING HILLS, CA. (CIPOLLA). 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. and Mrs. Chaz Cipolla with respect to real property located at 1 Middleridge Lane North, (Part of Lots 15, 16, 17-MR), Rolling Hills, CA requesting a Site Plan Review and Variance to legalize and retain previously graded path at the rear of the property and to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot. The area of grading consists of 15,250 square feet, which required 3,500 cubic yards of grading and which caused exceedance in the maximum permitted disturbance of the net lot of 49.7%. Section 2. Following several submittals for various developments, which would incorporate the request to retain the path, the applicants abandoned those requests, and therefore the application to retain the graded path became a project on its own. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application on January 16, 2018 and in the field on January 16, 2018. 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 Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed, and studied said proposal. The property owner and his representative were in attendance at the public hearings. Section 4. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the gross lot area is 4.19 acres. The net lot area, as calculated by the City, is 2.82 acres or 122,943 square feet. The property is irregular in shape and has a very' long street frontage (over 600 lineal feet) and the lot has a significant drop in elevation of 95 feet straight back from the house to the rear lot line. There is very little flat area on the property and it is mostly developed with the residence and driveway. The property is currently developed with a 2,900 square foot single-family residence and 468 square foot attached garage, and miscellaneous accessory structures. In April 2017, the applicants were granted approval for a house and garage addition, new basement and widening of the driveway approach. Section 5. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)-as a Class 3 exemption. - Section 6. Section 17.46.020(3) requires a development plan to be submitted for Site Plan Review for grading. With respect to the Site Plan Review application requesting approval of grading to create the path, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: Reso. 2018-02 1 7/13 • . A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the grading does not create additional structures and is located in an area below Middleridge Lane and will be screened from the road by the drop in elevation and landscaping which minimizes the visual impact of the path. B. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot because the graded path does not add to structural coverage and it will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space on the property . The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the topography of the lot have been considered and the path does not adversely affect or is materially detrimental to the adjacent..uses, buildings, or structures. The previously graded path was graded to allow the property owner access to the rear of the steep property, so that dead trees and vegetation could be removed and access retained to the rear area of the lot. The grading was minimal, less that 3-foot cut and/or fill and although located near two intermittent streams, it has been determined that the neither of the streams are classified as water bodies that fall under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers at the federal level or Department of Fish and Wildlife at the state level. This determination was made by said agencies. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences as it will remain open space and the slopes below and above it will be landscaped and protected from erosion. D. The development plan generally follows natural contours of the site to the maximum extent practicable to accomplish groomed and usable areas of the lot, subject to concurrent approval of Variance pursuant to Section 7 of this resolution. Natural drainage courses will not be affected by the project. E. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the graded path does not affect the currently approved access to the main uses on the property. F. 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 prevent the owner from making use of a parcel or property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity . Section 17.16.070B stipulates that the maximum permitted disturbance of —the -lot shall not -exceed 40% of the net lot area of the lot With the unperniitted grading for the path along the rear of the lot, the applicant requests a variance for lot disturbance to 49.7%. With respect to this request for Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: Reso. 2018-02 2 8/13 • • A. There are exceptional circumstances and conditions because the vast distance of the rear and side property lines from the residence and due to the steepness of the rear lot, the applicant graded and created the path to be able to remove dead trees and vegetation from the rear and sides of the property and provide access for future maintenance. The entire City has been designated as being located in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ) and the removal of dead trees and vegetation is a requirement of a City Ordinance. In addition the long frontage of the lot along the roadway easement, of over 600 feet, causes the size of the net lot area to be diminished due to the deductions taken for the net lot area. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question. Strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would deprive the property owner of the rights and benefits enjoyed by similarly situated properties in the same zone, including the ability to maintain the slopes and provide access to the lower portion of the lot for both, planting and maintenance of the property and is in furtherance of City's desire to remove dead trees and vegetation from properties. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the properties or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the disturbed area for the path is in the rear of the lot and adjacent area is screened from neighbors. Additional landscaping will assure greater vegetated buffer between neighboring properties. D. In granting of the Variance the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will be observed in that the as graded path will not affect the rural character of the community and a suitable stable and corral area has been set -aside on the site. E. The Variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hilts because while the total disturbed maximum is exceeded by a minor amount, itwascaused because the owner wished to comply with a portion of the Municipal Code which requires the removal of dead trees and vegetation. The project retains open space. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings in Sections 6 and 7, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review and a Variance in Zoning Case No. 935 to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot of49.7%and to retain the previously created 15,250 square footpath that required grading of 3,500 cubic yards of dirt subject to the following conditions: -A. - The Site Plan and Variance approvals shall -run with the land and the path may remain; this approval shall be null and void if the conditions of approval specified below are not met within the times specified below, or the approval granted is otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of Sections 17.46.080 and 17.38.070(A) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. Reso. 2018-02 3 9/13 • • B. If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by this resolution shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse and upon receipt of written notice from the City, all construction work being performed on the subject property shall immediately cease, other than work determined by the City Manager or his/her designee required to cure the violation. The suspension and stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant cures the violation to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his/her designee. In the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her designee's determination that a violation exists or disputes how the violation must be cured, the Applicant may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular meeting of the City Council for which the agenda has not yet been posted; the Applicant shall be provided written notice of the hearing. The stop work order shall remain in effect during the pendency of the hearing. The City Council shall make a determination as to whether a violation of this Resolution has occurred. If the' Council determines that a violation has not occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the Council will lift the suspension and the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has occurred and has not yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a deadline to cure the violation; no construction work shall be performed on the property until and unless the violation is cured by the deadline, other than work designated by the Council to accomplish the cure. If the violation is not cured by the deadline, the Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant's request or schedule a hearing for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant to Chapter 17.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC). 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 set forth in the resolution, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file for the path dated January 10, 2018 and the landscaping plan dated January 29, 2018 except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The applicant shall obtain a grading permit for the grading of the path. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. A copy of the conditions of this Resolution shall be printed on plans submitted to the Building Department. A final inspection by the Building Inspector must be granted for the "as graded" path. Any modifications and/or changes to the approved project, including resulting from field conditions, shall be discussed and approved by staff prior to implementing the changes. Such review will require a public hearing before the Planning Commission if the modifications represent a major modification of the project. F. A drainage plan, if required by the Building Department shall be prepared and approved by the grading and drainage engineer. In addition, an erosion control -plan is required and which has-been prepared and approved by the LA County grading and drainage engineer. The implementation of the erosion control plan shall commence by February 20, 2018. G. A licensed professional preparing the "as graded" plans for this project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform Reso. 2018-02 4 10/13 • in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and including conformance with all of the conditions set forth therein and the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Further, the person obtaining a grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project has been constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. H. Grading for the path entailed 3,500 cubic yards cut and fill total. No further grading or enlargement of the path shall be permitted. I. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 61,075 square feet or 49.7% including 12.4% disturbance for the unpermitted path, which includes the previously approved additions to the residence. J. A set -aside area for a future stable and corral of 1,000 square feet shall be retained on the property at all times, unless an application is filed for a CUP for stable construction, and said stable/corral are constructed. K. The landscaping plan, dated January 29, 2018, as approved with this application shall be implemented and planting completed within 6-months of this approval. L. The applicant shall submit a landscaping performance bond or other financial obligation, to be kept on deposit by the City, in the amount of the planting plus irrigation plus 15%. The bond shall be released no sooner than two years after completion of all plantings, subject to a City staff determination that the planting required for the project isin substantial conformance with the approved plan and is in good condition. M. All animals on the lot shall be kept in the corrals and in sufficient distance to adjacent residences as required by the RH Municipal Code. N. During planting, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, storm water pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors shall be required. O. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (B:MP's) requirements related to solid waste, drainage and storm water management. "P. Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and clear of any improvements including, but not be limited to fences -including -construction fences, any hardscape, -driveways, landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, except as otherwise approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association. Q. The applicant within two weeks of this resolution shall remove all debris, construction materials, wooden and other posts and flags that was left on site from Reso. 2018-02 5 11/13 41 • a previously constructed fence, other construction and depiction of the previously proposed project. R. During planting, to the maximum extent feasible, all parking shall take place on the project site and, if necessary, any overflow parking may take place within the unimproved roadway easements along adjacent streets, and shall not obstruct neighboring driveways, visibility at intersections or pedestrian and equestrian passage and a minimum of 4' wide path, from the edge of the roadway pavement, for pedestrian and equestrian passage shall be available and be clear of vehicles, construction materials and equipment. To'a maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car-pool into the City. S. During planting, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills. T. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at: http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite::o:safety&page::o:hazard_definitions #F1RE. It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions. Should a red flag warning be declared and if work is to be conducted on the property, the contractor shall have readily available fire distinguisher. U. Until the applicants execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this approval, the approvals shall not be effective. Such affidavit shall be recorded together with the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2018. / BRAD `CHELF, CHAJ MAN AT"1EST: TTE HALL, ITY CLERK 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 Reso. 2018-02 6 12/13 • • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2018-02 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCE TO LEGALIZE AND RETAIN PREVIOUSLY GRADED PATH AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBANCE OF THE LOT 1N ZONING CASE NO. 935, 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH (LOT 15, 16, 17-MR), ROLLING HILLS, CA. (CIPOLLA). Was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on February 20, 2018 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Cooley, Seaburn, and Chair Chelf. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirkpatrick. ABSTAIN: Commissioner Cardenas (recused). and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. WETTE HALL CITY CLERK Reso. 2018-02 7 13/13 • MEMORANDUM TO RECUSE Agenda Item: 6A TO: Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director SUBJECT: Zoning Case No. 935 -SPR 1 Middleridge Lane North DATE: February 20, 2018 Due to the proximity of the property of Commissioner Cardenas to the subject property, Commissioner Cardenas should recuse himself from consideration of Zoning Case No. 935 at 1 Middleridge Lane N. He may however, take a seat in the audience and participate as a resident. • 6(4 >atie;if gai • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No. 6A Mtg. Date: 02-20-18 TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: DATE PUBLISHED: ZONING CASE NO. 935; RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE N. (LOTS 15,16,17-MR) RA-S-1, 4.19 ACRES GROSS CHAZ AND EMILY CIPOLLA TAVISHA ALES, BOLTON ENGINEERING JANUARY 4, 2018 1. The applicants, Chaz and Emily Cipolla request a Site Plan Review and Variance to legalize and retain previously graded path at the rear of the property and to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot at 1 Middleridge Lane North. The Site Plan request is for grading of 3,500 cubic yards of dirt to create a 15,250 square foot walking path at the rear of the property. The Variance is to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot by 9.7% (49.7%). 2. Following several meetings for various proposed projects on the property, which included the request to retain the graded path; and following withdrawal of the proposed projects, except for the graded path, the Planning Commission opened a public hearing on January 16, 2018 and visited the site on the same day. At the evening meeting the Planning Commission provided direction to staff to prepare a resolution of approval for the as built project with conditions regarding landscaping. The following conditions discussed at the meeting are incorporated into the Resolution: • Staff to work with the landscape designer and a new revised landscaping plan to be submitted for Commission review at the February 20, 2018 meeting, and shall consists of: (plans included) a. Landscaping below the path up to the 3-rail fence ZC NO. 928,1 Middleridge Ln. N 1 • f • b. Landscaping above the path, up to the 3-rail fence • The approved winterization/erosion control plan shall be implemented and work commenced by February 20, 2018 • Landscaping to be completed within 6-mos of approval of the Resolution • Animals to be kept in the corrals • Landscaping financial instrument in the amount of labor and material, including irrigation, to be submitted to City and kept for a minimum of two years after planting or until such time as staff determines that the planting substantially meets the condition of approval. 3. Planning Commission Review When reviewing a resolution of approval, the Planning Commission must consider whether the proposed project meets the criteria for Site Plan Review and Variance. 4. Environmental Review The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 3, Section 15303. 5. Recommendation It is recommended that the Planning Commission review and consider the attached Resolution 2018-02 for adoption. SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 17.46.010 Purpose. The site plan review process is established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects iri the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. 17.46.050 Required findings. A. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review application. B. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal, unless the following findings can be made: 1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; 2. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; ZC NO. 935,1 Middleridge Ln. N. -2- 3. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; 4. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls); 5. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; 6. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 7. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas; 8. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 9. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES 17.38.050 Required findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings: A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. SOURCE: City of Rolling Hills Zoning Ordinance ZC NO. 935,1 Middleridge Ln. N. -3- RESOLUTION NO. 2018-02 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCE TO LEGALIZE AND RETAIN PREVIOUSLY GRADED PATH AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBANCE OF THE LOT IN ZONING CASE NO. 935, 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH (LOT 15, 16, 17-MR), ROLLING HILLS, CA. (CIPOLLA). 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. and Mrs. Chaz Cipolla with respect to real property located at 1 Middleridge Lane North, (Part of Lots 15, 16, 17-MR), Rolling Hills, CA requesting a Site Plan Review and Variance to legalize and retain previously graded path at the rear of the property and to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot. The area of grading consists of 15,250 square feet, which required 3,500 cubic yards of grading and which caused exceedance in the maximum permitted disturbance of the net lot of 49.7%. Section 2. Following several submittals for various developments, which would incorporate the request to retain the path, the applicants abandoned those requests, and therefore the application to retain the graded path became a project on its own. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application on January 16, 2018 and in the field on January 16, 2018. 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 Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed, and studied said proposal. The property owner and his representative were in attendance at the public hearings. Section 4. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the gross lot area is 4.19 acres. The net lot area, as calculated by the City, is 2.82 acres or 122,943 square feet. The property is irregular in shape and has a very long street frontage (over 600 lineal feet) and the lot has a significant drop in elevation of 95 feet straight back from the house to the rear lot line. There is very little flat area on the property and it is mostly developed with the residence and driveway. The property is currently developed with a 2,900 square foot single-family residence and 468 square foot attached garage, and miscellaneous accessory structures. In April 2017, the applicants were granted approval for a house and garage addition, new basement and widening of the driveway approach. Section 5. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a Class 3 exemption. Section 6. Section 17.46.020(3) requires a development plan to be submitted for Site Plan Review for grading. With respect to the Site Plan Review application requesting approval of grading to create the path, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: Reso. 2018-02 1 • • A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the grading does not create additional structures and is located in an area below Middleridge Lane and will be screened from the road by the drop in elevation and landscaping which minimizes the visual impact of the path. B. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot because the graded path does not add to structural coverage and it will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space on the property . The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the topography of the lot have been considered and the path does not adversely affect or is materially detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures. The previously graded path was graded to allow the property owner access to the rear of the steep property, so that dead trees and vegetation could be removed and access retained to the rear area of the lot. The grading was minimal, less that 3-foot cut and/or fill and although located near two intermittent streams, it has been deteinuined that the neither of the streams are classified as water bodies that fall under the jurisdiction of the Army Corps of Engineers at the federal level or Department of Fish and Wildlife at the state level. This determination was made by said agencies. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences as it will remain open space and the slopes below and above it will be landscaped and protected from erosion. D. The development plan generally follows natural contours of the site to the maximum extent practicable to accomplish groomed and usable areas of the lot, subject to concurrent approval of Variance pursuant to Section 7 of this resolution. Natural drainage courses will not be affected by the project. E. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the graded path does not affect the currently approved access to the main uses on the property. F. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is exempt. Section 7. Sections 17.3 8.010 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 prevent the owner from making use of a parcel or property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity . Section 17.16.070B stipulates that the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot shall not exceed 40% of the net lot area of the lot. With the unpermitted grading for the path along the rear of the lot, the applicant requests a variance for lot disturbance to 49.7%. With respect to this request for Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: Reso. 2018-02 2 • • A. There are exceptional circumstances and conditions because the vast distance of the rear and side property lines from the residence and due to the steepness of the rear lot, the applicant graded and created the path to be able to remove dead trees and vegetation from the rear and sides of the property and provide access for future maintenance. The entire City has been designated as being located in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity. Zone (VHFHSZ) and the removal of dead trees and vegetation is a requirement of a City Ordinance. In addition the long frontage of the lot along the roadway easement, of over 600 feet, causes the size of the net lot area to be diminished due to the deductions taken for the net lot area. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question. Strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would deprive the property owner of the rights and benefits enjoyed by similarly situated properties in the same zone, including the ability to maintain the slopes and provide access to the lower portion of the lot for both, planting and maintenance of the property and is in furtherance of City's desire to remove dead trees and vegetation from properties. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the properties or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the disturbed area for the path is in the rear of the lot and adjacent area is screened from neighbors. Additional landscaping will assure greater vegetated buffer between neighboring properties. D. In granting of the Variance the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will be observed in that the as graded path will not affect the rural character of the community and a suitable stable and corral area has been set -aside on the site. E. The Variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills because while the total disturbed maximum is exceeded by a minor amount, itwascaused because the owner wished to comply with a portion of the Municipal Code which requires the removal of dead trees and vegetation. The project retains open space. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings in Sections 6 and 7, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review and a Variance in Zoning Case No. 935 to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot of49.7%and to retain the previously cited 15,250 square footpath that required grading of 3,500 cubic yards of dirt subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan and Variance approvals shall run with the land and the path may remain; this approval shall be null and void if the conditions of approval specified below are not met within the times specified below, or the approval granted is otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of Sections 17.46.080 and 17.38.070(A) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. Reso. 2018-02 3 • • B. If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by this resolution shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse and upon receipt of written notice from the City, all construction work being performed on the subject property shall immediately cease, other than work determined by the City Manager or his/her designee required to cure the violation. The suspension and stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant cures the violation to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his/her designee. In the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her designee's determination that a violation exists or disputes how the violation must be cured, the Applicant may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular meeting of the City Council for which the agenda has not yet been posted; the Applicant shall be provided written notice of the hearing. The stop work order shall remain in effect during the pendency of the hearing. The City Council shall make a determination as to whether a violation of this Resolution has occurred. If the Council determines that a violation has not occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the Council will lift the suspension and the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has occurred and has not yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a deadline to cure the violation; no construction work shall be performed on the property until and unless the violation is cured by the deadline, other than work designated by the Council to accomplish the cure. If the violation is not cured by the deadline, the Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant's request or schedule a hearing for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant to Chapter 17.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC). 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 set forth in the resolution, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file for the path dated January 10, 2018 and the landscaping plan dated January 29, 2018 except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The applicant shall obtain a grading permit for the grading of the path. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. A copy of the conditions of this Resolution shall be printed on plans submitted to the Building Department. A final inspection by the Building Inspector must be granted for the "as graded" path. Any modifications and/or changes to the approved project, including resulting from field conditions, shall be discussed and approved by staff prior to implementing the changes. Such review will require a public hearing before the Planning Commission if the modifications represent a major modification of the project. F. A drainage plan, if required by the Building Department shall be prepared and approved by the grading and drainage engineer. In addition, an erosion control plan is required and which has been prepared and approved by the LA County grading and drainage engineer. The implementation of the erosion control plan shall commence by February 20, 2018. G. A licensed professional preparing the "as graded" plans for this project for Building Depaitiiient review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform Reso. 2018-02 4 • r • in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and including conformance with all of the conditions set forth therein and the City's Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Further, the person obtaining a grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project has been constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. H. Grading for the path entailed 3,500 cubic yards cut and fill total. No further grading or enlargement of the path shall be permitted. I. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 61,075 square feet or 49.7% including 12.4% disturbance for the unpermitted path, which includes the previously approved additions to the residence. J. A set -aside area for a future stable and corral of 1,000 square feet shall be retained on the property at all times, unless an application is filed for a CUP for stable construction, and said stable/corral are constructed. K. The landscaping plan, dated January 29, 2018, as approved with this application shall be implemented and planting completed within 6-months of this approval. L. The applicant shall submit a landscaping performance bond or other financial obligation, to be kept on deposit by the City, in the amount of the planting plus irrigation plus 15%. The bond shall be released no sooner than two years after completion of all plantings, subject to a City staff determination that the planting required for the project is in substantial conformance with the approved plan and is in good condition. M. All animals on the lot shall be kept in the corrals and in sufficient distance to adjacent residences as required by the RH Municipal Code. N. During planting, conformance with the air quality management district requirements, storm water pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors shall be required . O. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (B:MP's) requirements related to solid waste, drainage and storm water management. P. Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free . and clear of any improvements including, but not be limited to fences -including construction fences, any hardscape, driveways, landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, except as otherwise approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association. Q. During planting, to the maximum extent feasible, all parking shall take place on the project site and, if necessary, any overflow parking may take place within the Reso. 2018-02 5 • V • unimproved roadway easements along adjacent streets, and shall not obstruct neighboring driveways, visibility at intersections or pedestrian and equestrian passage and a minimum of 4' wide path, from the edge of the roadway pavement, for pedestrian and equestrian passage shall be available and be clear of vehicles, construction materials and equipment. To a maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car-pool into the City. R During planting, 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. S. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at: http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite::o:safety&page::o:hazard_definitions #F1RE. It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions. Should a red flag warning be declared and if work is to be conducted on the property, the contractor shall have readily available fire distinguisher. T. Until the applicants execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this approval, the approvals shall not be effective. Such affidavit shall be recorded together with the resolution. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2018. BRAD CHELF, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: YVETTE HALL, CITY CLERK 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 Reso. 2018-02 6 • • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2018-02 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW AND VARIANCE TO LEGALIZE AND RETAIN PREVIOUSLY GRADED PATH AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBANCE OF THE LOT IN ZONING CASE NO. 935, 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH (LOT 15, 16, 17-MR), ROLLING HILLS, CA. (CIPOLLA). Was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on February 20, 2018 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. YVET 1'L HALL CITY CLERK Reso. 2018-02 7 MEMORANDUM TO RECUSE Agenda Item: 4B TO: Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director SUBJECT: Zoning Case No. 935 -SPR 1 Middleridge Lane North DATE: January 16, 2018 - Field Trip Due to the proximity of the property of Commissioner Cardenas to the subject property, Commissioner Cardenas should recuse himself from consideration of Zoning Case No. 935 at 1 Middleridge Lane N. He may however, attend the field trip and participate as a resident. ge4 aiRaa,t9 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No. 4B Mtg. Date: 01-16-18FT TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: DATE PUBLISHED:, ZONING CASE NO. 935 1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE N. (LOTS 15, 16, 17-MR) RA-S-1, 4.19 ACRES GROSS CHAZ AND EMILY CIPOLLA TAVISHA ALES, BOLTON ENGINEERING JANUARY 4, 2018 REQUEST AND BACKGROUND 1. The applicants, Chaz and Emily Cipolla request a Site Plan Review and Variance to legalize and retain previously graded path at the rear of the property and to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot at 1 Middleridge Lane North. 2. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the gross lot area is 4.19 acres. The net lot area, as calculated by the City for development purposes, is 2.82 acres or 122,943 square feet and is irregular in shape with very long frontage (over 670 lineal feet), and is mostly steep. The lot has a significant drop in elevation of 95 feet from the house to the rear lot line. 3. Discretionary reviews required Site Plan Review (SPR) A SPR is required for grading for the previously graded unpermitted 15,250 sq.ft. path, which required 3,500 cubic yards of grading. The applicants would like to retain the graded path and legalize it. ZC NO. 928,1 Middleridge Ln. N • Variance Variance is requested to exceed the disturbance of the lot to 49.7%, which includes the - disturbance for the unpermitted path, (40% maximum allowed). 37.3% of the lot would be disturbed, if the path were not approved, (of which 1.86% is for the house additions). 4. Code Enforcement The applicant graded the path several years ago without obtaining approvals or grading permit, and this matter became and continues to be an active code enforcement case. The property has an existing disturbed area of 47.84%, which includes 12.4% and 15,250 square feet of the graded path. (Additional 1.86% disturbance was approved for the house additions). The applicants are asking to legalize the unauthorized grading. According to the applicant the path was created when he was clearing the property from trees and vegetation, which included many dead ones. No retaining walls were constructed. Following lengthy code enforcement proceedings, the applicants submitted a request to retain the path at the same time they submitted for other improvements on their property. 5. Previous requests and approvals In January 2017, the applicants submitted an application to the Planning Commission for a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit and Variances for an addition to the residence, series of retaining walls, widening of an existing driveway, construction of a 10-stall two story stable, new driveway to the stable, related grading for the project, including grading for an unauthorized path at the lower portion of the lot and to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot. The Planning Commission held several public hearings on this case including a site visit on 3/21/17. At the time of the 3/21/17 field trip, the Planning Commission did not observe the previously graded path located along the northern and north/easterly portion of the property, which the applicants wish to retain. At the March 21, 2017 evening Planning Commission public hearing, following discussion and input from several residents, the applicants requested that the project be separated into two phases; phase one would include the new addition, several of the retaining walls, widening of the residential driveway, retention of the "as graded" path and the exceedance of the disturbed area of the lot; and phase two would entail a new stable, corral, driveway to the stable, related walls and grading, as needed, and would be submitted at a later time. Following discussion relative to the phase one proposal, at the March 21, 2017 evening meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a Resolution of approval for phase one proposal, subject to their viewing the previously graded path. Members of the Commission stated that following the field trip they would make a decision ZC NO. 935, 1 Middleridge Ln. N. • • whether or not to consider the path with the first phase of the development, or at some other time. A field trip to view the path was scheduled for April 18, 2017. Following the 4/18/17 field trip, the Planning Commission decided not to include the path in their decision for the house addition and remodel, but consider it later, and adopted a Resolution of approval for the house only. They indicated that the grading for the future stable, corral and related walls could have an affect on the as graded path, and that these items should be considered together, (phase two of the development). In September 2017, the applicants submitted a revised application for 3,600 sq.ft. stable, including 2,450 sq.ft. first story and 1,150 sq.ft. loft with 250 sq.ft. covered porch, a 2,850 square foot corral, an 800 square foot guest house and a pool with related walls. This application also included the request to retain the unpermitted path. Following the first public hearing the 'applicants held meetings with neighbors and ultimately withdrew the application for phase two development. That left the question of the unpermitted path unresolved. 6. Grading and disturbance The path is 15,250 square feet and required 3,500 cubic yards of grading. The property has an existing disturbed area of 47.84%, which includes 12.4%, 15,250 square feet of area, (additional 1.86% disturbance was approved for the house additions). The resulting graded slopes are not greater than 2:1 gradient. The project of this magnitude cannot be approved administratively and require a Site Plan Review before the Planning Commission. The grading for the path caused the disturbance of the lot to exceed the maximum permitted by over nine percent. The applicants will be required to submit an erosion control plan and a landscaping plan for the graded areas, which must be approved by the building department. A landscaping plan has been submitted for the graded areas to the City. 7. Environmental Review/CEQA The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a Class 3, Section 15303 exemption. During the code enforcement proceedings, staff had concerns about how, and if, the grading of the path affected the two intermittent streams located on or near the rear and side property lines. Staff required that the applicant submit a determination from the Department of Fish and Wildlife if any permit would be required under their jurisdiction. The agencies, (Army Corps of Engineers at the Federal level and Department of Fish and Wildlife at the State level), based on the information submitted to them by the applicant, determined that neither of the streams are classified as water bodies that fall under their jurisdiction. 8. Planning Commission Review When reviewing a development application the Planning Commission must consider whether the project is consistent with the criteria for Site Plan Review and Variance. ZC NO. 935,1 Middleridge Ln. N. Zoning Case No. 935 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS II APPROVED 4-18-17 RA-S- 1 ZONE SETBACKS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE Front 50 ft. from front easement line ADDITION Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear property line STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (35% maximum) BUILDING PADS (30% Ruideline) Residential Stable GRADING Site Plan Review required if excavation and/or fill or combination thereof that is more than 3 feet in depth and covers more than 2,000 sq.ft.) must be balanced on site. DISTURBED AREA (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, and any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist.) STABLE (min. 450 SQ.FT. & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS Residence 4,650 sq.ft. *Basement 1,750 sq.ft. Garages attached 909 sq.ft. Stable - Future 450 sq.ft Att. Cov. Porches 380 sq.ft. Entry porch 350 sq.ft Service yard 96 sq.ft Outdoor Kitchen 155 sq.ft Tree House 75 sq ft Sheds 162 sgft TOTAL 7,227 sq.ft 7,092 sf. or 5.9% of 122,943 sq.ft. net lot area (excl/ allowances) 14,147 sq.ft. or 11.6% (excl/allowances) of 122,943 sq.ft. net lot area 84.54% of 7,215 sf. pad Future 1,300 c.y. cut, 1,210 c.y. fill; 600 c.y. to be used for recompaction for a total of 2,510 c.y. dirt 37.2% or 45,825 sq.ft. area (no variance is required) Future Future from Middleridge Ln. N Two Driveway aprons -CUP Planning Commission condition Planning Commission condition *Basements are not included in the calculations for coverage ZC NO. 935, 1 Middleridge Ln. N. PROPOSED LEGALIZE GRADED PATH Residence *Basement Garages attached Stable Att. Cov. Porches Entry porch Service yard Outdoor Kitchen Tree House Sheds (demo) TOTAL 4,650 sq.ft. 1,750 sq.ft. 909 sq.ft. 450 sq.ft. 380 sq.ft. 350 sq.ft 96 sq.ft 155 sq.ft 75 sq ft 162 sqft 7,227 sq.ft 7,092 sf. or 5.9%, excl allowances, of 122,943 sq.ft. net lot area 14,147 sq.ft. or 11.6%, excl allowances, of 122,943 sq.ft. net lot area 84.54% of 7,215 sf. pad Future 3,500 cubic yards; previously graded (for a total with the addition & driveway of 6,010 c.y.) 49.7% total lot (variance required 12.4% for the as graded path Future Future from Middleridge Ln. N 1 Existing from Middleridge Ln. N. Planning Commission condition Planning Commission condition SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 17.46.010 Purpose. The site plan review process is established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects in the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills. 17.46.050 Required findings. A. The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review application. B. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal, unless the following findings can be made: 1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; 2. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; 3. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences; 4. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls); 5. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area; 6. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; 7. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas; 8. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and 9. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES 17.38.050 Required findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings: A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question; ZC NO. 935, 1 Middleridge Ln. N. • • C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. SOURCE: City of Rolling Hills Zoning Ordinance ZC NO. 935,1 Middleridge Ln. N.