898, Construction of a raised deck,, Resolutions & Approval ConditionsRESOLUTION NO. 2016-09
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE
PLAN REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION AND GRADING;
AND A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD
SETBACK WITH A PORTION OF THE ADDITION AND TO
RETAIN A SHED IN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK IN ZONING
CASE NO. 898 AT 46 EASTFIELD, (LOT 97-EF) (MILLER).
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. Robert MilleP°.with
respect to real property located at 46 Eastfield, (Lot 97-EF), Rolling Hills, CA
requesting a Site Plan Review for the construction of a 1,757 square foot addition
to their existing residence for a total of 4,000 square feet, and grading of total of
700 cubic yards of dirt, of which 500 c.y. is for excavation and recompaction (250
c.y. each). The variances are requested for an 85 square foot portion of the
proposed addition that encroaches between 8-10 feet into the front yard setback
and to retain an existing wood shed in a side yard setback.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings
to consider the application on January 19, 2016, February 16, 2016, and March 15,
2016 and in the field on February 16, 2016. 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. No neighbors reviewed the plans before the meetings or
attended the meetings.
Section 3. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the lot area excluding the
roadway easement is 1.8 acres. For development purposes the net lot area of the
lot is 65,880 square feet or 1.51 acres. The property is developed with a 2,243
square foot residence, 420 square foot garage, 465 square foot swimming pool,
680 square foot pool house, several trellises, sheds, and other amenities. One
shed and the service yard are located in side setbacks and require a variance or
must be removed. The pool equipment area is located in the side setback as well
and it is considered legal -nonconforming.
Section 4. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a Class 1
exemption in that the project is an addition.
Reso. 2016-09 1
46 Eastfield Drive
Section 5. Section 17.46.020(3) requires a development plan to be submitted
for Site Plan Review for an addition over 999 square feet, and for grading. With
respect to the Site Plan Review application requesting approval of a 1,757 square
foot addition, and associated grading the Planning Commission makes the
following findings of fact:
A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan,
the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structure
complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density
residential development. The project conforms to Zoning Code lot coverage
requirements. The lot currently is nonconforming for disturbed area (maximum
40 % of net lot area permitted). There is a total existing disturbed area of 26,600
square feet (40.4% of the net lot area), which is not proposed to change. The
proposed project is located below Eastfield Drive and will be screened from the
road by the drop in elevation and landscaping which minimizes the visual
impact of the development.
B. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and
undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the
addition is located in a previously graded area and 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 nature, condition, and development of
adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the topography of the lot have been
considered, and the construction and maintenance of the proposed addition will
not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings,
or structures because the proposed addition will be constructed on a portion of
the lot which is already graded, will be below street view, is a sufficient distance
from nearby residences so that the proposed structure will not impact the view
or privacy of surrounding neighbors.
C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale
and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. The
proposed project is consistent with the scale of homes in the surrounding RA-S-1
similarly zoned neighborhood. The proposed project entails construction of an
addition and will create a residence that is 4,000 square feet. The average
residence size of the adjacent homes is 4,413 square feet, which is larger than the
proposed project.
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 6 of this
resolution. Natural drainage courses will not be affected by the project. Minimal
grading is proposed on previously graded areas and therefore existing drainage
channels are not anticipated to be impacted.
Reso. 2016-09 2
46 Eastfield Drive
E. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the
convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because no
change is proposed to the existing driveway, which is in compliance with
applicable requirements.
F. The project conforms to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act and is exempt.
Section 6. 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. Sections 17.16.110 requires that every lot in the
RAS-1 zone shall have a front setback of not less than 50 feet from the road
easement line. The applicant is requesting a Variance to encroach with an 85
square foot portion of the addition into the front yard setback by 10-feet, leaving
a 40-foot setback. Section 17.16.120A requires that every lot in the RAS-1 zone
shall have a side setback not less than 20 feet from the side property line. A
Variance is requested to retain an existing wood shed in the side setback. With
respect to this request for Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows:
A. There are exceptional circumstances and conditions because the
property was previously developed with a retaining wall in the front yard
setback and the residence was pushed close to the front yard setback with a steep
slope on the other side of the front of the lot. The addition will bring the
residence more in line and more compatible with other residences in the vicinity
with the additional square footage. While the lot is larger, the majority of it is
sloped and unbuildable. By utilizing a portion of the lot for the addition that is
already graded and flat, it allows for less overall disturbance of the lot. The front
encroachment is very minor and is not visible from the street or other residence.
The 100 square foot existing shed that encroaches in the side setback is small and
unobtrusive.
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
enjoy a similar sized home due to physical constraints of the lot. The
encroachment permits the use of the lot to the extent allowed for other properties
in the vicinity. The front and side encroachments are very minor.
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. Development in the front
Reso. 2016-09 3
46 Eastfield Drive
setbacks is minimal. The area of addition would not impair views. The
disturbance is not proposed to increase but is already above the maximum
allowance. The structural lot coverage and the total impervious lot coverage are
within the requirements of the City.
D. In granting of the Variance the spirit and intent of the Zoning
Ordinance will be observed in that the proposed addition will be orderly,
attractive, attached to the residence, and will not affect the rural character of the
community. The proposed addition will not encroach into potentially future
equestrian uses on the property. A suitable stable and corral area exists on the
site.
E. The Variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City
of Rolling Hills because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan
requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient
open space between surrounding structures. While the total disturbed maximum
is exceeded by a minor amount, it is legal non -conforming, and the structural lot
coverage and the total impervious lot coverage are within the requirements of
the City.
Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings in Sections 5 and 6, the Planning
Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review, and Variance in Zoning Case
No. 898 to construct a 1,757 square foot addition to the existing residence for a
total of 4,000 square feet residence, grading of total of 700 cubic yards of dirt, to
encroach with 85 square feet of the new addition into the front yard setback and
to retain the 100 square foot shed in the side setback subject to the following
conditions:
A. The Site Plan and Variance approval 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 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.
B. 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 thereunder shall lapse; provided that the City has given the
applicants 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.
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 Permit, or shown otherwise on
an approved plan.
Reso. 2016-09 4
46 Eastfield Drive
D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial
conformance with the site plan on file dated March 9, 2016, except as otherwise
provided in these conditions.
E. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building
and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan
approved with this application. A copy of the conditions of this Resolution shall
be printed on plans approved when a building permit is issued and a copy of
such approved plans, including conditions of approval, shall be available on the
building site at all times.
F. The licensed professional preparing construction plans for this
project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that
the plans conform 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 building permit for this project shall execute a
Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according
to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith.
G. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling
Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the property or this project, which
would constitute additional grading, height or any structural development
shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning
Commission.
H. Grading for this project will entail 100 cubic yards cut, 100 cubic
yards fill, plus over -excavation of 250 cubic yards and recompaction of 250 cubic
yards, for a total of 700 cubic yards of dirt. The 100 c.y. of cut will be spread on
the existing stable pad area, and shall not be exported.
I. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 7,401 square feet or 11.2%
of the total net lot area of the lot, excluding the allowed deductions. The total lot
coverage will be 13,418 square feet or 20.4% of the net lot area. The residential
building pad (outside of setbacks) will not be increased and will remain at 9,950
square feet. The coverage on this pad is proposed at 60.4%, which includes all of
the structures on this pad. With the allowed deductions the building pad
coverage will be 5,206 square feet or 52.3%. This is an increase from 34.7% from
the existing condition
J. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed a total existing
disturbed area of 26,600 square feet (40.4% of the net lot area), which is not
proposed to change.
Reso. 2016-09 5
46 Eastfield Drive
K. The future set -aside area for the stable and corral area of 1,000
square feet, shall be retained on the property at all times.
L. 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.
M. In conjunction with an application for a building permit for this
project, the applicant shall submit an application for a roof permit for the non -
permitted roof on the pool house. A final inspection for the pool house roof by
the Building Inspector must be granted prior to or in concurrence with a final
inspection of this project.
N. A drainage plan, as required by the Building Department shall be
prepared and approved by City Staff prior to issuance of a construction permit.
Such plan shall be subject to LA County Code requirements.
O. The setback lines in the vicinity of the construction for this project
shall remain staked throughout the construction.
P. During construction, conformance with the air quality management
district requirements, stormwater 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.
Q. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the
project site and, if necessary, any overflow parking shall take place within nearby
unimproved roadway easements, but not to obstruct neighboring driveways.
During construction, to maximum extend feasible, employees of the contractor
shall car-pool into the City.
R. 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.
S. The property owners shall be required to conform with the
Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department
Best Management Practices (BMP's) requirements related to solid waste,
drainage and storm water management and comply with the City's Low Impact
development Ordinance (LID), if applicable. Further the property owners shall
be required to conform to the County Health Department requirements for a
septic system, should changes to the existing system be required.
Reso. 2016-09 6
46 Eastfield Drive
T. A minimum of 50% of the construction material spoils shall be
recycled and diverted. The hauler shall provide the appropriate documentation
to the City.
U. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills
Community Association (RHCA). Perimeter 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 RHCA.
V. 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=safety&page=hazard_definitio
ns#FIRE. 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.
W. All requirements of the Building and Construction Code, the
Zoning Code, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be
complied with, including the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. All utility lines to the
residence shall be undergrounded pursuant to Section 17.27.030.
X. Prior to finaling of the project an "as graded" and an "as built"
plans and certifications shall be provided to the Planning Department and the
Building Department to ascertain that the completed project is in compliance
with the approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the project
during construction, shall be depicted on the "as built/as graded" plan.
Y. 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 19tAY
ATTEST:
HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK
L 2016.
"AliCHELF, RM
Reso. 2016-09 7
46 Eastfield Drive
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.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2016-09 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE
PLAN REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITION AND GRADING;
AND VARIANCES TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD
SETBACK WITH A SMALL PORTION OF THE ADDITION, TO
EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMUTED DISTURBED AREA OF
THE LOT, AND TO RETAIN A SHED IN THE SIDE SETBACK IN
ZONING CASE NO. 898 AT 46 EASTFIELD, (LOT 97-EF) (MILLER).
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on
April 19, 2016 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Cardenas, Kirkpatrick, Smith and Chairman Chelf.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Gray.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
ValLdua)
HEIDI LUCE
CITY CLERK
Reso. 2016-09 8
46 Eastfield Drive