Loading...
540, All encroachment into side yar, Resolutions & Approval Conditions• • RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO: CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 (310) 377-7288 (FAX) ( e6c) Lur3o v f ppg_uviN L- s; re_ phaw1?elrie >if Recorder's Use Please record this form with the Registrar -Recorder's Office and return to: City of Rolling Hills, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA 90274 (The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be notarized before recordation). AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) ZONING CASE NO. 540 SITE PLAN REVIEW SI VARIANCE • CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT • I (We) the undersigned state: I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows: 50 EASTF'1hLD DRIVE (LOT 99-EF). ROLLING HILLS This property is the subject of the above numbered case. I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said ZONING CASE NO. 540 SITE PLAN REVIEW MI VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ■ I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Print Print Owner /?A u! 7ei2i-e-: C Owner Name /f e- ? Name Signatur _J W ; Signature Address .50 E.4Ss-P, Lk Or Z.- __ Address City/StateJI / %,vC 1.L1/S D la.. 61- c9c)27/ City/State Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public. State of California ) County of Los Angeles ) CI U\ c C. On 11 ,Tan 1.997 before me, Joyce F. Liu, Notary Public, personally appeared Raymond W. Ferris and ,Tanice R. Ferris* * [ 1 Personall known to me -OR- [3 proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) ice' re subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that butt executed the same in authorized capacity(ies) and that by ix thei signature(s) on the instrument t e person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. 1 r QA1 'Z Witness by hand and official seal. Signtim 9 Totary JOYCE F. LIU COMM. # 1048210 Notary Public — California 5 LOS ANGELES COUNTY r •-• My Comm. Expires FEB 16,1999 * * * * * See exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part thereof 97-- 267003 1 • RESOLUTION NO.. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA, GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GUEST HOUSE, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 540. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Ferris with respect to real property located at 50 Eastfield Drive (Lot 99-EF), Rolling Hills, requesting a Variance to permit the construction of a garage that will encroach into the front yard setback, requesting a Variance to permit the construction of the same garage into the side yard setback, requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a Guest House, and requesting Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial additions to an existing single family residence. ' During the hearing process, the applicant revised plans to eliminate two subterranean garages, one attached to the residence at the east and the other attached to the guest house at the east. The residential garage at the east was removed and, the guest house deck will now be enclosed. Section 2. In 1977, a Conditional Use Permit was approved for a 720 square foot swimming pool and retaining walls constructed in relation to the pool. Section 3. The City Council took the zoning case under jurisdiction on November 25, 1996 because of the number of Variances, the close proximity of the garage to the street, and the size of the residence. The Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the appeal of the applications on December 11, 1996 at a field trip visit. The applicants and the applicants' representative, Mr. Thomas Blair, were in attendance at the hearing. Section 4. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on May 21, 1996, June 18, 1996, July 16, 1996, August 20, 1996, and September 17, 1996, and at a field trip visit on June 18, 1996 and September 7, 1996. The applicants were notified of the hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. The applicants and the applicants' representative, Mr. Thomas Blair, were in attendance at the hearings. Section 5. The City Council finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(e)) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. 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.. in the same zone. prevent ..the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. Section 17.16.110 requires a front yard setback for every residential parcel to be fifty (50) feet. The applicant is requesting a Variance to construct a garage which will encroach a maximum of fifteen (15) feet into the fifty (50) foot front yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the City Council finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates the construction of a garage in the front yard setback. The construction of the garage in the front yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. Resolution No. 802 97--- 267003 B. The Variance is necessary for the presery uon and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates the construction of a garage in the front yard setback. The construction of the garage in the front yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces, and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. In addition, the existing configuration of the residence makes the construction of, and use of garage spaces in the rear of the residence nearly inaccessible due to the narrow corridor between the side of the residence and the side property line. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve circulation on the lot and will not be visible to surrounding properties due to the distances between the garage and other adjacent residences. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council . hereby approves the Variance for Zoning ,Case No. 540 to permit the encroachment of a garage into the front yard setback with a maximum encroachment of fifteen (15) feet, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 16 of this Resolution. Section 8. Section 17.16.120 requires a side yard setback for every residential parcel in the RA-S-1 Zone to be twenty (20) feet. The applicant is requesting a Variance to construct a garage which will encroach a maximum of five (5) feet into the twenty (20) foot side yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the City Council finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates the construction of a garage in the side yard setback. The construction of the garage in the side yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates the construction of a garage in the side yard setback. The construction of the garage in the side yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces, and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. In addition, the existing configuration of the residence makes the construction of, and use of garage spaces in the rear of the residence nearly inaccessible due to the narrow corridor between the side of the residence and the side property line. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve circulation on the lot and will not be visible to surrounding properties due to the distances between the garage and other adjacent residences. Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 540 to permit the encroachment of a garage into the side yard setback with a maximum encroachment of five (5) feet, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 16 of this Resolution. Section 10. Section 17.16.070(B) requires that the natural conditions on a lot be maintained to the greatest degree possible and that disturbance be limited to a maximum disturbed area in the RA-S Zone of 40% of the net lot area. The applicant is requesting a J Resolution No. 802 -2- 97- 267003 Variance disturb 43.4% of ithe net lot area and ex• the maximum disturbance. With respect to this request for a Variance, the City Council finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates grading for a new driveway and access from a sharp curve section of Eastfield Drive. In addition, the existing lengthy driveway will be reverted to landscaping. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates grading for a new driveway and access from a sharp curve section of Eastfield Drive. In addition, the existing lengthy driveway will be reverted to landscaping. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve traffic circulation on the lot and on Eastfield Drive. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces,. and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. Section 11. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 540 to permit a disturbance of 43.4% of the net lot area, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 16 of this Resolution. Section 12. Section 17.16.210(A)(5) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a Guest House with a Conditional Use Permit under certain conditions. The applicant is requesting to construct a 792 square foot guest house. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the City Council finds as follows: A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for a guest house would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan and will be desirable for the public convenience and welfare because the use is consistent with similar uses in the community, and the area proposed for the guest house would be located in an area on the property where such use will not change the existing configuration of structures on the lot. B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and the construction of a guest house will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed structure is at the same level as the residential building pad and is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the guest house will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the guest house will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and is located on a 1.66 acre parcel of property that is adequate in size, shape and topography to accommodate such use. D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district because the 792 square foot size of the guest house is less than the 800 square foot maximum permitted and the guest house does not encroach into any setback areas. 97- 26'7003 Resolution No. 802 -3- E. The proposed conditional use is consit with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of Title 17 of the Zoning Code because the guest house will be 49 feet from the residence and there is sufficient space on the lot for future development of a stable. Section 13. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a guest house in accordance with the Development Plan attached hereto in Zoning Case No. 540 subject to the conditions contained in Section 16. Section 14. Section 17.46.020 requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings or structures, which involve changes to grading or an increase in the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period, may be permitted. With respect to the Site Plan Review application, the City Council makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setback, and lot coverage requirements, except as approved in Sections 6, 8 and 10. The lot has a net square foot area of 54,076 square feet. The proposed residence (5,361 sq. ft.), garage (880 sq. ft.), future stable (450 sq.ft.), guest house (792 sq.ft.), swimming pool (675 sq.ft.), and service yard (96 sq.ft.) will have 8,254 square feet which constitutes 15.2% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 16,101 square feet which equals 29.7% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. B. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, preserves and integrates into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls). C. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval, follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading. The natural drainage courses will be preserved and continue drainage to the canyons at the southwest side of this lot. D. The development plan will, based upon compliance with the conditions contained in this Resolution, supplement the existing vegetation with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. E. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval, substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Further, the proposed project will have a buildable pad of 12,848 square feet and a total building pad coverage of 34.8%, and a residential building pad coverage of 54.7%. F. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded. The proposed project is also consistent with the scale of other homes in the immediate neighborhood. Grading will be minor and required only to restore the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the proposed structures to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. Resolution No. 802 -4- 97 267003 CIF The proposed development, as modifiiby the conditions of approval, is 1 sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will create a safer driveway access from a sharp - curve section of Eastfield Drive, thereby improving the safety of the roadway. H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 15. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 540 for a proposed residential development as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A,, subject to the conditions contained in Section 16 of this Resolution. Section 16. The Variance to the front yard setback approved in Section 7, the Variance to the side yard approved in Section 9, the Variance to exceed the maximum disturbed area approved in Section 11, the Conditional Use Permit approved in Section 13, and the Site Plan for residential development approved in Section 15 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions: A. These Variance, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070, 17.42.070 and 17.46.080. B. It is declared and made a condition of these Variance, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, these approvals shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for a period of thirty (30) days. C. All requirements of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated August 14, 1996, and marked Exhibit A, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. F. Grading shall be limited so that the amount of soil displaced to construct the proposed project shall not exceed 380 cubic yards of cut soil and 380 cubic yards of fill soil. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. The grading plan shall utilize land form or contour grading techniques in its design so as to create a building pad and slopes that blend with the horizontal and vertical contours of the natural terrain. G. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 54.7%. H. Landscaping shall be provided and maintained to obscure the buildings and the building pad so that the structures, driveway, and graded slopes are screened and shielded from view at the northeastern easement line along Eastfield Drive with native drought -resistant vegetation that is compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community. I. A landscape plan must be submitted to and approved by the City of Rolling Hills Planning Department staff prior to the issuance of any grading and building permit. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the community. A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a grading and building permit Resolution No. 802 -5- 97- 267003 and shaft retained with the City for not less than* years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City Manager after the City' Manager determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. J. Any retaining walls required for the project shall not exceed 5 feet in height. K. No kitchen or other cooking facilities shall be provided within the guest house. L. No vehicular access or paved parking area shall be developed within 50 feet of the guest house. M. Occupancy of the proposed guest house or servant quarters shall be limited to persons employed on the premises and their immediate family or by the temporary guests of the occupants of the main residence. No guest may remain in occupancy for more than thirty days in any six-month period. N. Renting of the guest house is prohibited. O. The guest house shall not exceed 792 square feet. P. Eastfield Drive shall be kept open for vehicular access at all times during future grading and construction of the driveway access. Q. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the City Council must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. R. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. S. Notwithstanding Section 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional development shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. T. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these Variances, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals, or the approvals shall not be effective. U. All, conditions of these Variance, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals that apply must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 1996. JODY UR O ,YO�R 97- 267003 Resolution No. 802 -6- • ATTEST: MARILYN RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 802 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE. TO EXCEED THE MAXIMIM DISTURBED AREA, GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE -PERMIT FORA GUEST HOUSE, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 540. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on December 17, 1996 by the following roll call vote: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Hill, Pernell, Mayor Pro Tem Lay and Mayor Murdock. AYES: NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: A dministrative Offices. • DEPUTY ITY CL RK 9'7- 267003 Resolution No. 802 -7- • • RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA, GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GUEST HOUSE, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 540. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Ferris with respect to real property located at 50 Eastfield Drive (Lot 99-EF), Rolling Hills, requesting a Variance to permit the construction of a garage that will encroach into the front yard setback, requesting a Variance to permit the construction of the same garage into the side yard setback, requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a Guest House, and requesting Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial additions to an existing single family residence. During the hearing process, the applicant revised plans to eliminate two subterranean garages, one attached to the residence at the east and the other attached to the guest house at the east. The residential garage at the east was removed and the guest house deck will now be enclosed. Section 2. In 1977, a Conditional Use Permit was approved for a 720 square foot swimming pool and retaining walls constructed in relation to the pool. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on May 21, 1996, June 18, 1996, July 16, 1996, August 20, 1996, and September 17, 1996, and at a field trip visit on June 18, 1996 and September 7, 1996. The applicants were notified of the hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. The applicants and the applicants' representative, Mr. Thomas Blair, were in attendance at the hearings. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(e)) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 5. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. Section 17.16.110 requires a front yard setback for every • • residential parcel to be fifty (50) feet. The applicant is requesting a Variance to construct a garage which will encroach a maximum of fifteen (15) feet into the fifty (50) foot front yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates the construction of a garage in the front yard setback. The construction of the garage in the front yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates the construction of a garage in the front yard setback. The construction of the garage in the front yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces, and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. In addition, the existing configuration of the residence makes the construction of, and use of garage spaces in the rear of the residence nearly inaccessible due to the narrow corridor between the side of the residence and the side property line. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve circulation on the lot and will not be visible to surrounding properties due to the distances between the garage and other adjacent residences. Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 540 to permit the encroachment of a garage into the front yard setback with a maximum encroachment of fifteen (15) feet, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 15 of this Resolution. Section 7. Section 17.16.120 requires a side yard setback for every residential parcel in the RA-S-1 Zone to be twenty (20) feet. The applicant is requesting a Variance to construct a garage which will encroach a maximum of five (5) feet into the twenty (20) foot side yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 2 OF 9 • • property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates the construction of a garage in the side yard setback. The construction of the garage in the side yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates the construction of a garage in the side yard setback. The construction of the garage in the side yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces, and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. In addition, the existing configuration of the residence makes the construction of, and use of garage spaces in the rear of the residence nearly inaccessible due to the narrow corridor between the side of the residence and the side property line. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve circulation on the lot and will not be visible to surrounding properties due to the distances between the garage and other adjacent residences. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 540 to permit the encroachment of a garage into the side yard setback with a maximum encroachment of five (5) feet, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 15 of this Resolution. Section 9. Section 17.16.070(B) requires that the natural conditions on a lot be maintained to the greatest degree possible and that disturbance be limited to a maximum disturbed area in the RA-S Zone of 40% of the net lot area. The applicant is requesting a Variance to disturb 43.4% of the net lot area and exceed the maximum disturbance. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates grading for a new driveway and access from a sharp curve section of Eastfield Drive. In addition, the existing lengthy driveway will be reverted to landscaping. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 3 OF 9 • • B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates grading for a new driveway and access from a sharp curve section of Eastfield Drive. In addition, the existing lengthy driveway will be reverted to landscaping. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve traffic circulation on the lot and on Eastfield Drive. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces, and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 540 to permit a disturbance of 43.4% of the net lot area, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein byreference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 15 of this Resolution. Section 11. Section 17.16.210(A)(5) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a Guest House with a Conditional Use Permit under certain conditions. The applicant is requesting to construct a 792 square foot guest house. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for a guest house would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan and will be desirable for the public convenience and welfare because the use is consistent with similar uses in the community, and the area proposed for the guest house would be located in an area on the property where such use will not change the existing configuration of structures on the lot. B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and the construction of a guest house will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed structure is at the same level as the residential building pad and is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the guest house will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the guest house will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and is located on a 1.66 acre RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 4 OF 9 • • parcel of property that is adequate in size, shape and topography to accommodate such use. D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district because the 792 square foot size of the guest house is less than the 800 square foot maximum permitted and the guest house does not encroach into any setback areas. E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of Title 17 of the Zoning Code because the guest house will be 49 feet from the residence and there is sufficient space on the lot for future development of a stable. Section 12. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a guest house in accordance with the Development Plan attached hereto in Zoning Case No. 540 subject to the conditions contained in Section 15. Section 13. Section 17.46.020 requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings or structures, which involve changes to grading or an increase in the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period, may be permitted. With respect to the Site Plan Review application, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setback, and lot coverage requirements, except as approved in Sections 6, 8 and 10. The lot has a net square foot area of 54,076 square feet. The proposed residence (5,361 sq. ft.), garage (880 sq. ft.), future stable (450 sq.ft.), guest house (792 sq.ft.), swimming pool ,(675 sq.ft.), and service yard (96 sq.ft.) will have 8,254 square feet which constitutes 15.2% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 16,101 square feet which equals 29.7% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. B. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, preserves and integrates into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 5 OF 9 • • natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls). C. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval, follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading. The natural drainage courses will be preserved and continue drainage to the canyons at the southwest side of this lot. D. The development plan will, based upon compliance with the conditions contained in this Resolution, supplement the existing vegetation with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. E. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval, substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Further, the proposed project will have a buildable pad of 12,848 square feet and a total building pad coverage of 34.8%, and a residential building pad coverage of 54.7%. F. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded. The proposed project is also consistent with the scale of other homes in the immediate neighborhood. Grading will be minor and required only to restore the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the proposed structures to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. G. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will create a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, thereby improving the safety of the roadway. H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 14. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 540 for a proposed residential development as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 15 of this Resolution. Section 15. The Variance to the front yard setback approved in Section 6, the Variance to the side yard approved in Section 8, the Variance to exceed the maximum disturbed area approved in Section 10, the Conditional Use Permit approved in Section 12, and the Site Plan for residential development approved in Section 14 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions: RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 6 OF 9 • • A. These Variance, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070,17.42.070 and 17.46.080. B. It is declared and made a condition of these Variance, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, these approvals shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for a period of thirty (30) days. C. All requirements of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated August 14, 1996, and marked Exhibit A, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. F. Grading shall be limited so that the amount of soil displaced to construct the proposed project shall not exceed 380 cubic yards of cut soil and 380 cubic yards of fill soil. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. The grading plan shall utilize land form or contour grading techniques in its design so as to create a building pad and slopes that blend with the horizontal and vertical contours of the natural terrain. G. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 54.7%. H. Landscaping shall be provided and maintained to obscure the buildings and the building pad so that the structures, driveway, and graded slopes are screened and shielded from view at the northeastern easement line along Eastfield Drive with native drought -resistant vegetation that is compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community. I. A landscape plan must be submitted to and approved by the City of Rolling Hills Planning Department staff prior to the issuance of any grading and building permit. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the community. RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 7 OF 9 • • A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a grading and building permit and shall be retained with the City for not less than two years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. J. Any retaining walls required for the project shall not exceed 5 feet in height. K. No kitchen 'or other cooking facilities shall be provided within the guest house. L. No vehicular access or paved parking area shall be developed within 50 feet of the guest house. M. Occupancy of the proposed guest house or servant quarters shall be limited to persons employed on the premises and their immediate family or by the temporary guests of the occupants of the main residence. No guest may remain in occupancy for more than thirty days in any six-month period. N. Renting of the guest house is prohibited. O. The guest house shall not exceed 792 square feet. P. Eastfield Drive shall be kept open for vehicular access at all times during future grading and construction of the driveway access. Q. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. R. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. S. Notwithstanding Section 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional development shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 8 OF 9 • • T. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these Variances, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals, or the approvals shall not be effective. U. All conditions of these Variance, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals that apply must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND AD TED T,I� 19H SAY OF NOVEMBER, 1996. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 96-18 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA, GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GUEST HOUSE, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 540. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on November 19, 1996 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Sommer, Witte and Chairman Roberts. NOES: Commissioner Hankins. ABSENT: None . ABSTAIN: Commissioner Margeta. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 9 OF 9