Loading...
898, Construction of a raised deck,, Staff ReportsRd/a/to qtai 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: 05/09/16 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR Ti THRU: RAYMOND R. CRUZ, CITY MANAGER S SUBJECT: RESOLUTION 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). REQUEST 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, Mr. and Mrs. Robert Miller, request a Site Plan Review and Variances to construct a 1,757 square foot addition to the existing residence for a total of 4,000 square feet and grading of total of 200 cubic yards of dirt. The variances are requested for an 85 square foot portion of the proposed addition to encroach between 8- 10 feet into the front yard setback and to retain an existing wood shed in a side yard setback. The south addition will be constructed below the existing eave projection. 3. The Planning Commission by a vote 4-0-1 (Commissioner Gray absent - However, at the previous meeting of the Planning Commission he agreed to direct staff to bring a Resolution of approval), approved the project after the applicant revised the plan to address several issues the Planning Commission had. Specifically, the Planning Commission expressed concerns about the ridgeline of the new addition in the front, and the applicant responded by lowering the ridgeline by 2' and the rear addition is now proposed to be built under the existing eave projection. • • The Planning Commission found that the proposed addition to increase the residence to 4,000 square feet is comparable to the surrounding residences that average to 4,413 square feet. Further, the proposed project is not obtrusive as it is located below Eastfield Drive and will be screened from the road by the drop in elevation and landscaping. No further disturbance is required for the addition in the front setback as the area is level. They found that the configuration and location of the existing residence, which spans along the length of the building pad, makes it difficult to make any additions elsewhere to the house. BACKGROUND 4. 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. Records indicate that the residence was constructed in 1955. Through the years several additions were made to the residence. Grading for a corral area was approved in 1960 and a stable/tack room was also constructed in 1960. The pool was constructed in 1959 and in 1961 a pool shelter/guest house was constructed. The pool shelter/guest house was subject to a code enforcement issue in 2007, as a previous owner renovated the structure, and constructed a flat roof with a deck and outdoor barbeque without permits. Following code enforcement action, the previous owner obtained the required permissions and building permits, but has not corrected the roof configuration. As part of this approval, the applicant is required to correct the roof and obtain a building permit for the roof. The RHCA Architectural Committee is enforcing the slope of the roof. 5. Currently the lot is developed with a 2,243 square foot residence, 420 square foot garage, 465 square foot swimming pool, 680 square foot guest house, several trellises, sheds, and other amenities. One of the sheds is located in side setback and requires a variance or must be removed. The applicant is asking to retain the shed, thus the variance. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE 6. The proposed addition of 1,757 square feet contains an 85 square foot portion that encroaches into the required 50-foot front yard setback between 8 - 10 feet for a distance of approximately 23 feet, which requires a variance. The northern addition has a minimum 5' walkway clearance, and the southern addition has at least a 6'-7' walkway clearance around the addition. 7. 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. 8. The applicants request to retain a 100 square foot shed in the west side yard setback, which also requires a variance. ZC NO. 898 9. 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. There is an existing building pad of 2,840 square feet where a pool and guest house is located. The total building pad coverage on this pad remains at 41.55%. No changes are being proposed to this building pad. The future stable and corral are proposed to be set aside on an existing stable building pad, which is 3,375 square feet in area. The coverage on this pad with a future 450- square foot stable and an existing shed of 185 square feet will be 15.26%. No changes are being proposed to this future building pad. 10. The structural lot coverage proposed, with allowed deductions, will be 7,401 square feet or 11.2% net lot coverage. The total lot coverage will be 13,418 square feet or 20.4% net lot coverage. 11. The architect states that 85 square feet of the proposed 1,757 additions will encroach no more than 10 feet into the front setback. He advises that while the lot is larger than those in the direct vicinity of the property, the majority of it is sloped and unbuildable. By utilizing a portion of the existing flat space, be it in the front setback, it allows for no grading and less overall disturbance of the lot. The addition remains within the existing retaining wall and flat area on the site, and the total size of the residence will be in line with other homes in the neighborhood. 12. The Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date. 13. The project will be required to comply with storm water management requirements and all other Zoning Code requirements, including undergrounding of utility lines. 14. When reviewing a development application the Planning Commission considers whether the proposed project meets the criteria for a Site Plan Review and Variances and must find that the proposed uses are consistent with the General Plan and development standards of the City (except as related to the variances), including provision for open space and maintaining rural environment and that the uses will not adversely affect adjacent properties. 15. 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. ZC NO. 898 0 • ZC NO. 898 NEARBY PROPERTIES (For information only) Address 13 Open Brand Rd. 24 Outrider Rd. 48 Eastfield Dr. 45 Eastfield Dr. 44 Eastfield Dr. 50 Eastfield Dr. Average 46 Eastfield House size in sq.ft. (built/add or remodel) 3,700 (1955/1961 5,551 (1993/1994)* 2,898 (1956/1966) 5,820 (1954/1959) 3,186 (2007)* 5,325 (1999) 4,413 Proposed 4,078 Lot Area sq.ft. (excl. roadway easements) 216,057 112,820 78,410 93,650 35,720 50,530 97,865 77,970 NOTE: The above do not include garages, basements and other accessory structures. SOURCES: Assessors' records * City Records ZC NO.898 0 • • SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S- 1 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear easement line STRUCTURES (Site Plan Review required for new residence and if size of structure increases by more than 999 s.f. in a 36-month period). STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (35 % maximum) BUILDING PADS (30% guideline) Residence Pool Stable (min. 450 sq. ft. 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 (except basement) DISTURBED AREA (40% max; 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 SOFT. & 550 SO.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS EXISTING 11 PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ADDITION WITH GARAGE, POOL, POOL HOUSE, SHEDS Residence Garage Swimming Pool Pool Equipment Guest House Att/cov porches Entryway Att trellis garage Shed/stable pad Barbecue Kitchen Shed Service yard TOTAL 2243 sq.ft. 420 sq.ft 465 sq.ft. 35 sq. ft. 680 sq. ft. 300 sq. ft 465 sq. ft. 325 sq. ft. 185 sq. ft. 25 sq. ft. 300 sq. ft. 100 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 5,639 sq. ft. 7.9% w/allowed deductions 17.2% with exclusions/allowances Residence Garage Swimming Pool Pool Equipment Guest House Att/cov porches Entryway Att trellis garage Shed/stable pad Barbecue Kitchen Shed Service yard Stable (set -aside) TOTAL 7,401 sq.ft. w/ allowed deductions or 11.2% of 65,880 sq• ft. net lot area 13,418 sq.ft or 20.4% of 65,880 sq ft. net lot w/allowances 4000 sq.ft. 420 sq.ft. 465 sq.ft. 35 sq.ft. 680 sq.ft. 300 sq.ft. 465 sq.ft 325 sq.ft. 185 sq.ft. 25 sq.ft. 300 sq.ft. 100 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 450 sq.ft. 7,846 sq.ft. 34.7% 52.3% of 9,950 sq.ft. residential pad 41.55% 41.55% of 2,840 2.3% 15.3% sq.ft. of 3,375 sq. ft. N/A 40.4% N/A N/A Existing driveway approach N/A N/A 100 c.y. cut & fill for house, 250 c.y. overexcavation & 250c.y. compaction for house, SUM = 700 c.y. 40.4% 26,600 sq.ft. of net lot area 450 sq. ft. future proposed 550 sq. ft. future corral Off main private driveway Existing driveway approach N/A N/A ZC NO. 898 • • 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. ZC NO. 898 • • 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. ZC NO.898 to • THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK • • RESOLUTION 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 Mi11evith 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 lotarea 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 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 ,P 2 IICHELF, ATTEST:' ciuth l HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK Reso. 2016-09 7 46 Eastfield Drive L 2016. My7 • • 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 PERMI'1"TED 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 VAL, Yaw) HEIDI LUCE CITY CLERK Reso. 2016-09 8 46 Eastfield Drive g4 Rladerf qicai 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: 04-19-16 TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: DATE PUBLISHED: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR WENDY STARKS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER ZONING CASE NO. 898 46 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 97-EF) RA-S-1, 1.8 ACRES (EXCL. ROADWAY EASEMENT) MR. AND MRS. ROBERT MILLER TONY INFERRERA, ARCHITECT JANUARY 7, 2016 AND FEBRUARY 4, 2016 REQUEST AND RECOMMENDATION 1. The applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Robert Miller, request a Site Plan Review and Variances to construct improvements on their property at 46 Eastfield Drive. The Site Plan Review is for the construction of a 1,757 square foot addition to the 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 to encroach between 8- 10 feet into the front yard setback and to retain an existing wood shed in a side yard setback. 2. At the March 15, 2016 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a Resolution approving the project as presented during the Planning Commission meeting that modifies the roof line of the addition, which is proposed to be 12 inches higher than the existing residence. Previously proposed was a difference of 3' between the existing ridgeline and the proposed ridgeline. The south addition will be constructed below the existing eave projection. The northern addition has a minimum 5' walkway clearance, and the southern addition has at least a 6' walkway. The service yard has been relocated out of the easement and setback and is now adjacent to the existing garage. The shed will remain in the setback. ZC NO. 898 46 Eastfield. • • ♦ 3. It is recommended that the Planning Commission review and consider the attached Resolution No. 2016-09 for adoption. ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. 4 w . . RESOLUTION 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 Miller 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 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 01 46 Eastfield Drive f • • 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 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 19th DAY OF APRIL 2016. BRAD CHELF, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: HEIDI LUCE, CITY CLERK 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 PERMITTED 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: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. Reso. 2016-09 8 46 Eastfield Drive TO: FROM: II al Ra l&t, qe ai INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No. 7C Mtg. Date: 03-15-16 HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: DATE PUBLISHED: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR WENDY STARKS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER ZONING CASE NO. 898 46 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 97-EF) RA-S-1, 1.8 ACRES (EXCL. ROADWAY EASEMENT) MR. AND MRS. ROBERT MILLER TONY INFERRERA, ARCHITECT JANUARY 7, 2016 AND FEBRUARY 4, 2016 REQUEST AND RECOMMENDATION 1. The Planning Commission opened the public hearing in this case on January 19, 2016, viewed the project in the field on February 16, 2016 and continued the hearing to the evening meeting on February 16, 2016. The Planning Commission expressed concerns with the proposed development and recommended that the applicant restudy the ridgeline and massing of the addition at either end of the residence, ensure there is at least a 4' walkway around both additions, remove the previously proposed deck from the plans, and show the service yard on the plans. Several of the Commissioners expressed concerns about the massing of the project and requested clarification on the heights of the proposed additions in relation to the existing residence. 2. The applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Robert Miller, revised their project and request a Site Plan Review and Variances to construct improvements on their property at 46 Eastfield Drive. The Site Plan Review is for the construction of a 1,743 square foot addition to their existing residence for a total of 3,986 square feet (a reduction of 92 square feet from the previous request), and grading of total of 700 cubic yards of dirt, of which 500 c.y. would be for excavation and recompaction (250 c.y. each). ZC NO. 898 46 Eastfield. • • The variances are requested for a) an 85 square foot portion of the proposed addition that encroaches between 8-10 feet into the front yard setback, b) a request to retain an existing wood shed in a side yard setback, and c) to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot. 3. The applicants submitted a revised plan with modifications to the roof line, and elevations that illustrate how the proposed addition at the north end of the residence is compatible with the existing ridgeline, and is proposed to be 12 inches higher than the existing residence. Previously proposed was a difference of 3' between the existing ridgeline and the proposed ridgeline. The south addition will be constructed below the existing eave projection. The northern addition has a minimum 5' walkway clearance, and the southern addition has at least a 6' walkway shown on the plans. The deck has been removed from the plans, and the service yard has been relocated out of the easement and setback and is now adjacent to the existing garage. 4. It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the staff report, take public testimony and provide direction to staff. BACKGROUND 5. 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. Records indicate that the residence was constructed in 1955. Through the years several additions were made to the residence. Grading for a corral area was approved in 1960 and a stable/tack room was also constructed in 1960. The pool was constructed in 1959 and in 1961 a pool shelter/ guest house was constructed. The pool shelter/guest house was subject to a code enforcement issue in 2007, as a previous owner renovated the structure, and constructed a flat roof with a deck and outdoor barbeque without permits. Following code enforcement action, the owner obtained the required permissions and building permits, but has not corrected the roof configuration. The RHCA Architectural Committee is enforcing the slope of the roof. 6. Currently the lot is developed with a 2,243 square foot residence, 420 square foot garage, 465 square foot swimming pool, 680 square foot guest house, several trellises, sheds, and other amenities. One of the sheds 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. Since there are records of permits for the pool from 1959, the equipment area would have been constructed at the same time and is considered legal -nonconforming. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE 7. The proposed addition of 1,743 contains an 85 square foot portion that encroaches into the required 50-foot front yard setback between 8-10 feet for a distance of approximately 23 feet, which requires a variance. ZC No. 898 2 46 Eastfield Dr. • • 8. 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 previous plan included a deck that would have increased the disturbance further, but is no longer a part of this project. 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. 9. The applicants request to retain a 100 square foot shed in the west side yard setback, which also requires a variance. 10. 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 60.2%, which includes all of the structures on this pad. With the allowed deductions the building pad coverage will be 5,192 square feet or 52.2%. This is an increase from 34.7% from the existing condition. The code provides a guideline of 30% maximum coverage. There is an existing building pad of 2,840 square feet where a pool and guest house is located. 'The total building pad coverage on this pad remains at 41.55%. No changes are being proposed to this building pad. The future stable and corral are proposed to be set aside on an existing stable building pad, which is 3,375 square feet in area. The coverage on this pad with a future 450- square foot stable and an existing shed of 185 square feet will be 15.26%. No changes are being proposed to this future building pad. A fourth pad for the deck has been removed from this proposal. 11. The structural lot coverage proposed, with allowed deductions, will be 7,387 square feet or 11.2% net lot coverage. The total lot coverage will be 13,404 square feet or 20.4% net lot coverage. 12. The architect states that 85 square feet of the proposed 1,743 additions will encroach no more than 10 feet into the front setback. He advises that while the lot is larger than those in the direct vicinity of the property, the majority of it is sloped and unbuildable. By utilizing a portion of the existing flat space, be it in the front setback, it allows for no grading and less overall disturbance of the lot. The addition remains within the existing retaining wall and flat area on the site, and the total size of the residence will be in line with other homes in the neighborhood. 13. The Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date. 14. The project will be required to comply with storm water management requirements and all other Zoning Code requirements, including undergrounding of utility lines. ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. • • ti- t� 13 Openbrand 24 Outrider Road 48 Eastfield Dr. 45 Eastfield Dr. 44 Eastfield Dr. 50 Eastfield Dr. 46 Eastfield 15. When reviewing a development application the Planning Commission must consider whether the proposed project meets the criteria for a Site Plan Review and Variances and must find that the proposed uses are consistent with the General Plan and development standards of the City (except as related to the variances), including provision for open space and maintaining rural environment and that the uses will not adversely affect adjacent properties. 16. 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. ZC NO. 898 NEARBY PROPERTIES (For information only) Address House size in sq.ft. (built/add or remodel) 3,700 (1955/1961 5,551 (1993/1994)* 2,898 (1956/1966) 5,820 (1954/1959) 3,186 (2007)* 5,325 (1999) Proposed 4,078 Lot Area sq.ft. (excl. roadway easements) 216,057 112,820 78,410 93,650 35,720 50,530 77,970 NOTE:The above do not include garages, basements and other accessory structures. SOURCES: Assessors' records * City Records SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S- 1 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear easement line STRUCTURES (Site Plan Review required for new residence and if size of structure increases by more than 999 s.f. in a 36-month period). STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH GARAGE , POOL, GUEST HOUSE, GAZEBO, Residence Garage Swimming Pool Pool Equipment Guest House Att/cov porches Entryway Att trellis garage Shed/stable pad Barbecue Kitchen Shed Service yard TOTAL 2243 sq.ft. 420 sq.ft 465 sq.ft. 35 sq. ft. 680 sq. ft. 300 sq. ft 465 sq. ft. 325 sq. ft. 185 sq. ft. 25 sq. ft. 300 sq. ft. 100 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. PROPOSED NEW RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT, POOL, OUTDOOR KITCHEN, SET -ASIDE STABLE/ CORRAL Residence Garage Swimming Pool Pool Equipment Guest House Att/cov porches Entryway Att trellis garage Shed/stable pad Barbecue Kitchen Shed Service yard Stable (set -aside) 5,639 sq. ft. I TOTAL LOCATION 3986 sq.ft. 420 sq.ft. 465 sq.ft. 35 sq.ft. 680 sq.ft. 300 sq.ft. 465 sq.ft 325 sq.ft. 185 sq.ft. 25 sq.ft. 300 sq.ft. 100 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 450 sq.ft. 7,832 sq.ft. 7.9% w/ allowed deductions 1 7,387 sq.ft. w/ allowed v/ • • (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE 17.2% with (35 % maximum) exclusions/ allowances BUILDING PADS (30% guideline) Residence Pool Stable (min. 450 sq. ft. 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 (except basement) DISTURBED AREA (40% max; 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 deductions or 11.2% of 65,880 sq. ft. net lot area 13,404 sq.ft or 20.4% of 65,880 sq ft. net lot w/allowances 34.7% 52.2% of 9,950 sq.ft. residential pad 41.55% 41.55% of 2,840 2.3% 15.3% sq.ft. of 3,375 sq. ft. N/A 40.4% N/A I N/A I Existing driveway approach N/A I N/A 100 c.y. cut for house, 250 c.y. overexcavation & 250c.y. compaction for house, 100 c.y. fill for stable pad SUM = 700 c.y. 40.4% 26,600 sq.ft. of net lot area 450 sq. ft. future proposed 550 sq. ft. future corral I Off main private driveway I Existing driveway approach I Planning Commission review I Planning Commission review 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 minimizin building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. 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; 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. ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. • • Raillef qe& 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: 02-16-16 FT TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR WENDY STARKS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER APPLICATION NO. ZONING CASE NO. 898 SITE LOCATION: 46 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 97-EF) ZONING AND SIZE: RA-S-1, 1.8 ACRES (EXCL. ROADWAY EASEMENT) APPLICANT: MR. AND MRS. ROBERT MILLER REPRESENTATIVE: TONY INFERRERA, ARCHITECT REQUEST AND RECOMMENDATION 1. The Planning Commission held a public hearing in this case on January 19, 2016 and scheduled a field visit to the site on February 16, 2016. 2. The applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Robert Miller, request a Site Plan Review and Variances to construct improvements on their property at 46 Eastfield Drive. The construction consists of: a 1,835 square foot addition to their existing residence for a total of 4,078 square feet residence, and a 375 square foot raised deck with stairs leading down to it from the house pad and grading of total of 700 cubic yards of dirt. The variances are requested for: 1) the proposed deck wall does not meet the requirement of 2.5' high wall average and will be close to 5' average, 2) 150 square foot portion of the proposed addition encroaches into the front yard setback, 3) request to retain an existing wood shed and service yard in the side setback, and 4) exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot. 3. It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the staff report, view the project in the field, take public testimony and continue the meeting to the evening meeting of the Planning Commission. ZC NO. 898 46 Eastfield. C� • • BACKGROUND 4. 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. Records indicate that the residence was constructed in 1955. Through the years several additions were made to the residence. Grading for a corral area was approved in 1960 and a stable/tack room was also constructed in 1960. The pool was constructed in 1959 and in 1961 a pool shelter/ guest house was constructed. The pool shelter/ guest house was subject to a code enforcement issue in 2007, as a previous owner renovated the structure, constructed a flat roof with a deck and outdoor barbeque without permits. Following code enforcement action, the owner obtained the required permissions and building permits, but has not corrected the roof configuration. The RHCA Architectural Committee is enforcing the slope of the roof. 5. Currently the lot is developed with a 2,243 square foot residence, 420 square foot garage, 465 square foot swimming pool, 680 square foot guest house, several trellises, sheds, and other amenities. One of the sheds 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. Since there are records of permits for the pool from 1959, the equipment area would have been constructed at the same time and is considered legal -nonconforming. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE 6. The 375 raised deck is greater than 12" above grade and is proposed to be 5' out of grade on the downhill ' side. The deck and associated walls do not meet the requirement of 2.5' high wall average, and will be close to 5' average. This condition requires a variance. 7. The proposed addition of 1,835 contains a 150 square foot portion that encroaches into the required 50-foot front yard setback by 10 feet, leaving a 40-foot front yard setback, which requires a variance. 8. 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 (40.38% of the net lot area), which is proposed to be increased due to the deck construction to 27,800 square feet; an increase of 1,200 square feet, to 42.20%, which requires a variance. The architect states that the proposed disturbance follows the boundary of the existing block walls and stairway. 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. 9. The applicants request to retain a 100 square foot shed and 96 square foot service yard in the west side yard setback, which also require a variance. ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. • • 10. 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 62.56%, which includes all of the structures on this pad. With the allowed deductions the building pad coverage will be 54.81%. This is an increase from 33.16% from the existing condition. The code provides a guideline of 30% maximum coverage. There is an existing building pad of 2,840 square feet where a pool and guest house is located. The total building pad coverage on this pad remains at 41.55%. No changes are being proposed to this building pad. The future stable and corral are proposed to be set aside on an existing stable building pad, which is 3,375 square feet in area. The coverage on this pad with a future 450- square foot stable and an existing shed of 185 square feet will be 15.26%. No changes are being proposed to this future building pad. A fourth pad comprised of the 375 square foot deck is proposed with a total building pad coverage of 100%. 11. The structural lot coverage proposed, with allowed deductions, will be 7,854 square feet or 11.9% net lot coverage. The total lot coverage will be 13,916 square feet or 21.1 % net lot coverage. 12. The architect states that 150 square feet of the proposed 1,835 addition will encroach 10 feet into the front setback. He advises that while the lot is larger than those in the direct vicinity of the property, the majority of it is sloped and unbuildable. By utilizing a portion of the existing flat space, be it in the front setback, it allows for less grading and less overall disturbance of the lot. The addition remains within the existing retaining wall and flat area on the site, and the total size of the residence will be in line with other newer homes in the neighborhood. 13. The proposed raised deck is to be located between two existing walls and will not be obtrusive, it is on the side of the addition and not in setbacks. 14. The Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date. 15. The project will be required to comply with storm water management requirements and all other Zoning Code requirements, including undergrounding of utility lines. 16. When reviewing a development application the Planning Commission must consider whether the proposed project meets the criteria for a Site Plan Review and Variances and must find that the proposed uses are consistent with the General Plan and development standards of the City (except as related to the variances), including ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. • • 13 Openbrand 124 Outrider Road 48 Eastfield Dr. 45 Eastfield Dr. 44 Eastfield Dr. 50 Eastfield Dr. 46 Eastfield provision for open space and maintaining rural environment and that the uses will not adversely affect adjacent properties. 17. 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. ZC NO. 898 NEARBY PROPERTIES (For information only) Address House size in sq.ft. (built/ add or remodel) 3,700 (1955/1961 5,551 (1993/1994) 2,898 (1956/1966) 5,820 (1954/1959) 3,186 (2007) 5,325 (1999) Proposed 4,078 Lot Area sq.ft. (excl. roadway easements) 216,057 112,820 78,410 93,650 35,720 50,530 77,970 NOTE:The above do not include garages, basements and other accessory structures. SOURCES: Assessors' records ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S- 1 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear easement line STRUCTURES (Site Plan Review required for new residence and if size of structure increases by more than 999 s.f. in a 36-month period). STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) TOTAL LOT COVERAGE (35% maximum) BUILDING PADS (30% guideline) Residence Pool Stable (min. 450 sq. ft. stable) Deck 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 (except basement) DISTURBED AREA (40% max; 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 ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH GARAGE , POOL, GUEST HOUSE, GAZEBO, Residence Garage Swimming Pool Pool Equipment Guest House Att/cov porches Entryway Att trellis garage Shed/stable pad Barbecue Kitchen Shed Service yard 2243 sq.ft. 420 sq.ft 465 sq.ft. 35 sq. ft. 680 sq. ft. 300 sq. ft 465 sq. ft. 325 sq. ft. 185 sq. ft. 25 sq. ft. 300 sq. ft. 100 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. TOTAL 5,639 sq. ft 7.9% w/allowed deductions 17.2% with exclusions/ allowances 33.16% 41.55% 0.00% 0.00% N/A 40.38% N/A N/A Existing driveway approach N/A N/A 1 PROPOSED NEW RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT, POOL, OUTDOOR KITCHEN, SET -ASIDE STABLE/CORRAL LOCATION Residence Garage Swimming Pool Pool Equipment Guest House Att/cov porches Entryway Att trellis garage Shed/stable pad Barbecue Kitchen Shed Service yard Raised deck Stable (set -aside) . TOTAL 7,854 sq.ft. w/ allowed deductions or 11.9% of 65,880 sq. ft. net lot area 13,916 sq.ft or 21.1% of 65,880 sq ft. net lot w/ allowances 4078 sq.ft. 420 sq.ft. 465 sq.ft. 35 sq.ft. 680sq.ft. 300 sq.ft. 465 sq.ft 325 sq.ft. 185 sq.ft. 25 sq.ft. 300 sq.ft. 100 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 375 sq.ft. 450 sq.ft. 8,288 sq.ft. 54.81% of 9,950 sq.ft. residential pad 41.55% of 2,840 15.3% sq.ft. of 3,375 sq. ft. 100% of 375 sq.ft. 100 c.y. cut for house, 250 c.y. overexcavation for house = 350 c.y. total cut 100 c.y. fill for deck, 250 c.y. recompaction = 350 c.y. total fill SUM = 700 c.y. 42.20% 27,800 sq.ft. of net lot area 450 sq. ft. future proposed 550 so. ft. future corral Off main private driveway Existing driveway approach Planning Commission review I Planning Commission review • • 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. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. • • 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. ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. TO: FROM: • Rdia/if qeeei INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Agenda Item No. 8A Mtg. Date: 01/19/16 HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR WENDY STARKS, ASSOCIATE PLANNER ZONING CASE NO. 898 46 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 97-EF) RA-S-1, 1.8 ACRES (EXCL. ROADWAY EASEMENT) MR. AND MRS. ROBERT MILLER TONY INFERRERA, ARCHITECT JANUARY 7, 2016 REQUEST AND RECOMMENDATION 1. The applicants, Mr. and Mrs. Robert Miller, request a Site Plan Review and Variances to construct improvements on their property at 46 Eastfield Drive. The construction consists of: a 1,835 square foot addition to their existing residence for a total of 4,078 square feet residence, and a 375 square foot raised deck with stairs leading down to it from the house pad and grading of total of 700 cubic yards of dirt. The variances are requested for: 1) the proposed deck wall does not meet the requirement of 2.5' high wall average and will be close to 5' average, 2) 150 square foot portion of the proposed addition encroaches into the front yard setback, 3) request to retain an existing wood shed and service yard in the side setback, and 4) exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot. 2. It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the staff report, open the public hearing, take public testimony and schedule a field trip to the property. ZC NO. 898 46 Eastfield. • • BACKGROUND 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. Records indicate that the residence was constructed in 1955. Through the years several additions were made to the residence. Grading for a corral area was approved in 1960 and a 144 square foot stable/tack room was also constructed in 1960. The pool was constructed in 1959 and in 1961 a pool shelter/guest house was constructed. The pool shelter/guest house was subject to a code enforcement issue in 2007, as a previous owner renovated the structure, constructed a deck with flat roof and constructed outdoor barbeque without permits. Following code enforcement action, the owner. obtained the required permissions and building permits, but has not corrected the roof configuration. The RHCA Architectural Committee is enforcing the slope of the roof. 4. Currently the lot is developed with a 2,243 square foot residence, 420 square foot garage, 465 square foot swimming pool, 680 square foot guest house, several trellises, sheds, and other amenities. One of the sheds 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. Since there are records of permits for the pool from 1959, the equipment area would have been constructed at the same time and is considered legal -nonconforming. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE 5. The 375 raised deck is greater than 12" out of grade and is proposed to be 5' out of grade on the downhill side. The deck and associated walls do not meet the requirement of 2.5' high wall average, and will be close to 5' average. This condition requires a variance. 6. The proposed addition of 1,835 contains a 150 square foot portion that encroaches into the required 50-foot front yard setback by 10 feet, leaving a 40-foot front yard setback, which requires a variance. 7. 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 (40.38% of the net lot area), which is proposed to be increased due to the deck construction to 27,800 square feet; an increase of 1,200 square feet, to 42.20%, which requires a variance. The architect states that the proposed disturbance follows the boundary of the block walls and stairway. 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. ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. • • 8. The applicants request to retain a 100 square foot shed and 96 square foot service yard in the west side yard setback, which also require a variance. 9. 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 62.56%, which includes all of the structures on this pad, but excludes permissible deductions for covered porch, detached trellis, and barbecue for a total building pad coverage of 54.81%. This is an increase from 33.16% from the existing condition. The code provides a guideline of 30% maximum coverage. There is an existing building pad of 2,840 square feet where a pool and guest house is located. The total building pad coverage on this pad remains at 41.55%. No changes are being proposed to this building pad. The future stable and corral are proposed to be set aside on an existing stable building pad, which is 3,375 square feet in area. The coverage on this pad with a future 450- square foot stable and an existing shed of 185 square feet will be 15.26% with an allowed deduction of 120 square feet for the shed. No changes are being proposed to this future building pad. A fourth pad comprised of the 375 square foot deck is proposed with a total building pad coverage of 100%. 10. The structural lot coverage proposed, with allowed deductions, will be 7,854 square feet or 11.9% net lot coverage. The total lot coverage will be 13,916 square feet or 21.1% net lot coverage. 11. The architect states that 150 square feet of the proposed 1,835 addition will encroach 10 feet into the front setback. They advise that while the lot is larger than those in the direct vicinity of the property, the majority of it is sloped and unbuildable. By utilizing a portion of the existing flat space, be it in the front setback, it allows for less grading and less overall disturbance of the lot. The addition remains within the existing retaining wall and flat area on the site, and the total size of the residence will be in line with other newer homes in the neighborhood. 12. The proposed raised deck is to be located between two existing walls and will not be obtrusive, it is on the side of the addition and not in setbacks. 13. The Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date. 14. The project will be required to comply with storm water management requirements and all other Zoning Code requirements, including undergrounding of utility lines. ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. 15. When reviewing a development application the Planning Commission must consider whether the proposed project meets the criteria for a Site Plan Review and Variances and must find that the proposed uses are consistent with the General Plan and development standards of the City (except as related to the variances), including provision for open space and maintaining rural environment and that the uses will not adversely affect adjacent properties. 16. 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. ZC NO. 898 NEARBY PROPERTIES (For information only) Address House size in sq.ft. (built/add or remodel) 13 Openbrand 3,700 (1955/1961 24 Outrider Road 5,551 (1993/1994) 48 Eastfield Dr. 2,898 (1956/1966) 45 Eastfield Dr. 5,820 (1954/1959) 44 Eastfield Dr. 3,186 (2007) 50 Eastfield Dr. 1 5,325 (1999) 46 Eastfield Proposed 4,078 Lot Area sq.ft. (excl. roadway easements) 216,057 112,820 78,410 93,650 35,720 50,530 77,970 NOTE:The above do not include garages, basements and other accessory structures. SOURCES: Assessors' records SITE PLAN REVIEW RA-S- 1 ZONE SETBACKS Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from rear easement line STRUCTURES (Site Plan Review required for new residence and if size of structure increases by more than 999 s.f. in a 36-month period). ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH GARAGE , POOL, GUEST HOUSE, GAZEBO, Residence Garage Swimming Pool Pool Equipment Guest House Att/cov porches Entryway Att trellis garage Shed/stable pad Barbecue Kitchen Shed Service yard TOTAL 2243 sq.ft. 420 sq.ft 465 sq.ft. 35 sq. ft. 680 sq. ft. 300 sq. ft 465 sq. ft. 325 sq. ft. 185 sq. ft. 25 sq. ft. 300 sq. ft. 100 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 5,639 sq. ft. PROPOSED NEW RESIDENCE WITH BASEMENT, POOL, OUTDOOR KITCHEN, SET -ASIDE STABLE/CORRAL LOCATION Residence Garage Swimming Pool Pool Equipment Guest House Att/cov porches Entryway Att trellis garage Shed/stable pad Barbecue Kitchen Shed Service yard Raised deck Stable (set -aside) TOTAL 4078 sq.ft. 420 sq.ft. 465 sq.ft. 35 sq.ft. 680sq.ft. 300 sq.ft. 465 sq.ft 325 sq.ft. 185 sq.ft. 25 sq.ft. 300 sq.ft. 100 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 375 sq.ft. 450 sq.ft. 8,288 sq.ft. STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE (20% maximum) 7.9% w/allowed deductions TOTAL LOT COVERAGE 117.2% with (35% maximum) 1 exclusions/allowances BUILDING PADS (30% guideline) Residence 33.16 % Pool Stable (min. 450 sq. ft. stable) Deck 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 (except basement) DISTURBED AREA (40% max; 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 SO.FT. & 550 SQ.FT. CORRAL) STABLE ACCESS ROADWAY ACCESS VIEWS PLANTS AND ANIMALS 41.55% 0.00% 0.00% N/A 40.38% N/A I N/A Existing driveway approach N/A N/A 7,854 sq.ft. w/ allowed deductions or 11.9% of 65,880 sq. ft. net lot area 13,916 sq.ft or 21.1% of 65,880 sq ft. net lot w/allowances 54.81 % of 9,950 sq.ft. residential pad 41.55% of 2,840 15.3% sq.ft. of 3,375 sq. ft. 100% of 375 sq.ft. 100 c.y. cut for house, 250 c.y. overexcavation for house = 350 c.y. total cut 100 c.y. fill for deck, 250 c.y. recompaction = 350 c.y. total fill SUM = 700 c.y. 42.20% 27,800 sq.ft. of net lot area 450 sq. ft. future proposed 550 sq. ft. future corral 1 Off main private driveway 1 Existing driveway approach Planning Commission review Planning Commission review 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 . mall requirements of the zoning ordinance; ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr. • • 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 Reauired 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. ZC No. 898 46 Eastfield Dr.