Loading...
540, All encroachment into side yar, Staff ReportsMEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: • C1iy of l2 Fl q Jd,•f! NAN HUANG, FINANCE DIRECTOR LINDSEY BLEY, ADMINISTRATIVE INTERN RELEASE OF LANDSCAPING BOND AUGUST 10, 2001 • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com In 1997 a Landscaping Bond was issued in the amount of $230 from Janice Ferris at 50 Eastfield Drive. Since then the planting has been established. Please release the bond in the amount of $230 to Janice Ferris. Thank you. lcb bondrelease.memo Pnnterl on Recyclk,d 1'rrprn • aty (Pelting INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: rt ofrh@aol.com Agenda Item No.: 4.A. Mtg. Date: 12/17/96 MEETING DATE: DECEMBER 17,1996 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTENTION: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER SUBJECT: Zoning Case No. 540, an appeal of a Planning Commission approval of a request for a Variance to construct a 3-car garage that will encroach into the front yard setback, a request for a Variance to construct the same garage that will encroach into the side yard setback,.a request for a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions, a request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a guest house and a request for Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions and a guest house at an existing single family residence. Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Ferris, 50 Eastfield Drive (Lot 99-EF) RESOLUTION NO. 802: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA, GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GUEST HOUSE, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 540. BACKGROUND At the December 11, 1996 meeting, the City Council directed staff to prepare the attached draft resolution of approval for the subject project. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 802. cr Printed on Recycled paper. DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 802 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA, GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GUEST HOUSE, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 540. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Ferris with respect to real property located at 50 Eastfield Drive (Lot 99-EF), Rolling Hills, requesting a Variance to permit the construction of a garage that will encroach into the front yard setback, requesting a Variance to permit the construction of the same garage into the side yard setback, requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a Guest House, and requesting Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial additions to an existing single family residence. During the hearing process, the applicant revised plans to eliminate two subterranean garages, one attached to the residence at the east and the other attached to the guest house at the east. The residential garage at the east was removed and the guest house deck will now be enclosed. Section 2. In 1977, a Conditional Use Permit was approved for a 720 square foot swimming pool and retaining walls constructed in relation to the pool. Section 3. The City Council took the zoning case under jurisdiction on November 25, 1996 because of the number of Variances, the close proximity of the garage to the street, and the size of the residence. The Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the appeal of the applications on December 11, 1996 at a field trip visit. The applicants and the applicants' representative, Mr. Thomas Blair, were in attendance at the hearing. Section 4. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on May 21, 1996, June 18, 1996, July 16, 1996, August 20, 1996, and September 17, 1996, and at a field trip visit on June 18, 1996 and September 7, 1996. The applicants were notified of the hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. The applicants and the applicants' representative, Mr. Thomas Blair, were in attendance at the hearings. Section 5. The City Council finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(e)) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 6. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. Section 17.16.110 requires a front yard setback for every residential parcel to be fifty (50) feet. The applicant is requesting a Variance to construct a garage which will encroach a maximum of fifteen (15) feet into the fifty (50) foot front yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the City Council finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates the construction of a garage in the front yard setback. The construction of the garage in the front yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates the construction of a garage in the front yard setback. The construction of the garage in the front yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces, and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. In addition, the existing configuration of the residence makes the construction of, and use of garage spaces in the rear of the residence nearly inaccessible due to the narrow corridor between the side of the residence and the side property line. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve circulation on the lot and will not be visible to surrounding properties due to the distances between the garage and other adjacent residences. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings., the City Council hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 540 to permit the encroachment of a garage into the front yard setback with a maximum encroachment of fifteen (15) feet, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 16 of this Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 802 PAGE 2 OF 10 • • Section 8. Section 17.16.120 requires a side yard setback for every residential parcel in the RA-S-1 Zone to be twenty (20) feet. The applicant is requesting a Variance to construct a garage which will encroach a maximum of five (5) feet into the twenty (20) foot side yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the City Council finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates the construction of a garage in the side yard setback. The construction of the garage in the side yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates the construction of a garage in the side yard setback. The construction of the garage in the side yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces, and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. In addition, the existing configuration of the residence makes the construction of, and use of garage spaces in the rear of the residence nearly inaccessible due to the narrow corridor between the side of the residence and the side property line. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve circulation on the lot and will not be visible to surrounding properties due to the distances between the garage and other adjacent residences. Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 540 to permit the encroachment of a garage into the side yard setback with a maximum encroachment of five (5) feet, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 16 of this Resolution. Section 10. Section 17.16.070(B) requires that the natural conditions on a lot be maintained to the greatest degree possible and that disturbance be limited to a maximum disturbed area in. the RA-S Zone of 40% of the net lot area. The applicant is requesting a Variance to disturb 43.4% of the net lot area and exceed the maximum disturbance. With respect to this request for a Variance, the City Council finds as follows: RESOLUTION NO. 802 PAGE 3 OF 10 • • A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates grading for a new driveway and access from a sharp curve section of Eastfield Drive. In addition, the existing lengthy driveway will be reverted to landscaping. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates grading for a new driveway and access from a sharp curve section of Eastfield Drive. In addition, the existing lengthy driveway will be reverted to landscaping. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield, Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve traffic circulation on the lot and on Eastfield Drive. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces, and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. Section 11. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 540 to permit a disturbance of 43.4% of the net lot area, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 16 of this Resolution. Section 12. Section 17.16.210(A)(5) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a Guest House with a Conditional Use Permit under certain conditions. The applicant is requesting to construct a 792 square foot guest house. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the City Council finds as follows: A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for a guest house would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan and will be desirable for the public convenience and welfare because the use is consistent with similar uses in the community, and the area proposed for the guest house would be located in an area on the property where such use will not change the existing configuration of structures on the lot. B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and the construction of a guest house will not RESOLUTION NO. 802 PAGE 4 OF 10 • • adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed structure is at the same level as the residential building pad and is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the guest house will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the guest house will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and is located on a 1.66 acre parcel of property that is adequate in size, shape and topography to accommodate such use. D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district because the 792 square foot size of the guest house is less than the 800 square foot maximum permitted and the guest house does not encroach into any setback areas. E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of Title 17 of the Zoning Code because the guest house will be 49 feet from the residence and there is sufficient space on the lot for future development of a stable. Section 13. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a guest house in accordance with the Development Plan attached hereto in Zoning Case No. 540 subject to the conditions contained in Section 16. Section 14. Section 17.46.020 requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings or structures, which involve changes to grading or an increase in the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period, may be permitted. With respect to the Site Plan Review application, the City Council makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setback, and lot coverage requirements, except as approved in Sections 6, 8 and 10. The lot has a net square foot area of 54,076 square feet. The proposed residence (5,361 sq. ft.), garage (880 sq. ft.), future RESOLUTION NO. 802 PAGE 5 OF 10 • stable (450 sq.ft.), guest house (792 sq.ft.), swimming pool .(675 sq.ft.), and service yard (96 sq.ft.) will have 8,254 square feet which constitutes 15.2% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 16,101 square feet which equals 29.7% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. B. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, preserves and integrates into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls). C. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval, follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading. The natural drainage courses will be preserved and continue drainage to the canyons at the southwest side of this lot. D. The development plan will, based upon compliance with the conditions contained in this Resolution, supplement the existing vegetation with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. E. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval, substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Further, the proposed project will have a buildable pad of 12,848 square feet and a total building pad coverage of 34.8%, and a residential building pad coverage of 54.7%. F. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded. The proposed project is also consistent with the scale of other homes in the immediate neighborhood. Grading will be minor and required only to restore the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the proposed structures to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. G. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will create a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, thereby improving the safety of the roadway. H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 15. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 540 for a proposed residential development as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 16 of this Resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 802 PAGE 6 OF 10 • • Section 16. The Variance to the front yard setback approved in Section 7, the Variance to the side yard approved in Section 9, the Variance to exceed the maximum disturbed area approved in Section 11, the Conditional Use Permit approved in Section 13, and the Site Plan for residential development approved in Section 15 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions: A. These Variance, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070,17.42.070 and 17.46.080. B. It is declared and made a condition of these Variance, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, these approvals shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for a period of thirty (30) days. C. All requirements of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated August 14, 1996, and marked Exhibit A, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. F. Grading shall be limited so that the amount of soil displaced to construct the proposed project shall not exceed 380 cubic yards of cut soil and 380 cubic yards of fill soil. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. The grading plan shall utilize land form or contour grading techniques in its design so as to create a building pad and slopes that blend with the horizontal and vertical contours of the natural terrain. G. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 54.7%. H. Landscaping shall be provided and maintained to obscure the buildings and the building pad so that the structures, driveway, and graded slopes are screened and shielded from view at the northeastern easement line along Eastfield Drive with native drought -resistant vegetation that is compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community. RESOLUTION NO. 802 PAGE 7 OF 10 • • I. A landscape plan must be submitted to and approved by the City of Rolling Hills Planning Department staff prior to the issuance of any grading and building permit. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the community. A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a grading and building permit and shall be retained with the City for not less than two years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. j. height. K. No kitchen or other cooking facilities shall be provided within the guest house. Any retaining walls required for the project shall not exceed 5 feet in L. No vehicular access or paved parking area shall be developed within 50 feet of the guest house. M. Occupancy of the proposed guest house or servant quarters shall be limited to persons employed on the premises and their immediate family or by the temporary guests of the occupants of the main residence. No guest may remain in occupancy for more than thirty days in any six-month period. N. Renting of the guest house is prohibited. O. The guest house shall not exceed 792 square feet. P. Eastfield Drive shall be kept open for vehicular access at all times during future grading and construction of the driveway access. Q. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the City Council must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. R. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. RESOLUTION NO. 802 PAGE 8 OF 10 3 • • S. Notwithstanding Section 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional development shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. T. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these Variances, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals, or the approvals shall not be effective. U. All conditions of these Variance, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals that apply must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 1996. JODY MURDOCK, MAYOR ATTEST: MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 802 PAGE 9 OF 10 • STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 802 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA, GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GUEST HOUSE, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 540. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on December 17, 1996 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. DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 802 PAGE 10 OF 10 •City leolliny INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: ejtyofrh@aolcom Agenda Item No.: 3.A. Mtg. Date: 12/11/96 DATE: DECEMBER 11,1996 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER SUBJECT: Zoning Case No. 540, an appeal of a Planning Commission approval of a request for a Variance to construct a 3-car garage that will encroach into the front yard setback, a request for a Variance to construct the same garage that will encroach into the side yard setback, a request for a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions, a request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a guest house and a request for Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions and a guest house at an existing single family residence. Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Ferris, 50 Eastfield Drive (Lot 99-EF) BACKGROUND 1. The City Council took jurisdiction of the subject case on November 25, 1996 because of the number of Variances, the close proximity of the garage to the street, and the size of the residence. 2. The Planning Commission approved the attached resolution on November 19, 1996 at their regular meeting (3-1-0-1). Commissioner Hankins opposed the Variances for the garage and Commissioner Margeta abstained due to his recent appointment to the Commission. 3. The applicants request Variances for a new 880 square foot 3-car garage that will be located at the northern portion of the residence that will encroach into the front and side yard setbacks. The applicants state on the Variance application that there is limited area for the proposed use and that it is the only feasible alternative based on the topography and access of the site. The garage will encroach up to 15 feet into the front yard setback and encroach up to 5 feet into the side yard setback. During the hearing process, the applicants revised plans to eliminate two subterranean garages, one attached to the ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 1 Printed on Recycled Paper. t • residence at the east and the other attached to the guest house at the east. The residential garage at the east was removed and the guest house deck will now be enclosed. Two other areas of addition will be 917.5 square feet at the eastern portion of the residence and 1,423.5 square feet at the southwestern portion of the residence. A basement area will be situated below a portion of the southwest area addition. Other requests are: • The applicants are requesting a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions. The proposed disturbed area will be 23,478 square feet or 43.4% of the 54,076 square foot net lot area and exceeds the maximum 40% of the net lot area permitted by the Zoning Code. • The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 792 square foot guest house at the northwest corner of the lot enclosed by a wall that will not exceed 5 feet in height. The retaining wall will be twenty feet from the property line at the north and up to 63 feet from the rear property line at the west. The guest house will be 27 feet from the property line at the north and up to 68 feet from the property line at the west. • The applicants are requesting Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions to an existing single family residence. Site Plan Review is required for any new structure and for any additions that increase the size of the structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in any 36-month period. The construction will include the addition of 2,341 square feet of additions to be added to the existing 3,020 square foot residence for a total of 5,361 square feet, the demolition of the 576 square foot garage at the northwest side of the residence to be replaced by 880 square feet of garage space at the northern portion of the residence, a 675 square foot swimming pool, a 792 square foot guest house, a 450 square foot future stable and a 96 square foot service yard. • The Site Plan Review request includes the relocation of the driveway access at the eastern portion of the lot off Eastfield Drive. Drawings show that the existing 14 foot wide driveway with 16 foot apron will be closed and replaced by a 16 foot wide drive with a 28 foot apron that overlaps the existing driveway and is 20 feet further south. The existing garage will be demolished and access to the new garage space and stable at the southern portion of the lot will be from the new driveway access. The Traffic Commission reviewed and approved the proposed driveway access o n ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 2 May 23, 1996 with the requirement that the driveway access be scored for equestrian crossing. 4. Structural lot coverage proposed will be 15.2% (20% permitted). The total lot coverage proposed will be 16,101 square feet or 29.7% and is less than the maximum 35% of the net lot area permitted by the Zoning Code. 5. The following table comparing adjacent properties along each side of Eastfield Drive in the vicinity of the proposed project shows gross lot and residence size. EASTFIELD DRIVE ADDRESSES 45 47 49 51 53 46 48 50 52 54 OWNER Vachon Nakatani Basque Meyer Young Taylor Turner Ferris (EXISTING) Gagliano Hedges AVERAGE PROPOSED PROJECT LOT NO(S). 35 & 36 34 33 32 31 97 98 99 100 101 GROSS LOT AREA (ACRES) 2.74 1.28 1.31 1.34 1.39 1.87 1.86 1.71 1.32 1.17 1.60 1.71 RESIDENCE SIZE (SQUARE FEET) 5,204 2,774 2, 726 4,187 2,582 2,243 2,432 3,020 4,518 2,840 3,253 5,361 6. Structural coverage on the residential 12,848 square foot building pad will be 7,033 square feet or 54.7% and exceeds the Planning Commission's guideline maximum of 30%. Pool and stable coverage on the 10,883 square foot second building pad will be 10.3%. Coverage on both pads will be 34.4%. 7. Grading for the project will require 380 cubic yards of cut soil and 380 cubic yards of fill soil. 8. The original residence was built in 1950. In 1970, a new 625 square foot garage was completed as well as 1,188 square foot bedroom additions. In 1977, a Conditional Use Permit was approved for a 720 square foot swimming pool and retaining walls were constructed in relation to the pool. 9. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 3 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council testimony. CRITERIA'. & MAJOR IMPACTS RA -S-1 Zone Setbacks: Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line EXISTING No encroachments Structures Residence 3,020 sq. ft. (Site Plan Review required if Garage 576 sq.ft. size of structure increases by Swim Pool 675 sq.ft. at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period). TOTAL 4,271 sq.ft. TOTAL 9,294 sq.ft. review the appeal and take public PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED No encroachments Grading N/A Disturbed Area (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary 17% disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist and any planned landscaped areas) Structural Lot Coverage (20% maximum) Total Lot Coverage (35% maximum) 7.9% 20.4% Residential Building Pad Coverage (Guideline maximum of 30%) Pool & Stable Building Pad Coverage Residence 6,223 sq. ft. Garage 1,058 sq.ft. Swim Pool 675 sq.ft. Stable 450 sq.ft. Guest House 792 sq.ft. Service Yard 96 sq.ft. CURRENT PROPOSAL. 15 ft. encroachment into front yard setback for garage 5 ft. encroachment into side yard setback for garage Residence 5,361 sq. ft. Garage 880 sq.ft. Swim Pool 675 sq.ft. Stable 450 sq.ft. Guest House 792 sq.ft. Service Yard 96 sq.ft. TOTAL 8,254 sq.ft. 516 cubic yards of cut soil 380 cubic yards of cut soil 516 cubic yards of fill soil 380 cubic yards of fill soil 62.6% 17.2% 37.4% 54.6% of a 14,790 sq.ft. pad 43.4% 15.2% 29.7% 54.7% of a 12,848.25 sq.ft. pad 12.3% (stable was separate) 12.3%(stable was separate) 10.3%of a 10,883 sq.ft. pad Total Building Pad Coverage 21% ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 4 40.7% 34.4% Roadway Access Existing off Eastfield Drive Access to Stable and Corral [Accessibility and maximum N/A 4:1 (25%) slope required ONLY for new residence or additions that require Site Plan Review]. Preserve Views Proposed 18 feet wide with 28 foot wide apron and relocated 20 feet south on Eastfield Drive was reviewed by the Traffic Commission on May 23,1996 to be scored for equestrian use. Proposed w/slope of 11% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive at the southeast. N/A Planning Commission will review Preserve Plants and Animals N/A Planning Commission will review• VARIANCE REQUIRED FINDINGS Proposed 18 feet wide with 28 foot wide apron and relocated 20 feet south on Eastfield Drive was reviewed by the Traffic Commission on May 23,1996 to be scored for equestrian use. Proposed w/slope of 13% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive at the southeast. Planning Commission will review Planning Commission will review 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; and 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; and 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; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; 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. ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 5 • I CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR GUEST HOUSE a. Requires all guest or servant quarters on same recorded lot as main house b. Maximum 800 sq.ft. floor area c. No kitchen or other cooking facilities permitted d. Develop and maintain in substantial conformance with site plan e. No vehicular access or paved parking area permitted to be developed within 50' of proposed guest house or servant quarters f. No guest may remain in occupancy more than 30 days in any 6 month period g. Renting of guest house is prohibited h. Comply with all requirements i. Preliminary landscaping plan required ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 6 PROPOSED Proposed 792 sq.ft. proposed Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA, GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GUEST HOUSE, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 540. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Ferris with respect to real property located at 50 Eastfield Drive (Lot 99-EF), Rolling Hills, requesting a Variance to permit the construction of a garage that will encroach into the front yard setback, requesting a Variance to permit the construction of the same garage into the side yard setback, requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a Guest House, and requesting Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial additions to an existing single family residence. During the hearing process, the applicant revised plans to eliminate two subterranean garages, one attached to the residence at the east and the other attached to the guest house at the east. The residential garage at the east was removed and the guest house deck will now be enclosed. Section 2. In 1977, a Conditional Use Permit was approved for a 720 square foot swimming pool and retaining walls constructed in relation to the pool. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on May 21, 1996, June 18, 1996, July 16, 1996, August 20, 1996, and September 17,1996, and at a field trip visit on June 18, 1996 and September 7, 1996. The applicants were notified of the hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. The applicants and the applicants' representative, Mr. Thomas Blair, were in attendance at the hearings. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(e)) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 5. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. Section 17.16.110 requires a front yard setback for every • • residential parcel to be fifty (50) feet. The applicant is requesting a Variance to construct a garage which will encroach a maximum of fifteen (15) feet into the fifty (50) foot front yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates the construction of a garage in the front yard setback. The construction of the garage in the front yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates the construction of a garage in the front yard setback. The construction of the garage in the front yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces, and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. In addition, the existing configuration of the residence makes the construction of, and use of garage spaces in the rear of the residence nearly inaccessible due to the narrow corridor between the side of the residence and the side property line. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve circulation on the lot and will not be visible to surrounding properties due to the distances between the garage and other adjacent residences. Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 540 to permit the encroachment of a garage into the front yard setback with a maximum encroachment of fifteen (15) feet, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 15 of this Resolution. Section 7. Section 17.16.120 requires a side yard setback for every residential parcel in the RA-S-1 Zone to be twenty (20) feet. The applicant is requesting a Variance to construct a garage which will encroach a maximum of five (5) feet into the twenty (20) foot side yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 2 OF 9 • • property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates the construction of a garage in the side yard setback. The construction of the garage in the side yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates the construction of a garage in the side yard setback. The construction of the garage in the side yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces, and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. In addition, the existing configuration of the residence makes the construction of, and use of garage spaces in the rear of the residence nearly inaccessible due to the narrow corridor between the side of the residence and the side property line. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve circulation on the lot and will not be visible to surrounding properties due to the distances between the garage and other adjacent residences. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 540 to permit the encroachment of a garage into the side yard setback with a maximum encroachment of five (5) feet, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 15 of this Resolution. Section 9. Section 17.16.070(B) requires that the natural conditions on a lot be maintained to the greatest degree possible and that disturbance be limited to a maximum disturbed area in the RA-S Zone of 40% of the net lot area. The applicant is requesting a Variance to disturb 43.4% of the net lot area and exceed the maximum disturbance. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates grading for a new driveway and access from a sharp curve section of Eastfield Drive. In addition, the existing lengthy driveway will be reverted to landscaping. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 3 OF 9 • • B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates grading for a new driveway and access from a sharp curve section of Eastfield Drive. In addition, the existing lengthy driveway will be reverted to landscaping. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve traffic circulation on the lot and on Eastfield Drive. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces, and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 540 to permit a disturbance of 43.4% of the net lot area, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 15 of this Resolution. Section 11. Section 17.16.210(A)(5) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a Guest House with a Conditional Use Permit under certain conditions. The applicant is requesting to construct a 792 square foot guest house. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for a guest house would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan and will be desirable for the public convenience and welfare because the use is consistent with similar uses in the community, and the area proposed for the guest house would be located in an area on the property where such use will not change the existing configuration of structures on the lot. B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and the construction of a guest house will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed structure is at the same level as the residential building pad and is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the guest house will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the guest house will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and is located on a 1.66 acre RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 4 OF 9 • parcel of property that is adequate in size, shape and topography to accommodate such use. D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district because the 792 square foot size of the guest house is less than the 800 square foot maximum permitted and the guest house does not encroach into any setback areas. E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of Title 17 of the Zoning Code because the guest house will be 49 feet from the residence and there is sufficient space on the lot for future development of a stable. Section 12. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a guest house in accordance with the Development Plan attached hereto in Zoning Case No. 540 subject to the conditions contained in Section 15. Section 13. Section 17.46.020 requires . a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings or structures, which involve changes to grading or an increase in the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period, may be permitted. With respect to the Site Plan Review application, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setback, and lot coverage requirements, except as approved in Sections 6, 8 and 10. The lot has a net square foot area of 54,076 square feet. The proposed residence (5,361 sq. ft.), garage (880 sq. ft.), future stable (450 sq.ft.), guest house (792 sq.ft.), swimming pool f675 sq.ft.), and service yard (96 sq.ft.) will have 8,254 square feet which constitutes 15.2% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 16,101 square feet which equals 29.7% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. B. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, preserves and integrates into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 5 OF 9 • • natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls). C. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval, follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading. The natural drainage courses will be preserved and continue drainage to the canyons at the southwest side of this lot. D. The development plan will, based upon compliance with the conditions contained in this Resolution, supplement the existing vegetation with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. E. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval, substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Further, the proposed project will have a buildable pad of 12,848 square feet and a total building pad coverage of 34.8%, and a residential building pad coverage of 54.7%. F. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded. The proposed project is also consistent with the scale of other homes in the immediate neighborhood. Grading will be minor and required only to restore the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the proposed structures to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. G. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will create a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, thereby improving the safety of the roadway. H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 14. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 540 for a proposed residential development as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A, subject to the, conditions contained in Section 15 of this Resolution. Section 15. The Variance to the front yard setback approved in Section 6, the Variance to the side yard approved in Section 8, the Variance to exceed the maximum disturbed area approved in Section 10, the Conditional Use Permit approved in Section 12, and the Site Plan for residential development approved in Section 14 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions: RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 6 OF 9 • • A. These Variance, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070,17.42.070 and 17.46.080. B. It is declared and made a condition of these Variance, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, these approvals shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for a period of thirty (30) days. C. All requirements of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated August 14, 1996, and marked Exhibit A, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. F. Grading shall be limited so that the amount of soil displaced to construct the proposed project shall not exceed 380 cubic yards of cut soil and 380 cubic yards of fill soil. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. The grading plan shall utilize land form or contour grading techniques in its design so as to create a building pad and slopes that blend with the horizontal and vertical contours of the natural terrain. G. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 54.7%. H. Landscaping shall be provided and maintained to obscure the buildings and the building pad so that the structures, driveway, and graded slopes are screened and shielded from view at the northeastern easement line along Eastfield Drive with native drought -resistant vegetation that is compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community. I. A landscape plan must be submitted to and approved by the City of Rolling Hills Planning Department staff prior to the issuance of any grading and building permit. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the community. RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 7 OF 9 • • A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a grading and building permit and shall be retained with the City for not less than two years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. Any retaining walls required for the project shall not exceed 5 feet in height. K. No kitchen or other cooking facilities shall be provided within the guest house. L. No vehicular access or paved parking area shall be developed within 50 feet of the guest house. M. Occupancy of the proposed guest house or servant quarters shall be limited to persons employed on the premises and their immediate family or by the temporary guests of the occupants of the main residence. No guest may remain in occupancy for more than thirty days in any six-month period. N. Renting of the guest house is prohibited. O. The guest house shall not exceed 792 square feet. P. Eastfield Drive shall be kept open for vehicular access at all times during future grading and construction of the driveway access. Q. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan ,check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. R. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. S. Notwithstanding Section 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional development shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 8 OF 9 T. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these Variances, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals, or the approvals shall not be effective. U. All conditions of these Variance, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals that apply must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND AD TED T 19H PAY OF NOVEMBER, 1996. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 96-18 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA, GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GUEST HOUSE, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 540. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on November 19, 1996 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioners Sommer, Witte and Chairman Roberts. Commissioner Hankins. None. Commissioner Margeta. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. .k-MA DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 9 OF 9 • • City ./ Rolling INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 Agenda Itm : 'oofr: m Mtg. Date: 11/25/96 DATE: NOVEMBER 25,1996 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. 96-18: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA, GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GUEST HOUSE, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO A N EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 540 Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Ferris, 50 Eastfield Drive (Lot 99-EF) BACKGROUND 1. The Planning Commission approved the subject resolution on November 19, 1996 at their regular meeting (3-1-0-1). Commissioner Hankins opposed the Variances for the garage and Commissioner Margeta abstained due to his recent appointment to the Commission. 2. The applicants request Variances for a new 880 square foot 3-car garage that will be located at the northern portion of the residence that will encroach into the front and side yard setbacks. The applicants state on the Variance application that there is limited area for the proposed use and that it is the only feasible alternative based on the topography and access of the site. The garage will encroach up to 15 feet into the front yard setback and encroach up to 5 feet into the side yard setback. During the hearing process, the applicants revised plans to eliminate two subterranean garages, one attached to the residence at the east and the other attached to the guest house at the east. The residential garage at the east was removed and the guest house deck will now be enclosed. RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 1 Printed on Recycled Paper. • • Two other areas of addition will be 917.5 square feet at the eastern portion of the residence and 1,423.5 square feet at the southwestern portion of the residence. A basement area will be situated below a portion of the southwest area addition. Other requests are: • The applicants are requesting a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions. The proposed disturbed area will be 23,478 square feet or 43.4% of the 54,076 square foot net lot area and exceeds the maximum 40% of the net lot area permitted by the Zoning Code. • The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 792 square foot guest house at the northwest corner of the lot enclosed by a wall that will not exceed 5 feet in height. The retaining wall will be twenty feet from the property line at the north and up to 63 feet from the rear property line at the west. The guest house will be 27 feet from the property line at the north and up to 68 feet from the property line at the west. • The applicants are requesting Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions to an existing single family residence. Site Plan Review is required for any new structure and for any additions that increase the size of the structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in any 36-month period. The construction will include the addition of 2,341 square feet of additions to be added to the existing 3,020 square foot residence for a total of 5,361 square feet, the demolition of the 576 square foot garage at the northwest side of the residence to be replaced by 880 square feet of garage space at the northern portion of the residence, a 675 square foot swimming pool, a 792 square foot guest house, a 450 square foot future stable and a 96 square foot service yard. • The Site Plan Review request includes the relocation of the driveway access at the eastern portion of the lot off Eastfield Drive. Drawings show that the existing 14 foot wide driveway with 16 foot apron will be closed and replaced by a 16 foot wide drive with a 28 foot apron that overlaps the existing driveway and is 20 feet further south. The existing garage will be demolished and access to the new garage space and stable at the southern portion of the lot will be from the new driveway access. The Traffic Commission reviewed and approved the proposed driveway access on May 23, 1996 with the requirementthat the driveway access be scored for equestrian crossing. RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 2 • • 3. Structural lot coverage proposed will be 15.2% (20% permitted). The total lot coverage proposed will be 16,101 square feet or 29.7% and is less than the maximum 35% of the net lot area permitted by the Zoning Code. 4. The following table comparing adjacent properties along each side of Eastfield Drive in the vicinity of the proposed project shows gross lot and residence size. EASTFIELD DRIVE ADDRESSES OWNER 45 Vachon 47 Nakatani 49 Basque 51 Meyer 53 Young 46 Taylor 48 Turner 50 Ferris (EXISTING) 52 Gagliano 54 Hedges AVERAGE I PROPOSED PROJECT LOT GROSS LOT AREA RESIDENCE SIZE NO(S). (ACRES) (SQUARE FEET) 35 & 36 2.74 5,204 34 1.28 2,774 33 1.31 2, 726 32 1.34 4,187 31 1.39 2,582 97 1.87 2,243 98 1.86 2,432 99 1.71 3,020 100 1.32 4,518 101 1.17 2,840 . I1.60 I 3,253 I1.71 I 5,361 5. Structural coverage on the residential 12,848 square foot building pad will be 7,033 square feet or 54.7% and exceeds the Planning Commission's guideline maximum of 30%. Pool and stable coverage on the 10,883 square foot second building pad will be 10.3%. Coverage on both pads will be 34.4%. 6. Grading for the project will require 380 cubic yards of cut soil and 380 cubic yards of fill soil. 7. The original residence was built in 1950. In 1970, a new 625 square foot garage was completed as well as 1,188 square foot bedroom additions. In 1977, a Conditional Use Permit was approved for a 720 square foot swimming pool and retaining walls were constructed in relation to the pool. 8. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council receive and file Resolution No. 96-18. RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 3 CRITERIA & MAJOR IMPACTS 11 RA -S-1 Zone Setbacks: Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line Structures (Site Plan Review required if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period). TOTAL EXISTING No encroachments Residence Garage Swim Pool Grading N/A Disturbed Area (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary 17% disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist and any planned landscaped areas) Structural Lot Coverage 7.9% (20% maximum) Total Lot Coverage (35% maximum) 20.4% Residential Building Pad --- Coverage (Guideline maximum of 30%) Pool & Stable Building Pad Coverage 3,020 sq. ft. 576 sq.ft. 675 sq.ft. PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED No encroachments Residence 6,223 sq. ft. Garage 1,058 sq.ft. Swim Pool 675 sq.ft. Stable 450 sq.ft. Guest House 792 sq.ft. Service Yard 96 sq.ft. 4,271 sq.ft. TOTAL 9,294 sq.ft. CURRENT PROPOSAL 15 ft. encroachment into front yard setback for garage 5 ft. encroachment into side yard setback for garage Residence 5,361 sq. ft. Garage 880 sq.ft. Swim Pool 675 sq.ft. Stable 450 sq.ft. Guest House 792 sq.ft. Service Yard 96 sq.ft. TOTAL 8,254 sq.ft. 516 cubic yards of cut soil 380 cubic yards of cut soil 516 cubic yards of fill soil 380 cubic yards of fill soil 62.6% 17.2% 37.4% 54.6% of a 14,790 sq.ft. pad 43.4% 15.2% 29.7% 54.7% of a 12,848.25 sq.ft. pad 12.3% (stable was separate) 12.3%(stable was separate) 10.3%of a 10,883 sq.ft. pad Total Building Pad Coverage 21% RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 4 40.7% 34.4% • Roadway Access Existing off Eastfield Drive Access to Stable and Corral [Accessibility and maximum N/A 4:1 (25(1/0) slope required ONLY for new residence or additions that require Site Plan Review]. Preserve Views Proposed 18 feet wide with 28 foot wide apron and relocated 20 feet south on Eastfield Drive was reviewed by the Traffic Commission on May 23,1996 to be scored for equestrian use. Proposed w/slope of 11% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive at the southeast. N/A Planning Commission will review Preserve Plants and Animals N/A Planning Commission will review VARIANut REQUIRED FINDINGS Proposed 18 feet wide with 28 foot wide apron and relocated 20 feet south on Eastfield Drive was reviewed by the Traffic Commission on May 23,1996 to be scored for equestrian use. Proposed w/slope of 13% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive at the southeast. Planning Commission will review Planning Commission will review 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; and 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; and 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; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; 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. RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 5 • • CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR GUEST HOUSE PROPOSED a. Requires all guest or servant quarters on same recorded lot as main house b. Maximum 800 sq.ft. floor area c. No kitchen or other cooking facilities permitted d. Develop and maintain in substantial conformance with site plan e. No vehicular access or paved parking area permitted to be developed within 50' ofproposedguest house or servant quarters f. No guest may remain in occupancy more than 30 days in any 6 month period g. Renting of guest house is prohibited h. Comply with all requirements i. Preliminary landscaping plan required RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 6 Proposed 792 sq.ft. proposed Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA, GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GUEST HOUSE, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 540. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Raymond Ferris with respect to real property located at 50 Eastfield Drive (Lot 99-EF), Rolling Hills, requesting a Variance to permit the construction of a garage that will encroach into the front yard setback, requesting a Variance to permit the construction of the same garage into the side yard setback, requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a Guest House, and requesting Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial additions to an existing single family residence. During the hearing process, the applicant revised plans to eliminate two subterranean garages, one attached to the residence at the east and the other attached to the guest house at the east. The residential garage at the east was removed and the guest house deck will now be enclosed. Section 2. In 1977, a Conditional Use Permit was approved for a 720 square foot swimming pool and retaining walls constructed in relation to the pool. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on May 21, 1996, June 18, 1996, July 16, 1996, August 20, 1996, and September 17, 1996, and at a field trip visit on June 18, 1996 and September 7, 1996. The applicants were notified of the hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. The applicants and the applicants' representative, Mr. Thomas Blair, were in attendance at the hearings. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(e)) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 5. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. Section 17.16.110 requires a front yard setback for every • • residential parcel to be fifty (50) feet. The applicant is requesting a Variance to construct a garage which will encroach a maximum of fifteen (15) feet into the fifty (50) foot front yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates the construction of a garage in the front yard setback. The construction of the garage in the front yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied 'to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates the construction of a garage in the front yard setback. The construction of the garage in the front yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces, and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. In addition, the existing configuration of the residence makes the construction of, and use of garage spaces in the rear of the residence nearly inaccessible due to the narrow corridor between the side of the residence and the side property line. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve circulation on the lot and will not be visible to surrounding properties due to the distances between the garage and other adjacent residences. Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 540 to permit the encroachment of a garage into the front yard setback with a maximum encroachment of fifteen (15) feet, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 15 of this Resolution. Section 7. Section 17.16.120 requires a side yard setback for every residential parcel in the RA-S-1 Zone to be twenty (20) feet. The applicant is requesting a Variance to construct a garage which will encroach a maximum of five (5) feet into the twenty (20) foot side yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 2 OF 9 • • property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates the construction of a garage in the side yard setback. The construction of the garage in the side yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates the construction of a garage in the side yard setback. The construction of the garage in the side yard setback will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces, and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. In addition, the existing configuration of the residence makes the construction of, and use of garage spaces in the rear of the residence nearly inaccessible due to the narrow corridor between the side of the residence and the side property line. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve circulation on the lot and will not be visible to surrounding properties due to the distances between the garage and other adjacent residences. Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 540 to permit the encroachment of a garage into the side yard. setback with a maximum encroachment of five (5) feet, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 15 of this Resolution. Section 9. Section 17.16.070(B) requires that the natural conditions on a lot be maintained to the greatest degree possible and that disturbance be limited to a maximum disturbed area in the RA-S Zone of 40% of the net lot area. The applicant is requesting a Variance to disturb 43.4% of the net lot area and exceed the maximum disturbance. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and circulation on the existing lot necessitates grading for a new driveway and access from a sharp curve section of Eastfield Drive. In addition, the existing lengthy driveway will be reverted to landscaping. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 3 OF 9 • • B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope at the front of the lot which necessitates grading for a new driveway and access from a sharp curve section of Eastfield Drive. In addition, the existing lengthy driveway will be reverted to landscaping. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive and reduce coverage by impervious surfaces. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve traffic circulation on the lot and on Eastfield Drive. The areas of disturbance will allow the creation of a safer driveway access from the sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, reduce coverage by impervious surfaces, and will also improve the appearance of the proposed new construction. Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 540 to permit a disturbance of 43.4% of the net lot area, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 15 of this Resolution. Section 11. Section 17.16.210(A)(5) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a Guest House with a Conditional Use Permit under certain conditions. The applicant is requesting to construct a 792 square foot guest house. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for a guest house would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan and will be desirable for the public convenience and welfare because the use is consistent with similar uses in the community, and the area proposed for the guest house would be located in an area on the property where such use will not change the existing configuration of structures on the lot. B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and the construction of a guest house will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed structure is at the same level as the residential building pad and is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the guest house will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the guest house will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and is located on a 1.66 acre RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 4 OF 9 • • parcel of property that is adequate in size, shape and topography to accommodate such use. D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district because the 792 square foot size of the guest house is less than the 800 square foot maximum permitted and the guest house does not encroach into any setback areas. E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of Title 17 of the Zoning Code because the guest house will be 49 feet from the residence and there is sufficient space on the lot for future development of a stable. Section 12. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a guest house in accordance with the Development Plan attached hereto in Zoning Case No. 540 subject to the conditions contained in Section 15. Section 13. Section 17.46.020 requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings or structures, which involve changes to grading or an increase in the size of the building or structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period, may be permitted. With respect to the Site Plan Review application, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setback, and lot coverage requirements, except as approved in Sections 6, 8 and 10. The lot, has a net square foot area of 54,076 square feet. The proposed residence (5,361 sq. ft.), garage (880 sq. ft.), future stable (450 sq.ft.), guest house (792 sq.ft.), swimming pool 1675 sq.ft.), and service yard (96 sq.ft.) will have 8,254 square feet which constitutes 15.2% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 16,101 square feet which equals 29.7% of the 'plot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. B. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, preserves and integrates into the site design, to the maximum extent. feasible, existing RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 5 OF 9 • • natural topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls). C. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval, follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading. The natural drainage courses will be preserved and continue drainage to the canyons at the southwest side of this lot. D. The development plan will, based upon compliance with the conditions contained in this Resolution, supplement the existing vegetation with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. E. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval, substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Further, the proposed project will have a buildable pad of 12,848 square feet and a total building pad coverage of 34.8%, and a residential building pad coverage of 54.7%. F. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded. The proposed project is also consistent with the scale of other homes in the immediate neighborhood. Grading will be minor and required only to restore the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the proposed structures to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. G. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will create a safer driveway access from a sharp -curve section of Eastfield Drive, thereby improving the safety of the roadway. H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 14. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 540 for a proposed residential development as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 15 of this Resolution. Section 15. The Variance to the front yard setback approved in Section 6, the Variance to the side yard approved in Section 8, the Variance to exceed the maximum disturbed area approved in Section 10, the Conditional Use Permit approved in Section 12, and the Site Plan for residential development approved in Section 14 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions: RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 6 OF 9 • • A. These Variance, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070,17.42.070 and 17.46.080. B. It is declared and made a condition of these Variance, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, these approvals shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for a period of thirty (30) days. C. All requirements of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated August 14, 1996, and marked Exhibit A, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. F. Grading shall be limited so that the amount of soil displaced to construct the proposed project shall not exceed 380 cubic yards of cut soil and 380 cubic yards of fill soil. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. The grading plan shall utilize land form or contour grading techniques in its design so as to create a building pad and slopes that blend with the horizontal and vertical contours of the natural terrain. G. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 54.7%. H. Landscaping shall be provided and maintained to obscure the buildings and the building pad so that the structures, driveway, and graded slopes are screened and shielded from view at the northeastern easement line along Eastfield Drive with native drought -resistant vegetation that is compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community. I. A landscape plan must be submitted to and approved by the City of Rolling Hills Planning Department staff prior to the issuance of any grading and building permit. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the community. RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 7 OF 9 G9 • • A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a grading and building permit and shall be retained with the City for not less than two years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. j. Any retaining walls required for the project shall not exceed 5 feet in height. K. No kitchen or other cooking facilities shall be provided within the guest house. L. No vehicular access or paved parking area shall be developed within 50 feet of the guest house. M. Occupancy of the proposed guest house or servant quarters shall be limited to persons employed on the premises and their immediate family or by the temporary guests of the occupants of the main residence. No guest may remain in occupancy for more than thirty days in any six-month period. N. Renting of the guest house is prohibited. O. The guest house shall not exceed 792 square feet. P. Eastfield Drive shall be kept open for vehicular access at all times during future grading and construction of the driveway access. Q. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. R. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. S. Notwithstanding Section 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional development shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 8 OF 9 T. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these Variances, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals, or the approvals shall not be effective. U. All conditions of these Variance, Conditional Use Permit, and Site Plan approvals that apply must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADTED TI- 19'H DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1996. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: Y*1.d � - . f . MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 96-18 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A GARAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA, GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A GUEST HOUSE, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 540. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on November 19, 1996 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Sommer, Witte and Chairman Roberts. NOES: Commissioner. Hankins. ABSENT: None . ABSTAIN: Commissioner Margeta. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. RESOLUTION NO. 96-18 PAGE 9 OF 9 . • DEPUTY CITY CLERK Gs) City 0/!? fP..y JdPP HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 17,1996 TO: FROM: • 8D INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REOUEST ZONING CASE NO. 540 50 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 99-EF) RAS-1, 1.66 ACRES MR. AND MRS. RAYMOND FERRIS MR. THOMAS A. BLAIR, AIA, BLAIR ASSOCIATES AUGUST 10, 1996 Request for a Variance to construct a 3-car garage that will encroach into the front yard setback, a request for a Variance to construct the same garage that will encroach into the side yard setback, a request for a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions, a request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a guest house and a request for Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions and a guest house at an existing single family residence. BACKGROUND 1. The Planning Commission viewed a silhouette of the proposed project at a field trip visit on September 7, 1996. 2. Plans had been revised to eliminate the two previously proposed subterranean garages, one attached to the residence at the east and the other attached to the guesthouse at the east. The residential garage at the east was removed and the guest house deck will now be enclosed. Instead, the applicants request Variances for a new 880 square foot 3-car garage that will be located at the northern portion of the residence that will encroach into the front and side yard setbacks. The applicants state on the Variance application that there is limited area for the proposed use and that it is the only feasible alternative based on the topography and access of the site. The garage will encroach up to 15 feet into the front yard setback and encroach up to 5 feet into the side yard setback. Two other areas of addition will be 917.5 square feet at the eastern portion of the residence and 1,423.5 square feet at the ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 1 Printed on Recycled Paper. • southwestern portion of the residence. A basement area will be situated below a portion of the southwest area addition. The applicants made a 1,040 square foot reduction in the size of the residence and garage, reduced the structural lot coverage by 2%. reduced the total lot coverage by 7.7%, reduced the grading by 136 cubic yards, reduced the size of the residential building pad by 1,942 square feet, and reduced the amount of disturbed area by 19.2%. 3. Other requests are: • The applicants are requesting a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions. The proposed disturbed area will be 23,478 square feet or 43.4% of the 54,076 square foot net lot area and exceeds the maximum 40% of the net lot area permitted by the Zoning Code. • The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 792 square foot guest house at the northwest corner of the lot enclosed by a wall that will not exceed 5 feet in height. The retaining wall will be twenty feet from the property line at the north and up to 63 feet from the rear property line at the west. The guest house will be 27 feet from the property line at the north and up to 68 feet from the property line at the west. • The applicants are requesting Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions to an existing single family residence. Site Plan Review is required for any new structure and for any additions that increase the size of the structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in any 36-month period. The construction will include the addition of 2,341 square feet of additions to be added to the existing 3,020 square foot residence for a total of 5,361 square feet, the demolition of the 576 square foot garage at the northwest side of the residence to be replaced by 880 square feet of garage space at the northern portion of the residence, a 675 square foot swimming pool, a 792 square foot guest house, a 450 square foot future stable and a 96 square foot service yard. • The Site Plan Review request includes the relocation of the driveway access at the eastern portion of the lot off Eastfield Drive. Drawings show that the existing 14 foot wide driveway with 16 foot apron will be closed and replaced by a 16 foot wide drive with a 28 foot apron that overlaps the existing driveway and is 20 feet further south. The existing garage will be demolished and access to the new garage space and stable at the southern portion of the lot will be from the new driveway access. The Traffic Commission reviewed and approved the proposed driveway access on ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 2 • May 23, 1996 with the requirement that the driveway access be scored for equestrian crossing. 4. A Variance to exceed the Maximum Total Lot Coverage to construct substantial additions is no longer necessary as the size of the residence and garage were reduced by 1,040 square feet. The total lot coverage proposed will be 16,101 square feet or 29.7% and is less than the maximum 35% of the net lot area permitted by the Zoning Code. Structural lot coverage proposed will be 15.2% (20% permitted). 5. The following table comparing adjacent properties along each side of Eastfield Drive in the vicinity of the proposed project was revised to show gross lot area (rather than net lot area) and residence size. EASTFIELD'• : DRIVE,,, ADDRESSES GROSS LOT AREA . ° (ACRES) RESIDENCE. SIZE '"(SQUARE FEET)'''` 45 Vachon 35 & 36 2.74 5,204 47 Nakatani 34 1.28 2,774 49 Basque 33 1.31 ' 2, 726 51 Meyer 32 1.34 4,187 53 Young 31 1.39 2,582 46 Taylor 97 1.87 2,243 48 Turner 98 1.86 2,432 50 Ferris (EXISTING) 99 1.71 3,020 52 Gagliano 100 1.32 4,518 54 Hedges 101 1.17 2,840 AVERAGE I 1.60 I 3,253 I PROPOSED PROJECT I 1.71 'I 5,361 6. Structural coverage on the residential 12,848 square foot building pad will be 7,033 square feet or 54.7% and exceeds the Planning Commission's guideline maximum of 30%. Pool and stable coverage on the 10,883 square foot second building pad will be 10.3%. Coverage on both pads will be 34.4%. 7. Grading for the project will require 380 cubic yards of cut soil and 380 cubic yards of fill soil. 8. The original residence was built in 1950. In 1970, a new 625 square foot garage was completed as well as 1,188 square foot bedroom additions. In 1977, a Conditional Use Permit was approved for a 720 square foot swimming pool and retaining walls were constructed in relation to the pool. ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 3 9. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed plans and take public testimony. CRITERIA & MAJOR IMPACTS RA -S-1 Zone Setbacks: Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line Structures (Site Plan Review required if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period). Grading EXISTING No encroachments Residence Garage Swim Pool TOTAL N/A Disturbed Area (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary 17% disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist and any planned landscaped areas) Structural Lot Coverage 7.9% (20% maximum) Total Lot Coverage (35% maximum) 20.4% Residential Building Pad --- Coverage (Guideline maximum of 30%) Pool & Stable Building Pad Coverage 3,020 sq. ft. 576 sq.ft. 675 sq.ft. PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED No encroachments Residence 6,223 sq. ft. Garage 1,058 sq.ft. Swim Pool 675 sq.ft. Stable 450 sq.ft. Guest House 792 sq.ft. Service Yard 96 sq.ft. 4,271 sq.ft. TOTAL 9,294 sq.ft. 516 cubic yards of cut soil 516 cubic yards of fill soil 62.6% 17.2% 37.4% 54.6% of a 14,790 sq.ft. pad CURRENT `'" PROPOSAL 15 ft. encroachment into front yard setback for garage 5 ft. encroachment into side yard setback for garage Residence 5,361 sq. ft. Garage 880 sq.ft. Swim Pool 675 sq.ft. Stable 450 sq.ft. Guest House 792 sq.ft. Service Yard 96 sq.ft. TOTAL 8,254 sq.ft. 380 cubic yards of cut soil 380 cubic yards of fill soil 43.4% 15.2% 29.7% 54.7% of a 12,848.25 sq.ft. pad 12.3% (stable was separate) 12.3%(stable was separate) 10.3%of a 10,883 sq.ft. pad ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 4 Total Building Pad Coverage 21 % 40.7% Roadway Access Existing off Eastfield Drive Access to Stable and Corral [Accessibility and maximum N/A 4:1 (25%) slope required ONLY for new residence or additions that require Site Plan Review]. Preserve Views Proposed 18 feet wide with 28 foot wide apron and relocated 20 feet south on Eastfield Drive was reviewed by the Traffic Commission on May 23,1996 to be scored for equestrian use. Proposed w/slope of 11% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive at the southeast. N/A Planning Commission will review Preserve Plants and Animals N/A Planning Commission will review VARIANCE REQUIRED FINDINGS 34.4% Proposed 18 feet wide with 28 foot wide apron and relocated 20 feet south on Eastfield Drive was reviewed by the Traffic Commission on May 23,1996 to be scored for equestrian use. Proposed w/slope of 13% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive at the southeast. Planning Commission will review Planning Commission will review 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; and 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; and 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; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; 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 liazardous waste facilities; and G. That the variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills. ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 5 • • CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR GUEST HOUSE a. Requires all guest or servant quarters on same recorded lot as main house b. Maximum 800 sq.ft. floor area c. No kitchen or other cooking facilities permitted d. Develop and maintain in substantial conformance with site plan e. No vehicular access or paved parking area permitted to be developed within 50' of proposed guest house or servant quarters PROPOSED Proposed 792 sq.ft. proposed Required condition Required condition Required condition f. No guest may remain in occupancy more than 30 days in any 6 month period Required condition g. Renting of guest house is prohibited Required condition h. Comply with all requirements Required condition i. Preliminary landscaping plan required Required condition ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 6 • Ci4f ol Rolling HEARING DATE: SEPTEMBER 7,1996 TO: Z INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REQUEST ZONING CASE NO. 540 50 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 99-EF) RAS-1, 1.66 ACRES MR. AND MRS. RAYMOND FERRIS MR. THOMAS A. BLAIR, AIA, BLAIR ASSOCIATES AUGUST 10, 1996 Request for a Variance to construct a 3-car garage that will encroach into the front yard setback, a request for a Variance to construct the same garage that will encroach into the side yard setback, a request for a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions, a request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a guest house and a request for Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions and a guest house at an existing single family residence. BACKGROUND 1. Plans were revised to eliminate the two previously proposed subterranean garages, one attached to the residence at the east and the other attached to the guest house at the east. The residential garage at the east was removed and the guest house deck will now be enclosed. Instead, the applicants request Variances for a new 880 square foot 3-car garage that will be located at the northern portion of the residence that will encroach into the front and side yard setbacks. The applicants state on the Variance application that there is limited area for the proposed • use and that it is the only feasible alternative based on the topography and access of the site. The garage will encroach up to 15 feet into the front yard setback and encroach up to 5 feet into the side yard setback. Two other areas of addition will be 917.5 square feet at the eastern portion of the residence and 1,423.5 square feet at the southwestern portion of the residence. A basement area will be situated below a portion of the southwest area addition. ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 1 Printed on Recycled Paper. • • The applicants made a 1,040 square foot reduction in the size of the residence and garage, reduced the structural lot coverage by 2%. reduced the total lot coverage by 7.7%, reduced the grading by 136 cubic yards, reduced the size of the residential building pad by 1,942 square feet, and reduced the amount of disturbed area by 19.2%. 2. Other requests are: • The applicants are requesting a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions. The proposed disturbed area will be 23,478 square feet or 43.4% of the 54,076 square foot net lot area and exceeds the maximum 40% of the net lot area permitted by the Zoning Code. • The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 792 square foot guest house at the northwest corner of the lot enclosed by a wall that will not exceed 5 feet in height. The retaining wall will be twenty feet from the property line at the north and up to 63 feet from the rear property line at the west. The guest house will be 27 feet from the property line at the north and up to 68 feet from the property line at the west. • The applicants are requesting Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions to an existing single family residence. Site Plan Review is required for any new structure and for any additions that increase the size of the structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in any 36-month period. The construction will include the addition of 2,341 square feet of additions to be added to the existing 3,020 square foot residence for a total of 5,361 square feet, the demolition of the 576 square foot garage at the northwest side of the residence to be replaced by 880 square feet of garage space at the northern portion of the residence, a 675 square foot swimming pool, a 792 square foot guest house, a 450 square foot future stable and a 96 square foot service yard. • The Site Plan Review request includes the relocation of the driveway access at the eastern portion of the lot off Eastfield Drive. Drawings show that the existing 14 foot wide driveway with 16 foot apron will be closed and replaced by a 16 foot wide drive with a 28 foot apron that overlaps the existing driveway and is 20 feet further south. The existing garage will be demolished and access to the new garage space and stable at the southern portion of the lot will be from the new driveway access. The Traffic Commission reviewed and approved the proposed driveway access on May 23, 1996 with the requirement that the driveway access be scored for equestrian crossing. ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 2 • • 3. A Variance to exceed the Maximum Total Lot Coverage to construct substantial additions is no longer necessary as the size of the residence and garage were reduced by 1,040 square feet. The total lot coverage proposed will be 16,101 square feet or 29.7% and is less than the maximum 35% of the net lot area permitted by the Zoning Code. Structural lot coverage proposed will be 15.2% (20% permitted). 4. The following table comparing adjacent properties along each side of Eastfield Drive in the vicinity of the proposed project was revised to show gross lot area (rather than net lot area) and residence size. EASTFIELI DRIVE ADDRESSES OWNER 45 Vachon 47 Nakatani 49 Basque 51 Meyer 53 Young 46 Taylor 48 Turner 50 Ferris (EXISTING) 52 Gagliano 54 Hedges AVERAGE PROPOSED PROJECT LOT NO(S). 35 & 36 34 33 GROSS LOT AREA (ACRES) RESIDENCE SIZE (SQUARE FEET) 2.74 5,204 1.28 2,774 1.31 2, 726 32 1.34 4,187 31 1.39 2,582 97 1.87 2,243 98 1.86 2,432 99 1.71 3,020 100 1.32 4,518 101 1.17 2,840 I 1.60 I 3,253 I 1.71 I 5,361 5. Structural coverage on the residential 12,848 square foot building pad will be 7,033 square feet or 54.7% and exceeds the Planning Commission's guideline maximum of 30%. Pool and stable coverage on the 10,883 square foot second building pad will be 10.3%. Coverage on both pads will be 34.4%. 6. Grading for the project will require 380 cubic yards of cut soil and 380 cubic yards of fill soil. 7. The original residence was built in 1950. In 1970, a new 625 square foot garage was completed as well as 1,188 square foot bedroom additions. In 1977, a Conditional Use Permit was approved for a 720 square foot swimming pool and retaining walls were constructed in relation to the pool. 8. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 3 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed plans and take public testimony. CRITERIA'' & MAJOR'IMPACTS' RA -S-1 Zone Setbacks: Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side:. 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line Structures (Site Plan Review required if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period). TOTAL EXISTING No encroachments Residence Garage Swim Pool Grading N/A Disturbed Area (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary 17% disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist and any planned landscaped areas) Structural Lot Coverage 7.9% (20% maximum) Total Lot Coverage (35% maximum) 20.4% Residential Building Pad --- Coverage (Guideline maximum of 30%) Pool & Stable Building Pad Coverage 3,020 sq. ft. 576 sq.ft. 675 sq.ft. PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED No encroachments Residence 6,223 sq. ft. Garage 1,058 sq.ft. Swim Pool 675 sq.ft. Stable 450 sq.ft. Guest House 792 sq.ft. Service Yard 96 sq.ft. 4,271 sq.ft. TOTAL 9,294 sq.ft. CURRENT PROPOSAL 15 ft. encroachment into front yard setback for garage 5 ft. encroachment into side yard setback for garage Residence 5,361 sq. ft. Garage 880 sq.ft. Swim Pool 675 sq.ft. Stable 450 sq.ft. Guest House 792 sq.ft. Service Yard 96 sq.ft. TOTAL 8,254 sq.ft. 516 cubic yards of cut soil 380 cubic yards of cut soil 516 cubic yards of fill soil 380 cubic yards of fill soil 62.6% 17.2% 37.4% 43.4% 15.2% 29.7% 54.6% of a 14,790 sq.ft. 54.7% of a 12,848.25 sq.ft. pad 12.3% (stable was separate) 12.3%(stable was separate) 10.3%of a 10,883 sq.ft. pad Total Building Pad Coverage 21 40.7% 34.4% ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 4 Roadway Access Existing off Eastfield Drive Access to Stable and Corral [Accessibility and maximum N/A 4:1 (25%) slope required ONLY for new residence or additions that require Site Plan Review]. Preserve Views Proposed 18 feet wide with 28 foot wide apron and relocated 20 feet south on Eastfield Drive was reviewed by the Traffic Commission on May 23,1996 to be scored for equestrian use. Proposed w/slope of 11% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive at the southeast. N/A Planning Commission will review Preserve Plants and Animals N/A Planning Commission will review VARIANCE REQUIRED FINDINGS '' Proposed 18 feet wide with 28 foot wide apron and relocated 20 feet south on Eastfield Drive was reviewed by the Traffic Commission on May 23,1996 to be scored for equestrian use. Proposed w/slope of 13% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive at the southeast. Planning Commission will review Planning Commission will review 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; and 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; and 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; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; 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. ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 5 • • CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR GUEST HOUSE a. Requires all guest or servant quarters on same recorded lot as main house b. Maximum 800 sq.ft. floor area c. No kitchen or other cooking facilities permitted d. Develop and maintain in substantial conformance with site plan e. No vehicular access or paved parking area permitted to be developed within 50' of proposed guest house or servant quarters f. No guest may remain in occupancy more than 30 days in any 6 month period g. Renting of guest house is prohibited h. Comply with all requirements i. Preliminary landscaping plan required PROPOSED Proposed 792 sq.ft. proposed Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 6 •City 0/ HEARING DATE: AUGUST 20,1996 TO: FROM: • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REOUEST ZONING CASE NO. 540 50 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 99-EF) RAS-1, 1.66 ACRES MR. AND MRS. RAYMOND FERRIS MR. THOMAS A. BLAIR, AIA, BLAIR ASSOCIATES AUGUST 10, 1996 Request for a Variance to construct a 3-car garage that will encroach into the front yard setback, a request for a Variance to construct the same garage that will encroach into the side yard setback, a request for a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions, a request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a guest house and a request for Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions and a guest house at an existing single family residence. BACKGROUND 1. Plans were revised to eliminate the two previously proposed subterranean garages, one attached to the residence at the east and the other attached to the guest house at the east. The residential garage at the east was removed and the guest house deck will now be enclosed. Instead, the applicants request Variances for a new 880 square foot 3-car garage that will be located at the northern portion of the residence that will encroach into the front and side yard setbacks. The applicants state on the Variance application that there is limited area for the proposed use and that it is the only feasible alternative based on the topography and access of the site. The garage will encroach up to 15 feet into the front yard setback and encroach up to 5 feet into the side yard setback. Two other areas of addition will be 917.5 square feet at the eastern portion of the residence and 1,423.5 square feet at the southwestern portion of the residence. A basement area will be situated below a portion of the southwest area addition. ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 1 Printed on Recycled Paper. • • The applicants made a 1,040 square foot reduction in the size of the residence and garage, reduced the structural lot coverage by 2%. reduced the total lot coverage by 7.7%, reduced the grading by 136 cubic yards, reduced the size of the residential building pad by 1,942 square feet, and reduced the amount of disturbed area by 19.2%. 2. Other requests are: • The applicants are requesting a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions. The proposed disturbed area will be 23,478 square feet or 43.4% of the 54,076 square foot net lot area and exceeds the maximum 40% of the net lot area permitted by the Zoning Code. • The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 792 square foot guest house at the northwest corner of the lot enclosed by a wall that will not exceed 5 feet in height. The retaining wall will be twenty feet from the property line at the north and up to 63 feet from the rear property line at the west. The guest house will be 27 feet from the property line at the north and up to 68 feet from the property line at the west. • The applicants are requesting Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions to an existing single family residence. Site Plan Review is required for any new structure and for any additions that increase the size of the structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in any 36-month period. The construction will include the addition of 2,341 square feet of additions to be added to the existing 3,020 square foot residence for a total of 5,361 square feet, the demolition of the 576 square foot garage at the northwest side of the residence to be replaced by 880 square feet of garage space at the northern portion of the residence, a 675 square foot swimming pool, a 792 square foot guest house, a 450 square foot future stable and a 96 square foot service yard. • The Site Plan Review request includes the relocation of the driveway access at the eastern portion of the lot off Eastfield Drive. Drawings show that the existing 14 foot wide driveway with 16 foot apron will be closed and replaced by a 16 foot wide drive with a 28 foot apron that overlaps the existing driveway and is 20 feet further south. The existing garage will be demolished and access to the new garage space and stable at the southern portion of the lot will be from the new driveway access. The Traffic Commission reviewed and approved the proposed driveway access on May 23, 1996 with the requirement that the driveway access be scored for equestrian crossing. ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 2 • • 3. A Variance to exceed the Maximum Total Lot Coverage to construct substantial additions is no longer necessary as the size of the residence and garage were reduced by 1,040 square feet. The total lot coverage proposed will be 16,101 square feet or 29.7% and is less than the maximum 35% of the net lot area permitted by the Zoning Code. Structural lot coverage proposed will be 15.2% (20% permitted). 4. The following table comparing adjacent properties along each side of Eastfield Drive in the vicinity of the proposed project was revised to show gross lot area (rather than net lot area) and residence size. EASTFIELD DRIVE ADDRESSES 45 47 49 51 53 46 48 50 52 54 OWNER Vachon Nakatani Basque Meyer Young Taylor Turner Ferris (EXISTING) Gagliano Hedges AVERAGE PROPOSED PROJECT LOT GROSS LOT AREA NO(S). (ACRES) RESIDENCE SIZE (SQUARE FEET) 35 & 36 2.74 5,204 34 1.28 2,774 33 1.31 2, 726 32 1.34 31 1.39 97 1.87 98 1.86 99 1.71 100 1.32 101 1.17 1.60 1.71 4,187 2,582 2,243 2,432 3,020 4,518 2,840 3,253 5,361 5. Structural coverage on the residential 12,848 square foot building pad will be 7,033 square feet or 54.7% and exceeds the Planning Commission's guideline maximum of 30%. Pool and stable coverage on the 10,883 square foot second building pad will be 10.3%. Coverage on both pads will be 34.4%. 6. Grading for the project will require 380 cubic yards of cut soil and 380 cubic yards of fill soil. ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 3 • 7. The original residence was built in 1950. In 1970, a new 625 square foot garage was completed as well as 1,188 square foot bedroom additions. In 1977, a Conditional Use Permit was approved for a 720 square foot swimming pool and retaining walls were constructed in relation to the pool. 8. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed plans and take public testimony. CRITERIA & MAJOR IMPACTS RA -S-1 Zone Setbacks: Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line Structures (Site Plan Review required if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period). TOTAL EXISTING No encroachments Residence Garage Swim Pool Grading N/A 3,020 sq. ft. 576 sq.ft. 675 sq.ft. PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED No encroachments Residence 6,223 sq. ft. Garage 1,058 sq.ft. Swim Pool 675 sq.ft. Stable 450 sq.ft. Guest House 792 sq.ft. Service Yard 96 sq.ft. 4,271 sq.ft. TOTAL 9,294 sq.ft. 516 cubic yards of cut soil 516 cubic yards of fill soil Disturbed Area (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary 17% 62.6% disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist and any planned landscaped areas) Structural Lot Coverage (20% maximum) Total Lot Coverage (35% maximum) 7.9% 17.2% 20.4% 37.4% CURRENT PROPOSAL 15 ft. encroachment into front yard setback for garage 5 ft. encroachment into side yard setback for garage Residence 5,361 sq. ft. Garage 880 sq.ft. Swim Pool 675 sq.ft. Stable 450 sq.ft. Guest House 792 sq.ft. Service Yard 96 sq.ft. TOTAL 8,254 sq.ft. 380 cubic yards of cut soil 380 cubic yards of fill soil 43.4% 15.2% 29.7% ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 4 Residential Building Pad --- Coverage (Guideline maximum of 30%) Pool & Stable Building Pad Coverage Total Building Pad Coverage Roadway Access Access to Stable and Corral [Accessibility and maximum 4:1 (25%) slope required ONLY for new residence or additions that require Site Plan Review]. Preserve Views 54.6% of a 14,790 sq.ft. pad 54.7% of a 12,848.25 sq.ft. pad 12.3% (stable was separate) 12.3%(stable was separate) 10.3%of a 10,883 sq.ft. pad 21% Existing off Eastfield Drive N/A N/A Preserve Plants and Animals N/A 40.7% Proposed 18 feet wide with 28 foot wide apron and relocated 20 feet south on Eastfield Drive was reviewed by the Traffic Commission on May 23,1996 to be scored for equestrian use. Proposed w/slope of 11% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive at the southeast. Planning Commission will review Planning Commission will review VARIANCE REQUIRED FINDINGS 34.4% Proposed 18 feet wide with 28 foot wide apron and relocated 20 feet south on Eastfield Drive was reviewed by the Traffic Commission on May 23,1996 to be scored for equestrian use. Proposed w/slope of 13% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive at the southeast. Planning Commission will review Planning Commission will review 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; and 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; and 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; and D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; and E. That the variance does not grant special privilege; 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. ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 5 • • CODE REQUIREMENTS FOR GUEST HOUSE a. Requires all guest or servant quarters on same recorded lot as main house b. Maximum 800 sq.ft. floor area c. No kitchen or other cooking facilities permitted d. Develop and maintain in substantial conformance with site plan e. No vehicular access or paved parking area permitted to be developed within 50' of proposed guest house or servant quarters f. No guest may remain in occupancy more than 30 days in any 6 month period g. Renting of guest house is prohibited h. Comply with all requirements i. Preliminary landscaping plan required PROPOSED Proposed 792 sq.ft. proposed Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 6 41 • C1iy ofia efin9 HEARING DATE: JULY 16,1996 TO: FROM: INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REOUEST ZONING CASE NO. 540 50 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 99-EF) RAS-1, 1.66 ACRES MR. AND MRS. RAYMOND FERRIS MR. THOMAS A. BLAIR, AIA, BLAIR ASSOCIATES MAY 11, 1996 Request for a Variance to exceed the Maximum Total Lot Coverage to construct substantial additions, request for a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions, request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a guest house and request for Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions and a guest house at an existing single family residence. BACKGROUND Attached is a request from Mr. Thomas Blair, representing Mr. and Mrs. Ferris, to continue the proposed project to the next meeting because the Ferrises are out of town and more time is need by the architects to complete the drawings for an alternate design solution. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission continue Zoning Case No. 540 to the August 20, 1996 meeting. ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 1 Printed on Recycled Paper. , v -. i1 .ul, 11 • . A. BLAIR. A.I.A. July 11, 1996 Lola M. Ungar Principal Planner, City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Dear Lola, • BLAIR ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTURE & CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT On behalf of our clients, Mrs. and Mrs. Raymond Ferris, we are requesting a continuance of our case to the August 20, 1996 meeting. We were scheduled to be heard at the next Planning Commission meeting on July 16, 1996. The two most compelling reasons for this request arc: 1) Mr, and Mrs. Ferris mill be out of town for the July 16 meeting. 2) We (the architects) need more time to complete the drawings for an alternate design solution. If you have any questions, please call us here at the office. MAILING 2785 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, SUITE E149, TORRANCE, CA 90505 OFFICES 24423 HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD, TORRANCE, CA 90505 PHONE: (310) 791-4212 FAX: (310) 791-4211 • C14 0/ RJfi JIfh HEARING DATE: JUNE 18,1996 TO: FROM: • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REOUEST ZONING CASE NO. 540 50 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 99-EF) RAS-1, 1.66 ACRES MR. AND MRS. RAYMOND FERRIS MR. THOMAS A. BLAIR, AIA, BLAIR ASSOCIATES MAY 11, 1996 Request for a Variance to exceed the Maximum Total Lot Coverage to construct substantial additions, request for a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions, request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a guest house and request for Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions and a guest house at an existing single family residence. BACKGROUND 1. The following table provides comparisons with adjacent properties in the vicinity of the proposed project that was requested by Commissioner Witte at the Planning Commission Meeting on May 21, 1996: ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 1 '>rinted on Recycled per. EASTFIELD 'DRIVE'".: ADDRESSES 45 Vachon 46 Taylor 47 Nakatani 48 Turner 49 Basque 50 Ferris (EXISTING) 51 Meyer 52 Gagliano 53 Young 54 Hedges NET LOT AREA (ACRES) • RESIDENCE SIZE !(SQUARE FEET) 2.74 5,204 1.87 2,243 1.28 2,774 1.86 2,432 1.17 2, 726 1.24 3,020 1.34 4,187 1.36 4,518 1.39 2,582 1.17 2,840 AVERAGE 1.54 3,252 PROPOSED PROJECT 1.24 6,223 2. • The applicants are requesting a Variance to exceed the Maximum Total Lot Coverage to construct substantial additions. The total lot coverage proposed will be 20,205 square feet or 37.4% and exceeds the maximum 35% of the net lot area permitted by the Zoning Code. Structural lot coverage proposed will be 17.2% (20% permitted). • The applicants are requesting a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions. The proposed disturbed area will be 33,856 square feet or 62.6% of the 54,076 square foot net lot area and exceeds the maximum 40% of the net lot area permitted by the Zoning Code. • The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 792 square foot guest house at the northwest corner of the lot enclosed by a wall that will not exceed 5 feet in height. The retaining wall will be twenty feet from the property line at the north and up to 63 feet from the rear property line at the west. The guest house will be 27 feet from the property line at the north and up to 68 feet from the property line at the west. ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 2 • • • The applicants are requesting Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions to an existing single family residence. Site Plan Review is required for any new structure and for any additions that increase the size of the structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in any 36-month period. The construction will include 3,203 square feet of additions to be added to the existing 3,020 square foot residence for a total of 6;223 square feet, the demolition of the 576 square foot garage area at the northwest side of the residence to be replaced by 1,058 square feet of garage space at the southern portion of the residence, a 792 square foot guest house, a 450 square foot future stable and a 96 square foot service yard. • The Site Plan Review request includes the relocation of the driveway access at the eastern portion of the lot off Eastfield Drive. Drawings show that the existing 14 foot wide driveway with 16 foot apron will be closed and replaced by an 18 foot wide Y-shaped drive with a 28 foot apron that overlaps the existing driveway and is 20 feet further south. The existing garage will be demolished and access to the new garage space and stable at the southern portion of the lot will be from the new driveway access. The Traffic Commission will review the proposed driveway access on May 23, 1996. 3. Structural coverage on the residential 14,790 square foot building pad will be 8,073 square feet or 54.6% and exceeds the Planning Commission's guideline maximum of 30%. Pool coverage on the 5,500 square foot second building pad will be 12.3%. Coverage on both pads will be 40.7%. 4. Grading for the project will require 516 cubic yards of cut soil and 516 cubic yards of fill soil. 5. The original residence was built in 1950. In 1970, a new 625 square foot garage was completed as well as 1,188 square foot bedroom additions. In 1977, a Conditional Use Permit was approved for a 720 square foot swimming pool and retaining walls were constructed in relation to the pool. 6. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed plans and take public testimony. ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 3 CRITERIA & MAJOR IMPACTS RA -S-1 Zone Setbacks: Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line Structures (Site Plan Review required if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period). Grading EXISTING No encroachments Residence Garage Swim Pool TOTAL N/A Disturbed Area (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded 17% slopes and building pad areas, any nongraded area where impervious surfaces exist and any planned landscaped areas) Structural Lot Coverage (20% maximum) Total Lot Coverage (35% maximum) Residential Building Pad Coverage (Guideline maximum of 30%) Pool Building Pad Coverage Total Building Pad Coverage Roadway Access Access to Stable and Corral [Accessibility and maximum 4:1 (25%) slope required ONLY for new residence or additions that require Site Plan Review]. Preserve Views 7.9% 20.4% 3,020 sq. ft. 576 sq.ft. 675sq.ft. 4,271 sq.ft. 12.3% 21% Existing off Eastfield Drive N/A N/A PROPOSED No encroachments Residence Garage Swim Pool Stable Guest House Service Yard TOTAL 6,223 sq. ft. 1,058 sq.ft. 675 sq.ft. 450 sq.ft. 792 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. 9,294 sq.ft. 516 cubic yards of cut soil 516 cubic yards of fill soil 62.6% 17.2% 37.4% 54.6% 12.3% 40.7% Proposed 18 feet wide with 28 foot wide apron and relocated 20 feet south on Eastfield Drive to be reviewed by Traffic Commission Proposed w/a slope of 11% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive Planning Commission will review ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 4 • • IPreserve Plants and Animals CODE REQUIREMENTS ORGUEST HOUSE a. Requires all guest or servant quarters on same recorded lot as main house b. Maximum 800 sq.ft. floor area c. No kitchen or other cooking facilities permitted d. Develop and maintain in substantial conformance with site plan e. No vehicular access or paved parking area permitted to be developed within 50 of proposed guest house or servant quarters f. No guest may remain in occupancy more than 30 days in any 6 month period g. Renting of guest house is prohibited h. Comply with all requirements i. Preliminary landscaping plan required II N/A PROPOSED Proposed 792 sq.ft. proposed Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition IPlanning Commission will review ZONING CASE NO. 540 PAGE 5 Cil1 al) Rolling wee HEARING DATE: MAY 21,1996 TO: • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER APPLICATION NO. SITE LOCATION: ZONING AND SIZE: APPLICANT: REPRESENTATIVE: PUBLISHED: REOUEST ZONING CASE NO. 540 50 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 99-EF) RAS-1, 1.66 ACRES MR. AND MRS. RAYMOND FERRIS MR. THOMAS A. BLAIR, AIA, BLAIR ASSOCIATES MAY 11, 1996 Request for a Variance to exceed the Maximum Total Lot Coverage to construct substantial additions, request for a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions, request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a guest house and request for Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions and a guest house at an existing single family residence. DISCUSSION In reviewing the applicants' request under Title 17 (Zoning), staff would identify the following issues for evaluation: 1. • The applicants are requesting a Variance to exceed the Maximum Total Lot Coverage to construct substantial additions. The total lot coverage proposed will be 20,205 square feet or 37.4% and exceeds the maximum 35% of the net lot area permitted by the Zoning Code. Structural lot coverage proposed will be 17.2% (20% permitted). • The applicants are requesting a Variance to exceed the Maximum Disturbed Area to construct substantial additions. The proposed disturbed area will be 33,856 square feet or.62.6% and exceeds the maximum 40% of the net lot area permitted by the Zoning Code. • The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 792 square foot guest house at the northwest corner of the lot enclosed by a wall that will not exceed 5 feet in height. The retaining wall will be twenty feet from the property line at the north and up to 63 feet from the rear ZONING CASE NO. 538 PAGE 1 Printed on Recycled Paper. property line at the west. The guest house will be 27 feet from the property line at the north and up to 68 feet from the property line at the west. • The applicants are requesting Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions to an existing single family residence. Site Plan Review is required for any new structure and for any additions that increase the size of the structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in any 36-month period. The construction will include 3,203 square feet of additions to be added to the existing 3,020 square foot residence for a total of 6,223 square feet, the demolition of the 576 square foot garage area at the northwest side of the residence to be replaced by 1,058 square feet of garage space at the southern portion of the residence, a 792 square foot guest house, a 450 square foot future stable and a 96 square foot service yard. • The Site Plan Review request includes the relocation of the driveway access at the eastern portion of the lot off Eastfield Drive. Drawings show that the existing 14 foot wide driveway with 16 foot apron will be closed and replaced by an 18 foot wide Y-shaped drive with a 28 foot apron that overlaps the existing driveway and is 20 feet further south. The existing garage will be demolished and access to the new garage space and stable at the southern portion of the lot will be from the new driveway access. The Traffic Commission will review the proposed driveway access on May 23, 1996. 2. Structural coverage on the residential 8,073 square foot building pad will be 54.6% and exceeds the Planning Commission's guideline of 30%. Pool coverage on the 5,500 square foot second building pad will be 12.3%. Coverage on both pads will be 40.7%. 3. Grading for the project will require 516 cubic yards of cut soil and 516 cubic yards of fill soil. 4. The original residence was built in 1950. In 1970, a new 625 square foot garage was completed as well as 1,188 square foot bedroom additions. In 1977, a Conditional Use Permit was approved for a 720 square foot swimming pool and retaining walls were constructed in relation to the pool. 5. The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission review the proposed plans and take public testimony. ZONING CASE NO. 538 PAGE 2 • • CRITERIA' MAJOR IMPACTS RA -S-1 Zone Setbacks: Front: 50 ft. from front easement line Side: 20 ft. from property line Rear: 50 ft. from property line Structures (Site Plan Review required if size of structure increases by at least 1,000 sq.ft. and has the effect of increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in a 36-month period). Grading EXISTING No encroachments Residence Garage Swim Pool TOTAL N/A Disturbed Area (40% maximum; any graded building pad area, any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded 17% slopes and building pad areas, any non aded area where impervious surfaces exist and any planned landscaped areas) Structural Lot Coverage (20% maximum) Total Lot Coverage (35% maximum) Building Pad Coverage (30% maximum recommended) Roadway Access Access to Stable and Corral [Accessibility and maximum 4:1 (25%) slope required ONLY for new residence or additions that require Site Plan Review]. Preserve Views Preserve Plants and Animals 7.9% 20.4% 3,020 sq. ft. 576 sq.ft. 675sq.ft. 11,921 sq.ft. 24.3% Existing off Eastfield Drive N/A N/A N/A PROPOSED" No encroachments Residence Garage Swim Pool Stable Guest House Service Yard 6,223 sq. ft. 1,058 sq.ft. 675 sq.ft. 450 sq.ft. 792 sq.ft. 96 sq.ft. TOTAL 12,177 sq.ft. 516 cubic yards of cut soil 516 cubic yards of fill soil 54.6% 17.2% 37.4% 35.6% Proposed 18 feet wide with 28 foot wide apron and relocated 20 feet south on Eastfield Drive to be reviewed by Traffic Commission Proposed w/a slope of 11% or less from driveway off Eastfield Drive Planning Commission will review Planning Commission will review ZONING CASE NO. 538 PAGE 3 s CODE,REQUIREMENTS FOR QUEST; HOUSE a. Requires all guest or servant quarters on same recorded lot as main house b. Maximum 800 sq.ft. floor area c. No kitchen or other cooking facilities permitted d. Develop and maintain in substantial conformance with site plan e. No vehicular access or paved parking area permitted to be developed within 50' of proposed guest house or servant quarters f. No guest may remain in occupancy more than 30 days in any 6 month period g. Renting of guest house is prohibited h. Comply with all requirements i. Preliminary landscaping plan required PROPOSED Proposed 792 sq.ft. proposed Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition Required condition ZONING CASE NO. 538 PAGE 4