599, Construct a new tennis court, Resolutions & Approval Conditions411
City 0/ leolliny _AA
,=:
TO: County Clerk
County of Los Angeles
12400 East Imperial Highway
Norwalk, CA 90650
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
FROM: City of Rolling Hills
2 Portuguese Bend
Rolling Hills, CA 90
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
310 377-1521
X: (3,5s 7 8
.com
MAR 2 9 2000
SUBJECT: Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 and 21152 of the Public
Resources Code.
ZONING CASE NO. 599
Project Title
NONE LOLA UNGAR
State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency
(If submitted to Clearinghouse) Contact Person
(310) 377-1521
Area Code/Phone
Project Location (include county) 16 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 68-B-EF), ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
Project Description:
Requests for the following: Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a
proposed guest house, Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a
proposed tennis court, and Site Plan Review for the guest house, retaining walls,
tennis court and grading at an existing single family residence.
This is to advise that the CITY COUNCIL has approved the above described project on March 13. 2000
and has made the following determinations regarding the above described project:
1. The project [_will, ✓ will not] have a significant effect on the environment.
2. = An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of
CEQA.
✓ A Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
3. Mitigation measures [✓ were, _ were not] made a condition of the approval of the project.
4. A statement of Overriding Considerations [_was, ✓ was not] adopted for this project.
5. Findings [ / were, _were not] made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA.
This document is being filed in duplicate. Please acknowledge the filing date and return acknowledged
copy in thenclosed self-addressed envelope.
Signature (Public Age
Date received for filing:
tBAR 2 9 2000
March 14. 2000 PLANNING DIRECTOR
Date Title
THIS NOTXCF: WAS POSTED
ON
UNTII, R�2u�2�� «� 00163157
REGISTRAR-P, MR0fill1/0011", e?'#T
Printed on Recycled Paper.
•
City ol Rolling -fa
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION
De Minimus Impact Finding
Project Title/Location Name and Address of Project Proponent (include county):
Project Title: ZONING CASE NO. 599
Location
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
ILED -
MAR 2 9 2000
(_JnwI '}
te
16 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 68-B-EF), ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 DEPUTY
LOS ANGELES COUNTY G. MORLA
Proponents: MR. AND MRS. JOSEPH GREGORIO
Project Description:
Requests for the following: Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a
proposed guest house, Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a
proposed tennis court, and Site Plan Review for the guest house, retaining walls,
tennis court and grading at an existing single family residence.
Findings of Exemption (Attach Required Findings):
The City Council finds that there is no evidence that the proposed guest house, retaining walls and tennis
court and will have an effect on endangered or threatened species of plants and animals.
The City Council finds that the proposed guest house, retaining walls and tennis court will not have an effect
on wetlands and that water courses will not be eliminated or converted.
The City Council has determined that the proposed guest house, retaining walls and tennis court will not
have a significant adverse impact on the environment and has adopted a Negative Declaration consistent
with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Certification:
I hereby certify that the lead agency has made the above findings of fact and that based upon the
initial study and hearing record the project will not individually or cumulatively have an adverse effect on
wildlife resources, as in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code.
LOLA UNGAR
(Chief Planning O ' ' I)
Title: Planning Director
Lead Agency: City of Rolling Hills
Date: March 14, 2000
Printed ran Recycled Paper.
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO:
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
(310) 377-1521
(310) 377-7288 FAX
00-L194268
The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be notarized before recordation.
AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
ZONING CASE NO. 599
) §§
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
I (We) the undersigned state:
I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows:
16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA.
This property is the subject of the above numbered case.
I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said
ZONING CASE NO. 599
I/(We certify lare
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
der the penalty of perjury that the for going is true and correct.
ltu re`v
sN s Go2`o
Narry ypt'k /rlP / 6Lt dZ
Ad s$/;ho i'l� C. Qoa74
City/St/ate
Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public.
State of California )
County of Los Angeles )
On I Tia before me,
personally
appeared
gQ
Sign/24
NanietrepAte/w1 b
Addres 1.1? lk 96
a.74—
City/State
L
L
L
L
T Recorder's Use Only
�; s - G Le...tArcp..... K. 6 In‹.—
(or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s)
is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that ho/shc/they executed the same in
It/their authorized capacity(ies) and that by his/hcr/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the
entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
M.A. BARYE
COMM. #1180318 al
V ""'3 NOTARY PUBLIC • CALIFORNIA 0.
m y�, LOS ANGELES COUNTY al+4 My Comm. Expires May 16, 2002 1
Witness by hand and official seal.
tlk
Signature of NZy
SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREO
e.)e,,eir"
00 1190268 46,
RESOLUTION NO. 877
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A GUEST HOUSE,
GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A SPORTS COURT,
AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO PERMIT THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE GUEST HOUSE, RETAINING WALLS, AND SPORTS
COURT THAT REQUIRE GRADING AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN
ZONING CASE NO. 599.
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. Joseph S. Gregorio with
respect to real property located at 16 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills (Lot 68-B-EF) requesting a
Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of an 800 square foot guest house,
requesting a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a 5,111 square foot sports
court, and requesting Site Plan Review to permit the construction of the guest house, a 128-
foot long retaining wall, and sports court that will require grading at an existing single family
residence. During the Planning Commission hearing process, a regulation -sized 7,000 square
foot tennis court was proposed to replace the aforementioned tennis court, a 169-foot long
retaining wall to replace the previous retaining wall, and the following three Variances were
also requested: (i) Variance to exceed the maximum structural lot coverage, (ii) Variance to
exceed the maximum total lot coverage, and (iii) Variance to exceed the maximum disturbed
area. Later, during the City Council hearing process, the applicants reduced the court size
from 7,000 square feet to its original dimensions of 5,111 square feet, and eliminated the need
for the Variances to exceed the maximum structural lot coverage, total lot coverage and
maximum disturbed area.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to
consider the applications on September 21, 1999, October 19,1999 and November 16, 1999, and
at a field trip visit on October 12, 1999. The applicants were notified of the public hearing in
writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. Evidence was heard and
presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City
staff and the Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The
applicants were in attendance at the hearing. The following concerns were expressed by the
Commission and nearby property owners: Zoning Code requirements for recreation courts
and site specific issues pertaining to landscaping and views.
Section 3. On December 21, 1999, the Planning Commission approved the
application by Resolution No. 99-19 in Zoning Case No. 599.
Section 4. On January 10, 2000, the City Council took jurisdiction of Zoning Case
No. 599.
Section 5. The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the
case on January 24, 2000, February 14, 2000 and February 28, 2000, and at a field trip visit on
February 9, 2000. The applicants were notified of the public hearing in writing by first lass
mail and through the City's newsletter. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons
interested in affecting said proposal, from all persons protesting the same, and from members
of the City staff and the City Council having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal.
The applicants were in attendance at the hearings. The following concerns were expressed by
the Council: The number of Variances requested, Zoning Code requirements for recreation
courts and the height of retaining walls incorporated into the project. During the hearing
process, the applicants reduced the court size from 7,000 square feet to itsoriginal dimensions
of 5,111 square feet, thus eliminating the need for the Variances to exceed the maximum
structural lot coverage, total lot coverage and maximum disturbed area.
Section 6. On September 1, 1999, Planning staff prepared an Initial Study for the
project. The Initial Study found that the project would not have a significant effect on the
environment if certain measures were included in the project. A Mitigated Negative
Declaration was prepared with those mitigation measures and was circulated to the applicant
and other interested parties in accordance with State of California CEQA Guidelines. The
public notice of the Planning Commission's intent to recommend approval of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration was published on November 6, 1999. Copies of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration were sent to adjacent cities and other government agencies. No comments on the
Mitigated Negative Declaration were received.
Section 7. The City Council has reviewed the proposed Negative Declaration and finds
that it represents the independent judgment of the City and that it was prepared in compliance
Resolution No. 877 -1-
00 119048
with CEQA. Therefore, the Council finds that although the proposed project could have a
significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because
mitigation measures have been added to the project, and are incorporated therein by
reference. Based upon these findings, the City Council hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative
Declaration in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 8. Section 17.16.210(A)(5) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits
approval for a guest house under certain conditions provided a Conditional Use Permit for
such use is approved by the City Council. The applicants are requesting to construct an 800
square foot guest house at the central portion of the lot. 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 the construction of 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 these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the
proposed guest house will be constructed at the central portion of the lot 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 1.98 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 800 square foot size of the guest house equals 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 a stable structure and adjacent corral will be located at the eastern -most
portion of the lot.
Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves a
Conditional Use Permit for the construction of an 800 square foot guest house in accordance
with the development plan dated February 23, 2000 and marked Exhibit A in Zoning Case No.
599 subject to the conditions contained in Section 14 of this Resolution.
Section 10. Section 17.16.210(A)(7) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code allows for the
construction of a sports court with certain conditions provided a Conditional Use Permit for
such use is approved by the City Council. The applicants are requesting to construct a 5,111
square foot sports court east of the 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 the construction of a sports court
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 and appropriately located uses in the community, and the area proposed for the
sports court would be located in an area on the property that is on a second pad below the
residential building pad.
B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and
structures have been considered, and the construction of a 5,111 square foot sports court will
not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or
structures because the proposed sports court will be constructed on a portion of the secondary
building pad, will be the least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and
landscaped with mature trees and shrubs, is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so
that the sports court will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, will
Resolution No. 877 -2-
ti�
• 60 1190268
improve slope stability through the use of approved drainage, will accommodate recreation
for the owners and their children, and will permit the owners to enjoy their property without
deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners.
C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and
surrounding residences because the sports court will comply with the low profile residential
development pattern of the community and is located on a 1.98 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 graded area will not exceed a maximum graded area
of 10,000 square feet and does not exceed maximum cubic yardage of 750 cubic yards as the
applicants propose approved drainage.
E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles
County Hazardous Waste Management Plan related 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 a stable structure and adjacent corral will be located at the eastern -most
portion of the lot.
Section 11. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves the
request for a Conditional Use Permit in Zoning Case No. 599 for a proposed 5,111 square foot
sports court, as shown on the Development Plan dated February 23, 2000 and marked Exhibit
A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 14 of this Resolution.
Section 12. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for site
plan review and approval before any grading requiring a grading permit or any building or
structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing
buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to 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 by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six (36) month period. With
respect to the Site Plan Review application requesting construction of the guest house,
retaining wall, sports court and grading at an existing single family residence, the City Council
makes the following findings of fact:
A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning
Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structures comply 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. The lot has a net square foot area of 66,967 square feet. The existing
residence (5,264'sq.ft.), garage (787 sq.ft.), swimming pool (881 sq.ft.), proposed guest house
(800 sq.ft.), proposed sports court (5,111 sq.ft.), service yard (100 sq.ft.), and future stable (450
sq.ft.) will have 13,393 square feet which constitutes 20.0% of the lot. The total lot coverage
including paved areas and driveway will be 23,433 square feet which equals 34.9% of the lot.
The maximum disturbed area proposed is 26,500 square feet or 39.6%. The building pad
coverage for the 22,570 square foot residential btilding pad is 30.7%, the coverage on the
proposed 8,014 square foot guest house and sports court pad is 76.2%, building pad coverage
proposed for the future 1,265 square foot stable pad will be 35%, and the total building pad
coverage will be 42.1%. The proposed project is on a relatively large lot that has a gentle slope
with most of the proposed structures located below the road so as to reduce the visual impact
of the development. The proposed project is screened from the road so as to reduce the visual
impact of the development.
B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by
minimizing building coverage. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses,
buildings, and structures and the topography of the lot which has a gentle slope have been
considered, and the construction of an 800 square foot guest house; a 3-foot high, 145-foot
long retaining wall separating the guest house and sports court; a 3.5-foot high, 82 foot long
retaining wall; and a 5,111 square foot sports court will not adversely affect or be materially
detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed court will be
constructed on a portion of the secondary building pad, will be the least intrusive to
surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped with mature trees and shrubs, is a
sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the sports court will not impact the view or
privacy of surrounding neighbors, will improve slope stability through the use of approved
drainage, will accommodate recreation for the owners and their children, and will permit the
owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding
property owners.
Resolution No. 877 -3-
•
400 1190268
d
C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass
with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated
in Paragraph A, the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when
compared to this long, narrow gently sloping lot. The ratio of the proposed structures to lot
coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity.
D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native vegetation to
the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, the development plan preserves several mature
trees and shrubs and supplements it with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the
rural character of the community.
E. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state
of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structures will not cause the lot to
look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain .
scenic vistas across portions of the property. Although the proposed structures are located in
the rear yard, they will not effect a change to the existing residence. The development plans as
proposed will minimize impact on Eastfield Drive. The structures proposed will not be visible
from Eastfield Drive: Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain
scenic vistas across portions of the property.
F. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading
and the natural drainage courses will continue at the east side (rear) of this lot.
G. The development plan preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature
trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible
with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or
transition area between private and public areas.
H. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience
and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize
an existing driveway at the southwestern portion of the property off Eastfield Drive for access.
I. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act with the incorporation of mitigation measures to the project that are incorporated
within this Resolution.
Section 13. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves the
Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 599 for proposed structures as shown on the
Development Plan dated February 23, 2000 and marked Exhibit A, subject to the conditions
contained in Section 17 of this Resolution.
Section 14. The Conditional Use Permits regarding the 800 square foot guest house
and 5,111 sports court approved in Section 9 and 11, and the Site Plan Review approved in
Section 13 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions:
A. The Conditional Use Permits and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within
one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.42.070(A) and
17.46.080(A) unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of those sections.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Conditional Use Permits and Site Plan
Review approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended
and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicants have been
given written notice to cease such violation, the opportunity for a hearing has been provided,
and if requested, has been held, and thereafter the applicant fails to correct, the violation within
a period of thirty (30) days from the date of the City's determination.
C. All requirements of the 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 marked Exhibit A and dated February 23, 2000, except as otherwise provided
in these conditions.
E. The property on which the project is located shall contain an area of sufficient
size to also provide an area meeting all standards for a stable and corral with vehicular access
thereto in conformance with site plan review and recreation court limitations.
Resolution No. 877 -4-
•
00 1190268
F. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 13.393 square feet or 20.0% in
conformance with lot coverage requirements.
G. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 23,433 square
feet or 34.9% in conformance with lot coverage requirements.
H. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 26,500 square feet or 39.6% in
conformance with lot coverage requirements.
I. Residential building pad coverage on the 22,570 square foot residential building
pad shall not exceed 6,932 square feet or 30.7%, coverage on the 8,014 square foot guest house
and sports court pad shall not exceed 7,760 square feet or 76.2%, coverage on the 1,265 square
foot stable and corral pad shall not exceed 450 square feet or 35% and total building pad
coverage shall not exceed 42.1%.
J. The guest house shall not exceed 800 square feet and the surface of the sports
court shall not exceed 5,111 square feet in area. The location of the guest house and sports
court shall be as depicted on the Development Plan dated
February 23, 2000 and marked Exhibit A.
K. Balanced cut and fill for the sports court shall not exceed 750 cubic yards in
accordance with grading limitations.
L. The prepared or graded area shall not exceed 10,000 square feet in accordance
with grading limitations.
M. Grading shall not exceed 310 cubic yards of cut soil and 410 cubic yards of fill soil
(750 cubic yards maximum). Grading for the guest house will require 125 cubic yards of cut soil
and 25 cubic yards of fill soil. The total grading shall be balanced for a total cut of 435 cubic
yards and a total fill of 435 cubic yards and any soil preparation for the guest house and sports
court shall preserve the existing topography, flora, and natural features to the greatest extent
possible.
N. The 145 foot long retaining walls separating the guest house from the sports
court shall not exceed 3 feet in height. The 82 foot long retaining walls 5 feet west of the guest
house shall not exceed 3.5 feet in height.
O. The floor area of the guest house shall not exceed 800 square feet.
P. No kitchen or other cooking facilities shall be provided within the guest house.
Q. No vehicular access or paved parking area shall be developed within 50 feet of
the guest house.
R. Occupancy of the guest house shall be limited to persons employed on the
premises and their immediate family or by the temporary guest of the occupants of the main
residence. No guest may remain in occupancy for more than 30 days in any six month period.
S. Renting of the guest house is prohibited.
T. Sports court lighting shall not be permitted.
U. The sports court shall be screened with 6 foot high fencing on all four sides.
V. The sports court shall be screened on all four sides with drought -resistant mature
trees and shrubs such as Toyon and Lemonadeberry and shall not exceed 8 feet in height.
Landscape screening shall not include Eucalyptus or Pine trees.
W. Noise from sports court use shall not create a nuisance to owners of surrounding
properties.
X. The loft area of the stable shall have no glazed windows.
Y. The landscape plan shall include water efficient irrigation, to the maximum extent
feasible, that incorporates a low gallonage irrigation system, utilizes automatic controllers,
incorporates an irrigation design using "hydrozones," considers slope factors and climate
conditions in design, and utilizes means to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and
overspray in accordance with Section 17.27.020 (Water efficient landscaping requirements) of
the Rolling Hills Municipal Code.
Resolution No. 877 -5-
111 00 1190268
Z. Two copies of a preliminary landscape plan must be submitted for review by the
Planning Department and include native drought -resistant vegetation that will not disrupt the
impact of the views of neighboring properties prior to the issuance of any building or grading
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 drainage, 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.
AA. Landscaping shall be designed using mature trees and shrubs so as not to
obstruct views of neighboring properties but, to obscure the sports court.
AB. During construction, dust control measures shall be used to stabilize the soil from
wind erosion and reduce dust and objectionable odors generated by construction activities in
accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District, Los Angeles County and local
ordinances and engineering practices.
AC. During construction, conformance with local ordinances and engineering practices
so that people or property are not exposed to landslides, .mudflows, erosion, or land
subsidence shall be required.
AD. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district
requirements, stormwater pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and
engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise,
dust, objectionable odors, landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required.
AE. During and after construction, all soil preparation, drainage, and landscape
sprinklers shall prevent water from permeating the guest house and sports court building pad,
protect the building pad from erosion, and direct surface water to the rear of the lot at the
east.
AF. During. construction, the Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in
Section 7010 of the 1996 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be followed to
minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control stormwater pollution as
required by the County of Los Angeles.
AG. During construction, in the event that subsurface material of an archaeological,
paleontological or other cultural resource is encountered during project grading or
development, all grading and construction shall cease in the immediate area, and the find shall
be left untouched until a qualified professional archaeologist or paleontologist, whichever is
appropriate, is contacted and called in to evaluate the find and makes recommendations as to
disposition, mitigation or salvage. The developer shall incur the cost of such professional
investigation. The developer shall comply with the mitigation measures recommended and
approved by the City for the disposition, mitigation or salvage of such material.
AH. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site.
AI. During construction, the property owners .shall be required to schedule and
regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM
and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment
noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of
Rolling Hills.
AJ. The drainage plan system shall be modified and approved by .the Planning
Department and City Engineer, to include any water from any site irrigation systems as well
as sports court runoff, and that all drainage from the site shall be conveyed in an approved
manner to the rear or east of the lot. .
AK. An Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set` forth in Section 7010 of the
1996 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be prepared to minimize erosion
and to protect slopes and channels to control stormwater pollution as. required by the County
of Los Angeles.
AL. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water
Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and
maintenance of stormwater drainage facilities.
Resolution No. 877 -6-
• .00 1190268
AM. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water
Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices
(BMP's) related to solid waste.
AN. A detailed drainage plan that conforms to the development plan as approved by
the City Council must be submitted to the Rolling HillsPlanning Department staff for their
review.
AO. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community
Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any drainage, building or
grading permit.
AP. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and
Safety for plan check review shall conform to the development plan described in Condition D.
AQ. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional
grading or structural development shall require the filing of a new application for
approval by the Planning Commission.
AR. 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 must conform to the City of Rolling Hills standard 'of'2 to 1 slope ratio.
AS. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these
Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals, pursuant to Section 17.42.060, or the
approval shall not be effective.
AT. All conditions of these Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals
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 13Tij Q-IrRCH, 2000.
OIE,
MAYOR PRO TE ORE
A 1 I hST:
MARILYN ERN
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
Resolution No. 877 -7-
• 4 • 00 1190268
1r
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 877 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A GUEST HOUSE,
GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A SPORTS COURT,
AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO PERMIT THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE GUEST HOUSE, RETAINING WALLS, AND SPORTS
COURT THAT REQUIRE GRADING AT A SINGLE FAMILY 'RESIDENCE IN
ZONING CASE NO. 599.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on March 13, 2000 by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Hill, Lay, Murdock, and
Mayor Pro Tem Pernell.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Mayor Heinsheimer.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices.
lti rk
MARILYN KERN
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
Resolution No. 877 -8-
RESOLUTION NO. 99-19
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS (1) GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE
MAXIMUM PERMITTED STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE, (2)
GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM TOTAL LOT
COVERAGE, (3) GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE
MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA, (4) GRANTING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A GUEST HOUSE, (5)
GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A
TENNIS COURT, AND (6) GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW
APPROVAL TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE GUEST HOUSE,
RETAINING WALL, AND TENNIS COURT THAT REQUIRE GRADING
AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 599.
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. Joseph S. Gregorio
with respect to real property located at 16 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills (Lot 68-B-EF)
requesting a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of an 800 square foot
guest house, requesting a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a
5,111 square foot tennis court, and requesting Site Plan Review to permit the
construction of the guest house, a 128-foot long retaining wall, and tennis court that
will require grading at an existing single family residence. During the hearing
process, a regulation -sized 7,000 square foot tennis court was proposed to replace the
aforementioned tennis court, a 169-foot long retaining wall to replace the previous
retaining wall, and the following three Variances were also requested: (i) Variance
to _ exceed the maximum structural lot coverage, (ii) Variance to exceed the
maximum total lot coverage, and (iii) Variance to exceed the maximum disturbed
area.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing to consider the applications on September 21, 1999, October 19, 1999 and
November 16, 1999, and at a field trip visit on October 12, 1999. The applicants were
notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's
newsletter. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in
affecting said proposal and from members of the City staff and the Planning
Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The applicants
were in attendance at the hearing. The following concerns were expressed by the
Commission and nearby property owners: Zoning Code requirements for recreation
courts and site specific issues pertaining to landscaping and views.
Section 3. On September 1, 1999, Planning staff prepared an Initial Study
for the project. The Initial Study found that the project would not have a significant
effect on the environment if certain measures were included in the project. A
Negative Declaration was prepared with those mitigation measures and was
circulated to the applicant and other interested parties in accordance with State of
California CEQA Guidelines. The public notice of the Planning Commission's
intent to recommend approval of the Negative Declaration was published on
November 6, 1999. Copies of the Negative Declaration were sent 'to adjacent cities
and other government agencies. No comments on the Negative Declaration were
received.
Section 4. The Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed Negative
Declaration and finds that it represents the independent judgment of the City and
that it was prepared in compliance with CEQA. Therefore, the Commission finds
that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because mitigation
measures have been added to the project, and are incorporated therein by reference.
Based upon these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the mitigated
Negative Declaration in accordance with 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. A
Variance to Section 17.16.070(A)(1) is required because it states that coverage by
structures shall not be more than 20 percent of the net lot area. The applicant is
requesting a Variance because coverage by structures will cover 22.8% of the net lot
area. 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. The Variance for the structural lot
coverage is necessary because the lot is relatively long and narrow and two
bordering roadways exist at the western and northwestern sides of the property that
reduce the size of the net lot area. The lot size and configuration, together with the
existing development on the lot creates a difficulty in meeting this Code
requirement.
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. The Variance is necessary because of
the unusual size and configuration of the lot together with the City's development
RESOLUTION NO. 99-19
PAGE 2 OF 14
• •
standards result in more severe restrictions on the development of the subject
property than occurring on other lots in the vicinity.
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. All development will occur within
required setbacks and will be adequately screened to prevent adverse visual impact
to surrounding properties. Development on the site will be 22.8% which will allow
a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped.
Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 599 to permit coverage by
structures of 22.8%, subject to the conditions specified in Section 17.
Section 7. A Variance to Section 17.16.070 (A)(2) is required because it states
that coverage by structures and all other impervious surfaces, known as total lot
coverage, shall not be more than 35 percent of the net lot area. The applicant is
requesting a Variance because total lot coverage will be 37.8% of the net lot area.
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. The Variance for the total lot
coverage is necessary because the lot is relatively long and narrow and there are two
bordering roadways at, the western and northwestern sides of the property that
reduce the size of the net lot area. The lot size and configuration, together with the
existing development on the lot creates a difficulty in meeting this Code
requirement.
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. The Variance is necessary because of
the unusual size and configuration of the lot together with the City's development
standards result in more severe restrictions on the development of the subject
property than occurring on other lots in the vicinity.
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. All development will occur within
required setbacks and will be adequately screened to prevent adverse visual impact
to surrounding properties. Development on the site will be 37.8% which will allow
a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-19
PAGE 3 OF 14
Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 599 to permit total lot coverage of
37.8%, subject to the conditions specified in Section 17.
Section 9. A Variance to Section 17.16.070 (B) is required because it states
that disturbance shall be limited to 40% of the net lot area. The applicant is
requesting a Variance because total disturbance will be 41.1% of the net lot area.
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. The Variance for the total
disturbance is necessary because the lot is relatively long and narrow and there are
two bordering roadways at the western and northwestern sides of the property that
reduce the size of the net lot area. The lot size and configuration, together with the
existing development on the lot creates a difficulty in meeting this Code
requirement.
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. The Variance is necessary because of
the unusual size and configuration of the lot together with the City's development
standards result in more severe restrictions on the development of the subject
property than occurring on other lots in the vicinity.
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. All development will occur within
required setbacks and will be adequately screened to prevent adverse visual impact
to surrounding properties. Disturbed area on the site will be 41.1% which will allow
a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped.
Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 599 to permit a disturbed area of
41.1%, subject to the conditions specified in Section 17.
Section 11. Section 17.16.210(A)(5) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code
permits approval for a guest house under certain conditions provided a Conditional
Use Permit for such use is approved by the Planning Commission. The applicants
are requesting to construct an 800 square foot guest house at the central portion of
the lot. 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 the construction of a
guest house would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning
RESOLUTION NO. 99-19
PAGE 4 OF 14
• •
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 these adjacent uses, buildings, 'or
structures because the proposed guest house will be constructed at the central
portion of the lot 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
1.98 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 800 square foot size of the
guest house equals 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 a stable structure and adjacent corral will be located at
the eastern -most portion of the lot.
Section 12. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of an 800 square foot
guest house in accordance with the development plan dated October 19, 1999 and
marked Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 599 subject to the conditions contained in
Section 17 of this resolution.
Section 13. Section 17.16.210(A)(7) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code
allows for the construction of a tennis court with certain conditions provided a
Conditional Use Permit for such use is approved by the Planning Commission. The
applicants are requesting to construct a 7,000 square foot tennis court east of the
guest house. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning
Commission finds as follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-19
PAGE 5 OF 14
A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a
tennis court 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 and appropriately located uses in
the community, and the area proposed for the tennis court would be located in an
area on the property that is on a second pad below the residential building pad.
B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings,
and structures have been considered, and the construction of a 7,000 square foot
tennis court will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent
uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed tennis court will be constructed
on a portion of the secondary building pad, will be the least intrusive to
surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped with mature trees and
shrubs, is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the tennis court will
not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, will improve slope
stability through the use of approved drainage, will accommodate recreation for the
owners and their children, and will permit the owners to enjoy their property
without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners.
C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural
terrain, and surrounding residences because the tennis court will comply with the
low profile residential development pattern of the community and is located on a
1.98 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 graded area will not exceed a
maximum graded area of 10,000 square feet and does not exceed maximum cubic
yardage of 750 cubic yards as the applicants propose approved drainage.
E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of the Los
Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan related 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 a stable structure and adjacent corral will be located at
the eastern -most portion of the lot.
Section 14. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby
approves the request for a Conditional Use Permit in Zoning Case No. 599 for a
proposed 7,000 square foot tennis court, as shown on the Development Plan dated
October 19, 1999 and marked Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in
Section 17 of this resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-19
PAGE 6 OF 14
• •
Section 15. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted
for site plan review and approval before any grading requiring a grading permit or
any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration
or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an
increase to 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 by more than twenty-five percent
(25%) in any thirty-six (36) month period. With respect to the Site Plan Review
application requesting construction of the guest house, retaining wall, tennis court
and grading at an existing single family residence, the Planning Commission makes
the following findings of fact:
A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the
Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structures comply
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 with the
Variances approved in Sections 6, 8, and 10 of this Resolution. The lot has a net
square foot area of 66,967 square feet. The proposed residence (5,264 sq.ft.), garage (787
sq.ft.), swimming pool (881 sq.ft.), guest house (800 sq.ft.), tennis court (7,000 sq.ft.),
service yard (100 sq.ft.), and future stable (450 sq.ft.) will have 15,282 square feet
which constitutes 22.8% of the lot though not within the maximum 20% structural
lot coverage requirement was approved by Variance in Section 6. The total lot
coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 25,322 square feet which equals
37.8% of the lot, though not within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage
requirement was approved by Variance in Section 8. The proposed project is
screened from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development.
B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of
the lot by minimizing building coverage. The nature, condition, and development
of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the topography of the lot which has a
gentle slope have been considered, and the construction of an 800 square foot guest
house, a 3-foot high, 169-foot retaining wall, and a 7,000 square foot tennis court will
not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or
structures because the proposed court will be constructed on a portion of the
secondary building pad, will be the least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be
screened and landscaped with mature trees and shrubs, is a sufficient distance from
nearby residences so that the tennis court will not impact the view or privacy of
surrounding neighbors, will improve slope stability through the use of approved
drainage, will accommodate • recreation for the owners and their children, and will
permit the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the
rights of surrounding property owners.
C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale
and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated
in Paragraph A, although the lot coverage maximum will be exceeded, the proposed
project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to this long,
RESOLUTION NO. 99-19
PAGE 7 OF 14
•
narrow gently sloping lot. The ratio of the proposed structures to lot coverage is
similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity.
D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native
vegetation to the maximum extent feasible.. Specifically, the development plan
preserves several mature trees and shrubs and supplements it with landscaping that
is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community.
E. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and
undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new
structures will not cause the lot to look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the
lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain scenic vistas across portions of the
property. Although the proposed structures are located in the rear yard, they will
not effect a change to the existing residence. The development plans as proposed
will minimize impact on Eastfield Drive. The structures proposed will not be
visible from Eastfield Drive. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped
so as to maintain scenic vistas across portions of the property.
F. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to
minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue at the east side
(rear) of this lot.
G. The development plan preserves surrounding native vegetation and
mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping
which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and
landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas.
H. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the
convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the
proposed project will utilize an existing driveway at the southwestern portion of the
property off Eastfield Drive for access.
I. The project conforms with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act with the incorporation of mitigation measures to the
project that are incorporated within this Resolution.
Section 16. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 599 for
proposed structures as shown on the Development Plan dated October 19, 1999 and
marked Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 17 of this
Resolution.
Section 17. The Variances regarding lot coverages approved in Sections 6, 8,
and 10, the Conditional Use Permits regarding the 800 square foot guest house and
7,000 tennis court approved in Section 12 and 14, and the Site Plan Review approved
in Section 16 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions:
RESOLUTION NO. 99-19
PAGE 8 OF 14
• •
A. The Variances, Conditional Use Permits, and Site Plan Review
approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined
in Sections 17.38.070(A), 17.42.070(A), and 17.46.080(A) unless otherwise extended
pursuant to the requirements of those sections.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variances, Conditional Use
Permits and Site Plan Review approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated,
this approval shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse;
provided that the applicants have been given written notice to cease such violation,
the opportunity for a hearing has been provided, and if requested, has been held,
and thereafter the applicant fails to correct the violation within a period of thirty
(30) days from the date of the City's determination.
C. All requirements of the 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 marked Exhibit A and dated October 19, 1999, except as
otherwise provided in these conditions.
E. The property on which the project is located shall contain an area of
sufficient size to also provide an area meeting all standards for a stable and corral
with vehicular access thereto in conformance with site plan review and recreation
court limitations.
F. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 15,282 square feet or 22.8% in
conformance with lot coverage limitations approved in Section 6.
G. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 25,322
square feet or 37.8% in conformance with lot coverage limitations approved in
Section 8.
H. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 27,539 square feet or 41.1%
in conformance with lot coverage limitations approved in Section 10.
I. Residential building pad coverage on the 22,570 square foot residential
building pad shall not exceed 6,932 square feet or 30.7%, coverage on the 7,800 square
foot guest house and tennis court pad shall not exceed 8,014 square feet or 97.3%,
coverage on the 1,265 square foot stable and corral pad shall not exceed 450 square feet
or 35%.and total building pad coverage shall not exceed 47.7%.
J. The guest house shall not exceed 800 square feet and the surface of the
tennis court shall not exceed 7,000 square feet in area. The location of the guest
RESOLUTION NO. 99-19
PAGE 9 OF 14
• •
house and tennis court shall be as depicted on the Development Plan dated October
19, 1999 and marked Exhibit A.
K. Balanced cut and fill for the tennis court shall not exceed 750 cubic
yards in accordance with grading limitations.
L. The prepared or graded area shall not exceed 10,000 square feet in
accordance with grading limitations.
M. Grading shall not exceed 310 cubic yards of cut soil and 410 cubic yards of
fill soil (750 cubic yards maximum). Grading for the guest house will require 125
cubic yards of cut soil and 25 cubic yards of fill soil. The total grading shall be
balanced for a total cut of 435 cubic yards and a total fill of 435 cubic yards and any soil
preparation for the guest house and tennis court shall preserve the existing
topography, flora, and natural features to the greatest extent possible.
N. The 169 foot long retaining walls incorporated into the project shall not
exceed 3 feet in height.
O. The floor area of the guest house shall not exceed 800 square feet.
P. No kitchen or other cooking facilities shall be provided within the
guest house.
Q. No vehicular access or paved parking area shall be developed within 50
feet of the guest house.
R. Occupancy of the guest house shall be limited to persons employed on
the premises and their immediate family or by the temporary guest of the occupants
of the main residence. No guest may remain in occupancy for more than 30 days in
any six month period.
S. Renting of the guest house is prohibited.
T. Tennis court lighting shall not be permitted.
U. The tennis court shall be screened with 6 foot high fencing on all four
sides.
V. The tennis court shall be screened on all four sides with drought -
resistant mature trees and shrubs such as Toyon and Lemonadeberry and shall not
exceed 8 feet in height. Landscape screening shall not include Eucalyptus or Pine
trees.
W . Noise from tennis court use shall not create a nuisance to owners of
surrounding properties.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-19
PAGE 10 OF 14
• •
X. The loft area of the stable shall have no glazed windows.
Y. The landscape plan shall include water efficient irrigation, to the
maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a low gallonage irrigation system,
utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using "hydrozones,"
considers slope factors and climate conditions in design, and utilizes means to
reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray in accordance with Section
17.27.020 (Water efficient landscaping requirements) of the Rolling Hills Municipal
Code.
Z. Two copies of a preliminary landscape plan must be submitted for
review by the Planning Department and include native drought -resistant
vegetation that will not disrupt the impact of the views of neighboring properties
prior to the issuance of any building or grading 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
drainage, 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.
AA. Landscaping shall be designed using mature trees and shrubs so as not
to obstruct views of neighboring properties but, to obscure the tennis court.
AB. During construction, dust control measures shall be used to stabilize
the soil from wind erosion and reduce dust and objectionable odors generated by
construction activities in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management
District, Los Angeles County and local ordinances and engineering practices.
AC. During construction, conformance with local ordinances and
engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to landslides,
mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required.
AD. During construction, conformance with the air quality management
district requirements, stormwater pollution prevention practices, county and local
ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to
undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, objectionable odors, landslides, mudflows, erosion,
or land subsidence shall be required.
AE. During and after construction, all soil preparation, drainage, and
landscape sprinklers shall prevent water from permeating the guest house and
RESOLUTION NO. 99-19
PAGE 11 OF 14
• •
tennis court building pad, protect the building pad from erosion, and direct surface
water to the rear of the lot at the east.
AF. During construction, the Erosion Control Plan containing the elements
set forth in Section 7010 of the 1996 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code
shall be followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control
stormwater pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles.
AG. During construction, in the event that subsurface material of an
archaeological, paleontological or other cultural resource is encountered during
project grading or development, all grading and construction shall cease in the
immediate area, and the find shall be left untouched until a qualified professional
archaeologist or paleontologist, whichever is appropriate, is contacted and called in
to evaluate the find and makes recommendations as to disposition, mitigation or
salvage. The developer shall incur the cost of such professional investigation. The
developer shall comply with the mitigation measures recommended and approved
by the City for the disposition, mitigation or salvage of such material.
AH. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the
project site.
AI. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule
and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the
hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and
mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet
residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills.
AJ. The drainage plan system shall be modified and approved by the
Planning Department and City Engineer, to include any water from any site
irrigation systems as well as tennis court runoff, and that all drainage from the site
shall be conveyed in an approved manner to the rear or east of the lot.
AK. An Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section
7010 of the 1996 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be prepared to
minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control stormwater
pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles.
AL. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional
Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the
installation and maintenance of stormwater drainage facilities.
AM. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional
Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best
Management Practices (BMP's) related to solid waste.
AN. A detailed drainage plan that conforms to the development plan as
approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills
Planning Department staff for their review.
RESOLUTION NO. 99-19
PAGE 12 OF 14
•
1•
AO. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills
Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of
any drainage, building or grading permit.
AP. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of
Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the development plan
described in Condition D.
AQ. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional
grading or structural development shall require the filing of a new application for
approval by the Planning Commission.
AR. 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 must conform to the
City of Rolling Hills standard of 2 to 1 slope ratio.
AS. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all
conditions of these Variance, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review
approvals, pursuant to Section 17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective.
AT. All conditions of these Variance, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan
Review approvals 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 21ST DAY O. PEC= ' B 1999.
ATTEST:
k ait,)
MARILY KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
RESOLUTION NO. 99-19
PAGE 13 OF 14
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 99-19 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS (1) GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE
MAXIMUM PERMITTED STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE, (2)
GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM TOTAL LOT
COVERAGE, (3) GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE
MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA, (4) GRANTING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A GUEST HOUSE, (5)
GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A
TENNIS COURT, AND (6) GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW
APPROVAL TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE GUEST HOUSE,
RETAINING WALL, AND TENNIS COURT THAT REQUIRE GRADING
AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 599.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission o n
December 21, 1999 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners Hankins, Sommer, Witte and Chairman Roberts.
None.
Commissioner Margeta.
None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices.
02.k ‘ovii
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 99-19
PAGE 14 OF 14