491, Garage addition encroaching in, Resolutions & Approval Conditionsti
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL -TO:
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
93 1131858
xgEty D
AUG 0 2 1993 c er
C.1L1; OF, ,ROLLING HILLS °
's Use
Please record this form with the Registrar -Recorder's Office and
return to: City of Rolling Hills, 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
(The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be
notarized before recordation).
ACCEPTANCE FORM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
ZONING CASE NO. .491 SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
I (We) the undersigned state:
I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property
follows:
22 Eastfield Drive (Lot 84-EF)
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
This property is the subject of the above
x
x
described
numbered cases.
I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions
said
ZONING CASE NO. 491 SITE PLAN REVIEW x
VARIANCE .
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
as
in
•
I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Print Ai
Owner / 11L7''' h-, X ear
Name
Signature
Address f 7
City/State Ce, 7 %0)-7y
Address
Print All
Owner
Sn
Sigg(� „ nature %iJrrA..ew�
City/State Rel-ge��q
Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public.
,,,,,,........
State of Cal ifnrnia
County of Ins Annel Pc
i
0
2'oa7y
1
OFFICIAL NOTARY SEAL
CORALIE A CASTINE
Notary Public — California
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
My Comm. Expires JUN 12,10O4 ,
SS.
On this the 28tb day of
May 19 93 , before me,
Coralie A. Castine
the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared
Norman D. I Pan and Mary .F I pan
El personally known to me
0 proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence
to be the person(s) whose name(s) Are subscribed to the
within instrument, and acknowledged that They executed it.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
/6.4,
Notary's Signature
See Exhibit °A" attached
hereto and made a part hereof
•w
• 6K%,'i ; 'A "
RESOLUTION NO. 93-18
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE REAR YARD
SETBACK FOR A GARAGE ADDITION, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH
INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK FOR A BATHROOM ADDITION, GRANTING
A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE REAR YARD. SETBACK FOR A BAY
WINDOW ADDITION, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE REAR
YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS, AND GRANTING SITE
PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 491. •
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.
Norman Lean with respect to real property located at 22 Eastfield
Drive, Rolling Hills (Lot 84-EF) requesting: (1) a Variance to the
rear yard setback to construct a garage addition; (2) a Variance to
the rear yard setback to construct a bathroom addition; (3) a
Variance to the rear yard setback to construct a bay window
addition; (4) a Variance to the rear yard setback to construct
retaining walls; and (5) Site Plan Review for substantial
residential additions.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
public hearing to consider the applications .for Variances and Site
Plan Review on March 16, 1993 and April 27, 1993 and at a field
trip visit on April 17, 1993.
Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project is
categorically exempt from environmentalreview under the California
Environmental Quality Act pursuant to a Class 3 exemption provided.
by Section 15303 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Section 4. Sections 17.32.010 through 17.32.030 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. A Variance to Section 17.16.080' is required to
construct additions in the fifty (50) foot rear yard setback.
The applicant is requesting a garage addition which will encroach
34 feet into the rear yard setback. The Planning Commission finds:
A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
and conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that
do not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity
and zone. The Variance is necessary because the buildable area of
the lot is located at the rear of the property. Also, the existing
93 1131858
141
RESOLUTION NO. 93-18
PAGE 2
development pattern on the lot and the sloping front portion
precludes continued expansion of the house towards that area on the
lot without leaving areas of open space on the building pad.
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 the
property in question. The Variance is necessary because the
proposed addition will be aligned with the existing garage which
which will be replaced and moved 36 feet to the southeast. The
garage will not be visible from the street. The Variance will
permit the development of the property in a manner similar to
development patterns on surrounding properties.
C. The granting of this Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is
located. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion
of the lot to remain undeveloped.
Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves a Variance to allow a garage addition to
the residential structure to encroach into the rear yard setback to
a maximum of 34 feet as indicated on the Development Plan attached
hereto as Exhibit A subject to the conditions contained in Section
15.
Section 6. A Variance to Section 17.16.080 is required to
construct additions to the existing residence in the fifty (50)
foot rear yard setback. The applicant is requesting a bathroom
addition which will encroach up to 5 feet into the rear yard
setback. The Planning Commission finds:
A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
and conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that
do not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity
and zone. The Variance is necessary because the buildable area of
the lot is located at the rear of the property. Also, the existing
development pattern on the lot and the sloping front portion
precludes continued expansion of the house towards that area on the
lot without leaving areas of open space on the building pad.
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 the
property in question. The Variance is necessary because the
proposed addition will be will not encroach any further than
existing portions of the residence. Also, the Variance will permit
the development of the property in a manner similar to development
patterns on surrounding properties.
93 1131858
RESOLUTION NO. 93-18
PAGE 3
C. The granting of this Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property .is
located. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion
of the lot to remain undeveloped.
Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves a Variance to allow a bathroom addition
to the existing residential structure to encroach into the rear
yard setback to a maximum of 5 feet as indicated on the Development
Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A subject to the conditions
contained in Section 15.
Section 8. A Variance to Section 17.16.080 is required to
construct additions in the fifty (50) foot rear yard setback.
The applicant is requesting a bay window addition which will
encroach up to 14 feet into the rear yard setback. The Planning
Commission finds:
A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
and conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that
do not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity
and zone. The Variance is necessary because the buildable area of
the lot is located at the rear of the property. Also, the existing
development pattern on the lot and the sloping front portion
precludes continued expansion of the house towards that area on the
lot without leaving areas of open space on the building pad.
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 the
property in question. Also, the Variance will permit the
development of the property in a manner similar to development
patterns on surrounding properties.
C. The granting of this Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is
located. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion
of the lot to remain undeveloped.
Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves a Variance to allow a, bay window
addition to the existing residential structure to encroach into the
rear yard setback to a maximum of 14 feet as indicated on the
Development Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A subject to the
conditions contained in Section 15.
93 1131858
• •
RESOLUTION NO. 93-18
PAGE 4
Section 10. A Variance to Section 17.16.080 is required to
construct retaining walls in the fifty (50) foot rear yard setback.
The applicant is requesting to construct a multiple segmented
retaining wall that is approximately 179 feet long with a maximum
height of 3 feet. The proposed retaining walls will encroach up to
42 feet into the rear yard setback. The Planning Commission finds:
A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
and conditions applicable to the Property and the intended use that
do not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity
and zone. The front yard slopes upward from the street to the
building pad. The proposed walls are intended to delineate the
driveway and buttress the sloping area along the driveway at the
rear property line. The Variance is necessary because the
buildable area of the lot is located at the rear of the property.
Also, the existing development pattern on the lot and the sloping
front portion precludes continued expansion of the house towards
that area on the lot without leaving areas of open space on the
building pad.
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 the
property in question. The Variance is necessary to create a
terraced slope so as to permit multiple landscaping uses of the
property similar to landscaping patterns on adjacent properties.
Also, the Variance will permit the development of the property in
a manner similar to development patterns on surrounding properties.
The construction of these walls will allow for more beneficial use
of the property for landscaping purposes.
C. The granting of this Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is
located. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion
of the lot to remain undeveloped.
Section 11. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves a Variance to allow the construction of
approximately 179 feet of retaining walls to a maximum height of 3
feet to encroach into the rear yard setback to a maximum of 42 feet
as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A
subject to the conditions contained in Section 15.
Section 12. Section 17.34.010 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 may be made which
involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the
building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any
thirty-six month period.
93 1131858
RESOLUTION NO. 93-18
PAGE 5
Section 13 The Planning Commission makes the following
findings of fact:
A. The proposed development is compatible with the General
Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the
proposed structure .complies with the General Plan requirement of
low profile, low density residential development 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 49,702 square feet. The proposed residence
(4,496.5 sq.ft.), garage (706.5 sq.ft.), spa (50 sq.ft.), stable
(880 sq.ft.), and service yard (98 sq.ft.), will have 6,231 square
feet which constitutes 12.5% of the lot which is within the maximum
20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage
including paved areas and driveway will be 13,543 square feet which
equals 30.84% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall
lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is on a relatively
large lot with most of the proposed additions located away from the
road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development and is
similar and compatible with several neighboring developments.
B. The proposed development 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) and grading will be minimal to minimize
building coverage on the building pad itself.
C. The development plan follows natural contours of the
site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will
continue to Eastfield Drive and the northeast portion of the lot.
D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees
and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible 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 structural and total
lot coverage to be exceeded. Significant• portions of the lot, will
be left undeveloped so as to minimize the impact of development.
F. The proposed development is harmonious in scale and mass
with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences
because as indicated in Paragraph A, lot coverage maximums will not
be exceeded and the proposed project is of consistent scale with
the neighborhood, thereby grading will be required only to restore
the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the proposed
structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several
properties in the vicinity. 93 1131858
• •
RESOLUTION NO. 93-18
PAGE 6
G. The proposed development is sensitive and not
detrimental to convenienceand safety of circulation for
pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize
the existing vehicular access off Eastfield Drive, thereby having
no further impact on 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 for residential
additions as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto as
Exhibit A subject to the conditions contained in Section 15.
Section 15. The Variance to the rear yard setback approved in
Sections 5, 7, 9 and 11, and the Site Plan Review approval for
residential additions granted in Section 14 as indicated on the
Development Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit
A, are subject to the following conditions:
A. The Variances shall expire unless used within one year
from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.32.110
of the Municipal Code. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire
within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in
Section 17.34.080.A.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variances and
the Site Plan Review approval, 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 Building and Construction
Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the
subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise
set forth in these approvals, 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.except as
otherwise provided in these conditions.
E. All retaining walls incorporated into the project shall
not be greater than 5 feet in height at any one point.
F. The height of the new roof ridge line shall be no higher
than 134.84 feet which is 34.84 feet above the lowest point on the
property (100 feet, which is also known as the assumed benchmark
for ground elevation).
93 1131858
RESOLUTION NO. 93-18
PAGE 7
G. To minimize the prominence of the building on the pad,
the structures, driveway, graded slopes and retaining walls shall
be screenedand shielded from view with native drought -resistant
vegetation that is compatible with the surrounding vegetation of
the community.
H. The landscape plan shall include the use of native
drought -resistant vegetation along Eastfield Drive.
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. 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.
K. 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.
L. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed
40.8% and overall building pad coverage shall not exceed 43%.
M. No grading which requires a grading permit shall be
allowed for this project.
N. Any modifications to the project which would constitute
a modification to the development plan as approved by the Planning
Commission shall require the filing of an application for
modification of the Zoning Case pursuant to Section 17.34.070 of
the Rolling Hills Municipal Code.
93 1131858
r 1 '
1
•
RESOLUTION NO. 93-18
PAGE 8
RECORDED/FILED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS
RECORDER'S OFFICE
LOS ANGELES COUNTY
CALIFORNIA
4 PIS' 8 A.M. JUN 151993
0. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance
of all conditions of this Variance, pursuant to Section 17.32.087,
or the approval shall not be effective.
P. Conditions A, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, and 0
of this Variance and Site Plan Review approval 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 18TH DAY OF MAY, 1993.
EVIE ANKIN , ACTING CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
MARILYN fERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
The foregoing Resolution No. 93-18 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE REAR YARD
SETBACK FOR A GARAGE ADDITION, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH
INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK FOR A BATHROOM ADDITION, GRANTING
A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK FOR A BAY
WINDOW ADDITION, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE REAR
YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS, AND GRANTING SITE
PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 491.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission on May 18, 1993 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Commissioners Frost, Hankins, Lay and Raine
None
Chairman Roberts
ABSTAIN: None
DEPUTY cilly CLERK
93 1131858