The URL can be used to link to this page

599, Construct a new tennis court, Correspondence.4) Cry a/ RO/A4 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 195:' NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com July 3, 2003 To Wells Fargo Bank SUBJECT: Release of City of Rolling Hills From Certificate of Deposit Account # 0926894924 To whom it may concern: Please release the City of Rolling Hills from the Certificate of Deposit, issued by Wells Fargo Bank to Mrs. Laura Gregorio, in the amount of $9,269.00, account # 0926894924 on January 22, 2001. Mr. and Mrs. Gregorio have satisfactorily completed the work that was secured for with this Certificate of Deposit. Should you have any questions, please call me at (310) 377-1521. Yblanta Schwartz Planning Director �Frniierl nn fi•;r yrbrl I' „ •� JULY 3, 2003 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: NAN HUANG, FINANCE DIRECTOR //' l YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR V/ RELEASE OF LANDSCAPING BOND, 16 EASTWLE DRIVE, ZONING CASE NO. 599, GREGORIO. Please release the Certificate of Deposit No. 0926894924 to Mrs. Laura Gregorio. Mr and Mrs. Gregorio have satisfactorily completed the landscaping that was bonded for with this Certificate of Deposit. G J CRISS C GUNDERSON ARCHITECT 2024 Via Pacheco, Palos Verdes Estates, California 90274 TEL (310) 373-8077 FAX (310) 373-8277 Monday, April 23, 2001 Ms. Yolanta Schwartz, Principal Planner City of Rolling Hills No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 Regarding: No. 16 Eastfield Drive Gregorio guest house and sports court Dear Ms. Schwartz, APR 2 4 200 .CITY .CF::RQLLih r:.± ""LS The Gregorios are currently completing the grading and retaining wall construction for the above mentioned project. Site conditions have dictated a small modification in the approved site plan. To allow for a balanced cut and fill of graded earth, without exceeding the approved area of disturbance, we request the following modifications: 1) Retaining wall at westerly side of tennis court increased in height from the approved 36 inches to 46 inches. This wall was to receive a 36 inch high chain link fence, (enclosing the sports court), which will not be installed. It should be noted that the finish elevations of all proposed structures, including the ridge height at the guest house and the remaining sports court fencing, will not change from the approved site plan. 2) Retaining wall behind guest house (westerly) increased in height from the approved 36 inches to 46 inches. These walls can not be seen from surrounding properties in that sight lines are blocked by; fencing at easterly side of the sports court (regarding item 1) and by the guest house at item 2. Also, as shown in the approved landscape plan, shrubs will screened the conditions further. For clarification, copies of the areas of concern are attached in the form of a partial site plan and site cross section. This request has also been submitted to the Community Association for their consideration. Thank you, Criss Gunderson Architect cc: Mr. and Mrs. Gregorio Bolton Engineering A Transmitted via FAX, originals sent via US mail CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPruved FLANN►IN bate EPARTM . � . ENT1A)°L66-1 v)((k-t6/- ( 416 �� fv1 i4h5 COI-WS) P -t" iy � N C.ts�ir N1rJ& 1Nfo /474-SA r h WRY 1 -t`14 e ‘U p.. iyog-proti toizoggrrk,, �actsrt dlvi' � �yq avtAgP4 r? 6 31 • 7' -- r er� <MI� •t g-- 51. 'rE o.59'°Z. They e 0 --� 6T �otiN 7 N to 1°/-' Fww uNA sL.'P1 . I `/• C5S27 L, 1FwN �r tAII ,C• dk. CSte,) n (555) d • 12. • 4" gt• P•V•o.. vR,toI N -410 • ti/MT L 3/ '•ot l . i / l %I • /.. / • k #'emote tN' FAT Trr) �? A. FIN • 0- • l3J 5W.A-rm. . t r tit Nv WA L (Typ FaW •—•F,; ri'P ftt1• 3=1-F- M.. 5'03.00 ?At? vLE.V. ' 5 2 1 1 00,1 t- L. t •. R L. V. — st�Yf-. I(o%-->" `/. pi -ow LIhle (Wnz �1 S` ��MIN. pig "F NuE--;1\ _ e13: N� 1,44,0 Y - tot iN , TP..vr+ izzave 12- Alt ;O- 'ritteV �' -cou l ewe. 1 4 ---'\.) . to,424X rrAe_ fie. vi - t°► tub+-'°N d it-7PY r-Oee'N frevfxa'e-te-- R Al5tt4 (CoNtzii) A-79 1tero•‘°' , ET I I.JJ 1Jb WALJ. xP1N WN5 ohl - 77. • n, c�Nl�;.j'� \W W • r� vUl v`��cfL C*A • L. Le OttFrrm® e o.� t' 1?t- H( 42 0.� ;1 - ! ro t i—� ,oN a/. 4+s_OJl \ 1,, FLOW t_1N1g sm ( 4)/ e* r.V•o, vRNN eLvrti% MIN• WM t-y GErrti cF tN PEF=T 1YF9 �i Atvg. fIN. ELgV. S5 itETAIRINC. WALL C'11'P r-Y•o. D.L. rust. F1.JZ. et_ 5t13.o10 FIN . rL. 5'bL./5 ?Ab > V. .1'J . ^% t� f1' �� !ory's.0 � • s 1� O 4i' •V.''. V L. - 5Lo?F=_ I %. ,fLd,N c� 1 / *,T IN. t.irN. per, �� C' t58�i �� a� —�I'/• F�vJ—�N�le —� : - Cy��) f e1/4 L \ �. (yS) c4•%,. —; Syr►,` IN s D Geri iiuT '° ., ! h s r / Ez:Ei SO, SE ddIJ SOd ESO HOdd:NOSd30f19 SSIdJ •City ol Rolling January 16, 2001 Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gregorio 16 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: EXPIRATION OF APPROVALS FOR ZONING CASE NO. 599 16 Eastfield, ROLLING HILLS, CA (Lot 68B-EF) RESOLUTION NO. 877 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gregorio: This letter is to inform you that it has been almost one year since the approval of Zoning Case No. 599. Approvals will expire on March 13, 2001. You can extend approvals for one year only. if you apply to the Planning Commission in writing and request an extension prior to the expiration date. The filing fee for the time extension is $200 to be paid to the City of Rolling Hills. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincgrely, ,‘,„& lanta Schwartz Principal Planner cc: Mr. Douglas McHattie Pnrited on Recycled Parer. October 24, 2000 Mr. and Mrs. 16 Eastfield Rolling Hills, SUBJECT: • City oi leolling Joseph Gregorio Drive CA 90274 REFUND ENVIRONMENTAL FEE ZONING CASE NO. 599 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF) Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gregorio: INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com On September 20, 1999, you deposited an environmental fee charged by the State Department of Fish and Game for $1,300 with the City of Rolling Hills. Enclosed, find a refund check for $1,250. We have deducted two $25 fees ($50) charged by the County Recorder for the filing of a Negative Declaration prior to the Planning process on September 1, 1999 and the filing of a Notice of Determination at the completion of the Planning process with a request for . a waiver from the Department of Fish and Game on March 14, 2000. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, 41Led /4, Lola M. Ungar Planning Director 'w v Printed on Recycled Paper. i C•4 o/ ie0ii4 CERTIFIED MAIL March 14, 2000 Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gregorio 16 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 SUBJECT: AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM ZONING CASE NO. 599, 16 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 68-B-EF) RESOLUTION NO. 877 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gregorio: NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com This letter shall serve to notify you that the City Council adopted a resolution on March 13, 2000 granting the following requests: A Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed guest house, a request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed sports court and a request for Site Plan Review for the guest house, retaining walls, tennis court and grading at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA in Zoning Case No. 599. The City Council's decision in this matter shall become effective thirty days after the adoption of the resolution by the Council. You are now required to cause to be recorded an Affidavit of Acceptance Form together with the subject resolution in the Office of the County Recorder before the Council's action takes effect. We have enclosed a copy of RESOLUTION NO. 877, specifying the conditions of approval set forth by the City Council and the approved Exhibit A Development Plan to keep for your files. Once you have reviewed the Resolution, please complete the enclosed AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM, have the signature(s) notarized, and forward the completed form and a copy of the Resolution to: Los Angeles County Registrar -Recorder Real Estate Records Section 12400 East Imperial Highway Norwalk, CA 90650 Include a check in the amount of $9.00 for the first page and $3.00 for each additional page. The City will notify the Los Angeles County Building & Safety Division to issue permits only when the Affidavit of Acceptance is received by us and any conditions of the Resolution required prior to issuance of building permits are met. Please feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, '4 Lola Ungar Planning Director Enc: RESOLUTION NO. 877 AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect Cp Printed on Recycled Paper • • 4 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO: CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ,I ►► ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 -- (310) 377-7288 FAX 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 SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT I (We) certify (or declare) under the•penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. L L L T Recorder's Use Only Signature Signature Name typed or printed Name typed or printed Address Address City/State City/State Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public. State of California County of Los Angeles ) On before me, personally appeared personally known to me (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 he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies) and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness by hand and official seal. Signature of Notary SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF • 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 class 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- • 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- '4 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 Iot. 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 building 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- • • 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 d 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- • • F. Structural t 20.0 0 coverage shall not exceed 13.393 square feet or ' g q % 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 malls 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- S 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. Al. 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- 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 Hills Planning 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 13TH TnCH, 2000. O 1�t3 Y 1'!~Ri .D.S., MAYOR PRO T ORE A i"1'hST: 12 MARILYN kERN DEPUTY CITY CLERK Resolution No. 877 -7- • • STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF 03 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. MARILYN KERN DEPUTY CITY CLERK Resolution No. 877 -8- • • a, a fa a, a, 2.1 at 0 m cn cn E u W cc 0 z cc cc — w 1 0 a) Postage P 852 865 323 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) 1 to �o_s � jr. t 0 Street and No. mo o 4 e. , State and IP Co e h�:/s, 1 90.2zy Certified Fee • Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee Return Receipt showing to whom and Date Delivered U, rn Return Receipt showing to whom, •- Date, and Address of Delivery a> ITOTAL Postage and Fees o Postmark or Date co ch E 0 u_ to a. !r ?c. SENDER: ■ Complete items 1 and/or 2 for additional services. ■ Complete items 3, 4a, and 4b. • Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can return this card to you. ■ Attach this form to the front of the mailpiece, or on the back if space does not permit. ■ Write'Return Receipt Requested' on the mailpiece below the article number. • The Return Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date delivered. 3. Article Addressed to: G ----65f f l e. v-r Ri O///pis / 7/5, 69 9e,a 7 / �.0 599 5. Received By: (Print Name) Sig gty e' (Addressee orAv (j PS -For 3811, December 1994 ISCEHETI MAR 1 4 2000 (TY OF ROLLING HQLS d I also wish to receive the following services (for an extra fee): 1. 0 Addressee's Address 2. 0 Restricted Delivery Consult postmaster for fee. I4a. Article Number P SSa 56.- 3a 3 4b. Service Type ❑ Registered ,t3r. Certified ❑ Express Mail 0 Insured ❑ Return Receip‘for Merchandise 0 COD 17. Date of Del'vd 8. Addresseb s Adress (Only if requested and fee is paid) Domestic Return Receipt ai U at fn C C) ai CC 4- d cc rn c N 0: 0 !Ca •City (I leoffinv JUL February 29, 2000 Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gregorio 16 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 599, A request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed guest house, a request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed sports court, and a request for Site Plan Review for the guest house, retaining wall, tennis court and grading at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gregorio: This letter shall serve to notify you that the City Council voted at their regular meeting on February 28, 2000 to direct staff to prepare a resolution to approve your requests for a guest house, sports court, retaining walls and grading in Zoning Case No. 599 and shall be confirmed in the draft resolution that is being prepared. The City Council will review and consider the draft resolution, together with conditions of approval, at an upcoming meeting and make its final decision on your application at that subsequent meeting. The City Council's action taken by resolution approving the development application is tentatively scheduled for Monday, March 13, 2000. The decision shall become effective thirty days after the adoption of the City Council's resolution. The findings and conditions of approval of the draft resolution will be forwarded to you before being signed by the Mayor and City Clerk. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, Lola M. Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect Printed on Recycled Paper. • • Joseph and Laura Gregorio 16 Eastfield Dr. Rolling Hills, Ca 90274 February 23, 2000 Ms. Lola Ungar Planning Director, City of Rolling Hills No. 2.Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Dear Ms. Ungar, lAffg1:11WEE76' FEB 232000 CITY OF ROLLING RILLS You should have received -a revised drawing of oursports court and guest house: from. Criss Gunderson; We -are sending you this letter to help -you understand what we are interested in accomplishing at Monday nights City Council. meeting. Because the court size has been, reduced, this cancels the need for any variances. We would like to have our sports court and. guesthouse approved. The court has remainedin the same position thathas already -been -viewed by the Council. Due tothe nature of the situation,. we do not wish ..this to go back to the Planning.Conunision seeing that they have already recommended for approval the larger court. Nor do we wish to flag the court for the fourth time. We. respectfully request that our, project be approved. on.Monday night so. that we. may move forward to complete our guest house and sports court. Thank you, t< Joe and. Laura Grego • City o/ RO/& Jh/h THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Mayor GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S. Mayor Pro Tern FRANK E. HILL Councilmember B. ALLEN LAY Councilmember JODY MURDOCK. Councilmember • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com February 15, 2000 Mrs. Ginny Leeuwenburgh 12 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 599: AN APPEAL OF THE FOLLOWING PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED REQUESTS: (1) VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE, (2) VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM TOTAL LOT COVERAGE, (3) VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA, (4) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PERMIT THE .CONSTRUCTION OF A PROPOSED GUEST HOUSE, (5) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PROPOSED TENNIS COURT, AND (6) SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE GUEST HOUSE, RETAINING WALL, TENNIS COURT AND GRADING AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. MR. AND MRS. JOSEPH GREGORIO, 16 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 68-B-EF). Dear Mrs. Leeuwenburgh: The public hearing for the above referenced case was continued to the regular City Council meeting to be held on Monday, February 28, 2000. This continuance was granted at the request of the applicants in order to give them the opportunity to modify their proposal. This meeting will begin at 7:30 p.m. in the Rolling Hills City Council Chambers, 2 Portuguese Bend Road. Should you wish to discuss this in the interim, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Craig R. Nealis City Manager CRN:mlk 02/15/00gregoriocon tinue.ltr cc: Lola Ungar, Planning Director Printed on Recycled Paper. • C.•ey ./ l2 fl,.y JJ.•PG THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Mayor GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S. Mayor Pro Tem FRANK E. HILL Councilmember B. ALLEN LAY Councilmember JODY MURDOCK Councilmember • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com February 15, 2000 Mrs. Marilyn Malmuth 4 Outrider Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 599: AN APPEAL OF THE FOLLOWING PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED REQUESTS: (1) VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE, (2) VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM TOTAL LOT COVERAGE, (3) VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA, (4) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PROPOSED GUEST HOUSE, (5) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PROPOSED TENNIS COURT, AND (6) SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE GUEST HOUSE, RETAINING WALL, TENNIS COURT AND GRADING AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. MR. AND MRS. JOSEPH GREGORIO, 16 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 68-B-EF). • Dear Mrs. Malmuth: The public hearing for the above referenced case was continued to the regular City Council meeting to be held on Monday, February 28, 2000. This continuance was granted at the request of the applicants in order to give them the opportunity to modify their proposal. This meeting will begin at 7:30 p.m. in the Rolling Hills City Council Chambers, 2 Portuguese Bend Road. Should you wish to discuss this in the interim, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, A /4 raig R. Nealis City Manager CRN:mlk 02/15/00gregoriocon ti n ue.l t r cc: Lola Ungar, Planning Director Printed on Recycled Paper. • C14 o/ THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Mayor GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S. Mayor Pro Tem FRANK E. HILL Councilmember B. ALLEN LAY Councilmember JODY MURDOCK. Councilmember • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com February 15, 2000 Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gregorio 16 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 599: AN APPEAL OF THE FOLLOWING PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVED REQUESTS: (1) VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE, (2) VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM TOTAL LOT COVERAGE, (3) VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA, (4) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PROPOSED GUEST HOUSE, (5) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PROPOSED TENNIS COURT, AND (6) SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE GUEST HOUSE, RETAINING WALL, TENNIS COURT AND GRADING AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. MR. AND MRS. JOSEPH GREGORIO, 16 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 68-B-EF). Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gregorio: At the regular Rolling Hills City Council meeting held Monday, February 14, 2000, City Councilmembers approved your request for the continuation of the above referenced Zoning Case in order to allow you the opportunity to modify your proposal. Therefore, the next public hearing on your proposal will be held in the Rolling Hills City Council Chambers, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, beginning at 7:30 p.m. on Monday, February 28, 2000. Please submit your plans to this office no later than Tuesday, February 22, 2000 in order for us to evaluate your modified proposal. Should you wish to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to call. We appreciate your cooperation. Sincerely, Craig R. Nealis City Manager CRN:mlk 02/15/00gregorio.ltr cc: Lola Ungar, Planning Director Criss Gunderson Printed on Recycled Paper'. February 14, 2000 Joseph and Laura Gregorio #16 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, California Ms. Lola Ungar Planning Director, City of Rolling Hills #2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California • 2EgEllUR-9' FEB 1 4 2000 CITY OF ROLLING RILLS Sy Regarding: #16 Eastfield Drive, Gregorio Application, zoning case no. 599 Dear Ms. Ungar, After meeting with Craig R. Nealis on Friday February 11, we feel that it is in our best interest to modify our current plan. We respectfully request the time to do that and are asking for a two week continuance so that all of the proper steps can be taken. Thank you, -.i� e and Laura Gr:gr cc: Criss Gunderson •Cay .1) leffiny February 4, 2000 Ms. Julie Heinsheimer 7 Johns Canyon Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: 16 EASTFIELD DRIVE MR. & MRS. JOSEPH GREGORIO Dear Julie: • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Attached are the same landscape plans and a new cost estimate for your review that were presented to us for 16 Eastfield Drive proposed to be in compliance with Resolution No. 99-19 (attached). All of the plants proposed are now reduced to 1 gallon in size to reduce the cost of the bond. Is this acceptable? Please let me know if there is anything else that you need from the applicants or the Architect, Mr. Criss Gunderson. Sincerely, Lola Ungar Planning Director "a Printed on Recycled Paper LOU'S LANDSCAPING, INC. 43p. Landscaping & Masonry No job too large or too small Custom Landscaping , sod lawn. color automatic sprinklers. slope planting. tree trimming. complete drainage system. Retaining Walls, custom design driveways, exposed aggregate, brick, clone. custom pool deck. wood decking & fencing. FREE ESTIMATE • BONDED & INSURED LIC. /672.642 M area glee. 1152 832-4055 January 31,2000 Mr and Mrs Joe Gregorio 16 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills Tennis court fencing landscape bid. 1. 82 - 1 gallon Xylosma Comgestum @ 4.00 per plant $ 328.00 2. Labor to plant @ 8.00 per plant 656.00 3. Sprinkler system for perimeter of court 1,500 00 Total $ 2,484.00 •City 0/ FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION January 25, 2000 Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gregorio 16 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 599; An appeal of the following Planning Commission approved requests: (1) Variance to exceed the maximum structural lot coverage, (2) Variance to exceed the maximum total lot coverage, (3) Variance to exceed the maximum disturbed area, (4) Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed guest house, (5) Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed tennis court, and (6) Site Plan Review for the guest house, retaining wall, tennis court and grading at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gregorio: We have arranged for the City Council to conduct a field inspection of your property to view a silhouette of the proposed project on February 9. 2000. The City Council's timetable is to meet at 4 P.M. at your property. The site must be prepared according to the enclosed Silhouette Construction Guidelines and the following requirements: • A full-size silhouette in conformance with the attached guidelines must be prepared for ALL STRUCTURES of the project showing the footprints, roof ridges and bearing walls; • Show the height of the finished floor of the guest house and sports court; • A full-size silhouette must be prepared outlining the tennis court footprint and the 6 foot high screening on all four sides; and • Stake the retaining wall and the limits of the building pad. The owner and/or representative should be present to answer any questions regarding the proposal. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Lola Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect Printed on Recycled Paper. • Cit Jh116 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SILHOUETTE CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES When required by the Planning Commission or City Council, a silhouette of proposed construction should be erected for the week preceding the designated Planning Commission or City Council meeting. Silhouettes should be constructed with 2" x 4" lumber. Printed boards are not acceptable. Bracing should be provided where possible. Wire, twine or other suitable material should be used to delineate roof ridges and eaves. Small pieces of cloth or flags should be attached to the wire or twine to aid in the visualization of the proposed construction. The application may be delayed if inaccurate or incomplete silhouettes are constructed. If you have any further questions contact the Planning Department Staff at (310) 377-1521. 1 V ♦1♦/4r 1 SECTION PLAN 1•I.4 -41 ®Prrr1 f; fi f?n F cye lod (1%ir>Cr i • Ca ofieleb.y _Afro FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION January 25, 2000 Mr. and Mrs. Ken Leeuwenburgh 12 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 Mrs. Marilyn Malmuth 4 Outrider Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 599; An appeal of the following Planning Commission approved requests: (1) Variance to exceed the maximum structural lot coverage, (2) Variance to exceed the maximum total lot coverage, (3) Variance to exceed the maximum disturbed area, (4) Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed guest house, (5) Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed tennis court, and (6) Site Plan Review for the guest house, retaining wall, tennis court and grading at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Leeuwenburgh and Mrs. Malmuth: We have arranged for the City Council to conduct a field inspection of the subject property to view a silhouette of the proposed project on February 9. 2000. The City Council's timetable is to meet at 4 P.M. at the property. The owner and/or representative will be present to answer any questions regarding the proposal. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Lola Ungar Planning Director 161-ec- Pririted on Recycled Paper. •City ofielling NOTIFICATION LETTER • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com January 11, 2000 Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gregorio 16 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 599; An appeal of the following Planning Commission approved requests: (1) Variance to exceed the maximum structural lot coverage, (2) Variance to exceed the maximum total lot coverage, (3) Variance to exceed the maximum disturbed area, (4) Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed guest house, (5) Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed tennis court, and (6) Site Plan Review for the guest house, retaining wall, tennis court and grading at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Ms. and Mr. Gregorio: Zoning Case No. 599 was appealed by the City Council on Monday, January 10, 2000. The case has been set for public hearing consideration by the City Council at their meeting on Monday, January 24, 2000. The meeting will begin at 7:30 PM in the Council Chambers, Rolling Hills City Hall Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills. You or your designated representative must attend to present your project and to answer questions. The staff report for this project will be available at the City Hall after 3:00 PM on Friday, January 21, 2000. The report will be mailed to you. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Lola Ungar Planning Director cc: Criss Gunderson ►o Printed on Recycled Paper. City ofiel��n9 JUL January 7, 2000 Ms. Julie Heinsheimer 7 Johns Canyon Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN 16 EASTFIELD DRIVE MR. & MRS. JOSEPH GREGORIO Dear Julie: i INCORPORATED JANUARY 'A, 1951 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cltyofrh@aol.com Attached is the preliminary landscape plan for 16 Eastfield Drive for your review that was presented to us to be in compliance with Resolution No. 99-19 (attached). Note landscape conditions in Paragraphs V and Y through AA of Section No. 17. Please let me know if there is anything else that you need from the City or the property owner. Sincergly, Lola Ungar Planning Director ®Printed on Recyclfd Paper City 0/!2 Pf',.s Jh/i • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com CERTIFIED MAIL December 30, 1999 Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gregorio 16 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: APPEAL PERIOD AND AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM ZONING CASE NO. 599, 16 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 68-B-EF) RESOLUTION NO. 99-19 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gregorio: This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission adopted a resolution on December 21,... 1999 granting the following requests: (1) Request for a Variance to exceed the maximum structural lot coverage, (2) request for a Variance to exceed the maximum total lot coverage, (3) request. for Variance to exceed the maximum disturbed area, (4) request for. a Conditional Use Permitto permit the - construction of a proposed guest house, (5) request for a Conditional Use Permit to ..permit the • construction of a proposed tennis court (previously.:described as a sports court), and (6) request for Site,.. Plan Review for the guest house, retaining wall, tennis court and grading at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling ;Hills, CA in Zoning Case No. 599. : That. action,: • accompanied -by the record of the proceedings. before the Commission will be reported to the City Council l• • on January 10, 2000. The Planning Commission's decision in this matter shall become effective thirty days after the adoption of the resolution by the Commission, unless an appeal has been filed or the City Council takes jurisdiction of the case within that thirty (301 day appeal period. (Section 17.54.010(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code). Should there be an appeal, the Commission's decision will be stayed until the Council completes its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. If no appeals are filed within the thirty (30) day period after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution, the Planning Commission's action will become final and you will be required to cause to be recorded an Affidavit of Acceptance Form together with the subject resolution in the Office of the County Recorder before the Commission's action takes effect. We have enclosed a copy of RESOLUTION NO. 99-19, specifying the conditions of approval set forth by the Planning Commission and the approved Exhibit A Development Plan to keep for your files. Once you have reviewed the Resolution, please complete the enclosed AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM, have the signature(s) notarized, and forward the completed form and a copy of the Resolution to: Los Angeles County Registrar -Recorder Real Estate Records Section 12400 East Imperial Highway Norwalk, CA 90650 Include a check in the amount of $9.00 for the first page and $3.00 for each additional page. The City will notify the Los Angeles County Building & Safety Division to issue permits only when the Affidavit of Acceptance is received by us and any conditions of the Resolution required prior to issuance of building permits are met. Printed on Recycled Paper. Please feel free to call n1 (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions` (rtir---. Lola Ungar Planning Director ENC: RESOLUTION NO. 99-19 AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM APPEAL SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN Cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 (310) 377-7288 FAX 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 conditioris in said ZONING CASE NO.599 SITE PLAN REVIEW., VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT :.. . I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that; the foregoing is true and correct. • Signature Name typed or printed Address City/State Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public. State of California ) County of Los Angeles ) On before me, personally appeared Signature Name typed or printed Address City/State L L L T Recorder's Use Only personally known to me (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 he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies) and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness by hand and official seal. Signature of Notary SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF • 17.54.010 17.54 APPEALS 17.54.010 Time for Filing Appeals A. All actions of the Planning Commission authorized by this Title may be appealed to the City Council. All appeals shall be filed in writing with the City Clerk. B. All appeals must be filed on or before the 30th calendar day after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution on the project or application. Application fees shall be paid as required by Section 17.30.030 of this Title. C. Within 30 days after the Planning Commission adopts a resolution which approves or denies a development application, the City Clerk shall place the resolution as a report item on the City Council's agenda. The City Council may, by an affirmative vote of three members, take jurisdiction over the application. In the event the City Council takes jurisdiction over the application, the Planning Commission's decision will be stayed until the City Council completes its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter. 17.54.020 Persons Authorized to File an Appeal Any person, including the City Manager, may appeal a decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council, 'in accordance with the terms of this Chapter. 17.54.030 Form, Content, and Deficiencies in an Appeal Application A. All appeals shall be filed in writing with the City Clerk on a form or forms provided by the City Clerk. No appeal shall be considered filed until the required appeal fee has been received by the City Clerk. B. The appeal application shall state, at a minimum, the name and address of the appellant, the project and action being appealed, and the reasons why the appellant believes that the Planning Commission erred or abused its discretion, or why the Planning Commission's decision is not support by evidence in the record. 76 ROLLING HILLS ZONING MAY 24,1993 • • 17.54.030 C. If the appeal application is found to be deficient, the City Clerk shall deliver or mail (by certified mail), to the appellant a notice specifying the reasons why the appeal is deficient. The appellant shall correct the deficiency with an amendment to the appeal form within seven calendar days of receiving the deficiency notice. Otherwise, the appeal application will be deemed withdrawn, and the appeal fee will be returned to the applicant. 17.54.040 Request for Information Upon receipt of a written and complete appeal application and fee, the City Clerk shall direct the Planning Commission Secretary to transmit to the City Council the complete record of the entire proceeding before the Planning Commission. 17.54.050 Scheduling of Appeal Hearing Upon receiving an appeal, the City Clerk shall set the appeal for a hearing before the City Council to occur within 20 days of the filing of the appeal. In the event that more than one appeal is filed for the same project, the Clerk shall schedule all appeals to be heard at the same time. 17.54.060 Proceedings A. Noticing The hearing shall be noticed as required by Section 17.30.030 of this Title. In addition, the following parties shall be noticed: 1. The applicant of the proposal being appealed; 2. The appellant; and 3. Any person who provided oral testimony or written comments to the Planning Commission during or as part of the public hearing on the project. B. Hearing The City Council shall conduct a public hearing pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 17.34 of this Title. The Council shall consider all information in the record, as well as additional information presented at the appeal hearing, before taking action on the appeal. 77 ROLLING HILLS ZONING MAY 24, 1993 17.54.060 • C. Action The Council may act to uphold, overturn, or otherwise modify the Planning Commission's original action on the proposal, or the Council may remand the application back to the Planning Commission for further review and direction. The Council shall make findings to support its decision. D. Finality of Decision • The action of the City Council to approve, conditionally approve, or deny an application shall be final and conclusive. E. Record of Proceedings The decision of the City Council shall be set forth in full in a resolution or ordinance. A copy of the decision shall be sent to the applicant or the appellant. 17.54.070 Statute of Limitations Any action challenging a. final administrative order or decision by the City made as a result of a proceeding in which by law a hearing is required to be given, evidence is required to betaken, and discretion regarding a final and non -appealable determination of facts is vested in the City of Rolling Hills, the City Council, or in any of its Commissions, officers, or employees, must be filed within the time limits set forth in the ,California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6 78 ROLLING HILLS ZONING MAY 24, 1993 RESOLUTION NO. 99-19 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS (1) GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERIVi 1 i. h L' STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE, (2) GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM TOTAL LOT COVERAGE, (3) GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERIVu 1 1 EU 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' theconstruction, of 'a" 5,111. square :foot tennis court, and . requesting Site ,Plan Review, topermit ,-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. • DRAFT 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 inthe same zone prevent the,owner from: making use of a parcel.: of,: property to the same extent _ enjoyed by similarproperties 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 percentofthe 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 • • DRAFT 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 longand 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 inthe 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 DRAFT 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 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 • • DRAFT 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 guesthouse 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 • • DRAFT 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 detrimentalto 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 andMass with 'the site, the natural terrain,, andsurrounding, residences because the tennis c:court will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of..-the;.communitq and ' is located on .a 1.98. acre :.parcel --of . property that is adequate :;in'.:size; . shape.,and topography to accommodate such,use.: 7 -D..: The .1 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 DRAFT 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 Section6: 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% maximuxn ;.overall.., lot coverage requirement was approved by:. Variance in Section • 8. ,The: proposed :project: is screened from the road so as to reducethe 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 • • DRAFT 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, .a landscaping which is compatible 'with and . enhances the rural character : of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transitionarea 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 • • DRAFT 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 islocated shall containi. 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 DRAFT 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 s. 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• feet of the No vehicular access or'paved 'parking area shall be developed within' 50 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 • • DRAFT 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 andshall.. be retained with the City for not less than two years after landscape installation,,The 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 thatsuchlandscaping 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 DRAFT 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. 'Al. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and related traffic noise:, throughout the day betweenthe 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 • • DRAFT 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 .shalt :not .:be effective. AT. . All conditionsof 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. 0 1999. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: MARILmaA:Je"4". k 4/1") KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 99-19 PAGE 13 OF 14 DRAFT 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 PERlvui iw STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE, (2) GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM TOTAL LOT COVERAGE, (3) GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM FERMI a to DISTURBED AREA, (4) GRANTING A CON Li i iuNAL 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 on December 21,.1999, by the following roll call vote: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CommissionersHankins, 'Sommer, Witte and Chairman ;Roberts. None. Commissioner Margeta. None. and in compliance with, the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 99-19 PAGE 14 OF 14 • P 852 865 214 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) Sent to II ,7!/,"? :.12% pA 67.15 Street an No. P State and ZIP Code /,/ is Ni/iS CA Sc ie Postage ' - ICertified Fee Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee Return Receipt showing to whom and Date Delivered I /, 25 I u> J co Return Receipt showing to whom, Date, and Address of Delivery I JI w m I TOTAL Postage and Fees I co Postmark or Date co E o EL rn -. a `• SENDER: ,v ■Complete items 1 and/or 2 for additional services. H ■ Complete items 3, 4a, and 4b. c ■ Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can return this co ... card to you. > a Attach this form to the front of the mailpiece, or on the back if space does not permit. ■ Write'Return Receipt Requested' on the mailpiece below the article number. ■ The Return Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date delivered. i d a I also wish to receive the following services (for an extra fee): 1. ❑ Addressee's Address 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery Consult postmaster for fee. 3. Article Addressed to: I4a. Article Number VJ O /6 s752,'/a€ rn f%is�ii M/%s oi9 `947 73/ 0 a z 2C:1. 599 H- eived By: (Print Name) • •. S1gn•• e. ddressee or Agent) y S5a 8-65 4b. Service Type ❑ Registered ❑ Express Mail 3/� Certified 0 Insured ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise 0 COD 7. Date of Delivery I8. Addressee's Address (Only if requested and fee is paid) X PS 11' December 1994 Domestic Return Receipt G•n� efieFP.•..S Jd�FF November 23, 1999 Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gregorio 16 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 599, (1) Request for a Variance to exceed the maximum structural lot coverage, (2) request for a Variance to exceed the maximum total lot coverage, (3) request for a Variance to exceed the maximum disturbed area, (4) request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed guest house, (5) request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed tennis court (previously described as a sports court), and (6) request for Site Plan Review for the guest house, retaining wall, tennis court and grading at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gregorio: This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission voted at their regular meeting on November 16, 1999 to direct staff to prepare a resolution to approve your request for the subject project in Zoning Case No. 599 and shall be confirmed in the draft resolution that is being prepared. The Planning Commission will review and consider the draft resolution, together with conditions of approval, at an upcoming meeting and make its final decision on your application at that subsequent meeting. The findings and conditions of approval of the draft resolution will be forwarded to you before being signed by the Planning Commission Chairman and City Clerk. The decision shall become effective thirty days after the adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution unless an appeal has been filed or the City Council takes jurisdiction of the case within that thirty (301 day appeal period. (Section 17.54.010(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code). Should there be an appeal, the Commission's decision will be stayed until the Council completes its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. The Planning Commission's action taken by resolution approving the development application is tentatively scheduled for December 21, 1999. That action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission, is tentatively scheduled to be placed as a report item on the City Council's agenda at the Council's regular meeting on January 10, 2000. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sinc re Z ola M. Ungar • (eff,,t,r-- Planning Director ""` cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, AIA h pr Printed on Recycled Paper • City ofieolling _Afro FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com September 24,1999 Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gregorio 16 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 599, a request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed guest house, request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed sports court and request for Site Plan Review for the guest house, sports court and grading at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gregorio: We have arranged for the Planning Commission to conduct a field inspection of your property to view a silhouette of the proposed project on Tuesday. October 12.1999. The Planning Commission's timetable is to meet at 5:00 PM at your property. The site must be prepared according to the enclosed Silhouette Construction Guidelines and the following requirements: • A full-size silhouette in conformance with the attached guidelines must be prepared for ALL STRUCTURES of the project showing the footprints, roof ridges and bearing walls; • Show the height of the finished floor of the guest house and sports court; • A full-size silhouette must be prepared outlining the sports court footprint and the eight (8) foot high screening on all four (4) sides; and • Stake the retaining wall and the limits of the building pad. The owner and/or representative should be present to answer any questions regarding the proposal. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincer eee_ Lola Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect So Printed on Recycled Paper. et / RoI/i,S ;:: !957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E•mall: cityofrh@aol.com SILHOUETTE CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES When required by the Planning Commission or City Council, a silhouette of proposed construction should be erected for the week preceding the designated Planning Commission or City Council meeting. Silhouettes should be constructed with 211 x 4" lumber, Printed boards are not acceptable. Bracing should be provided where possible. Wire, twine or other suitable material should be used to delineate roof ridges and eaves. Small pieces of cloth or flags should be attached, to thewire or twine to aid in the visualization of the proposed construction: The application may be delayed if inaccurate or incomplete silhouettes are constructed. If you have any further questions contact the Planning Department Staff at (310) 377-1521. r11 �a YN♦1 IS SECTION PLAN @Panted on Recvraec] Paper MITIGATION MEASURES ZONING CASE NO. 599 MR. AND MRS. JOSEPH GREGORIO 16 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 68-B-EF), ROLLING HILLS As the applicant, I agree to incorporate these changes/conditions into my project, and understand that the public hearing and consideration by the City of Rolling Hills will be on the project changed/conditioned. Applicant(s)(i':/,x V,--I,` — Date q 20.95) Signature Applicant(s) 1h 10 a_ (L' �� Date q -'Ph- q9 Signature ��- v v , Applicant(s) (Print) ..- I bse r')1 1((.1 Ira (rc n ri o If no response is received within 15 days, the Environmental Determination requires that these changes/conditions be included in project. LOLA UNGAR, PLAN G DIRECTOR 9yo 91 Date City leo elins .uee STATUS OF APPLICATION September 9,1999 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gregorio 16 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 599, a request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed guest house, request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed sports court and request for Site Plan Review for the guest house, sports court and grading at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gregorio: Pursuant to state law the City's staff has completed a preliminary review of the application noted above and finds that the information submitted is: X Sufficiently complete as of the date indicated above to allow the application to be processed. Please note that the City may require further information in order to clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise supplement the application. If the City requires such additional information, it is strongly suggested that you supply that information promptly to avoid any delay in the processing of the application. The application for Zoning Case No. 599 has been set for public hearing consideration by the Planning Commission at their meeting on Tuesday, September 21,1999. The meeting will begin at 7:30 PM in the Council Chambers, Rolling Hills City Hall Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills. You or your designated representative must attend to present your project and to answer questions. The staff report for this project will be available at the City Hall after 3:00 PM on Friday, September 17,1999. We will forward a copy to you. Please call me when you receive this letter if you have any questions at (310) 377-1521. Lola Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect 0.5 Printed on Fiecyr,•led Papor. • • City 0/ Ailing ildio September 1, 1999 Los Angeles County Clerk Environmental Filings Department 12400 East Imperial Highway Norwalk, CA 90650 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Attn: Angel Shells SUBJECT: NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ZONING CASE NO. 599 REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PROPOSED GUEST HOUSE AND REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PROPOSED SPORTS COURT THAT WILL REQUIRE GRADING, AND REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE GUEST HOUSE, SPORTS COURT AND GRADING AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 16 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 68-B-EF), ROLLING HILLS, CA. Dear Angel: Enclosed find a Notice of Intent to file a Negative Declaration and a Notice of Public Hearing regarding Zoning Case No. 599, a request to construct a new guest house and a new sports court that will require grading where there is an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills. Please post for 30 days and after that time please stamp and return to the City in the enclosed self-addressed envelope. Since ply, LOLA UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR ENCLOSURE: Notice of Public Hearing Negative Declaration Printed on Recycled Paper tT,71nr3,•,i';ltitf;rir ITUI9'I iNg.1,T7 llnigCilitENZIT MEIC LLLI:uILylt t: tutilks NUMBER PAY TO THE ORDER OF County of LA County Recorder Registrar -Recorder 12400 E. Imperial Highwa Norwalk, CA 90650 DECITY OF ROLLIIHILLS 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROA ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 UNION BANK OF C�FORNIA Palos Verdes Cen 3 507 Silver Spur Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 16-49/1220 ********************** Twenty-Fiveand 00/100 DATE Sep prA 12808 **.******************** MICIRtiriattitIVVia:Aft .:ICCI'1k 1 ;f le3;:IGl..C:1.1•1Ao1N:'4L'J f?9V�tcl� II'OL280811' 1:L220004961:0732002L75ll' CITY OF ROLLING HILLS County of LA County Recorder c37 INVOICE NO 16 Eastfield NUMBER RIZED SIGNATURE 12808 Sep 2 99 GROSS AMT DISCOUNT NET 25.00 0.00 25.00 Audited and approved for payment : CITY OF ROLLING HILLS County of LA County Recorder c37 INVOICE NO 16 Eastfield NUMBER 25.00 12808 Sep 2 99 GROSS AMT DISCOUNT NET 25.00 0.00 25.00 Audited and approved for payment : C� 25.00 (4 AIYTHORIZED SIGNATURE M97SF016535M 10/97 iiA'3jPl',f4i'il .•ir.,LJS.. r.:,i ,.:,,.nci a�ims�� City 0/Roiling _Afro September 1, 1999 Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gregorio 16 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com PRELIMINARY NEGATIVE DECLARATION DETERMINATION REQUEST FOR APPLICANT'S CONCURRENCE ZONING CASE NO. 599 Request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed guest house and request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed sports court that will require grading at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gregorio: On September 1, 1999, the Planning staff of the City of Rolling Hills completed its review of the Environmental Questionnaire and other data regarding your project. From this review, a preliminary determination was made that a Negative Declaration would be the appropriate environmental document, providing the applicant concurs with the attached environmental conditions by either revising the project or agreeing to meet the provisions of the conditions. A Negative Declaration is a determination that although a proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in the case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. If the applicant agrees to the attached conditions, the document should be signed, dated and returned to the Planning Department at the above address along with a check made out to the CITY OF ROLLING HILLS in the amount of $1,300. (The document copy is for your records). The fee is charged by the State Department of Fish and Game in the amount of $1,250 and Los Angeles County Clerk in the amount of $25 for two separate filing fees. In order to continue with the Environmental review process on this application, please sign and submit the attached Mitigated Negative Declaration along with the required $1,300 within 30 days from the above date. Additional processing fees may be required if the Planning Commission or the City Council does not approve this Negative Declaration and requires additional environmental studies of the project. Please note that the mitigation measures listed on the Negative Declaration do not have to be met before the document is signed and returned with the fee. If you or your consultants desire to have the proposed mitigation measures modified please contact me as soon as possible. Any modifications to the proposed mitigated measures may necessitate the reconsideration of the proposed environmental determination. If you have any questions regarding environmental documentation or your tentative map, please call me at (310) 377-1521. LOLA UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect y�J Printed on Recycled Paper. • City o f led/J.1 L`Lo INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 _ September 1, 1999 Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Gregorio 16 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 MITIGATION MEASURES (PROJECT CHANGES/CONDITIONS) DUE TO ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com PROJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 599 The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed guest house and requesting a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed sports court that will require grading at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. The City of Rolling Hills Planning staff has determined that the following conditions or changes in the project are necessary in order to assure that there will be no substantial evidence that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment: Mitigation Measures A. The applicants shall prepare and submit to the City fifteen (15) preliminary grading plans showing the existing structures and the proposed sports court, drainage and erosion control facilities, a 450 square foot stable and a 550 square foot corral for the lot, areas of stormwater overflow or geological hazard, and blue line streams, at least 30 days prior to the Planning Commission hearing on the project application. B. The project shall be reviewed by the Rolling Hills Planning Commission. C. The property owners shall be required to conform with South Coast Air Quality Management District, Los Angeles County and local ordinances and engineering practices during construction by using dust control measures to stabilize the soil from wind erosion and reduce dust and objectionable odors generated by construction activities. The project may be potentially significant unless mitigation is incorporated for the project. D. 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 tul Printed on Recycled Paper. • MITIGATION MEASURES ZONING CASE NO. 599 MR. AND MRS. JOSEPH GREGORIO 16 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 68-B-EF), ROLLING HILLS comply with the mitigation measures recommended and approved by the City for the disposition, mitigation or salvage of such material. E. The property owner shall be required to conform with local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence. F. The property owners shall be required to conform 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. G. 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. H. The sports court shall be screened with fencing on all four sides. I. The sports court shall also be screened with native drought -resistant vegetation such as Toyon and Lemonadeberry on all four sides. J. All parking, during and after construction, shall take place on the project site. K. 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 septic tanks unless it is feasible to connect to the nearby County sanitary sewer system. L. 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. M. 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. • MITIGATION MEASURES ZONING CASE NO. 599 MR. AND MRS. JOSEPH GREGORIO 16 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 68-B-EF), ROLLING HILLS As the applicant, I agree to incorporate these changes/conditions into my project, and understand that the public hearing and consideration by the City of Rolling Hills will be on the project changed/conditioned. Applicant(s) Date Signature Applicant(s) Date Signature Applicant(s) (Print) If no response is received within 15 days, the Environmental Determination requires that these changes/conditions be included in project. LOLA UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR Date • • COPV MITIGATION MEASURES ZONING CASE NO. 599 MR. AND MRS. JOSEPH GREGORIO 16 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 68-B-EF), ROLLING HILLS As the applicant, I agree to incorporate these changes/conditions into my project, and understand that the public hearing and consideration by the City of Rolling Hills will be on the project changed/conditioned. Applicant(s) Signature Applicant(s) Signature Date Date Applicant(s) (Print) If no response is received within 15 days, the Environmental Determination requires that these changes/conditions be included in project. LOLA UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR Date • City 0/ leolliny _Afro September 1, 1999 ' Dr. Ira Toibin Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District 3801 Via La Selva Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ZONING CASE NO. 599 Requesti for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed guest house and request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed sports court at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Dr. Toibin: Enclosed find a Notice of Intent to file a Negative Declaration and a Notice of Public. Hearing regarding Zoning Case No. 599, a request to construct a new guest house and a new sports court that will require grading where there is an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills. After reviewing the Initial Study for the subject project, staff has determined 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. Accordingly, a Negative Declaration has been prepared. We have enclosed the proposed Negative Declaration for the subject case. Please review and direct all written comments to the City of Rolling Hills by September 21, 1999. Feel free to contact me at (310) 377-1521. Sincerely, Lola Ungar Planning Director ENCLOSURE: Negative Declaration Punted on Recycled Paper. Ci4 ol Rolling September 1, 1999 Ms. Diana Moreno Palos Verdes Peninsula Center Library 650 Deep Valley Drive Palos Verdes Peninsula, CA 90274 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ZONING CASE NO. 599 Requesti for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed guest house and request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed sports court at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Enclosed find a Notice of Intent to file a Negative Declaration and a Notice of Public Hearing regarding Zoning Case No. 599, a request to construct a new guest house and a new sports court that will require grading where there is an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills. After reviewing the Initial Study for the subject project, staff has determined 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. Accordingly, a Negative Declaration has been prepared. We have enclosed the proposed Negative Declaration for the subject case. Please review and direct all written comments to the City of Rolling Hills by September 21, 1999. Feel free to contact me at (310) 377-1521. Sincerely, Lola Ungar Planning Director ENCLOSURE: Negative Declaration Printed on Recycled Riper. • City 0/ Rolling _AIL September 1, 1999 Mr. Douglas Prichard, City Manager City of Rolling Hills Estates 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ZONING CASE NO. 599 Requesti for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed guest house and request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed sports court at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. Pr' Enclosed find a Notice of Intent to file a Negative Declaration and a Notice of Public Hearing regarding Zoning Case No. 599, a request to construct a new guest house and a new sports court that will require grading where there is an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills. After reviewing the Initial Study for the subject project, staff has determined 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. Accordingly, a Negative Declaration has been prepared. We have enclosed the proposed Negative Declaration for the subject case. Please review and direct all written comments to the City of Rolling Hills by September 21, 1999. Feel free to contact me at (310) 377-1521. Lola Ungar Planning Director ENCLOSURE: Negative Declaration Printed on Recycled Paper. • • Ci4 o/Rolling J&?e September 1, 1999 Mr. Les Evans, City Manager City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ZONING CASE NO. 599 Requesti for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed guest house and request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a proposed sports court at an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. Eya�is: �. Enclosed find a Notice of Intent to file a Negative Declaration and a Notice of Public Hearing regarding Zoning Case No. 599, a request to construct a new guest house and a new sports court that will require grading where there is an existing single family residence at 16 Eastfield Drive (Lot 68-B-EF), Rolling Hills. After reviewing the Initial Study for the subject project, staff has determined 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. Accordingly, a Negative Declaration has been prepared. We have enclosed the proposed Negative Declaration for the subject case. Please review and direct all written comments to the City of Rolling Hills by September 21, 1999. Feel free to contact me at (310) 377-1521. Sincerely, 1(Arsr. Lola Ungar Planning Director ENCLOSURE: Negative Declaration tis Printed on Recycled Paper