570, To conduct grading in rear yar, ApplicationC1i o/
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
VARIANCE NO PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
REOUEST FOR HEARING ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377.1521
FAX: (310) 377.7288
PROPERTY OWNER: J E RR.q S c s R t3 ca IR O
OWNER'S ADDRESS: C A lr'J A L L( 20 S 12„ ID
TELEPHONE NO.: 44 M 8' `a
PROPERTY ADDRESS: I o J L
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO. 2. t • S Co 7 % 3
ASSESSOR'S BOOK NO.7 %7 PAGE 1 CES PARCEL 3 2
AGENTS NAME: � 0 V t t ' L= tJG 1 A tE Ic ►
AGENTS ADDRESS: -3 04 T t� o A P L , P,',E, Ca e) O 2.14
TELEPHONE NO.: (3 10) 31 ' Z 5 C 1
Describe in detail the nature of the proposed use, including what aspects of the project
require a Variance.
IatrT4ttJttlCs, ,) Leb tl= Q,ApQ
Criteria to be satisfied for grant of Variance
Such change is based upon the following described exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances or conditions that do not apply generally to other property in the same
vicinity and zone.
tL 1 ea n C1 'i I t A i( CD 714 A T S 'i b 2 c`I
ki�7l=� RQNor-C vas.$ ut•\o07.Qc LtrD C..-:200(c)4
!1-I E.. 1-11 LL 4 I t7 G b o r 2 0 A D t t.)61,
,10 N�tc oP.tc-) PROPE2r ttSs
Such change will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare nor injurious to the
property or improvements in such vicinity and zone where property is located because
11AL_= CI-1AC,\h) t(.1.. CG1rTURL. trksGT
TO My`)A TC.SI A CnNTC2OL C4.0 M, l( c12
__(CD ID GI 0 Gr)
FILING FEE
A filing fee must accompany the application. Make check payable to: THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS.
OWNER'S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Property development in Rolling Hills is governed,by ordinances of the CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS ("City") and by private deed restrictions enforced by the ROLLING
HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION ("RHCA").
The land development permit process of the City and the RHCA are completely
independent and separate. Both must be satisfied and approval given by both the City and
the RHCA to develop property in Rolling Hills. An approval by either the City or the
RHCA does not mean or imply or ensure approval by the other.
The suggested sequence of property development is to obtain City approvals first.
I, (We), the undersigned, acknowledge that the above statement has been fully read and its
admonition is completely understood.
Executed at Lt..lhl6 /-) 1 L L 5
this 5 day of k.) tE PS E (_
By: & 4L_1
By:
, California
, 19c)7.
c) 63 t. L g 2 0 '5
Address
OWNER'S DECLARATION
I (We) declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed at 2, 0 L L l cal C.-I 14 1,u..
this fi h day of N d C 1 ( C(.
By:
By:
9/ CArALLEQr)'
Address
L L ez,
, California,
, 19 9 7
NOTE: The Owner's Declaration can only be used if this application is signed in California.
If this application is signed outside of California, the applicant should acknowledge before
a Notary Public of the State where the signature is fixed, or before another officer of that
State authorized by its laws to take acknowledgements, that he (it) owns the property
described herein, and that the information accompanying this application is true to the best
of his (its) knowledge and belief. Attach appropriate acknowledgment here.
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
COMPANY NAME:
COMPANY ADDRESS:
COMPANY PHONE NO. (
PROJECT ADDRESS:
DATE FILED tI/( 79 7
FEE: / 11..re)
RECEIPT NO: &LI
BY: //i, a„'„,
ZONING CASE NO: !' G)
TENTATIVEHEARING DATE:
• •
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
ZONING CASE
CERTIFIED PROPERTY OWNER'S LIST
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I, V G. SS 6 M. 1.4 1 G-, rn t Jr. ,declareunderpenalty
of perjury that the attached list contains the names and addresses of all persons to whom
all property is assessed as they appear on the latest available assessment roll of the County
within the area described and for a distance of one thousand (1,000) feet from the exterior
boundaries of property legally described as:
L. i 23 [�.t c.,204, Sv2\ICt !a 7
!7 a en 3 144 3 2.
Executed at PA LO 5 V E.R. 0 c ear A i $
1= I r i 1-I day of INi o v E: ►"t G E.2
Conditional Use Permit
Variance
Site Plan Review
Zone Change
, California, this
,19 �j 1
DATE
BUILDING AREAS
NET LOT AREA
BUILDING PAD(S)
RESIDENCE
GARAGE
ZING CASE NO.
ADDRES"
APPLICANT
CALCULATION OF LOT COVERAGE
EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
82,400
lc)33
238?a
GOO
SWIMMING POOL/SPA S ► 0
STABLE
RECREATION COURT
( )
SERVICE YARD
OTHER
TOTAL STRUCTURES
% STRUCTURAL
COVERAGE
% TOTAL PAD
COVERAGE
DRIVEWAY
6 (0 4
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
2 9 G sq.ft.
sq.ft.
464.. sq.ft.
Se,b %
► 4 8 4 sq.ft.
PAVED WALKS AND
PATIO AREAS 1600 sq.ft.
POOL DECKING (394 sq.ft.
TOTAL FLATWORK 4'7 5 4. sq.ft.
% TOTAL FLATWORK
COVERAGE / .11 %
TOTAL STRUCTURAL & FLATWORK
COVERAGE C1401.. sq.ft.
% TOTAL COVERAGE 1 k , 41 %
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
%
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
To
DATE
ONING CASE NO. ADDREP
APPLICANT
CALCULATION OF BUILDING PAD COVERAGE
PAD NO, 1
BUILDABLE PAD AREA Z `7 O sq.ft.
RESIDENCE 2 3 i3ES sq.ft.
GARAGE 600 sq.ft.
STABLE (BARN) sq.ft.
POOL tit O sq.ft.
RECREATION COURT
( ) sq.ft.
OTHER 2.86 sq.ft.
TOTAL STRUCTURES ON PAD NO. 1
% BUILDING PAD COVERAGE
.5 7 2'- sq.ft.
51079 %
PAD NO. 2
BUILDABLE PAD AREA 1 9 8 J sq.ft.
RESIDENCE sq.ft.
GARAGE sq.ft.
STABLE (BARN) `a 6 4- sq.ft.
POOL sq.ft.
RECREATION COURT
( ) sq.ft.
OTHER sq.ft.
TOTAL STRUCTURES ON PAD NO. 2
% BUILDING PAD COVERAGE
8 6 4- sq.ft.
REOUEST FOR HEARING
FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW
PROPERTY OWNER J G 2J2 Y L. e0CA►R l3Q R O_,
OWNER'S ADDRESS: C ca fay 4 LL t_ 2l9
TELEPHONE NO: 4 4- $ 3 S 15
PROPERTY'S ADDRESS: 4 5- Pis?
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO. �j 2. [� . 5. 60 7 / 3
ASSESSORS BOOK NO.7661 PAGE 1 S PARCEL 3 2.
AGENT'S NAME:
AGENTS ADDRESS: 2 S O 3 C O R.A L R C.) E. P.
TELEPHONE NO: (3 t 0) ti 41- 0 l 2 4)
NATURE OF PROPOSED PROJECT
Describe in detail the nature of the proposed project, including what aspects of the project require
a Site Plan Review:
C-t 2/ai761 TZ F P. `-4)A0-c•
FILL. (42t.)tiN1t) (.?G i 1rl1t el;
t , 1 •
;SITE PLAN REVIEW CFTERIA
Site plan review criteria upon which the Planning Commission must make an affirmative finding.
Describe in detail the project's conformance with the criteria below:
A. Is the project compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses? Explain how it
compares to the sizes, setbacks and other characteristics of neighboring houses.
tla F1LL 7.1i14T t le, SAt2c) V)1(,�
A 2. 4lA.Qp 'S • t t-er t L A 2 i`a ' i t-1 . T
_Q c t`1 t. Cc:, .
B. How does the project preserve and integrate into the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural
topographic features of the lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land
forms (such as hillsides and knolls)? Explain how the project preserves and integrates existing natural features.
yti" 1N.1A1 'vF Vale-fG i A 7.1Pfta M A-T 'iQ.Ee4
Ake 0 T A to r— c--f t tom . i-t i T7 0- A i I.) A r.4 t.7 l
I`d p12.6,t en. n T A Pl. 1-to0 pt= Go ) 120
C. How does the site development plan follow natural contours of the site to minimize grading? Extensive grading
and recontouring of existing terrain to maximize buildable area shall not be approved. Graded slopes shall be
rounded and contoured so as to blend with existing terrain. Grading shall not modify existing drainage redirect
drainage flow unless into an existing drainage course. Explain the nature and 'extent of the impact of grading
and proposed minimization on lots.
C-t Q. n t t'> t'"., 1 5 M t c-i o (2 14 Al A TU 12e. , Tt-i tr
c ea.. , L .
D. To what extent does the site development plan preserve surrounding native vegetation and supplement it xith
landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community? Landscaping should
provide a buffer and transition zone between private and public areas. Explain how the project preserves native
vegetation, integrates landscaping and creates buffers.
i i-t : t:)et5 ; i L+a t4GA Pta1C, l-5 13e.tA)6
MAtN t At✓n -- Wit.-ttt-t.rD Hover
• •
E. How does the site development plan preserve the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building
coverage? Lot coverage requirements shall be regarded as maximums and the actual amount of lot coverage
permitted should depend upon the existing buildable area of the lot. Explain how the lot coverage proposed
compares with lot coverage square footage and percentages on neighboring lots.
114 C. Pas) tt_ n t t
F. Is the site development plan harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding
residences? Setbacks shall be regarded as minimums and more restrictive setbacks shall be imposed where
necessary to assure proportionality and openness. Explain how the proposed project setbacks compare with the
existing setbacks of neighboring properties.
a L f` K t "5 i t t.1 G tE C t` I I I-4k
_gip tlEiC t%P tl2 0t_NIL£wPmtE $ iS.
G. Is the site development plan sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians
and vehicles? Explain how the number and types of vehicles relate to the driveway location, design, trip data,
landscaping and other on -site parking or storage areas.
IT 1-1a.5 i.\ a
H. Does the site development plan confonn with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act?
Explain how the project impacts the environment, e.g. significant impact, proposed mitigation measures.
He. P rz Pc) 'AL (Ce tt.1Sv ret trJn2 . 14/
• •
I hereby certify that the statements furnished above, and in attached exhibits, presents the data and
information required for the site plan review criteria evaluation to the best of my ability; and, that
the facts, statements and other information presented are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief.
Date: 1—
For: J t 212 L. S C.s112 (3 6 /Z 0
Applicant
DATE
ZONING CASE NO.
BUILDING AREAS
NET LOT AREA
BUILDING PAD(S)
RESIDENCE
GARAGE
SWIMMING POOL/SPA
STABLE
RECREATION COURT
( )
SERVICE YARD
OTHER
TOTAL STRUCTURES
% STRUCTURAL
COVERAGE
TOTAL PAD
COVERAGE
DRIVEWAY
PAVED WALKS AND
PATIO AREAS
POOL DECKING
TOTAL FLATWORK
% TOTAL FLATWORK
COVERAGE
TOTAL STRUCTURAL
COVERAGE
•
_ ADDRESS
APPLICANT
CALCULATION OF LOT COVERAGE
EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
82,400 sq.ft.
71933 sq.ft.
2,388 sq.ft.
600 sq.ft.
510
sq.ft.
864 sq.ft.
sq.ft.
286 sq.ft.
sq.ft.
4,648 sq.ft.
5.64 %
58.6 %
1,484 sq.ft.
1,800 sq.ft.
1.394 sq.ft.
4794 sq.ft.
5.77 %
& FLATWORK
9,402 sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft,
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
'7c
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
%
rc
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
% TOTAL COVERAGE
11.41 % % %
• •
DATE
ZONING CASE NO. ADDRESS
APPLICANT
CALCULATION OF BUILDING PAD COVERAGJ
PAD No. 1
BUILDABLE PAD AREA C0 3 `7 O sq.ft.
RESIDENCE 2 39 % sq.ft.
GARAGE to 00 sq.ft.
STABLE (BARN) sq.ft.
POOL I 0 sq.ft.
RECREATION COURT
( ) sq.ft.
OTHER Z S b sq.ft.
TOTAL STRUCTURES ON PAD NO. 1 3 ? e 4 sq.ft.
'lc BUILDING PAD COVERAGE ' °I 4 ti % %
IAD NO. Z
BUILDABLE PAD AREA 1583 sq.ft.
RESIDENCE sq.ft.
GARAGE sq.ft.
STABLE (BARN) a (0 4' sq.ft.
POOL sq.ft.
RECREATION COURT
sq.ft.
OTHER sq.ft.
TOTAL STRUCTURES ON PAD NO. 2
864 sq.ft.
% BUILDING PAD COVERAGE ri 4 , `i $ . %
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO:
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
(310) 377-1521
(310) 377-7288 FAX
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. 570
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
99 0151805
H.F311Y9
AUG 0 2 1999
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
Ry
I (We) the undersigned state:
am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows:
9 Caballeros Road (Lot 32-SK), 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. 570
I (10ertify (or declare)
ignatjJi
/0 Y.
Relit, or printi';d
., cc_
Ad-d s
C s
ty State
er th
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
ce-4-4//;?c)..po
/P,_
f' / �, Cst
Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public.
Signature
Name typed or printed
Address
City/State
L
L
L
L
+ Recorder's Use Only
State of California )
County of Los Angeles )
OnJAM 29,1990 before me, 17ot1&Lft5 /, M`/A7i/L)Mer7;elki4/1irc
personally appeared -c 2 2 S C-4 kr-,,r4 do —)
personally known to me ( — e=basis—sa#tsfaettrrry—e�tdente) to be the persons whose name(t)
is/are-subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/s #thoy executed the same in his/holt:half
authorized capacity( -ice and that by his/Iir signature(s) on the instrument the person*, or the entity upon behalf
of which the person(} acted, executed the instrument.
,�... Am,
DOUGLAS K. MC HATTIE 6 Witness by hand
Commission # 1125601
Notary Public — California
Los Angeles County
My Comm. Brakes Feb 2, 2001 t
fficial seal.
Siv:ture of Notary
SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF
•
E,th/Li t 114 4
• 99 0151805
RESOLUTION NO. 98-10
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE
NORTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO AUTHORIZE THE RETENTION WITH
MODIFICATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED
RETAINING WALLS, APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO
THE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO AUTHORIZE THE RETENTION
WITH MODIFICATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED
RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL
TO AUTHORIZE THE MAINTENANCE OF PREVIOUSLY CONDUCTED
AND ILLEGAL GRADING RELATED TO THE PREVIOUSLY CONSTRUCTED
RETAINING WALLS AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE
NO. 570.
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. Jerry Scarboro with
respect to real property located at 9 Caballeros Road (Lot 32-SK), Rolling Hills,
requesting a Variance to authorize the retention of existing illegally constructed
retaining walls that encroach into the north side yard setback, request for a Variance
to authorize the retention of existing illegally constructed retaining walls that
encroach into the south side yard setback and request for Site Plan Review to
authorize the maintenance of previously conducted and illegal grading to create a
rear yard pad area at an existing single family residence. During the hearing process,
the amount of grading was reduced to preclude the creation of a rear yard pad area.
Section 2. The illegal construction came to the attention of the City in
September, 1997. On Monday, September 8, 1997, Mr. Rafael Bernal, District
Engineering Associate, and Planning staff spoke to Mr. Scarboro about the "as built"
retaining walls that were constructed illegally at the subject site and ordered the work
stopped. The City notified the Scarboros by letter that the retaining walls were
constructed illegally and subject to review by the Planning Commission because the
walls were being constructed without permits and were encroaching into the side
yard setbacks. On another occasion, Mr. Bernal was informed of continued
construction taking place at the site and issued a Second Notice "Stop Work Order."
The Scarboros submitted a Variance application on November 6, 1997 and the subject
case was presented to the Planning Commission on December 16, 1997. On December
17, 1997, a Third Notice "Stop Work Order" was issued by Mr. Bernal and it was
emphasized in a letter on December 18, 1997 to the Scarboros to stop any work until
further information and verification regarding movement of soil and changing of
grades on the property was provided.
Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing
to consider the applications on December 16, 1997, January 20, 1998, February
RESOLUTION
NO. 98-10
•
* 99 0151805
17, 1998, March 17, 1998, April 21, 1998, and May 19, 1998, and at a field trip visit on
March 28, 1998. The applicant was 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 the project, from all persons protesting the same, and
from members of the City staff and the Planning Commission having reviewed,
analyzed and studied the project. Concerns expressed by Commissioners, concerned
residents and the applicants focused on the unauthorized construction of the
retaining walls, the number of "Stop Work Orders" issued, the tool shed, the
retaining wall heights and the retaining wall locations.
Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a
Class 4 and a Class 5 Exemption [State CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15304 (Minor
Alterations to Land) and Section 15305 (Minor Alterations to Land Use Limitations)]
and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the
California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 5. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar
properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of
property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity.
Section 17.16.120(B) requires a side yard setback for every residential parcel in the
RA-S-2 zone to be thirty-five (35) feet. The applicant is requesting a Variance to
authorize the retention of an encroachment into the north side yard setback to allow
two previously constructed illegal retaining walls to remain and be modified to a
maximum height of five (5) feet; the upper 143 foot long retaining . wall that
encroaches a maximum of twenty-seven (27) feet into the thirty-five (35) foot side
yard setback and the lower 143 foot long retaining wall that encroaches a maximum
of twenty-six (26) feet into the thirty-five (35) foot side yard setback. With respect to
this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows:
A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions
applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the
other property or class of use in the same zone because the lot is irregular in shape
and the previously constructed illegal retaining walls are located on a hillside slope
at the rear of the lot and away from the street and assist in preventing an existing
pool from potential collapse and in protecting the hillside from damage due to
erosion.
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
there was and will be minimum grading to construct the previously constructed
illegal retaining walls on this irregular shaped lot, drainage will be controlled on the
RESOLUTION NO. 98-10
PAGE 2 OF 9
•
99 0151805
property, and there will not be any greater incursion into the side yard than what
already exists on other properties in the same 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. The existing retaining walls will allow
drainage on the property to be controlled as it flows to the canyon to the east inside
the applicants' property, the height of the walls will be reduced, and a substantial
portion of the lot will remain undeveloped.
Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 570 to authorize the retention of
encroachments into the north side yard setback to authorize two previously
constructed illegal retaining walls to remain and be modified to a maximum height
of five (5) feet; the upper wall that encroaches a maximum of twenty-seven (27) feet
into the thirty-five (35) foot north side yard setback and the lower wall that
encroaches a maximum of twenty-six (26) feet into the thirty-five (35) foot north side
yard setback as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application
and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, dated May 12, 1998 and subject to
the conditions specified in Section 11 of this Resolution.
Section 7. The applicant is requesting a Variance to authorize the retention
of an encroachment into the south side yard setback to authorize the retention of an
encroachment into the south side yard setback to allow a portion of a previously
constructed illegal retaining wall to be demolished, relocated and modified to a
forty-three (43) foot long retaining wall with a maximum height of two (2) feet that
will encroach a maximum of five (5) feet into the thirty-five (35) foot side yard
setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds
as follows:
A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions
applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the
other property or class of use in the same zone because the lot is irregular in shape
and the existing retaining wall is located on a hillside slope at the rear of the lot and
away from the street and assist in protecting the hillside from damage due to
erosion.
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
there will be minimum grading to modify and construct the retaining wall on this
irregular shaped lot, drainage will be controlled on the property, and there will not
be any greater incursion into the side yard than what already exists on other
properties in the same vicinity.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-10
PAGE 3 OF 9
• 99 0151805•
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. The modified retaining wall will allow
drainage on the property to be controlled as it flows to, the canyon to the east inside
the applicants' property, the height of the walls will be reduced, and a substantial
portion of the lot will remain undeveloped.
Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 570 to allow a portion of a
previously constructed illegal retaining wall to be demolished, relocated and
modified to be a forty-three (43) foot long retaining wall with a maximum height of
two (2) feet that will encroach a maximum of five (5) feet into the thirty-five (35)
foot side yard setback as indicated on the development plan submitted with this
application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, dated May 12, 1998
and subject to the conditions specified in Section 11 of ,this Resolution.
Section 9. Section 17.46.020 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a
development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any
grading that requires a grading permit or any new building or structure may be
constructed. The applicants request Site Plan Review to allow previously
constructed and proposed limited grading and to allow the retention and
modification of previously constructed illegal retaining walls at an existing single
family residence. With respect to the Site Plan Review application, 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 grading and
retaining walls, as conditioned, comply with the General Plan requirement of low
profile, low density residential development with sufficient open space between
surrounding structures. With the Variances approved in Sections 6 and 8, the
project conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements. ,The lot has
a net square foot area of 82,400 square feet. The residence (2,388 sq.ft.), attached
garage (600 sq.ft.), pool (510 sq.ft.), stable (864 sq.ft.), and service yard (150 sq.ft.) will
have 4,648 square feet which constitutes 5.64% of the lot which is within the
maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage
including paved areas and driveway will be 9,402 square feet which equals 11.4% of
the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The
proposed project is on a relatively large lot with most of the retaining wall
structures located at or below and away from the road so as to reduce the visual
impact of the development.
B. The proposed development preserves and integrates into the site
design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the
lot including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and
land forms (such as hillsides and knolls) because a minimum amount of grading is
proposed and will only be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away
RESOLUTION NO. 98-10
PAGE 4 OF 9
• 1
99 0151805
from the previously constructed and modified retaining walls, the existing
residence, and neighboring residences.
C. The development plan follows the natural contours of the site to
minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at
the east side (rear yard) of this lot.
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.
E. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and
undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new
structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Further,
the proposed project is designed to minimize grading. Significant portions of the lot
will be left undeveloped so as to maintain scenic vistas across the northeasterly
portions of the property.
F. 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 lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded and the proposed
project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to this
irregular -shaped lot. Grading shall be permitted only to restore the natural slope of
the property.
G. 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 the same driveway to Caballeros Road for access.
H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental
review.
Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Site Plan Review request to allow previously constructed
retaining walls and proposed limited grading and to allow the modification and
retention of previously •constructed illegal retaining walls at an existing single
family residence, as indicated on the Development Plan dated May 12, 1998, and
marked Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 11.
Section 11. The Variance to permit encroachments into the north side yard
setback to allow two previously constructed illegal retaining walls to be retained and
modified to a maximum height of five (5) feet (the upper wall to encroach a
maximum of twenty-seven (27) feet into the thirty-five (35) foot north side yard
setback and the lower wall to encroach a maximum of twenty-six (26) feet into the
thirty-five (35) foot north side yard setback) approved in Section 6, the Variance to
RESOLUTION NO. 98-10
PAGE 5 OF 9
•
• 99 0151605
allow a modified forty-three (43) foot retaining wall to encroach 5 feet into the south
side yard setback approved in Section 8, and the Site Plan to allow previously
constructed retaining walls, previously completed and proposed limited grading,
and to permit the retention and modification of previously constructed illegal
retaining walls at an existing single family residence approved in Section 8 as
indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as
Exhibit A dated May 12, 1998, are subject to the following conditions:
A. The Variance and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within one
year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070 and
17.46.080.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance and Site Plan
Review approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, the Permit shall be
suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the
applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do
so for a period of thirty (30) days.
C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the
Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be
complied with unless otherwise approved by Variance.
D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance
with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A dated May 12, 1998, except as otherwise
provided in these conditions.
E. The northern upper retaining wall that is 8 feet from the property line
shall be reduced from a maximum height of 6.5 feet to vary from 2.6 feet to 5.0 feet
in height and shall not exceed 143 feet in length.
F. The northern lower retaining wall that is 9 feet from the property line
shall be reduced from a maximum height of 8.5 feet to vary from 0 feet to 5.0 feet in
height from northwest to southeast and shall not exceed 143 feet in length.
G. The southern retaining wall that is 24 feet from the property line shall
be partially demolished and relocated to be 30 feet from the property line, reduced
from a maximum height of 2.5 feet to vary from 1.0 foot to 2.0 feet in height, and
shall not exceed 43 feet in length.
H. Any retaining walls shall not exceed 5 feet in height, averaging no
more than 2-1/2 feet.
I. The top upper edge of all retaining walls shall be a continuous smooth
line and without jagged inclines or declines along the length of the wall.
RESOLUTION NO.98-10
PAGE 6 OF 9
•
• °/
99 01518.05
J. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 5.64% and total lot coverage of
structures and paved areas shall not exceed 11.4%.
K. Disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 13.6%.
L. Balanced cut and fill for the retaining walls shall not exceed 104 cubic
yards.
M. The graded area at the west side of the upper and lower northern
retaining walls shall not exceed 1,805 square feet.
N. The existing topography, flora and natural features of the lot shall be
retained to the greatest extent feasible.
O. Additional landscape screening shall be planted to obscure the eastern
and southern faces of the northern retaining walls and the northern faces of the
southern retaining walls.
P. Landscape screening for the eastern and southern faces of the retaining
walls shall be maintained so as not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but
to obscure the retaining walls.
Q. A landscape plan must be submitted to and approved by the City of
Rolling Hills Planning Department staff prior to the issuance of any grading and
building permit. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the purpose
and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature
trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants
that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the
community.
A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the landscaping
plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a grading and
building permit and shall be retained with the City for not less than two years after
landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City Manager after
the Planning Commission determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant
to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly
established and in good condition.
R. Review and approval of a site drainage plan by the City Engineer shall
be obtained for the existing and proposed grading and the retaining walls.
S. A 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 prior to the submittal of an applicable site drainage plan to the
County of Los Angeles for plan check.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-10
PAGE 7 OF 9
• s
99 O15I.05
T. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills
Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to approval of the
drainage plan.
U. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of
Building and Safety for site drainage plan review and building permits must
conform to the development plan described at the beginning of this section (Section
11).
V. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions
of these Variance and Conditional Use Permit approvals pursuant to Section
17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective.
W. All conditions of these Variance and Site Plan Review approvals must
be complied with prior to approval of the site drainage plan by the County of Los
Angeles.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 16T$ DA C JNE, 1998.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 98-10
PAGE 8 OF 9
•
1E
99 0151805
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
) §§
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 98-10 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE
NORTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO AUTHORIZE THE RETENTION WITH
MODIFICATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED
RETAINING WALLS, APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO
THE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO AUTHORIZE THE RETENTION
WITH MODIFICATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED
RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL
TO AUTHORIZE THE MAINTENANCE OF PREVIOUSLY CONDUCTED
AND ILLEGAL GRADING RELATED TO THE PREVIOUSLY
CONSTRUCTED RETAINING WALLS AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
IN ZONING CASE NO. 570.
was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning
Commission on June 16, 1998 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Sommer and Chairman Roberts.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Witte.
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Margeta.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the
following:
Administrative Offices
f . I
MARILYN KEl , DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 98-10
PAGE 9 OF 9
99 0151805
RECORDED/FILED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS
RECORDER'S OFFICE
• LOS ANGELES COUNTY
CALIFORNIA
2:01 PM JAN 29 1999
SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE RESERVED FOR RECORDER S USE
TITLE(S)
FFA- 12/W/ '"7-
FEE N/A N/A 0 20 9_ 19 04 19
CODE
REC. NO. NO PCOR D.A. SURVEY NOTIF. INVOL NON
FEE PAGES TITLES FEE MON. LIEN CONF.
c/. // o St .6;2 0
0
Assessor s Identification Number (AIN)
To Be Completed By Examiner Or Title Company In Black Ink
EXAMINER S INT.
Number of Parcels Shown
Revision Number
• •
C1iy
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM
(To Be Completed By Applicant)
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
Date Filed Zoning Case No.
GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Applicant J c.12_ C (a R Ia C) . Q Tel. 5 gh4 - S 3 B ►j
Address C A (3 A Le. 2 U S i.1D .
2. Legal Owner (Zr (3 p J r_ Tel.
Address
3. Project Address ) GAt (IA L. L t
Assessor's Book, Page, Parcel No. 7 �! (9 2 - Ora 8 - 0 3 Z Lot No. 3 Z.
4. . List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project,including
those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies:
VAC�tA`ti1Cl'=
5. Existing zoning district R A Gj - Z
6. Proposed project/use of site: 12.e.cp t o e t l I A L.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
7. Site size
8. Net lot area e 2, 40c.) S . -F .
9. • Total square footage of structures 4 `r5 Col S
10. Number of floors of construction (7 tJ 1:..
11. Basement square footage
12. Total combined flatwork and structural lot coverage Ca 0 el- 0
13. Will any exterior walls be removed or relocated? Which walls?
14. Will any interior walls be removed or relocated? Which walls? tl 0
15. Will the entire building structure require a new roof? 1) 0
• •
16. Will the existing roof remain intact, with less than 200 square feet added? t .\ , A ,
17. Will cut and fill be balanced? Amount cut Amount fill
18. Area of disturbance. Square feet . Percentage of lot
19. If residential, include the unit size. Square feet 2. 3 i3 8
20. If commercial, indicate the type of project, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square
footage of sales area, estimated employment per shift and loading facilities.
21. If industrial, indicate the type of project, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities.
22. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy,
loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project.
,
23. Attach plans.
24. Proposed scheduling. A • A, P
25. If the project involves a site plan review, variance, conditional use or rezoning application, state this and
indicate clearly why the application is required.
- \►a P L L S A P.m \$.l t VA
rb
Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss below all items checked yes (attach
additional sheets as necessary).
YES NO
26. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands, beaches, lakes or hills, or substantial
alteration of ground contours.
X. 27. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or
roads.
X. 28. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project.
-2-
YES NQ
-X_
4
1
29. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter.
30. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes, or odors in vicinity.
31. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground water quality or quantity, or alteration
of existing draining patterns.
32. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity.
33. Site on filled land or on slope of 10 percent or more. (-I t t.t. g t 0C? M 0 v (: i h141 10 %
34. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammable
or explosives.
35. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.).
36. Substantially increased fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.).
37. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
38. Describe the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil
stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Describe any existing
structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or
polaroid photos will be accepted.
1111.-L- 'De Lo _ 1M I.7lO.cJFC1 : 1--10 j PO0L
P t4 i t p -(- 3 a �-0 LL, = X t 5 i t r\ R c: A R O/A rZ tD
L tom. 0 LAW [.
39. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural,
historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land
use (one -family, guest house, office use, etc.) and scale of development (height, frontage, set -back, rear
yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted.
E.IErr14tN P. &ate 1= u Q D 1/41 L 0 CDCE t)
P. M-5ty c-.t rInL Dt Q, a or.m_ "riA)ei CAZ E.
LOT r5 ►►v e, Le. `a TORS 1-1 o MC. ,
-3-
• •
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Please explain all "yes" and "maybe" answers on separate sheets.)
40. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic
substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering
of the soil? S! t' c FILL le, lyGEnCO
c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features?
B E.A AP.T)
d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique
geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on
or off the site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes
in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the
channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any
bay, inlet or lake?
g•
Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as
earthquakes, landslides, mud slides, ground failure, or
similar hazards?
41. Air. Will the proposal result in:
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air
quality?
b. The creation of objectionable odors?
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any
change in climate, either locally or regionally?
42. Water. Will the proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements, in either marine or fresh waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate
and amount of surface water runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body?
e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of
surface water quality, including but not limited to
temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
YES MAYBE NO
1C
X
X_
-4-
• •
YES MAYBE NO
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters?
g•
Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception
of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise
available for public water supplies?
i. Exposure of people or property to water -related hazards
such as flooding or tidal waves?
J.
Significant changes in the temperature, flow, or chemical
content of surface thermal springs?
43. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species
of plants (including tress, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora
and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered
species of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a
barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species?
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
44. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species
or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals
including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms,
insects or microfauna)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered
species of animals? _
—
X
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result
in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? — —
45. Noise. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increases in existing noise levels?
b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? — _ X
46. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare?
47. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the
present or planned land use of an area?
-5-
• •
YES MAYBE NO
48. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources?
b. Substantial depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource?
49. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemical or
radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions?
b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an
emergency evacuation plan?
50. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution,
density, or growth rate of the human population of an area?
51. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a
demand for additional housing?
52. Transnortation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in:
a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new
parking?
c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems?
d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of
people and/or goods?
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles?
53. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in
a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following
areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection?
c. Schools?
d. Parks or other recreational facilities?
e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
f. Other governmental services?
-6-
• •
YES MAYBE NO
54. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of
energy, or require the development of new sources of energy?
55. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or
substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
56. Human Health. Will the proposal result in:
a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard
excluding mental health?
b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards?
57. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any
scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal
result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to
public view?
58. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the
quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities?
59. Cultural Resources.
a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the
destruction of a prehistoric or historic archeological
site?
b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic
effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure,
or object?
c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical
change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? _
d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred
uses within the potential impact area? _ X-
-7-
• •
60. Mandatory Findines of Sienificance.
YES MAYBE NO
a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the
range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California history
or prehistory?
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to
the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-
term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a
relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term
impacts will endure well into the future.)
c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable? (A project may affect two or
more separate resources where the impact is relatively small,
but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the
environment is significant.)
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause
substantial adverse effect on human beings, either directly
or indirectly?
X
-8-
• f
NOTE: In the event that the project site and any alternatives are not listed on any list compiled pursuant to
Section 65962.5 of the Government Code, then the applicant must certify that fact as provided below.
I have consulted the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code and hereby certify that
the development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are not contained on these lists.
Date \'okl. 41 1C17
.nil /(_ I�nC.cL�i
Signature
For J, C-D c A R , 1Z CO
Applicant
CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the
data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements,
and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Date t-)A\. 4+ lc) c
For
forms\environm.app
tYw�
Signature
J, 01_.CD
Applicant
-10-