Loading...
780, "To legalize ""as built"" trel, Resolutions & Approval ConditionsRESOLUTION NO. 2012-18 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A TIME EXTENSION TO COMMENCE RELOCATION OF AS BUILT IMPROVEMENTS IN ZONING CASE NO. 780, A VARIANCE FOR ENCROACHMENT WITH EXISTING WATER FEATURES AND TRELLIS INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK AT 7 CABALLEROS ROAD, (LOT 33-SK) (KWON). THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mrs. Hanna Kwon with respect to real property located at 7 Caballeros Road requesting an 18-months time extension to comply with the requirements of Resolution No. 2010-25 to relocate "as built" improvements. Section 2. The Commission considered this item at a meeting on September 18, 2012 at which time information was presented indicating that additional time is needed to process and implement the application. Section 3. Based upon information and evidence submitted, the Planning Commission granted a three month time extension and does hereby amend Paragraph A, Section 12 of Resolution No. 2010-25, dated October 19, 2010 to read as follows: A. The Variance approval shall expire within two years and three months from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070(A). Section 4. Except as herein amended, the provisions and conditions of Resolution No. 2010-25 shall continue to be in full force and effect. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 18 DAY OF SEPTEMEBER 2012. JEF PIEPER CHAIRMAN ATTEST: 49,E utb HEIDI LUCE DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2012-18 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF . THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A TIME EXTENSION TO COMMENCE RELOCATION OF AS BUILT IMPROVEMENTS IN ZONING CASE NO. 780, A VARIANCE FOR ENCROACHMENT WITH EXISTING WATER FEATURES AND TRELLIS INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK AT 7 CABALLEROS ROAD, (KWON). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on September 18, 2012 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Chelf, Henke, Mirsch, Smith and Chairman Pieper. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices divildiuto HEIDI LUCE DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 2010-25 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO RETAIN AN "AS BUILT" WATERFALL, KOI POND AND TRELLIS IN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK, AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 780, AT 7 CABALLEROS ROAD, (LOT 33-SK), (KWON). THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Application was duly filed by Mrs. Hanna Kwon with respect to real property located at 7 Caballeros, Rolling Hills (Lot 33-SK) requesting to retain an "as built" 409 square foot waterfall with koi pond and 1,076 square foot trellis in the side yard setback at an existing single family residence. Section 2. In April 2008 it came to the attention of staff from the adjacent property owner, that the applicant was renovating a koi pond and adjoining water cascade, both of which were located within the north side yard. The City inspected the property and initially determined that the nature of the work was the replacement of existing structures and therefore could remain in place and be renovated. This determination was made based on a site visit and phone conversations with the previous property owner, who stated that the koi pond and the cascade were on the property since before she moved into the house in the early 1980's. Section 3. The City of Rolling Hills Zoning Code regarding encroachment into setbacks was contradictory in the 1970's and 1980's. The definition on setbacks called for the setbacks to be free of structures, whereas under a separate section on accessory structures it stated, "minor structures could be located in setbacks". "Minor 'structures" were not defined. According to the previous RHCA Manager, ponds, fountains, outdoor kitchens and similar "minor" structures were regularly approved in setbacks. However, such structures would have required a building permit. There are no building permits on record for the koi pond or the cascading feature, although there are permits on record for the swimming pool and the spa. According to the building official, the koi pond and the water feature could have been a part of the approval for the pool, but not specifically called out on the permit. Section 4. In September 2008, staff was informed that the applicant began construction on a detached open -roofed trellis that covered and extended somewhat beyond the koi pond and that the water feature was larger than the one previously located in the area. Staff investigated further and determined that the trellis, pond and cascade exceeded the scope, in both size and location, of the pre-existing structures. Staff informed the owner of this determination and that their options were to either remove the trellis, pond and water features from the setback or apply for a Variance to retain them in the side setback. Reso. 2010-25 Z.C. NO. 780 1 Section 5. The owners advised the City that their intent was to apply for a Variance, but, due to the fact that the structures are also within the RHCA easement, proceeded first to obtain approval from the RHCA. On July 1, 2009 the RHCA Board of Directors granted a license allowing the trellis, pond, and water cascade to remain within the 10-ft easement. On September 1, 2009 the RHCA Architectural Committee approved the retention of these structures subject to the condition that one corner of the trellis roof, which was found to cross over the lot line, be removed. Section 6. On March 1, 2010 the owners submitted a Variance application seeking permission to retain the portions of the trellis, pond and water features within the north side yard. The applicants removed the corner portion of trellis roof that crossed the property line. Section 7. The property is zoned RAS-2. The gross lot area is 2.06 acres (90,091 square feet). The net lot area for development purposes is 72,683 square feet. The required zoning side yard setbacks in the RAS-2 zone are 35 feet from the side property lines. There are 10-foot Community Association easements along the side property lines. Section 8. There existed an ongoing issue with drainage in the area of the north side yard and the applicant stated that she was losing water from the pond. The remodel of the pond involved replacement and repair of the plumbing system and drainage. Section 9. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at a field trip visit and at their regular meeting on June 15, 2010, and at a public hearing on September 21, 2010. 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 applicant was in attendance at the hearings. The field trip public hearing and the regular meetings of the Planning Commission were properly noticed. Section 10. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption, Existing Facilities, and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 11. 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. Sections 17.16.120 and 17.16.130 require a side yard of 35-feet from the side property line in the RAS-2 zone. The applicant requests a Variance to encroach into the north side yard setback to permit the retention of a 409 square foot rock waterfall and 1,076 square foot trellis. 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, based on information from the Reso. 2010-25 ZC NO.780 2 complaining party and the previous property owner similar strucures existed previously in a similar location. Due to contradicting provision in the City's Zoning Code in the 1970' and 1980's it is possible that said structures would have been permitted. The issue brought forth by the adjacent proeprty owner was the proximity of the "as built" strctures to the proerty line and their enlargement. In addition, the subject lot is very narrow for being located in the RAS-2 zone, which requires a 35-foot side yard setbacks. At the roadway easemetn line the lot is 140 feet wide. With two 35-foot required side yard setbacks, the buidlable area between the setbacks is 70-feet. The residence encroaches into the side yard setabacks, both at the north side and at the south side. The trellis and the pond with water cascade, as conditioned, would be an extension of an already nonconforming condition. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question. The Variance is necessary to allow the property owner to carry the theme of rock structures along the side yard and to refresh the appearance of the pool landscaping along with poviding additional enjoyment and use of the koi pond and the trellis. The Commission has considered the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures, and the topography of the area in evaluating this finding and determined that the structures, once moved ffurther away rom the proeprty line are minor and do not interfee with the openness of the lot. 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 structures will give the proeprty a uniquly refreshing look and feel. A substantial portion of the lot will remain undeveloped. In addition, the proposed structures, as conditioned, will be screened with vegetation so as not to be visible from surrounding properties. Section 12. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 780 to permit the as built koi pond, water cascade and trellis to encroach into the side yard setback, subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance approval shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070(A) unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of that section. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance approval, 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 Reso. 2010-25 ZC NO. 780 3 complied with unless otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. At the sole expense of the applicant, the north property line of approximately 60 feet parallel to the water cascade /koi pond and trellis shall be permanently staked by a licensed surveyor. The staking shall be done in the presence of City staff. E. Once the property line is established, demolished portion of the trellis, water cascade and pond, if necessary, so that each is no less than six (6) feet from the north property line. F. Prepare a drainage plan for the entire north side yard area, beginning at the roadway easement and submit to the City's Building and Safety Department for review and approval and obtain the required permits. G. Obtain plumbing permits from the City's Building and Safety Department for the plumbing fixtures and building permit for the trellis, and all other permits, as required. H. Submit two sets of revised site plan showing the property line and the location of the "as built" structures as conditioned. I. There shall be no grading for the project. Should grading be required (as defined by the City) to correct the drainage in the north side yard area of the property, the applicant shall submit a Site Plan Review application and the Planning Commission shall review said application. J. The north side of the property in the vicinity of the "as built" structures shall be screened with landscaping at all times, subject to approval of the landscaping by the Rolling Hills Community Association. K. All of the water features on the property shall be in good repair at all times and the water be continually re -circulated to prevent mosquitoes breeding. L. The construction shall minimize erosion and protect slopes and channels to control storm water pollution. M. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance Form of all conditions of this Variance approval, pursuant to Section 17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective. N. All conditions of this Variance approval must be complied with prior to the issuance of a final inspection by City staff and Building Department. O. Notwithstanding sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any future modification to the property, which would constitute Reso. 2010-25 ZC NO. 780 4 structural development or grading, shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. P. Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 19th DAY OF OCTOBER 2010. ATTEST: HEIDI LUCE, DEPUTY CITY CLERK Reso. 2010-25 ZC NO.780 JILJN. SMITH, CHAIRPERSON 5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2008-25 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO RETAIN AN "AS BUILT" WATERFALL, KOI POND AND TRELLIS IN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK, AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 780, AT 7 CABALLEROS ROAD, (LOT 33-SK), (KWON). THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on October 19, 2010 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Chelf, Henke and Chairperson Smith. NOES: Vice Chairman Pieper. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: Commissioner DeRoy. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. Reso. 2010-25 ZC NO. 780 lath diukt DEPUTY CITY CLERK 6