Loading...
412, Alterations & additions to exi, Resolutions & Approval ConditionsRESOLUTION NO. 91-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION NO. 90-8 GRANTING A VARIANCE TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK AND SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 412. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A request has been filed by Mr. Gordon Siu with respect to real property located at 9 Caballeros Road, Rolling Hills (Lot 32-SK) requesting a modification to the condition of approval for a Variance to the side yard setback requirements to construct additions to the existing structure, a Variance to construct a retaining wall, and Site Plan Review. The modification requested is to extend the allowable time period to fulfill the requirements of the County of Los Angeles Department of Building and Safety. Section 2. The Commission considered this item at its meeting on May 21, 1991 at which time information was presented indicating that the extension of time is necessary due to the requirements of the County. Section 3. Based upon information and evidence submitted, the Planning Commission does hereby amend Paragraph (C), Section 10 of Resolution No. 90-8 to read as follows: "C. The Variance and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within twenty-four (24) months of the approval of this Resolution." Section 4. Except as herein amended, the provisions of Resolution No. 90-8 shall continue to be in full force and effect. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 21ST D MAY, 1991. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: DIANE SAWkER, DEPUTYI CITY CLERK i • Resolution No. 91-11 Page 2 The foregoing Resolution No. 91-11 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION NO. 90-8 GRANTING A VARIANCE TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK AND SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 412. was approved and adopted at a regular adjourned meeting of the Planning Commission on May 30, 1991 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS FROST, HANKINS, LAY, RAINE AND CHAIRMAN ROBERTS NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE DEPUTY Cl TY CLERK • • RESOLUTION NO. 90-R A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK, AND SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 412 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. Gordon Siu with respect to real property located at 9 Caballeros Road, Rolling Hills (Lot 32-SK) requesting a variance to the side yard setback requirements to construct an addition to the residence, and site plan review approval to construct- additions to the existing structure. A joint application was also duly filed by Mr. Gordon Siu with respect to Lot 32-SK and Dr. and Mrs. Mansoor Mirsaidi with respect to real property located at 1 Maverick Lane, Rolling Hills (Lot 31-SK) requesting a variance to construct a retaining wall, portions of which to lie on both parcels described above. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on January 16, 1990, February 20, 1990 and March 20, 1990; and conducted a field site review on January 6, 1990 and February 10, 1990. Section 3. With respect to the application submitted by Mr. Siu for a variance to the side yard setback to construct an addition to the residence, Sections 17.32.010 through 17.32.030 permit approval of a variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of the property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties. Pursuant to these Sections, the Planning Commission finds that: A. Due to the shape and topography of the lot and the existing developmental pattern, the residence cannot be expanded significantly into the side yards, because the lot is generally narrow and elongated, and the existing residence was originally developed with an angular orientation upon the lot. B. In view of the topographical situation and the existing developmental pattern of the residence, there exists unique circumstances, not generally applicable to other properties in the same zone, that justify the encroachment because the residential structure cannot be expanded significantly into the other side yard or front yard. • • C. The grant of the variance under these circumstances will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, will be compatible with surrounding properties and will be consistent with the goals of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 4. Based on the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 412 to permit an encroachment into the side yard setback, as indicated in the development plans submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions set forth in Section 10 of this Resolution. Section 5. With respect to the application submitted by Mr. Siu for site plan review, Section 17.34.010 requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alternation or repair to existing buildings may be made which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six (36) month period. Section 6. The Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed residential structure at 9 Caballeros Road is compatible with the low density, rural character requirements of the General Plan. This project is compatible with the Zoning Ordinance because the project complies with the Zoning Ordinance lot coverage requirements. The net square footage of the lot is approximately 82,400 square feet. The proposed residential structures and stable equal 6,419 square feet which represents 7.8% structural lot coverage, which is within the 20% maximum coverage that is permitted. The total lot coverage is 9,703 square feet which represents a proposed total lot coverage of 11.8% which is within the 35% maximum coverage that is permitted. The proposed project is compatible with surrounding residential structures. The proposed project includes a residence and existing stable, which structures are similar to surrounding residential land use patterns. 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 the proposed development will minimize grading by incorporating use of the existing building pad, lowering the proposed southerly residential addition, and retain the existing barn. The project will not disrupt mature trees and minimize alteration of existing natural land forms on the site. • • C. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading because all drainage flow from the site will be channeled into existing drainage courses to the canyon. D. The development plan preserves surrounding native vegetation of the site and supplements it with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. E. The development plan substantially preserves that natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the construction will not impact most of the lot area and will occur within the existing rear yard area of the lot where the current stable and open space exists and will be retained. F. The proposed development is harmonious in scale with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding because the structures will have a building pad coverage and a total lot coverage of 11.8%, which are less that the maximum percentages permitted by the City. G. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the existing driveway entry will not be changed. and mass residences of 32.8% prescribed H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Commission hereby approves the site plan review application for an expansion of the residential structure on the property located at 9 Caballeros Road as indicated on the development plan attached hereto as Exhibit A and subject to the conditions set forth in Section 10 of this Resolution. Section 8. With respect to the joint application submitted by Mr. Siu and Dr. and Mrs. Mansoor Mirsaidi for construction of a retaining wall crossing the common property line, Sections 17.32.010 through 17.32.030 permit approval of a variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of the property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties. Pursuant to these Sections, the Planning Commission finds that: A. Due to the shape and topography of the lot and the existing developmental pattern, construction of a retaining wall within the side yard is necessitated due to significant topographical conditions that exist, and because such wall is necessary to allow vehicular access to the rear each parcel. • • B. In view of the topographical situation and the existing developmental pattern, there exists unique circumstances, not generally applicable to other properties in the same zone, that justify the encroachment of the retaining wall. The construction of the wall will permit vehicular access to the rear of the parcels and mitigate potentially unsafe conditions by supporting the sloping topography adjacent to the vehicular access. C. The grant of the variance under these circumstances will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, and will be compatible with surrounding properties and will be consistent with the goals of the Zoning Ordinance because the retaining wall serves to support earth on Lot 31-SK that may impact Lot 32-SK should ground failure occur along the vehicular access. Section 9. Based on the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the variance for Zoning Case No. 412 to permit construction of a retaining wall which encroaches into the side yard setback, as indicated in the development plans submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions set forth in Section 10 of this Resolution. Section 10. The variance granted in Section 4, the site plan review approved in Section 7, and the variance granted in Section 9 are subject to the following conditions: A. The variance to construct a residential addition in the side yard setback as indicated on the development plan shall not be effective if the existing residential structure is demolished to an extent of more than fifty (50%) percent. B. Pursuant to Section 9, the variance for the construction of a retaining wall as indicated on the developmental plan shall not be effective unless a certified copy of the settlement agreement, as filed in the Los Angeles Superior Court entitled Stinnett v. Mirsaidi, L.A.S.C. Case No. C 694969, is filed with the City Clerk. C. The variance approvals shall expire if not used in one year from the effective date of approval as defined as specified in Section 17.32.110 of the Municipal Code. D. The proposed building plan must be approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Committee before the applicant receives a grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. • • E. Prior to the submittal of a final grading plan to the County of Los Angeles, the grading plan shall be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review, along with related geology, soils and hydrology reports. This grading plan must conform to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission. F. A landscape plan must be submitted to the City of Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for approval. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance. The landscaping plan shall incorporate existing mature trees and native vegetation. A bond in the amount of the cost estimate for the landscaping plus 15% may be required to be posted and retained with the City for not less than two years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City 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. G. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check must conform to the development plan approved with this site plan review. H. Any modifications to the development plan as approved by the planning Commission shall require the filing of an application for modification of the development plan and must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission pursuant to Section 17.34.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. day ATTEST: PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7th April ,, 1990. City Clerk Allan Roberts, Chairman