604, Construct retaining walls in s, Resolutions & Approval Conditionsti
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-06
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS 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 RETENTION WITH
MODIFICATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED
RETAINING WALLS AND ILLEGALLY CONDUCTED GRADING TO
FILL IN REAR YARD PAD AREAS AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
AT 9 CABALLEROS ROAD IN ZONING CASE NO. 604.
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. 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 south side yard setback and requesting 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.
Section 2. In August, 1999, it came to the attention of the Planning
Department that many truckloads of unauthorized soil were imported to the
subject property over a weekend and additional "as built" retaining walls were
constructed on the property. "As -built", plans were provided and staff met with the
applicant and his representative on October 28, 1999. At that time, it was
determined that because of unauthorized construction and grading that required
Variance and Site Plan review approval, the unauthorized additional work would
require review and approval by the Planning Commission.
Section 3. Previously, on June 16, 1998, the Planning Commission
approved a Variance to encroach into the north side yard setback to authorize the
retention with modifications of previously illegally constructed retaining walls,
approved 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
in Zoning Case No. 570 by Resolution No. 98-10. During the hearing process, the
amount of grading was reduced to preclude the creation of a rear yard pad area.
This case was the result of illegal construction that came to the attention of the City
in September, 1997.
Section 4. Earlier, in 1990, the Planning Commission approved a Variance
and Site Plan Review for construction of additions to the residence in Zoning Case
No. 412 at the site. The Commission also approved a joint Variance between Mr.
Gordon Siu, 9 Caballeros Road (Lot 32-SK) and Dr. and Mrs. Mansoor Mirsaidi, 1
Maverick Lane (Lot 31-SK) to construct a retaining wall within the north side yard
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-06
PAGE 1 OF 8
• •
setback, portions of which to lie on both parcels. The approved plans show a
portion of another retaining wall at the east to be removed from the side yard
setback. No work was done on either of the approved plans.
Section 5. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing to consider the applications on December 21, 1999, January 18, 2000,
February 15, 2000, March 21, 2000, April 18, 2000, and May 16, 2000, and at a field trip
visit on January 15, 2000. 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
supporting and 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 applicant
focused on the volume and depth of the unauthorized imported soil, the
unauthorized construction of additional retaining walls, the reduction of retaining
wall heights, the landscaping of the retaining walls, and the path/pool lighting.
Section 6. 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 7. 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 south side yard setback to
allow a previously constructed illegal retaining wall to remain and be modified to a
maximum height of two and a half (2.5) feet of the 16-foot long curved retaining
wall that encroaches a maximum of six (6) 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 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
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-06
PAGE2OF8
• .• •
constructed illegal retaining walls 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.
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 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 604 to authorize the retention of
encroachments into the south side yard setback to authorize a previously
constructed illegal retaining wall to remain and be modified to a maximum height
of two and a half (2.5) feet that encroaches a maximum of six (6) feet into the
thirty-five (35) foot south side yard setback. as indicated on the development plan
submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A,
dated June 8, 2000, 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 imported
soil to be retained, 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 Variance approved in Section 6, 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
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-06
PAGE3OF8
• •
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
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. Any additional 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 a previously
constructed retaining wall, allow 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 June
8, 2000 and marked Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 11.
Section 11. The Variance to permit an encroachment into the south side
yard setback to allow a previously constructed illegal retaining wall to be retained
and modified to a maximum height of two and a half (2.5) feet and to encroach a
maximum of six (6) feet into the thirty-five (35) foot south side yard setback
approved in Section 6 and the Site Plan to allow previously imported soil to be
retained, previously constructed and proposed limited grading, and to allow the
retention and modification of previously constructed illegal retaining walls at an
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-06
PAGE 4 OF 8
• •
existing single family residence approved in Section 10 as indicated on the
Development Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A dated June
8, 2000, 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, unless the property is maintained in accordance with this Resolution
including compliance with all conditions of approval.
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 June 8, 2000, except as otherwise
provided in these conditions.
E. The southern curved retaining wall that is 29 feet from the property
line shall be reduced from a maximum height of 6.5 feet to be 2.5 feet in height and
shall not exceed 16 feet in length.
F. Courses of the east/west portion of the upper retaining wall that is 8
feet from the property line at the north shall be removed so that the reduced wall
shall be no higher than a maximum of 5.0 feet in height from northwest to
southeast and shall not exceed 143 feet in length.
G. One course shall be removed from the northern half of the lower
retaining wall that is 8 feet from the property line and soil from the level above
shall be spread at the eastern side of the wall so that the wall will be reduced to a
mximum height of 5.0 feet from northwest to southeast and shall not exceed 143
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.
J. The 8-foot wide east/west easement at the north side of the lot shall be
maintained to allow accessibility to the existing barn.
K. All path/pool lighting shall be lowered to within 4 inches of the block
retaining walls.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-06
PAGE 5 OF 8
L. The number of path/pool lights shall be reduced so that the lights that
are 5 feet apart are spaced 10 feet apart.
M. Individual lighting shields shall be installed to obscure the eastern side
of the path/pool lights.
N. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 5.64% and total lot coverage of
structures and paved areas shall not exceed 11.4%.
site.
O. Disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 30.1%.
P. There shall be no further importation of soil or grading at the project
Q. The existing topography, flora and natural features of the lot shall be
retained to the greatest extent feasible.
R. Additional landscape screening shall be planted to obscure the eastern
faces of all retaining walls.
S. Landscape screening for the eastern faces of the retaining walls shall be
maintained so as not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but to obscure the
retaining walls.
T. Landscape screening on the northern lower retaining wall shall
include the planting and maintenance of Ficus repens (Creeping fig) to cover the
eastern face of the wall in addition to other native drought -resistant vegetation that
is compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community.
U. A modified 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. After the two-year period, upon the request of the applicant,
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.
V. Review and approval of a revised site drainage plan by the City Engineer
shall be obtained for the existing and proposed grading and the retaining walls.
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-06
PAGE 6 OF 8
i
• •
W. 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.
X. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills
Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to approval of the
drainage plan.
Y. 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).
Z. 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.
AA. 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 JUNE 20, 2000.
ATTEST:
MARILY K RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-06
PAGE 7 OF 8
• •
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2000-06 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS 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 RETENTION WITH MODIFICATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY
ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED RETAINING WALLS AND
ILLEGALLY CONDUCTED GRADING TO FILL IN REAR YARD
PAD AREAS AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 9
CABALLEROS ROAD IN ZONING CASE NO. 604.
was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning
Commission on June 20, 2000 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Sommer, Witte and
Chairman Roberts.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Margeta.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
n�.1,..P .. . l*.
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-06
PAGE 8 OF 8