630, An additionwithin the front ya, Resolutions & Approval ConditionsRESOLUTION NO. 2002-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO PLANNING
COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2001-12 AND APPROVING AN
EX/TENSION TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED VARIANCES TO
ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK WITH AN ADDITION
AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA IN
ZONING CASE NO. 630. (INMAN)
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. and Mrs. Gordon Inman with
respect to real property located at 11 Caballeros Road, Rolling Hills, requesting an
extension to previously approved Variances for an addition which would encroach into
the front yard setback and a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted lot disturbance.
Section 2. The Commission considered this item at a meeting on June 18, 2002,
at which time information was presented indicating that the extension of time is
necessary in order to complete plan check processing.
Section 3. Based upon information and evidence submitted, the Planning
Commission does hereby amend Paragraph A, Section 8 of Resolution No. 2001-12,
dated June 19, 2001, to read as follows:
"A. The Variances approvals shall expire within two years from the effective
date of this approval as defined in Section 17.38.070(A), unless construction on the
applicable portions of the structure have commenced within that time period."
Section 4. Except as herein amended, the provisions of Resolution No. 2001-12
shall continue to be in full force and effect.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 18TH DAY OF JUNE 2002.
(9()ILO-) dal)
EVIE HANKINS, VICE CHAIR
ATTEST:
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2002-11 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO PLANNING
COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-12 AND APPROVING AN
EXTENSION TO PREVIOUSLY APPROVED VARIANCES TO
ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK WITH AN ADDITION
AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA IN
ZONING CASE NO. 630. (INMAN)
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on June 18,
2002 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Margeta, Sommer and Chairwoman Hankins.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Witte.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
►-�,r P r<_ �h,�
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
• •
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM
PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA, AND GRANTING A VARIANCE TO
ENCROACH WITH AN ADDITION INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK
AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 11 CABALLEROS ROAD, IN
ZONING CASE NO. 630.
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. Inman with respect to real
property located at 11 Caballeros Road, Rolling Hills (Lot 23-SK) requesting a Variance
to exceed the maximum disturbed lot area and a. Variance to encroach into the front
yard setback with an addition.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing
to consider the applications on April 17, 2001, May 15, 2001 and at a field trip visit on
May 5, 2001. The applicant was notified of the public hearing in writing by first class
mail. 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
hearing.
Section 3. 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 4. 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. A Variance to Section 17.16.110 is required because it states that every
lot shall have a front yard of not less than 50 feet from the front easement line. The
applicant is requesting a Variance to encroach 17 feet by 17 feet or (289 square feet) into
the front yard setback to construct a total of 386 square feet additionat an existing
single family residential development. 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 that do not apply generally to the other property or class of
use in the same zone because the lot is small in size in comparison to the average lots in
the City, and there are two bordering roadways at the southern and eastern sides of the
property that reduce the size of the lot, area. The lot size and configuration, together
with the existing development on the lot creates a difficulty in meeting this Code
requirement.
• •
The existing legal nonconforming residence was built with the residence encroaching
up to 17 feet into the front yard setback. The existing residence and proposed addition
are modest in size.
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. Strict application of the Zoning
Ordinance would deprive the property owner of the right and benefits enjoyed by
similarly situated properties in the same vicinity and zone. The encroachment permits
the use of the lot to the extent allowed for other properties in the vicinity. The Variance
will permit the development of the property in a manner similar to development
patterns on surrounding properties.
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. Development in the front yard will allow the
remaining portion of the lot to remain undeveloped. The structural lot coverage and the
total impervious lot coverage are within the requirements of the City. The residential
building pad coverage exceeds the City's guidelines of 30%.
Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 630 to encroach into the front yard
setback, (west side), to construct a 386 square foot addition at an existing single family
residential development, of which 289 will encroach into the front yard setback, as
indicated on the development plan dated May 16, 2001, submitted with this application
and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, and subject to the conditions
specified in Section 8 of this Resolution.
Section 6. A Variance to Section 17.16.070 (B) is required because it states that
disturbance shall be limited to 40% of the net lot area. The applicant is requesting a
Variance because total disturbance will be 51.7% of the net lot area. With respect to this
request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows:
A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions
applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other
property or class of use in the same zone. The Variance for the total disturbance is
necessary because the lot is relatively small in size in comparison to the average lots in
the City, and there are two bordering roadways at the southern and eastern sides of the
property that reduce the size of the net lot area. The lot size and configuration, together
with the existing development on the lot creates a difficulty in meeting this Code
requirement.
B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone,
but which is denied to the property in question. The Variance is necessary because of
the unusual size and configuration of the lot together with the City's development
standards result in more severe restrictions on the development of the subject property
than occurring on other lots in the vicinity.
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-12
2
• •
C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone
in which the property is located. All development will be adequately screened to
prevent adverse visual impact to surrounding properties.
Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 630 to permit a disturbed area of
51.7%, as indicated on the development plan dated May 16, 2001, submitted with this
application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions
specified in Section 8.
Section 8. The Variance regarding the front yard encroachment approved in
Section 5 of this Resolution and the Variance regarding the percentage of the disturbed
net lot approved in Sections 7, are subject to the following conditions:
A. The Variances approvals shall expire within one year from the effective
date of approval as defined in Section 17.38.070(A), unless otherwise extended pursuant
to the requirements of this sections.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variances, that if any conditions
thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended and the privileges granted
thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been given written notice to
cease such violation, the opportunity for a hearing has been provided, and if requested,
has been held, and thereafter the applicant fails to correct the violation within a period
• of thirty (30) days from the date of the City's determination.
C. All requirements of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance, the
Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be
complied with unless otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an
approved plan.
D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance
with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A and dated May 16, 2001, except as otherwise
provided in these conditions.
E. The property on which the project is located shall contain an area of
minimum of 1000 square feet to provide an area meeting all standards for a stable (450
square feet) and corral (550 square feet) with vehicular access thereto.
F. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 6,267 square feet or 12.6% in
conformance with lot coverage limitations.
G. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 14,173
square feet or 28.4% in conformance with lot coverage limitations.
H. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 25,785 square feet or 51.7% in
conformance with lot coverage limitations, as approved in Section. 7 of this resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-12
3
• •
I. Residential building pad coverage on the 17,485 square foot residential
building pad shall not exceed 5,817 square feet or 33.3%, coverage on the 2,304 square
foot stable pad shall not exceed 450 square feet or 19.5%, and total building pad coverage
shall not exceed 31.7% which exceeds the Planning Commission guideline of 30%.
J. There shall be no grading of the site.
K. The existing topography, flora and natural features of the lot shall be
retained to the greatest extent feasible.
L. During construction, dust control measures shall be used to stabilize the
soil from wind erosion and reduce dust and objectionable odors generated by
construction activities in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management
District, Los Angeles County and local ordinances and engineering practices.
M. During construction, conformance with local ordinances and engineering
practices so that people or property are not exposed to landslides, mudflows, erosion,
or land subsidence shall be required.
N. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district
requirements, stormwater pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances
and engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle
trips, noise, dust, objectionable odors, landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land
subsidence shall be required.
Q. During construction, the Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set
forth in Section 7010 of the 1996 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be
followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control stormwater
pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles.
P. ' During construction, the property owners 'shall be required to schedule and
regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of
7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical
equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential
environment of the City of Rolling Hills.
Q. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site
and, if . necessary, any overflow parking shall take place within nearby roadway
easements.
R. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional
Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management
Practices (BMP's) related to solid waste.
S. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills
Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any
drainage, building or grading permit.
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-12
4
•
T. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building
and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the development plan described in
Condition D.
U. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of
these Variances approvals, pursuant to Section 17.38.060, or the approval shall not be
effective.
V. All conditions of these Variances approvals, that apply, must be complied
with prior to the issuance of a building permit from the County of Los Angeles.
W. Due to the fact that the project exceeds the maximum permitted disturbed
area, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional structural
development or additional lot disturbance shall require the filing of a new application
for discretionary review and approval by the Planning Commission.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 19TH DAY
ATTEST:
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-12
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
5
AYES:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS)
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2001-12 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED
DISTURBED AREA, AND GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH WITH AN
ADDITION INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
AT 11 CABALLEROS ROAD, IN ZONING CASE NO. 630.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on June
19th, 2001 by the following roll call vote:
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.
DEPUTY CHI CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-12
•