740, Demo exist corral and create a, Resolutions & Approval Conditions11/26/07
c_A
•
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
•
i
1111 111111 1111111120072598148
V
T RECORDER'S USE ONLY
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. 740
SITE PLAN REVIEW XX
VARIANCE XX
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
I (We) the undersigned state:
I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows:
16 GEOREFF, ROLLING HILLS, (LOT 6-GF), CA 90274
This property is the subject of the above numbered case and conditions of approval.
I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said
ZONING CASE NO. 740
SITE PLAN REVIEW XX
VARIANCE XX
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
�e) certify or declare under the penalty of perjury that the ioigis trued cor
Signatur \ , " oLc,eck I ) 9. 0 j /
Name ygedn �orpri��v5p
(
ressn
City/State
Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public
State of California )
County of Los Angeles) L
On Ater. 6/ .2001 before me, L//tGiak.7. Ark, #ahtvf/ i(C
/
Personally appeared I d( W. /3ei//<t nft c-I1 •l/e.
personally known to j e (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose
name) is/ a •ubscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/texecuted the same
in his/her '+authorized capacity ies and that by his/her/ eiP ignature(RLon the instrument the person(s), or
the on(acted, executed the instrument.
�.._ LINDA J. STARK
Commission # 1467227
Witness by band andofficia a /
Notary Public - California
Los Angeles County L.-
Sign re of Notary
My Comm. Exolres Feb 1. 2008r
tr'A"' 'i"1`AeHi&HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF
®G� t^llr )
Signature 1 p
Naf to me type()
oo�Nr printed4eI Pad
Add s01I I drly I1Its 1 r I
City/State 1 - /
A
cI
•
RESOLUTION NO. 2007-16
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING TO CREATE A PLAY
AREA IN THE AREA OF THE EXISTING CORRAL AND A VARIANCE TO EXCEED
THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA OF THE LOT AT AN EXISTING
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 740, AT 16 GEORGEFF ROAD,
(LOT 6-GF), (BEILKE).
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES
HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Application was duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Jared Beilke with
respect to real property located at 16 Georgeff Road, Rolling Hills (Lot 6-GF)
requesting a Site Plan Review for grading of 246 cubic yards of cut and 246 cubic yards
of fill to create a 3,240 square foot pad area for a lawn and play area in the area of the
existing corral and to construct a 655 square foot infinity swimming pool with spa, 45
square foot pool equipment shed and 53 square foot barbecue area on the existing
residential building pad. The applicants also request a Variance to exceed the
maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot (53.7%).
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings
to consider the application on July 17, 2007 and at a field trip on September 18, 2007,
after the City Council remanded this matter to the Planning Commission. The
applicants were notified of the public hearings 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 applicants and their representative were in
attendance at the hearings.
Section 3. The Planning Commission in May 2007 approved a Site plan
review and variances for 260 cubic yards of cut and 260 cubic yards of fill to create a
new building pad in the middle portion of the property for the construction of a 655
square foot swimming pool and 112 square foot pool equipment shed, as well as a
patio area with a 172 square foot trellis and 128 square foot outdoor barbecue area, and
Variances to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot (46%), and to
exceed the maximum permitted slope for access to the future stable area (average 40%
slope). In June, the City Council took this case under jurisdiction. The Council
expressed concern with the several Variances requested and the fact that an existing
stable will be removed to make room for a pool. In July at the City Council meeting the
applicants submitted a revised plan, which was substantially different from the
original proposal and the Council remanded the case back to the Planning
Commission.
Section 4. 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:
2007-16
Beilke 1
• •
Section 5. Section 17.46.020(A)(1) requires a Site Plan Review for grading
projects requiring a grading permit. With respect to the Site Plan Review application,
the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact:
A. The proposed activity is compatible with the General Plan and the
Zoning Ordinance. The Land Use Element of the General Plan establishes the
maintenance of strict grading practices to preserve the community's natural terrain.
The Building Code and the Zoning Ordinance require a balanced cut and fill ratio and
do not permit import or export of soil, except under special circumstances applicable to
a property and with a discretionary permission by the Planning Commission. The
project conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements. The proposed
graded area will not result in construction of a structure. It is to remain undeveloped
as a set aside area for a corral.
B. The proposed activity 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). Although grading of the existing sloping corral is necessary to
develop the play area only 5,489 square feet of the 37,120 square foot net lot area of the
lot will be affected by the grading. The development plan substantially preserves the
natural and undeveloped state of the lot and enhances it by additional landscaping.
Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space on
the property. No walls are proposed and the area previously proposed for grading will
not be affected and will remain. In addition, the existing stable will remain on site,
furthering the equestrian character and nature of the City The nature, condition, and
development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the topography of the lot
have been considered, and the construction of the play area will not adversely affect or
be materially detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the
proposed play area will be constructed on a portion of the lot which is the least
intrusive to surrounding properties, as it is already screened with trees and shrubs and
is a sufficient distance from nearby residences and the street so that it will not impact
the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will permit the owners to enjoy
their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property
owners.
C. The proposed development is harmonious in scale and mass with the
site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the
lot coverage maximum set forth in the Zoning Code will not be exceeded and the
proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood. No new structures
will be constructed on the graded area.
D. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to the
maximum extent feasible. The natural drainage courses will be preserved and
additional dissipater will be installed to aid the drainage from the upper residential
pad.
E. The development plan will be based upon compliance with the
conditions contained in this Resolution, supplement the existing vegetation with
2007-16
Beilke 2
•
•
landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the
community. Upon completion of the project the graded areas will be re -vegetated.
F. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the
convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the
proposed project does not affect the circulation for pedestrians and vehicles.
G. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act and is exempt from its requirements.
Section 6. 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 17.16.070 (B) is required because
it states that the lot disturbance shall be limited to 40% of the net lot area. With respect
to this request for a Variance for lot disturbance of 53.7%, 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 maximum
permitted disturbance is necessary because the disturbance is currently at the
maximum permitted at 40.0%. The additional disturbance will be minimal and will
remain as open space for play area only. No structures are proposed on the graded
area.
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 existing conditions of the lot. The lot is developed from side property line to side
property line with residential structure on an upper residential pad. There is no level
area adjacent to the residence for play area for the children. The play area would be
located in an area on the property that is on a pad below the residential building pad
and will not be visible from any neighbor or roadway.
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. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped
so as to maintain open space on the property. The proposed play area will be the least
intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped with mature
trees and shrubs, is of sufficient distance from nearby residences, so that it will not
impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will permit the owners to
enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding
property owners.
D. In granting the variance, the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance
will be observed. The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to regulate development in
2007-16
Beilke
an orderly fashion and in a manner consistent with the goals and policies of the
General Plan. Approval of the variance will not impede any goals of the Zoning
Ordinance or the General Plan. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent
uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and the development of a 3,240
square foot flat area, which will not have any hardscape surface, will not adversely
affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures
because the proposed play area will be modest in size, constructed in an area usable for
a corral, will be the least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and
landscaped with trees and shrubs, is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so
that it will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors and will permit
the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of
surrounding property owners.
E. The variance does not grant special privileges to the applicant. In absence
of the variance, the property owner would be deprived of the same rights and
privileges afforded to other property owners in the vicinity. Unique circumstances
applicable to the subject property make it infeasible for the property owner to comply
with Section 17.16.070. The minor overage requested will allow the property owner to
enjoy the same rights and privileges afforded to many other properties in the City.
F. The variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles
Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous
waste facilities.
G. The variance request is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed
project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies,
general land uses, and programs specified in the General Plan.
Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variance and Site Plan Review in Zoning Case No. 740 subject to
the following conditions:
A. The Site Plan Review and Variance approvals shall expire within two
years from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.46.080 and 17.38.070,
unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of this section.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan Review and Variance
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.
2007-16
Beilke 4
•
• a
D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance
with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A and dated September 11, 2007 except as
otherwise provided in these conditions.
E. The existing stable shall remain or an area not less than 450 square feet
in the same location be set aside for a future stable, should the existing stable be
demolished, and the corral area shall be undeveloped, but may be used as a pay area.
Access to the stable and corral shall remain and shall not be paved.
F. The property owners shall comply with the requirements of the Lighting
Requirements of the City of Rolling Hills, pertaining to lighting on said property,
including the pool area.
G. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 5,772 square feet or 15.5% in
conformance with lot coverage limitations.
H. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 9,201
square feet or 24.8% in conformance with total lot coverage limitations.
I. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 19,934 square feet or
53.7% in conformance with the Variance approval.
J. The residential building pad coverage on the 7,168 square foot pad shall
not exceed 67.6%, which do not include the covered porch.
K. Grading for this project shall not exceed 246 cubic yards of cut and 246
cubic yards of fill.
L. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code, any modification to the property, which would constitute
additional structural development, including additional walls, or additional
grading shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning
Commission.
M. No grading permit shall be issued unless the slope below the residential
building pad is planted with ground cover. Such planting shall commence within
two -weeks of receiving approval of this project.
N. The applicant shall submit two copies of landscaping plan for the
graded areas and the swimming pool. The landscaping shall include water efficient
irrigation that incorporates low gallonage irrigation system, utilizes automatic
controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using "hydrozones," considers slope
factors and climate conditions in design, and utilizes means to reduce water waste
resulting from runoff and overspray. Further, landscaping shall be designed using
mature trees and shrubs so as not to obstruct views of neighboring properties but to
screen the swimming pool area. If new trees or shrubs are planned in conjunction
with this project, at maturity, they shall not be higher than the ridge height of the
residence. Staff shall review the landscaping within one year of completion of the
swimming pool to ascertain that the landscaping is in good condition.
2007-16
Beilke 5
•
O. This project shall be reviewed and approved by the RHCA. The City
does not approve or recommend the design or any architectural features of the
proposed structures. Any deviations to this project that the RHCA may recommend
or request, which would trigger grading or change in the approved herein
development standards shall be reviewed by City staff and/or Planning
Commission.
P. The stable shall remain on the property and may not be converted
to a habitable use.
Q. Prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits, a drainage plan
shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department and Rolling Hills
Community Association and shall substantially comply with the plan reviewed by
the Planning Commission. Prior to issuance of a grading and/or building permit
permission shall be obtained from the RHCA to retain the three -rail fence in the
easement.
R. No drain structure shall be located in easements, unless approved by
the Rolling Hills Community Association. No irrigation or drainage device may be
located on a property in such a manner as to contribute to erosion or in any way
adversely affect an easement or a trail.
S. Perimeter easements and trails shall remain free and clear of any
improvements including, but not be limited to, fences -including construction fences,
grading (both cut and fill), landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, play
equipment, parked vehicles, building materials, debris and equipment, except that
the Rolling Hills Community Association may approve certain encroachments.
T 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.
U 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.
V. 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.
W. 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.
2007-16
Beilke 6
• •
X. 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.
Y. 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.
Z. During and after construction, all soil preparation, drainage, and
landscape sprinklers shall protect the building pad from erosion and direct surface
water in an approved manner.
AA. If an above ground drainage system is required by the Drainage
Engineer such system shall be designed in such a manner as not to cross over any
equestrian trails. The drainage system(s) (below or above ground) shall not discharge
water onto a trail, shall incorporate earth tone colors, including in the design of the
dissipater and be screened from any trail and neighbors' views to the maximum
extent practicable, without impairing the function of the drainage system.
AB. 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.
AC. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions
of this approval pursuant to Sections 17.46.065 and 17.38.060, or the approval shall not
be effective.
AD. All conditions of this Site Plan Review and Variance approval, that
apply, must be complied with prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit
from the County of Los Angeles.
AE. 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 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2007.
Zit,1 P
F ICHARD HENKE, VICE-CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
MARILYi RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
2007-16
Beilke 7
• •
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS)
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2007-16 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING TO
CREATE A PLAY AREA IN THE AREA OF THE EXISTING CORRAL AND A
VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA OF
THE LOT AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE
NO. 740, AT 16 GEORGEFF ROAD, (LOT 6-GF), (BEILKE).
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on
OCTOBER 16, 2007 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners DeRoy, Henke and Witte.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Smith and Chairman Sommer.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices.
ma/Lac-1,J
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
2007-16
Beilke 8
,1
Gec\ki,p of wkch
CS)
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
0- 2,6-07
Date
£JCrUJ&U'C
Place of Execution
ado„
RESOLUTION NO. 2007-08
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING TO CREATE A
BUILDING PAD FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SWIMMING POOL, PATIO AND
ANCILLARY USES AND GRANTING VARIANCES TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM
PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA OF THE LOT AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM
PERMITTED SLOPE FOR ACCESS TO THE FUTURE STABLE AREA AT AN
EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 740, AT 16
GEORGEFF ROAD, (LOT 6-GF), (BEILKE).
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY CJF ROLLING HILLS DOES
HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Application was duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Jared Beilke with
respect to real property located at 16 Georgeff Road, Rolling Hills (Lot 6-GF) requesting
a Site 'Plan Review for grading of 260 cubic yards of cut and 260 cubic yards of fill to
create a building pad for the construction of a 655 square foot swimming pool and 112
square foot pool equipment shed, as well as a patio area with a 172 square foot trellis
and 128 square foot outdoor barbecue area, and a request for a Variance to exceed the
maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot (46%), and a Variance to exceed the
maximum permitted slope for access to the future stable area (average 40% slope).
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings
to consider the application at a field trip on April 17, 2007 and at a regular meeting on
April 17, 2007. The applicants were notified of the public hearings 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 applicants and their representative
were in attendance at the hearings.
Section 3. The Planning Commission considered the request for the Site Plan
review and Variances, the proximity of the descending slope to the existing building
pad, the existing access to the stable, which also exceeds 25% slope and the general
terrain of the property.
Section 4. 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 5. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for
Site Plan Review and approval before any grading requiring a grading permit or any
building or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration 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 at least 1,000 square feet and has the
effect of increasing the size of the building by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in
any thirty-six (36) month period, which is measured from the date that a certificate of
occupancy is issued for a prior addition. The applicants propose to grade a 1,895 square
foot building pad for construction of a 655 square foot swimming pool and ancillary
• •
uses. With respect to the Site Plan Review application for the addition the Planning
Commission finds as follows:
A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the
Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structures comply with
the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with
sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to Zoning
Code setbacks and lot coverage requirements. The net lot area of the lot is 37,120 square
feet. The proposed development will have a total of 5,815 square feet of structures,
(including the existing residence, garage and accessory uses), which constitutes 15.6% of
the net lot which is within the maxin)um 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The
total lot coverage including all structures, paved areas and driveway will be 9,710
square feet, which constitutes 26.2% of the net lot which is within the 35% maximum
overall net lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is screened from the road so
as to reduce the visual impact of the development. The disturbed area of the lot will be
46%, which requires a Variance.
B. 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 lot to look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the lot
will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space on the property. Landscaping for
the pool area will be required, so to screen the development. The nature, condition, and
development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the topography of the lot
have been considered, and the construction will not adversely affect or be materially
detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed pad will
be constructed on a portion of the lot which is not intrusive to surrounding properties,
will be screened and landscaped with trees and shrubs, is of sufficient distance from
nearby residences so that it will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding
neighbors. There is no other area on the lot that can be developed with a pool and
outdoor living area, and which is reasonably close to the residence.
C. The proposed project is compatible with the General Plan and the Zoning
Ordinance. The Land Use Element of the General Plan establishes the maintenance of
strict grading practices to preserve the community's natural terrain. The Building Code
and the Zoning Ordinance require a balanced cut and fill ratio and do not permit
import or export of soil, except under special circumstances applicable to a property
and with a discretionary permission by -the Planning Commission. The project does not
require extensive grading and conforms to the Zoning Code lot coverage requirements;
D. 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 set forth in the Zoning Code will not be
exceeded and the proposed project is consistent with the scale and uses of the
neighborhood.
E. The development plan incorporates existing trees and native vegetation,
and the landscaping is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the
community.
Reso. 2007-08
16 Georgeff Rd.
•
F. The development plan follows natural contours of the site as no area for
the new building pad will be cut or filled by more than 3 feet. The terraced Walls will
not exceed 3 feet, except along a portion of the stairs leading to the lower pad.
G. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the
convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed
development will utilize the existing driveway.
H. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act and is exempt.
Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Site Plan Review application in Zoning Case No. 740 for grading of
a building pad to construct a swimming pool and ancillary uses subject to the
conditions contained in Section 9 of this Resolution.
Section 7. The applicant seeks a variance from the 40% maximum disturbed
area standard set forth in Section 17.16.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code.
Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Code permit approval of a variance from the
standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when, due to exceptional or
extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other
similar properties in the same zone, strict application of the Code would deny the.
property owner substantial property rights enjoyed by other properties in the same
vicinity and zone. Additional findings are also required, as detailed herein. 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 other properties in the same
vicinity and in the same zone. Section 17.16.070 of the Municipal Code provides that
disturbance shall be limited to 40% of the net lot area. The applicants propose to
demolish the existing 400 square -foot stable to allow room for a pad for a proposed
swimming pool. The topographic nature of the subject property is such that
construction of the pool in an area close to the home will require a fill slope that
complies with other applicable development standards. While the fill slope will only be
two feet thick on average, both the cut and fill areas are counted in the disturbed area
calculation. The pool could not be installed in this area adjacent to the home without
concomitant construction of the fill slope.
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 would be denied to the property in question absent a variance. The
applicants propose to demolish the existing 400 square -foot stable to allow room for a
proposed swimming pool. Swimming pools are a common amenity enjoyed by several
properties in the vicinity and zone. Installation of the pool in the area adjacent to the
home will require construction of a fill slope approximately two feet thick on average.
Construction of the fill slope will increase the disturbed area on the site from its current
38.9% of the net lot area to 46%. The overage is not significant and the property owner
should not be denied the privilege of a swimming pool simply because the topographic
nature of the lot makes it infeasible to comply strictly with Section 17.16.170.
Reso. 2007-08
16 Georgeff Rd.
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. A minor increase in the overall percentage of disturbed
area on the lot will have no effect on the public welfare or on property or improvements
in the vicinity.
D. In granting the variance, the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will
be observed. The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to regulate development in an
orderly fashion and in a manner consistent with the goals and policies of the General
Plan. Approval of the variance will not impede any goals of the Zoning Ordinance or
the General Plan. Rather, the variance will allow the property owner to enjoy the same
rights and privileges afforded to other property owners in the vicinity. The overage
requested is not substantial and does not undermine the spirit or intent of the Zoning
Ordinance.
E. The variance does not grant special privileges. to the applicant. In absence
of the variance, the property owner would be deprived of the same rights and privileges
afforded to other property owners in the vicinity. Unique circumstances applicable to
the subject property make it infeasible for the property owner to comply with Section
17.16.070. The minor overage requested will allow the property owner to enjoy the same
rights and privileges afforded to many other properties in the vicinity and zone.
F. The variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles
Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous
waste facilities.
G. The variance request is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed
project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies,
general land uses, and programs specified in the General Plan.
Section 8. The applicant seeks a variance from the 25% maximum slope
standard set forth in Section 17.16.170 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. Sections
17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Code permit approval of a variance from the
standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when, due to exceptional or
extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other
similar properties in the same zone, strict application of the Code would deny the
property owner substantial property rights enjoyed by other properties in the same
vicinity and zone. Additional findings are also required, as detailed herein. 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 other properties in the same
vicinity and in the same zone. Section 17.16.170 of the Municipal code requires a
vehicular accessway to the stable and corral area for delivery of feed and removal of
waste. Section 17.16.170 further provides that the accessway should not exceed a slope
of twenty-five percent. The vehicular accessway need not be paved and need only be
traversable by any motorized device capable of delivering feed and the removal of
waste. The topographic nature of the subject property is such that construction of an
Reso. 2007-08
16 Georgeff Rd.
J.
• •
accessway that conforms to the maximum 25% slope requirement would not be feasible
without extensive additional grading and the construction of retaining walls.
Development on the subject property is almost at the maximum permitted disturbed
at ea. Any additional grading would cause the disturbed area to further exceed the --
maximum permitted. The existing accessway is situated on an average 40% slope and is
traversable by any type of all -terrain vehicle.
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 would be denied to the property in question absent a variance. The
applicants propose to demolish the existing 400 square -foot stable to allow room for a
proposed swimming pool. There is an adequate area for a future stable and corral
elsewhere on the lot, below the proposed swimming pool pad. The accessway between
the home and that area averages a 40% slope. It cannot be reduced to 25% without
significant additional grading and the construction of retaining walls. The 40% slope
accessway is traversable by any type of all -terrain vehicle, consistent with the intent of
Section 17.16.170. Absent the variance, this property owner would either be precluded
from constructing a swimming pool in the area close to the home, an amenity enjoyed by
several properties in the vicinity and zone, or would be required to disturb a
significantly greater portion of the lot. Additional disturbance of the lot is disfavored as
the existing disturbance already exceeds the maximum allowed by the Code (see
variance findings for site disturbance in a separate section of this resolution). The
property owner should not be denied the privilege of a swimming pool simply because
the topographic nature of the lot makes it infeasible to comply strictly with Section
17.16.170.
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. As stated, the 40% slope accessway is traversable by any
all -terrain vehicle, in accordance with the intent of Section 17.16.170. No threat to persons
or property is anticipated to result from use of the 40% slope accessway under normal
circumstances. The existing accessway to the existing stable, located in the area of the
proposed swimming pool, exceeds 25% slope and has been used in the past for access to
the stable.
D. In granting the variance, the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will
be observed. The purpose of the Zoning Ordinance is to regulate development in an
orderly fashion and in a manner consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan.
Approval of the variance will not impede any goals of the Zoning Ordinance or the
General Plan. Rather, the variance will allow the property owner to enjoy the same rights
and privileges afforded to other property owners in the vicinity and will avoid the need
for significant additional disturbance to the lot while still affording reasonable access to
the corral area in a manner consistent with the intent of Section 17.16.170.
E. The variance does not grant special privileges to the applicant. To the
contrary, absent a variance, the property owner would be deprived of the same rights and
privileges afforded to other property owners in the vicinity. Unique circumstances
applicable to the subject property make it infeasible for the property owner to comply
with Section 17.16.170. It is in the best interest of the community to avoid significant
Reso. 2007-08
16 Georgeff Rd.
additional disturbance on this lot so long as reasonable access can still be afforded to the
stable and corral area.
F. The variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles
Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous
waste facilities.
G. The variance request is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed
project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies,
general land uses, and programs specified in the General Plan.
Section9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variances and Site Plan Review in Zoning Case No. 740 subject to
the following conditions:
A. The Site Plan Review and Variances approvals shall expire within two
years from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.46.080 and 17.38.070,
unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of this section.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan Review and 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 April 11, 2007 except as otherwise
provided in these conditions.
E. An adequate area of not less than 1,000 square feet shall be set aside for a
future stable and corral, as required by the Zoning Ordinance. Access to the stable and
corral shall not be paved or exceed 40% slope, as approved by this Variance.
F. The property owners shall comply with the requirements of the Lighting
Requirements of the City of Rolling Hills, pertaining to lighting on said property,
including the pool area.
G. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 5,815 square feet or 15.6% in
conformance with lot coverage limitations.
H. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 9,710
square feet or 26.2% in conformance with total lot coverage limitations.
Reso. 2007-08
16 Georgeff Rd.
A
I. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 17,075 square feet or 46.0% in
conformance with the Variance approval.
J. The existing residential building pad coverage on the 7,321 square foot pad
is 4,292 square feet or 58.6%, which do not include the covered porches. The proposed
pool building pad shall be 1,895 square feet and shall have coverage of not to exceed
39.2%. The existing future stable/ corral building pad is 2,355 square feet and will have
coverage of 19.1%.
K. Grading for this project shall not exceed 260 cubic yards of cut and 260
cubic yards of fill. Any additional disturbance, grading or grading quantities
changes, including from the excavation of footings, swimming pool, drainage, steps
and any other activity on site including additional walls, either required by the Los
Angeles County Building Department or due to conditions in the field, such as soils
and geology, shall require a modified application to be submitted and reviewed and
approved by the Planning Commission.
L. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code, any modification to the property, which would constitute additional
structural development or grading shall require the filing of a new application for
approval by the Planning Commission.
M. The existing topography, flora and natural features of the lot shall be
retained to the greatest extent feasible.
N. Prior to issuance of grading and / or building permits, a drainage plan
shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department.
O. Prior to issuance of grading and/or building permits the applicant shall
submit two copies of landscaping plan for the graded areas and the swimming pool.
The landscaping shall include water efficient irrigation that incorporates low gallonage
irrigation system, utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using
"hydrozones," considers slope factors and climate conditions in design, and utilizes
means to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray. Further, landscaping
shall be designed using mature trees and shrubs so as not to obstruct views of
neighboring properties but to screen the swimming pool area. If new trees or shrubs are
planned in conjunction with this project, at maturity, they shall not be higher than the
ridge height of the residence.
P. No drain structure shall be located in easements, unless approved by the
Rolling Hills Community Association.
Q. Perimeter easements and trails shall remain free and clear of any
improvements including, but not be limited to, fences -including construction fences,
grading (both cut and fill), landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, play
equipment, parked vehicles, building materials, debris and equipment, except that the
Rolling Hills Community Association may approve certain encroachments. "
Reso. 2007-08
16 Georgeff Rd.
• •
R. No irrigation or drainage device may be located on a property in such a
manner as to contribute to erosion or in any way adversely affect an easement or a trail
S. 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.
T. 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.
U. 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.
V. 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.
W. 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.
X. 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.
Y. During and after construction, all soil preparation, drainage, and
landscape sprinklers shall protect the building pad from erosion and direct surface
water in an approved manner.
Z. If an above ground drainage system is required by the Drainage Engineer
such system shall be designed in such a manner as not to cross over any equestrian
trails. The drainage system(s) (below or above ground) shall not discharge water onto a
trail, shall incorporate earth tone colors, including in the design of the dissipater and be
screened from any trail and neighbors' views to the maximum extent practicable,
without impairing the function of the drainage system.
AA. 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.
Reso. 2007-08
16 Georgeff Rd.
• •
AB. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of
this approval. pursuant to Sections 17.46.065 and 17.38.060, or the approval shall not be
effective.
AC. All conditions of this Site Plan Review and Variance approval, that apply,
must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building permit from the County of
Los Angeles.
AD. 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 15TH DAY OF MAY 2007
ARVEL WITTE, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
Reso. 2007-08
16 Georgeff Rd.
{9
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS)
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2007-08 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING TO CREATE A
BUILDING PAD FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SWIMMING POOL, PATIO AND
ANCILLARY USES AND GRANTING VARIANCES TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM
PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA OF THE LOT AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM
PERMITTED SLOPE FOR ACCESS TO THE FUTURE STABLE AREA AT AN
EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 740, AT 16
GEORGEFF ROAD, (LOT 6-GF), (BEILKE).
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on MAY
15, 2007 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners DeRoy, Hankins, Henke and Chairman Witte.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Sommer.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices.
Reso. 2007-08
16 Georgeff Rd.
DEPUTY CITY CL RK
in