Loading...
493, Addition to SFR with small por, Resolutions & Approval Conditionse3 600642 • RECORDED/FILED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS RECORDER'S OFFICE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CALIFORNIA 4MIN. 8 PAST A A.M. MAR 31 1993 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL^TO: CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 "OPT) APR ;70 moi CITY OF ROLLING HILLS Please record this form with the Registrar -Recorder's Office and return to: City of Rolling Hills, 2 Portuguese Bend Road *OW Rolling Hills, CA 90274 (The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be notarized before recordation). ACCEPTANCE FORM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss ZONING CASE NO. 4441 SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT I (We) the undersigned state: x x I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows: 1 Hackamore Road (Lot 30-EF), Rolling Hills This property is the subject of the above numbered cases. I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said ZONING CASE NO. dQ4 SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT x x I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Print Owner��VC C Name .. Signature Address����� J� Print Owner Name Signature -al/Address City/State L 4 ;h1;e4 / r� City/State • V Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public. )(1 ef/f act_ck2,4---t-cre- State of County of err SS. on this the day of • the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared ❑ personally known to me 0 proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) within instrument, and acknowledged that WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary's Signature 19_, before me, subscribed to the executed it. r See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof STATE OF CALIFORNIA93 600642 COUNTY OF LOS ANul�• ! c S Capacity Claimed By Signer: On 03/17/93 before me *AMY PERRETT ; personally appeared *PAUL GRUBS & fJ 7 CE GRUBS* OFFICIAL SEAT AMY PERRE1T NOTARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA PRIP4CtPAL OFFICE IN LOS ANGFI FS COUNTY My Commission Exp. Apr. 5, 1994 Official Notarial Seal This certificate must be attached to the document described at right. Title or Type of Document Number of Pages Signer(s) Other Than Named Above mh TY ' m `t6u , notary public, -or- proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature of Notary: AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEP i CE FORM Date of Document 03/ 1.7/ n3 t8th. ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT LE 76 tW91) RESOLUTION NO. 93-12 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT PORTIONS OF A RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK AND APPROVING SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF A. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 493. 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. and Mrs. Paul Grubs with respect to real property, located at 1 Hackamore Road, Rolling Hills (Lot 30-EF) requesting a Variance to permit the encroachment of portions of a residential structure into the front yard setback and requesting Site Plan Review for the reconstruction of a single family residence. The existing residential structure had been destroyed by fire on December 25, 1992. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications for the Variance and Site Plan Review on February 16, 1993 and individual field trip visits to the site were made by the Planning Commissioners. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project is categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to a Class 3 exemption provided by Section 15303 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Section 4. 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 a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties. A Variance to Section 17.16.060 is required to construct portions of a residential structure in the fifty (50) foot front yard setback. The applicant is requesting construction that will encroach a maximum of twenty-five (25) feet into the front yard setback. The Planning Commission finds: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and zone. The Variance is. necessary because the existing legal nonconforming residence was built within the front yard setback and the building pad is located'close to the street and adjacent residences. RESOLUTION NO. 93-12 PAGE 2 B. This 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 the building pad and topography of the rest of the lot preclude the requested residential structure from being built into the rear yard. C. The granting of this Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity or zone in which the property is located. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped. Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance to encroach into the front yard setback to construct portions of a residential structure to a maximum of 25 feet as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A subject to the conditions contained in Section 9. Section 6. 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, 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 more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period. The applicant has proposed to reconstruct a single family residence on the existing foundation on the subject site. Section 7. 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 structure complies 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 setback and lot coverage, requirements. The lot has a net square foot area of 51,818 square feet. The proposed residence of 2,579 square feet, garage of 620 square feet, a 680 square foot swimming pool, a 282 square foot storage building, a 450 square foot future stable, and a 100 square foot service yard will have 4,711 square feet which constitutes 9.1% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 10,096 square feet which equals 19.5% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project replaces RESOLUTION NO. 93-12 PAGE 3 the -existing house in the same location on a relatively large lot which provides adequate open space. The proposed structure conforms with the natural topographic features of the lot. The area will not be graded and provides a pad that conforms with the existing pad located on the site. The project is similar and compatible with scale of several neighboring developments. 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 because no grading will take place and, subject to conditions attached to this approval, most of the mature trees will not be removed, thereby retaining the current drainage pattern and landscape screening for the site. C. The development plan follows natural contours of the site and drainage courses will continue naturally away from the building pad. D. The development plan, subject to conditions attached to this approval, incorporates existing large trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible and supplements it with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. 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. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped. F. The proposed development is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences because as indicated in Paragraph A, lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded and the proposed project is of consistent scale with the neighborhood. The ratio of the proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. G. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize the existing vehicular access, thereby having no further impact on the roadway. H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. RESOLUTION NO. 93-12 PAGE 4 Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review for a proposed new residence at 1 Hackamoree Road in accordance with the Development Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A subject to the conditions contained in Section 9. Section 9. The Variance to the front yard setback approved in Section 5 and the Site Plan Review approval for a proposed new residence as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A as approved in Section 8 is subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance shall expire unless used within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.32.110 of the Municipal Code and the Site Plan Review approval shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.34.080.A. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance and Site Plan Review approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, these approvals 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 Zoning Ordinance and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in the approvals, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the Development Plan on file marked Exhibit A except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The building pad coverage shall not exceed 20.8%. F. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. G. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. H. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Variance and Site Plan Review, pursuant to Section 17.32.087, or the approval shall not be effective. I. Conditions A, C, D, E, F, G, and H must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. RESOLUTION NO. 93-12 PAGE 5 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 16TAY OF FEBRUARY, 1993. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK The foregoing Resolution No. 93-12 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT PORTIONS OF A RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK AND APPROVING SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 493. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on February 16, 1993 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Frost, Hankins, Lay, Raine and Chairman Roberts NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None LJ d 0,.1m���,,,� DEPUTY CITY CLERK