577, Encroach into the north side y, Resolutions & Approval Conditions• •
RESOLUTION NO. 99-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO PLANNING
COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 98-12, APPROVING AN EXTENSION
TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE
NORTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO AUTHORIZE THE RETENTION WITH
MODIFICATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED
RETAINING WALLS, AND APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO A
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE
SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO AUTHORIZE THE RETENTION WITH
MODIFICATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED
RETAINING WALLS AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN
ZONING CASE NO. 577.
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 Dr. and Mrs. Lynn Gill with respect to
real property located at 31 Chuckwagon Road (Lot 16-CF), Rolling Hills, requesting an
extension to a previously approved Variance to encroach into the north side yard
setback to authorize the retention with modifications of previously illegally constructed
retaining walls and approving an extension to a previously approved Variance to
encroach into the south side yard setback to authorize the retention with modifications
of previously illegally constructed retaining walls at an existing single family residence.
Section 2. The Commission considered this item at a meeting on May 18, 1999
at which time information was presented indicating that the extension of time is
necessary in order to comply with both the City and Community Association
requirements in order to acquire necessary permits to complete the work.
Section 3. Based upon information and evidence submitted, the Planning
Commission does hereby amend Paragraph A, Section 9 of Resolution No. 98-12, dated
June 16,1998, to read as follows:
"A. The Variance approvals shall expire within two years of the approval of
this Resolution."
Section 4. Except as herein amended, the provisions of Resolution No. 98-12
shall continue to be in full force and effect.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 18TH—D Y9F MAY, 1999.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
)<,4)-(rn)
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
• •
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
§§
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 99-11 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO PLANNING
COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 98-12, APPROVING AN EXTENSION
TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE
NORTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO AUTHORIZE THE RETENTION WITH
MODIFICATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED
RETAINING WALLS, AND APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO A
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE
SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO AUTHORIZE THE RETENTION WITH
MODIFICATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED
RETAINING WALLS AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN
ZONING CASE NO. 577.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on May
18,1999 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer, Witte and
Chairman Roberts.
NOES: None .
ABSENT: None .
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
•
31 Chuckwagon Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274 MAY 1 4 1999
May 13, 1999
Mr. Matt Shepherd
Shepherd Construction
P.O. Box 3216
Redondo Beach, CA 90266
Dear Matt:
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
I discussed what permits will be required for the work you will be doing with Lola
Unger, Planning Director, City of Rolling Hills. You will need two permits from the
County of Los Angeles:
1. PV Ledger stone veneer on front of the house
I am getting two sets of planned, stamped "approved" by the City of Rolling
Hills, run for you at Lomita Blueprint. You have the contract to set the value
of the veneer work, which is $8600.
2. Eighty linear feet of as -built 3 foot retaining walls in back of house
I am having two sets made of the site plan that was prepared by Denn
Engineers, stamped "approved" by the City of Rolling Hills, which show the
retaining walls and the details of the perforated drain pipes behind the walls.
I am also including the retaining wall design specifications provided by Denn
Engineers, and the detail of the perforated pipe placement prepared by Palos
Verdes Engineering Corporation.
I am having copies made of pictures I took during construction of the walls,
showing details of the footing two feet into bedrock, details of the rebar,
details of the drain pipes, and the completed three foot retaining walls.
• •
I measured the length of the three foot retaining walls, which are eighty feet in
length. To arrive at the value of the retaining walls for permit purposes, I
prorated the $8700 contract price for the 126 feet of retaining and garden
walls, arriving at 63% (80/126 = 63%) attributable to the retaining walls.
$8700 x 63% = $5481 for the three foot retaining walls.
Also enclosed are a copy of the 1988 permit for the retaining walls, which
were not completed at that time by the former owner, and a copy of the stop
work order dated 10-30-97.
I'II telephone when I have the plans.and the pictures for you.
Regards,
cc. Lola Unger, City of Rolling Hills
RESOLUTION NO. 98-12
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE . TO ENCROACH INTO
THE NORTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO AUTHORIZE THE RETENTION
WITH MODIFICATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED
RETAINING WALLS AND APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH
INTO THE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO AUTHORIZE THE
RETENTION WITH MODIFICATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY
CONSTRUCTED RETAINING WALLS AT A SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 577.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES
HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Dr. ,and Mrs. Lynn Gill with
respect to real property located. at 31 Chuckwagon Road (Lot 16-CF), Rolling .Hills,
requesting a Variance to authorize the retention of existing illegally constructed
retaining walls that encroach. into the north side yard setback, requesting a Variance
to authorize the retention of existing illegally constructed retaining walls and a
barbecue that encroach into the south side yard setback and requesting a Variance to
authorize the construction of a trellis that will encroach into the front yard setback.
During the hearing process, the request for the trellis: that would encroach into the
front yard setback was withdrawn.
Section 2. In October, 1997, it came to the attention of the City that
retaining walls were being constructed on the subject property without benefit of
building permits and the City called Dr. Lynn Gill. On October 24, 1997, Dr. Gill
visited City Hall to review 1988 plans for the_site. On Monday, October 30, 1997, Mr.
Rafael Bernal, District Engineering Associate, issued a "Stop Work Order" regarding
the retaining walls that required engineering and ordered the work stopped.
On November 17, 1997, staff received a letter from Dr. Gill describing the
sequence of events that prompted him to build the illegally constructed retaining.
walls and wherein the Gills concluded that in order for the former owners Mr. and
Mrs. Michele Migliaccio to have been issued a building permit in 1988, all City and
County requirements for retaining walls would have had to be met and therefore,
they did not pursue the matter further with the City or the County and requested
guidance regarding the necessary documents to file in order to be in compliance
with the regulations of the City, Community Association and the County. On
December 1, 1997, Mr. John O. Schuricht, Structural Engineer, Palos Verdes
Engineering, informed the City of the rationale for the design of the retaining walls
due to slope failure.
The City notified the Gills by letter on December 29, 1997, that the new
retaining walls were constructed illegally and subject to review by the Planning
RESOLUTION NO. 98-12
PAGE 1 OF 7
Commission because Variance approvals expire within one year from the effective
date of approval, the illegally constructed retaining walls encroach into the side yard
setbacks and that a Variance and a building permit are required.
On January 20, 1998, staff received a letter from Dr. Gill regarding his
understanding of the Variance and building permit requirements. On February 5,
1998, staff informed Dr. and Mrs. Gill of the need for an application and plans for
the retaining walls. The Gills submitted a Variance application on March 9, 1998.
Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing to consider the applications on March 17, 1998, April 21, 1998, and May 19,
1998, and at a field trip visit on March 28, 1998. 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 inaffecting said
project, from all persons protesting the same, and from members of the City staff
and the Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said project.
Concerns expressed by Commissioners, concerned residents and the applicants
focused on the unauthorized construction of the retaining walls, the unauthorized
completion of the retaining walls, the walls surrounding the pool equipment area,
and the heights, appearance, and locations of the retaining walls.
Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a
Class 5 Exemption . [State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15305 (Minor Alterations to
Land Use Limitations)] and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental
review under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 5. 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(A) requires a side yard . setback for every residential parcel in the
RA-S-1 zone to be twenty (20) feet. The applicant is requesting a Variance to
authorize an encroachment into the north side yard setback to allow the retention
and modification of two existing illegally constructed retaining walls that encroach
up to ten (10) feet into the twenty (20) foot side yard setback. The two walls are of
variable height, 3 feet maximum, and conjoin at the lower level of the side yard
setback. The ;upper wall is 105 feet long and the lower wall is 75 feet long. 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.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-12
PAGE 2 OF 7
_1
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 minimum grading to construct the previously 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, the uneven tops of
the walls will be smoothed, and a substantial portion of the lot will remain
undeveloped.
Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 577 to allow an encroachment
into the north side yard setback to authorize the retention of two existing illegally
constructed retaining walls that encroach up to ten (10) feet into the twenty (20) foot
side yard setback, as indicated on the development plan submitted with this
application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, dated June 5, 1998,
subject to the conditions specified in Section 9 of this Resolution.
Section 7. The applicant is requesting a Variance to permit an,
encroachment into the south side yard setback to authorize the retention and
modification of two existing illegally constructed retaining walls that encroach up to
twenty (20) feet and .a proposed brick barbecue to encroach up to seven (7) feet into
the twenty. (20) foot side yard setback. The two walls are of variable height, 5 feet
maximum. The upper wall is 30 feet long and the lower wall is 43 feet long, 30 feet
of which runs along the southern property line. 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 existing retaining wall is located on a hillside slope at the rear of the lot and
away from the street.
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 minimum grading to construct the previously constructed illegal
retaining walls on this irregular shaped lotand drainage will be controlled on the
property,
RESOLUTION NO. 98-12
PAGE 3 OF 7
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 modified retaining wall will allow
drainage on the property to be controlled as it flows to the canyon to the east within
the applicants' property, the height of the walls will be reduced, the uneven tops of
the walls will be smoothed, 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. 577 to allow the retention and
modification of two existing illegally constructed retaining walls that encroach up to
twenty (20) feet and a proposed brick barbecue to encroach up to seven (7) feet into
the twenty (20) foot side yard setback as indicated on the development plan
submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A,
dated June 5, 1998, subject to the conditions specified in Section 9 of this Resolution.
Section 9. The Variance to allow an encroachment into,, the north side yard
setback to authorize the retention of two existing illegally constructed retaining
walls that encroach into the side yard setback approved in Section 6 and the
Variance to allow an encroachment into, the south side yard setback to authorize the
retention and modification of two existing illegally constructed retaining walls and a
proposed brick barbecue to encroach into the side yard setback approved in Section 8
as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as
Exhibit A dated June 5, 1998, are subject to the following conditions:
A. The Variance approvals shall expire within one year from the effective
date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance 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. Any retaining walls shall not exceed 5 feet in height, averaging n o
more than 2-1/2 feet.
E. The uneven 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.
F. The east and south pool equipment walls shall be removed.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-12
PAGE 4 OF 7
G. The uneven top line of the southernmost retaining walls shall be
modified so as to reduce the wall and be parallel to the slope and slightly below the
topmost fence rail of the neighbor's adjacent 3-rail fence.
H. Plans shall be modified to reflect the requirements of Paragraphs D, E,
F, and G of this Section.
I. The existing topography, flora and natural features of the lot shall be
retained to the greatest extent feasible. i
J. Additional landscape screening shall be planted to obscure the eastern
faces of the retaining walls and the pool equipment area.
K. Landscape screening for the eastern faces of the retaining walls and the
pool equipment area shall be maintained so as not to obstruct views of neighboring
properties but to obscure the retaining ;walls and the pool equipment area.
L. A 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. 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.
M. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 16.7% and total lot coverage of
structures and paved areas shall not exceed 35.8%.
N. Disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 35.8%.
O. Review and approval of a site drainage plan by the City Engineer shall
be obtained for the drainage and the retaining walls.
P. 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.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-12
PAGE5OF7
Q. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills
Community Association ArchitecturalReview Committee prior to approval of the
drainage plan.
R. 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
9).
S. The applicantshall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions
of , these Variance approvals pursuant to Section 17.38.060, or the approval shall not
be effective.
T. All conditions of these Variance approvals must be complied with
prior to approval of the site drainage plan by the County of Los Angeles.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 16T�I _OF E, 1998.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
(J t J
.h�-1',vp-vim d- , fC �e��►�-j
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 98-12
PAGE 6 OF 7
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS. ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 98-12 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO
THE NORTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO AUTHORIZE THE RETENTION
WITH MODIFICATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED
RETAINING WALLS AND APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH
INTO THE SOUTH SIDE YARD SETBACK TO AUTHORIZE THE
RETENTION WITH MODIFICATIONS OF PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY
CONSTRUCTED RETAINING WALLS AT A SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 577.
•
was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning
Commission on. June 16, 1998 by the following roll call vote:
Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer and
Chairman Roberts.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
None.
Commissioner Witte
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
k„et/N....)
MARILYN KER1V, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 98-12
PAGE 7 OF 7