Loading...
571, Shore up hillside with a retai, Resolutions & Approval ConditionsRESOLUTION NO. 98-2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING WALL AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 571. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Lee Rosen with respect to real property located at 7 Lower Blackwater Canyon Road (Lot 83-RH), Rolling Hills, requesting Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial additions to an existing single family residence. The applicants' plans show the removal of the existing tennis court and replacement with a pool. During the hearing process, a Variance was requested to encroach into the front yard setback to construct a retaining wall for the driveway access area. Section 2. On May 17, 1977, a Conditional Use Permit for a tennis court was approved in Zoning Case No. 180. In 1981, a mixed use barn with loft and garage was constructed prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 229 (December 17, 1990) that requires a Conditional Use Permit for a Detached Garage or Mixed Use Structure. Section 3. In October, 1987, Mr. and Mrs. William Davisson withdrew a request for a Conditional Use Permit "to convert an existing two story stable and garage to servants quarters, and a request for a Variance to the height limitation for a two story structure to be used as servants quarters and garage with loft" in Zoning Case No. 342. Section 4. In March, 1992, Mr. and Mrs. Howard Long constructed a children's wing at the southwest portion of the residence, replacing an attached garage. In June, 1992, Mr. and Mrs. Long were granted Variance approval to encroach into the front yard setback to construct a retaining wall and Site Plan approval for substantial additions to the residence in Zoning Case No. 477. These approvals expired. Section 5. In February, 1995, Mrs. Doris Beiler-Hozumi was granted Variance approval to encroach into the front yard setback to construct a retaining wall, granted Variance approval to encroach into the front yard to construct a corral andanimal shelters, granted approval for a Conditional Use Permit for a pool cabana, and granted Site Plan Review approval of substantial additions to an existing residential structure in Zoning Case No. 524. These approvals expired. RESOLUTION NO. 98-2 PAGE 1 • • Section 6. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on December 16, 1997 and January 20, 1998, and at a field trip visit on January 10, 1998. The applicants were notified of the hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. Section 7. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(e)) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 8. 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 17.16.110 requires a front yard setback for every residential parcel to be fifty (50) feet. The applicant is requesting a Variance to construct a retaining wall with a maximum height of five (5) feet above the downslope grade, a maximum length of 200 feet, which will encroach a maximum of fifty (50) feet into the fifty (50) foot front yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and the existing location of the driveway on the property necessitate the construction of a retaining wall in the front yard setback in order to widen the driveway to support existing hillside cuts and slopes to allow safe access for emergency vehicles. 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 because of the steep slope on the lot which necessitates a retaining wall to support the slope bank next to the proposed driveway. The reconstruction of the wall in the front yard setback will create a safer accessway and that will also improve the appearance of the existing driveway. 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 because the proposed project will be compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve the geologic stability of the slope and will not be visible to surrounding properties due to the distances between the driveway and other adjacent residences. RESOLUTION NO. 98-2 PAGE 2 • • Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 571 to permit the encroachment of a retaining wall into the front yard setback, to a maximum height of five feet (5'), a maximum length of 200 feet and with a maximum encroachment of fifty feet (50'), as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 16 of this Resolution. Section 10. Section 17.46.020 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 or structures, which involve changes to grading or an increase in 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 or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period, may be permitted. With respect to the Site Plan Review application, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, 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 247,111 square feet. The proposed residence (7,310 sq. ft.), garage (891 sq. ft.), barn (1,500 sq.ft), pool .(1,100 sq.ft.), and service yard (100 sq.ft.) will have 10,901 square feet which constitutes 4.4% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 27,211 square feet which equals 11.6% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. B. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, 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). C. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval, follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at the northwest side of this lot. D. The development plan will, in compliance with the conditions contained in this Resolution, supplement the existing vegetation with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. E. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval, substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing RESOLUTION NO. 98-2 PAGE 3 • • building coverage because the new structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Further, the proposed project will have a buildable pad of 49,357 square feet and a total building pad coverage of 22.1%, with a residential building pad coverage of 20.2% and a barn/garage pad coverage of 47.2%. F. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded and the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood. Grading will be required only to restore the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to or less than the ratio found on properties in the vicinity. G. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, 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 route, 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. Section 11. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 571 for a proposed residential development as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 12 of this Resolution. Section 12. The Variance to the front yard setback approved in Section 9 and the Site Plan for residential development approved in Section 11 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions: A. These Variance and Site Plan approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval if construction pursuant to these approvals has not commenced within that time period, as required by Sections 17.38.070 and 17.46.080. B. It is declared and made a condition of these Variance and Site Plan 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 Buildings and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be RESOLUTION NO. 98-2 PAGE 4 • • 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 dated December 29, 1997 and marked Exhibit A, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. 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. F. Grading shall be limited so that the amount of soil displaced to construct the proposed retaining walls at the southeast garage area shall not exceed 85 cubic yards of cut soil and 85 cubic yards of fill soil. The soil cut to provide a 2 to 1 slope at the garage area shall be spread at the west side of the building pad where the tennis court will be removed. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. The grading plan shall utilize land form or contour grading techniques in its design so as to create a building pad and slopes that blend with the horizontal and vertical contours of the natural terrain. G. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 20.2%. H. Permits shall be obtained to reconvert the illegally converted garage/barn structure from offices to a garage and barn for animal keeping with loft to be used solely for garage space and animal keeping materials at the northern portion of the property to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector and the Planning Department within six (6) months of the approval of this resolution. I. The tennis court at the west side of the existing residence shall be removed and replaced with a 1,100 square foot swimming pool. J. Landscaping shall be provided and maintained to obscure the buildings and the building pad with native drought -resistant vegetation that is compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community. K. Retaining walls shall not exceed five (5') feet in height measured from the downslope side of the wall to the surface of the ground. L. The retaining wall in the front yard setback shall not exceed five (5') feet in height measured from the downslope side of the wall to the surface of the ground, shall not exceed 200 feet in length and shall be permitted to encroach the maximum fifty (50') feet into the front yard setback. The retaining wall shall be constructed in accordance with the approved Site Plan, identified as Exhibit "A". M. Lower Blackwater Canyon Road shall be kept open for vehicular access at all times during future grading and construction of the project. RESOLUTION NO. 98-2 PAGE 5 • • N. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. O. 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. P. Final inspection of the project by the Building Inspector and Planning Department shall not be approved unless and until: 1. Permits are obtained for the illegally converted garage/barn structure at the northern portion of the property that has been converted to offices and is reconverted into garage space and a barn for animal keeping with a loft to be used for animal keeping materials to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector and the Planning Department; 2. The tennis court at the west side of the existing residence has been removed and replaced with a swimming pool. Q. Notwithstanding Section 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional development shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. R. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these Variance and Site Plan approvals, or the approvals shall not be effective. S. All conditions of these Variance and Site Plan approvals must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPDAY OF FEBRUARY, 1998. ATTEST: ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN MARILYN ERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 98-2 PAGE 6 • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 98-2 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING WALL AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 571. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on February 17, 1998 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer, Witte and Chairman Roberts. None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None . and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. VYA DEPUTY CT[ S( CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 98-2 PAGE 7