Loading...
619, Major remodel and addition of , ApplicationFEE 111111111111111111111 LEAD NullNor SHEET MAR 2001 CITY OF ROLLING'.w+?.,La Ike !FEES a8- vv1 CODE 20 DA FEE Code 20 $ 2.00 CODE 19 CODE 9 r 01 0189864 RECORDEDIFILED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS .1 RECORDER'S OFFICE LOS ANGELESCOUNTY CALIFORNIA I0:21 AM FEB 05 2001 SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDERS USE TITLE(S) D.T.T. Assessor's Identification Number (AIN) To Be Completed By Examiner OR Title Company In Black Ink Number of Parcels Shown THIS FORM IS NOT TO BE DUPLICATED FEE CODE 9 FEE"� 2.00 11 6189864 oo: 84-61 •`RECORDEDIFILED IN OFFICIAL RECOJ� DS F'L RECORDERS OFFICE 3 " LOS ANGELES,COUNT - At'; :CAUE00 NIA"' 10;41= AM DEC 20 2000 SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDERS USE TITLE(S) Assessor's Identification Number (AIN) To Be Completed By Examiner OR Title Company In Black Ink r n D.T.T. Number of Parcels Shown n a - THIS FORM IS NOT TO BE DUPLICATED 01-0189864 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 The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be notarized before recordation. AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE_ FORM, • On STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ZONING CASE NO. 619 §§ DoG»i,+Rnsr- roll' /26- Akcokb ez 79 6bD 4— SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT L (We) the undersigned state: I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows: 12 UPPER BLACKWATER CANYON ROAD (LOT 97-1-RH), ROLLING HILLS, CA. This property is the subject of the above numbered case. am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said ZONING CASE NO. 619 Signa Add City/State Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public. State of California ) County of Los Angeles ) DEC 1 9 2000 personally appeared before rne, SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT re) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 2. Lo_l�-fit Name t • e ' or rinted- I I f PPC12 fit kcin i s= cr'&VN c;L�ir�1C� ftj LC.S CAI Io )(f Signs ure L Name typed orpr'nted Addre s0 LL t tV G i U L(C A l 4.7 City/State�(, , L Recorders Use Only MASAYUKI KUWAHARA personally known to me (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/elle/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies) and that by his/hPr/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of hich the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. MASAYUKI KUWAHARA NOTARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA 4„ COMMISSION # 1146457 a LOS ANGELES COUNTY L My Comm. Exp. July 11, 2001 Witness by hand Signatur6Notary SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF • 01-0189864 di RESOLUTION NO. 2000-25 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 12 UPPER BLACKWATER CANYON ROAD IN ZONING CASE NO. 619. 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. Pervaiz Lodhie with respect to real property located at 12 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road (Lot 97-1-RH), Rolling Hills, requesting Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial additions to an existing single family residence that requires grading. Section 2. A. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application on July 18, 2000, August 15, 2000, September 19, 2000, and October 17, 2000, and at a field trip visit on August 5, 2000. 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 were notified of the hearing in writing by first class mail. The applicants' representatives were in attendance at the hearings. Concerns expressed by Commissioners focused on the size of the house, the proposed graded area, and the height of the proposed residence. During the hearing process, the amount of grading was reduced, the size of the residence was reduced, the proposed residential roof ridge height was reduced, and an existing shed at the north end of the property was proposed to be removed. B. At the same time, the Planning Commission also conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider a Variance for an illegal 80 square foot deck constructed across the north property line between 10 and 12 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road within the front yard setback. The deck was approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association on September 21, 2000 and the Variance was approved the Planning Commission on October 17, 2000. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption (The State CA Guidelines, Section 15301(e)) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 4. Section 17.46.020 requires a development plan to be submitted 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 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. The proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile; low density residential development and maintain 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 161,019 square feet. The proposed residence (7,614 sq. ft.), garage (1,008 sq. ft.), Resolution No. 2000-25 Page 1 of 6 o 189864 T swimming pool/spa (450 sq.ft.), guest house (1,713 sq.ft.), barn (450 "sq. ft.), and service yard (35 sq.ft.) will have 11,270 square feet which constitutes 7.0% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 23,651 square feet which equals 14.7% 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 conditionsof approval, follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading. The natural drainage courses will be preserved and continue drainage to the canyons at the northern side of this lot. D. The development plan will, based upon 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 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 residential buildable pad of 30,433 square feet with a coverage of 29.8%. F. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and other residences on Upper Blackwater Canyon Road. As indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded. The proposed project is also consistent with the scale of other large homes in the immediate. neighborhood. Grading will be minor and required only to restore the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the proposed structures to lot coverage compares to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. G. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize the existing driveway accessway. U. The project conforms with therequirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 619 for a proposed residential development as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 6 of this Resolution. Section 6. The Site Plan Review approved in Section 5 of this Resolution is subject to the following conditions. A. This Site Plan approval 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 Section 17.46.080, or otherwise extended the Site Plan pursuant to the requirements of that section. Resolution No. 2000-25 Page 2 of 6 emu:;: 01-0189864 IIlh B. It is declared and made a condition of this Site Plan approval, 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 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 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 dated September 15, 2000, 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. Any grading shall preserve the existing topography, flora, and natural features to the greatest extent possible. G. Grading for the project shall not exceed 1,300 cubic yards of cut soil and 1,300 cubic yards of fill soil. H. Any retaining walls incorporated into the project shall not exceed 5. feet in height, averaging no more than 2-1/2 feet. I. The residential structure shall have a finished floor height of 882 and the roof ridge height shall not exceed 901 or 19 feet. feet. J. The project shall include a basement that shall not exceed a total of 2,058 square K. The property owner shall comply with all applicable provisions and regulations of Section 17.16.210(A)(5) (Guest House) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, including without limitation, the regulations prohibiting the renting of the guest house. L. The structural lot coverage shall not exceed 7.0% and the total lot coverage shall not exceed 14.7%. M. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 29.8%, stable and guest house pad building coverage shall not exceed 27.6%, and total lot coverage shall not exceed 20.7% N. The maximum disturbed area shall not exceed 23.6% of the net lot area. O. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to themaximumextent feasible, the existing mature trees and shrubs and the natural landscape screening surrounding the residential building pad. P. Landscaping shall include water efficient irrigation, to the maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a low gallonage irrigation system, utilizes automatic controllers, Resolution No. 2000-25 Page 3of6' 01-0189864 .Th incorporates an irrigationign using "hydrozones," considers' si'ope factors and climate conditions in design, and utilizes means to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray in accordance with Section 17.27.020 (Water efficient landscaping requirements) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. oes Q. Landscaping shall be designed using mature trees and shrubs so as not to obstruct the views of neighboring properties but, to obscure the residence. R. The property owner shall not plant any species of plant that are likely at mature height to impair the views of neighboring properties. S.. Landscaping shall be provided and maintained to obscure the residence and the building pad with native drought -resistant vegetation that is compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community. T. At maturity, the new landscape plantings around the proposed residence shall not exceed the ridge height of the residence. U. Two copies of a preliminary landscape plan must be submitted for review by the Planning Department and include native drought -resistant vegetation that will not disrupt the impact of the views of neighboring properties prior to the issuance of any building or grading 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 drainage, 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 City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. V. During construction, conformance with the air qualitymanagement 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, and objectionable odors shall be required. W. During construction, the Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 1996 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control stormwater pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles. 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. 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. 7 Resolution No. 2000-25 Page 4 of 6 ilk): 01-0189864 Z. The property owners shall be required to conform -with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and maintenance of septic tanks. AA. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and maintenance of stormwater drainage facilities. AB. 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. AC. An Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth is Section 7010 of the 1996 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be prepared to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control stormwater pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles. AD. 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. AE. 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. AF. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional structural development shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission. AG. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of the Site Plan approval, or the approvals shall not be effective. AH. All conditions of the Site Plan approval that apply must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2000 ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: r() . /to-) MARILYN K 'RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK Resolution No. 2000-25 Page 5 of 6 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ 01-0189864 I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2000-25, entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 12 UPPER BLACKWATER CANYON ROAD IN ZONING CASE NO. 619. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on October 17, 2000 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Sommer, Witte, and Chairman Roberts NOES: Commissioner Margeta ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. ht.tLai c . k )w-2 DEPUTY CITY CLERK Resolution No. 2000-25 Page 6 of 6 • 11!1I III11111111111111911111p11 FEB 0 2 2001 OF ROLLING' KILLS Pv FEE FEE $22 MM DAF $2 C-20 6 CODE 20 CODE 19 CODE 9' RECORDED/F/LED IN OFFICIAL RECORDS 00w1995253 LOS RECORDER'S OFFICE ANGELES COUNTY CALIFORNIA 22 2000 AT 8 A.m. SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDERS USE TITLE(S) DEC D.T.T. Assessor's Identification Number (AIN) To Be Completed By Examiner OR Title Company In Black Ink Number of Parcels Shown 1 THIS FORM IS NOT TO BE DUPLICATED RECORDING REQUESTED BY OLD REPUBLIC TITLE COMPANY WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO Name: CITY OF ROLLINGS HILLS Address: 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD , City, St.: ROLLING HILLS, CA Zip: 90274 Order No. 111222 THIS INSTRUMENT DELIVERED TO RECORDER SY OLD REPUBLIC TITLE .COMPANY .AS AN ACCOMMODATION ONLY tT HAS NOT SEEN EXAM NED FOR REGULARITY. SUFFICIENCY Oil AS TO ITS EFFECT. UPON THE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY HEREIN ammo. 00 1995253 SPACE ABOVE FOR RECORDERS USE TITLE(s) OF DOCUMENT AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM Assessors Identification Number (AIN) * t * 1 *ra, '. OLD REPUBLIC Yi * TITLE COMPANY lb* , .` (recording cover page 99) 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 The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be notarized before recordation. AFFIDAVIT OFACCEPTANCE FORM STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ), ZONING CASE NO. 619 SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT ✓ T Recorders Use Only 1 (We) the undersigned state: I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows: 10 AND 12 UPPER BLACKWATER CANYON ROAD (LOTS 84-2-RH & 97-1-RH), ROLLING HILLS, CA. This property is the subject of the above numbered case. 1 am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said ZONING CASE NO. 619 SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. !mil Signature /1 4 V ✓ ✓ c/. / .5307, Name typed or printed / "AR i3 ( ekckt t Cam0,1u,.► Address., ,Address City/State City/State Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public. Signature Name typed or printed State of Califomia ) County of Los Angeles) i% ^ On 12 1 � 2 Ii ): C ')f) before me, 7 e-�10A { cS WI A / "I r l � "' personally appeared ' I L) P PTA CS Jfn (17-1 personally known to me ( he-besis-ef--satisfaetery—evidenee) 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/hex/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 erson(r,) acted, executed the instr�t. tl - PATRICIA WISMAN Commission # 1245906 Notary Public - cattfamks Los Angeles County N, r xril. sDec17,2003 • SEE EXHIBIT �y han a icial seal. Signature of Notary "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF 00 1995253 iii'72/76577- • RESOLUTION NO. 2000-26 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR A PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED DECK AT 10 AND 12 UPPER BLACKWATER CANYON ROAD IN ZONING CASE NO. 620. 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. Murray Smith and Mr. and Mrs. Pervaiz Lodhie, with respect to real property located at 10 And 12 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road, (Lots 84-2-RH and 97-1-RH, respectively), Rolling Hills, requesting a Variance to permit an existing illegally constructed deck that encroaches into the front yard setback and is built across the common property line between two existing single family residences. Section 2. In December, 1999, it came to the attention of the City that a structure was being constructed on the subject property within required setbacks without the benefit of building permits. Staffspoke with Mr. Smith who declined to remove the deck and said that he would be pursuing the necessary steps to comply with the requirements of the Municipal Code. The Variance application was submitted by Mr. Smith on July 6, 2000 with the consent of Mr. and Mrs. Lodhie after it was learned that the deck extended across the neighboring property line. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application on July 18, 2000, August 15, 2000, September 19, 2000, and October 17, 2000, and at afield trip visit on August 5, 2000. The applicants were notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. Evidence was heard from members of the City staff, the applicants, and the Planning Commission reviewed, analyzed and studied the project. Concerns expressed by Commissioners and the applicants ,focused on the unauthorized construction of the deck within the required setbacks and within Rolling Hills Community Association easements. During the hearing process, the Planning Commission requested that review and approval of the deck be acquired from the Rolling Hills Community Association. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 3 Exemption [The State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures)) 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 17.16.110 requires a front yard setback for every RESOLUTION NO. 2000-26 PAGE 1 OF 4 00 1995253 • • residential parcel in the RA-S zone to be no less than fifty (50) feet from the front easement line. The applicants are requesting a Variance to authorize the retention of an encroachment into the front yard setbacks at two lots to allow a previously constructed 80 square foot deck that is up to 23.5 inches in height and encroaches up to 11 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback on the southern portion of the Smith lot and encroaches up to 3 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback on the northern portion of the Lodhie lot. The deck is situated at an angle across the common property line of both lots and extends 10 feet into the Smith property and extends 1 foot into the Lodhie property. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are , exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone. The lot is irregular in shape and the previously constructed illegal deck is located on a flat area at the front of both lots. The deck does not disturb the development pattern on the two lots and it is obscured from view by vegetation. The applicant chose this location because it is the highest point on the property and it affords him a view of city lights. 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 the development and use of the subject property in a manner consistent with the shapes of the lots and development of other property on this street justifies this additional small. incursion into the front yard setback. If the applicant were to locate the deck in any other location, his view would be obscured by adjacent development. There will not be any greater incursion into the front yard setback than already exists. C. The granting of the Variance will 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 substantial portion .of the lots will remain undeveloped. In addition, the deck, as conditioned, will be screened with vegetation so as not to be visible from Upper Blackwater Canyon Road and surrounding properties. Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings,. the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 620 to authorize the retention of an encroachment into the front yard setback to authorize a previously constructed 80 square foot illegal deck that is up to 23.5 inches in height that encroaches a maximum of eleven (11) feet into the fifty (50) foot front yard setback on the southern portion of the Smith lot and encroaches up to three (3) feet into the 50 foot front yard setback on the northern portion of the Lodhie lot as indicated on the development plan dated July 13, 2000, submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, and is subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance approval shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.38.070 unless the applicant has acquired building permits or otherwise extended the Variance pursuant to the requirements of those sections. RESOLUTION NO. 2000-26 PAGE2OF4 00 1995253 • B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance approval, 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 Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located shall be complied with unless otherwise set forth in this permit or approved by variance. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A and dated July 13, 2000, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The deck shall not exceed 80 square feet. F. Extensions or additions to the deck are prohibited. G. The deck shall not exceed 23.5 inches in height. H. Additional plantings surrounding the deck area are prohibited. I. The existing topography, flora and natural features of the lots shall be retained to the greatest extent feasible. J. Landscape screening that incorporates drought -resistant native plants shall be maintained to obscure the deck from Upper Blackwater Canyon Road. K. 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 and approval prior to the submittal of an applicable site drainage plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check. L. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to approval of the drainage plan. M. 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 6). N. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Variance approval pursuant to Section 17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective. O. All conditions of this Variance approval must be complied with prior to approval of the site drainage plan by the County of Los Angeles. RESOLUTION NO. 2000-26 PAGE 3 OF 4 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 17TH I AY.9rp ,TOBER, 2000. A'1"1'EST: is , r ham✓ MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2000-26 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE .FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR A PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED DECK/VIEW AREA AT 10 AND 12 UPPER BLACKWATER CANYON ROAD IN ZONING CASE NO. 620. was approved .and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on October 17, 2000 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 MARILYN KERN, I PUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 2000-26 PAGE 4 OF 4 00 1995253 • . REOUEST FOR HEARING FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW PROPERTY OWNER: Mr. & Mrs. Lodhie OWNER'S ADDRESS: 12 Upper Blackwater Canyon Rd TELEPHONE NO: (310) 541-1288 PROPERTY'S ADDRESS: 12 Upper Blackwater Canyon Rd. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT NO. 1 ASSESSORS'S BOOK NO. 199 PAGE 11-12 PARCEL 1 AGENT'S NAME: Ashai Design AGENT'S ADDRESS: 23670 Hawthorne Blvd. Suite #210 TELEPHONE NO: (310) 791-4445 NATURE OF PROPOSED PROJECT Describe in detail the nature of the proposed project, including what aspects of the project require a Site Plan Review: - Addition of 3,889 SF. to the existing residence - Addition of 255 SF. of Garage space - Major remodel of existing 3,775 SF. residence -Grading: Fill of approx 1,300 cu. yds. On the North & East side of the house and cut of approx. 1,300 cu. yds. On the South & West side of the house and the basement. - The addition to the house and grading requires site plan review. Date 6/8/00 Zoning Case No. Address 12 Up•Iackwater Canyon Rd Applicant Ashai Design CALCULATION OF BUILDING PAD COVERAGE (EXISTING) I PAD NO. 1 BUILDING PAD AREA 7,829 Sq.ft. RESIDENCE 1,713 Sq.ft. GARAGE 0 Sq.ft. STABLE (BARN) 450 Sq.ft. POOL 0 Sq.ft. RECREATION COURT OTHER TOTAL STRUCTURES ON PAD NO. 1 % BUILDING PAD COVERAGE 0 0 Sq.ft. Sq.ft. 2,163 Sq.ft. 27.6 I PAD NO.2 BUILDABLE PAD AREA 18,869 Sq.ft. RESIDENCE 3,779 Sq.ft. GARAGE 754 Sq.ft. STABLE (BARN) 0 Sq.ft. POOL 450 Sq.ft. RECREATION COURT ( ) 0 OTHER 0 TOTAL STRUCTURES ON PAD NO. 2 % BUILDING PAD COVERAGE Sq.ft. Sq.ft. 4,983 Sq.ft. 26.4 • Date Zoning Case No. Address 12 UlBlackwater Canyon Rd P Applicant Ashai Design CALCULATION OF BUILDING PAD COVERAGE (EXISTING) PAD NO.3 I BUILDING PAD AREA 16,351 Sq.ft. RESIDENCE 0 Sq.ft. GARAGE 0 Sq.ft. STABLE (BARN) 0 Sq.ft. POOL 0 Sq.ft. RECREATION COURT ( ) 0 Sq.ft. OTHER 342 Sq.ft. TOTAL STRUCTURES ON PAD NO. 1 342 Sq.ft. % BUILDING PAD COVERAGE 2.1 °fo • Date 6/8/00 Zoning Case No. Address 12 Up Blackwater Canyon Rd Applicant Ashai Design CALCULATION OF BUILDING PAD COVERAGE (NEW) PAD NO. 1 BUILDING PAD AREA 7,677 Sq.ft. RESIDENCE 1,713 Sq.ft. GARAGE 0 Sq.ft. STABLE (BARN) 450 Sq.ft. POOL 0 Sq.ft. RECREATION COURT ( ) 0 Sq.ft. OTHER 0 Sq.ft. TOTAL STRUCTURES ON PAD NO. 1 2,163 Sq.ft, % BUILDING PAD COVERAGE 28.1 PAD NO.2 I BUILDABLE PAD AREA 30,433 Sq.ft. RESIDENCE 7,614 Sq.ft. GARAGE 1,008 Sq.ft. STABLE (BARN) 0 Sq.ft. POOL 450 Sq.ft. RECREATION COURT ( ) 0 Sq.ft. OTHER 0 Sq.ft. TOTAL STRUCTURES ON PAD NO. 2 9,072 Sq.ft. % BUILDING PAD COVERAGE 29.8 Date Zoning Case No. Address 12 Up 0 Blackwater Canyon Rd Applicant Ashai Design CALCULATION OF BUILDING PAD COVERAGE (NEW) PAD NO.3 1 BUILDING PAD AREA 16,351 Sq.ft, RESIDENCE 0 Sq.ft. GARAGE 0 Sq.ft. STABLE (BARN) -342 Sq.ft. POOL 0 Sq.ft. RECREATION COURT ( ) 0 Sq.ft. OTHER 0 Sq.ft. TOTAL STRUCTURES ON PAD NO. 1 0 Sq.ft. % BUILDING PAD COVERAGE 0 -2h0Atren) Date 6/8/00 Caning Case No. (n I Address 12 per Blackwater Canyon Rd Applicant Ashai Design CALCULATION OF LOT COVERAGE BUILDING AREAS EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL NET LOT AREA 161,019 Sq. ft 0 Sq.ft. 161,019 Sq.ft BUILDING PAD (S) 41,101 Sq.ft. 16,692 Sq.ft. 57,793 Sq.ft. RESIDENCE 3,775 Sq.ft. 4,184 Sq.ft. 7,959 Sq.ft. GARAGE 753 Sq.ft. 256 Sq.ft. 1009 Sq.ft. SWIMMING POOL/SPA 743 Sq.ft. -293 Sq.ft. 450 Sq.ft. STABLE 450 Sq.ft. 0 Sq.ft. 450 Sq.ft. RECREATION COURT ( ) 0 Sq.& 0 Sq.ft. 0 Sq.ft. SERVICE YARD 0 Sq.ft. 35 Sq.ft. 35 Sq.ft. OTHER (Guest house & 2,055 Sq.ft. 0 Sq.ft. 2,055 Sq.ft. Shed) TOTAL STRUCTURES 7,776 Sq.ft. 4,182 Sq.ft. 11,958 Sq.ft. % STRUCTURAL 4.83 % 2.59 %. 7.42 % COVERAGE % TOTAL PAD 18.91 % 25.05 % 20.69 % COVERAGE DRIVEWAY PAVED WALKS AND PATIO AREAS POOL DECKING TOTAL FLATWORK % TOTAL FLATWORK COVERAGE 3,400 Sq.ft. 2,900 Sq.ft. 6,300 Sq.ft. 3,314 Sq.ft. 500 Sq.ft. 3,814 Sq.ft. 3,217 Sq.ft. -950 Sq.ft. 2,267 Sq.ft. 9,931 Sq.ft. 2450 Sq.ft. 12,381 Sq.ft. 6.17 % 1.52 % 7.69 TOTAL STRUCTURAL & FLATWORK COVERAGE 17,707 Sq.ft. 6,632 Sq.ft. 24,304 Sq.ft. % TOTAL COVERAGE 10.99 % 4.12 % 15.11 % • -"•""""1" CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ZONING CASE CERTIFIED PROPERTY OWNER'S LIST AFFIDAVIT STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss CITY OF .ROLLING :HILLS ) I, ROBERT VARGO ,declareunderpenalty of perjury that the attached list contains the names and addresses of all persons to whom all property is assessed as they appear on the latest available assessment roll of the County within the area described and for a distance of one thousand (1,000) feet from the exterior boundaries of property legally described as: PARCEL MAP 199-11-12 Executed at SEVENTH day of HAWTHORNE , California, this JUNE , la 2000 SIGNATUJ - City ol ie0ii*4 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com MI6 1i2 LETTER OF CONSENT TO EXTENSION OF TIME Government Code Section 6595 dry or POLLING N ).LI`S Date: - Application: Zoning Case No. 619 Department of Planning City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 Attn: Lola Ungar Dear Ms. Ungar: Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65957, Pervaiz and AIm81s Lodhie (collectively the "Applicants") hereby request and consent to a ninety (90) day extension to the time p- iods specified in Governm-. '••e -ctions 65950, 65950.1 and 65952 for the City of oll' g ills to take action • - e above referenced application. igna ure of pplicant o Apr licant's ` -presentative “\Ate °i HAE- Printed Name of Applicant or Applicant's Representative Received by: )/1/1,t, Signature Aflicant or Applicant's Representative At -HAS LO1H:i Printed Name of Applicant or Applicant's Representative Date: 6 /7 /Zo-ero R6980\0303\621582.1 Printed on Recycled Paper. • r City o` ePP.•..y J&fZ ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM (To Be Completed By Applicant) Date Filed (,a/y/CSC Zoning Case No. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Applicant(s) P1f5 'lOJ /-I/L Tel. 3( lU ) INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Address Cm/ 2. Legal Owner(s) /4R g HR Tel. (2I� l -- lZ A 8 Address /2. //PpLR R i, Lv4-rr7` CA -Ai Y&/U RD, C/¢- 3. Project Address /> i1PP/ (',y-NyG/(L_/�/->, Assessor's Book No. I q (f - // - /Z Lot No. / 4. Other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies: ,&rMLD/N6 rel m/T, /-/ /1 ES fkl-r'G PC-et--NN/NCB Ap0'P-ova • 5. Existing zoning district 1`/fs- 2, 6. Proposed project/use of site 53iN6 LE tf17?1)1. (LE / i J J PROJECT DESCRIPTION 7. Site size t (i,q q ga 8. Net lot area 177167 . "Net Lot Area" means the total area included within the lot lines of the lot or parcel of property, exclusive of: (a) the entire area within a recorded roadway easement plus the area within ten (10) feet measured perpendicular to the edge of the roadway easement; (b) the ten (10) foot perimeter of the lot perpendicular to the property lines; (c) any private drive or driveway that provides access to any other lot or parcel; and (d) the access strip portion of a flag lot. 9. Total square footage of structures 10. Number of floors of construction 11 . Basement square footage cSC 1-1 March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form ®Pr 'nrr•C or Fiyavrlr=y • 12. Total combined flatwork and structural lot coverage • 24, 3 04 13. Will any exterior walls be removed or relocated? Which walls? "/C S , M0S T of 14. Will any interior walls be removed or relocated? Which walls? 15. Will the entire building structure require a new roof? vas $ 16. Will the existing roof remain intact, with less than 200 square feet added? Na 17. Driveway Access and Parking: a b. c. d. e. f. 9. h. i. 1• TItC &XT. TIIC EXT, i�v,� ►-t-s. Is a new driveway accessway proposed? ,}s. 0 (Requires Traffic Commission Review). Number of driveway(s) Existing? ,X / Proposed? �/• / (Second driveway requires approved Conditionaflise Permit from Planning Commission). Width of driveway(s) Existing? I u �(3 a Proposed? (01— a 1 (Maximum of 20 foot width unless approved by the Planning Commission). Does first 20 feet of driveway have a maximum grade of 7%? (Maximum of 7% for first 20 feet of driveway required). a Existing? 7 a 1'YI A-X Proposed? 00 C Gt E Grade of driveway(s)? Existing? 12i1; MAX • Proposed? Pe) GHfN 6 C (Maximum of 12% unless approved by the Planning Commission). Has site plan been reviewed by Los Angles County Fire Protection Engineer to meet current driveway access requirements? NO Explain Does driveway cover more than a maximum 20% of the area of the yard in which it is located? MO Explain Does uncovered parking area cover more than a maximum 10% of the area of the yard in which it is located? kJ O Explain Does vehicular accessway to stable and corral have a maximum slope of 25% or less? E. S Stable and corral average vehicular access slope 200 . Does property have an above ground garage with a minimum capacity of 2 cars? L:.S With guest house a minimum of 3 cars? y E S 18. Grading quantities shall be balanced. Amount cut 2 , ' 7 D '1' . Amount fill Z., 110 49 3 (Include any basement cut in grading quantities). 19. Area of disturbance. 40% of net lot area maximum; any remedial grading (temporary disturbance), any graded slopes and building pad areas, and any nongraded area where impervious surfaces will remain or are proposed to be added. c Square feet 44,3q4 5F• Percentage of Net Lot Area . 2'4 ' (q 20. If residential, include the unit size. Square feet 1, q cj q SP --}- , b0'9 sr G,1/42,6A E . 1-2 March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form • • 21. If commercial, indicate the type of project, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, estimated employment per shift and loading facilities. NIA 22. If industrial, indicate the type of project, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities. U' /A 23. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project. N/.A . 24. Attach plans. ST�-T c Ji 1(zA7 G T I on) V. t 04 t N S 1 X M O IN T445 25. Proposed scheduling. c-cDNS-TR-OCTION oURfr T ION A,PPROx • 1 8 MON 7'HS, 26. If the project involves a site plan review, variance, conditional use or rezoning application, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required. S 1 r Q 1—A1J RE -kJ 1 REPO) (Lee) 'Fo iz-Pcp j rN A-1\11 ? Ob\ 1o{J 0V - 4,000 sF, ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, 27. Describe the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted. DPPR(7X Ace. L)T »j-r1 A sLOpIu -rowA;.t 7t+6 NGIZTH km r\-\ eXIsTINGt 51NGLE STOP-`! HevSC A Si N G Ge 57o y Ca i) E57 i-tooS E. a STAID t-E < 5 ki Et -11 Lc) T HA5 to To t 5 M rt-ru P-E Gtt-t-' 1 rc us & 'I tJ a March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form 1-3 • • 28. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one -family, guest house, office use, etc.) and scale of development (height, frontage, set -back, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted. k W/te N T PRoPE-7) f--5 . i ALL-.- DC �.9�!- � s/n�G L>✓ P l77 l t.'1 £, ci5s VA -et/ LNG IN A4,1 FRO To 12, 000 ©N .st,oP/NF/ 6Pct,vn Gv/T/4 c,4cdfPTuS,Jr P11,-) E 77 sES . A-t.-L- 57/24Uc-ua fl'2E /N6 L E- 57o,f2-y . PACPE7Y m�L✓7/PL- •-9TI-OCTu I N C i. c) r i N Gi /Y1lI t N ?LOUSE, G4 Rt2r4 -t.,, {5 7'// B LC � C, OE 7' i-YJT)j LTG . TI r_ 5 c TPA fi £ J S k E71SEyw u rs ,4RF ,I- t, PA 7/PP Pt)/ 7'14 Pfi,V �. 29. Is the proposed project consistent with: City of Rolling Hills General Plan Applicable Specific Plan . City of Rolling Hills Zoning Ordinance South Coast Air Quality Management Plan Congestion Management Plan Regional Comprehensive Plan 30. Have any of the following studies been submitted? Geology Report Hydrology Report Soils Report Traffic Study Noise Study _ Biological Study _ Native Vegetation Preservation Plan _ Solid Waste Generation Report _ Public Services/ Infrastructure Report 1-4 Yes No X x X_ x_ Historical Report Archaeological Report Paleontological Study Line of Sight Exhibits Visual Analysis Slope Map Fiscal Impact Analysis Air Quality Report Hazardous Materials/ Waste WA March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form • a, EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. Once the Lead Agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The Lead Agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a Tess than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," above may be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. See State CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less Than Significant With Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected. 9. The explanation of each issue should identify: a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form 1-5 • • Issues: L AESTHETICS — Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but 0 0 0 not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or 0 0 0 quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial Tight or glare which 0 0 0 would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? 1L AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural ❑ ❑ 0 resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ g ❑ 0 ❑ )!Ei. AIR QUALITY — Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 0 ❑ 0 applicable air quality plan? March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form 1-6 b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute 0 0 0 substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of 0 • 0 any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 0 0 0 concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial 0 0 0 number of people? 0 ll[. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project:: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or 0 0 ❑ through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat ❑ ❑ 0 or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally 0 0 ❑ protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native 0 0 0 )2( resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any policies or ordinances protecting 0 0 0 biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat 0 0 0 Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form 1-7 <I.essThan Potentially Significant with Less Than Significant. Mitigation Significant Impact, Incorporation Impact CULTURAL RESOURCES, -- Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance 0 of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ❑ significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ❑ ❑ 0 resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred 0 0 ❑ outside of formal cemeteries? yJ, GEOLOGY AND SOU— Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of Toss, injury, or death involving: ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ No Impact i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated ❑ 0 0 X on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 0 iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including 0 0 liquefaction? iv) Landslides? 0 0 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the Toss of topsoil? ❑ 0 c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, 0 0 or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18- 0 0 0 :C 1B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life and property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the 0 0 0 use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? 0 0 ',1st March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form 1-8 • YE HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? ❑ ❑ ❑ X ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 X d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of 0 0 0 hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area/ O ❑ ❑ f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, 0 0 0 .)E' would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an 0 ❑ 0 adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ❑ 0 0 loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form 1-9 y11. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY --Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ 0 0 .121 requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or 0 0 0 interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater able level (e.g., the production rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ❑ ❑ 0 V site or areas including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 0 0 0 A site or areas including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a mariner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed 0 0 ❑ g the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as 0 0 ❑ j� mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures 0 0 0 g which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of toss, 0 0 ❑ 'Ff injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 1-10 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form Di, LAND USF,AND PLANNING -- Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or 0 ❑ ❑ regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or ❑ 0 0 �( natural community conservation plan? x, MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would the project: a) Result in the Toss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the Toss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? XI. jNOISa - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? CI 0 O ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 0 ❑ ❑ 0 )4 ❑ 0 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 0 pit ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form KU. POPULATION AND HOUSING — Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ❑ 0 0 directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ❑ 0 ❑ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating 0 0 0 the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ail. pUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered govemmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? 0 0 ❑ Police protection? 0 0 0 Schools? ❑ 0 0 Parks? 0 ❑ 0 Other public facilities? 0 0 0 XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing 0 ❑ ❑ neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or 0 0 0 require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form 1-12 XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC — Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic Toad and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Exceed either individually or cumulatively, a level of 0 0 0 Jai service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either 0 0 0 an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature 0 ❑ ❑ 1r (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 0 0 0 f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ 0 0 kr g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs ❑ 0 0 It supporting alternative transportation (e.g., but turnouts, bicycle racks)? item XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS — Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ❑ 0 0 applicable Regional Water Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or ❑ 0 ❑ wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new stormwater ❑ ❑ 0 drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ❑ ❑ 0 project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 1-13 March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity 0 to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and 0 regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 1-14 CI � Ness �nan '::Potenti ;Slgnifioant With Less Than 5'Irn' ificant : ; Mitigation SlIgmnificant • Pa Incorporation P ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ No Impact ❑ ❑/ CI 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form • NOTE: Before the Lead Agency can accept this application as complete, the applicant must consult the lists prepared pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code and submit a signed statement indicating whether the project and any alternatives are located on a site which is included on any such list, and shall specify any list. HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES STATEMENT The development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are contained on the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code. Accordingly, the project applicant is required to submit a signed statement which contains the following information: 1. Name of applicant: M g-. geMSS. L©D f 1 L 2. Address: ) 2 (-)PrE--"(L¢vC.je-(, OA-YE?- c7AsNy O j l �GA, __FoL L (N 4*i czA 2-14 3. Phone Number: zfa - 54f- 12-80 4. Address of Site (street name and number if available, and ZIP code): r Z u .gi- 3tck- WttT csANYo N PcD4:t 12,c)L L) N 4\ I LL$ cj' p 2 "1 L1 . 5. Local Agency (city/county): LL I N j i*) LL$ / L A CDT' , 6. Assessor's book, page, and parcel number: /9q / 11 I I2 7. Specify any list pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code: STATE OF CALIFORNIA HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES SITES LIST (available at City Hall), 8. Regulatory identification number: 9. Date of List: JULY 1992 Date 06/oci/00 For Signature Applicant 1-15 March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form • • NOTE: In the event that the project site and any alternatives are not listed on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code, then the applicant must certify that fact as provided below. have consulted the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code and hereby certify that the development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are not contained on these lists. Date 0 670 60 For ER V .0 )71f 1 )� Applicant CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Date 06/ oC /DO For Signature Applicant 1-16 March 20, 2000 Environmental Information Form