432A, Modification to Reso 92-5; con, Resolutions & Approval Conditions•
4111
RECORDENNOFFIC1
1 RECORDS
RECORDERS
E
LOS ANGELES :,OUNTY
CALtFORi•JEA
31 PAST.11 A•.M APR 6 1992
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO:
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
92 595054
Recorder's Use
P FEE $8
L,2
Please record this form with the Registrar -Recorder's Office and
return to: City of Rolling Hills, 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
(The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be
notarized before recordation).
ACCEPTANCE FORM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
ZONING CASE NO. 4'3ZQ
I (We) the undersigned state:
I am (We are) the owner(s)
follows:
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
of the real property described as
G 4' e-va Gv, 1 (t,L g_A - 2 -s F
This property is the subject of the above numbered cases.
I am
said
(We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated
ZONING CASE NO. «32,4
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty
foregoing is true and correct.
Print .
Owne r ,,,( c i
Name --.-_.__.__I
Signatur
dd rs s 2- ,
City/State
Signatures
Print
Owner
Name
Signature
Address
City/State
conditions in
of perjury that the
IoZ%%
must be acknowledged by a notary public.
State of California
County of
ws .
u
OFFICIAL SEAL
PATTI FRENE?
v p.
NOTARY PUBLIC CALIFORNIA
:�a LOS ANGELES COUNTY
iLIpUM.��P
It
My Commission Expires Sept. 22, 1995
iW i' ♦ J 'Y W ''r V ♦ ♦ '', ' Y V ' .I
'4eee. .• ,e- `- -ter �e
Los Angeles
SS.
On this the 3rd day of
February
Patti French
the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared
Luigi Schiappa
I] personally known to me
0 proved to me on the basis or satisfactory evidence
is subscribed to the
Land acknowledged that he executed it.
nd - s official seal.
to be the person(s) whose name(s)
within instru
WITNESS
Nota
19 92 , before me,
•
er/
See Exhibit 'An/attached
hereto and made a part hereof
t
I
•
EXHIBIT "A"
Legal Description of Property
That certain property located in the County of
Los Angeles, City of Rolling Hills Estates, California, and
legally described as follows:
Lot 2 of Tract No. 30074 as per map recorded in Book 738
Pages 8 and 9 of Maps, recorded in the office of the County
Recorder of said County.
Also known as #6 W. Ringbit, Rolling Hills Estates,
California.
92- 595054
Page 14
•
igainvq
MAY 1 8 1992
CITY. OF ROLLING HILLS
RESOLUTION NO. 92-34
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION NO. 92-5, A
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE
FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE, CORRAL, AND
RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN
ZONING CASE NO. 432A.
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 Mr. Luigi Schiappa,
E.S. Development with respect to real property located at 6 Ringbit
Road West, Rolling Hills (Lot 8-A-2 SF) requesting a modification
to a previously approved Variance to permit encroachment into the
front yard setback to construct a stable, corral, and retaining
walls; and Site Plan Review of a proposed new residence. The
modification requested is to extend the allowable time period for
building construction.
Section 2. The Commission considered this item at a meeting
on December 15, 1992 at which time information was presented
indicating that the extension of time is necessary for the
applicant to acquire the finances for building construction.
Section 3. Based upon information and evidence submitted, the
Planning Commission does hereby amend Paragraph A, Section 11 of
Resolution No. 92-5 to read as follows:
"A. The Variance and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire
within two years of the approval of this Resolution."
Section 4. Except as herein amended, the provisions of
Resolution No. 92-5 shall continue to be in full force and effect.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 1992.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
,. K ,JA A- )
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
• I
RESOLUTION NO. 92-34
PAGE 2
The foregoing Resolution No. 92-34 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION NO. 92-5, A
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE
FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE, CORRAL, AND
RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN
ZONING CASE NO. 432A.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission on December 15, 1992 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Frost, Hankins, Lay, Raine and Chairman Roberts
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
n AlS
DEPUTY CPTY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN
ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT
A STABLE, CORRAL, AND RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE
PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 432A.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES
HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr. Luigi
Schiappa, E.S. Development with respect to real property located at
6 Ringbit Road West, Rolling Hills (Lot 8-A-2 SF) requesting: (1)
A Variance to permit encroachment into the front yard setback tc
construct a stable, corral, and retaining walls; and (2) Site Plan
Review of a proposed new residence. A previous proposal was denied
by the Planning Commission appealed to the City Copncil. During
the appeal, the applicant revised the plans and the City Council
remanded the revised application back to the Planning Commission
for further action.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
public hearing to consider the applications on November 19, 1991
and December 17, 1991, and at a field trip visit on December 7,
1991.
Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project is
categorically exempt from environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act.
Section 4. Sections 17.32.010 through 17.32.030 permit
approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the
Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances
applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar
properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a
parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar
properties. A Variance to Sections 17.16.011.H, 17.16.060, and
17.28.022 is required because these sections state that corrals or
pens not be located in the front yard; that every parcel in the
RA-S zone shall have a front yard of not less than fifty feet,
measured horizontally from the front easement line; and that
required yards be maintained unoccupied from the ground up of any
structures. The applicant is requesting a Variance to encroach up
to 31 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback to construct a 450
square foot stable, and a 550 square foot corral within the front
setback. The Planning Commission finds as follows:
A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and
conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do
not apply generally to the other property in the sa:r:e vicinity and
zone. The Variance for the stable and corral is necessary because
the topography of the site prevents the construction of a stable
and corral in the rear yard. The existing building pad is small
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
PAGE 2
and the rear yard slopes down to a canyon, thereby precluding the
creation of a flat area for a stable or corral in the rear yard.
The area proposed for the stable and corral is the only place
available on this property.
E. The Var-lance 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 the
property in question. The Variance is necessary because the
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance encourage the inclusion of
stables and corrals on properties in the City of Rolling Hills and
a stable and corral could not be feasibly located in the rear yard.
C. The granting of the Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is
located. The Variance will permit the construction of a stable and
corral which will not impact the street or neighboring properties
because they will be nestled into the hillside and will not be
seen. Also, the building pad for the stable is located down a long
driveway so that it will not be visible from the street.
Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves the Variance to permit the construction
of a 450 square foot stable and a 550 square foot corral to
encroach up to 31 feet into the front yard setback, subject to the
conditions specified in Section 11.
Section 6. A Variance to Sections 17.16.060 and 17.28.022 is
required to construct right-angle retaining walls that will
encroach up to 3 feet into the fifty (50) foot front yard setback,
a total of 51 feet in length, that will not be more than 5 feet in
height at any one point.
A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and
conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do
not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and
zone. The Variance for the retaining wall is necessary to support
the hillside slope and to improve the geologic stability of the
site at the driveway access turnaround area. Construction of the
retaining wall into the front yard setback will permit residence to
be set back further from the edge of the building pad in the rear
so as to reduce the prominence of the residence on the pad.
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 the
property in question. The Variance is necessary because it will
provide stability to the existing slope and permit a driveway
access turnaround area of sufficient size to permit necessary
vehicular maneuverability.
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
PAGE 3
C. The granting of the Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is
located. The Variance will permit the construction of a retaininc
wall which will provide improved geologic stability and drainage to
the subject property. Also, the wall will not be visible from
immediately surrounding residences.
Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves the Variance to permit the 51 foot long
retaining wall to encroach up to 3. feet into the front yard setback
not to exceed 5 feet in height at any one point as indicated on
Exhibit A attached hereto, subject to the conditions specified in
Section 11.
Section 8. Section 17.34.010 requires a development plan to
be submitted for site plan review and approval before any building
or structure may be constructed or any expansion, addition,
alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made which
involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the
building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any
thirty-six month period.
Section 9. With respect to the Site Plan Review application,
the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact:
A. The proposed development is compatible with the General
Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the
proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of
low profile, low density residential development with sufficient
open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to
Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements. The lot has a
net square foot area of 121,210 square feet. The proposed
residence (2,950 sq.ft.), garage (609 sq.ft.), swimming pool (366
sq.ft.), and future stable (450 sq.ft.) will have 4,471 square feet
which constitutes 3.7% of the lot which is within the maximum 20%
structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage
including paved areas and driveway will be 7,373 square feet which
equals 6.1% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot
coverage requirement. The proposed project is on a relatively
large lot with most of the proposed structures located away from
the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. The
pad is smaller and much steeper than several neighboring
developments.
B. The proposed development preserves and integrates into
the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural
topographic features of the lot including surrounding native
vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as
hillsides and knolls) because a minimum amount of grading is
proposed and will only be done to provide approved drainage that
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
PAGE 4
will flow away from the proposed residence and existing neighboring
residences. The soil displaced by the drilling of caissons for the
residence will be placed in the shaded areas shown on the
development plan.
C. The development plan 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 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 buildable pad coverage of 33.7%. Modifications have been
made to the application to reduce the size of the residence so as
to reduce its prominence on the lot. Significant portions of the
lot will remain undeveloped to allow scenic vistas across the
northwesterly portions of the property.
F. The proposed development is harmonious in scale and mass
with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences.
As indicated in Paragraph E, the lot coverage maximum will not be
exceeded and the proposed project is consistent with the scale of
the neighborhood. Modifications have been made to reduce the
prominence of the house on the lot by moving the structure away
from the edge of the building pad. Grading shall be permitted only
to restore the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the
proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on
several properties in the vicinity.
G. The proposed development is sensitive and not
detrimental to convenience and safety of .circulation for
pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize
the existing vehicular access, thereby having no further impact on
the roadway.
H. The project conforms with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt
from environmental review.
Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for
Zoning Case No. 432A for a proposed residential development as
indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A
and subject to the conditions contained in Section 11.
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
PAGE 5
Section 11. The Variance to permit the construction of a
stable and corral that will encroach into the front yard setback
approved in Section 5, the Variance to permit the construction of
a retaining wall into the front yard setback approved in Section. ',
and the Site Plan Review for residential development approved in
Section 10 are subject to the following conditions:
A. The Variance shall expire unless used within one year
from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.32.110
of the Municipal Code. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire
within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in
Section 17.34.080.A.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance and
the Site Plan Review approval, 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 Buildings and Construction
Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the
subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise
set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan.
D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial
conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A except as
otherwise provided in these conditions.
E. An approved sprinkler system shall be required for the
residence and garage and the project shall conform to all
applicable Los Angeles County Fire Department requirements.
F. It is a requirement of this approval, that no water from
the pool shall be drained into the canyons. All pool water shall,
when drained, be removed from the site by truck.
G. All retaining walls incorporated into the project shall
not be greater than 5 feet in height at any one point.
H. To minimize the building or. the pad, the structures,
driveway, graded slopes and retaining walls shall be screened and
shielded from view with native drought -resistant vegetation that is
compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community.
I. 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
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
PAGE 6
feasible, plants that are native to tl-e area and/or consistent with
the rural character of the, community.
A bond in the amount of the cost esti-^ate of the implementation of
the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior
to issuance of a grading and building pert and shall be retained
with the City for not less than two years after landscape
installation. The retained bond wi:: 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.
J. 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 must
conform to the City of Rolling Hills standard of 2 to 1 slope
ratio.
K. 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.
L. The working drawings submitted to the County Department
of Building and Safety for plan check review must include a 550
square foot corral and must conform to the development plan
approved with this application.
M. Notwithstanding Section 17.34.070 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.
N. The building pad coverage shall not exceed 33.7%.
0. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance
of all conditions of this Variance, pursuant to Section 17.32.087,
or the approval shall not be effective.
P. Conditions A, C, D, E, G, H, I, J, K, L, N, and 0 of
this Variance and Site Plan Review approval must be complied with
prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the
County of Los Angeles.
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
PAGE 7
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1992.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
DIANE SAYER, DEPUTr\CITY CLERK
The foregoing Resolution No. 92-5 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN
ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT
A STABLE, CORRAL, AND RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE
PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 432A.
was approved and adopted at a regular adjourned meeting of the
Planning Commission on January 11, 1992 by the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Lay, Raine and Chairman Roberts
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Frost
ABSTAIN: None
DEPUTY/CITY CLERK