0835RESOLUTION NO. 835
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN
ZONING CASE NO. 545A.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY
FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Requests were filed by Ms. Kelly Tsou with respect to real property
located at 6 Ringbit Road West (Lot 8 -A -2 -SF), Rolling Hills, requesting a Variance to
permit encroachment into the front yard setback to construct a stable and corral and
requesting Site Plan Review for the construction of a new single family residence
and attached garage. During the hearing process, the applicant revised plans to
relocate a stable from the front yard setback to the rear of the building pad and
withdrew the Variance.
Section 2. On July 18, 1996, it was determined by the City Manager
following consultation with the Planning Commission on July 16, 1996, that a new
plan and accompanying information submitted by the applicant were different from
a previous proposal that had been denied. The proposal would have required
grading to raise the building pad up to 14 feet. The determination allowed the
applicant to reapply within twelve months of the May 28, 1996 City Council denial
of the appeal by the City Council in previous Zoning Case No. 529A (Rolling Hills
Municipal Code Section 17.30.040).
Section 3. The project as proposed includes the construction of the
following structures: (i) a residence of 3,650 square feet, (ii) a garage of 680 square
feet; (iii) a future stable of 450 square feet, and (iv) a service yard of 96 square feet.
The subject property consists of 3.09 acres. The structural lot coverage proposed is
4,876 square feet or 4.1% and the total lot coverage proposed is 10.714 square feet or
9.0% within the limits of the Zoning Code. The building pad coverage proposed is
28.5%.
Section 4. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing to consider the requests on September 17, 1996, October 15, 1996, November
19, 1996, and December 17, 1996 and at a field trip visit on October 12, 1996.
Section 5. The applicant was notified of the public hearing in writing by
first class mail and through the City's newsletter. Evidence was heard and
presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal, from all persons
protesting the same, and from members of the City staff and the Planning
Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. Concerns
expressed by residents focused on the pad elevation, the construction of caissons or
soldier piles to stabilize the residence on the building pad and the fragility of the
canyon of which the subject lot made up a portion of the canyon wall.
Section 6. On December 17, 1996, following the close of the public hearing,
the Planning Commission requested that staff prepare a Resolution of Approval
regarding the project. Chairman Allan Roberts had abstained from all hearings
related to the case because of the close proximity of his property to this property. On
January 21, 1997, when the Resolution was presented to the Planning Commission,
the remaining four Commission members deadlocked with two in favor and two
against and thus were unable to approve the Resolution by a majority vote. The
applicant appealed that denial to the City Council. During that appeal, the applicant
submitted revised plans showing the relocation of a stable from the front yard
setback to the rear of the building pad. The Planning Commission adopted
Resolution No. 97-2 memorializing its tie vote on February 11, 1997.
Section 7. The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to
consider the requests on March 24, 1997, May 27, 1997, June 23, 1997, July 14, 1997,
Resolution No. 835 -1-
August 25, 1997, October 13, 1997, November 24, 1997, January 26, 1998, and February
25, 1998, and at a field trip visit on June 4, 1997.
Section 8. The applicant was notified of the public hearing in writing by
first class mail and through the City's newsletter. Evidence was heard and
presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal, from all persons
protesting the same, and from members of the City staff and the City Council having
reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The applicant's representatives were
in attendance at the hearings. The hearings were continued at the applicant's
request due to the incomplete geological evaluation of the proposed lot. Concerns
expressed by residents and the City Council focused on the amount of grading at the
project site, the area of grading at the project site, water runoff on the project site,
water runoff effects on the Flying Triangle Active Landslide Area, and the
viewscapes of neighboring property owners. The City Council directed the applicant
to provide a report regarding the effects of hydrology, bedrock and recompaction
issues, stages of grading, stable location, quantity of hardscape, and distance from the
Flying Triangle. During the hearing process, the City initiated "Step 3" of the grading
confirmation process for the proposed project by requiring the applicant to prepare
the soils and geology reports for the project to be evaluated by the County because
the grading plan was highly sensitive. The .County inspected the building site,
reviewed the plot plan, and the consultants' reports and determined that there were
no apparent adverse geotechnical conditions for the building site and submitted
standardized feasibility review sheets for the proposed building site. Los Angeles
County Department of Public Works representatives Mr. Robert Thomas, Geologist;
Ms. Maria Toribio, Soils Engineer; Mr. Phil Doudar, Hydrologist; and Ms. Lata
Thakar, District Engineer; were in attendance at the meeting to discuss the
evaluation of the proposed project.
Section 9. Information was submitted to the City that considered the project's
impact on grading, drainage, views, slope stability, and potential exacerbation of
land subsidence problems. This information was evaluated by staff and reviewed
during the hearing process. Several reports, studies and reviews by experts were
prepared or conducted which provided substantial evidence that the project would
not have a potentially significant impact on these environmental resources or
conditions. Consequently, the City Council finds that there is no substantial
evidence that the project may have a potentially significant impact on the
environment. Therefore, the City Council finds that the project qualifies as a Class 3
Exemption [State CA Guidelines, Section 15303 (a)] and is therefore categorically
exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality
Act.
Section 10. Section 17.46.030 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 at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the
building by more than twenty-five percent (257o) in any thirty-six (36) month period.
With respect to the Site Plan Review application for the construction of a new single
family residence and attached garage, the City Council 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 119,685 square feet. The proposed residence (3,650 sq.ft.),
garage (680 sq.ft.), stable (450 sq.ft.), and service yard (96 sq.ft.) will have 4,876 square
feet which constitutes 4.1% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural
lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and
driveway will be 10,714 square feet which equals 9.0% of the lot, which is within the
35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is on a
Resolution No. 835 -2-
relatively large lot with the proposed structures located well below the road so as to
reduce the visual impact of the development.
B. 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. The
proposed residence will have a buildable pad coverage of 25.9%. Further, the
proposed project is designed to minimize grading. Significant portions of the lot
will be left undeveloped so as to maintain scenic vistas across the westerly portions
of the property.
C. The proposed development, as conditioned, 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 when compared to this
irregular-shaped lot. The ratio of the proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to
the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. The proposed development
involves raising the level of the building pad from the existing building pad and
using caissons, soldier piles, or both to stabilize the property. The increased
elevation of the pad is appropriate in order to construct the development on more
stable soil which is located towards the eastern side of the property. In elevating the
pad in this location, the Council finds that the proposed structure will not
materially affect surrounding residences or the views from surrounding residences.
Also, the potential limited impairment of views is justified in relationship to the
need to create and construct the residence on a more stable building pad.
D. 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). Some grading of the eastern portion of
the lot will be required in order to create a building pad on the more stable portion
of the lot. The soil displaced by the drilling of caissons for the residence will be used
to raise the existing building pad up to five feet. Drainage will be designed to divert
water away from the proposed residence and the existing neighboring residences
using a method of drainage retention facilities on the building site to slow water
runoff and obtain the maximum potential percolation into the soil in order to
reduce increased flows from the site into the natural drainage courses.
E. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to
minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at
the west side (rear) of this lot. The proposed development involves raising the
level of the building pad from the existing building pad up to five feet. The
increased elevation of the pad is appropriate in order to create a building pad on the
more stable portion of the lot. In elevating the building pad, the Council finds that
the proposed structure will not materially affect surrounding residences or the
views from surrounding residences. Also, the potential limited impairment of
views is justified in relationship to the need to create and construct a residence on a
stable building pad.
F. 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.
G. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the
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. Although some members of the public asserted that the project would
adversely affect grading, drainage, views, slope stability, and potential exacerbation
of land subsidence problems, those assertions were not supported by substantial
evidence. Several reports, studies and reviews by experts were prepared or
Resolution No. 835 -3-
conducted which provided substantial evidence that the project would not have a
potentially significant impact on these environmental resources or conditions.
There was no substantial evidence introduced that the construction of a single
family residence would have a potentially significant impact on the environment.
Therefore, the City Council finds that the project would not have a potentially
significant impact on the environment, that it conforms with the requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from
environmental review in accordance with Section 15303 (a).
Section 11. Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby
approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 545A for a proposed
residential development as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein
as Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 545A and subject to the following conditions:
A. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within one year from the
effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.46.080.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan Review 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 on file marked Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 545A dated March 6,
1998, except as otherwise provided in these conditions.
E. Grading quantities for the development project shall not exceed 2,170
cubic yards of cut soil and 2,170 cubic yards of fill soil.
F. All retaining walls incorporated into the project shall not be greater
than 5 feet in height at any one point.
G. Residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 25.9%.
H. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 25.4% of the net lot area.
I. 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.
J. The proposed 15 foot wide access road and the existing driveway that
has a 207o to 18% slope shall conform with all requirements of the County of Los
Angeles Fire Department Fire Code Standard No. 10.207(A), Building Sites Not
Served By Improved Public Right -of -Ways.
K. Any grading shall preserve the existing topography, flora, and natural
features to the greatest extent possible. In order to minimize impacts to the hillsides
and canyon areas on this property, the building pad and graded slopes shall be
designed and developed in a manner that retains and restores native plant life
outside the building pad caused by pad grading and preserves the existing
contiguous topography, flora, and natural features of that area to the greatest extent
possible.
L. To prevent construction equipment from going beyond the limits of
the building pad, contractors shall use fencing or other barriers to the greatest extent
Resolution No. 835 -4-
possible. Contractors shall be informed that work on the site shall not encroach into
the mature natural vegetation areas except as specified on the approved Site Plan to
the greatest extent possible.
M. To minimize the building on 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.
N. Landscaping shall be designed to screen structures, but not to obstruct
views of neighboring properties.
O. 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 (i.e. California pepper, Toyon, etc.).
A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the landscaping
plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a grading and
building permit and shall be retained with the City for not less than two years after
landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City Manager after
the 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.
P. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County
of Los Angeles for plan check, the lot line adjustment approved by the Planning
Commission on October -17, -1995 for this property and the adjacent 4 -Ringbit -Road
West (Lots 8 -A -2 -SF and Lots 8 -A -SF, respectively) shall be recorded by the applicant,
or the approvals shall not be effective.
Q. A drainage system approved by the City Engineer shall be incorporated
into the overall plan of the development project and the landscaping plan based
upon the findings of the hydrology report presented to the Council. The drainage
system shall be designed to divert water away from the proposed residence and the
existing neighboring residences using a method of drainage retention facilities on
the building site to slow water runoff and obtain the maximum potential
percolation into the soil in order to reduce increased flows from the site into the
natural drainage courses.
R. 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 City Council must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning
Department staff for their review. The drainage flow incorporated into these plans
shall be directed to the northwest to the maximum extent feasible rather than to the
drainage course on the southeastern side of the property. Cut and fill slopes shall
not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio.
S. At the completion of grading for the project, an "as built" grading plan
stamped by a Certified Civil Engineer shall be prepared that conforms to the
development plan as approved by the City Council that includes a residential
building pad height of 882 feet and shall be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning
Department staff for their review.
Resolution No. 835 -5-
T. 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.
U. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 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 Site Plan Review
approval by the Planning Commission.
V. All conditions of this Site Plan Review approval must be complied
with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los
Angeles.
W. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions
of this Site Plan Review approval, or the approval shall not be effective.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF MARCH, 1998.
FRANK HILL, MAYOR PRO TEMPORE
ATTEST: ,
12za '* S - (-� "C�
MARILYN K RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ��
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 835 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN
ZONING CASE NO. 545A.
was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the City Council on
March 9, 1998 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell, Mayor Pro Tem Hill
and Mayor Lay.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Councilmember Murdock.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices.
P . k -kA�
DEPUTY CITY CLtRK
Resolution No. 835 -6-