0919RESOLUTION NO. 919
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
GRANTING APPROVALS FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS; A VARIANCE TO EXCEED
THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA; A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A DETACHED GARAGE; AND A VARIANCE TO
PERMIT THE DETACHED GARAGE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD
AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 1 JOHNS CANYON ROAD, IN
ZONING CASE NO. 648 (HOFMAN).
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE
AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Craig Hofman with respect
to real property located at 1 Johns Canyon Road, Rolling Hills (Lot 174 -C -MS) requesting 1)
Site Plan Review approval for the construction of 1,175 square foot addition, 770 square foot
detached garage and 475 cubic yards of grading; (2) a Variance to exceed the maximum
permitted disturbed area, (3) a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 770 square foot detached
garage, and (4) a Variance to permit the detached garage to be located in the front yard area.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to
consider the applications on April 16, 2002, May 21, 2002 and at a field trip visit on April 30,
2002. The applicants were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail.
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 and their representative were in attendance at the
hearings. One letter of objection of this project was received from a neighbor.
Section 3. Initially the applicants submitted a request to construct a new garage,
which would be attached to the main residence via a breezeway, and which would require
removal of several mature trees. In addition, the height of the ridgeline of the proposed garage
would be 2-3 feet higher than the ridgeline of the existing residence.
Section 4. At the field trip the Planning Commission expressed concerns about the
necessity to remove the mature trees and the height of the proposed garage. Subsequently, the
architect submitted a revised site plan, which was considered by the Planning Commission at
the May 21, 2002 meeting. The revised project includes a detached garage, which would be
lower than the originally proposed garage, and be located in the front yard area, which
requires a Conditional Use Permit and a Variance.
Section 5. The property is developed with an existing 4,486 square foot house, a 558
square foot stable, a 976 square foot swimming pool and a 7,264 square foot tennis court.
Currently there is no garage on the property. A previously existing garage was converted to
living area without City approval or a building permit. Pursuant to Section 17.16.160 of the
Zoning Code, every single-family dwelling shall have an above ground garage with a minimum
capacity of two cars. Portions of the existing structures encroach into the required setbacks and
are legal non -conforming.
Section 6. In order to meet the City's requirement of 35% total net lot coverage and
20% structural lot coverage, the applicants proposed to reduce the tennis court by 234 square
feet and return said area to natural, landscaped state. Small portions of existing walkways and
driveway will also be returned to a natural state to reduce the impervious areas on the lot.
Section 7. After discussion, deliberation and consideration of all evidence presented,
the Planning Commission found that the structural, the disturbed and impervious areas of the
property are pre-existing, and that the proposed project will only minimally affect the existing
conditions. The Planning Commission further found that the corrective measures proposed to
- reduce the size of the tennis court by 234 square feet is not feasible, and suggested that an area
of an existing parking pad be reduced by the same amount instead. The Commission found
that the spirit and intent of the proposal meets the goals of the City's General Plan and will not
negatively affect the subject property or adjacent areas.
Section 8. On June 18, 2002, the Planning Commission approved the application by
Resolution No. 2002-07.
Section 9. On June 28, 2002, the City Council took jurisdiction of Zoning Case No. 648. Due
to concerns pertaining to the existing tennis court lights, the City Attorney was directed to research
Resolution No. 919 -1-
options available to the City Council regarding the lights that were originally permitted in 1969 and
are, therefore, considered legal non -conforming.
The City Attorney has determined that the provisions of Ordinance 287, (Outdoor Lighting
Standards), apply in this case, as the ordinance states in part, " Outdoor lighting is prohibited except
as provided below." The list of permitted lights does not include tennis court lights.
The applicants submitted a letter July 1, 2002 stating that they will comply with the
Outdoor Lighting Ordinance and will deactivate the tennis court lights.
Section 10. The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the
case on July 8, 2002. The applicants were notified of the public hearing in writing by first class
mail and were in attendance. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in
affecting said proposal, and from members of the City staff and the City Council having
reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal.
Section 11. The City Council finds that the project qualifies as a Class 4 Exemption,
and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act.
Section 12. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for site
plan review and approval before any development requiring a grading permit or 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 (25%) in any thirty-six (36) month period. With
respect to the Site Plan Review application requesting 1,175 square foot addition, 770 square
foot new detached garage and 475 cubic yards of grading at an existing single-family
residence, 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 structures comply 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 setbacks, except
for the existing structures, and lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net area of 75,496
square feet. The residence (5,661 sq.ft.), proposed garage (770 sq.ft.), existing swimming pool
(976 sq.ft.), existing tennis court (7,264 sq.ft.), and existing stable (558 sq.ft.) will have 15,229
square feet which constitutes 20% of the net lot area which is within the maximum 20%
structural lot coverage permitted. With the reduction in impervious surfaces, which will be
returned to a natural, landscaped condition, the total lot coverage including paved areas and
driveways will be 26,368 square feet which equals 35.0% of the net lot, which is within the 35%
maximum overall lot coverage permitted. The proposed project is screened from the road by
mature trees so as to reduce the visual impact of the development.
B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot.
The proposed additions will be constructed on an existing building pad and will utilize
already existing impervious surfaces. The project will be screened and landscaped with
mature trees and shrubs, is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the detached
garage will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will permit the
owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding
property owners.
C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass
with the site. Although the disturbed area will exceed the 40% permitted, the proposed project
is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to properties in the vicinity.
The site was previously disturbed and no additional disturbance will result from the proposed
project.
D. The development plan incorporates existing trees and native vegetation to the -
maximum extent feasible. 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 lot to look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped
so as to maintain open space.
E. Approximately 1,216 square feet of the existing impervious areas will be restored
to original natural condition of the site to minimize paved areas, and will reduce the disturbed
area by one percent.
Resolution No. 919 -2-
F. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience
and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will not
change the existing circulation pattern and will utilize an existing driveway.
G. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act
Section 13. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the City
Council hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 648 for
proposed structures as shown on the Development Plan dated June 10, 2002 and marked
Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 20 of this Resolution.
Section 14. 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. A Variance to
Section 17.16.070 (B) is required because it states that the lot disturbance shall be limited to
40% of the net lot area. With respect to this request for a Variance for lot disturbance of 50.8%,
the City Council 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 Variance for the total disturbance is necessary because it already
exists. The existing disturbed area of the lot is at 51.8%. The applicant will reduce the
disturbed area to 50.8% by returning certain impervious areas to natural, landscaped
condition. A tennis court, which is included in the disturbed area calculations, exists on the
site and pre dates City of Rolling Hills and Rolling Hills Community Association's
requirements for tennis courts. The existing development, which includes the tennis court, on
the lot creates a difficulty in meeting this Code requirement.
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 of the existing conditions of the
lot. A very small portion of the lot will be disturbed to allow for the construction of the
detached garage, but 1,216 square feet of existing disturbed area will be undisturbed.
C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the
property is located. All development will occur within required setbacks, and will be
adequately screened to prevent adverse visual impact to surrounding properties.
Section 15. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the City
Council hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 648 to permit a disturbed area of
38,395 square feet or 50.8%, subject to the conditions specified in Section 20 of this Resolution.
Section 16. Section 17.16.210(A)(4) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits
approval of a detached garage under certain conditions, provided a Conditional Use Permit
for such use is approved. The applicants are requesting to construct a 770 square foot detached
garage. Such garage will be located in the front yard area of the lot. With respect to this request
for a Conditional Use Permit, the City Council finds as follows:
A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a detached
garage would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and
General Plan and will be desirable for the public convenience and welfare because the use is
consistent with similar uses in the community, and the area proposed for the garage would be
located in an area on the property where such use will not change the existing configuration of
structures on the lot.
B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and
structures have been considered, and the construction of a detached garage will not adversely
affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the
proposed garage will take place of an already existing paved driveway and is of sufficient
distance from nearby residences so that the garage will not impact the view or privacy of
surrounding neighbors.
Resolution No. 919 -3-
C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and
surrounding residences because the detached garage will comply with the low profile
residential development pattern of the community.
D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development
standards of the zone district and does not encroach into any setback areas.
E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles
County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting criteria for hazardous waste
facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous
Waste and Substances Sites List.
F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of Title 17 of the
Zoning Code because a stable already exists on the lot.
Section 17. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the
City Council hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a detached
garage in accordance with the development plan dated June 10, 2002 and marked Exhibit A in
Zoning Case No. 648 subject to the conditions contained in Section 20 of this Resolution.
Section 18. Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance, conditionally permitted uses may not
be located in the front yard area. The applicant is requesting permission to allow the detached
garage to be constructed in the front yard area. With respect to this request for a Variance, the
City Council finds as follows:
A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable
to the property that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same
zone. The proposed structure will be located on an existing building pad in the front yard. The
existing development on the lot creates a difficulty in relocating the proposed structure.
B. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the
property is located. The detached garage will be located on an already existing building pad
and will mitigate the necessity for any additional substantial grading of the lot. The proposed
location is desirous because several mature trees will be saved and the height of the garage
will be lower by 2-3 feet than if the garage was attached to the house, which would not require
a Variance or a Conditional Use Permit.
Section 19. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the City
Council hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 648 to permit a detached garage to
be located in the front yard, subject to the conditions specified in Section 19 of this Resolution.
Section 20. The Site Plan Review approved in Section 13 of this Resolution, the
Variances regarding the maximum permitted disturbed area, and the location of the proposed
detached garage in the front yard area approved in Sections 15 and 19 of this Resolution, and
the Conditional Use Permit regarding the construction of a detached garage approved in
Section 17 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions:
A. The Site Plan Review, Variances, and Conditional Use Permit approvals shall
expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070(A),
17.42.070(A), and 17.46.080(A) unless work commences prior to said expiration or otherwise
extended pursuant to the requirements of those sections.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan, Variances and Conditional
Use Permit approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be
suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicants have
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 Codes, the Zoning Ordinance,
and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless
otherwise set forth in this 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 and dated June 10, 2002, except as otherwise provided in
these conditions.
Resolution No. 919 -4-
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. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 15,229 square feet or 20% in conformance
with lot coverage limitations.
G. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 26,368 square
feet or 35.0% in conformance with total lot coverage limitations.
H. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 38,395 square feet or 50.8% in
conformance with lot coverage limitations approved in Section 12 of this Resolution.
I. Residential building pad coverage on the 23,094 square foot residential building
pad shall not exceed 6,431 square feet or 27.85%; coverage on all of the other existing building
pads shall not be increased.
J. The detached garage shall not exceed 770 square feet.
K. Grading shall not exceed 475 cubic yards of cut soil and 475 cubic yards of fill
soil. Grading shall be balanced on site and shall preserve the existing vegetation to the greatest
extent possible.
L. A portion of the existing driveway, west of the proposed garage and several
existing walkways shall be returned to a natural state and be landscaped in order to decrease
the amount of impervious surfaces on the lot, as indicated on the site plan on file in the
Planning Department dated June 10, 2002 and marked Exhibit A. In addition, 234 square feet
of the existing parking pad located behind the house, (east of the house) shall be returned to
natural state to match the adjacent area and shall be landscaped. Such area shall serve as
substitution for the 234 square feet of impervious area proposed to be removed from the tennis
court. Those areas shall be planted, to the maximum extent possible, with native vegetation.
M. An inspection by Los Angeles County Building Official shall be made to
ascertain that the unauthorized conversion of the area previously used for a garage was made
in a manner that meets the requirements of Building Codes. Should building code deficiencies
be found, the applicants shall correct all deficiencies, prior to the issuance of a final inspection
for the project. The applicants shall be responsible for all fees, including the "as built" fees for
said inspection.
N. A landscape plan for the areas to be returned to natural state and the areas
surrounding the proposed additions, including the detached garage, shall be submitted for
review and approval by the Planning staff. The landscaping plan shall include water efficient
irrigation, to the maximum extent feasible, that incorporates a low gallonage irrigation system,
utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using "hydrozones," considers
slope 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.
O. Landscaping shall be designed using mature trees and shrubs so as not to
obstruct views of neighboring properties but to obscure the detached garage. If any new trees
will be planted, such tree(s) shall be of native variety and when grown to maturity shall not
exceed the height of the ridgeline of the residence and the garage.
P. During construction, dust control measures shall be used to stabilize the soil from
wind erosion and reduce dust and objectionable odors generated by construction activities in
accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District, Los Angeles County and local
ordinances and engineering practices.
Q. During construction, conformance with local ordinances and engineering practices
so that people or property is not exposed to landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence
shall be required.
R. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district
requirements, storm water pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and
engineering practices so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise,
dust, objectionable odors, landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence shall be required.
S. During construction, the Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in
Section 7010 of the 1998 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be followed to
Resolution No. 919 -5-
minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control storm water pollution as
required by the County of Los Angeles.
T. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site.
U. 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.
V. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality
Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and
maintenance of storm water drainage facilities.
W. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality
Control Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP's)
related to solid waste.
X. All utility lines to the residence and the proposed garage shall be placed
underground. The roofing material shall conform to the requirements of the City of Rolling
Hills Building Code.
Y. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community
Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of building or grading
permit.
Z. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and
Safety for plan check review shall conform to the development plan described in Condition D.
AA. 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 shall be submitted to the Rolling
Hills Planning Department staff for their review.
AB. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these
Variances, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals, pursuant to Section
17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective.
AC. All conditions of the Variances, Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review
approvals, which apply, must be complied with prior to the issuance of a grading or building
permit from the County of Los Angeles.
AD. The property owners shall be required to conform to the City of Rolling Hills
Outdoor Lighting Standards Ordinance, (Ordinance No. 287). The applicants shall deactivate
the tennis court lights by no later than August 8, 2002.
AE. 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.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8th DAY OF JULY 2002.
Z
ALLEN LAY��OR
ATTEST:
1
) ,9P. k� �--�
-
MARILYN URN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
Resolution No. 919 -6-
1
1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ��
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 919 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
GRANTING APPROVALS FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION
OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS; A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM
PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA; A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT
A DETACHED GARAGE; AND A VARIANCE TO PERMIT THE DETACHED
GARAGE TO BE LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE AT 1 JOHNS CANYON ROAD, IN ZONING CASE NO. 648 (HOFMAN).
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on July 8, 2002 by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmember Pernell, Mayor Pro Tem Hill and Mayor Lay.
NOES: Councilmember Murdock.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: Councilmember Heinsheimer.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices.
DEPUTY CITV CLERK
Resolution No. 919 -7-