Loading...
0923RESOLUTION NO. 923 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO PERMIT GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND A FUTURE STABLE, AND GRANTING VARIANCES TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA OF THE LOT AND TO PERMIT ENCROACHMENT OF A RETAINING WALL INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 645, AT 20 EASTFIELD DRIVE, (LOT 83 -EF) (DYER). 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. Aaron Dyer with respect to real property located at 20 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills, (Lot 83 -EF), requesting a Site Plan Review to permit grading and construction of a new 4,458 square foot residence with a 693 square foot garage and a future stable, a Variance to permit a retaining wall to encroach into the rear yard setback and a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot. A 1,440 square foot basement is also proposed. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application on February 26, 2002, March 19, 2002, and July 16, 2002 meetings and at a field trip on March 11, 2002. The applicants were noticed of the public hearings by a 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' representative was in attendance at the hearings. During the course of the public hearings, the Commission requested that the applicant reduce the size of the proposed residence, and conform to the 30% residential building pad coverage guideline established by the Planning Commission. The applicants revised the proposal and reduced the residential building pad coverage to 32.9%. The applicants reduced the originally proposed house by 902 square feet and the garage by 55 square feet. At the July 16, 2002 meeting several neighbors spoke in favor of the project. Prior to the meeting, eight letters from neighbors were received in favor of the project. Section 3. On August 20, 2002, the Planning Commission approved the application by Resolution No. 2002-13. Section 4. On August 26, 2002, the City Council took jurisdiction of Zoning Case No. 645. The Council members were concerned about the proposed exceedance of the disturbed area of the lot and the lack of conditions for landscaping. Section 5. The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the case on September 9, 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. At the September 9, 2002 public hearing the City Council upheld the Planning Commission's approval, but requested that conditions for landscaping be added. Section 6. The City Council finds that the project qualifies as a Class 3 Exemption (The State of CA Guidelines, Section 15303) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 7. Section 17.46.030 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval 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 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 construction of the new house and garage to replace the existing residence and a future stable, 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 setback and lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net square foot area of 46,040 square feet. The proposed residence (4,458 sq.ft.), garage (693 sq.ft.), service yard and future stable (450 sq.ft.) will have 5,697 square feet which constitutes 12.4% of the lot coverage, which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. A 1,440 square foot basement is also proposed. The total lot coverage including paved areas and a new driveway will be 8,971 square feet, which equals 19.5% of the lot which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is located away from the roads so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. The building pad coverage is proposed at 32.9%, which exceeds the 30% guideline coverage established by the Planning Commission. The disturbed area of the lot is proposed at 46.6%, which exceeds the 40% maximum permitted and requires a Variance. B. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new structure will not cause the lot to look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space on the property. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures and the topography of the lot have been considered, and the construction of the new house and future stable will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed structures will be constructed on a portion of the lot which is the least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped with trees and shrubs which at maturity will not exceed 25 feet in height, is a sufficient distance from nearby residences and the street so that proposed structures 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, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum set forth in the Zoning Code will not be exceeded and the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood. D. The development plan incorporates existing building pad and preserves a large undeveloped landscaped area of the lot that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. The applicants will remove the existing driveway and landscape it to match the existing contours of the property, therefore, further reducing the impervious surfaces on the lot. E. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the northeast (towards the streets) of the lot. Grading for this project will involve 1,640 cubic yards of cut and 1,640 cubic yards of fill and will be balanced on site. F. The development plan preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought -tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas. G. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed driveway of off, Eastfield Drive follows natural contours and will require minimal grading. H. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is exempt. Section 8. 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. 645 for proposed structures as shown on the Development Plan dated JUNE 15, 2002, and marked Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 13 of this resolution. Section 9. Section 17.16.120 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires the side yard setback for every residential parcel in the RA -S-1 Zone to be twenty (20) feet, Section 17.16.110 requires that front yard setback be fifty (50) feet from the roadway easement line, and Section 17.16.130 requires that the rear yard setback be fifty (50) feet from the rear property line. Except for the required rear yard setback under certain conditions, all other required setbacks must remain unobstructed by structures. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Code 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 Resolution No. 923 -2- a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. The applicant is requesting permission to allow one, not to exceed 3 -foot high and 60 feet long, retaining wall to be located in the rear yard setback. 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 because the lot is irregular in shape and it fronts on two streets, Eastfield Drive and Outrider Road. Due to the double street frontage, much of the area of the lot is in the roadway easements. The remainder of the lot slopes upward from the streets with an existing building pad located at the westerly portion of the lot. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question because due to the existing grade, irregular shape of the property and double street frontage of the property, the placement of the house and driveway require a small cut into the rear yard slope, which requires a retaining wall in the rear yard setback. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the wall will be incorporated into the landscaping and will contain planters. In addition, the wall will not be visible from the public right-of-way and will be screened by existing mature trees in the rear. Construction of said wall would eliminate the necessity for any additional grading on the hillside. Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the City Council hereby approves the Variance to permit the construction of a retaining wall that will be located in the rear yard setback, in accordance with the development plan dated JUNE 15, 2002, and marked Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 645, subject to the conditions contained in Section 13 of this resolution. Section 11. 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 46.6%, 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 the configuration, double street frontage and topography of the lot create 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. Currently only a small portion of the lot has a slope that is suitable for construction. Additional grading and enlargement of this pad is needed to allow construction of a new residence. 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 12. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the City Council hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 645 to permit a disturbed area of 21,440 square feet or 46.6%, subject to the conditions specified in Section 13 of this Resolution. Section 13. The Site Plan review request to construct a new house, garage and a future stable approved in Section 8, the Variance request to construct a wall within the rear yard setback approved in Section 10, and the Variance request to exceed the 40% maximum permitted disturbance of the lot approved in Section 12 of this resolution are subject to the following conditions: Resolution No. 923 -3- A. The Site Plan review and the Variances approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval if construction pursuant to these approvals has not commenced within that time period, as required by Sections 17.46.080(A) and 17.38.070(A) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, or the approvals'granted are otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of these sections. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variances and Site Plan Review 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 Code, 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. This approval shall be subject to the approval of the soils, geology and geotechnical reports and studies by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works. E. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A and dated JUNE 15, 2002, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. F. 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. G. The basement shall not exceed 1,440 square feet and all requirements for the basements shall be met subject to Section 17.20.020 of the City of Rolling Hills Zoning Code. H. The future barn shall conform to all of the requirements of Sections 17.16.170 and 17.16.200 of the Zoning Code and be in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A and dated JUNE 15, 2002. I. Grading shall not exceed 1,640 cubic yards of cut and 1,640 cubic yards of fill and shall be balanced on site. J. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 5,697 square feet or 12.4% of the net lot area of the lot. K. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 8,971 square feet or 19.5% in conformance with lot coverage limitations. L. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 21,440 square feet or 46.6% of the net lot area in conformance with the Variance approval. M. Residential building pad coverage on the 15,940 square foot residential building pad shall not exceed 5,247 square feet or 32.9%; coverage on the 1000 square feet future barn pad shall not exceed 450 square feet or 45.0%. N. The applicant shall remove all asphalt and cement from the existing driveway and return the entire existing driveway to landscaped state to match the adjacent terrain and vegetation. O. Landscaping 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. P. All graded areas shall be landscaped. Landscaping for the entire project shall be designed using native shrubs and mature trees, which at full maturity shall not exceed the ridge height of the residence, and which will not obstruct views of neighboring properties. Two copies of landscaping plan for the graded/repaired area and a cost estimate for material, labor and irrigation to implement the landscaping plan shall be submitted for review by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of grading permit. Resolution No. 923 -4- 1 1 1 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 permit and shall be retained with the City for not less than two years after landscape installation. After the two- year period, upon the request of the applicant, the retained bond will be released by the City Manager after the City Manager or his designee determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. Q. The proposed wall in the rear yard setback shall not exceed three feet in height, in conformance with the Variance approval. R. During construction, any soil disturbance shall preserve the existing topography, flora, and natural features to the greatest extent possible. S. During construction, conformance with the air quality management 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. T. 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 minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control stormwater pollution as required by the County of Los Angeles. U. 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. V. 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. W. 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. X. 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 stormwater drainage and run-off facilities. Y. 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. Z. A drainage plan system shall be approved by the Planning Department and County District Engineer. Any water from any site irrigation systems and all drainage from the site shall be conveyed in an approved manner. AA. All utility lines shall be placed underground. The roof material for the new residence and future stable shall comply with the City of Rolling Hills Building Code requirements. The development shall comply with the City of Rolling Hills Outdoor Lighting requirements. AB. The applicants shall pay all of the applicable Los Angeles County Building and Safety and Public Works Department fees, including Parks and Recreation Fees for new residence. AC. A detailed drainage plan and grading plan that conforms to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission shall be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review and approval. AD. 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 "E". Resolution No. 923 -5- AE. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit. AF. The driveway access to the property shall be from Eastfield Drive. The construction of the driveway shall comply with the requirements of the Traffic Commission. AG. Until the applicant executes an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of the Variances and Site Plan Review approvals, as required by Section 17.42.070 of the Municipal Code, the approvals shall not be effective. AH. All conditions of the Variances and Site Plan approvals that apply shall be complied with prior to the issuance of a building permit from the County of Los Angeles. Al. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project or any future construction, 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 23rd DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2002. Y FRA K E. HI, MAYOR PRO-TEEM LL ATTEST: MARILYN kERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) �� CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 923 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO PERMIT GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND A FUTURE STABLE AND GRANTING VARIANCES TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA OF THE LOT AND TO PERMIT ENCROACHMENT OF A RETAINING WALL INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 645, AT 20 EASTFIELD DRIVE, (LOT 83 -EF) (DYER). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on September 23, 2002, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Councilmembers Heinsheimer, Pernell and Mayor Pro Tem Hill. NOES: None. ABSENT: Mayor Lay. ABSTAIN: Councilmember Murdock. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. DEPUTY CITY CLERK Resolution No. 923 -6- 1 1 1 Resolution No. 924 RESOLUTION NO. 924 NOT ADOPTED -1-