Loading...
2017-21 RESOLUTION NO.2017-21 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DENYING A REQUEST FOR MODIFICATIONS OF THE HEIGHT AND ROOF TYPE OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ADDITION TO AND MAJOR REMODEL OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESTDENCE AT 24 CINCHRING ROAD (LOT 1$-3-CH), IN ZONING CA�E NO. 932, {NAKAMURA). TI� PLANNING COMNIIS5ION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr, and Mrs. Takahashi Nakamura (collectively referred to as "Applicants") with respect�o real property located at 24 Cinchxing Road, {Lot �S-3-CH), Rolling I�ills, requesting modificafions to a previously appraved additian and ma�or remodel to a single- family residence in order to alter the roof type thereon and to deviate fron� the approved ridge height elevation af the residence by two feet. (Hereinafter collectively referred to as "Modifications."} The construction o£ the addition/remodel of the single-£amily residence is substantially completed and the current ridge height elevation is 3-feet above the previously approved height. The Applicants now propose to lower the ridge height elevation by one foot and to replace the previously proposed hip roof with a Dutch gable roof. Because the development standards meet the Ci�s requirements, no variances are required �elative to the Applicants' request. Section 2. The proposed Modifications are tlie result of the Applicants' atfempts to compiy with a pending code enforcexnent case. In the summer of 2015, �.�ring construction of the additio� and major rem.odel, the City began to receive inquiries from residents regarding the excessive height of the residence. By the fall of 2015, officials with the City and the Los Angeles County Building Deparhnent inspected the praperty and deemed the height af the residence {at 920.25 ft.) to be noncampliant with the previously approved plans {which reflected a ridge height elevation of 917.25 ft.). In order to bring the structure into compliance, the Applicants would either have ta Iowe:r the roofline to 9�7.25 ft. or apply to the Planning Commission£ox a modification to allow the hezght of the structure to remain at 92Q.25 ft. On September 1, 2017, the Applicants filed for a Site Plan Review for modifications to Iower the roofline to 919.25 ft. {fwa feet higher than approved); although the single-family residence addition has been substantially comple�ed and was constructed to a height which is three feet higher than was approved. The modification request also cal�s for changing out the roof type,which generally is associated with greater massing of structures. Resolution 2017-21,24 Cinchring 1 Section 3. The Planning Commission's conszderation of the application €or the proposed Modifications was conducted at several duly noticed public hearings; on September 19, 2017, and October 17, 2017. T'he Commission also conducted a no�iced public field trip visit to the site on October 17, 2017. The Applicants were notified of the public hearings in wri#ing. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affec�ing said proposal and from members of the Ci.ty staff and the Planning Cornmission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal. The Applicants and their representative were in attendance at the hearings. Section 4. The Planri.ing Commission finds that the project quali£ies as a Class 3 Exemption [State CEQA Guidelines, Sec�ion 15303] and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review und�r the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 5. Sections 17.46.020, 17.46.040 and 17.46.070 provide that the City Manager or designee may, without site plan review, approve certain modifications as an administ-rative item and shall not require public hearing ar notice. The proposed Modifications would normally not require a Site P�an Review; however, due ta the restriction placed in Resolution No. 20Q9-06 on any future development or modifica�ions to approved project on the subject property, a Site Plan Review is required. Condition AN of Resolution No. 2009- 06 states: "Notwifhstandi.ng Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.07Q of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any rnad'x�ication to this pro�ect or the p�operfiy, which would constitute additional structural developxr�ent, grading or addi�ional excavation of dirt and any modification incltading, l�ut �n� �im�#ecl to retaining walls, drainage devices, pad elevation, pool construction and any other deviation from fhe approved plana, shall require the �iling of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission." (Emphasis added.) Section 6. With regard to the Site Plan Review application the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed Modifications neither comply nor are consistent vvzth the goals and policies of the general plan. The proposed Modifications do not conform with the Cit-�s goal of low-profile, ranch style homes because the proposed ridge height elevation and roof type would add massing to �he previously approved addi�ion; would add bulk to the already app�oved single�family residence; and do not preserve viewscapes from adjacent residences. Resolution 2017-21,24 Cinchring 2 B. The px�oposed Modifica�ions are not harmanious in scale and mass with the site and the natu.ral terrain. The proposed Modifications do not conform with the City's goal of low-profile, ranch style homes because the proposed ridge height elevation and roof type would add massing to the previously approved addition; would add bulk to the already approved single-family residence; and do not preserve viewscapes from adJacent residences. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Cor�unission hereby denies the application in Zoning Case No. 923 for height and roof modification of a previously approved project, as shown on an approved development plan stamp dated at the LA County Building and Safefy Department on May 8, 2014. Section 8. The Applicant's unpermitted construction of higher than approved structure constitutes a Building Cade viola�ion. Sta.ff i.s directed to require the Applicants to bring the height of the residence into compliance with �he plan which was previously approved. Therefore, the Applicants shall undertake the following actions: A. Within three montlls of this Resolution, {unless the project is appealed or the City Council takes the project under jurisdiction) the Applicants shall renew aII construction permits through the LA County Building and Safety Deparhnent for fhis project and commence demolition of the illegal construction. B. Within five months of this Resolution the Applicants shall commence the construction of the pxoject in compliance with �he approved plans and commence g�ading activity for the previously approved detached garage/recreation room and access thereto per the specifications ou�lined in Resolution No. 2009-Ob. C. Within seven months o# this Resolution the Applicants shall obtain a building permit for the construction of the previously approved detached garage/xecrea�ion room and access thereto per the specification outlined in Resolution No. 2009-06. D. Within twelve mor�ths of this Resolution the project, including the garage/recreation room structures shall be substantiaily completed per fihe specificatio:ns ou�lined in Resolution No. 2009-06, including the driveway to the garage. At that fime the consfruction fence shall be removed from the premises together with any unnecessary and unused construction materials, green waste or other debris. Reso2utiott 2Q17-21,24 CincIiri[tg 3 E. W�thin fifteen months of this Resolution the project shall be totally completed, including the garage/recreation raom sts-ucture. Prior to receiving a final inspection or a certxficate of occupancy from the Los Angeles County Building and Safety Department both structures, (residence and fihe mixed use) and the driveways sha11 be completed and fixlly functional. F. Prior to obtaining final inspection or a certificafe of occupancy, certification of the ridge height of the residence, prepared by a licensed civil or structural engineer, shall be submitted to City staff and the LA County Building and Safety Department to ascertain fhat the completed project is in compliance with the approved p1ans. G. A11 conditi.ons of Resolution No. 2009-Q6 approved for the garage/recreation room strucfure shall be complied with and be implemented prior to fhe Applicants being grarited a final inspection or a certificate of occupancy£or the project. H. The hi.ghest ridgeline of the house shall be not higher than the 917.2�' elevation, as shown on the approved plans. This specified height of the ridgeline includes the finished roof, not the sheeting of the roof. Prior to placing the finished material on the roof, the ridgeline shall be cerfified by a certified civil or structural engineer; i� add'ztion, following the completion of the roof the final roof ridgeline shall be certified. I. A one-year time extension from the effective date of this Aesolution may be granted by the Pla.nning Commission to complete the project provided the applicant� filc an application with City staf€ on o� beiore the date of expiration of the required act�ons and 'zf the Planning Comxnission finds that that the expiration would constitute an undue hardship upon the property owner and that the continuation would not be materially detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the public. Section 9. The Pianning Commission further finds that �he correction.� specified in Section 8 of this Resolution are of great importance and are necessary to promote the health and safety of the residents of Rolling Hills, and therefore, the Plaruiing Commission resolve that said correctians shall be made withisi the time frame specified in Section 8 above. Section 10. The City or the Building Department staff may require that a constrvction fence be erected for the duration o£ the construction o£ thi.s project. Such fence shall not be Iocated in any easement or cross over trails or natural Resolution 2017-21,24 Cinchring 4 drainage course and shall be removed imr�iediately upon substantial comple�ion of the praject, or as required by staff. Secfion 1�. Prior to recammencing the work,the applicants shall execute and record an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Resolu�ion in the County Recorders Office. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 19th DAY OF DECEMB 2017. � a'� /r� fF� � f �� �y.� :� D LF,CHATR� AN / ATTEST: TTE HALL INTERIM CITY CLERK Any action challenging the final decision of fihe City made as a result of the public hearing on this app�.ication must be filed wifhin the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.07Q of the Rolling Hi11s Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Secti.on 1094.6. Resolution 2017-21,24 Cinchring 5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF L4S ANGELES ) §� CTTY OF R4LLING HILLS) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2Q17-21 entitled: A RESOLUTIOIV O� THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DENYING A REQUEST FOR MODIFICATIONS OF THE HEIGHT AND ROO� TYPE 4F A PREVZOUSLY APPROVED ADDITiON T4 AND MAJ4R REM4DEL OP A SZNGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE AT 24 CINCHRING ROAD (LOT 18-3-CH}, IN ZONING CASE NO. 932, (NAKAMURA). was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Comrnission on December 19, 2017 by�he following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Cardenas,Cooley, Kirkpatrick,Seaburn and Chair Chelf. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of Caiifornia was posted at the following: Adn�ulisirative Offices. � `� � . — �. - - - YVETTE HALL, INTERIM CITY CLERK ResoIution 2017-21,24 Cinchring 6