Agenda packet — Rolling Hills City Council, October 28, 2024 (part 1 of 3)

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ROLL CALL

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

4. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/ANNOUNCEMENTS

5. APPROVE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
This is the appropriate time for the Mayor or Councilmembers to approve the agenda as is or reorder.

6. BLUE FOLDER ITEMS (SUPPLEMENTAL)
Blue folder (supplemental) items are additional back up materials to administrative reports, changes to the posted agenda packet, and/or public comments received after the printing and distribution of the agenda packet for receive and file.

6.A. FOR BLUE FOLDER DOCUMENTS APPROVED AT THE CITY COUNCIL

MEETING
RECOMMENDATION: Approved

7. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
This is the appropriate time for members of the public to make comments regarding itemsnot listed on this agenda.

Pursuant to the Brown Act, no action will take place on any items not on the agenda.

8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Business items, except those formally noticed for public hearing, or those pulled for discussion are assigned to the Consent Calendar. The Mayor or any Councilmember may request that any Consent Calendar item(s) be removed, 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
(310) 377-1521
AGENDA
Regular City Council Meeting

CITY COUNCIL
Monday, October 28, 2024

CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
7:00 PM
The meeting agenda is available on the City’s website. The City Council meeting will be live-streamed on the City’s website.

Both the agenda and the live-streamed video can be found here:
https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php Members of the public may submit written comments in real-time by emailing the City Clerk’s office at [email protected].

Your comments will become part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name, but please do not provide any other personal information that you do not want to be published.

Recordings to City Council meetings can be found here: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php Next Resolution No. 1383 Next Ordinance No. 385
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item13A.pdf
1 discussed, and acted upon separately. Items removed from the Consent Calendar will be taken up under the "Excluded Consent Calendar" section below. Those items remaining on the Consent Calendar will be approved in one motion. The Mayor will call on anyone wishing to address the City Council on any Consent Calendar item on the agenda, which has not been pulled by Councilmembers for discussion.

8.A. APPROVE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2024
RECOMMENDATION: Approve.

8.B. APPROVE MOTION TO READ BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE FURTHER

READING OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS LISTED ON THE AGENDA
RECOMMENDATION: Approve.

8.C. APPROVE THE FOLLOWING CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: OCTOBER 14, 2024

REGULAR MEETING
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.

8.D. PAYMENT OF BILLS
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.

8.E. REPUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLING TONNAGE AND COMPLAINT REPORTS FOR SEPTEMBER 2024
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.

9. EXCLUDED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS

10. COMMISSION ITEMS

10.A. ZONING CASE 24-063: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE TO

CONSTRUCT SOLAR BATTERIES AND RELATED EQUIPMENT IN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18 EASTFIELD DRIVE, AND

FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 69-A-EF) (RICH)
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file the Planning Commission's decision to adopt Resolution No. 2024-12 approving the project.

CL_AGN_241028_CC_AffidavitofPosting.pdf
CL_MIN_241014_CC_F.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_PaymentOfBills_E.pdf
VC_REP_241021_September_TonnageReport.pdf
VC_REP_241021_September_C&D_Report.pdf
VC_REP_241021_September_RedTagReport.pdf
VC_REP_241021_September_RedTag_CityList.pdf
VC_REP_241021_September_CallLog_Redacted.pdf
VC_REP_241021_September_City_ComplaintList_Redacted.pdf Attachment 1: CL_PBN_240917_PH_RadiusMap_PC_18EastfieldDr_ZC24-063.pdf Attachment 2: PL_ADR_18EastfieldDr_240917_Development_Table.pdf Attachment 3: 2024-12_PC_Resolution_18EastfieldDr_ZC24-063_F.pdf Attachment 4: 2022-05_PC_Resolution_18EastfieldDr_ZC 21-16_E.pdf Attachment 5: Previously Approved Resolutions - 18 Eastfield Dr.pdf Attachment 6: PL_ADR_18EastfieldDr_ZC24-005_SolarPanels_240614_Revised_Plans.pdf 2 11. PUBLIC HEARINGS

11.A. ZONING CASE NO. 23-070: SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEVELOP A VACANT LOT

INCLUDING NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW

SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, AND FINDING THE

PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA)
RECOMMENDATION: Open the public hearing, take public testimony, and adopt Resolution No. 1376 approving the Project (Attachment 3A).

23.pdf
Attachment 8: PL_ADR_240612_23CrestRdE_ZC23-
070_TechRep_GeotechnicalReport.pdf
Attachment 9: PL_ADR_241002_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_TechRep_HydrologyReport.pdf Attachment 10A: CL_PBN_241014_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Proof_Affidavit.pdf Attachment 10B: CL_PBN_240812_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Affidavit.pdf Attachment 11: 22324_CIVIL PLANNING SET_10.02.24.pdf
Attachment 12: Drawing_SitePlanComparison_2024-10-02.pdf Attachment 13A: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P1p.pdf
Attachment 13B: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P2p.pdf
Attachment 13C: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P3.pdf
Attachment 13D: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P4.pdf
Attachment 14: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Civil_CityCouncil_10.14.24.pdf 3 12. OLD BUSINESS

12.A. UPDATE ON THE CITY HALL ADA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND PACIFIC ARCHITECTURE AND ENGINEERING'S INC. (PAE) REQUEST FOR

ADDITIONAL BUDGET TO COMPLETE RESPONSES TO PLAN REVIEW
COMMENTS; ADOPT BY RESOLUTION NO. 1379 AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO APPROPRIATE $4,000.00 IN

THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND FUNDED FROM A TRANSFER FROM

GENERAL FUND RESERVES AND APPROVE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO

PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH PAE COVERING ADDITIONAL

SERVICES FOR THE CITY HALL ADA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. Approve as presented.

13. NEW BUSINESS

13.A. APPROVE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

AGREEMENT WITH WILLDAN ENGINEERING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL

SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICES FOR THE CITY ON AN ON-CALL BASIS
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.

13.B. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 1382 AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO INCREASE APPROPRIATIONS BY $23,485.40 IN

THE GENERAL FUND REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE ACCOUNT FUNDED

FROM AVAILABLE GENERAL FUND RESERVES FOR EMERGENCY

PLUMBING REPAIRS RELATED TO EXTERIOR WATER MAIN LEAKS ON THE

CITY HALL CAMPUS
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented

14. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL
Attachment 15: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Landscape_CityCouncil_2024-10-

14.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment01_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment02_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment03_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment04_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment05_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment06_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment07_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment08_Redacted.pdf
ResolutionNo1379_CityHallADA_PAE_BudgetAmendment_F.pdf
CA_AGR_240909_PAE_5thAmendment_F.pdf
CA_AGR_240827_PAE_5A_ScopeChange_Proposal.pdf
CL_AGN_240909_CC_Item12A_PublicComment01.pdf
Attachment A - CA_AGR_241028_WIlldan_Amendment05_F.pdf
Attachment B - CA_AGR_080114_Willdan_E.pdf
Attachment C - CA_AGR_100114_Willdan_Amendment01_E.pdf
Attachment D - CA_AGR_120629_Willdan_Amendment02_E.pdf
Attachment E - CA_AGR_150114_Willdan_Amendment03_E.pdf
Attachment F - CA_AGR_240325_WIlldan_Amendment04_F_A_E.pdf ResolutionNo1382_WaterMainRepair_BudgetAmendment_F.pdf
4 15. MATTERS FROM STAFF

15.A. RECEIVE AND FILE FIRE FUEL ABATEMENT AND CODE ENFORCEMENT QUARTERLY REPORT FOR THE THIRD QUARTER OF 2024 (JULY 1 TO SEPTEMBER 30)
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.

15.B. RECEIVE AND FILE A PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS UPDATE
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.

15.C. RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND TRAFFIC COMMISSION TERMS EXPIRING ON JANUARY 1, 2025
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.

16. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION

16.A. EXISTING LITIGATION - GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(D)(1)THE

CITY FINDS, BASED ON ADVICE FROM LEGAL COUNSEL, THAT DISCUSSION

IN OPEN SESSION WILL PREJUDICE THE POSITION OF THE CITY IN THE LITIGATION. (1 CASE) a. NAME OF CASE: CONNIE ANDERSEN, ET AL. V.

CALIFORNIA WATER COMPANY, ET AL. (SEAVIEW CASE) CASE NO.:
24STCV20953
RECOMMENDATION: None.

16.B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 (TWO CASES) CPUC COMPLAINTS

AGAINST SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON AND SOCAL GAS
RECOMMENDATION: None.

16.C. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957 (B)(1) TITLE: CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: None.

17. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION

18. ADJOURNMENT
Next adjourned regular meeting: Tuesday, November 12, 2024, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, Attachment 1: CE_QRP_2024_Q3_241022_CC_CE_OpenedCases.pdf Attachment 2: CE_QRP_2024_Q3_241010_CC_CE_ClosedCases.pdf Attachment 3: CE_QRP_2024_Q3_241022_CC_CE_AllOpenCases.pdf Attachment A - CL_AGN_240909_CC_Item15B.pdf
Attachment B - CL_AGN_240909_CC_Item15B_Letter_SCG_09-13-24.pdf Attachment C - CL_AGN_240914_CC_Item15B_SCG_ ResponseLetter.pdf Attachment D - CL_AGN_240926_CC_Item15B_Letter_SupevisorHahn.pdf Attachment E - CL_AGN_240926_CC_Item15B_CongressionalFEMA_Letter.pdf Attachment A - CL_AGN_241028_CC_TentativeCommissionerAppointment_Timeline.pdf Attachment B - CL_AGN_241028_CC_PC-Appt_Posting.pdf
Attachment C - CL_AGN_241028_CC_TC-Appt_Posting.pdf
5 California, 90274.

Notice:

Public Comment is welcome on any item prior to City Council action on the item.

Documents pertaining to an agenda item received after the posting of the agenda are available for review in the City Clerk's office or at the meeting at which the item will be considered.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting due to your disability, please contact the City Clerk at (310) 377-1521 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and accommodation for your review of this agenda and attendance at this meeting. 6 Agenda Item No.: 6.A
Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO

CITY MANAGER
THRU: KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: FOR BLUE FOLDER DOCUMENTS APPROVED AT THE CITY COUNCIL

MEETING
DATE: October 28, 2024
BACKGROUND:

None.

DISCUSSION:

None.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approved.

ATTACHMENTS:

CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item13A.pdf
7 BLUE FOLDER ITEM (SUPPLEMENTAL)
Blue folder (supplemental) items are additional back up materials to administrative reports, changes to the posted agenda packet, and/or public comments received after the printing and distribution of the agenda packet for receive and file.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
October 28, 2024
11A. ZONING CASE NO. 23-070: SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEVELOP A VACANT LOT

INCLUDING NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW

SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, AND FINDING THE PROJECT

CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA)
FROM: CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK/EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE CITY

MANAGER
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment01_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment02_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment03_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment04_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment05_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment06_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment07_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment08_Redacted.pdf
8 BLUE FOLDER ITEM (SUPPLEMENTAL)
Blue folder (supplemental) items are additional back up materials to administrative reports, changes to the posted agenda packet, and/or public comments received after the printing and distribution of the agenda packet for receive and file.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
October 28, 2024
13A. APPROVE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT

WITH WILLDAN ENGINEERING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENTAL

SERVICES FOR THE CITY ON AN ON-CALL BASIS
FROM: CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK/EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO THE CITY

MANAGER
CA_AGR_241028_WIlldan_Amendment05_F.pdf
9 Agenda Item No.: 8.A
Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO

CITY MANAGER
THRU: KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: APPROVE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2024
DATE: October 28, 2024
BACKGROUND:

None.

DISCUSSION:

None.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve.

ATTACHMENTS:

CL_AGN_241028_CC_AffidavitofPosting.pdf
10 Administrative Report

8.A., File # 2506 Meeting Date: 10/28/2024
To: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
From: Christian Horvath, City Clerk
TITLE

APPROVE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 28, 2024

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS

CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )

AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING
In compliance with the Brown Act, the following materials have been posted at the locations below.

Legislative Body City Council
Posting Type Adjourned Regular Meeting Agenda
Posting Location 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA 90274 City Hall Window
City Website: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/city_council/city_council_archive_agendas/index.php Meeting Date & Time OCTOBER 28, 2024 7:00pm Open Session As City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills, I declare under penalty of perjury, the document noted above was posted at the date displayed below.

Christian Horvath, City Clerk
Date: October 25, 2024
11 Agenda Item No.: 8.B
Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO

CITY MANAGER
THRU: KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: APPROVE MOTION TO READ BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE FURTHER

READING OF ALL ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS LISTED ON THE AGENDA
DATE: October 28, 2024
BACKGROUND:

None.

DISCUSSION:

None.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve.

ATTACHMENTS:
12 Agenda Item No.: 8.C
Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO

CITY MANAGER
THRU: KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: APPROVE THE FOLLOWING CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: OCTOBER 14, 2024 REGULAR MEETING
DATE: October 28, 2024
BACKGROUND:

None.

DISCUSSION:

None.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve as presented.

ATTACHMENTS:

CL_MIN_241014_CC_F.pdf
13 MINUTES – CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, October 14, 2024

Page 1 ends

Minutes
Rolling Hills City Council
Monday, October 14, 2024
Regular Meeting 7:00 p.m.

1. CALL TO ORDER
The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills met in person on the above date at 7:01 p.m. Mayor Mirsch presiding.

2. ROLL CALL
Councilmembers Present: Wilson, Black, Pieper, Mayor Mirsch Councilmembers Absent: Dieringer
Staff Present: Karina Bañales, City Manager
Christian Horvath, City Clerk / Executive Assistant to the City Manager John Signo, Planning & Community Services Director
Pat Donegan, City Attorney

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Councilmember Wilson

4. PRESENTATIONS / PROCLAMATIONS / ANNOUNCEMENTS – NONE

5. APPROVE ORDER OF THE AGENDA
Mayor Mirsch requested moving Item 13A ahead of Item 11A. Without objection, so ordered.

6. BLUE FOLDER ITEMS (SUPPLEMENTAL)
Motion by Mayor Mirsch, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Pieper to receive and file Blue Folder Item 11A.

Motion carried unanimously with the following vote:

AYES: Wilson, Black, Pieper, Mayor Mirsch
NOES: None
ABSENT: Dieringer

7. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
Public Comment: Alfred Visco

8. CONSENT CALENDAR

8.A. APPROVE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 14, 2024

8.B. APPROVE MOTION TO READ BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE FURTHER READING OF ALL

ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS LISTED ON THE AGENDA

8.C. APPROVE THE FOLLOWING CITY COUNCIL MINUTES: SEPTEMBER 23, 2024 REGULAR

MEETING

8.D. PAYMENT OF BILLS
14 MINUTES – CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, October 14, 2024

Page 2 ends

8.E. APPROVE A LIGHT POLE IN FRONT OF THE MAIN GATEHOUSE ON PORTUGUESE BEND

ROAD AND IN FRONT OF THE GATEHOUSE ON CREST ROAD WEST ON THE RANCHO DEL

MAR SCHOOL PROPERTY

8.F. PULLED BY MAYOR PRO TEM PIEPER
Motion by Councilmember Black, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Pieper to approve the Consent Calendar except for Item 8F. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote:

AYES: Wilson, Black, Pieper, Mayor Mirsch
NOES: None
ABSENT: Dieringer

9. EXCLUDED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS

8.F. ZONING CASE NO. 24-073: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL TO ENLARGE AND MOVE A DRIVEWAY APRON APPROXIMATELY 10 FEET ON A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 10 CREST ROAD WEST (LOT 2-CH), ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (FRYKMAN), AND DETERMINING THE

PROJECT EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT Motion by Councilmember Black, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Pieper to approve as presented. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote:

AYES: Wilson, Black, Pieper, Mayor Mirsch
NOES: None
ABSENT: Dieringer

10. COMMISSION ITEMS – NONE
Mayor Mirsch moved to Item 13A.

13. NEW BUSINESS

13.A. RECEIVE AND FILE PRELIMINARY YEAR END RESULTS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2024
Presentation by Finance Operations Lead Consultant Robert Samario Councilmember Dieringer arrived at 7:12 p.m.

Motion by Councilmember Black, seconded by Councilmember Dieringer to receive and file. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote:

AYES: Wilson, Black, Dieringer, Pieper, Mayor Mirsch
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Mayor Mirsch moved to Item 11A.

11. PUBLIC HEARINGS
15 MINUTES – CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, October 14, 2024

Page 3 ends

11.A. ZONING CASE NO. 23-070: SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEVELOP A VACANT LOT INCLUDING

NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST,

AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA)
Presentation by Planning & Community Services Director John Signo Applicant presentations: Frank Escher, Principal, Escher GuneWardena Architecture Dave Hamilton, Geotechnical Engineer, Hamilton and Associates Eirik Haenschke, Geologist, Hamilton and Associates
Kevin Poffenbarger, Engineer, EPD Consultants
David Godshall, Landscape Architect, Terremoto
Allan Rigg, Engineer, Rigg Consulting
Yuki Ogasawara, Applicant
LA County Building & Safety: Mike Dorta
Public Comment: John Mackenbach, Heidi Mackenbach, Alfred Visco, Dustin McNabb, Melissa McNabb, Ann Bellis, Charlie Raine, Kathleen Hughes, Jim Partridge Motion by Councilmember Dieringer, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Pieper to continue the public hearing to the regularly scheduled October 28, 2024 City Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote:

AYES: Wilson, Black, Dieringer, Pieper, Mayor Mirsch
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

12. OLD BUSINESS

12.A. UPDATE ON THE CITY HALL ADA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AND PACIFIC ARCHITECTURE AND ENGINEERING'S INC. (PAE) REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL BUDGET TO COMPLETE RESPONSES TO PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS; ADOPT BY RESOLUTION NO. 1379 AUTHORIZING A FISCAL YEAR 2024-2025 BUDGET MODIFICATION TO APPROPRIATE $4,000.00 IN THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND FUNDED FROM A TRANSFER FROM GENERAL

FUND RESERVES AND APPROVE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

AGREEMENT WITH PAE COVERING ADDITIONAL SERVICES FOR THE CITY HALL ADA

IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
The City Council continued this item to the next meeting.

14. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL – NONE

15. MATTERS FROM STAFF

15.A. REVIEW AND APPROVE THE 2024 HOLIDAY OPEN HOUSE FINAL GUEST LIST Presentation by City Clerk / Executive Assistant to the City Manager Christian Horvath Public Comment: Jim Aichele
16 MINUTES – CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Monday, October 14, 2024

Page 4 ends

Motion by Councilmember Dieringer, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Pieper to approve the list as is but remove “and staff” where currently denoted. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote:

AYES: Wilson, Black, Dieringer, Pieper, Mayor Mirsch
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

16. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION
The City Council continued the following items to the next meeting.

16.A. EXISTING LITIGATION - GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(D)(1)THE CITY FINDS,

BASED ON ADVICE FROM LEGAL COUNSEL, THAT DISCUSSION IN OPEN SESSION WILL PREJUDICE THE POSITION OF THE CITY IN THE LITIGATION. (1 CASE) a. NAME OF CASE:

CONNIE ANDERSEN, ET AL. V. CALIFORNIA WATER COMPANY, ET AL. (SEAVIEW CASE) CASE NO.: 24STCV20953

16.B. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - EXISTING LITIGATION GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9 (2 CASES) CPUC COMPLAINTS AGAINST SOTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON

AND SOCAL GAS

17. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION

18. ADJOURNMENT: 11:54 P.M.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:54 p.m. on September 23, 2024. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, October 28, 2024 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. It will also be available via City’s website link at: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php All written comments submitted are included in the record and available for public review on the City website.

Respectfully submitted,
____________________________________
Christian Horvath, City Clerk
Approved,
____________________________________
Leah Mirsch, Mayor
17 Agenda Item No.: 8.D
Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO

CITY MANAGER
THRU: KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: PAYMENT OF BILLS
DATE: October 28, 2024
BACKGROUND:

None.

DISCUSSION:

None.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve as presented.

ATTACHMENTS:

CL_AGN_241028_CC_PaymentOfBills_E.pdf
18 19
20 21
Agenda Item No.: 8.E
Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK / EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT TO

CITY MANAGER
THRU: KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: REPUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLING TONNAGE AND COMPLAINT REPORTS FOR SEPTEMBER 2024
DATE: October 28, 2024
BACKGROUND:

As requested, Republic Services has provided the following clarifications to their reports:

Non-franchise means any business not covered under the City’s Franchise Agreement with Republic Services – for instance, temporary bins or roll offs for construction or cleanups or permanent dumpsters for horse properties.

The Commercial Recycling is hauled to various transfer facilities. Those facilities separate and recover(recycle) a portion of that material. They provide Republic recovery rates each month that is in turn used for the cities Republic serves.

The Greenwaste on the Non-Franchise report can show up and change for various reasons from month to month. Aspects like changes to the customers service type, load contamination and data entry errors can contribute to this.

DISCUSSION:

None.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

RECOMMENDATION:

Receive and file.

ATTACHMENTS:

VC_REP_241021_September_TonnageReport.pdf
VC_REP_241021_September_C&D_Report.pdf
VC_REP_241021_September_RedTagReport.pdf
VC_REP_241021_September_RedTag_CityList.pdf
VC_REP_241021_September_CallLog_Redacted.pdf
22 VC_REP_241021_September_City_ComplaintList_Redacted.pdf 23 Year 2024
Franchise Y/N Y
Month Commodity Tons Collected Tons Recovered Tons Disposed Diversion % 1 Greenwaste 79.86 79.86 - 100.00%
Trash 247.10 - 247.10 0.00%
1 Total 326.96 79.86 247.10 24.43%
2 Greenwaste 51.72 51.72 - 100.00%
Trash 198.13 - 198.13 0.00%
2 Total 249.85 51.72 198.13 20.70%
3 Greenwaste 53.42 53.42 - 100.00%
Trash 199.60 - 199.60 0.00%
3 Total 253.02 53.42 199.60 21.11%
4 Greenwaste 116.50 116.50 - 100.00%
Trash 183.05 - 183.05 0.00%
Trash - Free Residential Roll Off Bin 3.76 - 3.76 0.00% 4 Total 303.31 116.50 186.81 38.41%
5 Greenwaste 101.62 101.62 - 100.00%
Trash 180.98 - 180.98 0.00%
5 Total 282.60 101.62 180.98 35.96%
6 Greenwaste 83.11 83.11 - 100.00%
Trash 195.05 - 195.05 0.00%
Trash - Free Residential Roll Off Bin 1.10 - 1.10 0.00% Greenwaste - Free Residential Roll Off Bin 2.30 2.30 - 100.00% 6 Total 281.56 85.41 196.15 30.33%
7 Greenwaste 67.20 67.20 - 100.00%
Trash 238.54 - 238.54 0.00%
Greenwaste - Free Residential Roll Off Bin 5.32 5.32 - 100.00% 7 Total 311.06 72.52 238.54 23.31%
8 Greenwaste 75.89 75.89 - 100.00%
Trash 222.41 - 222.41 0.00%
Trash - Free Residential Roll Off Bin 1.62 - 37.45 0.00% 8 Total 299.92 75.89 259.86 25.30%
9 Greenwaste 102.52 102.52 - 100.00%
Recycle 0.79 0.16 0.63 20.35%
Trash 200.89 - 200.89 0.00%
9 Total 304.20 102.68 201.52 33.75%
Grand Total 2,612.48 739.62 1,908.69 28.31%

CITY OF ROLLING HILLS RESIDENTIAL FRANCHISE
2024

Page 1 of 2 ends

Year 2024
Franchise Y/N N
Month Commodity Tons Collected Tons Recovered Tons Disposed Diversion % 1 Greenwaste 19.61 19.61 - 100.00%
Recycle 0.27 0.04 0.23 15.00%
Trash 59.97 - 59.97 0.00%
Organics 0.16 0.10 0.06 61.71%
C&D 4.27 3.43 0.84 80.24%
1 Total 84.29 23.18 61.11 27.50%
2 Greenwaste 16.94 16.94 - 100.00%
Recycle 0.29 0.11 0.18 37.67%
Trash 57.05 - 57.05 0.00%
C&D 11.29 9.05 2.25 80.10%
2 Total 85.57 26.09 59.47 30.50%
3 Greenwaste 6.42 6.42 - 100.00%
Recycle 0.22 0.08 0.13 38.48%
Trash 35.05 - 35.05 0.00%
3 Total 41.69 6.50 35.19 15.60%
4 Greenwaste 11.07 11.07 - 100.00%
Recycle 0.27 0.11 0.16 40.00%
Trash 46.40 - 46.40 0.00%
4 Total 57.74 11.18 46.56 19.36%
5 Recycle 0.27 0.09 0.19 31.77%
Trash 70.08 - 70.08 0.00%
Organics 0.17 0.12 0.05 70.73%
C&D 11.15 8.95 2.20 80.24%
5 Total 81.68 9.16 72.52 11.21%
6 Greenwaste 11.95 11.95 - 100.00%
Recycle 0.21 0.07 0.13 36.18%
Trash 45.24 - 45.24 0.00%
Organics 0.16 0.12 0.04 73.76%
6 Total 57.56 12.14 45.42 21.09%
7 Greenwaste 8.71 8.71 - 100.00%
Recycle 0.24 0.07 0.16 30.41%
Trash 52.51 - 52.51 0.00%
Organics 0.14 0.10 0.04 70.71%
7 Total 61.59 8.88 52.71 14.42%
8 Greenwaste 0.09 0.09 - 100.00%
Recycle 0.56 0.18 0.38 32.62%
Trash 48.53 - 48.53 0.00%
Organics 0.06 0.05 0.02 71.55%
8 Total 49.25 0.32 48.93 0.65%
9 Greenwaste 1.72 1.72 - 100.00%
Recycle 0.60 0.44 0.16 73.16%
Trash 17.24 - 17.24 0.00%
Organics 0.05 0.04 0.01 80.17%
9 Total 19.61 2.20 17.41 11.19%
Grand Total 538.97 99.64 439.33 18.49%

CITY OF ROLLING HILLS NON-FRANCHISE
2024

Page 2 of 2 ends

Republic Services City of Rolling Hills
C&D Report Reporting Period September-24
Disposal Site Material Loads Taken Tons Collected
No C&D to Report
Summary
Row Labels Sum of Tons Collected
(blank)
Grand Total

Page 1 of 1 ends

Rolling Hills Red Tags – September 2024
Date Address Code Issue COMM
9/4/2024 29 CREST RD E 7 Greenwaste overloaded No
9/16/2024 17 CREST RD E 7 Greenwaste overloaded No
9/17/2024 25 PORTUGUESE BEND RD 7 Greenwaste overloaded No 9/19/2024 11 SADDLEBACK RD 7 Greenwaste overloaded No
27 City of Rolling Hills - September 2024 Red Tag List
Republic Services - Red Tag List
Date of Issue Time Issue Resident Name Resident Address Republic contacted Republic Reponse Date Reponse Time of Reponse Resolved 9/3/2024 Red Tag: Vehicle Blocking Access Way Resident Tanasha Malone 9/4/2024 Red Tag: Excessive Amount of Green Waste Resident Tanasha Malone 9/6/2024 Red Tag: Green Waste Not Properly Bundled Resident Tanasha Malone 9/26/2024 Red Tag: Green Waste Overloaded Resident Tanasha Malone 9/26/2024 Red Tag: Green Waste Too Heavy Resident Tanasha Malone 28 Republic Services Call Log Report
City: Rolling Hills
Year 2024
Month/Quarter 9
Summary of Calls by Type
Final Call
Final Call Type Sub-Type Total

2.Complaint Escalation 5

2.Complaint Total 5

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 9
Missed Yard Waste - Residential 4
Missed Bulk Service 1

3.Missed Pick Up Total 14
Grand Total 19
Pg 1 of 5 29
Republic Services Call Log Report
Final Call Type Sub-Type Case Number Date/Time Opened Date/Time Closed Created
By Request Description Resolution Comments Customer Category Account Number Site Account Name Site Address Phone

2.Complaint Escalation 20240906-200823115 9/6/2024 10:00 AM 9/10/2024 11:12 AM
Kris Adams
Alexandra Sermon
called to
report an issue. NOT YET

SERVICED THIS WEEK

NEEDS TO BE

COMPLETED WITH REG
SERVICE. STATED THAT

CITY SENT LETTER

STATING ROAD CLOSED

M ONDAY PLEASE ADV

DRIVER TUESDAY
SERVICED.
reviewed. RESI 9020204638 1

ALEXANDRA
SERMON
15 Upper Blackwater
Cyn Rd Palos Verdes
Peninsula CA

2.Complaint Escalation 20240913-201244846 9/13/2024 7:49 AM 9/17/2024 6:12 AM Tiana Woods
Debra Fornier
called to report an
issue. client advised me
of mpu for yesterday
and needs pick up
sooner than 9/16 as she
has landscapers coming
today if possible pls
contact client if able to
accommodate sooner
pick up .
will pick up 9/17/2024 RESI 9020003487 1

CURRENT

RESIDENT
30 CREST RD E

ROLLING HILLS CA
(000) 000-0000

2.Complaint Escalation 20240917-201465354 9/17/2024 1:03 PM 9/19/2024 5:25 AM Felisha Bell Debra Fornier (
YW has not been
serviced for either
Mondays or Thursdays.

Was missed 9/9, 9/13
and 9/16 andreported
for recovery for Monday
but was not done. Per
esca lation 20240913-
201244846 entered 9/13
and just being updated
today 9/17 on
Recovery 9/19/2024 RESI 9020003487 1

CURRENT

RESIDENT
30 CREST RD E

ROLLING HILLS CA
(000) 000-0000

2.Complaint Escalation 20240928-202155935 9/27/2024 5:02 PM 10/3/2024 9:19 AM Celina Calloway
Kamran Jahangard
called to
report an issue. CX says
driver went 2yrs when
house was under
construction without
servicing because he had
a commercial bin in front
of property. Says he
wants a supervisor to call
him back. .

Re-Assigned to the
supervisor in the area RESI 9020003456 1 RESIDENT
13 WIDELOOP RD

ROLLING HILLS CA
(000) 000-0000

2.Complaint Escalation 20240930-202212452
9/30/2024 10:42
AM
10/1/2024 12:33
PM
Carlos
Bojorquez
Robert Brockway
called to
report an issue. MPU
bulk on 09/27 and
worried miss again for
recovery as its almost
11AM.

Conf Serv RR RESI 9020003618 1

JENNIFER

BROCKWAY
87 EASTFIELD DR

ROLLING HILLS CA
Pg 2 of 5 30
Republic Services Call Log Report
Final Call Type Sub-Type Case Number Date/Time Opened Date/Time Closed Created
By Request Description Resolution Comments Customer Category Account Number Site Account Name Site Address Phone

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Bulk Service 20240927-202149536 9/27/2024 2:49 PM 9/30/2024 10:37 PM
Ebony
Richmond (blank) (blank) RESI 9020003618 1

JENNIFER

BROCKWAY
87 EASTFIELD DR

ROLLING HILLS CA

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240904-200608689 9/3/2024 5:05 PM 9/5/2024 10:35 PM Nikkita Shirley (blank) (blank) RESI 9020204638 1

ALEXANDRA
SERMON
15 Upper Blackwater
Cyn Rd Palos Verdes
Peninsula CA

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240906-200822860 9/6/2024 9:58 AM 9/10/2024 10:37 PM
Kris Adams (blank) (blank) RESI 9020204638 1

ALEXANDRA
SERMON
15 Upper Blackwater
Cyn Rd Palos Verdes
Peninsula CA

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240911-201124800 9/11/2024 12:37
PM
9/13/2024 10:30
PM
Arely
Ramirez
(blank) (blank) RESI 9020204638 1

ALEXANDRA
SERMON
15 Upper Blackwater
Cyn Rd Palos Verdes
Peninsula CA

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240916-201358795 9/16/2024 10:53
AM
9/18/2024 10:31
PM
BOBBIE

GONZALES
(blank) (blank) RESI 9020003607 1

CURRENT

RESIDENT
69 EASTFIELD DR

ROLLING HILLS CA
(000) 000-0000
Pg 3 of 5 31
Republic Services Call Log Report
Final Call Type Sub-Type Case Number Date/Time Opened Date/Time Closed Created
By Request Description Resolution Comments Customer Category Account Number Site Account Name Site Address Phone

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240923-201815963 9/23/2024 2:58 PM 9/25/2024 10:33 PM
Lakeisha
Jones
(blank) (blank) RESI 9020003656 1
NAVAL
BANSAL
12 GEORGEFF RD

ROLLING HILLS CA

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240924-201872556 9/24/2024 10:53
AM
9/26/2024 10:29
PM
Perla
Veronica
Iriarte
Serrano
(blank) (blank) RESI 9020003634 1

CURRENT

RESIDENT
1 FLYING MANE RD

ROLLING HILLS CA
(000) 000-0000

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240927-202155768 9/27/2024 4:56 PM 10/2/2024 10:35 PM
Celina
Calloway (blank) (blank) RESI 9020003456 1 RESIDENT
13 WIDELOOP RD

ROLLING HILLS CA
(000) 000-0000

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240930-202196725 9/30/2024 9:10 AM 9/30/2024 9:11 AM Tiana Charles (blank) (blank) RESI 9020206014 1

ROLLING HILLS

RESIDENT
33 CREST RD E

ROLLING HILLS CA

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Trash - Residential 20240930-202197227 9/30/2024 9:13 AM 10/2/2024 10:35 PM
Tiana
Charles (blank) (blank) RESI 9020206014 1

ROLLING HILLS

RESIDENT
33 CREST RD E

ROLLING HILLS CA
Pg 4 of 5 32
Republic Services Call Log Report
Final Call Type Sub-Type Case Number Date/Time Opened Date/Time Closed Created
By Request Description Resolution Comments Customer Category Account Number Site Account Name Site Address Phone

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Yard Waste - Residential 20240913-201244658 9/13/2024 7:48 AM 9/17/2024 10:24 PM
Tiana
Woods (blank) (blank) RESI 9020003487 1

CURRENT

RESIDENT
30 CREST RD E

ROLLING HILLS CA
(000) 000-0000

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Yard Waste - Residential 20240918-201550323 9/18/2024 2:07 PM 9/20/2024 10:30 PM
Josie
Nunez
(blank) (blank) RESI 9020003187 1

CURRENT

RESIDENT
12 CABALLEROS RD

ROLLING HILLS CA
(000) 000-0000

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Yard Waste - Residential 20240918-201553556 9/18/2024 2:35 PM 9/20/2024 10:30 PM
BOBBIE

GONZALES
(blank) (blank) RESI 9020003074 1

PAT & BILL

GARDNER
16 OUTRIDER RD

ROLLING HILLS CA

3.Missed Pick Up Missed Yard Waste - Residential 20240930-202253325 9/30/2024 3:27 PM 10/2/2024 10:35 PM
Fernando
Ibarra
Duran
(blank) (blank) RESI 9020003711 1
TRACY
HOLMES
10 WILLIAMSBURG LN

ROLLING HILLS CA
Pg 5 of 5 33
City of Rolling Hills Republic Services Complaint List -September 2024 Date of Issue Time Issue/Complaint Resident Name Resident Address Republic contacted Republic Reponse Date Reponse Time of Reponse Resolved 9/5/2024 Missed Greenwaste pickup 19 Southfield Dr.

Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone
9/9/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 16 Southfield Dr. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/10/2024 Missed Greenwaste Pickup 65 Portuguese Bend Rd. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/10/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 12 Cinchring Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/12/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 15 Upper Blackwater Canyon Rd. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/12/2024 Missed Greenwaste Pickup 5 Caballeros Rd. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/13/2024 Missed Greenwaste Pickup 5 Caballeros Rd. Tanaha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/13/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 1 Hummingbird Lane Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/13/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 42 Eastfield Dr. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/16/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 28 Eastfield Dr. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/17/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 42 Eastfield Dr. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/17/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 25 Caballeros Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/17/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 1 Flying Mane Rd. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/17/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 44 Eastfield Dr. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/20/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 37 Crest rd. W. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/20/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 25 Caballeros Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/20/2024 Missed Trash & Green waste Pickup 63 Crest Rd. E. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/20/2024 Missed Trash Pickup 59 Eastfield Dr. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/25/2024 Missed Greenwaste 8 Quailridge Rd. S. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 9/30/2024 Missed Trash and Green waste 33 Crest Rd. E. Tanasha Malone Tanasha Malone 34 Agenda Item No.: 10.A
Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JOHN F. SIGNO, AICP,
THRU: KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:

ZONING CASE 24-063: REQUEST FOR APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE

TO CONSTRUCT SOLAR BATTERIES AND RELATED EQUIPMENT IN
THE SIDE YARD SETBACK FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18

EASTFIELD DRIVE, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY

EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
(CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303
(LOT 69-A-EF) (RICH)
DATE: October 28, 2024
BACKGROUND:

Planning Commission
On September 17, 2024, the Planning Commission held a field trip at the subject property and continued to the evening meeting. Two residents were present during the field trip: Aaron De La Torre (18 Eastfield Drive) and Paul Kinkelaar (2 Roundup Road). Neither had issues with the project. During the evening meeting, there was no one from the public in attendance. The Commission discussed noise, location, and screening, and voted unanimously, 5-0, to approve the project.

Zoning, Location, Lot Description, and History
The property located at 18 Eastfield Drive is zoned RAS-1 and has a net lot area of 68,826 square feet (1.58 acre). On December 17, 1996, the Planning Commission approved a Site Plan Review request for a new single-family residence and other improvements to replace an existing residence on the subject property. On July 21, 1998, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit to construct a cabana and modification to the 1996 Site Plan Review approval for additional grading. On June 14, 2005, the Planning Commission approved a Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a stable and corral, a Conditional Use Permit to convert an existing stable into a recreation room, and a variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area on the lot. On May 17, 2022, the Planning Commission 35 granted approval for a Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a new retaining wall; Conditional Use Permit for a recreational game court; and Variance to exceed the maximum permitted lot disturbance in Zoning Case No. 21-16.

The lot is developed with a 5,265-square-foot single-family residence and a 1,284-square-foot garage. There are three existing building pads on site with approximately 50 50-foot difference in elevation. The highest point is located closest to the roadway easement on the western portion of the property; the lowest portion is located in the eastern portion of the lot near the existing stable and corral. The existing residence and garage are located on Pad 1, which is 26,083 square feet and located closest to the roadway easement; Pad 2 is 12,342 square feet in the middle of the property and contains a swimming pool, pool house, and garden. Pad 3, in the rear portion of the property, is 7,439 square feet and includes a stable, corral, and recreational game court.

DISCUSSION:

Applicant Request
The applicant is requesting a variance to encroach into the required side yard setback in order to construct a project that includes solar batteries and equipment. The project will be located 10 feet from the property line. There will be four batteries, each nine inches wide, three feet high, and two feet long. Distance from the residence to the batteries will be at least 15 feet, which provides adequate access around the residence. The pad area will be approximately 13 feet long by three feet wide, or 39 square feet.

The batteries will connect to new roof-mounted solar panels. Roof-mounted solar panels are approved administratively and not subject to discretionary review. The residence will also be re-roofed which is also approved administratively and not subject to Planning Commission review.

Variance to Encroach into the Side Yard Setback
Certain findings listed in Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC) Section 17.38.050 are required in order to approve a variance. Findings are included in the attached resolution and listed below.

MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE
Area of Disturbance
The location of the solar batteries is landscaped and has already been disturbed. There will be no further site disturbance.

Lot Coverage
The proposed concrete pad will be 39 square feet.
36 Environmental Review
The proposed project has been determined to not have a significant effect on the environment and is categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, which exempts accessory structures including new solar panels and equipment.

Public Participation
Neighbors within a 1,000-foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Daily Breeze on September 6, 2024. The applicants were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail.

CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE

17.38.050 Required Variance findings.

In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings:

1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone;

2. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question;

3. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity;

4. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed;

5. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant;

6. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and

7. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

RECOMMENDATION:

Receive and file the Planning Commission's decision to adopt Resolution No. 2024-12 approving the project.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1: CL_PBN_240917_PH_RadiusMap_PC_18EastfieldDr_ZC24-063.pdf Attachment 2: PL_ADR_18EastfieldDr_240917_Development_Table.pdf Attachment 3: 2024-12_PC_Resolution_18EastfieldDr_ZC24-063_F.pdf Attachment 4: 2022-05_PC_Resolution_18EastfieldDr_ZC 21-16_E.pdf Attachment 5: Previously Approved Resolutions - 18 Eastfield Dr.pdf Attachment 6: PL_ADR_18EastfieldDr_ZC24-005_SolarPanels_240614_Revised_Plans.pdf 37 City of Rolling Hills 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 TITLE VICINITY MAP CASE NO. Zoning Case No. 24-063
Variance
OWNER Rich
ADDRESS 18 Eastfield, Rolling Hills 90274 SITE
38 DEVELOPMENT TABLE – ZONING CASE NO. 24-063
(18 EASTFIELD DRIVE)
Request: Variance to Encroach
Into Side Yard Setback
PAD 1 PAD 2 PAD 3 TOTAL
RAS-1 Zone Setbacks
Front: 50 ft. from front easement line
Side: 20 ft. from side property line
Rear: 50 ft. from rear easement line
Single family
residence,
garage (SF)
Swimming
Pool, Pool
House (SF)
New Stable
and corral (SF)
Pad/Net Lot Area
Existing:
26,083
Proposed:
0 Total:
26,083
Existing:
7,317
Proposed:
5,025
Total:
12,342
Existing:
6,213
Proposed:
1,226
Total:
7,439
68,826
Residence 5,265 5,265
Garage 1,284 1,284
Swimming Pool/Spa 722 722
Pool Equipment 233 233
Proposed Solar Batteries & Equip. 39 39
Stable (min. 450 SF) 479 479
Corral (existing; min. 550 SF) (1,006) (1,006)
Recreation Court 1,697 1,697
Attached Covered Porched 377 353 730
Potting Shed 140 140
Aviary 76 76
Chicken Coop 83 83
Water Features, Etc. 294 294
Other 1,374 1,374
Total Structure Area 8,339 1,548 2,529 12,416
Structural Coverage (20%
maximum)
18%
Grading (balanced on site) None for this project --
Total Flatwork 8,708
Total Structural and Flatwork 21,124
Total Lot Coverage (35%
maximum)

30.7%
Building Pad Coverage
(Policy: 30% maximum)

32.0% 12.5% 29.9%
Disturbed Area (40% maximum; up
to 60% with slopes less than 3:1)
No Change No Change No Change 34,355

49.9%
39 1
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-12

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST TO

CONSTRUCT SOLAR BATTERIES AND EQUIPMENT IN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 24-063 FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18 EASTFIELD DRIVE, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY

EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 69-A-EF) (RICH)

THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. An application was duly filed by Joseph and Christine Rich with respect to real property located at 18 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills (Lot 69-A-EF) requesting a variance to construct solar batteries and equipment approximately 10 feet from the property line within the 20-foot side yard setback.

Section 2. On December 17, 1996, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 96-21 approving a Site Plan Review in Zoning Case No. 546 for the construction of a new single-family residence, and other improvements to replace an existing single-family residence.

On July 21, 1998, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 98-14 approving a Conditional Use Permit for a cabana and modifications to a Site Plan Review application to permit the construction of the cabana with increased grading in Zoning Case No. 579. On June 14, 2005, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2005-18 approving a Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a stable and corral to be reviewed by the Planning Commission; a Conditional Use Permit to convert an existing stable into a recreation room; and a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot in Zoning Case No. 703 of 40% to 48.4%. On May 17, 2022, the Planning Commission granted approval for a Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a new retaining wall; Conditional Use Permit for a recreational game court; and Variance to exceed the maximum permitted lot disturbance in Zoning Case No. 21-16.

Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at its special field trip meeting and its regular meeting on September 17, 2024. Neighbors within 1,000-foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Daily Breeze on September 6, 2024. The applicants were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail and were in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal.

Section 4. The property is zoned RAS-1 and the net lot area excluding the roadway easement is 68,826 square feet (1.58 acre). The lot is developed with a 5,265-square-foot single-family residence and a 1,284-square-foot garage. There are three existing building pads on site with approximately 50 feet difference in elevation. The existing residence and garage are located on the Pad 1 (25,546 square feet), which is the highest point and closest to the roadway easement on the western portion of the property; Pad 2 is 12,017 square feet in the 40 2
middle of the property and contains a courtyard area, swimming pool, and pool house. Pad 3 in on the eastern and rear portion of the lot, is the lowest part on the property, and is 893 square feet; it is developed with a stable, corral, and recreational game court.

Section 5. The Planning Commission finds that the Project is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to Section 15303 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (“State CEQA Guidelines”), Class 3 "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures." Class 3 exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including single family residence and accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Here, the Project involves the construction of solar batteries and equipment on a developed lot within a residential zone.

Accordingly, the Project qualifies for the exemption pursuant to Section 15303.

Further, no exceptions to the exemptions in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply.

Once built, the likelihood of a successive project on this site is low and probability of a cumulative impact is low.
c. Is not marked by unusual circumstances. There is nothing unusual about the construction of solar batteries and equipment in a residential area. In addition, the Project will implement best management practices (BMPs) to prevent erosion and construction pollutants from contacting stormwater.
d. Would not damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway.
e. Is not located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.
f. Would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.

The Planning Commission directs staff to prepare, execute, and file a Notice of Exemption with the Los Angeles County Clerk and the State Clearinghouse within five (5) working days of the Project’s approval and the adoption of this Resolution.

Section 6. Variance. Section 17.38.050 sets forth the required findings for granting a variance to encroach approximately 10 feet from the property line into the required 20-foot side yard setback identified in Section 17.16.120(A). With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows:

A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone.

There are extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property. The lot consists of an unusual lot configuration in that it is deep and slopes downward toward the rear. The site is 41 3
developed with a residence and related improvements and the side yard is the best place to construct the batteries and equipment.

B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in question.

Granting the requested variance to encroach into the required side yard setback is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone in that the site is already developed and the project will be consistent with other properties that have similar ground-mounted equipment.

C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.

Granting a variance to encroach into the required side yard will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity in that the project will be screened and adequately set back from neighboring structures.

Further, the project will be consistent with other development in the area in that other residences are equipped with solar batteries.

D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed.

Granting the requested variance will meet the spirit and intent of this title in that the project will be used for residential purposes and located on a residential lot.

E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant.

The project results in a common amenity enjoyed by many properties throughout the City and the proposed location is the best location since it is screened, not visible from the street, and located in close proximity to the existing electrical panel. The project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the General Plan.

F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities.

Granting a variance for the project will be consistent with the applicable portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan related to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. The project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List.

G. That the variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills.
42 4
Granting the variance to encroach into the required side yard setback will be consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills, which allows and encourages residential uses.

Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves Zoning Case No. 24-063 subject to the following conditions:

A. The Variance approval shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in RHMC Section 17.38.070 of the Zoning Ordinance unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of these sections.

B. If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by this resolution shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse and upon receipt of written notice from the City, all construction work being performed on the subject property shall immediately cease, other than work determined by the City Manager or his/her designee required to cure the violation. The suspension and stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant cures the violation to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his/her designee. In the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her designee’s determination that a violation exists or disputes how the violation must be cured, the Applicant may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular meeting of the City Council for which the agenda has not yet been posted; the Applicant shall be provided written notice of the hearing. The stop work order shall remain in effect during the pendency of the hearing. The City Council shall make a determination as to whether a violation of this Resolution has occurred. If the Council determines that a violation has not occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the Council will lift the suspension and the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has occurred and has not yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a deadline to cure the violation; no construction work shall be performed on the property until and unless the violation is cured by the deadline, other than work designated by the Council to accomplish the cure. If the violation is not cured by the deadline, the Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant’s request or schedule a hearing for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant to Chapter

17.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC).

C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise a variance to such requirement has been approved.

D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file at City Hall and approved by the Planning Commission except as otherwise provided in these conditions. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the approved development plan. All conditions of the Variance approval shall be incorporated into the building permit working drawings, and where applicable complied with prior to issuance of a grading or building permit from the building department.
43 5
The conditions of approval of this Resolution shall be printed onto a separate sheet and included in the building plans submitted to the Building Department for review and shall be kept on site at all times.

Any proposed modifications and/or changes to the approved project, including resulting from field conditions, shall be discussed with staff so that staff can determine whether the modification is minor or major in nature. Minor modifications are subject to approval by the City Manager or his or her designee. Major modifications are subject to approval by the Planning Commissioner after a public hearing. Applicant shall not implement modifications or changes to the approved project without the appropriate approval from the City Manager or designee or the Planning Commission, as required.

E. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to Building and Safety Department for issuance of building and grading permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission.

F. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and all of the conditions set forth herein and the City’s Building Code and Zoning Ordinance.

Further, the person obtaining a building and/or grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith.

G. Structural lot coverage of the lot shall not exceed 12,377 square feet or 18% of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (20% maximum). The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork, shall not exceed 20,835 square feet or

30.3% of the net lot area in conformance with lot coverage limitations (35% maximum).

H. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 49.9%, or 34,355 square feet surface area. Grading, other than preparation for the foundation, is not proposed.

L. The solar batteries and equipment shall be screened from neighboring properties with vegetation or fencing and maintained in good condition at all times. Conduit and wiring shall be underground or concealed in a manner approved by the Planning Director.

M. A minimum of five-foot level path and/or walkway, which does not have to be paved, shall be provided around the entire perimeter of all of structures, or as otherwise required by the Fire Department.

N. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Low Impact Development requirements for storm water management on site (RHMC Chapter 8.32). 44 6
O. Hydrology, soils, geology and other reports, as required by the Building and Public Works Departments, and as may be required by the Building Official, shall be prepared.

P. Prior to issuance of building permit, any new landscaping shall be shown on a landscaping plan and shall meet the requirements of the City. The landscape plan shall be submitted to the City in conformance with Fire Department Fuel Modification requirements, and shall be approved by the City.

Q. The project shall be landscaped, and continually maintained in substantial conformance with the landscaping plan on file. A detailed landscaping plan shall provide that any trees and shrubs used in the landscaping scheme for this project shall be planted in a way that screens the project development from adjacent streets and neighbors, such that shrubs and trees as they mature do not grow into a hedge or impede any neighbors’ views and the plan shall provide that all landscaping be maintained at a height no higher than the roof line of the nearest project structure. In addition, the landscaping plan shall provide for screening of the project with vegetation not to exceed 10 feet in height, and that the vegetation used for screening shall be planted in an off-set manner, so as to prevent it, as it grows from forming a solid hedge. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area, are water-wise and are consistent with the rural character of the community.

Plants listed as high hazardous plants under RHMC Section 8.30.015 are prohibited.

R. The landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, (Chapter 13.18 of the RHMC).

Pursuant to Chapter 8.30 of the RHMC, the property shall at all times be maintained free of dead trees and vegetation.

S. The setback lines and roadway easement lines in the vicinity of the construction for this project shall remain staked throughout the construction. A construction fence may be required.

T. Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and clear of any improvements to advance equestrian use and emergency preparedness for evacuation within the City. Where RHCA has demonstrated authority over the easement, the City’s Planning Director may grant relief from this condition upon satisfactory proof of permission from RHCA and a legitimate showing that there is no need for the condition to advance equestrian uses and emergency preparedness.

U. Minimum of 65% of any construction materials must be recycled or diverted from landfills. The hauler of the materials shall obtain City’s Construction and Demolition permits for waste hauling prior to start of work and provide proper documentation to the City.

V. 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. 45 7
W. During construction, to the extent feasible, all parking shall take place on the project site, on the driveway and, if necessary, any overflow parking may take place within the unimproved roadway easements along adjacent streets, and shall not obstruct neighboring driveways, visibility at intersections or pedestrian and equestrian passage. During construction, to the maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car-pool into the City. To the extent feasible, a minimum of 4’ wide path, from the edge of the roadway pavement, for pedestrian and equestrian passage shall be available and be clear of vehicles, construction materials and equipment at all times.

X. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and relate 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.

Y. Prior to demolition of the existing structures, an investigation shall be conducted for the presence of hazardous chemicals, lead-based paints or products, mercury and asbestos-containing materials (ACMs). If hazardous chemicals, lead-based paints or products, mercury or ACMs are identified, remediation shall be undertaken in compliance with California environmental regulations and policies.

Z. The property owner and/or his/her contractor/applicant shall be responsible for compliance with the no-smoking provisions in the Municipal Code. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at:
http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard_definitions#FIRE. It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions.

AA. The project shall drain in accordance with the City’s drainage requirements.

Drainage dissipaters shall be constructed outside of any easements. The drainage system shall be approved by the Department of Building and Safety. If an above ground swale and/or dissipater is required, it shall be designed in such a manner as not to cross over any equestrian trails or discharge water onto a trail, shall be stained in an earth tone color, and shall be screened from any trail, road and neighbors’ view to the maximum extent practicable, without impairing the function of the drainage system.

AB. 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.

AC. During construction, an Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 2016 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control storm water pollution. 46 8
AD. 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 and septic tank.

AE. The applicant shall pay all of the applicable Building and Safety and Public Works Department fees and Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District fees, if any.

AF. Prior to final inspection of the project, “as graded” and “as constructed” plans and certifications shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Department to ascertain that the completed project is in compliance with the Planning Commission approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the project during construction, shall be depicted on the “as built/as graded” plan.

AG. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of the Site Plan Review approval, or the approval shall not be effective.

AH. All conditions of this Resolution, when applicable, must be complied with prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit from the Building and Safety Department AI. Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 17th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024.

BRAD CHELF, CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST:
____________________________________

CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK
Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. 47 9

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§

CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2024-12 entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST TO

CONSTRUCT SOLAR BATTERIES AND EQUIPMENT IN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 24-063 FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 18 EASTFIELD DRIVE, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY

EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 69-A-EF) (RICH)
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on September 17, 2024, by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:

Administrative Offices.
__________________________________

CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK
48 49
50 51
52 53
54 55
56 57
58 59
60 61
RESOLUTION NO. 2005- 18

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE

CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE

PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A
STABLE AND CORRAL; GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE

PERMIT TO CONVERT AN EXISTING STABLE INTO A
RECREATION ROOM; GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED

THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA OF THE LOT

AND A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR DEVELOPMENT ON A

PROPERTY THAT REQUIRES PLANNING COMMISSION

REVIEW DUE TO EXISTING STRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT

RESTRICTION AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
IN ZONING CASE NO. 703, AT 18 EASTFIELD DRIVE, ( LOT 69- A-EF), ( RICH).

THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. An application has been filed by Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Rich, with respect to real property located at 18 Eastfield Drive, (Lot 69- A-EF), Rolling Hills, requesting a Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a 450 square foot stable with 360 square foot covered porch and a corral, Conditional Use Permit to convert an existing 320 square foot stable into a recreation room, a Variance to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area of the lot and a Site Plan Review for the proposed development on a property that requires Planning Commission review, due to existing structural development restriction approved in 1996 and in 1998. An addition of 446 square feet to the existing basement and modification to the entryway are also proposed.

Section 2. In 1996, the Planning Commission approved a Site Plan Review request for a new single family residence and other improvements to replace an existing residence on subject property. On July 21, 1998, the Planning Commission approved a Conditional Use Permit to construct a cabana and modification to the 1996 Site Plan Review approval for additional grading. Both, the 1996 and 1998 Resolutions of Approval contain a condition that any further development on the property is subject to Planning Commission review and approval.

Section 3 The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the request in Zoning Case No. 703 on April 19, 2005, May 17, 2005 and at a field trip on May 17, 2005. The applicants were notified of the hearings in writing by first class mail. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in said proposal. The Planning Commission heard a report from the City staff and reviewed, analyzed and studied the proposal. The applicants and the applicants' representative were in attendance at the hearings. 06 1316073 62
Section 4. The City staff received a letter from a neighbor objecting to the proposed location of the stable. The Planning Commission reviewed and analyzed the letter and scheduled a visit to view the proposed project from the objecting neighbor' s property. Prior to the field trip, the neighbor submitted a letter recanting her objection and requesting that the field trip to view the project from her property be cancelled.

Section 5. The Planning Commission 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 b 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 for grading for the stable and corral and the restriction placed in 1996 and 1998 on any future development on subject property the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact:

A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, and surrounding uses because the proposed stable complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures, and equestrian uses. The project conforms to Zoning Code setbacks and the grading will be minimal.

B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot. The proposed stable will be constructed on an existing building pad and minimal grading is required. The project is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the stable 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 net lot area exceeds the maximum permitted, the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to properties in the vicinity. The grading for the stable and corral will increase the disturbed lot area by 8.5%, which is minimal.

D. The development plan incorporates existing vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot and the stable will not cause the lot to look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space.
06 1316073 63
E. 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. No new stable access from Outrider Road or Eastifeld Drive is proposed.

F. The proposed project is to construct a stable and corral area of sufficient size that meets all standards for vehicular access thereto in conformance with site plan review requirements.

G. The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.

Section 7. 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 48.4%, the Planning Commission 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, 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. The existing 320 square foot stable is located in proximity to the cabana and swimming pool and is not utilized for a stable. The proposed stable will be located away from the living area" of the lot and will retain an equestrian flavor. The stable will only minimally affect the disturbance of the lot. 328 cubic yards of grading is required for this construction, which includes excavation for a basement. One of the goals of the General Plan is to encourage construction of equestrian uses, which this Variance would accommodate.

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.
16 1316073
64 Section 8. Section 17. 16. 210( A)( 2) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a recreation room under certain conditions, provided the Planning Commission approves a Conditional Use Permit. The applicant is requesting to convert the existing 320 square foot stable into a recreation room.

With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows:

A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the recreation room 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 recreation room 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 conversion will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed recreation room will be located in a cluster with other structures and will promote pad integration. The proposed recreation room is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that it will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors.

C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the recreation room 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 because the 320 square foot size of the recreation room is less than the maximum permitted under the Municipal Code.

E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and 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.
1 F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of Title 17 of the Zoning Code because an adequate area is set -aside for the construction of a stable structure, adjacent corral and access.

Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a 450 square foot stable, a Variance request to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot and a Conditional Use Permit to convert an existing 320 square foot stable into a recreation room, and a Site Plan Review for the total proposed development due to the restriction placed on the previously approved applications for subject property, in accordance with the Q73 6 1316
65 development plan dated March 28, 2005 and marked Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 703 subject to the following conditions:

A. The Site Plan, Variance and Conditional Use Permit approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval if work has not commenced as defined in Sections 17. 38. 070, 17.42. 070 and 17. 46.080 of the Zoning Ordinance, unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of these sections.

B. It is declared and made a condition of the approval, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the City has given the applicants 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 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. This shall include, but not be limited to, the requirements of the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance, Undergrounding of Utilities Ordinance, Roof Covering Ordinance and others.

D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A and dated March 28, 2005, except as otherwise provided in these conditions.

E. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 9, 254 square feet or 14. 8% in conformance with lot coverage limitations.

F. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 20,352 square feet or 32. 6% in conformance with lot coverage limitations.

G. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 30,236 square feet or

48.4% in conformance with the Variance approval.

H. Building pad coverage on the stable pad shall not exceed 25. 6%; including the covered patio. Building pad coverage on the residential building pad shall not exceed 31. 5% including covered porches and 28. 8% not including covered porches.

I. Grading for the stable and excavation for the basement shall not exceed 328 cubic yards of cut and 328 cubic yards of fill and shall be balanced on site.

J. The stable and recreation room shall be screened from adjacent properties. Landscaping shall be designed using mature trees and shrubs so as not to obstruct views from neighboring properties, but to screen these structures 06 1316073 66
on the lot. If trees are to be incorporated into the landscaping scheme, at maturity they shall be no higher than the ridge height of the stable and the recreation room on the lot.

K. The stable and corral shall be located a minimum of twenty- five feet from the rear property line and twenty feet from the side property line.

L. 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.

M. No kitchen or other cooking facilities shall be permitted in the recreation room. No sleeping quarters shall be permitted in the recreation room.

N. The stable shall be used exclusively for keeping permitted domestic animals. Commercial uses are not permitted.

O. 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.

P. During construction, conformance with the Air Quality Management District requirements, stormwater pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices shall be required so that people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, objectionable odors, landslides, mudflows, erosion, or land subsidence.

Q. During and after construction, all soil preparation, drainage, and landscape sprinklers shall protect the building pad from erosion and direct surface water in an approved manner.

R. 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.

S. 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.

T. If any walls are to be incorporated into the design of this project, they shall not be located in any setback nor shall they exceed 3- feet in height. 06 1316073
67 U. The drainage plan system shall be approved by the Planning Department and the County Drainage Engineer and shall assure that any water from any site irrigation systems and all drainage from the site shall be conveyed in an approved manner and shall remain on the property and not cross over any easements.

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 stormwater 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. The project shall be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any permits.

Y. 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.

Z. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46. 020 and 17.46. 070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the property, which would constitute additional structural development or grading, shall require the filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission.

AA. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Variance approvals, pursuant to Sections 17.38.060, 17.42.060 and 17.46. 065 of the Zoning Ordinance, or the approval shall not be effective.

AB. All conditions of this Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit and Variance approval, which apply, must be complied with prior to .the issuance of a building permit from the County of Los Angeles.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14th DAY OF JUNE 2005.

ROG R SbMMER, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:

MARILYN L. KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
06 1316073
68 t

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§

CITY OF ROLLING HILLS)
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2005- 18 entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF

ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A STABLE AND CORRAL; GRANTING

A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO CONVERT AN EXISTING STABLE INTO A RECREATION ROOM; GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE

MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA OF THE LOT AND A SITE PLAN

REVIEW FOR DEVELOPMENT ON A PROPERTY THAT REQUIRES

PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW DUE TO EXISTING STRUCTURAL

DEVELOPMENT RESTRICTION AT AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 703, AT 18 EASTFIELD DRIVE, ( LOT 69- A-EF), ( RICH).
was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission on June 14, 2005 by the following roll call vote:

AYES: Commissioner DeRoy, Hankins, Witte and Chairman Sommer.

NOES: None.

ABSENT: None.

ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:

Administrative Offices.

DEPUTY CITY CLERK
06 1316073
69 RESOLUTION NO. 98- 14

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY

OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT

FOR A CABANA AND APPROVING A REQUEST FOR

MODIFICATIONS TO AN APPROVED SITE PLAN REVIEW

APPLICATION TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CABANA

THAT REQUIRES INCREASED GRADING AT A SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN ZONING CASE NO. 579.

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. and Mrs. Russell Cole Shoemaker with respect to real property located at 18 Eastfield Drive ( Lot 69- A-EF), Rolling Hills requesting a Conditional Use Permit to permit the construction of a cabana and request for Site Plan Review modification to permit the construction of a cabana that requires increased grading at a single family residential development.

Section 2. On December 17, 1996, the Planning Commission approved a request for Site Plan Review application by Resolution No. 96- 21 in Zoning Case No. 546 for the construction of a new single family residence, and other improvements to replace an existing single family residence.

Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on May 19, 1998 and June 16, 1998, and at a field trip visit on June 9, 1998.

Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 3 Exemption ( State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15303( e) . and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act.

Section 5. Section 17. 16. 210( A)( 2) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a Cabana or detached recreation room with a Conditional Use Permit under certain conditions. The applicant is requesting to construct a 220 square foot cabana. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows:

A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the cabana 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 cabana would be located in an area on the property where such use will not change the existing configuration of structures on the lot.

RESOLUTION NO. 98- 14
PAGE 1
98 1701309
f b;:tA- 70
B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and the construction of cabana will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed cabana structure will be 90 feet from the residential structure and is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the cabana will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors.

C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the cabana will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and is located on a 1. 74 acre parcel of property that is adequate in size, shape and topography to accommodate such use.

D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district because the 220 square foot size of the cabana is less than the 800 square foot maximum permitted for similar accessory buildings and the cabana 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 the cabana will be adjacent to the pool.

Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a cabana in accordance with the Development Plan attached hereto in Zoning Case No. 579 subject to the conditions contained in Section 9.

Section 7. Section 17. 46. 010 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code 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 or structure by more than twenty- five percent ( 25%) in any thirty-six month period. In addition, a condition of Resolution No. 96-21 required that any modifications to the project which would constitute additional structural development requires the filing of a new application for Site Plan Review approval by the Planning Commission. The applicant is requesting to modify the approved Site Plan by constructing a cabana that requires increased grading. The applicant' s latest proposal submitted on April 6, 1998, includes additional grading of 85 cubic yards of cut soil and 85 cubic yards of fill soil for a total of 565 cubic yards of cut soil and 565 cubic yards of fill soil. With respect to this request, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact:

RESOLUTION NO. 98- 14
PAGE 2
98 1701309 71
A. The development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed grading together with the other improvements on the property complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project as modified conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage requirements. The lot has* a net square foot area of 62,471 square feet. The residence ( 5,079 sq.ft.), attached garage ( 1, 192 sq.ft.), swimming pool 624 sq. ft.), existing stable ( 320 sq.ft.), service yard ( 96 sq.ft.); and cabana ( 220 sq.ft.) will have 7,531 square feet which constitutes 12. 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 18, 571 square feet which equals 29. 7% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is on a relatively large lot with the proposed structures located away from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development and is similar and compatible with several neighboring developments. The building pad is 26,786 square feet and structural coverage on the building pad is 28. 1%.

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 will flow away from the proposed residence and existing neighboring residences.

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 east side ( rear) of this lot.

D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, the development plan preserves several mature trees and shrubs.

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. The residential and total lot coverage will not exceed the Planning Commission' s established guideline. 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 northerly portions of the property.

F. 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 RESOLUTION NO. 98- 14
PAGE 3
98 1701309
72 irregular -shaped lot. Grading shall be permitted only to restore the natural slope of the property.

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 same driveway to Eastfield Drive for access.

H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review.

Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves a modification to an approved Site Plan Review application to allow the proposed increased grading on the site for a cabana. The modifications are shown on the Development Plan and marked Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 579.

These approved modifications are subject to the conditions contained in Section 9 of this Resolution.

Section 9. The Conditional Use Permit for a cabana approved in Section 6 and the modification to permit the increased grading for the cabana from the amount previously approved in the Site Plan Review application, that is approved in Section 8, as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 579, are subject, to the following list of conditions. These conditions include applicable conditions of approval previously imposed on the Site Plan Review application by Resolution No. 96- 21 on December 17, 1996. To the extent these conditions duplicate prior conditions imposed on this project, the conditions set forth herein shall be considered as continuations of those prior requirements:

A. The Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections

17.42. 070( A) and 17.46. 080( A).

B. It is declared and made a condition of the Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, these approvals 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.

RESOLUTION NO. 98- 14
PAGE4
98 1701309
73 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. The cabana shall not exceed 220 square feet.

F. No sleeping quarters or kitchen or other cooking facilities shall be provided within the cabana or detached recreation room.

G. No vehicular access or paved parking area shall be developed within 50 feet of the cabana.

H. The basement door of the residence shall be solid ( without windows) and shall be subject to City staff approval.

I. Renting of the cabana is prohibited.

J. Any retaining walls incorporated into the project shall not exceed 5 feet in height, averaging no more than 2- 1/ 2 feet.

K. Residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 28. 1%.

L. Maximum disturbed area shall not exceed 39. 9% of the net lot area.

M. Grading shall not exceed 565 cubic yards of cut soil and 565 cubic yards of fill soil.

N. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to the maximum extent feasible, the existing mature trees and shrubs and the natural landscape screening surrounding the proposed building pad.

O. Two copies of a 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.

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 RESOLUTION NO. 98- 14
PAGE 5
98 1701309 74
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, 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.

Q. 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.

R. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review, pursuant to Section 17.42. 060, or the approval shall not be effective.

S. Notwithstanding Section 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.

T. All conditions of these Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 21ST D OF JU
ATTEST:

DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 98- 14
PAGE 6

ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
98 1'701309
75 INDEX VICINITY MAP

JURISDICTION NOTES

REV BY DATE COMMENTS
REV A BB 2/21/2024 Property Plan Added.

REV B BB 4/8/2024 Property Plan Updated.

REV C BB 5/29/2024 Swap PW2/+ for PW3
REV D BB 6/11/2024 Powerwall count decrease. FSM Added. * * * *

LICENSE

GENERAL NOTES
· ·
”

ABBREVIATIONS SCOPE OF WORK

ELECTRICAL NOTES
D D
D
76 (E) DRIVEWAY
Unlocked Gated
0 50' 100'
Scale:1" = 50'-0'

PROPERTY PLAN
D
77 (E) DRIVEWAY
T1
SV
SV
SV
SV
SV
SV
Unlocked Gated
Front Of House
36" FSB
36" FSB
18" FSB 12" WSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
36" FSB
18" FSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
18" FSB
12" WSB
18" FSB 12" WSB
18" FSB 36" FSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
36" FSB
18" FSB
12" WSB
18" FSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
18" FSB
36" FSB
12" WSB
18" FSB
18" FSB
12" WSB
Pitch
4/12
MP2
Pitch
4/12
MP3
Pitch 4/12 MP4
Pitch
4/12
MP5
Pitch
MP7
4/12
Pitch
MP8
4/12
Scale:1/16" = 1'
SITE PLAN 01' 16' 32'
#SSTAMPCA
#ESTAMPCA
LEGEND
MP3
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story
MP2
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story
MP4
18° (4:12)
106
18° (4:12)
106
Comp Shingle 1 Story
MP5
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story
MP5
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story
MP5
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story D
78 (E) DRIVEWAY
SV
SV 36" FSB
12" WSB 36" FSB
18" FSB 12" WSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
12" WSB 12" WSB
18" FSB
18" FSB
36" FSB
12" WSB
18" FSB 12" WSB
12" WSB
18" FSB
Pitch
4/12 MP2
Pitch
4/12 MP3
Pitch
4/12
MP4
Scale: 3/32" = 1'

SITE PLAN
0 1' 10' 21'
#SSTAMPCA
#ESTAMPCA
LEGEND
MP3
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story
MP2
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story
MP4
18° (4:12)
106
18° (4:12)
106
Comp Shingle 1 Story
MP5
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story
MP5
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story
MP5
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story
80 T1
SV
SV
Unlocked Gated
36" FSB
18" FSB 12" WSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
18" FSB 12" WSB
18" FSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
12" WSB
36" FSB
18" FSB
12" WSB
18" FSB
18" FSB
12" WSB
Pitch 4/12 MP4
Pitch
4/12
MP5
Pitch
MP8
4/12
Scale: 3/32" = 1'
SITE PLAN 0 1' 10' 21'
MP3
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story
MP2
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story
MP4
18° (4:12)
106
18° (4:12)
106
Comp Shingle 1 Story
MP5
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story
#SSTAMPCA
#ESTAMPCA
LEGEND
MP5
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story
MP5
18° (4:12)
196
18° (4:12)
196
Comp Shingle 1 Story D
81 NTS

TYPICAL PV SIDE VIEW SV
Scale: 1 1/2" = 1'
STANDOFF S1 Scale: 3/4"=1'-0"
TRENCH DETAIL T1
#SSTAMPCA
82 #SSTAMPCA
83 B
7 C
4 D
4 E
2 1 S1A
1 S1B
3 1 S2
3 1 S3
F
G
6 H6
5 J
12V ·
·
·
I
” –
A
#ESTAMPCA
D
84 B
7 C
4 D
4 E
2 1 S1A
1 S1B
3 1 S2
3 1 S3
F
G
6 H6
5 J
12V ·
·
·
I
” –
#ESTAMPCA D
85 SCALE: 1/4"= 1'

SOUTH WALL EXTERIOR FLOOR PLAN A

NORTH WALL
EXTERIOR EQUIPMENT ELEVATION E1 FREESTAND MOUNT
EXTERIOR EQUIPMENT ELEVATION E2
D
86 #ESTAMPCA ········· D
87 88

SOLAR PV SYSTEM

EQUIPPED WITH RAPID

SHUTDOWN
CAUTION: MULTIPLE SOURCES OF POWER
- Address: 18 Eastfield Dr
OPERATING VOLTAGE = 240V JB-90213442-00
89 NEC_2020-690_31_D_2
Per Code:
690.31.D.2
Label Location:
(C)(IC)(CB)
NEC_2020-690_53
Per Code:
690.53
Label Location:
(DC) (INV)
NEC_2020-690_13_B
Per Code:
690.13.B
Label Location:
(AC) (POI)(DC) (INV)
NEC_2020-690_54
Per Code:
690.54
Label Location:
(AC) (POI)
NEC_2020-690_13_B-3
Per Code:
690.13.B
Label Location:
(DC)(CB)
NEC_2020-705_12_B_3_2
Per Code:
705.12.B.3.2
Label Location:
(POI)
NEC_2020-705_12_B_3_3
Per Code:
705.12.B.3.3
NEC_2020-705_12_C
Per Code:
705.12.C
Label Location:
(POI)
NEC_2020-690_54-690_13_B
Per Code:
690.54; 690.13.B
Label Location:
(POI)
UL_1741_Power_Control_System
Per Code:

UL 1741 Power Control System
Label Location:
(INV)(LC)
NEC_2020-690_56_C_2
Per Code:
690.56.C.2
Label Location:

RSD Switch
NEC_2020-690_56_C
Per Code:
690.56.C
Label Location:
(MSP)
(POI): Point of Interconnection
(M): Utility Meter
(LC): Load Center
(INV): Inverter With Integrated DC Disconnect
(IC): Interior Run Conduit
(DC): DC Disconnect
(D): Distribution Panel
(CB): Combiner Box
(C): Conduit
(AC): AC Disconnect
NEC 2020 - Default Label Set
547.22
48 48
240
240
90 NEC_2020-408_4
Per Code:
408.4
Label Location:
(BLC)
NEC_2020-220
Per Code:
220
Label Location:
(BLC)
NEC_2020-312_8_A_3
Per Code:
312.8.A.3
Label Location:
(MSP)
NEC_2020-705_12_C-1
Per Code:
705.12.C
Label Location:
(MSP)
NEC_2020-706_15_C-2
Per Code:
706.15.c
Label Location:
(AC)
NEC_2020-705_12_B_3_2
Per Code:
705.12.B.3.2
Label Location:
(POI)
NEC_2020-705_12_B_3_3
Per Code:
705.12.B.3.3
NEC_2020-705_12_C-2
Per Code:
705.12.C
Label Location:
(MSP)
UL_1741_Power_Control_System
Per Code:

UL 1741 Power Control System
Label Location:
(INV)(LC)
IRC_2021-R_328_11
Per Code:

R328.11
Label Location:
(MSP)
NEC_2020-706_15_C
Per Code:
706.15.C
Label Location:
(MSP)
(MSP): Main Service Panel
(BLC): Backup Load Center
(AC): AC Disconnect
NEC 2020 - Default Label Set
240
92 91

!"!#$ %
&#'(#
")
&*

&+,

(&&)'+, -
.
/
)&(&&)
'+,

%
)
0&

!

"#

$ "

%
&&'
$

&&(
$

&&)*$

&)1&&
2&)
(

,
&-./*

0

1'
23 3

0
3&
&4(
'./-5

4
0

0

5 ( 6
7

8

4 ! *
$$
"#

4 ! *

4 ! *
7

% ! *
+

,
&-
+

9 ,
/*
5"
:"16$;<=

4
0

$*
&

$*
&
&

>
#

$*
&
<
$'
0

>
#

$*
&
<
&'
0

>
#

$*
&
<
<'
0

>
#

$*
&
;

4
@A'B

$*
&
-3

$*
&
6

$*
&
/5

>
#

$*
<

( "35"

%8

$*
;

>
#

*;:*$:&*&$ "

$<&6&;"&*&$'//
*"1 $:&
$*
-

$*
65

C

$*
/5

>

%

$*
D

>

%

$*
=5

$*
=
&C

#

>

%

$*
=
<5

C

>

%

$*
=
;

>

%

$*
$*

"

C
4

$*
$$

>

%

0

C

$*
$&"

% 5

>

%

0

C

$*
$<

E
@53B
4

&)1&&4 6+
3C4

@"2****$/B:F

@"
**$*<DB
"

:3C4

C

%:

4
:F

@
G$*
*
$&/</$&$&H()F*<**$;IB

<D
7

&&
-
!

*
7

@5B 56/

@1"(B
%

7

1
C

1
!

% J

A

11

&)1!
7&
8)
*9
4:/6.;<$ %
&="!#"!
53*;/$6**-K

%

8"

%

L::

:+
A"1(5+1:(!(M51 A
5+1 :53*;/$6**-K&*&*M*$

4:/6.
<$ %
&
53*;/$6**&K

L::

:+
A"1(5+1:(!(M51 A
5+1 :53*;/$6**&K&*&*M*=

*;:*$:&*&$ "

5

2
7 L::CCC

N*<:&*&$%"

5

2
7 "

$<&6&;"&*&$'//
*"1
&:&
92 The intended purpose of this document is to show that the PV system will never exceed 600VDC when designed to the max string length. To show this, we have provided voltage calculations using the electrical characteristics of various modules we will be installing. The relevant equations are below and will be used for all individual module calculations.

VCorString = (Voc + (Tlow о 25ÛC)Tvoc) כ 14
where Tvoc = CT,vocVoc
where Tlow = 2ÛC
Tesla 425W Module (T425S)
CT,voc соϬ͘Ϯϲ %/ÛC
Voc = 48.65 V
VCor = [48.65 + (2Û- 25ÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϲйΎϰϴ͘ϲϱͿ΁Ύϭϭ
VCorString = 567.15 V
(max string length is 11 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) Tesla 420W Module (T420S)
CT,voc соϬ͘ϮϲйͬÛC
Voc = 48.50 V
VCor = [48.50 + (2Û- 25ÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϲйΎϰϴ͘ϱ0Ϳ΁Ύϭϭ
VCorString = 565.40 V
(max string length is 11 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) Tesla 400W Module (T400H)
CT,voc соϬ͘Ϯ7 %/ÛC
Voc = 45.30 V
VCor = [45.30 + (2Û- 25ÛC) * (оϬ͘Ϯ7% * 45.30Ϳ΁Ύϭ2
VCorString = 577.36 V
(max string length is 12 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) Tesla 395W Module (T395H)
CT,voc соϬ͘Ϯ7 %/ÛC
Voc = 45.27 V
VCor = [45.27 + (2Û- 25ÛC) * (оϬ͘Ϯ7% * 45.27Ϳ΁Ύϭ2
VCorString = 576.98 V
(max string length is 12 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) SolarCity Standard 265W Module (SC265)
CT,voc соϬ͘ϯϲйͬÛC
Voc = 38.3 V
VCor = [38.3 + (2Û- 25ÛC) * (оϬ͘ϯϲйΎϯϴ͘ϯͿ΁Ύϭϰ
VCorString = 580.60 V
(max string length is 14 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) SolarCity 325W Module (SC325)
CT,voc соϬ͘ϮϯϱйͬÛC
Voc = 69.60 V
VCor = [69.60 + (2Û- 25ÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϯϱйΎϲϵ͘ϲ0Ϳ΁Ύϴ
VCorString = 586.90 V
(max string length is 8 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) SolarCity 315W Module (SC315B2)
CT,voc соϬ͘25 %/ÛC
Voc = 70.20 V
VCor = [70.20 + (2Û- 25ÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϱйΎ70.20Ϳ΁Ύϴ
VCorString = 593.89 V
(max string length is 8 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) Hanwha 345W Module (Q.PEAK DUO BLK-G6+/SC)
CT,voc соϬ͘ϮϳйͬΣ
Voc = 40.92 V
VCor = [40.92 + (2ÛоϮϱÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϳйΎϰϬ͘ϵϮͿ΁Ύϭϯ
VCorString = 564.99 V
(max string length is 13 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) Hanwha 340W Module (Q.PEAK DUO BLK-G6+/SC)
CT,voc соϬ͘ϮϳйͬΣ
Voc = 40.66 V
VCor = [40.66 + (2ÛоϮϱÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϳйΎϰϬ͘ϲϲͿ΁Ύϭϯ
VCorString = 561.40 V
(max string length is 13 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter Hanwha 320W Module (Q.PEAK DUO BLK-G5/SC)
CT,voc соϬ͘ϮϴйͬΣ
Voc = 40.56 V
VCor = [40.56 + (2ÛоϮϱÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϴйΎϰϬ͘ϱϲͿ΁Ύϭϯ
VCorString = 561.24 V
(max string length is 13 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) Hanwha 315W Module (Q.PEAK DUO BLK-G5/SC)
CT,voc соϬ͘ϮϴйͬΣ
Voc = 40.29 V
VCor = [40.29 + (2ÛоϮϱÛC) * (оϬ͘ϮϴйΎϰϬ͘ϮϵͿ΁Ύϭϯ
VCorString = 557.50 V
(max string length is 13 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) Hanwha 300W Module (Q.PEAK-G4.1/SC)
CT,voc соϬ͘ϮϴйͬΣ
Voc = 39.76 V
VCor = [39.76 + (2ÛоϮϱÛC) * ;оϬ͘ϮϴйΎϯϵ͘ϳϲͿ΁Ύϭϰ
VCorString = 592.49 V
(max string length is 14 modules for non-fixed voltage inverter) 93 ͘
94 FLASHING INSERT
ZS COMP DATASHEET 2
Listed to UL 2703 and UL 2582 for Wind Driven Rain
Part #850-1628
SPECIFICATIONS Designed for pitched roofs.

Installs in portrait and landscape orientations.

Engineered for spans up to 72” and cantilevers up to 24”.

ZS Comp has a UL 1703 Class “A” Fire Rating when installed using modules from any PDQXIDFWXUHUFHUWL¿HGDV³7\SH´RU³7\SH´
Attachment method UL listed to UL 2582 for Wind Driven Rain.

ZS Comp supports 50 psf (2400 Pa) front and up to 72 psf (3450 Pa) rear side design load rating for Portrait module orientation per UL 2703.

ZS Comp supports 50 psf (2400 Pa) front side and up to 72 psf (3450 Pa) rear side design load rating for Landscape module orientation.

Engineered for compliance with ASCE 7-05, 7-10, and 7-16 wind load requirements.

Zep wire management products listed to UL 1565 for wire positioning devices.

ZS Comp grounding products are listed to UL 2703 and UL 467.

ZS Comp bonding products are listed to UL 2703.

DESCRIPTION PV mounting solution for composition shingle roofs.

Works with all Zep Compatible Modules.

Auto bonding UL-listed hardware creates structural and electrical bond.

ROOFING SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS

MOUNTING BLOCK

CAPTURED WASHER LAG
Listed to UL 2703
Part #850-1633
Part #850-1631-002 and #850-1631-004
ZS COMP DATASHEET 3

GROUND ZEP LEVELING FOOT

DC WIRE CLIP HOME RUN CLIP
Listed to UL 1565
Part #850-1510

ARRAY SKIRT END CAP
Listed to UL 2703
Part #850-1511
Listed to UL 2703
Part #850-1613
Listed to UL 2703
Part #850-1608
Listed to UL 2703
Part #850-1606
Listed to UL 2703
Part #850-1586 (Left)
Part #850-1588 (Right)

SKIRT GRIP INTERLOCK
Listed to UL 2703
Part #850-1397
Listed to UL 1565
Part #850-1509
Listed to UL 2703
Part #850-1281

HYBRID INTERLOCK
95 TESLA.COM/ENERGY
Photovoltaic Combiner Box
Tesla 4J
Combiner Box
Tesla uses custom photovoltaic combiner boxes to combine solar module strings on the roof. The two combiner boxes defined here are purpose-built photovoltaic combiner box assemblies, with one designed for rail-based systems and one designed for systems without rails.

NOTE: Tesla 4J combiner box with bracket / cord grip has the same dimensions as Tesla 4J combiner box, but has the added bracket/cord grip as shown above.

End View
End View
Top View with Cover Top View with Cover

PERFORMANCE SPECIFICATIONS
Part Number Tesla 4J
Array System Voltage 600 Vdc
Single Input String Current Rating 42 A
Single Input String Current Rating 42 A
Dual Input String Current Rating 28.5 A
Output Current Rating (with jumpers) 57 A
Maximum Number of Single Inputs 4
Maximum Number of Combined Inputs 2
NA 2022-05-24

COMPLIANCE INFORMATION
Certifications UL 1741, UL 508, CSA 22.2 No. 94

ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIFICATIONS
Maximum Operating Temperature 50°C
Enclosure Type NEMA 3, 3R, 4, 4X, 12, 13
Ingress Rating IP66

MECHANICAL SPECIFICATIONS
Dimensions 185.93 x 228.6 x 126.8 mm (7.32 x 9.32 x 4.99 in) Tesla 4J Combiner
Box with Bracket /
Cord Grip

7.32 in (185.93 mm)

9.32 in (228.6 mm)

1.38 in
(35.1 mm)

3.61 in
(91.7 mm)
96 TESR-DS-0451-22 1

PV HAZARD CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND COMPONENTS
Function Manufacturer Model No. Firmware Versions and Checksums &HUWL¿FDWLRQ6WDQGDUG 3956(0LG&LUFXLW
Interrupter (MCI) Tesla MCI-1, MCI-2 N/A 8/3956(
Inverter, Powerwall+, or
Powerwall 3 Tesla

7.6 kW: 1538000 1

3.8 kW: 1534000 1

7.6 kW: 1850000 1

11.5 kW: 1707000 1
9&($)
9))%((
9&($)
V1, 0x3282A1
UL 1741, 1998
395663956(
PV Module Tesla 657657
6576575 N/A UL 61730
39+&6,QLWLDWRU
(PV Inverter)
'HGLFDWHG39V\VWHP$&FLUFXLWEUHDNHURU$&GLVFRQQHFWVZLWFKODEHOHGSHU1(&
requirements. N/A
39+&6,QLWLDWRU
(Powerwall+, Powerwall 3)
(PHUJHQF\VWRSGHYLFH
1,6'
/LVWHG(PHUJHQF\6WRS%XWWRQRU(PHUJHQF\6WRS
'HYLFHRU(PHUJHQF\6WRS8QLW
UL 508 or UL 60947
Parts 1, 5-1 and 5-5
39+&6,QLWLDWRU
(Powerwall 3)
2Q2ႇ(QDEOHVZLWFKORFDWHGRQ3RZHUZDOOZKHQODEHOHGDV5DSLG6KXWGRZQLQLWLDWRUSHU 1(&
UHTXLUHPHQWV UL 1741
1 $SSOLHVWRYDULDWLRQVRIWKLVSDUWQXPEHUZLWKVXႈ[RIWZRQXPEHUVDQGRQHOHWWHU 1RWH
39+&6LQVWDOODWLRQUHTXLUHPHQWVPD\UHGXFHWKHHႇHFWLYHHTXLSPHQWDQGFRPSRQHQWUDWLQJVEHORZWKHLQGLYLGXDOHTXLSPHQWDQGFRPSRQHQW 3956(UDWLQJVLQRUGHUWRDFKLHYH39+&6VKRFNKD]DUGUHGXFWLRQUHTXLUHPHQWV

PVHCS INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS
0D[6\VWHP9ROWDJH 600 Vඌඋ
39+&60D[LPXP&LUFXLW9ROWDJH
$UUD\,QWHUQDO9ROWDJH$IWHU$FWXDWLRQ
165 Vඌඋ (cold weather open circuit)
0D[6HULHV&RQQHFWHG3DQHOV%HWZHHQ0&,V
10

OTHER INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS
$Q0&,PXVWEHFRQQHFWHGWRRQHHQGRIHDFKVHULHVVWULQJRUPRXQWLQJSODQHVXEDUUD\VWULQJ 9HUL¿FDWLRQWKDW0&,VDUHLQVWDOOHGZLWKRUIHZHUPRGXOHVEHWZHHQ0&,VVKDOOEHGRFXPHQWHGIRULQVSHFWLRQE\YROWDJH PHDVXUHPHQWORJVDQGRUDVEXLOWVWULQJOD\RXWGLDJUDPV )RU39,QYHUWHU
7KH39+&6LQLWLDWRU
$&EUHDNHURUVZLWFK
VKDOOEHVL]HGDQGLQVWDOOHGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK1(&UHTXLUHPHQWV7KH VSHFL¿FSDUWVKDOOEHLGHQWL¿HGRQWKHDVEXLOWV\VWHPGUDZLQJV )RU3RZHUZDOORU3RZHUZDOO
7KH39+&6HPHUJHQF\VWRSLQLWLDWRUVKDOOKDYHWKHIROORZLQJPLQLPXPUDWLQJV 2XWGRRU
7\SH5
RUKLJKHU
9$DQGVKDOOEHLQVWDOOHGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK1(&UHTXLUHPHQWV7KHVSHFL¿FSDUWVKDOOEHLGHQWL¿HGRQWKHDVEXLOW V\VWHPGUDZLQJV5HIHUWRWKH3RZHUZDOOLQVWDOODWLRQPDQXDOIRUIXUWKHUGHWDLOV PV HAZARD CONTROL SYSTEM | BIPV
UL 3741 REPORT DATE 01-27-23

PV RAPID SHUTDOWN ARRAY
WARNING: To reduce the risk of injury, read all instructions.

TEPV-DS-0023-22 1
9HUL¿FDWLRQWKDWWKH0&,VDUHLQVWDOOHGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK DQG
VKDOOEHGRFXPHQWHGIRULQVSHFWLRQE\YROWDJHPHDVXUHPHQWORJVDQGRUDV EXLOWVWULQJOD\RXWGLDJUDPV
)RU39,QYHUWHU
7KH39+&6LQLWLDWRU
$&EUHDNHURUVZLWFK
VKDOOEHVL]HGDQGLQVWDOOHGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK1(&UHTXLUHPHQWV7KHVSHFL¿FSDUW VKDOOEHLGHQWL¿HGRQWKHDVEXLOWV\VWHPGUDZLQJV
)RU3RZHUZDOODQG3RZHUZDOO
7KH39+&6HPHUJHQF\VWRSLQLWLDWRUVKDOOKDYHWKHIROORZLQJPLQLPXPUDWLQJV 2XWGRRU
7\SH5RUKLJKHU
9
$DQGVKDOOEHLQVWDOOHGLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK1(&UHTXLUHPHQWV7KHVSHFL¿FSDUWVKDOOEHLGHQWL¿HGRQWKHDVEXLOWV\VWHPGUDZLQJV5HIHUWRWKH 3RZHUZDOOLQVWDOODWLRQPDQXDOIRUIXUWKHUGHWDLOV

PV HAZARD CONTROL EQUIPMENT AND COMPONENTS
)XQFWLRQ 0DQXIDFWXUHU 0RGHO1R )LUPZDUH9HUVLRQV
DQG&KHFNVXPV &HUWL¿FDWLRQ6WDQGDUG
,QYHUWHU3RZHUZDOORU
3RZHUZDOO 7HVOD
N:

N:

N:

N:

9&($)
9))%((
9&($)
9[$
8/8/

395663956(
0LG&LUFXLW,QWHUUXSWHU
0&,
7HVOD 0&,0&, 1$ 8/3956(
390RGXOHV 7KH39+&39PRGXOHVPXVWEHOLVWHGE\D157/WR8/DQGRU8/DQG8/ H[FOXGLQJ&ODVV
DQG&ODVV,

390RXQWLQJ6\VWHP
7KH39PRXQWLQJV\VWHPPXVWFRPSO\ZLWKRQHRIWKHIROORZLQJ

• /LVWHGE\157/WR8/DQGUDWHGIRUXVHZLWKWKHVSHFL¿F39PRGXOHVQRWHGDERYH • 7KHQRQFHUWL¿HGFRPELQDWLRQVRIPRXQWLQJDQG39PRGXOHVVKDOOEHHYDOXDWHGIRUORDGLQJPRXQWLQJDQG JURXQGLQJSHUWKH1(&DQGRWKHUDSSOLFDEOHLQVWDOODWLRQFRGHV 39&RQQHFWRUV
7KHIROORZLQJ39FRQQHFWRUVPD\EHXVHGWRFRQQHFWWRWKH7HVOD0&,V
• 6WDXEOLW\SH39.67,,85RUW\SH39.67(92
PDOH

• 6WDXEOLW\SH39.%7,,85RU39.%7(92
IHPDOH

• 6WDXEOL%UDQFK6RFNHW39$=%DQG%UDQFK3OXJ39$=6 • &RQQHFWRUVHYDOXDWHGE\DQ157/IRULQWHUPDWDELOLW\ZLWKWKHFRQQHFWRUVDERYH 39+&6,QLWLDWRU

39,QYHUWHU

'HGLFDWHG39V\VWHP$&FLUFXLWEUHDNHURU$&GLVFRQQHFWVZLWFKODEHOHGSHU1(&
UHTXLUHPHQWV
1$
39+&6,QLWLDWRU

3RZHUZDOO3RZHUZDOO

(PHUJHQF\VWRSGHYLFH
1,6'
/LVWHG(PHUJHQF\6WRS%XWWRQRU(PHUJHQF\6WRS
'HYLFHRU(PHUJHQF\6WRS8QLW
8/RU8/
3DUWV
DQG
39+&6,QLWLDWRU

3RZHUZDOO

2Q2ႇ(QDEOHVZLWFKORFDWHGRQ3RZHUZDOOZKHQODEHOHGDV5DSLG6KXWGRZQLQLWLDWRU SHU1(&
UHTXLUHPHQWV
8/

$SSOLHVWRYDULDWLRQVRIWKLVSDUWQXPEHUZLWKVXႈ[RIWZRQXPEHUVDQGRQHOHWWHU 1RWH
39+&6LQVWDOODWLRQUHTXLUHPHQWVPD\UHGXFHWKHHႇHFWLYHHTXLSPHQWDQGFRPSRQHQWUDWLQJVEHORZWKHLQGLYLGXDOHTXLSPHQWDQGFRPSRQHQW 3956(UDWLQJVLQRUGHUWRDFKLHYH39+&6VKRFNKD]DUGUHGXFWLRQUHTXLUHPHQWV

PVHCS INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS
0D[6\VWHP9ROWDJH 9ඌඋ
39+&60D[LPXP&LUFXLW9ROWDJH
$UUD\,QWHUQDO9ROWDJH$IWHU$FWXDWLRQ
9ඌඋ
FROGZHDWKHURSHQFLUFXLW

OTHER INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS
$Q0&,PXVWEHFRQQHFWHGWRRQHHQGRIHDFKVHULHVVWULQJRUPRXQWLQJSODQHVXEDUUD\VWULQJ 0&,VVKDOOEHLQVWDOOHGEHWZHHQVHULHVFRQQHFWHGPRGXOHFRPELQDWLRQVVXFKWKDWWKH39+&0D[LPXP&LUFXLW9ROWDJHDIWHUDFWXDWLRQLVQRJUHDWHU WKDQ9XQGHUDQ\FLUFXPVWDQFHV7KHLQVWDOODWLRQORFDWLRQFROGHVWDQWLFLSDWHGRSHUDWLQJDPELHQWWHPSHUDWXUHVKDOOEHXVHGWRFDOFXODWHWKH39 PD[LPXPYROWDJHLQDFFRUGDQFHZLWK1(&

PV HAZARD CONTROL SYSTEM | GENERIC PV ARRAY
UL 3741 REPORT DATE 01-27-23

PV RAPID SHUTDOWN ARRAY
:$51,1*
7RUHGXFHWKHULVNRILQMXU\UHDGDOOLQVWUXFWLRQV
7HVOD,QYHUWHU%DVHG39+&6&RQVLVWLQJRI7HVOD,QYHUWHUV7HVOD0&,DQGRWKHU OLVWHGFRPSRQHQWVWRFUHDWHWKHV\VWHP
97 Tesla Solar Shutdown Device 1 Datasheet
Electrical
Specifications
Nominal Input DC Current Rating (IMP) 12 A
Maximum Input Short Circuit Current (ISC) 19 A
Maximum System Voltage (PVHCS) 600 V DC
Solar Shutdown Device 1 Technical Specifications
Environmental
Specifications
Ambient Temperature -40°C to 50°C (-40°F to 122°F)
Storage Temperature –30°C to 70°C (–22°F to 158°F)
Enclosure Rating NEMA 4X / IP65
Compliance
Information
Certifications UL 1741 PVRSE, UL 3741,
PVRSA (Photovoltaic Rapid Shutdown Array)
RSD Initiation Method PV System AC Breaker or Switch
Compatible Equipment See Compatibility Table below
Mechanical
Specifications
Model Number MCI-1
Electrical Connections MC4 Connector
Housing Plastic
Dimensions 125 mm x 150 mm x
22 mm
(5 in x 6 in x 1 in)
Weight 350 g (0.77 lb)
Mounting Options ZEP Home Run Clip
M4 Screw (#10)
M8 Bolt (5/16")
Nail / Wood screw
RSD Module
Performance
Maximum Number of Devices per String 5
Control Power Line Excitation
Passive State Normally Open
Maximum Power Consumption 7 W
Warranty 25 years
—
The Solar Shutdown Device is a Mid-Circuit Interrupter (MCI) and is part of the PV system rapid shutdown (RSD) function in accordance with Article 690 of the applicable NEC. When paired with Powerwall+ or Tesla Solar Inverter, solar array shutdown is initiated by any loss of AC power.
650 mm 150 mm
125 mm
250 mm
M4 Screw
M8 Bolt
Nail /
Wood Screw
22 mm
UL 3741 PV Hazard Control (and PVRSA) Compatibility
Tesla Solar Roof and Tesla/Zep ZS Arrays using the following modules are certified to UL 3741 and UL 1741 PVRSA when installed with Powerwall+ or Tesla Solar Inverter and Solar Shutdown Devices. See Powerwall+ / Tesla Solar Inverter Rapid Shutdown: Module Selection Based on PV Hazard Control System Listing for guidance on installing other modules.

Brand Model Required Solar Shutdown Devices
Tesla Solar Roof V3 1 Solar Shutdown Device per 10 modules Tesla Tesla TxxxS (where xxx = 405 to 450 W, increments of 5) Tesla TxxxH (where xxx = 395 to 415 W, increments of 5) 1 Solar Shutdown Device per 3 modules 1
Hanwha Q.PEAK DUO BLK-G5 or Q.PEAK DUO BLK-G6+ 1 Solar Shutdown Device per 3 modules 1 Exception: Tesla solar modules installed in locations where the max Voc for three modules at low design temperatures exceeds 165 V shall be limited to two modules between Solar Shutdown Devices.

January 31, 2023
98 Q.PEAK DUO BLK ML-G10+ / TS
Q.PEAK DUO BLK
ML-G10+ SERIES
MODEL
385-405Wp | 132Cells

20.5% Maximum Module Efficiency

TOP BRAND PV

MODULES
USA
2022 PV MODULE RELIABILITY SCORECARD
2022 TOP PERFORMER
1 See data sheet on rear for further information.
² APT test conditions according to IEC / TS 62804-1:2015, method A (−1500 V, 96 h) The ideal solution for:

Rooftop arrays on
residential buildings
Qcells is the first solar module manufacturer to pass the most comprehensive quality programme in the industry: The new “Quality Controlled PV” of the independent certification institute TÜV Rheinland.

The most thorough testing
programme in the industry
Innovative all-weather technology
Optimal yields, whatever the weather with excellent low-light and temperature behaviour.

Inclusive 25-year product warranty and 25-year linear
performance warranty1
.

A reliable investment
Long-term yield security with Anti LeTID Technology,
Anti PID Technology2 and Hot-Spot Protect.

Enduring high performance
Q.ANTUM DUO Z Technology with zero gap cell layout
boosts module efficiency up to 20.5 %.

Breaking the 20% efficiency barrier
Zep compatibleTM frame design
High-tech black Zep CompatibleTM frame, for improved
aesthetics, easy installation and increased safety.

Rooftop arrays on
commercial/industrial
buildings
Format 74.4 in × 41.2 in × 1.57 in (including frame)
(1890 mm × 1046 mm × 40 mm)
Weight 51.8 lbs (23.5 kg)
Front Cover 0.13 in (3.2 mm) thermally pre-stressed glass with anti-reflection technology
Back Cover Composite film
Frame Black anodised aluminium
Cell 6 × 22 monocrystalline Q.ANTUM solar half cells
Junction box 2.09-3.98 in × 1.26-2.36 in × 0.59-0.71 in (53-101 mm × 32-60 mm × 15-18 mm), IP67, with bypass diodes Cable 4 mm² Solar cable; (+) ≥ 52.2 in (1325 mm), (−) ≥ 52.2 in (1325 mm) Connector Stäubli MC4; IP68
Mechanical Specification 45.3" (1150 mm)
4 × Fastening points (DETAIL A)
Frame

8.66"
(220 mm)

41.2" (1046 mm)

39.1" (992 mm)

1.57" (40 mm)
8 × Drainage opening

0.14" × 3.1" (3.6 mm × 8 mm)
6 × Grounding points ø 0.16" (4 mm)
DETAIL A 0,472" (12 mm)

0.354" (9 mm) 1.063" (27 mm)

14.6“ (370 mm)
4 × Drainage opening

74.4" (1890 mm)
≥ 52.2" (1325 mm)
≥ 52.2"(1325 mm)
Qcells pursues minimizing paper output in consideration of the global environment.

Note: Installation instructions must be followed. Contact our technical service for further information on approved installation of this product.

Hanwha Q CELLS America Inc. 400 Spectrum Center Drive, Suite 1400, Irvine, CA 92618, USA | TEL +1 949 748 59 96 | EMAIL [email protected] | WEB www.qcells.com Q.PEAK DUO BLK ML-G10+ SERIES
Specifications subject to technical changes © Qcells Q.PEAK_DUO_BLK_ML-G10+_TS_DA_385-405_2022-07_Rev01_NA Properties for System Design
Maximum System Voltage VSYS [V] 1000 (IEC) / 1000 (UL) PV module classification Class II Maximum Series Fuse Rating [A DC] 20 Fire Rating based on ANSI/UL 61730 TYPE 2 Max. Design Load, Push/Pull3 [lbs / ft2] 85 (4080 Pa) / 85 (4080 Pa) Permitted Module Temperature on Continuous Duty
−40 °F up to +185 °F
(−40 °C up to +85 °C) Max. Test Load, Push/Pull3 [lbs / ft2] 128 (6120 Pa) / 128 (6120 Pa) 3 See Installation Manual
UL 61730, CE-compliant,
Quality Controlled PV -
TÜV Rheinland; IEC 61215:2016,
IEC 61730:2016,
U.S. Patent No. 9,893,215
(solar cells)
Qualifications and Certificates
200 400 600 800 1000
90 100
80 110
0 05 10 25 15 20
86 98
95 80
100
85 Electrical Characteristics

TEMPERATURE COEFFICIENTS
Temperature Coefficient of ISC α [% / K] +0.04 Temperature Coefficient of VOC β [% / K] −0.27 Temperature Coefficient of PMPP γ [% / K] −0.34 Nominal Module Operating Temperature NMOT [°F] 109 ± 5.4 (43 ± 3 °C)
POWER CLASS 385 390 395 400 405
MINIMUM PERFORMANCE AT STANDARD TEST CONDITIONS, STC1 (POWER TOLERANCE +5 W / −0 W) Minimum Power at MPP1 PMPP [W] 385 390 395 400 405
Short Circuit Current1 ISC [A] 11.04 11.07 11.10 11.14 11.17 Open Circuit Voltage1 VOC [V] 45.19 45.23 45.27 45.3 45.34 Current at MPP IMPP [A] 10.59 10.65 10.71 10.77 10.83
Voltage at MPP VMPP [V] 36.36 36.62 36.88 37.13 37.39
Efficiency1 η [%] ≥ 19.5 ≥ 19.7 ≥ 20.0 ≥ 20.2 ≥ 20.5
MINIMUM PERFORMANCE AT NORMAL OPERATING CONDITIONS, NMOT2 Minimum Power at MPP PMPP [W] 288.8 292.6 296.3 300.1 303.8
Short Circuit Current ISC [A] 8.90 8.92 8.95 8.97 9.00
Open Circuit Voltage VOC [V] 42.62 42.65 42.69 42.72 42.76 Current at MPP IMPP [A] 8.35 8.41 8.46 8.51 8.57
Voltage at MPP VMPP [V] 34.59 34.81 35.03 35.25 35.46
1Measurement tolerances PMPP ± 3 %; ISC; VOC ± 5 % at STC: 1000 W/m2, 25 ± 2 °C, AM 1.5 according to IEC 60904-3 • ²800 W/m2, NMOT, spectrum AM 1.5 RELATIVE EFFCIENCY [%] Qcells PERFORMANCE WARRANTY PERFORMANCE AT LOW IRRADIANCE At least 98% of nominal power
during first year. Thereafter max.

0.5% degradation per year. At
least 93.5% of nominal power
up to 10 years. At least 86% of
nominal power up to 25 years.

All data within measurement
tolerances. Full warranties in
accordance with the warranty
terms of the Qcells sales
organisation of your respective
country.

Typical module performance under low irradiance conditions in comparison to STC conditions (25°C, 1000W/m2
).

YEARS IRRADIANCE [W/m²]
Qcells
Industry standard of p-mono*
*Standard terms of guarantee for the 5 PV companies with the highest production capacity in 2021 (February 2021)
RELATIVE EFFCIENCYCOMPARED TO NOMINAL POWER [%]
Certified
UL 61730
99 DCDC+
1 GD
x
x
x
x
x
1 DC
100
February 2007
8-20
For more information visit: www.eaton.com CA08101001E
Switching Devices
8 Safety Switches
Product Selection
120/240 Vac General-Duty, Fusible,
Single Throw
Specifications
■ 30 – 600 amperes.
■ Suitable for service entrance applications unless otherwise noted. ■ Horsepower rated.
■ Bolt-on hub provision. Provided for
general-duty switches in a NEMA 3R
enclosure. See Page 8-7 for selection.
■ UL listed File No. E5239. Meets
UL 98 for enclosed switches and
NEMA Std. KS-1.
■ 200 – 600 ampere switches
incorporate K-Series design.

DP221NGB DG321NRB
Table 8-40. 120/240 Vac General-Duty, Fusible, Single Throw Maximum hp ratings apply only when dual element time delay fuses are used. These switches do not have an interlock which prevents door from being opened when switch is in the ON position. Use 3-wire catalog numbers below.
Solid neutral bars are not included. Order separately from Table 8-1 on Page 8-5. WARNING! Switch is not approved for service entrance unless a neutral kit is installed. Grounded B phase rating, UL listed.

Note: All general-duty safety switches are individually packaged.

Note: Accessories are limited in scope on general-duty safety switches. See Page 8-5 for availability. In addition, clear line shields are available as an accessory on 200 – 600 ampere general-duty switches. Catalog Numbers: 200 A = 70-7759-11, 400 A = 70-8063-8, 600 A = 70-8064-8.

System Ampere
Rating
Fuse
Type
Provision
Maximum Horsepower Ratings NEMA 1 Enclosure
Indoor
NEMA 3R Enclosure
Rainproof Single-Phase ac 3-Phase ac dc
120 Volt 240 Volt 240 Volt 250 Volt Catalog
Number
Price
U.S. $
Catalog
Number
Price
U.S. $
Fusible — Plug Type
2-Wire (One Blade, One Fuse, S/N) — 120 Vac
30 Plug
(Type S, T
or W)
1/2 – 2 — — — DP111NGB —
3-Wire (Two Blades, Two Fuses, S/N) — 120/240 Vac
30 Plug
(Type S, T
or W)
1/2 – 2 1-1/2 – 3 — — DP221NGB Use
cartridge-type
fuse catalog
number
DG221NRB
Fusible — Cartridge Type
2-Pole 2-Wire (Two Blades, Two Fuses) — 240 Vac
30 60
100
200
400
600
—
—
—
—
H
H
—
—
—
—
—
—
1-1/2 – 3
3 – 10
7-1/2 – 15
15 —
—
3 – 7-1/2
7-1/2 – 15
15 – 30
25 – 60
50 – 125
75 – 200
—
—
—
—
—
—

DG225FGK
DG226FGK

DG225FRK
DG226FRK
3-Wire (Two Blades, Two Fuses, S/N) — 120/240 Vac
30 60
100
200
400
600
H
H
H
H
H
H
—
—
—
—
—
—
1-1/2 – 3
3 – 10
7-1/2 – 15
15 —
—
3 – 7-1/2
7-1/2 – 15
15 – 30
25 – 60
50 – 125
75 – 200
—
—
—
—
50 —
DG221NGB
DG222NGB
DG223NGB
DG224NGK
DG225NGK
DG226NGK
DG221NRB
DG222NRB
DG223NRB
DG224NRK
DG225NRK
DG226NRK

S/N S/N S/N
Discount Symbol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22CD 101
Gateway 3 Datasheet 2023
Gateway 3
1 Only Eaton CSR or BWH main breakers are 25 kA rated
Performance
Specifications
Model Number 1841000-01-y
Nominal Grid Voltage 120/240 V AC
Grid Configuration Split phase
Grid Frequency 60 Hz
Continuous Current
Rating
200 A
Maximum Supply
Short Circuit Current
22 kA with Square D or
Eaton main breaker
25 kA with Eaton main
breaker1
IEC Protective Class Class I
Overvoltage Category Category IV
Mechanical
Specifications
Dimensions 660 x 411 x 149 mm
(26 x 16 x 6 in)
Weight 16.4 kg (36 lb)
Mounting options Wall mount
Environmental
Specifications
Operating Temperature –20°C to 50°C (–4°F to 122°F)
Operating Humidity (RH) Up to 100%, condensing
Maximum Elevation 3000 m (9843 ft)
Environment Indoor and outdoor rated
Enclosure Type NEMA 3R
Compliance
Information
Certifications UL 67, UL 869A, UL 916, UL 1741 PCS,
CSA 22.2 107.1, CSA 22.2 29
Emmissions FCC Part 15, ICES 003
—
Tesla Gateway 3 controls connection to the grid in a Powerwall system, automatically detecting outages and providing seamless transition to backup power. It provides energy monitoring that is used by Powerwall for solar self-consumption, time-based control, and backup operation.
411 mm
660
mm
149
mm
AC Meter Revenue accurate (+/- 0.5%)
Communication CAN
User Interface Tesla App
Backup Transition Automatic disconnect for
seamless backup
Overcurrent
Protection Device
100–200 A
Service entrance rated
Eaton CSR, BWH, or BW, or
Square D QOM breakers
Internal Panelboard 200 A
8-space/16 circuit breakers
Eaton BR, Siemens QP, or
Square D HOM breakers
rated to 10–125A
Warranty 10 years
102
Powerwall 3
Power Everything
2024
—
Powerwall 3 is a fully integrated solar and battery system, designed to accelerate the transition to sustainable energy. Customers can receive whole home backup, cost savings, and energy independence by producing and consuming their own energy while participating in grid services. Once installed, customers can manage their system using the Tesla App to customize system behavior to meet their energy goals.

Powerwall 3 achieves this by supporting up to 20 kW DC of solar and providing 11.5 kW AC of continuous power per unit. It has the ability to start heavy loads up to 185 A LRA, meaning a single unit can support the power needs of most homes. Powerwall 3 ´æ¡æ´¬Í¡«ÓâÌææßâÓóî´ÓÍŻ«æîÍ¡«ď´¡Íî´ÍæîÆÆî´ÓÍæŻ¡æĊæĊæî¡Ì¡ĄßÍæ´ÓÍŻÍæ´ÌßÆ¡ÓÍÍ¡î´ÓÍîÓÍĊ¡Æ¡îâ´Æ service.
2024 Powerwall 3 Datasheet 2
Solar Technical
]ß¡´ďî´ÓÍæ
Maximum Solar STC Input 20 kW
u´î±æîÍtÓÆî¬¡ 600 V DC
Vt.ÍßóîtÓÆî¬¡YÍ¬¡ 60 — 550 V DC
VtCVVdtÓÆî¬¡YÍ¬¡ 60 — 480 V DC
CVVdæ 6
Maximum Current per MPPT (Imp) 13 A 5
Maximum Short Circuit Current per MPPT (Iæ) 15 A 5
VÓÿ¡âÿÆÆĚd¡±Í´Æ]ß¡´«´î´ÓÍæ
1 Typical solar shifting use case.
2 Values provided for 25°C (77°F), at beginning of life. 3.3 kW charge/discharge power. 3 d¡æî¡óæ´Í¬ÿ¡´¬±î¡¡«ď´¡ÍĊÌ¡î±ÓÓÆÓ¬ĊŮ
4 d±¡óæîÓÌ¡â´æ¡Ąß¡î¡îÓßâÓþ´¡´Íî¡âÍ¡îÓÍÍ¡î´þ´îĊ«ÓâVÓÿ¡âÿÆÆĚż¡ÆÆóÆâæ±ÓóÆÍÓî¡óæ¡æî±¡ßâ´ÌâĊÌÓ¡Ó« connectivity. Cellular connectivity subject to network operator service coverage and signal strength. 5 u±¡â¡î±¡´Íßóîóââ¡Íî¡Ą¡¡æî±¡CVVdâî´Í¬ŻÀóÌß¡âÍ¡óæ¡îÓÓÌ´Í¡îÿÓCVVdæ´ÍîÓæ´Í¬Æ¡´ÍßóîîÓ intake DC current up to 26 A ICV / 30 A ISC.

Battery Technical
]ß¡´ďî´ÓÍæ
Nominal Battery Energy 13.5 kWh AC 2
CĄ´ÌóÌÓÍî´ÍóÓóæ´æ±â¬¡VÓÿ¡â 11.5 kW AC
CĄ´ÌóÌÓÍî´ÍóÓóæ±â¬¡VÓÿ¡â 5 kW AC
JóîßóîVÓÿ¡â%îÓâYî´Í¬ ėƃĘŽ&â´Ó¡ÓÍď¬óâÆ¡ž CĄ´ÌóÌÓÍî´ÍóÓóæóââ¡Íî 48 A
Maximum Output Fault Current 10 kA
=Ó]îâîß´Æ´îĊŽĘæž 185 A LRA
VÓÿ¡â]Æ´Æ´îĊ Up to 4 Powerwall 3 units supported
]Ċæî¡Ìd¡±Í´Æ
]ß¡´ďî´ÓÍæ
CÓ¡ÆDóÌ¡â ĘĞėĞėėėƃĄĄƃĊ
DÓÌ´ÍÆ&â´tÓÆî¬¡Ž.ÍßóîǡJóîßóîž 120/240 VAC
&â´dĊß¡ Split phase
Frequency 60 Hz
Jþ¡âóââ¡ÍîVâÓî¡î´ÓÍ¡þ´¡ 60 A
]ÓÆâîÓîî¡âĊîÓ+ÓÌ¡Ź&â´«ď´¡ÍĊ 89% 1,2
]ÓÆâîÓ+ÓÌ¡Ź&â´«ď´¡ÍĊ 97.5% 3
]óßßÓâî¡.æÆÍ´Í¬¡þ´¡æ Gateway 3, Backup Switch, Backup Gateway 2 Connectivity Wi-Fi (2.4 and 5 GHz), Dual-port switched Ethernet, Cellular (LTE/4G 4)
+âÿâ¡.Íî¡â«¡ âĊÓÍîîâ¡ÆĊŻYß´]±óîÓÿÍŽY]ž¡âî´ď¡æÿ´î± and 2-pin connector, RS-485 for meters
AC Metering Revenue Grade (+/- 0.5%)
VâÓî¡î´ÓÍæ Integrated arc fault circuit interrupter (AFCI), Isolation CÓÍ´îÓâ.Íî¡ââóßî¡âŽ.C.žŻVtYß´]±óîÓÿÍŽY]žóæ´Í¬ d¡æÆC´ƃ´âó´î.Íî¡ââóßî¡âæ
óæîÓÌ¡â.Íî¡â«¡ d¡æÆCÓ´Æ¡ßß
Warranty 10 years
103
2024 Powerwall 3 Datasheet 3
Mechanical
]ß¡´ďî´ÓÍæ
´Ì¡Íæ´ÓÍæ ĘėĠĠĄĝėĠĄĘĠĚÌÌŽěĚŮęĜĄęěĄĞŮĝ´Íž
Weight 130 kg (287 lb)
CÓóÍî´Í¬Jßî´ÓÍæ Floor or wall mount
VÓÿ¡âÿÆÆĚd¡±Í´Æ]ß¡´«´î´ÓÍæ
Environmental
]ß¡´ďî´ÓÍæ
Operating Temperature –20°C to 50°C (–4°F to 122°F) 6
Jß¡âî´Í¬+óÌ´´îĊŽY+ž Up to 100%, condensing
Storage Temperature –20°C to 30°C (–4°F to 86°F), up to 95% RH, noncondensing, State of Energy (SOE): 25% initial Maximum Elevation 3000 m (9843 ft)
Environment Indoor and outdoor rated
ÍÆÓæóâ¡Yî´Í¬ DCĚY
.Í¬â¡ææYî´Í¬ IP67 (Battery & Power Electronics)
IP45 (Wiring Compartment)
VÓÆÆóî´ÓÍYî´Í¬ PD3
Jß¡âî´Í¬DÓ´æ¡ǠĘÌ < 50 db(A) typical
ƸĝęŽžÌĄ´ÌóÌ
Compliance
Information
¡âî´ďî´ÓÍæ UL 1642, UL 1699B, UL 1741, UL 1741 SA, UL 1741 SB, UL 1741 PCS, UL 3741, UL 1973, UL 1998, UL 9540, IEEE 1547- 2018, IEEE 1547.1, UN 38.3
&â´ÓÍÍ¡î´ÓÍ United States
Ì´ææ´ÓÍæ FCC Part 15 Class B
Environmental RoHS Directive 2011/65/EU
]¡´æÌ´ AC156, IEEE 693-2005 (high)
%´â¡d¡æî´Í¬ C¡¡îæî±¡óÍ´îÆ¡þ¡Æß¡â«ÓâÌÍ¡â´î¡â´ of UL 9540A
6 Performance may be de-rated at operating temperatures above 40°C (104°F). 609 mm 193
mm
1099 mm
2024 Powerwall 3 Datasheet 8
VÓÿ¡âÿÆÆĚĄÌßÆ¡]Ċæî¡ÌÓÍ«´¬óâî´ÓÍæ
Powerwall 3 with Backup Switch
Whole Home Backup
Powerwall 3 with Gateway 3
Whole Home Backup
Powerwall 3 with Backup Gateway 2
Partial Home Backup
104
Agenda Item No.: 11.A
Mtg. Date: 10/28/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JOHN F. SIGNO, AICP,
THRU: KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:

ZONING CASE NO. 23-070: SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEVELOP A

VACANT LOT INCLUDING NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE

CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23

CREST ROAD EAST, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY

EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
(CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303
(LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA)
DATE: October 28, 2024
BACKGROUND:

This item was continued from the October 14, 2024, and August 12, 2024, City Council meetings. To avoid redundancy, the staff reports for those meetings are included as Attachment 1A and 1B, respectively. At the October 14th meeting, the applicant's team gave a presentation, and the public was allowed to provide testimony. The hearing was continued to the October 28th meeting due to a scheduled power outage occurring at midnight. This staff report will only address the information and issues raised at the October 14, 2024 meeting – which include:

Tree Height: The applicant removed trees from the “mound”, but the landscape plan still shows six Quercus Agrifolia (Coast Live Oak, 30’ height, 30’ width) and four Cercis Canadensis (Forest Pansy, 12’ height, 12’ width) on the landscape plan.

Number of Variances: The proposal includes six variances which the City Council must make finding on as follows:

1. Improvements in the front yard. The stable, corral, swimming pool, and retaining walls are all proposed to be in the front yard, which is the area between the front roadway easement line and either the nearest line of the primary building or the nearest line of any enclosed or covered porch attached thereto.
105

2. Corral to encroach into the required 50-foot front setback measured from the street easement;

3. Retaining walls that exceed the maximum average height of two-and-one-half feet;

4. Basement with a portion extending beyond the building walls of the residence;

5. Decks/patios that exceed more than one foot above grade; and

6. Grading export.

Council requested LA County to have representatives be at the October 28th meeting to discuss grading, drainage, and geology. Staff has confirmed that representatives will be present.

Applicant Request
By way of brief background, on June 2, 2023, an application was filed by the applicant, Frank Escher of Escher, Gune, Wardena Architecture on behalf of the property owner, Yuki Ogasawara, requesting a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Variances under Zoning Case No. 23-070 (ZC 23 -070). The proposed project was for construction of a new single-family residence and other improvements on a vacant lot.

The applicant is requesting the following:
14,270 SF single-family residence (main residence)
1,000 SF garage (attached)
1,225 SF stable & 5,190 SF Corral (Discussed under the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Variance)
7,428 SF basement
700 SF accessory dwelling unit (ADU)
650 SF guest house
280 SF swimming pool
155 pool equipment
480 SF of attached covered porches
Service yard
Lightwell
Retaining walls to exceed a height of 3 feet (maximum 5 feet) 28,389 CY total grading
1 st Pad: 32,610 SF; 2nd Pad: 1,610 SF; 3rd Pad 2,900 SF; Sunset Terrace: 415 SF Oval driveway with center landscape mound
Landscaping and features
At the October 14th meeting, in response to public and City Council concerns, the applicant provided the following changes or clarifications:

Underground cisterns updated to capture 100-year storm with changes to the onsite water management plan resulting in minimal changes to the landscaping plan.

Removal of all trees on the mound such that no trees will be planted in that area.

Grading calculations updated to show 8 CY cut and 9 CY fill in the "sunset terrace" covered patio located downslope from the residence. The 1 CY difference is an adjustment which is expected to come from the main building pad.

DISCUSSION:

To reiterate, this discussion section is geared toward just the issues raised at the October 14, 106
2024 meeting, the project modifications in response to issues raised at the October 14, 2024 meeting, and an emphasis on the requested variances. The fuller discussion of the project and various entitlements and required findings are found in Attachment 1A.

Tree Height
At the October 14th meeting, Council questioned the trees proposed on the property as some may grow taller than the roof line of the proposed residence. Since the residence is located at a lower elevation than the proposed trees, it is not possible to keep all the trees lower than the roof line of the residence. Instead, the condition has been drafted so that landscaping provides screening and is "maintained at a height no higher than the roof line of the nearest Project structure." This allows trees next to the stable and accessory dwelling unit (ADU) to be as tall as those buildings. Condition P reads as follows:
"P. The Project shall be landscaped, and continually maintained in substantial conformance with the landscaping plan on file approved by the City’s landscape consultant. A detailed landscaping plan shall provide that any trees and shrubs used in the landscaping scheme for this Project shall be planted in a way that screens the Project development from adjacent streets and neighbors, such that shrubs and trees as they mature do not grow into a hedge or impede any neighbors’ views and the plan shall provide that all landscaping be maintained at a height no higher than the roof line of the nearest Project structure. In addition, the landscaping plan shall provide for screening of development with vegetation not to exceed 10 feet in height , and that the vegetation used for screening shall be planted in an off-set manner, so as to prevent it, as it grows from forming a solid hedge. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area, are water-wise and are consistent with the rural character of the community. Plants listed as high hazardous plants under RHMC Section 8.30.015 are prohibited." (Emphasis added.) It should be noted that the property had tall mature trees that were removed in the past few years. The applicant is attempting to reestablish the shade and benefits those trees provided in the past. However, City Council does have discretion to add, delete, or modify any of the conditions of approval as it sees fit based on valid reasons. The landscape plan will be modified to meet the conditions.

Number of Variances
The project originally requested six variances as listed above. However, the applicant has modified the Project to remove the decks and patios that were cantilevered more than 12 inches above grade. Thus, this requested variance is no longer applicable to the Project and only five are being requested.

So as presently constituted, the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC) requires a variance for the following project components:

1. Stable, corral, swimming pool, and retaining walls to encroach into the front yard (RHMC Section 17.16.200);

2. Corral to encroach into the required 50-foot front setback (RHMC Section 17.16.110 and

17.16.200);

3. Retaining walls that exceed the maximum average height of two-and-one-half feet (RHMC Section 17.16.190(F));

4. Basement with a portion extending beyond the building walls of the residence (RHMC Section 17.12.020); and

5. Grading export (RHMC Section 17.16.230).
107
In granting a variance, City Council must make the following findings:

A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone.

There are extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property. The location of stable and corral between the main house and the street is a design adopted by many neighbors on Crest Road East and would be consistent with other nearby properties. However, this design does require a variance to allow the stable, corral, swimming pool and retaining wall in the front yard and the corral to encroach into the required 50-foot setback. The area of the site considered the "front yard", between the proposed main residence and the street, is the widest and most level part of the site. Allowing the proposed pool and retaining walls to encroach into the front yard will be consistent with the natural slope of the existing property and reduce the need for additional grading. The construction of retaining walls to exceed the maximum average height of two-and-one-half feet, and the light well/tunnel portion of the basement extending beyond the building walls of the residence, will minimize grading and support the development. As a result of the shape of the lot, the grading of the Project requires a variance to export nonexempt grading of 3,131 CY of soil to keep the peak of the knoll below the height of the street and out of the view of neighbors.

Developments similar to the proposed Project, with stables and corrals in the front yard, are enjoyed by many neighbors on Crest Road East who similarly position main residences away from the street to create privacy and maximize views from their residences, all while making the equestrian uses of the neighborhood visible along the street. The variance requests are necessary for preservation and enjoyment of property rights consistent with other properties in the same vicinity and zone with the same types of structures and improvements in similar areas of the project. The variance request pertaining to the basement extending beyond the walls of the residence is solely for a light well type area that allows ingress and egress to the basement area as required by the building code. This subterranean tunnel type design minimizes grading and allows access to the basement area as depicted on the project plans.

C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.

Granting a variance for the Project will not be detrimental to the public welfare and will not be injurious to properties in the vicinity because it is consistent with the encroachments by the existing residences and structures and contributes to a consistent and equitable treatment of development in the surrounding area. The requested variances are designed to make the development less intensive in terms of grading, maximize privacy and reduce other impacts to the neighborhood to ensure the protection of the public welfare.

D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed.

The granting of the variance will allow for a development that is harmonious in scale and mass 108
with the site, the proposed Project is visually harmonious with adjacent properties and in scale with adjacent residential development.

E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant.

The variance does not grant special privileges for the Applicant; the proposed Project is similar to other properties on Crest Road East that have stables and corrals in the front yard and setbacks. The Project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, and general land uses specified in the General Plan.

F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities.

Granting a variance for the Project will be consistent with the applicable portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan related to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. The Project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. The proposed Project would not constitute a hazardous waste facility.

G. That the variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills.

Approvals granting the variance to allow encroachments into the front yard setback will be consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills, which encourages residential and equestrian uses.

Public Participation
The public was given an opportunity to address the Planning Commission during field trips and meetings on January 16, 2024, April 16, 2024, and June 18, 2024. City Council reviewed the Planning Commission's decision on July 22, 2024, and the public was allowed to participate.

City Council held public hearings on August 12, 2024, October 14, 2024, and October 28, 2024. The public was allowed to participate and provide comments at all meetings.

Environmental Review
The City has consistently applied Class 3 (CEQA Guidelines section 15303) categorical exemptions to single-family residence projects in the City. This Class 3 CEQA exemption (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including single family residence and accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Here, the Project involves the construction of a new single-family residence on a vacant lot within a residential zone, along with attached garage, driveway, stable, swimming pool, ADU, guesthouse and other residential improvements. It is staff’s position that the Project fits squarely within the Section 15303 exemption.

Further no exceptions to the exemptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply. The Project is not located in an environmentally sensitive habitat. As a single-family residence with accessory structures and landscaping/hardscaping improvements on a lot that permits a single-family residence, there is no likelihood of successive project on this site due to the 109
City’s current development standards.

Finally, staff does not believe there is a reasonable possibility that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. Assertions that this Project will have some different or dispositive impact on land movement issues in the City is not supported by any technical evidence and the Project involves water retention features above and beyond what has been typically required and approved for other projects in the City.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

RECOMMENDATION:

Open the public hearing, take public testimony, and adopt Resolution No. 1376 approving the Project (Attachment 3A).

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1A: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_StaffReports_CC241014_F.pdf Attachment 1B: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-
070_StaffReports_CC240812_CCStaffReport.pdf
Attachment 2A: PL_ADR_240711_23CRE_RadiusMap_VicinityMap_Google.pdf Attachment 2B: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_ProximityMap.pdf Attachment 2C: PL_ADR_240607_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_DevelopmentTable.pdf Attachment 2D: 240605_Comparison_Table_23_Crest_Road_East_CCMeeting_8.12.pdf Attachment 2E: 22324_Application Takeoffs-grading page 10.03.24.pdf Attachment 2F: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_StaffReports_CC241014_ChangeLog.pdf Attachment 3A: ResolutionNo1376_23CrestRoadE_ZC23-070_241028_F.pdf Attachment 3B: 2024-06_PC_Resolution_23CrestRoadE_ZC23-070_F_E.pdf Attachment 4: 240613_23 Crest Road East_ZC23-070_PhotosForCCAgenda.pdf Attachment 5A: PL_ADR_240118_23CrestRdE_ZC23-
070_CopyofEmailfromResidents17CRE_01.17.24.pdf
Attachment 5B: PL_ADR_240521_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_EmailfromPaulHuh.pdf Attachment 5C: CL_AGN_241014_CC_Item11A_PublicComment01_Redacted.pdf Attachment 5D: CL_AGN_241014_CC Item11A_PublicComment02_Redacted.pdf Attachment 5E: CL_AGN_241014_CC Item11A_PublicComment03.pdf Attachment 5F: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Letter_Escher_GuneWardena_241024.pdf Attachment 6: Attachment06_LandscapeReviewComments_23CrestRoadEast (ZC23-070) Attachment 7A: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_GMED_Referral.pdf Attachment 7B: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_LomitaAgencyRef_Rev_5-2024.pdf Attachment 7C: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_PagesFromGradingReviewSheet_02-23.pdf Attachment 8: PL_ADR_240612_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_TechRep_GeotechnicalReport.pdf Attachment 9: PL_ADR_241002_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_TechRep_HydrologyReport.pdf Attachment 10A: CL_PBN_241014_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Proof_Affidavit.pdf Attachment 10B: CL_PBN_240812_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Affidavit.pdf Attachment 11: 22324_CIVIL PLANNING SET_10.02.24.pdf
Attachment 12: Drawing_SitePlanComparison_2024-10-02.pdf Attachment 13A: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P1p.pdf
Attachment 13B: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P2p.pdf
110
Attachment 13C: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P3.pdf
Attachment 13D: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P4.pdf
Attachment 14: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Civil_CityCouncil_10.14.24.pdf Attachment 15: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Landscape_CityCouncil_2024-10-14.pdf CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment01_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment02_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment03_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment04_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment05_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment06_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment07_Redacted.pdf
CL_AGN_241028_CC_Item11A_PublicComment08_Redacted.pdf
111
Agenda Item No.: 11.A
Mtg. Date: 10/14/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JOHN SIGNO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY SERVICES THRU: KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:

ZONING CASE NO. 23-070: SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEVELOP A

VACANT LOT INCLUDING NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE

CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23

CREST ROAD EAST, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY

EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
(CEQA) PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303
(LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA)
DATE: October 14, 2024
BACKGROUND:

This item was continued from the August 12, 2024, City Council meeting. At that meeting, Council received the staff report and deliberated on the merits of the Project. Among other things, the City Council directed staff and the applicant to address the following:

Environmental Determination: Explore and confirm that the CEQA Class 3 categorical exemption determination for the Project is applicable.

Landscaping: Selection of tree and maturity height for placement on the mound.

Trellis: Re-evaluate the building pad for the 415 square foot trellis on the slope below the proposed residence to determine if grading is necessary:

LA County;s HydroCalc Calculator: Use LA Countys HydroCalc Calcualtor to calculate runoff rates and volume https://pw.lacounty.gov/wmd/dsp_LowImpactDevelopment.cfm Guest House: Clarify adjustments made to the location of the guest house.

Applicant's Technical Team : Provide the entire applicant team at the next meeting so that technical questions can be answered
Resolution Findings: Ensure that the findings and supporting analysis for the various entitlements in the resolution are consistent with the City’s pertinent zoning standards Pad Size: Explain the applicability of Rolling Hills Municiapl Code (“RHMC”) section

17.16.095 abd the minimum 12,000 SF pad size.
112
Building Pad Coverage Guidelines: Provide analysis of RHMC section 17.16.097 regarding guidelines for pad coverage.

Applicant Request
On June 2, 2023, an application was filed by the applicant, Frank Escher of Escher, Gune, Wardena Architecture on behalf of the property owner, Yuki Ogaswara, requesting a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Variances under Zoning Case No. 23-070 (ZC 23 -070).

The proposed project was for construction of a new single-family residence and other improvements on a vacant lot.

The applicant is requesting the following:
14,270 SF single-family residence (main residence)
1,000 SF garage (attached)
1,225 SF stable & 5,190 SF Corral (Discussed under the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Variance)
7,428 SF basement
700 SF accessory dwelling unit (ADU)
650 SF guest house
280 SF swimming pool
155 pool equipment
480 SF of attached covered porches
Service yard
Lightwell
Retaining walls to exceed a height of 3 feet (maximum 5 feet) 28,389 CY total grading
1 st Pad: 32,610 SF; 2nd Pad: 1,610 SF; 3rd Pad 2,900 SF; Sunset Terrace: 415 SF Oval driveway with center landscape mound
Landscaping and features
There have been changes to the project since the original submittal, mostly during the Planning Commission process. Since the August 12, 2024, City Council meeting, the following changes or clarifications have been made:

Underground cisterns updated to capture 100-year storm with changes to the onsite water management plan resulting in minimal changes to the landscaping plan.

No trees will be planted on the mound.

DISCUSSION:

The Project must be analyzed and weighed against the aforementioned required findings for the various entitlements for the Project. The City Council is limited to the record and evidence before it in analyzing the merits of the Project. A decision must be based on the explicit RHMC findings and be supported by evidence in the record.
113
Requested Entitlements
Site Plan Review
Per Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 17.46.020.A.1, a Site Plan Review (SPR) is required for the construction of any new buildings or structures that require any grading that is not exempt. The applicants are requesting a Site Plan Review for the construction of the project on a vacant lot. The proposal situates the main house and accessory structures as sensitively on the lot as possible, integrating them into the existing topography. The proposed residence will only be partially visible to adjacent neighbors with the inclusion of landscape features. The footprint of the main residence complies with the setback requirements of the RHMC. The main residence has been integrated into the existing slope to minimize grading and land disturbance by constructing a long and narrow V-shaped floor plan that closely follows the existing topography. The apex of the house is located at the point of the natural slope, with an adjacent west and east wing. The applicant is requesting a Site Plan Review for the following 14,270 SF single-family residence (main residence)
1,000 SF garage (attached)
1,225 SF stable & 5,190 SF Corral (also discussed under the CUP and Variance sections)
7,428 SF basement
650 SF guest house
480 SF of attached covered porches
Lightwell
Retaining walls to exceed a height of 3 feet (maximum 5 feet) 28,389 CY total grading
1st Pad: 32,610 SF; 2nd Pad: 1,610 SF; 3rd Pad 2,900 SF; Sunset Terrace: 415 SF Oval driveway with center landscape mound
Landscaping
Certain aspects of the project, such as the ADU, swimming pool (less than 800 square feet), pool equipment, and service yard, are approved administratively and not subject to Site Plan Review.

Site Plan Review requires that the City Council make the following findings it order to approve or conditionally approve the project:

A. The Project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance.

The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan and Zoning ordinance – sans the requested variances. 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 maintains the maximum possible distances from adjacent neighbors. The main residence has been integrated into the existing slope to minimize grading and land disturbance by constructing a long and narrow V-shaped floor plan that closely follows the existing topography, which will reduce the visual impact from neighboring properties. The Project complies with all of the City of Rolling Hills Development standards with the exception of requiring Variances for the structures to encroach into the front yard as discussed below in this Resolution.
114
The Project conforms to Zoning Code lot coverage requirements. The net lot area of the lot is 262,368 square feet (6.02 acres) per RHMC Section 17.16.060(A). The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 18,205 square feet or 6.94% (20% max. permitted) excluding exempt structures; and the total lot coverage proposed, including flatwork, would be 36,590 square feet or 13.95% (35% max. permitted). The disturbed area is 87,770 square feet or 33.45% (40% max permitted).

B. The Project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot.

The topography and the configuration of the lot have been considered, and the Project will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent uses, buildings, or structures; the Project will be built on new building pads which enables Project elements to be the least intrusive to surrounding properties. Further, the Project will be a sufficient distance from nearby residences so views and privacy of surrounding neighbors will not be impacted. The main house is sited to minimize grading and minimize impact on the site below the 1293-foot contour line that defines both the Finished Floor level and the precise orientation of the wings of the house. The landscape below this line will not experience any site disturbance and will be utilized to seed and reestablish a pallet of native species back into the landscape above the house. The Project includes three new building pads: Pad #1 is for the main residence for a total of 32,610 SF; Pad #2 is for the ADU for a total of 1,610 SF; and Pad #3 is for the stable for a total of 2,900 SF.

C. The Project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences.

The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, and is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to new residences in the vicinity of said lot. The proposed site plan is harmonious with the site conditions of the existing lot and neighboring lots. The integration of the into the slope following the topography enables the residence to be largely hidden from view from the street and neighboring residences, maximizing the distance between the main house and the street. The slopes being created have been rounded and it was attempted to mimic the existing natural slopes in the area.

D. The Project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls).

There will be no significant changes to the overall drainage features on the lot. There will be minimal impact to site design, vegetation, and mature trees. The property will be landscaped in accordance with the approved landscape plan.

E. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area.

The total proposed grading for the Project is 28,389 cubic yards (19,052 CY of cut and 9,337 CY of fill). The excavation for the basement (3,026 CY) and pool (105 CY) are exempt from the Site Plan Review. The non-exempt grading totaling 25,258 CY is subject to Site Plan 115
Review. The grading will be balanced on site with exception to 6,584 CY of non-exempt export. Rather than retaining the dirt on the property, export is needed to maintain the existing topography as much as possible. The Project has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and minimize grading to the extent feasible.

F. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course.

G. The Project 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.

Surrounding native vegetation and mature trees will not be affected or will be replaced. New vegetation will be installed in accordance with the approved landscape plan. The development will be considerate of the environment and will enhance the rural character of the community.

As such, the rural character of the community is maintained and privacy is maintained with neighbors. The new landscape will utilize this plant community as the framework for all new plantings in the landscape that will enhance the existing habitat and ecological community already present on site. These native plants are well suited to the existing site without the need for irrigation beyond their establishment period of 1 to 2 years. The trees will provide visual buffers and habitat creation between neighboring properties while preserving and protecting natural drainage patterns on the site. The new landscape adjacent to Crest Road focuses largely on the reestablishment of the coastal sage scrub planting community and providing habit for the local fauna while seamlessly blending the house into the surrounding native hillside without obstructing views
H. The Project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles.

The proposed site plan is not detrimental to convenience and safety of pedestrians and vehicles. The proposed continuous driveway allows for the simplest path between all structures, with an attached garage in the main residence accommodating four vehicles, suitable per Rolling Hills guidelines for the main house, guest house and ADU parking requirements. The open agricultural room in the stable will also facilitate storage of maintenance vehicles and equipment, as well as animal transportation equipment.

I. The Project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The Project is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to State CEQA 116
Guidelines, Section 15303, Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures).

Class 3 exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including single family residence and accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Here, the Project includes development on a vacant lot of a new single-family residence in a residential zone, with attached garage, driveway, stable, swimming pool, ADU, guesthouse and other residential improvements. Accordingly, the Project qualifies for the exemption pursuant to Section 15303.

Further, no exceptions to the exemptions in State CEQA Guidelines, section 15300.2, apply.

Conditional Use Permit
Per RHMC section 17.80.050, a conditional use permit is required for stable greater than 200- square-feet and a corral that is greater than 550 square feet in size. The proposed 1,225- square- foot stable exceeds the 200 -square-foot limit by 775 square feet. The proposed stable will not encroach into any required setbacks. The proposed corral encroaches into front yard and front setback. The stable and corral will also require a variance because they are located in the front yard. The corral will also require a variance to encroach into the 50-foot front setback. These are discussed below.

RHMC section 17.16.210 requires a conditional use permit in order to construct a guest house. The proposed 540-square-foot guest will not encroach into any required setbacks.

Further, a conditional use permit is required for an accessory structure that exceeds 200- square-feet. The project includes a detached 415-square-foot trellis at the bottom of the canyon. There are also two existing trails that lead down to the new trellis. The existing trails are currently overgrown and not accessible. The applicant is proposing to redesign and cut the overgrown vegetation the pathways for the new trellis.

In order to approve a CUP, the City Council must make the following findings:

A. That the proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan.

The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for a guesthouse, stable, corral, and trellis is consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because the use is consistent with similar uses in the community, and meets all the applicable code development standards for such use. The Project is compatible with existing land uses as other properties in the same zone have a guest house and stable.

B. That the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures have been considered, and that the use will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, building or structures.

The nature, condition, and development of adjacent structures have been considered, and the Project will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed guest house, stable, corral, and trellis will be located on the property with sufficient proximity to neighboring buildings and structures.

C. That the site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and shape to accommodate the uses and buildings proposed.

The proposed conditional uses comply with all applicable development standards in the RAS-2 117
Zone. The net lot area is 262,368 SF (6.02 acres) and is adequate to support the proposed uses. The area of the site considered the "front yard", between the proposed main residence and the street, is the widest and most level part of the site. The exception to this is the location of the stable in the front yard, and the corral in the front yard setback, both are subject to variances. The property will be developed and adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed uses and buildings.

D. That the proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district.

The proposed conditional uses comply with all applicable development standards of the RAS2 Zone, with exception to the variances requested herein.

E. That the proposed use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities.

Granting the proposed conditional use for the Project will be consistent with the applicable portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan related to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. The Project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. The proposed Project would not constitute a hazardous waste facility.

F. That the proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of this title.

The proposed Project allows the Applicant the ability to enjoy rights enjoyed by other residents in the City – the development and construction of a single-family home. The proposed uses are consistent with the residential character of the City.

Variance
The Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a variance for the following project components:

1. Stable, corral, swimming pool, and retaining walls to encroach into the front yard;

2. Corral to encroach into the required 50-foot front setback;

3. Retaining walls that exceed the maximum average height of two-and-one-half feet;

4. Basement with a portion extending beyond the building walls of the residence;

5. Decks/patios that exceed more than one foot above grade; and

6. Grading export.

In granting a variance, City Council must make the following findings:

A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone.

There are extraordinary circumstances applicable to this property. The location of stable and corral between the main house and the street is a design adopted by many neighbors on Crest Road East, requiring a variance to allow stables and corrals in the front yard and front yard setback. The area of the site considered the "front yard", between the proposed main residence and the street, is the widest and most level part of the site. Allowing the proposed 118
pool and retaining walls to encroach into the front yard will be consistent with the natural slope of the existing property. The construction of retaining walls to exceed the maximum average height of two-and one-half-feet, a basement with a portion extending beyond the building walls of the residence, and construction decks/patios more than one foot above grade will minimize grading and support the development. As a result of the shape of the lot, the grading of the Project requires a variance to export non-exempt grading of 3,131 CY of soil to keep the peak of the knoll below the height of the street and out of the view of neighbors.

Developments similar to the proposed Project, with stables and corrals in the front yard, are enjoyed by many neighbors on Crest Road East who similarly position main residences away from the street to create privacy and maximize views from their residences, all while making the equestrian uses of the neighborhood visible along the street. The variance requests are necessary for preservation and enjoyment of property rights consistent with other properties in the same vicinity and zone.

C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.

D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed.

The granting of the variance will allow for a development that is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the proposed Project is visually harmonious with adjacent properties and in scale with adjacent residential development.

E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant.

The variance does not grant special privileges for the Applicant; the proposed Project is similar to other properties on Crest Road East that have stables and corrals in the front yard and setbacks. . The Project, together with the variance, will be compatible with the objectives, policies, and general land uses specified in the General Plan.

F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities.

G. That the variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling 119
Hills.

City Council Concerns
Staff and the Applicant worked together to address the Council’s concerns raised the last time this Project was before the City Council:

Environmental Determination: The City has consistently applied Class 3 (CEQA Guidelines section 15303) categorical exemptions to single-family residence projects in the City. This Class 3 CEQA exemption (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including single family residence and accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Here, the Project involves the construction of a new single -family residence on a vacant lot within a residential zone, along with attached garage, driveway, stable, swimming pool, ADU, guesthouse and other residential improvements. It is staff’s position that the Project fits squarely within Section 15303 exemption.

Further, no exceptions to the exemptions in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply. The Project is not located in an environmentally sensitive habitat. As a single-family residence with accessory structures and landscaping/hardscaping improvements on a lot that permits a single- family residence, there is no likelihood of successive project on this site due to the City’s current development standards
Finally, staff does not believe there is a reasonable possibility that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. Assertions that this Project will have some different or dispositive impact on land movement issues in the City is not supported by any technical evidence and the Project involves water retention features above and beyond what has been typically required and approved for other projects in the City Landscaping: Following the August 12th meeting, the applicant has decided to eliminate all trees from the mound. Condition AP in the draft resolution has been updated to eliminate any specific tree type on the mound. Landscaping must be in compliance with the landscape plan as approved by the City's landscape consultant.

Trellis: The applicant proposes a 415 square foot (SF) trellis an existing pad located below the slope. It is accessible via existing trails, however, due to overgrown vegetation access is currently not available. City Council was not able to visit the pad during the August field trip due to the overgrown vegetation. The applicant reevaluated the pad location and determined there will be minor grading of 16 cubic yards (CY) balanced at the same location to level the slab foundation. Vegetation will be cleared for access.

LA County’s HydroCal Calculator: The applicant was directed to use LA County’s HydroCalc Calculator to calculate runoff rates and volumes:
https://pw.lacounty.gov/wmd/dsp_LowImpactDevelopment.cfm. The applicant was able to use the tool and has upgraded the underground cisterns to store the excess runoff from a 100- year storm. To staff’s understanding, this Project is unique in the City in that its water retention 120
design efforts are meant to capture and store 100-year storm runoff. The Summary of Hydrology Analysis is included as Attachment 9.

Guest House: Through the Planning Commission process, the applicant was able to relocate the guest house 10 feet to the northwest to distance the corner from the top of the canyon.

Plans showing the proposed project from December 2023, April 2024, and June 2024 are provided as Attachment 12.

Applicant’s Technical Team : The City Council requested to have the entire applicant team present in case there were questions for the engineer, geologist, or landscape architect. Staff has contacted the applicant to forward this request that the entire team be present. Staff has reached out to LA County to have representatives from the Public Works Department present as well.

Resolution Findings: The City Council requested that staff ensure the analysis for each finding in the proposed Resolution of approval was supported by the evidence in the record. Findings are listed below and the revised Resolution, supporting each finding, is included as Attachment 3A.

Pad Size: Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC) Section 17.16.095 indicates "The minimum size of a graded building pad shall be twelve thousand square feet [12,000 SF], as specified in the City's Subdivisions Code (Title 16 of this code)." The provisions in the Subdivision Code indicate the pad size is meant to demonstrate a minimum-sized pad for development of a main residence when a lot is subdivided. RHMC Section 17.18.020 requires all residential properties to be developed with a stable, contiguous corral and access thereto, or provide a minimum 1,000 SF to be set aside for such use. Thus, this minimum pad size described in Section 17.16.095 is not meant for accessory structures such as stables and other buildings as there exists another minimum size for these structures elsewhere in RHMC. Historically, the 12,000 SF minimum pad size has been applied to the main building pad and not for pads for stables and accessory structures. If the 12,000 SF minimum were required for all pads, including accessory structures, then a lot of other projects in the City would not have been subject to approval.

Building Pad Coverage Guidelines: RHMC Section 17.16.097 provides a guideline for "determining whether the proportion of the building pad that is proposed for development is appropriate. The Planning Commission's guideline is expressed in terms of a maximum percentage of building pad coverage. A determination as to whether a proposed project satisfies the guideline is determined by first calculating the square footage of the proposed structure(s) and of all existing structures on the lot, dividing that number by the square footage of that portion of the building pad that is not in the setbacks, and then comparing that percentage figure to the Commission's guideline percentage. . . Satisfaction of the Commission's guideline for allowable building pad coverage is only one of several factors for determining project compliance with the general plan and zoning ordinance and all other required findings for the particular approval sought must also be satisfied." , many projects exceeding this building pad guideline have been approved more recently.

Other Items
Traffic Commission Review of Driveway
The proposed driveway connects to Crest Road East and has a driveway apron of 62-feet 5- 121
inches wide. The driveway entrance will be 26 feet wide and connects to an oval-shaped driveway that will be 15 feet wide. The oval-shaped driveway connects to the barn, ADU, and main residence. Existing eucalyptus trees along Crest Road East will remain. The proposed driveway apron was reviewed and approved by the Traffic Commission on December 11, 2023. The City Council makes the final decision on the Traffic Commission’s recommendations.

Rolling Hills Community Association Review
Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date.

Public Participation
The public was given an opportunity to address the Planning Commission during field trips and meetings, and the City Council at the August 12, 2024 meeting and October 14, 2024 meeting.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

RECOMMENDATION:

Open the public hearing, take public testimony, and adopt Resolution No. 1376 approving the Project (Attachment 3A).

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1A: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-
122
070_StaffReports_CC240812_CCStaffReport.pdf
Attachment 1B: PL_ADR_240711_23CRE_RadiusMap_VicinityMap_Google.pdf Attachment 1C: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_ProximityMap.pdf Attachment 2A: PL_ADR_240607_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_DevelopmentTable.pdf Attachment 2B: 240605_Comparison_Table_23_Crest_Road_East_CCMeeting_8.12.pdf Attachment 2C: 22324_Application Takeoffs-grading page 10.03.24.pdf Attachment 2D: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_StaffReports_CC241014_ChangeLog.pdf Attachment 3A: ResolutionNo1376_23CrestRoadE_ZC23-070_241014_F.pdf Attachment 3B: 2024-06_PC_Resolution_23CrestRoadE_ZC23-070_F_E.pdf Attachment 4: 240613_23 Crest Road East_ZC23-070_PhotosForCCAgenda.pdf Attachment 5A: PL_ADR_240118_23CrestRdE_ZC23-
070_CopyofEmailfromResidents17CRE_01.17.24.pdf
Attachment 5B: PL_ADR_240521_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_EmailfromPaulHuh.pdf Attachment 5C: CL_AGN_241014_CC_Item11A_PublicComment01_Redacted.pdf Attachment 6: Attachment06_LandscapeReviewComments_23CrestRoadEast (ZC23-070) Attachment 7A: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_GMED_Referral.pdf Attachment 7B: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_LomitaAgencyRef_Rev_5-2024.pdf Attachment 7C: CL_AGN_240812_CC_Item11A_PagesFromGradingReviewSheet_02-23.pdf Attachment 8: PL_ADR_240612_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_TechRep_GeotechnicalReport.pdf Attachment 9: PL_ADR_241002_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_TechRep_HydrologyReport.pdf Attachment 10A: CL_PBN_241014_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Proof_Affidavit.pdf Attachment 10B: CL_PBN_240812_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Affidavit.pdf Attachment 11: 22324_CIVIL PLANNING SET_10.02.24.pdf
Attachment 12: Drawing_SitePlanComparison_2024-10-02.pdf Attachment 13A: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P1p.pdf
Attachment 13B: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P2p.pdf
Attachment 13C: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P3.pdf
Attachment 13D: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Architecture_CityCouncil_2024-10- 14_P4.pdf
Attachment 14: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Civil_CityCouncil_10.14.24.pdf Attachment 15: PL_ADR_23CRE_ZC23-070_Plans_Landscape_CityCouncil_2024-10-14.pdf 123
Agenda Item No.: 11.A
Mtg. Date: 08/12/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JOHN SIGNO, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY SERVICES THRU: KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:

ZONING CASE NO. 23-070: SITE PLAN REVIEW TO DEVELOP A

VACANT LOT INCLUDING NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND THE

CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH
BASEMENT, RETAINING WALLS EXCEEDING A HEIGHT OF 3 FEET
(UP TO A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 5 FEET), DRIVEWAY WITH
PORTIONS THAT EXCEED A WIDTH OF 20 FEET, AND OTHER
IMPROVEMENTS; CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR

CONSTRUCTION OF A STABLE, CORRAL, DETACHED TRELLIS, AND GUEST HOUSE; AND VARIANCES TO ALLOW THE STABLE,

CORRAL, SWIMMING POOL, AND RETAINING WALLS TO ENCROACH

INTO THE FRONT YARD, ALLOW A PORTION OF THE CORRAL TO

ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK, CONSTRUCT

RETAINING WALLS EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM AVERAGE HEIGHT

OF TWO-AND-ONE-HALF FEET, CONSTRUCT A BASEMENT WITH A

PORTION EXTENDING BEYOND THE BUILDING WALLS OF THE

RESIDENCE, CONSTRUCT DECKS/PATIOS MORE THAN ONE FOOT

ABOVE GRADE, AND ALLOW GRADING EXPORT FOR A PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 23 CREST ROAD EAST, AND FINDING THE PROJECT

CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA)
DATE: August 12, 2024
BACKGROUND:

On July 22, 2024, the City Council considered the Planning Commission's action to approve the proposed project and the Traffic Commission's action to approve the driveway apron. The City Council voted 5-0 to take the matter under its own jurisdiction. On August 1, 2024, a public hearing notice was published in the Daily Breeze for the field trip and evening Council meeting on August 12, 2024. Notices were mailed to owners within 1,000 feet of the subject property (Attachments 1A and 10).
124
Applicant Request
On June 2, 2023, an application was filed by the applicant, Frank Escher of Escher, Gune, Wardena Architecture on behalf of the property owner, Yuki Ogaswara, requesting a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, and Variances under Zoning Case No. 23-070 (ZC 23-070).

The proposed project was for construction of a new 14,680-square-foot (SF) single-family residence with a 7,849 SF basement, 1,000 SF attached garage, 1,225 SF stable, 5,190 SF corral, 600 SF accessory dwelling unit (ADU), 600 SF guest house, 280 SF swimming pool, 155 SF pool equipment, 480 SF of attached covered porches, 95 SF service yard, lightwells, maximum five-foot-high retaining walls, walkways, landscaping, and other improvements (Attachment 2). A 17,700 SF oval driveway was proposed in the front of the property for access to the residence, ADU, and stable.

Previous Projects
On January 2017, the City Council adopted a resolution approving Zoning Case (ZC) No. 902 for construction of an 11,500 SF new single-family residence with an 11,500 SF basement and appurtenances (See City Council Resolution No. 1202).

On December 12, 2018, the Planning Commission granted a two-year time extension for ZC No. 902 to January 23, 2021. Due to COVID-19 several entitlements were placed on hold and Assembly Bill 1561 created an automatic time extension for ZC No. 902 which extended the expiration to July 22, 2022.

On November 9, 2021, an application was received for development of a new 8,460 SF residence, basement, accessory dwelling unit (ADU), guest house, stable, swimming pool, spa, and other improvements (ZC No. 21-11). On March 15, 2022, the Planning Commission conducted a field trip and evening public hearing to discuss the project, and continued the public hearing to April 19, 2022. On March 24, 2022, the Traffic Commission recommended approval of the main driveway, but removal of the secondary driveway. On April 13, 2022, the applicant requested the item be pulled from the Planning Commission agenda since the property had been sold to a new owner who did not want to continue with the project. As such, ZC No. 21-11 was closed; the approval for ZC No. 902 ultimately expired.

Planning Commission Review of ZC 23-070
On January 16, 2024, the Planning Commission reviewed ZC 23-070 for the first time. After conducting a field trip and evening public hearing, the Planning Commission continued the item and directed staff to work with the applicant to revise the plans to address certain issues:

The height of the mound at the center of the oval driveway. The plans indicated a height of 15 feet from the existing grade at the highest point and showed Coast Live Oak Trees (these can grow up to 80 feet tall) to be planted. This would negatively impact the line of site from Crest Road East. The Commission required that the proposed mound be staked and silhouetted.

The residents at 17 Crest Road East expressed concerns about privacy and the proximity of the proposed barn.

The walkway that extends out from the basement and the portion of the basement under the covered patio that is not under the footprint of the residence.

The discrepancies with the grading calculations, application, and plans.

Mixed-Use Structure/Stable located in the front yard.

The guest house's proximity to the canyon.
125
Retaining walls along the stable.

Floor level above the grade/raised decks – various sections of the residence, guest house, stable, and guest house show raised decks.

Trellis calculations need to be added to the calculations (415 square feet (SF) On April 16, 2024, this item was presented to the Planning Commission for a second time.

That morning, the Planning Commission held a field trip at the site. Commissioners, staff, and attendees viewed the silhouettes of the proposed project. The project was presented later at the evening Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commissioners voted 4-0 (1 Commissioner was absent) to continue the item to the next meeting. The Planning Commission directed staff to work with the applicant to revise the plans to address the following:

The basement projection from the main residence;
The exit from the basement;
The proposed mount height at 1330' elevation, which must be lowered; Privacy; and
View blockage issues.

On June 18, 2024, the Planning Commission conducted a third field trip and evening public hearing. The applicant and several residents were present at the field trip. The Commission and the public were able to walk the site to better understand the proposed project. At the evening hearing, the Commission listened to the staff's presentation and heard the applicants' testimonies. Several residents spoke about stormwater concerns. At the conclusion of the evening hearing, the Planning Commission voted 3-0 (two commissioners absent) to adopt Resolution No. 2024-06 approving ZC 23-070 (Attachment 3). The action included amending the conditions of approval to address future area drainage, the height of the mound and what can be planted atop, and the orientation of a passageway to the basement.

Traffic Commission Review
On December 11, 2023, the Traffic Commission reviewed the proposed driveway and apron.

The proposed driveway connects to Crest Road East and has a driveway apron of 62 feet 5 inches wide. The driveway entrance will be 26 feet wide and connects to an oval-shaped driveway that will be 15 feet wide. The oval-shaped driveway connects to the barn, ADU, and main residence. Existing eucalyptus trees along Crest Road East will remain. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Traffic Commission voted 4-0 (one commissioner absent) to approve the proposed driveway and apron.

Zoning, Location, and Lot Description
The property is zoned RAS-2, and the gross lot area is 7.05 acres or 307,098 SF. The net lot area for development purposes is 6.02 acres or 262,368 SF. The lot is currently undeveloped and vacant (see photos in Attachment 4). The lot is irregularly shaped and has a depth of approximately 820 feet and a width of approximately 480 feet. The property slopes downward from Crest Road East to the rear of the property. The grade elevation between the proposed main building pad and the street is approximately 42 feet. The lot is located in the southern portion of the City and has views of the Pacific Ocean. A natural drainage course is located along the western portion of the lot, and a blue line stream, which is a part of the Klondike Canyon System, is located approximately 200 feet south of the southern property line of the lot. The lot is also located in proximity to the Geotechnical Hazardous area of the City, known 126
as the Flying Triangle. The existing topography of the project site slopes down approximately 115 feet from Crest Road East to the lowest portion of the lot. The closest structures to the proposed project are 330 feet to the north, 179 feet to the east, 220 feet to the west, and 403 feet to the south (Attachment 1B).

DISCUSSION:

Project Approved by the Planning Commission on June 18, 2024 The applicant revised the project during the public hearing process to address issues discussed at previous meetings. On June 18, 2024, the Planning Commission approved the following:
14,680 SF single-family residence
7,849 SF basement
1,000 SF attached garage
652 SF accessory dwelling unit (ADU; not subject to discretionary review) 1,225 SF stable and 5,190 SF corral (Discussed under the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Variance)
Retaining walls to exceed a height of 3 feet (maximum 5 feet) 28,389 cubic yards (CY) of total grading
25,343 SF mound in the center of the oval driveway
58,050 SF landscaping
Native plants & tree species
3,000 SF native pollinator meadow in the center of the mound Three building pads are proposed:

Pad 1: 32,610 SF main building pad
Pad 2: 1,610 SF accessory dwelling unit (ADU) pad
Pad 3: 2,900 SF stable pad
The Planning Commission amended or added conditions to address certain issues:

Condition AB: Language included to address drainage.

Condition AP: Condition added regarding the mound height (maximum elevation of 1330 feet) and landscaping.

Condition AQ: Condition added that basement passageway be redesigned to be angled or zigzagged.

Grading
The total grading is 28,389 CY (see Attachment 8). Grading export is 9,715 CY (3,131 CY exempt and 6,584 CY non-exempt). Grading for the mound was reduced from 11,405 CY to 9,337 CY. A Site Plan Review is required for the non-exempt grading and a Variance is required for non-exempt export.

Site Plan Review
Per Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC) Section 17.46.020.A.1, a Site Plan Review is required for the construction of any new buildings or structures that require any grading that is not exempt. RHMC Section 17.46.50 includes required findings which are listed below. 127
Conditional Use Permit
Per RHMC Section 17.80.050, a conditional use permit (CUP) is required for a stable greater than 200 SF and a corral that is greater than 550 SF. The proposed 1,225 SF stable exceeds the 200 SF limit by 775 SF. The stable has not changed in this project.

Per RHMC Section 17.16.210, a CUP is also required to construct a guest house. The new proposal for the guest house has been changed to 600 SF, which was reduced from 540 SF.

The guest house will not encroach into any required setbacks and was moved away from the top of the canyon.

As per RHMC Section 17.16.210, a CUP is required for an accessory structure that exceeds 200 SF. The project includes a detached 415 SF trellis at the bottom of the canyon. There are also two existing trails that lead down to the new trellis. The existing trails are currently overgrown and not accessible. The applicant is proposing to redesign and cut the overgrown vegetation on the pathways for the new trellis. There are no changes to the trellis.

Variances
The Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a Variance application and approvals for the following:

1. Stable, corral, swimming pool, and retaining walls to encroach into the front yard;

2. Corral to encroach into the required 50-foot front setback;

3. Retaining walls that exceed the maximum average height of two-and-one-half feet;

4. Basement with a portion extending beyond the building walls of the residence;

5. Decks/patios that exceed more than one foot above grade; and

6. Grading export.

Municipal Code Compliance
Lot and Building Pad Coverage
The net lot area is 262,368 SF. The structural coverage is as follows: the total proposed structural coverage is 18,970 SF or 7.23%, which is well below the 20% maximum (with deductions). The proposed flatwork coverage is 18,385 SF or 7.01%, which is below the 15% maximum. The total proposed structural and flatwork coverage for the entire lot with deductions is 37,355 SF or 14.24%, which is well below the 35% maximum. The project complies with all of the RHMC development standards.

The project exceeds the 30% maximum building pad coverage guidelines, the smaller building pads provides less disturbance to the lot and preserves the natural terrain.

Pad 1: Main Residence will be developed with a 32,610 SF building pad area for a total of 17,799 SF, or 54.58% building pad coverage. This exceeds the maximum 30% guideline by

24.58%.

Pad 2: ADU Pad will be developed with a 1,610 SF building pad area and a total of 700 SF, or

43.48% building pad coverage. This exceeds the maximum 30% guideline by 10.5%.

Pad 3: Stable Pad will be developed with a 2,900-square-foot building pad area and a total of 128
1,340 square feet, or 46.21% building pad coverage. This exceeds the maximum 30% guideline by 16.21%.

Disturbance
The total disturbed area for the lot will be 87,770 SF, or 33.45% of the lot (40% maximum permitted). The previous proposed disturbed area was 87,920 SF, or 33.51% of the lot (40% maximum permitted). This is a reduction of 150 SF or 0.06%.

Stable/Corral
The project includes a 1,225 SF one-story stable with 2 stalls, a tack room/office, 2 bathrooms, a tack workspace, feed/counter space, and a large agricultural space with a garage accessible from the circular driveway. The ridgeline of the new stable is 13.9 feet maximum height. The stable is accessible from a driveway that is connected off of the northwest portion of the oval-shaped driveway.

Site Access
The new driveway apron will be located at Crest Road East on the northeast side of the lot and will provide access to the oval driveway. The driveway will be 15 feet wide, leading to a stable storage garage, motor court, main entry to the house, and garage. The proposed continuous driveway allows for the simplest path between all structures, with a garage in the main residence accommodating four vehicles, suitable per RH guidelines for the main house, guest house, and ADU parking requirements. The center of the oval driveway will be landscaped with native trees, native plants, a native pollinator meadow, and a 115 SF water feature. An entry gate with pilasters will be located at the driveway entrance.

Walls
The RHMC Section 17.16.190(F), requires a Site Plan Review for any walls that exceed a height of 3 feet. Such walls require a variance if located in the front yard. The project includes 6 wall sections:

Wall A is located at the east wing of the main residence and connects to the guest house. It has a maximum height of 2.5 feet and an average height of 2.5 feet. Wall B is a 3-foot-high retaining wall located at the west wing of the main residence along the swimming pool. Wall C is located along the south portion of the mound and extends along the south portion of the driveway with a maximum height of 5 feet high with an average height of 4 feet high (Wall C requires a Variance). Wall D is located on the west portion of the mound and west portion of the driveway. The maximum height is 5 feet high, with an average height of 4.1 feet (Wall D requires a variance). Wall E located along the southern portion of the driveway, is a maximum of 2.5 feet high with an average height of 2.1 feet. Wall F is located just north of the stable walkway, and the maximum height is 3 feet high with an average of 2.4 feet high.

Landscaping
The project includes 58,050 SF of new native landscape area and 3,000 SF of a native 129
pollinator meadow area with a water feature, and 21 native tree species. The project proposes seven Lyonothamnus Floribundus known as the Catalina Ironwood trees that will grow up to a maximum height of 20 feet and maximum width of 12 feet, six Quercus Argrifolia known as the Coast Live Oak with a maximum height of 30 feet and 30 feet maximum width, and 8 Cercus Canadensis known as the Forest Pansy with a maximum height and width of 12 feet. The project will restore the majority of the new landscape areas to a state similar to the original pre-developed, pre-cleared condition of the site, with few visible changes to the existing topography and to the panoramic views from the street and neighboring houses. A review by the City's landscape consultant is required for compliance with landscape standards and the Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance (WELO). See Attachment 6 for the landscape review.

Building Height and Pad Elevations (Pads 1 - 3)
The new residence, basement, and attached garage will be developed on the lower southern portion of Pad 1 with a maximum ridge height of 12 feet 9 inches; the ridgeline of these structures will be about 31 feet below Crest Road East. The maximum height of the chimneys is 19 feet 2 inches. The main residence includes eaves that will extend a maximum of 8 feet.

The basement and atrium are located at the V section of the main residence under the proposed deck. The elevations on Page A201 of the plans show that there is a 5-foot maximum retaining wall just above the finished grade. The guest house will be 13 feet and 2 inches in height; the ridgeline of the structure will be about 31 feet below Crest Road East.

The accessory dwelling unit (ADU) (Pad 2) will be 11 feet and 9 inches in height, with a ridgeline about 5 feet below Crest Road East.

The front upper east portion of the lot (Pad 3) will consist of a corral and stable. The stable will be 13 feet and 9 inches in height, and the ridgeline of the structures will be about 5 feet below Crest Road East.

Drainage
A natural drainage course is located along the western portion of the lot, and a blue line stream, which is part of the Klondike Canyon System, is located approximately 200 feet south of the southern property line of the lot. The lot is also located in proximity to the Geotechnical Hazardous area of the City known as the Flying Triangle; however, no part of the lot is within the Flying Triangle.

This project is subject to the Low Impact Development (LID) requirements pertaining to stormwater management, including provisions for retention of run-off on the property. LID is plan checked by Building Services after the City grants entitlements. The proposed storage system is designed to store the difference in stormwater runoff volume between the pre-and post-development conditions. The design proposes two separate drainage systems, splitting runoff between the two adjacent watercourses, to mimic the existing flow patterns.

Included in each system is a Contech Urbangreen SRPE cistern system, at the main residence pad, to intercept and store runoff as follows:

1. The eastern system will collect runoff from the ADU, easterly driveway, easterly half of the residence and residential pad, and guest house.

2. The western system will collect runoff from the stable/corral, westerly driveway, westerly half of the residence and residential pad, and pool area.

3. Each system:
130
a. Will first pass runoff through a Contech inline CDS pre-treatment system to remove trash, debris, and suspended solids. Runoff will then enter the storage barrels. b. Downstream of the storage barrel will be a second manhole with a pump, supplying the irrigation system. Runoff impounded in the storage tanks will be used to irrigate the site after the storm has passed.
c. Above the soffit of the storage barrel, an overflow pipe will direct runoff exceeding the storage capacity and discharge to the watercourse below through an erosioncontrol outlet structure.

Utility Lines / Septic Tank
All utility lines for the development will be required to be placed underground. The Los Angeles County Public Health department will review the septic system (location to be determined).

Rolling Hills Community Association Review
Rolling Hills Community Association will review this project at a later date.

Public Participation
On January 16, 2024, Yuan Chang, 17 Crest Road East, attended the morning field trip and expressed concerns with privacy and the proximity of the proposed stable. Youkun Nie, representing the owner, submitted an email dated January 17, 2024, regarding the concern (Attachment 5A). The applicant has since moved the stable away from the property and reduced the size to address the concern.

At the January 16, 2024 evening meeting, John Mackenbach, 56 Portuguese Bend Road, commended the project but suggested putting the cisterns closer to vegetation. He asked about drainage and the applicant's team explained the drainage system.

On May 6, 2024, Paul Huh and Jane Huh, the residents of 20 Crest Road East, came into the City to review the project and express their concerns regarding any view obstructions at 23 Crest Road East. Mr. Huh sent an email to staff on May 21, 2024, opposing any obstructions above the Crest Road East ocean view (Attachment 5B).

On June 10, 2024, Charlie Raine, the resident at 4 Pinto Road, came into the City to review the drainage plans for 23 Crest Road East. He expressed his concerns regarding the capacity of cisterns, impermeable and permeable surfaces, excess water flowing into the canyon, future storm drainpipe that the applicant can tie into, and storm drain plans.

At the June 18, 2024 Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Raine discussed issues with drainage in his neighborhood. Leah Mirsch, 4 Cinchring Road, suggested a larger design for the cisterns.

At the July 22, 2024 City Council meeting, Mr. Raine expressed similar concerns he discussed with the Planning Commission. Mr. Mike Nash discussed the location and commented about stormwater. Mr. Alfred Visco suggested that City Council take the item under its jurisdiction and consider large projects south of Crest Road.

Environmental Review
The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 3, Section 15303. New construction of a single-family residence and accessory structures.
131

SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA
RHMC Section 17.46.010 Purpose.

The site plan review process is established to provide discretionary review of certain development projects in the City for the purposes of ensuring that the proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan; incorporates environmentally and aesthetically sensitive grading practices; preserves existing mature vegetation; is compatible and consistent with the scale, massing and development pattern in the immediate project vicinity; and otherwise preserves and protects the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Rolling Hills.

RHMC Section 17.46.50 Required findings.

The Commission shall be required to make findings in acting to approve, conditionally approve, or deny a site plan review. No project which requires site plan review approval shall be approved by the Commission, or by the City Council on appeal unless the following findings can be made:

1. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance; the project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot;

2. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences;

3. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and landforms (such as hillsides and knolls);

4. Grading has been designed to follow the natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area;

5. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course;

6. The project 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;

7. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles; and

8. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality.

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CRITERIA
RHMC Section 17.42.50 Basis for approval or denial of conditional use permit.

The Commission (and Council on appeal), in acting to approve a conditional use permit application, may impose conditions as are reasonably necessary to ensure the project is consistent with the General Plan, compatible with surrounding land use, and meets the provisions and intent of this title. In making such a determination, the hearing body shall find that the proposed use is in general accord with the following principles and standards:
132

1. That the proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan;

2. That the nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and that the use will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings or structures;

3. That the site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and shape to accommodate the use and buildings proposed;

4. That the proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district;

5. That the proposed use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities;

6. That the proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of this title.

CRITERIA FOR VARIANCE
RHMC Section 17.38.050 Required findings.

In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings:

1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone;

3. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity;

4. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed;

5. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant;

6. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities; and

7. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills.

FISCAL IMPACT:

None.

RECOMMENDATION:

Open the public hearing, take public testimony, and provide direction to staff and the applicant.

A resolution is provided in case the City Council wishes to approve the project with conditions (Attachment 11).

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment 1A: PL_ADR_240711_23CRE_RadiusMap_VicinityMap_Google.pdf Attachment 1B: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_ProximityMap.pdf Attachment 2: PL_ADR_240607_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_DevelopmentTable.pdf Attachment 3: 2024-06_PC_Resolution_23CrestRoadE_ZC23-070_F_E.pdf Attachment 4: 240613_23 Crest Road East_ZC23-070_PhotosForCCAgenda.pdf Attachment 5A: PL_ADR_240118_23CrestRdE_ZC23-
070_CopyofEmailfromResidents17CRE_01.17.24.pdf
133
Attachment 5B: PL_ADR_240521_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_EmailfromPaulHuh.pdf Attachment 6: Attachment06_LandscapeReviewComments_23CrestRoadEast (ZC23-070) Attachment7: 240605_Comparison_Table_23_Crest_Road_East_CCMeeting_8.12.pdf Attachment 8: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-
070_StaffReports_CC240812_GradingBreakdown.pdf
Attachment 9: 240605_ChangeLog_23 Crest Road East_CCMeeting_8.12.pdf Attachment 10: CL_PBN_240812_PH_CC_23CrestRdE_ZC23-070_Affidavit.pdf Attachment 11: ResolutionNo1376_23CrestRoadE_ZC23-070_F.pdf Attachment 12: PL_ADR_23CrestRdE_ZC23-
070_240715_Plans_9thSubmittal_CCMeeting7.22.24.pdf
134
1,000’
City of Rolling Hills ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
TITLE VICINITY MAP CASE NO. Zoning Case No. 23-070
Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permits, Variances

OWNER OGASAWARA
ADDRESS 23 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills 90274 SITE
135
Vicinity Map: 23 Crest Road East
136

PROXIMITY MAP
23 CREST ROAD EAST
ZC NO. 23‐070
137
Development Table for 23 Crest Road East Zoning Case No. 23-070_Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2024 Site Plan Review, Conditional
Use Permit
Variance
New 14,680 SF single family
residence with 7,849 SF basement,
atrium, 1,000 SF garage, 600 SF
guest house, 1,225 SF stable, 280
SF pool, new driveway apron,
circular driveway, decks, motor
court, retaining walls, concrete
stairs, and landscape

EXISTING
Vacant Lot

PROPOSED
PAD NO. 1
Main Residence,
Garage, Guest
House, Swimming
Pool, Decks,
Retaining Walls,
Entryways, Atrium,
Water feature

PROPOSED
PAD NO. 2
Accessory Dwelling Unit
(ADU)

PROPOSED
PAD NO. 3
Structure Stable with
Agricultural Storage and
Corral
TOTAL
RA-S- 2 Zone Setbacks
Front: 50 ft. from front
easement line
Side: 35 ft. from side property
line Rear: 50 ft.
from rear easement line
Net Lot Area 262,368 SF — — — 262,368 SF
Residence 0 SF 14,680 SF — — 14,680 SF
Garage 0 SF 1,000 SF — — 1,000 SF
Swimming Pool/Spa 0 SF 280 SF — — 280 SF
Pool Equipment 0 SF 155 SF — — 155 SF
Guest House 0 SF 600 SF — — 600 SF
Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) 0 SF — 700 SF — 700 SF
Stable 0 SF — — 1,225 SF 1,225 SF
Basement
Depth of Basement
0 SF
0 SF
7,849 SF
10 FT
— — 7,849 SF
10 FT
Entryway, Breezeway 0 SF 0 SF — — 0 SF
Attached Covered Porches 0 SF 480 SF — — 480 SF
Detached Structures:

Guest House
Water Feature
Trellis
0 SF
0 SF
0 SF
600 SF
115 SF
415 SF
— — 600 SF
115 SF
415 SF
Raised Deck 0 SF 0 SF — — 0 SF
138
Development Table for 23 Crest Road East Zoning Case No. 23-070_Planning Commission Meeting June 18, 2024 Service Yard 0 SF 95 SF — — 95 SF

EXISTING PROPOSED
PAD NO. 1

PROPOSED
PAD NO. 2

PROPOSED
PAD NO. 3 TOTAL
Grading 0 CY 19,052 CY Cut
9,337 CY Fill
— — 28,389 CY
Structural Coverage (20 %
maximum)
0 SF 18,970 SF (7.23%) — — 18,970 SF (7.23%)
Flatwork Coverage (15%
maximum)
0 SF 18,385 SF (7.01%) — — 18,385 SF (7.01%)
Total Structural &
Flatwork Coverage
(35% maximum)
0 SF 37,355 SF (14.24%) — — 37,355 SF (14.24%)
Disturbance (40% maximum) 0 SF 87,770 SF (33.45%) — — 87,770 SF (33.45%) Building Pad 1 Area
Building Pad Coverage
0 SF
0 SF
32,610 SF
17,799 SF (54.58%)
— — 32,610 SF
17,799 SF (54.58%)
Building Pad 2 Area
Building Pad Coverage
0 SF
0 SF
— 1,610 SF
700 SF (43.48%)
— 1,610 SF
700 SF (43.48%)
Building Pad 3 Area
Building Pad Coverage
0 SF
0 SF
— — 2,900 SF
1,340 SF (46.21%)
2,900 SF
1,340 SF (46.21%)
139
Comparison Table
6/5/2024 1
Comparison Table: 2017 Hynes, 2022 Dark Moon Ranch, and 2023 Ogasawara Orig. and Rev-1 Proposals Hynes 2017 Dark Moon Ranch 2022 Ogasawara 1/16/24 Ogasawara 4/16/24 Ogasawara 6/18/24 Architecture
Main Residence and Garage 11,520 sf 9,970 sf 13,000 sf 14,680 sf 14,680 sf Basement 10,400 sf 8,460 sf 7,610 sf 8,240 sf 7,849 sf
Covered Porches 2,500 sf 2,165 sf 480 sf 480 sf 480 sf
Guest House 800 sf 800 sf 540 sf 600 sf 600 sf
Guest House Porches 369 sf 570 sf 0 sf 0 sf 0 sf
Stable 2,092 sf 2,456 sf 1,940 sf 1,225 sf 1,225 sf
Stable Porches 350 sf 1,225 sf 0 sf 0 sf 0 sf
Misc Accessory Structures 956 sf 882 sf 300 sf 1,070 sf 1,070 sf Raised Deck 0 sf 520 sf 0 sf 0 sf 0 sf
Pool 864 sf 1,230 sf 270 sf 315 sf 280 sf
Hardscape 8,100 sf 6,390 sf 6,430 sf 5,595 sf 5,595 sf
Primary Driveway 8,860 sf 8,050 sf 16,100 sf 13,480 sf 13,480 sf Secondary Driveway 600 sf 1.850 sf 0 sf 0 sf 0 sf
Disturbance 95,850 sf 104,850 sf 92,460 sf 87,920 sf 87,770 sf Mound Height n/a n/a 1335' 1335' 1330'
Structure
Total Structures 29,851 sf 28,178 sf 17,184 sf 18,872 sf 18,970 sf Total Structures (excluding Basment) 19,451 sf 19,718 sf 9,574 sf 10,632 sf 11,121 sf Total Flatwork 17,560 sf 16,290 sf 20,520 sf 18,714 sf 18,385 sf Total Structures and Flatwork 47,411 sf 44,468 sf 37,704 sf 37,587 sf 37,770 sf Total Structures (excluding Basment) and Flatwork 37,011 sf 36,008 sf 30,094 sf 29,347 sf 29,921 sf Grading
Cut 15,185 cy 14,600 cy 16,980 cy 17,320 cy 19,052 cy
Fill 7,300 cy 9,310 cy 11,950 cy 11,405 cy 9,337 cy
Over-excavation 11,750 cy 17.510 cy 3,760 cy 3,760 cy 3,760 cy Recompaction 13,885 cy 22,800 cy 5,400 cy 5,400 cy 5,400 cy Total Cut and Fill 22,485 cy 23,910 cy 28,930 cy 28,725 cy 28,389 cy Total Overall 48,120 cy 64,220 cy 38,090 cy 37,885 cy 37,549 cy

6.5.24 140
DATE: 5/30/2024 ZONING CASE NO.: 23 Crest Road East
Grading Quantities: Cubic Yds. Max Depth
5363 13.6
For other structures (i.e. walls)
List Stable 63 3.3
ADU 61 3.8
Sunset Terrace 8 3.0
For driveway(s) 2,848 15.0
For yard areas 3,818 15.1
For basement excavation 3,026 10.0
For pool/spa excavation 105 4.5
Overexcavation 3,760 3.0
TOTAL CUT 19,052 16.4
TOTAL EXPORT Export:

FILL
12 3.2
For other structures (i.e. walls)
List Stable 202 6.8
ADU 10 1.8
Sunset Terrace 8 3.0
For driveway(s) 457 6.9
For yard areas 3,247 11.9
For basement excavation 0 0
For pool/spa excavation 0 0
Recompaction 5,400 3
TOTAL FILL 9,336 11.9
28,388
Existing pad elevations House ADU Stable Cabana
Finished Floor - - -
Finished Grade - - -
Proposed pad elevations
Finished floor 1293.00 1319.00 1316.00 1293.00
Finished grade 1292.50 1318.50 1315.50 1292.50
Basement 1283.50

PAD/FLOOR ELEVATIONS
at structure
TOTAL GRADING (Sum
of total cut and total fill):
at top of slope
9,716
For house/addition
0 ADDRESS:
at structure
Max Depth Location
6,585

GRADING AND EXCAVATION INFORMATION
Export (less exempt):

CUT/EXCAVATION
For house/addition
at toe of slope
141
Site Planning Change Log (From 12/1/23 to 4/16/24)
Main House
-Finish floor at 1293’ (Previous 1291’)
-Apex at 1288’ (Previous 1286’)
-Building footprint moved 12’-5” North and 4’-6” East
-Pool footprint angled perpendicular to west property line (previously parallel with main house west wing) -Building GSF incl. Basement 21,920 sf (Previous 20,940 sf) Guest House
-Finish floor at 1293’ (Previous 1291’)
-Building footprint moved 16’ North and 4’ West
-Southeast building corner from property line 51’-3” (Previous 39’-9”) -Southeast building corner does not require fill grading (Previously required fill grading) ADU
-Finish floor at 1319’ (Previous 1320’)
-Building footprint moved 2’-6” North and 0’-8”’ West
-Northeast building corner from property line 38’-8” (Previous 37’-5”) -Building footprint 38’-4” x 18’-4” (Previous 36’-0” x 16’-0”) -Building GSF 700 sf (Previous 576 sf)
Stable
-Finish floor at 1316’ (Previous 1314’)
-Building southwest corner 62'4" from the western property line and 207'11" from the north east corner of 17 Crest Road East's nearest building.
(Previous southwest building corner 39'8" from the western property line and 185'7" from the north east corner of 17 Crest Road East's nearest building)
-Building footprint 58’-10” x 20’-10” (Previous 70’’-0” x 27’-6”) -Building GSF 1,225 sf (Previous 1,295 sf)
-Office space, closet space, and full bath are omitted (Previously included) Civil
-Total grading 28,725 cy (Previous 28,930 cy)
-Total Structure 18,457 sf (Previous 17,184 sf)
-Total disturbed area 87,920 sf (Previous 92,460 sf)
-Total flatwork 18,715 sf (Previous 20,520 sf)
-Primary driveway 13,480 sf (Previous 16,100 sf)
-Paved walks, patio areas 2,675 sf (Previous 4,010 sf)
-Pool decking 1,120 sf (Previous 410 sf)
Site Planning Change Log (From 4/16/24 to 6/18/24)
Main House
-Building footprint moved 9’-5” North and 3’-5” West.
-Southwest building corner from property line 57-9” (Previous 65’-9”) -Southeast building corner from property line 100'-11" (Previous 100'-1") -Building east wing rotated clockwise 5 deg.
-Pool deck area 1,100 sf (Previous 1,500 sf)
-All basement area under covered porch has been removed. -Basement area 7,428 sf (Previous 7,610 sf)
Guest House
-Building footprint rotated counterclockwise 12 deg.
-Southeast building corner from property line 55’-1” (Previous 51’-3”) Civil
-Total grading 28,725 cy (Previous 28,930 cy)
-Total Structure 18,457 sf (Previous 17,184 sf)
-Total disturbed area 87,920 sf (Previous 92,460 sf)
-Total flatwork 18,715 sf (Previous 20,520 sf)
-Primary driveway 13,480 sf (Previous 16,100 sf)
-Paved walks, patio areas 2,675 sf (Previous 4,010 sf)
-Pool decking 1,120 sf (Previous 410 sf)
Site
-Mound height 1330’ (Previous 1335’)
142
RESOLUTION NO. 1376

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF ZONING CASE NO. 23-070 FOR A SITE PLAN

REVIEW TO DEVELOP A VACANT LOT INCLUDING NON-EXEMPT GRADING

AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 CREST

ROAD EAST, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT

FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA).

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

I. Recitals
Section 1. On June 2, 2023, an application was filed by the applicant, Frank Escher of Escher, Gune, Wardena Architecture on behalf of the property owner Yuki Ogasawara, to request approval to construct on the vacant lot at 23 Crest Road East. The proposed Project under Zoning Case (ZC) No. 23-070 includes a new 14,270-square-foot (SF) single-family residence with a 7,428 SF basement, 1,000 SF attached garage, 1,225 SF stable, 5,190 SF corral, 700 SF accessory dwelling unit (ADU), 650 SF guest house, 280 SF swimming pool, 155 pool equipment, 480 square feet of attached covered porches, service yard, lightwells, maximum five-foot-high retaining walls, walkways, native landscaping, and other improvements (the “Project”). There is a proposed 13,480-square-foot oval driveway with access to the residence, ADU, and stable.

Section 2. The property is zoned RAS-2 and the gross lot area is 7.05 acres or 307,098 SF. The net lot area for development purposes is 6.02 acres or 262,368 SF. The lot is currently undeveloped and vacant. The lot is irregularly shaped and has a depth of approximately 820 feet and a width of approximately 480 feet. The property slopes downward from Crest Road East to the rear of the property. The grade elevation between the proposed main building pad and the street is approximately 42 feet. The lot is located in the southern portion of the City, and has views of the Pacific Ocean. A natural drainage course is located along the western portion of the lot and a blue line stream, which is a part of the Klondike Canyon System, is located approximately 200 feet south of the southern property line of the lot. The lot is also located in proximity to the Geotechnical Hazardous area of the City, known as the Flying Triangle.

Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at its morning field trip meeting and regular meeting for the first time on January 16, 2024. Neighbors within a 1,000-foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Daily Breeze on January 5, 2024. The applicant and owner were notified of the public hearings and were in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal. The Planning Commission opened the meeting, took public testimony, and continued the public hearing to a later date. The 143
2 Resolution No. 1376
23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara)
Planning Commission directed staff to work with the applicant on revising the plans to address the issues.

The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at its morning field trip meeting and regular meeting for a second time on April 16, 2024. Neighbors within a 1,000-foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Daily Breeze on April 5, 2024. The applicant and owner were notified of the public hearings and were in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal. The Planning Commission opened the meeting, took public testimony, and continued the public hearing to a later date. The Planning Commission directed staff to work with the applicant on revising the plans to address the issues.

Subsequently, the applicant revised the Project, and it was brought back to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at its field trip meeting and regular meeting for a third time on June 18, 2024.

Neighbors within a 1,000-foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Daily Breeze on June 8, 2024. The applicant was notified of the public hearings and was in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented at the public hearings from all persons interested in affecting said proposal. On June 18, 2024 the Project was approved by the Planning Commission by 3-0 Vote (2 Commissioner were absent) to adopt Resolution No. 2024-06 approving Zoning Case No. 23-070. The action included amending the conditions of approval to address future area drainage, the height of the mound and what can be planted atop, and the orientation of a passageway to the basement.

On July 22, 2024, the City Council considered the Planning Commission's action to approve the proposed Project and the Traffic Commission's action to approve the driveway apron. The City Council voted 5-0 to take the matter under its own jurisdiction.

The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at a morning field trip on August 12, 2024, and regularly scheduled evening meetings on August 12, 2024. The City Council then continued the item and heard it again on October 14 and 28, 2024. Neighbors within a 1,000-foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the Daily Breeze on August 1, 2024, and October 4, 2024. The applicants and owner were notified of the public hearings and were in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal. The City Council opened the public hearing, took public testimony, and discussed the Project.

Section 4. On February 13, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1202 approving Zoning Case (ZC) No. 902 for construction of an 11,500 SF new single-family residence with an 11,500 SF basement and appurtenances. On December 12, 2018, the Planning Commission granted a two-year time extension for ZC No. 902 to January 23, 2021.

Due to COVID-19 entitlements were placed on hold and Assembly Bill 1561 created an automatic time extension. As such, the expiration date for ZC No. 902 was extended to July 22, 2022, but the permit was not used and expired.

On November 9, 2021, an application was received for development of a new 8,460- square-foot residence, basement, accessory dwelling unit (ADU), guest house, stable, 144
3 Resolution No. 1376
23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara)
swimming pool, spa, and other improvements (ZC No. 21-11). On March 15, 2022, the Planning Commission conducted a field trip and evening meeting and continued the item to April 19, 2022. However, before the April 19, 2022 meeting could take place, the applicant requested the item be pulled because the property had been sold and there was no interest in moving forward with the Project as proposed. As such, the item did not return to the Planning Commission and ZC No. 21-11 was closed. Thus, the Project was never approved.

Section 5. On December 11, 2023, the Traffic Commission reviewed the proposed driveway and apron located on Crest Road East under the current application (ZC No. 23-070).

The Traffic Commission recommended approval of the new driveway and apron to City Council.

II. Findings
Section 6. CEQA Findings. The City Council finds that the Project is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to Section 15303 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (“State CEQA Guidelines”), Class 3 "New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures." Class 3 exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including single family residence and accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Here, the Project involves the construction of a new single-family residence on a vacant lot within a residential zone, along with attached garage, driveway, stable, swimming pool, ADU, guesthouse and other residential improvements. Accordingly, the Project qualifies for the exemption pursuant to Section 15303.

Further, no exceptions to the exemptions in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply.

Specifically, the Project:
a. Is not located in a particularly sensitive environment. The Project is located in an urbanized area and is not environmentally sensitive.
b. There is no possibility of a cumulative impact of the same type of project in the same place over time. The Project entails the construction of a 14,270-square-foot single-family residence with accessory structures and landscaping/hardscaping improvements. Once the residence is built, the likelihood of a successive project on this site is low and probability of a cumulative impact is low.
c. Is not marked by unusual circumstances. There is nothing unusual about the construction of a new single-family residence and accessory structures in a residential area. In addition, the Project will implement best management practices (BMPs) to prevent erosion and construction pollutants from contacting stormwater.
d. Would not damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings, or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway.
e. Is not located on a site which is included on any list compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the Government Code.
f. Would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
145
4 Resolution No. 1376
23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara)
The City Council directs staff to prepare, execute, and file a Notice of Exemption with the Los Angeles County Clerk and the State Clearinghouse within five (5) working days of the Project’s approval and the adoption of this Resolution.

Section 7. Site Plan Review Findings. Site Plan Review is required for construction of any new building or structure pursuant to Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC) Section

17.46.020(A). The Project requires a Site Plan Review (SPR) in order to develop a vacant lot including non-exempt grading, for the construction of a new single-family residence, basement, attached garage, retaining walls that exceed a height of 3 feet (up to a maximum of 5 feet), oval driveway with portions that exceed a width of 20 feet, and other improvements. With respect to the Site Plan Review for the development, the City Council hereby makes the following findings:

A. The Project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance.

The Project complies with all of the City of Rolling Hills Development standards with the exception of requiring Variances for the structures to encroach into the front yard as discussed below in this Resolution.

The Project conforms to Zoning Code lot coverage requirements. The net lot area of the lot is 262,368 square feet (6.02 acres) per RHMC Section 17.16.060(A). The structural net lot coverage is proposed at 18,205 square feet or 6.94% (20% max. permitted) excluding exempt structures; and the total lot coverage proposed, including flatwork, would be 36,590 square feet or 13.95% (35% max. permitted). The disturbed area is 87,770 square feet or 33.45% (40% max permitted).

The landscape below this line will not experience any site disturbance and will be utilized to seed and reestablish a pallet of native species back into the landscape above the house. The Project 146
5 Resolution No. 1376
23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara)
includes three new building pads: Pad #1 is for the main residence for a total of 32,610 SF; Pad #2 is for the ADU for a total of 1,610 SF; and Pad #3 is for the stable for a total of 2,900 SF.

C. The Project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences.

E. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area.

Rather than retaining the dirt on the property, export is needed to maintain the existing topography as much as possible. The Project has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and minimize grading to the extent feasible.

F. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course.

Grading will be balanced on site with exception to 9,715 CY of export (3,131 CY exempt and 6,584 CY non-exempt). Grading has been minimized by integrating the main residence into the natural slope. The width of the main residence is limited to 25 feet, and the result is a long and narrow ranch house rambling along the 1293-foot contour line. The main residence is centered on its site so that runoff is not increased within existing drainage courses on either side of the lot. Control of water collected by impervious surfaces will utilize large cisterns to collect and redistribute storm-water in a controlled manner that does not alter drainage courses or runoff loads from the undeveloped state of the lot. These cisterns are designed to retain runoff in the event of a 100-year storm event.
147
6 Resolution No. 1376
23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara)
G. The Project 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.

Surrounding native vegetation and mature trees will not be affected or will be replaced.

New vegetation will be installed in accordance with the approved landscape plan. The development will be considerate of the environment and will enhance the rural character of the community. As such, the rural character of the community is maintained and privacy is maintained with neighbors. The new landscape will utilize this plant community as the framework for all new plantings in the landscape that will enhance the existing habitat and ecological community already present on site. These native plants are well suited to the existing site without the need for irrigation beyond their establishment period of 1 to 2 years. The trees will provide visual buffers and habitat creation between neighboring properties while preserving and protecting natural drainage patterns on the site. The new landscape adjacent to Crest Road focuses largely on the reestablishment of the coastal sage scrub planting community and providing habit for the local fauna while seamlessly blending the house into the surrounding native hillside without obstructing views
H. The Project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles.

I. The Project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The Project is categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15303, Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures). Class 3 exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including single family residence and accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Here, the Project includes development on a vacant lot of a new single-family residence in a residential zone, with attached garage, driveway, stable, swimming pool, ADU, guesthouse and other residential improvements.

Accordingly, the Project qualifies for the exemption pursuant to Section 15303. Further, no exceptions to the exemptions in State CEQA Guidelines, section 15300.2, apply.

Section 8. Conditional Use Permit Findings. RHMC Section 17.16.040 and 17.16.200 require a Conditional Use Permit per RHMC Section 17.16.040(A)(3) for a guest house, per RHMC Section 17.16.040(A)(6) for a stable over 200 square feet, per RHMC Section

17.16.040(A)(7) for corral over 550 square feet, and per 17.16.200(H) for a 400 SF detached trellis, respectively. The Applicant is proposing a 650 SF guesthouse located at the eastern 148
7 Resolution No. 1376
23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara)
portion of the main building pad. The Applicant is also proposing a 1,225 SF stable with two stalls and a tack room, and a 5,190 SF corral. Given the foregoing, in accordance with RHMC Section 17.42.050, the City Council makes the following findings:

A. That the proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan.

C. That the site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and shape to accommodate the uses and buildings proposed.

The proposed conditional uses comply with all applicable development standards in the RAS-2 Zone. The net lot area is 262,368 SF (6.02 acres) and is adequate to support the proposed uses. The area of the site considered the "front yard", between the proposed main residence and the street, is the widest and most level part of the site. The exception to this is the location of the stable in the front yard, and the corral in the front yard setback, both are subject to variances. The property will be developed and adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed uses and buildings.

D. That the proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district.

The proposed conditional uses comply with all applicable development standards of the RAS-2 Zone, with exception to the variances requested herein.

E. That the proposed use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities.

Section 9. Variance Findings. Section 17.38.050 sets forth the required findings for granting Variances to allow:

1. Stable, corral, swimming pool, and retaining walls to encroach into the front yard (RHMC Section 17.16.200);

2. Corral to encroach into the required 50-foot front setback (RHMC Section 17.16.110 and 17.16.200);

3. Retaining walls that exceed the maximum average height of two-and-one-half feet (RHMC Section 17.16.190(F));

4. Basement with a portion extending beyond the building walls of the residence (RHMC Section 17.12.020); and

5. Grading export (RHMC Section 17.16.230).

With respect to this request for Variances, the City Council finds as follows:

A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone.

As a result of the shape of the lot, the grading of the Project requires a variance to export nonexempt grading of 3,131 CY of soil to keep the peak of the knoll below the height of the street and out of the view of neighbors.

Developments similar to the proposed Project, with stables and corrals in the front yard, are enjoyed by many neighbors on Crest Road East who similarly position main residences 150
9 Resolution No. 1376
23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara)
away from the street to create privacy and maximize views from their residences, all while making the equestrian uses of the neighborhood visible along the street. The variance requests are necessary for preservation and enjoyment of property rights consistent with other properties in the same vicinity and zone with the same types of structures and improvements in similar areas of the project. The variance request pertaining to the basement extending beyond the walls of the residence is solely for a light well type area that allows ingress and egress to the basement area as required by the building code. This subterranean tunnel type design minimizes grading and allows access to the basement area as depicted on the project plans.

C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.

D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed.

E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant.

F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities.

G. That the variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills.
151
10 Resolution No. 1376
23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara)
Approvals granting the variance to allow encroachments into the front yard setback will be consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills, which encourages residential and equestrian uses.

Section 10. Based upon the foregoing findings, and the evidence in the record, the City Council hereby approves Zoning Case No. 23-070 subject to the following conditions:

A. Approval for the Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permits, and Variances shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in RHMC Section

17.38.070 of the Zoning Ordinance unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of this section.

17.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC).

D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file at City Hall and approved by the City Council on August 12, 2024, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the approved development plan. All conditions of the Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permits, and Variance approvals shall be incorporated into the building permit working drawings, and where applicable complied with prior to issuance of a grading or building permit from the building department. 152
11 Resolution No. 1376
23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara)
The conditions of approval of this Resolution shall be printed onto a separate sheet and included in the building plans submitted to the Building Department for review and shall be kept on site at all times.

Any proposed modifications and/or changes to the approved Project, including resulting from field conditions, shall be discussed with staff so that staff can determine whether the modification is minor or major in nature. Minor modifications are subject to approval by the City Manager or his or her designee. Major modifications are subject to approval by the City Council after a public hearing. Applicant shall not implement modifications or changes to the approved Project without the appropriate approval from the City Manager or designee or the City Council, as required.

E. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to Building and Safety Department for issuance of building and grading permits, the plans for the Project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the City Council.

F. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this Project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this Project and all of the conditions set forth herein and the City’s Building Code and Zoning Ordinance.

Further, the person obtaining a building and/or grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the Project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith.

G. Structural lot coverage of the lot shall not exceed 18,205 square feet or 6.94% of the net lot area (20% maximum). The flatwork coverage is 18,385 square feet or 7.01%. The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork, shall not exceed 36,590 square feet or 13.95% (35% maximum).

H. The total disturbed area will be 87,770 square feet or 33.45% (maximum 40%).

Grading for this Project shall not exceed 19,052 cubic yards of cut and 9,337 cubic yards of fill for a total of 28,389 cubic yards. Total export of 9,715 cubic yards, Variance granted for nonexempt 6,584 cubic yards, and export of exempt 3,131 cubic yards for the basement and swimming pool.

I. The total proposed building pad coverage for the residential main pad 1 (32,610 square foot area) is 17,799 square feet or 54.58% which is above the 30% maximum guideline.

The total proposed building pad coverage for the ADU pad 2 (1,610 square foot area) will be 700 square feet or 43.48%, which exceeds the maximum 30% guideline. The total proposed for stable pad 3 (2,900 square foot area) is 1,340 square feet or 46.21% which exceeds the maximum 30% guideline.

J. A driveway access shall be provided per the Fire Department requirements and the driveway shall be roughened and the first 20 feet of the driveway shall not exceed 7% in slope.

153
12 Resolution No. 1376
23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara)
K. Access to the stable and to the corral shall be decomposed granite or 100% pervious roughened material; it shall not be wider than 12 feet.

L. A minimum of five-foot level path and/or walkway, which does not have to be paved, shall be provided around the entire perimeter of all of the proposed structures, including the detached garage and stable, or as otherwise required by the Fire Department.

M. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Low Impact Development requirements for storm water management on site (RHMC Chapter 8.32).

N. Hydrology, soils, geology and other reports, as required by the Building and Public Works Departments, and as may be required by the Building Official, shall be prepared.

O. Prior to issuance of a final construction approval of the Project, all graded slopes shall be landscaped. Prior to issuance of building permit, the landscaping plan shall meet the requirements of the City, shall be submitted to the City in conformance with Fire Department Fuel Modification requirements, and shall be approved by the City’s landscape consultant.

P. The Project shall be landscaped, and continually maintained in substantial conformance with the landscaping plan on file approved by the City’s landscape consultant. A detailed landscaping plan shall provide that any trees and shrubs used in the landscaping scheme for this Project shall be planted in a way that screens the Project development from adjacent streets and neighbors, such that shrubs and trees as they mature do not grow into a hedge or impede any neighbors’ views and the plan shall provide that all landscaping be maintained at a height no higher than the roof line of the nearest Project structure. In addition, the landscaping plan shall provide for screening of development with vegetation not to exceed 10 feet in height, and that the vegetation used for screening shall be planted in an off-set manner, so as to prevent it, as it grows from forming a solid hedge. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area, are water-wise and are consistent with the rural character of the community. Plants listed as high hazardous plants under RHMC Section 8.30.015 are prohibited.

Q. The applicant shall submit a landscaping performance bond or other financial obligation, to be kept on deposit by the City, in the amount of the planting plus irrigation plus 15%. The bond shall be released no sooner than two years after completion of all plantings, subject to a City staff determination that the plantings required for the Project are in substantial conformance with approved plans and are in good condition.

A Certificate of Completion shall be submitted by the Project designer or contractor prior to final landscape installation inspection.

R. The landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, (Chapter 13.18 of the RHMC).

S. Pursuant to Chapter 8.30 of the RHMC, the property shall at all times be maintained free of dead trees and vegetation.
154
13 Resolution No. 1376
23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara)
T. The setback lines and roadway easement lines in the vicinity of the construction for this Project shall remain staked throughout the construction. A construction fence may be required.

U. Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and clear of any improvements to advance equestrian use and emergency preparedness for evacuation within the City. Where RHCA has demonstrated authority over the easement, the City’s Planning Director may grant relief from this condition upon satisfactory proof of permission from RHCA and a legitimate showing that there is no need for the condition to advance equestrian uses and emergency preparedness.

V. Minimum of 65% of any construction materials must be recycled or diverted from landfills. The hauler of the materials shall obtain City’s Construction and Demolition permits for waste hauling prior to start of work and provide proper documentation to the City.

W. 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.

X. During construction, to the extent feasible, all parking shall take place on the Project site, on the new driveway and, if necessary, any overflow parking may take place within the unimproved roadway easements along adjacent streets, and shall not obstruct neighboring driveways, visibility at intersections or pedestrian and equestrian passage. During construction, to the maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car-pool into the City. To the extent feasible, a minimum of 4’ wide path, from the edge of the roadway pavement, for pedestrian and equestrian passage shall be available and be clear of vehicles, construction materials and equipment at all times.

Y. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and relate 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.

Z. Prior to demolition of the existing structures, an investigation shall be conducted for the presence of hazardous chemicals, lead-based paints or products, mercury and asbestoscontaining materials (ACMs). If hazardous chemicals, lead-based paints or products, mercury or ACMs are identified, remediation shall be undertaken in compliance with California environmental regulations and policies.

AA. The property owner and/or his/her contractor/applicant shall be responsible for compliance with the no-smoking provisions in the Municipal Code. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at:
http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard_definitions#FIRE. It is the sole responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions.
155
14 Resolution No. 1376
23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara)
AB. Development shall drain in accordance with the approved grading and drainage plan. Drainage dissipaters shall be constructed outside of any easements. The drainage system shall be approved by the Department of Building and Safety. If an above ground swale and/or dissipater is required, it shall be designed in such a manner as not to cross over any equestrian trails or discharge water onto a trail, shall be stained in an earth tone color, and shall be screened from any trail, road and neighbors’ view to the maximum extent practicable, without impairing the function of the drainage system. In the event a storm drain pipe is installed to divert water flows through Klondike Canyon, the property owner shall use reasonable efforts to investigate the viability of creating a connection between the water overflow from the two cisterns on the property and the installed storm drain pipe.

AC. 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.

AD. During construction, an Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 2022 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control storm water pollution.

AE. 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 and septic tank.

AF. The applicant shall pay all of the applicable Building and Safety and Public Works Department fees and Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District fees, if any.

AG. Prior to final inspection of the Project, “as graded” and “as constructed” plans and certifications shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Department to ascertain that the completed Project is in compliance with the City Council approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the Project during construction, shall be depicted on the “as built/as graded” plan.

AH. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of the Variance approval, or the approval shall not be effective.

AI. All conditions of this Resolution, when applicable, must be complied with prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit from the Building and Safety Department.

AJ. Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6.

AK. To the extent permitted by law, applicant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Rolling Hills, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party 156
15 Resolution No. 1376
23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara)
against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside, or void any permit or approval for this Project authorized by the City, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorney’s fees and costs in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its choice. The applicant shall reimburse the City for any court and attorney's fees which the City may be required to pay as a result of any claim or action brought against the City because of this permit. Although the applicant is the real party in interest in an action, the City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of the action, but such participation shall not relieve the permittee of any obligation under this condition.

AL. The stable and corral shall comply with all requirements in Sections 17.18.060 and

17.18.090, unless otherwise approved herein.

AM. Future expansion of the driveway or motor court is prohibited unless previously approved by the City. Connection to the stable and corral shall be decomposed granite or 100% pervious roughened material; it shall not be less than 6 feet wide and no wider than 12 feet.

AN. New landscaping in the Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) easement is prohibited unless previously approved by RHCA. Landscaping not approved by RHCA in the easement shall be removed from the final landscape plan.

AO. The ADU will require Evergreen landscape screening that must be planted and maintained between the ADU and adjacent parcels. The plant specimens for screening must not exceed the maximum roofline height of the ADU. All landscaping must be drought-tolerant. All landscaping must be from the City's approved plant list.

AP. The mound shall have a maximum elevation of 1330 feet. Landscaping on the mound shall be planted in accordance with the approved landscape plan on file at City Hall.

Three-foot-high shrubs shall be allowed atop the mound. Landscaping shall be reviewed and approved by the City’s landscape consultant prior to issuance of a grading permit.

AQ. The passageway on the western side of the basement shall be angled or zigzagged. The passageway shall be redesigned on the plans and reviewed and approved by the Planning Department prior to submittal to building plan check.

AR. The applicant, irrespective of any approval, direction or other information from the County of Los Angeles or other relevant permitting agency, shall not modify any part or portion of the Project that impacts, deals with or is related to the drainage on the Property, including the size and scope of the proposed cisterns on the Property, without prior City approval.

Section 11. Custodian of Records: The documents and materials associated with this Resolution that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California 90274. The Director of Planning and Community Services is the custodian of records for the record of proceedings.
157
16 Resolution No. 1376
23 Crest Road East (Ogasawara)
Section 12. Protest of Fees, Dedications, Reservations or Other Exactions: Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020, the applicant may protest the imposition of fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions imposed on this development project by taking the necessary steps and following the procedures established by Sections 66020 through 66022 of the California Government Code.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28th DAY OF OCTOBER 2024.

LEAH MIRSCH, MAYOR
ATTEST:
____________________________________

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§

CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 1376 entitled:

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF ZONING CASE NO. 23-070 FOR A SITE PLAN

REVIEW TO DEVELOP A VACANT LOT INCLUDING NON-EXEMPT GRADING

AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 CREST

ROAD EAST, AND FINDING THE PROJECT CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT

FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
PURSUANT TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15303 (LOT 132A-MS) (OGASAWARA)
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on October 28, 2024, by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:

Administrative Offices.
__________________________________

CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
23 Crest Road East (Zoning Case No. 23-070)
June 18, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting Photos
Photo #1: Taken on June 13, 2024 from top of Crest Road East looking west. 176
Photo 2 taken on June 13, 2024 from standing at the top of Crest Road East looking west. 177
Photo 3: Taken on June 13, 2024 from standing at the top of Crest Road East looking west. 178
From: Youkun Nie <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2024 4:04 PM
To: John Signo <[email protected]>; Stephanie Grant <[email protected]> Cc: TAO SPACES <[email protected]>; zhe song <[email protected]> Subject: 23 Crest Rd East---My client's concerns
H i John, Stephanie, H ope yo u are doi ng well! Af ter pa rticipa ting the fiel d tri p and public hea ring yesterday o n the devel opmen t plan at 2 3 Crest R oad East ( Subject Project ), my client has a few conce External ([email protected])
Report This Email FAQ Protection by INKY
Hi John, Stephanie,
Hope you are doing well!
After participating the field trip and public hearing yesterday on the development plan at 23 Crest Road East ( Subject Project), my client has a few concerns about the Subject Project:

1. The potential impact of the Subject Project's WEST WING on my client's privacy
The Subject Project is located at a higher grade than my client's house at 17 Crest Rd East, and its site layout will enable the people in its west wing to see my client's house from high above.

To better understand how the Subject Project might impact his privacy, my client would like to request a site section from the Owner of the Subject Project. The site section shall include both the Subject project and my client's house and demonstrate what measures the Subject project will take to protect my client's privacy.

2. The Potential impact of the Subject Project's STABLE on my client's privacy My client is not comfortable with the location of the Subject Projects Stable either. The Stable's adjacency to my client's property will potentially impact my client's privacy, and the Stable's odor will potentially bring unpleasant feeling to my client. It might be more desirable if the Owner of the Subject Project could consider switching the Stable location with ADU's,
My client understands that he was supposed to raise his concerns before the Public Hearing. He will greatly appreciate it if you can kindly advise what he can do with his above concerns.

Any way, it doesn't mean my client opposes to the Subject Project. While he is raising his concerns, he wants to be a good neighbor of the Subject Project's Owner.

Thanks for your time. Look forward to hearing from you. 179
Best,
Youkun Nie
180
181
From: Kathleen Hughes
To: City Clerk
Subject: Opposition and Request for Geologist at the Next Meeting Date: Monday, October 7, 2024 1:00:47 PM
EXTERNAL EMAIL - This email was sent by a person from outside your organization. Exercise caution when clicking links, opening attachments or taking further action, before validating its authenticity.

Dear City Council,
My name is Kathleen Hughes and my husband, Dan Bethencourt, and I live at Caballeros Road, less than a mile from the proposed construction at 23 Crest Road East.

I have already voiced my opposition to any construction at 23 Crest Road East given the land movement we are seeing directly below it. The owner has tried to quell fears about this by designing tanks to capture water. But I am also concerned about the impact of the construction itself.

I would like to request the opinion of an independent geologist. I would also like to hear from any engineers and geologists the owner hired and I think that team should be available to answer questions from the public. They were supposed to be at the last meeting but were unfortunately out of town.

RPV has banned new construction believing that it will exacerbate the current devastating slide. Many of our residents are now devastated by the loss of their utilities. Why on earth would we take the risk of making the slide even worse when we know that the slide in 1956 was triggered by construction?
I'm amazed you are even considering this project! Why not, at a minimum, wait until we have time to collect more data about the rate of land movement within our city? The Fire Station, less than a quarter mile away, has cracks in its foundation. The Fykman's home, on the same street, has had its power cut off.

Please delay this project!
Thank you,
Kathleen Hughes
Rolling Hills
182
James and Ann Bellis
Quail Ridge Rd. South
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
1 October 14, 2024
City of Rolling Hills
City Council
2 Portuguese Bend Rd.

Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Cc Rolling Hills Community Association
1 Portuguese Bend Rd.

Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Dear City of Rolling Hills:

Again, this letter requests that the City of Rolling Hills agendize and enact a moratorium on development of land and on removal large trees (greater than 3” diameter) until the City can adequately address geotechnical and hydrologic conditions and risks for land in Rolling Hills above the Greater Portuguese Bend Landslide Complex. For the purposes of this letter, “development” is considered demolition, grading, excavating, earthworks, and non-emergency construction of new structures. This letter opposes the development of 23 Crest Rd.

Pursuant to Government Code section 66300, subdivision (b)(1)(B)(ii), a city cannot enforce a moratorium that would limit housing development until it has submitted the ordinance to and received approval from HCD. Conditions for imposing a moratorium, or similar restrictions on housing development, must demonstrate “an imminent threat to the health and safety of persons residing in, or within the immediate vicinity of, the area subject to the moratorium” (Gov. Code, § 66300, subd. (b)(1)(B)(i)). The City and its elected and appointed officials can demonstrate and know that there is an imminent threat to the Rolling Hills residents living in the vicinity of the Greater Portuguese Landslide Complex.

I continue to submit this same letter. I am now the squeaky wheel that is being ignored. I ask the City Council and City Manager, “Why is this moratorium item not getting agendized?” If the City agendizes this moratorium item and votes “no,” then that is the final decision, and the residents will confidently know where the City stands on the landslide issue. If the City votes “yes” to enact a moratorium, the residents will see that the City is being prudent and not trying to add to an already existing problem. It is beyond my mental capacity how a City Council can confidently approve the development of new structures in an active land slide area with no utilities or in areas under the threat of utility abandonment. City approval of these development projects is not only hazardous for the construction workers of the development, but hazardous to the families who eventually live in the structures, and hazardous to those who own property and structures around 183
James and Ann Bellis
Quail Ridge Rd. South
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
2 the new development. Until the City can prove that development is safe and not adding to a continuing landslide issue, should the moratorium be lifted.

With regards to 23 Crest Rd: development of a vacant parcel resulting in more impervious surfaces does not “help” keep water from penetrating a landslide slip layer; impervious surfaces just divert water, resulting in more heavily saturated neighboring areas. Trees however, do maintain water in the upper layers of the earth, preventing water from reaching down into landslide slip layers. This is the reason for a moratorium on development and removal of 3+ inch trees.

I AGAIN REQUEST, THE CITY AGENDIZE A MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT AND REMOVAL OF 3+ INCH DIAMETER TREES, PUBLICALLY DISCUSS THE ITEM, AND VOTE ON THE ITEM.

Sincerely,
James and Ann Bellis
Quail Ridge Rd. S., Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Enclosed
Table of Figures
Figure 1: September 9, 2024 Crack between 3 and 5 Quail Ridge Rd. S. .............................................. 3 Figure 2: September 9, 2024 Crack and movement on Quail Ridge Rd. S. ............................................ 3 Figure 3: September 24th, 2024 Showing Expanding Crack and vertical movement ........................ 4 Figure 4: September 29, 2024 showing crack widening and vertical movement............................... 5 Figure 5:September 29, 2024 showing crack all the way through property and damaging fence ....... 5 Figure 6: September 30, 2024 Crack running through retaining wall................................................ 6 Figure 7: Greater Portuguese Bend Landslide Complex Overview Map........................................... 7 Figure 8: Proposed Rolling Hills Moratorium Area........................................................................... 8 184
James and Ann Bellis
Quail Ridge Rd. South
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
3 Figure 1: September 9, 2024 Crack between 3 and 5 Quail Ridge Rd. S.

Figure 2: September 9, 2024 Crack and movement on Quail Ridge Rd. S. 185
James and Ann Bellis
Quail Ridge Rd. South
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
4 Figure 3: September 24th, 2024 Showing Expanding Crack and vertical movement 186
James and Ann Bellis
Quail Ridge Rd. South
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
5 Figure 5:September 29, 2024 showing crack all the way through property and damaging fence Figure 4: September 29, 2024 showing crack widening and vertical movement 187
James and Ann Bellis
Quail Ridge Rd. South
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
6 Figure 6: September 30, 2024 Crack running through retaining wall 188
James and Ann Bellis
Quail Ridge Rd. South
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
7 Figure 7: Greater Portuguese Bend Landslide Complex Overview Map 189
James and Ann Bellis
Quail Ridge Rd. South
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
8 Figure 8: Proposed Rolling Hills Moratorium Area
190
Alfred Visco Statement At Rolling Hills 10-14-24 City Council Meeting Re: 23 Crest Road East Development Project
It must be kept in mind that this Project is quite frankly massive in scope both in the structural and flatwork coverage of 36, 590 sq. ft. (.84 acres) and the disturbed area of 87,770 sq. ft. (2.015 acres).

Pg. 83.

Under the heading of Environmental Determination the following statement is set forth: “ Assertions that this Project will have some different or dispositive impact on land movement issues in the City is not supported by any technical evidence...”. Pg. 50. Unfortunately this is a prime example of not finding what you are not looking for.

The Hamilton and Associations cover letter is dated May 23, 2024 and is entitled Geotechnical and Geological Report Update. Pg. 124. Thus on its face it does not and can not take into consideration the recent land movement in Rolling Hills which commenced in approximately June /July 2024 and of course the GS survey reports published commencing on September 14, 2024. Nor does it take into consideration the recent geological reports and studies set forth in Rancho Palos Verdes city council meetings since May 2024. Delving into the actual HA report it even becomes less supportive of the foregoing environmental determination. For example, all of the geotechnical and geologic engineering investigation on the subject site were performed in 2013 and 2014. Pg. 129.

As set forth in the HA report the Flying Triangle landslide is purportedly located within 230 feet west of the west site margin and about 425 feet southwest of the proposed site development. Pg. 137.

There is no analysis done, of course, to determine if in fact this statement is currently accurate. The more recent RPV reports bring into question what has been historically viewed as the outer limits of the reactivated landslide areas and waive a red flag as to the accuracy of the Flying Triangle landslide location as reported decades ago, especially when coupled with the new Rolling Hills land movement.

The HA report goes on to state that the maximum depth of the Flying Triangle landslide slide mass is enigmatic. Some have indicated it is 76 feet deep while others concluded it could be as much as 450 feet below the ground surface. Pg. 137. Yet the deepest boring conducted on the site was only 59 feet. Pg. 129.

The only logical conclusion one can and should draw from all of the foregoing is that the HA report is inadequate and does not support the assertion that the Project will not have an impact on land movement. The City Council should not approve the Project and direct that a new geotechnical and geological report be prepared based on current and adequate geotechnical and geologic engineering investigations.
191
October 24, 2024
Hon. Leah Mirsch, Mayor
City of Rolling Hills
2 Portuguese Bend Rd
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
RE: Zoning Case No. 23-070
23 Crest Road East
Rolling Hills, CA 90274 (Lot 132A-MS)
Dear Mayor Mirsch and City Council Members,
In preparation for the October 28th City Council Meeting we would like to address comments from neighbors and council. County or County-approved officials, such as plan checkers, are in the best position to verify our team’s expert findings. Should the plan checkers have questions about our experts’ findings they will request further investigation from our team.

We would ask that the Council not take arbitrary and capricious action and direction from the crowd based on speculative concerns and instead rely on the expertise of County or County-approved staff. There have been requests from at least two neighbors for the City to instate a moratorium on this property. A moratorium is fraught with risk for the City. 1 Moreover,
a moratorium would not be supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. To date, there have been no expert refutations of the findings from our team; any opposition has relied on anecdotal observation and speculative conclusions. As stated by our geologists, if any scientific evidence is made available that contradicts their findings, they would like to be the first to know. We ask that the council judge the project based on the findings presented by our experts or any other expert testimony. Our client has pledged commitment to contributing to a city-planned regional solution but cannot agree to its full implementation as a prerequisite to building on her property.
1 In neighboring Rancho Palos Verdes, a moratorium on building was struck down by the court and found to be invalid where not supported by evidence and facts, resulting in a takings claim against that city. See Monks v. City of Rancho Palos Verdes (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 263, 270. 192
Answers to specific question/comments noted from the City Council Meeting on 10/14/2024:

1. We have brought claims of water infiltrating the western canyon to our experts.

Our geologist has surveyed the area in question and found no evidence of fissures or other geologic anomalies that would correspond to water infiltration on our site.

2. Is the boring depth of 59’ sufficiently deep?
Our Geotechnical and Geological Report is ready for review by plan check officials who can expertly determine the completeness and thoroughness of our report, or request additional investigations.

3. Is bentonite or any other clays determined to be underneath the bedrock at the property’s location?
There is no evidence that the geologic formation differs from what has been previously mapped and peer-reviewed and included in our Geotechnical and Geological Report.

Our Geotechnical and Geological Report is ready for review by plan check officials who can expertly determine the completeness and thoroughness of our report, or request additional investigations.

4. Are the geologic reports from 2014 to May 2023 accurate and reflective of current conditions reported in the property’s immediate area?
There is no evidence that the geologic formation differs from what has been previously mapped and peer-reviewed and included in our Geotechnical and Geological Report.

Our Geotechnical and Geological Report is ready for review by plan check officials who can expertly determine the completeness and thoroughness of our report, or request additional investigations.

5. Are the calculations for toilet flushings accurate?
The numbers used for the calculations are determined by the California Green Building Standards Code, Chapter 8, WS-1 and are subject to review by plan check officials.

Please note that any changes to the WS-1 use table will not change the overall volume 193
dispersed from the cisterns each month; the planting palette is such that its irrigation needs are met in the driest of years but can and do benefit from supplementary irrigation.

6. Has the project received will-serve letters from utility companies? Letters have been sent to respective utility companies for water, electricity, and gas requesting will-serve letters. To date, we have not received any correspondence. There is no reason to believe the property will not be served since the other neighbors in the vicinity on stable ground are being served.

7. Does the plan check by LA County differ in kind or quality from the outsourced method (Wildan)?
No it does not. Both plan check entities follow the same building code standards.Many building departments, including LA County, outsource their plan check to experts in private practice.

8. Can the property’s acreage be verified and reflected on all pertinent documents? Yes. The total lot area is 7.05 acres.

9. What are the variances applied for?
The six variances included in the project’s resolution are as follows:

A. The stable, corral, swimming pool, and retaining walls encroach into the front yard.Variance to RHMC 17.18.040.A.3.d, RHMC 17.16.200.G.1, RHMC

17.16.190.F.

The buildable zone established by the steep slopes on the lower half of the property prompted this variance that other sites with similar site plans have applied for. Properties with corral and/or stable within setback to easement line are: 12 Crest Rd. E.; 17 Crest Rd. E.; 8 Crest Rd. E.; 63 Crest Rd. E; 2 Possum Ridge on Crest Rd. E.; 1 & 2 South Field Dr. on Crest Road East; and 10 Flying Mane Ln. on Crest Rd. E. Properties with corral/stable in the front yard are: 29 Crest Rd. E.; 5 Crest Rd. E; 10 Crest Rd. W.
194
B. Corral encroaches on front yard setback.

Variance to RHMC 17.16.160.H.

Precedent in Rolling Hills for variance. See explanation in variance 1.

C. Retaining walls exceeding the maximum average height of two-and one-half-feet.

Variance to RHMC 17.16.190.F.

All retaining walls are limited in height to a maximum of 5’-0”. All retaining walls higher than 2’-6” in height slope down to 0’-0” at one end.

D. Basement with portion extending beyond the building walls of the residence.

Variance to 17.16.080.B.1
Area extending beyond first floor footprint is limited to only the basement exit corridor (labeled on the architectural plans as Bas. Exit 110).

E. Decks/patios contain areas more than one foot above finished grade.

Variance to 17.44.020.D.

Submitted architecture and civil drawings for the main house, guest house, stable, and ADU do not show any decks or patios with areas more than 1’ above finish grade. The sunset pavilion’s finish floor is at 2’6” above grade to minimize grading at this location.

F. Non-exempt export
Variance to 15.04.110.4
Per submitted calculations, total export equals 9,715 cy including non-exempt export equaling 6,584 cy. The non-exempt export will reduce the height of the central knoll (mound) to a height below street level minimizing visual impact of grading.

Thank you for your attention in reviewing our project.

Sincerely,
Frank Escher and Ravi GuneWardena, FAIA
195
Cc: Yukiko Ogasawara
3 Flying Mane Ln
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Jeff Lewis, Esq.
827 Deep Valley Dr Suite 209
Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274
Patrick Donegan
2 Portuguese Bend Rd
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
196
Environmental Design Associates
14121 Sawston Circle . Westminster, CA 92683
Phone 714.350.6910
1 DATE: January 30, 2024
TO: Stephanie Grant
FIRM: City of Rolling Hills
FROM: Carrie Mandarino
PROJECT: 23 Crest Road E
SUBJECT: Conceptual Landscape Plan Review
Dear Stephanie,
Thank you for the opportunity to review the conceptual landscape plan for 23 Crest Road East located in the City of Rolling Hills. The landscape plans have been reviewed for compliance with the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO).

Landscape plans were reviewed for appropriateness and adaptability of selected plants, water efficient irrigation design, and the use of design elements that enhance the character of the community. Review of hardscape and precise grading and drainage are not included.

Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) Compliance Landscape plans have been reviewed for compliance with The City of Rolling Hills Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance No. 361.

This is a Conceptual Plan submittal with approximately 83,000 s.f. of landscape. The MAWA and ETWU calculations for the project are not provided. Refer to the City of Rolling Hills Water Efficient Landscape Submittal Package for plan requirements and Water Efficient Landscape Worksheet. Use the Eto of 39.7 for City of Rolling Hills in the calculations. Include the water feature in the ETWU calculation with a 1.0 plant factor and 1.0 irrigation efficiency (1.0 ETAF). Show the fountain as a high hydrozone, and provide a hydrozone map.

The proposed plant palette is comprised low water use native plants. Three groups of low water use zones are shown and include a Native Meadow, Native Garden, and Native Chaparral. Photos with plant water use are shown and checked per WUCOLS IV Region 3 South Coastal.

The Project Application needs to be submitted. Show a Statement of Compliance with the Landscape Ordinance, and a note requiring a 3-inch layer of mulch on the plan. Planting notes should include soil preparation with amendments for planting.

Irrigation Plan
An irrigation plan was not submitted. A Conceptual Plan for Water Management was included. Provide an irrigation plan showing equipment location and a legend. 197
Environmental Design Associates
14121 Sawston Circle . Westminster, CA 92683
Phone 714.350.6910
2 Planting Plan
The plant palette is comprised of a variety of low water use trees, shrubs, succulents, grasses, and ground cover that are adapted to the local climate and conditions on site.

Three plant palette zones of low water use plants are shown including, Native Meadow, Native Garden, and Native Chaparral. Photos of plants are included with the WUCOLS Water Use.

Low water use native trees specified include: Quercus agrifolia and Lyonothamnus.

Moderate water use Cercis ‘Forest Pansy’ is also specified.

Planting details are shown. Planting notes should also be provided with soil preparation and amendments.

City Requirements and Notes
Per City of Rolling Hills requirements, trees specified shall not grow taller than the roof ridge height. Species of concern that grow taller than this include Quercus agrifolia and Lyonothamnus. Cercis ‘Forest Pansy’ trees are acceptable. Trees should also be located so that neighboring views are not obstructed. Show the mature tree height in legend. No City prohibited tree species are shown on the plan.

No planting is allowed in the RHCA easement. In addition, hedges are not allowed in Rolling Hills. The Toyon hedge shown at the edge of the property should be spaced in an uneven pattern approximately 15 feet minimum apart so as not to create a hedge.

The following notes should be added to the Plan:

No landscaping shall be allowed in the RHCA easement.

Trees specified shall not grow higher than the height of the roof ridge.

Trees shall be planted in locations that do not hinder views from the adjacent lots.

Trees are required to be maintained to a height not to exceed the roof ridge and so that views from adjacent lots are not obstructed.

Hedges are not allowed.

Required Revisions for MWELO Compliance
 Provide Water Efficient Landscape Worksheet project calculations.  Include water feature in calculations as a high hydrozone with a 1.0 ETAF.  Provide required notes on plan: Statement of Compliance with Landscape Ordinance, and 3-inches of mulch required in all planting areas.  Provide irrigation plan with legend, notes/specifications, and details.  Provide planting plan with legend, and notes/specifications.  Specify smaller trees with acceptable mature tree height below roof ridge. Locate trees so that neighboring views are not obstructed. Show mature height in legend.  Space Toyon shrubs so as not to create a hedge.
 Add City Required Notes shown above to plan.
198
Environmental Design Associates
14121 Sawston Circle . Westminster, CA 92683
Phone 714.350.6910
3 Installation Note
The irrigation and planting plans shall be installed per the approved landscape plan documentation package. Any changes or substitutions to plans shall be subject to approval by the planning department and landscape architect for the City.

A Certificate of Completion shall be submitted by the project designer or contractor prior to final landscape installation inspection.

I appreciate the opportunity to assist with the review of this landscape plan and would be happy to discuss any questions you may have.

Respectfully submitted,
Environmental Design Associates
Carrie Mandarino, RLA #4769
199
County of Los Angeles - Department of Public Works

GMED PLAN CHECK REFERRAL FORM

TO BE COMPLETED BY COUNTY PLAN CHECKER ONLY
---- APPLICANT TO UPLOAD THIS SHEET TO GMED ----
Plan Checker Name ________________________ District Office ___________ BSD Permit Case: BLD ________________ GRAD________________________ Valuation: BLD $_______________ GRAD (cubic yards)
Linked GMED Plan Case: ESTU _______________________________________ Address: ______________________________________APN_______________  Multiple Plan Checks on subject site (Please Verify in EpicLA/DAPTS) Initial reason for referral:
 Seismic Hazard Zone
Liquefaction / Seismically Induced Landslide / Fault Zone  Slope Stability
Over-Steeped Slopes / Landslide / Debris Flow
 Retaining Walls or Structures
Basement / Tiered / Soldier Piles / Tie-Back / Geo-Grid  Foundations Recommendations
Piles / Caissons / Mat / Settlement / Repairs / Soil-Cement Columns  Temporary Conditions
Shoring / Steep excavations / Slot-Cuts / Tie-Backs
 Low Impact Development
Soil Infiltration Rate / Infiltration Report / LID BMP Location and Depth  Grading
Fill and Bearing Recommendations / Soil-Improvements / Geology  Other (Please Specify)
________________________________________________
________________________________________________
Please Note:

This initial referral reason may not limit the extent of GMED review. Additional geologic and geotechnical conditions may become apparent after GMED review of the plans, reports, and references.

Please verify with your Plan Checker:

GMED plan check fees will need to be paid prior to start of plan check. Once invoiced, please pay GMED fees online through EpicLA or at the Building and Safety District Office. 200
County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works
Geotechnical and Materials Engineering Division
GEOLOGY AND SOILS ENGINEERING – DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUBMITTALS Requirements Prior to Submittal
Plan check applications must be filed with Building and Safety or Land Development Division and an Agency Referral form provided BEFORE any documents can be accepted for review by GMED. For questions regarding the submittal or review process, please contact GMED at [email protected], or (626) 458- 4923.

GMED Submittals for LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION (LDD)
Log in to the same web application used to submit to LDD:
https://epicla.lacounty.gov/SelfService/#/home.

Once logged in, click “Apply” then under the “Plans” heading click “Geotechnical Study.” GMED Submittals for BUILDING AND SAFETY (BSD)
If your BSD application is through EPIC LA/CSS, log in to EpicLA/CSS:
https://epicla.lacounty.gov/SelfService/#/home.

First-time users of EpicLA/CSS are required to create site login. Please register on-line.

Once logged in, click “Apply” then under the “Plan” heading click “Geotechnical Study.” You will receive an ESTU# for your GMED plan check.

If your BSD application is through a Contract City system, then submit documents to GMED here: https://dpw.lacounty.gov/apps/esubmissions/gme/default.aspx. First-time users are required to create a site login.

PDF file format for GMED Submittal
Please include all plan sheets into one PDF file.

Please name the file in the following format:

For Agency Referral Forms:

Name file as: “Agency Referral Form”
For Plans:
“YYYYMMDD – [Type of Plan]”
Submittal Date- example: “20190101 – Grading Plan”

For Reports:
“YYYYMMDD – [Firm Name]”
Submittal Date- example: “20190101 – Best Geotechnical Company” 201
Lomita Agency Referral Rev 05-2024

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION

AGENCY REFERRAL

VHFHSZ Y / N
Waste Sewer / Septic
Hwy.

Dedication
Y / N
______ ft.

Geology Fault / Liq / LS
Methane Y / N
Code
Enforce.

Y / N
# _______________
(N) Address Y / N

LOMITA DISTRICT OFFICE
24320 S. Narbonne Avenue
Lomita, CA 90717
Telephone: (310) 534-3760, Fax (310) 530-5482
Office Hours: 8:00 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. M - F
Plan Checker Hours: 8:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. Appointments are recommended Prepared By HNM OM Initial Date
Applicant’s
Signature:

Plans for (Grading/ Structure) at __________________________________________________ _____________________________________ (Address) (Locality)
Plan Check No. _______________________________________________ was submitted on _______________________________________ Land Use Zone _____________________ Proposed Occupancy _____________________ Type of Construction ____________________ Description of proposed work: __________________________________________________________________________________________

THIS NOTICE IS TO INFORM YOU THAT APPROVAL FROM THE AGENCIES MARKED BELOW, IN ADDITION TO BUILDING PLAN CHECK APPROVAL, MUST BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65913.3, if review of the permit application is required by a State Agency or Other Agency, as marked below, the applicable time limits for review of the application are tolled until the applicant provides Building and Safety with a copy of the Agency approval. Issuance of this referral sheet shall serve as formal notice of tolling. You may need to submit the pertinent plans, plan check number, calculations, reports, etc., directly to these agencies. To assist you, we have listed below the information which you will need to contact these agencies. Follow-up is your responsibility. Please be aware that some items resulting from these agency plan reviews may affect your building plan check. These should be communicated to your Building Plan Check Engineer as soon as possible to prevent unnecessary delays. Submit all agency approvals 48 hours prior to permit issuance. Notify the Plan Check Engineer when all agency approvals have submitted and request review.

ADDITIONAL AGENCY CLEARANCES MAY BE REQUIRED BY YOUR BUILDING PLAN CHECK ENGINEER

COUNTY AGENCIES

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
____ AVIATION DIVISION
1000 S. Fremont Ave., Bldg. A9 East, 1st Flr., Alhambra, CA 91803 (626) 300-4600 Mon-Thurs 7:00 a.m. - 5:45 p.m.
____ BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION
Headquarters M-Th 6:45 - 5:30 (626) 458-3173
900 S. Fremont Ave., 3rd Fl, Alhambra, CA 91803-1331
Approval for the following sections is required as noted below:
□ ELECTRICAL SECTION
900 S. Fremont Ave., 3rd Fl, Alhambra, CA 91803-1331
(626) 458-3180
Approval is required for:
□ Energy Plan Check □ Electrical Code Check
□ Emergency Egress Illumination (O.L. ≥ 100)
□ Methane Mitigation required in Methane Zone
□ MECHANICAL SECTION
900 S. Fremont Ave., 3rd Fl, Alhambra, CA 91803-1331
(626) 458-3182
Approval is required for:
□ Energy Plan Check □ Mechanical Code Check
□ Plumbing Code Check □ Roof Drainage
□ Green Building Check
□ Methane Mitigation required in Methane Zone
□ Research Section
900 S. Fremont Ave., 3rd Fl, Alhambra, CA 91803-1331
(626) 458-3173
(Alternate Materials, Methods, SMRF…)
□ GRADING AND DRAINAGE SECTION
Anthony Wong – Regional Drainage and Grading Engineer
24320 S. Narbonne Ave, CA Lomita 90717
(310) 534-3760
Thursday 8:00 -11:00 a.m.
□ Grading Plan Check
□ “Rough Grade” approval is required prior to
issuance of building permit
□ Drainage Plan Check (NPDES/LID COMPLIANCE)
□ Drainage approval is required
____ LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION – PERMIT SECTION
Permits are required for road excavations and encroachments within County roads and Flood Control easements.
□ PERMIT SECTION
900 S. Fremont Ave., 3rd Floor, Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 (626) 458-3129 6:45-5:30 Mon-Thurs
□ Westchester Office
5530 W. 83rd St, Westchester, CA 90045
(310) 649-6300 7:30 a.m. – 3:30 p.m. Mon-Fri
____ ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS DIVISION
Plan approval is required for most commercial and industrial buildings for:
□ INDUSTRIAL WASTE / UNDERGROUND TANKS /

STORMWATER
Lomita Office Headquarters
24320 S. Narbonne Ave 900 S. Fremont Ave., Annex 3rd Fl Lomita, CA 90717 Alhambra, CA 91803-1331
(310) 534-4862 (626) 458-3517
8:00-9:30 a.m. Mon-Fri 6:45-5:30 Mon-Thurs
[email protected] Industrial Waste
[email protected] Underground Storage Tanks
[email protected] Stormwater
□ NPDES/SUSMP Approval
Industrial Waste Unit
900 S. Fremont Ave, Annex 3rd Fl
Alhambra, CA 91803-1331
(626) 458-3517 7:00am-5:00pm Mon-Thurs
□ DUMP AREAS/METHANE MITIGATION/OIL & GAS
WELLS/CONTAMINATED SOIL HAZARDS (structure within
1,000 ft from a landfill)
900 S. Fremont Ave., Annex 3rd Fl
Alhambra, CA 91803-1331
[email protected]
(626) 570-2810 7:00am -5:00pm Mon-Thurs
□ SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT (TRASH ENCLOSURES)
900 S. Fremont Ave., Annex 3rd Floor
Alhambra, CA 91803-1331
[email protected]
(626) 570-2810 7:00am -5:00pm Mon-Thurs
□ CONSTRUCTION & DEMOLITION DEBRIS RECYCLING AND REUSE PLAN 900 S. Fremont Ave., Annex 3rd Fl, Alhambra, CA 91803-1331 (626) 458-3517 www.CleanLA.com 6:45-5:30 Mon-Thurs
Instructions on how to apply are available at: www.LACountyCND Email at [email protected]
(626) 458-3517 7:00am -5:00pm Mon-Thurs
_____ GEOTECHNICAL AND MATERIALS ENGINEERING DIVISION (GMED) GEOLOGY/SOILS SECTIONS - Plan approval is required for site stability and geologic hazard. (626) 458-4925 M-Th 6:30-5:15 pm Upload plans, reports, GMED fee receipt, this Agency Referral Sheet to:
https://epicla.lacounty.gov/SelfService/#/home
GMED Referral for:

Seismic Hazard Zone
Liquefaction / Seismically Induced Landslide / Fault Study Slope Stability
Over-Steepened Slopes / Landslide / Debris Flow
Retaining Walls or Systems
Basement / Tiered / Soldier Piles / Tie-Back / Geo-Grid Foundation Recommendations
Piles / Caissons / Mat / Repairs / Soil-Cement Columns
Temporary Conditions
Shoring / Steep Excavations / Slot-Cuts / Tie-Backs
202
Lomita Agency Referral Rev 05-2024
____ LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
900 S. Fremont Ave., 3rd Fl, Alhambra, CA 91803-1331
(626) 458-4921 6:45-5:30 Mon-Thurs
□ SUBDIVISION PLAN CHECK SECTION
□ LANDSCAPE (Residential or Non-Residential landscaped area > 500 square feet)
□ HIGHWAY DEDICATION Form "48-0040-DPW"
should be filled out when plan approval for street improvements and/or dedication is required for commercial and multiple residential buildings. "Bridge & Major Thoroughfare (B&T) Fee" is also required for commercial, multiple residential buildings and designated tracts.
(626) 458-4915
_____ MAPPING AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT
□ ADDRESS REQUEST:

Manual: Address Request Manual

OTHER COUNTY DEPARTMENTS
____ DEPT OF PUBLIC HEALTH – Environmental Health Division 5050 Commerce Way, Baldwin Park, CA 91706
(626) 430-5380
Approval is required for:
□ Private Sewage Disposal Systems
□ Underground Cisterns
□ Food Service Establishments
6053 Bristol Parkway 2nd Fl, Culver City 90230
(310) 665-8483 8:00 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.
□ Public Swimming Pool- Recreational Health
(626) 430-5360
□ X-Ray Machine Installation
Radiation Management
3530 Wilshire Blvd., 9th Fl
Los Angeles, CA 90010
(213) 351-7897
____ COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY
Payment of Library Facilities Mitigation Fee is required. A Certificate of Payment or a Certificate of Clearance must be obtained from the Public Library. Bring Plan Check Fee Receipt from Building and Safety. 7400 E. Imperial Highway, Downey, CA 90242
(562) 940-8430 M-Th 7:30 am - 5:30 pm
____ PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
Approval for building plans is required for construction adjacent to "Designated Trails"
Planning Division, Research & Trails Section
510 S. Vermont Ave. 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90020
(213) 351-5098 M-Th 7:00 am – 5:30 pm
____ REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT
320 W. Temple St., 13th Floor (Rm. 1360)
Los Angeles, CA 90012-3282
Public Counter : 1:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Mon-Thurs
Telephone Hours: 7:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. (213) 974-6411 Mon-Thurs Southwest District Office for General Information:
1320 W. Imperial Hwy, Los Angeles, CA 90044
(323) 820-6500
Mon – Thurs 7:30 a.m.– 11:30 a.m.
(must sign in by 11:00 a.m.)
____ DEPARTMENT OF ARTS AND CULTURE
Compliance of the Public Art in Private Development Ordinance is required.

Pat Gomez (Phone or email inquiries only) [email protected] or 213-315-9972 M-Th 9:00am-5:00pm
_____ LOS ANGELES COUNTY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Recordation of affordable housing land use covenant is required and must be recorded senior to all existing deeds of trust on the property.

Payment of monitoring fee is required at time of covenant recordation.

Paulina Safarian (Email inquiries only)
[email protected]

STATE AGENCIES
____ CALTRANS
Permits are required for outdoor signs, excavation, encroachment (including driveway aprons) and improvements (including grading or structures that affect drainage) on State Highways:
100 S. Main Street 2nd Fl.

Los Angeles, CA 90012
(213) 897-3631
____ CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
A Coastal Development permit is required. Prior to application submittal obtain local approval in concept from the Regional Planning Department.
200 Oceangate 10th Fl, Suite 1000, Long Beach, CA 90802 (562) 590-5071
____ STATE DEPT. OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS - CAL/OSHA

DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH
Permit is required for excavation of trenches which are 5 ft. or more deep into which a person is required to descend or for the construction or demolition of any structure 4 or more stories. Brick-lined seepage pits may require permit.

County Area & Contracted Cities: Lawndale Office:
680 Knox St, Ste. 100 320 W. 4th St, Ste. 850
Torrance, CA 90502 Los Angeles, CA
(310) 516-3734 (213) 576-7451
____ STATE DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION DIVISION OF OIL

AND GAS
Obtain clearance for the requirements of abandonment of oil wells. 5816 Corporate Ave., Ste. 200, Cypress, CA 90630-4731
(714) 816-6847
____ CALIFORNIA STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD

DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
STORM WATER PERMIT UNIT – Notice of intent required when disturbed area  1 acre.

P. O. Box 1977, Sacramento, CA 95812-1977
(916) 341-5536

OTHER AGENCIES
____ FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU OF THE CONSOLIDATED FIRE

PROTECTION DISTRICT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY
- Plan approval is required
4475 W. El Segundo Blvd., Hawthorne, CA 90250
(310) 263-2732
[email protected]
□ FIRE STATION DEVELOPER FEE is required
4475 W. El Segundo Blvd., Hawthorne, CA 90250
□ "HAZMAT" form must be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department for non-residential occupancies if hazardous materials are being handled. Obtain form from Building and Safety and submit to:

Fire Prevention Bureau
Hazardous Materials Section
5825 Rickenbacker Road, Commerce, CA 90040-3027
(323) 890-4000
□ FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS
5823 Rickenbacker Road, Commerce, CA 90040-3027
(323) 890-4125
□ OTHER APPROVALS (Sprinklers<20 Heads, Sprinklers:

Residential & Remodel, Pool draft Hydrant, Alarms, Hoods, Restaurants with new cooking, Tanks, and TI<2500 sq. ft.) 4475 W. El Segundo Blvd., Hawthorne, CA 90250
(310) 263-2732
□ FUEL MODIFICATION
Brushing Clearance Office, Fire Station 32
605 N. Angeleno Ave., Azusa, CA 91702
(626) 969-5205 Mon-Fri 8:00-5:00 p.m.
____ COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT
Payment of sewer connection fee is required
1955 Workman Mill Rd., Whittier 90601
(562) 908-4288 ext. 2727
____ SCHOOL DISTRICT
Development fee must be paid to the District for residential and commercial construction. A "Certificate of Payment of Developer Fee" must be submitted to Building and Safety prior to obtaining a building permit.
□ Obtain “Certification Form” from B&S District Office. ____ SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
(SCAQMD)
Applicants for non-residential buildings must fill out "Air Quality Permit Checklist" furnished by Building & Safety. If "Yes" is marked, a written release will be required before occupancy is allowed. Notification form required for demolition and alteration permits where ASBESTOS is involved.
21865 E. Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4182
(909) 396-2000, (800) 288-7664
____ LOCAL WATER COMPANY
□ Provide a copy of the Fire Flow Availability letter (Form 195/196) completed by the water company serving the site. (Form
available from B&S District Office)
□ Provide a “Will Serve” letter from the water company for all new residential and commercial buildings (including additions that will create new units) prior to permit issuance
____ CITY APPROVALS
□ City of Lomita
24300 S. Narbonne Ave.

Lomita, CA 90717
(310) 325-7110
□ City of Rolling Hills
2 Portuguese Bend Rd.

Rolling Hills CA 90274
(310) 377-1521
203
Lomita Agency Referral Rev 05-2024
OTHER
204

Page 10 ends

Rolling Hills City CouncilOctober 28, 2024

Rolling Hills City Council
October 28, 2024