137, Construct tennis court in fron, Correspondence• •
K. H. WATTS COMPANY
INCORPO RAT E D
1047 WEST 164TH STREET
GARDENA, CALIFORNIA 90247
TELEPHONE: (213) 323-6131
TELEX: 67-3568
REPRESENTING: BALTIMORE AIRCOIL COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA
March 14, 1975
City of Rolling Hills, Inc,
it 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, California 90274
Attention: Planning Commission
Gentlemen:
I have received two notices from the city which indicate that the
Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills will hold a public
hearing at 7:30 p.m. , Tuesday, March 18th, 1975, to consider the
issuance of a conditional use permit under Article III, Section 3.06
of Ordinance No. 33, for the construction of a stable and tennis court
in the front yard of Lot 17-FT to Mr. David Perrin, #3 Wrangler Road,
in the City of Rolling Hills,
I personally feel that the City of Rolling Hills is at a point in its
development where the rural character of the city is at stake.
It is my opinion that tennis court construction in front and side yards
on Eastfield Road, made possible by conditional use permits, detracts
from the rural atmosphere of our community.
It is my impression that the granting of conditional use permits is
primarily for particular hardship cases. The hardships I refer to
would have to do with access to the property, stable, etc, , which
would necessitate structures in front yards.
It now appears that prospective buyers are looking for maximum
utilization of their property, with stables, tennis courts, orchards,
swimming pools, etc.
I have reviewed Article III, Section 3.06 of Ordinance No. 33 and
the references to a conditional use permit seem to point more at
public buildings and public utilities and not to frontiyard structures
on residential lots,
(continued)
To: City of Rolling Hills, Inc, March 14, 1975
Attention: Planning Commission
(continued - page 2)
I think the city is now at the point that if we continue to issue
front yard conditional use permits for the construction of tennis
courts, then a precedent could be established.
I am not opposed to tennis courts, providing that an owner has
adequate land and that it can be constructed and developed within
the framework of our city laws and, of course, that it does not
environmentally affect the general area.
In Mr. Perrin's case, I am not opposed to the stable reconstruction
which was originally in the front yard. I am concerned about tennis
court construction in front yards throughout our city.
In the Flying Triangle there are a number of lots having large front
yards which would be suitable for tennis courts. Is it possible if
the conditional use permit is granted for Mr. Perrin's tennis court
that a precedent will be established? If this possibility exists
there would be no real reason to reject any front yard conditional
use permit in the future, whether it be Wrangler Road, Portuguese
Bend Road, or wherever else.
I urge the Planning Commission to take this matter under consideration
and evaluate the overall impact of the continued issuance of conditional
use permits for this type of development in front. yards.
I purchased my home in Rolling Hills for its beautiful rural character,
and I hope that we continue to maintain our city in this manner.
Very truly yours,
Kenneth H. Watts
# 1 Wrangler Road
Rolling Hills, California 90274
March 12, 1975
Planning Commission
City of Rolling Hills
No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, California 90274
Gentlemen:
With reference to the request for a conditional use permit
relating to a tennis court in the front yard of Lot 17-FT,
3 Wrangler Road, I would request that the Planning Commission
seriously consider the environmental impact on the rural nature
of our community, of the increasing number of tennis courts with
high fences and substantial masses of concrete. Since the City
now has three excellent tennis courts for our residents, I feel
that no tennis court should be permitted which requires granting
of a conditional use permit or variance where there is any poten-
tial for interferring with views or where the tennis court is
seen by a significant number of residents.
I know this is a difficult problem and there are always
equities to balance, but I wanted to express my views as an
individual regarding this and other future tennis court requests
that may come before you.
My comments do not relate to the request for construction of
a stable since that is consistent with the various priorities of
our community and will be subject to the control of the Architectural
Committee as far as height and asthetics.
DWC:sjb
yours,
Crocker
10 Crest Road West
Rolling Hills, CA 90274