Loading...
589, Construct a new SFR with garag, Correspondencei City 0/ June 17, 2005 Mr. Frederick Ripley 215 Via La Soledad Redondo Beach, CA 90277 SUBJECT: 91 CREST ROAD EAST Dear Mr. Ripley: INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityotrh@aol.com We are in receipt of your letter, in which you requested that a final inspection for your new residence at 91 Crest Road East be conducted and utilities released without completing (paving) of the driveway. We have discussed this matter with the Department of Building and Safety and the Fire Department and were advised against your request. The Fire Department requires an all weather access to all properties. According to the Fire Department, the proposed temporary driveway would not support the weight of a fire engine in case of an emergency. The Building and Safety will not final any project until the driveway is paved to Fire Department standards. We also find that the difficulty with your request is that once the project is finaled and the utilities released, the City would not have a method to guarantee that the driveway will be completed to satisfy the public access requirements. Therefore, we cannot approve your request. However, we would consider releasing one of the utilities prior to conducting a final inspection, if this helps your situation. Enclosed please find a copy of acceptable all weather access requirements from the Fire Department. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call Craig Nealis, City Manager or me at (310) 377-1521. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincer ly Yok9 to Schwartz Planning Director cc: Craig Nealis, City Manager Steve DeMarr, Building Inspector ®Pri',terl or) Rip. Jan. /UU7 1 : 4,rlvt NO. VI ID r. L REV 04/03 mi. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION ALL WEATHER ACCESS REQUIREMENTS All development constructed within the jurisdiction of the County of Los Angeles Fire Department shall comply with Sections 902 and 901.3 (fire apparatus access roads; timing of installation of fire protection facilities, respectively) of the Los Angeles County Fire Code. For clarification purposes of Section 902.2.2.2, the term all-weather driving capabilities shall mean a surface that will support the imposed loads of a fire apparatus during inclement weather, including normal rainfall. All weather access roads shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. Permissible access road construction may include, but not be limited to the following: A. Three inch (3") Type II A.C. pavement on four inch (4") crushed aggregate base. B. Six inch (6") Type II A.C. pavement on native soil. C. Six inch (6") Portland cement concrete pavement on native soil. D Four inch (4") crushed aggregate base (sand, gravel mix compacted to 95% or greater) with the first layer of asphalt. Access road construction shall be governed by specifications as set forth by the County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works, or modified as prepared by a State of California registered civil engineer. • • DEAR, MR. C. NEALES CITY MANAGER, ROLLING HILLS, CA.90247 AS TO OUR RECENT DISCUSSION, WE ARE WITHIN 6-8 WEEKS OF COMPLETION, BUT WE HAVE SOME LOGISTICAL PROBLEMS. WE WOULD LIKE TO DO THE FOLLOWING, COMPLETE ALL INTERIOR, AND EXTERIOR CONSTRUCTION. THE DRIVEWAY AND ALL AREAS TO BE LANDSCAPED WILL BE GRADED TO WITHIN 3 INCHES OF FINAL GRADE. ALL EXTERIOR DRAINAGE IS COMPLETE, AND THE DRIVEWAY HAS 8 INCHES OF CRUSHED GRAVEL ON IT. THE ONLY THING NOT COMPLETE WILL BE THE RETAINING WALL ON THE EAST SIDE, AND THE PAVING OF THE DRIVEWAY. AS YOU KNOW, WE HAVE 2- 20 FOOT SHIPPING CONTAINERS, WITH MANY OF THE ORIGINAL FURNITURE FROM THE OLD HOUSE. WHEN WE ARE ABLE TO MOVE THESE ARTICLES IN, WE WILL NOT NEED THE CONTAINERS AND WILL SELL THEM. THE CONTAINERS WILL BE REMOVED, ALSO WE HAVE LARGE AMOUNTS OF LANDSCAPE STONE THAT WILL HAVE TO BE MOVE, BOTH OF WHICH WILL REQUIRE THE USE OF HEAVY EQUIPMENT ON THE DRIVEWAY, THIS WOULD DESTROY A FRESHLY PAVED DRIVEWAY. IF YOU COULD HELP US TO GET THE FINAL INSPECTION SO THE COUNTY WILL RELEASE THE ELECTRIC AND GAS UTILITIES, SO WE COULD ACCOMPLISH THIS, IT WOULD BE MUCH APPRECIATED. IF THIS IS A PROBLEM LET ME OR RICK MARSHALL (310- 547-0304) KNOW, SO WE CAN LOOK FOR OTHER OPTIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. SINCERELY, /C ,777( FREDERIC RIPLEY (310-378-2967) &J/P/Q7S Bolo Engineering Corpolkion 707 Silver Spur Road, Suite 201 Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 tel (310) 544-6010 fax (310) 544-0458 April 26, 2002 City of Rolling Hills #2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Attention: Craig Nealis, City Manager Subject: Import 150 yards of dirt #91 Crest Road East Dear Mr. Nealis The contractor, Rick Marshall has completed importing the 150 cubic yards of dirt which was allowed per the January 31,2002 letter. The source of the dirt was 100 cubic yards from #10 Portuguese Bend Road and 50 cubic yards from a source outside of Rolling Hills. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please call. Sincerely, Bolton Engineering Corp. Ross N. Bolton, RCE 26120 President CITY OF ROLLING HILLS SA" PARTMEN Date • Boitn Engineering CorpoStion 707 Silver Spur Road, Suite 201 Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 tel (310) 544-6010 fax (310) 544-0458 April 26, 2002 City of Rolling Hills #2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Attention: Craig Nealis, City Manager Subject: Export 100 yards of dirt #10 Portuguese Bend Road Dear Mr. Nealis We have reviewed the site and talked to the contractor, Rick Marshall regarding the export of 100 cubic yards. This export has been completed. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please call. Sincerely, Bolton Engineering Corp. Ross N. Bolton, RCE 26120 President r/ o clp1..�ING Hi1.ts C /i Boli Engineering Corporeion 707 Silver Spur Road, Suite 201 Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 tel (310) 544-6010 fax (310) 544-0458 January 31, 2002 City of Rolling Hills #2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Attention: Craig Nealis, City Manager Subject: Import 150 yards of dirt #91 Crest Road East Dear Mr. Nealis CITY OF ROLLING HILLS A. pcJ /. SG��'' VIPARTMENT 3 2 — Y—o2— uitu We request you permit the Ripleys at #91 Crest Road East to import up to 150 cubic yards to complete the grading work for their new home. The grading for the new house is underway. The need to import the soil was not foreseen prior to the commencement of construction and the grading for the house cannot be completed without the requested import. The dirt quantities that were initially calculated during the development of the grading plan didn't anticipate all the field conditions during construction including the quantity and size of rock encountered which cannot be used for fill. Another factor is that the geologist required a deeper key be cut at the toe of the fill. The filling of the key contributed to the shortage of dirt due to the shrinkage of this material. Currently, there is a major house addition at #10 Portuguese Bend Road being constructed. The grading has been completed but there is about 100 surplus yards of dirt that was generated from the foundation excavation. We request permission to move this dirt to #91 Crest Road East. We also request that the additional 50 yards of dirt be allowed to be imported from sources outside the City of Rolling Hills. We appreciate your consideration. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please call. Sincerely, Bolton Engineering Corp. Ross N. Bolton, RCE 26120 President • Bolt* Engineering Corporon 707 Silver Spur Road, Suite 201 Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 tel (310) 544-6010 fax (310) 544-0458 January 30, 2002 City of Rolling Hills #2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Attention: Craig Nealis, City Manager Subject: Export 100 yards of dirt #10 Portuguese Bend Road Dear Mr. Nealis CITY OF ROLLING H11.LS ." :;: o DEPARTMENT -OZ Date We request you permit the Hwungs at #10 Portuguese Bend Road export up to 100 cubic yards to complete the addition to their home. The grading for the new house has been completed The need to export the soil was not foreseen prior to the commencement of construction and the work for the house addition cannot be completed without the requested export. The dirt quantities that were initially calculated during the development of the grading plan didn't anticipate the cut from the foundation. Currently, there is a grading project at #91 Crest Road East that needs dirt to complete their grading. We request permission to move this dirt to #91 Crest Road East. We appreciate your consideration. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please call. Sincerely, Bolton Engineering Corp. ////7JA Ross N. Bolton, RCE 26120 President 11/ 1 Subj: Double Driveway Date: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 8:39:07 AM From: EGONZALE@dpw.co.la.ca.us To: crhscag@aol.com I am following up on our conversation RE: double driveways. The job I couldn't remember is 91 Crest Road East (Mr. and Mrs. Ripley). I haven't had a chance to visit this property so I don't know if there is an existing double driveway. In any event, can you tell me if you have seen these plans and is the City o.k. with having the resident use the water tank's access road as one of the points of entry to the residence? Eric Gonzalez L.A. County Building and Safety Division Drainage and Grading Section 310-534-3760 %"1147;vii�AIM' tit2 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC"-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859- 1 11> <META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.0.4712.0"> <TITLE>Double Driveway</TITLE> </HEAD> <!-- Converted from text/rtf format --> I am following up on our conversation RE: double driveways.&nbsp; The job I couldn't remember is 91 Crest Road East (Mr. and Mrs. Ripley).&nbsp; I haven't had a chance to visit this property so I don't know if there is an existing double driveway. 8/28/01 America Online : Crhscag Page 1 City ofieoffing _AA July 31, 2001 Mr. and Mrs. Fred Ripley 215 Via La Soledad Redondo Beach, CA 90277 • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL Dear Mr. and Mrs. Ripley: Please sign and notarize the enclosed Affidavit of Acceptance form and mail/hand deliver together with the RESOLUTION NO. 99-3 to the County Clerks Office in Norwalk. Please refer to the letter dated January 21, 1999 for fee requirements and instructions. The City cannot stamp plans for building permit unless we receive a copy of the recorded documents. If you have any questions, please call me at (310) 377-1521. Sincerr¢ly c,14 YoVnta Schwartz, Principal Planner ®Printed or. Recycled Paper • • Cii 0/120/16,9 B. ALLEN LAY Mayor FRANK E. HILL Mayor Pro Tem THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Councilmember JODY MURDOCK Councilmember GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S. Councilmember May 23, 2002 Mr. Fred Ripley 215 Via La Soledad Redondo Beach, CA 90277 INCO.PORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cltyofrh@aol.com Dear Mr. Ripley: Thank you for attending the City Council meeting on May 13th and placing your concerns in writing regarding the building permit process in the City of Rolling Hills. This letter responds to the issues you raised at the City Council meeting and in your letter. The Parks and Recreation Fee that you have referred to in your correspondence was adopted by a Resolution of the City Council in 1982. Revenue derived from this fee is based upon valuation of new residential construction and is used to fund recreational facilities in the City. Examples of facility improvements include upgrades to the tennis court playing surfaces and gazebo facilities, riding ring pedestrian pathway improvements, new equestrian tie-ups and fencing improvements at the City -owned horse riding facilities. It is true that the Community Association is responsible for certain levels of maintenance at these facilities. However, as the property owner, the City takes responsibility for owner improvements to these facilities as required by our lease agreement. In preparing this correspondence, we researched other properties where new homes have been constructed in the City and have been subject to this Fee. These records are not maintained at City Hall but are available at the County. A sampling of our research indicates that in 1988, $4,100 was assessed on the development at 10 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road; in 1997, $14,310 was assessed on the development at 1 Buggywhip Drive; and also in 1988, $3,615 was assessed on the development 36 Eastfield Drive. Additionally, fees were collected for development at 5 Sagebush Lane in 1996 totaling $6,153 and 1 Packsaddle Road East in the amount of $6,065. This represents just a sampling of the properties that paid this Fee. The Parks and Recreation Fee for your development was based upon a valuation of your 5,430 sq. ft. residence and 1,212 sq. ft. garage. These structures were valued at $724,320. Therefore, your total Fee is $5,121.60. Mr. Fred Ripley May 23, 2002 Page 2 The existing County Building Permit Fees are based upon a Resolution adopted by the City Council in 1982 and have not been increased since that time. The fees charged above the standard County fee offset the additional costs incurred by the City in administering and issuing building permits. Finally, you have requested that the City send a letter to the County indicating that it approve your projects in a timely manner. Since we have been involved with your project, we have always immediately responded to any concerns that you or your representatives have expressed regarding the County permitting or plan review process. I have discussed this with your representative, Mr. Criss Gunderson, who indicates that all issues relating to the applicant initiated changes to the building foundations have been resolved. If, however, there are any unresolved issues, which you would like to discuss with City and County representatives, please let us know and we will be more than happy to coordinate a meeting. Thank you again for your correspondence. Sincerely, //` Craig R. Nealis City Manager CRN:mlk 05/21/02ripley.ltr cc: City Council Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director Ed Acosta, Building & Safety Manger, County of LA • ;tame °v �9 city oi ROili/g -li� INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 JODY MURDOCK Mayor B. ALLEN LAY Mayor Pro Tem THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Councilmember FRANK E. HILL Councilmember GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S. Councilmember May 15, 2001 Mr. Criss C. Gunderson Architect 2024 Via Pacheco Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274 Dear Mr. Gunderson: 4 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cltyofrh@aol.com Thank you for your correspondence dated May 10, 2001 regarding the Ripley Project, 91 Crest Road East. Based upon the comments that you have provided to this office, we will approve a 90 day extension to the building plan check and grading and hydrology report, without fee. Should you wish to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you for your correspondence. Sincerely, Craig R. Nealis City Manager CRN:mlk S -z WO I Lcc rc 05/15/01gunderson.ltr cc: Lata Thakar, District Engineer Yolanta Schwartz, Principal Planner Rafael Bernal, District Engineering Associate Keith Ehlert. Geologist Ross Bolton, Bolton Engineering Mr. and Mrs. Fred Ripley ®Printed on Recycled Paper ..CRISS C GUNDERSON ARCHITECT: 2024 Via Pacheco, Palos Verdes Estates, California TEL (310) 373-8077 FAX (310) 373-8277, Mr. Craig Nealis, . - Rolling Hills City Manager No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills,,California, Regarding: Ripley residcnce 91 Crest Road West LA. County building plan check no. 0011300006 LA County geology and soils pl. ch. 'No. 001130006 LA County grading plan check no. 0011160001 . . • Dear Mr. Nealis, As you .. are . aware from . previous . conversations, ,the' above mentioned building plan:' check application willexpire on May 30;.2001 Subsequently, I have discovered that the geological and soils reviews will expire on the same said date and; grading and hydrology will expire on May ;11, 2001(please .note that' these application where submitted approximately 5 ''/2 months prior). The current state of these multiple applications does not allowadequate time to complete thes process of approval. Therefore: The Ripley's respectfully request_a time'extension for all applications listed above, and for any and all' independent reviews attached toany and all fees paid to the County;' by. the Ripley's, so that their, engineers, and myself, may have the time necessary to complete the approval process: The root' of the delay is the inability to explore for data at the proposed seepage pits site. The consulting geologist for the Ripley's, Mr. Keith Ehlert, has experienced delays in starting the percolation test for the private sewage disposal system, as required by the Health Department, County of Los Angeles. The review and approval of this test by the County is. a key requirement for all mentioned departmental approvals. The difficulties encountered in completing• the percolation test have been, and still remain, are: • 1) Unseasonably heavy rains throughthe winter and early spring; limiting property access for the drill rig. Compounding the problem is the resulting schedulingbacklogs- greatly reducing drill rig availability.:. • 2)., A relatively new County requirement to provide a written "certification of accuracy" for the water meter used during the percolation test. At this time; no company; including the .California Water Company, can provide such a meter.' Officials at the County Health Department have no knowledge of where Mr. Ehlert might locate'a certified meter, nor a company, ' or companies, capableof:certifying a meter. We are hopeful a meter can be located soon, and, or. this requirement will be waved based on the lack of availability. At' 1 • this timewe may be forced to cancel our next schedule drill rig, for the second time, adding to the delays. Los Angeles County .charges a 25% fees, based on the original, plan check fee,, for a 180 day 'extension. Fees paid to date to the County total $13,040.71 (receipts attached, please note the double charge for geology/soils, which we expect will be credited during the permitting phase). Penalties for application extensions will total $3,260.17 without your. help. The Ripley's believe that this additional fee is unjustified and a hardship. If at all possible, could you please assist us in extending the plan check process, without the Ripley's incurring additional costs. Criss Gunderson, Architect cc: Ms. Lata Thakar, District Engineer, County Building and Safety, Lomita Office Ms. Peggy Minor, Rolling Hills Community Association' Mr. Keith Ehlert Geologist Mr. Ross Bolton, Bolton Engineering Mr. and Mrs. Fred Ripley Mr. Rick Marshal, general contractor Transmitted via fax, originals mailed, cc faxed Sent By: B&S LOMITA; To: ROLLING HILLS Post -It'" brand fax transmittal memo 7671 1 310 530 5482; a Page 1 TO Circt Co. Dept. Far N Address: Telephone: Fax: Caning hours Zs From co. Phone 'Fear At: 13103777288 ^ 49 ,21 J cL• Dec-14-00 10:22; Dec-13.01106:25PM; LOS ANGE S F PUBLIC WORKS 'MENT DiVI ION SOILS ENGINEERING REVIEW SHEET 900 9. Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 (026) 458-4925 (826) 458-4913 - Monday through Thursday 8-9 a.m. & 3-s p.m. • Single Family Residence Location 91 Crept Road East. City of Rolfina HiNg Developer/Owner ; Rfolev Engineer/Architect Ena[neerina Soils Engineer • Keith W. Ehiert (P.N. 4268-981 Geologist • $ate as above Grading Plan Check No. 0011160001 Review of: Grading Plan Dated By Processing Center 11/20/00 Soils Engineering Report Dated 11/30/98 Geologic Report Dated 1 I/30/98 ACTION: Plan Is not recommended for approval. REMARKS: 1. Subrtilt an update soils report/leiter, which addresses and evaluates one year, Verifying the validity and applicability of the original soils r Page 1/3 Post-Ir Fax Note 7671 I re L¢',l1aVnak�t• cow 4".111r 6^.41 04Ar. ) Fax r District Office 12. p2 Job No. B372Q01 Sheet 1 of 2 DISTRIBUTION: 1 Drainage 1 Grading _1 Geo/SSoils Central Fie District Engineer. _i Geologist 1 Solis Engineer _1 Engineer/Archi'bct he most recent plans, for all reports older than port. 2. Provide data on the possible adverse Impact of the private sewage isposal system(s) relative to rite stability and adjacent properties. Discuss the path of migration of the effluent an whether ponding or dayllghtinp of the effluent will occur.: Stability calculations must consider the effect of ponding/ rched groundwater. 3. Provide chemical test results (sulfate, chbride, resistivity. and pH, a .) for the on-stta soils to address the presence of chemicla deleterious to construction materials and utility lines. a testa must be in accordance with California Test Methods. Department of Transportation. or equivalent (aqueous solution tests, such as EPA Tests or similar mothoda ore not acceptable). Recommend mitigation es necessary 4. The sods ,oport shell contain a finding regarding the safely of the budding site/grading eonstructlon against hazard from future Iendsliding, settlement or slippage and a finding regarding the effect that the proposed building or grading constructbn will have on the geologic stability of property outside of the building alto. The finding must be unconditional and stated In the future tense. 5. Show the:following on the grading plans: a. detail of keying and benching for placement of tits over slopes steeper than 5:1 gradient. b. Location of private sewage disposal system(s). 6. The Sok Engineer of record must review the grading plans end algn and stamp the plans in verificationof his recommendations. Original manual signature and wet stamp are required. 1 Sent By: B&S LOMITA'; Sent By: LACDPW; • • 1 310 530 5482; Dec-14-00 10:22; 628 458 4913; Dec • 13.91113: 25PM; Page 2/3 Page 2/3 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELIS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC W RKS LAND DEVELOPMENT DM- SON SOILS ENGINEERING REVIEW SHEET Address: 900 S. Fremont Ave. Alhambra, CA 91803 Telephone: (826) 458-4925 Fax: (626) 4584913 Calling hours • Monday through Thursday 8-9 a.m. & 3-4 p.m. Grading Plan Cheek No. 001118_ District Office 12.02 Job No. ; I3372401 Sheet 2 of 2 REMARKS (cost): 7. Submit two sets of grading plans to the Soils Section for verification of compliance with County codes and policies. 8. Requirements of the Geology Section are attached. 9. Include a copy of this review sheet with your response. NOTES TO THE ROAN CHEQER/BUILDING AND SAFETY DISTRICT EN',NEER: 1) ED TO CURRENT STANDARDS.ISHAVE MEDIUM TO HIGH EXPANSION POTENTIAL. 2) FILL NOTE 3(e) SHOULD B Prepared by _ '! "' 'G< f. Alam NOi6 E; Public e.fery, rstittve to peetechnlcai subsurface exploration. inctusthm or the Loa Angeles County Cade, Chapter 11.K, and the State et • Date 12/7/00 miasma with current codes for excavation., anon tale/ Orders. Amtr:91 Sent By: B&S LOMITA; sent iv: LACDPW; Sheet.j_ of 1 REVIEWER CALLING HOURS 8.9 s.m. & 3-4 p.m. Mon.-Thurs. email: mmontgom@dpw.co.la.ca.us TraotlPM Parent Tract Site Address 91 Grist Road East Geologist Keith Ehprt Solis Engineer Keith Ehlart • 1 310 530 5482; 626 458 4913; Cour - of Los Angeles Department of Pt* LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISIOr GEOLOGIC REVIEW SHEET 900 6. Fremont Ave., Alhambra, CA ;)1803 TEL. (628) 456.4926 Lot(e) Location Roiling Hills Dec-14-00 10:22; Dec-13.1 03:25PM; Ito Wort- ._._ Owdopsr/Owner_fljolev Engineer/Arch. Altsiradgineerinct Page 3/3 Page 3/3 Dist. Office 12.02 F ✓ NF DISTRIBUTION 1 0lst. Office 1, Geologist Soils Engr, Section File ▪ Grading Sect. _L Proc. Ctr. Review of: Grading P.C. No. 1101116_0001 Building P.C. No. For: Geology and Soils Engineering Reports) Dated 11/30/98 Action: Plan is not 'recommended for approval for reasons below. RemarkalCondition;: 1. Please depict, on the grading plans and geologic map, the location of the proposed sewage disposal system. 2. All recommendations of the consulting geologist and soils engineer n tat be incorporated into the design or shown as notes oil the plans. 3. The plan Must be specifically approved by the consultant geologist an soils engineer by manual, original signature(s) and date(s) on each sheet prior to approval by the Geology Section. Submit TWO sets of signed plans to this office. 4. Add the following es notes to the plan: In -grading Inspections must be made by the consulting geologist and solle engineer. Monthly in -grading inspection reports mt(st be submitted directly to the Geology and Soils Section tube consultenta• Rough grading must be approved by finel geology and soils engineers 1g report prior to approval by the Geology and Soils Seotlon. An As -Built Geologic Map must be included in the final jeotogy report. Submit report for approval tor issuance of building permit. Provide a final report statement that veri ries work was done in accordance with report recommendations and coda provisions (Section 7021-3). Foundation, well, and pool excavations must be Inspected and approved by the consulting geologist and soils engineer prior to the placing of steel or concrete. 5. Show, on the plans, the location of all fills, cuts and cut/fill transition 9. 6. The englniering geology report shall contain a finding regarding the safety of the building site for the proposed structure against hazard from future landsliding, settlement or Opp, le and a finding regarding the effect that the proposed building or grading construction will have on the geologic suability of property outside of the building site. The eteterraent must be substantiated by appropriate data and analyses The submitted etetement le lnaonclusive. The consultantis must Specifically state that the proposed grading and structure will be free from landellding, settlernnent and slippage. 7. Provide date on the possible adverse Impact of the private sewage disposal system relative to site stability and adjacent properties. Discuss the path of migration of effluent and whether daylighting of the effluent will occur. Stability calculations must consider the effect on groundwater. Show o n geologic cross seetion(s) the entioipated path end saturation from the effluent bused on hydrogeology of the site. Make specific recommendations regarding the location and design of the system, 8. The Soils Engineering review dated I2/Wis attached. Reviewed by Dote 11/27/QQ M • ael A. Montgomery NOIIC1e, Pubic sets. •rdatlra to e.otselltlroal subeuAaes.sp&redon. soar be waked n aceordener with current codes fo►eaavedone, inch+WS et the Los Angeles County Cede. Chapter 11.4S. end the etete 0 Carom*, Tide s. Consueoten iele1Y otesn. The-14enu.i for ?rope/Alen of d.otechnlosr Report." prepared by County et Lea Mg.l.s. O.partment rt Public worts is 'mailable on the Internet et the following eddreca: nrto:tiepw.eo.l..es.ushnedlmenvs►•pot p-lmepubn.wlgsology ravi.wlformatForm_e 11123188 411. • City ofieolling November 27, 2000 Mr. and Mrs. Fred Ripley 215 Via La Soledad Redondo Beach, CA 90277 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521' FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: EXPIRATION OF APPROVALS FOR ZONING CASE NO. 589 NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 91 CREST ROAD EAST (LOT 69-B-MS) Dear Mr. and Mrs. Ripley: This letter is to inform you that it has been almost one year since a time extension was approved by the Planning Commission for Zoning Case No. 589. Note that these approvals will expire on January 19, 2001 and unless you acquire permits before then, under Section 17.46.080(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code you must refile based upon the same criteria as for the issuance of a new permit. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Lola Ungar Planning Direct cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect Printed on Recycled Paper. 1' • City opeoffin December 29, 1999 Mr. and Mrs. Fred Ripley 215 Via La Soledad Redondo Beach, CA 90277 • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aoi.com SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION APPROVAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 589 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Ripley: This letter shall serve as official notification that a one year time extension was APPROVED by the Planning Commission at their regular meeting on December .21,' 1999 for the subject case. : . We have enclosed a copy of RESOLUTION NO. 99-20, specifying the condition'sof approval set forth by the Planning Commission. •; . Note that this approval will expire on January 19, 2001 and unless you acquire permits before then, under Section 17.46.080(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code you must refile based upon the same criteria as for the issuance of a new permit. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Lola Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect ®Printed on Recvcted Paper. RESOLUTION NO. 99-20 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-3 AND APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 589. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A request has been filed by Mr. and Mrs. Fred Ripley with respect to real property located at 91 Crest Road East (Lot 69-B-MS), Rolling Hills, requesting an extension to a previously approved Site Plan Review for the construction of a new single family residence to replace an existing single.family residence. Section 2. The Commission considered,.this item at a meeting on December 21,1999 at which time information was presented iridicating.that the extension of time is necessary because the applicants intend to start construction on their new home in the spring of 2000, after the winter. rains.. Section 3. ., ;Based upon. information and evidence : submitted; :'the Planning Commission 'does `hereby amend Paragraph :A; -Section,7: of Resolution No. 99-3,: dated January 19,1999, to read as follows: • :°. '', "A. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within two years of . the approval of this Resolution." Section 4, Except as herein amended, the provisions of Resolution No. 99-3 shall continue to be in full force and effect. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 21ST D C ER,1999. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: MARILYN RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK • • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 99-20 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 99-3 AND APPROVING AN EXTENSION TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 589. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on December 21,1999 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Sommer, Witte and Chairman Roberts. NOES: , None. ABSENT: Commissioner Margeta. ABSTAIN:: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices • F..x/trJ DEPUTY CITY CLERK • 4 CRISS C GUNDERSON ARCHITECT 2024 Via Pacheco, Palos Verdes Estates, California TEL (310) 373-8077 FAX (310) 373-8277 November 20, 1999 Chairman Roberts City of Rolling Hills Planning Commission No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills California Regarding: Ripley residence, zoning case 589, time extension Dear Chairman Roberts, The Ripleys intend on starting construction on their new home in the spring of 2000, after the winter rains. Please extend the site review approval an additional year. Thank you, Criss Gunti+srson Archite OFFICIALOECEIPT 24Ly of cRoffin.g oViffd. N? 7032 CALIFORNIA 614;),,, 2,0&cp ratt.e.,4.0_e_o 3 RECEIVED FROM THE SU U, OF rT:tr° ..kl—LA44":1L PVE tro OL RS FoP1"trSalet-4-4-t; '64r - t 9 —Zgataq (LA., do. reg. A;,.64174LA/ar4171.22c- 4Ezwi.. FUND AMOUNT DAT 1(17,4,1 .(r) A ()C& At Utf44 C.) CITY CLERK WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, F.A. 14071 INo. 1 Lower Blackwater Cyn Rd ROLLING HILLS ESTATES, CA 90275 Rolling Hills, Califomia 90274 90-7162/3222 (310) 544-8887 11/23/1999 PAY TO THE City of Rolling Hills ORDER OF ' $ "200.00 • ' Two Hundred and 00/1 MEMO Ripley extension fee 100 L40 7 LIP' 1: 3 2 2 2 7 L6 2 ?1:13 ? Lui 2 7144 7 Lou 211° . • CRISS GUNDERSON ARCHITECT City of Rolling Hills DOLLARS 8 Security featunn included Wags on back. ( 11/23/1999 14071 Business:Fees 200.00 Primary Ripley extension fee 200.00 CRISS GUNDERSON ARCHITECT 14071 City oi Rolling _JJA November 18, 1999 Mr. and Mrs. Fred Ripley 215 Via La Soledad Redondo Beach, CA 90277 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: EXPIRATION OF APPROVALS FOR ZONING CASE NO. 589 91 Crest Road East (Lot 69-B-MS), Rolling Hills, CA. RESOLUTION NO. 99-3 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Ripley: This letter is to inform you that it has been almost one year since the approval of Zoning Case No. 589. Approvals will expire on January 19, 2000. You can extend approvals for one year only if you apply to the Planning Commission in writing to request an extension prior to the expiration date. The filing fee for the time extension is $200 to be paid to the City of Rolling Hills. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Lola Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect ®Printed on Recycled Paper. • • City 0/ leoffin February 8, 1999 Mr. and Mrs. Fred Ripley 215 Via La Soledad Redondo Beach, CA 90277 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: MEETING DATE ADJUSTMENT ZONING CASE NO. 589, 91 Crest Road East (Lot 69-B-MS) RESOLUTION NO. 99-3 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Ripley: This letter shall serve to notify you that the action of the Planning Commission on January 19, 1999 to approve your request for Site Plan Review has been adjusted and will be reported to the City Council at the next possible meeting on Thursday. February 18. 1999 at 7:30 AM which is an adjoumed regularly scheduled meeting. The action of the Planning Commission will be accompanied by the record of the proceedings. Sincerely, Lola Ungar Planning Director cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect Printed on Recycled Paper. RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO: CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 (310) 377-7288 FAX The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be notarized before recordation. AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) ZONING CASE NO. EU SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT I (We) the undersigned state: I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows: 91 CREST ROAD EAST (LOT 69-B-MS), ROLLING HILLS, CA This property is the subject of the above numbered case. am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said ZONING CASE NO. 5112 SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. L L T Recorder's Use Only Signature Signature Name typed or printed Name typed or printed Address Address City/State City/State Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public, State of California ) County of Los Angeles ) On before me, personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies) and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. Witness by hand and official seal. Signature of Notary SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF • • City °Moiling CERTIFIED MAIL January 21, 1999 Mr. and Mrs. Fred Ripley 215 Via La Soledad Redondo Beach, CA 90277 INCORPORATED •JANUARY 24, 1957 SUBJECT: APPEAL PERIOD AND AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM ZONING CASE NO. 589, 91 Crest Road East (Lot 69-B-MS) RESOLUTION NO. 99-3 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Ripley: NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission adopted a resolution on January 19, 1999 to approve your request to construct a new single family residence to replace an existing single family residence for property at 91 Crest Road East (Lot 69-B-MS), Rolling Hills, CA in Zoning Case No. 589. That action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission will be reported to the City Council on February 8, 1999. The Planning Commission's decision in this matter shall become effective thirty days after the adoption of the resolution by the Commission, unless an appeal has been filed within that thirty (30) day appeal period. (Section 17.54.010(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code). Should there be an appeal, the Commission's decision will be stayed until the Council completes its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. If no appeals are filed within the thirty (30) day period after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution, the Planning Commission's action will become final and you will be required to cause to be recorded an Affidavit of Acceptance Form together with the subject resolution in the Office of the County Recorder before the Commission's action takes effect. We have enclosed a copy of RESOLUTION NO. 99-3, specifying the conditions of approval set forth by the Planning Commission and the approved Exhibit A Development Plan to keep for your files. Once you have reviewed the Resolution, please complete the enclosed AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM, have the signature(s) notarized, and forward the completed form and a copy of the Resolution to: Los Angeles County Registrar -Recorder Real Estate Records Section 12400 East Imperial Highway Norwalk, CA 90650 Include a check in the amount of $9.00 for the first page and $3.00 for each additional page. The City will notify the Los Angeles County Building & Safety Division to issue permits only when the Affidavit of Acceptance is received by us and any conditions of the Resolution required prior to issuance of building permits are met. Printed on Recycled Paper. Please feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, 711944#1°-..- LOLA UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR ENC: RESOLUTION NO. 99-3 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM APPEAL SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE. cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect RESOLUTION NO. 99-3 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 589. 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 Mr. and Mrs. Fred Ripley with respect to real property located at 91 Crest Road East (Lot 69-B-MS) requesting Site Plan Review to permit the construction of a new single family residence to replace an existing single family residence. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application on November 17, 1998, December 15, 1998, and January 19, 1999 at a field trip visit on December 12, 1998. The applicants were notified of the hearing in writing by first class mail. The applicants and the applicants' representatives were in attendance at the hearings. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 2 Exemption [State CA Guidelines, Section 15302] and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 4. Section 17.46.020 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 or structures, which involve changes to grading or an increase in 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, may be permitted. With respect to the Site Plan Review application, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: A. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structure complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setback, and lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net square foot area of 147,610 square feet. The proposed residence (7,910 sq. ft.), garage (1,600 sq. ft.), future stable (450 sq. ft.), and service yard (100 sq. ft.) will have 10,060 square feet which constitutes 6.8% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 28,697 square feet which RESOLUTION NO. 99-3 PAGE 1 OF 4 equals 19.4% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. B. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, 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 because a minimum amount of grading is proposed and will only be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the proposed residential development and existing neighboring residences. C. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval, follows natural contours of the relatively flat site to minimize grading. The natural drainage courses will be preserved and continue drainage to the canyons at the southern side of this lot. D. The development plan will, based upon compliance with the conditions contained in this Resolution, supplement the existing vegetation with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. E. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval, 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. Further, the proposed project will have a total buildable pad of 69,450 square feet with 14.5% of pad coverage. F. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, 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. The proposed project will be located on a relatively flat portion of a steep sloping lot that is also consistent with the scale of other homes in the immediate neighborhood. Grading will be minor and required only to restore the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the proposed structures to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. G. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval, is sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will provide a safer driveway accessway. H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. RESOLUTION NO. 99-3 PAGE 2 OF 4 • Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 589 for a proposed residential development as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A, subject to the following conditions: A. This Site Plan approval shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval if construction pursuant to these approvals has not commenced within that time period, as required by Section 17.46.080. B. It is declared and made a condition of this Site Plan approval, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval 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. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated January 11, 1999, and marked Exhibit A, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. F. The finished floor elevation on the residential building pad shall not exceed 1,437 feet. G. Grading for the project shall not exceed 650 cubic yards of cut soil and 650 cubic yards of fill soil, allowing for shrinkage of the soil when it is compacted. H. The proposed project shall not include a basement. I. The residential and total building pad coverage shall not exceed 14.5%. J. area. The maximum disturbed area shall not exceed 19.4% of the net lot K. Landscaping shall be provided and maintained to obscure the buildings and the building pad with native drought -resistant vegetation that is compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community. L. 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 RESOLUTION NO. 99-3 PAGE 3 OF 4 • • approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. M. 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. N. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 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 approval by the Planning Commission. O. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of the Site Plan approval, or the approvals shall not be effective. P. All conditions of the Site Plan approval that apply must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOP D THIS 9TH( AY OF JANUARY,1999. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST:A.A".} MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 98-22 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO REPLACE AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 589. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on December 15, 1998 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer, Witte and Chairman Roberts. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. DEPUTY CITY C RK RESOLUTION NO. 99-3 PAGE 4 OF 4 • 17.54.010 17.54 APPEALS 17.54.010 Time for Filing Appeals A. All actions of the Planning Commission authorized by this Title may be appealed to the City Council. All appeals shall be filed in writing with the City Clerk. B. All appeals must be filed on or before the 30th calendar day after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution on the project or application. Application fees shall be paid as required by Section 17.30.030 of this Title. C. Within 30 days after the Planning Commission adopts a resolution which approves or denies a development application, the City Clerk shall place the resolution as a report item on the City Council's agenda. The City Council may,•by an affirmative vote of three members, take jurisdiction over the application. In the event the City Council takes jurisdiction over the application, the Planning Commission's decision will be stayed until the City Council completes its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter. 17.54.020 Persons Authorized to File an Appeal Any person, including the City Manager, may appeal a decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council, in accordance with the terms of this Chapter. 17.54.030 Form, Content, and Deficiencies in an Appeal Application A. All appeals shall be filed in writing with the City Clerk on a form or forms provided by the City Clerk. No appeal shall be considered filed until the required appeal fee has been received by the City Clerk. B. The appeal application shall state, at a minimum, the name and address of the appellant, the project and action being appealed, and the reasons why the appellant believes that the Planning Commission erred or abused its discretion, or why the Planning Commission's decision is not support by evidence in the record. 76 ROLLING HILLS ZONING MAY 2.4, 1993 • • 17.54.030 C. If the appeal application is found to be deficient, the City Clerk shall deliver or mail (by certified mail), to the appellant a notice specifying the reasons why the appeal is deficient. The appellant shall correct the deficiency with an amendment to the appeal form within seven calendar days of receiving the deficiency notice. Otherwise, the appeal application will be deemed withdrawn, and the appeal fee will be returned to the applicant. 17.54.040 Request for Information Upon receipt of a written and complete appeal application and fee, the City Clerk shall direct the Planning Commission Secretary to transmit to the City Council the complete record of the entire proceeding before the Planning Commission. 17.54.050 Scheduling of Appeal Hearing Upon receiving an appeal, the City Clerk shall set the appeal for a hearing before the City Council to occur within 20 days of the filing of the appeal. In the event that more than one appeal is filed for the same project, the Clerk shall schedule all appeals to be heard at the same time. 17.54.060 Proceedings A. Noticing The hearing shall be noticed as required by Section 17.30.030 of this Title. In addition, the following parties shall be noticed; 1. The applicant of the proposal being appealed; 2. The appellant; and 3. Any person who provided oral testimony or written comments to the Planning Commission during or as part of the public hearing on the project. B. Hearing The City Council shall conduct a public hearing pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 17.34 of this Title. The Council shall consider all information in the record, as well as additional information presented at the appeal hearing, before taking action on the appeal. ROLLING HILLS ZONING 77 MAY 24,1943 17.54.060 C. Action The Council may act to uphold, overturn, or otherwise modify the Planning Commission's original action on the proposal, or the Council may remand the application back to the Planning Commission for further review and direction. The Council shall make findings to support its decision. D. Finality of Decision The action of the City Council to approve, conditionally approve, or deny an application shall be final and conclusive. E. Record of Proceedings The decision of the City Council shall be set forth in full in a resolution or ordinance. A copy of the decision shall be sent to the applicant or the appellant. 17.54.070 Statute of Limitations Any action challenging a final administrative order or decision by . the City made as a result of a proceeding in which by law a hearing is required to be given, evidence is required to be taken, and discretion regarding a final and non -appealable determination of facts is vested in the City of Rolling Hills, the City Council, or in any of its Commissions, officers, or employees, must be filed within the time limits set forth in the California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6 ROLLING HILLS ZONING 78 MAY 1993 a, • • P•852 865 278 RECEIPT SFOR URANCE CERTIFIED P IcED MAIL NO VIDED NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) Postage Certified Fee Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee Return Receipt showing to whom and Date Delivered Return Receipt showing to whom. Date, and Address,Q! Delivery SENDER: • Complete Items 1 and/or 2 for additional services. • Complete Items 3, 4a, and 4b. • Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can retum thls card to you. • Attach this form to the front of the mailplece, or on the back if space does not ■ permit. rite VRetum Receipt Requested' on the matlpiece below the article number. ■ The Retum Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date delivered. t 3. Article Addressed to: 4 I Mr. %%ir5. Fed Pi pl e V in' I V , � so/edetd.— Yecdondo c 9 ? 77 I a z 7 0 also wish to receive the following services (for an extra fee): 1. ❑ Addressee's Address Z 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery N Consult postmaster for fee. a. Article N unbar P Sa $&s ,278. 3) Certified cn Nxh��sM�Il ❑ Insured 5 / .)�tumelp"ftgl�(ale 0 COD 0 /Vey 589 5 ia_ elved By: (Print ame -FG j, 'f tature (Addressee or Agent) PS Aemr 811, December/1994 / 4b. Service Type 0 Reolsered AC:7 Date tit CjHvAA)- t%j &*dd fssee dJ ss (Only 11 requested Lliogtfe rchandise 102595-97-B-0179 Domestic Retum Receipt .1 'r City 0/ leolliny JUL FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E mall: cityofrh@aol.com November 20, 1998 Mr. and Mrs. Fred Ripley 215 Via La Soledad Redondo Beach, CA 90277 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 589, Request for Site Plan Review to construct a new single family residence at 91 Crest Road East (Lot 69-B-MS), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Ripley: We have arranged for the Planning Commission to conduct a field inspection of your property to view the proposed project on Saturday. December 12. 1998. The Planning Commission will meet at 7:30 AM at your property. The site must be prepared according to the enclosed Silhouette Construction Guidelines and the following requirements: The site must be prepared according to the enclosed Silhouette Construction Guidelines and the following requirements: • A full-size silhouette must be prepared for ALL STRUCTURES of the project showing the footprints, roof ridges, bearing walls and any retaining walls; • Stake or flag the limits of the building pad, and the side property lines; and • Delineate areas to be graded showing finished floor or grade elevations. The owner and/or representative should be present to answer any questions regarding the proposal. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, d1 LOLA UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect .: Printed on Recycled Paper. Ci, `RJ&, INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (213) 377.1521 FAX (213) 377-7288 SILHOUEE CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES 1. When required by the Planning Commission or City Council, a silhouette of proposed construction should be erected for the week preceding the designated Planning Commission or City Council meeting. 2. Silhouettes should be constructed with 2" x 4" lumber. Printed boards are not acceptable. 3. Bracing should be provided where possible. 4. Wire, twine or other suitable material should be used to delineate roof ridges and eaves. 5. Small pieces of cloth or flags should be attached to the wire or twine to aid in the visualization of the proposed construction. 6. The application may be delayed if inaccurate or incomplete silhouettes are constructed. 7. If you have any futher questions contact the Planning Department Staff at (213) 377-1521. •. •. .. „ :: :• .t SECTION 11 1 PLAN `N11G Hlllfe r CEO • 0/ /E'0ff LLLh INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 STATUS OF APPLICATION & NO fIFICATION OF MEETING E-mail: cltyofrh@aol.com November 5,1998 Mr. and Mrs. Fred Ripley 215 Via La Soledad Redondo Beach, CA 90277 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 589, Request for Site Plan Review to construct a new single family residence at 91 Crest Road East (Lot 69-B-MS), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Ripley: Pursuant to state law the City's staff has completed a preliminary review of the application noted above and finds that the information submitted is: X Sufficiently complete as of the date indicated above to allow the application to be processed. Please note that the City may require further information in order to clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise supplement the application. If the City requires such additional information, it is strongly suggested that you supply that information promptly to avoid any delay in the processing of the application. Your application for Zoning Case No. 589 has been set for public hearing consideration by the Planning Commission at their meeting on Tuesday, November 17,1998. The meeting will begin at 7:30 PM in the Council Chambers, Rolling Hills City Hall Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills. You or your designated representative must attend to present your project and to answer questions. The staff report for this project will be available at the City Hall after 3:00 PM on Friday, November 13,1998. We will forward a copy to you. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, /./71(a. Z4)7— LOLA M. UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect ®Printed en Recycled Paper.