Loading...
586, Encroachment into front yard s, CorrespondenceCOLA OF LOS ANGELES REGISTRAR-RECORDER/COUNTY CLERK • 12400 IMPERIAL HWY. - P.O. BOX 1024, NORWALK, CALIFORNIA 90651-1024 / (562) 462-2716 CORNY B. McCORMACK REGISTRAR-RECORDERICOUNTY CLERK Dear Customer: Af 3'i'199 dr 1.^l- i ifirYO 11 d4-iti :§s The purpose of this letter is to it u,thnt t-he-document you recently mailed to this department has been recorded. Enclosed is a certified copy of the document which reflects the date of recording. -Your original document will be returned to you after it has been entered into our database and imaged for archival retention. Unfortunately, this process is currently six months behind because of 1) a significant increase in real estate activity which has resulted in recording volumes reaching 15,000 property documents daily, and 2) unanticipated computer system problems due to our conversion from microfilm to more modem digital imaging technology for our document retention process. To tackle the six month backlog we have now hired 100 temporary staff.. Please accept our apology for the continued delay in mailing your original document back to you. In the meantime, the enclosed certified copy has the same legal standing as your original document. Also, once your original document has been imaged by our new computerized system, any request in the future for a certified copy will be produced with clarity. This certified copy was produced off of microfilm which is more difficult to read. Thank you for your patience as we finalize our conversion from microfilm to digital imaging technology. Once this process is completed, our service to the public will be enhanced. Turnaround time from document recording to return of original documents will be able to be accomplished within six weeks. Sincerely, Conny B. McCormack Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk Enclosure Cuy °P? ffwS Jhft FRANK E. HILL Mayor THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Mayor Pro Tem B. ALLEN LAY Councilmember JODY MURDOCK Councilmember GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S. Councilmember March 23,1999 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 Mr. and Mrs. Brent Harris 1 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 586, APPEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR A PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED GARDEN PLATFORM/VIEW AREA. Mr. and Mrs. Brent Harris, 1 Crest Road East (Lot 1-FT) Dear Mr. and Mrs. Harris: Thank you for taking time to attend the City Council meetings relating to the 4bove referenced case. At the regular City Council meeting held Monday, March 22, 1999, the vote of City Council caused the action of the Planning Commission to stand in this case. Therefore, your application for your Variance is approved based upon the adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 98-23 on December 15, 1998. We have e}nclosed a copy of that Resolution and related correspondence for your records. Please be certain to comply with the recordation requirements in the attached correspondence. Should you wish to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, 147 raig R. Nealis City Manager CRN:mlk 03/23/99harris.ltr cc: City Council Lola Ungar, Planning Director Ms. Tamara Powers Mr. Lon Clearwaters Mr. & Mrs. Dominique Claessens Mr. & Mrs. Peter Mindnich Ms. Christine Mulligan Printed on Recycled Paper. • ofi2ll..y JUL CER1'1.NlED MAIL December 17,1998 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 Mr. Brent Harris Trustee for Security Trust Company Trust No. 013475 1 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: APPEAL PERIOD AND AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM ZONING CASE NO. 586, 1 CREST ROAD EAST (LOT 1-FT) RESOLUTION NO. 98-23 Dear Mr. Harris: This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission adopted a resolution on December 15, 1998 to approve a Varianceto encroach into the front yard setback for a previously illegally constructed garden platform/view area at 1 Crest Road East (Lot 1-FT), Rolling Hills, CA in Zoning Case No. 586. That action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission will be reported to the City Council on January 11, 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 or the City Council takes jurisdiction of the case 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. 98-23, 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 rA, Panted on Recycled Paper • • 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. Please feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, LOLA UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR ENC: RESOLUTION NO. 98-23 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM APPEAL SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE. cc: Ms. Christine Mulligan • • 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. T Recorder's use Only AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ZONING CASE NO. 586 §§ 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: 1 CREST ROAD EAST (LOT 1-FT), ROLLING HILLS, CA This property is the subject of the above numbered case. I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said ZONING CASE NO. 586 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 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 �x it, i ! ;q y • • RESOLUTION NO. 98-23 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR A PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED GARDEN PLATFORM/VIEW AREA IN ZONING CASE NO. 586. 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. Brent Harris, Trustee for Security Trust Company, Trust No. 013475, with respect to real property located at 1 Crest Road East (Lot 1-FT), Rolling Hills, requesting a Variance to permit an existing illegally constructed garden platform/view area that encroaches into the front yard setback at an existing single family residence. Section 2. A. In June, 1998, it came to the attention of the City that a structure was being constructed on the subject property within required setbacks without the benefit of building permits. Staff spoke with the Harris' representative, Ms. Christine Mulligan, Mulligan Studios, Landscape Design & Development. In a letter dated June 10, 1998, Ms. Mulligan interpreted the structure as a walkway which is permitted within required setbacks. B. On July 21, 1998, the Planning Commission concurred with staff's determination per the Municipal Code that the garden platform/viewing area constitutes a structure and not a walkway as originally claimed by the applicants. C. On August 25, 1998, staff received a letter from Ms. Mulligan informing staff that Mr. and Mrs. Harris and Ms. Mulligan would be pursuing the necessary steps to comply with the requirements of the Municipal Code. The Harrises submitted a Variance application on September 25, 1998. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application on October 20, 1998 and November 17, 1998, and at a field trip visit on November 7, 1998. The applicant was notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. Evidence was heard from members of the City staff, the applicants -and the Planning Commission reviewed, analyzed and studied the project. Concerns expressed by Commissioners and the applicants focused on the unauthorized construction of the garden platform/view area, its use and its location in order to gain a "city lights" view. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 3 Exemption [State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures)] and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. RESOLUTION NO. 98-23 PAGE 1 OF 4 • • Section 5. 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. Section 17.16.110 requires a front yard setback for every residential parcel in the RA-S zone to be no less than fifty (50) feet from the front easement line. The applicant is requesting a Variance to authorize the retention of an encroachment into the front yard setback to allow a previously constructed 192 square foot garden platform/view area that is up to 40 inches in height and encroaches up to 43 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback at the northwest corner of the lot to remain. With respect to this request for a Variance, 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 because the lot is irregular in shape and the previously constructed illegal garden platform/view area is located on a flat area at the front of the lot. The garden platform/view area does not disturb the development pattern on the lot and it is obscured from view by vegetation. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinityand zone, but which is denied to the property in question. The Variance is necessary because the development and use of the subject property in a manner consistent with the shape of the lot and development of other property on this street justifies this additional small incursion into the front yard setback. There will not be any greater incursion into the front yard setback than already exists. 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. A substantial portion of the lot will remain undeveloped. In addition, the garden platform/view area, as conditioned, will be screened with vegetation so as not to be visible from Crest Road, Portuguese Bend Road and surrounding properties. Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 586 to authorize the retention of an encroachment into the front yard setback to authorize a previously constructed illegal garden platform/view area to that encroaches a maximum of forty-three (43) feet into the fifty (50) foot front yard setback as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, dated October 5, 1998, and is subject to the following conditions: RESOLUTION NO, 98-23 PAGE 2 OF 4 • • A. The Variance approval shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.38.070. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance approval that if any conditions thereof are violated, the Permit 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 Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise approved by Variance. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A dated October 5,1998, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The garden platform/view area shall not exceed 192 square feet. F. The garden platform/view area shall not exceed 40 inches in height. G. The existing topography, flora and natural features of the lot shall be retained to the greatest extent feasible. H. Landscape screening that incorporates drought -resistant native plants. shall be planted and maintained to obscure the garden platform/view area from Crest Road and Portuguese Bend Road. I. A plan that conforms to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review prior to the submittal of an applicable site drainage plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check. J. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to approval of the drainage plan. K. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for site drainage plan review and building permits must conform to the development plan described at the beginning of this section (Section 7). L. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Variance approval pursuant to Section 17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective. RESOLUTION NO. 98-23 PAGE 3 OF 4 • • M. All conditions of this Variance approval must be complied with prior to approval of the site drainage plan by the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 1998. ---h i i :o i_ ---- ALLAR ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: MARILYN , DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 98-23 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE , TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK . FOR . A PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED GARDEN PLATFORM/VIEW AREA IN ZONING CASE NO. 586. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on December 15, 1998 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Hankins, Witte and Chairman Roberts. Commissioners Sommer and Margeta. None. ABSTAIN: None . and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices MARILYN I ERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 98-23 PAGE 4 OF 4 17.54.010 • • 1754 APPEALS 1754.010 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 1730.030 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. ROLLING HILLS ZONING 76 MAY 24,1993 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. 77 ROLLING HILLS ZONING MAY 24, 1993 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 78 ROLLING HILLS ZONING MAY 7,4, 1993 Mr.:Craig Nealis;, City Manager -City of Rolling. Hills 2 Portugese Bend Road :Rolling Hills, CA 90274, Zoning Case No: 586 Variance to Encroach into Front Yard Setback @ 1;Crest Road East (The, Harris Property) Mr: and Mrs Harris and I are dismayed that the Variance we,have; strived so long and hard' for is still up in the air;.and.'now appears may be tentatively„granted with the potential to be withdrawn at some uncertain point in the, future.' 'We'feelthat any,: connected with this Variance,must contain. strict guidelines alto the nature Of special circumstances that would give rise to us having, to' modify'. or tear down the garden. setting: Additionally, we ask that notification and appeal provisions be built into all provisions so, th•at we are;given proper. notice of any future action proposed by the City;and will have the ability to appeal should' a determinationbe made that this garden materially` interferes with imminent community use We also ask that, if it is determined that this Variance carry a provision, the Variancenot terminate uponithe transfer of.property to new, owners, unreasonably forcing us, to tear down a. garden setting that is a graceful and scenic complement to the landscaping of this property and to the surrounding' properties as well. (as testifi'ed to by,a number of supporting neighbors) We feel the focus of any provision should be directed at potential'street"widening"along Portuguese, Bend or Crest Road and that, since this possibilityimay not arise for man years; if ever; a'nd'since this site ' falls not within• the easement area but. only withinthe set back area, termination upon' sale would be a pointless exercise;' when no City construction has been. planned as the motivating` factor: The very nature ofia variance:is such that the'. property owner, and:all ,future owners,.can rest assured the project has been legally accepted for as long as the project stands. To do otherwise is to unfairly single,us‘out of the accepted‘norm::" Please consider the above. points' as you review the options connected with -this Variance, and do,no t hesitate to contact'me,so that:we;can discuss them: look'' forward' to hearing from'you: Sincerely, ' Christine.Mulligan cc:, Ms.„Lola Ungar, Planning'.Director. Landscape' Design ,k, Developmeni 3950 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 4'1; Long.Beack,' California 90807.. Pfione:2i Q 427' 7656 . `' Fax: B' 595.0790 '. • City 0/ Rolling -AA FRANK E. HILL Mayor THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Mayor Pro Tem B. ALLEN LAY Councilmember JODY MURDOCK Councilmember GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S. Councilmember March 9,1999 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 Ms. Christine Mulligan Mulligan Studios 3950 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 11 Long Beach, CA 90807 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 586, APPEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR A PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED GARDEN PLATFORM/VIEW AREA. Mr. and Mrs. Brent Harris, 1 Crest Road East (Lot 1-FT) Dear Ms Mulligan: Thank you for attending the City Council meeting on Monday, March 8,1999. As you know, the City Council continued the public hearing regarding the above referenced Zoning Case to their next meeting on Monday, March 22,1999. This meeting will begin at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers. The purpose of this continuance was to allow the City Attorney an opportunity to review other options regarding the Variance that were discussed at the City Council meeting. We will forward you and your client a copy of the staff report when it is prepared. Should you wish to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Craig R. Nealis City Manager CRN:mlk 03/09/99mulligan.ltr cc: City Council Lola Ungar, Planning Director Ms. Tamara Powers Mr. Lon Clearwaters Mr. & Mrs. Dominique Claessens Mr. & Mrs. Peter Mindnich Mr. & Mrs. Brent Harris Printed on Recycled Paper. FRANK E. HILL Mayor THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Mayor Pro Tem B. ALLEN LAY Councilmember JODY MURDOCK Councilmember GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S. Councilmember s £II, Ot ie0i �1G1,6 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 February 9, 1999 Ms. Christine Mulligan Mulligan Studios 3950 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 11 Long Beach, CA 90807 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 586, APPEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR A PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED GARDEN PLATFORM/VIEW AREA. Mr. and Mrs. Brent Harris, 1 Crest Road East (Lot 1-FT) Dear Ms Mulligan: As expected, the City Council continued the public hearing for review of the above referenced Zoning Case to Thursday, February 18,1999. It is anticipated that the City Council will arrive at 1 Crest Road at approximately 7:45 a.m. Should you wish to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to let me know. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, raig R. Nealis City Manager CRN:mlk 02/09/99mulligan.ltr cc: City Council Lola Ungar, Planning Director Ms. Tamara Powers Mr. Lon Clearwaters Mr. & Mrs. Dominique Claessens Mr. & Mrs. Peter Minc}nich Mr. & Mrs. Bret Harris Panted on Recycled Paper. • City 0/ Rollinv FRANK E. HILL Mayor THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Mayor Pro Tem B. ALLEN LAY Councilmember JODY MURDOCK Councilmember GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S. Councilmember 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 February 3, 1999 Ms. Christine Mulligan Mulligan Studios 3950 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 11 Long Beach, CA 90807 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 586, APPEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR A PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED GARDEN PLATFORM/VIEW AREA. Mr. and Mrs. Brent Harris, 1 Crest Road East (Lot 1-FT) Dear Ms Mulligan: As you know, members of the City Council opened the public hearing on the above referenced case at their City Council meeting held on January 25t''. At that meeting, the City Council continued this public hearing to the City Council meeting scheduled for Monday, February 8th with the intention of establishing a field trip to be conducted after February 8th. We anticipate that the field trip will be held on Thursday, February 18th at 7:30 a.m. at 1 Crest Road East. We will forward a copy of the staff report for the field trip to you and the interested parties listed below prior to that date. Should you wish to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Craig R. Nealis City Manager CRN:mlk 02/03/99mulligan.ltr cc: City Council Mr. & Mrs. Dominique Claessens Lola Ungar, Planning Director Mr. & Mrs. Peter Mindnich Ms. Tamara Powers Mr. Sr Mrs. Bret Harris Mr. Lon Clearwaters Printed on Recycled Paper. Lon Clearwaters #4.Cinchring Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 January 21, 1999 City Council City of Rolling Hills No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 Re: Zoning Case No. 586 Mr. and Mrs. Brent R. Harris pgEtIVEii JAN 211999 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS qv Dear Council Members: We reside at #4 Cinchring Road, Rolling Hills, and are neighbors of Brent and Beth Harris. We have received notice of the hearing set for January 25, 1999 concerning Zoning Case #586. We approve of the variance being granted to the Harrises. I am familiar with the garden and planter in the northwest corner of the Harris property. It is not obvious from either Crest Road or Portuguese Bend Road. The Harrises have planted Oleanders around the perimeter of the area and by spring the subject area will not be visible from either street. In evaluating this matter I believe the City Council should consider the totality of improvements to the Harrises property since their purchase_ They have dramatically improved the appearance of the landscaping and residence consistent with a traditional Rolling Hills look. The Harrises are a very positive addition to our community. I am surprised and concerned that this application is still an issue. In October 1998 we wrote to the Planning Commission and appeared at a hearing urging the granting of the requested variance. It was my understanding that a variance was approved after a field trip to the site. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. LRC:bg FROM : Powers • TEL: 310 372 1368 1111JAN.22. 1999 12:1B AM P 1 Tamara Ritchey Powers 3 North Quail Ridge, Rolling Hills, California 90274 Phone: 310-372-3387 FAX: 310-372-1368 TO: Rolling Hills City Council FAX: 377-7288 DATE: January 20, 1999 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS Rv RE: Zoning Case 586 It has come to my attention that there is some discussion of a review of zoning case 586 concerning the planter steps located at 1 Crest Road East. I have watched the review process of this planter unfold for many months, now (having previously owned 18 and 22 Crest), and am perplexed by the ongoing discussion. The planter, in my view, is an attractive addition to a corner of the Harris' yard previously unplanted. It is not visible from either Crest Road or Portuguese Bend, and is integrated into the total planting and landscaping plan that has been developed and implemented on the property. It is part of a clear improvement to the overall look of the yard. JAN 2 2 1999 This landscaping element has been studied, discussed and debated at great length (at surprisingly great length) and I see no benefit from now re - reviewing the decisions of both the Planning Commission and the Community Association. I hope you will decide to concur with the approval of this landscaping, and allow the Harris' and the City to move on to other projects. ara•oes Dear City Council. Members, 1/20/99 JAN 2 2 1999 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS Beth and I live at 1 Crest Road East. We are sorry we cannot personally attend the January 25th meeting as we are out of town' on along standing business trip. Ms. Christine Mulligan, our landscape designer, will represent -us in oral public testimony. Our property is the subject of case No. 586, which discusses the appeal of the Planning Commissiorf s approval of the garden located in the northwest corner of our yard in a part of the easement that was previously a'barren area. The garden feature in question is a series of wooden steps with an integrated garden platform and planter box that serves to display our collection of potted succulents. Surprisingly to us, following the City's Codes as we read them and following the approval and very positive comments of the Rolling Hills Community Association, our garden project -was declared a "structure" by the City last summer. After this • declaration occurredit was recommended we submit,a variance plan (subject to meeting the tests) for conformity. As you can see from the record we have followed this procedure to the letter and subsequently the Planning Commission approved the variance on December 15, 1998. In addition to an. approval their resolution includes a set of conditions, one of which is the continuation' of landscape screening, to which we will agree. We were heartened bythe positive feedback we have received by neighbors strolling or riding by over these past months as well'as the positive public comments and letters'that were sent to the Planning Commission. In the end we continue to be pleased that the natural design for this garden area has' elicited a good community response. And in spite of the fact that the screened wooden steps/planter has, after some city banter of its own, been declared a "structure," the garden now has successfully passed the rigorous and exceptional conditions required for a variance as judged by the City's Planning `Commission, We believe that the Council approval of this case should not likely represent a precedent for several important reasons. First the peculiar facts of this case. The garden with its walkway was conceived as a totality: Therefore although the steps/planter may seem unusual in its, design it truly, does function as it was described, as a walkway, , garden path and a set of simple steps leading to a viewing area surrounded by more distinctive potted specimens. As built, the walkway is quite an unusual "structure": it houses nothing, has no roof or walls, provides no shelter -from the elements. It has no function except; as a path into a rather small and serene garden and as theonly area we • • • can view the city lights from our property. By our initial reading of the Code, walkways and steps are clearly allowed in easements with conditions or qualifiers. Importantly, the initial City staff response was not in opposition to our design, except for requiring a change to the original plan which cut out a rectangular planter box, thus further articulating the walkway: We.complied with this suggestion at an additional cost of $550.00. Then before the final, landscaping was completed yielding the, garden's 'unified whole, and after the cost of the extra planter had been expended, the steps and planter were declared a "structure." The second reason we think this case is not particularly precedent setting is that the Planning Commission has already deemed that, it satisfies the painstaking and exceptional variance conditions that apply to each particular variance granted. Importantly these are listed as items 5A, 5B, and 5C of the Planning Commission Resolution 98-23. If a project does not meet these stipulated requirements a variance may not be granted. By its very nature, a variance responds to exceptional situations like this one, and not to commonly recurring cases.. The final reason regarding our view 'has to do with the delays, costs, and fees born by us over this long process. To have imagined at the start of our garden project that this sequence of ,events would be required (following a serious study of the Code beforehand), would have seriously dissuaded us from investing in this property improvement. And this is what is quite troubling. Many people put a great deal of energy and love into their gardens. A number of these terrific gardens are visible throughout our beautiful city. We ourselves have invested thousands of dollars in supplemental planting of natural indigenous material, that has been a joy to us as well as'to our neighbors. However, by following this saga through\the public process, -Others may, be dissuaded from creating and investing in appropriate and fitting gardens that might require non -plant materials as part of their designs. We ask through your deliberations and.conclnsions that you approve the Planning Commission's original resolution 98-23 as adopted and dispel these concerns. Thank you, for your consideration of 'our views. • Sincerely,, rent and Bei Harris • Ciiy ofieolling January 12,1999 Mr. Brent Barris Trustee for Security Trust Company Trust No. 013475 1 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CA 90274 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 P.ORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 586, APPEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR A PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED GARDEN PLATFORM/VIEW AREA FOR PROPERTY AT 1 CREST ROAD EAST (LOT 1-FT), ROLLING HILLS, CA. Dear Mr. Harris: This letter shall serve as official notification that Zoning Case No. 586 was taken under jurisdiction by the City Council at their regular meeting on Monday, January 11,1999. The appeal has been set for public hearing consideration by the City Council at their regular meeting on Monday, Tanuary 25. 1999. 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, January 22,1999. Please arrange to pick up the staff report to preview it prior to the hearing. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. PLANNING DIRECTOR cc: Ms. Christine Mulligan, Mulligan Studios Printed on Recycled Paper. .JAN-2 1 -'9'9 THU 1 2: 2 1 P - 0 1 1 DOMINIQUE AND GEORGIA CLAESSENS 6 CREST ROAD EAST, ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA 90274 PHONE: (310) 541-1541 FAX: (310) 541-0195 Rolling Hills City Council 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, Calif. 90274 PER FAX: 377-7288 ZONING CASE NO: 586 Dear Sirs, January 20, 1999 )10]IlVE-11 JAN 2 1 1999 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS Alv I am writing in regards to the possible appeal of the variance granted to Beth and Brent Harris at No. 1 Crest Road E. We understand that there is a possibility that the City Council will appeal the variance previously granted to the Harris's for the viewing platform that was constructed on their property that is. visible from Crest. I find the idea of putting the Harris's through so much trouble for an ollvc ,ls improvement to the property rather hard to believe. I have watched the improvements on the property and know the Harris's to be very aware of the atmosphere that the City of Rolling Hills is trying to preserve. They have kept the improvements to the Saffo home very ttnettOlie Rolling Hills style. My understanding is that the platform has a historical significance, that the S'affo's had a viewing platform at some time. I personally find the platform, which they are using to put potted plants on, a very charming addition to the corner of Crest and Portuguese Bend Rd. Anything to distract you from looking at the home across the street is a definite improvement. I would like to see them out there enjoying the city view which their plants are now taking advantage of. The platform is already tisappearing behind foliage and I will regret it when I can no longer see such a charming addition our city. I feel that we are lucky to have people such as the Harris's who are so aware of the Rolling Hills heritage and really would like to preserve it. Sincerely, Georgia Claessens (Storm) •City ./ leollin9 _WA CERTIFIED MAIL December 17, 1998 • 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 Mr. Brent Harris Trustee for Security Trust Company Trust No. 013475 1 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: APPEAL PERIOD AND AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM ZONING CASE NO. 586, 1 CREST ROAD EAST (LOT 1-FT) RESOLUTION NO. 98-23 Dear Mr. Harris: This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission adopted a resolution on December 15, 1998 to approve a Variance to encroach into the front yard setback for a previously illegally constructed garden platform/view area at 1 Crest Road East (Lot 1-FT), Rolling Hills, CA in Zoning Case No. 586. That action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission will be reported to the City Council on January 11, 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 or the City Council takes jurisdiction of the case 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. 98-23, 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 Printed on Recyc.;led Paper • • 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. Please feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, PLANNING DIRECTOR ENC: RESOLUTION NO. 98-23 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM APPEAL SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE. cc: Ms. Christine Mulligan • • 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. T Recorder's Use Only AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ZONING CASE NO. 586 ) §§ 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: 1 CREST ROAD EAST (LOT 1-FT), ROLLING HILLS, CA This property is the subject of the above numbered case. I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said ZONING CASE NO. 586 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 Signature Signature Name typed or printed Name typed or printed Address Address City/State City/State Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary oublic. 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 • • RESOLUTION NO. 98-23 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR A PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED GARDEN PLATFORM/VIEW AREA IN ZONING CASE NO. 586. 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. Brent Harris, Trustee for Security Trust Company, Trust No. 013475, with respect to real property located at 1 Crest Road East (Lot 1-FT), Rolling Hills, requesting a Variance to permit an existing illegally constructed garden platform/view area that encroaches into the front yard setback at an existing single family residence. Section 2. A. In June, 1998, it came to the attention of the City that a structure was being constructed on the subject property within required setbacks without the benefit of building permits. Staff spoke with the Harris' representative, Ms. Christine Mulligan, Mulligan Studios, Landscape Design & Development. In a letter dated June 10, 1998, Ms. Mulligan interpreted the structure as a walkway which is permitted within required setbacks. B. On July 21, 1998, the Planning Commission concurred with staff's determination per the Municipal Code that the garden platform/viewing area constitutes a structure and not a walkway as originally claimed by the applicants. C. On August 25, 1998, staff received a letter from Ms. Mulligan informing staff that Mr. and Mrs. Harris and Ms. Mulligan would be pursuing the necessary steps to comply with the requirements of the Municipal Code. The Harrises submitted a Variance application on September 25, 1998. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the application on October 20, 1998 and November 17, 1998, and at afield trip visit on November 7, 1998. The applicant was notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter. Evidence was heard from members of the City staff, the applicants, and the Planning Commission reviewed, analyzed and studied the project. Concerns expressed by Commissioners and the applicants focused on the unauthorized construction of the garden platform/view area, its use and its location in order to gain a "city lights" view. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 3 Exemption [State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15303 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures)] and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. RESOLUTION NO. 98-23 PAGE 1 OF 4 • • Section 5. 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. Section 17.16.110 requires a front yard setback for every residential parcel in the RA-S zone to be no less than fifty (50) feet from the front easement line. The applicant is requesting a Variance to authorize the retention of an encroachment into the front yard setback to allow a previously constructed 192 square foot garden platform/view area that is up to 40 inches in height and encroaches up to 43 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback at the northwest corner of the lot to remain. With respect to this request for a Variance, 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 because the lot is irregular in shape and the previously constructed illegal garden platform/view area is located on a flat area at the front of the lot. The garden platform/view area does not disturb the development pattern on the lot and it is obscured from view by vegetation. 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 the development and use of the subject property in a manner consistent with the shape of the lot and development of other property on this street justifies this additional small incursion into the front yard setback. There will not be any greater incursion into the front yard setback than already exists. 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. A substantial portion of the lot will remain undeveloped. In addition, the garden platform/view area, as conditioned, will be screened with vegetation so as not to be visible from Crest Road, Portuguese Bend Road and surrounding properties. Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 586 to authorize the retention of an encroachment into the front yard setback to authorize a previously constructed illegal garden platform/view area to that encroaches a maximum of forty-three (43) feet into the fifty (50) foot front yard setback as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, dated October 5, 1998, and is subject to the following conditions: RESOLUTION NO. 98-23 PAGE 2 OF 4 A. The Variance approval shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.38.070. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance approval that if any conditions thereof are violated, the Permit 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 Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise approved by Variance. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A dated October 5, 1998, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The garden platform/view area shall not exceed 192 square feet. F. The garden platform/view area shall not exceed 40 inches in height. G. The existing topography, flora and natural features of the lot shall be retained to the greatest extent feasible. H. Landscape screening that incorporates drought -resistant native plants shall be planted and maintained to obscure the garden platform/view area from Crest Road and Portuguese Bend Road. I. A plan that conforms to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review prior to the submittal of an applicable site drainage plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check. J. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to approval of the drainage plan. K. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of Building and Safety for site drainage plan review and building permits must conform to the development plan described at the beginning of this section (Section 7). L. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Variance approval pursuant to Section 17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective. RESOLUTION NO. 98-23 PAGE 3 OF 4 M. All conditions of this Variance approval must be complied with prior to approval of the site drainage plan by the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 1998. ( ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: iti MARILYNL~KEYZN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 98-23 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR A PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONSTRUCTED GARDEN PLATFORM/VIEW AREA IN ZONING CASE NO. 586. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on December 15, 1998 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Commissioners Hankins, Witte and Chairman Roberts. Commissioners Sommer and Margeta. None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices MARILYN I41ERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 98-23 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 1730.030 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 24, 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. 77 ROLLING HILLS ZONMG MAY 24, 1993 • • 1754.060 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 HIUS ZONING 78 MAY 24, 1993 rnco Retur Dat a> c T o p co O LL rn a P 852 865 275 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) Sent to elf^, i 2-'i1 Av -$ c Street and No. P. State and ZIP Code Postage Certified Fee Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee Return Receipt showing to whom and Date Delky,ered `/7 ),3.:� I/1/4 e'c�i o, i to whom, ddre�sy f D livery 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 return this card to you. • Attach this form to the front of the mailpiece, or on the back if space does not permit. ' Write 'Return Receipt Requested' on the mailpiece below the article number. ■The Retum Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date delivered. 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number ,,, �/ Pc, l Cite /L.e") eta — mu) S� • ,ice //1,i� i�% //5 (/9 90,27Y O O Z�_c,/Urir $86P cc 5. Received Ey. (Pant N med cc atu (Addressee or ,Age : • Pa-•rm 1, December 1994 ai 1. ❑ Addressee's Address 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery m Consult postmaster for fee. °- • v 4b. Service Type ❑ Registered .Certified ma) ❑ Express Mail 0 Insured S ❑ Retum Receipt for Merchandise 0 COD 7. Date of Delivery S. Addressee's Address (Only if requested and fee is paid) I also wish to receive the following services (for an extra fee): 102595-97-B-0179 Domestic Return Receipt • City ofieo een9 Jh/i, November 19,1998 • 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 Mr. and Mrs. Brent Harris 1 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 586, Request for a Variance to permit an existing illegally constructed garden platform/view area that encroaches into the front yard setback for property at 1 Crest Road East (Lot 1-FT), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Harris: This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission voted at their regular meeting on November 17,1998 to direct staff to prepare a resolution approving a Variance to encroach into the front yard setback to authorize the retention of a previously illegally constructed garden platform/view area in Zoning Case No. 586 and shall be confirmed in the draft resolution that is being prepared. The Planning Commission will review and consider the draft resolution, together with conditions of approval, at an upcoming meeting and make its final decision cn your application at that subsequent meeting. The findings and conditions of approval of the draft resolution will be forwarded to you before being signed by the Planning Commission Chairman and City Clerk. The decision shall become effective thirty days after the adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution unless an appeal has been filed or the City Council takes jurisdiction of the case within that thirty (301 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. The Planning Commission's action taken by resolution approving the development application is tentatively scheduled for Tuesday, December 15, 1998. That action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission, is tentatively scheduled to be placed as a report item on the City Council's agenda at the Council's regular meeting on Monday, January 11,1999. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, LOLA UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR cc: Ms. Christine Mulligan ®Printed on Recycled Paper. • i eily apeo llins .wee FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION October 21,1998 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 Mr. and Mrs. Brent Harris 1 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 586, Request for a Variance to permit an existing illegally constructed garden platform/view area that encroaches into the front yard setback for property at 1 Crest Road East (Lot 1-FT), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Harris: We have arranged for the Planning Commission to conduct a field inspection of your property to view the "as built" garden platform/view area on Saturday, November 7,1998. The Planning Commission will meet at 7:30 AM at your property. Please stake or flag the front yard setback line. The owner and/or representative should be present to answer any questions regarding the proposal. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, LOLA UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR cc: Ms. Christine Mulligan Pririted or, Recycled Paper. • October 16, 1998 City Council City of Rolling Hills No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 Re: Mr. and Mrs. Brent R. Harris Zoning Case No. 586 Dear Council Members: OCTHUM [3 1 9 199e cme OF ROLLING' HILLS Rv I reside at #4 Cinchring Road, Rolling Hills, and am a neighbor of Brent and Beth Harris. We have received the notice respecting the request by the Harrises for a variance and we respectfully ask that you grant the Harris' request for said variance. I am familiar with the subject improvement in the northwest corner of the Harris' property. It is not obvious from either Crest Road or Portuguese Bend Road. Additionally, the Harrises have planted Oleanders around the perimeter of the area and in a few months the subject improvement will not be visible at all from either street. I wish to mention that the Harrises have done a superb job of landscaping and re- doing their residence. As you all are probably aware, the house was for many years the home of Dr. Paul and Joan Saffo. The Harrises have been conscious in attempting to maintain the traditional appearance of the property; yet, at the same time they have remarkably improved its appearance by upgrading the house and re -doing the landscaping. We live directly across Portuguese Bend Road from the Harrises and feel that we are fortunate to have them as neighbors. Very truly you Clearwaters LRC:bg SDF lor 415-751-0250 M910/17/98 07:39 PM E 1/1 • Tamara Ritchey Powers TO: Planning Commission City of Rolling Hills FAX: 377-7288 DATE: October 16, 1998 RE: Zoning Case #586 To Whom It May Concern: OCT 1 9 1998 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS Rv I have received your notice concerning Zoning Case #586, and would like to add my support for the garden platform being discussed. I have gone to the Harris house specifically to see the area, and find it to be a well planted, aesthetically attractive landscaping element, which creates a comfortable spot along the walkway for viewing the city lights. In no way does this walkway detract from the yard -- indeed, I believe, it adds to the landscaping on the property. hope you will also support this request. Thank you for you consideration. Tamara Powers 22 Crest Road East • ot Rolling fidid INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 STATUS OF APPLICATION & NOTIFICATION OF MEETING October 8, 1998 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com Mr. and Mrs. Brent Harris 1 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 586, Request for a Variance to permit an existing illegally constructed garden platform/view area that encroaches into the front yard setback for property at 1 Crest Road East (Lot 1-FT), Rolling Hills, CA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Harris: 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. 586 has been set for public hearing consideration by the Planning Commission at their meeting on Tuesday, October 20, 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, October 16, 1998. Please arrange to pick up the staff report to preview it prior to the hearing. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. LOLA M. UNGAR PLANNING DIRECTOR cc: Ms. Christine Mulligan Printed on Recycled Paper.