158, Construct a tennis court in fr, Application•
• CITY OF ROLLING HILLS •
,plication for a) Change of Zoning
b) Variance from Zoning Ordinance
XX c) Conditional Use Permit
ie .undersigned
NAME
Carlton E. & Shirley A. Gregory
25 Caballeros' Road
STREET ADDRESS
is/are the owner(s) of XX
has'peLwission or the owner-
s plaintiff
• Rolling Hills
.gal description of property situated at
13 Johns Canyon Road
STREET ADDRESS
LOT
3
:titions for' tennis court
I. Such change is warranted,because (State reasons)
RPgi,PsrP9_ (Referpne,e our letter to the City Council)
377 1824
TELEPHONE NO
30605
TRACT
II. Such change is based upon the following described exceptional or extra-
ordinary circumstances or conditions that do not apply generally to other
propertyor class -of use in the -same vicinity and zone -(State* circum-
stance _ _ T)oPS not apply
.I.. Such change is necessary for the .preservation _and -enjoyment of a -sub- •
stantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity
and zone (State reasons) No change requested
V. Such change will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to the property or improvements in such_vicinity and zone cohere
property is located because the tennis court is located to the rear
of th^ rQ Arty 2t 2n P1Qvarinn a98 psosition that. in our opin,ion
is notdetr men a to the environmental q a ties otthe city U L1C
adjacent land owners (reference letters or approval).
(If additional space is needed, use reverse side of sheet)
ht
Rolling Hills City Council
No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, California 90274
Dear Council Members:
July 10, 1976
Re: Building Permits
13 Johns Canyon Road
We respectfully request that you read and consider in
detail the following statements and conditions pertaining to our
efforts and procedures to date relating to obtaining permits to
construct a home and tennis court at #13 Johns Canyon Road (lot 3).
We instructed our Real Estate Broker to search only for a
lot to accommodate a tennis court and did not plan to purchase a
lot where a tennis court could not be located.
We requested the requirements for a lot from the city
offices to accommodate a tennis court.
Our personal requirements were to purchase a lot that would
not require us to ask for any known variances or considerations
from the city. Known requirements as follows:
1) location of tennis court in rear of house
2) setbacks within proper limits
3) no encroachments into any easements or side line
setbacks
4) percentage of usage of property coverage including
building, tennis court, future stable and pool site,
paving, etc. within proper limits
We purchased a lot at #,13 Johns Canyon Road (lot #3) which
fulfilled all known requirements,, We also felt that the proposed
tennis court would not have any adverse impact on the rural
character of the city in the location proposed for it and with
the screening planned.
We obtained an architect to develop this property within
the limits prescribed above.
Preliminary plans were submitted to the architectural
committee and all suggested changes were made including the
rotation of the house and tennis court on the property to conform
more naturally to the terrain and environment.
• •
Minutes of the architectural committee dated April 5, 1976
indicate approval of complete project, with a few minor changes,
and that we would not have to resubmit. These minutes and a
letter dated January 26, 1976 with recommendations for proper
screening of the tennis court are enclosed for your observation.
At this point the architect was instructed to proceed
with completed construction drawings and submit them to the
county for plan check.
We, simultaneously on approximately April 15, 1976, contacted
the city offices with reference to obtaining our city permits.
We were told specifically that the permits could be issued at
that time. The fee would be $890.79 for the house and $115.00
for the tennis court. It was suggested by Peggy Minor that since
these plans were approved and that permits could be issued at any
time on or after April 5, 1976 that we could consider purchasing
these permits at a time that the county plan check was complete
and the contractor selected.
Since at this point in time we could not anticipate the amount
of time required to complete detailed construction drawings, county
plan check and selection of contractor we elected to accept her
suggestion since it was our understanding that the city permits were
valid for one year and we did not want to unnecessarily restrict
ourselves time wise in the construction phase. County Plan Check
was completed approximately July 7, 1976.
Also during this period of time a loan application was .
submitted to California Federal Savings Association and subsequently
approved. We then authorized California Federal to proceed with
the loan documents and adhered to their request and forwarded them
a ."good faith" check to bind their commitment through July 30,
1976. There have been strong indications that having to reapply
would put us in an unfavorable.or perhaps even an impossible
borrowing position. We have incurred architectural fees,
plan check expenses, and other expenses totaling $16,380 to date.
On Friday, July 9, 1976 we called Peggy Minor to make an
appointment to obtain our city permits on that date, as we were
ready to proceed. We were informed by Peggy that she would very
much like to issue the permits as previously discussed, however
something had occurred that week that would not allow her to do
so. Efforts were made for possible solutions. The consensus
of parties contacted was to present a detailed letter to the City
Council and have a representative or personally appear at the
Council meeting July 12, 1976. We elected to personally appear
to answer any questions the council may have.
We believe that with the stated facts at the disposal of
the City Councilan equitable disposition of this matter can be
made at this meeting by way of granting permission for the
issuance of the permits requested.
Enc. 2
1
Sincerely
67/
ours,
C.E. (Gene) and Shirley Gregory
25 Caballeros Road
Rolling Hills, California
Phone: 377-1824
sRoLLLn3OWL- eommur2 J o16.S.oeiation
of cRango atos (Vedet
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND RD. • ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
ROLLING HILLS
(213) 377-1521
Mr. and Mrs. C. E. Gregory
25 Caballeros Road
Rolling Hills, California 90274.
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gregory: Re: 13 Johns Canyon Road
170A-3-MS
CALIFORNIA
January 26, 1976
With regard to your new home at 13 Johns Canyon Road, the
Landscape Committee took a field trip to view the property
and make recommendations that can be considered when your
landscape plan is considered.
They request that tall trees should not be planted on the canyon
side of your property where they will obscure the view for resi-
dents on Johns Canyon Road and Chestnut Lane. Therefore, in
screening the tennis court, the height of plants should be
carefully considered.
Enclosed is a sheet containing guidelines in preparing your
landscape plan. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
•
Pegh Minor
Secretary
pm
Enclosure
•
April 5, 1976 •
5) C. E. GREGORY
13 Johns Canyon Road
170A-3-MS
P. C. 1589.
Residence approved with following notations on plans:
1) No projections more than 6" at gable ends (including gutters)
2) Slumpstone is to be painted approved white. White sample
stain is not approved. Trim and location of trim to be
submitted separately for approval.
3) Mailbox pillar design is not approved. All mailboxes shall
be installed on 4" x 4" post, four feet above grade, or as
may be required by postal regulation; and painted with
Rolling Hills white paint.
4) Service yard fence shall be 6'6" high.
5) Skylight detail is not approved. Skylights may not be
raised more than one inch above the highest point of the
roof shingle. Aluminum colored framing shall be colored
to match roof material.
C. E. GREGORY 170A-3-MS
13 Johns Canyon Road P. C. 1590
Tennis court grading approved as submitted. Fence shall be
10' maximum height.
7) WALLACE KREAG 77-EF
18 Outrider Road P. C. 1646
Stable design approved as noted on plans. Delete windows
from loft.
8) MARVIN MALMUTH
10 Poppy Trail
3-PT
P. C. 1652
As discussed with Architect, resubmit in preliminary form:
1) Delete glass under high roof above lower roof.
2) Tennis court, pool'and guest house to be submitted
separately for approval.
3) Paint approved white, trim and location of•trim to be
submitted for approval.
9) LYTTLETON E. WILSON (SCHRANK) 1-BW
10 Buggy Whip Drive P. C. 1657
Resubmit in final form with the following shown:
1) Entire building program concept planned for eventual
development, including stable location and access.
2) Driveway grade shall not exceed 207. Show on plans.
3) Square footage chart shall be shown.
4) Submit finished grading plan, showing all necessary swales
or retaining walls.
5) Locate service yard on plot plan in a convenient
location for trash pickup. Show detail of fence. Minimum
size is 96 square feet.
6) 6" is maximum beam end extensions.
7) Delete diamond panes in front door for more conventional
design.
10) HERBERT KRAUS
16 Crest Road East
193-2-MS
P. C. 1628
I
Residence design approved with following requirements:
1) Front door design is not appropriate. Use square panels.
2) Service yard fence shall be 6'6" high. Vertical boards
shall match residence.
3) Maximum height for retaining walls is 5' from finished grade
to top of wall.
4) Light detail approved as submitted.
5) Paint approved white, trim and location of trim to be submitted.
2.
• •
William R. Peters
fi1 Aspen Way
Rolling Hills Estates, California 90274
377-8639
July 16, 1976
Mr. and Mrs. C. E. Gregory
25 Caballeros Road
Rolling Hills, California 90274
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gregory:
We understand that the City of Rolling Hills requires a Zone Variance
for the construction of your proposed tennis court on Lot 3, Tract
30605.
We have reviewed your plans and as purchasers of Lot 2, Tract 30605, we
have no objections.to the granting of the variance.
We hope this letter will assist you.
Sincerely,
o
William . Peters
WRP/SWP:cw
Susan W. Peters
•
July 24, 1976
Mr.•and Mrs. C.E. Gregory
25 Caballeros Road
Rolling Hills, California 90274
Dear Mr. and Mrs Gregory:
I understand that the City of Rolling Hills requires
you to obtain a Conditional Use Permit for the construction
of a tennis court on your 2 acre parcel at 13 Johns Canyon
Road (lot 3 tract 30605). •
As the owner of the acreage immediately east of your
property, I wish to inform you and the Planning Commission
that I do not have any objections to the construction of
your tennis court, as shown on your site plan.
Walter Storm
• •
July 26, 1976
Mr. & Mrs. C.E. Gregory
25 Caballeros Road
Rolling Hills, Calif. 90274
Dear Mr. and Mrs. c egory:
We have reviewed your plans .for your proposed Tennis Court.
on Lot 3 Tract 30605. As residents of #9 John's Cayon Rd,
we have no objections•to its location or construction.
We hope this letter will assist you in your endeavor and
are looking forward to having you as neighbors.
Sincerely,
Donald Williams l%21/JZGi dz>
Donna Williams
#9 Johns Canyon Rd
Rolling Hills, Calif. 90274
L 0+111Loverc.cl C.
0 i o 4; S ua rG A 0 +-oa .e.
C?-a►)C2s) = 2.517..5 4
g21 4q S .n-4
CI 1 l (o) + 6 (cc -t- '3 (o = Z I Z
-�� ucrr c
e' ACe ncr4 ,Parc.--batc\cl c.
0o) 41425,8
•
At? gReev
CZ: ae,C6ae/
o/D//1/S' C,Aiy i/,c"�
�v?, 13Z pc;
e
C► °) C+-101si-4 1) V 41104,4- 43 2Qu 4
( 1) iic. Z 11 = 811.141
0
) C203.70) = too `itn
1 E, 4 ‘4 r#T
0o1)6 03,i-0 ' ►1r 1%'
Zp3o
1
4 4vJok re.
'Main \71.d4\,
rooS arex\
2°i 1
6\i 1
{
1 Zoo 111 ` 4 ';F:i 0
S°Y,--6
0 cc �! 1cc LAekrc`
LCD gab le- \Oo Z
1
0i455,84'
(r4,••• c\tt
i
•
?A J Gt GC
3 1Z`"c _106
11k.0
Q
e) �konc U-
CC"— coc\A \)."11 A 45'S
`',‘,1 C. 3