Loading...
262, Construct a tennis court, CorrespondenceCity Oi /O//ifli Jet_ INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 MASON H. ROSE V Mayor GODFREY PERNELL Mayor Pro Tem DONALD CROCKER Councilman THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Councilman GORDANA SWANSON Councilwoman TEENA CLIFTON City Manager Los Angeles County Engineer Department of Building & Safety 24320 S. Narbonne Avenue Lomita, Ca. 90717 Gentlemen: NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90274 (213) 377-I321 January 25, 1982 Re: Zoning Case No. 262 You have received a copy of the Conditions of Approval for Zoning Case No. 262, Gerald Katell, 27 Crest Road West, which was approved by the Planning Commission on April 21, 1981. -.We want to be sure that you have given special attention to Condition No. 8 regarding a requirement that a landscape plan and irrigation system be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and approval prior to grading. Though we know that you give attention to drainage matters on all plans submitted to you for review, we want to be sure that because of the magnitude of residential development on this property particular attention is given to the drainage. I would like to discuss with you the concerns expressed by the neighbors about disposal of water with relation to Crest Road, and I would.appreciate it if you would have one of your drainage personnel please call me. Very truly yours, Teena Clifton City Manager TC/jc • ID • January 12, 1981 S. D. WEIMAN 1400 CENTINELA BOULEVARD INGLEWOOD, CALIFORNIA 90302 TELEPHONE: 678-9061 Plann3:ng Commission City of Rolling Hills No. 2 Portuguese Bend Rd. Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Gentlemen: This letter is intended to state our position as regards the application for a tennis court to be placed in the front yard of the property located at 27 Crest Road West. We have examined the plot plan as submitted by Mr. and Mrs. Gerald Katell. Based upon the location of the proposed tennis court, we must raise the strongest possible objections to the application. I have attached to this letter a plot plan of my home at 29 Crest Rd. West. Our property is located to the west of and adjacent to the Katell property. The plot plan indicates the bedroom wings in close proximity to the proposed location of the Katell tennis court. The distance between the bedrooms and the Katell court may be as little as 45 feet. The bedrooms in our home are used. for both sleep and study purposes. One bedroom wing constitutes the master bedroom while the second wing houses five children bedrooms. Each of the latter contains a built desk and full study facilities. The bedrooms are used extensively by my wife who is a full time student at UCLA, my oldest son, a first year student at Loyola Law School and by the other four children, three of whom are also in local colleges. Those children who live on campus come home on weekends during the school year. It is extremely important that. their environment be a quiet one. We are fortunate to have a tennis court. .That court is located approximately 128 feet from the house. Loud sounds from the court are easily heard in our house. We are concerned about noise generating from the court that will disturb sleep. It seem inconceivable that the applicant, given almost five acres to work with, would submit a plan that places a proposed tenniscourt within fifty feet of a neighbor's bedrooms. Any contention by the applicant that he has no other place to 6 S. D. WEIMAN 1400 CENTINELA BOULEVARD INGLEWOOD, CALIFORNIA 90302 TELEPHONE: 678-9061 locate the court borders on the absurd. There remains two acres in his rear yard without any apparent development plan. I do not understand why the court was not placed in the backyard. The only assumption I can make is that the rear ... yard will be used for a future lot split application. I believe that weare entitled, as a basic property right, to the quiet enjoyment of our home. This is especially meaningful to the residents of the City of Rolling Hills. The proposed court constitutes an invasion of our privacy. I do not feel that any applicant is entitled to diminish his neighbor's right to the quiet enjoyment of his home., I am sincerely distressed that the applicants are submitting this type of proposal. I think it indicates a basic disregard for the people they will have to live with. In addition, the application is ill advised. There simply are no front yard structures on Crest Road in Rolling Hills. I strongly urge a denial of the application. Yours truly, S.D. Weiman xr -t 1. �• gyp• -- L.2‘ ` s . IIG•O' .�„ .s y •Ft au h:r%ka;�s�4 A R'. wr • £i1 O/ INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Mayor DONALD W. CROCKER Mayor Pro Tem GODFREY PERNELL Councilman MASON H. ROSE V Councilman GORDANA SWANSON Councilwoman 7EENA CLIFTON City Manager Mr. Gerald Katell 7 Silverbit Rolling Hills Estates, NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90274 (213) 377-1521 May 13, 1981 Re: Zoning Case No. 262 Tennis Court Dear Mr. Katell, Enclosed is a copy of the Findings and Report,•Zoning Case No. 262, denying your request for a Variance of Front Yard Requirementsand a Conditional Use Permit for construc- tion of a tennis court in the front yard of your property at 27 Crest Road West, and approving an amended plan and a request for a Conditional Use Permit for construction of the court in the rear yard, prepared by William Kinley, the City Attorney. Please be advised that the approval is for the tennis court only, and does not apply to any future or proposed construction shown on the plan. The approval of the tennis court is effective for one year from the date of grant of the Conditional Use Permit on April 21, 1981. Very. truly .yours, Chairman, Planning Commission JM/ j c • ./ ihit, DONALD W. CROCKER Mayor MASON H. ROSE V Mayor Pro Tem THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER Councilman GODFREY PERNELL Councilman GORDANA SWANSON Councilwoman TEENA CLIFTON City Manager Mr. Marvin Lowe, Regional Engineer 24320 S. Narbonne Avenue Lomita, Ca. 90717 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (213) 377.1521 May.12, 1981 Re: Zoning Case No. 262, Lot 174-B Gerald Katell, 27 Crest Road West Dear Mr. Lowe, The Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills granted a Conditional Use Permit in the matter of a tennis court at 27 Crest Road West on April 21, 1981 to Mr. Gerald Katell. Testimony taken during the courseof the hearings in this matter indicated a great concern relative to possible problems caused by additional drainage down stream from the proposed tennis court. The applicant and his representatives indicated that the proposed house and front yard area woulddrain southerly to Crest Road West. Northerly drainage would be limited to the tennis court and rear yard area. We would appreciate your office giving special attention to the drainage problems in the area northerly of the subject property. You may feel it appropriate, in light of the concerns expressed by neighbors, to make this communication a part of the permanent records for the property. For your information we have included a copy of the hydrology report submitted by Mr. Katell as a part of his request. Very y yours, JM/jc Chairman, Planning Commission (213) 375-2556 FROM L. A. 772-1555 SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING CORPORATION 304 TEJON PLACE PALOS VERDES ESTATES, CALIFORNIA 90274 March 5, 1981 Mr. Gerald Katell 7 Silverbit Lane Rolling Hills Estates, CA. 90274 Subject: 27 Crest Road West, Rolling Hills Dear Mr. Katell: RAYMOND L.OUIGLEY DONALD E. DAWSON RONALD 6. McALPIN CONSULTING ENGINEERS At your request we have investigated the effect of three suggested changes to the grading plan for the subject property. The results of our study are as follows: 1. Q. What drainage problems wouldrbe caused by relocating the proposed tennis court to the rear yard area? A. The net change in runoff from the area occupied by the court would be only 0.06 cfs, which if added to the 12.52 cfs expected from the total area would be insigni- ficant. 2. Q. Would the addition of a retention basin to the rear yard drainage system help to mitigate the impact of the proposed development? A. The attached calculation shows the size .of basin required to reduce peak runoff after development to the rate ex- pected under existing conditions. This size appears to be compatible with the landscape architects' proposed pond. 3. Q. Can the runoff from the proposed house be routed to Crest Road instead of to the rear yard? A. As shown on the attached sketch, an area of 1.25 acres which includes the proposed house, driveways, and upper yard area can be drained to Crest Road by means of a 12 inch diameter pipe. The net effect of. this change would be to increase the flow in Crest Road by 17%, and decrease the flow directed toward the rear propertyline by 20%. Routing this drainage to Crest Road would improve conditions at the rear of the property and preclude the need fora SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING C•PORATION March 5, 1981 Re: 27 Crest Road West, Rolling Hills Page 2 of 2 retention basin, but would require some improvement of the culvert crossing Crest Road. Very truly yours, SOUTH.6AY>ENGINEERING CORPORATION Ronald B. McAlpin RMA:st -enclosure • • jreci J.-ameetman ONE CENTURY PLAZA, NINTH FLOOR 2029 CENTURY PARK EAST LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90067 (213) 277.6318 January 30, 1981 Mrs. Jody Murdock Rolling Hills Planning Commission 2 Portuguese Bend Rd. Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Dear Mrs. Murdock: My wife and I are the property owners at 1 Johns Canyon Road, one property removed from the Katell estate at 27 Crest Rd. West, Rolling Hills. We would like to express our approval of the location of their proposed tennis court. We, and many other residents of Rolling Hills, appreciate the cost of grading and addi- tional expense necessary to create a sunken court which, I understand, will not be visable from Crest Road or any other property. We are also very supportive of the fact that their new home is designed by Cliff May and will be a very welcome addition to Rolling Hills due to the high standards of quality of that well-known architect. Anything offensive about "a tennis court" is certainly softened by the fact that most of the property owners in the area already have tennis courts. Further, the land- scape architecture by Robert Herrick Carter will go a long way toward covering any unsightly features and dramatically improving the look of the property from where it stands today. Thank you for your consideration. FJH:bjh S. D. WEIMAN 1400 CENTINELA BOULEVARD INGLEWOOD, CALIFORNIA 90302 TE LEPHONE: 678-9061 January 12, 1981 Planning Commission City of Rolling Hills No. 2 Portuguese Bend Rd. Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Gentlemen: This letter is intended to state our position as regards the application for a tennis court to be placed in the front yard of the property located at 27 Crest Road West. We have examined the plot plan as submitted by Mr. and Mrs. Gerald Katell. Based upon the location of the proposed tennis court, we must raise the strongest possible objections to the application. I have attached to this letter a plot plan of my home at 29 Crest Rd. West. Our property is located to the west of and adjacent to the Katell property. The plot plan indicates the bedroom wings in close proximity to the proposed location of the Katell tennis court. The distance between the bedrooms and the Katell court may be as little as 45 feet. The bedrooms in our home are used. for both sleep and study purposes. One bedroom wing constitutes the master bedroom while the second wing houses five children bedrooms. Each of the latter contains a built desk and full study facilities. The bedrooms are used extensively by my wife who is a full time student at UCLA, my oldest son, a first year student at Loyola Law School and by the other four children, three of whom are also in local colleges. Those children who live on campus come home on weekends during the school year. It is extremely important that their environment be a quiet one. We are fortunate to have a tennis court. That court is located approximately,128 feet from the house. Loud sounds from the court are easily heard in our house. We are concerned about noise generating from the court that will disturb sleep. It seem inconceivable that the applicant, given almost five acres to work with, would submit a plan that places a proposed tennis court within fifty feet of a neighbor's bedrooms. Any contention by the applicant that he has no other place to S. D. WEIMAN 1400 CENTINELA BOULEVARD INGLEWOOD, CALIFORNIA 90302 TELEPHONE: 678-9061 locate the court borders on the absurd. There remains two acres in his rear yard without any apparent development plan. I do not understand why the court was not placed in the backyard. The only assumption I can make is that the rear yard will be used for a'future lot split application. I believe that we are entitled, as a basic property right, to the quiet enjoyment of our home. This is especially meaningful to the residents of the City of Rolling Hills. The proposed court constitutes an invasion of our privacy. I do not feel that any applicant is entitled to diminish his neighbor's right to the quiet enjoyment of his home.,; I am sincerely distressed that the applicants are submitting this type of proposal. I think it indicates a basic disregard' for the people they will have to live with. In addition, the application is ill advised. There simply are no front yard structures on Crest Road in Rolling Hills. I strongly urge a denial of the application. Yours truly, S.D. Weiman