573, Approval of an illegal previou, CorrespondenceCITY OF ROLLING
12/31/98 15:43 a s
I III 1:1a1u:41l I
— •
Ij 001
LANCO ENGINEERING
Mr. Craig R. Nealis
City of Rolling Hills
No, 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
RE: NO. 6 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH
Dear Mr. Nealis:
r CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ��
Air IV heart)
Approved S
Adt/v
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
December 31, 1998
• Date
In removing and replacing existing soil in order to create the
guest parking area per the approved and permitted plan, the soil
apparently shrank. This is typically caused by the in sitti.Soil
being in a lesser state of compaction that the compaction of the
finished grading. In order to complete the grading per the
approved plan, the volume of material lost due to shrinkage Sriitst be
replaced by material from elsewhere on the site or must be iflported
from off -site.
As there is no. work currently approved for elsewhere on the site
from which to generate the necessary material, I am hereby
requesting that you allow the importation of up to 140 cubic yairds
of material on the site. Assuming that the trucks to be used Will
carry approximately 9 cubic yards per load, this will heceseitate
approximately 16 round trips to the property.
Please do not hesitate to call nie if you have any questions or t
can be of further assistance to you.
Sincerely,
LANCO ENGINEERING
Michael A. Nichols
President
(WP.CRAIGRNEALIS)
DEC 3 1 1998
CITY OF ROLLING HILL°
1010 CRENSHAW BLVD. • SUITE "200 • TORRANCE, CA 90501 • (310) 533 955 • FAX (310) 533-0320
0
JCity0/ lc 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
August 25, 1998
Ms. Denise Brown
Program Administrator
Board of Architectural Examiners
Landscape Architects Program
400 R Street, Suite 4000
Sacramento, CA 95814
SUBJECT: ILLEGAL GRADING AT 6 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, ROLLING
HILLS, CA
BY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT #1606
MR. GARRETT CARLSON
Dear Ms. Brown:
Enclosed find a copy of the "Planning Process Guide for the Residents of Rolling
Hills, Permits -Approvals, Don't Go to Work Without Them!" that we had meant to
include in our letter regarding the subject project.
You may call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Your cooperation is
appreciated.
Sincerely,
LOLA UNGAR
PLANNING DIRECTOR
Printed on Recycled Paper
STATE OF CALIFORNIA — STATE AND CON 'R SERVICES AGENCY PETE WILSON, Governor
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL EXAMINS
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS PROGRAM
400 R STREET, SUITE 4000, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814
TELEPHONE: (916) 445-4954 FAX (916) 324-2333
cNtate of
alltomla
Department of
Consumer
Affairs
August 20, 1998
Lola Ungar, Planning Director
City of Rolling Hills
No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Dear Ms. Ungar:
Re: Garret Carlson - Landscape Architect License #1606
,r.
AUG 2 4, 1998
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
Ry
Thank you for writing to the Landscape Architects Program regarding the illegal grading that
occurred in connection with a project headed by Garrett Carlson, a licensed landscape architect.
The Program has opened an enforcement case in response to the information you provided and is
in the process of inquiring into the circumstances surrounding the matter. Therefore, I request
that you provide any additional information that may be helpful to the inquiry. I would
appreciate it if you would also forward a copy of `Planning Process Guide for the Residents of
Rolling Hills, Permits -Approvals, Don't Go to Work Without Them!' as it was not enclosed with
your letter.
Again, thank you for bringing this situation to our attention. If you have any questions or
concerns regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at (916) 445-4954.
Sincerely,
Denise Brown
Program Administrator
Ci4f WA/tiny JJ.fP,
July 14,1998
Ms. Taryn Smith
Landscape Architects Program
400 R Street, Suite 4000
Sacramento, CA 95814
•
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
SUBJECT: ILLEGAL GRADING AT 6 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, ROLLING HILLS, CA
BY LICENSED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT #1606
MR. GARRETT CARLSON
Dear Ms. Smith:
This letter is to request your cooperation with the existing and future clients of Mr.
Garrett Carlson, Licensed Landscape Architect #1606, with respect to making sure
that they obtain all required City approvals, grading and building permits for
grading and structures built in the City of Rolling Hills.
This request stems from a recent experience with Mr. Carlson and his client Mrs.
Tamara Torino at 6 Middleridge Lane South, Rolling Hills, CA.
Mr. Carlson constructed grading to reconfigure an on -site guest driveway and
parking area at an existing single family residence without benefit of City required
Site Plan Review and grading permits. During the process of obtaining City
approval of the grading and retaining walls structures, Mr. Carlson maintained that
he has done this kind of work all over the world and has never needed a permit.
The property owner was in violation of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section
15.04.010 and Los Angeles County Building Code Section 301(a) (Permits Required)
and according to Section 15.04.120 (Grading Permits), "A person shall not perform
any grading without first obtaining a grading permit to do so from the Building
Official" and in accordance with Section 17.46.020 of the Rolling Hills Municipal
Code requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval
before any grading that requires a grading permit or any new building or structure
may be constructed. According to Section 17.12.190, "'Structure' means a
combination of materials assembled in a form for use, occupancy or ornamentation
whether installed on, above or below the surface of land or water and requiring a
fixed location or attached to something having a fixed location. "Structure" shall
also include fences, retaining walls, latticework and garden walls."
Printed on Recycled Paper
• •
Following City stop work orders and after the grading took place, the applicant made
application for Site Plan Review in March, 1998. The City's approval requires
certain conditions and modifications to the grading by the applicants. These include
requiring a grading permit to be obtained from the City and the County to repair the
grading of the eastern leg of the driveway area.
Please have Mr. Carlson advise and inform present and future clients that the use
and location of all proposed structures within the City of Rolling Hills are required
to be reviewed by the Planning Department to determine planning, zoning and
building and safety requirements and to obtain required City and County grading
permits. We are enclosing a copy of the "Planning Process Guide for the Residents of
Rolling Hills, Permits -Approvals, Don't Go to Work Without Them!" for your
reference.
Let us know if there is any further information that you need and we will be happy
to provide assistance. We would also appreciate a response regarding the disposition
of this matter.
You may call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Your cooperation is
appreciated.
PLANNING DIRECTOR
cc: City Council
Planning Commission
Mr. Craig Nealis, City Manager
Mr. Michael Jenkins, City Attorney
Mr. Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney
Ms. Peggy Minor, Rolling Hills Community Association Manager
Ms. Lata Thakar and Mr. Rafael Bernal, L.A. County Department of
Public Works, Building and Safety Division, Lomita office
Mrs. Tamara Torino
Mr. Richard Huddleson
Mr. Garrett Carlson
Ciy 0/R0ffi4 Jh/t
CERTIFIED MAIL
June 23, 1998
Mrs. Tamara Torino
6 Middleridge Lane South
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
•
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
SUBJECT: APPEAL PERIOD AND AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM
ZONING CASE NO. 573, 6 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 255-UR)
RESOLUTION NO. 98-11
Dear Mrs. Torino:
This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission adopted a
resolution on June 16, 1998 granting Site Plan Review approval to authorize
previously illegally conducted and limited grading for an on -site guest driveway and
parking area at a single family residence at 6 Middleridge Lane South (Lot 255-UR),
Rolling Hills, CA in Zoning Case No. 573. That action, accompanied by the record of
the proceedings before the Commission was reported to the City Council on June 22,
1998.
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. 98-11, specifying the conditions of
approval set forth by the Planning Commission and the approved Exhibit A
Development Plan to keep for your files. Once you have reviewed the Resolution,
please complete the enclosed AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM, have the
signature(s) notarized, and forward the completed form and a copy of the
Resolution to:
t.
Printed on Recycled Paper.
• •
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,el
/.of-ea_
LOLA UNGAR
PLANNING DIRECTOR
ENC: RESOLUTION NO. 98-11
EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM
APPEAL SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE.
.cc: Mr. Richard Huddleson, Architect
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND 1110: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. Recorder's Use
AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
ZONING CASE NO. 573
) §§
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
L
I (We) the undersigned state:
I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows:
6 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH (LOT 255-UR), ROLLING HILLS
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. 573 SITE PLAN REVIEW ,L
VARIANCE _
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
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. 98-11
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL
TO AUTHORIZE PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONDUCTED AND
LIMITED GRADING FOR AN ON -SITE GUEST DRIVEWAY AND
PARKING AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING
CASE NO. 573.
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 Mrs. Tamara Torino with
respect to real property located at 6 Middleridge Lane South (Lot 255-UR), Rolling
Hills, requesting a Site Plan Review to authorize the maintenance of previously
conducted and illegal grading to reconfigure an on -site guest driveway and parking
area along with retaining walls at an existing single family residence. During the
hearing process, the amount of grading was reduced.
Section 2. On August 19, 1997, Mrs. Tamara Torino, applicant, was issued a
building permit by the City and the County to construct a 277 square foot residential
addition at the property at 6 Middleridge Lane South. Mrs. Torino was also
replacing her existing driveway when the City was informed of grade changes taking
place at the building site at the eastern leg of the Y-shaped driveway.
On November 5, 1997, Mr. Rafael Bernal, District Engineering Associate,
issued a "Stop Work Order" because grading was taking place without benefit of a
grading permit. Because of the winter rains, the City allowed Mrs. Torino to
continue work on the residential addition, replace the existing southwestern leg of
the Y-shaped driveway to access the residence and requested that Mrs. Torino
provide engineering information about the City's requirement for a grading permit.
On November 12, 1997, Inspector Bernal issued a second "Stop Work Order"
notice when he discovered further grading work was being done. On December 19,
1997, Mr. Keith W. Ehlert, Engineering Geologist, informed Mrs. Torino that the
eastern leg of the Y-shaped driveway had been widened and filled with 288 cubic
yards of soil. The City needed further information from Mrs. Torino. On January 14,
1998, Mr. Ehlert informed Mrs. Torino that 1,870 square feet was affected by the
driveway modifications. From this information, staff calculated and verified with
Mr. Ehlert by telephone that 4.16 feet of fill soil was used to reorient and widen the
driveway and determined that a grading permit was required for the grading work.
Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing to consider the application on March 17, 1998, April 21, 1998, and May 19,
1998, and at a field trip visit on March 28, 1998. The applicant was notified of the
public hearing in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-11 .
PAGE 1 OF 5
Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in the project, from
all persons protesting the same, and from . members of the City staff and the
Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied the project.
Concerns expressed by Commissioners, concerned residents and the applicants
focused on the unauthorized grading, the possible obstruction of neighbors' views
by recent planting of Pine and other trees, and parking at the building site.
Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a
Class 4 Exemption [State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15304 (Minor Alterations to
Land)] and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the
California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 5. Section 17.46.020 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a
development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any
grading that requires a grading permit or any new building or structure may be
constructed. The applicant requests Site Plan Review to authorize the maintenance
of previously conducted and illegal grading to reconfigure an on -site guest driveway
and parking area along with retaining walls at an existing single family residence.
With respect to the Site Plan Review application, the Planning Commission makes
the following findings of fact:
A. The illegal development is compatible with the General Plan, the
Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed grading, as
conditioned, complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low
density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding
structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setback and lot coverage
requirements. The lot has a net square foot area of 154,899 square feet. The residence
(3,878 sq.ft.), attached garage (474 sq.ft.), pool (800 sq.ft.), future stable (450 sq.ft.), and
guest house (450 sq.ft.) will have 6,052 square feet which constitutes 3.9% of the lot
which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total
lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 13,517 square feet which
equals 8.7% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage
requirement. The proposed project is on a relatively large lot with the parking area
area and proposed retaining wall structures located above and away from the road so
as to reduce the visual impact of the development.
B. The illegal development preserves and integrates into the site design,
to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural topographic features of the lot
including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land
forms (such as hillsides and knolls) because a minimum amount of grading is
proposed and will only be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away
from the graded area and proposed retaining walls, the existing residence, and
neighboring residences.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-11
PAGE 2 OF 5
• •
C. The development plan follows the natural contours of the site to
minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at
the north and east sides of this lot.
D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native
vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, the development plan
preserves several mature trees and shrubs.
E. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and
undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new
structures will not cause the structural and total lot coverage to be exceeded. Further,
the proposed project is designed to minimize grading. Significant portions of the lot
will be left undeveloped so as to maintain scenic vistas across the northeasterly
portions of the property.
F. The illegal development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and
mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in
Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded and the proposed
project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to this
irregular -shaped lot. Grading shall be permitted only to restore the natural slope of
the property.
G. The illegal development is sensitive and not detrimental to the
convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the
proposed project will utilize the same driveway tu..0 'va'rieros-k-oacLf r access.
H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental
review.
Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Site Plan Review request to authorize the maintenance of
previously conducted and illegal grading to reconfigure an on -site guest driveway
and parking area along with retaining walls at an existing single family residence, as
indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as
Exhibit A dated April 9, 1998, that is subject to the following conditions:
A. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within one year from the
effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.46.080.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan Review 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.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-11
PAGE 3 OF 5
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 April 9, 1998, except as otherwise
provided in these conditions.
E. Any retaining walls shall not exceed 3 feet in height.
F. The top upper edge of all retaining walls shall be a continuous smooth
line and without jagged inclines or declines along the length of the wall.
G. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 3.9% and total lot coverage of
structures and paved areas shall not exceed 8.7%.
H. Disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 14.1%.
I. Grading to repair the eastern driveway parking area shall not exceed
286 cubic yards of cut soil and 286 cubic yards of fill soil.
J. Grading of the eastern leg of the driveway shall not exceed 5,520 square
feet of ground surface area.
K. The existing topography, flora and natural features of the lot shall be
retained to the greatest extent feasible.
L. Additional landscape screening shall be planted to obscure the
southern faces of the retaining walls and the residence but not block views in the
northeastern and western corridors of the lot.
M. Landscaping to obscure the retaining walls and residence shall be
maintained so as not to exceed the ridge line of the residence.
N. Review and approval of a site drainage plan by the City Engineer shall
be obtained for the existing and proposed grading and the retaining walls.
O. 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 applicablesite drainage plan to the
County of Los Angeles for plan check.
P. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills
Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to approval of the
drainage plan.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-11
PAGE 4 OF 5
• •
Q. 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
11).
R. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions
of these Variance and Conditional Use Permit approvals pursuant to Section
17.38.060, or the approval shall not be effective.
S. All conditions of this Site Plan Review approvals must be complied
with prior to approval of the site drainage plan by the County of Los Angeles.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 16TH , 1998.
ATTEST:
12M lit N I RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
) §§
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 98-11 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO AUTHORIZE
PREVIOUSLY ILLEGALLY CONDUCTED AND LIMITED GRADING FOR AN ON -
SITE GUEST DRIVEWAY AND PARKING AREA AT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
IN ZONING CASE NO. 573.
was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission on June 16, 1998
by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer and
Chairman Roberts.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Witte.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices
MARILYNKKERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 98-11
PAGE 5 OF 5
•
1734.010
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 appealsmust be Med 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 HIUS ZONING
MAY 34,1993
• 40
1734.030'
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 1734 of this Title. The Council shall
consider all information in the record, as well as additional
information presented at the appeal hearing, before taking action
on the appeal.
ROLLING HILLS ZONING
77 MAY 11.1993
1734.060
• •
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.
L 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 24.1993
ai
;o
0
a)
ry
m
0
v 3. Article Addressed to:
M
0
ci 2.C, /t4 s73
5. Received By: (Print Name)
cc
E�//r5, 7a - - / 0 -0-70
1e'0//-7,5 ff%/J ci9 9oa-7y
6. Signature:<�s/rAg )
PS Ft rjr 3811, December 1994
PS Form 3800, June 1985
P 852 865 263 •
RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL
ND INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED
NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL
(See Reverse)
Sent to
Street and No.
t 0 4_-/ -512 P Stat and ZIP Code rid'
%,4`//s l-'/9 2227
Postage �-� j Sr q 7
Certified Fee
Special Delivery Fee
Restricted Delivery Fee
Return Receipt showing
to whom and Date Delivered
f•/0
Tr Posjt4 Fee
s- tmark or1T 8
SENDER:
■ Complete Items 1 and/or 2 for additional services.
■ Complete Items 3, 4a, and 4b.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can retum this
card to you.
■ Attach this form to the front of the maiipiece, or on the back If space does not
permit.
■ Write"Retum Receipt Requested' on the mailpiece below the article number.
■ The Retum Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date
delivered.
•
I also wish to receive the
following services (for an
extra fee):
1. ❑ Addressee's Address
2. 0 Restricted Delivery
Consult postmaster for fee.
4a. Article Number
Ssa2565R63
4b. Service Type
❑ Registered
❑ Express Mail ❑
❑ Retum Receipt for Merchandise 0
7. Date of Delivery
Certified
Insured
COD
8. Addressee's Address (Only if requested
and fee Is paid)
102595-97-B-0179 Domestic Return Receipt
Thank you for using Return Receipt Service.
01)
Ciy Rolling
May 20, 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
Mrs. Tamara Torino
6 Middleridge Lane South
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 573: Request for Site Plan Review to permit existing illegally
graded reconfigured on -site guest driveway and parking area.
Dear Mrs. Torino:
This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission voted at their regular meeting
on May 19, 1998 to direct staff to prepare a resolution to approve your request for Site Plan
Review to permit previously constructed and limited grading for an on -site guest driveway and
parking area at a single family residence in Zoning Case No. 577 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 on 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 (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.
The Planning Commission's action taken by resolution approving the development application
is tentatively scheduled for June 16, 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 June 22,1998.
Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
LOLA M. UNGAR
PLANNING DIRECTOR
cc: Mr. Richard Huddleson
Printed on Recycled Paper.
MARCH 27, 1998
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS
ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA, 90274
SUBJECT:
ZONING CASE NO. 573
TAMARA TORINO RESIDENCE
#6 SO. MIDDLERIDGE LANE
A
R HUDDLESON
ARCHITECT
THANK YOU IN ADVANCE FOR CONDUCTING YOUR FIELD TRIP IN WHAT PROMISES TO BE
A VERY WET AND RAINY DAY. I HAVE REVIEWED THE FOLLOWING MATERIAL WITH MRS.
TORINO WHO CONCURS WITH THE FOLLOWING THOUGHTS. SINCE WE MET ON THE 17TH
OF MARCH WE HAVE HAD THE SURVEYORS ON THE PROPERTY TO LAY OUT THE
DRIVEWAY AND THE LIMIT OF GRADING AND WISH TO SUBMIT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION
THE FOLLOWING THOUGHTS:
1. AS YOU KNOW THE CITY HAS GRANTED US PERMISSION TO REPLACE THE EXISTING
DRIVEWAY ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE FROM THE STREET TO THE
GARAGE. ONLY A PORTION OF THIS DRIVE HAS BEEN INSTALLED TO PROVIDE
ACCESS IF REGRADING OF THE TURN AROUND AREA IS REQUIRED.
2. MRS. TORINO HAS PROVIDED PLANNING DIRECTOR UNGER A PHOTOGRAPH
CONFIRMING THAT THE ACCESS TO THE TURN AROUND HAS REMAINED AT THE
SAME LOCATION AS THE ORIGINAL ACCESS ROAD THAT WAS REMOVED. THIS
SHOULD ALLOW FOR THE ACCESS TO BE REPLACES WITHOUT GRADING AS PER
CONDITION NO. 1 ABOVE.
3. THE FILL PLACED FOR THE REMAINING DRIVE TO THE TURN AROUND AREA WAS
LESS THAN 3 FEET. THIS SHOULD ALLOW FOR THE REMAINING DRIVE TO THE TURN
AROUND AREA TO BE REPLACED WITHOUT GRADING SINCE THIS HEIGHT IS EXEMPT
FROM MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 15.04.
4. THE SURVEYORS VERIFIED THAT THE GRADING PLAN DESIGN COULD BE MODIFIED
TO LOWER THE HEIGHT OF THE TURN AROUND DESIGN TO MATCH THE GRADING IN
THE FIELD AND THAT THE EXISTING SLOPE IS GENTLER THAN THE 2:1 DESIGN
STANDARD.
IN CONCLUSION WE WOULD POINT OUT THAT YOUR CONCURRENCE WITH THE ABOVE
WOULD MEAN THAT THE ONLY AREA REQUIRING A GRACING PERMIT WOULD BE THE
TURN AROUND AREA OF THE GUEST PARKING. THIS, COUPLED WITH THE FACTS
POINTED OUT ABOVE, WOULD RESULT IN A SUBSTANTIAL REDUCTION IN THE GRADING
AMOUNT. WE COULD PROVIDE THESE FIGURES AT YOUR REQUEST.
WE CONTINUE TO HOPE THAT SINCE THE ONLY VIOLATION TO GRADING ORDINANCES
OCCURRED IN THE LAST FEW FEET OF THE TURN AROUND AND SINCE SUBSTANTIAL
DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ARE TO BE CONSTRUCTED THAT YOU ALLOW THIS GRADING
TO REMAIN WITHOUT REGRADING THE TURN AROUND AREA.
PLEASE CALL ME IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED ANY ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION.
BEGARDS
HUDDLESON ARCHITECTS, INC.
COPY: TAMARA TORINO
4136 SEA VIEW LANE • LOS ANGELES CALIFORNIA 90065 • 213 343 9122
•
City ofieo ee�n9 _uee
FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION
March 19,1998
Mrs. Geri Becker
5 Middleridge Lane South
Rolling Hils, CA 90274
•
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377.1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 573: Request for Site Plan Review to permit
existing illegally graded reconfigured on -site guest driveway and
parking area for property at 6 Middleridge Lane South (Lot 255-UR).
Dear Mrs. Becker:
We have arranged for the Planning Commission to conduct a field inspection of the
subject property on Saturday, March 28,1998.
The Planning Commission will meet at 7:30 AM at 6 Middleridge Lane.
Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions.
Sincere y
LOLA M. UNGAR
PLANNING DIRECTOR
it
Printed on Recycled Paper
• •
City opeoffiny _Afro
FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION
March 18, 1998
Mrs. Tamara Torino
6 Middleridge Lane South
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
. E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 573: Request for Site Plan Review to permit
existing illegally graded reconfigured on -site guest driveway and
parking area.
Dear Mrs. Torino:
We have arranged for the Planning Commission to conduct a field inspection of
your property to view the "as built" grading on Saturday, March 28.1998.
The Planning Commission will meet at 7:30 AM at your property.
The site must be prepared in accordance with the following requirement:
• Stake the limits of the proposed grading.
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.
Sincer
y,
OLA UNGAR
PLANNING DIRECTOR
cc: Mr. Richard Huddleson
•City ol Rotting
•
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
STATUS OF APPLICATION
& NOTIFICATION OF MEETING
March 5, 1998
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
Mrs. Tamara Torino
6 Middleridge Lane South
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 573, Request for Site Plan Review to permit an existing
illegally graded reconfigured on -site guest driveway and parking area for
property at 6 Middleridge Lane South (Lot 255-UR), Rolling Hills, CA.
Dear Mrs. Torino:
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. 573 has been set for public hearing consideration by the
Planning Commission at their meeting on Tuesday, March 17, 1998.
The meeting will begin at 7:30 PM in the Council Chambers, Rolling Hills City Hall
Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills. You or your designated
representative must attend to present your project and to answer questions.
The staff report for this project will be available at the City Hall after 3:00 PM on Friday,
March 13, 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.
Sincerely,
LOLA M. UNGAR
PLANNING DIRECTOR
cc: Mr. Richard Huddleson
®Printed on Recycled Pam,