739, Demo existing SFR & garage. C, Correspondence1 •
Bob and Lisa Margolis
9 Eastfield Dr.
Rolling Hills, Ca 90274
Wayne Chatman
Building Inspector
County of Los Angeles
California
Re: Release of gas for 9 Eastfield Dr., Rolling Hills
Dear Inspector Chatman,
January 19, 2011
We are now very close to the final on our home in Rolling Hills after two years of
construction.
At this time we need to run our gas systems so we can test the hot water systems, the
heating systems as well as the various appliances.
We understand the release of the gas does not constitute a final approval from the city of
Rolling Hills nor the County of Los Angeles. Both the city, and the RHCA, do however
authorize the release of the gas for the purposes stated.
Please release the gas at this time and we look forward to your next inspections for the final
completion of this home that you have been such an important part of our team in building.
Thai* you,
Bob and Lsa.dvlargolis
Approved for gas release:
1-Zv-it
1.ing
nta Schwartz, Cit anner Date
Hills, California
\ I -2A
Kris e • Raig, RHCA \ Date
.,..ASSOCIATES
ARCI-IITECTURE, INTERIORS and PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Wayne Chatman
Building Inspector
County of Los Angeles
Lomita Office
Re: Temporary Power and Gas for 9 Eastfield, Rolling Hills
Dear Inspector Chatman,
2785 Pacific Coast Hvvy
Box E-149, Torrance
California, 90505
PH: 310-375-2380
Fax: 310-375-2390
www.blairassociates.net
September 21, 2010
Please provide inspection of the main electrical panel, and if approved, authorize the release of the
power and gas on a temporary basis so that we can test the building systems (electrical and
mechanical) to ensure operation and safety prior to final building inspection approval.
We understand that this is a temporary test of the systems and that occupancy of the home is not
allowed until full final inspection sign offs from the city and county are made.
Tom Blair
chitect and Builder
Robert and Lisa Margolis
Owners
Rolling Hills Planning Approval:
,fir ;; / 0
JUN 2 3 2010
City of Rolling Hills
B v _
THE DESIGN
WORKS
'CREATIVE SOLUTIONS
COMPANY: City of Rolling Hills
No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, California 90274
ATTENTION: Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director
PROJECT: Margolis Residence, #9 Eastfield Drive
TRANSMITTING: (2) sets of revised landscape plans
TRANSMITTAL
WijtoVV
n ,
\L ‘'`
Phone: (310) 544-6222
Fax: (310) 544-7288
Project #: j0715
Date: 06.21.10
AOC
Yolanta:
Please find attached the 2 sets of landscape plans per your request for plan check.
I have addressed the comments made in your 4/13/10 letter.
• Proposed Pines and Peppers have been removed from the plant palette.
• Plant quantities have been thinned at the front of the house as well as some other areas. There were a few
species of plants that were in the legend that were not on the plans so we have reduced the number of plant
varieties. The bulk of the plant material is comprised of only a few different species. A number of species listed in
the legend occur in only one specific spot.
• If you or your consultant has any questions regarding the irrigation plan please have them call me. I would be
more than happy to explain any items in the irrigation that are not clear.
• The idea is to have the plant material obscure most of the valve boxes, etc. so that they are not readily visible. An
as built plan is required from the Contractor, showing dimensions from fixed objects to mainline, valves, etc. so
any below irrigation equipment can be located.
• As per our conversation and yours with the LACFD, a Fuel Modification and a plan submittal to the Fire
Department is not required for this project.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call.
Thank you.
Regards,
Warren Arata
The Design Works
5185 Bluemound Road
Rolling Hills Estates, Ca. 90274
310.375.0828
626.202.8747 cell
deswksecox.net
IF ALL THAT IS LISTED IN TRANSMITTAL IS NOT RECEIVED, PLEASE CALL (310) 375-0828
EFOR YOUR INFORMATION ❑AS REQUESTED
®WITH ENCLOSURES ❑FOR OUR RECORDS
❑WITHOUT ENCLOSURES
EPHONE WHEN RECEIVED
5185 BLUEMOUND ROAD. ROLLING HILLS ESTATES CALIFORNIA. 90274 USA (310) 375-0828 — DESWKS aOCOX.NET
•
elty o Polling
April 13, 2010
Dr. and Mrs. Robert Margolis
9 Eastfield Drive
Rolling Hills CA 90274
RE: Landscaping plan
Dear Dr. and Mrs. Margolis:
•
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
The City's landscaping consultant reviewed the landscaping plan you submitted for the project.
In general, she found the plants to be appropriate for this area and meet the City's intent for low
water usage plants. However, she found the variety of plants to be excessive as well as too
densely spaced. For example, she noted that the Spanish lavender planned around the front of
the house are closely spaced and will result in unsightly bushes, when mature. In addition, the
City and the Fire Department discourage planting new Pepper Trees or Pine Trees in the City,
and we would appreciate if you didn't plant any.
The landscaping plan is very difficult to read due to the variety of plants proposed and some of
the plant symbols in the legend are not shown on the plan. The irrigation plan is also
complicated and the consultant noted that as the plants mature, it would be difficult to find and
maintain the many water valves proposed.
Please be advised that the Fire Department will also review this plan and make
recommendations for fire fuel reduction. Also be advised that any trees you plant may not at
maturity exceed the ridge line of the residence, and no trees may be planted, which at maturity
would block views from neighboring properties.
If the Fire Department requires a modified plan, please follow their direction and provide the
City with the plan approved by the Fire Department. The D.G. pad and fence in/on the roadway
easement must be approved by RHCA. Please contact them for their requirements at 310 544-
6222.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to call me at
310 37,7-1521.
Si
anta Schwartz
anning Director
cc: The Design Works
Thomas Blair, Architect
7714_ ciles•;pi
Co v-42,, --zo(„4„,„,,
9 8s" e/tce ,,%
Printed on Recycled Paper
• •
City fRoreng.,urto
April 1, 2010
Blue Door Gardens
Ms. Julie Heinsheimer
803 Deep Valley Drive
Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274
SUBJECT: LANDSCAPING PLAN
9 Eastfield Drive
Dear Julie:
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377.1521
FAX: (310) 377.7288
Enclosed for your review and comment is a landscaping plan for the property at
9 Eastfield. The Planning Commission placed a condition that the house be
screened from the adjacent property (11 Eastfield), but no views obstructed. See
conditions "S" and "T" (p.5). In addition, the RHCA granted the property owner
a license agreement to plant in License Area A and Area B, as indicated on the
plan. No financial obligation was required.
Please review the plan and determine if it meets the intent of the enclosed
conditions of the resolution of approval, low water usage plants and low
flammable material. No irrigation plan was submitted, which I am asking for.
Once you review the plan, as a courtesy, I will forward it to the property owner
at 11 Eastfield. The property owners at 9 Eastfield have already removed some of
the tress that were blocking a view from 11.
Thank you for your time and expertise.
erel
.S4
lanta Schwartz
arming Director
Enclosure
Printed on Recycled Paper
l
• •
Q. The driveway approach may be moved to the south, subject to
trimming of trees located on the southwestern corner of the driveway for better
visibility when driver is coming out of the driveway. An approval for trimming
of the trees shall be obtained from the RHCA, as some of the trees may be located
in roadway easement.
R. A minimum of four -foot level path and/or walkway, which does
not have to be paved, shall be provided around the entire perimeter of the
residence and garage.
S. The property shall be landscaped and screened from adjacent
properties. Landscaping shall be designed using trees and shrubs so as not to
obstruct views of neighboring properties but to screen the project. Landscaping
shall include water efficient irrigation that incorporates low gallonage irrigation
system, utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using
"hydrozones," considers slope factors and climate conditions, and utilizes means
to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray.
The proposed landscaping, if approved by the Rolling Hills Community
Association, may be located in the southerly easement. Such landscaping shall be
developed for the purpose of screening the subject development from 11
Eastfield Drive and to provide for privacy for the subject property and the
property to the south. Additionally, the applicant should cooperate with the
property owner to the south to trim and / or remove several of the existing trees
to restore a view corridor for the property to the south. The areas where the trees
are to be removed shall be remediated and planted with ground cover or low
growing bushes to prevent erosion of the soil and slopes.
T. Prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit two copies
of a preliminary landscape plan shall be submitted for review by the Planning
Department in compliance with condition "S" above. Native trees and other
'native plants shall be utilized, and which are consistent with the rural character
of the community.
U. If during construction a construction fence is installed, it shall not
block any easements or trails.
V. During construction perimeter easements shall remain clear and
free of debris, parked vehicles, building material, building equipment and all
other construction items.
W. During construction, conformance with the air quality management
district requirements, stormwater pollution prevention practices, County and
local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not
exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors shall be
required.
X. During construction, the Erosion Control Plan containing the
elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 2001 County of Los Angeles Uniform
Reso. 2007-06
Q Pactfiald
5
NORTH
r-
>
N.)
0
Cr% 0
tjT
PREPARED FOR:
Dr. and Mrs. Robert Margolis
#q Eastland Drive
Rolling Hills, Galifornia
q0274
•
•
X
CD
0.)
PROJECT
•
co
0
Margolis Residence
Landscape Drawings
=
y
SHEET TITLE
PLANTING PLAN
----- "*"
........
•
•
City (lett, „All,
50TH ANNIVERSARY
1957 - 2007
May 17, 2007
Dr. and Mrs. Robert Margolis
9 Eastfield Drive
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE E3END ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
,(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 739. Request for a Site Plan Review to
construct a new residence to replace an existing residence.
Dear Dr. and Mrs. Margolis:
This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission adopted a resolution on
May 15, 2007 granting your request for Site Plan Review in Zoning Case No. 739. That action,
accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission will be reported to the
City Council on TUNE 11, 2007 at their regular meeting beginning at 8:00 PM. You or your
representative should be present to answer any questions the Council may have. (PLEASE
NOTE THE CHANGE OF TIME OF THE COUNCIL MEETING ON THAT DAY).
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. Should you wish to receive
instructions for filing an appeal please contact me.
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.
The staff report to the City Council, together with the Resolution will be mailed to you on
Friday, June 8, 2007. Please review the Resolution. After the City Council's action, I will
forward to you instructions for recordation of the Affidavit Of Acceptance Form and the
Resolution.
Please feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
lanta Schwartz
lanning Director
cc: Thomas Blair, Blair Associates
Printed 011 Recycled Pnpci
50TH ANNIVERSARY
1957 - 2007
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
•
eity
•
0l12 llihg
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
MAY 15, 2007
HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
YOLANTA SCHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR
APPLICATION NO.:
SITE LOCATION:
ZONING AND SIZE:
APPLICANT:
REPRESENTATIVE:
PUBLISHED:
ZONING CASE NO. 739
9 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 55-EF)
RA-S-1; 4.3 ACRES (GROSS)
DR. AND MRS. ROBERT MARGOLIS
THOMAS BLAIR, BLAIR AND ASSOCIATES
FEBRUARY 10, 2007
REOUEST AND RECOMMENDATION
1. Request for a Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a 5,000
square foot residence with 704 square foot garage, 1,080 square feet of covered
porches, 80 square foot attached trellis, 400 square foot detached trellis, 48 square
foot barbeque area, 120 square foot breezeway and 126 square foot service yard.
No basement is proposed. The applicants also request to widen the driveway
and modify the driveway approach.
2. It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No.
2007-06 approving this development.
BACKGROUND
3. At the April 17, 2007 Planning Commission meeting the Commission
directed staff to prepare a Resolution approving the proposed project. The vote
was 4-1. Commissioner Hankins was absent and excused..
4. At the April meeting the Commission noted that the residential building
pad coverage for this project was proposed at 33.4%. In order to bring the
residential building pad to 30% coverage, the structures on this pad would have
to be reduced by 663 square feet.
5. The attached Resolution No. 2007-06 contains standard findings of facts
and conditions, including conditions that no construction, grading or any other
activity may take place in the easements and setbacks, that the 25-foot easement
line be staked throughout the construction, that there be a four foot pathway
around the entire residence and garage, that a landscaping plan be submitted to
® Printed on Recycled Paper
• •
staff and that planting in the easements is subject to RHCA approval for the
purpose of screening the. project and providing privacy for both property
owners.
6. As of the writing of this report, the applicant and the adjacent property
owner have not entered into an agreement for the landscaping and staff did not
receive a landscaping plan. The project architect has been in contact with the
RHCA staff and received a verbal support of landscaping in his client's
easement.
RESOLUTION NO. 2007-06
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE
PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A
NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO REPLACE AN
EXISTING RESIDENCE AT 9 EASTFIELD DRIVE, IN ZONING
CASE NO. 739 (LOT 55-EF), (MARGOLIS).
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 Dr. and Mrs. Robert
Margolis with respect to real property located at 9 Eastfield Drive (Lot 55-EF),
Rolling Hills, CA requesting a Site Plan Review to permit grading of 615 cubic
yards of cut and 615 cubic yards of fill and construction of a new 5,000 square
foot single family residence, with 704 square foot garage, 1,080 square feet of
covered porches, 80 square foot attached trellis, 400 square foot detached trellis
on a separate building pad, 48 square foot barbeque area, 120 square foot
breezeway and 126 square foot service yard. No basement is proposed. In
addition, the applicants propose to widen the driveway and modify the
driveway approach.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public
hearings to consider the application on February 20, 2007, April 17, 2007, and at
field trip visit on March 20, 2007. The applicant was notified of the public
hearings in writing by first class mail. Evidence was heard and presented from
all persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City
staff and the Planning Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said
proposal. The applicants and their representative were in attendance at the
hearings.
Section 3. The Traffic Engineer reviewed the proposed driveway
approach modification and recommended approval with a condition that the
plants to the southwest of the driveway approach are trimmed for improved
visibility from the driveway.
Section 4. During the proceedings, Mr. Wallace, property owner at 11
Eastfield Drive expressed concerns over the possible loss of views from his
property by the construction of the new residence and the loss of view from
different areas of his property by the existing tall trees on the applicant's
property. The applicant and Mr. Wallace agreed to cooperate and work with the
RHCA to address removal of certain trees located in the easement and planting
other trees in the easement to accomplish mutual concerns of privacy and
restoring a view for Mr. Wallace.
Section 5. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as
a Class 3 Exemption (The State of CA Guidelines, Section 15303) and is therefore.
Reso. 2007-06
Q Factfiald
1
categorically exempt from environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act.
Section 6. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be
submitted for site plan review and approval before any grading requiring a
grading permit or any building or structure may be constructed or any
expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings may be made
which involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the building or
structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of
the building by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six (36) month
period. With respect to the Site Plan Review application requesting grading and
construction of the new residence, the Planning Commission makes .the
following findings of fact:
A. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan,
the Zoning Ordinance ,and surrounding uses because the proposed structure
complies with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low -density
residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding
structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setbacks and lot coverage
requirements. Due to the fact that the property has a 25-foot side yard easement,
the development will be located further away from the side property line than it
would be required under the Zoning requirements of 20 feet setback. The net lot
area of the lot is 138,030 square feet, (3.17 acres). The structural coverage is
proposed to be 7,700 square feet of structures, which constitutes 5.6% of the net
lot, which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The
total lot coverage including all structures, paved areas and driveway is proposed
to be 17,262 square feet, which constitutes 12.5% of the net lot which is within the
35% maximum overall net lot coverage requirement. The project is proposed to
be screened from adjacent properties. Adequate area adjacent to the existing
stable is available to construct an addition to the existing 420 square foot stable to
meet the minimum requirement of 450 square feet stable. The existing corral
meets the minimum requirement for a 550 square foot corral. The project
complies with all other requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, except for the of
30% guideline of building pad coverage.
B. The development plan substantially preserves the natural and
undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the new
structure will not cause the lot to look overdeveloped. Significant portions of the
lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space on the property. The
nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures
and the topography of the lot have been considered, and the construction of the
new house will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the adjacent
uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed structure will be constructed
on a portion of the lot which is the least intrusive to surrounding properties, will
be located on an existing building pad, so that no new grading would be
required to enlarge the building pad, will be screened and landscaped with trees
and shrubs and is a sufficient distance from nearby residences. With the
neighbors' cooperation and request for new landscaping, the proposed structure
will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors.
Reso. 2007-06
Q PactfiPld
2
C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale
and mass with the site and adjacent properties. As indicated in Paragraph A, the
lot coverage maximum set forth in the Zoning Code will not be exceeded.
D. The development plan, with the mitigation measures, which
includes a condition .to provide a landscaping plan that would provide privacy
for the adjacent property owner and to open up view corridors for the adjacent
property owner incorporates existing and new trees and native vegetation.
E. The residence will be developed on an existing building pad.
Grading for this project will involve 615 cubic yards of cut and 615 cubic yards of
fill, and will be balanced on site. The new development will be located on an
existing building pad in the same general configuration as the existing residence.
F. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the
convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because access
will be taken from an existing road and will utilize the existing driveway.
G. The project conforms to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act and is exempt.
Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 739 for
grading and construction of a new residence, as shown on the Development Plan
dated February 12, 2007, and marked Exhibit A, subject to the following
conditions:
A. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within two years from
the effective date of approval if construction pursuant to these approvals has not
commenced within that time period, as required by Sections 17.38.070 and
17.46.080(A) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, or the approval granted are
otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of these sections.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan Review and
Variance approval, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall
be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse; provided that the
applicants have been given written notice to cease such violation, the
opportunity for a hearing has been provided, and if requested, has been held,
and thereafter the applicant fails to correct the violation within a period of thirty
(30) days from the date of the City's determination.
C. All requirements of the Building Code, the Zoning Ordinance, and
of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless
otherwise set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan.
Reso. 2007-06
Q Factfiplrl
3
• •
D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial
conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A and dated February 12,
2007, except as otherwise provided in these conditions.
E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of
Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development
plan approved with this application.
F. All utility lines to the new development shall be placed
underground.
G. The development shall at all times comply with City's Lighting
Ordinance, roofing material ordinance and all other City's and County's
ordinances and codes.
H. The property on which the project is located shall contain a set
aside area to provide an area meeting all standards for a stable, corral with access
thereto.
I. Grading shall not exceed 615 cubic yards of cut and 615 cubic yards
of fill and shall be balanced on site. -
J. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 7,700 square feet or 5.6% of
the net lot area of the lot, which includes the stable, but excludes the detached
trellis and barbecue area.
K. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed
17,262 square feet or 12,5% in conformance with lot coverage limitations.
L. The disturbed area shall not exceed 36,375 square feet or 26.3%. The
new residence will be located on an already disturbed pad.
M. Residential building pad coverage on the 19,558 square foot
residential building pad shall not exceed 6,530 square feet or 33.4%. The stable
building pad shall have coverage of 6.9%.
N. The drainage devices shall be kept clear of vegetation and other
debris to allow uninterrupted water flow. A 24-inches below ground drainage pipe
shall traverse the property from south side to the north side. The head wall and the
dissipater are proposed to be located in the easements, and have been approved by
the Rolling Hills Community Association.
O. The southerly side yard setback line (20 feet from property line)
and the 25-foot easement line shall be delineated during the entire duration of
the construction and no construction or grading shall take place in the easement
or setback.
P. The paved portion of the driveway shall be minimum 16 feet wide
and shall be tinted in earth tone color or otherwise be constructed of decorative
Reso. 2007-06
Q Paetfialrl
• •
stone, tile or other decorative material. The remainder of the driveway, not to
exceed a total of 20 feet in width, shall be decorative and constructed of porous
material.
Q. The driveway approach may be moved to the south, subject to
trimming of trees located on the southwestern corner of the driveway for better
visibility when driver is coming out of the driveway. An approval for trimming
of the trees shall be obtained from the RHCA, as some of the tress may be located
in roadway easement.
R. A minimum of four -foot level path and/or walkway, which does
not have to be paved, shall be provided around the entire perimeter of the
residence and garage.
S. The property shall be landscaped and screened from adjacent
properties. Landscaping shall be designed using trees and shrubs so as not to
obstruct views of neighboring properties but to screen the project. Landscaping
shall include water efficient irrigation that incorporates low gallonage irrigation
system, utilizes automatic controllers, incorporates an irrigation design using
"hydrozones," considers slope factors and climate conditions, and utilizes means
to reduce water waste resulting from runoff and overspray.
The proposed landscaping, if approved by the Rolling Hills Community
Association, may be located in the southerly easement. Such landscaping shall be
developed for the purpose of screening the subject development from 11
Eastfield Drive and to provide for privacy for the subject property and the
property to the south. Additionally, the applicant should cooperate with the
property owner to the south to trim and/or remove several of the existing trees
to restore a view corridor for the property to the south. The areas where the trees
are to be removed shall be remediated and planted with ground cover or low
growing bushes to prevent erosion of the soil and slopes.
T. Prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit two copies
of a preliminary landscape plan shall be submitted for review by the Planning
Department in compliance with condition "S" above. Native trees and other
native plants shall be utilized, and which are consistent with the rural character
of the community.
U. If during construction a construction fence is installed, it shall not
block any easements or trails.
V. During construction perimeter easements shall remain clear and
free of debris, parked vehicles, building material, building equipment and all
other construction items.
W. During construction, conformance with the air quality management
district requirements, stormwater pollution prevention practices, County and
local ordinances and engineering practices so that people or property are not
Reso. 2007-06
Q Pactfalrl
5
exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors shall be
required.
X. During construction, the Erosion Control Plan containing the
elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 2001 County of Los Angeles Uniform
Building Code shall be followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and
channels to control stormwater pollution as required by the County of Los
Angeles.
Y. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the
project site and, if necessary, any overflow parking shall take place within nearby
roadway easements.
Z. During construction, the property owners shall be required to
schedule and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day
between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when
construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere
with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills.
AA. The property owners shall be required to conform with the
Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department
requirements for the installation and maintenance of septic tanks.
AB. The property owners shall be required to conform with the
Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Public Works Department
Best Management Practices (BMP's) related to solid waste.
AC. The Planning Department and County District Engineer shall
approve the drainage plan. All water from any site irrigation systems and all
drainage from the site shall be conveyed in an approved manner and shall drain
towards the north of the property. The water shall not sheet over onto the
neighboring properties. Drainage structures may be located in easements, as
approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association. During and after
construction, all soil preparation, drainage, and landscape sprinklers shall
protect the building pad from erosion and direct surface water in an approved
manner.
AD. The applicants shall pay all of the applicable School District fees,
Los Angeles County Building and Safety and Public Works Department fees,
including Parks and Recreation Fees for new residence.
AE. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills
Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of
any grading or building permit.
AF. Until the applicant executes an Affidavit of Acceptance of all
conditions of the Site Plan Review approval, as required by Section 17.46.065 of
the Municipal Code, the approvals shall not be effective.
Reso. 2007-06
Q PactfiPlrl
6
AG. All conditions of the Site Plan approval that apply shall be
complied with prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit by the
County of Los Angeles.
AH. Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a
result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time
limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code
of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 15th DAY OF MAY 2007.
ATTEST:
MARILYN L. KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
ARVEL WITTE, CHAIRMAN
Reso. 2007-06
Q Paetfialil
7
• •
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS)
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2007-06 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE TO REPLACE AN
EXISTING RESIDENCE AT 9 EASTFIELD DRIVE, IN ZONING CASE NO. 739 (LOT
55-EF), (MARGOLIS).
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on
May 15, 2007 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices.
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
Reso. 2007-06
Q FaetfiaLl
8
elty o//eJ/n �ae�
50TH ANNIVERSARY
1957 — 2007
April 18, 2007
INCORPORATED JANUARY• 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
Dr. and Mrs. Robert Margolis
9 Eastfield Drive
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 739 Request for a Site Plan Review.
Dear Dr. and Mrs. Margolis:
This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission voted at their regular
meeting on April 17, 2007 to direct staff to prepare a resolution to approve your request
in Zoning Case No. 739, with conditions, 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 on May 15,
2007 and make its final decision on your application.
The findings and conditions of approval of the draft resolution will be forwarded to you
before the Planning Commission meeting.
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.
As stated above, the Planning Commission's action taken by resolution approving the
development application is scheduled for Tuesday, May 15, 2007 at 6:30 v.m. 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 agenda at the
Council's regular meeting on Monday Tune 11, 2007.
Please continue working with you neighbor on a landscaping plan and agreement and
submit to City. In addition, please notify the Rolling Hills Community Association to gain
approval for landscaping in the easements.
Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter.
Sin rely,
lanta Schwartz
anning Director
cc: Thomas Blair, Blair Associates
0
Printed on Recycled Paper
WI LLDAN
Serving Public Agencies
MEMORANDUM
To: Anton Dahlerbruch, City Manager
From: Vanessa Munoz, Traffic Engineer
Date: March 27, 2007
Subject: #9 EASTFIELD DRIVE DRIVEWAY
Based on a field visit on March 22, 2007 to #9 Eastfield Drive, I the recommend the
driveway widening be permitted. The following item should be required for the approval:
• Trimming of trees located on the southwest corner of the driveway. Trees shall
be trimmed behind edge of pavement to allow better visibility when driver is
coming out of the driveway.
Poi""'sf "} • 111, IWOPP.1I', TED IANUARY 24, 1957
50TH ANNIVERSARY
1957 — 2007
FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION
February 26,, 2007
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90274
(330) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
Dr. and Mrs. Robert Margolis
9 Eastfield Drive
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Dear Dr. and Mrs. Margolis:
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 739 Request for a Site Plan Review to construct a new
residence to replace an existing residence.
The Planning Commission will conduct a field visit to your property on Tuesday . March
20, at 7:30 AM.
You or your representative must be present to answer any questions the Commission may
have.
The site must be prepared according to the following requirements:
A. Stake/delineate the 20-foot side yard setback and
the 25-foot side easement line in the area of the
proposed construction;
B. Stake delineate the drainage devices in the
easements;
C. Show the area of the driveway that is planned to
be widened;
D. Show the proposed driveway approach;
E. A full-size silhouette in conformance with the
attached guidelines must be prepared for the
proposed structure showing the footprints, ridge
heights, porches, entryways, breezeway and eaves;
F. Delineate/show the elevation differential between
the existing and resulting elevations, including
the pad elevation;
G. Assure that the stable, corral and access to the
stable are obvious;
H. Indicate (i.e. with a ribbon), which trees, shrubs
and other vegetation will be removed as a result
of this .project;
Your neighbors within 1,000-foot radius will be
notified of this site visit.
�,,,,t,d,,,, P c -ci,_d P„p,
After the field trip, the next Planning Commission meeting will take place on March 20,
2007, (same night as the field trig), at 6:30 v.m. at Citu Hall, at which time the Commission
zvill further discuss and deliberate this project.
Please do not hesitate to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
t
olanta Schwartz
Planning Director
cc: Thomas Blair, Blair Associates
•
•
City opeolli.9.
INCcRPcr .TED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityotrh@aol.com
SILHOUETTE CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES
When required by the Planning Commission or City Council, a silhouette of
proposed construction should be erected for the week preceding the
designated Planning Commission or City Council meeting.
Silhouettes should be constructed with 2" x 4" lumber. Printed boards are not
acceptable.
Bracing should be provided where possible.
Wire, twine or other suitable material should be used to delineate roof ridges
and eaves.
Small pieces of cloth or flags should be attached to the wire or twine to aid in
the visualization of the proposed construction.
The application may be delayed if inaccurate or incomplete silhouettes are
constructed.
If you have any further questions contact the Planning Department Staff at
(310) 377-1521.
SECTION
-10
4
PLAN
®11,11L,I r..; 14..r.:yr 1,..1 {�:II Ir•t
•
Michael and Laura Walla,
11 Eastfield Drive
Rolling Hills, California 90274
February 19, 2007
Ms. Yolanta Schwartz
Planning Director
City of Rolling Hills
2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, California 90274
Re: Margolis New House Construction Project — 9 Eastfield Drive
Dear Ms. Schwartz:
By
FEB 2 C 20O7
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
We have specific concerns about the new house and garage complex proposed by Robert and
Lisa Margolis at 9 Eastfield Drive. We reside in the house situated directly to the south of the
Margolis' existing house. We do not oppose the concept of a new house being built on the Margolis
property. However, we are concerned about certain features of the proposed design that may impact
our views, our privacy and our quiet.
We have performed a limited review of the plans submitted for the project at the City offices.
Based on that review, we have prepared the attached summary of our concerns that we would like the
Planning Commission to consider in its evaluation of the proposed project. We have identified in the
summary what we believe are a few accommodations that could alleviate our concerns and lead to a
mutually beneficial project for both families. It is likely that the Planning Commission, based on its
experience with these types of issues, will have additional ideas about how to achieve a mutually
beneficial project.
We have met with Robert and Lisa Margolis to discuss our concerns. We have agreed in
principle to seek mutually beneficial solutions, but have not yet had an opportunity to discuss specific
design parameters or changes. To preserve our rights and to ensure that the Planning Commission
gives full consideration to our views, we feel compelled to submit our concerns and requested
accommodations in writing.
Please ensure that this letter and the attached two -page summary are presented to the Planning
Commission as a part of its review tomorrow evening at the Planning Commission meeting. We are
also planning to attend the meeting and present our ideas at that time.
Sincerely,
Michael and Laura Wallace
Attachment
cc: Robert and Lisa Margolis
Mar is New House Project - 9 Eastfield Dr•
Areas of Concern & Requested Accommodations
By
Wallace Family - 11 Eastfield Drive (Neighbor to South)
Ouestions & Concerns
1) Does the new house and garage need to be so close to our house? Could the new buildings be
located further north or reoriented so it would not be so crowded next to our master bedroom
and master bathroom?
2) Our most significant concern is the impact the new house and garage will have on our views of
the Santa Monica Bay, Santa Monica Mountains and the South Bay (Queen's Necklace). The
views that would be impacted by the new house and earaae are OUR ONLY VIEWS of the
ocean or city from our house and backyard. We currently have beautiful views of these areas
from our backyard, master bedroom and master bathroom that were primary design
considerations in our recent remodeling project. We are particularly worried that the new
house will eliminate or reduce these views, especially those from our master bedroom porch
and other patios in my backyard. This is very important to us.
3) We are concerned that the new house extends further to the west into our view corridor than the
existing house (which already somewhat impairs our northward views of the South Bay).
Could the house be situated further to the east, or the westernmost room be relocated so the
new house extends no further west than the existing house (or even less so)?
4) We are very worried that the extensive roofs of the new house will block the city lights views
we have from four windows in our master bedroom and master bathroom. We specifically
designed these windows to capture these views as part of our recently completed master suite
remodeling project. If the new roofline is any higher than the existing roofline, we will lose
these valuable and beautiful views. Could the overall height of the roofline be maintained or
even lowered by some combination of the following (or other ideas)?
a. lower the elevation of the new house by 3 feet to the same level as the motor court
F. use 8 foot walls at areas of the house where our views are most impacted
c. use a lower pitch roof (3 in 12)
d. use a hip roof design rather than a gable roof design
e. consider the location of chimneys to minimize their impact on our views
f. other ideas
5) We are concerned that the main entrance to the new house and the breezeway to the study and
bedrooms attached to the new garage will be directly under our master bedroom and bathroom
window and result in excessive noise in our new master suite. The existing house has its front
entrance on the opposite side of our master suite and creates no disturbance in this location.
Eliminating the breezeway could enable moving the house eastward out of our view corridor.
Connecting the garage to the house would shorten the very long overall east -to -west length of
the new house and garage complex (approximately 200 feet of continuous roofline) and create a
sound barrier between the front entrance of the new house and our master suite.
1 of 2
4
'Argolis New House Project - 9 Eastfielrive
Areas of Concern & Requested Accommodations
By
Wallace Family —11 Eastfield Drive (Neighbor to South)'
6) The size of the new house and garage building seem very large for the space available and
exceed the pad coverage guidelines of the City. However, if accommodations could be made to
maintain or even improve our views, and to minimize the impact of the close proximity of our
houses, we think the Margolis project could be nicely done and a benefit to both properties.
7) Summary of Accommodations Reauested
a. Do not build any portion of the new house further west than the westernmost point of
the existing house to preserve our views of the Santa Monica Bay (Queen's Necklace).
b. Move the entire new house further to the east and to the north to preserve our views and
maximize space between our houses.
c. Lower the pad elevation and rooflines of the new house to preserve our views.
d. Design and locate chimneys to preserve our existing views.
e. Consider combining main house and garage building to shorten overall east -west length
of buildings and to create a sound barrier between new front entrance and our master
suite.
f. Remove and/or trim many large trees that currently obstruct our valuable views.
g•
Grant a "view easement" allowing ongoing maintenance of landscaping to maintain our
valuable views in the future, regardless of ownership of the property.
8) We request that The City of Rolling Hills pass a Resolution attaching conditions to the
approval of the Margolis project, specifically (1) the westernmost point of building
construction not extend beyond existing house, (2) the maximum elevation of new roofline not
exceed the elevation of the existing roofline in any location, (3) the maximum length of east -
west roof run be reduced to some reasonable level (less than the currently proposed 200 feet),
and (4) providing tree removal and maintenance conditions for view preservation.
9) We will gladly support the Margolis application if the above accommodations are made. We
believe the requested accommodations can be made without impacting the goals the Margolis
project attempts to achieve. However, if the proposed design is not modified to address our
legitimate concerns, and ultimately leads to an application that blocks our views, infringes our
privacy and disturbs our quiet, then we believe the proposed new house and garage complex is
inappropriate for the property. It is obviously much too large a home for the space available
unless appropriate accommodations are made to address neighborhood concerns. We will
oppose the application with the City with all reasonable means unless meaningful efforts are
made to address our very limited and reasonable concerns.
2 of 2
Memorandum
To: Yolanta Schwartz, City of Rolling Hills Planning Director
From: Julie Roberts, Architectural Inspector and Secretary
Date: February 14, 2007
Re: 9 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills
In regards to clarification of the use of easements on this property, this
property does have an unique situation were the easements are 25 'wide
(larger) than the setback at 20'wide. It has been brought to my attention
that the property suffers from a major erosion control and drainage problem
due to most of the residences in the Eastfield Drive tract drain through the
Margolis Property.
The RHCA has reviewed and agreed with the proposed drainage plan that
will be installed in both side easements.
Please let me know if you have any further questions.
RH CITY — re:9 Eastfield Drive—2-14-07