Loading...
538, For a previously constructed 1, Correspondence• City ol ie0ti4 Jh/1 CERTIFIED MAIL June 21, 1996 Mr. Errol Gordon 15 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 411 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 SUBJECT: APPEAL PERIOD AND AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM ZONING CASE NO. 538, 15 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 52-EF) RESOLUTION NO. 96-11 Dear Mr. Gordon: -This letter shall serve as official notification that Zoning Case No. 538 was APPROVED by the Planning Commission and the enclosed resolution was approved on June 18, 1996 at a regular meeting. The Planning Commission's decision will be reported to the City Council at their regular meeting on Monday, June 24, 1996. The approval will become effective: (1) Thirty (30) days after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution if no appeals are filed within that time period (Section 17.54.010(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code attached), AND (2) An Affidavit of Acceptance Form and the subject resolution must be filed by you with the County Recorder. We have enclosed a copy of RESOLUTION NO. 96-11, 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: Los Angeles County Registrar -Recorder Real Estate Records Section 12400 East Imperial Highway Norwalk, CA 90650 Include a check in the amount of $7.00 for the first page and $3.00 for each additional page. Printed on Re.i;,enled PAno, • • PAGE 2 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. SINCER L (1A-:#1.°(gaii41.u.. LOLA UNGAR PRINCIPAL PL NER ENC: RESOLUTION NO. 96-11 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM APPEAL SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE. cc: Mr. Douglas McHattie • • • RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO: Recorder's Use CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 Please record this form with the Registrar -Recorder's Office and return to: City of Rolling Hills, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA 90274 (The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be notarized before recordation). AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGF.I.FS ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS S ) ZONING CASE NO. 538 SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE ■ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ❑ I (We) the undersigned state: I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows: 15 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 52-EF1 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. 538 SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE ■ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ❑ I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Print Print Owner Owner Name Name Signature Signature Address Address City/State City/State Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary nubile. State of County of On this the _day of , 19_,before me, §§ the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared ❑ personally known to me 0 proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) subscribed to the within instrument, and acknowledged that executed it. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary's Signature See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof RESOLUTION NO. 96-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN ENCROACHMENT FOR A PREVIOUSLY CONSTRUCTED ART STUDIO/HOBBY SHOP INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA, AND APPROVING SITE PLAN REVIEW TO PERMIT A PREVIOUSLY CONSTRUCTED ART STUDIO/HOBBY SHOP IN ZONING CASE NO. 538. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr. Errol Gordon with respect to real property located at 15 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills (Lot 52-EF) requesting a Variance to permit an encroachment into the side yard setback for a previously constructed illegal art studio/hobby shop, requesting a Variance to exceed the maximum structural lot coverage, and a request for Site Plan Review to permit a previously constructed illegal art studio/hobby shop structure. During the hearing process, additional requests for a Variance to permit a previously constructed illegal solid wood fence that encroaches into the side yard setback and a request to exceed the maximum permitted disturbed area were introduced. Later the applicant proposed to remove the solid wood fence. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on March 19, 1996, April 16, 1996, May 21, 1996, and at a field trip visit on March 30, 1996. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 3 Exemption [State CA Guidelines, Section 15301(e)] and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 4. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity. A Variance to Sections 17.16.120 and 17.16.150 is required because they state that every parcel in the RA-S-1 zone shall have a side yard of not less than 20 feet from the side property line. The applicant is requesting a Variance to permit a previously constructed 256 square foot art studio/hobby shop that encroaches up to 5.5 feet into the side yard setback to remain in the side yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: • • A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone because the lot is long and narrow and building structures are thereby required to be crowded against side lot lines and close to adjacent residences. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed byy other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question. The Variance is necessary because these types of accessory structures are not uncommon in the City, the location of structures along side setback lines is prevalent in this area of the City, and other adjacent structures already encroach into the setback. Thus, there will not be any greater incursion into the side setback than already exists. In addition, this encroachment will not impact the adjacent bridle trail. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. The Variance is necessary because these types of accessory structures are not uncommon in the City, the location of structures along side setback lines is prevalent in this area of the City, and other adjacent structures already encroach into the setback. Thus, there will not be any greater incursion into the side setback than already exists. In addition, this encroachment will not impact the adjacent bridle trail. Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Variance for Zoning Case No. 538 to permit an art studio/hobby shop to encroach up to 5.5 feet into the side yard setback, subject to the conditions in Section 12. Section 6. A Variance to Section 17.16.070(A)(1) is required because it states that coverage by structures shall not be more than 20 percent of the net lot area. The applicant is requesting a Variance because coverage by structures will cover 21.7% of the net lot area. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone. The Variance for the lot coverage is necessary because the lot is relatively small and is long and narrow. Building structures are located within side yards and close to adjacent residences. The lot size and configuration, together with the existing development on the lot creates a difficulty in meeting this Code requirement. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question. The Variance is necessary because of the size and shape of the lot and the lots in the general vicinity that are smaller than other lots in the surrounding area. RESOLUTION NO. 96-11 PAGE 2 OF 7 • • C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. Development on the pad will be 21.7% which will allow a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 538 to permit coverage by structures of 21.7%, subject to the conditions specified in Section 12. Section 8. A Variance to Sections 17.16.070(B) is required because that section states that the natural conditions on a lot shall be maintained to the greatest degree possible and that disturbance shall be limited to forty (40) percent of the net lot area. The applicant is requesting a Variance because 46.2% of the net lot area is "disturbed." With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same zone. The Variance for the disturbed area is necessary because the lot is relatively small in comparison to most lots in the City. It is also long, narrow, relatively flat, and building structures are located within side yards and close to adjacent residences. B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied to the property in question. The Variance is necessary because of the size and shape of the lot and the lots in the general vicinity that are smaller than other lots in the surrounding area that make it difficult to develop this lot in a manner consistent with other homes in the City. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located. Substantial portions of the lot will remain undeveloped. Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 538 to permit the disturbed area of the lot (46.2%) to exceed the Code requirement, subject to the conditions specified in Section 12. Section 10. Section 17.46.030 requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before 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, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact: RESOLUTION NO. 96-11 PAGE 3 OF 7 • • 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 setback and lot coverage requirements with the Variances approved in Sections 5 and 7 of this Resolution. The lot has a net square foot area of 55,925 square feet. The residence (2,405 sq.ft.), garage (610 sq.ft.), swimming pool (740 sq.ft.), tennis court (6,895 sq.ft.), stable (1,175 sq.ft.), and service yard (96 sq.ft.) will have 12,177 square feet which constitutes 21.7% of the lot. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 19,212 square feet which equals 34.4% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The project is on a relatively large lot with the art studio/hobby shop located well away from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. B. • The development plan substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage because the existing art studio/hobby shop structure will not cause the total lot coverage to be exceeded. The proposed residence will have a buildable pad coverage of 35.6%. Further, no grading will be required. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped. C. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the total lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded and the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to this small and irregular -shaped lot. The ratio of the proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. D. The proposed 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). No grading will be required. E. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at the northwest side (rear) of this lot. Drainage will continue along Eastfield Drive at the east side of the property. F. The development plan supplements the existing vegetation with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. G. The proposed development is sensitive to and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize the existing vehicular access, thereby having no further impact on the roadway. H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. RESOLUTION NO. 96-11 PAGE 4 OF 7 • • Section 11. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 538 for a proposed art studio/hobby shop as indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A and subject to the conditions specified in Section 12. Section 12. The Variance to the side yard setback approved in Section 5, the Variance to the structural lot coverage approved in Section 7, the Variance to the disturbed area approved in Section 9, and the Site Plan Review approved in Section 11 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.38.070 and 17.48.0080. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance approval, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval shall be suspended and the privileges granted thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been given written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for a period of thirty (30) days. C. The applicant shall obtain all required building, plumbing, electrical and other Uniform Code Permits for the art studio/hobby shop. In addition, all requirements of the Buildings and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise set forth in a lawfully issued building, plumbing, electrical or other Uniform Code Permit. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file and marked Exhibit A, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. The existing 6 foot high, 84 foot long solid wood fence at the northwestern portion of the lot shall be removed within 60 days of the approval of this Resolution. F. Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 21.7%. G. Building pad coverage shall not exceed 35.6%. H. Landscaping shall be maintained to screen structures, but not to obstruct views of neighboring properties. I. The proposed ten (10) foot easement instead of the existing twenty-five (25) foot easement at the rear portion of the lot shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Association and shall be recorded prior to the issuance of any building permit. J. The art studio/hobby shop shall be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any building permit. RESOLUTION NO. 96-11 PAGE 5 OF 7 • • K. Building and all other required Uniform Code Permits shall be obtained for the art studio/hobby shop within one year of the effective date of approval of this Resolution. L. Notwithstanding Section 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional development shall require the filing of a new application for Site Plan Review approval by the Planning Commission. M. All conditions of these Variance and Site Plan Review approvals must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. N. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of these Variance and Site Plan Review approvals, or the approvals shall not be effective. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 18TH DAY O, ATTEST: MARILYN I RN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 96-11 PAGE 6 OF 7 1 96 ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 96-11 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN ENCROACHMENT FOR A PREVIOUSLY CONSTRUCTED ART STUDIO/HOBBY SHOP INTO THE SIDE YARD SETBACK, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED DISTURBED AREA, AND APPROVING SITE PLAN REVIEW TO PERMIT A PREVIOUSLY CONSTRUCTED ART STUDIO/HOBBY SHOP IN ZONING CASE NO. 538. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on June 18, 1996 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Sommer and Chairman Roberts. NOES: Commissioner Witte. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. RESOLUTION NO. 96-11 PAGE 7 OF 7 . k-ems DEPUTY CIT4SC CLERK • • i SENDER: yin , s P 852 8135 •.202 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) Sent to mr. Lt.; n-r) l o r,'lf Postage Certified Fee . Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee i PS Form 3800, June 1985 /5 oS `.-4 J 9 �YE`tl�Street an PAS/1e�d PCode/s/' 3 Return Receipt showing to whom and Date Delivered Return Receipt showing to whom, Date, and Address f+Delivery, TOTAL Postag6 ,,,.,ees'41JAS'>, S6r / (J Postmark op Oat • Complete items 1 and/or 2 for additional services. • Complete items 3, and 4a & b. • Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can return this card to you. • Attach this form to the front of the mailpiece, or on the back if space does not permit. • Write "Return Receipt Requested" on the mailpiece below the article number • The Return Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date C delivered. m 3. Article Addressed to: 4a. Article Number I also wish to receive the following services (for an extra fee): 1. ❑ Addressee's Address 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery Consult postmaster for fee. Mr, ' Q / G© -y7 4b. Service Type 0 1 s�5 f �.QPc�`�Yi tteJ l 1// , N i>; C 951a7y a2_C./1/v.sR/3 ci 5. Signature (Addressee) 1- H ►,�9igt_tur g-nt) 1. > PS Form/3811, December 1991 ❑ Registered ❑ Insured Certified ❑ COD ❑ Express Mail ❑Return Receipt for u) Merchandise o 7. Date ofeliver ai 0. 0 8. Addressee's Address (Only if requested ,x and fee is paid) w *U.S. GPO:1993--352-714 DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT H Clopeolli,1 May 23,1996 Mr. Errol Gordon 15 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377.1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 538, a request for a Variance to permit a previously constructed illegal art studio/hobby shop that encroaches into the side yard setback, a request for a Variance to exceed the maximum structural lot coverage, and a request for Site Plan Review to permit a previously constructed illegal art studio/hobby shop structure for property at 15 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills, CA; more precisely, Lot 52-EF. Dear Mr. Gordon: This letter shall serve as official notification that Zoning Case No. 538 was APPROVED by the Planning Commission at their regular meeting on May 21, 1996. The final Resolution and conditions of APPROVAL will be forwarded to you after they are signed by the Planning Commission Chairman and City Clerk. The Planning Commission's decision will be reported to the City Council at their regular meeting on June 24, 1996. You should also be aware that the decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed within thirty (301 days after adoption of the Planning Commission's Resolution (Section 17.54.010(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code). Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, LOLA M. UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER cc: Mr. John Resich Mr. Douglas McHattie Panted on Recycled P;3par • GINNY LEEUWENBURGH 12 EASTFIELD DRIVE ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 April 12, 1996 17....7 (a 17 nl APR 1 6 1996 _J CITY OF RC _L...0 IiILLS sx MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION: ZONING CASE NO. 538 I WISH TO BE ON THE RECORD AS OPPOSING APPROVAL OF THE "AS BUILT" CONSTRUCTION ON THIS PROPERTY. THE LOWER EASTFIELD AREA WAS DEVELOPED IN THE LATE FORTIES AND EARLY FIFTIES. THIS AREA NOW HAS EIGHT TENNIS COURTS, MANY COMPLETELY IMPROVED LOTS AND SEVERAL LOTS UNDER THE MINIMUM ONE ACRE ZONING. I FIRMLY SUPPORT MAINTAINING THE FRONT, REAR AND SIDE YARD SETBACKS AS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN THE SEPARATION OF IMPROVEMENTS IN THIS CITY. APPROVING THIS REQUEST FOR "AS BUILT" STRUCTURES AND RAISING LOT COVERAGE WILL GIVE THIS PROPERTY A PRIVILEGE AND A PROPERTY RIGHT NOT ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPER- TIES IN THE AREA. PLEASE PROTECT THE ZONING IN THIS CASE AND DENY THIS "AS BUILT" REQUEST AND INCREASING THE MAXIMUM STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE ON THIS PROPERTY. THANK YOU, ti•••%\ Le-0-4A,Lue.A400..fral,ln GINNY LEEUWENBURGH • • C'L1 0/ /eOfffl JUL INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION March 20, 1996 Mr. and Mrs. George Farinsky 13 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: 15 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 52-EF) Dear Mr. and Mrs. Farinsky: We have arranged for the Planning Commission to conduct a field inspection of the "as built" construction on Saturday. March 30. 1996. The Planning Commission will meet at 7:30 AM at 15 Eastfield Drive. The owner and/or representative will be present to answer any questions regarding the proposal. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, LOLA M. UNG PRINCIPAL PLANNER Pr,nrpd1 hn R.cy ;fr d Pw .. • • City 0fi2 PPn9 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION March 20, 1996 Mr. Errol Gordon 15 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 538, a request for a Variance to permit a previously constructed illegal art studio/hobby shop that encroaches into the side yard setback, a request for a Variance to exceed the maximum structural lot coverage, and a request for Site Plan Review to permit a previously constructed illegal art studio/hobby shop structure for property at 15 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills, CA; more precisely, Lot 52-EF. Dear Mr. Gordon: We have arranged for the Planning Commission to conduct a field inspection of your property to view the "as built" construction on Saturday. March 30. 1996. The Planning Commission will meet at 7:30 AM at your property. 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. Since ely, f& A, LOLA M. UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER cc: Mr. Douglas McHattie Printed on Recycled Paper. Cuy o/ /20fiL Jh/i INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 STATUS OF APPLICATION & NOTIFICATION OF MEETING March 1,1996 Mr. Errol Gordon 15 Eastfield Drive Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 538, a request for a Variance to permit a previously constructed illegal art studio/hobby shop that encroaches into the side yard setback, a request for a Variance to exceed the maximum structural lot coverage, and a request for Site Plan Review to permit a previously constructed illegal art studio/hobby shop structure for property at 15 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills, CA; more precisely, Lot 52-EF. Dear Mr. Gordon: 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. 538 has been set for public hearing consideration by the Planning Commission at their meeting on Tuesday. March 19.1996. 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 15, 1996. 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. Sincere y, die4 LOLA M. UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER cc: Mr. Douglas K. McHattie, South Bay Engineering 0.1 Printed on Recycled Paper.