387, Lot line adjustment - Certific, CorrespondenceMarch 06, 1989
To the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills:
I have reviewed the request for lot line adjustment in zone case Number 387
and I am strongly opposed to it. This is really not a simple lot line
adjustment, but is a complete change of the original intent of the
subdivision, by excluding the "buffer zone" which separates my property from
this subdivision.
When I recently purchased this property, I reviewed the subdivision map of
lot 241-A-1-MS and if I knew a vacant lot, adjoining and not separated from my
property, were present, I would have had serious reservations. These stem
from my family's desire for unimpaired view, privacy, and security from
disturbance to the natural stability of our hillside.
With the present property boundaries, I look out on a pastoral setting without
roof lines or view obstruction. The downhill property developed immediately
below mine (Lot 239A-G), has a large cluster of pine trees which will
eventually become view obstructing. I have no desire to see a developer or
speculator come in and recreate a similar blockage on a higher and closer
slope.
I also have grave concerns about the extensive grading that might occur not
only on this addition to the subdivision, but to the hillside as a whole. One
only has to look at #5 Chuckwagon as an example. Anytime one changes the
natural topography of a slope or introduces another source of subterranean
water through septic tanks, there exists a risk of geologic destabilization.
The development of this subdivsion and lot line adjustment, in my opinion,
contradicts the intention of the legislation for view impairment and general
site plan review. I am actually rather surprised that this subdivision was
even granted in the first place, and to extend it to my property boundary is
something I must vigorously protest.
Sincerely yours,
J'A„
RICHARD E. KRAUTHAMER, M.D. '
41 Crest Road West