Loading...
546, Demo existing SFR the construc, Correspondence• City 0/ Roilinv June 20, 1997 Mr. and Mrs. Russell Shoemaker 28000 Palos Verdes Drive East Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 i 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: PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR BOND CALCULATION Dear Mr. and Mrs. Shoemaker: This letter shall serve as official notification that the Preliminary Landscape Plan for bond calculation for Zoning Case No. 546 has been APPROVED although review of the total cost estimate appears to be understated. We estimate that plant material, sod and labor to cost $23,000 and the Irrigation System to be $10,500. The result is $33,500 plus 15% for a total of $38,525. The bond is required prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. In accordance with Resolution No. 96-21, the bond shall be retained with the City for not less than two years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, ofreet LOLA M. UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER Printed on Recycled Paper, • City ova r��na June 6, 1997 Ms. Julie Heinsheimer 7 Johns Canyon Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: LANDSCAPING PLAN REVIEW 18 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 69-A-EF) MR. AND MRS. RUSSELL COLE SHOEMAKER Dear Julie: 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 Attached is the landscape plan and a cost estimate for 18 Eastfield Drive for your review that were presented to us to be in compliance with Resolution No. 96-21 (attached). Please let me know if there is anything else that you need from the Landscape Designer Ms. Marie Herbrandson or the applicants. Sincerely, OLA M. UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER Printed on Recycled Paper. • • .... �I City O! Rolling 31;>L>L� INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 v CERTIFIED MAIL December 20, 1996 Mr. and Mrs. Russell Shoemaker 28000 Palos Verdes Drive East Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 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. 546, 18 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 69-A-EF) RESOLUTION NO. 96-21 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Shoemaker: This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission adopted a resolution on December 17, 1996 to approve your request for Site Plan Review for the construction of a new single family residence and attached garage to replace an existing single family residence at 18 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills, CA; more precisely, Lot 69-A-EF in Zoning Case No. 546. 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 Monday, January 13, 1997 (corrected date). 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 willbe 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. 96-21, 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, Printed on Recycled Paper. • • 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. 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, LOLA UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER ENC: RESOLUTION NO. 96-21 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM APPEAL SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE. cc: Mr. Thomas A. Blair, AIA • bi¢ 4,4 ' RESOLUTION NO. 96-21 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 546. THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. An application has been filed by ,Mr. and Mrs. Russell Cole Shoemaker with respect to real property located at 18 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills (Lot 69-A-EF), requesting Site Plan Review for the construction of a new single family residence and attached garage to replace an existing single family residence. Section 2. The Commission considered this item at a public hearing on October 15, 1996 and November 19, 1996, and at a field trip visit on November 2, 1996. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(e)) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 4. Section 17.46.020 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval for any grading requiring a grading permit and 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 or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period. The applicants request Site Plan Review to construct a residence, attached garage, and swimming pool/spa. With respect to the Site Plan Review application, 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 setback and lot coverage requirements. The lot has a net square foot area of 59,705 square feet. The proposed residence (5,079 sq.ft.), attached garage (1,192 sq.ft.), swimming pool spa (624 sq.ft.), 96 square foot service yard and existing stable (320 sq.ft.) will have 7,311 square feet which constitutes 12.2% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 17,726 square feet which equals 29.7%, which is within the 35% maximum overall RESOLUTION NO. 96-21 PAGE 1 OF 5 • • lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is on a relatively large lot with most of the proposed structures located away from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. B. 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) because a minimum amount of grading is proposed and will only be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the proposed residence and existing neighboring residences. C. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at the east side (rear) 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. The residential and total lot coverage will not exceed the Planning Commission's established guideline. 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 northerly portions of the property. F. 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 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 proposed 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 to Eastfield Drive for access.. H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for construction of a new single family residence, an attached garage, swimming pool/spa, service yard and existing RESOLUTION NO. 96-21 PAGE 2 OF 5 • • stable as indicated on the Development Plan dated October 11, 1996, and marked, Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 6. Section 6. The Site Plan Review application approved in Section 5 of this Resolution is subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17.46.080. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Site Plan Review approvals, 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. 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 the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file marked, Exhibit A, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. E. Grading shall not exceed 480 cubic yards of cut soil and 480 cubic yards of fill soil. F. All retaining walls incorporated into the project shall not be greater than 5 feet in height at any one point. G. Residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 28.5%. H. Maximum disturbed area shall not exceed 39.4% of the net lot area. I. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to the maximum extent feasible, the existing mature trees and shrubs and the natural landscape screening surrounding the proposed building pad. J. Two copies of a landscape plan must be submitted for review by the Planning Department and include native drought -resistant vegetation that will not disrupt the impact of the views of neighboring properties prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. The landscaping plan submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with the rural character of the community. RESOLUTION NO. 96-21 PAGE 3 OF 5 A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior to issuance of a grading and building permit and shall be retained with the City for not less than two years after landscape installation. The retained bond will be released by the City Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. K. Prior to the submittal of an applicable final grading plan to the County of Los Angeles for plan check, a detailed grading and drainage plan with related geology, soils and hydrology reports that conform to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission must be submitted to the Rolling Hills Planning Department staff for their review. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. L. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of any building or grading permit. M. 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. N. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review, pursuant to Section 17.42.060, or the approval shall not be effective. O. All conditions of this Site Plan Review approvals must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 17THDECEMBER, 1996. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 96-21 PAGE 4 OF 5 • • STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 96-21 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 546. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on December 17, 1996 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Sommer, Witte and Chairman Roberts. NOES: Commissioner Margeta. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 96-21 PAGE 5 OF 5 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO: CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 (310) 377-7288 FAX Recorder's Use 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 ANGELES) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) ZONING CASE NO. 546 SITE PLAN REVIEW • VARIANCE ❑ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 0 I (We) the undersigned state: I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows: 18 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills, CA; more precisely, Lot 69-A-EF 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. 546 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 City/State Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary nublic. Address City/State 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 thereof • • 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 appeals must be filed 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 17.30.030 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 ROLUNG HILLS ZONING MAY 11, 1993 1734 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 reiquired by Section 1730.030 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 24. 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. E. 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 afinal.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 0 v p! 12 a>r ai c 0 P 852 865 207 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) Sent to Street and No. P.Q., State and ZIP Code V . C /9 c70„9 Postage Certified Fee Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee Return Receipt showing to whom and Date Delivered rn Return Receipt showing to whom, r- Date, and Ad Delivery ar c /./0 5 y Y 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 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 delivered. I also wish to receive the following services (for an extra fee): 1. ❑ Addressee's Address 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery Consult postmaster for fee. d 3. Article Addressed to: 14a. Article Number EP2,-. it liIYS• bS5pLC 340eior 2a 8 2 Poeo ' Palos ins TDr;o sf ac Q • Z a/ cc 5-Receiv.� w cc o. 7S d By: (Print Name) L3 6. Sign ure: (Addresse r gent) >. X M PS Form 3811, December 1994 Spa 4Rro5' a 0 7 4b. Service Type ❑ Registered Certified ❑ Express Mail 0 Insured ❑ Retum Receipt for Merchandise 0 COD 7. Date of Delivery 2,6/ S. Addressee's Address< (Only if requested and fee is paid) Domestic Return Receipt ai 0 m to , c 5) 0 d cc c• cc • N `0 0 T ' as, November 27,1996 Mr. and Mrs. Russell Shoemaker 28000 Palos Verdes Drive East Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 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. 546, a request for Site Plan Review for the construction of a new single family residence and attached garage to replace an existing single family residence at 18 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills, CA; more precisely, Lot 69- A-EF. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Shoemaker: This letter shall serve to -notify you that the Planning Commission voted at their regular meeting on November 19, 1996 to direct staff to prepare a resolution to approve your request for the construction of a new single family residence and attached garage to replace an existing single family residence in Zoning Case No. 546. The Planning Commission will review and consider the draft resolution, together with the conditions of approval, at an upcoming meeting and make its final decision on your application at that upcoming 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 Planning Commission's action is not final until the resolution has been approved by the Commission. The Planning Commission's 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 consideration by the Commission on December 17, 1996. 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 January 9,1996. 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. Thomas A. Blair, AIA • • C1iy ofi2 ??',.y FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION October 17, 199,6 Mr. and Mrs. Russell Shoemaker 28000 Palos Verdes Drive East Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 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. 546, a request for Site Plan Review for the construction of a new single family residence and attached garage to replace an existing single family residence at 18 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills, CA; more precisely, Lot 69- A-EF. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Shoemaker: We have arranged for the Planning Commission to conduct a field inspection of your property to view a silhouette of the proposed project on Saturday, November 2,1996. The Planning Commission's timetable is to meet at 7:30 AM at your property. The site must be prepared according to the enclosed Silhouette Construction Guidelines and the following requirements: • A full-size silhouette must be prepared for ALL STRUCTURES of the project showing the footprints, roof ridges and bearing walls; • Stake the limits of the building pad; and • Delineate areas to be graded showing finished floor or grade elevations. The owner and/or representative should be present to answer any questions regarding the proposal. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, a. LOLA M. UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNE Enclosure: Silhouette Construction Guidelines cc: Mr. Thomas A. Blair, AIA Printed on Recycled Paper. • C4f J QRo/�ing o INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO, 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (213) 377.1521 FAX (213) 377.7288 SILHOUETTE CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES, 1. 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. The Silhouette shall not remain erected for a period longer than one week unless directed by the Planning Commission or City Council. 2. Silhouettes should be constructed with 2" x 4" lumber. Printed boards are not acceptable. 3. Bracing should be provided where possible. 4. wire, twine or other suitable material should be used to delineate roof ridges and eaves. 5. Small pieces of cloth or flags should be attached to the wire or twine to aid in the visualization of the proposed construction. 6. The application may be delayed if inaccurate or incomplete silhouettes are constructed. 7. If you have any futher questions contact the Planning Department Staff at (213) 377-1521. Ni PLAN SECTION IS • C1iy 0/ RO/fi Jh/h NOTIFICATION LETTER September 30, 1996 Mr. and Mrs. Russell Schoemaker 28000 Palos Verdes Drive East Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 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. 546, a request for Site Plan Review for the construction of a new single family residence and attached garage to replace an existing single family residence at 18 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills, CA; more precisely, Lot 69-A-EF. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Shoemaker: Your application for Zoning Case No. 546 has been set for public hearing consideration by the Planning Commission at their meeting on Tuesday, October 15,1996. 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, October 11, 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. Sincerely, e-e it • ?':a79—C--- LOLA M. UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER cc: Mr. Thomas A. Blair, AIA Printed on Recycled Paper.