Loading...
491, Garage addition encroaching in, Correspondencei • Ci1 o/ IJfin JII/& L• December 3, 1993 Mr. and Mrs. Norman Lean 59 Crest Road East 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: LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR 22 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 84-EF). Dear Mr. and Mrs. Lean: We have received word from the landscaping consultant that in order to comply with the Site Plan Review Ordinance, the submitted plan needs some revision. The embankment along Eastfield Drive would benefit by the addition of groupings of any of the following fire - retardant, drought -resistant native plants: BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME COTONEASTER PARNEYI COTONEASTER HORIZONTALIS ACACIA REDOLENS CEANOTHUS CEANOTHUS GRISEUS HORIZONTALIS ROMNEYA COULTERI RED CLUSTERBERRY ROCK COTONEASTER PROSTRATE ACACIA 'CONCHA' CARMEL CEANOTHUS MATILIJA POPPY The remaining portion of the plan shows no removal of existing trees and shrubs and the cost estimate has been deemed appropriate. Please revise plans, resubmit 2 copies of the plans and a bond or check for $10,120. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, c�. LOLA M. UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER Printed on Recycled Paper. • • TO: MEMORANDUM Lola Ungar, Principal Planner City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 ATTENTION: Craig Nealis, City Manager FROM: Julie Heinsheimer, Landscape Consultan SUBJECT: Zoning Case No.: 491 DATE: November 10, 1993 In order to comply with the Site Plan Review Ordinance the submitted plan needs some revision. The embankment along Eastfield Drive would benefit by the addition of groupings of any of the following fire -retardant, droughtresistant native plants. BOTANICAL COMMON COTONEASTER PARNEYI RED CLUSTERBERRY COTONEASTER HORIZONTALIS ROCK COTONEASTER ACACIA REDOLENS PROSTRATE ACACIA CEANOTHUS 'CONCHA' CEANOTHUS GRISEUS HORIZONTALIS CARMEL CEANOTHUS ROMNEYA COULTER' MATILIJA POPPY The remaining portion of the plan shows no removal of existing trees and shrubs. The cost estimate is appropriate. • • ik v D� DD.4c, . City O/ Rolling iLLS INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 =.T V NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 October 19, 1993 Ms. Julie Heinsheimer 7 Johns Canyon Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR 22 EASTFIELD DRIVE Dear Julie: Please review the landscape plan, the estimate, and the resolution attached. Mr. Lean prepared the plan and estimate himself. If there are any additions, corrections or the plan does not meet with your approval, please let me know. Sincerely, LOLA Printed on Recycled Paper. 1 o/ JUL CERTIFIED MAIL May 25, 1993 Mr. and Mrs. Norman Lean 59 Crest Road East 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. 491, 22 EASTFIELD DRIVE (LOT 84-EF) APPEAL PERIOD AND AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM RESOLUTION NO. 93-18 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Lean: This letter shall serve as official notification that Zoning Case No.491 was APPROVED by the Planning Commission and the enclosed resolution was approved on May 18, 1993 at a regular meeting. The Planning Commission's decision was reported to the City Council at theirregular meeting on May 24, 1993. The approval will become effective: (1) Twenty days after the receipt of this letter if no appeals are filed within that time period (Section 17.32.140 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 (Section -17.32.087). We have enclosed a copy of RESOLUTION NO. 93-18, 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 to: County Recorder. Room 15. 227 North Broadway. Los Angeles. CA 90012 with a check in the amount of $ 5.00 for the first pace and $ 3.00 for each additional base. 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. Pr.r±ed on Recycled Paper. • • PAGE 2 Sincerely, LOLA UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER ENCLOSURES.: RESOLUTION NO. 93-18, EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM, AND APPEAL SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE. cc: Mr. George Sweeney RESOLUTION NO. 93-18 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK FOR A GARAGE ADDITION, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK FOR A BATHROOM ADDITION, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK FOR A BAY WINDOW ADDITION, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 491. 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. and Mrs. Norman Lean with respect to real property located at 22 Eastfield Drive, Rolling Hills (Lot 84-EF) requesting: (1) a Variance to the rear yard setback to construct a garage addition; (2) a Variance to the rear yard setback to construct a bathroom addition; (3) a Variance to the rear yard setback to construct a bay window addition; (4) a Variance to the rear yard setback to construct retaining walls; and (5) Site Plan Review for substantial residential additions. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducteda duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications for Variances and Site Plan Review on March 16, 1993 and April 27,1993 and at a field trip visit on April 17, 1993. Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project is categorically exempt_from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to a Class 3 exemption provided by Section 15303 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Section 4. Sections 17.32.010 through 17.32.030 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. A Variance to Section 17.16.080' is required to construct additions in the fifty (50) foot rear yard setback. The applicant is requesting a garage addition which will encroach 34 feet into the rear yard setback. The Planning Commission finds: A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and zone. The Variance is necessary because the buildable area of the lot is located at the rear of the property. Also, the existing RESOLUTION NO. 93-18 PAGE 2 development pattern on the lot and the sloping front portion precludes continued expansion of the house towards that area on the lot without leaving areas of open space on the building pad. 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 the property in question. The Variance is necessary because the proposed addition will be aligned with the existing garage which which will be replaced and moved 36 feet to the southeast. The garage will not be visible from the street. The Variance will permit the development of the property in a manner similar to development patterns on surrounding properties. C. The granting of this Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped. Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Variance to allow a garage addition to the residential structure to encroach into the rear yard setback to a maximum of 34 feet as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A subject to the conditions contained in Section 15. Section 6. A Variance to Section 17.16.080 is required to construct additions to the existing residence in the fifty (50) foot rear yard setback. The applicant is requesting a bathroom addition which will encroach up to 5 feet into the rear yard setback. The Planning Commission finds: A. __There are .exceptional -or_ extr-aardinary-- circumstances and conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and zone. The Variance is necessary because the buildable area of the lot is located at the rear of the property. Also, the existing development pattern on the lot and the sloping front portion precludes continued expansion of the house towards that area on the lot without leaving areas of open space on the building pad. 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 the property in question. The Variance is necessary because the proposed addition will be will not encroach any further than existing portions of the residence. Also, the Variance will permit the development of the property in a manner similar to development patterns on surrounding properties. RESOLUTION NO. 93-18 PAGE 3 C. The granting of this Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Variance to allow a bathroom addition to the existing residential structure to encroach into the rear yard setback to a maximum of 5 feet as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A subject to the conditions contained in Section 15. Section 8. A Variance to Section 17.16.080 is required to construct additions in the fifty (50) foot rear yard setback. The applicant is requesting a bay window addition which will encroach up to 14 feet into the rear yard setback. The Planning Commission finds: A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and zone. The Variance is necessary because the buildable area of the lot is located at the rear of the property. Also, the existing development pattern on the lot and the sloping front portion precludes continued expansion of the house towards that area on the lot without leaving areas of open space on the building pad. 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 the property in question. Also, the Variance will permit the development of the property in a manner similar to development patterns on surrounding properties. C. The granting of this Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped. Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Variance to allow a bay window addition to the existing residential structure to encroach into the rear yard setback to a maximum of 14 feet as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A subject to the conditions contained in Section 15. ! • RESOLUTION NO. 93-18 PAGE 4 Section 10. A Variance to Section 17.16.080 is required to construct retaining walls in the fifty (50) foot rear yard setback. The applicant is requesting to construct a multiple segmented retaining wall that is approximately 179 feet long with a maximum height of 3 feet. The proposed retaining walls will encroach up to 42 feet into the rear yard setback. The Planning Commission finds: A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and zone. The front yard slopes upward from the street to the building pad. The proposed walls are intended to delineate the driveway and buttress the sloping area along the driveway at the rear property line. The Variance is necessary because the buildable area of the lot is located at the rear of the property. Also, the existing development pattern on the lot and the sloping front portion precludes continued expansion of the house towards that area on the lot without leaving areas of open space on the building pad. 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 the property in question. The Variance is necessary to create a terraced slope so as to permit multiple landscaping uses of the property similar to landscaping patterns on adjacent properties. Also, the Variance will permit the development of the property in a manner similar to development patterns on surrounding properties. The construction of these walls will allow for more beneficial use of the property for landscaping purposes. C. The granting of this Variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located. Development on the pad will allow a substantial portion of the lot to remain undeveloped. Section 11. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Variance to allow the construction of approximately 179 feet of retaining walls to a maximum height of 3 feet to encroach into the rear yard setback to a maximum of 42 feet as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A subject to the conditions contained in Section 15. Section 12. Section 17.34.010 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 more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period. . • RESOLUTION NO. 93-18 PAGE 5 Section 13 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 49,702 square feet. The proposed residence (4,496.5 sq.ft.), garage (706.5 sq.ft.), spa (50 sq.ft.), stable (880 sq.ft.), and service yard (98 sq.ft.), will have 6,231 square feet which constitutes 12.5% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 13,543 square feet which equals 30.84% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage requirement. The proposed project is on a relatively large lot with most of the proposed additions located away from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development and is similar and compatible with several neighboring developments. 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) and grading will be minimal to minimize building coverage on the building pad itself. C. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural 'drainage courses will continue to Eastfield Drive and the northeast portion of the lot. D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible and supplements it with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. 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. Significant• portions of the lot, will be left undeveloped so as to minimize the impact of development. F. The proposed development is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences because as indicated in Paragraph A, lot coverage maximums will not be exceeded and the proposed project is of consistent scale with the neighborhood, thereby grading will be required only to restore the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on several properties in the vicinity. • • RESOLUTION NO. 93-18 PAGE 6 G. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize the existing vehicular access off Eastfield Drive, 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. Section 14. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review for residential additions as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto as Exhibit A subject to the conditions contained in Section 15. Section 15. The Variance to the rear yard setback approved in Sections 5, 7, 9 and 11, and the Site Plan Review approval for residential additions granted in Section 14 as indicated on the Development Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A, are subject to the following conditions: A. The Variances shall expire unless used within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.32.110 of the Municipal Code. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.34.080.A. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variances and the Site Plan Review approval, that if any conditions thereof are violated, these approvals 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 Building 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 these approvals, 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. All retaining walls incorporated into the project shall not be greater than 5 feet in height at any one point. F. The height of the new roof ridge line shall be no higher than 134.84 feet which is 34.84 feet above the lowest point on the property (100 feet, which is also known as the assumed benchmark for ground elevation). RESOLUTION NO. 93-18 PAGE 7 G. To minimize the prominence of the building on the pad, the structures, driveway, graded slopes and retaining walls shall be screened and shielded from view with native drought -resistant vegetation that is compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community. H. The landscape plan shall include the use of native drought -resistant vegetation along Eastfield Drive. I. A landscape plan must be submitted to and approved by the City of Rolling Hills Planning Department staff.prior to the issuance of any grading and building 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. 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. J. 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 must conform tothe City. of Rolling Hills standard of 2 to 1 slope ratio. K. 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. L. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 40.8% and overall building pad coverage shall not exceed 43%. M. No grading which requires a grading permit shall be allowed for this project. N. Any modifications to the project which would constitute a modification to the development plan as approved by the Planning Commission shall require the filing of an application for modification of the Zoning Case pursuant to Section 17.34.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. RESOLUTION NO. 93-18 PAGE 8 0. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Variance, pursuant to Section 17.32.087, or the approval shall not be effective. P. Conditions A, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L,. M, N, and 0 of this Variance and Site Plan Review approval must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 18TH DAY OF MAY, 1993. I-2A) EVIE`AANKIN ACTING CHAIRMAN ATTEST: airlif7aN; DEPUTY CITY CLERK The foregoing Resolution No. 93-18 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK FOR A GARAGE ADDITION, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK FOR A BATHROOM ADDITION, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK FOR A BAY WINDOW ADDITION, GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH INTO THE REAR YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT RETAINING WALLS, AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL FOR SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 491. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on May 18, 1993 by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Commissioners Frost, Hankins, Lay and Raine None Chairman Roberts None rt t . k. .> DEPUTY C� I`�Y CLERK • 1611.140--17. )4.16. • 17.32.140 Appeal --Persons authorised. The ectioft by the Planning Commission 'in matters described in this r • chapter shall be by majority vote and shall be final, eNNn. `• elusive and effective twenty calendar days after the tittni r` of notice, as provided in Section 17.32.090, unless within said twenty -day period an appeal in writing is filed wit* the City Clerk by any of the following: A. The applicant: S. Any person who protested, either orally or in writing, as a matter of record, prior to the final vote of the Planning Commission on the matter and who. in addition, received or was entitled to receive the written notice specified in subdivision 2 of subsection A of Sottipn 17.40.060; or C. The City Council, upon the affirmative vote of three members of the Council. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: mod. 155 54, 1978: Ord. 33 $6.14, 1960). 17.32.150 Appeal--Contents--Fee. An appeal from any order, requirement, decision, or determination under the title must set forth specifically wherein it is claimed there was an error or abuse of discretion by the Planning Commission or wherein the decision of the Planning Commiegio,A is not supported by the evidence in the matter. In addition, any person appealing the decision of the Planning Commission must pay to the City Clerk, at the time of filing the written notice of appeal, the required fee specified by resolution as hereafter adopted and from time to time changed by the City Council. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord. 33 $6.15,.1960). 17.32.160 Appeal--Recordkeeping. Upon receipt of a written appeal and the payment of the fee required, the City Clerk shall advise the Secretary of the Planning Commission to transmit forthwith the complete record of the entire proceeding before the Planning Commission. The Secretary of the Planning Commission shall be charged with the duty and responsibility of maintaining a complete file and record on each application processed pursuant to this chapter which shall contain the original application processed pursuant to this chapter, all correspondence • reports pertaining thereto, all affidavits of publicatiel, posting and mailing, as required by law, :minutes of all stings of the Planning Commission pertaining to this natter, advisory reports of technical agents, the report, findings and decision of the Planning Commission, and an affidavit of the mailing and the giving of said notice, as required by this chapter. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord. 33 56.16, 1960). 215 (Rolling Hills 8/03) • •17.22.170-•17.32.200 17.32.170 City Council to be Board of Zoning Adl)ustment_and Ap2eal. For the purpose of this chapter and in conformity with Article 2 of Chapter 4, Title 7 of the Government Code of the State of California, the City Council appoints and creates each and every member of the City Council, sitting as a whole, as the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Zoning Appeal for the City. The City Council shall meet as a Board of Zoning Adjustment and Zoning Appeal in connection with other City business and, in so meeting, shall be governed by all. the rules and regulations now adopted or hereafter adopted governing the procedure of the City Council. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord. 33 $6.17, 1960). 17.32.180 Appeal--Hearing--Notice--Basis for decision. The City C1erx shall set a hearing before the City Council 4,1 �y as t noifdZoning Adjustment and Zoning Appeal not less tha after the receipt of said appeal or request for review. The hearing shall be on at leas ten days prior written notice to the applicant, the appellant, and to any other persons who received or should have received, under Section 17.40.060, notice of the hearing before, the Planning Commission. At such a hearing no new matter nor new evidence shall be received or considered by the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeal, and the Board shall make its determination on the basis of the record brought before it on appeal or review. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord. 33 56.18, 1960). 17.32.190 Appeal --New hearing --Authorized when. Notwith- standing the provisions of Section 17.32.180, the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeal may, by majority action at any tine during the course of the review of a decision of the Planning Commission under this chapter brought before it by appeal, determine that a new hearing shall be set by the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeal, at which time the public will be entitled to appear to present new or additional evidence for or against said application. (Ord. 108 (part) , 1981: Ord. 33 56.19, 1960) . 17.32.200 Appeal --New hearing--{opy of records. The action of the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeal shall be by majority vote and shall be final and conclusive. The decision of the Board under this chapter shall be set forth in full in the minutes of the meeting of the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeal. A certified copy of the excerpts of said minutes shall be delivered by the City Clerk to the City Council, the Secretary of the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission for their use and records, as well as to the applicant or the appellant, if they are different parties. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord. 33 $6.20, 1960) . 216 (Rolling pills 8/83) • • 17.32.210-•17.36.010 17.32.210 Appeal --Notice. Upon the filing of such an appeal, the City Clerk shall give notice of the filing of said notice to: A. Applicant; B. Appellant; and C. Any person who protested, either orally or in writing, as a matter of record, prior to the final vote of the planning Commission on the matter and who, in addition, received or was entitled to receive the written notice specified in subdivision 2 of subsection 8 of Section 7.40.060. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord. 155 56, 1978: Ord. 33 $6.21, 1960). 17.32.220 Appeal -Rearing --Multiple appeals. In the event more than one appeal is filed purusant to Section 17.32.140 then all appeals shall be heard at the sans time. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord. 155 56, 1978: Ord. 33 56.22, 1960) . 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). ACCEPTANCE FORM STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss ZONING CASE NO. 491 SITE PLAN REVIEW VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT x I (We) the undersigned state: I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows: 22 Eastfield Drive (Lot 84-EF) Rolling Hills, CA 90274 This property is the subject of the above numbered cases. I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said ZONING CASE NO. 491 SITE PLAN REVIEW x VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Print Owner Name Signature Address City/State Print Owner Name Signature Address City/State Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public. esc«-r�f���,•�ee�••-�,-ss�<<.ca-i�-crisc�^�°s*sr-r+�-.rur.�rrurcf�-rrr State of On this the day of 19___, before me, ss. County of the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared O personally known to me O proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence tope 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 llJy./!Il..�..r./l!I f!llll./-/�!!✓1!!JIfllflll See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof • C1i ofi2 fP,�,.S April 30, 1993 Mr. and Mrs. Norman Lean 59 Crest Road East 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. 491: A request for a Variance to permit encroachment into the rear yard setback to construct an attached garage and a swimming pool, and a request for Site Plan Review to permit substantial additions to an existing single family residence at 22 Eastfield Drive (Lot 84-EF). Dear Mr. and Mrs. Lean: This letter shall serve as official notification that Zoning Case No. 491 was APPROVED by the Plannning Commission at their regular meeting on April 27, 1993. 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 May 24, 1993. You should also be aware that the decision of the Planning Commission may be appealed within twenty days after you receive the final Resolution (Sections 17.32.140 and 17.32.150 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 PLANNE cc: Mr. George Sweeney Printed on Recycled Paper. •City oi leolling March 23, 1993 • (HLE' ) INCORPORATED JANUARY 214,4257r NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 Mr. and Mrs. Norman Lean 59 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: Zoning Case No. 491: A request for a Variance to permit encroachment into the rear yard setback to construct an attached garage and a swimming pool, and a request for Site Plan Review to permit substantial additions to an existing single family residence at 22 Eastfield Drive (Lot 84-EF). Dear Mr. and Mrs. Lean: 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. April 17. 1993. The Planning Commission will meet at 7:30 AM at City Hall for a time and then proceed to the scheduled project sites. Do not expect the Commission at 7:30 AM, but be assured that the field trip will take place before 11 AM. The site must be prepared with a full-size silhouette of the proposed project showing the roof ridge and bearing walls. We have enclosed Silhouette Construction Guidelines. 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. Sincerely, LOLA M. UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANER cc: Mr. George Sweeney, Architect Printed on Recycled Paper. • Ci44 Wk./ling Jh/id • 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. ; rei V icr. • • • • SECTION i 1 1 1 q R .PLAN fa /E'O/fiflCLI, O/ JULJUD INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NOTIFICATION LETTER March 1, 1993 Mr. and Mrs. Norman Lean 59 Crest Road East Rolling Hills, CA 90274 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 SUBJECT: Zoning Case No. 491: A request for a Variance to permit encroachment into the rear yard setback to construct an attached garage and a swimming pool, and a request for Site Plan Review to permit substantial additions to an existing single family residence at 22 Eastfield Drive (Lot 84-EF). Dear Mr. and Mrs. Lean: Your application for Zoning Case No. 491 has been set for public hearing consideration by the Planning Commission at their meeting on Tuesday, March 16, 1993. 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 12, 1993. Please arrange to pick up the staff report to preview it prior to the hearing. Please call me at (213) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sinc rely, LOLA M. UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER cc: Mr. George M. Sweeney, Architect Printed on Recycled Paper.