7, Allow existing SFR to encroach, CorrespondenceMay 252 1961
lir. Robert K. Fox.
33 Yacht &! .rbor Drive
Portuguese i nd9 California
3r Pot,
Enclosed herewith ..s the
FINDINGS A11D FOII L riEponT from the Planning
Commission of. the .City.. of Rollin g ls,
Fours very truly,
cretary, .Planning Commission
May 18, 1961
Mr., Robert K. Fox
83 Yacht Harbor Drive
Portuguese Vend, California
Dear Mr. Fox,
In order to complete the City of Rolling Hills
Planning Commission file on your variance
application, it is necessary. that we have a
copy of the plot plan of your property showing
a) the location of the building on the,
proPerty; and
the.area for which the variance
was requested; and
)
c) the outside boundaries showing
dimensions and easements..
Kindly submit the plot plan as soon as possible,
Yours very truly
Secretary, Planning Commission
mip
t3"dT C. r' a, a '>rr E ° yr
." . o� . Ci ai' gaa;.32,�..y�t.��.� � ..?«t;.wj.l.�3��.d..i�. a..a�'�"::.al.C:�.r
Los, :»:s:ae1e3s Court y Building ilding and Safety Dept.
.1C2 . trE:wa&. Lomita Boulevard
LomiE;.c:, .California
..,-Dear th.. Laui 1,
At its meeting held 1kly 16, 1961
the Pia nn iu; G oluil:k., s u L on o2 the City aolling
UilI s approved a variance for a .` ` 'on foot
6 •,,fit, yard , . , 4 (c ce Ordinance No. 33 -
Section 1:31) inotead of a t;4enty-ave~ foot
ac back for 1°'1r. w oti:.'rt £ , aaolL for the location
oE a reoidex; ce at 13. Outrider der noad on Lot 94,
avC CY Cw.d..i,.�i: q w.J. t Y�'ir° „,. :y 5✓i. 4".6 .,i.w,�S...�.A il? l is .
Very truly your,
Gilbert B. Uyers
City Clerk
• 1
May 1, 1961
Planning Commission
City of Rolling Hills
Rolling Hills, California
Gentlemen:
I am the owner of Lot 94 at 13 Outrider Road, Eastfield section
of Rolling Hills. I have begun construction of a home on that lot.
The plans for the home have been approved by Rolling Hills
Community Association and have also been approved by the City of
Rolling Hills (Los Angeles County Building Department). The date
of approval by the County is January 26, 1961 and the date of
approval by Rolling Hills Community Association is October 24, 1960.
Although I have received a grading permit from the County dated
October 17, 1960, I have been unable to secure a building permit
because of Zoning Ordinance 33 which, in my particular case, would
require a setback of 25 feet from the side property line. The plans
that were approved by both the Association and the County show a
setback of only 15 feet from the property line to the roof overhang.
Because of the fact that the plans were approved, construction was
started and grading and foundation trenches have been dug. Obviously,
to comply at this time with Zoning Ordinance 33 would involve consider-
able difficulty and expense.
I therefore petition the Planning Commission for a variance from
Zoning Ordinance 33. The extraordinary and unusual circumstances in
this case are obvious from the above history. Due to an oversight,
Zoning Ordinance 33 was not applied, and construction was begun on
the basis of the approved plans. The variance, if granted, would
allow much fuller use of my property --the same use which has been
extended to other property holders in the area whose homes were built
before passage of Zoning Ordinance 33. Finally, the variance would
in no way damage or deteriorate any other property in the neighborhood
or vicinity. The nearest home is several hundred feet away and the
variance would in no way transgress or injure financial or esthetic
values of my neighbors' property. To comply with Zoning Ordinance 33
would require complete revision of the plans.
Thank you very much for your consderat
Respectfully yo
/
ert K. Fox
on.
RKF:ah