159, Construct a tennis court, Resolutions & Approval ConditionsBEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In the Matter of the Application )
)
of )
) ZONING CASE NO. 159
Dr. Richard Witmer )
)
Lot 14-EF )
FINDINGS AND REPORT
The application of Dr. Richard Witmer, Lot 14-EF, Eastfield Tract,
for a conditional use permit under Section 3.01, Paragraph 3 (c) of
Ordinance No. 112 for construction of a tennis court came on for
hearing on the 27th day of July, 1976 in the Council Chambers of the
Administration Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills,
California, and the applicant, having submitted evidence in support
of the application, the Planning Commission being advised, now makes
its Findings and Report as required by the Ordinances of the City of
Rolling Hills, California.
I.
The Commission finds that the applicant, Dr. Richard Witmer, is
the owner of that certain real property described as Lot 14-EF, located
at 79 Eastfield Drive in the City of Rolling Hills, and that notice of
the public hearing in connection with said application was given as
required by Sections 8.06 and 8.07 of Ordinance No. 33 of the City of
Rolling Hills, California. The Commission finds, further, that no
communication, written or verbal, was received in opposition to the
request,and that letters from Joseph and Frances Nebolon, 68 Eastfield
Drive and Norton Donner, 81 Eastfield Drive, approving the tennis court
have been entered into the file, and that Mr. Robert Archer, 77 Eastfield
Drive appeared
objection to a
at the hearing and advised the Commission that he has no
tennis court on the property, and felt'that the improve-
ment would add to the value of the surrounding properties.
II.
TheCommission finds that the applicant requests the conditional use
permit for construction of a tennis court in a legal location on the
property which consists of 3.036 acres in the RAS-1 zone. The Commis-
sion finds that a conditional use permit should be granted in order to
• •
preserve property rights possessed by other property in the same vicinity
and zone, and, that the granting of such conditional use permit would not
be materially detrimental to the public welfare nor injurious to other
property in the same vicinity and zone. As a condition of approval, the
Commission requires that the fence surrounding the tennis court not
exceed 10 feet in height.
III.
From the foregoing it is concluded that a conditional use permit,
subject to conditions imposed, should be granted under Section 3.01,
Paragraph 3 (c) of Ordinance No. 112 for construction of a tennis court
to Dr. Richard Widmer, Lot 14-EF, and it is, therefore, so ordered.
/s/ Forrest Riegel
Chairman, Planning Commission
cretary, Plannin: Commission