421, Reduction of front yard setbac, Correspondence•
City Q/ Rolling �f i INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(213) 377-1521
FAX: (213) 377-7288
June 11, 1990
Mr. Charles Hiliway
2 Flying Mane Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
RE: Zoning Case No. 421;
Request for Varianceto reduce the lot frontage requirement
for an additional driveway access, to encroach into the
front yard setback to construct a retaining wall, and to
exceed the seven percent (7%) maximum allowable grade for
the first twenty feet of a driveway; Request for Conditional
Use Permit for an additional driveway access, located at 2
Flying Mane Road, Rolling Hills, Lot 62-A-SF
Dear Mr. Hiliway:
This is to inform you that the City Council, at their meeting on
May 14, 1990, voted to ratify the Planning Commission's approval of
the above referenced planning/zoning case application.
Pursuant to Section 17.32.087, Ordinance No. 207, an Affidavit of
Acceptance form must be executed before the above approval becomes
effective. A copy of the Resolution of Approval, specifying
conditions of approval set forth by the Planning Commission, is
enclosed for your information. Once you have reviewed the Resolution
of Approval, please complete the enclosed Affidavit of Acceptance
form, have the signature(s) notarized, and forward the Affidavit to
the Office of the County Recorder, Room 15, 227 North Broadway, Los
Angeles, CA 90012, with a check in the amount of $7.00. When the
Affidavit of Acceptance has been returned to the City, duly executed
and recorded, the Los Angeles County Department of Building and Safety
will be notified that a permit can be issued.
Please feel free to call Mr. Ray Hamada, Principal Planner, at
377-1521, if you have any questions.
Very truly,
Betty V lkert
Deputy City Clerk
/bv
•
City olRotting -Alla
Mr. and Mrs. Charles Hillway
2 Flying Mane Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(213) 377.1521
FAX: (213) 377-7288
April 19, 1990
RE: ZONING CASE NO. 421; Request for Variance to frontage
requirement for additional driveway access; Request for
Variance to the seven percent (7%) maximum allowable grade
for driveways; Request for Variance to encroach into the
front yard setback to construct a retaining wall; Request
for Conditional Use Permit for additional drivewayaccess
located at 2 Flying Mane Road, Rolling Hills, Lot62-A-SF
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hillway:
Pursuant to Section 17.32.090 (enclosed) of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code, this letter shall serve as official notification that
the above -stated Zoning Case application was reviewed by the Planning
Commission at their regular meeting of April 18, 1990. At that
meeting, the Planning Commission voted to approve the request for a
frontage variance, maximum slope variance, front yard setback
variance, and Conditional Use Permit for an additional driveway
access.
The Planning Commission's decision will be reported to the City
Council at their regular meeting on May 14, 1990. The decision of the
Planning Commission may be appealed, pursuant to Sections 17.32.140
and 17.32.150 (copies enclosed) of the Municipal Code. A copy of
Resolution No. 598, establishing the fee for filing an appeal, is also
enclosed for your information.
Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Mr.
Ray Hamada, Principal Planner, at 377-1521.
Sincerely,
Betty olkert
Deputy City Clerk
Encls. (3)
Planning Commission
City of Rolling Hills
Rolling Hills, California 90274
Re: Additional driveway at
2 Flying Mane Road
April 12, 1990
APR 2 1990
CITY OF, .ROLLING HILLS
Bo.t.i �Y.7mMIG.ee TnerpgnYSbl M
This letter supplements our letter of February 15, submitted to you with
our plan for an additional driveway and requesting your consideration
and approval of a (1) Conditional Use Permit for an additional driveway
access and (2) Variance in connection with the conditions that are not in
technical compliance with the City 0rdnances and Municipal Codes. Namely,
these relate to the frontage requirement of 250 feet; the seven percent
maximum allowable grade for driveways; and possible retaining wall en-
croachment into the front yard setback.
Pertinent to this request for your approval is the fact that, since starting
construction of the driveway last October, we have worked (assisted by the
City Manager, Terry Belanger) with the Rolling Hills Traffic Commission over
a number of months to produce a plan satisfactory to that Commission. Through-
out these negotiations we have made every effort (at considerable expense)
to satisfy all requirements that arose during the months involved, except
those which would eventually require the above Variances due to our indivi-
dual property circumstances. Based on the services provided us by an en-
gineering firm (which completed a land survey to establish side boundaries
of the property, determined land slope contours, measured and prepared lot
coverage tabulation, etc.), both the Traffic Commission and subsequently
the Association Architectural Committee have approved our plan.
Relative to our need for a Variance from the allowable grade for driveways,
we should point out that the slope as agreed upon and as approved by the
Traffic Commission is shown on our plan drawing as Alternative "A" --
not to be confused with the slope as it appears on site presently. In other
words, more grading will be done to meet the requirements from a traffic
safety standpoint.
As for other specific measurements as they relate to Title 17 of the City
Planning Commission Guidelines, they are shown on the plan drawing and
summarized as follows:
1. Driveway width: 12 feet, with short section in front of house at 15
feet
2. Separation between driveway exit and entry: 115 feet
3. Coverage of lot (including residence, garage, present and proposed
driveways, paved walks and patios, and allowance for stable): Total
buildings - 9.6%; total coverage - 26.6%
_z•
-
4. Coverage of front yard: 18.9%
5. Distance from "parking area" to front roadway easement: 33 feet
6. Distance to nearest intersection: over 150 feet
7. Frontage on maintained roadway: 185 feet
As we have already stated in correspondence to the Traffic Commission, our
objectives in planning the driveway are valid ones -- namely:
1. To provide a safer and more convenient exit than our present driveway,
which has always required guests and delivery trucks to back out onto
Flying Mane Road, a very difficult exit;
2. To provide safer temporary parking for guest,who have, at times in the
past, had to park on Flying Mane Road, which is narrow and has vir-
tually no shoulder in front of our property;
3. To improve the aesthetic quality of our front yard as related to exist-
ing large trees and as related to our neighborhood on Flying Mane Road.
As you know by now, we started construction of the driveway over six months
ago. In retrospect we acknowledge it would have been prudent to have in-
quired as to requirements involved in extending our present driveway, but
at the time we were unaware of the restrictive codes involved. The fact
remains now that, if we are prevented from completing it, reconstruction
of the bank that has been cut away would be very difficult, we have been
advised. Having explored other alternative driveway possibilities fully
with the Traffic Commission, we feel confident that the plan approved by
them is the most desirable solution to our present situation.
The rationale that led us to request Variances and the necessary Conditional
Use Permit is well documented in our series of letters originating last
October 16 and followed by others dated October 22, November 8, November
16, January 5 and February 4. It is our understanding that these letters,
the drawings we submitted and other material have been provided to your
Commission to delineate fully and support our planned construction.
As residents of Rolling Hills since 1951, we have been cognizant of the
desires of our community to maintain and foster a "rural character", and we
endorse it. We feel that the plan we have developed is consonant with the
community objectives while also fulfilling our needs as mentioned above,
and we solicit and shall appreciate your approval to enable us to complete
construction and restore our landscaping.
Thank you.
Sincerely yours,
Charles A. illway
at-a,..
Aida B. Hillway
c: Terry Belanger
Ray Hamada Telephone: 377-1456
• •
March 15, 1990
Planning Commission
City of Rolling Hills
2 Portugese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
RE: Request for a Variance, Request for a CUP,
Zoning Case No. 421, #2 Flying Mane Road
Dear Commissioners:
We would like to go on record as supporting the above
application.
The Hillways have designed a beautiful driveway that will be
a stylish and elegant addition to our street, and we urge you
to approve the application as soon as possible so they can
complete it.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Bob and Mrcia Gold
9 Flying Mane Road
Rolling Hills
(213) 377-3555
By
MAR 1 61990
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
February 15, 1990
Planning Commission
City of Rolling Hills
Rolling Hills, California 90274
Re: Additional driveway at
2 Flying Mane Road
Rolling Hills, California
Attached is information required for the granting of a
(1) Conditional Use Permit and (2) Variance in connection.
with a planned additional driveway on our property.
Additional information was provided to the Traffic Commission
and to the City Manager previously and is in our file at the
City Hall. Our plan has already been approved by the Traffic
Commission.
Specificationsfor the construction of the additional driveway
conform to all requirements of the City and Association and are
of the same design as the existing driveway -- 4 inches of reinforced
concrete over 4 inches of compacted sub -base with double -rows
of brick spacers at 12 foot intervals. Retaining walls are of
slump -stone with brick capping.
Thank you.
Sincerely yours,
Charles A. Hillway
Aida B. Hillway
w
February 4, 1990
Traffic Commission
City of Rolling Hills
Rolling Hills, Ca. 90274
Attn: Ginny Leeuwenburgh, Chairwoman
This letter is in response to a request by my neighbors,
Charles and Aida Hillway of 2 Flying Mane Road, who inform
me that it is a requirement of your Commission as related
to construction of a new driveway on their property.- _____
To insure maximum safety conditions related to sight -distance
on Flying Mane Road and the new driveway's egress on that
street, I agree to allow my neighbors, in consultation with
me, to trim and keep in trim any low hanging limbs and brush
which obstruct a clear view from the driveway to the end of
Flying Mane Road and its juncture with Southfield Drive.
Sincerely,
Dr. William F. Marano
2 Southfield Drive
Rolling Hills, California
January 5,:,1990
Traffic Commission
City of. Rolling Hills..
Rolling Hills, California
Double access driveway at /2 Flying Mane Road
Subsequent to ourlast. meeting,.. we; have had Denn Engineering (23751 Madison;''.
Street, Tt'orrance ),, finder the direction of ';Mr. Gary Roehl,
. complete a land survey that establishes'two id .de boundaries:, of
the property,
2 ▪ measure and determine land slope contours of the front yard as they
relate to the proposed driveway, and
3. prepare a plot drawing of the front yard showing the driveway in
relation to the easement •,line, as well. as . a cross-section view of the
driveway in terms ofthe top slope grade existing presently in the
unfinished driveway and with three alternatives.
Additionally,' we. consulted with Mr. Roehl in a joint meeting with, our ° con-
tractors who are constructing the driveway, Pat and,: Perry.di,Angelo, to
discuss the slope' grade, traffic safety and conformity with land contours
involved in the construction. We are proposing the conensus of that dis-
cussion as our plan.
To designate the'boundaries,_,markers.have been placed by:Denn Engineering on;.'
;the ,property lines .and. in . the center of F.lyingMane Road.' As the drawing
shows', the driveway.. clears. the easement as required.;;
As tothe top slope grade alternatives (designated in the drawing as.A,LJ3,
and C), we feel that C would most reasonably adapt to the natural contors:
of the land without severely violating the integrity and aesthetics of
the front yard, while also providing a gradual and safe slope onto Flying
Mane. Road with visibility and car control. The other alternatives would
result in a deep "trench" extending well back into the front yard, which,
in fact, would obstruct the driver's visibility onto Flying Mane.: Road and
in both directions.
We are .submitting'to you a.copy of the engineering drawing and'also,`ns yiu
requested, assigned statement from our neighbor, Dr. William Marano, 'agreeing
tb our keeping in trim any low hanging limb and brush on the corner of
his property.
We; trust that wehave provided everything needed to•allow,,you'to'grant,us
the,' approval' of your Commission..
Thank ,you• for your'. assistance.
2 Flying Mane Road
Rolling Hills, California
Telephone 377-1456
cc:
Terry Belaziger
Sincerely yours, '.
Cha les A. Hil way`
Aida B..Hillway