145, Side yard variance - 5 ft. on , Correspondence•
LOWELL A. WOODEN
2$12Peacock OLD
6 a. awwr +a.wie Rg, 3
PALOS VERDES PENINSULA, CALIFORNIA 90274
213 377-3517
Mrs June Cunningham
City Clerk
City of Rolling Hills, California
October 29, 1975
Dear Mrs. Cunningham:
Per section 6.14 of the City records I hereby file this written
appeal of Zoning Case No. 145, Lowell Wooden, #8 Chesterfield
Road, Rolling Hills, California. This appeal is directed
according to the procedures to the City of Rolling Hills Council.
Strong exception is taken to Planning Commissioners Hanscom and
Stern whereby the 15 (fifteen) feet of West area side yard is
ample room and provides ample space to reach the rear areas of
the property. We note that the immediate West area neighborls
space to reach their rear areas is a mar 7 (seven) feet, of
which eighteen inches extends over their property line.
Ample hardship in this case I feel has been demonstrated.
Without the five (5) foot side yard variance, the home looses
its esthetic and structural appeal. The home also looses its
floor plan appeal of maintaining the view areas for which the
property was purchased in the major living areas of the house
as shown on the accompanying floor plan. When the other homes
and particularity the immediate West neighborIs home roof is
within 42 inches of the property line, is it certainly not cre—
ating a distinctive discriminatory hardship upon me?
Finally the home would also loose the 3 car garage advantage
and reduce the garage to 2 car which will not only lower the
value, but affect the neighborhood, and create undue hardship
upon myself and family.
Your assistance in this important matter of appeal is very greatly
appreciated.
Very truly yours,
Lowell A. Wooden
September 26, 1975
Mr. David Daum
3304 Calumet Trail
Michigan City, Indiana 46360
Dear Mr. Daum,
Enclosed is a plat map for the properties on Chesterfield.
Road in Rolling Hills The. Planning Commission considered
Mr. Platt's,request at their meeting on September 16th"
and scheduled a: field trip to the site on Saturday,
October,,18th. The request will again be considered by
the Planning Commission attheir next meeting on October
21st, and you will be advised of their.' decision. You
will have ten days to comment on the decision, if you,
wish.
Minutes of the September and October meetings of the
Planning Commission concerning this property will be
sent to you as soon as they have been printed.
Very truly yours,
June C. Cunningham„
Deputy City Clerk