Loading...
527, Addition to SFR, Correspondenceei4 (Rolling wee July 19,1996 Mr. and Mrs. Richard Hilliard 6 Meadowlark Lane Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: LANDSCAPE PLAN APPROVAL 6 Meadowlark Lane (Lot 20-RH) Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hilliard: • INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377.7288 E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com This letter shall serve as official notification that the Landscape Plan for Zoning Case No. 527 has been APPROVED and you can come in at any time between the hours of 7:30 AM and 5PM any weekday to have your building plans stamped for approval. We have attached a copy of the approved Landscape Plan for your records. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerel LOLA M. UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER Printed on Recycled Paper, 1 City 0 Af tfl. _WA INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 October 19,1995 Mr. and Mrs. Richard Hilliard 6 Meadowlark Lane Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 527, RESOLUTION NO. 95-13 6 MEADOWLARK LANE (LOT 20-RH) Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hilliard: Attached is a copy of the revised approved plan for the subject case showing the relocated guest house and two copies of a statement referring to construction of the stable access road and grading for the corral only when permits are issued by the County that you agreed upon. Please sign, date and return one copy of the statement. The other copy is for your files. By the way, don't forget to file the Affidavit of Acceptance Form and a copy of Resolution No. 95-13 with the County Recorder as noted in our letter of October 4, 1995. Please feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincegly, //et Z6- r" LOLA UNGA PRINCIPAL PLANNER ENC: REVISED EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN STABLE ACCESS AND GRADING STATEMENT Cuy ol�ern9 OCTOBER 19,1995 ZONING CASE NO. 527, RESOLUTION NO. 95-13 6 MEADOWLARK LANE (LOT 20-RH) MR. RICHARD HILLIARD MRS. PATRICIA HILLIARD INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 As the applicants, we understand that construction of the vehicle access road and grading for the proposed stable and corral will not be permitted unless and until stable plans axe approved by the City and County and a permit is issued by the County of Los Angeles. Applicant(s) Signature Applicant(s) Signature Date Date ®Pnntnd or. Recycled Paper cry ofieo efine OCTOBER 19, 1995 ZONING CASE NO. 527, RESOLUTION NO. 95-13 6 MEADOWLARK LANE (LOT 20-RH) MR. RICHARD HILLIARD MRS. PATRICIA HILLIARD INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 As the applicants, we understand that construction of the vehicle access road and grading for the proposed stable and corral will not be permitted unless and until stable plans are approved by the City and County and a permit is issued by the County of Los Angeles. P<VLaitd . llzfA aitd /0. 23.95 Applicant(s) Signature Date Partau, atutad, Applicant(s) Signature d0.23.95 Date Printed on Recycled Paper. • City ./ leolliny CERTIFIED MAIL October 4,1995 Mr. and Mrs. Richard Hilliard 6 Meadowlark Lane 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: APPEAL PERIOD AND AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM ZONING CASE NO. 527, 6 MEADOWLARK LANE (LOT 20-RH) RESOLUTION NO. 95-13 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hilliard: This letter shall serve as official notification that Zoning Case No. 527 was APPROVED by the Planning Commission and the enclosed resolution was approved on September 30, 1995 at an adjourned regular meeting. The Planning Commission's decision will be reported to the City Council at their regular meeting on October 9, 1995. The approval will become effective: (1) Thirty (30) days after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution if no appeals are filed within that time period (Section 17.54.010(B) 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. We have enclosed a copy of RESOLUTION NO. 95-13, 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 the completed form and a copy of the Resolution to: Los Angeles County Registrar -Recorder Real Estate Records Section 12400 East Imperial Highway Norwalk, CA 90650 Include a check in the amount of $7.00 for the first page and $3.00 for each additional page. • • PAGE 2 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. SINCERY, OLA UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER ENC: RESOLUTION NO.95-13 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM APPEAL SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE. cc: Mr. Lamar Robinson Mr. Douglas McHattie RESOLUTION NO. 95-13 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A GUEST HOUSE AND APPROVING A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND GRADING FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 527. 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. Richard Hilliard with respect to real property at 6 Meadowlark Lane, Rolling Hills (Lot 20-RH) requesting a Conditional Use Permit to permit construction of a guest house, request for Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial additions to an existing single family residence and grading for a future stable and corral. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the applications on July 18, 1995, August 15, 1995, and September 19, 1995, and at field trip visits on August 5, 1995 and September 30, 1995. Section 3. During the hearing process, the Planning Commission reviewed the close proximity of the proposed project and the adjacent property's garage at 3 Meadowlark Lane, building permits for the existing garage at 3 Meadowlark Lane, the height of the existing recreation court fencing, the building pad coverages, and driveway coverage in the side yard. The applicants revised their plans by reducing the size of the garage and removing the existing recreation court and chain link fencing and reoriented the guest house. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 1 Exemption (State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15301(e)) and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 5. Sections 17.16.210(A)(5) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permits approval of a Guest House under certain conditions. The applicants are requesting to construct a 800 square foot guest house at the central portion of the lot. With respect to this request for a Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. The granting of a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a guest house would be consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan and will be desirable for the public convenience and welfare because the use is consistent with similar uses in the community, and the. RESOLUTION NO. 95-13 PAGE 1 • • area proposed for the guest house would be located in an area on the property where such use will not change the existing configuration of structures on the lot. B. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent uses, buildings, and structures have been considered, and the construction of a guest house will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed guest house will be constructed on a portion of the secondary building pad and is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the guest house will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors. C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the guest house will comply with the low profile residential development pattern of the community and is located on a 1.742 acre parcel of property that is adequate in size, shape and topography to accommodate such use. D. The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district because the 800 square foot size of the guest house equals the 800 square foot maximum permitted and the guest house does not encroach into any setback areas. E. The proposed conditional use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. F. The proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of Title 17 of the Zoning Code because there is a future stable structure and corral proposed for the lot. Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of an 800 square foot guest house in accordance with the Development Plan dated September 14, 1995 and marked Exhibit A in Zoning Case No. 527 subject to the conditions contained in Section 9 of this resolution. Section 7. Section 17.46.020 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a development plan to be submitted for site plan review and approval before any grading requiring a grading permit and 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 at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of increasing the size of the building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any thirty-six month period. The applicants request Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial additions to an existing single family residence, an attached garage, guest house, swimming pool, and a stable and corral that requires grading. With respect RESOLUTION NO. 95-13 PAGE 2 • • to the Site Plan Review application, 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 structures comply 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 with the Conditional Use Permit for a guest house approved in Section 6 of this Resolution. The lot has a net square foot area of 63,163 square feet. The proposed residence (3,653 sq.ft.), attached garage (589 sq.ft.), guest house (800 sq.ft.), pool (530 sq.ft.), future stable (450 sq.ft.), service yard (96 sq.ft.) will have 6,118 square feet which constitutes 9.7% of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 11,317 square feet which equals 17.9% 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 structures located below and away from the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. The building pad coverage proposed for the 11,608 square foot residential building pad is 37.4%, building pad coverage proposed for the 4,684 square foot pad that contains a pool and guest house will be 14.3%, and the building pad coverage proposed for the 1,395 square foot pad for the future stable and corral pad is 32.3%. The total building pad coverage (all three pads) will be 28.0%. 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) because a minimum amount of grading is proposed and will only be done to provide approved drainage that will flow away from the proposed residence and existing neighboring residences. C. The development plan follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will continue to the canyons at the northern side (rear) of this lot. D. The development plan incorporates existing large trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, the development plan preserves several mature trees and shrubs. 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. Further, the proposed project is designed to minimize grading. Significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain scenic vistas across the northerly portions of the property. RESOLUTION NO. 95-13 PAGE 3 • • F. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. As indicated in Paragraph A, the lot coverage maximum will not be exceeded and the proposed project is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to this irregular -shaped lot. Grading shall be permitted only to restore the natural slope of the property. G. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize the same driveway to Meadowlark Lane for access. H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental review. Section 8, Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial additions to an existing single family residence, an attached garage, guest house, swimming pool, service yard, and a stable and corral that requires grading, as indicated on the Development Plan dated September 14, 1995 and marked Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in Section 9. Section 9. The Conditional Use Permit for a guest house approved in Section 6 and the Site Plan Review approved in Section 8 of this Resolution are subject to the following conditions: A. The Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in Sections 17. 42.070 and 17.46.080. B. It is declared and made a condition of the Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, this approval 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 Buildings 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 the Permit, 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. RESOLUTION NO. 95-13 PAGE 4 • • E. The existing recreation court lighting and surrounding fence shall be removed prior to construction of the guest house. F. The height of the retaining wall below the residence at the north shall be cut parallel with the slope and a new guard rail shall be constructed above the cut wall. G. No kitchen or other cooking facilities shall be provided within the guest house. H. No vehicular access or paved parking area shall be developed within 50 feet of the guest house. I. Occupancy of the guest house shall be limited to persons employed on the premises and their immediate family or by the temporary guest of the occupants of the main residence. No guest may remain in occupancy for more than 30 days in any six month period. J. Renting of the guest house is prohibited. K. All retaining walls incorporated into the project shall not be greater than 5 feet in height at any one point. L. Residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 37.4%, the pool and guest house pad coverage shall not exceed 14.3%, and the building pad coverage for the stable and corral pad shall not exceed 32.3%. The total building pad coverage (all three pads) shall not exceed 28.0%. M. Grading for the proposed stable and corral shall not exceed 920 cubic yards of cut soil and 920 cubic yards of fill soil. N. Landscaping shall be provided to obscure the residential and pool and guest house pads from neighboring residences, to the maximum extent feasible. O. Landscaping shall incorporate and preserve, to the maximum extent feasible, the existing mature trees and shrubs and the natural landscape screening surrounding the proposed building pad. P. Two copies of a landscape plan must be submitted for review by the Planning Department and include native drought -resistant vegetation that will not disrupt the impact of the views of neighboring properties prior to the issuance of any building or grading 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. RESOLUTION NO. 95-13 PAGES • • 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. Q. 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 shall not exceed a steepness of a 2 to 1 slope ratio. R. 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. S. Notwithstanding Section 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any modifications to the project which would constitute additional development shall require the filing of a new application for Site Plan Review approval by the Planning Commission. T. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review, pursuant to Section 17.42.060, or the approval shall not be effective. U. All conditions of these Conditional Use Permit and Site Plan Review approvals must be complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County of Los Angeles. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON THE 30 • I AY MBER, 1995. ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: t) MARIL KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 9543 PAGE 6 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) §§ I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 95-13 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS APPROVING A REQUEST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A GUEST HOUSE AND APPROVING A REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND GRADING FOR A FUTURE STABLE AND CORRAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 527. was approved and adopted at an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission on September 30, 1995 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Commissioners Frost, Hankins, Witte, and Chairman Roberts NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Raine ABSTAIN: None and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices -P MARILYNiKERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK RESOLUTION NO. 95-13 PAGE 7 • • 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). AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CITY OF ROLLING HILLS §§ ZONING CASE NO. 527 S1'I'E PLAN REVIEW 111 VARIANCE ❑ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ■ I (We) the undersigned state: I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows: 6 MEADOWLARK LANE (LOT 20-RH) 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.527 Sl'1'b PLAN REVIEW In VARIANCE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT • (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 17.54.010 17.54 APPEALS 17.54.010 Time for Filing Appeals A. All actions of the Planning Commission authorized by this Title may be appealed to the City Council. All appeals shall be filed in writing with the City Clerk. B. All appeals must be filed on or before the 30th calendar day after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution on the project or application. Application fees shall be paid as required by Section 17.30.030 of this Title. C. Within 30 days after the Planning Commission adopts a resolution which approves or denies a development application, the City Clerk shall place the resolution as a report item on the City Council's agenda. The City Council may, by an affirmative vote of three members, take jurisdiction over the application. In the event the City Council takes jurisdiction over the application, the Planning Commission's decision will be stayed until the City Council completes its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter. 17.54.020 Persons Authorized to File an Appeal Any person, including the City Manager, may appeal a decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council, in accordance with the terms of this Chapter. 17.54.030 Form, Content, and Deficiencies in an Appeal Application A. All appeals shall be filed in writing with the City Clerk on a form or forms provided by the City Clerk. No appeal shall be considered filed until the required appeal fee has been received by the City Clerk. B. The appeal application shall state, at a minimum, the name and address of the appellant, the project and action being appealed, and the reasons why the appellant believes that the Planning Commission erred or abused its discretion, or why the Planning Commission's decision is not support by evidence in the record. 76 ROLLING HILLS ZONING MAY 24, 1993 17.54.030 C. If the appeal application is found to be deficient, the City Clerk shall deliver or mail (by certified mail), to the appellant a notice specifying the reasons why the appeal is deficient. The appellant shall correct the deficiency with an amendment to the appeal form within seven calendar days of receiving the deficiency notice. Otherwise, the appeal application will be deemed withdrawn, and the appeal fee will be returned to the applicant. 17.54.040 Request for Information Upon receipt of a written and complete appeal application and fee, the City Clerk shall direct the Planning Commission Secretary to transmit to the City Council the complete record of the entire proceeding before the Planning Commission. 17.54.050 Scheduling of Appeal Hearing Upon receiving an appeal, the City Clerk shall set the appeal for a hearing before the City Council to occur within 20 days of the filing of the appeal. In the event that more than one appeal is filed for the same project, the Clerk shall schedule all appeals to be heard at the same time. 17.54.060 Proceedings A. Noticing The hearing shall be noticed as required by Section 17.30.030 of this Title. In addition, the following parties shall be noticed: 1. The applicant of the proposal being appealed; 2. The appellant; and 3. Any person who provided oral testimony or written comments to the Planning Commission during or as part of the public hearing on the project. B. Hearing The City Council shall conduct a public hearing pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 17.34 of this Title. The Council shall consider all information in the record, as well as additional information presented at the appeal hearing, before taking action on the appeal. 77 ROLLING HILLS ZONING MAY 24, 1993 • • 1734.060 C. Action The Council may act to uphold, overturn, or otherwise modify the Planning Commission's original action on the proposal, or the Council may remand the application back to the Planning Commission for further review and direction. The Council shall make findings to support its decision. D. Finality of Decision The action of the City Council to approve, conditionally approve, or deny an application shall be final and conclusive. E. Record of Proceedings The decision of the City Council shall be set forth in full in a resolution or ordinance. A copy of the decision shall be sent to the applicant or the appellant. 17.54.070 Statute of Limitations Any action challenging a final administrative order or decision by the City made as a result of a proceeding in which by law a hearing is required to be given, evidence is required to be taken, and discretion regarding a final and non -appealable determination of facts is vested in the City of Rolling Hills, the City Council, or in any of its Commissions, officers, or employees, must be filed within the time limits set forth in the California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6 78 ROLLING HILLS ZONING MAY 24, 1993 ' ▪ SENDER: ▪ y • Complete items 1 and/or 2 for additional services. cp • Complete items 3, and 4a & b. ,01 • Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can d return this card to you. • Attach this form to the front of the mailpiece, or on the -back if space " does not permit. • Write "Return Receipt Requested" on the mailpiece below the article number. " • The Return Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date Gdelivered. - 0 3. Article Addressed to: O - amr.-1 //hrs. ,Oc, 7/% I/,`cc • 16 i etzcic)zd %rk ' ° '>)5 "t //S 09 r9 a _c a. 5,27 cc • 5. Signatur�A�ssee cc 6. S• i--g- ##�naa�attturrJJre (Agent) 96a7V 1 also wish to receive the following services (for an extra fee): 1. ❑ Addressee's Address 2. ❑ Restricted Delivery Consult postmaster for fee. 4a. Article Number 4b. Service Type ❑ 5.Aistered ❑ Insured Certified ❑ Express Mail 7. Date of Deliv CC y 0 0 8. Addressee's Address (Only if requested .m and fee is paid) H PS Form 3811, December 1991 *U.S. GP0:1993-352-714 ❑ COD ❑ Return ceipt for iMerch dise DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT H UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, f icial );isiixess9 \ i-- fts OCT 1 01995 CITY OF !ILLS By PENAL B RI.VAT -. USE TO AVOID -PAYMENT OF POSTAGE Sal Print -your name, address and ZIP Code here CITY OF ROLL X HILLS #2 PORi UMESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 5il£n1!Hi IInil ifFfi£iii3 Milli Ih iiiliii111111111111 P 852 865 172 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) Sent to Mr.-1 `I'J/5„C�£e..-Aa,r-,/ M/ho r.?-•.P Street and No. 11 ,RC'aca?4� /Q�i'/fC f YNr, OJ P. State and ZIP Code //i,-,b Postage Certified Fee ISpecial Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee Return Receipt showing to whom and Date Delivered rn Return Receipt shoGiing.'to_whorn ,- Date, and Address of,Delvery, e., ':, a> 7 TOTAL Postage and fees ' S 1 o Postmark or Dated '• C� 9% �j ' op M `ram;, U. :fit. , . N a STICK POSTAGE STAMPS TO ARTICLE TO COVER FIRST CLASS POSTAGE, CERTIFIED MAIL FEE, AND CHARGES FOR ANY SELECTED OPTIONAL SERVICES. (see front) 1. If you want this receipt postmarked, stick the gummed stub to the right of the return address leaving the receipt attached and present the article at a post office service window or hand it to your rural carrier. (no extra charge) 2;.1f you'do not wan{ihisteceipt postmarked, stick the gummed stub to the right of the return address of the article, date; detach`.and retain the receipt, and mail the article. you want a return receipt, write the certified mail number and your name and address on a return receipt card,. Form-3811; and attach it to the front of the article by means of the gummed ends if space per- mits: Otherwise;'affix to back of article. Endorse front of article RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED adjace'nt to the number.'-., 4. If you want delivery restricted to the addressee, or to an authorized agent of the addressee, endorse RESTRICTED DELIVERY on the front of the article. 5. Enter fees for the services requested in the appropriate spaces on the front of this receipt. If return receipt is requested, check the applicable blocks in item 1 of Form 3811. 6. Save this receipt and present it if you make inquiry. U.S.G.P.O. 1987-197-722 Ir2EPUE0 AUG 07 1995 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS By 3 Meadow Lark Lane Rolling Hills, Ca. August 7, 1995 Planning Commission City of Rolling Hills No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California REQUEST: 0n site view to the left of No. 3 Meadow Lark Lane(side of garage). The map shown at the "on site" review, Sat. Aug. 5, did not show the entrance to the proposed garage on lot No. 20. Mrs. Hilliard informed us that the architect plans a circular drive with the entrance facing the side toward No. 3 Meadow Lark. Is this permissible with the current available land and easement?* IWe will be away from August 10 - Sept. 17, and plan to move the metal storage building off the property line when we return. Sincerely yours, Virgannia F. Gibson ae" Richard B. Gibson * See stake at the top of the hill - the next stake is almost level with the proposed guest house. 1' / Jt 1yi 28, 1995 .,„.,_, Lola Ungar Principal Planner Planning Commission City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 HMliq AUG 0 2 1995 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS By Subject: Zoning Case No 527 Mr. & M:rs. Richard Hilliard, 6 Meadowlark Lane (Lot 20-RH) Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a guest house, request for Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial additions; and request for Site Plan Review for grading for a future stable and corral. Dear Planning Commission: At the last Planning Commission meeting on July 18, 1995 we were very upset by the comments made by our neighbors. While we fully understand everyone's right to come to public meetings and voice their opinions, their comments seemed completely out of place and contained many false allegations. After thinking about their comments, we feel it is necessary and our right to respond and have our opinion voiced for the record. The Planning Commission as we understand it, follows a set of written rules, regulations and City guidelines to determine whether plans for a remodel, guest house or stable can be built on a property in Rolling Hills. Over this past year, we have hired professionals including Keith Ehlert, a licensed geologist, South Bay Engineering for the site plan and Robinson/North Architects to help design our project. All three firms have worked on homes in Rolling Hills and are very familiar with the reguulations. It has been a long process to come up with a plan that we feel we can live with and that meets City and Association requirements. South Bay Engineering and our architect attended the July 18 Planning Commission meeting so that, if there were any questions about the plan, we would have experts there that could answer any questions. *0 N Page two However, at that meeting, our neighbors chose to speak about issues which have no relation to our remodel or had any valid objections to the permits requested. Nevertheless, our response to their comments are: 1. Peninsula Landscaping does not operate out of our home and has not since October, 1994. Our equipment and trucks are stored in three locations in San Pedro, workers meet at the job site everyday, materials are drop shipped at the customer's and customers never come to our property -- Rick meets them at their property to discuss job and give estimates. Peninsula Landscaping workers do come to our property once a week to do the gardening and they come here to clear brush, trim trees, etc. on an as needed basis. We cherish our privacy from our business as much as our neighbors do. We don't want our workers at our home for any reason other than to do specific work on the property. This week and next, our workers will be on our property clearing out the lower pads for the Field inspection. 2. We respect that our neighbor has a 4 year old. We love kids and don't want anything to happen to anyone's child. But when a young child runs out into the street, we can only hope that whoever is driving on the street will be able to stop in time. It is our recommendation that the 'Sanjars trim the hedge surrounding their driveway or put up a mirror to the street, so that people driving on the street can see kids in their driveway. It would also help the Sanjar's when they are backing out of their driveway, as they have almost run us over twice. 3. If the Keesals or any other neighbor sees anyone walking through their property, we ask that they call the police. Those people are trespassing and we, too, feel the need for more security. During times when we were cleaning off our property, including our lower hillside, we found evidence of transients living in the canyon. This is one reason we look forward to landscaping and cleaning up this part of our property. It is a constant source of worry about who's living down there. 4. Dr. Gibson is worried about the steepness of the canyon for the future stable. The area is so overgrown with trees and brush, it is dfficult for him to see, but there is a lower pad which is perfect for a barn and corral. He needs to refer to the site plan and geology report. •00 Page three 5. Mr. Swart voiced his concerns about the fact that we come and go a lot from our house. This seems to be his biggest contention against us. We didn't know there was a rule that limits you to how many times you can come and go from your own home or how many times you can drive on the street. This is his problem and probably stems from the fact that his house sits right on the street with no set back. We are being required to set our house back 50' from the street. It seems to us that our neighbors are grasping at straws to prevent us from remodeling, but they really have not had what we would call relevant objections to our plans and request for permits. We understand remodeling causes disruption in the neighborhood for a while but it is absolutely necessary and in accordance with our property rights to seek the permits. Our house is 44 years old and was not kept up over the last 15 years. The plumbing, electrical and heating is not operational at many times and we need to get our project moving before any of these items go out completely. We look forward to the field inspection by the Commission on August 5, 1995. We will again have South Bay Engineering and our architect at the property for any questions. Our hope is that you will look at the project objectively and base your decision on its own merits. Sineerly, Pait iltada Ric1 and Pat Milliard Owners of 6 Meadowlark Lane Rolling Hills, CA 90274 (310)377-4689 cc: Rolling Hills Community Association • C14,. efi2 f?..y JJ.•P! FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION July 25, 1995 Mr. and Mrs. Richard Hilliard 6 Meadowlark Lane 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. 527 Mr. and Mrs. Richard Hilliard, 6 Meadowlark Lane (Lot 20-RH) Request for a Conditional Use Permit for a guest house, request for Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial additions; and request for Site Plan Review for grading for a future stable and corral. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hilliard: We have arranged for the City Council to conduct a field inspection of your property to view a silhouette of the proposed project on Saturday, August 5, 1995. The Planning Commission will meet at 7:30 AM at your property site. The site must be prepared according to the enclosed Silhouette Construction Guidelines and the following requirements: • A full-size silhouette must be prepared for ALL STRUCTURES of the project showing the footprints, roof ridges and bearing walls. • Stake the limits of the building pads and stable and corral pads. The owner and/or representative should be present to answer any questions regarding the proposal. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, oe-6 Zatyz LOLA M. UNGAR PRINCIPAL PLANNER Enclosed: Silhouette Construction Guidelines cc: Mr. Douglas McHattie Printed on Recycled Paper. • Ci1 ofieo een$ • 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. • • • • • 1 AN SECTION 1 61-710 PLAN SAMUEL A. ICE E SAL, JR. STEPHEN YOUNG ROBERT R. LOOAN, MICHAEL M. OLESS PETER R. BOUTIN SCOTT T. PRATT TERRY ROSS JOHN D. OIFFIN WILLIAM H. COLLIER, JR. ROBERT D. FEIORNER PHILIP A. MGLEOD NEAL 5. ROBB BEN SUTER STEPHEN C. CLIFFORD E. SCOTT DOUGLAS JOSEPH S. SCRUCHERT SHANNON L. MCDOUOALDt WILLIAM E. MC DONNELL, JR. MICHAEL A. THURMAN DAWN M. SCHOCH TIMOTHY N. WILL ALBERT E. PEACOCK III* CAMERON STOUT JOHN R. LOFTUS DAVID M. BARTHOLOMEW JEFFREY D. WARREN ROBERT J. STEMLER LISA M. BERTAIN JANET M. SIMMONS ROBERT J. BOCRO} DOUGLAS R. DAVIS* ELIZABETH A. HENDRICK LINDA A. LOFTUS MICHELE R. FRON ELIZABETH P. BEAZLEY ERIC R. SWETT ROBERT A. BLEICHER PAUL J. SCHUMACHER BRIAN L. ZAOON GREGORY E. COPELAND OF COUNSEL MICHAEL H. WOODELL* REESE H. TAYLOR, JR. 1 • JOSEPH A. WALSH II MICHAEL C. LICOSATI KAREN L. ROBINSON OARY R. GLEASON MICHAEL L. ARMITAGE ;JODI 5. COHEN MARK W. NELSON PHILIP R. LEMPRIEREt LESLIE M. SULLIVAN ROBERT B. ERICSON HERBERT H. RAY, JR.* E. SCOTT PALMER JILL E. OLOFSON JULIE L. TAYLOR LISA K. DONAHUE STACEY MYERS GARRETT MICHAEL A. SITZMAN GORDON C. YOUNG WILLIAM J. BRIDOEN GREGORY A. BOSS RICHARD W. SMIRL PAUL I. HAMADA ELIZABETH J. LINDH LAUREN SARA FORBES PETER J. MOROAN III ROD D. MILLER JEFFREY S. SIMON KELLY J. MOYNIHAN ALISSA B. JANES ELIZABETH E. ATLEE DANIEL J. FINNERTY GABRIELLE L. WALKER THADDEUS I. PAUL} CRAIG E. HOLDEN ESTHER S. KIM JOHN M. WHELAN KIMBERLY WONO LAUREN N. FEIN TERESA S. MACE ERIC P. DAMON City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 By LAW OFFICES KEESAL, YOUNG & LOGAN A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CATALINA LANDING 310 GOLDEN SHORE P.O. BOX 1730 LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90801-1730 (310) 430-2000 TELECOPIER: (310) 436-7416 . (310) 690-8332 Attn: Planning Commission Dear Planning Commission Members: July 17, 1995 JUL 1 7 1995 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS SAN FRANCISCO OFFICE SUITE 1500 FOUR EMBARCADERO CENTER SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 (415) 398-6000 TELECOPIER: (415) 981-7729 • (415) 362-8505 ANCHORAGE OFFICE SUITE 650 1029 WEST ORD AVENUE ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501-1917 (907) 279-9696 TELECOPIER: (907) 279-4230 SEATTLE OFFICE SUITE 2714 1301 FIFTH AVENUE SEATTLE, WASHINOTON 98101 (206) 622-3790 TELECOPIER: (208) 343-9529 TELEX: KEESAL LOB 656460 *ADMITTED IN ALASKA } ADMITTED IN WASHINGTON t ADMITTED IN CALIFORNIA S WASHINGTON ALL OTHERS ADMITTED IN CALIFORNIA I am an adjacent landowner to the Hilliards who, I understand, have requested a conditional use permit for the construction of a guest house, stable, corral and large parking area, as well as a substantial additional to their own home. While I am delighted to see anyone improve their home, I seriously question the purpose and appropriateness of some of these proposed additions. It is my understanding that the Hilliards are operating a commercial landscaping business from their home. I walked by this morning and took some photos which confirm two trucks, equipment and material were and are in the parking area. My wife and I were dismayed to see several Latin American workers crossing our property approximately 30 feet from our physical backyard. It appears they were leaving the Hilliards property by that route to avoid detection after the Hilliards were warned about running a business from their home. While we do not know the Hilliards and hope that ultimately their home will be beautiful and a welcome addition to Rolling Hills, all that seems to have been done so far is to have cut down landscaping which exposes a view of their home to us. Attached are photos demonstrating that fact. Prior to that, there were trees and bushes which made our home much more private. • • City of Rolling Hills July 17, 1995 Page 2 I question the wisdom of grading the property for the proposed additions, given the steepness of the grade. I am also concerned about the adverse affect on our privacy, our view and our enjoyment of our home. Thank you for your consideration. Best regards, (,kw otvat SAMUEL A. KEESAL, JR. SAK/tpf (306683) Mrs. C. Banta 6 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 To the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills, Dear Sirs, • Rolling Hills, 7.16.95 ©[CLflV a JUL 1 7 1995 _� CITY OF ROLLING HILLS By I received your notice of a public hearing before the Planning Commission regarding the zoning case No.527. The proposed construction of a guest house and grading for future stable is planned on a very slanted area, which is part of the canyon adjacent to my property. I am concerned that these constructions could effect the proper functions and appearance of this natural canyon. I would request that the Planning Commission investigates these matters carefully before approving any permits and plans of this case. Yours sincerely, Mrs. C. Banta. • Ed, H. Swart 2 Meadowlark Lane, Rolling Hills, CA 90274 To the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills, \ 11 JUL 1 71995 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS By July" 15, 1995 Rolling Hills, Gentlemen, I am writing to oppose the granting of a conditional use permit in zoning case # 527. My opposition is based on the following: 1. The occupants of the home on the property are operating a commercial business from their home. They acknowledged that they were operating a landscaping business from the property, from the day they moved into the residence. In fact my wife and I have both witnessed landscaping laborers coming to the property in the early morning, picking up equipment and materials, leaving the property, presumably to do landscaping work elsewhere and returning in the late afternoon to return, trucks, equipment,etc. After concerns were expressed, the laborers began also leaving the property via the canyon to Palos Verdes Drive N. It=has come to my attention that the Hilliards likewise operating a business from their previous home with trucks, equipment, materials, etc., causing complaints from the neighbors. 2. I question whether the guest house and its substantial parking area will, in fact, be used as a "guest house". Given the information above, I question whether the guest house would be used as an office for the business with trucks and equipment being stored in the parking. area. 3. I question if the steep sloped land, part of an important natural canyon, bordering also to my property, is suitable for all this proposed construction, Thank you for your attention to this matter, Sincerely, Ed. H. Swart • • July 13, 1995 Mr. Craig Nealis City Manager City of Rolling Hills No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 RE: Zoning Case No. 527 Dear Mr. Nealis: JUL 7 1995 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS By The Howell family of 2 Saddleback Road objects to the variance requested by the Hilliard family of 6 Meadowlark Lane to build a guest house and a stable on the steep grade bordering the canyon joining Bent Springs Canyon. We feel it would undermine this small hill we share with the residents of Meadow Lark Lane. Two canyons with running water meet just below this hill of five homes and we are concerned about any grading and building on this hillside. We strongly object to this variance for a guest house and grading. We have also noticed the owners have been running their gardening business, Peninsula Landscaping, from their home and yard. We fear this expansion of guest house and barn would be used for storage of plants and equipment and for business purposes, both of which are not permitted in the City of Rolling Hills. Sincerrelr, i) V 'rent F. Howell BFH/mh howell\nealis tip tigEM-11 JUL. g 21995 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS By 3 Meadow Lark Lane Rolling Hills, Ca. July 13, 1995 City of Rolling Hills Attn: Mr. Craig Nealis Re: Lot # 20 We understand the necessity of preserving our steep rolling hills, especially near the canyons, with adequate vegetation to.prevent_flooding and possible landslides. Our hill to the canyon, as well as lot # 20, is very steep; therefore we question the feasibility of grading necessary for a future stable on the lower level of this lot without expert opinion. We are sorry that we will be unable to attend the hearing on Tuesday, July 18. Z-,48,44„ Richard B. Gibson V.irgl✓nia F. Gibson City Rolling!r;rTC pORAT[r JAN1,1.1P` 21;, STATUS OF APPLICATION July 6, 1995 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX: (310) 377-7288 Mr. and Mrs. Richard Hilliard 6 Meadowlark Lane Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 527, Request for a Conditional Use Permit to permit construction of a guest house, request for Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial additions to an existing single family residence; and request for Site Plan Review to permit grading for a future stable and corral for property at 6 Meadowlark Lane, Rolling Hills (Lot 20-RH). Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hilliard: Pursuant to state law the City's staff has completed a preliminary review of the application noted above and finds that the information submitted is: X Sufficiently complete as of the date indicated above to allow the application to be processed. Please note that the City may require further information in order to clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise supplement the application. If the City requires such additional information, it is strongly suggested that you supply that information promptly to avoid any delay in the processing of the application. Your application for Zoning Case No. 527 has been set for public hearing consideration by the Planning Commission at their meeting on Tuesday, July 18, 1995. 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, July 14,1995, Please arrange to pick up the staff report to preview it prior to the hearing. Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Sincerely, dtd 2. , ( L LOLA M. UNGAR (j PRINCIPAL PLANNER cc: Mr. Douglas McHattie Printed