99, 10 ft. side yard variance and , 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 )
)
)
)
Mr. John. Bennett
Lot 58EF
ZONING CASE NO. 99
FINDINGS AND REPORT
The application of Mr. John Bennett, Lot 58EF, Eastfield Tract
for a variance of side yard requirements under Article III, Section.3.07
of Ordinance No. 33 came on, for hearing. on the 16th day of March, 1971
in the Council Chambers of the Administration Building,.2 Portuguese
Bend Road,, Rolling Hills, California, and the applicant, having submit-
ted evidence in support of his application, the Planning Commission,
being advised, now makes its Findings and Report as required by the
Ordinances of the City of Rolling Hills, California.
1
The Commission. finds that the applicant, Mr. John Bennett, is the
owner of that certain realproperty described as Lot 58-EF, Eastfield
Tract, located in the City of Rolling Hills, California, 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.
II. -
The Commission. further finds -that -no person appeared at said pub-
lic bearing in opposition to the application for a variance, and that
no evidence was received by the Commission in opposition thereto.
III.
The Commission further finds that a grading and wall plan prepared
by a civil engineer had been prepared, and on the recommendation of a
geologist the court was located so it would not be cut too close to
the toeof a slope, and a .varian of 10' of side yard requirements
would be required. .Further, the Commission finds that because of the
topography, the property easement could not be used for a trail; the
:area is included in the 1970 F.lo.-d Control Bond Issue, and the Rolling.
Hills Community Association owns the easement and will retain control
for future use. The Commission: finds therefore that a variance of 410
feet of side yard requirements to allow for construction of a tennis
court should be granted to the applicant in order to preserve sub-
stantial property rights possepsed by other property in the same vicinity
and zone, and that the granting of such variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to"property in the same
vicinity and zone.
IV.
From the foregoing it is concluded that a variance of side yard
requirements should be granted by the Planning Commission of the City
of Rolling Hills to Mr. John Bennett, Lot 58-EF, Eastfield Tract, in
accordance with the plot plan marked Exhibit I on file in these pro-
ceedings, and it is, therefore, so ordered.
Secretary, Plan
g
ammission
/s/ Godfrey Pernell
Chairman, Planning Commission