Loading...
670, Construct a new SFR & Guest ho, CorrespondenceC1ty o/f2 EL'ny _iJifG 50TH ANNIVERSARY 1957 - 2007 November 21, 2007 Mr. and Mrs. Howard Slusher 18 Crest Road East 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: RELEASE OF LANDSCAPING CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT # 12151-03367 18 CREST ROAD E, ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Slusher: The City of Rolling Hills is hereby authorizing Bank of America to release the above mentioned certificate of deposit in the amount of $35,000 which you posted with the City in Zoning Case No. 670 for property located at 18 Crest Road East in the City of Rolling Hills, California, for the purpose of landscaping. The landscaping conditions required in Zoning Case No. 670 have been satisfactorily met. The release of the certificate of deposit to Mr. and/or Mrs. Slusher is therefore granted. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me a (310) 377- 1521. rely, Tanta Schwartz anning Director cc: Nan Huang, Finance Director ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The Time Deposit Certificate No. 12151-03367 was released to me from the City of Rolling Hills on / Nisi, .. 2 f , , 2007. Signatu --: A I a ? ett" tom- Date: ///y/l 0 Printed on Recycled Paper 41 • JUN 0 9 2006 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS By To: Ms. Wendy Liu From: Howard S. Slusher Re: 18 Crest Road East City of Rolling Hills Date: June .5, 2006 I am in receipt of your letter of "non-compliance", dated May 16, 2006, received by me via certified mail on June 2, 2006. Note this communication was forwarded to 2 Wrangler Road, Rolling Hills, California. (The enclosed invoices from your office show my current, home address, accurately, as 2092 Summit Drive, Lake Oswego, Oregon). The subject letter indicates we failed "to submit a completed Notice of Intent and the appropriate'fees". I believe this communication is in error. As I discussed with you on the phone (my call to you of June 2), we have received invoices from SWRCB for the billing periods of (1) April, 2005 through March, 2006 and (2) April, 2006 through March, 2007. Both of these invoices have been paid in full. Specifically, $261.00 was paid on May 15, 2005 and $224.00 was paid on May 1, 2006. To document the above, I enclose the following: 1. Invoice number 0427477 in the amount of $261.00. This amount was paid on May 15, 2005. 2. Invoice number 0522903 in the amount of $224.00. This amount was paid on May 1, 2006. If your records do not show payment(s) received, please advise me. I will contact my bank and have them forward copies of the cancelled checks (front and back) to your attention. Finally, I informed you on the phone that not only did we, in a timely manner, file said notice and make requisite payments but recently, in accornce with your notice provisionirequested "Notice of Termination" papers from SWRCB. You asked who at your Agency forwarded said documents to me (see enclosed). In checking my file they were forwarded, at my request, by John C. Nielsen of your Division of Administrative Services, on or about May 1, 2006. Of. course, since the project is not at the end, I have not completed same and/or returned same. I trust the enclosed will take care of matters. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me directly (see below) or through my Oregon office, via my administrative assistant, Julie Dieringer at (503) 671-3529 (phone) or (503) 671-3355 (fax). Please note that during the next three weeks, I will be involved in extensive international travel. In the unlikely event, you desire to reach me directly, (and not through my assistant) I anticipate my travel schedule is now finalized; the following hotel contact numbers will reach me directly (I do not usually carry a mobile phone). Please note, if;contact is by phone, I will be nine (9) hours "behind" you. Thus,:. when it is 8:00AM in California on a Monday it will be 5:OOPM: on the same Monday in my various locations. (i) ` June 9-12 Hamburg, Germany (phone) (49/40) 369-500 (fax) (49/40) 369-501-000 (ii) June 13-16 Floriana, Malta (phone) (356/21) 381-000 (fax) (356/21) 381-347 (iii) June 17-19 Riva del Garda, Italy (phone) (39/0464) 566-600 (fax) (39/0464) 566-566 (iv) June 20-22 Bellagio, Italy (phone) (39/031) 950-216 (fax) (39/031) 051-529 (v) June 23-25 Stressa, Italy (phone) (39/032) 393-8938 (fax) (39/032) 332-405 (vi) June 27 In office - - Oregon (phone) (503) 671-3531 (fax) (503) 671-3355 Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. cc: Kelly Rowland cc:Yolanta Schwartz TO: Ms. Myung Chun FRAM: Yolanta Schwartz, City of Rolling Hills Dear Ms. Chun A guest house was already approved and constructed on 18 Crest Rd. E. The City ordinance does not allow more than one guest house on a property. Below are the records from the County of Los Angeles Building Permits: BL 0405180053 NEW 800 SQ FT GUEST HOUSE BL 0404190051 NEW 8,630 SQ FT RESIDENCE Finaled 07/21/06 Finaled 07/21/06 If you need additional information or have other questions, please call me at 310 377-1521. Thank you Yolanta California Iional Water Quality*control Board Los Angeles Region Dan Skopec Acting Agency Secretary Recipient of the 2001 Environmental Leadership Award from Keep California Beautiful 320 W. 4th Street, Suite 200, Los Angeles, California 90013 Phone (213) 576-6600 FAX (213) 576-6640 - Internet A May 16, 2006 Mr. Howard Slusher 2Wrangler Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 geles MAY 1 8 2006 CIS OF ROLLING HILLS Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor via Certified Mail Claim No. 7003 3110 0003 3258 4714 NOTICE OF NON-COMPLIANCE: FAILURE TO OBTAIN COVERAGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) GENERAL PERMIT FOR STORM WATER DISCHARGES ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY (ORDER NO. 99-08 DWQ; NPDES NO. CAS000002) — SINGLE RESIDENCE AT 18 CREST ROAD EAST, ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (NON -FILER NO. 715) Dear Mr. Slusher: On May 4, 2006, Regional Water Quality Control Board staff (Wendy Liu) inspected the construction site located at 18 Crest Road East, Rolling Hills. Staff found that the construction activity disturbs more than one acre area and it was not covered under the subject General Permit. Staff met with Mr. Kelly Rowland of Hoffman Construction Company and advised him of the need for the. property owner to obtain the General Permit coverage. You are hereby required to submit a completed Notice of Intent (NOI) and the appropriate fees, on or before June 16, 2006 to: ' State Water Resources Control Board Division of Water Quality Attention: Storm Water Permit Unit P. O. Box 1977 Sacramento, CA 95812-1977 A.NOI submitted to the State Board by a corporation must be signed by a current responsible corporate officer. Furthermore, under the General Permit, you are required to develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention plan (SWPPP), and to monitor the effectiveness of your SWPPP and a Monitoring Program. You are hereby required to develop a complete SWPPP, with certification signature, and submit a copy of the SWPPP and the completed NOI by June 16, 2006, to: Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board Storm Water Section 320 West 4th Street, Suite 200 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Attention: Ms. Wendy Liu California Environmental Protection Agency Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California's water resources for the benefit of present and future generations. Mr. Howard Slusher -2- May 16, 2006 A copy of the General Permit and NOI is attached, and can also be downloaded from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) web site: www.waterboards.ca.cov/stormwtr/docs/finalconstpermit.pdf. If you fail to respond to this notice, you will be in violation of Section 13399.30 of the California Water Code (CWC). This section requires any person that discharges, proposes to discharge, or is suspected by a Regional Board or SWRCB of discharging storm water associated with construction activity, and that has not obtained coverage under an appropriate storm water NPDES permit, to submit to the Regional Board, within 30 days from the date of which notice is sent by the Regional Board, an NOI to obtain coverage. Failure to submit a required NOI will subject you to an enforcement action by the Regional Board to impose civil liability administratively in an amount that is not less than $5,000 per year of non compliance or fraction thereof. If you have questions regarding this matter or if you have a language barrier and need help with translation, please contact Wendy Liu at (213) 620- 2219. Sincerely, gu Solomon, Unit Chief Storm Water Compliance and Enforcement Enclosures: Construction Storm Water General Permit with NOI cc: Yolanta Schwartz, Public Education Coordinator, City of Rolling Hills Kelly Rowland, Hoffman Construction Company California Environmental Protection Agency 0 Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California's water resources for the benefit of present and future generations. 13.)/4) it411 Engineering C Q . rro 707 Silver Spur Road, Suite 201 Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 (310) 544-6010 March 16, 2005 Rolling Hills City Hall Yolanta Schwartz, Planning Director City of Rolling Hills #2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, Ca. 90274 cl R .: 2005 Subject: Grading for Slusher Residence #18 Crest Road East Dear Ms. Schwartz: 3 2The site development plan approved by the City had allowed cut and fill amounts of 2698-cu. yds respectively for the project. The only visible portions of the fill are the areas at the front and rear of the house. The fill at the rear calculated to be 1428 cu. yds., and the front fill calculated at 1208 cu. yds. The actual construction resulted in 2705 cu. yds. of fill. The fill at the rear is 2296 cu. yds. This extra fill was necessary to build up the rear yard pad and slightly increase its square footage. The grading for the front yard was subsequently reduced in size and scope, thusly only required 409 cu. yds of fill, a reduction of 799 cu. yds. The grading in the front was moved back from the street a total of 17 feet, covering much less area allowing approximately 7280 sq. ft. of the property to remain undisturbed when compared to the approved plans. A clear film plot of the "As Graded" topographic survey is attached. Sincerely DougIas K. McHattie Vice President Bolton Engineering Corporation 12121/M004 08:43 310-544-0458 BOLTON ENGINEERING Boltot Engineering Cor p oraaon 707 Silver Spur Road, Suite 201 Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 tel (310) 544-6010 fax (310) 544-0458 December 20, 2004 City of Rolling Hills #2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling. Hills,. CA_ 90274 Attention: Craig Nealis, City Manager Subject: Export 200 cubic yards ofdirt at # 56 Eastfield Drive Import 200 cubic yards of dirt at # 18 Crest Road East Dear Mr. Nealis PAGE 01 We request you allow the Cosers at # 56 Eastfield Drive to export 200 cubic yards to the Slushers at #18 Crest Road East to import this same 200 cubic yards to complete the projects for their homes. The construction of the Coser residence at #56 Eastfield Drive is under construction. They are in the process of installing the foundation. This foundation is more extensive than anticipated. They need to remove approximately 200 cubic yards of dirt to complete their project. This export of dirt was not expected prior to construction. The grading operation at # 18 Crest Road East is underway. The extent of the over excavation was considerably greater than expected due to the adverse soils condition encountered at the site. This has resulted in more shrinkage of the fill than expected and requires the import of additional dirt from these two projects. This import was not expected during the design phase. We appreciate your consideration. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please call. Sincerely, Bolton Engineering Corp. 74,3-6 IL. Ross N. Bolton, RCE 26120 President CITY OF ROLLING HILLS Approved/tA- 4-1 PLAN NIN(C>! DEPARTMENT Date I(9"ld-(/0JIT- r i . A ��� v 7 t,{, t l (�i �t5 ,r.—vt4'G�( ��'�- (-Cut ti By RIMAD OCT i 1 2004 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS • • e-, To: Yolanta Schwartz From: Howard S. Slusher Re: 18 Crest Road East Zoning Case No. 670 Date: October 5, 2004 Thank you for your letter of August 25, 2004. I wanted to delay my response until I had sufficient information to make certain assurances to your office. I believe I am, now, in that position. On September 8, 2004, the actual grading permit was issued by Los Angeles County. I have said permit in my possession. I fully anticipate we will "break ground" prior to November 1, 2004. I anticipate we will have, not only "commenced grading" but will have much of the pad completed prior to the "commencement expiration date" of November 21, 2004. Accordingly, at this time I do not foresee the need for the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills to consider an extension. Notwithstanding the above, out of an abundance of caution, recognizing your time frame for receipt of a request for an extension, I am forwarding this letter (and the enclosed check) to ask that my potential request for a one year extension (to November 20, 2005) be placed on the Planning Commission's Agenda for the November 16, 2004 (the third Tuesday of November) meeting. It is my understanding that a proper filing of this letter is one received by your office any time prior to November 2, 2004 (two weeks prior to the November 16 meeting). Given the present schedule, I respectfully request you do not process my check; I am relatively certain I will contact your office prior to November 1 and inform you that (1) grading has commenced (2) remove my request from the Planning HOWARD S. SLUSHER NIKE, INC. ONE BOWERMAN DRIVE, BEAVERTON, OR 97005.6453 TEL:503.671.6453 FAX:503.671.6300 1 • • (2 Commission's Agenda of November 16 and (3) "return check to sender". Your office has requested the reasons for seeking said extension, if, indeed, such a request is formalized on the Agenda. am pleased to do so. I will be direct and regrettably not "politically correct". The submittal process and concomitant approval process by the City of Rolling Hills and the Community Association, while time consuming, was professional and adhered to reasonable guidelines. I cannot say the same for, various departments of, Los Angeles County. 1. The geology section (Karen Vasquez) and soils section (Gan Lem) of Los Angeles County was often at conflict with professional consultants retained by me. 1.1 There appeared to be significant tension with the means (not the substance) used by my retained geological consultant, (Ray Eastman) — a highly regarded individual with more than thirty years of experience in Palos Verdes and The County. I finally had to replace Mr. Eastman with Coast Geotechnical (Todd Houseal). Obviously, this substitution of professional consultants caused certain delays; however, only then did the "paper log jam" open up. 1.2 Further, I retained Western Labs (Kirk Sheller) to perform the soils consultancy. Most regrettably Mr. Sheller, almost immediately, became very ill. I attempted, in his absence, sensitive to his ongoing health problems, to work with others in his firm. It was, to say the least, not efficient. As you may know, Mr. Sheller, at a very young age, recently passed away from cancer. I changed consulting firms. Again, it took some time "to catch up" but Steven Eg of SWN Soiltech was able to quickly attain the desired approvals from The County. HOWARD S. SLUSHER NIKE, INC. ONE BOWERMAN DRIVE, BEAVERTON, OR 970056453 TEL:503671.6453 FAX:503.671.6300 1.3 I understand "the law" related to septic tank use has recently been altered. I am informed by my retained Civil Engineer Consulting firm (Doug McHattie of Bolton Engineering) "that I am the first in Rolling Hills" to be governed by these new regulations. I retained, an experienced and well respected company to assist my efforts in this area; namely, Peninsula Septic (Nick Dragich). I was informed very late in the process by The County (Robert Hughes and Mia Shur) that he was not certified to work under the new regulations. Loyal to his company, our project was delayed while The County (Mia Shur) insisted he take courses to become certified that were not even scheduled! Welcome to Catch 22!! Once Peninsula Septic became certified, in my opinion, we have had nothing , but totally unprofessional behavior by The County's Department of Health Services in reviewing this effort (Mia Shur). Our plans were on "her desk", by her own admission, in excess of four months! Each and every time we believe we had complied with "one last request" — there was another one. Finally, on September 30, we requested a meeting with Ms. Shur's supervisor (Patrick Nejadian). I am informed by Bolton Engineering (Doug McHattie), our civil engineering consultant, that Ms. Shur "absolutely covenanted" to stamp and release the documents "no later than the morning of October 1, 2004". At the time of writing this letter I am unable to independently confirm that said promised action, in fact, occurred. Due to my experiences with The County I have become wary of proceeding with grading without having the building permit, in hand. I am informed (by Doug McHattie) and believe that the County (Ed Acousta) is now willing to issue the building and wall permits on October 5, 2004. HOWARD S. SLUSHER NIKE, INC. ONE BOWERMAN DRIVE, BEAVERTON, OR 97005.6453 TEL:503.671 6453 FAX:503.671.6300 • • 2. Another significant reason for delay was, partially, "self inflicted". We retained, as General Contractor, C.W. Howe (Bill Howe) conditioned upon attaining a given price for the project. The price was not attained. Mr. Howe will no longer be involved with the project. We have, in the last month, worked with two other General Contractors. We anticipate we will formalize contractual documents with one company prior to October 8, 2004. 2.1 Expectations are one thing. Reality is, often quite another. In the unlikely event I do not reach a contractual accord with a General Contractor, in a timely manner, I will, in fact, need to request of the Planning Commission an extension of time to commence grading. 3. At the present time, it is my understanding, in addition to my securing a contract with a General Contractor, that the only items outstanding prior to issuance of the buildina permit (and I will not, due to the above stated concerns with The County, move forward without said permit in hand) are the following: 3.1 Approval of the Septic System by Mia Shur (promised no later than October 1, 2004) and 3.2 Payment of the following fees: (i) To the P.V. Schools - $19,331 (Paid on October 4, 2004) (ii) To Los Angeles County - $25,552.50 (permit fee). (In the hands of Doug McHattie as of October 4, 2004; it is anticipated these fees will be hand delivered by Mr. McHattie on or before October 6, 2004). If, in fact, there are no last minute "surprises", I will not require placement on the agenda of the Planning Commission. However, in the unlikely event there is but yet another surprise, I may need to go forward and request an extension to November 20, 2005. HOWARD S. SLUSHER NIKE, INC. ONE BOWERMAN DRIVE, BEAVERTON, OR 97005.6453 TEL:503.671 6453 FAX:503.671.6300 4 • • You asked for reasons for the delay. You probably have received more than you wanted to hear! Obviously, it has not been for a lack of effort on our end. We have been most diligent, punctual and persistent; however, certain individuals "serving" Los Angeles County, often, in my opinion, responded in anything but a professional manner. In any event, I hope my potential request for an extension is merely academic. But given the "snake bit" history, to date, on this project I write this memo in an attempt to be "safe rather than sorry". Thank you for your consideration. P.S. I will be in Shanghai and Beijing from October 8 through October 18. I can always be reached through my Administrative Assistant, Julie Dieringer (503/671-3529-phone, and/or 503/671- 3355-fax). cc: Doug McHattie HSS/jrd HOWARD 5. SLUSHER NIKE, INC. ONE BOWERMAN DRIVE, BEAVERTON, OR 97005.6453 TEL:503.671.6453 FAX:503.671.6300 • Ci4o�RoeenS �rPe August 25, 2004 Mr. Howard Slusher One Bowerman Drive Beaverton, OR 97005-6453 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 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 670, SITE PLAN FOR A NEW RESIDENCE. Dear Mr. Slusher: This letter is to inform you that it has been almost one year since the Planning Commission granted the approval of Zoning Case No. 670. The approval will expire on NOVEMBER 21, 2004, unless grading and/or construction commences on or prior to that date. You can extend the approval for one year only if you apply to the Planning Commission in writing to request an extension prior to the expiration date. In your request indicate the reason for seeking the extension. The filing fee for the time extension is $200 payable to the City of Rolling Hills. The Planning Commission meets on the third Tuesday of each month. In order for your request to be placed on the Planning Commission's agenda, it must be submitted to the Planning Department a minimum of two weeks prior to the Commission's meeting. Should you have any questions, please call me at 310 377-1521. Si erely, olanta Schwartz Planning Director C cc: Douglas McHattie, Bolton Engineering @Printed on 03/24/2004 16:34 FAX 503 671 3355 • NIKE Z 002 To: Philip Belleville From: Howard S. Slusher Re: Weed control Date: March 24, 2004 .Thank you for your email of March 23, 2004, pursuant to the above subject matter. I have contacted Rolling Hills personnel and appropriate other officials for advice and suggested direction on this matter. I will proceed in accordance with their informed and considered professional counsel. The request for you (and/or your agents and/or employees) to enter my property is respectfully denied. Further, 1 am curious why you would address a copy of the above referenced correspondence of March 23 to a Civil Engineer, namely, Bolton Engineering? I spoke with Ross Bolton and informed him that any correspondence between you and he, resulting in the use of his professional time, albeit minimal, without my direct and prior written approval should not be billed to me .... but directly to you for payment. DICTATED BUT NOT READ CORRECTED COPY 12:30PST sty oMo fP,..S -WA March 12, 2004 Mr. Howard Slusher One Bowerman Drive Beaverton, OR 97005-6453 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 SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR BOND APPROVAL Dear Mr. Slusher: This letter shall serve as notification that the Preliminary Landscape Plan for bond calculation for Zoning Case No. 670 has been APPROVED. In accordance with Resolution No. 2003-20, the bond 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/Planning Director determines that the landscaping was installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that such landscaping is properly established and in good condition. Please submit a Letter of Credit, Certificate of Deposit or Landscaping Bond in the amount of $34,488.5 (the amount of the landscaping and irrigation cost, plus 15 %) to the City in the name of City of Rolling Hills. Once the security deposit is finalized, your representative may come in at any time between the hours of 7:30 AM and 5:00 PM any weekday to have your building plans stamped for plan check or grading. The County of Los Angeles Building and Safety Division may have different requirements for landscaping for the graded areas. This approval applies only to City requirements. Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Siinc ely, lanta Schwartz lanning Director cc: Jacqueline Ignon Landscape Architect ®Priloscrl or, B U OOR GARDENS 803 Deep Valley Drive Rolling Hills Estates California 90274 310.377.1611 fax 310.377.1637 MAR 0 5 2Q 't CITY OF ROLLING HILLS By Thursday, March 04, 2004 Yolanta Schwartz, City Planner City of Rolling Hills No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Dear Yolanta, Enclosed you will find a list of plant material that I am suggesting for the Slusher Residence, as discussed. This plant material complies with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan Review Ordinance, incorporating existing mature trees and native vegetation, and utilizing to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and are consistent with the rural character of the community. Please feel free to call if you have any further questions. _J The following plants are useful as street screening material: Botanical Name FeiJoa sellowiana Prunus ilicifolla lyonil These plants are suggested as ground covers: Botanical Name Acacia redolens Baccharls pilularis Pigeon Point' Ceanothus griseus horizontalis 'Yankee Point' Ceanothus Julia Phelps' Cistus spp. Echium candicans (syn.: Echium fastuosum) Fremontodendron 'California Glory' Rhus integrifolia Salvia clevelandii 'Allen Chickering' Common Name Pineapple Guava Catalina Cherry (easily kept at 15 - 20 feet) Common Name Prostrate Acacia Dwarf Coyote Bush Ground Cover Ceanothus Phelps Ceanothus Rockrose Pride -of -Madeira Fremontodendron Lemonade Berry Allen Chickering California Blue Sage • BI�UOEOR GARDENS February 24, 2004 Yolanta Schwartz Planning Director City of Rolling Hills No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 310-377-1521 SUBJECT: LANDSCAPE PLAN Slusher Residence 13 Crest Road East Dear Yolanta: Per review of the referenced landscape plan it is my opinion that it complies with Resolution No. 2003-20, Paragraphs L, M, and N which pertain to the landscaping requirements for this property. The included cost estimate from Fujimoto Landscaping Inc. is both fair and accurate. Please call if you have any questions. Yours truly, 803 Deep Valley Drive Rolling Hills Estates California 90274 310.377.1611 fax 310.377.1637 Ci1y o/ ie0ii. JhI'h February 3, 2004 Ms. Julie Heinsheimer 7 Johns Canyon Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 SUBJECT: LANDSCAPE PLAN 18 Crest Road East Dear Julie: 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 Attached is a landscape plan for 18 Crest Road East for your review and comment, as required by Resolution No. 2003-20 (excerpt attached). The project entails the construction of a new single family residence, pool and a guest house on a vacant parcel of land. Note landscape conditions in paragraphs L, M and N of the Resolution. The Planning Commission required security deposit for labor and material, including irrigation, therefore please review the cost estimate as well. Thank you for taking the time to review the landscaping requirements for our cases and providing us with your expertise. Sincerely, Yo nta Schwartz Pl ing Director Enclosure Pririted on Recycled Paper. January 22, 2004 City of Rolling Hills Parklands Committee 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, Calif. 90274 Re: Slusher Residence.- 18 Crest Rd. East, Rolling Hills, Calif. To Whom It May Concern: Please find the attached Planting Plan, Irrigation Plan and Installation Estimate for your review and approval. The planting close to the residence will reflect the architecture of the structure with a more formal layout. As the planting areas move away from the residence, the layout is Tess formal. The plant material is chosen for its low maintenance, low flammability, low fuel and low water requirements. The rear of the property will be left in its natural state. The homeowners, Howard and Rebecca Slusher are committed to moving and saving existing specimen trees, when possible, that may be impacted by the construction and grading. Please feel free to call my office if you have questions. Sincerely, 67///-A-- Jacqueline Ignon Landscape Architect 310-316-6129 Lie. No. 3287 Jacqueline Ignon • Landscape Architect 843 Avenue 'C', Redondo Beach, California 90277 • (310) 316-6129 11/04/2003 15:34 FAX 503 671 3355 NIKE • e1002 To: Philip Belleville From: Howard S. Slusher Re: 18 Crest Road East - Barn Location Date: November 4, 2003 Your communication of October 30, has been received by me. Your request to enter my property, at the above referenced location, for the sole purpose "to walk the space" with an engineer is hereby granted. To be prudent, said grant is conditioned on the following: 1 _ You provide to me, in writing, a minimum of 96 hours in advance of the intended visit, a notice of the day and time of said visit, providing it is on or before November 14, 2003. 2. You, personally, hold me and my family harmless for any and all injury or damage to your person and/or property and to that of the engineer while either individual is on subject property. Said "hold -harmless document" should be drafted by you, at your expense, and forwarded to me for my signature signaling acceptance. No entry shall be made by you and/or your engineer until you have received said written approval signed by me. 3. in order to minimize potential injury your site walk should be scheduled between the daylight hours of 10:OOAM and 4:OOPM. 4. Under no circumstances shall you and/or your engineer touch, disturb and/or move anything (other than soil and vegetation caused by your careful walking) on the subject property including, but not limited to existing stakes and associated materials prepared for the site visit. Any said alteration of existing stakes will be replaced by me but paid, in full, by you. 11/04/2003 15:35 FAX 503 671 3355 NIKE • • CZ 003 5. Further, said permission by me for entry by you and/or your engineer shall be not deemed, by either individual, as a waiver of any rights I might have against either individual in law or equity (I would require your engineer to counter -sign your letter to me). It is clear that there is a dispute between you and me. It appears you expect to appeal the unanimous (5-0) decision of the Planning Commission which was, in fact, unanimously noted, without comment, by the City Council (4-0, with one member absent). In accordance with one of your prior communications you will probably take this matter to the Courts, if, in fact, the unanimous decision of appointed officials and elected officials is not reversed. I am not willing to give you permission to use the services of any of the consultants I have retained for this matter. Accordingly, I refuse your request to use Mr. Bolton and/or other members of his firm. Your acknowledgement that you are not an engineer and therefore cannot place "any location on a drawing" is noted. This community, I am certain, has many well -qualified engineers (other than Mr. Bolton and members of his firm). You are free to retain any one of them, "on your dime", for your purposes. You may note that I made this exact request to you, in writing, in at least two prior communications (please see my letters to you of October 6 and October 14). To date, it is my understanding you have refused to retain a qualified engineer to perform said services. The future stable location, shown on our submittals, was not only approved unanimously, (5-0) by the Planning Commission and noted, without comment, by the unanimous consent of the four members present at the City Council meeting, but I am informed and believe that one member of the City Council inquired if any member of the Architectural Committee (who also unanimously, (5-0) approved the house design) had any comment on the barn location. It is my understanding the City Council was accurately informed that no member of the Architectural Committee expressed any objection. Finally, it should be noted that, again, I am informed and believe that the representative of The Caballeros expressed, at the time of the 11/04/2003 15:35 FAX 503 671 3355 NIKE • • CZ004 site visit, and again to the Planning Commission at their hearing, that she believed the barn site was "perfectly located". To this end, the future stable location, unanimously approved by the Planning Commission, is totally located at the 970 contour level. The land in that area, in essence, has zero slope. In realistic terms it would require no grading and virtually no disturbance of soils. Concomitantly, the associated land for a corral and paddock would also be at 970; therefore, the total future development of stable, corral and paddock would require, in essence, no grading. The stable location suggested by you (staked by Mr. Bolton pursuant to your unauthorized direction) is clearly inferior to the unanimously approved location. I am informed and believe that the location you suggest, as an alternate, has a two (2) foot slope from one corner to another. In addition, to add a corral and paddock would require grading for a minimum of one (1) additional foot and probably two (2) feet for a total of three to four feet of grading. Further, if located where you desire, the stable and associated road would bifurcate the desired open space and disturb the very character you claim to appreciate and hold to be precious. In my view, pursuant to your letter of October 30, if there is a misunderstanding it is yours and not mine. In summary, the approved location for the stable by the unanimous (5-0) vote of the Planning Commission and accepted, without objection, by the unanimous consent of the four attending members of the City Council and with no objection voiced by the Architectural Committee, when they approved the house plans (on the first submission) is without significant disturbance of soils and/or grading. This cannot be said of your proposed location. Mr. Belleville, we may well be "talking about nothing". I may or may not build a stable. If I do elect to build this structure it would be so that my daughter could actualize her interests and abilities. Three years ago, my wife and I (at age 63) adopted a one -year -old malnourished Chinese girl who had the motor development of an American child of four to five months. She was abandoned by her parent(s) in the Anhui Province. Emily, who lived the first year of her life in an orphanage, in the rural town of Tong Ling, is now a fully functioning four year old. She loves horses. She cannot walk by one without petting it. She goes to the Lake Oswego Hunt Club whenever 11/04/2003 15:36 FAX 503 671 3355 NIKE • 111, I1005 she is given the opportunity. She rides as often as allowed. If her interest, in horses, continues we will build a stable on our property as soon as desired. In an attempt to settle this matter and not waste the valuable time and efforts of elected and appointed City officials (to say nothing of staffs involvement - - - I note, that between August 19 and October 30, a period of slightly more than two months, they have received no Tess than fifteen (15) communications from you, on this matter! If you agree in writing before November 15, 2003, to waive all of your objections on this matter (including the construction of the barn) I will agree to not commence construction on the barn in the calendar years of 2004 and 2005. This will give you ample time, if you desire, to plant hedges and/or trees, at your design and at your sole expense, on your property but in a manner that with two years of a "growth head -start", will provide you maximum privacy, by "blocking out the barn", if and when I were to construct one. In truth, I do not know why you feel the way you do. Certainly your arguments have not been persuasive to me and/or any elected or appointed official who has heard same. According to the calculations of my consultant's, your house is more than four hundred (400) feet from mv proposed home. Your house is more than two hundred (250) feet from mv proposed barn. Your guesthouse with almost all windows facing away from the proposed site, is approximately one hundred and seventy five (175) feet from proposed barn. And finally, your barn (with no windows facing my property) is about one hundred and twenty-five (125) feet from the Proposed barn site. If you really feel strongly about "not seeing a barn" in a rural community (when, in fact, you have a large one) and/or "feel the intrusion" upon your guests, who, as you know can only inhabit your guest house for no more than 30 days in anv six month period - -than the two year moratorium I am granting to you, in the spirit of compromise, will enable you, with the proper tree selection, to gain complete privacy. Further, you should note there is significant growth in that very area at the present time! To paraphrase the Planning Commission in their unanimous (5- 0) vote, "(we) found the proposed (barn) location to be most desirable". Further, the Planning Commission found that "significant portions of the lot will be left undeveloped so as to maintain open space (emphasis added) on the property". They went on to state that 11/04/2003 15:36 FAX 503 671 3355 NIKE • 2006 "the construction of the new house and stable (emphasis added) will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to the adjacent uses... (and) is a sufficient distance from nearby residences so that the proposed structure will not (emphasis added) impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors (emphasis added)..._". The Planning Commission went further when they stated, "the development plans follow natural contours of the site to minimize grading (emphasis added)...". YOUR PROPOSED "COMPROMISE" FLIES DIRECTLY IN THE FACE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DIRECTION. It is "as if' you are throwing dirt at their carefully thought out and worded decisions. If your motives, as you say, are not personal to me, one has to wonder if, indeed, you are attempting to embarrass the membership of the Planning Commission and/or City Council. I respect your property rights. I would hope you would respect mine. I have said all I intend to say on this matter. I will keep my offer open until 11:59PM (PST) on November 14, 2003. If not unequivocally accepted, it is to be deemed withdrawn and no longer available for acceptance. I have spent an inordinate amount of time on this matter. I do not wish to "sand bag " you. I will make no other offers to you. I truly wish, for the sake of all concerned (and not just you and me) that you accept my offer of a two-year moratorium; however, if you choose to not do so I will be forced to react; namely, defend with vigor and with all of the resources I have available to me. In a word, my four -year -old daughter has taught me how to survive. I will not disappoint her. I will not allow her interests to be abandoned once again. Your proposed actions will be a pity for both of our families. It is not the way I or any proper thinking individual would hope to be greeted by a new neighbor. And certainly you must recognize when THERE WAS NOT ONE OBJECTION, voiced by anv elected and/or appointed member of the Planning Commission, City Council and Architectural Committee, this speaks volumes on who is "on the side of right" in this issue. I truly hope I receive a positive response from you. If you accept my offer, please draft the necessary language for my review and signature_ If not, you may be assured of an extensive defense (and, if appropriate, offense) throughout the administrative and 11/04/2003 15:37 FAX 503 671 3355 NIKE • i Ej007 judicial process. Thank you for your humane and fair consideration of this matter. I trust my offer will put this matter behind us and allow all concerned to focus on more constructive pursuits (no pun intended). DICTATED BUT NOT READ cc: Ross Bolton cc: Doug McHattie cc: Peggy Minor cc: Craig Nealis cc: Yolanda Schwartz cc: Kirk Sheller JRD:hss AOL.COM I Message View http://webmail.aol.com/fmsgview.adp?folder=SU5CT1g=&uid=7... Subj: Re: Barn location Date: 10/30/2003 3:33:56 PM Eastern Standard Time From: PFBE1 To: Howard.Slusher@nike.com Cc: Julie.Dieringer@nike.com, PFBE1, Citvofrh, BoltonEnaCorn @cs.com Thanks for your note. I also don't want to prolong our email process, but I believe there are some serious factual misunderstandings. It is my understanding that the location which Mr. Bolton staked out for the Planning Commission did not require any significant grading or disturbance of soils. I understood that he located it there to avoid disturbance, rather than even further east in the spot which he and I talked about when we met on the preceding Monday. In any event, I said that I would compromise with almost any location further east from the location immediately across the easement from my property. I am confident there are areas further east which would not be in your vista, or obstruct unduly the open space as the Juanita Crane trail turns north at the corner of my property, would not involve any material soil disturbance and which would be less intrusive to my privacy. Not being an engineer, I cannot place any location on a drawing. But, I would be happy to walk the space with Mr. Bolton to find a spot which meets our respective criteria. If I agree that there is no such spot, then I will withdraw my objection. If it appears that there is such a spot, there of course would be no understanding for a change until you had an opportunity to consider it and agree. The 30 day period to appeal to the City Counsel started running on October 21, so time is starting to be of the essence for me to make that decision. I hope to hear from you soon so we can hopefully put all of this to rest. Best regards, Phil Belleville 1 of 1 10/30/03 3:45 AM • Cuy op2 FP„g JUL October 28, 2003 Mr. and Mrs. Howard Slusher One Bowerman Drive Beaverton, OR 97005-6453 • 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 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 670, 18 Crest Road East, Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a new single-family residence and a guest house and Conditional Use Permit for the guest house on a vacant lot. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Slusher: This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2003-20 on October 21, 2003, granting your request. That action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission was reported to the City Council on October 27, 2003. The Planning Commission's decision in this matter shall become effective thirty days after the adoption of the resolution by the Commission, unless an appeal has been filed or the City Council takes jurisdiction of the case within that thirty (30) day appeal period. If no appeals are filed within the thirty (30) day period after adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution, the Planning Commission's action will become final and you will be required to cause to be recorded an Affidavit of Acceptance Form together with the subject resolution in the Office of the County Recorder, before the Commission's action takes effect. Please find enclosed a copy of the Resolution and an Affidavit of Acceptance Form. Please complete the AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM, have the signature(s) notarized, and forward (or hand deliver) the completed form and 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 $9.00 for the first page and $3.00 for each additional page. I am also enclosing a copy of the approved Development Plan, for your files. The City will notify the Los Angeles County Building & Safety Division to issue permits only after the recorded Affidavit of Acceptance and Resolutions are received by us and anv conditions of the Resolutions required prior to issuance of building permits are met. Please read the conditions of the Resolution to determine, which conditions must be met prior to the City issuing building/grading permits. ® Pr It on Re:cyr:lr:d • Please feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions. Si rely, f,- olanta Schwartz Planning Director Enclosures: AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM RESOLUTION NO. 2003-20 EXHIBIT "A" DEVELOPMENT PLAN (applicant only) cc: Bob Thompson, Architect Douglas McHattie, Bolton Engineering 10/O6/2003 16:21 FAX 503 671 3355 NIKE • • 2002/003 To: Phil Belleville From: Howard S. Slusher Re: 18 Crest Road - - Barn Location Date: October 6, 2003 Your email, dated September 28, to Bolton Engineering, was faxed to my Oregon office on September 30. I, in fact, have returned to the office, this morning, following one week in London, to find said communication. l am more than pleased to consider any ideas you might have pursuant to the above captioned matter. The location of the barn, as submitted by us, was the result of working with various highly qualified professionals; most of whom possess extensive experience in Rolling Hills. As you know, it was this specific location that was unanimously approved, 5-0, by the Planning Commission, on September 16, following their site visit to the subject property on September 9. Further, I am informed that many individuals participating at the site meeting (members of the Commission and other interested parties), felt that said location was not only "proper" but "ideal". Notwithstanding the above, I am pleased to keep an open mind and review any alternate location you believe works in a superior way for all concerned. But again, I remind you that our first and only submittal was approved 5-0, by the Commission. Certainly their unanimity speaks volumes. In order to minimize confusion and potential communication problems, which apparently has occurred on this matter previously, 1 suggest that you forward to me, written plans submitted with appropriate drawings. I will then review and evaluate your ideas to determine if this problem perhaps could be resolved "to our mutual satisfaction". If your ideas appear prudent to me, I will, of course, ask professional consultants, employed by me for their input, prior to responding to you. sty 0/ JUL September 17, 2003 Mr. and Mrs. Howard Slusher One Bowerman Drive Beaverton, OR 97005-6453 • 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 SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 670, 18 Crest Road East, Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a new single-family residence and a guest house and Conditional Use Permit for the guest house on a vacant lot. Dear Mr. and Mrs. Slusher: This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission voted at their regular meeting on September 16, 2003 to direct staff to prepare a resolution to approve your request in Zoning Case No. 670 and shall be confirmed in the draft resolution that is being prepared. The Planning Commission will review and consider the draft resolution, together with conditions of approval, at an upcoming meeting on October 21, 2003 and make its final decision on your application at that meeting. At the September 16, 2003 meeting, new information and calculations were presented. In addition, after some discussion between the architect and the Planning Commission it was agreed that the highest point of the exterior roofline of the structures shall not exceeds 20 feet from the finished grade. Please submit a revised Site Plan showing the location of the exercise room within the garage and its size, correctly mark the detached structure as a guest house, if this is its intended use, and show an elevation of the highest portion of the structure, indicating "not to exceed 20' in height from finished grade." Please submit seven copies, two for file — one of which should be highlighted with the building pad areas and disturbed area and five copies for the City Council. The findings and conditions of approval of the draft resolution will be forwarded to you before the Planning Commission meeting. The decision shall become effective thirty days after the adoption of the Planning Commission's resolution unless an appeal has been filed or the City Council takes jurisdiction of the case within that thirty (30) day appeal period. (Section 17.54.010(B) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code). Should there be an appeal, the Commission's decision will be stayed until the Council completes itsproceedings in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. As stated above, the Planning Commission's action taken by resolution approving the development application is scheduled for Tuesday, October 21, 2003. That action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission, is tentatively scheduled to be placed as a report item on the City Council's agenda at the Council's regular meeting on Monday, October 27, 2003. ®F'nnterl t)r rioicyrlmd ( ',tt".' • • Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter. Sincerely, Xdi Y3I nta Schwartz Planing Director cc: Douglas McHattie, Bolton Engineering Bob Thompson, Architect 09/15/03 MON 14:59 FAX 310 377 7288 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID ST. TIME USAGE T PGS. RESULT MEMORANDUM: DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: ***xs***m************s 0 *** TX REPORT *** ********************* 0093 15032250803 09/15 14:59 00'35 1 OK SEPTEMBER 15, 2003 BOB THOMPSON, ARCHITECT YOLANTA S CHWARTZ, PLANNING DIRECTOR 18 CREST ROAD, SITE PLAN REVIEW & CUP I do not have your phone number, therefore, cannot call you to discuss the revisions. I want to advise you that if any of the coverage calculation, (structural coverage and total coverage), grading quantities, disturbed area, etc.. have changed due to the proposed revisions, you should have those calculations available at the meeting or e-mail/Fax them to me today or early tomorrow. I will have them available at the Commission places before the meeting. If the Commission finds that these revisions represent major changes, they may want to digest them, before directing staff to prepare a resolution, either of approval or denial. So, do not be surprised, if the project is not approved tomorrow, but may be continued to the October meeting. My fax is 31.0 377-7288 E-mail yschwartz@cityofrh.net Post .it"° Fax Note Fax # 7671 Oslo Phone A` Z ! 7 1 Pages 09/15/03 MON 14:31 FAX 310 377 7288 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS a001 • ********************* 0 * lc * TX REPORT * ck * **************c ****** TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO 0092 CONNECTION TEL 15032250803 CONNECTION ID ST. TIME 09/15 14:30 USAGE T 00'43 PGS. 1 RESULT OK ion, Sep 8, 2003 8:13 AM Subject: Stable Location In Zoning Case 670 Date: Friday, September 5, 2003 6:17 PM - From: PFBE1@aol.com • To: <mkern@cityofrh.net>, <Cityofrh@aol.com. Co: <PFBEl@aol.com>, <BoltonEngCorp©cs.com> Dear Planning Commission: Unfortunately, the prospective compromise concerning the Future Stable location at 18 Crest Road East has fallen through. Ross Bolton and .I had a very good meeting at the site this morning and we were hopeful that we had a compromise by locating the Future Suable east of, and perhaps slightly north of, the proposed guest house near the eastern easement line. That would have tucked it in on relatively level land without obstructing our vista or the vista of riders on the Crane trail, However, Ross and I talked later this afternoon and he reported that the amount of disturbance in connection with other aspects of the site are relatively aggressive, and that placement where we spotted would make it more so, this they would not risk their ongoing relationship with the City and ask for approval of something which might make it even more aggressive. I told him that I would take the brunt of it and ask that you make whatever exception may be necessary at our request to eliminate the controversy and dispute on the subject. Since the site is relatively level at the desired spot, this is to formally ask that you do not hold it against the other approvals being sought 18 Crest Road East and approve the location Ross and I discussed near the East property line of the property. Ross apparently has changed the plans submitted to put the Future Stable directly north of the proposed guest house on the property. That is movement in the right direction and somewhat better, but it still will stick out like a sore thumb and obstruct our view through a beautiful open space. It would be tragic to plan it there when there is such a great opportunity to make it much less visible in a location which eliminates the dispute and one which all concerned would approve. We are very sorry that we cannot change our plans for next Tuesday afternoon and thus cannot attend the meeting at the property. We will be available all morning and until mid afternoon. But, this is to ask that you please help out to eliminate the problem and not hold the slight disturbance that would be caused by the Future Stable against the balance of the project. Ir you do that, it is my understanding that the Future Stable will be placed in the location Ross and I picked this morning. Respectfully submitted, • • e::41t oi Rofftni �ae� FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION August 22, 2003 Mr. Howard Slusher One Bowerman Drive Beaverton, OR 97005-6453 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 ZONING CASE NO. 670 18 Crest Road East, (Lot 193-1-MS). Site Plan Review for grading and construction of a new single family residence, guest house and recreation room and Conditional Use Permits for the construction of a guest house and recreation room on a vacant parcel of land. Dear Mr. Slusher: The Planning Commission will conduct a field inspection of your property at 18 Crest Road East to view a silhouette of the proposed project on Tuesday, September 9, 2003. The Planning Commission's timetable is to meet at 5:30 PM at another site and then proceed to your property. As the exact time cannot be estimated, do not expect the Commission before 6:00 PM. The site must be prepared according to the enclosed Silhouette Construction Guidelines and the following requirements: A. A full-size silhouette in conformance with the attached guidelines must be prepared for ALL STRUCTURES of the project showing the footprints, roof ridges and bearing walls (residence, guest house recreation room and future stable); B. Stake the pool and pool deck; C. Delineate the side property lines and setback lines on the side of the property where the proposed structures will be located, (including stable); D. Show the height of the finished floor of the proposed structures; E. Delineate the new driveway & motor court—(requiredtobe minimum of 50 feet from the guest house). @Pru rt,.(I or Rocyri :d I':uva • • F. Indicate which trees, shrubs and other vegetation will be removed as a result of this project. G. Delineate the extent of the area to be disturbed. 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. Yolanta Schwartz Planning Director cc: Douglas McHattie, Bolton Engineering