571, Shore up hillside with a retai, Correspondence•
CEO ofiePP,.a
THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER
Mayor
GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S.
Mayor Pro Tern
FRANK E. HILL
Councilmember
B. ALLEN LAY
Councilmember
JODY MURDOCK
Councilmember
March 21, 2000
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
Mr. and Mrs. Lee Rosen
7 Lower Blackwater Canyon Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Dear Mr. and 'Mrs. Rosen: . .
Thank you for taking:. thetime tomeet with us on Monday;,March-20t1 to discuss the
graded padadjacent: to the: barn on your property. s.
After reviewingthis.pad'in the field with the assistance 'of your contractor; Matthew T.
Kroha, and reviewing your 'approved plans and the approved plans that:were partially
completed by the previous property owner, it appears that this pad was constructed as
part of the Site Plan Review approval from the previous property owner. However, as
we discussed, grading permits were not obtained for this pad.
We appreciate your willingness to have your contractor work with the County of Los
Angeles to obtain an appropriate grading permit. Please understand, that receipt of the
grading permit will not authorize the construction of any structures on that portion of
your property. It is our understanding that you are not proposing any habitable
structures at this time and will be planting lawn on that portion of your property.
We would appreciate that you obtain all appropriate grading permits within the next
six months, no later than September 20, 2000. Should you wish to discuss this further,
please do not hesitate to call. ' Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Craig R. Nealis
City Manager
CRN:mlk
03/20/00rosen.ltr
cc: Lola Ungar, Planning Director
Tri/Sam Development, President Matthew T. Kroha
Rafael Bernal, Los Angeles County Department of Building & Safe
Printed on Recycled Paper
08/16/00 WED.11:48 FAX 310 377 7288 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS IO01
0 sk>E:**sksksksksksk:::i:kksl:sl:sY.skk: 0
$** TX REPORT *$*
t
TRANSMISSION OK
TX/RX NO 1047
CONNECTION TEL
CONNECTION ID
ST. TIME 08/16 11:45
USAGE T 01'18
PGS. 2
RESULT OK
5415314
47)(Mity INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
FAX VE SHEET
DATE: 8'J 1 (er 0 0
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE SEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 9Q274
(310) 377.1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cltyohh@aoLgom
TIME ENT: 1 1 *- Li c--rn
TO: rnAm ` £VYt LA �� 1P -�' FROM: -tu_..r )1l Pl
ar
FAX: OPERATOR:
SUBJECT:
REMARKS:
•
•
Cu R0fA
CERT1ti1LD MAIL
February 24, 1998
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
Mr. and Mrs. Lee Rosen
58 Hidden Valley Road
Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274
SUBJECT: APPEAL PERIOD AND AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM
ZONING CASE NO 571, 7 LOWER BLACKWATER CANYON ROAD
(LOT 83-RH)
RESOLUTION NO. 98-2
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Rosen:
This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission adopted a resolution on
February 17, 1998 to approve your request for a Variance to construct a retaining wall
that will encroach into the front yard setback and request for Site Plan Review to
construct substantial additions to an existing single family dwelling at 7 Lower
Blackwater Canyon Road (Lot 83-RH), Rolling Hills, CA in Zoning Case No. 571. That
action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the Commission will be
reported to the City Council on February 25, 1998.
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. (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 its proceedings in
accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code.
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.
We have enclosed a copy of RESOLUTION NO. 98-2, 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 $9.00 for the first page and $3.00 for each additional
page.
Printed on Recycled Paper.
• •
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.
Sincerely,
LOLA UNGAR
PLANNING DIRECTOR
ENC: RESOLUTION NO. 98-2
EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM
APPEAL SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE.
cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect
• •
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO:
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
(310) 377-1521
(310) 377-7288 FAX
Recorder's Use
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 ANGFJ FS
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
ZONING CASE NO. 571
) §§
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
I (We) the undersigned state:
I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows:
7 LOWER BLACKWATER CANYON ROAD (LOT 83-RH). ROLLING HILLS
This property is the subject of the above numbered case.
I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in said
ZONING CASE NO. 571 SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Print Print
Owner Owner
Name Name
Signature Signature
Address
City/State_______
Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public.
State of California )
County of Los Angeles )
On before me,
Address
City/State
personally appeared
[ ] Personally known to me -OR- [ ] proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose
name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in
his/her/their authorized capacity(ies) and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity
upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
Witness by hand and official seal.
Signature of Notary
See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof
RESOLUTION NO. 98-2
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH
INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING
WALL AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF
SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 571.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES
HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. An application was duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Lee Rosen with
respect to real property located at 7 Lower Blackwater Canyon Road (Lot 83-RH),
Rolling Hills, requesting Site Plan Review for the construction of substantial
additions to an existing single family residence. The applicants' plans show the
removal of the existing tennis court and replacement with a pool. During the
hearing process, a Variance was requested to encroach into the front yard setback to
construct a retaining wall for the driveway access area.
Section 2. On May 17, 1977, a Conditional Use Permit for a tennis court was
approved in Zoning Case No. 180. In 1981, a mixed use barn with loft and garage
was constructed prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 229 (December 17, 1990) that
requires a Conditional Use Permit for a Detached Garage or Mixed Use Structure.
Section 3. In October, 1987, Mr. and Mrs. William Davisson withdrew a
request for a Conditional Use Permit "to convert an existing two story stable and
garage to servants quarters, and a request for a Variance to the height limitation for
a two story structure to be used as servants quarters and garage with loft" in Zoning
Case No. 342.
Section 4. In, March, 1992, Mr. and Mrs. Howard Long constructed a
children's wing at the southwest portion of the residence, replacing an attached
garage. In June, 1992, Mr. and Mrs. Long were granted Variance approval to
encroach into the front yard setback to construct a retaining wall and Site Plan
approval for substantial additions to the residence in Zoning Case No. 477. These
approvals expired.
Section 5. In February, 1995, Mrs. Doris Beiler-Hozumi was granted
Variance approval to encroach into the front yard setback to construct a retaining
wall, granted Variance approval to encroach into the front yard to construct a corral
and animal shelters, granted approval for a Conditional Use Permit for a pool
cabana, and granted Site Plan Review approval of substantial additions to an
existing residential structure in Zoning Case No. 524. These approvals expired.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-2
PAGE 1
•
Section 6. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing to consider the applications on December 16, 1997 and January 20, 1998, and
at a field trip visit on January 10, 1998. The applicants were notified of the hearing
in writing by first class mail and through the City's newsletter.
Section 7. 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 8. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code permit approval of a Variance from the standards and
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary
circumstances applicable to the property and not applicable to other similar .
properties in the same zone prevent the owner from making use of a parcel of
property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity.
Section 17.16.110 requires a front yard setback for every residential parcel to be fifty
(50) feet. The applicant is requesting a Variance to construct a retaining wall with a
maximum height of five (5) feet above the downslope grade, a maximum length of
200 feet, which will encroach a maximum of fifty (50) feet into the fifty (50) foot front
yard setback. With respect to this request for a Variance, the Planning Commission
finds as follows:
A. There are exceptional and extraordinary circumstances and conditions
applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the
other property or class of use in the same zone because the sloping topography and
the existing location of the driveway on the property necessitate the construction of
a retaining wall in the front yard setback in order to widen the driveway to support
existing hillside cuts and slopes to allow safe access for emergency vehicles.
B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone,
but which is denied to the property in question because of the steep slope on the lot
which necessitates a retaining wall to support the slope bank next to the proposed
driveway. The reconstruction of the wall in the front yard setback will create a safer
accessway and that will also improve the appearance of the existing driveway.
C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and
zone in which the property is located because the proposed project will be
compatible with surrounding properties and will help to improve the geologic
stability of the slope and will not be visible to surrounding properties due to the
distances between the driveway and other adjacent residences.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-2
PAGE 2
• .
Section 9. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Variance for Zoning Case No. 571 to permit the encroachment
of a retaining wall into the front yard setback, to a maximum height of five feet (5'),
a maximum length of 200 feet and with a maximum encroachment of fifty feet (50'),
as indicated on the development plan submitted with this application and
incorporated herein by reference as Exhibit A, subject to the conditions specified in
Section 16 of this Resolution.
Section 10., Section 17.46.020 requires a development plan to be submitted
for Site Plan Review and approval before any building or structure may be
constructed or any expansion, addition, alteration or repair to existing buildings or
structures, which involve changes to grading or an increase in 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, may be permitted. With respect to the Site Plan Review
application, the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact:
A. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval,
is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses
because the proposed structure complies 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. The lot has a net square foot area of 247,111 square feet. The
proposed residence (7,310 sq. ft.), garage (891 sq. ft.), barn (1,500 , sq.ft), pool 11,100
sq.ft.), and service yard (100 sq.ft.) will have 10,901 square feet which constitutes 4.4%
of the lot which is within the maximum 20% structural lot coverage requirement.
The total lot coverage including paved areas and driveway will be 27,211 square feet
which equals 11.6% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot
coverage requirement.
B. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval,
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).
C. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval,
follows natural contours of the site to minimize grading and the natural drainage
courses will continue to the canyons at the northwest side of this lot.
D. The development plan will, in compliance with the conditions
contained in this Resolution, supplement the existing vegetation with landscaping
that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community.
E. The development plan, as modified by the conditions of approval,
substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing
RESOLUTION NO. 98-2
PAGE 3
• •
building coverage because the new structures will not cause the structural and total
lot coverage to be exceeded. Further, the proposed project will have a buildable pad
of 49,357 square feet and a total building pad coverage of 22.1%, with a residential
building pad coverage of 20.2% and a barn/garage pad coverage of 47.2%.
F. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of approval,
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.
Grading will be required only to restore the natural slope of the property. The ratio
of the proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to or less than the ratio found on
properties in the vicinity.
G. The proposed development, as modified by the conditions of
approval, is sensitive and not detrimental to convenience and safety of circulation
for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will utilize the existing
vehicular access route, thereby having no further impact on the roadway.
H. The project conforms with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act and is categorically exempt from environmental
review.
Section 11. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission
hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for Zoning Case No. 571 for a
proposed residential development as indicated on the development plan
incorporated herein as•Exhibit A, subject to the conditions contained in Section 12 of
this Resolution.
Section 12. The Variance to the front yard setback approved in Section 9 and
the Site Plan for residential development approved in Section 11 of this Resolution
are subject to the following conditions:
A. These Variance and Site Plan approvals shall expire within one year
from the effective dateof approval if construction pursuant to these approvals has
not commenced within that time period, as required by Sections 17.38.070 and
17.46.080.
B. It is declared and made a condition of these Variance and Site Plan
approvals, that if any conditions thereof are violated, these approvals 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
RESOLUTION NO. 98-2
PAGE 4
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 dated December 29, 1997 and marked Exhibit A, except as
otherwise provided in these conditions.
E. The working drawings submitted to the County Department of
Building and Safety for plan check review must conform to the development plan
approved with this application.
F. Grading shall be limited so that the amount of soil displaced to
construct the proposed retaining walls at the southeast garage area shall not exceed
85 cubic yards of cut soil and 85 cubic yards of fill soil. The soil cut to provide a 2 to 1
slope at the garage area shall be spread at the west side of the building pad where the
tennis court will be removed. Cut and fill slopes shall not exceed a steepness of a 2
to 1 slope ratio. The grading plan shall utilize land form or contour grading
techniques in its design so as to create a building pad and slopes that blend with the
horizontal and vertical contours of the natural terrain.
G. The residential building pad coverage shall not exceed 20.2%.
H. Permits shall be obtained to reconvert the illegally converted
garage/barn structure from offices to a garage and barn for animal keeping with loft
to be used solely for garage space and animal keeping materials at the northern
portion of the property to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector and the Planning
Department within six (6) months of the approval of this resolution.
I. The tennis court at the west side of the existing residence shall be
removed and replaced with a 1,100 square foot swimming pool.
J. Landscaping shall be provided and maintained to obscure the buildings
and the building pad with native drought -resistant vegetation that is compatible
with the surrounding vegetation of the community.
K. Retaining walls shall not exceed five (5') feet in height measured from
the downslope side of the wall to the surface of the ground.
L. The retaining wall in the front yard setback shall not exceed five (5')
feet in height measured from the downslope side of the wall to the surface of the
ground, shall not exceed 200 feet in length and shall be permitted to encroach the
maximum fifty (50') feet into the front yard setback. The retaining wall shall be
constructed in accordance with the approved Site Plan, identified as Exhibit "A".
M. Lower Blackwater Canyon Road shall be kept open for vehicular access
at all times during future grading and construction of the project.
RESOLUTION NO. 98-2
PAGE5
N. 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.
O. 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.
P. Final inspection of the project by the Building Inspector and Planning
Department shall not be approved unless and until:
1. Permits are obtained for the illegally converted garage/barn
structure at the northern portion of the property that has been converted to offices
and is reconverted into garage space and a barn for animal keeping with a loft to be
used for animal keeping materials to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector and
the Planning Department;
2. The tennis court at the west side of the existing residence has
been removed and replaced with a swimming pool.
Q. 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 approval by the
Planning Commission.
R. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all
conditions of these Variance and Site Plan approvals, or the approvals shall not be
effective.
S. All conditions of these Variance and Site Plan approvals must be
complied with prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the County
of Los Angeles.
1998.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADODAY OF FEBRUARY,
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
11" zi L h
MARILYN 'KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 98-2
PAGE 6
•
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 98-2 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO ENCROACH
INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING
WALL AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL OF
SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONS TO AN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
STRUCTURE IN ZONING CASE NO. 571.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on
February 17, 1998 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioners Hankins, Margeta, Sommer, Witte and
Chairman Roberts.
None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices.
DEPUTY CI CLERK
RESOLUTION NO. 98-2
PAGE 7
•
1734.010
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 erredor 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. 4
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 1734 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.
ROLLING HILLS ZONING
77 MAY 7A. 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
ROWNG WEIS ZONING
MAY 24, 1993
P 85.2 865 246
RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL
NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED
NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL
(See Reverse)
Sent to
J�lP. 01IS. lobe
treet and No.
Ji dcl . va
t./
P. ., State and IP Code
Postage 5
Certified Fee �i+ E'Enii,'�!4@
Special Deliv rye ee
Restricted Delyety
/.v7
)kl
S
Return Receipt 6'fiDwtne ,. ,• ifto whom and Date Delivered° ,// 1
you
co Return Receipt showing fo whom,
r Date, and Address of Delivery
a) .
TOTAL Postage and Fees
cpPostmark or Date
M
E
`o
LL
N
a
SENDER:
• Complete items 1 and/or 2 for additional services.
o Complete items 3, 4a, and 4b.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can return this
card to you.
• Attach this form to the front of the mallpiece, or on the back if space does not
permit.
• Write'Retum Receipt Requested' on the mallpiece below the article number.
• The Return Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date
delivered.
3. Article Addressed to:
»4f.f f'hrs. )re /eases
5s //;roc -1 Vd a a.
/201V H) J/s d, C.'I
9oR7y
5. Received By: (Print Narr1
6. Signature:t .dressee orA
X
PS Form 381
1
•
ent
Diacember 1994
I also wish to receive the
following services (for an
extra fee):
1. ❑ Addressee's Address
2. 0 Restricted Delivery
Consult postmaster for fee.
4a. Article Number
$5q g 65 /4
4b. Service Type
❑ Registered
❑ Express Mail
❑ Retum Receipt for Merchandise 0 COD
7. Date of Delivery
2_ --2,7
Certified
0 Insured
8. Addressee's Address (Only'if requested
and fee is paid)
102595.97-B-0179 Domestic Return Receipt
\NONIl�,9
January 27, 1998
a
City 0/
Mr. and Mrs. Lee Rosen
58 Hidden Valley Road
Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274
i
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. 571, Request for a Variance to construct a retaining wall
that will encroach into the front yard setback and request for Site Plan Review to
construct substantial additions to an existing single family dwelling at 7 Lower
Blackwater Canyon Road (Lot 83-RH), Rolling Hills, CA.
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Rosen:
/
This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission voted at their regular meeting
on January 20, 1998 to direct staff to prepare a resolution to approve your request for a
Variance to construct a retaining wall that will encroach into the front yard setback and request
for Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions to an existing single family dwelling in
Zoning Case No. 571. The Planning Commission will review and consider the draft resolution,
together with the conditions of approval, at an upcoming meeting and make its final decision on
your application at that upcoming meeting The findings and conditions of approval of the
draft resolution will be forwarded to you before being signed by the Planning Commission
Chairman and City Clerk. The Planning Commission's action is not final until the resolution has
been approved by the Commission.
The Planning Commission's 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 its proceedings in accordance with the provisions of the
Municipal Code.
The Planning Commission's action taken by resolution approving the development application
is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Commission on February 17, 1998. 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 February 23,1998.
Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
LOLA M. UNGAR
PLANNING DIRECTOR
cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect
Printed on Recycled Paper.
December 5, 1997
• •
elly O/ ROLL`•ng ilL& INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
STATUS OF APPLICATION & NOTIFICATION OF MEETINIz LUNG HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377.7288
E-mail: cityotrh@aol.com
Mr. and Mrs.Lee Rosen
58 Hidden Valley Road
Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 571, Request for Site Plan Review to construct substantial
additions to an existing single family dwelling at 7 Lower Blackwater Canyon
Road (Lot 83-RH), Rolling Hills, CA.
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Rosen:
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. 571 has been set for public hearing consideration by the
Planning Commission at their meeting on Tuesday, December 16, 1997.
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,
December 12,1997. 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.
&tr.—
LOLA M. UNGAR
PLANNING DIRECTOR
cc: Mr. Criss Gunderson, Architect
Printed on Recycled Paper.