619, Major remodel and addition of , Correspondence• •
City 0/ leollinf _AA
CERTIFIED MAIL
October 30, 2000
Mr. and Mrs.Pervaiz Lodhie
12 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
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: APPEAL PERIOD AND AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM
ZONING CASE NO. 619, 12 UPPER BLACKWATER CANYON ROAD (LOT
97-1-RH)
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-25
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Lodhie:
This letter shall serve to notify you that the Planning Commission adopted a
resolution on October 17, 2000 granting a request for Site Plan Review to construct
substantial additions to an existing single family residence that requires grading at 12
Upper Blackwater Canyon Road (Lot 97-1-RH), Rolling Hills, CA in Zoning Case No.
619. That action, accompanied by the record of the proceedings before the
Commission will be reported to the City Council on November 13, 2000.
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(6) 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. 2000-25. 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:
C,
Printed on Recycled Pape,.
•
Los Angeles County Registrar- order
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.
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 D ector
ENC: AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-25
APPEAL SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE
EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN
cc: Mr. Tony Ashai, Ashai Designs
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
The Registrar -Recorder's Office requires that the form be notarized before recordation.
AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
ZONING CASE NO. 619
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
I (We) the undersigned state:
I am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as follows:
12 UPPER BLACKWATER CANYON ROAD (LOT 97-1-RH), ROLLING HILLS, CA.
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. 619 SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Signature Signature
Name typed or printed Name typed or printed
Address Address
City/State City/State
Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public..
State of Califomia
County of Los Angeles)
On before me,
personally appeared
L
ott Recorder's Use Only
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
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
August 10, 2000
Mr. and Mrs. Pervaiz and Almos Lodhie
12 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road
Rolling Hills, California 90274
SUBJECT: Zoning Case No. 619
Field Trio on Auoust 5. 2000
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Lodhie:
This letter will confirm receipt of your correspondence dated August 7, 2000, with respect to the above -
referenced matter. While I apologize for any misunderstandings that may have transpired at the
August 5, 2000 field trip to your property, the City must take issue with the allegations set forth in your
letter. The members of the Planning Commission are consummate professionals and your insinuations
that the Planning Commission was unprepared for the field trip and treated you differently from other
applicants based on your ethnicity are without merit.
As you are aware, the City of Rolling Hills is an entirely residential community with a distinct rural
character. The City's zoning code is designed to preserve the distinct rural residential character of
Rolling Hills and ensure development that is compatible with the City's land use policies. All development
must conform to the City's existing low profile, ranch style architecture and be designed to be sensitive to
the natural environment and the City's open space requirements. Excessive grading and environmental
disturbance are strongly discouraged.
Field trips to project sites are a standard part of the application process in the City of Rolling Hills.
Review of the project plans provides only limited insight into the overall impact of the project on the
community. Field trips to the site allow the Planning Commission to observe the natural conditions on the
property, the surrounding neighborhood, and the impact the proposed development will have on each of
• these. For developments such as yours, completed silhouettes of the proposed construction are required
of all applicants before the City conducts its field trip.
In preparation for a scheduled field trip, the Planning Commission carefully reviews the plans submitted
by the applicant and develops a list of concerns and questions they need answered to properly evaluate
the proposed project. Typically, the applicant's architect attends the field trip to explain the technical
aspects of the project.
On Saturday, August 5, 2000, the Planning Commission had three scheduled field trips. Your property
was the second site inspected by the Planning Commission. I duly informed you in my letter dated
July 24, 2000, that the Planning Commission would begin their field inspections promptly at 8:00 AM.
The letter also indicates that you and/or your representative should be present to answer any questions
regarding the proposed project.
The Planning Commission arrived at your property at approximately 8:15 a.m. ready to begin its on -site
inspection. Both you and your wife were present and the silhouette was in place. Your architect,
however, was not in attendance. Despite your assertions to the contrary, you were not prepared for the
621635-2
Printed en Recycled Paper.
Pervaiz and Almos Lodhie
August 10, 2000
Page 2
Planning Commission's visit. The Planning Commission specifically requested information with regard to
the location of the additions, the proposed location of the basement, where the cut and fill would occur,
and how the grading would be accomplished. You were unable to provide this information, and in your
architect's absence, I was required to lead the tour of the site. I was able to point out the basement
location and show the Commission the general parameters of the project. But, I was not able to answer
questions specifically related to the proposed grading.
The Planning Commission spent nearly 45 minutes at your property. Such a lengthy on -site field trip is
highly unusual for the City. Typically these field trips last approximately 15-20 minutes. In the absence of
your architect, the Planning Commission made every effort to fully review your site and afford you an
opportunity to address their concerns and questions. The Planning Commission expressed reservations
about the size of the proposed residence in relation to neighboring residences, the large amount of
grading being p-roposed-,-th-e- cutting "of the- atready steep westr(stfeet sidey sl-Cpe, and the fill -et the eagt
side of the building pad where there is a steep incline. The Planning Commission suggested that you
consider modifying the proposed plans and schedule a second.field trip to the site when your architect
could be present.
Although your architect did arrive shortly before 9:00 a.m. as the Planning`Commission was leaving, there
was insufficient time to properly discuss the project. The Planning Commission still had to conduct a third 2
field trip, and their commitments to the other property owner required the Planning Commission to move -
on to the next site without further delay. The Planning Commission's failure to complete the inspection of "
your project site was due not to a lack of preparation on the part of the Planning Commission but, rather,
your inability to answer their questions in the absence of your architect during the field trip.
With respect to your concern over the safety issues of the silhouette, you are free to remove the
silhouette pending the Planning Commission's rescheduled field trip to your site. However, as the
Planning Commission indicated, you may wish to modify your project to address the concerns raised
during the field trip and, if the silhouette is removed, it must be reinstalled before any future field trip to
allow the Planning Commission to properly perform their evaluation of your project. If modifications are
made, the silhouette must be altered accordingly to reflect those modifications.
Finally, your allegations that the Planning Commission treated you differently because of your ethnicity
are unfounded. As previously noted, the construction of silhouettes and the on -site field trips are
standard procedures in the Rolling Hills review process. They are required of all applicants, and you
were treated no differently than any other applicant in your position. The problems you encountered
stemmed from your inability to provide the information requested by the Planning Commission and the
absence of your architect during the field trip inspection. The purpose of these field trips is to allow the
Planning Commission to adequately evaluate a proposed project in order to enable them to make an
informed decision on the project's compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood and the City as a
whole.
The City is willing to work with you to reach a mutually acceptable resolution to this matter. But, the City
cannot alter its standard procedures to accommodate your particular project. To do so would be unfair to
the other applicants who are required to comply with these procedures. A field trip is a necessary part of
the application process, particularly for projects of this magnitude. If the field trip reveals a project may
potentially negatively impact the surrounding neighborhood, the Planning Commission, as was the case
here, routinely recommends modifications to mitigate the impact. A follow-up field trip will need to be
scheduled to your property at a time that is mutually acceptable to both you and your architect to allow
the Commission to adequately evaluate any modifications to the project in response to the August 5,
2000 field trip.
Pervaiz and Almos Lodhie
August 10, 2000
Page 3
If you have any questions, or I can provide any further assistance in this matter, please do not hesitate to
contact me directly.
Sincerely,
Lola Ungar
Planning Director
cc: Mr. Craig Nealis, City Manager
Mr. Michael Jenkins, City Attorney
Mr. Robert Pittman, Assistant City Attorney
Mr. Tony Ashai, Ashai Designs
Pervaiz & Altnos Lodhie •
12 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road
Rolling Hills, California 90274
August 7, 2000 FAX NO: (310) 377-7288
Lola M. Ungar
Planning Director
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
No. 2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, Califomia 90274
Reference: Zoning Case No. 619
Subject: Silhouette Property Inspection
AUG 0 8 2000
CITY OF ROLLING- HILLS
Av
Dear Ms. Ungar:
First let me say, we are extremely upset with the way we were treated by the Rolling.
Hills Planning Commission last Saturday, August 5. It is very obvious to us that the
Planning Commission was ill prepared for this scheduled trip.
On July 18, 2000, we presented to the Rolling Hills Planning Commission our home
improvement plans. At this time, the Commission determined that an on -site inspection
was necessary. Per your letter of July 24, (copy attached), we immediately hired a
contractor to construct the necessary silhouette which needed to be completed in time
for the Planning Commission to inspect our property between 8:00 and 9:00 AM, August
5, 2000. We were prepared and ready.
Within a matter of minutes and before the Commission actually inspected our property,
they announced that they would not complete the inspection and would have to make
arrangements to come back at a later date. When I asked what date, no anticipated date
could be given. I asked if the silhouette guidelines had to be kept in place. There
response was, "No, but you'll need to have it reconstructed if you do take it down." At a
cost of $2,300, that would not be a viable solution.
The silhouette is really a major problem and safety hazard, not to mention an eyesore.
We are unable to park one of our cars in the garage, and we have to maneuver (with
difficulty) to get the second car out. We also have three children who use our property
for recreation and play. This now is impossible due to the possibility of injury. We do not
want any of their friends to come over due to this exact possibility.
Because the remodeling of our home is necessary, we must have approval in the
shortest time -period possible. Besides being crowded and needing additional bedrooms,
bathrooms, etc., our home will be used for accommodating and entertaining intemational
business clients.
When we hired our architect and our plans were drawn, we made sure we were always
within the requirements of the City of Rolling Hills, in every aspect, including the
Lola M. Ungar • •
Page 2
City of Rolling Hills
construction of the Silhouette per your instructions. Why the delay? Could this have
something to do with our ethnicity?
I am upset and insulted by the way the City and the Planning Commission has treated
us. The Commission had more than enough time to go over our remodeling plans before
they came to our property last Saturday. There is absolutely no excuse for the actions of
the Committee members. They refused to cooperate with us, even though we followed
all of your instructions and fulfilled every requirement.
I have lived in this area for over 16 years. I started my business in this area and now
employee over 200 people. I am a well-known and respected intemational businessman
in the South Bay. I also know that if I ran my company this way, I would not be in
business long.
I hope we can get this situation taken care of so we can proceed immediately with our
remodeling. If not, I will seek advice from my attorney and we will proceed from there.
incerely,
ervaiz & A os Lodhie
AL:adg
CC:
Godfrey Pemell, Mayor
Craig Nealis, City Manager
Bob Ackerman, Esq.,
Corleto & Ackerman
15760 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 801
Encino, CA 91436
Enclosure
City 0/ Roiling -AZ
STATUS OF APPLICATION
& NOTIFICATION OF MEETING
July 6, 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.Pervaiz Lodhie
12 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 619, Request for Site Plan Review to construct substantial
additions to an existing single family residence that requires grading at 12 Upper
Blackwater Canyon Road (Lot 97-1-RH) Rolling Hills, CA.
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Lodhie:
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. 619 has been set for public hearing consideration by the
Planning Commission at their meeting on Tuesday. July 18. 2000.
The meeting will begin at 7:30 PM in the Council Chambers, Rolling Hills City Hall Administration
Building, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills. You or your designated representative must
attend to present your project and to answer questions.
The staff report for this project will be available at the City Hall after 3:00 PM on Friday, July 14,
2000. We will forward the report to you.
Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
PleeLk
LOLA M. UNGAR
PLANNING DIRECTOR
cc: Mr. Tony Ashai, Ashai Designs
C,
Printed on Recycled
C'ity 0/ leoffin _JUL
FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION
August 16, 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.Pervaiz Lodhie
12 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 619, Request for Site Plan Review to construct substantial
additions to an existing single family residence that requires grading at 12 Upper
Blackwater Canyon Road (Lot 97-1-RH) Rolling Hills, CA.
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Lodhie:
We have arranged for the planning Commission to, conduct a field inspection of yoUriaroperty to
vieW a silhouette of the proposed prOjeCt on Saturday, September 9, 2000. '
The Planning Commission's timetable is to meet at .8:00 AM at 12 Upper Blackwater Canyon .Road:
The site must be prepared according to the enclosed Silhouette Construction iGuidelines and the ,
following requirements:
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;
• Stake the limits of the building pad;
• Show the height of the finished floor of the proposed
building pad.
• Stake any proposed retaining walls; and
• Stake area limits of proposed cut and fill.
The owner and/or representative should be present to answer any questions regarding the proposal.
Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Lola M. Ungar
Planning Director
Enclosure: Silhouette Construction Guidelines
cc: Mr. Tony Ashai, Ashai Designs
Printed on Recycled Pat'ler.
•
y leollinf flit/6
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
SILHOUETTE CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES
When required by the Planning Commission or City Council, a silhouette of
proposed construction should be erected for the week preceding the
designated Planning Commission or City Council meeting.
Silhouettes should be constructed with 2" x 4" lumber. Printed boards are not
acceptable.
Bracing Should be provided Where possible
Wire, twine or other suitable material should be used' to delineate roof - ridges
and eaVes.
Small pieces of cloth or flags should be attached tO the wire or twine to •aid in
the visualization of the proposed construction.
The application may be delayed if inaccurate :or incomplete silhouettes are
constructed.
If you have any further questions contact the Planning Department Staff at
(310) 377-1521.
SECTION
4
ir4****0*1*
4
r4•441.4“444.141444
PLAN
Printed on Recycled Paper.
0
„. City .1) Rollinf _Alio INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
a-
- )--
ca
FIELD TRIP NOTIFICATION
July 24, 2000
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
Mr. and Mrs.Pervaiz Lodhie
12 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 619, Request for Site Plan Review to construct substantial
additions to an existing single family residence that requires grading at 12 Upper
Blackwater Canyon Road (Lot 97-1-RH) Rolling Hills, CA.
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Lodhie:
We have arranged for the Planning Commission to conduct a field inspection of your property to
view a silhouette of the proposed project on Saturday, August 5, 2000.
The Planning Commission's timetable is to meet at 8:00 AM at the deck located at the south end of
10 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road and the north end of your property and then proceed to the
project site.
The site must be prepared according to the enclosed Silhouette Construction Guidelines and the
following requirements:
• 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;
• Stake the limits of the building pad; and
• Show the height of the finished floor of the proposed
building pad.
•The owner and/or representative should be present to answer any questions regarding the proposal.
Please call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Lola M. Ungar
Planning Director
Enclosure: Silhouette Construction Guidelines
cc: Mr. Tony Ashai, Ashai Designs
®Printed on Recycled Paper.
„/ leollinf Jjdf�
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
SILHOUETTE CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES
When required by the Planning Commission or City Council, a silhouette of
proposed construction should be erected for the week preceding the
designated Planning Commission or City Council meeting.
Silhouettes should be constructed with 2” x 4" lumber. Printed boards are not
acceptable.
Bracing should be provided where possible.
Wire, twine or other suitable material should be used to delineate roof ridges
and eaves.
Small pieces of cloth or flags should be attached to the wire or twine to aid in
the visualization of the proposed construction.
The application may be delayed if inaccurate or incomplete silhouettes are
constructed.
If you have any further questions contact the Planning Department Staff at
(310) 377-1521.
SECTION
will[h+morT,4,,h40
PLAN
stairo.*".4.
4.
0.
0.
4.
Prtnted on Recycled Paper,
•
City 0/ leoffi,4 _WA
•
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills
will hold a Public Hearing at 7:30 PM on Tuesday, July 18, 2000 in the Council Chambers
of City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA for the purpose of receiving
public input regarding the following:
ZONING CASE NO. 619, Request for Site Plan Review to construct substantial additions
to an existing single family residence that requires grading at 12 Upper Blackwater
Canyon Road (Lot 97-1-RH) Rolling Hills, CA.
APPLICATIONS REQUIRED BY MUNICIPAL CODE: Site Plan Review - Section 17.46.
The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Any person is welcome to review the subject application and plans prior to the public
hearing at the City Hall Administration Building located at 2 Portuguese Bend Road,
Rolling Hills, CA.
If you challenge the approval or denial of this permit application in court, you may be
limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning
Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing.
Publish in Palos Verdes Peninsula News July 8, 2000.
Printed on Recycled Paper.
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS.
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL AND POSTING
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SS
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
I am a citizen of the United States. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within
proceeding; my business address is 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California.
On the
I served the within
day of , 2000
Ale 6/9
0
a copy of which is .annexed hereto and made a part hereof, on the person, or persons, named
below by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelopewithTostage thereon fully
.! prepaid, in the United States mail at Rolling Hills,: California addressed astollows:.‘
FAXED MAILED
DELIVERED
Palos Verdes City Attorney City Manager
Planning Commission
Peninsula News
Also posted at City Hall.
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on the day of
, 2000 at Rolling Hills, California.
MELINDA SCHOEN
CLERK
PROOF OF PUBLICATION This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES,
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident
of the County aforesaid; I am over the age of
eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the
above -entitled matter. I am the principle clerk of the
printer of the
Palos Verdes Peninsula News
a newspaper of general circulation, printed and
published semi -weekly
in the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
County of Los Angeles, and which newspaper has
been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by
the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles,
State of California, under the
date of
October 15 19 63
Case Number C 824957; that
the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy
(set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been
published in each regular and entire issue of said
newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the
following dates, to -wit:
all in the year 20 OD.
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Rancho Palos Verdes
Dated at
California, this day of_i . 2000
ggE1119
JUL 1 1 20
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
Proof of Publication of
PVPN# (14-
P.V.P. News No. blb4
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Planning
Commission of the City of Rolling Hills will hold a Public
Hearing at 7:30 PM on Tuesday, July 18, 2000 in the
Council Chambers of City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend
Road, Rolling Hills, CA for the purpose of receiving pub-
lic input regarding the following:
ZONING CASE NO. 619, Request for Site Plan Review
to construct substantial additions to an existing single
family residence that requires grading at 12 Upper
Blackwater Canyon Road (Lot 97-1-RH), Rolling Hills,
CA.
APPLICATIONS REQUIRED BY MUNICIPAL CODE:
Site Plan Review- Section 17.46.
The project has been determined to be categorically
exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA).
Any person is welcome to review the subject applica-
tion and plans prior to the public hearing at the City Hall
Administration Building located at 2 Portuguese Bend
Road, Rolling Hills, CA.
If you challenge the approval or denial of this permit
application in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public
hearing described in this notice, or in written correspon-
dence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior
to, the public hearing.
Published in the Palos Verdes Peninsula News on July
_8, 2000.
Signature