432A, Modification to Reso 92-5; con, CorrespondenceHaw did&Savings
ANO LOAN ASSOCIATION
:1501 SEPULVEDA BOULEVARD • MANHATTAN BEACH, CALIPORNIA 90,66 • PHONE (310) 796-5500
February 15, 1994
Rolling Hills Homeowner's Association
RE: 6 Ringbit Rd., W., Rolling Hills, CA 90274
To Whom It May Concern:
Please consider this letter as authorization for Rob Buchan and his
Associates to acquire any necessary information regarding the above
mentioned property.
Rob Buchan of Landmark Realty Center represents Hawthorne Savings
and Loan Assoc. as agent for the above property.
Should you have any questions regarding same, please do not
hesitate to contact me directly at (310) 796-5529.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
S
xae! C°out ler
Vice Pr sident, Asset Management
cc: file
Km
TOTAL P.O2
SEP 20 1993
ATE ART ,
0 93 1820147
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO
t AwTHORNf SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION
ATTa JEANNIE HOOGKINS {
19251 SO. HAWTHORNE eLVD. Stewart f Title
HAWTHORNS, CA 90250
AWL TAX STATEMENTS TO
Same ss Above
Title Order No. 511806
. /3
Trusts, Sale No. F-58175 Reference No. 21100738-1
TRUSTEE'S DEED UPON SALE
A.P.N. NO. 7567-10-8
The undersigned grantor declares:
1) The grantee herein was the foreclosing beneficiary.
2) The amount of the unpaid debt together with costs was....... S 384 , 9 78 , 13
3) The amount pald by the grantee at the trustee sale was...... $337.214 , 74 '
4) The documentary transfer tax Is None
5) Said property Is In the City of ROLLING HILLS
and HAWTHORNE FINANCIAL CORPORATION, A DELAWARE CORPORATION
(herein called Trustee), as the duty appointed Trustee under the Deed of Trust hereinafter described, does
hereby grant and convey, but without warranty, express or Implied. to HAWTHORNE SAVINGS AND LOAN
ASSOCIATION, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION
(herein called Grantee), all of Its right, title and Interest In and to that certain property situated In the County
of TOS ANGELES State of CalHomla, described as follows: SEE EXHIBIT 'A' ATTACHED
AND MADE A PART HEREOF. APN 47567-10-8
RECITALS:
This conveyance is nude pursuant to the powers conferred upon Trustee by that certain Deed of Trust
dated 11/21/88 and executed by ISCO INDUSTRIES INC. , A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION
as Trustor, and recorded 12/01/88 as Instrument No. 88-1917323 In book
page of Official Records of j,OS ANGELES County, California, and aver fulfillment of
the conditions specified In said Deed of Trust authorizing this conveyance
Default occurred as set forth In a Notice of Default and Election to Sep which was recorded In the office of the
Recorder of said County.
All requirements of law regarding the mailing of copies of notices or the.publcatlon of a copy of the Notice of
Default or the personal delivery of the copy of the Notice of Default and the posting and publication of copies
of the Notice of a Sale have been complied with.
Said property was sold by said Trustee at public auction on 07/08/93 et the Place named in the Notice of
Sate, in the County of j1OS ANGELES , Ccilforma, In which the property is situated. Grantee, being the
highest bidder at such sale, became the purchaser of said property and paid therefore to said trustee the
amount bid being $337.214.74 in lawful money of the United States, or by the satisfaction, pro
tanto, of the obligations then secured by said Deed of Trust.
Date: 07/12/93
HAWTHORNE FINANCIAL CORPORATION
X Ord
SCOTT RRALY, RESIDENT
X �„�i/L.,
•
JAt1ES D SAGE, SECRETARY
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
On 0-1 R-09 before nor, AR FHA t^ASFV , a Nosy Putbdo In and for Rad county, personalty pp. rad
QCt1TT ARSry ann .T .1MPn n portonolly know p
me Or proved to me on the bode of sadshatory evfdwwy b be the portant') *how nse(a) Woe submitted to do ',Rein Instrument
and d.,, . . „, J to the that hWatWtt»y usouud the ,arse in Ids/hontheir oliso,ized c eatypte4, sod tot by hWtsrNi* efp,wrr+(s)
the the prson(s)• or entity upon bdsdl of *Molt the parson(*) acted, exso„ led the Instrument
and offfotd
Notary Pubao In and for r ad Covey and Syr.
LORENA CASEY
f ATRDDo1)
I is LORENA CASEY [
< . , COMM. t 985105 Z
a 'lt!ii J 1kiary Public — Coxforrnla
] LO•, ANGELES COUNTY
Q My Comm. t *cs MAR 19.1977
s
Cly OyD Rolling INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 195:7,, :
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
October 19, 1993
Mr. Luigi Schiappa, President
E.S. Development
220 Pacific Coast Highway
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
SUBJECT: EXPIRATION OF EXTENSION APPROVALS
RESOLUTION NO. 92-34
ZONING CASE NO. 432A
6 RINGBIT ROAD WEST (LOT 8-A-2-SF)
Dear Mr.Schiappa:
It has been almost two years since your project was approved by the
Planning Commission. We would like to remind you that your
extension approvals for the subject zoning case will expire on
January 11, 1994.
Section 17.46.080(B)(3) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code
requires that any extension beyond the second anniversary shall not
be granted unless a public hearing is held and approval granted in
the same manner and based upon the same criteria as required for
approval of the original project.
Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
LOLA UNGAR
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
Printed on Recycled Paper.
• f
C1iy 0/l2 Rolling _AP?,
December 18, 1992
Mr. Luigi Schiappa, President
E.S. Development
220 Pacific Coast Highway
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
' ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
SUBJECT: Time extension approval for Zoning Case No. 432A
Resolution No. 92-34
Dear Mr. Schiappa:
This letter shall serve as official notification that a one year
time extension was APPROVED by the Planning Commission at their
regular meeting on December 15, 1992 for the subject case.
We have enclosed a copy of Resolution No. 92-34, specifying the
conditions of approval set forth by the Planning Commission.
Note that this approval will expire on January 11, 1994 and unless
you acquire permits before then, under Section 17.34.080.B you must
refile based upon the same criteria as for the issuance of a new
permit.
Feel free to call me if you have any questions at (310) 377-1521.
Sincerely,
LOLA M. UNGAR�,J
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
Printed on Recycled Paper.
RESOLUTION NO. 92-34
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION NO. 92-5, A
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE
FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE, CORRAL, AND
RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN
ZONING CASE NO. 432A.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES
HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. A request has been filed by Mr. Luigi Schiappa,
E.S. Development with respect to real property located at 6 Ringbit
Road West, Rolling Hills (Lot 8-A-2 SF) requesting a modification
to a previously approved Variance to permit encroachment into the
front yard setback to construct a stable, corral, and retaining
walls; and Site Plan Review of a proposed new residence. The
modification requested is to extend the allowable time period for
building construction.
Section 2. The Commission considered this item at a meeting
on December 15, 1992 at which time information was presented
indicating that the extension of time is necessary for the
applicant to acquire the finances for building construction.
Section 3. . Based upon information and evidence submitted, the
Planning Commission does hereby amend Paragraph A, Section 11 of
Resolution No. 92-5 to read as follows:
"A. The Variance and Site Plan Review approvals shall expire
within two years of the approval of this Resolution.".
Section 4. Except as herein amended, the provisions of
Resolution No. 92-5 shall continue to be in full force and effect.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 15TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 1992.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
K jk.
MARILYN KERN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
• •
♦/
RESOLUTION NO. 92-34
PAGE 2
The foregoing Resolution No. 92-34 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO RESOLUTION NO. 92-5, A
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN ENCROACHMENT INTO THE
FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT A STABLE, CORRAL, AND
RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN
ZONING CASE NO. 432A.
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission on December 15, 1992 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Commissioners Frost, Hankins, Lay, Raine and Chairman Roberts
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
DEPUTY I"TY CLERK
December 3,.1992
City. of Rolling Hills
Attn:'Lola Ungar, Principal Planner
No. 2 Portuguese: Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA., 90274
Re: Request for Extension
Zoning Case No. 432A, Resolution No. 92-5
#6 Ringbit Road West (Lot 8-A-2-SF)
Dear Ms. Ungar:.
DEC 0 7 1992"
c.1a'OE ROLLING HILL
CERTIFIED MAIL -
Return Receipt Requested
Let this missive serve as an official request to the Rolling Hills
Planning "Commission that wehereby seek a one year extension in
the. 'above :referenced zoning case.,
Financial constraints that have occurred recently necessitate this,
supplication. -Rest assured we will do everything in ourpower_
to move forward in,achieving entitlements to construct the
proposes) residence - in your fine city.,
We ask for a favorable response from the Planning Commission':
and would like a.n extension to January 11, 1994.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Development, Inc.
220 SOUTH PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, SUITE 112 • REDONDO BEACH, 'CA _90277.•"(213) 37675058.'• FAX # (213) 376-4326
eify ie0ii4 Jh/I
December 2, 1992
Mr. Luigi Schiappa, President
E.S. Development, Inc.
220 S. Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 112
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
•
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 19571
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND'RO D
ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
SUBJECT: EXPIRATION OF APPROVALS
ZONING CASE NO. 432A, RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
6 RINGBIT ROAD WEST (LOT 8-A-2-SF)
Dear Mr. Schiappa:
We would like to remind you that your approvals in the subject
zoning case will expire on January 11, 1992.
You can extend approvals for one year only if you apply to the
Planning Commission in writing to request an extension prior to the
expiration date.
Feel free to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
LOLA UNGAR
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
Printed on Recycled Paper.
•
City� O /Ofling „AIL INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
March 19, 1992
Mrs. Lynn F. Ramsdell
Remax Realty of Palos Verdes Peninsula
450 Silver Spur Road
Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(213) 377.1521
FAX: (213) 377-7288
SUBJECT: PROPERTY OFFERING AT 6 RINGBIT ROAD WEST (LOT 8-A-2-SF)
Dear Mrs. Ramsdell:
It has come to the attention of the City of Rolling Hills that the E.S. Development
property at 6 Ringbit Road West is being offered for sale with approved City
plans for development.
At this time, we urge you to inform any prospective client that the approvals for
Zoning Case No. 432A run with the land, however, per Section 17.34.080.A of the.
Rolling Hills Municipal Code, approvals will expire on January 11, 1993. Approval
may be extended by the Planning Commission or City Council for an additional
year only if an application is filed on or before the expiration date (Section
17.34.080.B). A copy of Resolution No. 92-5 is enclosed for your records.
We wish you the best of luck with your real estate business. Please do not
hesitate to call me at (310) 377-1521 if you have any further questions regarding
the permit process.
Sincerely,
gro-4,
LOLA UNGAR
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
Attachment: Section 17.34.080 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code
Resolution No. 92-5
019 ie01ing j/, INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
O
CERTIFIED MAIL
January 21, 1992
Mr. Luigi Schiappa, President
E. S. Development
220 Pacific Coast Highway
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(213) 377-1521
FAX: (213) 377-7288
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 432A. 6 Ringbit Road West (Lot 8-A-2-SF)
APPEAL PERIOD AND AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM,
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
Dear Mr. Schiappa:
This letter shall serve as official notification that Zoning Case No. 432A was APPROVED
by the Planning Commission and the enclosed resolution was approved on January 11. 1992
at an adjourned regular meeting. The Planning Commission's decision will be reported to
the City Council at their regular meeting on January 27. 1992.
The approval will become effective:
(1) Twenty days after the receipt of this letter if no appeals
are filed within that time period (Section 17.32.140 of the
Rolling Hills Municipal Code attached), AND
(2) An Affidavit of Acceptance Form and the subject Resolution
must be filed by you with the County Recorder (Section 17.32.087).
We have enclosed a copy of RESOLUTION No. 92-5 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 received the Resolution, please complete the enclosed
AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM, have the signature(s) notarized, and forward to:
County Recorder. Room 15.227 North Broadway. Los Angeles. CA 90012 with a check in
the amount of $ 5.00 for the first page and $ 2.00 for each additional nape.
• •
Resolution 92-5
Page 2
The City will notify the Los Angeles County Building & Safety Division to issue permits only
when the Affidavit of Acceptance Forms are received by us and any conditions of the
Resolutions required prior to issuance of building permits are met.
Please feel free to call me at (213) 377-1521 if you have any questions.
SINCERELY,
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
ENCLOSURES: RESOLUTION NO. 92-5, EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT
PLAN, AFFIDAVIT OF ACCEPTANCE FORM, AND APPEAL
SECTION OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE.
cc: Mr. Tom Hood
/r
It
•
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN
ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT
A STABLE, CORRAL, AND RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE
PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 432A.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES
HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Applications were duly filed by Mr. Luigi
Schiappa, E.S. Development with respect to real property located at
6 Ringbit Road West, Rolling Hills (Lot 8-A-2 SF) requesting: (1)
A Variance to permit encroachment into the front yard setback to
construct a stable, corral, and retaining walls; and (2) Site Plan
Review of a proposed new residence. A previous proposal was denied
by the Planning Commission appealed to the City Council. During
the appeal, the applicant revised the plans and the City Council
remanded the revised application back to the Planning Commission
for further action.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed
public hearing to consider the applications on November 19, 1991
and December 17, 1991, and at a field trip visit on December 7,
1991.
Section 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project is
categorically exempt from environmental review under the California
Environmental Quality Act.
Section 4. Sections 17.32.010 through 17.32.030 permit
approval of a Variance fror 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. A Variance to Sections 17.16.011.H, 17.16.060, and
17.28.022 is required because these sections state that corrals or
pens not be located in the front yard; that every parcel in the
RA-S zone shall have a front yard of not less than fifty feet,
measured horizontally from the front easement line; and that
required yards be maintained unoccupied from the ground up of any
structures. The applicant is requesting a Variance to encroach up
to 31 feet into the 50 foot front yard setback to construct a 450
square foot stable, and a 550 square foot corral within the front
setback. The Planning Commission finds as follows:
A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and
conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do
not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and
zone. The Variance for the stable and corral is necessary because
the topography of the site prevents the construction of a stable
and corral in the rear yard. The existing building pad is small
•
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
PAGE 2
and the rear yard slopes down to e canyon, thereby precluding the
creation of a flat area for a stable or corral in the rear yard.
The area proposed for the stable and corral is the only place
available on this property.
B. The Variance is necessary for the preservation and
enjoyment of a substantial property richt possessed by other
property in the same vicinity and zone, but which is denied the
property in question. The Variance is necessary because the
General Plan and Zoning Ordinance encourage the inclusion of
stables and corrals on properties in the City of Rolling Hills and
a stable and corral could not be feasibly located in the rear yard.
C. The granting of the Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is
located. The Variance will permit the construction of a stable and
corral which will not impact the street or neighboring properties
because they will be nestled into the hillside and will not be
seen. Also, the building pad for the stable is located down a long
driveway so that it will not be visible from the street.
Section 5. Based upon the foregoing findings; the Planning
Commission hereby approves the Variance to permit the construction
of a 450 square foot stable and a 550 square foot corral to
encroach up to 31 feet into the front yard setback, subject to the
conditions specified in Section 11.
Section 6. A Variance to Sections 17.16.060 and 17.28.022 is
required to construct right-angle retaining walls that will
encroach up to 3 feet into the fifty (50) foot front yard setback,
a total of 51 feet in length, that will not be more than 5 feet in
height at any one point.
A. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances and
conditions applicable to the property and the intended use that do
not apply generally to the other property in the same vicinity and
zone. The Variance for the retaining wall is necessary to support
the hillside slope and to improve the geologic stability of the
site at the driveway access turnaround area. Construction of the
retaining wall into the front yard setback will permit residence to
be set back further from the edge of the building pad. in the rear
so as to reduce the prominence of the residence on the pad. •
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 the
property in question. The Variance is necessary because it will
provide stability to the existing slope and permit a driveway
access turnaround_ area of sufficient size to permit necessary
vehicular maneuverability.
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
PAGE 3
C. The granting of the Variance will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or
improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is
located. The Variance will permit the construction of a retaining
wall which will provide improved geologic stability and drainage to
the subject property. Also, the wall will not be visible from
immediately surrounding residences.
Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves the Variance to permit the 51 foot long
retaining wall to encroach up to 3 feet into the front yard setback
not to exceed 5 feet in height at any one point as indicated on
Exhibit A attached hereto, subject to the conditions specified in
Section 11.
Section 8. Section 17.34.010 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 may be made which
involve changes to grading or an increase to the size of the
building or structure by more than twenty-five percent (25%) in any
thirty-six month period.
Section 9. With respect to the Site Plan Review application,
the Planning Commission makes the following findings of fact:
A. The proposed development is compatible with the General
Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the
proposed 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 121,210 square feet. The proposed
residence (2,950 sq.ft.), garage (609 sq.ft.), swimming pool (366
sq.ft.)., and future stable (450 sq.ft.) will have 4,471 square feet
which constitutes 3.7% of the lot which is within the maximum 20%
structural lot coverage requirement. The total lot coverage
including paved areas and driveway will be 7,373 square feet which
equals 6.1% of the lot, which is within the 35% maximum overall lot
coverage requirement. The proposed project is on a relatively
large lot with most of the proposed structures located away from
the road so as to reduce the visual impact of the development. The
pad is smaller and much steeper than several neighboring
developments.
B. The proposed development preserves and integrates into
the site design, to the maximum extent feasible, existing natural
topographic features of the lot including surrounding native
vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms (such as
hillsides and knolls) because a minimum amount of grading is
proposed and will only be done to provide approved drainage that
• •
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
PAGE 4
will flow away from the proposed residence and existing neighboring
residences. The soil displaced by the drilling of caissons for the
residence will be placed in the shaded areas shown on the
development plan.
C. The development plan follows natural contours of the
site to minimize grading and the natural drainage courses will
continue to the canyons at the 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 substantially preserves the natural
and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage
because the new structures will not cause the structural and total
lot coverage to be exceeded. Further, the proposed project will
have a buildable pad coverage of 33.7%. Modifications have been
made to the application to reduce the size of the residence so as
to reduce its prominence on the lot. Significant portions of the
lot will remain undeveloped to allow scenic vistas across the
northwesterly portions of the property.
F. The proposed development is harmonious in scale and mass
with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences.
As indicated in Paragraph E, the lot coverage maximum will not be
exceeded and the proposed project is consistent with the scale of
the neighborhood. Modifications have been made to reduce the
prominence of the house on the lot by moving the structure away
from the edge of the building pad. Grading shall be permitted only
to restore the natural slope of the property. The ratio of the
proposed structure to lot coverage is similar to the ratio found on
several properties in the vicinity.
G. The proposed development 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, 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 10. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning
Commission hereby approves the Site Plan Review application for
Zoning Case No. 432A for a proposed residential development as
indicated on the development plan incorporated herein as Exhibit A
and subject to the conditionscontained in Section 11.
. •
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
PAGE 5
Section 11. The Variance to permit the construction of a
stable and corral that will encroach into the front yard setback
approved in Section 5, the Variance to permit the construction of
a retaining wall into the front yard setback approved in Section 7,
and the Site Plan Review for residential development approved in
Section 10 are subject to the following conditions:
A. The Variance shall expire unless used within one year
from the effective date of approval as defined in Section 17.32.110
of the Municipal Code. The Site Plan Review approval shall expire
within one year from the effective date of approval as defined in
Section 17.34.080.A.
B. It is declared and made a condition of the Variance and
the Site Plan Review approval, that if any conditions thereof are
violated, the Permit shall be suspended and the privileges granted
thereunder shall lapse; provided that the applicant has been given
written notice to cease such violation and has failed to do so for
a period of thirty (30) days.
C. All requirements of the Buildings and Construction
Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, and of the zone in which the
subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise
set forth in the Permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan.
D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial
conformance with the site plan on file marked Exhibit A except as
otherwise provided in these conditions.
E. An approved sprinkler system shall be required for the
residence and garage and the project shall conform to all
applicable Los Angeles County Fire Department requirements.
F. It is a requirement of this approval, that no water from
the pool shall be drained into the canyons. All pool water shall,
when drained, be removed from the site by truck.
G. All retaining walls incorporated into the project shall
not be greater than 5 feet in height at any one point.
H. To minimize the building on the pad, the structures,
driveway, graded slopes and retaining walls shall be screened and
shielded from view with native drought -resistant vegetation that is
compatible with the surrounding vegetation of the community.
I. A landscape plan must be submitted to and approved by
the City of Rolling Hills Planning Department staff prior to the
issuance of any grading and building permit. The landscaping plan
submitted must comply with the purpose and intent of the Site Plan
Review Ordinance, shall incorporate existing mature trees and
native vegetation, and shall utilize to the maximum extent
•
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
PAGE F
feasible, plants that are native to the area and/or consistent with
the rural character of the community.
A bond in the amount of the cost estimate of the implementation of
the landscaping plan plus 15% shall be required to be posted prior
to issuance of a grading and building permit and shall be retained
with the City for not less than two years after landscape
installation. The retained bond will be released by the City
Manager after the City Manager determines that the landscaping was
installed pursuant to the landscaping plan as approved, and that
such landscaping is properly established and in good condition.
J. 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 must
conform to the City of Rolling Hills standard of 2 to 1 slope
ratio.
K. 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.
L. The working drawings submitted to the County Department
of Building and Safety for plan check review must include a 550
square foot corral and must conform to the development plan
approved with this application.
M. Notwithstanding Section 17.34.070 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.
N. The building pad coverage shall not exceed 33.7%.
O. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance
of all conditions of this Variance, pursuant to Section 17.32.087,
or the approval shall not be effective.
P. Conditions A, C, D, E, G, H, I, J, K, L, N, and 0 of
this Variance and Site Plan Review approval must be complied with
prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit from the
County of Los Angeles.
RESOLUTION NO. 92-5
PAGE 7
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1992.
ALLAN ROBERTS, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
DIANE SA YER, DEPUTY ITY CLERK
The foregoing Resolution No. 92-5 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A VARIANCE TO PERMIT AN
ENCROACHMENT INTO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK TO CONSTRUCT
A STABLE, CORRAL, AND RETAINING WALLS AND GRANTING SITE
PLAN REVIEW APPROVAL IN ZONING CASE NO. 432A.
was approved and adopted at a regular adjourned meeting of the
Planning Commission'on January 11, 1992 by the following roll call
vote:
AYES: Commissioners Hankins, Lay. Raine and Chairman Roberts
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Frost
ABSTAIN: None
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND MAIL TO: Recorder's Use
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
GPI
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).
ACCEPTANCE FORM
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss
ZONING CASE NO. 4324
I (We) the undersigned state:
SITE PLAN REVIEW
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
x
I. am (We are) the owner(s) of the real property described as
follows:
647) 6; / ,ea,p4,, (- s -,4- Z - S F )
This property is the subject of the above numbered cases.
I am (We are) aware of, and accept, all the stated conditions in
said
ZONING CASE NO. «32/4 SITE PLAN FEVIEW ,C
VARIANCE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
I (We) certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Print
Owner
Name
Signature
Print
Owner
Name
Signature
Address Address
City/State City/State
Signatures must be acknowledged by a notary public.
ik State of
County of
f
On this the
day of
the undersigned Notary Public, personally appeared
❑ personally known to me
❑ proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence
to be the person(s) whose name(s)
within instrument, and acknowledged that
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary's Signature
19_, before me,
• ,
subscribed to the
executed it.
See Exhibit 'A" attached
hereto and made a part hereof
• 17.32.140-•17.32.180
17.32.140 Appeal• -Persons authorized. The action by
the Planning Commission in matters described in this �•
chapter shall be by majority vote and shall be final, con- (/
elusive and effective twenty calendar days after the filing l
of notice, as provided in Section 17.32.090, unless within r
said twenty -day period an appeal in writing is filed with
the City Clerk by any of the following:
A. The applicant;
B. Any person who protested, either orally or in
writing, as a matter of record, prior to the final vote
of the Planning Commission on the matter and who, in
addition, received or was entitled to receive the written
notice specified in subdivision 2 of subsection A of Section
17.40.060; or
C. The City Council, upon the affirmative vote of
three members of the Council. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord.
155 54, 1978: Ord. 33 56.14, 1960) .
17.32.150 Appeal--Contents--Fee. An appeal from any
order, requirement, decision, or determination under the
title must set forth specifically wherein it is claimed
there was an error or abuse of discretion by the Planning
Commission or wherein the decision of the Planning Commission
is not supported by the evidence in the matter. In
addition, any person appealing the decision of the Planning
Commission must pay to the City Clerk, at the time of filing
the written notice of appeal, the required fee specified by
resolution as hereafter adopted and from time to time
changed by the City Council. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord.
33 56.15, 1960).
17.32.160 Appeal--Recordkeeping. Upon receipt of a
written appeal and the payment of the fee required, the
City Clerk shall advise the Secretary of the Planning
Commission to transmit forthwith the complete record of
the entire proceeding before the Planning Commission. The
Secretary of the Planning Commission shall be charged with
the duty and responsibility of maintaining a complete file
and record on each application processed pursuant to this
chapter which shall contain the original application
processed pursuant to this chapter, all correspondence and
reports pertaining thereto, all affidavits of publication,
posting and mailing, as required by law, minutes of all
meetings of the Planning Commission pertaining to this
matter, advisory reports of technical agents, the report,
findings and decision of the Planning Commission, and an
affidavit of the mailing and the giving of said notice, as
required by this chapter. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord.
33 56.16, 1960).
215 (Rolling Hills 8/83)
110
•17. 32. 170-17. 32. 300
17.32.170 City Council to be Board of Zoning
Ad 'ustment _and Appeal . for th purpose of this chapter
and in conformity with Article 2 of Chapter 4, Title 7 of
the Government Code of the State of California, the City
Council appoints and creates each and every member of the
City Council, sitting as a whole, as the Board of Zoning
Adjustment and Zoning Appeal for the City. The City Council
shall meet as a Board of Zoning Adjustment and Zoning Appeal
in connection with other City business and, in so meeting,
shall be governed by all the rules and regulations now
adopted or hereafter adopted governing the procedure of
the City Council. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord. 33 56.17,
1960).
17.32.180 Appeal --Hearing_ Notice --Basis for decision.
The City Clerx shall set a nearing before the City Council
as t Zoning Adjustment and Zoning Appeal not less
tha after the receipt of said appeal or request
for review. The hearing shall be on at least ten days, prior
written notice to the applicant, the appellant, and to any
other persons who received or should have received, under
Section 17.40.060, notice of the hearing before the Planning
Commission. At such a hearing no new matter nor new
evidence shall be received or considered by the Board of
Zoning Adjustment and Appeal, and the Board shall make its
determination on the basis of the record brought before it
on appeal or review. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord. 33 56.18,
1960) .
17.32.190 Appeal --New hearing --Authorized when. Notwith-
standing the provisions of Section 17.32.180, the Board of
Zoning Adjustment and Appeal may, by majority action at any
time during the course of the review of a decision of the
Planning Commission under this chapter brought before it by
appeal, determine that a new hearing shall be set by the
Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeal, at which time the
public will be entitled to appear to present new or additional
evidence for or against said application. (Ord. 188(part),
1981: Ord. 33 56.19, 1960).
17.32.200 Appeal --New hearing --Copy of records. The
action of the Board of Zoning Adjustment and Appeal shall be
by majority vote and shall be final and conclusive. The
decision of the Board under this chapter shall be set forth
in full in the minutes of the meeting of the Board of Zoning
Adjustment and Appeal. A certified copy of the excerpts of
said minutes shall be delivered by the City Clerk to the
City Council, the Secretary of the Planning Commission and
the Planning Commission for their use and records, as well
as to the applicant or the appellant, if they are different
parties. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord. 33 56.20, 1960).
216 (Rolling Hills 8/83)
• 17.32.210-=17.34.010
17.32.210 Appeal --Notice. Upon the filing of such
an appeal, the City Clerk shall give notice of the filing of
said notice to:
A. Applicant;
8. Appellant; and
C. Any person who protested, either orally or in
writing, as a matter of record, prior to the final vote of
the Planning Commission on the matter and who, in addition,
received or was entitled to receive the written notice
specified in subdivision 2 of subsection 8 of Section
7.40.060. (Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord. 155 $6, 1978: Ord.
33 S6.21, 1960).
17.32.220 Appeal--Hearing--Multiple appeals. In the
event more than one appeal is filed purusant to Section
17.32.140 then all appeals shall be heard at the same time.
(Ord. 188(part), 1981: Ord. 155 56, 1978: Ord. 33 S6.22,
1960) .
ilm, •
Cit, ofied�'ny
December 18, 1991
Mr. Luigi Schiappa, President
E.S. Development
220 Pacific Coast Highway
Redondo Beach., CA 90277
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24,
1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(213) 377-1521'
FAX: (213) 377-7288
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 432A, a request for a Variance to permit
the encroachment of a stable and corral within the front
yard setback; and a request for Site Plan Review for a
proposed new residence and attached garage for property
at 6 Ringbit Road West, Rolling Hills, CA; more
precisely, Lot 8-A-2-SF.
Dear Mr.Schiappa:
This letter shall serve as official notification that Zoning Case
No. 432A as noted above was APPROVED by the Planning Commission at
their ,regular meeting on December 17, 1991.
The final Resolution and conditions of APPROVAL will be forwarded
to you after they are signed by the Planning Commission Chairman
and City Clerk.
The Planning Commission's decision will be reported to the City
Council at their regular meeting on January 13, 1992. You should
also be aware that the decision of the Planning Commission may be
appealed within twenty days after you receive the final Resolution.
(Sections 17.32.140 and 17.32.150 of the Rolling Hills Municipal
Code).
Feel free to call me at (213) 377-1521 if you have any questions
regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
,cf&
LOLA M. UNGA
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
wl'
cc: Mr. Thomas C. Hood
Ci,y ofieollin9 Jh/I
November 22, 1991
Mr. Luigi Schiappa, President
E.S. Development
220 Pacific Coast Highway
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(213) 377-1521
FAX: (213) 377.7288
SUBJECT: ZONING CASE NO. 432A, a request for a Variance to permit
the encroachment of a stable and corral within the front
yard setback; and a request for Site Plan Review for a
proposed new residence and attached garage for property
at 6 Ringbit Road West, Rolling Hills, CA; more
precisely, Lot 8-A-2-SF.
Dear Mr.Schiappa:
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, December 7, 1991 at 7:00 AM.
The site must be prepared with a full-size silhouette of the
proposed project showing the roof ridge and bearing walls. We have
enclosed Silhouette Construction Guidelines.
The owner and/or representative should be present to answer any
questions regarding the proposal.
Feel free to call me at (213) 377-1521 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
c/
LOLA M. UNGAR
PRINCIPAL PLANNER
cc: Mr. Thomas Hood
• •
1'c1y INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
f ..
M!.
- o--
ca
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(213) 377-1521
FAX (213) 377.7288
SILHOUETTE CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES
1. When required by the Planning Commission or City Council, a
silhouette of proposed construction should be erected for the
week preceding the designated Planning Commission or City
Council meeting. The Silhouette shall not remain erected for
a period longer than one week unless directed by the Planning
Commission or City Council.
2. Silhouettes should be constructed with 2" x 4" lumber.
Printed boards are not acceptable.
3. Bracing should be provided where, possible.
4. Wire, twine or other suitable, material should be used to
delineate roof ridges and eaves.
5. Small pieces of cloth or flags should be attached to the wire
or twine to aid in the visualization of the proposed
construction.
6. The application may be delayed if inaccurate or incomplete
silhouettes are constructed.
7. If you have any futher questions contact the Planning
Department Staff at (213) 377-1521.
I,r ; 1
f 1 ` j
i ' I
0
PLAN
SECTION
4