Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Archives topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Homeowner asks Rancho Palos Verdes to restore 1977 plans and clarify balcony policy for Hill Complex
Summary
Jean Rogers told the Planning Commission she recovered a 63‑sheet set of original 1977 plans and asked the city to add them to the archive and to clarify zoning interpretation so homes with original side‑overhanging balconies are not forced to demolish features when applying for repairs or upgrades.
Get email alerts on the Archives topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Jean Rogers, a homeowner in the Hill Complex subdivision, told the Rancho Palos Verdes Planning Commission on April 14 that she personally reassembled a 63‑sheet set of original plans dating to 1977 and a 1985 letter staff located in archives, and she urged city staff and commissioners to add the materials to the official files and update policy guidance.
Rogers said her family had begun a dialogue with Community Development and paid fees to modify a second‑level deck, only to be told the city could not find baseline plans and therefore required individual homeowners to prove original compliance. She said the city’s prior determination applied to a neighbor at 16 Hilltop and had resulted in demolition of an overhanging balcony when that neighbor could not prove compliance.
"The city has now determined that these plans are not available and cannot be recovered," Rogers said in public comment, and she asked that staff be instructed to archive the recovered documents and adjust policy so similarly situated homeowners are treated consistently.
Why it matters: Rogers said the issue affects scores of homes in the tract (she cited about 91 properties that share similar features) and that clarifying the baseline would prevent uncertainty and costly, potentially unnecessary demolition during routine permits. Staff accepted the submitted materials and acknowledged they would review them and advise on next steps for archival and policy guidance.
What happens next: Staff indicated that they will review the materials Rogers supplied and consider whether to add them to the official archive and whether a policy clarification or future agenda item is warranted.

