07-26-2021_CCAgendaPacket_SUPPLEMENTAL1.CALL TO ORDER
2.ROLL CALL
3.OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME
This is the appropriate time for members of the public to make comments regarding the items on
the consent calendar or items not listed on this agenda. Pursuant to the Brown Act, no action will
take place on any items not on the agenda.
4.CONSENT CALENDAR
Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX (310) 377-7288
AGENDA
Regular City Council Meeting
CITY COUNCIL
Monday, July 26, 2021
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
7:00 PM
SUPPLEMENTAL
All Councilmembers will participate in-person wearing masks per Los Angeles County Health
Department's Health Officer Order effective Saturday, July 17, 2021. The meeting agenda is available
on the City’s website. A live audio of the City Council meeting will be available on the City’s website.
Both the agenda and the live audio can be found here: https://www.rolling-
hills.org/government/agenda/index.php.
Members of the public may come in to City Hall wearing masks, per the new Health Officer's Order.
Zoom teleconference will not be available for this meeting, but member of the public may submit
written comments in real-time by emailing the City Clerk’s office at cityclerk@cityofrh.net. Your
comments will become part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name, but please
do not provide any other personal information that you do not want to be published.
Audio recordings to all the City Council meetings can be found here:
https://cms5.revize.com/revize/rollinghillsca/government/agenda/index.php While on this page, locate
the meeting date of interest then click on AUDIO. Another window will appear. In the new window,
you can select the agenda item of interest and listen to the audio by hitting the play button. Please
contact the City Clerk at 310 377-1521 or email at cityclerk@cityofrh.net for assistance.
Next Resolution No. 1286 Next Ordinance No. 371
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
1
request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council
Actions.
4.A.REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 12, 2021.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.
4.B.PAYMENT OF BILLS.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.
4.C.REPUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLING TONNAGE REPORT FOR JUNE 2021.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.
4.D.COMMENDATION CERTIFICATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY DIVISION TO THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES BLANCA
PACHECO.
RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented.
5.COMMISSION ITEMS
5.A.ZONING CASE NO. 21-01 AND RESOLUTION 2021-09: 1) CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR A PROPOSED TWO-CAR DETACHED GARAGE; 2) VARIANCES FOR:
LOT AND PAD COVERAGE EXCEEDANCE AND FOR GRADING EXPORT; AND 3)
SITE PLAN REVIEW GRADING FOR DEVELOPED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23
CHUCKWAGON ROAD, ROLLING HILLS, CA (RAMIREZ).
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
5.B.ZONING CASE NO. 21-05 AND RESOLUTION 2021-07: 1) CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR A PROPOSED 180 SQUARE-FOOT ATTACHED STUDIO RESULTING
IN A MIXED USE STRUCTURE; 2) SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR 71.6 CUBIC YARDS
OF GRADING; AND 3) VARIANCE FOR IMPORTING 18 CUBIC YARDS OF
GRAVEL FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2 SPUR LANE, (LOT 12-B-
CH) ROLLING HILLS, CA (RAJEWSKI).
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
5.C.ZONING CASE NO. 20-09 AND RESOLUTION 2021-08 : APPROVAL OF
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A 1,516 SQUARE FOOT SPORTS COURT; SITE
PLAN REVIEW FOR 256 CUBIC YARDS OF GRADING; AND VARIANCE FOR
ENCROACHMENT OF THE SPORTS COURT INTO THE REQUIRED SETBACKS
LOCATED 75 SADDLEBACK ROAD, (LOT 68-2-RH) ROLLING HILLS, CA (KIM).
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
7.12.2021_CCMinutes.P.pdf
Payment of Bills.pdf
0621 - Rolling Hills YTD Tonnage Report.pdf
RH City Council Commendation Certificate for LCAC President B.P..doc
23 Chuckwagon Plans.pdf
Development_Proposal_Table.23Chuckwagon.pdf
PC_Resolution_2021-09.pdf
RAJEWSKI_RESIDENCE-JUNE15_final_set.pdf
Development Table - ZC 21-05_CC.07.26.21.docx
2021-07.PC_RESOLUTION_2_Spur_Lane_draft.docx
2
6.PUBLIC HEARINGS
7.OLD BUSINESS
7.A.REVIEW OVERALL PROJECT COST ESTIMATES AT 65% DESIGN PROGRESS FOR
TWO LAYOUT OPTIONS FOR THE CITY HALL ADA IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION: Review additional data for the project and provide direction
to staff.
8.NEW BUSINESS
8.A.RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT ON CITY SPONSORED COMMUNAL BINS TO BE
DEPLOYED BETWEEN AUGUST 20, 2021 AND AUGUST 27, 2021, TO ASSIST
RESIDENTS WITH FIRE FUEL REDUCTION IN THE COMMUNITY.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
8.B.RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT ON THE JULY 21, 2021 FIRE FUEL COMMITTEE
MEETING; AND CONSIDER AND APPROVE THE COMMITTEE'S
RECOMMENDATION.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file, and consider and approve the committee's
recommendation.
8.C.CONSIDER THE PURCHASE OF A UTILITY VEHICLE FOR A NOT-TO-EXCEED
AMOUNT OF $20,000.
RECOMMENDATION: Consider and approve purchase of utility vehicle.
8.D.CONSIDER A PENINSULA CITIES JOINT LETTER TO BE SENT TO THE
CALIFORNIA AND LOS ANGELES COUNTY CITIZENS REDISTRICTING
COMMISSION DESCRIBING THE CITY AND THE CITY'S PREFERENCE FOR
REDISTRICTING.
RECOMMENDATION: Provide direction to staff to finalize joint-Peninsula letter,
and authorize the Mayor to sign the joint letter if all Peninsula cities agree.
8.E.CONSIDER HOLDING A CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION
WORKSHOP ON STORMWATER.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council schedule a meeting date
2021-06-01_Max_Court_-_Drawings_final_06.14.21_75 SBR.pdf
Development_Table_-_ZC_20-09_PC_06.15.21_75 SBR.docx
SUPPLEMENTAL_2021-08.PC RESOLUTION 75 Saddleback Road_Sports Court.docx
rolling hills city hall _option2_202006008d Layout1 (1).pdf
20210519_city hall renovation cost estimate_two options.pdf
20200509_rollinghills_costestimate10.pdf
20210707_option 1_alt Layout1 (1).pdf
COUNCIL MEMBER MIRSCH'S FF COMMITTEE PROPOSAL.2.DRAFT.docx
07-21-2021 FF Agenda.pdf
Kubota.pdf
20210720 Redistricting Letter Report.pdf
Attachment C PV Cities Community Profile.docx
3
and direct staff to coordinate with the Planning Commission on the workshop.
9.MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS
9.A.SUPPORT A REGIONAL TOWN HALL TO INFORM THE PUBLIC ON THE
IMPACTS OF SENATE BILL 9 (HOUSING DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS) AND
SENATE BILL 10 (UPZONE ANY PARCELS TO 10 UNITS OF RESIDENTIAL
DENSITY).
RECOMMENDATION: Receive presentation from Mayor Bea Dieringer and provide
direction to staff.
9.B.RECEIVE AND FILE SOUTH BAY CITIES LETTER TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, FOURTH DISTRICT SUPERVISOR JANICE HAHN TO
MODIFY THE RECENT HEALTH ORDER RELATING TO MASKING; AND
CONSIDER SENDING JOINT LETTER WITH THE PENINSULA CITIES.
R EC O MM EN D ATION : Receive a presentation from Mayor Bea Dieringer and
provide direction to staff.
10.MATTERS FROM STAFF
11.CLOSED SESSION
12.ADJOURNMENT
Next regular meeting: Monday, August 9, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling
Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California, 90274.
BOS Letter re Health Order EDITED 7 2021.docx
Ltr Masking Mandate_FINAL (Karen Davis)_07162021.pdf
SUPPLEMENTAL - 20210723_Peninsula_Masking_Mandate_draft_GG.docx
Notice:
Public Comment is welcome on any item prior to City Council action on the item.
Documents pertaining to an agenda item received after the posting of the agenda are available for review in the City
Clerk's office or at the meeting at which the item will be considered.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting
due to your disability, please contact the City Clerk at (310) 377-1521 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to enable the
City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and accommodation for your review of this agenda and
attendance at this meeting.
4
Agenda Item No.: 4.A
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:JANELY SANDOVAL, CITY CLERK
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 12, 2021.
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
None.
DISCUSSION:
None.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve as presented.
ATTACHMENTS:
7.12.2021_CCMinutes.P.pdf
5
Minutes 1
City Council Regular Meeting
July 12, 2021
MINUTES OF A
REGULAR MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
MONDAY, JULY 12, 2021
1. CALL TO ORDER
The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills met in person and via Zoom Teleconference
on the above date at 7:05 p.m.
Mayor Bea Dieringer presiding.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson
Absent: None.
Staff Present: Elaine Jeng, City Manager
Meredith T. Elguira, Planning and Community Services Director
Janely Sandoval, City Clerk
Ashford Ball, Senior Management Analyst
Stephanie Grant, Code Enforcement Officer
Michael Jenkins, City Attorney
Terry Shea, Finance Director
Jennifer Misetich, Deputy City Attorney
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE BY MAYOR DIERINGER.
3. OPEN AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME
None.
4. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
4A REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 14, 2021 AND MEETING
MINUTES OF JUNE 28, 2021.
City Clerk Sandoval presented edits.
MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to approve minutes as corrected including
Councilmember Mirsch’s correction, and Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Pieper, Mirsch, and Wilson.
6
Minutes 2
City Council Regular Meeting
July 12, 2021
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pro Tem Black.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
5A PAYMENT OF BILLS.
5B SPONSOR THE LEAD BLOCK CAPTAINS TO ATTEND THE 2021
LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE AND
EXPO ON SEPTEMBER 22-24, 2021 AT THE SAFE CREDIT UNION
CONVENTION CENTER IN SACRAMENTO.
5C APPROVE SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE PALOS VERDES PENINSULA
LAND CONSERVANCY FOR PHASE 3 FUEL LOAD REDUCTION IN
THE NATURE PRESERVE IN THE AREAS ADJACENT TO THE CITY
BORDER.
5D LETTER OF COMMENDATION FOR TREVOR MOORE, LOS
ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT DEPUTY FORESTER.
MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to approve as presented and Mayor Pro
Tem Black seconded the motion.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson.
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
6. COMMISSION ITEMS
None.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7A A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AND APPROVE A RESOLUTION
AUTHORIZING PLACEMENT OF SOLID WASTE SERVICE CHARGES
OWED TO REPUBLIC SERVICES PURSUANT TO ITS SOLID WASTE
FRANCHISE WITH THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ON THE FY 2021-
2022 LOS ANGELES COUNTY AUDITOR-CONTROLLER’S OFFICE
ANNUAL TAX ROLL.
7
Minutes 3
City Council Regular Meeting
July 12, 2021
Finance Director Shea presented the item.
Discussion was held.
MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to put it on the tax roll, and Councilmember
Mirsch seconded the motion. Councilmember Mirsch amended the motion to make a
finding that there is no majority protest by property owners within the City of Rolling
Hills, adopt the enclosed resolution in the attached report, and place the sanitation service
charge on the annual County of L.A. Tax Roll, and Councilmember Pieper seconded the
amended motion.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
and Mirsch.
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Wilson.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
8. OLD BUSINESS
8A ROLLING HILLS 5TH CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT CERTIFICATION
BY CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT.
Planning and Community Services Director Elguira presented the item.
Discussion was held.
MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to receive and file, and Councilmember
Mirsch seconded the motion.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson.
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
8B REVIEW OVERALL PROJECT COST ESTIMATES AT 65% DESIGN
PROGRESS FOR TWO LAYOUT OPTIONS FOR THE CITY HALL ADA
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF.
MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to move 8B to next Council meeting, and
Mayor Pro Tem Black seconded the motion.
8
Minutes 4
City Council Regular Meeting
July 12, 2021
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson.
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
9. NEW BUSINESS
9A SBCCOG COMMEMORATIVE SHOVEL TO CELEBRATE THE
NOVEMBER “TURN-UP” OF THE SOUTH BAY FIBER NETWORK.
City Manager Jeng presented the item.
MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to receive and file, and Councilmember
Mirsch seconded the motion.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson.
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
9B RECEIVE AND FILE UPDATED ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS
FOR CITY RESPONSE IN THE WORKPLACE TO COVID-19.
Senior Management Analyst Ball presented the item.
Deputy City Attorney Misetich provided additional information regarding the item.
Discussion was held.
MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to receive and file, and Councilmember
Wilson seconded the motion.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson.
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
9C DEMONSTRATION OF RESIDENT PORTAL: EMERGENCY
INFORMATION SYSTEM AND TRADING POST.
Senior Management Analyst Ball presented the item.
9
Minutes 5
City Council Regular Meeting
July 12, 2021
Discussion was held.
Resident Arlene Honbo explained that the Block Captains’ access to the EIS contains less
residential details compared to the information accessible by staff.
Resident Jim Aichele stated his concerns regarding who will have access to residents’
information and is afraid inappropriate items will be posted for sale in the Trading Post.
Discussion continued.
MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to receive and file, and Councilmember
Wilson seconded the motion.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson.
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
9D REPORT ON JUNE 30, 2021 FIRE FUEL COMMITTEE MEETING.
Senior Management Analyst Ball presented the item.
Discussion was held.
Resident Arlene Honbo explained that the Los Angeles County Fire Department
(LACFD) had already explained their data gathering process. She also recommended
that the City Council approve policies and use grant funds to begin clearing certain
canyons. Lastly, she stated that she understood that clearing the canyons is a complicated
process, but feels that a short-term solution addressing fire fuel modification can be
beneficial for the City.
Resident Gene Honbo stated that the City must decide on a short-term solution, but
further explained that fires can start internally and not just externally so additional exit
routes should be considered. He also stated that clearing the bottom of the canyons could
be of assistance.
Resident Jim Aichele is concerned that there is certain vegetation that burns quickly and
should be cleared from the canyons. He also recommended considering clearing certain
trails within the canyons for fire fuel protection.
Resident Alfred Visco stated that following LACFD’s recommendations can be
beneficial and a start. He also recommended that staff create a polygon establishing the
10
Minutes 6
City Council Regular Meeting
July 12, 2021
area that should be tackled, thus creating a new methodology to be able to focus on short-
term solutions.
Discussion continued.
MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to push the item to the next meeting to
include requested information in order to make a decision, and Councilmember Wilson
seconded the motion.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson.
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
9E APPROVE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE
AGREEMENT WITH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN ASSOCIATES FOR
LANDSCAPE PLAN CHECK SERVICES.
Planning and Community Services Director Elguira presented the item.
Discussion was held.
MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to approve the first amendment to the
professional services agreement with Environmental Design Associates, and
Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson.
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
9F APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MV
CHENG & ASSOCIATES FOR FINANCE SERVICES FOR A NOT-TO-
EXCEED AMOUNT OF $68,960 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022.
City Manager Jeng presented the item.
Discussion was held.
MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to approve the agreement as presented, and
Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion.
11
Minutes 7
City Council Regular Meeting
July 12, 2021
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson.
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
10. MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE
REPORTS
10A ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION (RHCA) GATE
ATTENDANT TRAVON THOMPSON’S SERVICE TO THE
COMMUNITY.
Mayor Dieringer presented the item.
MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned to give a commendation certificate, and
Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson.
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
10B AB 215 HOUSING ELEMENT: REGIONAL HOUSING NEED:
RELATIVE PROGRESS DETERMINATION (DIERINGER).
Mayor Dieringer presented the item.
Discussion was held.
MOTION: Councilmember Pieper motioned that if all four Peninsula Cities address the
housing bill, the City of Rolling Hills can address it as well, and Councilmember Wilson
seconded the motion.
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Dieringer, Mayor Pro Tem Black, Pieper,
Mirsch, and Wilson.
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.
10C DRONE POLICY (DIERINGER).
12
Minutes 8
City Council Regular Meeting
July 12, 2021
Mayor Dieringer presented the item.
Discussion was held.
Resident Jim Aichele recommended drafting a drone ordinance allowing drones to be
used only within the drone owner’s property, and that drone owners should receive
written consent to fly over other residents’ properties.
Resident Arlene Honbo restated and agreed with resident Aichele’s comments.
Resident Alfred Visco restated and agreed with resident Aichele’s comments, and
recommended that staff conduct further research regarding other cities’ ordinances on
drones.
11. MATTERS FROM STAFF
11A FIRE FUEL ABATEMENT ENFORCEMENT CASES QUARTERLY
REPORT FOR THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2021 (APRIL 1 THROUGH
JUNE 30).
Code Enforcement Officer Grant presented the item.
Discussion was held.
12. CLOSED SESSION
None.
13. ADJOURNMENT
Hearing no further business before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 10:08
p.m. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday,
July 26, 2021 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2
Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. It will also be available via City’s
website link at: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php
Respectfully submitted,
____________________________________
Janely Sandoval
City Clerk
13
Minutes 9
City Council Regular Meeting
July 12, 2021
Approved,
________________________________
Bea Dieringer
Mayor
14
Agenda Item No.: 4.B
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:CONNIE VIRAMONTES , ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:PAYMENT OF BILLS.
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
None.
DISCUSSION:
None.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve as presented.
ATTACHMENTS:
Payment of Bills.pdf
15
16
Agenda Item No.: 4.C
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:JANELY SANDOVAL, CITY CLERK
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:REPUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLING TONNAGE REPORT FOR JUNE
2021.
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
None.
DISCUSSION:
None.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve as presented.
ATTACHMENTS:
0621 - Rolling Hills YTD Tonnage Report.pdf
17
Franchise?Y
Mth/Yr Overall Commodity Tons Collected Tons Recovered Tons Disposed Diversion %
Jan-21 Trash 235.42 36.03 199.39 15.30%
Greenwaste 49.43 49.43 - 100.00%
Jan-21 Total 284.85 85.46 199.39 30.00%
Feb-21 Trash 206.11 18.38 187.73 8.92%
Greenwaste 62.07 62.07 - 100.00%
Feb-21 Total 268.18 80.45 187.73 30.00%
Mar-21 Trash 231.10 7.19 223.91 3.11%
Recycle 3.64 0.91 2.73 24.95%
Greenwaste 89.04 89.04 - 100.00%
Mar-21 Total 323.78 97.14 226.64 30.00%
Apr-21 Trash 239.29 34.90 204.39 14.58%
Greenwaste 52.70 52.70 - 100.00%
Apr-21 Total 291.99 87.60 204.39 30.00%
May-21 Trash 147.58 - 147.58 0.00%
Greenwaste 125.97 125.97 - 100.00%
May-21 Total 273.55 125.97 147.58 46.05%
Jun-21 Trash 193.00 - 193.00 0.00%
Greenwaste 111.34 111.34 - 100.00%
Jun-21 Total 304.34 111.34 193.00 36.58%
Grand Total 1,746.69 587.96 1,158.73 33.66%
0.00
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS RESIDENTIAL FRANCHISE
2021
Contract Requires 30% Household -
Page 1 of 2
18
Agenda Item No.: 4.D
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:JANELY SANDOVAL, CITY CLERK
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:COMMENDATION CERTIFICATE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE LOS
ANGELES COUNTY DIVISION TO THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA
CITIES BLANCA PACHECO.
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
Mayor Bea Dieringer served on the 2020-2021 Los Angeles County Division, League of California
Cities Board of Directors, representing the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG).
Mayor Dieringer requested to be reappointed in the same capacity for 2021-2022.
DISCUSSION:
Mayor Bea Dieringer requested staff to prepare a city certificate for outgoing President of the Los
Angeles County Division, League of California Cities, Blanca Pacheco for her services for the
Division. Ms. Pacheco is the Mayor Pro Tem for the City of Downey. Mayor Dieringer will present
the certificate at the installation dinner for the incoming president on August 5, 2021. The installation
event is scheduled for 6pm at the Calabasas Civic Center.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The preparation of the certificate is included in the operating budget for FY2021-2022.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve as presented.
ATTACHMENTS:
RH City Council Commendation Certificate for LCAC President B.P..doc
19
City Council Commendation
Presented to
Blanca Pacheco
The Rolling Hills City Council commends you for
your demonstrated exceptional leadership as the
President for the Los Angeles County Division for the
League of California Cities. Even when confronted with
difficult and unexpected circumstances, you have led
with elegance, knowledge, and provided skills necessary
to promote and make your organization’s division
successful. Your leadership and performance qualities
will be a prime example of what measures incoming
Presidents should exemplify to continue having a
fruitful organization. On behalf of City of Rolling
Hills, thank you for your outstanding service to the
League of California Cities.
Issued this 26th day of July, 2021
_______________________________________
Bea Dieringer
Mayor
20
Agenda Item No.: 5.A
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:MEREDITH ELGUIRA, PLANNING DIRECTOR
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:ZONING CASE NO. 21-01 AND RESOLUTION 2021-09: 1)
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PROPOSED TWO-CAR
DETACHED GARAGE; 2) VARIANCES FOR: LOT AND PAD
COVERAGE EXCEEDANCE AND FOR GRADING EXPORT; AND 3)
SITE PLAN REVIEW GRADING FOR DEVELOPED PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 23 CHUCKWAGON ROAD, ROLLING HILLS, CA
(RAMIREZ).
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
LOCATION AND LOT DESCRIPTION
Zoning and Land Size
The property is zoned RAS-1 and has a net lot area of 23,288 square feet. The lot was developed with a
2,770 square-foot single family residence and a 439 square-foot attached two-car garage. There are two
existing building pads on site. The existing residence and garage are located on the primary building
pad (Pad #1), which has a total area of 7,581 square feet. The secondary building pad (Pad #2) has a
total area of 3,914 square feet and is located on a lower elevation behind the existing residence. The
proposed swimming pool, pool equipment, barbecue, patio and fire pit will be located on Pad #1. The
secondary building pad is the proposed site for the detached two-car garage, Accessory Dwelling Unit
(ADU) and the set aside area for future stable and corral.
REQUEST AND PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Applicants' Project Scope
Applicants are proposing to build: 800 square-foot Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU), which does not
require any discretionary approval, 419 square-foot detached two-car garage, 576 square-foot new
swimming pool, 50 square-foot pool equipment area, 470 flatwork and 641 cubic yards of grading.
Applicants' Requests
Variances
Applicants are requesting Variances for: exceeding the 30% maximum building pad coverage for the
pool addition on the first building pad and for the proposed garage and future stable on the second
building pad; exporting 384 cubic yards of grading, and exceeding the maximum 20% structural
21
coverage.
Site Plan Review
Applicants are requesting a Site Plan Review (SPR) for the proposed 641 cubic yards of grading.
Conditional Use Permit
Applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the proposed detached 419 square-foot
two-car garage, which will attach to the proposed ADU.
DISCUSSION:
MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE
Variances to Exceed the Maximum 30% Building Pad Coverage and 20% Structural Coverage.
Applicants are requesting to exceed the maximum 30% building pad coverage for Pad #1 and Pad #2
and to exceed the 20% maximum structural coverage for the entire lot. The proposed 576 square-foot
swimming pool, pool equipment and deck are going to be located on Pad #1. Pad #1 area coverage will
increase by 8.2% from 44.1% to 52.3%. The proposed building pad coverage for Pad #2 is 42.6%. The
proposed overall development will exceed the allowable 20% structural coverage by 5.6%.
Many of the residents in the City of Rolling Hills enjoy the amenity of having a swimming pool on site.
Applicants' lot is less than one acre in size and is one of the smaller lots in the City and this makes it
difficult to comply with the strict application of the Code. The proposed development on Pad #1 is
already on an existing disturbed area. The proposed flatwork and grading would allow applicants to
install the pool on Pad #1 and enjoy the additional amenities of having a patio, fire pit and barbecue
area. The proposed location of the pool would also afford applicants views of the City and beyond. The
proposed development on Pad #1 is low to the ground and will not cause any view impacts to the
adjacent neighbors. Lastly, the proposed grading for the pool and flatwork, and additional impermeable
surface will not have any adverse impacts to existing drainage pattern in the area. As mentioned earlier,
Pad #1 is an existing disturbed area already used for outdoor activities.
Applicants are also proposing to add an 800 square-foot Accessory Dwelling Unit on Pad #2. The
proposed ADU meets code and does not require any discretionary approvals. In addition to the ADU,
applicants are also proposing to add a 419 square-foot detached two-car garage. Applicants must also
include a minimum 450 square-foot set aside area for a future stable. The proposed development with
the set aside increases the pad coverage to 42.6% or 1,669 square feet (800 SF of which is for ADU).
Per Code, although maximum lot area coverage may limit the size of an ADU, it cannot be smaller than
800 square feet. One off-street parking space is required for ADU.
Applicants are not proposing to build the stable and corral but they are required to allocate space for the
uses and include them in the discretionary request if such uses exceed code requirements.
The proposed overall structural coverage total is 27.3% of the net area; an increase of 9.9% from
existing coverage. The maximum allowed by code is 20%. The ADU is included in the 27.3% total
coverage.
The City of Rolling Hills limits building size through the use of lot coverage, building pad coverage,
and the allowance of one story structure. The subject lot has a net area of 23,288 square feet with
building Pad #2 consisting of 3,914 square feet. The proposed ADU (800 SF), two-car garage (419 SF)
22
and stable set aside (450 SF) would exceed the allowable building pad coverage of 30% or 1,174 SF by
12.6% or 495 square feet.
Out of the three uses mentioned above for Pad #2, the only area required to be identified is for future
equestrian use. Although it does not have to be built, the Code requires that a set aside of 450 SF needs
to be included in any development plans being proposed if it exceeds code requirements. As of January
2020, through a State mandate, the City no longer has the authority to deny an applicant's request to
build an ADU that complies with Code. In addition, the State prohibits cities from requiring applicants
to limit the size of an ADU to less than 800 square feet unless it is a Junior ADU, which is attached to
the main residence. Given the current regulation constraints, the only use that could be modified, to
avoid relief from the code, is the proposed two-car garage. The City's ADU code requires one off-street
parking.
Site Plan Review Request for 1,336 Cubic Yards of Grading
Applicants are proposing 641 cubic yards of grading, 384 cubic yards will be exported. The proposed
grading will require Building and Safety's approval for drainage. The proposed grading will not
significantly change the terrain of the site because most of the site has been disturbed. Most of the
grading will consist of maximum 2-foot cuts for the proposed flatwork.
Conditional Use Permit Request for the Proposed Detached Garage
Applicants are proposing to add a 419 square-foot two-car detached garage. The proposed garage
contributes to the exceedance of the building pad and structural coverage on Pad #2. The existing house
has an existing two-car attached garage. The proposed two-car garage is not a requirement for the
approval of the ADU but it allows for vehicles to be accommodated on site and thus, prevents off-site
parking and any potential impediments to street traffic.
Environmental Review
The proposed project has been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and is
categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section 15304 (Minor Alterations to
Land) of the CEQA Guidelines, which exempts minor alterations in the condition of land, including but
not limited to grading on land with a slope of less than 10 percent. The grading taking place on the
property is on land with a slope of less than 10 percent to account for the detached garage structure. The
proposed project has been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and is
categorically exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to Section 15303 (New Construction or
Conversion of Small Structures) of the CEQA Guidelines, which exempts accessory structures
including garages, carports, patios, swimming pools, and fences. The detached garage, ADU and pool
qualify as new construction of small structures.
Public Participation
Three neighbors were present at the Planning Commission Field Trip held on April 20, 2021 and the
adjacent neighbor at 25 Chuckwagon Road spoke at the Evening Meeting held on April 20, 2021.
Additional calls were received to discuss the proposed project from those who attended and spoke at the
meetings. Concerns about height, density, and frequency of use of the easement behind the property
were discussed.
23
Planning Commission Decision
The three members of Planning Commission who were present voted unanimously to approve the
project. There was no appeal filed against the project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
NONE.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
ATTACHMENTS:
23 Chuckwagon Plans.pdf
Development_Proposal_Table.23Chuckwagon.pdf
PC_Resolution_2021-09.pdf
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Site Plan Review, Variance and
Conditional Use Permit EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
RA-S- 1 Zone Setbacks
Front: 50 ft. from front easement
line
Side: 20 ft. from side property line
Rear: 50 ft. from rear easement line
SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCE, 2-CAR
GARAGE
POOL, POOL EQUIPMENT,
FLATWORK, DETACHED 2-
CAR GARAGE AND ADU
Net Lot Area 23,288 SF 0 SF 23,288 SF
Residence 2,770 SF 0 SF 2,770 SF
Attached Garage 439 SF 0 SF 439 SF
2nd Garage 0 SF 419 SF 419 SF
Swimming Pool/Spa 0 SF 576 SF 576 SF
Pool Equipment 0 SF 50 SF 50 SF
ADU 0 SF 800 SF 800 SF
Cabana 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Stable minimum: 450 SF
Corral minimum: 550 SF
0 SF 450 SF 450 SF/550 SF
(set aside)
Recreation Court 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Attached Covered Porches,
Entryway, Porte Cochere,
Breezeways
331 SF 0 SF 331 SF
Attached Trellis 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Detached Structures: Outdoor
Kitchen 70 SF BBQ 28 SF & Fire Pit 38 SF 61 SF
Water Features 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Service Yard 75 SF 0 SF 75 SF
Basement Area 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Grading (balanced on site) Unknown 641 cubic yards 641 cubic yards
(384 CY export)
Total Structure Area 4,065 SF 1,911 SF 5,976 SF
% Structural Coverage 17.4% 8.2% 25.6%
Total Structures Excluding: up to 5
legal and up to 800 SF detached
structures that are not higher than 12
ft (no more than 120 SF per structure
per deduction, except for trellis)
4,065 SF 1.845 SF 5,910 SF
Structural Lot Coverage
(20% maximum) 17.4% 7.9% 25.3%
Total Structural and Flatwork Lot
Coverage (35% maximum)
17.4% 9.9% 27.3%
Building Pad #1 Coverage
(30%maximum) 7,581 SF
44.1 % 8.2% 52.3%
Building Pad #2 Coverage
(30% maximum) 3,914 SF
2.6% 40% 42.6%
Total Disturbed Area SF 4,065 SF 2,315 SF 6,380 SF
Total Disturbed Area
(40% maximum)
17.4% 9.9% 27.3%
Retaining/Garden Wall Remove/replace same height Repair same
height/location
Roadway Access Existing driveway approach No change No change
32
1
Resolution 2021-09
23 Chuckwagon Road (Ramirez)
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-09
A RESOLUTION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
A PROPOSED TWO-CAR DETACHED GARAGE; VARIANCES
FOR: LOT AND PAD COVERAGE EXCEEDANCE AND FOR
GRADING EXPORT; AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING
FOR DEVELOPED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 CHUCKWAGON
ROAD, ROLLING HILLS, CA (RAMIREZ).
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. Ramirez requesting Conditional Use
Permit for a proposed two-car detached garage, which is attached to an accessory dwelling unit, Variances
for: lot and pad coverage exceedance and grading export; and Site Plan Review for grading for a property
located at 23 Chuckwagon Road.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the
application on May 18, 2021 including a morning field trip and an evening meeting. The applicants were
notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail. Evidence was heard and presented from all
persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City staff and the Planning
Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal.
Section 3. The property is zoned RAS-1 and has a net lot area of 23,288 square feet. The lot is
currently developed with a 2,770 square-foot single family residence and a 439 square-foot attached two
car garage. There are two existing building pads on site with an eight-foot difference in elevation. The
existing residence and garage are located on the upper pad (7,581 square feet) towards the front portion of
the property and the secondary building pad (3,914 square feet) is on the lower pad on the rear of the
property.
Section 4. This project is also categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301
(Existing Facilities) because it involves minor alteration of or addition to an existing developed residential
lot. The proposed swimming pool, pool equipment, barbecue, patio and fire pit will be located on primary
pad. The secondary building pad is the proposed site for the detached two-car garage, Accessory Dwelling
Unit (ADU) and the set aside area for future stable and corral.
Section 5. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit
approval of a Variance granting relief from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when
exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property prevent the owner from making use
of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity or zone. In
proposing to exceed the 30% maximum building pad coverage for the pool addition on the first building
pad and for the proposed garage and future stable/corral on the second building pad; exporting 384 cubic
yards of grading, and exceeding 20% structural coverage, Variances are required to grant relief from the
Zoning Ordinance.
33
2
Resolution 2021-09
23 Chuckwagon Road (Ramirez)
With respect to the aforementioned request for a Variance from Zoning Ordinance, the Planning
Commission finds as follows:
A. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the
property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone in that the property
has a net lot area of approximately one-half acre, which limits the buildable area on site;
B. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property
rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in
question due to the limited size and existing topography that make it difficult to comply with the City of
Rolling Hills Municipal Code’s development standards;
C. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or
injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity in that the proposed development will comply with
the required building code, will not have adverse visual impact to adjacent properties and is in keeping
with the character and scale of the community;
D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed in that the
proposed development does not prevent anyone from enjoying their property rights, the improvements are
visually harmonious with adjacent properties and in scale with adjacent residential development;
E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant in that the proposed addition
is in character and similar in scale with existing residential development and the applicant will have the
opportunity to enjoy the same amenities enjoyed by other residents in the community;
F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous
Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. The proposed
location of the project will not be sited near hazardous waste facilities and is surrounded by residential
land use; and
G. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills in
that the applicant will enjoy the same rights that residents in the community enjoy, the proposed
improvements are in character and scale as the existing neighborhood, and it preserves the rural character
of the City.
Section 6. Sections 17.46.010 through 17.46.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit
approval of a Site Plan Review granting relief from the standards and requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance when exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property prevent the owner
from making use of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same
vicinity or zone. In proposing to grade the site, a Site Plan Review approval is required to grant relief from
Section 17.43.010 and 17.16.190 of the Zoning Ordinance.
With respect to the aforementioned request for Site Plan Review from Zoning Ordinance Section
17.46.050, the Planning Commission finds as follows:
34
3
Resolution 2021-09
23 Chuckwagon Road (Ramirez)
A. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan
and all requirements of the zoning ordinance in that the proposed grading and accessory structures are
sensitive to the surrounding uses and will not cause adverse impact on views or harm to surrounding
residences;
B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing
building coverage on the existing pads. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the
actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot. The proposed
development is in located on a parcel less than one acre in size, surrounded by road and driveway
easements. The size and existing topography constraints make it difficult to comply with lot coverage
requirements however, the proposed pool will have no view impact and the accessory structures will be
screened by landscaping from adjacent neighbors and maintains adequate setbacks from the easements
and adjacent properties;
C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding
residences. The proposed improvements are of similar scale with existing houses in the neighborhood;
D. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible,
existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage
courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls). The site is developed with single family residence
with two-car garage. The proposed addition will not further increase disturbance of the site and the grading
is limited to 641 cubic yards;
E. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount
of grading required to create the building area. The proposed pool location has previously accommodated
a flat open lawn area. The secondary pad has been graded to accommodate a shed and a parking pad, which
will be removed;
F. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such
flow is redirected into an existing drainage course. The proposed excavation for the pool will occur on a
flat surface previously disturbed to create a flat lawn for outdoor activities. The proposed pool will not
have any impacts on drainage;
G. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these
elements with drought-tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of
the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas. The
proposed improvements will be constructed on previously disturbed lot;
H. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of
pedestrians and vehicles in that the project will not encroach into trails or road easements; and
I. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Section 7. The Rolling Hills Municipal Code require a Conditional Use Permit for a project a
mixed use structure pursuant to RHMC Section 17.16.040(A)(3) subject to certain conditions pursuant to
35
4
Resolution 2021-09
23 Chuckwagon Road (Ramirez)
RHMC Section 17.16.210(A)(6). The project proposes to construct a new mixed use structure consisting
of a 419 square-foot, two-car detached garage and 800 square foot Accessory Dwelling Unit. The Planning
Commission made the following findings:
A. That the proposed conditional use (a mixed use structure) is consistent with the General Plan.
The mixed use structure consisting of a 419 square-foot detached garage and 800 square foot recreation
room is consistent with similar uses in the community and is a permitted use with a CUP. Although the
mixed use structure requires a variance to allow building pad and lot coverage exceedance, the positioning
of the mixed use structure will be located on a previously disturbed area. The proposed structure is setback
from the rear and side property lines and will be screened by landscaping;
B. That the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures have
been considered, and that the use will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent
uses, building or structures. The mixed use structure will be on a lower pad than the residence and will
have no impact on adjacent residences. Due to the existing development and limited size of the lot,
Applicants are limited in where the mixed-use could be constructed. In addition, the proposed size and
height of the mixed use structure blends in with the scale of the existing development in the neighborhood.
The proposed grading required to construct the mixed-use is minimized by locating the structure on a
previously graded pad and with existing access to the pad;
C. That the site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and shape to accommodate
the use and buildings proposed. The mixed use structure is located on the existing secondary building pad,
which is at a lower elevation than the primary building pad. Although the secondary pad will need to be
expanded to accommodate the required vehicle turning radius in front of the garage, it is the only area that
will cause the least disturbance. The current site is already developed with the existing secondary building
pad and existing access which help minimize grading and allow for shorter walls.
D. That the proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the
zone district. The mixed use structure complies with all applicable development standards of the zone
district as approved by this Resolution. Although the mixed use structure requires a variance, the
positioning of the mixed use structure will be located on a previously disturbed area. It will not change
the existing configuration of the structures on the lot and it will have adequate setback to minimize impacts
on the surrounding properties;
E. That the proposed use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous
Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the
project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List; and
F. That the proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of this title. The construction
of the mixed use structure allows the Applicants to build an ADU, which is allowed by code; and to build
a garage will is an allowed land use with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Even with the
construction of the mixed use structure, there is sufficient set aside area on the property for a future stable
and corral. Allowing the mixed-use would allow the applicant the same rights to amenities enjoyed by
other residents in the community.
36
5
Resolution 2021-09
23 Chuckwagon Road (Ramirez)
Section 8. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves Variance,
Site Plan Review and Conditional Use Permit requests for Zoning Case No. 2021-01 for a proposed two car
detached garage, which is attached to an accessory dwelling unit, lot and pad coverage exceedance, grading
export, and grading, subject to the following conditions:
A. This approval shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval if construction
pursuant to this approval has not commenced within that time period, as required by Sections 17.38.070
and 17.46.080 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, or the approval granted is otherwise extended pursuant
to the requirements of this section.
B. If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by this resolution shall
be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse and upon receipt of written notice from the
City, all construction work being performed on the subject property shall immediately cease, other than
work determined by the City Manager or his/her designee required to cure the violation. The suspension
and stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant cures the violation to the satisfaction of the City
Manager or his/her designee. In the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her
designee’s determination that a violation exists or disputes how the violation must be cured, the Applicant
may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular meeting
of the City Council for which the agenda has not yet been posted, the Applicant shall be provided written
notice of the hearing. The stop work order shall remain in effect during the pendency of the hearing. The
City C ouncil shall make a determination as to whether a violation of this Resolution has occurred. If the
Council determines that a violation has not occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the
Council will lift the suspension and the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has
occurred and has not yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a deadline to cure the
violation; no construction work shall be performed on the property until and unless the violation is cured
by the deadline, other than work designated by the Council to accomplish the cure. If the violation is not
cured by the deadline, the Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant’s request or schedule a
hearing for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant to Chapter 17.58 of the
Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC).
C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, LA
County Building Code 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 dated May 18, 2021 except as otherwise provided in these conditions.
E. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to the Building and Safety Department for
issuance of building permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that
the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission.
F. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check
review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. A copy of the conditions of
this Resolution shall be printed on plans approved when a building permit is issued and a copy of such
approved plans, including conditions of approval, shall be available on the building site at all times.
37
6
Resolution 2021-09
23 Chuckwagon Road (Ramirez)
G. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building Department
review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution
approving this project and including conformance with all of the conditions set forth therein and the City’s
Building Code and Zoning Ordinance.
Further, the person obtaining a building permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction
stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith.
H. Primary pad area coverage will be maximum 52.3%. The proposed building pad coverage for
the secondary pad is maximum 42.6%. The maximum overall development is 25.6%. I. No further
disturbance is proposed.
J. A minimum of four-foot level path and/or walkway, which does not have to be paved, shall
be provided along the rear of the home, to allow passage around the home. A retaining wall is permitted
with a maximum height of 5 feet.
K. Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, any
modification to this project or to the property, which would constitute additional structural development,
grading, excavation of dirt and any modification including, but not be limited to retaining walls, drainage
devices, pad elevation and any other deviation from the approved plan, shall require the filing of a new
application for approval by the Planning Commission.
L. During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements,
stormwater pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that
people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors shall be
required.
M. During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site. During
construction, to maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car- pool into the City.
N. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate
construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday
through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to
interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills.
O. The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control
Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP’s) requirements related
to solid waste, drainage and storm water management.
P. During construction, all parking shall take place on the project site and, If necessary, any
overflow parking shall take place within nearby unimproved roadway easement adjacent to subject site.
There shall be no blocking of adjacent driveways or of the roadway easement for passage of pedestrians
and equestrians. During construction a flagmen shall be present to direct traffic when it is anticipated that
a lane may be impeded.
38
7
Resolution 2021-09
23 Chuckwagon Road (Ramirez)
Q. A minimum of 65% of the construction material spoils shall be recycled and diverted. The
hauler shall secure a “Construction and Demolition Permit” from the City of Rolling Hills, and provide
the required documentation. The permit shall be pulled prior to issuance of the final Planning Approval.
R. The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and
grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at:
http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard_definitions#FIRE. It is the sole
responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions.
Should a red flag warning be declared and if work is to be conducted on the property, the contractor shall
have readily available fire distinguisher.
S. Prior to finaling of the project, ”as constructed” plans, electronic copy and certifications shall
be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Department to ascertain that the completed
project is in compliance with the approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the project during
construction, shall be depicted “as built/as graded”.
T. Prior to Final Planning Approval, the applicant shall obtain approval for the proposed
landscaping from the Planning and Fire Departments.
U. The retaining wall behind the property, along the rear easement, shall be repaired or replaced
with same height wall in the same exact location.
V. Applicants shall landscape around the proposed ADU to minimize visibility from adjacent
neighbors.
W. Until the applicants execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this approval,
the approvals shall not be effective. Such affidavit shall be recorded together with the resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14th DAY OF JUNE,2021.
BRAD CHELF, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
JANELY SANDOVAL, CITY CLERK
39
8
Resolution 2021-09
23 Chuckwagon Road (Ramirez)
Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this
application must be filed within the time limits set forth in section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal
Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6.
40
9
Resolution 2021-09
23 Chuckwagon Road (Ramirez)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2021-09 entitled:
A RESOLUTION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
A PROPOSED TWO-CAR DETACHED GARAGE; VARIANCES
FOR: LOT AND PAD COVERAGE EXCEEDANCE AND FOR
GRADING EXPORT; AND SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING
FOR DEVELOPED PROPERTY LOCATED AT 23 CHUCKWAGON
ROAD, ROLLING HILLS, CA (RAMIREZ).
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on June 14, 2021 by the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices.
JANELY SANDOVAL, CITY CLERK
41
Agenda Item No.: 5.B
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:STEPHANIE GRANT , ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:ZONING CASE NO. 21-05 AND RESOLUTION 2021-07: 1)
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PROPOSED 180 SQUARE-FOOT
ATTACHED STUDIO RESULTING IN A MIXED USE STRUCTURE; 2)
SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR 71.6 CUBIC YARDS OF GRADING; AND 3)
VARIANCE FOR IMPORTING 18 CUBIC YARDS OF GRAVEL FOR THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2 SPUR LANE, (LOT 12-B-CH)
ROLLING HILLS, CA (RAJEWSKI).
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
On June 15, 2021, the three present Planning Commissioners unanimously voted to approve Zoning
Case No. 21-05 and Resolution No. 2021-07 for a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed use structure,
Site Plan Review for 71.6 cubic yards of grading, and Variance to legalize importation of gravel. The
proposed project is exempt from CEQA. No appeal was filed against the project.
DISCUSSION:
Zoning, Land Size and Existing Conditions
The property is zoned RAS-1 and the gross lot area is 2.04 acres or 88,740 square feet. The net lot area,
for development purposes, is 1.9 acres or 82,874 square feet. The lot is currently developed with an
existing 4,104 square-foot residence, 575 square-foot garage, 316 square-foot guesthouse, 134 square-
foot detached studio, 556 square-foot basement area, and 557 square-foot pool. There are two building
pads on site. The existing residence and garage are located on the upper building pad (28,485 square
feet) and the pool is located on the lower building pad (3,395 square feet).
There is currently active construction on site that comprise of: interior remodel, 236 square-foot
addition to existing 316 SF guesthouse (guesthouse will be converted to a shop totaling 552 square
feet), 312 square-foot addition to existing two-car garage, 62 square-foot addition to the front porch
entry 738 square foot porch, 595 square foot driveway addition, 1,244 square feet paved area/walkways,
245 square-foot partial demolition of the main residence, demolition of 134 square-foot studio, and
widening of an existing 12-foot wide driveway to 20 feet per L.A. County Fire Department. The current
42
construction added less than 999 square feet to the residence and demolished less than 50% of the
exterior walls therefore, the current project was approved by the Planning Department under
Administrative Review.
The proposed project is for the construction of a 180 square-foot (SF) studio that will be attached to the
guesthouse/garage. The 180 SF addition will result in the two structures having a shared wall and thus,
requires a Conditional Use Permit approval for the proposed mixed use structure. In addition, staff later
discovered that the applicant imported gravel to use as fill in the driveway expansion and conducted
grading without permits, these past actions required Variance and Site Plan review, respectively.
Variance
The LA County Fire Department required the expansion of the existing driveway for fire access that
resulted in the importation of gravel. The applicant is requesting Variance for importing 18 cubic yards
of gravel without a permit. In order to extend the existing driveway, 18 cubic yards of gravel were
imported to fill the additional area.
Site Plan Review
The applicant is requesting Site Plan Review (SPR) for 71.6 cubic yards of grading. The total cut for the
proposed project is 34 cubic yards: 18 cubic yards for the driveway and 16 cubic yards for the front
patio. The total fill for the project is 37.6 cubic yards: 13 cubic yards for the garage addition, 3 cubic
yards for the new planter area, 3.6 cubic yards for the basement, and 18 cubic yards (maximum depth of
24 inches) for the driveway.
Conditional Use Permit
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the proposed 180 SF studio. The 136 SF
studio was demolished without a permit. The applicant is proposing to build a new studio that will
attach to the workshop (previously a guesthouse)/garage.
Past Approvals for the Property
On October 19, 2020, the applicant submitted an application for Administrative Review. The
application was for: a remodel, demolition, re-roof, 312 SF garage addition, addition of 237 SF to
existing shop (previously guesthouse), 738 SF covered porches, 62 SF breezeway, 57 SF to existing
detached shed, and 7 cubic yards of grading.
Staff approved the project on November 3, 2020 and the applicant submitted the approved plans for plan
check to the Building and Safety Department. During plan check, it was determined by the Fire Dept.
that a wider driveway would be required for Fire access.
On January 15, 2021, the applicant submitted revised Administrative Review Application (Case No. 21-
05) and revised plans for: a remodel, 537 SF addition, re-roof, 738 SF covered porches, 312 SF garage
addition, demolition, and 40 cubic yards of grading. The grading quantity increased due to the
expansion of the driveway.
On March 2, 2021, the Fire Dept. approved the 20-foot driveway expansion.
The expansion of the driveway also required and received Traffic Commission approval. On March 25,
2021 the Traffic Commission approved the driveway expansion. The applicant started construction
during this phase prior to receiving final approval from the Planning Department. During Planning’s
review, staff discovered that grading, importing gravel and demolition of the studio had occurred
43
without permits.
The City of Rolling Hills approved the revised project (Case No. 21-05) on March 26, 2021 for: a
remodel, 537 SF addition, re-roof, 738 SF covered porches, 312 SF garage addition, demolition, and 40
cubic yards of grading. The proposed 180 SF studio that will be attached to the guesthouse/garage will
be approved at a later date by the Planning Commission.
On April 5, 2021, the applicant submitted plans and application for Variance for the import of gravel
and Conditional Use Permit application for the mixed-use structure. After the review of grading, the Site
Plan Review was added because the proposed grading exceeded 50 cubic yards of dirt (proposed total
71.6 cubic yards).
MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE
Disturbance
The lot was graded in the past and the disturbed area is 59.90% (49,720 square feet). The RHMC states
there are exceptions for disturbance to exceed the maximum 40% of the net lot area. As defined in
Section 17.16.070, in order to encourage gradual transition in grade and natural appearance the
disturbed area may be a maximum of sixty percent of the net lot area, provided that at no point the
slopes resulting from the grading are greater (steeper) than 3:1, or three units horizontal (run) to one
unit vertical (rise). The 59.9% disturbance is in accordance with Section 17.16.070, therefore a
Variance is not required. Grading is proposed on previously disturbed areas.
Lot Coverage
The residential building pad is 23,485 square feet and the second building pad is 3,395 square feet for a
total combined building pad area of 26,880 square feet. The proposed structure will be located on the
first pad, attached to the new shop and existing garage. The structural coverage on this building pad is
proposed to be 6,772 square feet or 28.37% (30% max permitted). The total overall structural net lot
coverage is proposed at 6,772 square feet or 9.35%, (20% max. permitted); and the total lot coverage
proposed will be 15,968 square feet or 19.26% (35% max. permitted).
Grading
The grading is necessary for the widening of the driveway to comply with Fire Code access
requirements. The Fire Code requires a 20-foot driveway, clear of any horizontal or vertical
obstructions, to accommodate the width and height of a fire truck and its equipment. In order to extend
the existing driving, 18 cubic yards of gravel was imported to fill the strip. The grading is limited to a
total of 71.6 cubic yards The total cut for the proposed project is 34 cubic yards: 18 cubic yards for the
driveway and 16 cubic yards for the front patio. The total fill for the project is 37.6 cubic yards: 13
cubic yards for the under garage addition, 3.6 cubic yards for the basement, 3 cubic yards for the new
planter area, and 18 cubic yards (maximum 24 inches) for the driveway. All grading activities will be
balanced onsite.
Buildable Pad
The buildable pad area for Pad No. 1 is 23,485 SF and structures total 28.37% (6,772 SF). The buildable
pad area for Pad No. 2 is (3,395 SF).
Stable and Corral Set Aside
The applicant proposes to set aside a 1,000 square feet for a future stable and corral west of the mixed-
44
use structure. Access to the future stable corral is also available.
Environmental Review
The project has been determined to be categorically exempt (Class 3) pursuant to Section 15303 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
ATTACHMENTS:
RAJEWSKI_RESIDENCE-JUNE15_final_set.pdf
Development Table - ZC 21-05_CC.07.26.21.docx
2021-07.PC_RESOLUTION_2_Spur_Lane_draft.docx
45
NEW GRADED STRIP TODRIVEWAY WIDENING TO 20'PER FIRE DEPARTMENTREQUIREMENTS18 Cu. Yds FILLPLPL SPUR LANESCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"NPROPOSED SITE PLAN(+ 586 SQ.FT.)(+ 312 SQ.FT.)LEGEND:NEW FLOOR AREA ADDITIONEXISTING FLOOR AREA DEDUCTION(- 415 SQ.FT.)NEW GARAGE AREA ADDITIONSLOPE4 1/2:12
SLOPE
4 1/2:12
SLOPE
4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE
4 1/2:12
SLOPE
4 1/2:12
SLOPE
4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE3 1/2:12SLOPE3 1/2:12SLOPE3 1/2:12SLOPE3 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12 SLOPE4 1/2:12
SLOPE4 1/2:12BUILDING FOOTPRINTNEW HARDSCAPEEXISTING DRIVEWAYNEW CONCRETEMOTOR COURTEXISTING POOL DECKPROPERTY LINEBUILDING PAD LINEEXISTING PORCH(NOT INCLUDE ON BUILD PAD COVERAGE)EXISTING COVERED PORCHBENCHDN LOWERWOOD DECKAC UNITBELOWUPPERWOOD DECKBEN
C
H
BENCHLOWERWOOD DECKBREEZE WAYEXISTING WOOD DECKEXISTING WOOD DECKEXISTING BUILDING TO BE CONVERTEDTO NEW COVERED PORCHNEW COVERED PORCHEXISTING BUILDING TO BE CONVERTEDTO NEW COVERED PORCHNEW GARAGENEW FLOOR AREAADDITIONEXISTING WOOD DECKEXISTING POOLEQUIPMENTEXISTING HARDSCAPENEW PLANTER WALL2'-6" MAXIMUM HEIGHT(VARIES)NEW FLOOR AREAADDITIONNEW ENTRY WAY(NOT INCLUDE ONBUILD PADCOVERAGE)EXISTING BUILDING PAD AREA:BUILDING PAD #1: 23,485BUILDING PAD #2: 3,395RE- BUILT ART STUDIO/STORAGE SHEDNEW STONE WALL24" MAX.RETAINING WALLA1.01SLOPE AWAYFROM BUILDINGBY 2% MIN.SLOPE AWAYFROM BUILDINGBY 2% MIN.SLOPE AWAYFROM BUILDINGBY 2% MIN.SLOPE AWAYFROM BUILDINGBY 2% MIN.SLOPE AWAYFROM BUILDINGBY 2% MIN.SLOPE AWAYFROM BUILDINGBY 2% MIN.SLOPE AWAYFROM BUILDINGBY 2% MIN.SLOPE AWAYFROM BUILDINGBY 2% MIN.SLOPE AWAYFROM BUILDINGBY 2% MIN.SLOPE AWAYFROM BUILDINGBY 2% MIN.EXISTING SEPTIC TANK8' Length X 4' Width X 5' DeepE.G.1301.58F.F. ELV.1304.00F.F. ELV.1304.00F.F. ELV.1304.00F.F. ELV.1303.02F.F. ELV.1296.40F.F. ELV.1303.90F.F. ELV.1303.90F.F. ELV.1303.858' +/-4:1
SLOPE
F.F.EL.1303.84NEW GRADING AREA4 Cu. Yds Under New Garage3 Cu. Yds New PlanterNEW GRADING AREA9 Cu. Yds Under New PorchPROPERTY MARKERNEW GRADED TO PROVIDEFIRETRUCK ACCES PERFIRE DEPARTMENTREQUIREMENTS6 Cu. Yds CUTEXISTING 3"-24"STONE WALLTO REMAINEXISTING PLANTERTO BE DEMOLISHED20'-0"EXISTING GATE29'-0"EXISTING DISPERSAL SYSTEM50' Length X 3' Width X 3' Deep33'-0"EXISTING SEPTIC TANK8' Length X 4' Width X 4' DeepEXISTING (2) DISPERSAL SYSTEM25' Length X 2' Width X 3.5' DeepEXISTING (2) DISPERSAL SYSTEM25' Length X 2' Width X 3.5' Deep10' +/-20'-0"NEW 3"-10"STONE WALLNEW 3"-10"STONE WALLFUTURE SEPTIC TANK LOCATION(JS 1500 G TANK)10'-10" Length X 4'-10" Width X 5'-8" DeepFOR FUTURE EXPANSIONPER PERCOLATION FEASILITY STUDYREPORT BY COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INCW.O. 612121-01 DATED: 02/21/2021FUTURE (2) DISPERSAL SYSTEMFOR FUTURE EXPANSIONPER PERCOLATION FEASILITY STUDYREPORT BY COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INCW.O. 612121-01 DATED: 02/21/2021FUTURE TWO LEACH LINES3' Wide x 86' LengthFOR FUTURE EXPANSIONPER PERCOLATION FEASILITY STUDYREPORT BY COAST GEOTECHNICAL, INCW.O. 612121-01 DATED: 02/21/2021POSSIBLE FUTURELOCATION FORBARN AND CORRAL(1000 SQ.FT.)CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMMENCE ONLY AFTERPLANNING COMMISSION APPROVALDRIVEWAY EXTENSIONSUBJECT TODISCRETIONARYAPPROVALTHE STUDIO IS NOT PERMITTED.SUBJECT TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMITPROPOSED SCOPE FORREVIEW ON JUNE 15, 2021BY THE PLANNINGCOMMISSIONNOTE: ALL OTHER WORKSHOWN HAS BEENAPPROVED PREVIOUSLYAND IS CURRENTLYUNDER CONSTRUCTION.OUTDOOR LIVINGNEW FOOTINGF.F.EL.1303.84E.G.1300.00E.G.1294.00E.G.1295.00E.G.1297.00SECTION 1SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"E.G.1297.004:1 SLOPE TYP.2'-3 1/2"E.G.1301.58E.G.1301.00NEW FILL AREANEW GARAGENEW PLANTER WALL2'-6" MAXIMUM HEIGHT(VARIES)NEW GRADING AREA 14 Cu. Yds Under New Garage3 Cu. Yds New PlanterNEW COVERED PORCHA1.01E.G.1301.58F.F.EL.1303.84NEW GRADING AREA 29 Cu. Yds Under New PorchDRIVEWAY WITH 18Cu.Yds FILLSCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 SPUR LANE PL20'
-0
"7'
-6
"12'
-6
"
10"
7"
3"
PROJECT TITLE:CLIENT NAME:JOB NO:DATE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:SHEET NO:SHEET TITLE:CHECKED BY:20-011BFLdM01-15-2021Drawings and specifications as instruments of service are and shall remain the property of the design professional. Copies of the drawings and specifications retained by the client may be utilized only for his use and for occupying the project for which they were prepared, and not for the construction of any other projects. Any use or reproduction of these drawings in whole or part by any means whatsoever is strictly prohibited except with specific written consent of EnviroTechno Architecture.AS NOTEDRAJEWSKI
RESIDENCE
2 SPUR LANE
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
MR. AND MRS. RAJEWSKI
RESIDENCE
2 SPUR LANE
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 INTERACTIVE ARCHITECTURE + INTERIOR DESIGNENVIROTECHNOe-mail: luis@envirotechno.comwebsite: envirotechno.com116 S. CATALINA AVE. SUITE 102REDONDO BEACH, CA 90277VOICE: 310-379-9716ARCHITECTURAL STAMP:DEMOSEDANOVEMBER2STATEOFCALIFORN LIC # C32440E
NLUIS
LIC
RAESRCHITEC0,20
2
IA ,AIAT0
BID SET - 01/15/2021
PROPOSED
SITE PLANA1.0GRADING AREA 1SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"GRADING AREA 2SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"46
LFDCBKJIHFDCBALKJIHMM1234567810121314151612131415165678101234111199GGEEA2'-0"3'-11"16'-4"19'-0"2'-8"8'-0"3'-6"
13'-0"111123247788899102019191611316AP-01AP-03AP-05AP-06AP-07AP-08AP-09A0104070506150809131418172021222327241110121631A252603BCDFGHIJKLNOPQR3233Z34M35383637PC-06PF-06PC-07PF-07PF-09PC-08PF-08PC-09PF-04PC-11PF-01PC-14PC-13PC-03PC-12PF-13PF-15PF-12PF-14PF-03PF-1155555'-0"8'-6"3'-6"157722'-6""A"3'-0"1'-8"1'-8"EQ.EQ.1'-8"1'-8"2323EQ.EQ.EQ. "A"6'-4"3'-6"5'-0"3'-0"84'-7"6'-6"3'-0"3'-0"3'-10"161617GARAGEFPSHOPHALLBATHSHOWERHALLPORCHUPPERWOOD DECKTO REMAIN (E)BE
N
C
H
BENCHDN NEW ART STUDIO/STORAGE SHEDPORCHLOWERWOOD DECK (E)AC UNITBELOWBEDROOM #1BEDROOM #2BATHSHOWERTUBGUEST ROOM /HOBBY ROOMW.I.C.SHOWERMASTER BATHW.I.C. (HIS)W.I.C. (HERS)DLAUNDRYWSHOWERPOWDERPOOLBATHKITCHENLIVING ROOMENTRYDWPANTRYDINING AREAGAS FPMASTER BEDROOMFAMILY ROOMNEW GARAGEDNBREEZE WAYRELOCATEDELECTRICAL PANEL200 amps V.I.F.COVERED PORCHTOILETMUD ROOMFRZREFFP (E)NEW RELOCATED STEPS (3)MAX. RISER 7 3/4" MIN. TREAD 10"MATCH EXISTINGNEW PLANTER18OUTDOOR LOUNGE112100102101103104106107109108111113114115116121120119122117110118105NON-STRUCTURALWALLSNON-STRUCTURALWALL677S2815'-0"12'-0"3002T31B19PC-104S-5.11111 MIN. 2%SLOPE25252410'-1"3'-10"6'-6"354126789101A10.12A10.13A10.14A10.15A10.11112131415161718192021PC-01PC-02PC-03PC-04PC-04PC-05PC-06PC-07PC-08PC-09PC-10PC-11PC-12PC-13PC-14PF-01PF-03PF-02PF-04PF-05PF-06PF-07PF-08PF-09PF-10PF-11PF-12PF-13PF-14PF-1511212223BASEMENTUPNEW MILLWORK- COORDINATE DESIGN AND FINISHES W/OWNER.NEW FLOOR LIVING AREA ADDITION (586 SQ.FT.)NEW UPPER CABINETCOORDINATE FINAL DESIGN W/ OWNERNEW BASE CABINET WITH STONE TOP AND 6" TILE BACKSPLASH ATBATHROOMS; FULL BACKSPLASH AT KITCHEN AND LAUNDRYCOORDINATE FINAL DESIGN AND SPECIFICATIONS W/ OWNERNEW ISLAND - COORDINATE FINAL DESIGN W/ OWNERNEW SHELVING SYSTEMCOORDINATE FINAL DESIGN W/ OWNERNEW ENTRY/ EXIT DOOR MUST OPEN OVER A LANDING NOTMORE THAN 1.5" BELOW THE THRESHOLD. EXCEPTION:PROVIDING THE DOOR DOES NOTSWING OVER THELANDING. LANDING SHALL BE NOT MORE THAN 7.75" BELOWTHE THRESHOLD. STORM AND SCREEN DOORS AREPERMITTED TO SWING OVER ALL EXTERIOR STAIRS ANDLANDINGS. (CBC 1008.1.6,R311.3.1)LANDING SHALL BE 36" MIN. DIMENSION, MEASURED IN THEDIRECTION OF TRAVEL AND SLOPED AWAY FROM DOOR AMINIMUM OF 2% AND NO LESS THAN THE WIDTH OF THEDOOR OR THE STAIRS SERVED - WHCHEVER IS GREATER.NEW FIREPLACE HEARTH AND MANTELCOORDINATE FINAL DESIGN AND SPECIFICATIONS W/ OWNERNEW CLOSET SHELVING SYSTEM - COORDINATE FINAL DESIGN ANDSPECIFICATIONS W/ OWNERHOSE BIB LOCATION, CONFIRM FINAL LOCATIONWITH OWNER ON SITEH.B.TEMPERED GLASS - CONTRACTOR TO CONFIRMREQUIREMENTS WITH DOOR AND WINDOW SUPPLIEREXISTING STUD WALL TO REMAININTERIOR SURFACE: PROVIDE NEW 5/8" GYP. BOARD AT ALLEXPOSED FRAMING CONDITIONS. PREPARE FOR NEW PAINTFINISH.PROVIDE 5/8" TYPE 'X' GYPSUM BOARD FINISH AT GARAGESIDE WHEN ADJACENT TO LIVING AREAS .EXTERIOR SURFACE: REMOVE EXISTING WOOD SIDING ANDREPLACED WITH NEW PRE-PRIMED "ARTESAN" HARDIECEMENT FIBER BOARD & 2" BATTEN @ 16" ON CENTER - SEEELEVATIONS FOR LOCATION AND ADDITIONAL FINISHES.REFER TO T-24 SHEETS FOR INSULATION REQUIREMENTS.NEW NON PLUMBING WALLS:2x4 WOOD STUDS @ 16" O.C. - U.N.O. - WITH 5/8" GYPSUMBOARD FINISH AT INTERIOR SIDE AND PRE-PRIMED"ARTESAN" HARDIE CEMENT FIBER BEVELED SIDING -U.N.O.REFER TO T-24 SHEETS FOR INSULATION REQUIREMENTS.NEW EXTERIOR WALLS AND INTERIOR PLUMBING WALLS:2x6 WOOD STUDS @ 16" O.C. - U.N.O. - WITH 5/8" GYPSUMBOARD FINISH AT INTERIOR SIDE AND PRE-PRIMED"ARTESAN" HARDIE CEMENT FIBER BOARD & 2" BATTEN@ 16" ON CENTER - U.N.O.REFER TO T-24 SHEETS FOR INSULATION REQUIREMENTS.KEY NOTESGENERAL LEGENDEXISTING RETAINING WALL W/ NEW 2X4 STUDS @ 16" O.C.AND 5/8" GYPSUM BOARD AT EXPOSED SIDE.REFER TO T-24 SHEETS FOR INSULATION REQUIREMENTS.NEW CONCRETE RETAINING/ FOUNDATION WALL(SEE STRUCTURAL FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION)WITH 2X4 FURR-OUT WOOD STUDS AT 16" O.C.WITH 5/8" GYPSUM BOARD AT EXPOSED SIDE U.N.O.REFER TO T-24 SHEETS FOR INSULATION REQUIREMENTS.NEW GARAGE FLOOR AREA ADDITION ( 312 SQ.FT.)EXISTING FLOOR AREA DEDUCTION ( - 415 SQ.FT.)NEW BULT-IN CABINET FOR REFRIGERATOR. COORDINATE FINALDESIGN AND SPECIFICATIONS W/ OWNERNEW VELUX SKYLIGHT ABOVE - ICC-ES REPORT - ESR-4108. COORDINATEEXACT LOCATION WITH OWNER ON SITE - CENTER OVER ISLANDNEW BUILT IN CABINET WITH STONE TOPCOORDINATE FINAL DESIGN W/ OWNEREXISTING FIREPLACE TO REMAINCOORDINATE HEARTH AND MANTEL NEW DESIGN W/ OWNERINTERIOR STAIRS, GUARDRAIL, AND HANDRAIL,SEE DETAILSPROVIDE 30" MINIMUM CLEAR WIDTH AT WATER CLOSET SPACE AND24" MINIMUM CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF WATER CLOSETPER CPC SECT. 407.5SEMI-FRAMELESS TEMPERED GLASS DOOR AND SHOWER ENCLOSURECOORDINATE DESIGN AND DIMENSIONS WITH ARCHITECT ON SITECLOTHES DRYER EXHAUST DUCT TO RUN THROUGH WALL TO ROOF -MAX. LENGTH 14' WITH TWO 90 DEGREE ELBOWS MAXIMUM PERSECTION 504.3.1 THROUGH 504.3.1.2 OF THE CMCSLOPE CONCRETE FROM GARAGE BACK TO GARAGE FRONT DOORFRAMELESS TEMPERED GLASS DOOR AND SHOWER ENCLOSURECOORDINATE DESIGN AND DIMENSIONS WITH ARCHITECT ON SITESHOWER SEAT - COORDINATE HEIGHT AND LAYOUT W/ OWNERNEW 30" MIN. SQUARE ATTIC ACCESSCOORDINATE EXACT LOCATION WITH OWNER ON SITELINE OF CEILING / SOFFIT ABOVENEW 5/8" TYPE 'X' GYPSUM BOARD FINISH BETWEEN GARAGEAND LIVING AREAS5/8" TYPE 'X' GYPSUM BOARD FINISH UNDER STAIRS ANDALL AROUND INSIDE SPACEPLUMBING CONTROLSCHEDULESTORAGE AREAB01"CAVE" DESIGN AROUND RANGE - COORDINATE DESIGN &DIMENSIONS W/ OWNERPLUMBING FIXTURESCHEDULEEXISTING STUD WALL TO REMAINAT EXTERIOR WALL RAISE PLATE HEIGHT TO 8'-6"AT INTERIOR WALL RAISE PLATE HEIGHT PER CEILINGDESIGN. REFER TO WALL FINISH NOTES ABOVE.(CONSULT WITH ARCHITECT AND OWNER ON SITE)EXISTINGFIREPLACE LINEABOVEEXISTING WINDOW WELLTO BE COVERED12S-413BA-11.024EXTERIOR STAIRS, GUARDRAIL, AND HANDRAIL,SEE DETAILS9A10.110A10.111A10.125EGRESS WINDOW WITH MIN. 5.7 SQ.FT. NET CLEAR OPENING AREA (5SQ.FT. FOR GRADE OPENINGS AND BASEMENT WINDOW WELLS),MIN. 24" OF NET CLEAR HEIGHT OPENING AND MIN. 20" OF NETCLEAR WIDTH OPENING PER CBC SECT. 1029Ø2'-6"Ø2'-6"Ø2'-6"Ø2'-6"F.F. ELV.1304.00F.F. ELV.1304.00F.F. ELV.1304.00F.F. ELV.1304.00F.F. ELV.1304.00F.F. ELV.1304.00F.F. ELV.1303.90F.F. ELV.1303.90F.F. ELV.1303.90F.F. ELV.1303.85F.F. ELV.1303.90F.F. ELV.1303.90F.F. ELV.1303.90F.F. ELV.1303.02F.F. ELV.1303.02F.F. ELV.1303.02F.F. ELV.1296.40F.F. ELV.1296.40F.F. ELV.1296.40F.F. ELV.1296.40F.F. ELV.1296.30F.F. ELV.1296.30F.F. ELV.1296.30F.F. ELV.1296.30F.F. ELV.1296.40F.F. ELV.1296.30F.F. ELV.1296.00NOTE:ALL STAIRWAYS SHALL HAVE AN ILLUMINATION LEVEL ONTREAD RUNS OF NOT LESS THAN 1 FOOT-CANDLE (11 LUX)TANKLESS WATER HEATERS LOCATIONVERIFY WITH ARCHITECT ON SITE -SEE T-24 SHEETS FOR SIZEFAUF.A.U. IN ATTICSEE DETAIL12A10.1FAUF.A.U. IN ATTICSEE DETAIL12A10.11'-4"1'-4"21'-3"11'-5"22'-10"2'-10"4'-7"3'-0"PC-043'-3"10'-10"3'-8"EQ.EQ.5'-10"11'-8"(V.I.F)(V.I.F.)(V.I.F)EQ.EQ.2727EQ.EQ.1'-9"8'-3"6(V.I.F.)
5'-0"1'-6"(E)27(E)
7'-5"7'-3"171'-4"5'-7"(E)
EQ.EQ.
EQ.EQ.25'-2"17'-3"24'-0"EQ.EQ.H.B.H.B.H.B.27H.B.(V.I.F.)UAP-01AP-03AP-02AP-04AP-05AP-09AP-07AP-08AP-06APPLIANCESCHEDULERANGE WITH OVEN BELOW(SPEC'S TO FOLLOW).PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.DISHWASHER (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW) -PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.REFRIGERATOR (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.DRYER (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.WASHER (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.HOOD WITH FAN - EXHAUST TO EXTERIOR(SPECS TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.DISHWASHER (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.FREEZER (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.36" WIDE DIRECT VENT METAL FIREPLACEHEATILATOR - HEIRLOOM 36PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.INSPECTOR SHALL VERIFY THAT PRODUCT ISU.L. LISTED PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.1.PROVIDE SOUND INSULATION AT ALL BATHROOM ANDBEDROOM WALLS2.PROVIDE TANKLESS WATER HEATERS - CONFIRM SIZE ANDLOCATION W/ OWNER3.ALL PLUMBING LINES SHOULD BE "AQUAPEX" - PROVIDEADEQUATE SIZE PIPING AND QUALITY TO AVOID LOWEREDWATER PRESSURE. PROVIDE ADEQUATE FASTENING TO AVOIDVIBRATION.COORDINATE FINAL DESIGN WITH OWNER26STORAGE CABINET DOORS - COORDINATE FINAL DESIGN W/OWNERNOTE:27NEW "LOMPOC" STONE FINISH. COORDINATE SUB BASE AND DRAINAGELAYOUT W/ LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT - DRAIN AWAY FROM BUILDING.28INSTALL OWNER PROVIDED STEAM UNIT.29NEW FLOOR SYSTEM OVER REMOVED STAIR SHAFT- REFER TO STRUCTURALNEW RECESSED FULL HEIGHT SLIDING GLASS PARTITION- COORDINATE DESIGN W/ OWNER22H.B.AA-11.0281627AP-02PF-05PC-05AP-04514EXISTING WINDOW WELLTO REMAINPF-108117EXISTING WINDOW WELLEXISTING LIGHT WELL TO BE COVEREDWITH NEW FLOOR SYSTEM1PROPOSED ENTRY LEVEL CONSTRUCTION PLANSCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"NORTHA7.03A7.04A7.01A7.02A8.0AA8.0BA8.0DA8.0EA8.0FA8.0DA8.0EA8.0FA-8.0GA-8.0HA-8.0HA8.0CA8.0CA8.1IA8.1JA8.1J14'-5"1252630ROOF LINE ABOVE3030303030WOOD (E)WOOD (E)1ELECTRICPANELPROPOSED BASEMENT LEVELCONSTRUCTION PLANSCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"NORTH15NEW 42" HT. GUARDRAIL29262931NEW FLOOR SYSTEM OVER EXISTING LIGHT WELL- REFER TO STRUCTURAL31PC-01PF-02PC-02KITCHEN SINK FAUCET AND CONTROLS (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.LAVATORY SINK FAUCET AND CONTROLS (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.LAVATORY SINK FAUCET AND CONTROLS (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.SHOWER HEAD AND CONTROLS (SPECS TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.TUB FAUCET AND CONTROLS W/ SEPARATE HAND-HELDSHOWER / CONTROLS (SPECS TO FOLLOW)- PROVIDED BY OWNER & INSTALLED BY G.C.LAVATORY SINK FAUCET AND CONTROLS (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.HAND-HELD SHOWER HEAD AND RAIN HEADWITH CONTROLS (SPECS TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.LAUNDRY SINK FAUCET AND CONTROLS (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.LAVATORY SINK FAUCET AND CONTROLS (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.HAND-HELD SHOWER/SHOWER HEAD COMBOWITH CONTROLS (SPECS TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.LAVATORY SINK FAUCET AND CONTROLS (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.SHOP SINK FAUCET AND CONTROLS (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.KITCHEN SINK W/ GARBAGE DISPOSAL(SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.LAUNDRY SINK (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.LAVATORY SINK (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.TOILET (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.FREE-STANDING TUB (SPECS TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.LAVATORY SINK (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.LAVATORY SINK (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.TOILET (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.LAVATORY SINK (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.TOILET (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.TOILET (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.LAVATORY SINK (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.TOILET (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.SHOP SINK (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.SHOWER HEAD WITH CONTROLS (SPECS TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.LAVATORY SINK (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.LAVATORY SINK FAUCET AND CONTROLS (SPEC'S TO FOLLOW)PROVIDED BY OWNER AND INSTALLED BY G.C.2 % SLOPEDRAIN MIN.2 % SLOPEDRAIN MIN.2 % SLOPEDRAIN MIN.(E) 2 % SLOPEDRAIN MIN.2 % SLOPEDRAIN MIN.2 %
SLOPEDRAIN
M
IN
.2 %
SLOPEDRAIN
M
IN
.
2 % SLOPE
DRAIN MIN.
2 % SLOPE
DRAIN MIN.
5'-0"5'-0"3'-3"5'-0"2'-2"3'-6"3'-0"7'-10"3'-0"6'-6"5'-6"8'-7"provide gas,water and electrical stub-out possible bbq locationRemove window "Z"- Becomes "P"4"4'-0"3'-11"5555PROPOSED SCOPE FORREVIEW ON JUNE 15, 2021BY THE PLANNINGCOMMISSIONNOTE: ALL OTHERWORK SHOWN HASBEEN APPROVEDPREVIOUSLY AND ISCURRENTLY UNDERCONSTRUCTION.PROJECT TITLE:CLIENT NAME:JOB NO:DATE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:SHEET NO:SHEET TITLE:CHECKED BY:20-011BFLdM01-15-2021Drawings and specifications as instruments of service are and shall remain the property of the design professional. Copies of the drawings and specifications retained by the client may be utilized only for his use and for occupying the project for which they were prepared, and not for the construction of any other projects. Any use or reproduction of these drawings in whole or part by any means whatsoever is strictly prohibited except with specific written consent of EnviroTechno Architecture.AS NOTEDRAJEWSKI
RESIDENCE
2 SPUR LANE
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
MR. AND MRS. RAJEWSKI
RESIDENCE
2 SPUR LANE
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 INTERACTIVE ARCHITECTURE + INTERIOR DESIGNENVIROTECHNOe-mail: luis@envirotechno.comwebsite: envirotechno.com116 S. CATALINA AVE. SUITE 102REDONDO BEACH, CA 90277VOICE: 310-379-9716ARCHITECTURAL STAMP:DEMOSEDANOVEMBER2STATEOFCALIFORN LIC # C32440E
NLUIS
LIC
RAESRCHITEC0,20
2
IA ,AIAT0
REVISIONS 05-02-2021
PROPOSED
FLOOR PLANA3.047
11A-10.010A-10.08A-10.01A-10.01A-10.01A-10.02A-10.02A-10.02A-10.01A-10.010A-10.010A-10.010A-10.03A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.05A-10.05A-10.05A-10.05A-10.05A-10.07A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.05A-10.0SLOPE4 1/2:12
SLOPE
4 1/2:12
SLOPE
4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12
SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE
4 1/2:12
SLOPE
4 1/2:12
SLOPE
4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE4 1/2:12SLOPE3 1/2:12NEW ROOF AT NEW GARAGENEW ROOF AT NEWOUTDOOR LIVINGNEW ROOF AT NEWENTRY PORCHNEW ROOFAT SHOPSLOPE3 1/2:12ROOF NOTES1. ROOF COVERING SHALL BE CLASS "A" AS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 1505.22. VALLEY FLASHINGS SHALL BE NO LESS THAN 0.019 INCH (NO. 26 GALVANIZED SHEET GAGE)CORROSION-RESISTANT METAL INSTALLED OVER 36-IN. WIDE UNDERLAYMENT CONSISTING OF ONELAYER OF 72-POUND MINERAL SURFACED NON-PERFORATED CAP SHEET MEETING ASTM D3909RUNNING THE FULL LENGTH OF THE VALLEY.3. ROOF GUTTERS SHALL BE DESIGNED TO PREVENT THE ACCUMULATION OF LEAVES AND DEBRIS.4. VENT OPENINGS FOR ENCLOSED ATTICS, ENCLOSED EAVE SOFFIT SPACES, ENCLOSED RAFTERSPACES AND UNDER FLOOR VENTS SHALL RESIST THE INTRUSION OF BURNING EMBERS AND FLAMETHROUGH THE VENT OPENINGS. VENT OPENING SHALL COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING:A. LISTED VENT COMPLYING WITH ASTM E2886 ORB. PROTECTED BY CORROSION RESISTANT, NON-COMBUSTIBLE WIRE MESH WITH MIN. 1/16" AND MAX. 1/8" OPENINGS5. VENTS SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED ON UNDERSIDE OF EAVES AND CORNICES UNLESS ONE OF THECONDITIONS SET FORTH IN SECTION 706A.3 OR R337.6.3 ARE MET.6. UN-VENTED ENCLOSED RAFTER ASSEMBLIES AT "CONTACT CEILING" SHALL BE COMPLETELY FILLEDAT REQUIRED RATING PER T-24 SHEETS WITH OPEN CELL INSULATION AND SHALL COMPLY WITHSECTION R-806.5 - C.R.C. 2013.01LINE OF BUILDING BELOW020304NEW 4" RECTANGULAR PAINTED, GALVANIZED ALUMINUM DOWNSPOUT.COORDINATE FINAL LOCATION W/ OWNER ON SITE.NEW 4" RECTANGULAR PAINTED, GALVANIZED ALUMINUM GUTTER.SHALL BE DESIGNED TO PREVENT THE ACCUMULATION OF LEAVES ANDDEBRIS - AT EXISTING ROOF EAVE ADD 2X PAINTED FASCIA BOARDKEY NOTESROOF LEGENDATTIC VENTS BY O-HAGIN PAINTED METAL VENT "FLAT STYLE" TOMATCH ROOF TILE AND COLOR - (ICC - ES SBCCI - 9650A)05CHIMNEY CRICKET AS NEED IT- SEE DETAIL061'-6" x 1'-6" FLAT SKYLIGHT W/ SOLAR GREY GLASS AS MANUFACTUREDBY VELLUX, ICC-ES LEGACY REPORT NER-216. GREY ANODIZEDALUMINUM SKYLIGHT MOUNTED ON A GREY ANODIZED ALUMINUMCLADDED WOOD FRAME CURB. SCREW TO CURB AND SEAL SCREWHEADS WITH SILICONE CAULKING - SEE DETAIL074'-0" x 2'-0" FLAT SKYLIGHT W/ SOLAR GREY GLASS AS MANUFACTUREDBY VELLUX, ICC-ES LEGACY REPORT NER-216. GREY ANODIZEDALUMINUM SKYLIGHT MOUNTED ON A GREY ANODIZED ALUMINUMCLADDED WOOD FRAME CURB. SCREW TO CURB AND SEAL SCREWHEADS WITH SILICONE CAULKING - SEE DETAIL -CONFIRM SIZE AND FINAL LOCATION W/ OWNER.EXTEND EXISTING CHIMNEY HEIGHT (10'-0" CLEAR AND 2'-0" HIGHFROM ANY ADJACENT ROOF) TO MEET SPARK ARRESTOR HEIGHTCLEARANCES REQUIRED BY CODE - PROVIDE NEW PAINTED METALSHROUD - CONFIRM DESIGN AND FINISH W/ ARCHITECT0810NEW SKYLIGHT CRICKET - SEE DETAILEXISTING ROOF STRUCTURE AND FINISH TO REMAINPATCH AND REPAIR AS NEEDEDATTIC AREA10'-0" x 4'-6" FLAT SKYLIGHT W/ SOLAR GREY GLASS AS MANUFACTUREDBY VELLUX, ICC-ES LEGACY REPORT NER-216. GREY ANODIZEDALUMINUM SKYLIGHT MOUNTED ON A GREY ANODIZED ALUMINUMCLADDED WOOD FRAME CURB. SCREW TO CURB AND SEAL SCREWHEADS WITH SILICONE CAULKING - SEE DETAIL -CONFIRM SIZE AND FINAL LOCATION W/ OWNER.0910'-0" x 4'-0" FLAT SKYLIGHT W/ SOLAR GREY GLASS AS MANUFACTUREDBY VELLUX, ICC-ES LEGACY REPORT NER-216. GREY ANODIZEDALUMINUM SKYLIGHT MOUNTED ON A GREY ANODIZED ALUMINUMCLADDED WOOD FRAME CURB. SCREW TO CURB AND SEAL SCREWHEADS WITH SILICONE CAULKING - SEE DETAIL -CONFIRM SIZE AND FINAL LOCATION W/ OWNER.010101010101010101010101010102020202020202020202020303030303030303030305060707081010SLOPE4 1/2:12
SLOPE
4 1/2:12
SLOPE4 1/2:1204041320.22'NEW RIDGE1318.72'
NEW RIDGE 1006SLOPE3 1/2:12SLOPE3 1/2:124A-10.04A-10.01A-10.01A-10.003037A-10.07A-10.0NEW ROOFAT STUDIONEW ROOF STRUCTURE AND FINISH - WITH LIGHT WEIGHT TILETO MATCH EXISTING - CLASS "A"ICC - ES EVALUATION REPORT No. ESR - 1900 ; LARR 25021CRRC #: 0918-0003Attic Vent Calculations:Vent Area = 0.67 sq. ft.Attic area = 1,529 sq. ft. / 150 = 10.19 sq. ft. of vents / 0.67 = 15.21 = 16 Vents providedattic vents - provided - Flat Style Vents by Ohagins Inc. (ICC-9650A) ;Painted Same color than Roof Finish Material.2A-10.02A-10.01A-10.01A-10.01A-10.01A-10.01111111111113A-10.011112A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.04A-10.01A-10.0112A-10.01A-10.05A-10.0SLOPE4 1/2:121317.97'NEW RIDGE061006PROPOSED ROOF PLANSCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"NORTH0311LINE OF POST OR COLUMN BELOW6A-10.00909100909101010PROPOSED SCOPE FORREVIEW ON JUNE 15, 2021BY THE PLANNINGCOMMISSIONNOTE: ALL OTHER WORKSHOWN HAS BEENAPPROVED PREVIOUSLYAND IS CURRENTLYUNDER CONSTRUCTION.PROJECT TITLE:CLIENT NAME:JOB NO:DATE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:SHEET NO:SHEET TITLE:CHECKED BY:20-011BFLdM01-15-2021Drawings and specifications as instruments of service are and shall remain the property of the design professional. Copies of the drawings and specifications retained by the client may be utilized only for his use and for occupying the project for which they were prepared, and not for the construction of any other projects. Any use or reproduction of these drawings in whole or part by any means whatsoever is strictly prohibited except with specific written consent of EnviroTechno Architecture.AS NOTEDRAJEWSKI
RESIDENCE
2 SPUR LANE
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
MR. AND MRS. RAJEWSKI
RESIDENCE
2 SPUR LANE
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 INTERACTIVE ARCHITECTURE + INTERIOR DESIGNENVIROTECHNOe-mail: luis@envirotechno.comwebsite: envirotechno.com116 S. CATALINA AVE. SUITE 102REDONDO BEACH, CA 90277VOICE: 310-379-9716ARCHITECTURAL STAMP:DEMOSEDANOVEMBER2STATEOFCALIFORN LIC # C32440E
NLUIS
LIC
RAESRCHITEC0,20
2
IA ,AIAT0
REVISIONS 05-02-2021
PROPOSED
ROOF PLANA6.048
8'-0"8'-6"NEW WINDOWNEW STONE VENEERAT EXISTING FIREPLACE, DESIGN &COLOR TO BE SUBMITTED AT LATER DAYSEE DETAIL9'-1"NEW SLIDINGDOOR SYSTEM2'-6" MAX.
(VARIES)
4'-0"J1032OPENFIN. FLRDOOR HEADNEW TOP PLATE AT PORCHNEW OUTDOOR LOUNGENEW GARAGE ADDITIONNEW ADDITION AT SHOPNEW GARAGEPLATE HT.4 WEST ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"NEW RELOCATED STEPSSEE DETAIL8'-1"(E) TOP PLATEEXISTING
EXTEND EXISTING CHIMNEY HEIGHT TO MEETSPARK ARRESTOR HEIGHT CLEARANCES BY CODENEW16
NEW ART STUDIO/STORAGE SHED3311A-10.17A-10.1EXTERIOR GUARDRAIL /HANDRAIL - SEE DETAILS9A-10.110A-10.1 STONE VENEERAT NEW PILASTERSEE DETAIL7A-10.13A10.03A10.212A10.212A10.211A10.211A10.212A10.2NEW 4X4 PAINT GRADECORNER POSTFRAMELESS CORNEREXISTING ROOF FRAMING TO REMAINW/ NEW LIGHT WEIGHT CONCRETE TILE ROOFEXISTING ROOF FRAMING TO REMAINW/ NEW LIGHT WEIGHT CONCRETETILE ROOFEXISTING ROOF FRAMING TO REMAIN W/NEW LIGHT WEIGHT CONCRETE TILE ROOFNEW PAINT GRADE FIRE RATEDBOARD & 2" W BATTEN@ 16"O.C. ICC-ERC-229010A10.1EXTERIOR GUARDRAIL /HANDRAIL - SEE DETAILSEXTERIOR GUARDRAIL /HANDRAIL - SEE DETAILS11A10.2NEW SKYLIGHTPROPOSED SCOPE FOR REVIEW ON JUNE15, 2021 BY THE PLANNING COMMISSIONNOTE: ALL OTHER WORK SHOWN HASBEEN APPROVED PREVIOUSLY AND ISCURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.7'-10"
8'-6"NEW WINDOWNEW STONEVENEERNEW WINDOW AT EXISTING LOCATIONAPPROXIMATE SAME SIZECLOSE-OFF AS NEEDEDNEW WINDOW AT EXISTING LOCATIONAPPROXIMATE SAME SIZECLOSE-OFF AS NEEDEDNEW PAINT GRADE FIRE RATEDBOARD & 2" W BATTEN@ 16"O.C. ICC-ERC-22902'-6" MAX.(VARIES)4'-0"FILL AREA01BCHIP34NEW WINDOW7'-6"
8'-1"(E) TOP PLATEFIN. FLR.NEW HD.NEW TOP PLATENEW ADDITIONAT SHOPEXISTINGNEWADDITIONWINDOW HEADNEW ENTRY PORCHEXISTING ROOF FRAMING TO REMAINNEW GARAGEPLATE HT.NEW GARAGE ADDITION9'-1" PLATE HEIGHTNEW MUD ROOMADDITIONNEW ROOF FRAMING1NORTH ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"(E) TOP PLATE28S STONE VENEERAT NEW PILASTERSEE DETAIL7A-10.17A-10.11210.211A10.22A10.210A10.22A10.2NEW LIGHT WEIGHT CONCRETE TILE ROOF1A10.010A10.21A10.21A10.26A10.26A10.27A10.23A10.011A10.0TYP.2A10.210A10.22A10.22A10.210A10.22A10.2OENTRY DOOR- DESIGN AND FINISH TO BESUBMITTED AT A LATER DATESTAIN - GRADE WOOD STRUCTURENEW STAIN GRADE WOOD POST & CORBELSNEW PAINT GRADE FIRE RATED BOARD & 2" W BATTEN@ 16"O.C. ICC-ERC-2290NEW PAINT GRADE FIRE RATED BOARD & 2" W BATTEN@ 16"O.C. ICC-ERC-2290NEW PAINT GRADE FIRE RATEDBOARD & 2" W BATTEN@ 16"O.C. ICC-ERC-22904X4 PAINT GRADE FIRE RATEDCORNER POSTNEW LIGHT WEIGHT CONCRETE TILEROOFNEW SKYLIGHT7'-6"
8'-6"
9'-1"REPLACE EXISTING GARAGE DOORSAME LOCATION - SAME SIZENEW WINDOWNEW WINDOWML353637NEW WINDOWOPENFIN. FLRWINDOW HEADNEW TOP PLATE AT PORCHNEW GARAGE ADDITIONNEW GARAGEPLATE HT.NEW MUD ROOMADDITIONEXISTINGNEWADDITION2EAST ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"NEW OUTDOOR LOUNGE8'-1058"2'-0"
EXISTING NEW
EXTEND EXISTING CHIMNEY HEIGHTTO MEET SPARK ARRESTOR HEIGHTCLEARANCES BY CODE7A-10.19A10.28A10.29A10.21A10.2--1A10.2DN2A10.22A10.22A10.22A10.210A10.2NEW PAINTED METAL SHROUD- FINAL DESIGN AND COLORTO FOLLOWGARAGE DOOR DESIGN AND FINISH TO BESUBMITTED AT A LATER DATENEW STAIN GRADE WOODPOST & CORBELSNEW 4X4 PAINT GRADECORNER POSTNEW PAINT GRADE FIRE RATEDBOARD & 2" W BATTEN@ 16"O.C. ICC-ERC-2290NEW PAINT GRADE FIRE RATEDBOARD & 2" W BATTEN@ 16"O.C. ICC-ERC-2290NEW STONE VENEERDESIGN & COLOR TO BESUBMITTED AT LATER DAYEXISTING ROOF FRAMING TO REMAINW/ NEW LIGHT WEIGHT CONCRETETILE ROOFEXISTING ROOF FRAMING TO REMAINW/ NEW LIGHT WEIGHT CONCRETETILE ROOFNEW SKYLIGHTNEW SKYLIGHT8'-0"8'-6"NEW SLIDINGDOOR SYSTEMNEW SLIDINGDOOR SYSTEMNEW SLIDINGDOOR SYSTEMNEW SLIDINGDOOR SYSTEMNEW WINDOWNEW STONE VENEERAT EXISTING FIREPLACEDESIGN & COLOR TO BESUBMITTED AT LATER DAYNEW SLIDINGDOOR SYSTEMK2221201911141710'-0"24"
N.T.S.FLR.DOOR HEADERFIN.NEW OUTDOOR LOUNGE3SOUTH ELEVATION1/4" = 1'-0"NEW TOP PLATEEXISTING
EXTEND EXISTING CHIMNEY HEIGHTTO MEET SPARK ARRESTOR HEIGHTCLEARANCES BY CODENEW
EXISTING NEW EXTEND EXISTING CHIMNEY HEIGHTTO MEET SPARK ARRESTOR HEIGHTCLEARANCES BY CODE9'-1"
7'-10"
6'-8"NEW ART STUDIO/STORAGE SHED9'-1"T0230 STONE VENEERAT NEW PILASTERSEE DETAIL7A-10.112A10.211A10.22A10.011A10.0TYP.NEW STAIN GRADE WOODPOST AND CORBELS - TYP.4A10.0SIM.SIM.SIM.11A10.2SIM.12A10.23A10.03A10.2SIM.NEW DOOR10A10.22A10.24A10.212A10.05A10.02A10.22A10.2NEW PAINTED METAL SHROUD - FINAL DESIGN AND COLOR TO FOLLOWSTAIN - GRADE WOOD STRUCTURENEW 4X4 PAINT GRADECORNER POSTNEW PAINT GRADE FIRE RATEDBOARD & 2" W BATTEN@ 16"O.C. ICC-ERC-2290NEW PAINT GRADE FIRE RATEDBOARD & 2" W BATTEN@ 16"O.C. ICC-ERC-2290NEW PAINT GRADE FIRE RATEDBOARD & 2" W BATTEN@ 16"O.C. ICC-ERC-2290NEW PAINT GRADE FIRE RATEDBOARD & 2" W BATTEN@ 16"O.C. ICC-ERC-2290EXISTING ROOF FRAMING TO REMAINW/ NEW LIGHT WEIGHT CONCRETETILE ROOFNEW PAINT GRADE FIRE RATEDBOARD & 2" W BATTEN@ 16"O.C. ICC-ERC-2290EXISTING ROOF FRAMING TO REMAINW/ NEW LIGHT WEIGHT CONCRETETILE ROOFTYP.FRAMELESSCORNER12A10.211A10.212A10.212A10.211A10.2PROPOSED SCOPE FOR REVIEW ON JUNE15, 2021 BY THE PLANNING COMMISSIONNOTE: ALL OTHER WORK SHOWN HASBEEN APPROVED PREVIOUSLY AND ISCURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.PROJECT TITLE:CLIENT NAME:JOB NO:DATE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:SHEET NO:SHEET TITLE:CHECKED BY:20-011BFLdM01-15-2021Drawings and specifications as instruments of service are and shall remain the property of the design professional. Copies of the drawings and specifications retained by the client may be utilized only for his use and for occupying the project for which they were prepared, and not for the construction of any other projects. Any use or reproduction of these drawings in whole or part by any means whatsoever is strictly prohibited except with specific written consent of EnviroTechno Architecture.AS NOTEDRAJEWSKI
RESIDENCE
2 SPUR LANE
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
MR. AND MRS. RAJEWSKI
RESIDENCE
2 SPUR LANE
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 INTERACTIVE ARCHITECTURE + INTERIOR DESIGNENVIROTECHNOe-mail: luis@envirotechno.comwebsite: envirotechno.com116 S. CATALINA AVE. SUITE 102REDONDO BEACH, CA 90277VOICE: 310-379-9716ARCHITECTURAL STAMP:DEMOSEDANOVEMBER2STATEOFCALIFORN LIC # C32440E
NLUIS
LIC
RAESRCHITEC0,20
2
IA ,AIAT0
REVISIONS 05-02-2021A7.0ELEVATIONS
49
Zoning Case No. 21-05 (2 Spur Lane) pg. 1
Development Table Zoning Case No. 21-05 (2 Spur Lane)
CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT, SITE PLAN
REVIEW, & VARIANCE
EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
RA-S-1 Zone Setbacks
Front: 50 ft. from front easement
line
Side: 20 ft. from side property
line
Rear: 50 ft. from rear easement
line
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
WITH GARAGE, GUEST
HOUSE, STUDIO, POOL
CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR A PROPOSED
180 SQUARE-FOOT
ATTACHED STUDIO
RESULTING IN A MIXED
USE STRUCTURE; SITE
PLAN REVIEW FOR 71.6
CUBIC YARDS OF
GRADING; AND
VARIANCE FOR
IMPORTING 18 CUBIC
YARDS OF GRAVEL FOR
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
LOCATED AT 2 SPUR
LANE, (LOT 12-B-CH)
ROLLING HILLS, CA
(RAJEWSKI).
Net Lot Area 82,874 SF 0 SF 82,874 SF
Residence 4,104 SF -245 SF 3,859 SF
Garage 575 SF 312 SF 887 SF
Swimming Pool/Spa 557 SF 0 SF 557 SF
Pool Equipment 20 SF 0 SF 20 SF
Guest House 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Shop (old Guest House)316 SF 237 SF 552 SF
Stable 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Recreation Court 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Attached Covered
Porches,(Rear Porch-Cabana)
Entryway, Porte Cochere,
Breezeways
463 SF
47 SF
573 SF
62 SF
1,036 SF
109 SF
Attached Trellis 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Studio 134 SF 46 SF 180 SF
Lightwell 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Service Yard 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Basement Area 556 SF 0 SF 556 SF
Total Structure Area 5,639 SF 984 SF 7,756 SF
Structural Coverage 8.17%1.18%9.55%
Structural Coverage
(20% maximum)7.48%2.22%9.70
Grading (balanced on site)Unknown 71.6 CY 71.6 CY
Total Lot Coverage
(35% maximum)
15.66%3.6%19.26%
Building Pad Coverage 1
(30%maximum)
23.81 %4.56 %28.37%
50
Zoning Case No. 21-05 (2 Spur Lane) pg. 2
Building Pad Coverage 2
(30%maximum)
16.99%0%16.99%
Building Pad Coverage 3
(30%maximum)
%%%
Disturbed Area
(40% maximum)
59.9 %0%59.9%
Stable min. 450 S.F.SF SF SF
Corral min. 550 S.F.N/A SF SF
Riding Ring N/A SF SF
Retaining/Garden Wall
Roadway Access
51
Resolution No. 2021-07
2 Spur Lane Mixed-Use Structure -1-
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-07
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT FOR A MIXED-USE STRUCTURE; A VARIANCE FOR THE
IMPORTATION OF GRAVEL; AND A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR
LEGALIZING 71.6 CUBIC YARDS OF GRADING LOCATED AT 2 SPUR
LANE (LOT 12-B-CH) ROLLING HILLS, CA (RAJEWSKI).
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. Paul Rajewski on April 5, 2021 with respect
to real property located at 2 Spur Lane, Rolling Hills (Lot 12-B-CH) requesting a Conditional Use Permit
for the construction of an attached 180 square foot mixed-use structure to an existing shop and garage, a
Site Plan Review for 71.6 cubic yards of grading and Variance for the importation of gravel for the
expansion of an existing 12-foot wide driveway to comply with L.A. County Fire requirements.
Section 2.The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the
proposed project during an on-site field trip and an evening teleconference meeting on the same day, June
15, 2021. The applicants were notified of the field trip and public teleconference hearing in writing by
first class mail and email.
Neighbors within 1,000-foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in the
Daily Breeze on June 5, 2021. The applicants and their agents were notified of the public hearings in
writing by first class mail and the applicants and agents were in attendance at the hearings evidence was
heard and presented from all person interested in affecting said proposal, and from members of the City
staff.
On October 19, 2020, the applicant submitted an Administrative Review Application and plans to the
Planning Department for aresidentialaddition less than 999 square feet, remodel, 7 cubic yards of grading,
and less than 50% demolition of exterior walls. The Administrative Review application and plans were
approved by staff on November 3, 2020. The applicant submitted the approved plans for plan check to the
Building and Safety Department. The Fire Department Plan check review triggered an expansion of the
existing driveway. The applicant revised the approved plans and re-submitted to the Planning Department
for approval. The expansion of the driveway also required Traffic Commission approval.
The site is currently undergoing active construction and was approved at ministerial level on March 26,
2021. The existing improvements on the property comprise of existing, approved and under construction
elements of development including a remodel, residential addition less than 999 square feet, demolition,
and re-roof.
Section 3.The property is zoned RAS-1 and the gross lot area is 2.04 acres or 88,740 square
feet. The net lot area for development purposes is 1.9 acres or 82,874 square-feet. The lot is currently
developed with an existing 4,104 square-foot residence, 575 square-feet garage, 316 square-feet shop/old
52
Resolution No. 2021-07
2 Spur Lane Mixed-Use Structure -2-
guest house, 134 square-feet detached studio, and 556 square feet basement area, 556 square foot
basement, and 557 square-foot pool. There are two building pads, the existing residence and garage are
located on the upper building pad (28,485 square feet), and the pool is located on the lower building pad
(3,395 square feet).
Section 4.The Planning Commission finds that the project is exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA) pursuant to Class 3, Section 15303 (a) and (3) of the CEQA
guidelines.
Section 5. Site Plan Review. The Rolling Hills Municipal Code requires a Site Plan Review for
a project that proposes grading pursuant to RHMC Section 17.46.020(A)(1). The project proposes total
grading of 71.6 cubic yards. The Planning Commission makes the following findings:
A.The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan
and all requirements of the zoning ordinance.
The property is 1.90 acres, which is within the requirements of the RAS-1 zone. The proposed
71.6 cubic yards of grading meet the requirements of the City. The existing 12-foot wide driveway had to
be widened to 20-feet to comply with the Fire Department's access requirements. The grading is necessary
for the widening of the driveway to meet Fire Code access requirements. The Fire Code requires a 20-foot
driveway, clear of any horizontal or vertical obstructions, to accommodate the width and height of a fire
truck and its equipment. In order to extend the existing driving, 18 cubic yards of gravel was imported to
fill the strip. The total cut for the proposed project is 34 cubic yards: 18 cubic yards for the driveway and
16 cubic yards for the front patio. The total fill for the project is 34 cubic yards: 13 cubic yards for the
under garage addition, 3.6 cubic yards for the basement, 3 cubic yards for the new planter area, and 18
cubic yards (maximum 24 inches) for the driveway. All grading activities will be balanced onsite
B.The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by
minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual
amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot.
The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing
building coverage. The topography and the configuration of the lot have been considered, and it was
determined that the proposed development will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to
adjacent uses, buildings, or structures, because the development will be constructed on the existing area
that has already been developed and is below the allowable maximum 30% building pad coverage. The
building pad coverage on Pad No. 1 is 28% (6,772 square feet) and Pad No. 1 is 16.99% (577 square feet).
The lot is 1.90 acres net in size and is sufficiently large to accommodate the proposed uses.
The disturbed area of the lot is existing at 59.9% which was previously approved above the 40%
maximum disturbance. All work for the proposed project will be constructed within the existing disturbed
area.
C.The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and
surrounding residences. The proposed mixed-use development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and
mass with the site. The proposed project is located out of sight of the street and will be visible to one
neighbor, and is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to properties in the vicinity.
53
Resolution No. 2021-07
2 Spur Lane Mixed-Use Structure -3-
The site is currently under construction, and developed with a single family residencethat has been
partially demolished for renovation. The overall project upon completion will consist of a 3,859 main
residence, 8,887 square foot garage, 552 square-foot shop, 1,036 square feet of covered porches, 109
square foot breezeway, 556 square foot basement, 20 foot wide fire approved driveway, and 180 square
foot studio (proposed mixed-use). The development complies with the low profile residential development
pattern of the community and will not give the property an over-built look. The mixed-use is low in profile,
and the massing is will not be seen by the adjacent neighbors.
D.The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible,
existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage
courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls).
The proposed remodel, addition, mixed-use structure, and grading will not further increase
disturbance of the site. The grading is limited to a total of 71.6 cubic yards (3.5 cubic yards for the
basement). In addition, the project will be conditioned to use native vegetation that will blend in with the
surrounding area to preserve the natural sand native vegetation, while complying with the Fire
Department’s Fuel Modification requirements.
E.Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the
amount of grading required to create the building area.
The development previously graded and disturbed. The majority of the grading that is required is
to meet the emergency access and fill in the front patio, under the garage addition, 3.6 for the basement,
and new planter area. The grading is very minimal and will not exceed 71.6 cubic yards.
F.Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such
flow is redirected into an existing drainage course.
The proposed grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow. The
drainage will remain the same.
G.The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements
these elements with drought-tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural
character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and
public areas.
H.The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement
of pedestrians and vehicles.
The development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for
pedestrians and vehicles because the existing 20-foot wide driveway and apron has met all of the
requirements of the L.A. County Fire Department and approved by the Traffic Commission. There is
ample parking in the garage and parking for guests on site. There are not changes to the circulation patterns
on the site.
I.The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.
The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA) pursuant to Class
3, Section 15303 (a) and (3) of the CEQA guidelines.
54
Resolution No. 2021-07
2 Spur Lane Mixed-Use Structure -4-
Section 6.Conditional Use Permit. Section 17.12.130 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code
permits approval of a mixed-use structure with a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed 180 square foot
mixed-use structure complies with all requirements of these sections. With respect to this request for a
Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows:
A.That the proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan.
That the proposed conditional use (a mixed-use structure) is consistent with the General Plan. The
mixed use is a permitted use with a Conditional Use Permit.
B.That the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures have
been considered, and that the use will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent
uses.
The proposed size and height of the mixed use structure blends with the existing development and
adjacent residences in the neighborhood.
C.That the site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and shape to accommodate
the use and buildings proposed.
The mixed-use structure is located on the existing primary building pad, which is on the same
elevation of the shop, 7.5 feet below the floor level of garage. The net lot size of 1.90 acres and can
accommodate the proposed use.
D.That the proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of
the zone district.
The project complies with the zoning regulations of the RAS-1 Zone with a Conditional Use
Permit.
E.That the proposed use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous
Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the
project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List.
The proposed conditional uses are consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County
Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the
project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List.
F.That the proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of this title.
The property currently is being improved with a remodel and less than 999 square foot addition.
The project promotes the City’s goal for promoting equestrian uses and maintaining rural character. The
proposed structure is 180 square feet and blends in with existing structures.
E.The proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the
zone district and requires Conditional Use Permits pursuant to Section17.12.130of the Zoning Ordinance.
55
Resolution No. 2021-07
2 Spur Lane Mixed-Use Structure -5-
The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding
residences in that the proposed use complies with the low profile residential development pattern of the
community and will not give the property an over-built look. The gross lot is 2.04 acres net in size and is
sufficiently sized to accommodate the proposed use.
Section 7. The City of Rolling Hills requires a Variance pursuant to Section 15.04.110(1) states
no import of soil shall be permitted to any lot in the City, except where a variance pursuant to Chapter
17.38 has been approved.The LA County Fire Department required the expansion of the existing driveway
for fire access. The applicant is requesting a Variance for the import of 18 cubic yards of gravel. With
respect to the aforementioned request for a Variance from Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission
finds as follows:
A.That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the
property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone.
The City requires a Variance for the import of any soils. The LA County Fire Department required
the expansion the existing 12-foot wide driveway by 8 feet to meet the 20-foot wide fire code requirement.
The 20-foot wide driveway has been constructed, the applicant is requesting a Variance for legalize the
work.
B.That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property
rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in
question.
In order to comply with the Zoning, the applicant is requesting a Variance to allow the import of
18 cubic yards of gravel. The import of 18 cubic yards of gravel is necessary for the widening of the
driveway to accommodate Fire Department access and vehicular access to the house in case of an
emergency.
C.That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.
The proposed development will comply with the required fire code, will not have adverse visual
impact to adjacent properties and is in keeping with the character and scale of the community
D. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed. The
granting of relief from the code will allow the applicant to enjoy the same rights enjoyed by other residents
in the community.
The proposed addition required a Fire and Building Code compliant driveway. The granting of the
variance will comply with the required health and safety measures required by the Fire Department.
E. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant.
The proposed addition is in character and similar in scale with existing residential development
and the applicant will have the opportunity to enjoy the same amenities enjoyed by other residents in the
community.
56
Resolution No. 2021-07
2 Spur Lane Mixed-Use Structure -6-
F. That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous Waste
Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities.
The proposed project site is not on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances
Sites List.
G.That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills.
The proposed improvements are in character and scale as the existing neighborhood and preserves
the rural character of the City.
Based upon the foregoing findings, and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby
approves Zoning Case No. 21-05 request for a Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a 180 square
feet mixed-use, a Site Plan Review for 71.6 cubic yards of grading, and a Variance for the import of 18
cubic yards of gravel, subject to the following conditions:
A. This approval shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval unless the
approval granted is otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of RHMC Sections 17.38.070 and
17.46.080.
B. If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by this resolution
shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse and upon receipt of written notice
from the City, all construction work being performed, if any, on the subject property shall immediately
cease, other than work determined by the City Manager or his/her designee required to cure the
violation. The stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant cures the violation to the satisfaction of
the City Manager or his/her designee. In the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her
designee’s determination that a violation exists or disputes how the violation must be cured, the Applicant
may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular meeting
of the City Council for which the agenda has not yet been posted, the Applicant shall be provided written
notice of the hearing. The stop work order shall remain in effect during the pendency of the hearing. The
City Council shall make a determination as to whether a violation of this Resolution has occurred. If the
Council determines that a violation has not occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the
Council will lift the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has occurred and has not
yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a deadline to cure the violation; no
construction work shall be performed on the property until and unless the violation is cured by the
deadline, other than work designated by the Council to accomplish the cure. If the violation is not cured
by the deadline, the Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant’s request or schedule a hearing
for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant to Chapter 17.58 of the RHMC.
C. All requirements of the Building 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
this permit, or shown otherwise on an approved plan. Construction fencing may be required.
D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on
file received on April 5, 2021 except as otherwise provided in these conditions. The working drawings
submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the approved
development plan. All conditions of the Site Plan Review approval shall be incorporated into the building
permit working drawings, and where applicable complied with prior to issuance of a grading or building
permit from the building department.
57
Resolution No. 2021-07
2 Spur Lane Mixed-Use Structure -7-
The conditions of approval of this Resolution shall be printed onto building plans submitted to the Building
Department for review and shall be kept on site at all times.
Any modifications and/or changes to the approved project, including resulting from field conditions, shall
be discussed and approved by staff prior to implementing the changes.
E.Prior to submittal of final working drawings to Building and Safety Department for
issuance of building permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that
the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission.
F.A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building
Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this
Resolution approving this project and all of the conditions set forth therein and the City’s Building Code
and Zoning Ordinance.
Further, the person obtaining a building and/or grading permit for this project shall execute a
Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and
any plans approved therewith.
G.Structural lot coverage of the lot shall not exceed 7,756 square feet or 9.35% of the net lot
area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (20% maximum).
The total lot coverage proposed, including structures and flatwork, shall not exceed 15,802 square
feet or 19.06%, of the net lot area, in conformance with lot coverage limitations (35% max).
H. 71.6 cubic yards of grading shall take place for the proposed project. The proposed grading
of the lot, including the approved stable and corral set aside shall not exceed 59.9%.
I.A minimum of five-foot level path and/or walkway, which does not have to be paved, shall
be provided around the entire perimeter of all structures, or as otherwise required by the Fire Department.
J.The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Lighting Ordinance of the City of
Rolling Hills (RHMC 17.16.190 E), pertaining to lighting on said property, roofing and material
requirements of properties in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.
K.All utility lines to the residence, stable, and garage shall be placed underground, subject to
all applicable standards and requirements.
L.A drainage plan, if required by the Building Department, shall be prepared and approved
by City Staff prior to issuance of a construction permit. Such plan shall be subject to LA County Code
requirements.
M.If applicable, the new landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City’s Water
Efficient Landscape Ordinance, (Chapter 13.18of the RHMC).
N. The setback lines and roadway easement lines in the vicinity of the construction for this
project shall remain marked throughout the construction.
58
Resolution No. 2021-07
2 Spur Lane Mixed-Use Structure -8-
O.Perimeter easements, including roadway easements and trails, if any, shall remain free and
clear of any improvements including, but not be limited to fences-including construction fences, any
hardscape, driveways, landscaping, irrigation and drainage devices, except as otherwise approved by the
Rolling Hills Community Association.
P.Minimum of 65% of any construction materials must be recycled or diverted from
landfills. The hauler of the materials shall obtain City’s Construction and Demolition permits for waste
hauling prior to start of work and provide proper documentation to the City.
Q.During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements,
stormwater pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that
people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors shall be
required.
R.During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate
construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday
through Saturday, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere
with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills.
S.The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and
grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at:
http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard_definitions#FIRE. It is the sole
responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions.
Should a red flag warning be declared and if work is to be conducted on the property, the contractor shall
have readily available fire distinguisher.
T.The property owners shall be required to conform with the Regional Water Quality Control
Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP’s) requirements related
to solid waste, drainage and storm water drainage facilities management. Further the property owners shall
be required to conform to the County Health Department requirements for a septic system, if a new septic
system is required.
U.Prior to finaling of the project an “as constructed” set of plans and certifications, including
certifications of ridgelines of the structures, shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building
Department to ascertain that the completed project is in compliance with the approved plans. In addition,
any modifications made to the project during construction, shall be depicted on the “as built” plan.
V. The applicant shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this permit
pursuant to Zoning Ordinance, or the approval shall not be effective. The affidavit shall be recorded
together with the resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2021.
_____________________________
BRAD CHELF, CHAIRMAN
59
Resolution No. 2021-07
2 Spur Lane Mixed-Use Structure -9-
ATTEST:
______________________________________
JANELY SANDOVAL, CITY CLERK
60
Resolution No. 2021-07
2 Spur Lane Mixed-Use Structure -10-
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2021-07 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING
HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN
ATTACHED MIXED-USE STRUCTURE; A VARIANCE FOR THE IMPORTATION OF
GRAVEL; AND A SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR GRADING LOCATED AT 2 SPUR LANE
(LOT 12-B-CH) ROLLING HILLS, CA (RAJEWSKI). THE PROJECT HAS BEEN
DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on June 15, 2021 by the
following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following:
Administrative Offices.
__________________________________
JANELY SANDOVAL, CITY CLERK
61
Agenda Item No.: 5.C
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:STEPHANIE GRANT , ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:ZONING CASE NO. 20-09 AND RESOLUTION 2021-08 : APPROVAL OF
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A 1,516 SQUARE FOOT SPORTS
COURT; SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR 256 CUBIC YARDS OF GRADING;
AND VARIANCE FOR ENCROACHMENT OF THE SPORTS COURT
INTO THE REQUIRED SETBACKS LOCATED 75 SADDLEBACK ROAD,
(LOT 68-2-RH) ROLLING HILLS, CA (KIM).
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
On June 15, 2021, the three present Planning Commissioners unanimously voted to approve Zoning
Case No. 20-09 and Resolution No. 2021-08: Conditional Use Permit for a 1,516 square-foot sports
court; Site Plan Review for 256 cubic yards of grading; and Variance for encroachment of the sports
court into the rear and side yard setbacks. The project is exempt from CEQA and no appeal was filed
against the project.
DISCUSSION:
The property is zoned RAS-1 and the net lot area for development purposes is 1.8 acres or 78,690
square-feet. The lot is currently developed with an existing 5,069 square-foot residence, 1,612 square-
foot garage, 443 square-foot pool, and 679 square feet of entryways.
The applicant is proposing to build a 1,516 square-foot basketball half court with a 3-foot high retaining
wall in the northwest corner portion of the irregularly shaped lot. The lot is sloped, which makes
buildable space limited. The proposed site is the only useable area on which the sports court can be
built. The proposed sports court will also require a Variance for the encroachment into the required 50-
foot rear yard setback and 20-foot side yard setback. The proposed project will not impede the
enjoyment or views of any other neighboring properties. The applicant is proposing to screen the
basketball court with landscaping.
MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE
62
Variance
The applicant requested to construct a 49' x 31' basketball half court and 3-foot high retaining walls on
the northwest corner portion of the irregularly shaped lot. The proposed sports court requires a Variance
for encroachment into the required 50-foot rear setback and 20-foot side yard setback. This is the best
location for the proposed sports court because most of the site's topography are on steeper slopes. The
location of the proposed basketball court abuts the Rolling Hills Community Association trail to the
north. The proposed sports court will encroach into the required rear yard setback by 20-feet and the
side yard setback by 10-feet.
Many of the residents in the City of Rolling Hills enjoy the amenity of having a sports court on site. A
Variance was required for the proposed project pursuant to Section 17.16.210(7)(B) of the RHMC,
which states that a game court shall not be located in the front yard or any setback.
Site Plan Review
The RHMC Chapter 17.46 Section 17.46.020(A)(1) states a Site Plan Review is required for grading.
The applicant proposes to grade a total of 180 cubic yards of dirt for the sports court and 76 cubic yards
of future grading for the 1,000 square-foot stable and corral set aside. The total proposed grading for the
project site is 256 cubic yards.
Conditional Use Permit
Section 17.16.210(A)(7) of the RHMC Zoning Ordinance permits recreational game courts, subject to
approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
Grading and Stabilization
The construction of the sports court will require a total of 180 cubic yards of grading. The applicant
proposes 90 cubic yards cut and 90 cubic yards fill for the proposed sports court. The applicant proposes
38 cubic yards cut and 38 cubic yards balanced for the future stable. Most of the grading will consist of
maximum 4-foot cuts for the proposed basketball court and 2-foot cuts for the proposed future stable
and corral. Grading will be balanced on site. The location of the proposed basketball court abuts the
Rolling Hills Community Association bridle trail, to the north and west, but grading will not have any
impact on the existing trail or easements.
Disturbance
The lot was graded in the past and the disturbed area is 23.90% (18,831 square feet). The applicant is
proposing to disturb an additional 5% (3,934 square feet, which brings the total disturbed area to 28.9%
(22,765 square feet).
Lot Coverage
The lot area is 78,690 square feet. The total overall structural net lot coverage is proposed at 9,894
square feet or 12.6%, (20% max. permitted); and the total lot coverage proposed will be 22,765 square
feet or 28.9%, (35% max. permitted).
Environmental Review
The project has been determined to be categorically exempt (Class 3) pursuant to Section 15303 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
63
Receive and file.
ATTACHMENTS:
2021-06-01_Max_Court_-_Drawings_final_06.14.21_75 SBR.pdf
Development_Table_-_ZC_20-09_PC_06.15.21_75 SBR.docx
SUPPLEMENTAL_2021-08.PC RESOLUTION 75 Saddleback Road_Sports Court.docx
64
65
66
67
68
Zoning Case No. 2020-09 (75 Saddleback Road) pg. 1
Development Table Zoning Case No. 2020-09 (75 Saddleback Road)
Site Plan Review,
Conditional Use Permit &
Variance
EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL
RA-S-1 Zone Setbacks
Front: 50 ft. from front easement
line
Side: 20 ft. from side property
line
Rear: 50 ft. from rear easement
line
The lot is currently developed
with an existing 5,069 square-
foot residence, 1,612 square-
feet garage, 443 square-foot
pool and 679 square feet of
entryways.
Conditional Use Permit for a
1,516 square foot Sports
Court, Site Plan Review for
156 cubic yard of grading,
and Variances to encroach
into the rear and side yard
setbacks.
Net Lot Area 78,690 SF 0 SF 78,690 SF
Residence 5,069 SF 0 SF 5,069 SF
Garage 1,612 SF 0 SF 1,612 SF
Swimming Pool/Spa 443 SF 0 SF 125 SF
Pool Equipment 125 SF 0 SF 20 SF
Guest House 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Cabana 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Stable 0 SF 450 SF 450 SF
Recreation Court 0 SF 1,516 SF 1,516 SF
Attached Covered
Porches,(Rear Porch-Cabana)
Entryway, Porte Cochere,
Breezeways
0 SF
679 SF
0 SF
0 SF
0 SF
679 SF
Attached Trellis 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
2 Sheds 0 SF SF SF
Lightwell 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Service Yard 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF
Basement Area 0 SF 0 SF 556 SF
Total Structure Area 7,928 SF 1,966 SF 9,894 SF
Depth of Basement
Structural Coverage 10.1 %2.5 %12.6 %
Total Structures Excluding: up to
5 legal and up to 800 SF detached
structures that are not higher than
12 ft (no more than 120 SF per
structure per deduction, except
for trellis)
SF SF SF
Structural Coverage
(20% maximum)10.1%2.5%12.6%
Grading (balanced on site)256 CY 256 CY
Total Lot Coverage
(35% maximum)
23.9%5%28.9%
Building Pad Coverage 1
(30%maximum)
%%28%
Building Pad Coverage 2
(30%maximum)
N/A 0%%
69
Zoning Case No. 2020-09 (75 Saddleback Road) pg. 2
Building Pad Coverage 3
(30%maximum)
%%%
Disturbed Area
(40% maximum)
23.9%5%28.9%
Stable min. 450 S.F.SF 450 SF 450 SF
Corral min. 550 S.F.N/A 550 SF 550 SF
Riding Ring N/A SF SF
Retaining/Garden Wall
Roadway Access
70
1
Resolution 2021-08
75 Saddleback Road (Kim)
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-08
A RESOLUTION ZONING CASE NO. 20-09 REQUEST FOR: 1)
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A
1,516 SQUARE FOOT SPORTS COURT; 2 SITE PLAN REVIEW
FOR 256 CUBIC YARDS OF GRADING; 3) VARIANCES FOR
ENCROACHMENT INTO THE REQUIRED SETBACKS FOR THE
SPORTS COURT FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED 75
SADDLEBACK ROAD, (LOT 68-2-RH) ROLLING HILLS, CA
(KIM).
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND,
RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.On December 10, 2020, an application was duly filed by Mr. and Mrs. Kim
requesting for 1) Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a 1,516 square foot sports court; 2) Site
Plan Review for 256 cubic yards grading; 3) Variance for encroachment into the side setback and rear
setback for the proposed sports court for the subject property located at 75 Saddleback Road, Rolling
Hills, CA 90274.
Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the
application on June 15, 2021 including a morning field trip and an evening meeting. The applicants were
notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail. Evidence was heard and presented from all
persons interested in affecting said proposal and from members of the City staff and the Planning
Commission having reviewed, analyzed and studied said proposal.
Section 3. The property is zoned RAS-1 The property is zoned RAS-1 and the net lot area for
development purposes is 1.8 acres or 78,690 square-feet. The lot is currently developed with an existing
5,069 square-foot residence, 1,612 square-feet garage, 443 square-foot pool and 679 square feet of
entryways. The applicant is proposing to build a 1,516 square foot basketball half court with a 3-foot high
retaining walls.
Section 4. This project is also categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301. The
project consists 1,516 square foot sports court and 3-foot retaining walls. The project also consists of 256
cubic yards of grading
Section 5. Sections 17.38.010 through 17.38.050 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code permit
approval of a Variance grantingrelief from the standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance when
exceptional or extraordinary circumstances applicable to the property prevent the owner from making use
of a parcel of property to the same extent enjoyed by similar properties in the same vicinity or zone. In
proposing to encroach into the rear and side yard setback for the proposed 1,516 square foot basketball
half court with a 3-foot high retaining wall Variances are required to grant relief from Section 17.16.130
17.16.120 of the Zoning Ordinance.
With respect to the aforementioned request for a Variance from Zoning Ordinance, the Planning
71
2
Resolution 2021-08
75 Saddleback Road (Kim)
Commission finds as follows:
A.That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the
property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone in that the property
is sloped and inclined so the site’s buildable space is limited. The proposed location is the suitable due to
the incline and slopes on the lot;
B.That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property
rights possessed by other properties in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied the property in
question due to the existing topography that make it difficult to comply;
C.That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity in that the proposed development will comply
with the required building code, will not have adverse visual impact to adjacent properties and is in
keeping with the character and scale of the community;
D.That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed in that the
proposed development does not prevent anyone from enjoying their property rights, the improvements are
visually harmonious with adjacent properties and in scale with adjacent residential development;
E.That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant in that the proposed
addition is in character and similar in scale with existing residential development and the applicant will
have the opportunity to enjoy the same amenities enjoyed by other residents in the community;
F.That the variance is consistent with the portions of the County of Los Angeles Hazardous
Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. The proposed
location of the project will not be sited near hazardous waste facilities and is surrounded by residential
land use; and
G.That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills in
that the applicant will enjoy the same rights that residents in the community enjoy, the proposed
improvements are in character and scale as the existing neighborhood, it preserves the rural character of
the City.
Section 6. The Rolling Hills Municipal Code require a Conditional Use Permit for a project a
Recreational Game Court pursuant to RHMC Section 17.16.210(A)(6). The applicant is proposing to
build a 1,516 square foot basketball half court with a 3-foot high retaining wall in the northwest corner
portion of the triangular shaped lot. The proposed sports court will also require a Variance for the
encroachment into the required 50-foot rear setback by 20 feet and 20-foot side setback by 10 feet. The
Planning Commission makes the following findings:
A.That the proposed conditional use 1,516 square foot basketball court is consistent with the
General Plan. The sports court is consistent with similar uses in the community and is a permitted use with
a CUP. Although the basketball court requires a variance to allow it in the rear and side yard setback, the
location of the court. The proposed project is located in the northwest corner of the lot and is out of the
views of the neighboring properties.
72
3
Resolution 2021-08
75 Saddleback Road (Kim)
B.That the nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures have
been considered, and that the use will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent
uses, building or structures. Due to the configuration of the lot, easements, and configuration of the lot,
the proposed sports court was limited to the construction location.
C.That the site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and shape to accommodate
the uses proposed, the net lot area is 78,690 square feet adequate to support the proposed use. There is no
other location to place the proposed sports court onsite without causing significant change to the current
terrain.
D.That the proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of
the zone district. The sports court complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district
as approved by this Resolution. The existing disturbance is 10.1% and the additional disturbance is 2.5%,
therefore the total proposed disturbance is 12.6%, which is below the maximum 40%.
E.That the proposed use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous
Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the
project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List.
F.That the proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of this title. The
construction of the sports court, and conversion and addition to the stable allows the Applicants the ability
to enjoy rights enjoyed by other residents in the City. Construction of the sports court in the rear yard
setback and side yard setback, allows the applicants to minimize the amount of grading on the lot. The
applicant proposes grading of 256 cubic yards.
Section 6. The Rolling Hills Municipal Code require a Site Plan Review for a grading pursuant to
Chapter 17.46 Section 17.46.020(A)(1) states a Site Plan Review is required for grading.. The applicant
is proposing to build a 1,516 square foot sports court, 256 cubic yards of grading, and all dirt will be
balanced on site. The Planning Commission makes the following findings:
A. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of the general plan
and all requirements of the zoning ordinance. The Site Plan Review for the proposed 1,516 square foot
sports is consistent with the purposes and objectives of the General Plan because the proposed project is
consistent with similar amenities in the community, meets all the applicable code development standards,
with the exception of encroaching in the required setbacks, and is located in an area on the property that
is adequately sized to accommodate the proposed project
B.The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by
minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual
amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot; The topography and
the configuration of the triangular shaped lot have been considered, and it was determined that the
proposed project will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent uses, buildings, or
structures. The proposed sports court located on the northwest corner portion of the lot.
C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and
73
4
Resolution 2021-08
75 Saddleback Road (Kim)
surrounding residences. The proposed sports court will be located on the northwest corner of the property
and will not impact views of the surrounding residences, but will enhance the use of the project site.
D. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible,
existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage
courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls); The proposed pool will be built on an existing pad.
The net lot area is over 78,690 square feet and is sufficient to accommodate the proposed use. There will
be no significant changes to the site design, as the residential uses will remain and the proposed sports
court will be constructed in an that is suitable for the use.
E. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the
amount of grading required to create the building area. The proposed sports court will require a total of
256 cubic yards of grading. The applicant proposes 90 cubic yards cut and 90 cubic yards fill for the
proposed basketball court. The applicant proposes 38 cubic yards cut and 38 cubic yards balanced for the
future stable. Most of the grading will consist of maximum 4-foot cuts for the proposed basketball court
and 2-foot cuts for the proposed future stable and corral. All dirt shall be balanced on site. The location of
the proposed basketball court abuts the Rolling Hills Community Association Easements to the north and
west, Bridle Trail, and grading will not have any impact on the existing trails or easements.
F.Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such
flow is redirected into an existing drainage course; no drainage channels will be affected by the proposed
grading.
G.The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements
these elements with drought-tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural
character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and
public areas. The applicant is proposing landscaping along the west portion of the court. The proposed
project will preserve the natural and native vegetation.
H.The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenient and safe movement of
pedestrians and vehicles; and The proposed sports court is located in the at the northwest corner of the
property and will not impact the existing circulation on the lot.
I.The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act.
This project is also categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15301.
Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the
Conditional Use Permit, Variance, and Site Plan Review request in Zoning Case No. 20- 09 for Conditional
Use Permit for the construction of a 1,516 square foot sports court; 2) Site Plan Review for 256 cubic
yards grading; 3) Variance for encroachment into the side and rear setback for the proposed sports court,
subject to the following conditions:
A.This approval shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval if
constructionpursuanttothisapprovalhasnotcommencedwithinthattime period, as required by Sections
17.38.070 and 17.46.080 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, or the approval granted is otherwise
extended pursuant to the requirements of this section.
74
5
Resolution 2021-08
75 Saddleback Road (Kim)
B.If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by this resolution
shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse and upon receipt of written notice
from the City, all construction work being performed on the subject property shall immediately cease,
other than work determined by the City Manager or his/her designee required to cure the violation. The
suspension and stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant cures the violation to the satisfaction of
the City Manager or his/her designee. In the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her
designee’sdetermination that a violation exists or disputes how the violation must be cured, the Applicant
may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular meeting
of the City Council for which the agenda has not yet been posted, the Applicant shall be provided written
notice of the hearing. The stop work order shall remain in effect during the pendency of the hearing. The
City Council shall make a determination as to whether a violation of this Resolution has occurred. If the
Council determines that a violation has not occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the
Council will lift the suspension and the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has
occurred and has not yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a deadline to cure the
violation; no construction work shall be performed on the property until and unless the violation is cured
by the deadline, other than work designated by the Council to accomplish the cure. If the violation is not
cured by the deadline, the Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant’s request or schedule
a hearing for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant to Chapter 17.58 of
the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC).
C.All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance, LA
County Building Code 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 dated April 1, 2021 except as otherwise provided in these conditions.
E.Prior to submittal of final working drawings to the Building and Safety Department for
issuance of building permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that
the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission.
F.The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check
review must conform to the development plan approved with this application. A copy of the conditions of
this Resolution shall be printed on plans approved when a building permit is issued and a copy of such
approved plans, including conditions of approval, shall be available on the building site at alltimes.
G.A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building
Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this
Resolution approving this project and including conformance with all of the conditions set forth therein
and the City’s Building Code and Zoning Ordinance.
Further, the person obtaining a building permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction
stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approvedtherewith.
H.Structural lot coverage shall not exceed 9,894 square feet, or 12.6% and total lot coverage
shall not exceed 28.9% or 2 squarefeet.
75
6
Resolution 2021-08
75 Saddleback Road (Kim)
I.The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 28.9% (of net lot area). No further disturbance
isproposed.
J.Notwithstanding Sections 17.46.020 and 17.46.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code,
any modification to this project or to the property, which would constitute additional structural
development, grading, excavation of dirt and any modification including, but not be limited to retaining
walls, drainage devices, pad elevation and any other deviation from the approved plan, shall require the
filing of a new application for approval by the Planning Commission.
K.During construction, conformance with the air quality management district requirements,
stormwater pollution prevention practices, county and local ordinances and engineering practices so that
people or property are not exposed to undue vehicle trips, noise, dust, and objectionable odors shall be
required.
L.During and after construction, all parking shall take place on the project site. During
construction,to maximumextent feasible,employeesofthecontractorshall car- pool into the City.
M.During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate
construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday
through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to
interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills.
N.Thepropertyowners shall be requiredto conform with the RegionalWater Quality Control
Board and County Public Works Department Best Management Practices (BMP’s) requirements related
to solid waste, drainage and storm water management.
O.During construction, all parking shall take place on the project site and, If necessary, any
overflow parking shall take place within nearby unimproved roadway easement adjacent to subject site.
There shall be no blocking of adjacent driveways orof the roadway easement for passage of pedestrians
and equestrians. During construction a flagmen shall be present to direct traffic when it is anticipated that
a lane may be impeded.
P.A minimum of 65% of the construction material spoils shall be recycled and diverted. The
hauler shall secure a “Construction and Demolition Permit” from the City of Rolling Hills, and provide
the requireddocumentation. The permit shall be pulled prior to issuance of the final Planning Approval.
Q.The contractor shall not use tools that could produce a spark, including for clearing and
grubbing, during red flag warning conditions. Weather conditions can be found at:
http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard_definitions#FIRE. It is the sole
responsibility of the property owner and/or his/her contractor to monitor the red flag warning conditions.
Should a red flag warning be declared and if work is to be conductedonthe property,the contractor shall
havereadilyavailablefiredistinguisher.
R.Prior to issuance of Final Planning Approval, shall submit approved landscape plans by the
Fire Department and the City’s Landscape Architect.
76
7
Resolution 2021-08
75 Saddleback Road (Kim)
S.Applicant shall pull Planning permit for temporary construction prior to issuance of Final
Planning Approval.
T.Prior to finaling of the project, ”as constructed” plans, electronic copy and certifications
shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Departmentto ascertainthat the completed
projectisin compliance withtheapproved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the project during
construction, shall be depicted “as built/as graded”.
U.Until the applicants execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of this approval,
the approvals shall not be effective. Such affidavit shall be recorded together with the resolution.
V.The applicant shall plant landscaping to screen the proposed sports court from the adjacent
bridle trails. Landscaping shall not encroach into any of trail easements.
W.The flat area surrounding the sports court shall consist of permeable surface materials.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 15th DAY OF JUNE, 2021.
BRAD CHELF, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
JANELY SANDOVAL
CITY CLERK
Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this
application must be filed within the time limits set forth in section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills
Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6.
77
8
Resolution 2021-08
75 Saddleback Road (Kim)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS )
I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2021-05 entitled:
A RESOLUTION ZONING CASE NO. 20-09 REQUEST FOR: 1)
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A 1,516 SQUARE FOOT
SPORTS COURT; 2) REQUEST FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR
256 CUBIC YARDS OF GRADING; 3) REQUEST FOR VARIANCES
FOR ENCROACHMENT INTO THE REQUIRED SETBACKS FOR
THE SPORTS COURT FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY
LOCATED 75 SADDLEBACK ROAD, (LOT 68-2-RH) ROLLING
HILLS, CA (KIM).
was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on June 15, 2021 by
the following roll call vote:
AYES:COMMISSIONERS: Cardenas, Cooley, and Douglass.
NOES:NONE.
ABSENT:Kirkpatrick and Chair Chelf.
ABSTAIN:NONE.
and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative
Offices.
JANELY SANDOVAL
CITY CLERK
78
Agenda Item No.: 7.A
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:ALAN PALERMO, PROJECT MANAGER
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:REVIEW OVERALL PROJECT COST ESTIMATES AT 65% DESIGN
PROGRESS FOR TWO LAYOUT OPTIONS FOR THE CITY HALL ADA
IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF.
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
In December 2019, the City released a Request For Proposal for Architectural and Engineering Design
Services to prepare ADA Improvement Plans for the Rolling Hills City Hall, excluding building exterior
path of travel.
At the January 27, 2020 City Council Meeting, City Council considered and approved a Professional
Services Agreement with Pacific Architecture and Engineering, Inc. to prepare Improvement Plans
(ADA and Space Planning).
A kick off meeting with Pacific Architecture and Engineering, Inc. was held February 27, 2020.
At the May 26, 2020 City Council Meeting, City Council received a presentation from staff on the
options developed to bring the restrooms up to date and comply with ADA and related codes.
At the July 13, 2020 City Council Meeting, City Council received a presentation from staff with
additional information to the two preferred options including opinions of probable costs of construction.
At this July 13, 2021 City Council Meeting, City Council voted to move forward with the more
economic Option 2 which kept the restrooms in the same location. Option 1 and Option 2 layouts
presented at the July 13, 2020 City Council meeting are attached to this report.
Pacific Architecture and Engineering, Inc. has submitted the 65% plans for City review on March 9,
2021. This submittal incorporated the restroom option selected at the July 13, 2020 City Council
Meeting. The City has reviewed the 65% plans with comments. Before City review comments are
returned to Pacific Architecture and Engineering, Inc. to further develop the plans to 90% design,
Councilmember Jeff Piper noted that the City considered the options with the cost estimate capturing
the cost to improve the restrooms and not the overall project. Councilmember Pieper recommended
that the City Council revisit the restroom options. In response to Councilmember Pieper's suggestion, at
the April 12, 2021 meeting, the City Council directed staff to provide a comprehensive project cost
79
estimate for restroom layout Options 1 and 2.
DISCUSSION:
In July 2020, staff was directed to develop layout Option 2 to design completion. In March 2021,
design development of Option 2 reached 65%. In response to the City Council's directive from the
April 12, 2021 meeting, Pacific Architecture and Engineering Inc.was authorized to use budget
dedicated for design of Option 2 to prepare comprehensive project cost estimates for both restroom
options/layouts. To do so, Option 1 needed to be developed to the 65% level to have a project cost
estimate that can be compared to the project cost estimate of Option 2.
Pacific Architecture and Engineering Inc. estimated that at 65% design completion, the overall project
cost for implementing Option 2 is approximately $784,390. At 65% design completion, the overall
project cost for implementing Option 1 is approximately $952,810. The cost difference between the
two options is approximately $168,420.
Pacific Architecture and Engineering Inc. estimated that at 10% design completion, the cost estimate to
implement restroom improvements only for Option 2 was $268,660. At 10% design completion, the
cost estimate to implement restroom improvements only for Option 1 was $671,420. The cost
difference between the two restroom improvement options was $402,760.
At the June 28, 2021 City Council Meeting, City Council directed staff to add dimensions for the
Option 1 layout for additional discussion and review at the July 12, 2021 City Council Meeting. The
updated Option 1 layout with dimensions is attached. Using the dimension for Option 1, staff also
taped the City Hall lobby to locate the proposed public counter.
At the July 12, 2021, the City Council delayed the item to the July 26, 2021 meeting.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost of implementing the City Hall ADA improvement project is recommended to be budgeted in
the Capital Improvement Program for FY 2021-2022.
Depending on the City Council's direction after reviewing the additional cost estimates, additional
budget will be needed for Pacific Architecture and Engineering Inc. to complete the design development
to 100% and prepare construction documents.
RECOMMENDATION:
Review additional data for the project and provide direction to staff.
ATTACHMENTS:
rolling hills city hall _option2_202006008d Layout1 (1).pdf
20210519_city hall renovation cost estimate_two options.pdf
20200509_rollinghills_costestimate10.pdf
20210707_option 1_alt Layout1 (1).pdf
80
81
ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
TWO OPTIONS COMPARISION
May 17, 2021
PREPARED BY
FOR
PACIFIC ARCHITECTURE & ENGINEERING, INC.
Rev 0
82
PACIFIC ARCH & ENG, INC. 0FFICE: 424-3301721 DATE: 05/17/21
NO: 20-06
REV: 1
PROJECT: ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
OWNER: CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
CLIENT: CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
DESIGN TEAM: PACIFIC ARCHITECTURE & ENGINEERING. INC.
ARCHITECTURAL: PACIFIC ARCH & ENG 310-405-3878
STRUCTURAL: TBD
MECHANICAL: TBD
ELECTRICAL: TBD
ESTIMATING TEAM:
ARCH/STRUCT: RW
PLUMBING: RW
ELECTRICAL: RW
CHECKED BY: JF
ESTIMATE LEVEL:TWO OPTIONS COMPARISION
ESTIMATE TYPE:OPINION OF COST
PLAN DATE:2021-05-06, 14 PAGES
SPEC DATE:NONE
PROJECT TYPE:ADA & NON-ADA UPGRADES
PROJECT SCOPE:
ESTIMATE BASIS:
THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS IS MODERNIZING THEIR CITY HALL BUILDING WITH ADA UPGRADES IN THE RESTROOMS FOR OPTIONS 1 & 2
AND ADDITIONAL NON-ADA UPGRADES IN OTHER AREAS OF THE FACILITY IN OPTION 1 ONLY.
THIS COST ESTIMATE IS DEFINED AS AN “OPINION OF COST” MEANING THAT THE COSTS REFLECTED IN THE ESTIMATE ARE THE
CONSIDERED OPINION OF THE ESTIMATOR BASED ON THE CURRENT COSTS OF MATERIAL AND LABOR, UPON INFORMATION
AVAILABLE IN PUBLISHED REFERENCE SOURCES, HISTORICAL COST DATA, CLIENT OR VENDOR PROVIDED COST DATA AND THE
PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF THE ESTIMATOR. THE FINAL COST OF THE PROJECT MAY VARY FROM THE ESTIMATOR’S “OPINION OF COST”
BASED ON FACTORS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE ESTIMATOR SUCH AS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE NUMBER OF GENERAL
CONTRACTORS AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS PARTICIPATING IN THE BID PROCESS; SUDDEN CHANGES IN NATIONAL AND LOCAL
MARKET CONDITIONS; THE NATIONAL AND LOCAL ECONOMY; AND DECISIONS MADE BY THE CLIENT.
Page 1 of 3 83
PACIFIC ARCH & ENG, INC. 0FFICE: 424-3301721 DATE: 05/17/21
NO: 20-06
REV: 1
COMPETITIVE BIDDING:
ESCALATION:
WAGE RATES:
WORK SCOPE CHANGES:
PHASES:NONE
PRORATES: AREA SF: GSF
GENERAL CONDITIONS:25.0%ADA AREAS 0
DESIGN CONTINGENCY:25.0%NON-ADA AREAS 0
ESCALATION:6.0%
INSURANCE & BONDS:1.2%
OVERHEAD & PROFIT:25.0%TOTAL BUILDING AREA 0
ESCALATION:
ESCALATION (9 MONTHS TO MPC AT 3.5% P/A)
ESCALATION PER YEAR:6.0%
ESTIMATE DATE:05/17/21
START DATE:01/15/22 CONST. LEN: 6.0 MONTHS
FINISH DATE:07/15/22 MID-POINT: 12.0 MONTHS
THE PRICES IN THIS ESTIMATE ARE BASED ON COMPETITIVE BIDDING. COMPETITIVE BIDDING IS RECEIVING RESPONSIVE BIDS FROM AT
LEASTFIVEORMOREGENERALCONTRACTORSANDTHREEORMORERESPONSIVEBIDSFROMMAJORSUBCONTRACTORSOR
TRADES. MAJOR SUBCONTRACTORS ARE CONCRETE, MASONRY, STRUCTURAL STEEL, FRAMING, ROOFING, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING
AND ELECTRICAL SUBCONTRACTORS AND ANY OTHER MAJOR COMPONENTS OF THE PROJECT.
WITHOUT COMPETITIVE BIDDING, CONTRACTOR BIDS CAN AND HAVE RANGED FROM 25% TO 100% AND MORE OVER THE PRICES IN
THIS ESTIMATE, DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE JOB. WITH COMPETITIVE BIDDING, CONTRACTOR BIDS CAN RANGE AS LOW AS 25%
BELOW THE PRICES IN THIS ESTIMATE BASED ON CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS.
ESCALATION IS BASED ON 3.5% PER YEAR AND CARRIED FROM THE ESTIMATE DATE TO THE MID-POINT OF CONSTRUCTION. ONE
MAJOR FACTOR IN ESCALATION IS INFLATION AND WE MAY BE IN A PERIOD WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR EXTREME INFLATIONARY
PRESSURES. THERE ARE TOO MANY VARIABLES TO DETERMINE HOW ESCALATION WILL IMPACT ANY SPECIFIC PROJECT. THERE MAY
ONLY BE NEGLIGIBLE IMPACT OR IT MAY BE GREATER THAN PREDICTED.
THIS OPINION OF COST IS BASED ON MARKET WAGE-RATES & CONDITIONS AND CURRENTLY APPLICABLE PREVAILING WAGES IN LOS
ANGELES COUNTY.
THE USER IS CAUTIONED THAT SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT, OR ALTERATIONS TO THE PROJECT DOCUMENTS
AFTER COMPLETION OF THIS OPINION OF COST ESTIMATE CAN CAUSE MAJOR COST CHANGES. IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE, TEAM
SHOULD BE NOTIFIED AND AN APPROPRIATE ADJUSTMENT MADE TO THIS OPINION OF COST ESTIMATE.
Page 2 of 3 84
PACIFIC ARCH & ENG, INC. 0FFICE: 424-3301721 DATE: 05/17/21
NO: 20-06
REV: 1
SUPPLIER PROVIDED QUOTES & OTHER CONTACTS:
NONE
GENERAL EXCLUSIONS (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED):
1. ARCHITECTURAL FEES, ENGINEERING FEES & OTHER SOFT COSTS.
2. THE COST OF LAND & EASEMENT ACQUISITION.
3. ASSESSMENTS, TAXES, FINANCE, LEGAL & DEVELOPMENT CHARGES.
4. COMPRESSION OF SCHEDULE & PREMIUM OR SHIFT WORK.
5. RESTRICTIONS ON THE CONTRACTOR'S WORKING HOURS.
6. BUILDER'S RISK, PROJECT WRAP-UP & OTHER OWNER PROVIDED INSURANCE PROGRAMS.
7. SUSTAINABLE DESIGN & LEED REQUIREMENTS.
8. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL HANDLING, DISPOSAL & ABATEMENT.
9. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT MITIGATION.
10. OWNER SUPPLIED & INSTALLED FURNITURE, FIXTURES & EQUIPMENT.
11. LOOSE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT EXCEPT AS SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED.
Page 3 of 3 85
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS JOB NO: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:PROJECT SUMMARY ESTIMATE DATE: 05/17/21
REV: 0
TWO OPTIONS COMPARISION
TAB DESCRIPTION ADJ SF UNIT COST TOTAL
PROJECT SUMMARY
OPT 1 - OFFICES, PUBLIC AREAS & RESTROOMS 3,100 SF $307.36 952,810$
OPT 2 - OFFICES, PUBLIC AREAS & RESTROOMS 2,590 SF $302.85 784,390$
DELTA 168,420$
SPECULATIVE BID RANGE FORECAST
BASED ON CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS
AND GENERAL CONTRACTOR BIDDER PARTICIPATION LEVELS
% OPTION 1 OPTION 2
1 - 2 GC BIDDERS 100% 1,905,620$ 1,568,780$
2 - 3 GC BIDDERS 75% 1,667,420$ 1,372,690$
3 - 4 GC BIDDERS 50% 1,429,220$ 1,176,590$
4 - 5 GC BIDDERS 25% 1,191,020$ 980,490$
5 - 6 GC BIDDERS 0% 952,810$ 784,390$
6 - 7 GC BIDDERS -5% 905,170$ 745,180$
7 - 8 GC BIDDERS -10% 857,530$ 705,960$
8 - 9 GC BIDDERS -15% 809,890$ 666,740$
10 + GC BIDDERS -20% 762,250$ 627,520$
NOTE: THE BASIC CONCEPT IS THAT HISTORICALLY WITH FEWER GC BIDDERS PRICES WILL
GENERALLY RISE AND WITH MORE GC BIDDERS PRICES WILL GENERALLY FALL.
5/19/2021 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 20% SD Estimate Rev 0 Options 1&2_jf (F-86) Page 1 of 1
86
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 1 - OFFICES, PUBLIC AREAS & RESTROOMS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/17/21
ADJUSTED GSF: 3,100
REV 0
TWO OPTIONS COMPARISION
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
OPTION 1
1.10 GENERAL CONDITIONS INCLUDED IN PRORATES - NONE
2.10 SITEWORK 5.1% 8.55 26,500
2.20 DEMOLITION 5.7% 9.57 29,670
3.10 CONCRETE 4.8% 8.04 24,910
6.10 CARPENTRY 11.3% 18.98 58,850
8.10 DOORS & WINDOWS 12.7% 21.37 66,250
9.10 FINISHES 16.4% 27.55 85,420
9.50 TILE 4.6% 7.72 23,930
10.10 SPECIALTIES 1.6% 2.72 8,430
15.10 PLUMBING 7.1% 11.94 37,000
15.20 FIRE PROTECTION 0.9% 1.50 4,650
15.30 HVAC 11.9% 20.00 62,000
16.10 ELECTRICAL 17.9% 30.00 93,000
TOTAL DIRECT COST $167.94 520,610$
PRORATES
GENERAL CONDITIONS 20.0% 104,130
DESIGN CONTINGENCY 25.0% 130,160
ESCALATION 6.0% 31,240
SUBTOTAL $253.59 786,140$
CONTRACTOR BURDENS
BONDS 1.2% 9,440
OVERHEAD & PROFIT 20.0% 157,230
OPTION 1 - TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $307.36 952,810$
5/19/2021 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 20% SD Estimate Rev 0 Options 1&2_jf Page 1 of 6
87
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 1 - OFFICES, PUBLIC AREAS & RESTROOMS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/17/21
ADJUSTED GSF: 3,100
REV 0
TWO OPTIONS COMPARISION
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
1.10 GENERAL CONDITIONS
See Prorates Above. 0.00 -
-
SUBTOTAL 1.10 $0.00 SF NONE
2.10 SITEWORK
Reroute (e) Sewer Line, 4" 165 LF 100.00 16,500
Restore Landscaping & Hardscape (Allowance) 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000
-
SUBTOTAL 2.10 $8.55 SF 26,500
2.20 DEMOLITION
Mass Demolition Areas (Per SF Allowance) 250 SF 10.00 2,500
Power & Data Trench, 18"w 41 LF 50.00 2,050
Demo for New Restroom Concrete 224 SF 10.00 2,240
Demo Flooring Only (Per SF Allowance) 2,976 SF 5.00 14,880
Haul & Disposal Fees (Allowance) 1 LS 5,500.00 5,500
Sawcutting (Allowance) 1 LS 2,500.00 2,500
-
SUBTOTAL 2.20 $9.57 SF 29,670
3.10 CONCRETE
New Restroom Sloping Concrete & Substrate 224 SF 35.00 7,840
Float & Level Previous Restroom Floor 70 SF 10.00 700
Concrete Curb, 6" 96 LF 65.00 6,240
Power & Data Trench, 18"w 41 LF 125.00 5,130
Misc. Concrete Work (Allowance) 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000
-
SUBTOTAL 3.10 $8.04 SF 24,910
5/19/2021 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 20% SD Estimate Rev 0 Options 1&2_jf Page 2 of 6
88
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 1 - OFFICES, PUBLIC AREAS & RESTROOMS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/17/21
ADJUSTED GSF: 3,100
REV 0
TWO OPTIONS COMPARISION
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
6.10 CARPENTRY
Rough Carpentry
Wood Framed Walls, 2x4 x 134 lf 1,340 SF 20.00 26,800
Wood Framed Furr Walls, 2x4 x 54 lf 540 SF 20.00 10,800
Reframe (e) Door Openings 14 EA 500.00 7,000
Finish Carpentry
Lobby Reception Desk 10 LF 650.00 6,500
Misc. Finish Carpentry (Per SF Allowance) 3,100 SF 2.50 7,750
-
SUBTOTAL 6.10 $18.98 SF 58,850
8.10 DOORS & WINDOWS
Doors, Frames & Std Hardware
New Interior Doors, SC Wood, 3'x7' 9 EA 3,250.00 29,250
New Exterior Doors, SC Wood, 3'x7' 4 EA 3,250.00 13,000
New Exterior Doors, SC Wood, 6'x7' 1 PR 6,000.00 6,000
Includes Frames & Standard Hardware
Additional Hardware
Panic Hardware 5 EA 1,500.00 7,500
Self Closers 14 EA 750.00 10,500
-
SUBTOTAL 8.10 $21.37 SF 66,250
9.10 FINISHES
Wall Finishes
Stucco, Exterior, 3 Coats 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000
Gypboard, Walls, Type X, 5/8" 3,220 SF 5.00 16,100
Insulation/Sound Batts 1,880 SF 2.50 4,700
Misc. Patch & Repair (Per SF Allowance) 3,100 SF 2.50 7,750
Walls include gypboard, sound batts & paint.
Flooring
Carpet Tiles 2,536 SF 10.00 25,360
Vinyl Base, 4" 670 LF 7.50 5,030
5/19/2021 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 20% SD Estimate Rev 0 Options 1&2_jf Page 3 of 6
89
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 1 - OFFICES, PUBLIC AREAS & RESTROOMS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/17/21
ADJUSTED GSF: 3,100
REV 0
TWO OPTIONS COMPARISION
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
Ceilings
Acoustic Ceiling Tile, 2x4 1,060 SF 7.50 7,950
Gypboard, Ceilings, Type X, 5/8" 230 SF 5.00 1,150
Painting
Painting, Walls, 3 Coats 3,220 SF 2.50 8,050
Painting, Ceilings, 3 Coats 230 SF 2.50 580
Paint/Stain Doors 15 EA 150.00 2,250
Misc. Additional Painting (Allowance) 1 LS 1,500.00 1,500
-
SUBTOTAL 9.10 $27.55 SF 85,420
9.50 TILE
Restrooms
Ceramic Tile, Floor 224 SF 25.00 5,600
Ceramic Tile, Wainscot, 4' 336 SF 30.00 10,080
Lobby
Ceramic Tile, Floor 216 SF 25.00 5,400
Ceramic Tile, Base 95 LF 30.00 2,850
-
SUBTOTAL 9.50 $7.72 SF 23,930
10.10 SPECIALTIES
Toilet Partitions & Accessories
Toilet Partition, ADA 1 EA 1,500.00 1,500
Toilet Partition, Door & Panel 1 EA 500.00 500
Coat Hooks 3 EA 75.00 230
Grab Bar Sets 2 EA 350.00 700
Mirrors 3 EA 120.00 360
Paper Towel Dispenser & Waste Combo 2 EA 750.00 1,500
Seat Cover Dispensers 3 EA 75.00 230
Soap Dispensers 3 EA 75.00 230
Toilet Paper Dispensers 3 EA 75.00 230
General Building Specialties
Corner Guards 8 EA 75.00 600
Markerboards, 6'x4' 1 EA 600.00 600
TV Wall Mounting Bracket 1 EA 750.00 750
Misc. General Building Specialties (Allowance) 1 LS 1,000.00 1,000
-
5/19/2021 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 20% SD Estimate Rev 0 Options 1&2_jf Page 4 of 6
90
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 1 - OFFICES, PUBLIC AREAS & RESTROOMS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/17/21
ADJUSTED GSF: 3,100
REV 0
TWO OPTIONS COMPARISION
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
SUBTOTAL 10.10 $2.72 SF 8,430
5/19/2021 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 20% SD Estimate Rev 0 Options 1&2_jf Page 5 of 6
91
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 1 - OFFICES, PUBLIC AREAS & RESTROOMS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/17/21
ADJUSTED GSF: 3,100
REV 0
TWO OPTIONS COMPARISION
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
15.10 PLUMBING
Toilets 3 EA 2,500.00 7,500
Urinals 1 EA 1,500.00 1,500
Lavatories 3 EA 1,000.00 3,000
Plumbing Rough-Ins 7 EA 3,500.00 24,500
Sterilization & Testing 1 LS 1,000.00 500
-
SUBTOTAL 15.10 $11.94 SF 37,000
15.20 FIRE PROTECTION
Adjust Sprinkler Heads (Per SF Allowance) 3,100 SF 1.50 4,650
-
SUBTOTAL 15.20 $1.50 SF 4,650
15.30 HVAC
Reconfigure Existing HVAC (Per SF Allowance) 3,100 SF 20.00 62,000
-
SUBTOTAL 15.30 $20.00 SF 62,000
16.10 ELECTRICAL
Reconfigure Existing Electrical (Per SF Allowance) 3,100 SF 30.00 93,000
-
SUBTOTAL 16.10 $30.00 SF 93,000
5/19/2021 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 20% SD Estimate Rev 0 Options 1&2_jf Page 6 of 6
92
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 2 - OFFICES, PUBLIC AREAS & RESTROOMS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/17/21
ADJUSTED GSF: 2,590
REV 0
TWO OPTIONS COMPARISION
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
OPTION 2
1.10 GENERAL CONDITIONS INCLUDED IN PRORATES - NONE
2.10 SITEWORK 0.0% - NONE
2.20 DEMOLITION 6.1% 9.33 24,170
3.10 CONCRETE 5.1% 7.83 20,290
6.10 CARPENTRY 12.4% 19.15 49,600
8.10 DOORS & WINDOWS 11.7% 18.07 46,800
9.10 FINISHES 16.5% 25.31 65,560
9.50 TILE 4.2% 6.51 16,870
10.10 SPECIALTIES 1.2% 1.83 4,730
15.10 PLUMBING 9.3% 14.29 37,000
15.20 FIRE PROTECTION 1.0% 1.50 3,890
15.30 HVAC 13.0% 20.00 51,800
16.10 ELECTRICAL 19.5% 30.00 77,700
TOTAL DIRECT COST $153.83 398,410$
PRORATES
GENERAL CONDITIONS 25.0% 99,610
DESIGN CONTINGENCY 25.0% 99,610
ESCALATION 6.0% 23,910
SUBTOTAL $239.98 621,540$
CONTRACTOR BURDENS
BONDS 1.2% 7,460
OVERHEAD & PROFIT 25.0% 155,390
OPTION 2 - TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $302.85 784,390$
5/19/2021 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 20% SD Estimate Rev 0 Options 1&2_jf Page 1 of 5
93
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 2 - OFFICES, PUBLIC AREAS & RESTROOMS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/17/21
ADJUSTED GSF: 2,590
REV 0
TWO OPTIONS COMPARISION
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
1.10 GENERAL CONDITIONS
See Prorates Above. 0.00 -
-
SUBTOTAL 1.10 $0.00 SF NONE
2.10 SITEWORK
None -
-
SUBTOTAL 2.10 $0.00 SF NONE
2.20 DEMOLITION
Mass Demolition Areas (Per SF Allowance) 250 SF 10.00 2,500
Power & Data Trench, 18"w 41 LF 50.00 2,050
Demo for New Restroom Concrete 260 SF 10.00 2,600
Demo Flooring Only (Per SF Allowance) 2,264 SF 5.00 11,320
Haul & Disposal Fees (Allowance) 1 LS 4,700.00 4,700
Sawcutting (Allowance) 1 LS 1,000.00 1,000
-
SUBTOTAL 2.20 $9.33 SF 24,170
3.10 CONCRETE
New Restroom Sloping Concrete & Substrate 186 SF 35.00 6,510
Concrete Curb, 6" 110 LF 65.00 7,150
Power & Data Trench, 18"w 41 LF 125.00 5,130
Misc. Concrete Work (Allowance) 1 LS 1,500.00 1,500
-
SUBTOTAL 3.10 $7.83 SF 20,290
5/19/2021 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 20% SD Estimate Rev 0 Options 1&2_jf Page 2 of 5
94
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 2 - OFFICES, PUBLIC AREAS & RESTROOMS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/17/21
ADJUSTED GSF: 2,590
REV 0
TWO OPTIONS COMPARISION
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
6.10 CARPENTRY
Rough Carpentry
Wood Framed Walls, 2x4 x 80 lf 800 SF 20.00 16,000
Wood Framed Furr Walls, 2x4 x 38 lf 380 SF 20.00 7,600
Finish Carpentry
Lobby Reception Desk 9 LF 650.00 5,850
Coffee Break, Base Cab 9 LF 450.00 4,050
Coffee Break, Wall Cab 9 LF 350.00 3,150
Misc. Finish Carpentry (Per SF Allowance) 2,590 SF 5.00 12,950
-
SUBTOTAL 6.10 $19.15 SF 49,600
8.10 DOORS & WINDOWS
New Interior Doors, SC Wood, 3'x7' 13 EA 3,600.00 46,800
Includes Frames & Standard Hardware
-
SUBTOTAL 8.10 $18.07 SF 46,800
9.10 FINISHES
Wall Finishes
Stucco, Exterior, 3 Coats 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000
Gypboard, Type X, 5/8" 1,980 SF 5.00 9,900
Insulation/Sound Batts 1,180 SF 2.50 2,950
Misc. Patch & Repair (Per SF Allowance) 2,590 SF 2.50 6,480
Walls include gypboard, sound batts & paint.
Flooring
Carpet Tiles 2,264 SF 10.00 22,640
Vinyl Base, 4" 530 LF 7.50 3,980
Ceilings
Suspended/Framed' Gypboard Ceiling 242 SF 20.00 4,840
Gypboard, Ceilings, Type X, 5/8" 242 SF 2.50 610
5/19/2021 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 20% SD Estimate Rev 0 Options 1&2_jf Page 3 of 5
95
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 2 - OFFICES, PUBLIC AREAS & RESTROOMS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/17/21
ADJUSTED GSF: 2,590
REV 0
TWO OPTIONS COMPARISION
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
Painting
Painting, Walls, 3 Coats 1,980 SF 2.50 4,950
Painting, Ceilings, 3 Coats 242 SF 2.50 610
Paint/Stain Doors 13 EA 200.00 2,600
Misc. Additional Painting (Allowance) 1 LS 1,000.00 1,000
-
SUBTOTAL 9.10 $25.31 SF 65,560
9.50 TILE
Restrooms
Ceramic Tile, Floor 190 SF 25.00 4,750
Ceramic Tile, Wainscot, 4' 404 SF 30.00 12,120
-
SUBTOTAL 9.50 $6.51 SF 16,870
10.10 SPECIALTIES
Toilet Accessories
Coat Hooks 3 EA 75.00 230
Grab Bar Sets 2 EA 350.00 700
Mirrors 3 EA 120.00 360
Paper Towel Dispenser & Waste Combo 3 EA 750.00 2,250
Seat Cover Dispensers 3 EA 75.00 230
Soap Dispensers 3 EA 75.00 230
Toilet Paper Dispensers 3 EA 75.00 230
General Building Specialties
Misc. General Building Specialties (Allowance) 1 LS 500.00 500
-
SUBTOTAL 10.10 $1.83 SF 4,730
15.10 PLUMBING
Toilets 3 EA 2,500.00 7,500
Urinals 1 EA 1,500.00 1,500
Lavatories 3 EA 1,000.00 3,000
Plumbing Rough-Ins 7 EA 3,500.00 24,500
Sterilization & Testing 1 LS 500.00 500
-
SUBTOTAL 15.10 $14.29 SF 37,000
5/19/2021 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 20% SD Estimate Rev 0 Options 1&2_jf Page 4 of 5
96
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 2 - OFFICES, PUBLIC AREAS & RESTROOMS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/17/21
ADJUSTED GSF: 2,590
REV 0
TWO OPTIONS COMPARISION
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
15.20 FIRE PROTECTION
Adjust Sprinkler Heads (Per SF Allowance) 2,590 SF 1.50 3,890
-
SUBTOTAL 15.20 $1.50 SF 3,890
15.30 HVAC
Reconfigure Existing HVAC (Per SF Allowance) 2,590 SF 20.00 51,800
-
SUBTOTAL 15.30 $20.00 SF 51,800
16.10 ELECTRICAL
Reconfigure Existing Electrical (Per SF Allowance) 2,590 SF 30.00 77,700
-
SUBTOTAL 16.10 $30.00 SF 77,700
5/19/2021 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 20% SD Estimate Rev 0 Options 1&2_jf Page 5 of 5
97
ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
10% SCHEMATIC DESIGN COST ESTIMATE
May 9, 2020
20-06
PREPARED BY
PACIFIC ARCHITECTURE & ENGINEERING, INC.
HERMOSA BEACH, CA
Rev 0
RHWCC JOB NUMBER:
98
PACIFIC ARCH & ENG, INC.0FFICE: 310-698-8711 DATE: 05/09/20
2447 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, SUITE 218 RHW NO: 20-06
HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 REV: 0
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA
OWNER:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
DESIGN TEAM:PACIFIC ARCHITECTURE & ENGINEERING. INC.
ARCHITECTURAL: PACIFIC ARCH & ENG
STRUCTURAL:TBD
MECHANICAL:TBD
ELECTRICAL:TBD
ESTIMATING TEAM:
ARCH/STRUCT: RW
PLUMBING:RW
ELECTRICAL:RW
CHECKED BY:JFH
ESTIMATE LEVEL:10% SCHEMATIC DESIGN COST ESTIMATE
ESTIMATE TYPE:OPINION OF COST
PLAN DATE:2020-05-06, 3 PAGES
SPEC DATE:NONE
PROJECT TYPE:ADA & NON-ADA UPGRADES
PROJECT SCOPE:
ESTIMATE BASIS:
THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS IS MODERNIZING THEIR CITY HALL BUILDING WITH ADA UPGRADES
THIS COST ESTIMATE IS DEFINED AS AN “OPINION OF COST” MEANING THAT THE COSTS REFLECTED IN THE ESTIMATE ARE THE
CONSIDERED OPINION OF THE ESTIMATOR BASED ON THE CURRENT COSTS OF MATERIAL AND LABOR, UPON INFORMATION
AVAILABLE IN PUBLISHED REFERENCE SOURCES, HISTORICAL COST DATA, CLIENT OR VENDOR PROVIDED COST DATA AND THE
PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OF THE ESTIMATOR. THE FINAL COST OF THE PROJECT MAY VARY FROM THE ESTIMATOR’S “OPINION OF COST”
BASED ON FACTORS BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE ESTIMATOR SUCH AS, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE NUMBER OF GENERAL
CONTRACTORS AND/OR SUBCONTRACTORS PARTICIPATING IN THE BID PROCESS; SUDDEN CHANGES IN NATIONAL AND LOCAL
MARKET CONDITIONS; THE NATIONAL AND LOCAL ECONOMY; AND DECISIONS MADE BY THE CLIENT.
Page 1 of 3 99
PACIFIC ARCH & ENG, INC.0FFICE: 310-698-8711 DATE: 05/09/20
2447 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, SUITE 218 RHW NO: 20-06
HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 REV: 0
COMPETITIVE BIDDING:
ESCALATION:
WAGE RATES:
WORK SCOPE CHANGES:
PHASES:NONE
PRORATES: AREA SF: GSF
GENERAL CONDITIONS:25.0%ADA AREAS 0
DESIGN CONTINGENCY:35.0%NON-ADA AREAS 0
ESCALATION:2.1%
INSURANCE & BONDS:1.2%
OVERHEAD & PROFIT:25.0%TOTAL BUILDING AREA 0
ESCALATION:
ESCALATION (9 MONTHS TO MPC AT 3.5% P/A)
ESCALATION PER YEAR:3.5%
ESTIMATE DATE:05/09/20
START DATE:09/01/20 CONST. LEN: 6.0 MONTHS
FINISH DATE:03/01/21 MID-POINT: 7.0 MONTHS
THE PRICES IN THIS ESTIMATE ARE BASED ON COMPETITIVE BIDDING. COMPETITIVE BIDDING IS RECEIVING RESPONSIVE BIDS FROM AT
LEASTFIVEORMOREGENERALCONTRACTORSANDTHREEORMORERESPONSIVEBIDSFROMMAJORSUBCONTRACTORSOR
TRADES. MAJOR SUBCONTRACTORS ARE CONCRETE, MASONRY, STRUCTURAL STEEL, FRAMING, ROOFING, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING
AND ELECTRICAL SUBCONTRACTORS AND ANY OTHER MAJOR COMPONENTS OF THE PROJECT.
WITHOUT COMPETITIVE BIDDING, CONTRACTOR BIDS CAN AND HAVE RANGED FROM 25% TO 100% AND MORE OVER THE PRICES IN
THIS ESTIMATE, DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE JOB. WITH COMPETITIVE BIDDING, CONTRACTOR BIDS CAN RANGE AS LOW AS 25%
BELOW THE PRICES IN THIS ESTIMATE BASED ON CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS.
ESCALATION IS BASED ON 3.5% PER YEAR AND CARRIED FROM THE ESTIMATE DATE TO THE MID-POINT OF CONSTRUCTION. ONE
MAJOR FACTOR IN ESCALATION IS INFLATION AND WE MAY BE IN A PERIOD WITH THE POTENTIAL FOR EXTREME INFLATIONARY
PRESSURES. THERE ARE TOO MANY VARIABLES TO DETERMINE HOW ESCALATION WILL IMPACT ANY SPECIFIC PROJECT. THERE MAY
ONLY BE NEGLIGIBLE IMPACT OR IT MAY BE GREATER THAN PREDICTED.
THIS OPINION OF COST IS BASED ON MARKET WAGE-RATES & CONDITIONS AND CURRENTLY APPLICABLE PREVAILING WAGES IN LOS
ANGELES COUNTY.
THE USER IS CAUTIONED THAT SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT, OR ALTERATIONS TO THE PROJECT DOCUMENTS
AFTER COMPLETION OF THIS OPINION OF COST ESTIMATE CAN CAUSE MAJOR COST CHANGES. IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE, RHWCC
SHOULD BE NOTIFIED AND AN APPROPRIATE ADJUSTMENT MADE TO THIS OPINION OF COST ESTIMATE.
Page 2 of 3 100
PACIFIC ARCH & ENG, INC.0FFICE: 310-698-8711 DATE: 05/09/20
2447 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY, SUITE 218 RHW NO: 20-06
HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 REV: 0
SUPPLIER PROVIDED QUOTES & OTHER CONTACTS:
NONE
GENERAL EXCLUSIONS (UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED):
1.ARCHITECTURAL FEES, ENGINEERING FEES & OTHER SOFT COSTS.
2.THE COST OF LAND & EASEMENT ACQUISITION.
3.ASSESSMENTS, TAXES, FINANCE, LEGAL & DEVELOPMENT CHARGES.
4.COMPRESSION OF SCHEDULE & PREMIUM OR SHIFT WORK.
5.RESTRICTIONS ON THE CONTRACTOR'S WORKING HOURS.
6.BUILDER'S RISK, PROJECT WRAP-UP & OTHER OWNER PROVIDED INSURANCE PROGRAMS.
7.SUSTAINABLE DESIGN & LEED REQUIREMENTS.
8.H AZARDOUS MATERIAL HANDLING, DISPOSAL & ABATEMENT.
9.ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT MITIGATION.
10.OWNER SUPPLIED & INSTALLED FURNITURE, FIXTURES & EQUIPMENT.
11.LOOSE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT EXCEPT AS SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED.
Page 3 of 3 101
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS RHWCC JOB NO: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:PROJECT SUMMARY ESTIMATE DATE: 05/09/20
REV: 0
10% SCHEMATIC DESIGN COST ESTIMATE
TAB DESCRIPTION ADJ SF UNIT COST TOTAL
PROJECT SUMMARY
OPTION 1 - RESTROOMS & RECONFIGURATION 1,390 SF $483.04 671,420$
OPTION 2 - RESTROOMS 260 SF $1,033.31 268,660$
SPECULATIVE BID RANGE FORECAST
BASED ON CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS
AND GENERAL CONTRACTOR BIDDER PARTICIPATION LEVELS
%OPTION 1 OPTION 2
1 - 2 GC BIDDERS 100%1,342,840$ 537,320$
2 - 3 GC BIDDERS 75%1,174,990$ 470,160$
3 - 4 GC BIDDERS 50%1,007,130$ 402,990$
4 - 5 GC BIDDERS 25%839,280$ 335,830$
5 - 6 GC BIDDERS 0%671,420$ 268,660$
6 - 7 GC BIDDERS -5%637,850$ 255,230$
7 - 8 GC BIDDERS -10%604,280$ 241,800$
8 - 9 GC BIDDERS -15%570,710$ 228,370$
10 + GC BIDDERS -20%537,140$ 214,930$
NOTE: THE BASIC CONCEPT IS THAT HISTORICALLY WITH FEWER GC BIDDERS PRICES WILL
GENERALLY RISE AND WITH MORE GC BIDDERS PRICES WILL GENERALLY FALL.
5/9/2020 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 10% SD Estimate Rev 0 (F-86)Page 1 of 1 102
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS RHWCC JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 1 - RESTROOMS & MISC. AREAS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/09/20
ADJUSTED GSF: 1,390
REV 0
10% SCHEMATIC DESIGN COST ESTIMATE
ITEM #DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
OPTION 1
1.10 GENERAL CONDITIONS INCLUDED IN PRORATES - NONE
2.10 SITEWORK 7.1% 17.99 25,000
2.20 DEMOLITION 8.2% 20.86 28,990
3.10 CONCRETE 5.5% 13.95 19,390
6.10 CARPENTRY 7.5% 19.05 26,480
8.10 DOORS & WINDOWS 10.9% 27.68 38,480
9.10 FINISHES 18.8% 47.68 66,280
9.50 TILE 4.4% 11.28 15,680
10.10 SPECIALTIES 2.4% 6.06 8,430
15.10 PLUMBING 10.5% 26.62 37,000
15.20 FIRE PROTECTION 1.0% 2.50 3,480
15.30 HVAC 9.9% 25.00 34,750
16.10 ELECTRICAL 13.8% 35.00 48,650
TOTAL DIRECT COST $253.68 352,610$
PRORATES
GENERAL CONDITIONS 20.0%70,530
DESIGN CONTINGENCY 35.0%123,420
ESCALATION 2.1%7,410
SUBTOTAL $398.54 553,970$
CONTRACTOR BURDENS
BONDS 1.2%6,650
OVERHEAD & PROFIT 20.0%110,800
OPTION 1 - TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $483.04 671,420$
5/9/2020 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 10% SD Estimate Rev 0 pg4 Page 1 of 5 103
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS RHWCC JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 1 - RESTROOMS & MISC. AREAS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/09/20
ADJUSTED GSF: 1,390
REV 0
10% SCHEMATIC DESIGN COST ESTIMATE
ITEM #DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
1.10 GENERAL CONDITIONS
See Prorates Above. 0.00 -
-
SUBTOTAL 1.10 $0.00 SF NONE
2.10 SITEWORK
Sewer Line, 4"150 LF 100.00 15,000
Restore Landscaping & Hardscape (Allowance)1 LS 10,000.00 10,000
-
SUBTOTAL 2.10 $17.99 SF 25,000
2.20 DEMOLITION
Mass Demolition Areas (Per SF Allowance)1,200 SF 15.00 18,000
Demo for New Restroom Concrete 224 SF 10.00 2,240
Demo Flooring Only (Per SF Allowance)190 SF 5.00 950
Haul & Disposal Fees (Allowance)1 LS 5,300.00 5,300
Sawcutting (Allowance)1 LS 2,500.00 2,500
-
SUBTOTAL 2.20 $20.86 SF 28,990
3.10 CONCRETE
New Restroom Sloping Concrete & Substrate 224 SF 35.00 7,840
Float & Level Previous Restroom Floor 70 SF 10.00 700
Concrete Curb, 6"90 LF 65.00 5,850
Misc. Concrete Work (Allowance)1 LS 5,000.00 5,000
-
SUBTOTAL 3.10 $13.95 SF 19,390
5/9/2020 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 10% SD Estimate Rev 0 pg4 Page 2 of 5 104
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS RHWCC JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 1 - RESTROOMS & MISC. AREAS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/09/20
ADJUSTED GSF: 1,390
REV 0
10% SCHEMATIC DESIGN COST ESTIMATE
ITEM #DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
6.10 CARPENTRY
Rough Carpentry
Wood Framed Walls, 2x4 1,250 SF 10.00 12,500
Wood Framed Walls, 2x8 200 SF 12.50 2,500
Reframe (e) Door Openings 6 EA 500.00 3,000
Finish Carpentry
Lobby Reception Desk, 10 lf 1 EA 5,000.00 5,000
Misc. Finish Carpentry (Per SF Allowance)1,390 SF 2.50 3,480
-
SUBTOTAL 6.10 $19.05 SF 26,480
8.10 DOORS & WINDOWS
New Interior Doors, SC Wood, 3'x7'13 EA 2,960.00 38,480
Includes Frames & Standard Hardware -
-
SUBTOTAL 8.10 $27.68 SF 38,480
9.10 FINISHES
Wall Finishes
New Walls, 2x4 x 125 lf 1,250 SF 20.00 25,000
New Walls, 2x8 x 20 lf 200 SF 25.00 5,000
Misc. Patch & Repair (Per SF Allowance)1,390 SF 2.50 3,480
Walls include gypboard, sound batts & paint.
Flooring
Resilient Flooring 570 SF 10.00 5,700
Carpet Tiles 110 SF 10.00 1,100
Lobby Brick (Remove & Replace)380 SF 20.00 7,600
Vinyl Base, 4"410 LF 7.50 3,080
Ceilings
Acoustic Ceiling Tile, 2x4 1,060 SF 7.50 7,950
Suspended Gypboard Ceiling 224 SF 15.00 3,360
Paint Gypboard Ceiling 224 SF 2.50 560
5/9/2020 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 10% SD Estimate Rev 0 pg4 Page 3 of 5 105
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS RHWCC JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 1 - RESTROOMS & MISC. AREAS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/09/20
ADJUSTED GSF: 1,390
REV 0
10% SCHEMATIC DESIGN COST ESTIMATE
ITEM #DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
Additional Painting
Paint/Stain Doors 13 EA 150.00 1,950
Misc. Additional Painting (Allowance)1 LS 1,500.00 1,500
-
SUBTOTAL 9.10 $47.68 SF 66,280
9.50 TILE
Ceramic Tile, Floor 224 SF 25.00 5,600
Ceramic Tile, Wainscot, 4'336 SF 30.00 10,080
-
SUBTOTAL 9.50 $11.28 SF 15,680
10.10 SPECIALTIES
Toilet Partitions & Accessories
Toilet Partition, ADA 1 EA 1,500.00 1,500
Toilet Partition, Door & Panel 1 EA 500.00 500
Coat Hooks 3 EA 75.00 230
Grab Bar Sets 2 EA 350.00 700
Mirrors 3 EA 120.00 360
Paper Towel Dispenser & Waste Combo 2 EA 750.00 1,500
Seat Cover Dispensers 3 EA 75.00 230
Soap Dispensers 3 EA 75.00 230
Toilet Paper Dispensers 3 EA 75.00 230
General Building Specialties
Corner Guards 8 EA 75.00 600
Markerboards, 6'x4'1 EA 600.00 600
TV Wall Mounting Bracket 1 EA 750.00 750
Misc. General Building Specialties (Allowance)1 LS 1,000.00 1,000
-
SUBTOTAL 10.10 $6.06 SF 8,430
5/9/2020 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 10% SD Estimate Rev 0 pg4 Page 4 of 5 106
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS RHWCC JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 1 - RESTROOMS & MISC. AREAS ESTIMATE DATE: 05/09/20
ADJUSTED GSF: 1,390
REV 0
10% SCHEMATIC DESIGN COST ESTIMATE
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
15.10 PLUMBING
Toilets 3 EA 2,500.00 7,500
Urinals 1 EA 1,500.00 1,500
Lavatories 3 EA 1,000.00 3,000
Plumbing Rough-Ins 7 EA 3,500.00 24,500
Sterilization & Testing 1 LS 1,000.00 500
-
SUBTOTAL 15.10 $26.62 SF 37,000
15.20 FIRE PROTECTION
Adjust Sprinkler Heads (Per SF Allowance) 1,390 SF 2.50 3,480
-
SUBTOTAL 15.20 $2.50 SF 3,480
15.30 HVAC
Reconfigure Existing HVAC (Per SF Allowance) 1,390 SF 25.00 34,750
-
SUBTOTAL 15.30 $25.00 SF 34,750
16.10 ELECTRICAL
Reconfigure Existing Electrical (Per SF Allowance) 1,390 SF 35.00 48,650
-
SUBTOTAL 16.10 $35.00 SF 48,650
5/9/2020 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 10% SD Estimate Rev 0 pg4 Page 5 of 5
107
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS RHWCC JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 2 - RESTROOMS ONLY ESTIMATE DATE: 05/09/20
ADJUSTED GSF: 260
REV 0
10% SCHEMATIC DESIGN COST ESTIMATE
ITEM #DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
OPTION 2
1.10 GENERAL CONDITIONS INCLUDED IN PRORATES - NONE
2.10 SITEWORK 0.0%- NONE
2.20 DEMOLITION 7.0% 35.38 9,200
3.10 CONCRETE 11.9% 60.04 15,610
6.10 CARPENTRY 4.6% 23.46 6,100
8.10 DOORS & WINDOWS 6.8% 34.15 8,880
9.10 FINISHES 12.3% 62.23 16,180
9.50 TILE 13.2% 66.81 17,370
10.10 SPECIALTIES 3.6% 18.19 4,730
15.10 PLUMBING 28.2% 142.31 37,000
15.20 FIRE PROTECTION 0.5% 2.50 650
15.30 HVAC 4.9% 25.00 6,500
16.10 ELECTRICAL 6.9% 35.00 9,100
TOTAL DIRECT COST $505.08 131,320$
PRORATES
GENERAL CONDITIONS 25.0%32,830
DESIGN CONTINGENCY 35.0%45,970
ESCALATION 2.1%2,760
SUBTOTAL $818.77 212,880$
CONTRACTOR BURDENS
BONDS 1.2%2,560
OVERHEAD & PROFIT 25.0%53,220
OPTION 2 - TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $1,033.31 268,660$
5/9/2020 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 10% SD Estimate Rev 0 pg4 Page 1 of 5 108
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS RHWCC JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 2 - RESTROOMS ONLY ESTIMATE DATE: 05/09/20
ADJUSTED GSF: 260
REV 0
10% SCHEMATIC DESIGN COST ESTIMATE
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
1.10 GENERAL CONDITIONS
See Prorates Above. 0.00 -
-
SUBTOTAL 1.10 $0.00 SF NONE
2.10 SITEWORK
None -
-
SUBTOTAL 2.10 $0.00 SF NONE
2.20 DEMOLITION
Mass Demolition Areas (Per SF Allowance) 260 SF 15.00 3,900
Demo for New Restroom Concrete 260 SF 10.00 2,600
Haul & Disposal Fees (Allowance) 1 LS 1,700.00 1,700
Sawcutting (Allowance) 1 LS 1,000.00 1,000
-
SUBTOTAL 2.20 $35.38 SF 9,200
3.10 CONCRETE
New Restroom Sloping Concrete & Substrate 210 SF 35.00 7,350
Concrete Curb, 6" 104 LF 65.00 6,760
Misc. Concrete Work (Allowance) 1 LS 1,500.00 1,500
-
SUBTOTAL 3.10 $60.04 SF 15,610
5/9/2020 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 10% SD Estimate Rev 0 pg4 Page 2 of 5
109
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS RHWCC JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 2 - RESTROOMS ONLY ESTIMATE DATE: 05/09/20
ADJUSTED GSF: 260
REV 0
10% SCHEMATIC DESIGN COST ESTIMATE
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
6.10 CARPENTRY
Rough Carpentry
Wood Framed Walls, 2x4 120 SF 10.00 1,200
Wood Framed Walls, Dbl 2x4 340 SF 12.50 4,250
Finish Carpentry
Misc. Finish Carpentry (Per SF Allowance) 260 SF 2.50 650
-
SUBTOTAL 6.10 $23.46 SF 6,100
8.10 DOORS & WINDOWS
New Interior Doors, SC Wood, 3'x7' 3 EA 2,960.00 8,880
Includes Frames & Standard Hardware
-
SUBTOTAL 8.10 $34.15 SF 8,880
9.10 FINISHES
Wall Finishes
New Walls, 2x4 x 12 lf 120 SF 20.00 2,400
New Walls, Dbl 2x4 x 34 lf 340 SF 25.00 8,500
Misc. Patch & Repair (Per SF Allowance) 260 SF 2.50 650
Walls include gypboard, sound batts & paint.
Ceilings
Suspended Gypboard Ceiling 210 SF 15.00 3,150
Paint Gypboard Ceiling 210 SF 2.50 530
Additional Painting
Paint/Stain Doors 3 EA 150.00 450
Misc. Additional Painting (Allowance) 1 LS 500.00 500
-
SUBTOTAL 9.10 $62.23 SF 16,180
5/9/2020 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 10% SD Estimate Rev 0 pg4 Page 3 of 5
110
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS RHWCC JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 2 - RESTROOMS ONLY ESTIMATE DATE: 05/09/20
ADJUSTED GSF: 260
REV 0
10% SCHEMATIC DESIGN COST ESTIMATE
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
9.50 TILE
Ceramic Tile, Floor 210 SF 25.00 5,250
Ceramic Tile, Wainscot, 4' 404 SF 30.00 12,120
-
SUBTOTAL 9.50 $66.81 SF 17,370
10.10 SPECIALTIES
Toilet Accessories
Coat Hooks 3 EA 75.00 230
Grab Bar Sets 2 EA 350.00 700
Mirrors 3 EA 120.00 360
Paper Towel Dispenser & Waste Combo 3 EA 750.00 2,250
Seat Cover Dispensers 3 EA 75.00 230
Soap Dispensers 3 EA 75.00 230
Toilet Paper Dispensers 3 EA 75.00 230
General Building Specialties
Misc. General Building Specialties (Allowance) 1 LS 500.00 500
-
SUBTOTAL 10.10 $18.19 SF 4,730
15.10 PLUMBING
Toilets 3 EA 2,500.00 7,500
Urinals 1 EA 1,500.00 1,500
Lavatories 3 EA 1,000.00 3,000
Plumbing Rough-Ins 7 EA 3,500.00 24,500
Sterilization & Testing 1 LS 500.00 500
-
SUBTOTAL 15.10 $142.31 SF 37,000
15.20 FIRE PROTECTION
Adjust Sprinkler Heads (Per SF Allowance) 260 SF 2.50 650
-
SUBTOTAL 15.20 $2.50 SF 650
5/9/2020 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 10% SD Estimate Rev 0 pg4 Page 4 of 5 111
PROJECT:ROLLING HILLS CITY HALL RENOVATIONS RHWCC JOB NO.: 20-06
LOCATION:ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA PREPARED BY: RW
CLIENT:CITY OF ROLLING HILLS CHECKED BY: JFH
DESCRIPTION:OPTION 2 - RESTROOMS ONLY ESTIMATE DATE: 05/09/20
ADJUSTED GSF: 260
REV 0
10% SCHEMATIC DESIGN COST ESTIMATE
ITEM # DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL
15.30 HVAC
Reconfigure Existing HVAC (Per SF Allowance) 260 SF 25.00 6,500
-
SUBTOTAL 15.30 $25.00 SF 6,500
16.10 ELECTRICAL
Reconfigure Existing Electrical (Per SF Allowance) 260 SF 35.00 9,100
-
SUBTOTAL 16.10 $35.00 SF 9,100
5/9/2020 Rolling Hills City Hall Renovations 10% SD Estimate Rev 0 pg4 Page 5 of 5 112
113
Agenda Item No.: 8.A
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:ASHFORD BALL, SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT ON CITY SPONSORED COMMUNAL
BINS TO BE DEPLOYED BETWEEN AUGUST 20, 2021 AND AUGUST 27,
2021, TO ASSIST RESIDENTS WITH FIRE FUEL REDUCTION IN THE
COMMUNITY.
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
In an effort to reduce the risk of wildfires in the City of Rolling Hills, the City Council tasked the Fire
Fuel Committee to identify actions to minimize risk. One recommendation by the Fire Fuel Committee
is to provide communal bins to assit residents with disposal of vegetation trimmings to encourage the
community to reduce fire fuel. The recommendation was approved by the City Council in June 2021.
DISCUSSION:
Republic Services is the City's solid waste collection provider. Republic Services has a franchise
agreement with the City. The agreement was recently approved in April 2020 by the City Council for a
term of nine years. As with previous franchise agreements, the annual service fee includes one 40 cubic
yard bin for green waste disposal per property per year.
Pursuing the City Council's direction to provide communal bins for the community, staff worked with
Republic Services and was able to negotiate without amending the existing franchise agreement to have
Republic Services provide ten communal bins (40 cubic yard) per year to the City, starting on July 1,
2021. The City will specify the locations for the placement of communal bins provided that the
locations are accessible by Republic Services for drop off and pick-up and approved by the Rolling
Hills Community Association (RHCA). The communal bins will be deployed for a period of five days
in a batch of five bins.
The first batch of five bins will be available on August 20, 2021 and the bins will be picked up on
August 27, 2021. The designated locations for the first five bins are within the highest wildfire risk
areas identified by the Los Angeles County Fire Department. Staff also reviewed the designated
locations for accessibility, ease of use for residents in the community, size of the bins in relation to the
street, and size of the truck carrying the bins with Republic Services and the RHCA.
114
The five locations are as follows:
2 Bins will be placed on Quail Ridge North
2 Bins will be placed on Portuguese Bend Road
1 Bin will be placed on Spur Lane
The location on Spur Lane is owned by Cal Water. Staff is working on Cal Water to be permitted to
place a communal bin at the site. Staff will be sending out a map of the locations via the City's Blue
Newsletter.
Residents can take advantage of the communal bins throughout the year and order a 40 cubic yard bin
for green waste disposal as a part of the property's annual service fee.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Republic Services will be providing the ten communal bins per year as a part of the current franchise
agreement with no extra cost to the City.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
ATTACHMENTS:
115
Agenda Item No.: 8.B
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:ASHFORD BALL, SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:RECEIVE AND FILE A REPORT ON THE JULY 21, 2021 FIRE FUEL
COMMITTEE MEETING; AND CONSIDER AND APPROVE THE
COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION.
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
At the June 30, 2021, Fire Fuel Committee meeting, the Committee discussed the feedback given to
them from City Council regarding the proposal to conduct one fire fuel abatement project in the
canyons per year. The Committee had planned to present that recommendation at the July 12, 2021 City
Council meeting but Council member Leah Mirsch requested to hold off on the presentation. She also
requested to hold another Fire Fuel Committee meeting on July 21, 2021 so that the Committee can
consider another fire fuel reduction proposal.
DISCUSSION:
The July 21, 2021 Fire Fuel Committee was the Committee's seventh meeting since May 2021. Six
members of the community attended the meeting. The Committee discussed two items. The first item
was in response to Mayor Pro Tem Jim Black's request to have the Fire Department to provide feedback
on the factors that set priority canyon number four over priority canyon number five or another lower
ranked canyon. Per the Los Angeles County Fire Department, prioritization of the canyons in Rolling
Hills with respect to fire risk was based on the following factors:
Topography
Local weather patterns
Fuel load
Fire history
Density of homes
Environmental health
Natural habitat for wildlife; and
Stable hillsides for erosion control.
The Los Angeles County Fire Department noted that they provided their opinion on canyons with
respect to fire risk as subject matter experts. The City can utilize the priority list as presented or take a
116
different approach to mitigate risk. The Committee received and filed the report.
The second item discussed was Council member Mirsch's fuel reduction proposal detailed in the
attachment to this report. A summary of the Council member Mirsch's proposal is as follows:
1. The current fire fuel condition in in the canyons, as identified by the L.A. County Fire Department,
rise to the level of posing a threat to the safety of life and property to our residents, and should therefore
be addressed as a nuisance.
2. Determine if a new or enhanced ordinance is required or recommended to enable the city to declare
and abate the nuisance. If so, the City would proceed with prescribed ordinance development process.
3. Communicate to the residents why the new policy has been established, stressing safety benefits to
life and property by modifying fuel levels in the canyons
4. Designate an area for abatement action using the Fire Departments' priority list.
5. Notify all residents within the designated area that they need to perform fire fuel abatement by a
specified date.
6. Property owners within the designated area can (a) perform the abatement work on their own, (b)
perform the abatement work with the assistance of the city and render payment upon completion, or (c)
do nothing.
7. If a property owner elects to do nothing, or fails to authorize the city to work on their property, or
fails to remit payment due for remediation work, or does not perform the work on their own by a
specified date, that property would be declared a nuisance and the nuisance abatement process would
begin.
8. This process would be one time only, in each of the canyons specified as High Risk by the Fire Dept.
Going forward, all required maintenance will be the total responsibility of the property owner. If unsafe
conditions re-occur on the property and a nuisance is declared, the city will begin the nuisance
abatement process.
At the Fire Fuel Committee meeting on July 21, 2021, Council member Mirsch's recommendation was
supported by the community members in attendance and approved by the Committee to report at the
City Council meeting. The Fire Fuel Committee's recommendation to the City Council is to consider the
two proposals and make a comparison of the two proposals for a final decision. The two proposals are
as follows:
A. Fund one canyon fire fuel abatement project per year.
B. Designate an area of a canyon, work with the property owners to abate fire fuel in the area and go
through the nuisance abatement proceedings if the property owners in the designate area take no
abatement action.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Fire Fuel Committee member Mirsch noted that the second recommendation would be a huge
undertaking for the city. The City does not have resources available to perform the project management
functions recommended. Engagement of a contracted project manager could be considered. Options for
possible funding should be explored, including re-allocating funds from other budget categories,
application for grants and other.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file, and consider and approve the committee's recommendation.
ATTACHMENTS:
COUNCIL MEMBER MIRSCH'S FF COMMITTEE PROPOSAL.2.DRAFT.docx
117
07-21-2021 FF Agenda.pdf
118
1
FIRE FUEL COMMITTEE’S CANYON VEGETATION MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATION # 2
DRAFT
BACKGROUND
The city of Rolling Hills is located in an area designated by CAL FIRE to be at the highest risk level for wildfires.
Some factors considered in this designation include a history of brushfires in the city (mostly originating
outside city borders), miles of canyons containing tons of highly flammable vegetation, steep, rugged terrain
and strong wind conditions. All of these conditions not only put us at a higher risk for a wildfire, but also
impact firefighting efforts during an event.
Additional characteristics of our city also increase the risk to life and property in the event of a wildfire,
including a limited number of evacuation routes, narrow, winding roads impacting first responders’ ability to
access many properties, and lack of dependable cell service or other communication capabilities (walkie talkie,
etc).
California has experienced significant increases in the number, size and severity of wildfires in recent years.
Current record drought levels and higher temperatures cause vegetation to dry and become flammable
sooner, quickly adding to existing hazardous fire fuel levels. Designated High Fire Zones have essentially
become tinderboxes, with the risk of a catastrophic fire and accompanied threat to life and property
increasing at alarming rates.
Over the years the city has recognized the relationship between proper vegetation management and fire
safety. In addition to annual inspections conducted by L.A. County Fire Department, reminders are routinely
sent by the city to all residents, stressing the importance of properly maintaining the vegetation on their
properties to reduce fire hazards. To assist residents in their efforts the city’s solid waste hauler provides two
free unlimited green waste pick-ups per year, and one free 40-yard haul-away container per property per year.
In 2015, in response to the increased number and severity of wildfires in California, the city enacted an
ordinance (Ordinance No. 345 and Chapter 830) finding dead trees, shrubs, and other plants a fire hazard,
potentially injurious to safety and general welfare of the public, and therefore declared a public nuisance. The
dead vegetation was required to be removed at the property owner’s expense, and failure to abate or correct
the public nuisance would be handled in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 8.24.
Note: in 2019 the ordinance was updated to include live tumbleweeds, further clarification of types of dead
vegetation, and an exclusion of slope areas steeper than 2:1 (50%).
Sometime during this period L.A. County Fire also increased the area covered in their annual inspection from
100 ft from a structure to 200 ft. And although this was a welcome revision, on properties with the acreages
found in Rolling Hills, it still leaves huge amounts of area to be maintained (or not) at an owner’s discretion.
All of these efforts resulted in improved mitigation around homes and in other easily accessible areas of the
property. But the size and topography of many of our lots can create situations where large areas of their
properties are not in owners’ everyday view, and/or in steep canyons with limited accessibility. In those
119
2
situations there has been minimal action to reduce hazardous fuel levels, and in many cases, vegetation in the
canyons has grown unabated for decades.
With recent increased publicity and focus on the number of catastrophic fires in California, combined with
heightened awareness of the risks posed to our city by the ever-growing amounts of hazardous vegetation in
our canyons, the public and the city began to look for ways to address this issue.
The first step seemed to be to find out the various reasons why so many property owners – who normally
maintain most areas of their properties in a beautiful manner - fail to deal with hazardous fire fuels in the
canyons located on their property. With that information we could work with the community to explore
possible solutions.
To begin the process, the City Council agreed to Councilmember Mirsch’s suggestion to hold a Focus Group to
obtain information from the community. Councilmember Mirsch was authorized to conduct a Focus Group via
Zoom, open to all members of the community on April 14, 2021. City Manager Jeng and Planning Director
Elguira helped facilitate the meeting, which was attended by over 30 members of the public. During the first
half of the 2+ hour meeting, participants were asked to provide feedback on reasons why so little action has been
taken by residents to manage fire fuel in canyons located on their own private property. Many reasons were shared,
with the most repeated being cost, difficulty, unsure of proper way to remove vegetation, and lack of awareness that
canyon vegetation was their responsibility. In the second half of the meeting, participants were asked to suggest
solutions to the problems identified in the first half of the meeting. Many solutions were suggested, including having the
city perform and pay for the work, have the city require the residents to do the remediation on their own properties at
their own expense, and have the city provide a cost sharing or incentive program to assist property owners.
The complete list of problems and proposed solutions developed from the group, along with a brief report out of the
meeting were shared at the April 26th City Council meeting. Also at that meeting the council authorized the Fire Fuel
Sub-Committee, comprised of Mayor Pro Tem Black and Councilmember Mirsch, to hold public meetings to continue
conversation with the community and develop recommendations to reduce fire fuel levels in our canyons. The first
meeting was held on May 5th. The sub-committee continued to meet every 2 weeks and a total of 7 public meetings
have been held. One meeting was a field trip, where RHCA Maintenance Supervisor Artie Beckler drove Committee
members and city manager (via Kubota) over the community’s extensive trail system for an up close look at vegetation
in the canyons.
During this series of meetings, the committee - accompanied by plentiful feedback from the public - discussed many
issues, including review of existing regulations and enforcement policies, the effectiveness of voluntary vs mandatory
policies, who should be responsible for mitigating unsafe conditions on private property, existing grant scope and
additional grant possibilities, environmental issues relating to vegetation management, and the identification of
opportunities for the city to assist in the effort. A staff recommendation for the city to undertake mitigation action in 1
canyon identified in the Fire Dept’s Risk assessment report per year was also considered. All of this information,
including the recommendation for a city-sponsored annual mitigation project was shared at the next city council
meeting.
DISCUSSION
The single point of agreement throughout all of these discussions has been that the public has strongly
indicated it wants the city to enact policies to protect the community from wildfire risks associated with
overgrown vegetation in our canyons – and they want us to act with a sense of urgency and do something as
quickly as possible. The Fire Fuel Sub-Committee supports their request.
120
3
The sub-committee believes, for all of the reasons indicated earlier in this document, that current fire fuel
conditions in the canyons, as identified by the L.A. County Fire Dept., rise to the level of posing a threat to
the safety of life and property to our residents, and should therefore be addressed as a nuisance.
Following is an outline of suggested policy and action plans in support of that belief. Every attempt has been
made to consider the input and differing views received during our meetings, resulting in a “hybrid approach”,
with options available for property owners. It is not a “quick fix”, but rather an attempt to create a sustainable
solution.
1- The hazardous fuels in the canyons are made up of both living and dead vegetation, but as outlined earlier,
currently the city has only declared the presence of dead vegetation, dead palm fronds, and dead or living
tumbleweeds to constitute a nuisance. The city has fairly broad powers in designating an unsafe condition to
be a nuisance. We should discuss with our city attorney if a specific ordinance to deal with this vegetation is
required or recommended, and if so the city would proceed with the normal ordinance development process.
2- Communication and education would obviously be a key function. Property owners need to know what to
expect, understand the plan and their options with time to make their choices. Details in this area would be
developed if the recommendation is accepted.
3- Designation of an area (canyon) for abatement action would be made using the Fire Dept’s Risk Assessment
List. At this time the committee members are in agreement that the canyons identified by the FD as High Risk
should be used to determine actions, but are not in agreement with how the order of selection of the canyons
would be made. This issue has already been referred to the full council for consideration.
4- Notification to all property owners in the designated area that abatement must be completed by XX/XX/XX
date. A reasonable amount of time would be allowed.
5- Property owners with hazardous levels of vegetation would be given the option of:
A) Performing the abatement work themselves, to be completed by the xx/xx/xx date
B) Joining a city-lead effort where the city would
- obtain scope of work specifications
- obtain bids for entire job (by property) and select the vendor(s) to perform the work
- provide the cost of the work to each property owner
- determine start date
- ensure quality of work meets contractual specifications
The property owner would be required to
- by a specified date, pay to the city the amount due for the work on their property
- sign forms authorizing the city and its selected vendor(s) to enter onto their property
and perform the specified work
C) Do nothing
121
4
6 – If a property owner with hazardous levels of vegetation decides to do nothing, fails to authorize the city to
work on their property, fails to remit payment due for remediation work, or does not perform their own
abatement work by the specified date, then the property would be declared a nuisance, and the city would
begin nuisance abatement process (Chapter 824)
Maintenance
This process would be one time only, in each of the canyons specified as High Risk by the Fire Dept.
Going forward, all required maintenance will be the total responsibility of the property owner. If unsafe
conditions re-occur on the property and a nuisance is declared, the city will begin the nuisance abatement
process
Fiscal Impact
This would obviously be a huge undertaking for the city. Currently the city does not have the resources
available to perform the project management functions recommended. Engagement of a contracted Project
Manager could be considered. It is probably safe to say that funding levels in the current budget would fall
significantly short of a project of this size, however Council’s approval or amendments to the scope of the
recommendation would be required to estimate the level of impact. Options for possible funding
opportunities should be explored, including re-allocating funds from other budget categories, application for
grants awards, etc.
It should be noted that funds expended under this recommendation would be spent providing administrative
assistance to the community, not for any actual work performed on private property.
Recommendation
It is recommended that City Council discuss the actions outlined, and consider whether the proposal will help
us improve the safety to life and property in our community by reducing fire fuel in the canyons. Does it create
a sustainable solution?
It is also suggested that the council compare this recommendation with that of an earlier pending
recommendation for one city-provided mitigation effort per year. The two plans contain very different
approaches, including the matter of funding responsibility – the property owner paying to maintain their own
property vs the city exercising its legal authority to use public funds on private property for the safety and
benefit of the entire community.
The Fire Fuel subcommittee appreciates Council’s consideration of our recommendations and looks forward to
answering any questions you may have.
122
1.PARTICIPANTS
2.ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION
2.A.RECEIVE AND FILE THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT'S
RESPONSE TO QUESTION FROM FIRE FUEL COMMITTEE ON THE CANYON
PRIORITY LIST.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file.
2.B.RECEIVE A PRESENTATION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER MIRSCH ON TWO
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL FOR FIRE FUEL REDUCTION IN
THE CANYONS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION: Receive presentation and provide direction to staff.
3.COMMENTS WILL BE TAKEN BY EMAIL IN REAL TIME - PUBLIC COMMENT
WELCOME
This is the appropriate time for members of the public to make comments regarding items not listed on this agenda.
Pursuant to the Brown Act, no action will take place on any items not on the agenda.
4.ADJOURNMENT
Next meeting: WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 04, 2021 at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chamber,
Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA 90274.
2 Portuguese Bend Road
Rolling Hills, CA 90274
AGENDA
Special Fire Fuel Management
Committtee Meeting
FIRE FUEL MANAGEMENT
COMMITTEE
Wednesday, July 21, 2021
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
6:30 PM
Executive Order
All Committee members will participate in-person wearing masks per Los Angeles County Health
Department's Health Officer Order effective Saturday, July 17, 2021. The meeting agenda and live
audio will be available on the City’s website: https://www.rolling-
hills.org/government/agenda/index.php
Members of the public may come in to City Hall wearing masks, per the new Health Officer's Order.
Zoom teleconference will not be available for this meeting, but members of the public can submit
written comments in real-time by emailing the City Clerk’s office at cityclerk@cityofrh.net. Your
comments will become part of the official meeting record. You must provide your full name, but
please do not provide any other personal information that you do not want to be published.
Council member Mirsch's FF COMMITTEE PROPOSAL. DRAFT.pdf
1123
Documents pertaining to an agenda item received after the posting of the agendas are available for review in the
City Clerk's office or at the meeting at which the item will be considered.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting due to your disability, please contact the City Clerk at (310) 377-1521 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting
to enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and accommodation for your review of
this agenda and attendance at this meeting.
2124
Agenda Item No.: 2.A
Mtg. Date: 07/21/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:ASHFORD BALL, SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:RECEIVE AND FILE THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE
DEPARTMENT'S RESPONSE TO QUESTION FROM FIRE FUEL
COMMITTEE ON THE CANYON PRIORITY LIST.
DATE:July 21, 2021
BACKGROUND:
The Los Angeles County Fire Department (Fire Department) prioritized 11 canyons from highest
wildfire risk to lower wildfire risk within the City of Rolling Hills. The Fire Department assisted the
City in preparing a scope of work for the Cal OES/FEMA vegetation management grant. Based on the
Fire Department's scope of work, topography, local weather patterns, fuel load, fire history, and density
of homes were factors used for the prioritization. Additional considerations for the prioritization
included environmental health, natural habitat for wildlife, and stable hillsides for erosion control.
The Fire Department added that canyons that would be at risk from wind driven fires originating from
the southwest are Paint Brush Canyon, Portuguese Canyon, Altamira Canyon, and Forrestal Canyon.
Based on fire history, these south facing canyons have the highest risk for a wildfire in the future.
Canyons that would be at risk during northeast winds are Georgeff Canyon, Purple Canyon, Willow
Canyon, Sepulveda Canyon, Blackwater Canyon, John’s Canyon, Agua Magna Canyon.
At the June 30, 2021 Fire Fuel Committee meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Black requested the Fire
Department to provide feedback on the factors that set priority canyon number four over priority canyon
number five or another lower ranked canyon.
DISCUSSION:
In response to Mayor Pro Tem Black's inquiry, the Fire Department reiterated the following factors used
to rank the canyons susceptible to the highest risk of wildfires to the lower risks of wildfires:
Topography
Local weather patterns
Fuel load
Fire history
Density of homes
3125
Environmental health
Natural habitat for wildlife; and
Stable hillsides for erosion control.
The Fire Department also noted that if they were responsible for mitigating the wildfire risks in the
canyons within the City of Rolling Hills, they would apply resources for fuel reduction at the canyons
listed in the order of priority. However, in this context, the Fire Department is serving as an advisor as
the subject matter expert. The Fire Department noted that the City can accept the Fire Department's
advice or decide to apply resources in a different approach.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None. The Fire Department's services are paid for by residents (property tax bill) via participation in the
fire district. The Fire Department noted that they will not charge the City for non-routine work (i.e.,
generating project scope of work for the City's grant, and or serving as the City's advisor in wildfire risk
management in the canyons).
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
ATTACHMENTS:
4126
Agenda Item No.: 2.B
Mtg. Date: 07/21/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:ASHFORD BALL, SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:RECEIVE A PRESENTATION FROM COUNCIL MEMBER MIRSCH ON
TWO RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL FOR FIRE
FUEL REDUCTION IN THE CANYONS AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO
STAFF.
DATE:July 21, 2021
BACKGROUND:
At the June and July 2021 City Council meetings, the Fire Fuel Committee presented to the City
Council with the recommendation to have the City fund one fire fuel abatement project in the canyons.
The City Council provided feedback to the Fire Fuel Committee and the Committee conducted
additional discussions and at the June 30, 2021 Committee meeting. The Committee was ready to
represent the recommendation to the City Council at the July 12, 2021 City Council meeting but Fire
Fuel Committee member and Council member Leah Mirsch requested to hold off on the presentation.
She also requested to hold another Fire Fuel Committee meeting on July 21, 2021 so that the
Committee can discuss her second recommendation to go along with the first recommendation.
DISCUSSION:
Fire Fuel Committee member Mirsch's second recommendation is detailed in the attachment to this
report. A summary of the second recommendation is as follows:
1. The City Council to direct the City Attorney to investigate a new or enhanced ordinance to deal
with fire fuel loading in the canyons.
2. Communicate with residents and educate residents on the importance of fire fuel reduction in the
canyons to reduce wildfire risks.
3. Designate an area for abatement action using the Fire Departments' priority list.
4. Notify all residents within the designated area that they need to perform fire fuel abatement by a
certain date.
5. Property owners within the designated area can (a) perform the abatement work on their own, (b)
perform the abatement work with the assistance of the city and render payment upon completion,
or (c) do nothing.
6. If property owners elect to do nothing, or fail to authorize the city to work on their property, or
fail to remit payment due for remediation work, or does not perform the work on their own by
5127
specified date, the properties would be declared a nuisance and go through the nuisance
abatement process.
Fire Fuel Committee member Mirsch is proposing that the City Council consider the first and second
recommendations at the July 26, 2021 City Council meeting and that the City Council conduct a
comparison of the two approaches for final decision.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Fire Fuel Committee member Mirsch noted that the second recommendation would be a huge
undertaking for the city. The City does not have resources available to perform the project management
functions recommended. Engagement of a contracted project manager could be considered. Options
for possible funding should be explored, including re-allocating funds from other budget categories,
application for grants and other.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive presentation and provide direction to staff.
ATTACHMENTS:
Council member Mirsch's FF COMMITTEE PROPOSAL. DRAFT.pdf
6128
1
FIRE FUEL COMMITTEE’S CANYON VEGETATION MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATION # 2
DRAFT
BACKGROUND
The city of Rolling Hills is located in an area designated by CAL FIRE to be at the highest risk level for wildfires.
Some factors considered in this designation include a history of brushfires in the city (mostly originating
outside city borders), miles of canyons containing tons of highly flammable vegetation, steep, rugged terrain
and strong wind conditions. All of these conditions not only put us at a higher risk for a wildfire, but also
impact firefighting efforts during an event.
Additional characteristics of our city also increase the risk to life and property in the event of a wildfire,
including a limited number of evacuation routes, narrow, winding roads impacting first responders’ ability to
access many properties, and lack of dependable cell service or other communication capabilities (walkie talkie,
etc).
California has experienced significant increases in the number, size and severity of wildfires in recent years.
Current record drought levels and higher temperatures cause vegetation to dry and become flammable
sooner, quickly adding to existing hazardous fire fuel levels. Designated High Fire Zones have essentially
become tinderboxes, with the risk of a catastrophic fire and accompanied threat to life and property
increasing at alarming rates.
Over the years the city has recognized the relationship between proper vegetation management and fire
safety. In addition to annual inspections conducted by L.A. County Fire Department, reminders are routinely
sent by the city to all residents, stressing the importance of properly maintaining the vegetation on their
properties to reduce fire hazards. To assist residents in their efforts the city’s solid waste hauler provides two
free unlimited green waste pick-ups per year, and one free 40-yard haul-away container per property per year.
In 2015, in response to the increased number and severity of wildfires in California, the city enacted an
ordinance (Ordinance No. 345 and Chapter 830) finding dead trees, shrubs, and other plants a fire hazard,
potentially injurious to safety and general welfare of the public, and therefore declared a public nuisance. The
dead vegetation was required to be removed at the property owner’s expense, and failure to abate or correct
the public nuisance would be handled in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 8.24.
Note: in 2019 the ordinance was updated to include live tumbleweeds, further clarification of types of dead
vegetation, and an exclusion of slope areas steeper than 2:1 (50%).
Sometime during this period L.A. County Fire also increased the area covered in their annual inspection from
100 ft from a structure to 200 ft. And although this was a welcome revision, on properties with the acreages
found in Rolling Hills, it still leaves huge amounts of area to be maintained (or not) at an owner’s discretion.
All of these efforts resulted in improved mitigation around homes and in other easily accessible areas of the
property. But the size and topography of many of our lots can create situations where large areas of their
properties are not in owners’ everyday view, and/or in steep canyons with limited accessibility. In those
7129
2
situations there has been minimal action to reduce hazardous fuel levels, and in many cases, vegetation in the
canyons has grown unabated for decades.
With recent increased publicity and focus on the number of catastrophic fires in California, combined with
heightened awareness of the risks posed to our city by the ever-growing amounts of hazardous vegetation in
our canyons, the public and the city began to look for ways to address this issue.
The first step seemed to be to find out the various reasons why so many property owners – who normally
maintain most areas of their properties in a beautiful manner - fail to deal with hazardous fire fuels in the
canyons located on their property. With that information we could work with the community to explore
possible solutions.
To begin the process, the City Council agreed to Councilmember Mirsch’s suggestion to hold a Focus Group to
obtain information from the community. Councilmember Mirsch was authorized to conduct a Focus Group via
Zoom, open to all members of the community on April 14, 2021. City Manager Jeng and Planning Director
Elguira helped facilitate the meeting, which was attended by over 30 members of the public. During the first
half of the 2+ hour meeting, participants were asked to provide feedback on reasons why so little action has been
taken by residents to manage fire fuel in canyons located on their own private property. Many reasons were shared,
with the most repeated being cost, difficulty, unsure of proper way to remove vegetation, and lack of awareness that
canyon vegetation was their responsibility. In the second half of the meeting, participants were asked to suggest
solutions to the problems identified in the first half of the meeting. Many solutions were suggested, including having the
city perform and pay for the work, have the city require the residents to do the remediation on their own properties at
their own expense, and have the city provide a cost sharing or incentive program to assist property owners.
The complete list of problems and proposed solutions developed from the group, along with a brief report out of the
meeting were shared at the April 26th City Council meeting. Also at that meeting the council authorized the Fire Fuel
Sub-Committee, comprised of Mayor Pro Tem Black and Councilmember Mirsch, to hold public meetings to continue
conversation with the community and develop recommendations to reduce fire fuel levels in our canyons. The first
meeting was held on May 5th. The sub-committee continued to meet every 2 weeks and a total of 7 public meetings
have been held. One meeting was a field trip, where RHCA Maintenance Supervisor Artie Beckler drove Committee
members and city manager (via Kubota) over the community’s extensive trail system for an up close look at vegetation
in the canyons.
During this series of meetings, the committee - accompanied by plentiful feedback from the public - discussed many
issues, including review of existing regulations and enforcement policies, the effectiveness of voluntary vs mandatory
policies, who should be responsible for mitigating unsafe conditions on private property, existing grant scope and
additional grant possibilities, environmental issues relating to vegetation management, and the identification of
opportunities for the city to assist in the effort. A staff recommendation for the city to undertake mitigation action in 1
canyon identified in the Fire Dept’s Risk assessment report per year was also considered. All of this information,
including the recommendation for a city-sponsored annual mitigation project was shared at the next city council
meeting.
DISCUSSION
The single point of agreement throughout all of these discussions has been that the public has strongly
indicated it wants the city to enact policies to protect the community from wildfire risks associated with
overgrown vegetation in our canyons – and they want us to act with a sense of urgency and do something as
quickly as possible. The Fire Fuel Sub-Committee supports their request.
8130
3
The sub-committee believes, for all of the reasons indicated earlier in this document, that current fire fuel
conditions in the canyons, as identified by the L.A. County Fire Dept., rise to the level of posing a threat to
the safety of life and property to our residents, and should therefore be addresse d as a nuisance.
Following is an outline of suggested policy and action plans in support of that belief. Every attempt has been
made to consider the input and differing views received during our meetings, resulting in a “hybrid approach”,
with options available for property owners. It is not a “quick fix”, but rather an attempt to create a sustainable
solution.
1- The hazardous fuels in the canyons are made up of both living and dead vegetation, but as outlined earlier,
currently the city has only declared the presence of dead vegetation, dead palm fronds, and dead or living
tumbleweeds to constitute a nuisance. The city has fairly broad powers in designating an unsafe condition to
be a nuisance. We should discuss with our city attorney if a specific ordinance to deal with this vegetation is
required or recommended, and if so the city would proceed with the normal ordinance development process.
2- Communication and education would obviously be a key function. Property owners need to know what to
expect, understand the plan and their options with time to make their choices. Details in this area would be
developed if the recommendation is accepted.
3- Designation of an area (canyon) for abatement action would be made using the Fire Dept’s Risk Assessment
List. At this time the committee members are in agreement that the canyons identified by the FD as High R isk
should be used to determine actions, but are not in agreement with how the order of selection of the canyons
would be made. This issue has already been referred to the full council for consideration.
4- Notification to all property owners in the des ignated area that abatement must be completed by XX/XX/XX
date. A reasonable amount of time would be allowed.
5- Property owners with hazardous levels of vegetation would be given the option of:
A) Performing the abatement work themselves, to be completed by the xx/xx/xx date
B) Joining a city-lead effort where the city would
- obtain scope of work specifications
- obtain bids for entire job (by property) and select the vendor(s) to perform the work
- provide the cost of the work to each property owner
- determine start date
- ensure quality of work meets contractual specifications
The property owner would be required to
- by a specified date, pay to the city the amount due for the work on their property
- sign forms authorizing the city and its selected vendor(s) to enter onto their property
and perform the specified work
C) Do nothing
9131
4
6 – If a property owner with hazardous levels of vegetation decides to do nothing, fails to authorize the city to
work on their property, fails to remit payment due for remediation work, or does not perform their own
abatement work by the specified date, then the property would be declared a nuisance, and the city would
begin nuisance abatement process (Chapter 824)
Maintenance
This process would be one time only, in each of the canyons specified as High Risk by the Fire Dept.
Going forward, all required maintenance will be the total responsibility of the property owner . If unsafe
conditions re-occur on the property and a nuisance is declared, the city will begin the nuisance abatement
process
Fiscal Impact
This would obviously be a huge undertaking for the city. Currently the city does not have the resources
available to perform the project management functions recommended. Engagement of a contracted Project
Manager could be considered. It is probably safe to say that funding levels in the current budget would fall
significantly short of a project of this size, howev er Council’s approval or amendments to the scope of the
recommendation would be required to estimate the level of impact. Options for possible funding
opportunities should be explored, including re-allocating funds from other budget categories, application for
grants awards, etc.
It should be noted that funds expended under this recommendation would be spent providing administrative
assistance to the community, not for any actual work performed on private property.
Recommendation
It is recommended that City Council discuss the actions outlined, and consider whether the proposal will help
us improve the safety to life and property in our community by reducing fire fuel in the canyons. Does it create
a sustainable solution?
It is also suggested that the council compare this recommendation with that of an earlier pending
recommendation for one city-provided mitigation effort per year. The two plans contain very different
approaches, including the matter of funding responsibility – the property owner paying to maintain their own
property vs the city exercising its legal authority to use public funds on private property for the safety and
benefit of the entire community.
The Fire Fuel subcommittee appreciates Council’s consideration of our recommendations a nd looks forward to
answering any questions you may have.
10132
Agenda Item No.: 8.C
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:MEREDITH ELGUIRA, PLANNING DIRECTOR
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:CONSIDER THE PURCHASE OF A UTILITY VEHICLE FOR A NOT-TO-
EXCEED AMOUNT OF $20,000.
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
In the first quarter of this year, City staff recommended purchasing a utility vehicle to help the Code
Enforcement Officer (CEO) access more sites and cover more areas to look for dead vegetation. Many
o f the reports staff receives about dead vegetation are from vantage points not seen from road
easements. Most are located along trails or in canyons visible from private properties only. Some of
these sites are very difficult to access on foot, given the City's terrain and size. Currently, staff is relying
on RHCA staff to provide rides to certain locations when they are available. In some cases, staff hikes
the trails to get to sites but it is time consuming and the distance covered is limited. Staff having access
to a utility vehicle would safely allow for greater access and coverage in less time.
Another reason staff is requesting that the City Council consider purchasing a utility vehicle is for staff's
safety. The City is three square miles and is comprised of rolling hills and steep canyons. In order to
access areas not visible from the road, the CEO would have to drive her car to the entrance of a trail and
hike the rest of the way to get to a site. During hot weather season, staff is completely exposed to
outdoor elements, typically away from visibility and potentially with no cell phone signal. If there's an
emergency, hiking out of the area could take a long time and potentially exacerbate the situation.
Having access to a utility vehicle could help bring staff back to safety in a much shorter period of time.
Access to a utility vehicle will be beneficial to both the community and staff. The utility vehicle allows
staff to cover more areas in less time while at the same time getting staff to and from locations more
safely, especially during an emergency. Staff recognizes that there are areas in the City, due to the steep
terrain, that should not be accessed by a utility vehicle. Staff can survey these trails, with the help of
RHCA maintenance crew, to establish boundaries that prohibits access by City staff.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has looked into different models of Kubota and reached out to RHCA for advise. RHCA has also
offered to help in choosing the right vehicle to use in the City. The average MSRP for a Kubota utility
vehicle is approximately $15,000. RHCA uses Kubota RTV x1140 and its current MSRP is $16,999.
133
FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost to purchase and operate a utility vehicle has been included in the adopted FY 21-22 Budget.
RECOMMENDATION:
Consider and approve purchase of utility vehicle.
ATTACHMENTS:
Kubota.pdf
134
135
Agenda Item No.: 8.D
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:JANELY SANDOVAL, CITY CLERK
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:CONSIDER A PENINSULA CITIES JOINT LETTER TO BE SENT TO
THE CALIFORNIA AND LOS ANGELES COUNTY CITIZENS
REDISTRICTING COMMISSION DESCRIBING THE CITY AND THE
CITY'S PREFERENCE FOR REDISTRICTING.
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
In November of 2008, Californians voted to approve Proposition 11, the Voters FIRST Act, authorizing
the creation of the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission. The goal of such commission was
to transfer the job of drawing legislative district lines from the California Legislature to the citizens. In
November 2010, Proposition 20, authorized the commission to also draw U.S. Congressional districts.
Every 10 years, upon the release of the most updated federal government census information, in order to
accurately reflect the state’s population, the boundaries of the Congressional, State Senate, State
Assembly, and State Board of Equalization districts must be redrawn.
The California Citizens Redistricting Commission (Commission) draw the lines based on strict,
nonpartisan rules that assist with ensuring districts are relatively equal in population with fair
representation. The Commission holds public meetings in hopes of public participation to determine
which communities share common interest and can benefit from common representation. The
Commission ask the public to describe their communities, experience, and the importance as to why
they should maintain together with their current communities during redistricting. There will be a
Communities of Interest Public Input Meeting for the Los Angeles region on July 30, and upon
receiving the 2020 census data, there will be an additional Public Input Meeting and Line Drawing
Session from October 2021 – January 2022. The final product of the redistricting are expected to be
released in February.
In addition, the Los Angeles County Citizens Redistricting Commission is also interested in receiving
public comments to determine which communities should share common representation within the Los
Angeles County Board of Supervisors. The Los Angeles County Citizens Redistricting Commission
will hold their public testimony for the southwestern coastal section of the county on August 19.
136
Back in November of 2011, the former Mayor Pro Tem of City of Rancho Palos Verdes (RPV)
submitted their written letter/comment establishing their interest in staying connected with the north
coastal cities and communities of the South Bay region. These cities and communities share
transportation, economic and cultural factors that have traditionally connected them in previous years,
as well as allowing them to maintain within the same district.
DISCUSSION:
City of Rancho Palos Verdes provided the City of Rolling Hills their report and drafted letters that were
presented to their City Council on July 20, 2021. There is two drafted letters attached that will be
submitted to the California Citizens Redistricting Commission and the Los Angeles County Citizens
Redistricting Commission establishing the City of Rancho Palos Verdes views and request to stay
within the same district as the north coastal cities and communities of the South Bay region such as the
City of Rolling Hills.
Attached is a draft letter that includes all four Peninsula cities establishing their views and goals in
wanting to be redistricted together. The letter includes the four Peninsula cities current represented
districts, the shared amenities and contracts, which is the reason that all four cities are advocating to stay
within their current district or drawn lines. The letter establishes the communal relationship the four
cities share, and the overall goal of trying to maintain their traditions.
RPV’s goal is to attain signatures form all four mayors and maintain all the Peninsula cities within the
same district, as they have been for the last couple of year. By submitting a joint letter, signed by all
four cities, the Peninsula cities are demonstrating the agreement they have in hopes of staying together,
continuing to share amenities, and continuing the traditional of being a union Peninsula.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Provide direction to staff to finalize the joint-Peninsula letter, and authorize the Mayor to sign the joint
letter if all Peninsula cities agree.
ATTACHMENTS:
20210720 Redistricting Letter Report.pdf
Attachment C PV Cities Community Profile.docx
137
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 07/20/2021
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Regular Business
AGENDA TITLE:
Consideration and possible action to send letters to the California and Los Angeles
County Citizens Redistricting Commissions describing the City’s preferences for regional
representation.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Authorize the Mayor to sign letters to the California and Los Angeles County
Citizens Redistricting Commissions describing the City’s community and
preferences for regional representation alongside the northerly South Bay cities;
and,
(2) Direct Staff to circulate a draft to the Peninsula cities for a joint-Peninsula letter,
and authorize the Mayor to sign the joint letter, should the other cities agree.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
ORIGINATED BY: McKenzie Bright, Administrative Analyst
REVIEWED BY: Karina Bañales, Deputy City Manager
APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. Draft letter to the California Citizens Redistricting Commission (page A-1)
B. Draft letter to the Los Angeles County Citizens Redistricting Commission
(page B-1)
C. Draft Peninsula cities letter (page C-1)
D. Comments on the redistricting of the Palos Verdes Peninsula, dated April
21, 2011 (page D-1)
BACKGROUND:
In November 2008, California voters passed Proposition 11, the Voters FIRST Act,
authorizing the creation of the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission to draw
1 138
new legislative district lines, transferring the job from the California Legislature to the
citizens. In November 2010, Proposition 20, the Voters FIRST Act for Congress,
additionally granted the responsibility of drawing U.S. Congressional districts to the
Commission.
Every 10 years, after the federal government releases updated census information,
California must redraw the boundaries of its Congressional, State Senate, State
Assembly, and State Board of Equalization districts to correctly reflect the state’s
population.
The 14-member California Citizens Redistricting Commission (Commission) must draw
the district lines in conformity with strict, nonpartisan rules designed to create districts of
relatively equal population that will provide fair representation for all Californians. To
assist with this process, the Commission holds public meetings to solicit and receive
public input as they determine which communities share common interests and should
share common representation.
The Commission is soliciting testimony describing communities, including what connects
the people and why it’s important that they be kept together during redistric ting. The
Commission will be holding a Communities of Interest Public Input Meeting for the Los
Angeles region on July 30. After the Commission receives the 2020 census data, it will
hold additional Public Input Meetings and Line Drawing Sessions from Octo ber 2021-
January 2022. Final district maps are expected to be released in February.
Similarly, the Los Angeles County Citizens Redistricting Commission is also soliciting
testimony as it determines which communities should share common representation
within the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. The L.A. Country Commission will
hear public testimony for the southwestern coastal section of the county on August 19.
DISCUSSION
During the 2010 redistricting process, the City requested that the City be districted with
the coastal cities of the South Bay, generally northward from the City, located west of the
I-110 and I-405 freeways and south of Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). This
districting is due to shared transportation, economic, and cultural factors (see Attachment
D). In previous years, the City tended to be districted, along with other Peninsula cities,
toward Long Beach.
The proposed letters seek to maintain the current district distribution, including the
Peninsula cities and the South Bay cities, including Torrance, Redondo Beach, Hermosa
Beach, Manhattan Beach, among other communities. The different representative
districts since 1992 are illustrated on the next page.
2 139
Rancho Palos Verdes Representative Districts
CA Senate CA Assembly US Congressional
2011-
2021
2001-
2011
1991-
2001
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes, along with the Peninsula and South Bay cities, are
primarily residential communities and share a common affinity and appreciation of our
location's unique physical and cultural environment along the coast.
The City frequently works with the other cities on the Peninsula, sharing a school district,
library district, local transit authority, land conservancy, and issuing joint statements. The
cities of Rancho Palos Verdes, Rolling Hills, and Rolling Hills Estates additionally share
a regional contract with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department for law
enforcement, and the four cities contract with the Los Angeles County Fire Department.
The four cities on the Peninsula work together when it comes to emergency
preparedness, public safety, and other shared concerns.
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes also works closely with the South Bay Cities Council of
Governments (SBCCOG) and considers itself an integral part of the South Bay.
The attached letters (see Attachments A and B) describe the characteristics of the City
and request that the City continue to be districted with the more northern South Bay cities.
Staff recommends the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign the letters t o be
transmitted to the Redistricting Commissions in advance of their regional hearings and to
provide Staff direction on circulating regional letters for joint-Peninsula community
recognition (Attachment C).
3 140
ALTERNATIVES:
In addition to the Staff recommendation, the following alternative actions are available for
the City Council’s consideration:
1. Identify revised language to add to the letters.
2. Direct Staff not to send the letters.
3. Take other action, as deemed appropriate.
4 141
July 20, 2021 Via Email
California Citizens Redistricting Commission
721 Capitol Mall, Suite 260
Sacramento, CA 95814
SUBJECT: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Community
Dear Commissioners:
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is located on the Palos Verdes Peninsula in Los
Angeles County. The City shares the Peninsula with the cities of Palos Verdes Estates,
Rolling Hills, and Rolling Hills Estates. The Peninsula is currently represented by the
33rd U.S. Congressional District, the 26th State Senate District, and the 66th State
Assembly District.
The Peninsula cities share one school district, one library district, one local transit
authority, one land conservancy, and frequently work together on areas of mutual
interest such as emergency preparedness and public safety. The cities of Rancho Palos
Verdes, Rolling Hills, and Rolling Hills Estates additionally share a regional contract with
the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department for law enforcement, and the four cities
contract with the Los Angeles County Fire Department.
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes has been intimately tied to the coastal cities and
communities of the South Bay region, including, but not limited to, the Peninsula cities,
Torrance, Redondo Beach, Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, and El Segundo , many
of which are within the jurisdiction of the California Coastal Commission. We share with
our northerly South Bay neighbors a dependence upon a common transportation
network for access to the rest of the Los Angeles region , and share many economic and
cultural factors.
We are primarily a residential community and share a common affinity and appreciation
of the unique physical and cultural environment afforded by our location along the coast.
Many of the prominent regional community organization s serve the area extending
northward from Rancho Palos Verdes toward Los Angeles International Airport (LAX).
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes considers itself to be an integral part of the South
Bay, as evidenced by its active participation in the South Bay Cities Council of
Governments (SBCCOG).
A-1 142
California Citizen’s Redistricting Commission
July 20, 2021
Page 2
Following the 2010 Census, the City was realigned with the northern coastal cities and
communities of the South Bay – located generally west of the I-110 and I-405 freeways
and south of LAX. We have appreciated the common representation these districts have
provided and would request that the City continue to be districted with the other cities on
the Palos Verdes Peninsula, and with the South Bay. Images of maps showing the
City’s, Peninsula’s, and SBCCOG boundaries are attached.
Thank you for your efforts to draw the new district lines for California. We look forward
to continuing being represented alongside other South Bay cities in the new districts.
Sincerely,
Eric Alegria
Mayor, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
cc: Rancho Palos Verdes City Council and City Manager
Palos Verdes Estates City Council and City Manager
Rolling Hills City Council and City Manager
Rolling Hills Estates City Council and City Manager
Jacki Bacharach, Executive Director, South Bay Cities Council of Governments
A-2 143
California Citizen’s Redistricting Commission
July 20, 2021
Page 3
Attachment 1: Map of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
A-3 144
California Citizen’s Redistricting Commission
July 20, 2021
Page 4
Attachment 2: Map of the South Bay Cities Council of Governments, Including
Peninsula Cities1
1 Peninsula Cities are highlighted in green. Includes portions of unincorporated Los Angeles County.
A-4 145
July 20, 2021 Via Email
Los Angeles County Citizens Redistricting Commission
P.O. Box 56447
Sherman Oaks, CA 91413
SUBJECT: City of Rancho Palos Verdes Community Profile
Dear Commissioners:
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is located on the Palos Verdes Peninsula. The City
shares the Peninsula with the cities of Palos Verdes Estates, Rolling Hills, and Rolling
Hills Estates. The Peninsula is currently represented by the Fourth Supervisorial
District.
The Peninsula cities share one school district, one library district, one local transit
authority, one land conservancy, and frequently work together on areas of mutual
interest such as emergency preparedness and public safety. The cities of Rancho Palos
Verdes, Rolling Hills, and Rolling Hills Estates additionally share a regional contract with
the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department for law enforcement, and the four cities
contract with the Los Angeles County Fire Department.
The City of Rancho Palos Verdes has been intimately tied to the coastal cities and
communities of the South Bay region, including, but not limited to, the Peninsula cities,
Torrance, Redondo Beach, Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach, and El Segundo many
of which are within the jurisdiction of the California Coastal Commission. We share with
our northerly South Bay neighbors a dependence up on a common transportation
network for access to the rest of the Los Angeles region. We are primarily a residential
community and share a common affinity and appreciation of the unique physical and
cultural environment afforded by our location along the co ast. Many of the prominent
regional community organizations serve the area extending northward from Rancho
Palos Verdes toward Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). The City of Rancho Palos
Verdes considers itself to be an integral part of the South Bay, as evidenced by its
active participation in the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG).
Due to shared transportation, economic and cultural factors, the City would request to
remain aligned with the South Bay cities – located generally west of the I-110 and I-405
freeways and south of LAX. We have appreciated the common representation this
district has provided and would request that the City continue to be districted with the
B-1 146
Los Angeles County Citizens Redistricting Commission
July 20, 2021
Page 2
other cities on the Palos Verdes Peninsula, and with the South Bay. Images of maps
showing the City’s, Peninsula’s, and SBCCOG boundaries are attached.
Thank you for your efforts to draw the new district lines for the Los Angeles County
Board of Supervisors. We look forward to continuing to be represented alongside other
South Bay cities in the new district.
Sincerely,
Eric Alegria
Mayor, City of Rancho Palos Verdes
cc: Rancho Palos Verdes City Council and City Manager
Palos Verdes Estates City Council and City Manager
Rolling Hills City Council and City Manager
Rolling Hills Estates City Council and City Manager
B-2 147
Los Angeles County Citizens Redistricting Commission
July 20, 2021
Page 3
Attachment 1: Map of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
B-3 148
Los Angeles County Citizens Redistricting Commission
July 20, 2021
Page 4
Attachment 2: Map of the South Bay Cities Council of Governments, Including
Peninsula Cities1
1 Peninsula Cities are highlighted in green.
B-4 149
July 20, 2021 Via Email
California Citizens Redistricting Commission
721 Capitol Mall, Suite 260
Sacramento, CA 95814
SUBJECT: Palos Verdes Peninsula Community
Dear Commissioners:
The Cities of Rancho Palos Verdes, Palos Verdes Estates, Rolling Hills, and Rolling
Hills Estates are located on the Palos Verdes Peninsula in Los Angeles County. The
Peninsula is currently represented by the 33rd U.S. Congressional District, the 26th State
Senate District, and the 66th State Assembly District.
The Peninsula cities share one school district, one library district, one local transit
authority, one land conservancy, and frequently work together on areas of mutual
interest such as emergency preparedness and public safety. The cities of Rancho Palos
Verdes, Rolling Hills, and Rolling Hills Estates additionally share a regional contract with
the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department for law enforcement, and the four cities
contract with the Los Angeles County Fire Department.
The Peninsula cities are intimately tied to the coastal cities and communities of the
South Bay region, including, but not limited to, Torrance, Redondo Beach, Hermosa
Beach, Manhattan Beach, and El Segundo, many of which are within the jurisdiction of
the California Coastal Commission. We share with our northerly South Bay neighbors a
dependence upon a common transportation network for access to the rest of the Los
Angeles region, and share many economic and cultural factors.
We are primarily residential communities and share a common affinity and appreciation
of the unique physical and cultural environment afforded by our location along the coast.
Many of the prominent regional community organization s serve the area extending
northward from the Peninsula toward Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). The
Peninsula cities are an integral part of the South Bay, as evidenced by our active
participation in the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG).
Following the 2010 Census, the cities were realigned with the northern coastal cities
and communities of the South Bay – located generally west of the I-110 and I-405
freeways and south of LAX. We have appreciated the common representation these
districts have provided and would request that the Peninsula cities continue to be
districted together and with the South Bay.
C-1 150
California Citizens Redistricting Commission
Page 2
Thank you for your efforts to draw the new district lines for California. We look forward
to continuing being represented alongside other South Bay cities in the new districts.
Sincerely,
Eric Alegria Michael Kemps
Mayor, City of Rancho Palos Verdes Mayor, City of Palos Verdes Estates
Bea Dieringer Steven Zuckerman
Mayor, City of Rolling Hills Mayor, City of Rolling Hills Estates
cc: Rancho Palos Verdes City Council and City Manager
Palos Verdes Estates City Council and City Manager
Rolling Hills City Council and City Manager
Rolling Hills Estates City Council and City Manager
Jacki Bacharach, Executive Director, South Bay Cities Council of Governments
C-2 151
CITVOF
TI-IQMAS 0 . LONG, MAYOR
ANTHONY M. MISH ICH. MAYOR P RO TEM
BRIAN CAMP BELL COU'ICN.HAN
DoUGLAS W. STERN, COUNCILMAN
SWAN WOu:NVCZ, CouNCILMAN
April 21 , 2011
C aliforn ia Citizens Redistricting Commission
1130 'K' St., Ste . 101
Sacramento, CA 95814
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
SUBJECT: Comments on the Redistricting of the Palos Verdes Peninsula and the South
Bay Area of Los Angeles County
Dear Commissioners:
The Rancho Palos Verdes City Council is pleased that the California Citizens Redistricting
Commission will be conducting public hearings in the Los Angeles area over the next few weeks.
Rancho Palos Verdes is one of four cities that occupy the Palos Verdes Peninsula along the
coastli ne of the South Bay area of Los Angeles County. Currently, the Peninsula falls within several ,
heavily "gerrymandered" congressional and legislative districts, which result in the alignment of our
communities with such disparate areas as eastern Long Beach (54th State Assembly D istrict), central
Orange County (46th U .S. Congressional District) and central Los Angeles County (25th State Senate
District).
H istorically, Rancho Palos Verdes has been intimately tied to the north coastal cities and
communities of the South Bay region, including (but not limited to) Torrance , Redondo Beach,
Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach and El Segundo. We share with our northerly South Bay
neighbors a dependence upon a common transportation network for access to the re st of the Los
Angeles region . We serve as a "bedroom community" for the regional aerospace and manufacturing
hub of the South Bay. We also share a common affinity and appreciation of the unique physical and
cultural environment afforded by our location along the coast. Many of the prominent regional
community organizations (such as the Kiwani s and Rotary clubs) serve the area extending
northward from Rancho Palos Verdes towards LAX. Rancho Palos Verdes considers itself to be an
integral part of the South Bay, as evidenced by its active parti cipation and leadership in the South
Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG).
My City Council colleagues an d I encourage the Commission to take the opportunity provided by the
decennial redistricting of the state to consider re-aligni ng the City of Rancho Palos Verdes wi th the
n orth coastal cities and communities of the South Bay-located generally west o f the l-110 and 1-405
freeways and south of LAX-for the traditional reasons of shared transportation , economic and
cultu ral factors.
309110 H.AWNORNc 0LVO. / RAl'lcHo ~s Ve'<OtS, CA 90275-5391 / (3 10l 54 4 -5205 / FAX (310) 544-5 291 / WWWPALOSVEROES.COM/RPV
;:.-~~ P~1NT1:Q ON RECYO.EO Fli\Pf:R
D-1 152
California Citizens Redistricting Commission
April 21 , 2011
Page 2
cc: Rancho Palos Verdes City Council
Carolyn Lehr, City Manager.
Mayor John Rea and Palos Verdes Estates City Council
Mayor B . Allen Lay and Rolling Hills City Council
Mayor Steven Zuckerman and Rolling Hills Estates City Council
D-2 153
July 20, 2021 Via Email
California Citizens Redistricting Commission
721 Capitol Mall, Suite 260
Sacramento, CA 95814
SUBJECT: Palos Verdes Peninsula Community
Dear Commissioners:
The Cities of Rancho Palos Verdes, Palos Verdes Estates, Rolling Hills, and Rolling
Hills Estates are located on the Palos Verdes Peninsula in Los Angeles County.The
Peninsula is currently represented by the 33rd U.S. Congressional District, the 26th State
Senate District, and the 66th State Assembly District.
The Peninsula cities share one school district, one library district, one local transit
authority, one land conservancy, and frequently work together on areas of mutual
interest such as emergency preparedness and public safety.The cities of Rancho Palos
Verdes, Rolling Hills, and Rolling Hills Estates additionally share a regional contract with
the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department for law enforcement, and the four cities
contract with the Los Angeles County Fire Department.
The Peninsula cities are intimately tied to the coastal cities and communities of the
South Bay region, including, but not limited to, Torrance, Redondo Beach, Hermosa
Beach, Manhattan Beach, and El Segundo, many of which are within the jurisdiction of
the California Coastal Commission. We share with our northerly South Bay neighbors a
dependence upon a common transportation network for access to the rest of the Los
Angeles region,and share many economic and cultural factors.
We are primarily residential communities and share a common affinity and appreciation
of the unique physical and cultural environment afforded by our location along the coast.
Many of the prominent regional community organizations serve the area extending
northward from the Peninsula toward Los Angeles International Airport (LAX).The
Peninsula cities are an integral part of the South Bay, as evidenced by our active
participation in the South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG).
Following the 2010 Census, the cities were realigned with the northern coastal cities
and communities of the South Bay –located generally west of the I-110 and I-405
freeways and south of LAX.We have appreciated the common representation these
districts have provided and would request that the Peninsula cities continue to be
districted together and with the South Bay.
154
California Citizens Redistricting Commission
Page 2
Thank you for your efforts to draw the new district lines for California. We look forward
to continuing being represented alongside other South Bay cities in the new districts.
Sincerely,
Eric Alegria Michael Kemps
Mayor, City of Rancho Palos Verdes Mayor, City of Palos Verdes Estates
Bea Dieringer Steven Zuckerman
Mayor, City of Rolling Hills Mayor, City of Rolling Hills Estates
cc:Rancho Palos Verdes City Council and City Manager
Palos Verdes Estates City Council and City Manager
Rolling Hills City Council and City Manager
Rolling Hills Estates City Council and City Manager
Jacki Bacharach, Executive Director, South Bay Cities Council of Governments
155
Agenda Item No.: 8.E
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:MEREDITH ELGUIRA, PLANNING DIRECTOR
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:CONSIDER HOLDING A CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING
COMMISSION WORKSHOP ON STORMWATER.
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
On June 28, 2021, the City Council was given an update on the latest developments that could impact
the City's alternative compliance methods with stormwater pollutant limitations. Based the information
presented, the City Council decided to join the Enhanced Watershed Management Program (EWMP),
follow the stormwater consultant's recommendation to request that the Torrance Airport Project
consider modular storage to accommodate Rolling Hills' runoff, and to reach out to the Water Quality
Board in regards to the City's Time Schedule Order extension. The main goal of the City is to
demonstrate that the City's natural canyon systems combined with the City's Low Impact Development
characteristics help retain the 85th percentile/24-hour rainfall.
DISCUSSION:
Staff is proposing that the City Council hold a meeting with the Planning Commission to discuss
establishing methods and policies that will help the City achieve its goal of limiting stormwater
pollutants through on site retention of stormwater runoff.
Staff recommends that the City Council schedule a meeting from one of the dates listed below:
Monday, September 13, 2021 at 6:00 PM
Tuesday, September 21, 2021 at 5:00 PM
Monday, September 27, 2021 at 6:00 PM
Tuesday, October 19, 2021 at 5:00 PM
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council schedule a meeting date and direct staff to coordinate with the
Planning Commission on the workshop.
156
ATTACHMENTS:
157
Agenda Item No.: 9.A
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:JANELY SANDOVAL, CITY CLERK
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:SUPPORT A REGIONAL TOWN HALL TO INFORM THE PUBLIC ON
THE IMPACTS OF SENATE BILL 9 (HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
APPROVALS) AND SENATE BILL 10 (UPZONE ANY PARCELS TO 10
UNITS OF RESIDENTIAL DENSITY).
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
SB 9 eliminates single-family zoning areas across California, and can mean that multiple homes will be
compressed together in one lot. Furthermore, it can also transition into duplexes being built and
constructed within a city currently established with single family-housing zones. SB 10 would allow
developers to evaluate single-family zones that currently have empty acreage and lots, and determine
that such lots are adequate to develop and build up to ten-units creating more housing availability.
DISCUSSION:
Mayor Bea Dieringer is seeking to hold a regional town hall to inform the general public about the
impacts of SB 9 and SB 10 if these bills were passed by the California State Legislature. Mayor
Dieringer is working with the South Bay Cities Council of Government (SBCCOG) to host the regional
town hall at a location in the City of Torrance for in-person attendance with Zoom access for interested
parties outside of the area. Mayor Dieringer requests that the City Council's support in holding the
regional town hall on SB 9 and SB 10 and for the City Council to direct staff to provide an education
campaign on SB 9 and SB 10 for the residents of Rolling Hills.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The coordination on the regional town hall is included in the operating budget for FY 2021-2022.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive presentation from Mayor Bea Dieringer and provide direction to staff.
ATTACHMENTS:
158
Agenda Item No.: 9.B
Mtg. Date: 07/26/2021
TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:JANELY SANDOVAL, CITY CLERK
THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT:RECEIVE AND FILE SOUTH BAY CITIES LETTER TO LOS ANGELES
COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, FOURTH DISTRICT
SUPERVISOR JANICE HAHN TO MODIFY THE RECENT HEALTH
ORDER RELATING TO MASKING; AND CONSIDER SENDING JOINT
LETTER WITH THE PENINSULA CITIES.
DATE:July 26, 2021
BACKGROUND:
There have been multiple health order changes, in regards to COVID-19, pertaining to wearing mask
during indoor activities. On June 15, 2021, there was a health order from the Los Angeles County
Department of Public Health (LACDPH) that allowed indoor activities to resume with the caveat that if
an individual is not vaccinated, they must continue wearing a mask indoors, but if an individual is
vaccinated, then there was no need to continue wearing a mask. Due to the rise in positive COVID-19
cases, on July 17, 2021, the LACDPH issued a new health order that required all individuals hosting
and meeting indoors, regardless of vaccination status, to wear a mask.
DISCUSSION:
In response to the recent health order mandating masks for all regardless of vaccination status for indoor
activities, on Monday, July 19, 2021, some elected officials in the South Bay cities jointly sent a letter
to the Los Angeles County Board Fourth District Supervisor Janice Hahn requesting that the current
health order be amended to eliminate the mandate on masking. These cities include El Segundo,
Manhattan Beach, Torrance, Palos Verdes Estates, Rancho Palos Verdes and Rolling Hills Estates.
On Thursday, July 15, 2021, Mayor Bea Dieringer was requested by other elected officials in the South
Bay to participate in the letter. On Tuesday, July 20, 2021, Mayor Dieringer requested that staff place
the letter on the July 26, 2021 City Council agenda so that the Council has an opportunity to discuss the
matter. Mayor Dieringer also noted that she is coordinating with the other Peninsula cities regarding
their interest for a joint Peninsula letter on the matter. City of Rancho Palos Verdes has prepared a draft
letter pertaining to Peninsula Cities.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The research and coordination work on the masking mandate and the comment letter are a part of the
159
operating budget for FY 2021-2022.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive a presentation from Mayor Bea Dieringer and provide direction to staff.
ATTACHMENTS:
BOS Letter re Health Order EDITED 7 2021.docx
Ltr Masking Mandate_FINAL (Karen Davis)_07162021.pdf
SUPPLEMENTAL - 20210723_Peninsula_Masking_Mandate_draft_GG.docx
160
Dear Honorable Friend Supervisor Hahn:
We, the undersigned mayors and council members from the South Bay Cities demand the
reversal of the latest county health order on behalf of our constituents. At a minimum, we appeal
to be exempted based on our vaccination rates and much lower COVID case numbers.
We need a director and a health department that sets warranted policies based on our unique
service area demands and needs.We need a credible director and a health department that we
can trust.
In the most populated county with more than 10 million residents and the size of several
countries in Europe, Dr. Ferrer calls 1902 new cases “alarming.” These are 1902 cases where
more than 98% will recover, according to medical literature. While we recognize that every death
is tragic, she reports that six died out of 10 million people. That data is being used out of context
to establish a health order that punishes fully vaccinated and compliant citizens. For the same
period, the lives lost under varying circumstances such as car accidents, overdose, cancer should
put into perspective the percentage of Covid related deaths. Further, we think it is imperative to
consider how many took their own lives out of desperation and financial ruin due to this
pandemic and how the new policies will add to this growing number. Reporting this data and
establishing health orders based on it without the proper context does not help us develop sound
and balanced public health policy.
Our constituents are questioning why they were told to vaccinate to see normalcy because our
constituents did follow protocol and vaccinate themselves. The vaccination rates in our cities
have reached what many scientific journals label “herd immunity” for vaccines with 95% efficacy.
With this herd immunity established, why are these individuals now being told to wear masks
again? We must be exempt.
We have had enough of these policies! We demand that you stop this one-size-fits-all approach
to health and health outcomes. If the goal is to have more people vaccinated, then the health
department needs to contextualize that data by service area and establish health directives by
using the power of data and persuasion instead of setting mandates that defy common sense and
science. This most recent order will drive people away from the vaccine. We, as community
leaders, did, and continue to do, our jobs to lead our communities to be fully vaccinated. In our
cases, the evidence is clear. We need Dr. Ferrer out of our way.
We are not alone in our strong disagreement with this order. The CDC and even our state policies
do not align with this recent order. Even county officials are not in agreement with the order. The
utter confusion and anguish caused by this order in our communities are unnecessary and
painful. We see no reason to punish this county when 57 counties in this state are open to
business and not requiring mask-wearing for individuals who have been vaccinated.
We implore you to modify this recent order, engage with us, and set a policy that better reflects
the unique context of our area. The arbitrary nature of these health policies only contributes to
the instability of our individual and collective recovery from this pandemic.
161
Most respectfully,
Hon. Drew Boyles, Mayor City of El Segundo
Hon. Suzanne Hadley, Mayor of Manhattan Beach
Hon. Mike Griffiths, Mayor Pro Tem City of Torrance
Hon. Aurelio Mattucci, Council Member City of Torrance
Hon. Heidi Ashcraft, Council Member City of Torrance
Hon. Michael Kemps, Mayor City of Palos Verdes Estates
Hon. David McGowan, Council Member City of Palos Verdes Estates
Hon. Eric Alegria, Mayor City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Hon. John Cruikshank, Council Member City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Hon. Frank V. Zerunyan, Mayor Pro Tem City of Rolling Hills Estates
Hon. Velveth Schmitz, Council Member City of Rolling Hills Estates
162
163
164
165
July 23, 2021
L.A. County Board of Supervisors
Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration
500 West Temple Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Dr. Barbara Ferrer, Director
L.A. County Department of Public Health
5050 Commerce Drive
Baldwin Park, CA 91706
SUBJECT: Rescinding the Countywide Indoor Masking Mandate
Dear Supervisors and Dr. Ferrer:
The cities of Palos Verdes Estates, Rancho Palos Verdes, Rolling Hills and Rolling Hills
Estates call on you to rescind the countywide masking mandate in indoor public settings
for all individuals who are fully vaccinated, which was imposed without a full explanation
of the science and data modeling behind this decision.
This recent mandate is the latest example of conflicting and confusing restrictions that
have eroded public trust in government and caused Los Angeles County residents to
question our leadership during the pandemic. The rationale behind the decision to again
require masking for everyone runs counter to the guidance on masking issued by the U.S.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the California Department of Public Health
and Cal/OSHA.
Our cities understand and fully appreciate the difficult task of leading during these times
to ensure the safety of county residents. In this case, we need additional information
before we can support additional restrictions. As you are aware, this additional
requirement continues to place a burden on all cities and their elected and appointed
officials, who are obligated to explain the actions being taken by the county..
Given the current state of vaccinations in the county, coupled with the Cal/OSHA
mandates for businesses on masking, what is the projected case reduction by
mandating an indoor masking requirement for everyone?
According to the Department of Public Health's press release on April 21:
166
L.A. County Board of Supervisors and Dr. Ferrer
July 23, 2021
Page 2
"Looking at the data on breakthrough infections after vaccination that the CDC
released last week, the risk of infection in people who are fully vaccinated was 1
in 13,275 –much less common than 1 in 10 infected with COVID-19 who were not
vaccinated. And the risk of death goes from 1 in 500 to 1 in a million."
Mandatory indoor masking made sense when masks were the best defense in our toolkit.
We are in a much different place today. According to the Vaccine Dashboard provided by
the Department of Public Health, our cities have an overall vaccination rate of 75%. Our
most vulnerable population, which is historically those residents aged 65 and older, has
a vaccination rate of 90%. Overall, the county is showing similar vaccination rates. The
revised Health Officer Order requiring masking for everyone indoors is inconsistent with
the county's own published vaccination statistics. This one-size-fits-all approach does not
take into account the higher vaccination rates and lower transmission rates found in
communities such as ours.
Currently, the trends in COVID-19 cases are heavily weighted toward younger,
unvaccinated individuals. According to a July 20 press release, the Department of
Public Health stated:
“Of the new cases reported by Public Health, 83% are among people under the
age of 50 years old with 65% of new cases among people between the ages of 18
and 49 years old.”
According to available information from the COVID-19 Data Dashboard provided by the
Department of Public Health, the current level of hospitalizations is around 650
individuals. In February of this year when a similar level of infection rates existed,
hospitalizations exceeded 2,000 individuals. We understand that hospitalizations trail
infection rate increases. However, as documented above, the current trend shows
younger, unvaccinated individuals being infected. Historically, these individuals have not
used as many medical resources and the death rates have been much lower than those
65 and over.
The Peninsula cities very much appreciate the extraordinary effort the county has
undertaken to provide our residents access to COVID-19 vaccines. Everyone who would
like to receive a vaccine is eligible to do so for free; individuals have myriad ways to
receive it. What we are talking about now is choice. Without a federal or state mandate
on COVID-19 vaccines, there is little that cities can do to assist more than they already
have and continue to do through advocacy and encouragement
167
L.A. County Board of Supervisors and Dr. Ferrer
July 23, 2021
Page 3
Sincerely,
Michael Kemps
Mayor
City of Palos Verdes Estates
Eric Alegria
Mayor
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
Bea Dieringer
Mayor
City of Rolling Hills
Steve Zuckerman
Mayor
City of Rolling Hills Estates
cc:Ben Allen, Senator, 26
th State Senate District
Al Muratsuchi, Assembly Member, 66th Assembly District
Palos Verdes Estates City Council
Rancho Palos Verdes City Council
Rolling Hills City Council
Rolling Hills Estates City Council
Jacki Bacharach, Executive Director, South Bay Cities Council of Governments
168