The URL can be used to link to this page

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