Loading...
05-26-2020_CCAgendaPacket1.CALL TO ORDER 2.ROLL CALL 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 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 request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. 4.A.APPROVAL OF MINUTES. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 AGENDA Regular Council Meeting CITY COUNCIL Tuesday, May 26, 2020 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS 7:00 PM This meeting is held pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20 issued by Governor Gavin Newsom on March 17, 2020. All Councilmembers will participate by teleconference. Public Participation: A live audio of the City Council meeting will available on the City’s website (http://www.rolling-hills.org). The meeting agenda is on the City’s website (https://www.rolling- hills.org/government/agenda/index.php). Members of the public may submit comments in real time by emailing the City Clerk at ycoronel@cityofrh.net. Your comments will become part of the official meeting record. Please provide your full name, but please do not provide any other personal information (i.e., phone numbers, addresses, etc.) that you do not want to be published. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 02-10-20CCDraftMinutes 02-24-20CCDraftMinutes 1 4.B.PAYMENT OF BILLS. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. 4.C.CONSIDER AND APPROVE PARTICIPATION IN SUPPORT LOCAL RECOVERY COALITION ENCOURAGED BY THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council participate in the League of California Cities Local Recovery Coalition campaign and send a support letter to the Governor of California to request $7 billion in state aid to help California cities and $500 billion in federal aid over the next two years. 5.COMMISSION ITEMS 5.A.CONSIDER AND APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 1252 GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 400 SQUARE-FOOT LAP POOL WITH SPA IN THE FRONT YARD OF AN EXISTING RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD (WACHS). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve Resolution No. 1252 granting approval for a Variance request to construct a 400 square-foot lap swimming pool with spa in the front yard of a residence located at 52 Portuguese Bend Road. 6.PUBLIC HEARINGS None. 7.OLD BUSINESS 7.A.CONSIDER ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION'S REQUEST TO REPLACE THE EXISTING SEPTIC TANK SERVING THE RESTROOM AT MAIN GATE. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council approve RHCA's request to replace the existing septic tank in the event of failure. 03-09-20CCDraftMinutes 03-23-20CCDraftMinutes 03-30-20CCDraftMinutes 04-13-20CCDraftMinutes_Joint CC and PC 04-13-20CCDraftMinutes 04-27-20CCDraftMinutesCC 05-11-20CCMinutes Payment of Bills RH_City-Letter-of-Support-FINAL.docx CC Resolution_1252__52_Portuguese_Bend_Road___ZC_20-03.doc Exhibits.pdf Planning Commission Report.pdf 05-01-20 PC Action Minutes.docx Supplemental Agenda Packet Relating to Item 5A 20-05-20__Lttr from KristenR regarding the septic tank replacement.pdf 2 7.B.CONSIDER LAYOUT OPTIONS TO BRING EXISTING RESTROOMS AT CITY HALL TO COMPLY WITH ADA AND RELATED CODES, AND SELECT AN OPTION TO CONTINUE THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive a presentation from staff on the options developed to bring the restrooms at City Hall to comply with ADA and related codes, select an option, and direct staff to proceed with development of design plans. 8.NEW BUSINESS 8.A.CONSIDER AND APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC. TO PREPARE THE GENERAL PLAN SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council approve a Professional Services Agreement with Rincon Consultants, Inc. to update the Safety Element. 8.B.CONSIDER AND APPROVE SUBSCRIPTION TO IWORQ PERMIT TRACKING SOFTWARE. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve subscription to iWorQ permit tracking software to improve services to residents with respect to development projects, code enforcement cases and land use matters. 8.C.CONSIDER AND APPROVE SUBSCRIPTION TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY'S GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends subscribing to LA County's GIS to be able to have aerial photographs of the City, contour information, measurement capabilities to enhance staff's service to the community. 8.D.RECOMMENDATIONS FROM FINANCE/BUDGET/AUDIT COMMITTEE ON PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020/2021. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council receive a report from the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee and approve the Committee's recommendations on the proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2020/2021. 7A_May_11_2020_StaffReport_CityHallADAOptions.pdf 7A_ADA_Restrooms_Options_2020_May.pdf 7A_CodeSections_ADAOptions.pdf Rolling Hills Safety Element Proposal.pdf Cost Proposal - Rolling Hills Safety Element .pdf Supplemental Agenda Packet Relating to 8A Price Proposal for Rolling Hills CA 05222020.pdf Supplemental Agenda Packet Relating to 8B SR_Rolling_Hills_Tasks_Deliverables_20200511.pdf Sample Maps.docx Sample Arcadia.pdf Layers.pdf LARIAC6 - City of Rolling Hills.pdf Finance Budget Audit Comittee Notes 05-18-20_v2.docx RHFY2019-2020Accomplishments_v2.pptx 3 8.E.BUDGET WORKSHOP. RECOMMENDATION: Review the proposed Fiscal Year 2020/2021 Budget and provide recommendations. 9.MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS 10.MATTERS FROM STAFF None. 11.ADJOURNMENT Next regular meeting: Tuesday, June 08, 2020 at 7:00 p.m. via teleconference. FY 20-21 V1 Budget Highlights 5-26-2020 Budget Workshop.pdf Copy of FY 20-21 Graph 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: 05/26/2020 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:YOHANA CORONEL, CITY CLERK THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:APPROVAL OF MINUTES. DATE:May 26, 2020 BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: None. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. ATTACHMENTS: 02-10-20CCDraftMinutes 02-24-20CCDraftMinutes 03-09-20CCDraftMinutes 03-23-20CCDraftMinutes 03-30-20CCDraftMinutes 04-13-20CCDraftMinutes_Joint CC and PC 04-13-20CCDraftMinutes 04-27-20CCDraftMinutesCC 05-11-20CCMinutes 5 -1- MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2020 1.CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Mirsch at 07:01p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. 2.ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmembers Present:Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson. Councilmembers Absent:Black. Others Present:Elaine Jeng, P.E., City Manager. Meredith Elguira, Planning and Community Services Director Yohana Coronel, City Clerk Michael Jenkins, City Attorney Chris Sarabia, Land Conservancy Conservation Director Alfred Visco, 15 Cinchring Road Mrs. Toshiko Nakamura, 24 Cinchring Road 3.OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME NONE. 4.CONSENT CALENDAR Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. A.MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING OF AUGUST 27, 2018 AND REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 09, 2018. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED B. CONSIDER AND APPROVE RESOLUTION 1248: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN CITY RECORDS AS PROVIDED BY SECTION 34090 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED 6 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-10-20 -2- C.CONSIDER AND APPROVE RESOLUTION 1249 THAT SUPPORTS THE RECOMMENDATION BY THE PERSONNEL COMMITTEE TO ADJUST THE MAXIMUM CITY CONTRIBUTION TO EMPLOYEE HEALTH INSURANCE PREMIUMS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2020 THROUGH 2024. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED D. PAYMENT OF BILLS. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED Councilmember Dieringer moved that the City Council approve the consent items as presented with amendments to the minutes. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 5.COMMISSION ITEMS NONE. Mayor Mirsch requested that Old Business Item 7B be heard first due to a guest present in the audience. (Out of Order) 7.OLD BUSINESS B. RECEIVE AND FILE A PRESENTATION FROM THE PALOS VERDES PENINSULA LAND CONSERVANCY ON THE ACACIA AND MUSTARD PLANTS REMOVAL WORK IN THE PRESERVE. Land Conservancy staff Chris Sarabia introduced himself and gave an update on the removal of the Acacia and Mustard plants in the preserve via PowerPoint presentation. He reported to the Council that the project was to remove two acres of Acacia and mow over sixteen acres of Mustard plants. This was to be followed up with annual mowing for three years, beginning in 2020 and site maintenance to minimize Mustard Plant regrowth. He informed the Council that some areas were hard to reach and therefore the Conservancy had to deploy hand-crews to mow. He further stated that the Conservancy crew was trained to recognize native plants and worked carefully around them. The crew also noticed Milkweed growing back which is essential to the Monarch Butterfly’s survival. Mr. Sarabia pointed out that careful measures were taken in order to prevent habitat impacts. Mayor Mirsch asked if the Conservancy used any chemicals to prevent regrowth of certain plants and trees. 7 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-10-20 -3- Mr. Sarabia replied that very minimal chemicals were used. Rather than treating certain areas with chemicals, the Conservancy closely monitors for regrowth. Using Chemicals is not the Conservancy’s first choice. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper requested that the Conservancy submit a timeline of when the residents should mow the Acacia. He suggested that staff provide the information in the City’s Blue Newsletter. Mayor Mirsch asked for public comment. Alfred Visco, resident of 15 Cinchring Road stated that from the view of his home some Mustard plants had not been completely removed. Mr. Sarabia replied that the areas noted by Mr. Visco should have been mowed. He asked Mr. Visco if it was possible that the Rim Trail was in front of the Mustard line. Mr. Visco answered that the Rim Trail winds in and out of the Mustard plants and felt that the Conservancy should have cleared the Mustard plants. He noted that the Conservancy’s crew did not follow the polygon lines. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper asked if the Conservancy could come up with a “next-phase” plan for fire reduction for Rolling Hills. Mayor Mirsch suggested that the Conservancy remove plants for fire mitigation rather than removing them based on type. Councilmember Wilson inquired about the difficulties of entering the site to perform the work. Mr. Sarabia replied that the crew had entered from properties on Cinchring Road. Councilmember Dieringer asked for clarification on the polygons referenced in Mr. Sarabia’s presentation. Mr. Sarabia showed areas where the Conservancy had mowed and removed plants and the hard to reach areas via shapes on presentation slides or polygons. Mayor Mirsch noted that Lemonade Berry is not an endangered plant and inquired regarding the Conservancy’s treatment of the plant. Mr. Sarabia stated the Lemonade Berry would only be removed if the County Ag Commissioner viewed it as a fire hazard. If so, it would be documented, and a fee would be associated with the removal. Trimming of the Lemonade Berry is only conducted when necessary. Mr. Visco inquired if the Conservancy was willing to map existing vegetation for the City or possibly map selected canyons. He requested the City Council consider the service. 8 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-10-20 -4- Councilmember Black arrived at 7:34 p.m. Mrs. Toshiko Nakamura, resident of 24 Cinchring, expressed disappointment with the community with respect to fire preparation. She requested the Council to consider a fence along the City border and grow ivy on the fence to stop the fire coming into the City. From experience she noted that residents on Cinchring are the biggest victims when it comes to wildfires. Mayor Mirsch thanked Mrs. Nakamura for her comments. Mr. Sarabia stated that his hope was that the efforts being made by the Land Conservancy would help with fire mitigation. He also added that RPV had doubled their enforcement by having Rangers and Volunteers actively patrol the area. Councilmember Black added that he has never witnessed anyone patrolling the area. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper informed Councilmember Black that the Conservancy was asked to work on a “second-phase” vegetation management plan. Councilmember Wilson asked if the Preserve was patrolled by vehicle or on foot. Mr. Sarabia replied both, by vehicle and on foot. Enforcement officers are in uniform and conduct random checks throughout the week. Mr. Sarabia recommended reporting issues in the Preserve to the Rangers and/or volunteers. Mrs. Nakamura commented that she observed over 20 motorcycles in the area during the nighttime. Mayor Mirsch thanked Mrs. Nakamura for her comments and asked that Mrs. Nakamura’s comments be logged and communicated to RPV. City Manager Jeng requested the City Council to take Item 8A-New Business out of order so as to be able to dismiss the Finance Director before the end of the Council meeting. The Mayor and City Council concurred. (Out of Order) 8.NEW BUSINESS A.REVIEW OF FISCAL YEAR 2018/2019 AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. Finance Director Terry Shea gave an overview of the Fiscal Year 2018-2019 Audited Financial Statements. Lance, Soll & Lunghard LLP (LSL) audited the City’s financial records including a review of internal controls and testing procedures. Audit results were presented to the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee in December 2019. There were no issues or findings reported by the auditors 9 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-10-20 -5- Councilmember Dieringer noted that on page 129 of the staff report that the firm was not engaged to report on several items listed. She then questioned if the Council should seek the auditors to report on those items. Finance Director Shea replied that it was his opinion that LSL was not correct with that statement because LSL clearly stated in the letter labeled Independent Auditor’s Report, page 136, providing an opinion on the governmental activities (debt and capital assets), major funds (general fund, transit fund and the underground utility fund) and all the other funds. He clarified LSL does not provide an opinion on RSI and management discussions. He assured the Council that he would follow up with LSL to clarify the language. Councilmember Dieringer recalled the Finance Director offering an option of internal control. She recalled the option was going to be explored but did not recall if it was ever brought back to the Council. Finance Director Shea assured the Council that the City does have effective internal control for staff. For example, the Council signs all the checks; the City Manager and/or Department Heads approve all the invoices. The Finance Department does not approve any invoices. He offered to go back to last year’s City Council meeting minutes and confirm the discussion on internal control options. Councilmember Dieringer stated best practices called for a rotation of auditors in order to have a fresh set of eyes. Finance Director Shea shared that three years ago the City only received cost proposals from 5 firms. Three out of the 5 firms were interviewed and Councilmember Black, who sat the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee, made the decision to hire LSL. He recalled the other committee member (Mirsch) was unavailable when the decision was made. He noted that there are three years left on LSL’s current contract and that LSL switched partners about two years ago. Per State law auditors must rotate partners every 6 years. Mayor Mirsch shared that she had finance background and still had trouble with government accounting. She stated that she felt it was important for the Council to understand the audit reports since they are responsible for signing off on the documents. She inquired about training to better prepare the Council for financial decisions. Finance Director Shea offered to conduct a workshop for the Council. Mayor Mirsch and Councilmember Dieringer stated they would both be interested in attending the workshop. Finance Director Shea continued to review the audit reports and highlighted pages 148-149, the City’s accruals. He reported that there were no issues reported by the Internal Control Letter. He moved on to the financial statements, page 150. The page listed the City’s total assets of $5,945,000 from the General Fund. Finance Director Shea reported the total liability to be $150,000, for a total Fund Balance of approximately $5.7 million. He reminded the Council that 10 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-10-20 -6- the City has three major funds. Funds are determined by size and must be 10% of the assets, 10% of the liabilities, 10% of the revenues or 10% of the expenditures and 5% of the City’s franchise fund. The City’s trash fund meets these criteria. Councilmember Wilson asked if the Transit fund could be further explained. He asked is this the money the City gives away, trades, and/or sells at a discount. Finance Director Shea replied yes and explained that the Transit Fund has to do with Prop A and Prop C funds. The City gifts the Prop C money and sells the Prop A money. Finance Director Shea turned the Council’s attention to page 152 and explained that the General Fund took in $2,352,000 and spent $1,858,000 resulting in an excess of revenues of $493,000. He continued to review the rest of the reconciliation statements of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balances of governmental funds for the year ending June 30, 2019. He reviewed the business type activity highlighted on page 154. He explained that the City receives money through the property tax rolls twice a year. The City then pays Republic Services. He stated that as of June 30, 2019 the City owed Republic Services $397,000. It was his understanding that amount was paid in early September 2019. City Manager Jeng explained that RH residents are charged $1,100 for trash services and that the City pays Republic Services approximately $1,295 per property for the current year. Councilmember Wilson asked what the difference was between the two fees. He further inquired if the City went by the number of parcels, because it is his understanding that there are about 685. Finance Director Shea replied the difference between the two fees was about $200.00. City Manager Jeng replied that historically the City used 685 number parcels but currently there are more parcels than 685. Councilmember Wilson stated that when he ran the math and multiplied $200.00 by 685, he came to a total of $13700.00. He was curious why that amount was not noted in the report and reported as a loss or reimbursement. Finance Director Shea replied that it was his understanding that there was a difference between the numbers of parcels the City has and the number of parcels charged. City Manager Jeng clarified that there was a difference between accounts placed on the tax roll and the Republic Service’s invoices to the City. Councilmember Wilson stated he understood but again stressed that he felt there should be representation of how much cost the City is absorbing regarding the resident’s trash service subsidy fee. Finance Director Shea replied he understood how the report could be slightly deceiving. 11 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-10-20 -7- City Manager Jeng offered to work with Finance Director Shea to prepare a report that breaks down the information from year to year. She stated she would also share the break down report with the Solid Waste Committee. Finance Director Shea continued to report on the pension’s liabilities on page 187. He reported that the pension liability went down from $627,859.00 to $622,408.00. He pointed out how the liabilities numbers have changed throughout the years between 2015 through 2019. He stated that money was set-aside in the Pension Stabilization Trust for the increase in cost. He added the City currently had a total of approximately $400,000 in the account. He will be recommending more deposits into the Pension Stabilization Fund. He continued to page 189 and reviewed the OPEB assets. He stated that the OPEB net liability is an asset of $209,000.00. The last quarterly statement showed the City had over $600,000.00 in the account. Councilmember Dieringer asked the Finance Director if he had a recommendation for the Council as to the disparity between the Pension Stabilization Fund and the Liability Fund. Finance Director Shea replied that it was his understanding that the consensus from the Budget/Finance/Audit Committee was to recommend to the Council that they should set aside $150,000 for the upcoming budget. What was originally set aside was not enough and mentioned that the liabilities increased by 152%. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper stated that is was his understanding that the City pays Republic Services in two parts. He asked if there was a way to pay Republic Services upfront and request a discount to future service rates. Finance Director Shea stated that some of his other clients pay vendors once the money is collected. Rolling Hills however gets billed by Republic Services in July for the first six months and then again in January for the second six months. He suggested exploring the possibility of changing the timing of the payout. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper moved that the City Council receive and file the item as presented. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion and the motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Black, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 6.PUBLIC HEARINGS A.CONSIDER AND APPROVE ADOPTION OF AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AMENDING CHAPTER 17.28 OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND JUNIOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND DETERMINE THE ORDINANCE TO BE EXEMPT FROM CEQA AND INTRODUCE AND 12 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-10-20 -8- APPROVE A NON-URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AMENDING CHAPTER 17.28 OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND JUNIOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND DETERMINE THE ORDINANCE TO BE EXEMPT FROM CEQA. Planning and Community Services Director Meredith Elguira gave an overview of the Urgency and Non-Urgency Ordinance via PowerPoint presentation. She stated that the item had gone before the Planning Commission on January 21, 2020. In 2019, the California Legislature and the California Governor signed into law several bills (“New ADU Laws”) that amended Government Code sections 65852.2 and 65852.22 to impose new limits on local authority to regulate ADUs and JADUs. She reported that the New ADU Laws took effect on January 1, 2020, and if the City’s ADU Ordinance does not comply with the New ADU Laws, the City’s Ordinance will become null and void on that date as a matter of law. Failure to comply with Government Code sections 65852.2 and 65852.22 (as amended) as of January 1, 2020 renders the City’s Ordinance regulating ADUs and JADUs null and void, thereby limiting the City to the application of the few default standards provided in Government Code sections 65852.2 and 65852.22 for the approval of ADUs and JADUs. She stated that new ADU laws were presented to the Planning Commission which comply with the State’s requirements and are also exempt from CEQA. She stated that the City had to make findings for the proposed revisions to assure that the new regulations would not cause significant impact to the community. For example, that there would be no damage to the scenic resources and that the site is not located in the vicinity of a hazardous waste site, which the City is not. Another finding, that there is no significant impact to historical resources (not currently present in the City). She reviewed the difference between ADU and JADU. A JADU is not larger than 500 square feet. It is contained entirely within an existing or proposed new single-family residence. It includes a separate sanitation facility, or it can be shared within the existing single-family residence. It also includes an efficiency kitchen, which would consist of appliances, at least 15 square feet of counter space and 30 square feet of cabinet space. An ADU is either an attached or detached residential dwelling unit. It is completely independent and can either have an efficiency unit or a manufactured unit. She proceeded to highlight the changes to the code. She stated that there are two requirements, one is a building permit and the other would require an ADU permit. A building permit is needed when an existing detached or attached unit has been converted. Any discretional approval can be waived if the unit is at least 4 feet away from the side yard or rear yard setback. The unit must be smaller than 800 square feet and lower than 16 feet in height. She informed the Council that an ADU could be located within any part of the parcel, including the front property line. This would be an over the counter approval which would require a building permit and that the City must act within 60 days of a complete application. She added that there were certain stipulations that must be met. For example, the unit cannot be rented for less than 60 days. It cannot be sold separately from the single-family residence. There are also occupancy requirements, which she pointed out per the list on the PowerPoint presentation. Councilmember Black left the meeting at 8:37 p.m. 13 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-10-20 -9- PCSD Elguira pointed out that there were also deed restrictions. She proceeded to go over the development standards and informed the Council that she had received advice from the City Attorney’s Office. Together they tried to develop the most stringent requirements that could be submitted to HCD for approval. The most stringent requirements that were advised to her were to make a one bedroom and/or studio a maximum of 800 square feet. For two bedrooms or more the maximum is 1000 square feet. If either unit are outside the requirements set forth (maximum 800 square feet, no taller than 16 feet), they will have to comply with the front property line set-back of 30 feet, side and rear property line of 4 feet, and maximum lot coverage of 50%. She proceeded to outline further details via the PowerPoint Presentation. PCSD Elguira informed the Council that she confirmed with the Finance Director that the City does not have impact fees, which are usually used to defray some infrastructure cost for a new development. Finance Director Shea informed her that the City does not have enough development and usually in a built-out City you do not get impact fees from single family residential development, but rather from a large development like multi-family residential development. She explained that impact fees help pay for schools, sewer and/or roads. For any non-conforming ADU the City would require the owner go through a discretionary approval which would require a conditional use permit. She stated that she felt the most important thing to point out about the ADU/JADU Ordinance was the building permit requirements for applications regarding converted spaces. If it is an existing accessory structure, the applicant would need a building permit. This unit must meet the following requirements: independent exterior access and fire and safety access. A detached new unit must be 4 feet away from the side and rear set-back; must be 800 square feet or less and maximum 16 feet in height; and a building permit is required. There are separate requirements for multi-family lot zones, but since there are none in the City this was not reviewed however it was added to the ordinance because it was a State requirement. The goal was to put forth regulations in order to receive the States’ approval and have the City’s own regulations in place. She informed the Council that the Housing Ad Hoc Committee and the Planning Commission were informed that this item would be brought back once more information was available or if staff had additional recommendations. PCSD Elguira added that there were discussions on adding more regulations outside of the ADU umbrella, possibly to the City’s Building Code or Fire Code requirements. Councilmember Dieringer asked about the definition of the JADU in the ordinance. A JADU was described as contained entirely within an existing or proposed single family residences however in the proposed ordinance the word “residence” was listed as “structure”. She stated that the word “structure” could be interpreted as any building on a single-family lot, even an uninhabited building. PCSD Meredith Elguira replied that she believed the definition was understood that it must be a secondary structure to the residential unit since all the City’s zoning is a residential zone. She explained there must be a primary residence prior to having an accessory dwelling unit. City Attorney Michael Jenkins commented that he believed single family structure and single- family residence means the same thing. 14 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-10-20 -10- Mayor Pro Tem Piper suggested approving the item as is. City Attorney Jenkins stated that he did not see any ambiguity with the word or any issues changing the word structure to dwelling. He added that once the ordinance is adopted, staff may come back with some minor changes but that would be a separate process. He stated there should be no changes between the first reading and the second reading. Councilmember Dieringer requested the change of the word “structure” to “residence” be made to clarify that this “structure” is a dwelling unit. She also wanted to address the process and timing highlighted on page 4, regarding ADU permits. It was her understanding that the City must act on an application within 60 days of receipt and that there were only two exceptions to the rule. She inquired if the City was obligated to approve an application if the applicant fails to reply to the City’s inquiry about a concern. She asked if there was a possibility of a hybrid situation where the City would not deny the application but request a modification before approval. City Attorney Jenkins replied that the City was not obligated to approve an incomplete application or if insufficient information was provided. The applicant would have to come back and reapply. In a hybrid situation, the City could approve the application if the corrections are made and submitted. If changes needed to be made, the applicant would be asked to agree to a delay; if the applicant does not agree, the application would be denied. Councilmember Dieringer wanted to confirm that the City would not permit anything over two bedrooms for any ADUs. PCSD Elguira replied that State code allows up to 1200 square feet and can be more than 1 bedroom. The City’s ordinance proposes a maximum of 1000 square feet to deter applicants from exceeding 1 bedroom. However, she reminded the Council that the Planning Department does not conduct post-construction inspections. City Attorney Jenkins confirmed that the City would not allow more than two bedrooms. Councilmember Dieringer asked for the definition of a right-of-way line and clerestory. She also asked if the City could collect impact fees since it was in the language of the proposed ordinance. PCSD Elguira replied that the right-of-way line was referring to an easement. Clerestory refers to a bank of windows. City Attorney Jenkins replied that there was a difference between filing fee and impact fee. He explained that imposing an impact fee requires a study. That study must demonstrate that the ADU is creating an impact on the community and that the community must be compensated. The fee would then be used to mitigate that impact. The City currently does not have impact fees for Single family residences. Furthermore, the City would have a hard time placing an impact fee on ADUs. Mayor Pro Tem Piper predicted that the septic issue would slow the process down. He shared that his neighbors, the Shumaker’s were quoted $120,000 to install a new septic tank. 15 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-10-20 -11- Councilmember Dieringer stated she did not understand the issue regarding utility fees and how that is detailed in the proposed ordinance. PCSD Elguira explained that if a unit exists and it is being converted, it is assumed that there are utilities in place. For new detached ADU’s the applicant would have to pay for a connection fee. The typical building permit would be required to connect. If this connection would require an upgrade to an electrical panel, then the City could require undergrounding per the City’s code. Councilmember Wilson asked if a resident has an attached garage and they wanted to convert to a JADU, was the resident obligated to have an efficiency kitchen in place. He then asked what would happen if the efficiency kitchen was removed in later years? How would that unit be viewed? PCSD Elguira replied yes, the resident would be obligated to have an efficiency kitchen in place. She then added that policing ADUs and JADUs would be difficult. She explained that the unit would be considered illegal because the owner would have signed a deed declaring the unit as an accessory dwelling unit with efficiency kitchen and that the unit is self-sufficient. Once those elements are removed and the unit no longer is self-sufficient, the unit would no longer be considered a JADU. Councilmember Wilson suggested that when advertising information about ADUs and JADUs in the Blue Newsletter to spell out the acronyms (ADUs and JADUs) for those residents that are not familiar with the language. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper requested a list of requirements be given to all applicants of ADU and JADUs in order to try and curb the growth of potential units. Mayor Mirsch requested to discuss solid fencing and vegetation as screens. PCSD Elguira replied that she is working with the RHCA, and Assistant City Attorney Todd Leishman to address those issues in addition to issues regarding opaque glass. Councilmember Dieringer asked if the City’s code allowed for multi-family dwellings. Her concern was that multiple ADUs could be erected on one parcel. City Attorney Jenkins answered no. Mayor Mirsch opened the item to public comment. Alfred Visco, 15 Cinchring Road, asked about the eligible structures to which ADUs could be attached. He also asked if he converted his 1000 square foot garage to an ADU, would he be obligated to provide additional parking spaces. PCSD Elguira replied that an attached ADU can be attached to an existing barn, single car garage or a single-family house. He would not be required to provide additional garage or parking spaces. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper moved that the City Council approve waiving a full reading and adopt the 16 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-10-20 -12- Urgency Ordinance Number 364U. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion and the motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper moved that the City Council introduce and approve on first reading the Non-Urgency Ordinance Number 364. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion and the motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 7.OLD BUSINESS A.ANNOUNCE COX “POP-UP” OPEN HOUSE AT HESSE PARK. TWO SESSIONS BETWEEN 3PM AND 8PM TO ACCOMMODATE RESIDENT’S SCHEDULES. DATE TO BE DETERMINED (ORAL). PCSD Elguira stated that other Peninsula Cities have service issues with COX. The City of Rolling Hills Estates advised that COX would hold an open house tentatively scheduled for March 4th, 2020. Two sessions of the open house will be held; one at 3pm and the other at 8pm. PCSD Elguira stated that she planned to come back to the Council with a confirmed date at the next City Council meeting. City Manager Jeng offered to announce the event in the City’s Blue Newsletter. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper moved that the City Council receive and file the item as presented. Councilmember Dieringer seconded the motion and the motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. C. DISCUSS FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022 AND 2022-2023 POTENTIAL BUDGET ITEMS TO SUPPORT THE CITY COUNCIL PRIORITIES DEVELOPED AS A PART OF THE STRATEGIC PLANNING WORKSHOP. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper moved that the City Council move Item 7C to the next City Council Meeting of February 27, 2020. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion and the motion passed by voice vote as follows: 17 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-10-20 -13- AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 9.MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS NONE. 10.MATTERS FROM STAFF Councilmember Dieringer inquired about having someone review the internal control of the City. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper recalled Finance Director Shea provided this service for other cities. He suggested asking Finance Director Shea for a quote to add the service to his scope of work. Mayor Mirsch mentioned that the Council packets have been produced and posted on the City’s website by Thursdays. She asked Councilmember Dieringer if she has found the postings of the agenda by Thursdays helpful. Councilmember Dieringer stated that she appreciated being able to download the agenda but is frustrated that the attachments cannot be found on the same page as the agenda. She would prefer to download one document with everything included. Mayor Mirsch remarked that all Councilmembers could benefit from one downloaded document. 11. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Mirsch adjourned the meeting at 9:06p.m. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, February 24, 2020 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. Respectfully submitted, _______________________ Yohana Coronel, MBA City Clerk Approved, 18 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-10-20 -14- _____________________________________ Leah Mirsch Mayor 19 -1- MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2020 1.CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Mirsch at 7:03p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. 2.ROLL CALL Councilmembers Present:Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, Wilson. Councilmembers Absent:Black. Others Present:Elaine Jeng, P.E., City Manager. Meredith Elguira, Planning and Community Services Director Yohana Coronel, City Clerk Michael Jenkins, City Attorney Alfred Visco, 15 Cinchring 3.OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME None. 4.CONSENT CALENDAR Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. A.MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 13, 2020. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED B.PAYMENT OF BILLS. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council approve the consent items as presented with minutes as amended. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None.20 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-24-20 -2- 5.COMMISSION ITEMS NONE. 6.PUBLIC HEARINGS A.WAIVE FULL READING AND APPROVE ADOPTION OF A NON- URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AMENDING CHAPTER 17.28 OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND JUNIOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND DETERMINE THE ORDINANCE TO BE EXEMPT FROM CEQA. PCS Director Elguira presented the item for a second reading and requested City Council approval. Councilmember Dieringer asked City Attorney Jenkins if the issues cited in a letter received from the Californians for Homeownership could be reviewed later so the Council could proceed with the approval of the ordinance. City Attorney Jenkins answered in the affirmative. He advised the City would be complying notwithstanding the correspondence and the Council could look at the issues presented in the letter at a later time. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper suggested contacting the City of Los Angeles about their Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) rules. He is curious about their handling of the situation. PCS Director Elguira assured the Council she would check with the City of Los Angeles and report back. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper moved that the City Council approve the items as presented. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. B.WAIVE FULL READING AND ADOPT 2019 CALIFORNIA STANDARD BUILDING CODE AS ADOPTED AND AMENDED BY LOS ANGELES COUNTY AND FINDING THE ACTION EXEMPT FROM CEQA. PCS Director Elguira advised that the proposed ordinance was introduced for first reading at the January 27, 2020 City Council Meeting and was approved for a second reading. She recommended the Council waive the second reading and adopt the ordinance. 21 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-24-20 -3- Councilmember Dieringer moved that the City Council approve the items as presented. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 7.OLD BUSINESS A.DISCUSS FISCAL YEARS 2021-2022 AND 2022-2023 POTENTIAL BUDGET ITEMS TO SUPPORT THE CITY COUNCIL PRIORITIES DEVELOPED AS A PART OF THE STRATEGIC PLANNING WORKSHOP. City Manager Jeng reviewed the item from the City Council workshop held on Saturday, January 25th, 2020. She summarized the Council’s common priorities as Wildfire Mitigation/Emergency Preparedness, Utility Undergrounding, Drainage, and Sewer. She wants to advance these priorities as budgetary items for fiscal year 2021. Councilmember Dieringer asked if the City was exploring the legal liability with regards to drainage, City maintained improvements, and policy changes on individual properties. She recalled concerns voiced by the City Attorney about possible legal liability and expectant costs if the Council moved forward with the idea of the City maintaining improvements to sewers or drainage on private property. City Manager Jeng responded that there were two parts to the drainage topic. The first would be a policy change on individual properties. This could be discussed with Commissioners to place requirements on new development projects for onsite water retention. The second part would be for the City to identify capital improvement projects. She clarified the City would not own facilities, but it helps to identify and find solutions for common run-offs. Councilmember Dieringer recalled Councilmember Black’s comment from the previous meeting about installing catch basins throughout the City. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper stated this item must start with the Planning Commission in order to change the planning rules. He prefers to use the Measure W money for City Hall projects and eventually work up towards the canyons. He requested that staff provide the Council with the overall cost for the sewer project and outline the steps so the Council could make an informed decision. Councilmember Wilson asked if past budget items would be rolled into next year’s budget. He queried how much money was available after the current projects were completed and what would be a realistic allocation for future items. City Manager Jeng confirmed that past budget items were rolled into the current year’s budget. She advised that 80% of the projects should be completed in the current year. She understood the 22 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-24-20 -4- concern because for the last three years there has been a surplus of 50k. This was a result of incomplete capital improvement projects from past years. She explained that this year’s revenue and expenses might equalize because the Council has been actively working on projects. City Manager Jeng understands the Council does not want to overspend and if the Council completes all four priorities next year, it is likely there would be more expenses than revenue. She suggested that the Council could direct staff to keep the projects at the expected revenue minus expenses. Councilmember Wilson asked if the Council moved forward with the sewer design, how long would the design plan work for and does it have an expiration date. He asked if the Los Angeles County Sanitation District has an expiration date on design plans. City Manager Jeng answered that the designs have expiration dates, however, the shelf life of a design plan is between three to five years depending on code changes. She added that the commitment letter from the Los Angeles County Sanitation District was also good for three to five years. If the Council were to take longer than three to five years, the City would have to redesign and check if there were any changes to the sanitation district codes. Councilmember Dieringer asked if the amendments would cost as much as the initial design plan. City Manager Jeng advised there was a cost associated with checking for updates, but the fees are small if the updates were minimal. She explained that the cost is relative to the amount of work that needs to be done to update the drawings. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper suggested establishing if the Council wants to spend a million dollars on the project and if so, then move forward with the design. If the Council decides to not move forward with the sewer project, then the Council could deal with the tennis courts. He would prefer to decide on what projects the Council was willing to spend money on and move forward from there. Councilmember Wilson asked City Manager Jeng what her expectations were from the discussion. City Manager Jeng replied that she was seeking a path for the proposed items in order to put a plan together, however, she understands that the Council prefers to see current numbers before committing. Councilmember Dieringer requested a menu of items with approximate costs to see how they interrelate. Mayor Mirsch opened the item for public comments. Alfred Visco, 15 Cinchring Road, referred to his letter submitted to the Council on February 17th, 2020. The letter suggested ways that the Council could leverage allocated money. He informed the Council that he had a representative from the California Fire Safety Council that was willing to give a presentation to the Council and/or the RHCA during an open meeting. He felt this could be a great source of information and urged the Council to take advantage of the representative’s expertise. 23 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-24-20 -5- Mayor Mirsch thanked Mr. Visco for his comments. B.UPDATE ON COX OPEN HOUSE AT HESE PARK. FEBRUARY 27, 2020, TWO SESSIONS FROM 3PM TO 5PM AND 6PM TO 8PM. (ORAL). City Manager Jeng informed the Council that COX is hosting a Pop House to hear customer service issues from the Peninsula on February 27, 2020 from 3pm-5pm and 6pm-8pm. This item was advertised in the City’s Blue Newsletter and required no action from the Council. 8.NEW BUSINESS A.CONSIDER AND APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR CITY HALL CAMPUS SITE AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES. City Manager Jeng gave an overview of the landscaping services for City Hall. In 2015 Pacific Coast Landscape Services (PCL) was selected in response to the City’s request for proposal. Their contract included landscape maintenance services for the City Hall campus and the tennis courts for three years from on January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2019. In November 2019 PCL’s contract was terminated for failure to meet the agreement terms, conditions, and requirements. City staff then contracted with Bennett Landscape Services on an interim basis. She informed the Council that staff was ready to seek competitive pricing and release a request for proposal (RFP). Councilmember Dieringer commented staff added items to the contract to ensure there was more accountability from the vendor. She asked if staff listed everything needed. City Manager Jeng replied in the affirmative and added that Councilmember Wilson made an excellent suggestion to add cleaning the rain gutters. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper requested that the trash enclosure also be maintained. City Manager Jeng stated that she had renamed the title to read “Site and Landscape Maintenance,” versus “Landscaping Maintenance.” Councilmember Dieringer moved that the City Council approve the RFP for the site and landscaping maintenance for the City Hall Campus and direct staff to advertise this proposal. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote. AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 9.MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS 24 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-24-20 -6- Councilmember Dieringer gave a report about the Regional Law Committee meeting that was held on February 13th,2020. She stated that the School Resource Officers (SRO) were present and gave an overview of their workday. According to the SROs, they walk around all day at Palos Verdes High School. The SROs mentioned they would be attending the Regional Law Meeting when the time came to renew their Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). She warned she needed more information about their daily routine before renewing their MOU. Councilmember Wilson expressed concerns about one SRO stating he does traffic control in the morning at the high school. He feels that volunteers should oversee traffic control and because that is not the best use of the SROs time. He added that it did not seem the SROs had a schedule and/or supervision during the day. Mayor Mirsch requested that the Regional Law Committee members follow up with the concerns expressed before the Council signs off on the renewal of the SROs MOU. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper asked when the Council would vote to renew their MOU. City Manager Jeng responded that the MOU was just signed and that copies were distributed about two weeks ago. The City is supposed to be billed on a quarterly basis, but issues arose with the School District when reviewing the cost for security. She was informed that the School District is sorting out the issues before invoicing the cities for last year’s bill. There was talk about creating another MOU or extending the existing MOU to future years. The Superintendent’s Office wants to make that decision within a month and then submit it to the Regional Law Committee. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper asked if the other cities were present at the Regional Law Meeting and if they had the same concerns the Rolling Hills Committee members had expressed. Councilmember Dieringer replied that she felt other members knew something needed to be done but were comfortable with knowing something was in place. Councilmember Black wondered if the SROs visited other schools during the day. Councilmember Wilson stated that the SROs mentioned that they had been to the middle schools, but he could not determine if it happened more than once. It is his belief that the SROs had not visited any elementary schools. Councilmember Dieringer stated that it seemed to her that the SROs only monitor the two high schools (Palos Verdes High and Peninsula High). She would find it helpful if they list examples of things their presence has averted. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper asked for a status on coyote activity and if the City was still allocating money for the program. City Manager Jeng replied Fernando Berrera, the Wildlife Specialist and State Licensed Trapper, just reported catching a female coyote in Rolling Hills and that staff keeps a tally of the captured coyotes. City staff also requests consent forms when residents call City Hall about coyote 25 Minutes City Council Meeting 02-24-20 -7- sightings. She reminded the Council Wildlife Specialist Berrera has been able to service the City and Peninsula because the Office of Janice Hahn specifically allocated money to the Peninsula. She advised the allocation needs to continue beyond June 30, 2020 in order to keep the service. Mayor Mirsch asked if this was an item, she should bring up at a future Contract Cities and County Board of Supervisors meetings. City Manager Jeng replied yes. Councilmember Wilson asked what the budget cycle was for the County. City Manager Jeng replied the County is on the same fiscal calendar as the City and they make budget decisions around the month of April. 10.MATTERS FROM STAFF NONE. 11. ADJOURNMENT THE MEETING WILL BE ADJOURNED IN MEMORY OF FLORENCE HORN, A LONG TIME RESIDENT OF ROLLING HILLS. SHE PASSED AWAY ON FEBRUARY 20, 2020. Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Mirsch adjourned the meeting at 7:49 p.m. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, January 27, 2020 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. Respectfully submitted, ___________________________________ Yohana Coronel, MBA City Clerk Approved, _____________________________________ Leah Mirsch Mayor 26 -1- MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, MARCH 09, 2020 1.CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Mirsch at 7:02p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. 2.ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmembers Present:Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer and Wilson. Councilmembers Absent:Black. Others Present:Elaine Jeng, P.E., City Manager. Meredith Elguira, Planning and Community Services Director. Yohana Coronel, City Clerk. Michael Jenkins, City Attorney. Alfred Visco, 15 Cinchring Road. Abas Goodarzi, 2 Wrangler Road. Marcia Shoettle, 24 Eastfield Drive. Susan Sleep, 5W Ringbit Road West. David McKinnie, 3 El Concho. Brian Wells, Los Angeles County Fire Department. 3.OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME Alfred Visco, 15 Cinchring Road, provided an update on a February 17th Fire Council Letter he submitted to the City Council. He reported that some of the RHCA Board members had expressed interest in attending a City Council meeting if a representative from the California Fire Safety Council was scheduled to speak. He stated that the Fire Safety Council representative was available after March. He requested that the Council agendize scheduling the California Fire Safety Council presentation for the first meeting in April. Mayor Mirsch asked Mr. Visco if the Association was willing to pick up the item. Mr. Visco replied that it was his understanding that the Association would attend the City Council Meeting when the representative was scheduled to speak. He also suggested that when the Fire Safety representative was invited to speak that the Council should invite the public to attend. Abas Goodarzi, 2 Wrangler Road, commented that he had recently became aware of damage to his property due to rainwater. He stated the City was informed of his problem in 2006 and nothing 27 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -2- was done. He recently learned that the Association was looking into the matter but postponed acting because they were seeking a legal opinion. He explained that water continues to drain on his property and has created a water wash-out about 20-25 feet down and caused the hill to come down. He stated he would continue to follow up with the Association and hopes to work towards a friendly resolution. Mr. Goodarzi noticed that on the previous City Council agendas, the Council had actions items for undergrounding and drainage. He would appreciate it if the Council makes drainage a budget priority because drainage is a more serious issue than undergrounding 4.CONSENT CALENDAR Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. A.MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 25, 2020, REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 27, 2020, AND REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 24, 2020. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED B.PAYMENT OF BILLS. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED C. CONSIDER AND APPROVE RESOLUTION 1250: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AUTHORIZED THE DESTRUCTION OF CERTAIN CITY RECORDS AS PROVIDED BY SECTION 34090 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED Councilmember Dieringer asked to table consent item 4A until the next City Council Meeting. Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council approve consent items 4B and 4C as presented. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 5.COMMISSION ITEMS NONE. 6.PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE. 7.OLD BUSINESS 28 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -3- NONE. 8.NEW BUSINESS A.CONSIDER AND APPROVE A PETITION FOR THE FORMATION OF AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FOR CERTAIN PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT, TOGETHER WITH APPURTENANCES, APPURTENANT WORK AND ACQUISITION, WHERE NECESSARY, IN A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT KNOWN AND DESIGNED AS UNDERGROUNDING UTILITY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2020-1 (EASTFIELD DRIVE UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS). City Manager Elaine Jeng reported that this item was listed as New Business but in fact the matter was presented to Council several times in the past. The item was new in the sense that an undergrounding project, Eastfield Drive Utility Improvements Project, requested approval to form an assessment district. She informed the Council that the project’s proponent, Mrs. Marcia Shoettle, was present in the audience. She informed the Council that the project’s design was completed, and the Association has given a portion of the necessary easements that were collected from property owners. Edison has released the design plans for a construction bid. Despite the project’s progression, it was out of order and the petition should have come to the Council in the beginning of the project, once the proponent had formed the group. The group should have requested Council’s approval to form an assessment district. The process to form an assessment district involves the project’s proponent soliciting approvals from the property owners in the proposed district. She pointed out that 60% participation is mandated to form an assessment district according to the City’s guidelines. This translates to a requirement of 60% acreage within the overall acreage of the project. She proceeds to highlight the acreage via a PowerPoint presentation. Mayor Mirsch inquired about the 30 days to pay the assessment and asked if there was a level and/or amount where a bond would be viewed as profitable. City Manager Jeng replied that according to the City’s Bond Counsel and Assessment Engineer the bond is another form of financing. The group could opt to do a bond, which would be more marketable at a certain price range. She advised that the Bond Counsel had seen financing through a bank as well. City Manager Jeng reiterated that appropriate terminology is financing because the amount of the bond is unknown for the first 30 days. That time is used by the group to determine how they prefer to pay down their share of the cost. Councilmember Wilson asked if there were other districts looking to form an assessment district. City Manager Jeng advised there was one other project by Mr. David McKinnie and Clint Patterson. It was her understanding that they wanted to form an assessment district and have been hosting neighborhood meetings, however it was in the beginning stages. Mayor Mirsch opened the item for public comment. 29 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -4- Mr. Goodarzi asked how much of this expense the City was going to absorb. City Manager Jeng answered the City had contributed about 1/3 of the expenses thus far totaling $35,882.00 as indicated on page 42 of the staff report. On March 19, 2019, the Council decided to contribute 1/3 of the cost solely to assessment districts design and nothing more beyond that. Mr. Goodarzi inquired why City is involved in undergrounding. He expressed concern over the City’s interest and finances. He stated that he currently has drainage problems and does not feel that undergrounding should be a priority. He does not see this as a necessity for the City compared to drainage. He stated he could call Edison for whatever he needed, and Edison would charge it to his bill. He attended two meetings and it was his understanding that the bill for this project is continuous. Mayor Mirsch replied that she appreciated Mr. Goodarzi concern for the City’s Finances. She assured him that the Council was highly concerned as well. She explained the policy has been in place for a year and that the current Council, along with previous Councils, felt that undergrounding was a benefit to the City and the community. The City may budget $100,000.00 each year, but that does not mean the City will spend the full allocation. She referenced the staff report and highlighted that the Council is capped at $35,000.00 for the project. If the cost increases, the assessment district must make provisions. She clarified that the Council offers seed money as an incentive to encourage residents to form districts for undergrounding projects. This is something the Council has been doing for some time and this was the first group to progress this far. She further stated that this does not indicate undergrounding is more important than drainage. Mr. Goodarzi asked how the City would get its money back and if the properties in the group would be reassessed. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper replied that the City was not trying to recover any money. The Council is financially conservative and was very careful about spending the resident’s money. He stated the Eastfield Drive Utility Improvements Project group spent a lot of money and energy to move the project forward. The Association and the City decided to pay a third each with the residents paying the remaining third for the first part of it to see if they can get the project off the ground. He stated that the completion of this project would make the City look better and increase property values. He understood Mr. Goodarzi has a drainage issue and assured him that it was something the Council has discussed. He also pointed out that Mr. Goodarzi was talking about issues that involve private property and roads. The drainage has come up in previous Council meetings and has been flagged as a priority by the Council. He assured Mr. Goodarzi that the Council was listening to his concerns, but he also wanted to point out that undergrounding and drainage were two separate issues. Mr. Goodarzi stated that he understood what Mayor Pro Tem Pieper said but he still felt that undergrounding only adds value to properties once they are reassessed. Mayor Mirsch commented that she felt that the removal of poles and undergrounding does add value to the community. The streets that have undergrounding and do not have poles look better in her opinion. If money were not an issue the entire City would have undergrounding. She further 30 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -5- stated that previous Councilmembers had expressed the same sentiment. Marcia Shoettle, 24 Eastfield Drive, commented that having the City support her project assisted her in recruiting participation. Susan Sleep, 5W Ringbit Road West, commented that she does not live anywhere near Eastfield, but the big heavy overhead lines devalue the entire the City. She further stated that she would gladly contribute to the project because it helps the entire City. Mr. Goodarzi added that if the concern was safety and beauty then why not add lights to the existing poles for safer roads. Having poles in the community add value because Edison and the utility companies must provide maintenance for the trees around the poles. He stated that undergrounding benefits the utility companies and furthermore the City should leverage them to provide landscaping and maintenance services. Mayor Mirsch thanked Mr. Goodarzi for his comments. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper moved that the City Council approve the assessment district as presented. Councilmember Dieringer seconded the motion and the motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. B.CONSIDER AND DISCUSS A POLICY FOR CITY CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS UNDERGROUNDING OF OVERHEAD WIRES AND POLES THAT ARE NOT A PART OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS. City Manager Jeng stated that this item was to discuss setting policy for undergrounding single poles. She clarified that the previous item discussed assessment district projects. On March 2019, the Council set a policy for contribution amounts, set a cap for assessment district projects and created a MOU with the Association to share costs. She explained that provided clarity to the residents that were considering forming an assessment district. Single poles, however, have been handled on a case-by-case basis. She pointed out that the Council has not been consistent but understood why. She explained every pole was different (location, single versus multiple lines) and that there were special considerations taken in some cases. She hoped that the Council could reach some common ground regarding single pole requests. This would help provide better direction, help staff process the single pole request and address some past concerns. City Manager Jeng proceed to review past single pole projects. The most recent project that received City contribution was a utility pole on 38 Saddleback. The City Council approved a contribution of approximately 10% of the overall project cost, which matched RHCA's contribution amount of $3,295. The staff report relating to 38 Saddleback was attached to the Council’s report for reference. She highlighted other utility undergrounding projects that received City contribution. In reviewing various projects, the City Council based contribution amounts on 31 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -6- overall cost, RHCA's contribution amount, or the percentage of SCE engineering cost. City Manager Jeng also sought clarity on the process of payouts. One project stated that the payout would be done upon 75% completion and as she pointed out any percent of a project is difficult to measure if it is not 100%. Another issue the staff consulted with the legal department was regarding the City’s contribution to a single party. It was determined that any City contribution must have a public benefit, which means it would benefit more than one resident. A question was posed if a blanket determination could be made that undergrounding utility poles helps with wildfire mitigation and that is a community wide benefit. This is another aspect for the Council to determine. She explained that the Council is welcomed to define parameters or continue on a case- by-case basis. Mayor Mirsch thanked City Manager Jeng for her overview. She predicts that the Council will be seeing more single pole requests and requested that the Council consider having a discussion on the item. Mayor Mirsch opened the item for public comment. David McKinnie, 3 El Concho, shared that he has had discussions with people about single poles. He stated that one of the major issues with single poles was figuring out the cost. If someone tries to draw some parallel to the utility districts, then you would need to identify the engineering cost. He was unsure how Edison breaks this cost down. He referenced the staff report for 38 Saddleback and stated it was the best break down he has seen. He presumes the Association and the City reviewed the break down before they decided how much they wanted to contribute. He did not recall seeing the bid, but he saw that it shows Edison’s cost of $22,000. He was not sure if that amount was for what they considered engineering design cost or cost before the project started. He advised the Council that if they decided to explore that route for non-utility districts, they would first have to define what the engineering cost would be. He suggested collaborating with Edison to get a good estimation of the engineering cost. Once that amount is defined, then the City could decide how much to contribute. Mrs. Sleeps stated that she brought photos of all the poles on Ringbit Road West. She wanted to work on the 3 poles located on the street above her. Instead of trying to do everything at once, she and her neighbor, Mr. Shumaker, decided it was best to divide and conquer. She stated that Mr. Shumaker was assigned pole A and B, and she was assigned pole C. She then informed the Council that the pole assigned to her, pole C, and the people above her does not affect her view, but does affect her neighbors, Mr. Joe Hummel, Mr. Charlie Shumaker. She also added that the pole was in her driveway. So rather than trying to herd cats, it was decided that each neighbor would take a pole. She stated that her pole is at the end of the line and that she had already paid for her invoice for engineering cost, totaling $6,600.00. She further stated that the Association had already written her a check for a total of $2,250.00 which comes to a 1/3 of the cost. She informed the Council that she had already paid for the undergrounding and construction cost. She stated that the cost to tear up the street for a single pole came to $22,500.00 and that did not include the engineering cost. Mr. Goodarzi stated that he would reach out to Edison executives to see if there would be a way for the City receive credit for the preventative maintenance measures they have taken by doing 32 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -7- undergrounding. Mayor Mirsch closed the item from public comments. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper admitted the Council had been inconsistent with contributions towards undergrounding that is not part of an assessment district, but the Council was getting better as more projects came up. His issue was how to confirm the removal of one pole serving more than one resident. He commented that the removal of a pole could help with fire mitigation. He stated the Council needed to be careful in declaring cost projections. He shared there was a huge difference between a single pole and a feeder line pole, which powers an entire area. He compared the removal of single poles on past projects to the Eastfield project and estimated the City spent about $2,500.00 per house. He believes the Council has spent too much money on the removal of single poles and would be better off declaring an amount to contribute regardless of engineering cost. If the Council set a policy on the matter, it should decide how much money to contribute per pole, but admitted each pole is different making that amount difficult to establish. Mayor Mirsch stated that she felt it was better for everyone to know what the Council’s policy would be and what to expect from it. Councilmember Wilson commented that single poles could have a lot more variables and unknowns than an assessment district. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper stated that the Eastfield project started with 19 poles and as the project progressed, the number of poles changed. If they are trying to make it easier for staff to process, they can simply place a bounty on a pole no matter its location. If the amount is out of line for whatever reason, the applicant could come before the Council and be heard individually. Councilmember Dieringer stated that the Council should investigate how much funding the City has allocated for these projects. She was not sure how many poles the City has but that the City does not have money to fund the removal of all the poles. She was also concerned about the legal considerations. She recalled the Council considering these types of projects before and if the project benefited more than one person, which it did. She further stated that she did not think that the Council could come up with a magic number to contribute. The Council made different decisions on each pole because each pole and circumstance were different. She thinks Council should develop considerations and encourage people to apply before the project begins. This allows the Council to evaluate the project, find out how many people it would serve, and determine if there is a community need. She acknowledged removing numerous poles would be some sort of fire mitigation but questioned if that justifies the Council undergrounding every single pole. She suggested the Council put together a workable policy because single poles are different than an assessment district, which clearly has a community benefit. Mayor Mirsch stated that she concurs with everyone’s point of view. She agrees assessment districts defines who benefits and the costs. She does not feel the Council or staff are able to assess how much value there is to a pole. It has been established that all poles are not alike including fire safety considerations. She is not inclined to determine how much a pole is worth and was not in support of assigning an amount per pole. She stated that if the Council considered reimbursing a 33 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -8- portion of cost, it would have to be based on that project. The Council has made fire mitigation a high priority. If undergrounding utilities is considered a benefit to fire mitigation, then that could mean that undergrounding does benefit the community. She requested counsel’s position. City Attorney Michael Jenkins stated that he was not sure. He informed the Council had two options. They could review each project on a case-by-case basis. The advantage is that the Council could look at individual facts to determine if it would produce a benefit (i.e. fire or esthetic). The disadvantage is that it is more time consuming and does not provide the kind of incentive the Council wants to give applicants. The question becomes how the Council would create a generic policy. Can the Council arrive at a broad conclusion that the elimination of every single pole would produce a community benefit that would be equal? He stated there would be an equality issue in determining which pole removal would be more beneficial to the community. For example, a pole in an obscure area versus a pole that is highly visible. The Council could create a policy and create some criteria. Some poles may meet all the criteria some may only meet half the criteria. He suggested that if a pole only meets half the criteria then that pole would then only receive half of the contribution. This is one way to bring consistency rather than the Council deal with it on a case-by-case basis. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper suggested bringing the item up at the joint meeting between the City Council and the Planning Commission in April. He suggested the Council to come up with something repeatable and hoped it would address 90% of the projects. He proposed if the applicant does not like the answer, they could come before the Council and it could be treated as an individual case. He would like policy that is clear for residents and staff. He does not think staff should have to decide if a pole is a fire issue or view obstruction. The next issue for the Council to discuss was a palpable amount of money for the poles with transformers versus the 4KW giant poles. Mayor Mirsch stated the giant poles would more likely form a district because those poles service many homes. Councilmember Dieringer stated more discussion is needed in order to develop ideas. Mayor Mirsch asked if the Council was inclined to form an Ad Hoc Committee. She was interested if anyone cared to join her. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper moved that the City Council form an Ad Hoc Subcommittee with Mayor Pro Tem Pieper and Mayor Mirsch as members. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion and the motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 34 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -9- C.CONSIDER A REQUEST FOR CITY CONTRIBUTION TO UNDERGROUND A SINGLE UTILITY POLE AT 5 RINGBIT ROAD WEST. Planning and Community Services Director Meredith Elguira gave a PowerPoint presentation of the undergrounding of a single pole at 5 Ringbit Road West. The application was submitted by Susan Sleep on February 4th, 2020 requesting reimbursement. She explained the infrastructure of the project has been completed per the slide submitted by Ms. Sleep. Director Elguira spoke with Southern California Edison (SCE) and they informed her that permits for this project were issued on March 3rd, 2020. The project is expected to be completed within 45 days of the issued permit. Ms. Sleep’s pole is part of a larger project but no letters of support were received. Mr. Shumaker is also proposing removing 2 poles. Director Elguira highlighted the SCE project planner explained that this project is an outlier because the pole was smaller and an end pole, which minimized the cost. The design cost was nominal and not included in the invoice with the engineering cost, which includes pulling of the cable, labor, and project materials. Ms. Sleep requested reimbursement of an unknown amount because her project benefits the community. Councilmember Dieringer asked staff to confirm that letters of support were requested from the applicant and received none. Director Elguira stated that was correct and added that the applicant referred staff to the Shumaker’s project to locate letters of support. She further stated that the bigger project had the support of other residents including Mr. Shumaker and the adjacent neighbor. When she visited the site with Mr. Shumaker, SCE, and a potential contractor, two residents were present to support the bigger project. Mayor Mirsch opened the item for public comment. Ms. Sleep stated that she was not sure why the Council was trying to reinvent the wheel. The Association already offered a 1/3 of the engineering cost. She has an email from the City dated August 18th stating that City has been contributing 1/3 to engineering cost and it was her understanding that this was encouraged by the City. She does not understand why this is so difficult and the hoops she has gone through was not encouraging. She informed the Council COX and Frontier already ran lines at no cost. She felt that the questions being brought up had not been researched. If a 1/3 of the engineering cost was paid by the Association and the correspondence, she has from Mayor Mirsch states the City’s been covering a 1/3 why was the Council making it complicated. She proclaimed the Council either wants to encourage residents or they do not, and people will give up if it is complicated. She stated her group wanted all three poles done, but it proved to be too difficult and doing one pole at a time seemed easier. She suggested the Council continue to pay 1/3 of the engineering cost and if the engineering cost is expensive, the neighbors could contribute. She referenced the earlier discussion about the Council creating a policy and stated the value is determined by the work involved to remove the pole not the value someone attributes to the view or fire hazard. She believes the Council should consider the full cost and not cap a pole at $2,500.00. She felt the Council was complicating the issue and making the process difficult. She already paid the invoice and would continue with the project either way. She added that removing pole A and B would be nice and it would be nicer if her neighbors received support 35 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -10- since they are investing a large amount of money. Ms. Sleep advised she is willing to contribute her requested reimbursement to the Eastfield project because that project would benefit the whole City. Mayor Mirsch reiterated the Council encourages these projects and that was the purpose for the discussion. The Council’s policy is to pay for a 1/3 of the engineering cost for assessment districts. When she replied to Ms. Sleep’s email in August and she indicated “many neighbors” the Mayor thought she was talking about an assessment district. Ms. Sleep spoke with Edison and it was too difficult to form a district and determined that if each neighbor took a pole, then the whole street would be done. It was not practical to do an assessment with a bond, she stated that Joe Hummel, the Shumaker’s, and the Kirkpatrick’s all agreed they wanted the poles done and signed the email. The group confirmed that they were all willing to contribute but that the assessment district was too cumbersome. They projected if each person took a pole, the cost would end up being about same. Mayor Mirsch stated she understood, and the Council was trying to work it out. The Council is considering her project, like all the others, and they were looking at all aspects. She advised that her request would now be under the preview of the Ad Hoc Committee and that the Council had enough information to consider her case. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper explained that these are public funds and the City must follow certain protocols. Until recently, the City donated to larger groups because of the benefit to the entire City. He explained that Ms. Sleep’s project involved a single pole at the end of a street and that the Council had to have a conversation to decide if they can prove it is a community benefit. He agreed it is a drawn-out process but there are multiple steps that need to happen. He stated the City strives to make all processes easy for the residents. He thanked her for undergrounding the pole and reminded her that the Council must go through the obligated steps and the City’s counsel attends meetings to monitor the legalities. Ms. Sleep insisted this was not a new issue and the Council had seen this issue before. She suggested the Council review the Hackamore case because it was a single pole project as well. Mr. McKinnie stated that there were two key issues before the Council. The first one was the use of public funds. The second issue was if the Council provided funds, what items should be considered and how much to cover. He indicated he was not clear what the $6,700.00 bill represented. Was it just engineering, which he understands to be the front-end cost before any construction or whether it includes some of Edison’s construction. He stated that the invoice was hard to read because it was blurry and listed labor, materials, and other items. It appeared the bill might be for the whole project. He did not believe the Council had all the necessary information. City Attorney Jenkins interjected to say this was not a good use of the time. A member of the public was constantly talking out of turn. He then noted a speaker was testifying while reading a document for the first time. He discouraged the Council’s evaluation on this item if they have not seen all the documentation. He suggested that staff provide comments on whether the Council is ready to go forward with the issue. 36 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -11- City Manager Jeng stated that staff had reviewed all the documents submitted by Ms. Sleep, which was only her correspondence with Edison. She provided an Edison invoice for about $6,000.00, which she paid. She proceeded to review the invoice that Mr. McKinnie questioned. She stated that there was a line item for design that read zero cost. There was labor, materials, and other items listed that related to Edison’s fieldwork. She pointed out that cost was not for design but rather Edison’s labor. She also highlighted Ms. Sleep had another line item listing a separate contractor, for trenching. It was the staff’s understanding that the pole had not been removed and confirmed that with Edison. She reminded the Council that past practice has been to issue payment upon completion of work. There was only one project when funds were released before completion. That payment was issued upon 75% completion of the work but could not recall the name of that project. She concluded the Council should not contribute at this point. She recommends the Council wait until the applicant has demonstrated the work is completed. The contribution would be at the Council’s discretion. Councilmember Dieringer stated everything must be considered as a whole and she does not believe the Council has all the information or knowledge on what criteria the Council should apply. Past projects are being referenced as one-pole policies and that was not the case because the Council did not treat it that way. Since more information was needed, she would not vote on the item based on the information provided. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper stated that his problem was the information presented does not match what is being said. He recognizes that the Council needs to figure out a policy. Councilmember Dieringer moved that the City Council table the item until the Council meets with the Ad Hoc Committee to develop a proposal for policy going forward and receives further information from staff regarding the completion of this project and the cost involved. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper seconded the motion and the motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. The City Council recessed at 8:25pm. The City Council reconvened the regular meeting at 8:31 p.m. D.CONSIDER AND DISCUSS RESTRICTING THE PLANTING OF SIX HIGH HAZARD PLANTS PER LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT READY! SET! GO! PROGRAM. City Manager Jeng stated that staff has been working on the Wildfire Mitigation Plan with First Responders (Los Angeles County Fire Department and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department), Rolling Hills Community Association, and members of the Block Captain Program. The focus of the group is to release a draft copy of the Community Wildfire Protection Plan 37 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -12- (CWPP). The CWPP is meant to be an action plan that all the entities previously described can utilize to mitigate wildfire. Rolling Hills along with other Peninsula cities are in a very high fire zone. One topic of discussion is high-hazard plants located in the Ready! Set! Go! Brochure issued by the Fire Department. Brain Wells from the Fire Department was present to answer questions. She referred the Council to page 88 where the brochure list six high hazard plants: Acacia, Eucalyptus, Juniper, Palms, Pine and Pampas Grass. As the City continues to develop an action plan for the CWPP, staff wanted to engage the Council in a discussion regarding high-hazard plants and implementing restrictive measures. Some of the plants, as Mr. Visco pointed out, have oils that mimic ceresin. She stressed the discussion was not about the existing plants in the community, but restricting these plants going forward. Mayor Mirsch stated the Association currently has a Landscape Committee that is also addressing this type of issue. She again reminded everyone that this discussion had nothing to do with the existing plants in the community. The proposal before the Council was to consider a position going forward to restrict these types of plants. Brian Wells, Los Angeles County Fire Department, introduced himself and stated he had 10 years’ experience working in Rolling Hills as he was previously assigned to Station 106. Councilmember Dieringer asked Mr. Wells if he knew the background why these six plants were placed as high hazard in the brochure. Firefighter Wells replied that most of the information comes from the State and it is their recommendation. He stated these plants have an explosive nature because of the oils in them and are susceptible to fire. Councilmember Dieringer asked if the State’s information came from existing literature. Mr. Wells stated he did not know that off hand. Councilmember Dieringer stated that when the Fire Department came to inspect her property, she inquired about a palm tree. She clarified she did not plant the palm tree but asked the Fire Department if the palm tree presented a problem. They informed her that the plant was not a problem and that it was fine where it was. She then stated that she wondered if the Ready!Set!Go! Brochure is well known policy against palm trees and why there would be inconsistent information. Firefighter Wells replied that the presence of palm trees is not necessarily bad but rather the dead palm fronds underneath that presents a problem. He stated that he was not aware of the condition of the palm tree she was referring to but perhaps the Fire Department was able to determine the palm tree was healthy and did not present a problem during their inspection. Councilmember Dieringer asked if parts of the tree are dead/dying or if they are poorly maintained would that be considered a fire issue. Firefighter Wells replied in the affirmative. He highlighted page 4 of the brochure that states 38 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -13- “special attention should be given to the use and maintenance of ornamental plants known or thought to be high-hazard plants when used in close proximity of structures”. These examples include Acacia, Cedar, Cypress, Eucalyptus, Italian Cypress, Juniper, Palms (remove all dead fronds). He pointed out that problems come in to play when those plants are placed too close to structures and unmaintained. That could cause a fire problem. Councilmember Dieringer rebutted that it had more to do with where the plant is in relationship to the residence. Firefighter Wells advised that was correct. He stated because Rolling Hills is on a hill and is in a high fire hazard zone, the Fire Department inspects up to 200 hundred feet away from homes. He explained it is a considerable distance that most people do not consider. Councilmember Dieringer stated it was her opinion that the brochure may be inaccurately identifying six plants as high-hazard when they are simply thought to be high-hazard. She asked if there was data available to support the fact that the plants are high hazard. Firefighter Wells stated he would have to defer her inquiry to their Forestry Division and that he would also follow up with Chief Hale about whether there is data available to support the statements made in the brochure. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper asked if a healthy Eucalyptus tree would catch fire. He also inquired if restricting the identified plants would be beneficial or overkill for the City. Firefighter Wells responded it depends on what causes the fire to transmit from place to place. He also stated that it would be beneficial for the City in his opinion. Councilmember Wilson asked how one makes the distinction between Acacia tree and an Acacia shrub. Firefighter Wells stated he would have to consult the Forestry Division and report back. Councilmember Dieringer asked about the note on page 4, which suggests that homeowners to pay attention to the use and maintenance of these types of plants when used in proximity of a structure. The brochure does not say these plants should never be planted. Firefighter Wells stated Councilmember Dieringer was correct and that it had to do with maintenance and the upkeep of those plants. Mayor Mirsch opened the item for public comment. Alfred Visco, 15 Cinchring Road, jokingly thanked Councilmember Dieringer for the cross examination of Firefighter Wells and advised he was available for cross examination as well. He advised page 4 of the brochure also includes Cedar, Cypress, and Italian Cypress. He stated that it was obvious that the brochure was inconsistent and that it was written as a general guide and not for Rolling Hills. The City already had experts from the Land Conservancy discuss Acacia and its 39 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -14- dangers. He recalled the City funded the removal of Acacia along the Rolling Hills border. He reported that Eucalyptus and Pine trees produce essential oils. Pine tree essential oils are terrenes, which is essentially turpentine. Eucalyptus produce essential oils consistent with Pine trees. The problem with Eucalyptus trees is that it does not need a very high temperature before it starts off- gassing its oils. It creates a fog over itself of these highly flammable oils and it is how crown fires occur in these trees. He stated that of course trees should be properly maintained but the problem is a lot of these trees are not close to the roads, they are not close to houses and therefore are not being properly maintained. Palm trees have fatty oils with thyglicery, which are not nearly as flammable as the essential oils but are still flammable. He stated he knows this because he was in the natural fats, oils, and processing business before he became an attorney. Palm trees are a problem as well because their leaves are horizontal and are more prone to catching the falling embers than a properly maintained Eucalyptus or Pine tree. He stated that he had not done any research on Juniper or Pampas Grass and therefore would take the Fire Departments recommendations that both plants are high-hazard and should not be planted. He stated that it was his opinion that it had nothing to do with structures but rather with fire fuel. He stated that the Council has taken a first good step in banning the six named plants. Mayor Mirsch thanks Mr. Visco for his comments. Councilmember Dieringer commented that the City has a lot of conditions in place for fire safety but has not implemented all its conditions. She stressed that she has a problem with rules and regulations that criminalize things when the community simply needs to practice diligence. She further stated that even if the Council decides an ordinance was necessary, there is already an ordinance in place regarding dried/dead plants and vegetation. She suggested placing the restriction of the plants in the CWPP but only after more research is done with solid science to support it. Councilmember Wilson asked Director Elguira if she has seen landscape plans with any of the listed plants. Planning Director Elguira stated she has seen some projects with palm trees Mayor Pro Tem Pieper stated that the City already has requirements in place for new projects. He believes the City would be in better shape if a couple of plants were banned and it would minimize concerns. If there was a reference list when homeowners landscaped, they would be less likely to use those plants. Mayor Mirsch explained the reason why this item came before the Council was because the public asked for information regarding the types of vegetation that could be planted. There was work being done by the Association and they also hired a Fire Consultant who had mentioned that these plants are not suggested. She asked if the Council would like to get ahead of the curb on this issue and if there was a motion to consider moving forward. Which she clarified meant to discuss the item, give staff direction that Council would like to have an ordinance, and going through the public hearings process. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper stated that he would prefer the item as a guideline. 40 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -15- Mayor Mirsch stated that the reason for having this ordinance beforehand was to hopefully set an example. She reminded everyone that the Council was committed to fire safety. She stated that she would like to direct staff, if the Council agreed, that going forward these plants are not permitted in landscaping plans. She asked if the guidelines could legally be part of the planning approval process without having an ordinance. City Attorney Jenkins stated the Council could establish guidelines, but they would not be legally enforceable. Councilmember Dieringer stated that the guidelines should be put in context. City Manager Jeng stated that staff could establish guidelines to discourage people from planting the listed plants. If people proceed to plant them then the City would convey to them to please properly maintain those plants. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper wants the City to be firm about what the expectation is. He suggested repeating that the listed plants are undesirable. 9.MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS A.REPORT BY SOUTHBAY CITIES COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT (SBCCOG) LIAISON ON CONSIDERATION TO CHANGE THE MEMBERSHIP DUES (ORAL REPORT). City Manager Jeng reported that the South Bay Cities Council of Government (SBCCOG) was considering changing the formula that calculates the membership’s dues. She stated that she and Councilmember Dieringer met with other Peninsula City Managers and one South Bay CCOG representative to discuss the potential changes. She wanted to report on how the discussion had gone and deferred to Councilmember Dieringer. Councilmember Dieringer stated one of the SBCCOG suggestions was to pay a base of $10,000.00 and she communicated this was not the City’s preferred option. She expressed that was not a win for the City of Rolling Hills as it may be for other cities. She further stated that she was working on recommendations on how membership dues should be structured. She noted that part of the recommendation was informing her Council of what was going. She explained that it was an ongoing process and that she had met with other Peninsula Cities to try and see if there was a collective view. She stated that she understood that the other Cities are not in the same position as Rolling Hills because they receive funding from measures that do traffic control, whereas Rolling Hills does not because the City has private roads. She stated that the City had a few things that they would need the SBCCOG for compared to the other cities. Mayor Mirsch asked why the City was still a part of the SBCCOG if that was the case. 41 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -16- Councilmember Dieringer answered that the SBCCOG helped with the Climate action plan and the City receives regional information. They also offered to help with the energy efficiency plan. The SBCCOG looks for ways to be helpful for their Cities and noted that other CCOG’s had hired people to help their cities with their Affordable Housing Plan. She also stated that the SBCCOG was controlling the Measure M (transit) monies so it was clear to see how this would be a big deal for other cities. Meanwhile Rolling Hills has no money to gain so she felt at liberty to speak out about the membership dues change. She also informed the SBCCOG that if they insisted on the base of $10,000.00 the City would walk and assumed the Council would agree. Councilmember Wilson asked how much the City currently pays in membership dues. Councilmember Dieringer advised the City currently pays $6,500.00. Mayor Pro Tem Piper stated he supports the City not being a member of the SBCCOG. Mayor Mirsch thanked Councilmember Dieringer for her efforts. B.REPORT BY PERSONNEL COMMITTEE ON THE UPDATE TO THE EMPLOYEE HANDBOOK AND PERSONNEL POLICY MANUAL (ORAL REPORT). City Manager Jeng gave an overview of the updates the Personnel Committee made to the Employee handbook. They reached out to the City Attorney’s office to check for any legislative updates. They approached Council with the salary survey and medical health benefit updates. She foresees another month of work may be needed but acknowledges committee assignments may change. The updates are not complete and although she hoped for completion by January 1st, the next best milestone would be July 1st. This would provide the new fiscal year as an effective date. She posed the question if the current members (Mayor Mirsch and Councilmember Dieringer) may stay on the committee in order to complete the assignment. Mayor Mirsch confessed that the project was a bigger than she imagined. There were a lot of changes in laws, work environments, and it required more work. She stated that the Personnel Committee has been very comprehensive and apologized for taking longer than expected. She stated that if changes are made to the composition of the Personnel Committee it would derail the assignment. It was her hope that the New Mayor would allow the current members to stay on the committee until the completion of the Employee Handbook. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper agreed and thought it was necessary to retain the committee members. C.REPORT BY FIRE FUEL REDUCTION AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE COMMUNITY WILDFIRE PROTECTION PLAN (ORAL REPORT). City Manager Jeng reported on the City’s wildfire mitigation work. The members of Fire Fuel Reduction Ad Hoc Subcommittee, including Mayor Mirsch and Councilmember Wilson, have had good correspondence and meetings with the Association. The Association Subcommittee members were Tom Heinsheimer and Roger Hawkins. She reported that the compositions of the 42 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -17- Subcommittee on the Association side had changed. Roger Hawkins was replaced by Anne Smith. The next scheduled meeting is scheduled for March 25, 2020 to review the final draft of the Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP). Ms. Smith attended the last meeting and provided tons of feedback on the CWPP. She felt there was good progress on the CWPP and there was good conversation about the needs of the community. Mayor Mirsch stated the meetings have been very productive. The Block Captains involvement has made a significant difference. The Block Captains organized a field trip with the Association and Fire Department to visit the East Gate, which has been a contentious issue. Because of the field trip, it seems there may be some movement on that item. Councilmember Wilson stated the Honbo’s have been great in keeping the momentum up. City Manager Jeng added the Fire Department has been great as well. The Fire Department attends all the coordination meetings and Block Captain Meetings. They have been educating the City on evacuations. They were instrumental in the Field Trip with the Association Board Members and informed them about the care necessary for the entry/exit gates during emergencies. 10.MATTERS FROM STAFF NONE. 11. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Mirsch adjourned the meeting at 9:24p.m. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled for Monday, March 23, 2020 beginning at 7:00p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. Respectfully submitted, ____________________________________ Yohana Coronel, MBA City Clerk Approved, _____________________________________ Leah Mirsch Mayor 43 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-09-20 -18- 44 -1- MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, MARCH 23, 2020 1.CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Mirsch at 07:01p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. 2.ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmembers Present:Mayor Mirsch, Black, Dieringer, and Wilson. Councilmembers Absent:Pieper*. Others Present:Elaine Jeng, P.E., City Manager. Meredith Elguira, Planning and Community Services Director. Yohana Coronel, City Clerk. Michael Jenkins, City Attorney. Terry Shea, Finance Director. *Mayor Pro Tem Pieper was excused for his absence. 3.OPEN AGENDA - PUBLIC COMMENT WELCOME NONE. 4.CONSENT CALENDAR Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. A.MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 25, 2019. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED B.PAYMENT OF BILLS. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED Councilmember Dieringer pointed out that she had some corrections to the minutes. City Manager Jeng confirmed that the corrections were received and assured Councilmember Dieringer that the corrections would be applied. 45 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-23-20 -2- Councilmember Dieringer moved that the City Council approve all consent items with amendments to the minutes of November 25, 2019. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Black, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Pieper. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 5.COMMISSION ITEMS NONE. 6.PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE. 7.OLD BUSINESS NONE. 8.NEW BUSINESS A.DISCUSS THE PROCLAMATION OF LOCAL EMERGENCY REGARDING THE THREAT OF COVID-19. City Manager Jeng advised surrounding agencies had declared a local emergency, which included the County of Los Angeles, 13 South Bay cities and wanted to discuss whether the Council wanted to do the same in response to COVID-19. The City of Rolling Hills is part of the South Bay Cities Council of Government (SBCCOG) and the only city that has not declared a local emergency. She highlighted that Bradbury, another Southern California city similar in size to Rolling Hills, had not declared a local emergency. She pointed out that other cities adjacent to Rolling Hills have departments that need more resources; for example, Parks and Recreation have restrooms that need servicing. They also must consider if Park Rangers are necessary to enforce social distancing. They need to assess if there is enough personnel to ensure emergency response times are adequate. The City of Rolling Hills does not have any of those issues to prepare for because the City is comprised of single-family homes. If there was a need for First Responders, they would be covered under the County’s Declaration of Emergency. City Manager Jeng stated she was not recommending the Council declare a local emergency. She reminded the Council that regardless which entity declares an emergency, the Rolling Hills Municipal Code allows her to gather resources and obtain vital supplies because the City Manager is the Director of Emergency Services. Rolling Hills Municipal Code, Section 2.32.060 Per Section 3.32.060, A6, states “in the event of the proclamation of a local emergency; the proclamation of a state of emergency; or the Director of the State Office of Emergency Services, or the existence of a “state of war emergency” the Director of Emergency Services is allowed to do the following…” Since the County and State have declared an emergency, she has been empowered to make decisions without the Council having to declare a local emergency. 46 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-23-20 -3- Councilmember Dieringer clarified that City Manager Jeng could proceed with all the items she mentioned if she declared a local emergency but if the State declared an emergency that would not include the County. City Manager Jeng confirmed and stated that the County’s declaration of emergency covers all the jurisdictions within its County. Councilmember Wilson asked if the City was subject to the most restrictive guidelines of whatever jurisdiction the City falls under. City Attorney Jenkins replied that the strictest rules apply. Councilmember Wilson inquired what would be the downside of declaring an emergency. City Manager Jeng replied that she spoke to Councilmember Dieringer about the same question. Once an emergency is declared, the City must report to the State. This means the City would have to document their expenditures and staff hours and see if there would be reimbursements at a later time. Other cities that have different departments may also use the declaration as a method to suspend existing rules. Mayor Mirsch asked if the City does not declare an emergency now was there anything to preclude the City from declaring down the line. City Attorney Jenkins replied that there was nothing that would preclude the City from declaring at a later time. Councilmember Dieringer would like to have confirmation of proposed reimbursement and that the City can, in fact, file through the County before providing a definitive answer on the matter. City Manager Jeng explained there are two parts to the reimbursement; 1) what would be eligible and 2) the City’s response activities for Rolling Hills. First Responders overtime pay would be considered an eligible item. Non-essential employees that are sent home and continue to receive pay would be a questionable. The subject of reimbursement is still a work in progress. Mayor Mirsch asked about the activation of the Emergency Operating Center (EOC) and whether that goes away if the City were to declare an emergency. City Manager Jeng stated that she was not sure if declaring an emergency affects the EOC. Other agencies declared a local emergency and opened their EOC at the lowest level. This means they do not have a physical person manning it, there is software that allows agencies to do it virtually. She advised she was not fully versed on how that works but believes when a call comes in; it triggers a chain-of-calls to the appropriate parties. Councilmember Black moved that the City Council approve staff’s recommendation and not declare a City emergency. City Attorney Jenkins suggested that the Council receive and file the item. He wanted to make sure the Council understood that the motion suggested by Councilmember Black does not preclude the City Manager from declaring an emergency in between meetings if circumstances change and 47 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-23-20 -4- it is necessary to declare one. Councilmember Dieringer concurred with the City Attorney and suggested amending the first motion to include that the Council reserves the right to declare an emergency later if circumstances change. Councilmember Black made a second motion. Councilmember Black moved that the City Council approve staff’s recommendation and not declare a City emergency and receive the item. Councilmember Dieringer seconded the motion and the motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Black, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Pieper. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. B.CONSIDER AND APPROVE PARTICIPATION IN ALERT SOUTHBAY NOTIFICATION SYSTEM. City Manager Jeng introduced the Alert Southbay Notification System. It is a new system that crosses jurisdictional boundaries. Before the arrival of Alert Southbay, along with recent legislation, cities did not have the ability to notify communities across borders. She gave an overview of Senate Bill 833 and 821. Bill 821 permits each county and city to grant access to the contact information of resident account holders through public utility bill records. This is important because the City’s notification system only serves the people who opt in. She informed the Council both Senate Bills would allow the City to pull data in order to notify residents of alerts even if they had not signed up for notifications. Majority of the South Bay Cities fall under the Los Angeles County Disaster Area known as Area G. Area G purchased Everbridge, which is the vendor selling Alert Southbay. Many cities currently use a notification system similar to Rolling Hills Notify- Me, which is owned by Blackboard. Notify-me aims to inform residents within a certain community. The City’s notification system has approximately 120 registrants, which is very limited given the population. If there were an explosion at the refinery, the refinery would be able to notify select cities of that event including residents that did not sign up for notifications. Alert Southbay allows the City to notify more residents, especially in pressing matters. She added the program would be beneficial to the City since it is a bedroom community. The residents would also be notified of events in the surrounding cities. City Manager Jeng recommended that the City participate in Southbay Alert. The City would have to subscribe to the Everbridge program to participate. The cost attached is $5,171.00 for the first year. The following two years would total $4,171.00. There is also an introductory cost to retrieve the white page data and that would be $5,000.00 per participant, however, the refinery is covering this cost. All Area G cities have enrolled except for Lawndale and Carson, but they are expected to join. The City of Rolling Hills was added to the project and is partnered with Rolling Hill Estates. The City must subscribe to the program to solely notify Rolling Hills residents. Councilmember Dieringer inquired who would be sending out the notifications. 48 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-23-20 -5- City Manager Jeng replied that participants send their own notifications. She explained that Rolling Hills geographic area was added to the map features of Alert Southbay, but we cannot use the service until the City pays for it. Councilmember Wilson asked if Alert Southbay had anything to do with the fiber network that is being built. City Manager Jeng explained the fiber network ring is the infrastructure to be able to deliver faster internet service and is not related to Alert Southbay. Councilmember Wilson stated that he understood people would receive messages without opting in and further inquired if people could opt out. He also asked if Alert Southbay was the same thing as Everbridge. City Manager Jeng replied in the affirmative. She clarified that Everbridge is the parent company. She informed the Council that Alert Southbay went live in January/February of 2020. She advised that some South Bay Cities decided to transfer their data to Everbridge. Alert Southbay allows people to choose which cities notifications they would like to receive. Mayor Mirsch asked City Manager Jeng if she thought that joining Alert Southbay would improve the participation within the community and enhance their ability to receive important notifications. City Manager Jeng commented that it was her opinion that the COVID-19 situation will motivate people to sign on. Alert Southbay allows the City to get messages out to people that have never opted in for any notifications. It is a benefit to the agency to push out information but does not know if it will motivate people to opt into other notifications. Councilmember Wilson asked if people decide not to opt in, would they receive notifications for Rolling Hills and Rolling Hills Estates. City Manager Jeng explained that if the City decides to participate, the white pages would be for Rolling Hills only. People would have to go to the site and register for other notifications. She explained that when Rolling Hills was added to Everbridge, Rolling Hills and Rolling Hills Estates were combined as one but does not know the reason why as she was not part of the original decision. It worked out for the best because if the City were not added in there would be additional upfront costs. Currently Rolling Hills is part of Rolling Hills Estates but if RHE were to send out a notification it would not include Rolling Hills. Councilmember Dieringer asked to confirm that the City currently could not initiate sending notifications to only Rolling Hills residents only. City Manager Jeng explained that if the City subscribes to the system, the City could send notifications to Rolling Hills residents only and choose if adjacent cities should receive pertinent notifications. 49 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-23-20 -6- Councilmember Dieringer moved that the City Council approve to participate in the Alert Southbay notification system and subscribe to services on Everbridge. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion and the motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Black, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Pieper. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. C.CONSIDER AND APPROVE MID-YEAR BUDGET YEAR. Finance Director Terry Shea gave an overview of the Mid-Year Budget report. He stated in June 2019 the City adopted a budget with a total of $2,278,000.00 in revenues, $2,234,000.00 in expenditures, and $329,000.00 in deficits. The main reason for the budget deficit was because of the transfer of money to the Traffic Safety Fund for roadway striping totaling $54,500.00, transfers to the Capital Improvement Fund for the Tennis Court Project $320,000.00, and $30,000.00 for the ADA design work at City Hall. He continued that the total General Fund year-to-date revenues were $1,076,405, which is $179,270 less than expected through February 2020. Expenditures were $1,129,921, which is $253,169 less than budgeted through February 2020. The FY 19/20 revenues compared to expenditures after transfers presents a decrease of $37,516 compared to an anticipated budgeted shortfall of $111,415 through February. As such, the City is $73,899 better than anticipated at mid-year. Total revenues were more than anticipated in property transfer tax and interest income, but he stated that interest income was declining rapidly and does not expect to see an increase because rates are dropping fast. Building and other Permit Fee revenues were down below the mid-year projections and is $60,000 below this time last year. There were a couple of months where the City paid instead of collecting money. He stated the costs for the City Attorney are slightly above the mid-year projected amount but are well below the mid-year amount in the Planning Department for view cases. Total Finance expenditures are as budgeted at mid-year. Total expenditures in Planning are less than anticipated due to the invoices from Los Angeles County for services being lower than the prior year through December 2019. The Planning Budget included $80,000 for the Housing Element, which has yet to be expended. Costs for the Storm Water Management through February is at $73,415, which is over the budgeted amount of $65,000, but overall, the Planning Department expenditures are well below the projected mid-year amounts, so no adjustment is being proposed. The original Traffic Safety Fund Budget included $40,000 for Road Striping. A Contract Change Order with PCI was approved in January 2020 to add work identified in Schedule B for $36,526.50. As part of the Staff Report, the additional funds were allocated from the tennis court improvement project.Through February, expenditures include engineering and project management totaling $12,545 mainly for engineering and project management. The original Capital Project Fund Budget included $320,000 for the Tennis Court improvements and $30,000 for the City Hall ADA Design work. Through February, the City has only expended $7,960 for lighting and project management and $5,360 on the City Hall ADA Design. The City Council allocated $36,526.50 from the Tennis Court Project to the Traffic Safety Fund as mentioned 50 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-23-20 -7- above. At the October 14, 2019 City Council meeting, the Council allocated $34,200 for Fuel Load Reduction to be performed by the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy (Conservancy). Through February, the City has not been billed by the Conservancy for the work performed. The original Utility Fund Budget included $150,000 for undergrounding projects and $22,000 for a Sewer Feasibility Study. For the undergrounding projects through February there is only $2,088 in expenditures. The City's contribution of $7,712 to the Eastfield Undergrounding Project Assessment Engineer fee has not posted to the account. For the Sewer Feasibility Study, the City expended $27,366 through February to Willdan for engineering and Alan Palermo for project management cost. The Sewer Feasibility Study started last fiscal year and the allocated budget for FY 19/20 assumed payout of certain expenses in FY 18/19 that did not materialize. Staff is not proposing any Budget Adjustments to the General Fund Revenues at this time. He advised his office would monitor the Building and other Permit Fees. Since revenues were down, it was a good thing that expenditures were down by approximately the same amount. The General Fund proposed expenditure adjustments have increased $10,000 for account 01-01-801 (City Attorney) and a $10,000 decrease in account 01-15-872 (Property Development – Legal Expense). The FY 19/20 mid-year budget review shows the City has a positive budget variance of $73,899. Revenues are down $179,270, expenditures are down $253,169, and net transfers in and out are equal. With no proposed budget adjustments to revenues and no change in total budgeted expenditures, the projected budget deficit is still $329,300. The projected General Fund balance by June 30, 2020, with the no proposed changes, would be $5,466,480, which is slightly over two times the City’s annual general fund expenditures. Councilmember Black thanked the Finance Director for his overview. Finance Director Shea offered to go over the schedules in the staff report. The first schedule was the General Fund revenues and expenditures on page 49. He read the summary and stated that revenues from July through February FY 19/20 were $1,076,405. The adjusted eight-month budget was $1,255,000.00, which indicates the City’s revenues are about 80% at mid-year and about 40% for the year. He stated that the biggest drop was due to the Building Permit being down. He stated that for expenditures, for the City’s Administration Department were at about 79% of the mid-year in salaries and that is due to the timing of onboarding people because the salaries were budgeted for the full year. He stated that salaries and benefits were down and that everything else was progressing okay. The Finance Department is right on budget so there was nothing to report. Planning and Development salaries and benefits are where he predicted. He stated that the City was up a bit in the NPDES but down in other areas, but overall, the City is at 80% at the mid-year and at about 53% at yeam r-end. Law Enforcement is down due to the budgeted amount for Wildlife and Coyote. The City is charging a little more to the CalCops Fund because the City had a little more money than anticipated. We are about $10,000.00 lower in law enforcement and $20,000.00 less in the Wildlife and Pet Management account. Mayor Mirsch asked to confirm that the coyote services fall under the law enforcement line item in the general fund. Finance Director Shea replied in the affirmative. 51 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-23-20 -8- City Manager Jeng explained the mid-year budget report helps her track where the City stands in revenues. She reviews projections and identifies trends. If the trend indicates the City is not catching up the revenue that was budgeted, then she would slow down the expenditures for the rest of the year. She directed the Council to look at the last column on page 49, she stated that the percentage meant revenues are tracking 50% and above. She stated that some items could not be tracked by percentage, for example, striping. Once the striping project is complete there are no more expenditures. Then there are contractual service expenses with consultants, and she must assess if the City is depleting those funds quickly. She reported that the City is not overspending. There is some adjustment for legal fees but that is due to new issues. A transfer would be made to allocate legal expenses from the Planning Department back to the City Administration line item. She also wanted to add that the City was expecting revenue from Measure W, the clean water parcel tax, but it has not come in yet. The City budgeted $65,000.00 in the general fund that was supposed to be offset by Measure W. If Measure W does not come in as expected, then the line item would have to be increased in order to meet the expenses for the year. Councilmember Wilson stated that Building and other Permit Fees were down by $60,000.00 and asked if less construction lead to the reductions in the fees. City Manager Jeng replied that there were two parts. The first was the reduction of projects and the second was that the City had more grievances on properties. The City calls the Building and Safety Department to conduct inspections for complaints. For example, residents have reached out to the City stating they have drainage issues. The complaint was the rain caused all these issues. Building and Safety logs their hours when they come out for an inspection. At months end, they track expenditures plus revenue coming in from building permits then reconcile. In past years, the numbers have always been positive because there were more applications than expenditures. Recently, there have been fewer projects, which lead to less revenue from building permits but more inspections. Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council receive and file the item as presented with the adjustment. Councilmember Dieringer Mayor seconded the motion and the motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Black, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Pieper. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. D.CONSIDER AND APPROVE RENEWAL OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY GENERAL SERVICES AGREEMENT. City Manager Jeng stated that the agreement before them was a typical agreement that is approved by Council every five years. It allows the City to utilize County services. Mayor Mirsch asked if the agreement had anything to do with the Fire Department. City Manager Jeng answered that the Los Angeles County Fire Department services the City via 52 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-23-20 -9- the Fire District. The Fire Department services fall outside this general services agreement. Councilmember Wilson asked if this agreement would include animal control. City Manager Jeng replied that was a separate contract. City Attorney Michael Jenkins clarified the general services agreement covers all services that are not covered by a specific contract. For example, if the City has a specific contract for Sheriff’s services, the general services agreement would not include that. He stated that it was his belief that the Animal Control is a separate contract and asked City Manager Jeng to confirm. City Manager Jeng replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Dieringer moved that the City Council approve the renewal of the Los Angeles County General Services contract. Councilmember Wilson Mayor seconded the motion and the motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Black, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Pieper. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 9.MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS A.CONSIDER ACTION TO ENCOURAGE STATE LEGISLATURE TO DELAY PAYMENTS OF PROPERTY TAX (ORAL). Councilmember Black stated that people’s businesses have gone to zero and the Federal Government has advocated a tax holiday, which means people do not have to pay their taxes until July 15th. He understood that the portion of Rolling Hills property taxes collected was about $0.07 or $0.08 on the dollar. He felt that the Council should assist their residents and request that the State not collect the City’s portion of property taxes until July 15th. He mentioned that rent evictions have been outlawed, which impacts property owners if they cannot collect rents. The City is in good financial shape and can stand to go a few months without hitting their tax receipts. Mayor Mirsch agreed and advised she reached out to other Peninsula Mayors to see if there was any interest because the request would have more impact if the whole area asked. This was after City Manager Jeng sent out the information from the County Treasurer and Tax Collector stating they had no authority to appease this sort of request and would have to approach the State. She heard back from RPV and RHE. They had some interest and if Rolling Hills wrote a letter they would sign on. The PVE Mayor did not reply to her request. When she was on the conference call with the other Mayors, he was against it because it was their only source of income. Councilmember Dieringer asked for staff’s position was on the issue. 53 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-23-20 -10- City Manager Jeng indicated staff did not have a position on the matter. She reminded Mayor Mirsch the City’s largest revenue source is property tax but reiterated the City had enough in reserves if property taxes were delayed. Councilmember Black requested that along with the letter, staff and/or the City Manager approach the City’s local representatives and request they present the City’s request to the State Legislature. Councilmember Wilson concurred with Councilmember Black and asked if the City knew of other Cities outside the Peninsula considering this matter. City Manager Jeng did not have a sense of what other cities were considering but could reach out. She noticed cities were more concerned about PARS, rent evictions, parking enforcement, street sweeping, and other issues. There was a call between Mayor Mirsch and Mayor Pro Tem Pieper with Assemblyman Al Miratsuchi and other Peninsula Mayors recently where Mayor Pro Tem Pieper discussed delaying property taxes. Mayor Mirsch stated she would be happy to take lead on the project. Councilmember Black moved that the City Council direct staff to request the State and Local Legislature, including the Governor’s office, in writing with a direct approach to allow a property tax holiday for Rolling Hills residents up until July 15th to correlate with the Federal Tax Holiday. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion and the motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Black, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Pieper. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Councilmember Black asked when the Council would discuss reopening City Hall. Councilmember Dieringer commented that the City was under the Governor’s current directive to close City Hall until April. Councilmember Black replied the City was exempt. City Manager Jeng sent a notice to the community advising residents that City Hall is closed to the public as of March 16th and the closure would run until the end of March per the first Health Order. Since then, a second and third Health Order was released. The third Health Order stated that the closure does not apply to public employees in the course of their employment for a government agency, but also states that all public and private gatherings are prohibited. She proceeded to state that she welcomed the Councils thoughts on the matter. City Attorney Jenkins stated that this item was not listed on the agenda for discussion. He stated that the Council could agendize the item for discussion for the next meeting. 54 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-23-20 -11- Councilmember Black stated the next Council meeting is scheduled for April 13th and that does not work for him. He is not interested in keeping City Hall closed and wants to open by April 1 st. He stated there was nothing in a health order that requires City Hall to be closed. Health Orders one, two, and three had to do with group gatherings and social distancing. He believes City Hall lends itself very well to maintain social distancing. He could place tables at the front door and residents could not get anywhere near the staff. The staff could place cones or signs every six feet to make sure residents do not line up too close together when they are waiting for services. Mayor Mirsch repeated the item was not on the agenda and suggested the Council have an emergency meeting via teleconference since Dr. Black would like to have a discussion. City Attorney Jenkins stated that the Council could adjourn the meeting to any date and time they would like between now and the next meeting. Mayor Mirsch asked Councilmember Black if that was okay. It was obvious that he wanted to have the discussion before April 13th,and she did not see any alternative. Councilmember Black replied if that is what it takes. City Hall should not have closed from a medical viewpoint and needs to be opened right away. He does not want it to continue past March. Mayor Mirsch asked if there was interest among the Council to have an emergency meeting. Councilmember Wilson and Councilmember Dieringer concurred. Mayor Mirsch asked that the Council teleconference in order to practice social distancing. Councilmember Black asked why the Council was asked to teleconference. He suggested conducting the meeting before April 1st. Mayor Mirsch asked how much notification was needed to host a special meeting. City Attorney Jenkins stated that if the Council wanted to meet within the next three days, then the Council would have to call a special meeting. If the Council went beyond the 72 hours, then they could adjourn the meeting to that time and a new agenda would be posted. Councilmember Black advised the Council had four days left in the current week or they could meet on Monday, March 30th. Again, he specified City Hall should be open today and he does not want it to continue any longer. Mayor Mirsch asked what the Councils desired for dates and times. Discussion ensued among the Council and they agreed that the meeting would be adjourned to Monday, March 30th, 2020 at 7pm. Councilmember Black stated that he recommended following the recommendations of the CDC and the State. He also was happy to recommend sites with good information on COVID-19. 55 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-23-20 -12- Councilmember Wilson remarked that the mustard was in full bloom. He recalled the Land Conservancy advised there was an ideal time to mow it. He believes it is right before the mustard releases seeds and the City is at that window. He would hate for the City to miss the opportunity but understands that it may not be addresses right now. City Manager Jeng stated she could not open up discussion because the item was not agendized but would investigate it and bring it back. Councilmember Wilson asked about the Crest East striping and questioned the appropriateness of the striping used in that section. He inquired where the striper gets the specifications. City Manager Jeng replied CalTrans standards are used and its manual on uniformed traffic control devices for the state. Mayor Mirsch stated that communication is key. It is important to have more communication to know what is going on for the next Mayor. She knows that other cities are having nightly briefings and thought that was a good idea. She asked if the Council would be interested in End-of-Day communication from Elaine. Councilmember Black stated that the Council has a group text and prefers to use text to communicate. He stated that email would not work for him because he is not at home watching his computer. City Attorney Jenkins clarified that the exception under the Governor’s new order is that it allows the majority of the Council, in real time, to listen to an update on the COVID-19 emergency and ask questions. Council can listen through a telephone, a teleconference, zoom meeting, or be present even though it is not an actual meeting of the City Council. This exception does not allow the Council to engage in any other form of communication with each other consisting of a majority. It does not allow emailing, texting, or any other communication among the majority unless it is a unilateral communication from the Mayor or City Manager to the rest of the Council to stay updated. Mayor Mirsch thanked the City Attorney for his clarification. City Manager Jeng asked the Council if they would find it helpful to have a phone call with her on some frequency to get an update on the development of COVID-19 and response activities. Councilmember Dieringer stated that Council could call her on an as needed basis. In keeping with the City Attorney’s explanation, the Council would not be able to interact on a group text or group email to ask questions because that is not the forum. It is only on news conference that the exception applies. City Manager Jeng commented that if the Council is on a conference call with her, they are allowed to ask questions about the update, but they cannot have a conversation among themselves about 56 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-23-20 -13- the issue. She asked if the Council would like a call from her to disseminate information, which would allow them to ask questions with respect to COVID-19. Mayor Mirsch asked if Councilmember Dieringer had a question and City Manager Jeng provided her information; she wondered if that information would be better shared if all of the Councilmembers were listening to it at the same time. City Attorney Jenkins stated that City Manager Jeng could provide the Council with regular updates in writing. If City Manager Jeng receives questions that are of interest to the Council, she could send an email. Councilmember Black stated that it might not be in real time for the Councilmembers. If it is really important City Manager Jeng could simply send a group text. Councilmember Wilson asked under what circumstances might there be a need to address the Council in real time; perhaps to report an outbreak in the City. Councilmember Black stated if residents became infected what would the City do differently. They would still practice social distancing and stay home. The Council should assume that residents are already infected and more will likely become infected. The reality is we probably already know people that are infected and will know people that will die from it, but that does not mean they are going to do anything differently. It is going to settle down, the curve will flatten, which is happening. Some of the medicines being made might work and then a vaccine will ultimately become available, but it will take longer. The reality is there are certain people in the City that are infected. Mayor Mirsch asked if the Council wanted to conduct the meeting on the 30th in person or via teleconference. Councilmember Dieringer stated that she felt that accommodations should be made for both. Mayor Mirsch asked Councilmember Black for his opinion on whether it was okay to meet in person for the next meeting. Councilmember Black stated absolutely. He stated that the distancing is six feet and that it is physics not magic. Mayor Mirsch stated that showing up in person was optional for the Council and staff. 10.MATTERS FROM STAFF NONE. 11. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Mirsch adjourned the meeting at 57 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-23-20 -14- 08:18p.m. The next special meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, March 30, 2020 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. Respectfully submitted, _______________________________ Yohana Coronel, MBA City Clerk Approved, _____________________________________ Leah Mirsch Mayor 58 -1- MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, MARCH 30, 2020 1.CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Mirsch at 7:01p.m. via teleconference. 2.ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmembers participating via teleconference: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper Black, Dieringer and Wilson. Councilmembers Absent:None. Others participating via teleconference: Elaine Jeng, P.E., City Manager. Yohana Coronel, City Clerk. Michael Jenkins, City Attorney. 3.OPEN AGENDA NONE. 4.MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS A.DISCUSS RE-OPENING CITY HALL TO THE PUBLIC ON APRIL 1, 2020. Mayor Mirsch explained that the item for tonight’s discussion was brought up at the City Council Meeting on March 23, 2020. She indicated that the item could not be discussed because it was not agendized. This adjourned meeting was scheduled to discuss the matter. Mayor Mirsch expressed that she was very uncomfortable discussing the item before the Council. She thought it was inappropriate to discuss opening City Hall to the public given all the latest developments. The State, Federal and County all released recommendations and orders that strongly encouraged people to stay safe at home. In her opinion, this included the Council and City staff. In order to make sure Councilmembers did not speak over each other, she directed them to speak in alphabetical order. Councilmember Black stated that he was the Councilmember that brought up the topic at the last City Council meeting. He noted that the title of the agenda item was wrong, and the City was not aligned with the Los Angeles County Health Order because that order did not specifically include 59 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-30-20 -2- public entities. People are asked to adhere to public distancing of six feet or more and not have large group gatherings, but businesses and entities considered essential could remain open. He understood that it was normal to be afraid or concerned but it was more important to know how to manage fear. It was brought to his attention that City Hall staff was sent home because a part-time staff member reported possible exposure on Thursday, March 19th. Councilmember Black said medical professionals know that a person is only contagious 24-48 hours prior to showing symptoms. He specifically sent out the recommendations from hospitals and the CDC as to when people could go to back to work after being in close contact with someone with the virus. He pointed out that none of the City’s actions followed CDC recommendations. Part of leadership is to show people how to behave and not panic. He stated that the City’s actions represented one panic move after another. He stated that City staff should be in the building, the building should be open, and that staff should observe six-foot distances. He indicated that with a small staff, they were safer in City Hall than anywhere else. Councilmember Dieringer shared that she works in the public sector. She stated the State Supreme Court was drafting new measures because of the latest developments. Her office is dealing with criminal defendant’s constitutional rights to have a trial. Notwithstanding the importance of these constitutional rights, the Courts have decided to suspend cases that were in trial. She commented that this pandemic is being taken very seriously. She concluded that she was not in favor of opening City Hall. She pointed out that the City has a very small staff and if one person were to get sick, everyone would have to be quarantined, bringing everything to a halt. The City needed to exercise caution and Councilmember Dieringer added that there was nothing that could not be done through phone calls and email. Residents could drop things off and staff could retrieve them without having personal contact. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper stated that he does not understand why the grocery clerks, Costco employees, and the guys at the marijuana dispensary must go to work and City staff would not go to work. Until recently, City Hall accepted walk-ins and conducted business by appointments. He thought the set up was very reasonable. He stated he goes back and forth on the issue and cannot come up with an answer. He wondered if the City was conducting business effectively while telecommuting. He wondered if the City stopped permitting and reviewing plans and were these functions also stopped at LA County offices. He commented that Rolling Hills is a small piece of a bigger puzzle. The current situation does not allow the City to stand out and be different. He believed closing City Hall is wrong if staff’s physical absence prevents business from being conducted. Mayor Pro Tem inquired if business is disrupted with LA County offices closed? He expressed working at City Hall was safer than working at any other place. City Attorney Michael Jenkins suggested City Manager Jeng clarify some of the concerns raised by Mayor Pro Tem Pieper. He observed there was a perception that City Hall closed its doors, staff walked away, there was no work being performed, and that was not his understanding. City Manager Jeng reported that City Hall was closed to the public on Monday, March 16, 2020. City staff continued to report to work as usual behind closed doors until Wednesday, March 25, 2020 when all staff were directed to temporarily telecommute because a part-time staff member reported she was exposed to someone that may have the COVID-19. City Manager Jeng said the 60 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-30-20 -3- item before the Council was to discuss whether City Hall should be opened to the public and not whether City staff should telecommute. City Attorney Jenkins clarified that City staff had been telecommuting because of the exposure to the part-time employee. Councilmember Black insisted no exposure occurred. He stated that a lot of non-medical people were making incorrect medical treatment plans and it made no sense. City Attorney Jenkins stated the status quo before the possible exposure was that all employees were physically reporting to work, but the doors were closed to the public. If a member of the public had city business, they could make an appointment. He explained that nothing different was being proposed. He clarified for the Council that the only question before them was should City Hall unlock the doors during business hours and have unrestricted access from any member of the public. City Manager Jeng added that the County also closed its doors to the public. It was her understanding that County staff was still working in the office but at a limited capacity. The County has since developed ways to issue permits and check plans remotely. They were also exploring ways to pay fees remotely. All these services did not exist prior to the COVID-19. She stated that City staff is in constant contact with the County’s Building and Safety office that serves Rolling Hills. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper asked about daily foot traffic at City Hall prior to closure. City Manager Jeng responded that majority of City Hall’s walk-ins were from residents to discuss issues requiring city assistance. These visits have been replaced by phone calls and there has been no feedback or service issues. Consultants visit City hall to drop off plans. They have been directed to submit plans electronically and added that it is more efficient with electronic submittal. There have been no requests for walk-in service. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper stated he was in support of status quo. He stated that more City services need to be streamlined and that the City could use this time to transition. He stated it did not matter to him one way or another unless he hears from residents of inadequate service. Councilmember Wilson concurred with Mayor Pro Tem Pieper. He shared that his business is considered essential and had conflicting feelings. He was dealing with employees who were very concerned with customer interactions and had to find ways to address it. Some of his employees expressed concerned about proximity to other employees so his company implemented social distancing requirements. Some of his employees expressed concern about continuing to work even though his company did its best to make sure all employees felt safe and comfortable. On the other hand, he stated that a lot of his employees were happy to be employed. There is real fear within people and that fear takes a toll on employees. Councilmember Wilson expressed the importance of City Hall being open to the public, but it appeared that the important business was continuing. He stated he missed having the public at the Council meetings and some of the orders were heavy handed perhaps unnecessary, but we won’t know if it was needed. 61 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-30-20 -4- Mayor Mirsch stated that she respected Councilmember Black as a physician and trusted him with her care. However, she took issue with his statement of “non-medical people making decisions” because she too has been listening to Public Health Officials such as Dr. Jerome Adams, Dr. Anthony Fauci, and Dr. Barbara Ferrer. They all continue to stress that people should have limited contact with the public. She reiterated the City’s business could continue without having the office open to the public. She received comments from residents questioning the need to open City Hall to the public. Furthermore, the City was not perceived as panicking but rather following guidelines from the public health government officials and other physicians in a position to provide information. Councilmember Black stated City Hall was panicking and it made no sense to him. He called for a vote on the item. Mayor Pro Tem Piper stated that he agreed with Councilmember Black, however he proposed a motion for City Hall to continue to operate as is. Mayor Mirsch asked for clarification on the appropriate motion. City Attorney Jenkins clarified that the question was whether City Hall should be opened to the public. Councilmember Black could make a motion to reopen City Hall to the public or someone else could make a motion to maintain the status quo. He noted that the status quo was City Hall would be available to the public by appointment, email, or by phone. Councilmember Black motioned that City Hall be reopened to the public in accordance with the Los Angeles County Public Health recommendations and the CDC guidelines and pretend that staff is present at City Hall. The motion was not seconded. Mayor Mirsch asked if Council needed a motion to keep the status quo. City Attorney Jenkins stated no motion was needed to maintain the status quo. Councilmember Black requested to continue the meeting to next week to discuss staff’s physical presence at City Hall. The City was going against medical practices regarding the Coronavirus. He requested to have the City Council meet weekly because it was his opinion that bad decisions were being made. Mayor Mirsch stated that the next regular Council meeting was scheduled for April 13, 2020. She inquired if Councilmember Black wanted to hold a meeting on April 06, 2020. Councilmember Black stated that this is an emergency and the City Council should meet as soon as possible to resolve City staff not being at work. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper asked if City staff was going to be available to work. 62 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-30-20 -5- City Manager Jeng stated she is waiting for the COVID-19 test result. If the result is negative, staff will physically return to City Hall. If the test result is positive, she would seek further information before proceeding. Councilmember Black stated he disagreed with the City Manager’s actions. If the employee was potentially exposed on the 19th and had shown no symptoms by the 30th this person did not have the virus on the 19th. The part-time employee could have contracted the disease on the 27th by going to the supermarket but did not contract the virus on the 19th. Mayor Mirsch asked if there was a possibility that the employee could be a carrier of the disease. Councilmember Black stated that carriers were not necessarily infectious. A person could be infectious between 24-48 hours before they show symptoms. He again stated that the part-time employee could not have become infected on the 19th if the person infected first showed symptoms the 24th. City Manager Jeng stated the Council entrusted her with the operations of City Hall and she was doing so to the best of her ability. Although she is not a medical professional and does not have one on staff, she gathered the best information available to care for the wellbeing of the community and City staff. Councilmember Black replied that the City Manager had a medical professional on her Council who was willing to talk to her. He inquired if the person was tested? It was his understanding that people do not have to get tested and further added that the test results fall under patient privacy. Test result for individuals cannot be legally released to other individuals. City Manager Jeng stated according to the employer of the person, a city official of another city, he was tested, and his test result will be shared. City Attorney Jenkins reminded the Mayor that there was a request to schedule an adjourned meeting for Monday, April 6, 2020 to reassess the situation. Mayor Mirsch stated she would like to schedule a meeting for next Monday and inquired if she needed a second motion. City Attorney Jenkins stated she could adjourn the meeting to Monday, April 6th, set a time, and wait for a second motion to vote. Councilmember Black moved that the City Council adjourn the City Council meeting of March 30, 2020 to Monday, April 06, 2020 at 7pm. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Black, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 63 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-30-20 -6- ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Mayor Mirsch provided an update on her conversations with the State Assembly representative and Senator Ben Allen’s office regarding the City’s request to extend the property tax payment deadline. She was unable to reach Governor Newsom’s office. She also spoke with the Tax Collector’s office and the County Treasurer Tax Collector’s office. The League of California Cities and seven other agencies sent a letter asking the State not to extend the property tax payment deadline. The responses she received from her outreach was that a person could appeal to have their late fees waived after April 11th. If the person’s reason for late payment had to do with COVID-19, a task force would investigate the request. All the people she spoke with did not support a payment deadline extension because property tax is a revenue source for the cities necessary to pay for first responders, doctors, and essential services. Councilmember Black stated that it was his understanding that if a person wanted their late fees waived, they would have to prove that they were physically incapable of doing so due to COVID- 19. He asked if his interpretation was correct. Mayor Mirsch stated that she wondered the same thing but unfortunately, she was not able to get an answer. Councilmember Black asked City Attorney Jenkins if he would go to jail if he recommended that people not pay their property taxes if they were having a hard time. City Attorney Jenkins replied he would not be violating any laws by providing his opinion. Councilmember Dieringer stated Councilmember Black had the right to free speech. City Attorney Jenkins indicated that Councilmember Black needed to make clear that he was stating his personal opinion and was not speaking as a Councilmember. 11. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Mirsch adjourned the meeting at 7:50p.m. to an adjourned meeting of the City Council scheduled for Monday, April 06, 2020 beginning at 7:00p.m. via teleconference. 64 Minutes City Council Meeting 03-30-20 -7- Respectfully submitted, _______________________________ Yohana Coronel, MBA City Clerk Approved, _____________________________________ Leah Mirsch Mayor 65 -1- MINUTES OF A JOINT STUDY SESSION MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, APRIL 13, 2020 1.CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Mirsch at 6:07p.m. via teleconference. 2.ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmembers participating via teleconference: Mayor Mirsch, Black*, Dieringer, Pieper, and Wilson. Commissioners Present: Chairman Chelf, Cardenas, Cooley, Kirkpatrick and Seaburn. Councilmembers Absent:None. Others participating via teleconference: Elaine Jeng, P.E., City Manager. Meredith Elguira, Planning and Community Services Director. Yohana Coronel, City Clerk. Michael Jenkins, City Attorney. Jane Abzug, Assistant City Attorney. *Councilmember Black joined the meeting at 6:47pm. 3.OPEN AGENDA –PUBLIC COMMENT NONE. 4.CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT STUDY SESSION PCS Director Meredith Elguira gave an introduction of the joint study session between the Planning Commission and the City Council. She highlighted the list of discussion topics submitted by both bodies for input and/or questions to create a path forward. Enforcement of Power on Nuisance PCS Director Meredith Elguira explained the City receives numerous complaints regarding lights, landscaping, dead vegetation, fallen trees on private property, and damaged fences. Commissioner Cooley asked how the City distinguishes a nuisance from a code violation. Assistant City Attorney Jane Abzug replied that nuisance is defined per the municipal code, which states a "nuisance" shall be defined as anything which is injurious to health or safety, or is indecent 66 Minutes Joint Study Session between PC & CC 04-13-20 -2- or offensive to the senses, or an obstruction to the free use of property…” (RHMC, Chapter 8.24). She added the section also sets forth that the Council may define by ordinance any particular condition constituting a nuisance. If the Planning Commission had a particular item to recommend to the Council as a nuisance, that could be a way to address the enforcement of power on nuisance. City Manager Jeng commented that from an operational standpoint, it becomes difficult to differentiate the two because there are times when code violations are continuous, and it becomes a nuisance. Chair Chelf did not recall handling nuisance issues. It seemed that City staff is more familiar with nuisance issues. He stated that some people have had their green fence up for years and roll-off containers in the front yard. He feels that residents are abusing their fencing permit and that is a more important issue. The containers should be placed in the backyard or side yard and residents should not be allowed to bring in more than one at a time. They should only be for building materials and not used for storage. Assistant City Attorney Jane Abzug commented this topic came up about 6 months ago when discussing resolutions of approval and placing conditions on construction and trailers. She reminded the Council and the Planning Commission that if the City were to prohibit those things outside of the construction context there would need to be a code amendment. Mayor Pro Tem Piper asked how the City determines when to direct a property owner to remove the fencing when they have an open permit. Chair Chelf advised the Planning Commission had discussions about a fence time limit. It was suggested that the property owner reapply for a fencing permit every 6 months and provide proof why the fence was needed. If no proof is submitted, then the property owner would have a certain number of days to remove the fencing. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper wondered how the City could deal with the outliers that have keep their fence up. Chair Chelf recognizes there is always someone that will abuse the timeline forcing the City to change all the rules. He suggested having a safeguard in place if a property owner has a fence up for no reason; then City has a mechanism to enforce removal. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper asked the PCS Director to create and present a manageable process to the Planning Commission to make it part of the rules. Chair Chelf added if the City made the applicant responsible for renewing their fencing permit every 6 months, there would be no need to make a big deal of it. Commissioner Kirkpatrick commented that there was not a lot of fencing around the City. He suggested better communication between property owners, contractors, and the Planning Commission. 67 Minutes Joint Study Session between PC & CC 04-13-20 -3- Chair Chelf suggested defining what “under construction” means to give property owners guidelines to keep or remove fencing. PCS Director Elguira replied that staff could easily address the issue with the Code Enforcement Officer and make the timeframe of the fencing part of the conditions of approval for projects. She added that it was easier when the language is part of the code. It was also noted that Building and Safety input would be needed. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper presumed the Council needed to figure out how to implement the timeframe of fencing into the City’s municipal code. He asked if the Planning Commission would take lead on this process and bring it to the Council for approval. PCS Director Elguira replied in the affirmative. Councilmember Wilson cautioned both bodies they would have to be very specific about the proposed regulations. A construction container could be easily confused with a roll-off dumpster. He also reminded both bodies that containers come in various sizes. Mayor Mirsch recalls addressing that issue regarding a project on Crest. Decisions were made that specified the size and number of storage containers and should be listed in the conditions of approval. Councilmember Dieringer recommended the City talk to Building and Safety to better define the need, type, and how long the container should remain on the property. PCS Director Elguira replied that the planning department would follow up on both issues with the Building and Safety Department. Tree and View Protection PCS Director Elguira reported she receives numerous calls about tree and view protections. She was processing one case and estimates three more on the horizon. She has submitted one letter and had two residents inquire about the process. She determined this was becoming a hot topic. Commissioner Kirkpatrick asked if the residents were interested in understanding the process or were, they attempting to resolve an issue. PCS Director Elguira responded one resident has been going back and forth with their neighbor over a year. Another resident spoke to their neighbor and wrote a letter, while one resident requested advice from her and the City Manager on how to approach his neighbor regarding his view problem. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper commented the City modified the rules. These three cases need to go through the process to determine if the hybrid compromise works. If logical conclusions are reached, then they could leave it as is. If it does not go well, the City will have to change the process again. He does not want to change anything without the hybrid rules being tested. 68 Minutes Joint Study Session between PC & CC 04-13-20 -4- ADU & JADUs PCS Director Elguira reported the City adopted amended ordinances based on the State’s new laws requiring cities to allow ADUs and JADUs. The process starts with a review of the requirements and staff provides the applicant with stringent guidelines. One application was submitted and approved; however, the applicant has not picked up the plans. The applicant met the setback and height requirements and the covenant is being prepared. A second applicant requested a site visit. Thus far, every applicant has been open to amending their design, setback, and plans to blend in with the City’s character. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper asked if there was need for the Planning Commission to address ADUs and JADUs. PCS Director Elguira advised the process for ADUs and JDU’s is ministerial. Chair Chelf fears some people will use the ADU process to bypass the Planning Commission’s approval process of a conditional use permit (CUP). Assistant City Attorney Jane Abzug replied State law prohibits discretionary review for ADUs/JADUs (which conform with state law/the City’s ordinance). But that if an applicant wants a guest house (or an ADU/JADU that did not conform), it would still need to go through the CUP process. PCS Director Elguira asked if there were any concerns. Several questions were raised regarding the States laws, undergrounding, and septic tanks. PCS Director Elguira indicated that the City has standards that will be enforced. Regarding undergrounding, the guidelines state it must be done when upgrading the electrical panel. The septic systems would have to be addressed with the Building and Safety Department. Housing Element PCS Director Elguira conveyed the City was in the process of responding to HCD. City Manager Jeng is reviewing the draft. Alternative options are being explored regarding how the City will comply and provide 18 affordable units. With the passing of the new ADU laws, the State is allowing cities to count their ADU’s toward affordable units given that there is a program in place making it feasible for the homeowner to build an ADU on their property. The City is looking to move in that direction and try to comply with the RHNA obligations using ADU’s and JADU’s. She informed the Planning Commission and the Council that she was not sure how the State would receive the City’s proposal making it a calculated risk. The City is going to wait to hear back from the State before moving forward with the school site or any other site. A question was presented if the City had to prove that ADU’s and JADU’s are being used for affordable housing. City Attorney Jenkins explained the availability of ADUs in the zoning ordinance alone will not be sufficient to obtain a certification for the housing element. The only way an ADU program will 69 Minutes Joint Study Session between PC & CC 04-13-20 -5- succeed is if the ADUs are covenanted for affordability and actually built. The only way the ADUs are going to be covenanted for affordability is if the City were to provide sufficient incentive for a property owner to place a covenant on their property and that the unit built will only be rented to income eligible persons. There was internal discussion and there are no viable financial incentives that can be provided. The City cannot rely on the ADU program to satisfy the RHNA requirements particularly for affordable housing. The City will have to identify some sites but is not limited to the two institutional sites located outside the gates. Residential zone sites could also be considered along Palos Verdes Drive. City Manager Jeng informed the Planning Commission that the City has a work plan with the HCD. They are currently editing the 2013-2014 housing element report. There will be a second round of edits that the Commission will be a part of that includes public outreach. She anticipates this will occur in September/October 2020. Councilmember Black joined the meeting at 6:47p.m. Stormwater Councilmember Black remarked that the City has less than 10 storm water exits. His hope is to have property owners address their own water runoff by implementing drain catch basins. He would like to start with individual homes then move on to individual canyons until all storm drains are eliminated. Commissioner Kirkpatrick replied that he supports his idea but suggested analyzing each site where catch basins would be placed. The Planning Commission and the Council both pledged support for storm water runoff, however, they would like to conduct a study in order to better understand what the catch basins do and the cost before making it a requirement. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper suggested the Planning Commission take lead on how storm water runoff should be addressed. Chair Chelf commented that the subject matter is outside of the Planning Commissions realm and will need a consultant to guide them on how to control water in order to provide suggestions to the Council. City Manager Jeng remarked that she would work with PCS Director Elguira on considerations, contact consultants to seek more information about storm water, and come up with some measures. She noted that the Planning Commission is interested in looking at cost while the Council is interested in eliminating discharge. They will combine the two and put a proposal together to present to the Planning Commission and then the Council. She will report on their progress and come back with a date to hold another joint study session. 5. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Mirsch adjourned the meeting at 07:03 70 Minutes Joint Study Session between PC & CC 04-13-20 -6- p.m. The next meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, April 27, 2020 beginning at 7:00 p.m. via teleconference. Respectfully submitted, ________________________________ Yohana Coronel, MBA City Clerk Approved, _____________________________________ Leah Mirsch Mayor 71 -1- MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, APRIL 13, 2020 1.CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Mirsch at 7:05p.m. via teleconference. 2.ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmembers participating via teleconference: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper Black, Dieringer and Wilson. Councilmembers Absent:None. Others participating via teleconference: Elaine Jeng, P.E., City Manager. Meredith Elguira, Planning & Community Services Director. Yohana Coronel, City Clerk. Michael Jenkins, City Attorney. Jane Abzug, Assistant City Attorney. 3.OPEN AGENDA Clint Patterson and Richard Boos (via email) thanked the outgoing Mayor, incoming Mayor, and commended the City Manager for a job well done. They commented specifically on the undergrounding projects and expressed appreciation and support. 4.CONSENT CALENDAR Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. A.MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 27, 2020. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED B.PAYMENT OF BILLS. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED C. REPUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLING TONNAGE REPORT FOR JANUARY AND FEBRUARY 2020. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED D. CONSIDER PROCLAIMING THE MONTH OF APRIL 2020 AS NATIONAL DONATE LIFE MONTH. 72 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-13-20 -2- RECOMMENDATION: STAFF RECOMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PROCLAIM THE MONTH OF APRIL 2020 AS NATIONAL DONATE LIFE MONTH AND PROMOTE THE NATIONAL DONATE LIFE MONTH IN THE CITY’S BLUE NEWSLETTER. Councilmember Dieringer pointed out that she had corrections to the minutes. Mayor Mirsch requested pulling consent item 4B. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper moved that the City Council approve all consent items with amendments to the minutes of January 27, 2019. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Black, Dieringer, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Item 4B Councilmember Wilson pulled item 4B and queried a vendor. He also inquired about potential reimbursements from Republic Services for the HF&H Consultants charge and Chen’s for the Michael Baker charge listed. City Manager Jeng replied she could not recall the vendor’s name, however, she did note the vendor was addressing the gopher problem at City Hall. She added that both charges would be refunded to the City by each of the parties (Republic Services and Chen’s) as agreed. Mayor Mirsch requested the payment of bills report provide more detailed information in the description column. Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council approve consent item 4B. Mayor Pro Tem Pieper Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Mirsch, Pieper, Black, Dieringer, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 5.PRESENTATION OF CITY COUNCIL REORGINIZATION A.PRESENTAITON OF NEW MAYOR AND MAYOR PRO-TEM. B.PRESENTATION TO MAYOR MIRSCH IN RECOGNITION OF HER SERVICE DURING HER 2019-2020 TERM AS MAYOR. C.COMMENTS FROM OUTGOING MAYOR. 73 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-13-20 -3- Mayor Mirsch declared that the Council would now reorganize. She called for a nomination for Mayor. Councilmember Wilson nominated Jeff Pieper for Mayor. Councilmember Dieringer seconded the nomination. Hearing no other nominations, she declared Jeff Pieper be elected Mayor by acclamation. Newly elected Mayor Pieper thanked outgoing Mayor Mirsch for all her hard work and presented her with a plaque. Mayor Pieper conducted the remainder of the meeting and proceeded to select a Mayor Pro Tem. He called for nominations. Councilmember Mirsch nominated Bea Dieringer for Mayor Pro Tem. Councilmember Wilson seconded the nomination. Hearing no other nominations, he declared that Bea Dieringer be elected Mayor Pro Tem by acclamation. Outgoing Mayor Mirsch made a statement summarizing issues and accomplishments over the last year. She thanked the staff for all their hard work and for providing excellent service to the residents. She also thanked her fellow Councilmembers for their support. Councilmember Wilson thanked the outgoing Mayor. He stated she did an excellent job. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer thanked the outgoing Mayor for always ensuring everyone’s voice was heard. 6.CITY COUNCIL AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION Please refer to the minutes for the Special Planning Commission meeting. 7.OLD BUSINESS A.CONSIDER AND APPROVE AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT FOR RESIDENTIAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SERVICES WITH REPUBLIC SERVICES. City Manager Jeng reported that the Solid Waste franchise agreement would expire June 30, 2020. The Solid Waste Committee has been working on an amended and restated agreement with Republic Services. Numerous meetings were held and progress was reported with regard to terms discussed. The Solid Waste Committee and staff’s recommendation is to approve the amended and restated agreement with Republic Services for nine years, starting July 1, 2020. She noted the General Manager Ray Grothaus was available for questions. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. 74 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-13-20 -4- Arun Bhumitra asked via email what were the stipulations on cancelling or revising the contract if issues arise. Councilmember Wilson replied there are liquidated damages that can be enforced if there is a failure to perform. Councilmember Mirsch moved that the City Council approve the Amended and Restated agreement for residential solid waste management services with Republic Services and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. Councilmember Black seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. B.DICUSS CURRENT CITY SUBSIDY FOR SOLID WASTE SERVICES RATE INCREASE AND CONSIDER DISCONTINUING THE SUBSIDY BEGINNING JULY 1, 2020. City Manager Jeng reported the City kept the resident’s rates at $1100.00 per yearper parcel. Since there is a new contract with Republic Services, the new rate is $1292.00 per year, per parcel. If the City continues with the subsidy of the 685 parcels per year, the City would subsidize approximately $132,000.00. She recommends discontinuing the subsidy and provided options to move forward. The City could increase the residents’ contributions to the current rate or phase the subsidy over a couple of years and gradually catch the residents up. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none, he returned to the discussion. Councilmember Black commented that the City had plenty of money and it continues to grow. There were two years of funds in the bank. This was one way to give the residents their money back and added that he was stunned that the Council was considering discontinuing the subsidy. Councilmember Mirsch stated that she was not stunned at discussing $132,000.00. The reason for the surplus was because certain projects had not been executed. She expressed concern about what the City’s revenues will look like in the future. She pointed out that rates increases were not unique to Rolling Hills and that big changes were happening in the solid waste environment. Councilmember Wilson asked if Councilmember Black could concede that the Council could not continue in perpetuity and possibly consider lowering the percentage of the subsidy. Councilmember Black replied he would not concede. Councilmember Dieringer mentioned there was different ways in which the residents can benefit. She does not have a problem with the subsidy but prefers subsidizing a percentage of the fees. She discussed building projects and a subsidy for reducing fees because the people doing the building 75 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-13-20 -5- projects are the ones benefiting and the City is paying more for them. She suggested subsidizing a percentage of the fee so there is some benefit for every resident versus changing fees on building projects. Mayor Pieper advised the Council did not need to make a permanent decision. The discussion is about making a decision for the fiscal year 2020-2021 subsidy; it will go from $92,000.00 to $132,000.00 bringing an increase of $40,000.00. Councilmember Black moved that the City Council continue the subsidies for the residents and pick up the current increases for FY 2020-2021. Pro Tem Dieringer seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, and Black. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mirsch and Wilson. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 8.NEW BUSINESS A.CONSIDER AND APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH URBAN FUTURES TO SERVE AS THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR FOR EASTFIELD UNDERGROUDING UTILITY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT. City Manager Jeng clarified that the contract with Urban Features is only serving the Eastfield Undergrounding Utility Assessment District. This item is for preparation of the next step. Urban Features is a financial advisor. The project is currently waiting for Edison’s construction bid to inform the assessment district of the cost. The property owners within the assessment will vote to continue the project after this information is received. If they vote to move forward, the City needs to provide the assessment district with financing options. The assessment district has the option to pay cash or finance. If they choose to finance, the group can go through a private bank or sell a bond. This is where a financial advisor is needed. Like other services the City has provided to the assessment district, the City engages the service provider with the policy that the Council will only contribute to design cost and because an exception was made for the Shoettles project, the Council agreed to pay a partial for the assessment district. The City is not contributing to this item. The cost of Urban Futures will be funded completely by the property owners within the district. City Manager Jeng is recommending engaging the services of Urban Futures, if the project does not go forward then the consultants contract expires and there is not fee and any money collected is returned to the property owners within the district. Councilmember Wilson asked if consultant and the cost associated contemplated from the beginning and were the members of the utility district expecting this cost. City Manager Jeng replied that she was not sure what the assessment group understood but she provided a letter to the property owners within the district to let them know that an assessment engineer needed to be hired along with assistance for the financing side of the project but she did 76 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-13-20 -6- not provide a cost. City Attorney Jenkin explained that the City cannot do a financing without a financial advisor. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none, he returned to the discussion. Councilmember Dieringer wanted to confirm that the City would collect the money from the assessment district first before the Council executes the contract. City Manager Jeng replied in the affirmative.The money collected will be deposited into an escrow account. Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council approve a professional services agreement with Urban Futures and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. B.CONSIDER AND APPROVETHE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP) FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO PREPARE AN UPDATE TO THE CITY’S SAFETY ELEMENT. City Manager Jeng explained the Safety Element is a companion element that serves the General Plan and was last updated in 1990. The City applied for grant funds through CalOES to update the plan. The City was recently awarded the grant and accepted it. The next step is to hire a consultant to prepare the update and staff prepared a Request For Proposal (RFP) to solicit consultant services. The project will be paid for by the grant. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none, he returned to the discussion. Councilmember Black inquired about the cost for services. City Manager Jeng replied the cost is unknown until fees are solicited from consultants through the RFP process. Councilmember Wilson asked for a status update on other CalOES grant applications. City Manager Jeng replied there were no other applications with CalOES regarding grant projects (i.e. CWPP, vegetation management in the canyons and an undergrounding project along Eastfield). Councilmember Mirsch moved that the City Council approve the RFP, advertise the RFP on the city's website, and other outlets. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer seconded the motion. The motion 77 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-13-20 -7- passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. (10A out of order) 10.MATTERS FROM STAFF A.RECEIVE AND FILE FIRST QUARTER 2020 REPORT ON FIRE FUEL ABATEMENT ENFORCEMENT CASES. PCS Director Elguira reported on 2020 first quarter fire fuel abatement enforcement cases. There is a jump in the report because there are expired permits according to Building and Safety but some projects were never finalized. Staff is following up on the expired permits to ensure work is not in progress or if the project was completed, to attain final approval. There are 7 new cases under vegetation and 12 cases were closed last quarter. There are 81 cases under the comprehensive list, which includes 61 cases with open permits and 75 cases were closed. She pointed out that the active cases are now highlighted. City Manager Jeng added that staff will be reaching out for status with open permit cases. At the request of Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer, the quarterly report was reconfigured and now one list shows the streets in alphabetical order and the second list is organized chronologically based on the date a case was initiated. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none, he returned to the discussion. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer inquired about addressing the expired permit issue. There should be an incentive for people to finalize their permits. Mayor Pieper pointed out that this is the first time the City has compiled this sort of list and it will fall under the Code Enforcement Officer. He suspects 80% of the cases listed have been finalized or the project never happened. PCS Director Elguira clarified the incentive for property owners to finalize their projects is the certificate of occupancy because you cannot occupy a building without the certificate. Staff is working with the Building and Safety Department to confirm they are following up with expired permits as well. Councilmember Wilson inquired about inconsistencies with some of the cases listed. On one page a cases is shown as closed but on the second page the same case is shown as open. PCS Director Elguira replied she would follow up and get back to Councilmember Wilson. 78 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-13-20 -8- Councilmember Mirsch commented that she liked the two separate reports but also requested that the older open cases list a status. PCS Director Elguira replied she would add a status column. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council receive and file the report. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. B. UPDATE ON ACTION PLAN WITH CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT (HCD) TO RESPOND TO REVIEW COMMENTS ON THE CITY’S 5HT CYCLE HOUSING ELEMENT. City Manager Jeng specified this was a report out and no action was needed from the Council. On May 3, 2019, the City of Rolling Hills provided the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) its plan of action to comply with the City's Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) obligations. The City provided milestones that it must meet during the 2019-2020 reporting period. This plan of action shows the City's commitment in finding ways to meet its housing obligations in a timely manner. She concluded by stating she was open for questions. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none, he returned to the discussion. Mayor Pieper received and filed the report on behalf of the Council. (9A out of order) 9.MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS A.CONSIDER REQUEST FROM COUNCILMEMBER BLACK THAT THE MAYOR CALL A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CIYT COUNCIL WITHIN 48 HOURS OF ISSUANCE OF AN ORDER BY THE CITY MANAGER PERTAINING TO COVID-19 IN ORDER TO PROVIDE FOR COUNCIL REVIEW. Councilmember Black reported that there have been two emergency orders in relation to COVID- 19. The first was to close City Hall and the second was sending City staff home for possible exposure to a part-time employee who may have had contact with a person with COVID-19. He suggested that whenever a major decision is being made with relation to COVID-19, the City Council should review it within forty-eight hours. He feels that non-medical personnel should not make medical decisions. 79 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-13-20 -9- Councilmember Mirsch commented she does not think the Council needs to review the City Manager’s decisions related to COVID-19. She has not found any of the actions taken by the City Manager inappropriate. Prior to any action taken by the City Manager, Councilmember Mirsch thoroughly reviewed the informationavailable to her and the City Manager had procedures in place to assure that City business would continue. She believes that the actions taken by the City Manager follow the principle of applying an abundance of caution and she acted appropriately within her authority. She was not making medical decisions but rather making administrative decisions how to best run City Hall. Mayor Pieper stated now that he is Mayor, he expects to communicate with the City Manager on a daily basis about COVID-19 issues. Even though he understands Councilmember Black’s point of view, he will continue to communicate with the City Manager and try to make the best decisions with the information available to them. City Manager Jeng will continue to send out her written report and if Councilmember Black notices something in the report he does not agree with, then a meeting can be scheduled. He does not feel a meeting should be called for everything COVID-19. Councilmember Black clarified he only wants to call a meeting for any emergency actions relating to COVID-19. He added it was clearly wrong that staff was sent home for 14 days for presumed potential exposure. Mayor Pieper committed he and the City Manager will make the best decisions they can within a timely manner. If a decision needs to be made by the group, then a meeting will be scheduled. City Attorney Jenkins clarified that the Mayor was proposing this route rather than establishing a hard and fast rule that has to be followed in every instance. The Mayor will work closely with the City Manager on a daily basis with this emergency and if a decision is made and there are concerns expressed by the Council, he will call a meeting. He can call a special meeting, which can occur as early as 24 hours or 48 hours. It can be established as needed rather than applying a hard and fast rule. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none, he returned to the discussion. Councilmember Mirsch commented this highlights the necessity for frequent communication when swift action is needed and information is rapidly changing. She asked if the Council was interested in having daily briefing calls as a temporary measure for the duration of the COVID- 19 orders. The Council could adjourn their regular meeting to a continued meeting to discuss possible required actions. Mayor Pieper advised he understood there are lots of options and would like to address any issues first. If someone is unhappy with his decision, then a meeting or call could be scheduled. City Attorney Jenkins added that the action is aligned with the County Health Officer and the Governor. They are both coming down with orders and the City is subject to those orders like every City in the County. City Manager Jeng can continue to provide copies of those orders to the Council to keep them informed of what is going on at the County and State level. Given the 80 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-13-20 -10- unique nature of the City, there is not a lot the City can do compared to others. He agrees with the Mayor that if the City Manager continues to provide her reports and forwards all of the Governors orders, proclamations, and the County Health Orders, the Council will have a lot of information with which the Council unfortunately won’t have control over but which they are subject to. 11. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Pieper adjourned the meeting at 9:38p.m. to a regularmeeting of the City Council scheduled for Monday, April 27, 2020 beginning at 7:00p.m. via teleconference. Respectfully submitted, _______________________________ Yohana Coronel, MBA City Clerk Approved, _____________________________________ Jeff Pieper Mayor 81 -1- MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, APRIL 27, 2020 1.CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Pieper at 7:06p.m. via teleconference. 2.ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmembers participating via teleconference: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. Councilmembers Absent:None. Others participating via teleconference: Elaine Jeng, P.E., City Manager. Meredith Elguira, Planning and Community Services Director Yohana Coronel, City Clerk. Michael Jenkins, City Attorney. Jane Abzug, Assistant City Attorney. Chris Sarabia, Conservation Director. Terry Shea, Finance Director. Jim Walker, Budget Consultant. 3.OPEN AGENDA Alfred Visco petitioned the City to immediately abate the extreme fire hazard and public nuisance in Paint Brush Canyon via email. He requested an update on the status of 7 Ranchero Road as well. He suggested the City reduce the amount of high fire risk vegetation with detailed mapping and a presentation from the Fire Safe Council representative. He has not noticed any Mustard mowing as proposed by the Land Conservancy. He recommended the City explore the possibility of canyon properties transferring ownership to the Nature Preserve or placing an easement on relevant portions of the property for the Nature Preserve to conduct maintenance. 4.CONSENT CALENDAR Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. A.MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 10, 2020. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED B.PAYMENT OF BILLS. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED 82 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-27-20 -2- C. REPUBLIC SERVICES RECYCLING TONNAGE REPORT FOR MARCH 2020. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED D. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2020. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED E.UPDATED CITY COUNCIL BUDGET CALENDART FOR FY 2020-2021. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED F. NEW 2020 SPRING CLEANUP DATES. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer requested to pull item 4A to go the next meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council approve consent items 4B, 4C, 4D, 4E and 4F. Councilmember Black seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 5.COMMISSION ITEMS NONE. 6.PUBLIC HEARING NONE. 7.OLD BUSINESS A.CONSIDER AND APPROVE A PROPOSAL FROM PALOS VERDES PENINSULA LAND CONSERVANCY FOR ADDITIONAL FIRE FUEL REMOVAL WORK IN THE PRESERVE IN THE AREAS ADJACENT TO THE CITY BORDER. City Manager Jeng reported the City Council approved an agreement with the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy (Land Conservancy) on October 14, 2019 in the amount of $34,200 for fire fuel removal. Two acres of Acacia removal within the northeastern portion of the Portuguese Bend Reserve along the Rim Trail was $27,000 and $7,200 for removing 16 acres of invasive mustard plant around Grapevine Trail. The Land Conservancy completed this work in early March. The agreement included a maintenance article for three years at $12,000 per year for springtime Mustard mowing and monitoring of Acacia to prevent regrowth. The Land Conservancy’s work commenced on April 20, 2020. During the February 10, 2020 City Council meeting, Land Conservancy staff provided a presentation of the fire fuel removal conducted between November 2019 and February 2020. Per the Council’s request for added fire fuel removal in the Preserve, Conservation Director Chris Sarabia, attended the teleconference to answer 83 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-27-20 -3- questions. City Manager Jenginformed the Council she had asked the Land Conservancy to submit maps of the 2019 proposal and the current proposal. She highlighted the different areas on maps #1, page 47, and map #2, page 48, that were worked on in 2019 and how it lines up with the new proposal of $50,000.00. Mr. Sarabia provided overview of the maps and pointed out the work underway by the Land Conservancy. He addressed Mr. Visco’s comment and stated they were working on the accessible areas of the canyon and noted that Paint Brush Canyon was complicated to access. He explained part of the proposal includes limbing the Pine trees because they are too expensive to remove but offered to obtain a quote from a contractor if the Council preferred. He noted communities grow attached to their Pine trees and are unwilling to remove them. He is working with Cal State Long Beach Master’s Program of Geographical Information Science who is attempting to map the entire Peninsula. The mapping will inform the Land Conservancy where the Acacia is located, especially in tough areas, and hopes to share that information with all the Peninsula Cities. Councilmember Wilson asked if the Mustard seed is being caught before it drops, how many Pine trees were being limbed up, and how high was the limbing. Mr. Sarabia advised the Mustard is currently flowering and developing seeds, so they try to remove it now to cut out the seed bank. The contractor would address the trees on the side of the conservancy, approximately 3 or 4, and limb up the standard six feet. He warned if a tree trunk is on private property the Land Conservancy would not touch it. Councilmember Black asked what was happening with the green between Fire Station Trail and Crest going west toward the school. Mr. Sarabia replied that the area is full of native plants, however, the area is very hard to access and would exceed their budget because of the equipment required. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer asked if the Mustard mowing was needed for the next three years and what is the cost per year to mow the pink area on the map. She also inquired if Mr. Sarabia knew about the fire issue and the efficacy of removing the Mustard versus the Acacia. Mr. Sarabia replied in the affirmative and stated he did not have the cost for the mowing of the pink area and did not included in the proposal because of budget constraints. He could include it in the follow-up proposal with a multi-year maintenance plan if that was the Council’s pleasure. He explained that Acacia is targeted because it is a long-life shrub; the longer it lives, the bigger it grows. Mustard is an annual plant and only lives one to two years, therefore when it is mowed it is thinned out. Mayor Pieper replied that the Council would like a multi-year maintenance plan. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Alfred Visco commented via email that he was in support of the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy proposal. He noted no explanation was given why the Pine trees would not be 84 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-27-20 -4- removed and only limbed up because Pine trees and Acacia are listed as high fire hazard plants by the LA County Fire Department Ready!Set!Go! brochure. He recommends that the Pine trees be removed but if they cannot be removed, then the canopies should be thinned. Mayor Pieper asked how long it would take to complete the pink area and requested the Land Conservancy submit the cost for maintaining the area. He also requested the estimated cost to cut down the three Pine trees. Mr. Sarabia speculated it would take 37 workdays to mow the Acacia and advised he could obtain a quote for the removal of the Pine trees and include it in the maintenance proposal. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer commented it is important to know the cost of mowing the pink area before making a decision because it was not worth mowing if the maintenance could not be kept in future years. Mayor Pieper asked how long it would take to finish the blue area. Mr. Sarabia replied that estimated completion was three and a half weeks. Mayor Pieper explained that the blue area can be mowed but the pink area is downhill and would need to be worked on by hand. Mayor Pieper declared after the blue area is finished, the Council would decide on the pink area. He requested the cost to cut down the three Pine trees versus limbing them up be provided by the next meeting so the Council can make a decision. Councilmember Wilson asked if it would cost less than $22,000.00 to come back the second year. Mr. Sarabia replied it is typically less but could consult with his field crew. He noted it is a temporary safety measure that brings peace of mind. Mowing for fuel modifications is a yearly process. The Conservancy takes an ecological approach and uses science to enhance advantages. Councilmember Mirsch requested confirmation about the proposed Pine trees not being on private property. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council postpose the decision until the next meeting when the total cost of the new proposal is provided by Mr. Sarabia. Councilmember Black seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 85 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-27-20 -5- B.PRESENTATION ON A POTENTIAL PROJECT TO ELIMINATE STORMWATER DISCHARGE AT ONE DISCHARGE POINT FROM THE CITY TO THE RECEIVING WATERS. City Manager Jeng referenced the City Council Strategic Plan Workshop held on January 25, 2020, where priorities were identified for the next three years. One of the topics explored was parcel project polices for individual parcels and capital improvement projects throughout the City to elevate the requirements from MS4 permits. She conferred with a consultant because all la county agencies are discharging their stormwater to certain bodies of water. Rolling Hills is divided in two watersheds on the Peninsula. The southern watershed drains to the Santa Monica Bay. The other watershed, East of City Hall, drains to the Machado Lake. The Regional Water Quality Control Board mandates the City monitor the drainage quality entering Santa Monica Bay and Machado Lake. The Santa Monica Bay reading indicates the City’s water is clean, however, issues arose with Machado Lake. The Regional Water Quality Control Board specified the City would not be considered as discharging water if the City can hold the discharge at a certain volume (a 24- hour rainstorm at the 85% percentile). City Manager Jeng shared a presentation illustrating that staff could evaluate the discharge points to Machado Lake and deploy a project to be in compliance with the MS4 permits and approach them for some relief. The proposal includes discharge points along Brent Spring Canyon at City Hall. The Regional Board advised the City needs to capture 1.1 million gallons in that drainage area, which translates to building a storage catch basin with a relieve valve in case of recurrent storms. In order to meet that requirement, the City would need to draw the water down; run a pipe down from that canyon to a nearby sewer facility and discharge it into the sewer. This would require the Sanitation Districts permission. The cost of the project is approximately 3.2 million dollars, which could be paid with the local Measure W funds. There is also Prop 1 money from the State that can be used along with other grant sources. Mayor Pieper asked how many exits points the City needs to cover to be compliant and how the City would deal with the exit points on private property. City Manager Jeng replied all the points that exit to the Machado Lake assumes worst case scenario and the City would have to get easements rights from property owners or have some agreement in place. The property owner adjacent to City Hall dedicated half of Brent Spring Canyon and is now City owned. Councilmember Wilson asked if the proposed dam would be built on City or private property and what did the allowance line item mean. City Manager Jeng replied it would be a combination of the City, Rolling Hills Estates, and private property. The line item was for permitting with various agencies like the Sanitation District. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer asked if the discharge points south and east could be diverted to one point and address the collective discharges at one point. City Manager Jeng advised it might be possible but depends on the terrain, footprint of each point, and how easy it is to route from one point to another. She explained the Torrance Airport Project is proposing taking four Peninsula Cities discharge and directing it toward the Torrance Airport 86 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-27-20 -6- and retaining that volume. Councilmember Mirsch asked if there was a deadline for the grants mentioned beforehand. City Manager Jeng replied the first round of regional money for Measure W application deadline is mid-July. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Alfred Visco commented via email that he was not familiar with the discharge issue and the presentation set forth, however, there could be some benefits for the proposed project over and above the stormwater issues. There could be a substantial amount of stormwater maintained in the reservoir, which would reduce the fire risk in the canyon. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council request the City Manager to broach the State Board to confirm if the Council proceeded with the project, would they not be required to report for the MS4 regarding the Machado Lake water district and if grant money is available. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. C.FY 2020/21 BUDGET PREPARATION DOCUMENTS FY 2019/2020 YEAR- END REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE PROJECTIONS FY 2020/2021 CONSUMER PRICE INDEX (CPI) ADJUSTMENT FOR BUDGET. Budget Consultant, Jim Walker, gave an overview of the 2019-2020-year end projections and the March 2020 consumer price index that will be used for the 2020-2021 budget. Staff projects total General Fund Revenues through June 30, 2020 as $1,887,597, which is $390,703 lower than the amended Budget amount of $2,278,300. The decreased revenues are primarily Building & Other Permit Fees, which lowered by $346,288 and Variance, Planning & Zoning Fees, which are projected to be lower by $30,169 due to the effect of COVID-19. For General Fund Expenditures through June 30, 2020 projections are $1,868,938, which is $364,662 lower than the amended budget amount of $2,233,600. The decrease is primarily due to the following: City Administration Department projected Salary and Benefit savings associated with vacant Senior Management Analyst position; Planning & Development Department projected LA County Building Inspection savings associated with lower volume of building inspections; Law Enforcement projected savings associated with unspent Wild Life Management & Pest Control expense; and Non-Department cost savings for peninsula wide preparedness staff member. We are projecting a deficit of $26,041 before all operating transfers. Prior to this meeting the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee approved to continue to appropriate funds to CIP projects, mainly the tennis courts and ADA project for City Hall. 87 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-27-20 -7- Mr. Walker continued to review the March 2020 consumer price index, which was 1.9%. That is what will be used for the COLA adjustment and other contractual budget items for the 2020-2021 budget. Last year the March CIP was 2.7%. Councilmember Black asked if there was another CIP that could be used instead of March. Mr. Walker replied that it was agreed last year to use March because the CIP for May is not released until June after the budget has been adopted. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. There was no public comment. Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council receive and file the item. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Councilmember Black requested item 9A be heard next because he would have to leave the meeting soon. Item 9A (out of order) 9.MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS A.CONSIDER REQUEST FROM MAYOR PIEPER TO DISCUSS TIMING FOR RE-OPENING ROLLING HILLS TO THE PUBLIC. Mayor Pieper reported that City Manager Jeng provided access to conduct city business in-person by appointment. Residents can call, email, or make an appointment with staff for service. No other cities in Los Angeles County are open to the public. He has spoken to other Mayor’s in the Peninsula and they are trying to figure out when to reopen City Halls. The targeted date is May 1, 2020. He expressed concern about being the first City to reopen to the public and having negative media attention. Other cities might not be happy with their decision to proceed and may lead to unfavorable interactions. He also discussed how to staff City Hall when the doors are reopened to maintain safety and not risk losing the entire department if someone contracts COVID-19. He concluded if Rolling Hills is the first City to reopen, it would put unnecessary pressure on the City and cannot see the benefits. Councilmember Black stated City Hall is considered an essential business and should have never closed. City Hall is ideal for social distancing. From a medical viewpoint, there is no reason City 88 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-27-20 -8- Hall cannot be open if common sense is used. He does not care what other cities are doing and Rolling Hills needs to show leadership. Mr. Walker commented that he has contact with JPIA and suggested that the Council consider the general liability issue. Councilmember Black replied that workers compensation would take care of the employees. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer commented that the courts are closed, and people have their Constitutional rights on hold. She noted that all the speedy trail-rights courts are closed until May 15, 2020 and it could be extended. It did not make sense for City Hall to open especially with a small staff. If someone comes in and does not respect social distance and one employee gets sick that would lead to the rest of the staff being quarantined. How would business continue? Councilmember Black argued that courthouses are a dramatically different setting than City Hall and cannot be compared. Councilmember Mirsch commented a health order is in effect until May 15th. The County is still encouraging minimal contact with the public. She does not believe there is any need not met with the way City Hall is conducting business. She has not received any complaints that services are not being provided. Councilmember Black stated that the May 15th date is applicable to non-essential businesses and City Hall is considered an essential business. He asked how many building permits have been issued since then beginning of March. PCS Director Elguira replied half a dozen permits have been issued. Councilmember Wilson commented that he does not support opening City Hall because he has not heard of anyone requesting services and not being serviced. Councilmember Black made a motion to reopen City Hall and stated that he does not care what other Mayors are doing. No second followed. Mayor Pieper notified the Council that City Manager Jeng had a plan ready if City Hall needed to be reopened on short notice. He expressed concern about the PR value when dealing with other cities and the topic would be readdressed if anything changed. Councilmember Black left the City Council meeting at 8:58pm. Item 8C (out of order) C. STRATEGIC PLANNING WORKSHOP DISCUSSION #3. 89 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-27-20 -9- City Manager Jeng reported the Strategic Planning Workshop was held, in addition to regular meetings, to provide guidance on developing budget items for the next fiscal year. At the Workshop, the Council developed four priorities for the City: Wildfire Mitigation/Emergency Preparedness, Utility Undergrounding, Drainage, and Sewer. Under each category is a list of budget items that support the Council’s priorities, and all are proposed for next year: Wildfire Mitigation/Emergency Preparedness 1. Block Captain Program 2. Fire Fuel Reduction in the Preserve 3. Fire Fuel Reduction in Rolling Hills 4. CWPP Development/Adoption 5. Arborist to support enforcement of Fire Fuel Abatement Ordinance Utility Undergrounding 1. Crest Road Undergrounding Cal OES grant 2. Eastfield Drive Undergrounding Cal OES grant 3. Assessment District support continuous workshops for neighborhood groups 4. Pursue grants for projects Drainage 1. Parcel based hydromodification policy development to minimize impacts to surrounding canyons and downstream parcels 2. Bent Springs capital improvement project feasibility study to include City Hall campus stormwater discharge 3. Masterplan to eliminate stormwater discharge from the City Sewer 1. Investigate extension of existing sewer mains into the City of Rolling Hills 2. Design of 8" sewer main along Portuguese Bend Road/Rolling Hills Road to connect with County truck line on Crenshaw Boulevard 3. Pursue grants for capital improvement projects A spreadsheet with high-level cost estimates for the budget items listed above was included. The dollar amounts are high estimates based on past experiences and industry recommendations. She was providing information for discussion and feedback. Councilmember Wilson asked if portions of the mentioned projects were in the current year’s budget and how much of an increase would this be for next year if approved. City Manager Jeng replied that $50,000.00 for the Fire Fuel reduction in the Preserve would come out of the current budget if it were approved in the next meeting. Staff could get started on a portion of the sewer project if the Council were to move forward with the design this year. A portion of the $90,000.00 would be taken out of that line item and then moved to the next fiscal year. All the other expenses get carried over to the next fiscal year. 90 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-27-20 -10- Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer asked about the fire fuel reduction for properties that are adjacent to the preserve. How can money be devoted to fire fuel reduction on private property that would not be offered to other people in Rolling Hills who would like money to remove fire fuel from their land. She asked for more details for parcel based hydromodifications policy development. She inquired about $8,000.00 allocation. City Manager Jeng said this would be a path to approach those property owners if they are willing to work with the City on fuel management and make use of the investment on the Preserve. She is only trying to seek out possible options and is open to suggestions. The line item is a placeholder for now. Staff is exploring authoring policies that mandate projects look at impacts of stormwater discharge outside of their property, which would be identified as hydromodifications. The $8,000.00 was allocated for technical instruction to guide the City on future provisions for developers to follow and determine if the parameters placed on the development projects were feasible. Mr. Walker commented on Fire Fuel reduction and asked if the City reached out to the Fire Department for weed abatement. City Manager Jeng explained the Fire Department only evaluates areas 200 feet from a structure and beyond that is up to the AG Commission. The AG Commission contracted to take care of some fuel management issues on a parcel-by-parcel basis. The areas of interest do not fall under the Fire Department purview. Councilmember Wilson asked what would be constituted a gift of public funds if the City used money to fund or subsidize removal of weed abetment on private property. City Attorney Jenkins suggested to fashion a program that addressed a specific issue that could be argued as a community problem and to a greater extent, is a problem for the private property owner. Standards would have to be established and treat every similar situation the same. He advised thinking it through before committing any public funds to that venture. Generally private property owners are financially responsible for the condition of their property and the remediation of the conditions of their property. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. There was no public comment. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council receive, and file item as presented. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 8.NEW BUSINESS 91 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-27-20 -11- A.UPDATE ON MEASURE W – SAFE CLEAN WATER PROGRAM TRANSFER AGREEMENT TO RECEIVE LOCAL RETURN ALLOCATIONS. City Manager Jeng reported staff presumed local Measure W monies would come in and offset the cost of MS4 permits but that money is not going to be realized because the City was informed that the agreement has to be signed before the disbursement would be expected in August. The staff report is to inform the Council that the agreement has been forwarded to the City Attorney’s office and the City’s consultant McGowan and Associates reviewed it on the City’s behalf and comments were sent to the County. No action is needed for this item just informing the Council that staff needed to appropriate additional general funds for this year and back fill the MS4 compliance cost for the current year. She also reported that 30% of the W monies could be used toward existing programs such as paying Ms. McGowan’s fees. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. There was no public comment. Councilmember Mirsch moved that the City Council receive and file the item as presented. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. B.UPDATE ON LOS ANGELES COUNTY REVIEW OF THE CITY’S SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY PHASE II PROJECT. City Manager Jeng updated the Council on the Sewer Feasibility Study Phase II Project. RHCA requested permission to proceed with replacing the septic tank near the tennis courts. The Council requested the Association delay their improvements until they received confirmation on the city’s sewer feasibility study and the county accepted the study. The feasibility study remains under review by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (LACDPW). On April 13, 2020, Willdan Engineering reported that LACDPW expects to complete the review of the City's sewer study on the week of April 27, 2020. She reviewed the comments received from the County. Back in November 2019, staff informed the Council that there is a segment of the pipe that needed to be upgraded from the proposed 8- inch pipe to a 10-inch pipe to accommodate the additional discharge from the City. The estimated project cost, with the pipe upgrade, was approximately $1,087,000. The review comment received in early 2020 called for the methodology of estimating sewer flow to be changed from occupancy to land use/zoning requiring the proposed 10-inch pipe to be upgraded to a 12-inch pipe in three segments of the existing sewer system. Increasing the sizes in the lower segments will place the sewer under design capacity. The new estimated project cost, with the proposed size increase, is 92 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-27-20 -12- approximately $1,098,000; of that $84,000.00 is for engineering cost. The next phase would be to hire an engineering company to do the design. Mayor Pieper asked when the best time is to approach an engineering company to get a cheaper rate. City Manager Jeng replied it would be in the interest of the city to construct the sewer line in the next three years. Engineering fees will remain the same due to the fact it is a different industry that has multipliers for benefits, staff, and other charges from other people. It was her belief that the savings will come from the construction side. If the economy slows down, the City might get good pricing for labor and material cost. Councilmember Wilson commented that the contingency line item is high and does not like it. She clarified the line item was an engineer’s estimate at a very high level. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. There was no public comment. Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council receive and file the item as presented. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer Councilmember Black seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 10.MATTERS FROM STAFF NONE. 11. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Mirsch adjourned the meeting at 9:34p.m. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled for Monday, May 11, 2020 beginning at 7:00p.m. via teleconference. 93 Minutes City Council Meeting 04-27-20 -13- Respectfully submitted, _______________________________ Yohana Coronel, MBA City Clerk Approved, _____________________________________ Jeff Pieper Mayor 94 -1- MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS, CALIFORNIA MONDAY, MAY 11, 2020 1.CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Mayor Pieper at 7:02p.m. via teleconference. 2.ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Councilmembers participating via teleconference: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson. Councilmembers Absent:None. Others participating via teleconference: Elaine Jeng, P.E., City Manager. Meredith Elguira, Planning & Community Services Director. Yohana Coronel, City Clerk. Michael Jenkins, City Attorney. Francesca Wach, 52 Portuguese Bend Road. John Resich. Chris Sarabia, Conservation Director for Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy. 3.OPEN AGENDA Alfred Visco thanked the City via email for following up with the owner of 17 Cinchring Road about the abatement of dead vegetation. He inquired if Mr. Sarabia knew when the detailed mapping of dead vegetation would be available. He concluded with suggesting the Land Conservancy prepare a proposal to clear the dead vegetation and remove the Acacia in Paint Brush Canyon on the Rolling Hills and Nature Preserve side of the border. 4.CONSENT CALENDAR Matters which may be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. Any Councilmember may request removal of any item from the Consent Calendar causing it to be considered under Council Actions. A.MINUTES – REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 10, 2020, REGULAR MEETING OF FEBRUARY 24, 2020, REGULAR MEETINF OF MARCH 09, 2020, REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 23, 2020, SPECIAL MEETING OF 95 Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -2- MARCH 30, 2020, JOINT STUDY SESSION WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL APRIL 13, 2020 AND REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 27, 2020. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED B.PAYMENT OF BILLS. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED C. CONSIDER AND APPROVE UPDATED CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS. RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE AS PRESENTED D. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ROLLING HILLS 2020 RELIABILITY REPORT. RECOMMENDATION: STAFF RECOMENDS THAT THE CITY COUNCIL RECEIVE AND FILE THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON ROLLING HILLS 2020 CIRCUIT RELIABILITY REPORT. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer requested to pull consent item 4A and 4C. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council approve consent items 4B and 4D as presented. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor, Pieper, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: *Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. *Councilmember Black reported to the meeting at 7:12 p.m. due to technical difficulties. Item 4A Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer requested to move the minutes submitted for approval to the May 26, 2020 City Council meeting to allow time for review. Item 4C Mayor Pieper advised the only modification made to committee assignments was moving Councilmember Wilson to the Personnel Committee because he has not previously served. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer requested to be an alternate on select committees and he therefore removed himself and assigned Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer as the alternate member of the following committees: Los Angeles Sanitation District No. 5, Los Angeles County City Selection Committee and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). Mayor Pro Dieringer stated that five committees address policy and present to the Council. She previously served on the Fire Fuel Reduction Ad Hoc Subcommittee and was inclined to continue but understood Mayor Mirsch desired the seat. 96 Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -3- Councilmember Wilson was happy to step aside and allow Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer to serve. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council approve consent item 4C as amended. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Mirsch and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: *Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. *Councilmember Black reported to the meeting at 7:12 p.m. due to technical difficulties. 5.COMMISSION ITEMS A.CONSIDERATION TO RECEIVE AND FILE RESOLUTION NO. 2020-03 FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 400 SQUARE-FOOT LAP SWIMMING POOL WITH SPA IN THE FRONT YARD OF AN EXISTING RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD. PCS Director Elguira gave an overview of the project via PowerPoint presentation. The applicant requested approval to construct a 400 square-foot lap pool with spa in the front yard of an existing residence at 52 Portuguese Bend Road. Due to the irregular shape of the subject lot and geometry of Portuguese Bend Road, the backyard of the parcel functions as the main entrance to the property. The front façade of the existing residence faces the back courtyard. The residence's front entry, garage doors, and driveway that lead up to the main residence is located in the rear courtyard, which functions as the receiving area on the parcel. The proposed pool and spa are technically located behind the residence;however,the back of the residence faces the front yard.The proposed project cannot be seen from the surrounding streets or canyons. The proposed pool elevation is above Portuguese Bend Road and several hundred feet away from adjacent properties. The proposed project will result in minimal lot disturbance because the lot is already developed with a residence, attached garage, barn, and hardscape. The project has been determined categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and was approved on February 19, 2020 by Rolling Hills Community Association. Mrs. Luna submitted a letter of opposition on April 20, 2020 aboutthe proposed project concerning potential view impact and the lack of public notification for the Planning Commission meeting. The item was subsequently rescheduled to May 1, 2020 to meet public noticing requirements. Mrs. Luna and her son, the property owner's representative, and Chair Chelf met with staff on the field trip to survey the area and take pictures. Mrs. Luna's property is located to the rear of the subject property at a much higher elevation than the pool pad. The proposed pool will not be visible from her property and her view of the Pacific Ocean will not be impacted. Mrs. Luna sent an email after the field trip to inform the City she no longer objects to the proposed project. PCS Director Elguira reported that Mr. Charlie Raine submitted a letter on May 11, 2020, which stated there was improper noticing for the proposed project. He clarified that he was not opposed 97 Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -4- to theprojectat 52 Portuguese Bend Road but rather disturbed byincreased runoff into the canyons generated by adding impermeable surfaces that impose danger to southern properties. The City and RHC should have a plan in place to deal with the runoff and subsequent consequences caused by approved projects. He has voiced his concerns at past Planning Commission and City Council meetings about this issue and urged the City and RHCA not to continue ignoring the matter. PCS Director Elguira clarified that the Planning Commission meeting held on Tuesday, April 21, 2020 was adjourned to Friday, May 1, 2020 to address the notification issue for this item. She informed the Council that the property owner and applicant were present (via teleconference) and available for questions. She reminded Councilmember Mirsch of the need to recuse herself due to her residence’s proximity from the subject parcel. Councilmember Black commented that he was inclined to receive and file the item but questioned whether proper notification had been provided. PCS Director Elguira replied that the Planning Commission had adjourned its regular meeting on April 21st 2020 to May 1st 2020 because the public hearing mailers were not sent to the residents within the 500-foot radius of the subject parcel. The Planning Commission met on May 1 st, 2020 at 7:30 a.m. via teleconference to allow the residents enough time to submit their comments. Mayor Pieper asked counsel if the City was in compliance with public notifications with regard to this project. City Attorney Jenkins responded that legal obligations were met. The Planning Department consulted with Assistant City Attorney Jane Abzug. The regular Planning Commission meeting was adjourned to May 1st and it was his understanding that appropriate notice was given. Councilmember Wilson asked why Mr. Raine stated that a notice had been provided with a wrong date. PCS Director Elguira explained the public was properly noticed and clarified the mailers sent to the residents within the subject parcel radius had a typographical error on the day listed not the date. Councilmember Black recommended postponing the item to the next City Council meeting in order to have the item properly notified without errors. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion because Mr. Raine did not attend the meeting because of the mistake on the notification. City Attorney Jenkins highlighted the Council had three options. 1) Remand the item back to the Planning Commission, 2) take jurisdiction over the item or 3) receive and file the item. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. John Resich, stated that proper notice did go out to the surrounding area with regards to the special 98 Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -5- meeting. PCS Director Elguira reiterated a typographical error was made on the mailers sent to residents within the subject parcel radius. City Attorney Jenkins withdrew his earlier comment and stated the benefit of moving the item to the next Council meeting would be for him to review all the notices that were sent out. It was his recommendation that the Council continue the item for further examination of the notices and that the Council could then make a recommendation. Mayor Pieper highlighted the Council did not have a problem with the project. He asked counsel for the quickest way to expedite the process. City Attorney Jenkins replied the Council could take jurisdiction over the item or remand the item to the Planning Commission for a new hearing. If the Council took jurisdiction over the item, the project could be expedited if staff has enough time to notice the public hearing. PCS Director replied notices could be sent the following day. Mayor Pieper stated that the Council would take jurisdiction over the item. He thanked John Resich for his comments and closed the item from public comment. *Councilmember Black disconnected from the meeting at 7:43pm due to technical difficulties. Councilmember Wilson withdrew his support for Councilmember Blacks motion. Mayor Pieper made a substitute motion that the City Council direct staff to immediately send public hearing notices and theCouncil schedule a meeting as soon as possible to review the project. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: *Black. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: Mirsch. 6.PUBLIC HEARING NONE. 7.OLD BUSINESS A.CONSIDER AND APPROVE AN ENHANCED PROPOSAL FROM PALOS VERDES PENINSULA LAND CONSERVANCY FOR ADDITIONAL FIRE FUEL ABATEMENT IN THE PRESERVE IN THE AREAS ADJACENT TO THE CITY BORDER. 99 Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -6- City Manager Jeng announced that this item carried over from the last City Council meeting on April 27, 2020. The Council requested an updated proposal from the Conservancy to include annual mowing to eradicate Acacia and Mustard. That cost comes to $20,800.00 per year for the spring mowing. The second element was the removal of Pine trees. The first proposal included only limbing up the Pine trees. The cost for removal of the Pine trees is $19,250.00. She announced Chris Sarabia, Conservation Director for Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy was present via teleconference to answer questions. Mayor Pieper asked if there were other Pine trees on the Rolling Hills side of the border. Mr. Sarabia replied there is a continuation of Pine trees that move on to private property. He elaborated that the contractor estimated the cost based on a week of work to remove the Pine. Mayor Pieper clarified that if the Council went back to the original proposal they would be at $50,000.00 and the ongoing maintenance for the ongoing work is $21,000.00 on top of the $12,000.00. The $12,000.00 was the annual work for the previous portion. City Manager Jeng asked Mr. Sarabia for the proposed number of Pine trees removed for the cost. Mr. Sarabia believed that cost was for 4 or 5 Pine trees. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Alfred Visco commented via email that there was an error in the updated proposal from the Land Conservancy. It should state “removing” instead of “limbing” Pine trees. Removing Pine trees is far superior to limbing for several reasons but it primarily eliminates the need for future maintenance. He supports the Land Conservancy’s proposal. Mayor Pieper closed the item for public comment and continued with the discussion. Mayor Pieper commented he was not inclined to spend money on limbing the Pine trees on the Conservancy side until the Pine trees on the Rolling Hills side are maintained. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer asked what portion of the remaining $28,000.00 is dedicated to limbing the Pine trees. Mr. Sarabia replied the Land Conservancy would be mowing all the dry brush in an attempt to prevent ladder fuel from moving up the Preserve side. Limbing was the recommended treatment for the Pine so the branches are not touching the ground. The standard limbing for a Pine tree is 6 feet. Councilmember Mirsch agreed with Mayor Pieper’s suggestion but also agrees with Mr. Sarabia that the Pine trees need to be limbed up. She believes that the City needs to limb up the trees and determine what is happening with the Pine trees on private property before spending any resources on removing the Pine trees on the Conservancy’s property. 100 Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -7- *Councilmember Black rejoined the meeting at 7:50 p.m. Councilmember Black commented that he was in favor of removing the Pine trees completely rather than limbing them up. Councilmember Mirsch moved that the City Council approve the Land Conservancy’s proposal of $50,000.00 onetime work including limbing up the Pine trees and approve the annual work for three years. Revisit the issue of removing the Pine trees once there is a plan for the trees on the Rolling Hills side. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Mayor Pieper requested from Mr. Sarabia and City Manager Jeng schedule a site visit to see the progress and talk about the other side of Rim Trail. Item 8B (out of order) B.CONSIDER AND APPROVE FINANCE/BUDGET/AUDIT COMMITTEE’S RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO INVESTMENT, FINANCIAL, BUDGET, DEBT AND ASSET CAPITALIZATION POLICIES, AND SCHEDULE OF FEE AND CHARGES. Finance Director Terry Shea gave a summary of the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee’s recommended changes to investment, financial, budget, debt and asset capitalization policies and schedule of fee charges. All policies were approved by the auditors which were then reviewed by the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee. One recommendation was to change the cash reserve and the refuse fund to the amount of the service fee subsidy. The subsidy for FY 20/21 will be approximately $132,000.00. The PARS Pension Rate stabilization program was set up and the liability is about $239,000.00 It was recommended to pay half in the FY 20/21 budget and the other half in the FY 21/22 budget. A new fund needs to be set up for Measure W monies and it needs to be added to the City’s policies. Every year the City has capital improvement projects (CIPs) that are ongoing. A recommendation was made to add a section to carry over the appropriations from the capital policies to the next fiscal year. With decreased Building permit revenues, staff recommends increasing the multiplier from 2.25% to 2.5%. The proposal was discussed with the Committee members and they suggested changing the cash reserve amount for the refuse fund to the amount of the service fee subsidy absorbed by the general fund. This would fluctuate every year dependingon what the rates and the differences were and it would be approved as a budgeted transfer each year. The Committee is in favor of increasing the PARS Pension Rate stabilization fund to $50,000.00 per year until the City is caught up and each year after the yearly audit, review the reserve fund balance available and make a transfer in order to keep the rate stabilization fund up to the liability. The Committee proposed adding a fund section for Measure 101 Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -8- W monies and a section to approve CIPs carryovers for unexpended budget appropriations and review it annually with the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee. The Committee did not recommend any changes to the schedule of fees or the multiplier. Councilmember Mirsch wanted to confirm the Committee recommended paying $50,000.00 per fiscal year with an understanding that the liability curve increases every year. She asked if the City prepares annual expenditure forecast with a 4-year outlook. She also inquired if the City had any other City approved consultants besides Willdan. Councilmember Black replied that the City is committed to paying $50,000.00 every fiscal year with the hope of paying off the debt in two years. City Manager Jeng advised the City only has Willdan to help expedite building permit reviews. Finance Director Shea replied the Finance department does a 5-year cash forecast as part of the budget process, which includes the current year plus 4 years and it is updated every year. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer asked about the Finance Director’s reason for increasing the multiplier. She also requested the Council revisit the issue mid-year and the Finance Director produce a mid- year report to show how much the City is recovering in terms of cost with staff doing an individual permit. Finance Director Shea explained his reasoning was strictly based on the level of activity since permit revenues were down compared to this time last year. Councilmember Wilson summarized that the multiplier was being used to recover the City’s cost and not to profit. Finance Director Shea concurred. Councilmember Wilson moved that the City Council approve the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee recommendations. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Item 7B (out of order) 7.OLD BUSINESS B.ACCEPT THE SEWER FEASIBILITY STUDY PHASE II AS COMPLETE AND DIRECT STAFF TO PROCEED WITH THE DESIGN OF THE 8" 102 Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -9- SEWER MAIN ALONG PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD/ROLLING HILLS ROAD. City Manager Jeng reported this item was still under review by Los Angeles County when it was previously presented to the Council. The County has since accepted the Sewer Feasibility Study and the City can proceed with the next step. As part of the submittal, the City achieved two Will- Serve letters. The first letter accepts discharge from the City Hall campus; the second is to receive discharge from 235 homes within the City of Rolling Hills. The Council waited for acceptance by the County before responding to the Associations request to replace the septic tank near the main gate. She pointed out that the final study was attached to the staff report. The overall cost estimate for the project, which included the design, construction, and management, was $1.1 million dollars. Of that, $85,000.00 is estimated for engineering design which is the next step for the project if the Council proceeds. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none he returned to the discussion. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council accept the Sewer Feasibility Study Phase II as complete and direct staff to procure engineering services to proceed with design of the 8" sewer main along Portuguese Bend Road/Rolling Hills Road. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor, Pieper, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. Item 8A & 8C (out of order) 8.NEW BUSINESS A.ACCEPT THE FY 2019-2020 TRAFFIC SIGNING, STRIPING, AND PAVEMENT MARKING PROJECT AS COMPLETE AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THECONTRACT PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZE THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION TO BE FILED WITH THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE. City Manager Jeng indicated on January 13, 2020 City Council awarded a construction contract to PCI for signing and striping of horse crossings, four streets (Middleridge Lane North, Middleridge Lane South, Williamsburg Lane and Lower Blackwater Canyon Road), Crest Road East, and the proposed all-way stop control at Williamsburg Lane and Lower Blackwater Canyon Road. The final project construction cost was $75,384.50. Staff recommends that the Council accept the FY 2019-2020 Traffic Signing, Striping, and Pavement Marking Project as complete and in accordance with the contract plans and specifications, file Notice of Completion with the Los Angeles County Recorder's office,and release retention as final payment to PCI after the expiration of the lien period. 103 Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -10- Councilmember Wilson asked how many traffic markers (bumpers) were replaced. City Manager Jeng replied she did not know because the City put down signing and markers where they were needed based on the Uniform Traffic Device code. There was disparity between how much was removed and how much was replaced. It was her belief more were placed because code calls for longer center lane markers as confirmed by the City’s Traffic Engineer. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none, he returned to the discussion. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council accept the FY 2019-2020 Traffic Signing, Striping, and Pavement Marking Project as complete and in accordance with the contract plans and specifications, file Notice of Completion with the Los Angeles County Recorder's office, and release retention as final payment to PCI after the expiration of the lien period. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. C.CONSIDER LAYOUT OPTIONS TO BRING EXISTING RESTROOMS AT CITY HALL TO COMPLY WITH ADA CODES, AND SELECT AN OPTION TO CONTINUE THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS. City Manager Jeng presented all of the layout options prepared by Pacific Architecture and Engineering Inc. (PAE) via PowerPoint. On January 27, 2020, the City Council engaged PAE to prepare construction plans to bring City Hall into compliance with Americans with Disabilities (ADA) codes. The focus of PAE’s work are restrooms as they require major work due to space constraints. Improvements needed for restrooms will dictate the manner in which the other improvements are constructed at City Hall. PAE worked with staff to develop several options to be in full compliance with ADA codes, functionality, budgetary constraints, and impact to City Hall operations during construction. PAE was asked to keep all necessary improvements within the existing footprint of the building. Attached to the staff report were five options for consideration with high level construction cost ranking by PAE. She described and compared each option: Option 1 (Cost #1, #1 being the most cost effective) This option would create three separate All Gender restrooms in the existing restroom locations. One of the three restrooms has to be ADA compliant. This option would eliminate the closet space holding the water heater, refrigerator, the telephone box/wires, cables and switches for the City's computer network, and the small kitchenette. The uses eliminated by the new restrooms would need to be replaced elsewhere in City Hall. Option 2 (Cost #2) 104 Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -11- This option would keep the men and women's restrooms in the current locations but both sets of restrooms would need to be converted into single use. The entry way into the restrooms would need to be widened to meet building code. This option would create an ADA restroom in the current copy room. To access the ADA restroom, the public counter would need to be rotated 90 degrees. This option would diminish the footprint of the existing copy room. Option 3 (Cost #3) The restrooms would be moved to the copy room. The public counter would be rotated 90 degrees to allow a walkway from the front door to the new restrooms. There would be a women's restroom and an All Gender restroom. Both sets of restrooms would be ADA compliant. In place of the existing restrooms, a copy room, a meeting room and additional storage room would be created. This option separates the public part of the house from the staff side of the house but diminishes considerably the existing office space that needs to house three employees. Option 3.5 (Cost #3.5) This option is a variation of Option 3 with the All Gender restroom placed in portions of the lobby rather than the office space. As with Option 3, this layout would allow the creation of a meeting room and preserve the office space for three employees. Option 4 (Cost #4 most expensive) This option plots ADA compliant restrooms in the existing location. As with Option 1, this layout would displace a number of existing uses that need replacement elsewhere in City Hall and would require the widening of the existing hallway by shrinking the offices located across the restrooms. City Manager Jeng would like for the Council to review, discuss, and choose an option in order to continue with engineering plans and bring City Hall up to ADA codes. Mayor Pieper reviewed the project and his concern was how many people can fit in City Hall. He expressed that the City Manager did a great job in providing the most cost effective plans with variations. He inquired if there was a way to measure if the cost between Option 1 and 3.5 is worth the layout change. Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer stated that using Option 1 as a base point could be problematic since the cost is not available. Rewiring City Hall and moving the water heater along with the pipes can be expensive. She was concerned about reducing lobby space because it is occasionally used for special events. Councilmember Wilson commented there was a lot of potential unintended cost. He noticed that attic access might no longer be accessible with some of the options presented. He agreed that pricing must be clearer before a decision can be made. Councilmember Black asked why City Hall required 3 restrooms and what were the required dimensions for an ADA restroom. Mayor Pieper stated there were already 3 restrooms in City Hall. 105 Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -12- City Manager Jeng explained that if there is a male and female restroom then there must be an ADA restroom for each sex. Councilmember Black commented that it was his understanding that there could be a unisex restroom. He suggested having 2 stalls in the female restroom and converting the male restroom to a unisex ADA compliant restroom. City Manager Jeng referred to was Option 1 as resembling that idea. There are several possible combinations but the fixture count is required by Building Code and is not related to ADA compliance. Mayor Pieper suggested tabling the item for two weeks to work with the City Manager and consult the architect about ADA rules. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none, he returned to the discussion. *Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer did not vote on the item because she disconnected from the meeting due to technical difficulties. Mayor Pieper moved that the City Council table the item for two weeks until more information is available about ADA requirements. Councilmember Mirsch seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Black, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: *Dieringer. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 9 & 10 (out of order) 9.MATTERS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS Councilmember Mirsch statedshe attended a webinar that discussed funding issues due to COVID- 19. She was shocked at the investment types and strategies that CalPERS uses. She suggested the Council consider designating someone to actively monitor the issue with the League. Mayor Pieper replied that he would discuss the matter with City Manager Jeng. He asked counsel if the City could recruit a representative and participate on the phone calls to better understand the issue. City Attorney Jenkins could recruit a volunteer to attend a Council meeting and confer with the Council. Councilmember Black inquired when City Hall was going to reopen. 106 Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -13- Mayor Pieper replied that City Hall was reopening on Monday, May 18, 2020. The delay has been partly due to unresolved liability issues. 10.MATTERS FROM STAFF NONE. *Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer rejoined the meeting at 9:14 p.m. 8D (out of order) 8.NEW BUSINESS D. CONSIDER AND APPROVE A THREE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN. City Manager Jeng discussed the City’s three year capital improvement plans. Annually in June, the City Council adopts an operating budget with General Fund transfers to capital improvement projects. Because of the one-yearcycle, the adopted budget resets at the end of the year and capital improvement projects that are not completed within the year are reevaluated for funding the following year. Typical capital improvement projects span multiple years because they require planning, design, public bidding, and construction. To make provisions for all phases of the project, a complete expenditure plan is necessary. She highlighted the different projects via PowerPoint and how they will span over three years: 1) 8-inch sewer main, 2) tennis courts 3) City Hall ADA Improvements and 4) City Hall Parking Lot and explained it is possible to complete all four projects in three years. A chart displayed the schedule and coordination of projects. For example, instead of replacing the septic tank at the tennis courts, the City would connect to the 8- inch main sewer line, but the sewer line project needs to be scheduled first. Consequently, the roadway must be dug upin order to place pipe underground, which leads us to the City Hall parking lot improvement. She concluded this was her 3-year proposal to the Council and based it on in- progress projects while taking the Council’s priorities under advisement. If the Council approves the CIP plan, it does not mean the Council is obligated to the amount or the schedule proposed. The plan is to help the Council and staff visualize the undertaking of a phase, of a particular project with the timeframe and cost. Her recommendation is to approve a 3-year CIP plan. She will work with the Finance Department to include it in the budget if approved and revisit the plan yearly to adjust it accordingly. Mayor Pieper commented the CIP plan was a really good list of things that are feasible and can be accomplished. He advised that if the Council approves the CIP plan, they are approving a concept and these projects are pending and to be included in the yearly review of the budget. City Manager Jeng replied in the affirmative and added the plan is a tool to help the Council figure out their expenditures. Mayor Pieper opened the item for public comment. Hearing none, he returned to the discussion. 107 Minutes City Council Meeting 05-11-20 -14- Mayor Pro Tem Dieringer moved that the City Council approve the item as a concept and in the order in which the project should be completed. Councilmember Wilson seconded the motion. The motion passed by voice vote as follows: AYES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Mayor Pieper, Dieringer, Mirsch, and Wilson. NOES:COUNCILMEMBERS: Black. ABSENT:COUNCILMEMBERS: None. ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: None. 11. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the City Council, Mayor Pieper adjourned the meeting at 9:33p.m. to a regularmeeting of the City Council scheduled for Monday, April 27, 2020 beginning at 7:00p.m. via teleconference. Respectfully submitted, _______________________________ Yohana Coronel, MBA City Clerk Approved, _____________________________________ Jeff Pieper Mayor 108 Agenda Item No.: 4.B Mtg. Date: 05/26/2020 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:YOHANA CORONEL, CITY CLERK THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:PAYMENT OF BILLS. DATE:May 26, 2020 BACKGROUND: None. DISCUSSION: None. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. ATTACHMENTS: Payment of Bills 109 110 Agenda Item No.: 4.C Mtg. Date: 05/26/2020 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:ELAINE JENG, CITY MANAGER THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:CONSIDER AND APPROVE PARTICIPATION IN SUPPORT LOCAL RECOVERY COALITION ENCOURAGED BY THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES. DATE:May 26, 2020 BACKGROUND: The League of California Cities is an association of California city officials who work together to enhance their knowledge and skills, exchange information, and combine resources so that they may influence policy decisions that affect 483 cities across California. Based on the League of California Cities (LCC) analysis, California cities are projecting a nearly $7 billion general fund revenue shortfall over the next two fiscal years due to the COVID-19 pandemic impacts on city budgets and services statewide. The LCC data analysis shows that the shortfall will grow by billions of dollars as modified stay-at-home orders extend into the summer months. DISCUSSION: In response, the LCC started the Support Local Recovery campaign. The goals of the campaign are as follows: State Government: Secure $7 billion in direct and flexible funding to support critical local services and secure CARES Act funding for all cities for COVID-19 related expenditures. Federal Government: Secure $500 billion in direct and flexible funding for all cities nationwide to support critical local services. As a part of the campaign, LCC is asking municipalities to send a support letter to the Governor of California, copied to legislators to Support Local Recovery. A draft of the support letter is attached to this report. The pandemic has caused a major reduction in business transactions resulting in cities unable to provide services to their communities. With only have residential land use in the City of Rolling Hills, thus the 111 impacts to the City's general fund budget is relatively minimal compared to other cities across California and the adjacent cities on the Peninsula. To show support for the adjacent cities on the Peninsula and many other cities in California severely impacted by the Safer at Home Orders, Rolling Hills can do its part by participating in the Support Local Recovery campaign and send a support letter to legislators as requested by the LCC. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact to join Support Local Recovery campaign and to send a support letter. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council participate in the League of California Cities Local Recovery Coalition campaign and send a support letter to Governor of California to request $7 billion in state aid to help California cities and $500 billion in federal aid over the next two years. ATTACHMENTS: RH_City-Letter-of-Support-FINAL.docx 112 ***City Letterhead*** May 26, 2020 Honorable Gavin Newsom Governor, State of California State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 VIA E-mail: ExternalAffairs@gov.ca.gov Dear Governor Newsom: The City of Rolling Hills thanks you for your leadership and efforts to protect and support Californians during this unprecedented public health crisis. Cities remain on the front line helping residents stay safe and in their homes, delivering emergency services, and supporting local businesses and community organizations. However, as emergency costs continue to grow, city revenues to fund local services are plummeting. COVID-19 is having devastating impacts on city budgets and services statewide. Based on the League of California Cities analysis, California cities are projecting a nearly $7 billion general revenue shortfall over the next two fiscal years. This shortfall will grow by billions of dollars if stay-at-home orders to protect public health extend into the summer months and beyond. The City of Rolling Hills projects that these shortfalls will impact our core city services. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 crisis, the City of Rolling Hills has stepped up to protect and serve our community. In order to continue to be a full partner with the state in saving lives, protecting our communities, and ultimately recovering from this crisis, we need your help. City of Rolling Hills has joined the Support Local Recovery coalition and we are calling on you to immediately support the following actions: Provide $7 billion in direct and flexible state funding to support critical local services and allocate CARES Act funding for all cities for COVID-19-related expenditures. Advocate to secure $500 billion in direct and flexible funding from the federal government for all cities nationwide to support critical local services. 113 The City of Rolling Hillsappreciates your consideration of our requests and look forward to further discussing in the coming days how together we can continue to best protect Californians and reopen our economy. Thank you again for your leadership and partnership during these uncertain times. Sincerely, Jeff Pieper Mayor City of Rolling Hills Cc:Senator Ben Allen Assembly Member Al Muratsuchi Bismarck Obando, League of California Cities, SupportLocalRecovery@cacities.org 114 Agenda Item No.: 5.A Mtg. Date: 05/26/2020 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:MEREDITH ELGUIRA, PLANNING DIRECTOR THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:CONSIDER AND APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. 1252 GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 400 SQUARE-FOOT LAP POOL WITH SPA IN THE FRONT YARD OF AN EXISTING RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD (WACHS). DATE:May 26, 2020 BACKGROUND: At the May 11, 2020 City Council meeting, the City Council took under their jurisdiction the proposed variance request to construct a pool with spa in the front yard of a residential property. The project was taken under the Council's jurisdiction to rectify an error in the public notice that was sent to residents within a 1,000-foot radius of the subject parcel. The public notice provided the wrong day, Tuesday instead of Friday, May 1, 2020. A revised public notice was sent out and published to comply with the required public noticing regulations. DISCUSSION: The Planning Commission at their May 1, 2020 special meeting adopted Resolution No. 2020-03 granting a Variance request approval to construct a 400 square-foot lap swimming pool with spa in the front yard of an existing residence located at 52 Portuguese Bend Road. Due to the irregular shape of the subject lot and geometry of Portuguese Bend Road, the backyard of the parcel functions as the main entrance to the property. The front façade of the existing residence faces the back courtyard. The residence's front entry, garage doors and driveway that leads up to the main residence are located in the rear court yard which functions as the receiving area on the parcel. The proposed pool and spa, to be located in the front yard, are technically located behind the existing residence however the back of the residence faces the front yard. The proposed project is not seen from the surrounding streets or canyons. The proposed pool elevation is above the Portuguese Bend Road elevation and several hundred feet away from adjacent properties. The proposed project will result in minimal lot disturbance due to the lot being already developed with a residence, an attached garage, barn and hardscape.115 Zoning, Land Size and Existing Conditions The lot is an irregularly shaped parcel located in RAS-2 zone. The net lot area is 74,379 square feet, which is slightly below the requirements of RAS-2 which requires a minimum net lot area of 87,120 square feet. The lot is developed with a 3,960 square-foot residence with a 940 square-foot attached garage. The house is currently under renovation. The existing swimming pool, located in the rear yard, will be demolished and converted into a water fountain. The existing pool equipment area located on north side the of the existing residence will remain. There is an existing 450 square-foot barn located at the northwest corner of the parcel near the entrance. Neighbor Concerns A phone call was received from a neighbor, Mrs. Luna, inquiring if other variance requests have been requested by the owner. A letter was later submitted informing the Planning Department that Mrs. Luna opposed the proposed project due to potential view impact and that a public notice was not received for the proposed Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission meeting was subsequently rescheduled to May 1, 2020 to meet the public noticing requirements. On the day of the field trip, Mrs. Luna and her son met with staff, the owner's representative and Chair Chelf to survey the area and take pictures. After the field trip, Mrs. Luna sent an email informing the City that she no longer objects to the proposed project and variance request due to the project not having any view impact from her property. Mrs. Luna's property is located to the rear of the subject property at a much higher elevation than the pool pad. The proposed pool will not be visible from her property and her view of the Pacific Ocean will not be impacted. On the evening of May 11, 2020, an email was received from Mr. Charlie Raine informing staff, the Association, the Planning Commission, and the City Council about his concerns regarding increasing impermeable surface and its impact on water runoff, and the error on the public notice. He clarified that he was not specifically opposed to the proposed pool but is opposed to any increase in runoff coming down the canyons into the landslide area. His email was read into record that evening. Past Approval for the Property On October 17, 2017, the Planning Commission approved Zoning Case No. 930, for a Site Plan Review for the construction of a garage addition, covered porches, and trellis. Municipal Code Compliance Grading Construction activities will include pool excavation of 220 cubic yards overall. The proposed pool depth is six feet. Lot Coverage Total net lot coverage is 17,287 square feet or 23.2% and maximum allowed is 35%. Total structural coverage is 7,101 square feet or 9.5% and maximum allowed is 20%. Disturbance The proposed project will result in 54.41% or 40,475 square feet of overall disturbed area. Exceptions to the maximum 40% disturbance is permitted up to 60% of the net lot area, provided that at no point 116 the slopes resulting from the grading are not greater than 3:1, or three units horizontal to one unit vertical, RHMC Sect. 17.16.070.B.A.1. Rolling Hills Community Association Review Rolling Hills Community Association approved the proposed project on February 19, 2020. Environmental Review The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposed project site is developed with single family residence, attached garage, hardscape and barn. There is no existing sensitive habitat area in or around the area of the proposed pool site. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES 17.38.050 Required Findings. In granting a variance, the City Council must make the following findings: 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; 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; That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; 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; and That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impact. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve Resolution No. 1252 approving a Variance request to construct a 400 square-foot lap swimming pool with spa. ATTACHMENTS: CC Resolution_1252__52_Portuguese_Bend_Road___ZC_20-03.doc Exhibits.pdf Planning Commission Report.pdf 05-01-20 PC Action Minutes.docx Supplemental Agenda Packet Relating to Item 5A 117 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 1 RESOLUTION NO. 1252 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 400 SQUARE-FOOT SWIMMING POOL AND SPA IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD, (LOT 4-FT-RH), (WACHS). ZONING CASE NO. 20-03. THE CITY COUNCIL 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. Barton Wachs with respect to real property located at 52 Portuguese Bend Road, (Lot 4-FT-RH), Rolling Hills, CA requesting a Variance for the construction of a new swimming pool and spa proposed in the front yard of the property (pursuant to City’s Zoning Ordinance, no structures are permitted in front of the leading edge of the residence). There is an existing pool located in the rear of the property that will be demolished and converted into a water fountain. Section 2.The City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed project during on-site field trips and Special Public Meeting held on May 1, 2020. The applicants were notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail, by phone and email. Section 3.The property is zoned RAS-2 with a net lot area of 1.7 acres or 74,379 square feet. The existing property is currently developed with a 3,690 square- foot residence currently being renovated with an existing 940 square foot attached garage, and a 450 square foot barn. There is also an existing swimming pool located on the rear of the property which will be partially filled and converted into a water fountain. The new proposed project enables a lap swimming pool with an infinity edge and spa. Section 4.The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 exemption Guidelines. Minimal grading will occur on the parcel relating to the proposed pool and spa project. In addition, the proposed location of the pool and spa is within the disturbed area of the subject parcel. No sensitive habitat will be impacted by the proposed project. 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 118 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 2 vicinity or zone. In proposing to construct a new 400 square-foot pool and spa in the front yard area, a Variance is required to grant relief from the following Sections of the Zoning Ordinance: 17.16.200.G.1. (no structures shall be located in the front yard). With respect to the aforementioned request for a Variance, the City Council finds as follows: A.There are exceptional circumstances and conditions on the subject property that do not apply generally to the other properties in that the frontage of the property covers majority of the lot’s perimeter making the front yard encompass majority of the useable yard area. Due to the irregular shape of the subject lot and geometry of Portuguese Bend Road, the backyard of the parcel functions as the main entrance to the property. The front façade of the existing residence faces the back courtyard. The garage doors and driveway that leads up to the main structure are located in the rear court yard which functions as the receiving area on the parcel. The proposed pool and spa, to be located in the front yard, are technically located behind the existing residence; the back of the residence faces the front yard. This special circumstance makes it difficult for the owner to enjoy the same rights possessed by other property owners in the City. B.The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to the property in question by strict application of the code. The property right which otherwise would be enjoyed is the ability to utilize a portion of their front yard with a pool for lap swimming and spa. The proposed location of the new pool and spa is not visually intrusive to its neighbors and is not visible from the road easement which is located at a lower elevation. C.The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located in that the proposed new pool and spa would not be visible from the adjoining street or private properties and therefore are not expected to result in any visual or privacy impacts. The proposed project must comply with the LA County Building Code. D.In granting of the Variance the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will be observed in that the proposed new construction of the pool and spa will be orderly, attractive, and will not affect the rural character of the community. The subject proposed structures are in the front of the property and will not impact the existing residence, but will enhance the use of the existing structures and previously approved residential addition. E.The Variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, constructed in the ground with sufficient open space 119 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 3 between surrounding structures. The proposed project is located on an existing developed lot and is not visible from abutting parcels. F.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 will comply with the disposal of construction and debris requirements. G.Allowing the construction of the proposed pool and spa does not grant special privilege to the applicant given that the front yard coverage covers most of the lot due to the geometry of Portuguese Bend Road affecting this particular site. Section 6.Based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council hereby approves the Variance in Zoning Case No. 20-03 the construction of a new 400 square foot swimming pool and spa for relocation in the front yard, subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance Permit 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 Section 17.46.080 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, or the approval granted is otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of those sections. 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 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 120 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 4 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, 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. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated January 29, 2020, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. 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. The 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. D.The total overall lot coverage of the net lot area shall not exceed 17,287 square feet or 23.2% E.The total structural coverage of the net lot shall not exceed 7,101 square feet or 9.5%. F.The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 40,475 square feet or 54.41% (of net lot area). G.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 the pool and decking. H.Per LA County Building Code, a pool barrier and/or fencing shall be required for the pool. 121 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 5 I.A drainage plan, as 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. J.The existing pool equipment area shall be fully enclosed by a wall with the opening to the interior of the property, facing the property residence and shall utilize the most quiet and technologically advanced equipment to dampen the sound. 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 construction, all parking shall take place on the project site. During construction, to the maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall 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.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 and comply with the City’s Low Impact development Ordinance (LID), if applicable. O.A minimum of 65% of the construction material spoils shall be recycled and diverted. The hauler shall provide the appropriate documentation to the City. P.All graded areas shall be landscaped. In addition, the swimming pool, spa and pool equipment area shall be screened from the neighbors and a landscaping plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. If landscaping of 500 square foot area or greater is introduced or redeveloped, the landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Any plants introduced for this project shall not grow into a hedge but be offset and shall not exceed the roof ridgeline. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and are consistent with the rural character of the community. Q.The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) Architectural Review Committee. 122 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 6 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#FIR E. 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.All requirements of the Building and Construction Code, the Zoning Code, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with, including the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. T.Prior to finaling of the project an “as graded” and an “as constructed” plans 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 on the “as built/as graded” plan. Hardcopy and electronic copy of “as built” plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of Final Certificate of Occupancy. 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. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF MAY 2020. _______________________________ JEFF PIEPER, MAYOR ATTEST: ____________________________ YOHANA CORONEL, 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. 123 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 7 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 1252 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF VARIANCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 400 SQUARE-FOOT SWIMMING POOL AND SPA IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD (LOT 4-FT- RH) (WACHS). ZONING CASE NO. 2020-03. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council on May 26, 2020, 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. _______________________________________________ CITY CLERK 124 8125 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD PROPOSED LAP POOL/SPA* LOCATION (*not to scale) 9126 10127 Agenda Item No.: 5.A Mtg. Date: 05/01/2020 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. 20-03: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 400 SQUARE FOOT SWIMMING POOL AND SPA IN THE FRONT YARD LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD. (WACHS) DATE:May 01, 2020 BACKGROUND: Request The applicant is requesting a Variance for the construction of a new 400 square-foot swimming pool and spa located in the front yard. There is an existing pool located in the rear yard that will be partially demolished and converted into a water fountain. The existing pool equipment area located on side of the existing residence will remain. The zoning code prohibits any construction in the front yard without a Variance. Planning Commission Review The field trip occurred on different days to comply with the social distancing requirements currently in effect throughout LA County. Additional discussions will take place at the Special Public Meeting on the morning of May 1, 2020. DISCUSSION: Zoning, Land Size and Existing Conditions The lot is an irregularly shaped parcel zoned RAS-2. The net lot area is 74,379 square feet, which is slightly below the requirements of the RAS-2 that requires a minimum net lot area of 87,120 square feet. The lot is developed with a 3,960 square residence with a 940 square-foot attached garage. The house is currently under renovation. The existing swimming pool located in the rear yard will be demolished and converted into a water 1128 fountain. There is an existing 450 square foot barn located at the northwest corner of the parcel. The Planning Department received an application for a new 400 square-foot pool with spa, water feature, and stone deck. The proposed project is not seen from the surrounding streets. The proposed pool elevation is above the Portuguese Bend Road elevation. The proposed project will result in minimal lot disturbance due to the lot being already developed with a residence with an attached garage and hardscape. Neighbor Concerns An inquiry was received from a neighbor, Mrs. Luna, inquiring if other variance requests have been requested by the owner. Mrs. Luna and her son attended the field trip and sent an email after the field trip informing the City that she does not object to the variance request. Past Approval for the Property On October 17, 2017, the Planning Commission approved Zoning Case No. 930, for a Site Plan Review for the construction of a garage addition, covered porches, and trellis. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE Grading, Structural and Total Lot Coverage Construction activities will include pool excavation of 220 cubic yards overall. The proposed depth of the pool is six feet. No dirt will be exported. Disturbance The proposed project will result in 54.41% or 40,475 square feet of overall disturbed area. Exceptions to the maximum 40% disturbance is permitted up to 60% of the net lot area, provided that at no point the slopes resulting from the grading are greater than 3:1, or three units horizontal to one unit vertical, RHMC Sect. 17.16.070.B.A.1. Rolling Hills Community Association Review Rolling Hills Community Association approved the proposed project on February 19, 2020. Planning Commission Responsibilities When reviewing a resolution for a development application, the Planning Commission must consider whether the proposed project meets the findings for a Variance request. Environmental Review The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES 17.38.050 Required Findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings: 1. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property 2129 that do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and zone; 2. 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; 3. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; 4. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; 5. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; 6. 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; and 7. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City of Rolling Hills Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2020-03 granting a Variance request to allow construction of a new 400 square foot pool and spa in the front yard located at 52 Portuguese Bend Road. (Wachs) ATTACHMENTS: 52 Portuguese Bend Raod - Pool and Spa.pdf Resolution 2020-03 (52 Portuguese Bend Road) (ZC 20-03).pdf Amended Resolution Cover Sheet.docx Revised Resolution 2020-03 (52 Portuguese Bend Road) (ZC 20-03) 04.28.20.doc 3130 POOL AND SPA ADDITION 4131 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2020-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 400 SQUARE-FOOT SWIMMING POOL AND SPA IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD, (LOT 4-FT-RH), (WACHS). ZONING CASE NO. 20-03. 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. Barton Wachs with respect to real property located at 52 Portuguese Bend Road, (Lot 4-FT-RH), Rolling Hills, CA requesting a Variance for the construction of a new swimming pool and spa proposed in the front yard of the property (pursuant to City’s Zoning Ordinance, no structures are permitted in front of the leading edge of the residence). There is an existing pool located in the rear of the property that will be demolished and converted into a water fountain. Section 2. The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed project during an on-site field trip and Special Public Meeting held on May 1, 2020. The applicants were notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail, by phone and email. Section 3. The property is zoned RAS-2 with a net lot area of 1.7 acres or 74,379 square feet. The existing property is currently developed with a 3,690 square- foot residence currently being renovated with an existing 940 square foot attached garage, and a 450 square foot barn. There is also an existing swimming pool located on the rear of the property which will be partially filled and converted into a water fountain. The new proposed project enables a lap swimming pool with an infinity edge and spa. Section 4. The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 exemption Guidelines. 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 construct a new 400 square-foot pool and spa in the front yard area, a Variance is required to grant relief from the following Sections of the Zoning Ordinance: 17.16.200.G.1. (no structures shall be located in the front yard). 5132 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 2 With respect to the aforementioned request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional circumstances and conditions on the subject property that do not apply generally to the other properties in that the frontage of the property covers majority of the lot’s perimeter making the front yard encompass majority of the useable yard area. B. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to the property in question by strict application of the code. The property right which otherwise would be enjoyed is the ability to utilize a portion of their front yard with a pool for lap swimming and spa. The proposed location of the new pool and spa is not visually intrusive to its neighbors and is not visible from the road easement which is located at a lower elevation. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located in that the proposed new pool and spa would not be visible from the adjoining street or private properties and therefore are not expected to result in any visual or privacy impacts. The proposed project must comply with the LA County Building Code. D. In granting of the Variance the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will be observed in that the proposed new construction of the pool and spa will be orderly, attractive, and will not affect the rural character of the community. The subject proposed structures are in the front of the property and will not impact the existing residence, but will enhance the use of the existing structures and previously approved residential addition. E. The Variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, constructed in the ground with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The proposed project is located on an existing developed lot and is not visible from abutting parcels. F. 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 will comply with the disposal of construction and debris requirements. G. Allowing the construction of the proposed pool and spa does not grant special privilege to the applicant given that the front yard coverage covers most of the lot due to the geometry of Portuguese Bend Road affecting this particular site. 6133 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 3 Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance in Zoning Case No. 20-03 the construction of a new 400 square foot swimming pool and spa for relocation in the front yard, subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance Permit 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 Section 17.46.080 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, or the approval granted is otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of those sections. 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 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, 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. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated January 29, 2020, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. 7134 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 4 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. The 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. D. The total overall lot coverage of the net lot area shall not exceed 17,287 square feet or 23.2% E. The total structural coverage of the net lot shall not exceed 7,101 square feet or 9.5%. F. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 40,475 square feet or 54.41% (of net lot area). G. 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 the pool and decking. H. The property shall be maintained free of dead trees and vegetation. Any proposed landscaping shall receive approval from the City prior to issuance of a building permit. I. Per LA County Building Code, a pool barrier and/or fencing shall be required for the pool. J. A drainage plan, as 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. K. The existing pool equipment area shall be fully enclosed by a wall with the opening to the interior of the property, facing the property residence and shall utilize the most quiet and technologically advanced equipment to dampen the sound. 8135 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 5 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 construction, all parking shall take place on the project site. During construction, to the 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 and comply with the City’s Low Impact development Ordinance (LID), if applicable. P. A minimum of 65% of the construction material spoils shall be recycled and diverted. The hauler shall provide the appropriate documentation to the City. Q. All graded areas shall be landscaped. In addition, the swimming pool, spa and pool equipment area shall be screened from the neighbors and a landscaping plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. If landscaping of 5,000 square foot area or greater is introduced or redeveloped, the landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Any plants introduced for this project shall not grow into a hedge but be offset and shall not exceed the ridgeline of the recreation room. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and are consistent with the rural character of the community. R. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) Architectural Review Committee. Perimeter 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 RHCA. 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: 9136 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 6 http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard_definitions#FIR E. 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. All requirements of the Building and Construction Code, the Zoning Code, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with, including the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. U. Prior to finaling of the project an “as graded” and an “as constructed” plans 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 on the “as built/as graded” plan. Hardcopy and electronic copy of “as built” plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of Final Certificate of Occupancy. V. 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 1st DAY OF MAY 2020. _______________________________ BRAD CHELF, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: ____________________________ YOHANA CORONEL, 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. 10137 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 7 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020-03 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF VARIANCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 400 SQUARE-FOOT SWIMMING POOL AND SPA IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD (LOT 4-FT-RH) (WACHS). ZONING CASE NO. 2020-03. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on May 1, 2020, 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. _______________________________________________ CITY CLERK 11138 Amended Resolution Posted to Agenda Packet on April 30, 2020 12139 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2020-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 400 SQUARE-FOOT SWIMMING POOL AND SPA IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD, (LOT 4-FT-RH), (WACHS). ZONING CASE NO. 20-03. 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. Barton Wachs with respect to real property located at 52 Portuguese Bend Road, (Lot 4-FT-RH), Rolling Hills, CA requesting a Variance for the construction of a new swimming pool and spa proposed in the front yard of the property (pursuant to City’s Zoning Ordinance, no structures are permitted in front of the leading edge of the residence). There is an existing pool located in the rear of the property that will be demolished and converted into a water fountain. Section 2.The Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed project during on-site field trips and Special Public Meeting held on May 1, 2020. The applicants were notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail, by phone and email. Section 3.The property is zoned RAS-2 with a net lot area of 1.7 acres or 74,379 square feet. The existing property is currently developed with a 3,690 square- foot residence currently being renovated with an existing 940 square foot attached garage, and a 450 square foot barn. There is also an existing swimming pool located on the rear of the property which will be partially filled and converted into a water fountain. The new proposed project enables a lap swimming pool with an infinity edge and spa. Section 4.The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 exemption Guidelines. Minimal grading will occur on the parcel relating to the proposed pool and spa project. In addition, the proposed location of the pool and spa is within the disturbed area of the subject parcel. No sensitive habitat will be impacted by the proposed project. 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 13140 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 2 vicinity or zone. In proposing to construct a new 400 square-foot pool and spa in the front yard area, a Variance is required to grant relief from the following Sections of the Zoning Ordinance: 17.16.200.G.1. (no structures shall be located in the front yard). With respect to the aforementioned request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A.There are exceptional circumstances and conditions on the subject property that do not apply generally to the other properties in that the frontage of the property covers majority of the lot’s perimeter making the front yard encompass majority of the useable yard area. Due to the irregular shape of the subject lot and geometry of Portuguese Bend Road, the backyard of the parcel functions as the main entrance to the property. The front façade of the existing residence faces the back courtyard. The garage doors and driveway that leads up to the main structure are located in the rear court yard which functions as the receiving area on the parcel. The proposed pool and spa, to be located in the front yard, are technically located behind the existing residence; the back of the residence faces the front yard. This special circumstance makes it difficult for the owner to enjoy the same rights possessed by other property owners in the City. B.The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to the property in question by strict application of the code. The property right which otherwise would be enjoyed is the ability to utilize a portion of their front yard with a pool for lap swimming and spa. The proposed location of the new pool and spa is not visually intrusive to its neighbors and is not visible from the road easement which is located at a lower elevation. C.The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located in that the proposed new pool and spa would not be visible from the adjoining street or private properties and therefore are not expected to result in any visual or privacy impacts. The proposed project must comply with the LA County Building Code. D.In granting of the Variance the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will be observed in that the proposed new construction of the pool and spa will be orderly, attractive, and will not affect the rural character of the community. The subject proposed structures are in the front of the property and will not impact the existing residence, but will enhance the use of the existing structures and previously approved residential addition. E.The Variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, constructed in the ground with sufficient open space 14141 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 3 between surrounding structures. The proposed project is located on an existing developed lot and is not visible from abutting parcels. F.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 will comply with the disposal of construction and debris requirements. G.Allowing the construction of the proposed pool and spa does not grant special privilege to the applicant given that the front yard coverage covers most of the lot due to the geometry of Portuguese Bend Road affecting this particular site. Section 6.Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance in Zoning Case No. 20-03 the construction of a new 400 square foot swimming pool and spa for relocation in the front yard, subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance Permit 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 Section 17.46.080 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, or the approval granted is otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of those sections. 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 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 15142 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 4 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, 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. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated January 29, 2020, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. 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. The 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. D.The total overall lot coverage of the net lot area shall not exceed 17,287 square feet or 23.2% E.The total structural coverage of the net lot shall not exceed 7,101 square feet or 9.5%. F.The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 40,475 square feet or 54.41% (of net lot area). G.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 the pool and decking. H.Per LA County Building Code, a pool barrier and/or fencing shall be required for the pool. 16143 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 5 I.A drainage plan, as 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. J.The existing pool equipment area shall be fully enclosed by a wall with the opening to the interior of the property, facing the property residence and shall utilize the most quiet and technologically advanced equipment to dampen the sound. 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 construction, all parking shall take place on the project site. During construction, to the maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall 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.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 and comply with the City’s Low Impact development Ordinance (LID), if applicable. O.A minimum of 65% of the construction material spoils shall be recycled and diverted. The hauler shall provide the appropriate documentation to the City. P.All graded areas shall be landscaped. In addition, the swimming pool, spa and pool equipment area shall be screened from the neighbors and a landscaping plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. If landscaping of 500 square foot area or greater is introduced or redeveloped, the landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Any plants introduced for this project shall not grow into a hedge but be offset and shall not exceed the roof ridgeline. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and are consistent with the rural character of the community. Q.The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) Architectural Review Committee. 17144 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 6 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#FIR E. 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.All requirements of the Building and Construction Code, the Zoning Code, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with, including the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. T.Prior to finaling of the project an “as graded” and an “as constructed” plans 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 on the “as built/as graded” plan. Hardcopy and electronic copy of “as built” plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of Final Certificate of Occupancy. 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. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 1st DAY OF MAY 2020. _______________________________ BRAD CHELF, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: ____________________________ YOHANA CORONEL, 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. 18145 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 7 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020-03 entitled: 19146 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 8 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF VARIANCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 400 SQUARE-FOOT SWIMMING POOL AND SPA IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD (LOT 4-FT-RH) (WACHS). ZONING CASE NO. 2020-03. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on May 1, 2020, 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. _______________________________________________ CITY CLERK 20147 City of Rolling Hills INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 UNOFFICIAL ACTION MINUTES SPECIAL PLANNING COMMISSION CITY HALL MEETING FRIDAY, MAY 01, 2020 7:30 A.M. 1.CALL MEETING TO ORDER A special meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Chairman Chelf at 7:31 a.m. on Friday, May 01, 2020 via teleconference. 2.ROLL CALL Commissioners Present:Cardenas Cooley, Kirkpatrick, Seaburn, and Chairman Chelf. Commissioners Absent:None. Others Present:Meredith Elguira, Planning & Community Services Director. Jane Abzug, Assistant City Attorney. Yohana Coronel, City Clerk. 3.APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA ACTION:Approved as presented. 4.PUBLIC COMMENTS ON MINUTES AND ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA Susana Luna. 5.NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS A.ZONING CASE NO. 20-03: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 400 SQUARE FOOT SWIMMING POOL AND SPA IN THE FRONT YARD LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD. (WACHS) ACTION:Commissioner Cardenas moved that the Planning Commission approve Resolution No. 2020-03 granting a variance request to allow construction of a new 400 square 148 -2- foot pool and spa in the front yard located at 52 Portuguese Bend Road (Wachs). Commissioner Cooley seconded the motion, which carried without objection. 6. ITEMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION None. 14.ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the Planning Commission, Chair Chelf adjourned the meeting at 7:48 a.m. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled to be held on Tuesday, May 19, 2019 beginning at 6:30 p.m. via teleconference. 149 Supplemental Agenda Packet Relating to Item 5A Posted May 26, 2020 150 Agenda Item No.: 5.A Mtg. Date: 04/21/2020 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. 20-03: REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 400 SQUARE-FOOT SWIMMING POOL AND SPA IN THE FRONT YARD LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD. (WACHS) DATE:April 21, 2020 BACKGROUND: Request The applicant is requesting a Variance for the construction of a new 400 square-foot swimming pool and spa located in the front yard. There is an existing pool located in the rear yard that will be partially demolished and converted into a water fountain. The existing pool equipment area located on side of the existing residence will remain. The zoning code prohibits any construction in the front yard without a Variance. Planning Commission Review The field trip will occur on different days to comply with the social distancing requirements currently in effect throughout LA County. Additional discussions will take place at the public hearing in the evening on the same day. DISCUSSION: 15151 Zoning, Land Size and Existing Conditions The lot is an irregularly shaped parcel zoned RAS-2. The net lot area is 74,379 square feet, which is slightly below the requirements of the RAS-2 that requires a minimum net lot area of 87,120 square feet. The lot is developed with a 3,960 square residence with a 940 square-foot attached garage. The house is currently under renovation. The existing swimming pool located in the rear yard will be demolished and converted into a water fountain. There is an existing 450 square foot barn located at the northwest corner of the parcel. The Planning Department received an application for a new 400 square-foot pool with spa, water feature, and stone deck. The proposed project is not seen from the surrounding streets. The proposed pool elevation is above the Portuguese Bend Road elevation. The proposed project will result in minimal lot disturbance due to the lot being already developed with a residence with an attached garage and hardscape. Neighbor Concerns An inquiry was received from a neighbor inquiring if other variance requests have been requested by the owner. Past Approval for the Property On October 17, 2017, the Planning Commission approved Zoning Case No. 930, for a Site Plan Review for the construction of a garage addition, covered porches, and trellis. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE Grading, Structural and Total Lot Coverage Construction activities will include pool excavation of 220 cubic yards overall. The proposed depth of the pool is six feet. No dirt will be exported. Disturbance The proposed project will result in 54.41% or 40,475 square feet of overall disturbed area. Exceptions to the maximum 40% disturbance is permitted up to 60% of the net lot area, provided that at no point the slopes resulting from the grading are greater than 3:1, or three units horizontal to one unit vertical, RHMC Sect. 17.16.070.B.A.1. Rolling Hills Community Association Review Rolling Hills Community Association approved the proposed project on February 19, 2020. City Council Responsibilities When reviewing a resolution for a development application, the City Council must consider whether the proposed project meets the findings for a Variance request. Environmental Review 16152 The project has been determined to be categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Recommendation It is recommended that the Planning Commission consider approving the variance request for the proposed construction of a new 400 square-foot swimming pool and spa proposed in the front yard of the subject property and a proposed deck around the perimeter of the proposed swimming pool and spa. CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES 17.38.050 Required Findings. In granting a variance, the Commission (and Council on appeal) must make the following findings: 1. 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; 2. 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; 3. That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; 4. That in granting the variance, the spirit and intent of this title will be observed; 5. That the variance does not grant special privilege to the applicant; 6. 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; and 7. That the variance request is consistent with the general plan of the City of Rolling Hills. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City of Rolling Hills Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2020-03 granting a variance request to allow construction of a new 400 square foot pool and spa in the front yard located at 52 Portuguese Bend Road. (Wachs) ATTACHMENTS: 52 Portuguese Bend Raod - Pool and Spa.pdf Resolution 2020-03 (52 Portuguese Bend Road) (ZC 20-03).pdf 17153 POOL AND SPA ADDITION 18154 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2020-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A VARIANCE REQUEST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 400 SQUARE-FOOT SWIMMING POOL AND SPA IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD, (LOT 4-FT-RH), (WACHS). ZONING CASE NO. 20-03. 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. Barton Wachs with respect to real property located at 52 Portuguese Bend Road, (Lot 4-FT-RH), Rolling Hills, CA requesting a Variance for the construction of a new swimming pool and spa proposed in the front yard of the property (pursuant to City’s Zoning Ordinance, no structures are permitted in front of the leading edge of the residence). There is an existing pool located in the rear of the property that will be demolished and converted into a water fountain. 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 meeting on the same day, April 21, 2020. The applicants were notified of the public hearing in writing by first class mail, by phone and email. Section 3. The property is zoned RAS-2 with a net lot area of 1.7 acres or 74,379 square feet. The existing property is currently developed with a 3,690 square- foot residence currently being renovated with an existing 940 square foot attached garage, and a 450 square foot barn. There is also an existing swimming pool located on the rear of the property which will be partially filled and converted into a water fountain. The new proposed project enables a lap swimming pool with an infinity edge and spa. Section 4. The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 exemption Guidelines. 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 construct a new 400 square-foot pool and spa in the front yard area, a Variance is required to grant relief from the following Sections of the Zoning Ordinance: 17.16.200.G.1. (no structures shall be located in the front yard). 19155 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 2 With respect to the aforementioned request for a Variance, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. There are exceptional circumstances and conditions on the subject property that do not apply generally to the other properties in that the frontage of the property covers majority of the lot’s perimeter making the front yard encompass majority of the useable yard area. B. The variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property owners in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to the property in question by strict application of the code. The property right which otherwise would be enjoyed is the ability to utilize a portion of their front yard with a pool for lap swimming and spa. The proposed location of the new pool and spa is not visually intrusive to its neighbors and is not visible from the road easement which is located at a lower elevation. C. The granting of the Variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located in that the proposed new pool and spa would not be visible from the adjoining street or private properties and therefore are not expected to result in any visual or privacy impacts. The proposed project must comply with the LA County Building Code. D. In granting of the Variance the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance will be observed in that the proposed new construction of the pool and spa will be orderly, attractive, and will not affect the rural character of the community. The subject proposed structures are in the front of the property and will not impact the existing residence, but will enhance the use of the existing structures and previously approved residential addition. E. The Variance request is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rolling Hills because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, constructed in the ground with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The proposed project is located on an existing developed lot and is not visible from abutting parcels. F. 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 will comply with the disposal of construction and debris requirements. G. Allowing the construction of the proposed pool and spa does not grant special privilege to the applicant given that the front yard coverage covers most of the lot due to the geometry of Portuguese Bend Road affecting this particular site. 20156 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 3 Section 6. Based upon the foregoing findings, the Planning Commission hereby approves the Variance in Zoning Case No. 20-03 the construction of a new 400 square foot swimming pool and spa for relocation in the front yard, subject to the following conditions: A. The Variance Permit 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 Section 17.46.080 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code, or the approval granted is otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of those sections. 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 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, 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. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file dated January 29, 2020, except as otherwise provided in these conditions. 21157 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 4 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. The 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. D. The total overall lot coverage of the net lot area shall not exceed 17,287 square feet or 23.2% E. The total structural coverage of the net lot shall not exceed 7,101 square feet or 9.5%. F. The disturbed area of the lot shall not exceed 40,475 square feet or 54.41% (of net lot area). G. 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 the pool and decking. H. The property shall be maintained free of dead trees and vegetation. Any proposed landscaping shall receive approval from the City prior to issuance of a building permit. I. Per LA County Building Code, a pool barrier and/or fencing shall be required for the pool. J. A drainage plan, as 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. K. The existing pool equipment area shall be fully enclosed by a wall with the opening to the interior of the property, facing the property residence and shall utilize the most quiet and technologically advanced equipment to dampen the sound. 22158 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 5 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 construction, all parking shall take place on the project site. During construction, to the 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 and comply with the City’s Low Impact development Ordinance (LID), if applicable. P. A minimum of 65% of the construction material spoils shall be recycled and diverted. The hauler shall provide the appropriate documentation to the City. Q. All graded areas shall be landscaped. In addition, the swimming pool, spa and pool equipment area shall be screened from the neighbors and a landscaping plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. If landscaping of 5,000 square foot area or greater is introduced or redeveloped, the landscaping shall be subject to the requirements of the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Any plants introduced for this project shall not grow into a hedge but be offset and shall not exceed the ridgeline of the recreation room. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area and are consistent with the rural character of the community. R. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) Architectural Review Committee. Perimeter 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 RHCA. 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: 23159 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 6 http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/lox/main.php?suite=safety&page=hazard_definitions#FIR E. 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. All requirements of the Building and Construction Code, the Zoning Code, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with, including the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. U. Prior to finaling of the project an “as graded” and an “as constructed” plans 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 on the “as built/as graded” plan. Hardcopy and electronic copy of “as built” plans shall be submitted to the Planning Department prior to issuance of Final Certificate of Occupancy. V. 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 21st DAY OF APRIL 2020. _______________________________ BRAD CHELF, CHAIRMAN ATTEST: ____________________________ YOHANA CORONEL, 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. 24160 Reso. 2020-03 52 Portuguese Bend Road 7 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2020-03 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF VARIANCE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW 400 SQUARE-FOOT SWIMMING POOL AND SPA IN THE FRONT YARD OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 52 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD (LOT 4-FT-RH) (WACHS). ZONING CASE NO. 2020-03. was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on April 21, 2020, 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. _______________________________________________ CITY CLERK 25161 From:Susana Luna To:Yohana Coronel; Susana Luna Cc:Jorge Luna Subject:Re: 52 Portuguese Bend Variance Objection Date:Tuesday, April 21, 2020 7:58:47 AM Dear Planning Commission & Meredith, Thank you so much for taking the time to meet with us this morning. We appreciate you taking our input and feedback in regards to this variance. After our site visit, taking some pictures, and learning about the project, we have no objection for the pool to be built exactly as it was marked and planned. Thanks once again and have a good day. Sincerely, Susana Luna On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 12:53 PM Yohana Coronel <YCoronel@cityofrh.net> wrote: Good afternoon Ms. Susana Luna, Thank you for contacting the City of Rolling Hills. Please except this email as confirmation of your comment. Many Thanks, Yohana Coronel City Clerk City of Rolling Hills – City Hall 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills CA 90274 O: 310.377.1521 | F: 310.377.7288 162 E: Ycoronel@CityofRH.net This is a transmission from the City of Rolling Hills. The information contained in this email pertains to City business and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient and you have received this message in error, please advise the sender by reply email and delete the message. WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted by e-mail. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachments for the presence of viruses. The CITY OF ROLLING HILLS accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. From: Susana Luna <lunaranch11@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2020 12:46 PM To: Yohana Coronel <YCoronel@cityofrh.net>; Susana Luna <lunaranch11@gmail.com> Cc: Jorge Luna <jorgeaminluna@gmail.com> Subject: 52 Portuguese Bend Variance Objection Dear Planning Committee and City Clerk, This email serves as live feedback for zoning case no 20-03 for 52 Portuguese Bend Rd, requesting a variance for a 400 square foot pool and spa at the front of the property. Please respond this email confirming receipt of this email and be aware that I have copied my son on this email who is serving as my counsel. I received a notice of Field Trip to the property for March 17th at 7:30 am. The trip and meeting was cancelled due to the COVID situation. I was not given the opportunity to provide feedback or input regarding this variance and I have not received any other notices from the city regarding this matter to date. This property and its development has seriously impacted my ocean view and I would like to physically, and personally, see the proposed request to assure myself that no further detriment will be made. In other words, I object to the variance until I can be assured that I will not be negatively impacted and that the request is in keeping with the CC&Rs of our city. 163 The nature of our beautiful city is very important to me, as I have lived here for over 35 years. It is also important to highlight the fact that just because a pool/fountain was once located near that location, does not de facto guarantee the option of having it again. Variances of this nature have always been looked at with fresh eyes balancing all interested parties. Furthermore, it seems that proper procedures are not being followed and I would appreciate a clarification and re-evaluation by the planning committee regarding this case. I only received a single notice of field trip that was then cancelled. I recognize that these are extraordinary times, but these decisions have permanent implications for our community and in particular for neighbors that will be directly impacted. I have attached the resolution which states that the variance was approved for a meeting that has not yet even taken place. It also states that the public was notified of this meeting. The resolution is incorrect on two counts: you cannot pass a resolution of a meeting that has not yet taken place and the public, me included, was not notified of the meeting to which the resolution depends on. With respect, I ask the planning commission to take into account the feedback of the upcoming field trip scheduled for April 21st at 7:30am and the possible negative permanent implications of approving the request. I greatly appreciate you taking into serious consideration these important objections and requests. I look forward to hearing from you and working together to resolve the situation. Sincerely, Susana Luna 5 Crest Rd East 164 165 166 Agenda Item No.: 7.A Mtg. Date: 05/26/2020 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:YOHANA CORONEL, CITY CLERK THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDER ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION'S REQUEST TO REPLACE THE EXISTING SEPTIC TANK SERVING THE RESTROOM AT MAIN GATE. DATE:May 26, 2020 BACKGROUND: The Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) requested the City Council's approval to implement improvements at the Tennis Courts. Per the lease agreement between the City and RHCA, the tenant RHCA is required to seek the City's approval before undertaking capital improvements above a defined dollar amount. At the August 26, 2019 meeting, preliminary cost estimates of the proposed tennis court improvements were provided to the City Council. The City Council made additional inquiries for more precise estimates and discussed the logistics of RHCA's proposed project and the City's planned ADA improvements at the tennis courts. At the October 14, 2019 City Council meeting, City staff provided an oral report on the RHCA's project based on updated information provided by RHCA. In January 2020, RHCA amended their initial request and limited the ask to replace the existing septic tank serving the restroom at the main gatehouse. RHCA submitted a proposal from Peninsula Septic Service, Inc., for $71,400. If approved by the Council, the replacement was anticipated for March/April 2020. The tennis court improvement project, inclusive of a new restroom and sink, is currently in design. Staff recommended that the City Council solicit additional information relating to the tennis court improvement project before deciding on RHCA's request to replace the existing septic tank. On May 11, 2020 the Council decided to move forward with engineering design for the 8-inch sewer line that could also serve the restroom at the main gatehouse. City staff contacted RHCA and informed them of the Council's action.167 DISCUSSION: On May 20, 2020, given Council's direction on the sewer main line, RHCA expressed no issues with waiting for the completion of the project and withdrew their request to replace the existing septic tank. However, in recognition of the age of the existing septic tank and the potential failure of the septic tank while the City advances the construction of the 8" sewer main line along Portuguese Bend Road, RHCA is requesting that the City approve the replacement of the septic tank on an emergency basis. RHCA expressed that they will pay for the construction and permit fees related to the septic tank replacement, if needed. FISCAL IMPACT: Consideration of RHCA's proposal to replace the existing septic tank will not have fiscal impacts to the City. If the City Council approves RHCA's request, RHCA will be responsible for the construction cost and associated permit fees. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council approve the RHCA request to replace the existing septic tank in the event of failure. ATTACHMENTS: 20-05-20__Lttr from KristenR regarding the septic tank replacement.pdf 168 169 Agenda Item No.: 7.B Mtg. Date: 05/26/2020 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:ELAINE JENG, CITY MANAGER THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:CONSIDER LAYOUT OPTIONS TO BRING EXISTING RESTROOMS AT CITY HALL TO COMPLY WITH ADA AND RELATED CODES, AND SELECT AN OPTION TO CONTINUE THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS. DATE:May 26, 2020 BACKGROUND: At the May 11, 2020 City Council meeting, staff presented layout options for the restrooms at City Hall to comply with Americans with Disability Act (ADA) and relevant codes. The staff report from the May 11, 2020 and the five layout options presented are included as an attachment to this report. At the conclusion of staff's presentation, based on his experience with ADA codes, one member of the City Council expressed that City Hall does not need three restrooms and the existing urinal can be eliminated. DISCUSSION: On Tuesday, May 12, 2020, staff held a virtual meeting with the City's architect Pacific Architecture and Engineering Inc. (PAE) to review the comments from the May 11, 2020 City Council meeting. PAE provided relevant sections from the California Building and Plumbing codes to demonstrate the process in reaching the conclusion that City Hall requires 1 toilet for men, 2 toilets for women, 1 urinal for men, 1 lavatory for men, 1 lavatory for women, 1 drinking fountain and 1 service sink. City Hall falls in two groups per code: Assembly Group A-3 and Business Group B. Assembly Group A-3 addresses the City Council Chamber and the Business Group B addresses the offices in City Hall. Based on occupancy load, the assembly space of City Hall would need to make provisions for 40 people; the business areas would need to make provisions for 60 people. Translating the occupancy load into fixture counts, Assembly A-3 would require a minimum of 1 toilet for men for occupancy count between 1 and 100 people, 2 toilets for occupancy count between 25-50 people, 1 urinal for men for occupancy count between 1 and 100 people, 1 lavatory for men for occupancy count between 1 and 200 people, 1 lavatory for women for occupancy between 1 and 100 people. The total fixture count for City Hall would be greater if using Business occupancy. Per PAE, it appears the code requirements at the time City Hall was constructed did not change as the current number of fixtures are aligned with the current codes.170 The layout options presented at the May 11, 2020 City Council meeting all satisfy the code required fixture count for City Hall. FISCAL IMPACT: PAE's current contract with the City includes a defined number of hours dedicated to exploring improvement options. Should the City Council decide to request PAE to further develop improvement options beyond the ones presented, the City may incur additional design costs. It is unknown at this time the overall construction cost of bringing City Hall into compliance with ADA and relevant codes. If the City Council approves the recommended option, it is anticipated that PAE can further develop the design plans in the months of June 2020 to provide a more refined estimate of the overall cost of improvements. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive a presentation from staff on the options developed to bring the restrooms at City Hall to comply with ADA and relevant codes, select Option 3.5 and direct staff to proceed with development of design plans. ATTACHMENTS: 7A_May_11_2020_StaffReport_CityHallADAOptions.pdf 7A_ADA_Restrooms_Options_2020_May.pdf 7A_CodeSections_ADAOptions.pdf 171 Agenda Item No.: 8.C Mtg. Date: 05/11/2020 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:ELAINE JENG, CITY MANAGER THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:CONSIDER LAYOUT OPTIONS TO BRING EXISTING RESTROOMS AT CITY HALL TO COMPLY WITH ADA CODES, AND SELECT AN OPTION TO CONTINUE THE DEVELOPMENT OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS. DATE:May 11, 2020 BACKGROUND: On January 27, 2020, the City Council engaged Pacific Architecture and Engineering Inc. (PAE) to prepare a set of construction plans to bring City Hall into compliance with Americans with Disabilities (ADA) codes. PAE was provided with a copy of the City's draft ADA Transition Plan completed by Disability Access Consultants (DAC) paid for by the City's insurance provided CJPIA. PAE was tasked to address the deficiencies listed in the draft ADA Transition Plan for City Hall. This includes the front door, the pathways, the public counter, the Council Chamber, and the restrooms. DISCUSSION: The first focus of PAE's work is the restrooms as the restrooms require major work due to existing space constraints. Improvements needed at the restrooms will dictate the manner in which the other improvements will be constructed at City Hall. PAE worked with staff to develop many options with the priority to be in full compliance with ADA and relevant codes, consideration for functionality, and considerations for budget and impacts to City Hall operations during construction. PAE was asked to the extent possible, keep all necessary improvements within the existing footprint of the building. Attached to this report are five options for consideration with high level construction cost ranking by PAE. Option 1 (Cost #1, #1 being the most cost effective) This option would create three separate All Gender restrooms in the existing restroom locations. One of the three restrooms has to be ADA compliant. This option would eliminate the closet space holding the water heater, refrigerator, the telephone box/wires, cables and switches for the City's computer network, and the small kitchenette. The uses eliminated by the new restrooms would need to be replaced elsewhere in City Hall. 172 Option 2 (Cost #2) This option would keep the men and women's restrooms in the current locations but both sets of restrooms would need to be converted into single use. The entry way into the restrooms would need to be widened to meet building code. This option would create an ADA restroom in the current copy room. To access the ADA restroom, the public counter would need to be rotated 90 degrees. This option would diminish the footprint of the existing copy room. Option 3 (Cost #3) The restrooms would be moved to the copy room. The public counter would be rotated 90 degrees to allow a walkway from the front door to the new restrooms. There would be a women's restroom and an All Gender restroom. Both sets of restrooms would be ADA compliant. In place of the existing restrooms, a copy room, a meeting room and additional storage room would be created. This option separates the public part of the house from the staff side of the house but diminishes considerably the existing office space that needs to house three employees. Option 3.5 (Cost #3.5) This option is a variation of Option 3 with the All Gender restroom placed in portions of the lobby rather than the office space. As with Option 3, this layout would allow the creation of a meeting room and preserve the office space for three employees. Option 4 (Cost #4) This option plots ADA compliant restrooms in the existing location. As with Option 1, this layout would displace a number of existing uses that need replacement elsewhere in City Hall and would require the widening of the existing hallway by shrinking the offices located across the restrooms. The cost ranking provided by PAE is specific to the cost of improving the restrooms. It should be noted that the overall impacts of the options presented are currently not available because the project is in the early stages of development. It should also be noted that as a part of the PAE's scope of work, PAE will develop options for consideration and based on a selected option will further develop the design plans for the overall improvements. Should the City decide to change the selected option necessitating changes to the overall improvement plans as the project progresses, the City may incur additional design fees. Evaluating the five options, Option 4 was eliminated as the layout would require changes to many other components of City Hall unnecessarily and also it is the most expensive option. Option 1 is ranked the most economical option but it would require external customers to traverse through a small opening at the front lobby, through working offices to access restrooms. This option would require the replacement of other uses that may be more costly to replace than to keep in its existing locations. Also given the unknown environment as the world return to day to day activities due to a temporary shut down to slow the pandemic, this option would not create a separation between public and private use. Option 2 is ranked the second most economical option. This option would create a separation between the public and private use, keep existing uses intact but additional structural work is necessary to be compliant with the building code. Options 3 and 3.5 offer functionality, the separation of public and private uses, the addition of a much needed meeting room and locates areas to replace displaced uses. Between Option 3 and 3.5, Option 3.5 would be preferred to keep the office space as is to accommodate three existing employees that occupy that space. Staff recommends that the City Council select Option 3.5. FISCAL IMPACT:173 In FY 2019-2020, $30,000 was budgeted for architectural/engineering services for the City Hall ADA Improvement project. The City Council engaged the services of PAE on January 27, 2020 for amount not-to-exceed $36,744.16. The City Council also approved to fund the shortfall of $6,722.16 from the funds set aside for the Tennis Court Improvement project. It is unknown at this time the overall cost of bringing City Hall into compliance with ADA and relevant codes. If the City Council approves the recommended option, it is anticipated that PAE can further develop the design plans in the months of May and June 2020 to provide a good estimate of the overall cost of improvements. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council receive a presentation from staff on the options developed to bring the restrooms at City Hall to comply ADA codes, selection Option 3.5 and direct staff to proceed with development of design plans. ATTACHMENTS: ADA_Restrooms_Options_2020_May.pdf 174 COUNCIL CHAMBERLOBBYRECEPTIONCITY MANAGERARCHITECTURAL ROOMWORKROOMARCHITECTURAL VAULTHT:8'2"23'-734"11'-7"HT:8'2"15'-818"2'-218"CASEWORKCASEWORK 3'6" high10'-1"31'-6"31'-4"20'-10"15'-5"23'-6"EACH DOOR 3'32'-6"31'-7"5'CEILING 8 '2"10'-6"3'-5"3'-612"15'-5"15'-634"11'32'-6"24'-6"15'-012"DOOR 2-10WIDE, 7'9 HIGHT3'-10"GLASS WALL WOOD FRAME15'-6"CASEWORK 3 '6" high13'-6"CLOSETBOOK KEEPERCITY CLERK\412"3'-334"6'-10"23'-9"16'-034"3'-678"6'-734"10'-214"6'-012"6'-012"3'-1"3'-512"3'-012"2'-2"10'-814"4'-134"1'-712"ITWATER HEATERCOFFEEWOMEN ADAALL GENDER Radius Radius RadiusRadius6'-114"2'-812"4'-8"RadiusRadiusADAWOMENSMENCOMPARISON OF SIZE175 LOBBYRECEPTIONCITY MANAGERARCHITECTURAL ROOMWORKROOMARCHITECTURAL VAULTHT:8'2"23'-734"11'-7"HT:8'2"15'-818"2'-218"CASEWORKCASEWORK 3'6" high10'-1"31'-6"31'-4"20'-10"15'-5"23'-6"EACH DOOR 3'32'-6"31'-7"5'3'-5"3'-612"15'-5"15'-634"11'32'-6"24'-6"15'-012"3'-10"15'-6"CASEWORK 3'6" high13'-6"BOOK KEEPERCITY CLERK\412"ALL GENDER RadiusRadiusADARadiusRadiusRadiusRadiusALL ALL DISPLACEDIT PHONE DATAWATER HEATERCOFFEEREFRIGERATORGENDER GENDER PUBLIC RESTROOMDOORS OPEN OUT TOHALL WAY ODOR NOISEISSUES, NOT ENOUGHROOM FOR DOUBLEDOOR10'-818"23'-778"11'-6"5'-318"5'-914"176 COUNCIL CHAMBERLOBBYRECEPTIONCITY MANAGERARCHITECTURAL ROOMARCHITECTURAL VAULT23'-734"11'-7"HT:8'2"2'-218"CASEWORK31'-6"23'-6"EACH DOOR 3'32'-6"31'-7"5'CEILING 8 '2"10'-6"3'-5"3'-612"15'-634"11'32'-6"24'-6"15'-012"CLOSETBOOK KEEPERCITY CLERK\412"3'-678"6'-112"10'-214"6'-012"6'-012"3'-8"3'-512"3'-012"2'-2"10'-814"4'-134"1'-712"ITWATER HEATERCOFFEEMENSWOMENONE NEW AT LOBBYRadiusRadiusADACOPYALL GENDEREXISTING CORRIDORWIDTHS DO NOT MEETBUILDING CODE SOWALLS NEED TO BEDEMO'D AND WOULDNEED TO BE WIDENEDIF PLUMBING IS ROUTEDHERE, CONSIDERMOVING RESTROOMSAND CAPTURE SPACEAT EXISTINGRESTROOMSCONVERT TO SINGLEUSERCONVERT TO SINGLEUSER177 LOBBYRECEPTIONCITY MANAGEROFFICECOPYBOOK KEEPERCITY CLERKWOMEN ADAALL GENDER RadiusRadius Radiu s Radius6'-114"2'-812"4'-8"RadiusRadiusADASTORAGEMEETING7'-738"10'-214"COFFEEITPUBLICRESTROOM TOBE SEPARATEDFROM PRIVATESPACETHIS COULD BESEPARATEDINTO TWO ALLGENDERS BUTWOULD BEMORE COSTLYMORE WALLSVS TOILETCOMPARTMENTS21'-434"12'-018"SEPARATION OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE178 179 COUNCIL CHAMBERLOBBYRECEPTIONCITY MANAGERARCHITECTURAL ROOMWORKROOMARCHITECTURAL VAULTHT:8'2"23'-734"11'-7"HT:8'2"15'-818"2'-218"CASEWORKCASEWORK 3'6" high10'-1"31'-6"31'-4"20'-10"15'-5"23'-6"EACH DOOR 3'32'-6"31'-7"CEILING LOW 8 '7.5"CEILING HIGH 13'9"5'3'-5"3'-612"15'-5"15'-634"11'32'-6"24'-6"15'-012"DOOR 2-10WIDE, 7'9 HIGHT3'-10"SLIDING DOOR 3' LEAVESGLASS WALL WOOD FRAME15'-6"CASEWORK 3'6" h igh 13'-6"BOOK KEEPERCITY CLERK\412"3'-512"WOMEN ADAALL GENDER Radiu s RadiusRadius Radiu s6'-114"2'-812"4'-8"Radius Radius ADA3'-378"NOT ENOUGH SPACE IN FRONT OF DOORPER CODE20'-612"10'-818"THIS ORIENTATION DOESNT FIT180 California Building Code, Chapter 3 Use and Occupancy Classification, Section 303.4 Assembly Group A and Section 304 Business Group B 181 California Building Code, Chapter 10 Means of Egress, 1004 Occupancy Load California Code of Regulations, Title 19, Division 1, 3.27 The number of occupants of any building, structure, or portion thereof, shall not exceed the permitted or posted capacity. Table 1004.5 Maximum Floor Area Allowances Per Occupant 182 California Plumbing Code 2019, Chapter 4 Plumbing Fixtures and Fixture Fittings, 422.0 Minimum Number of Required Fixtures, Table 422.1 Minimum Plumbing Facilities 183 Agenda Item No.: 8.A Mtg. Date: 05/26/2020 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:MEREDITH ELGUIRA, PLANNING DIRECTOR THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:CONSIDER AND APPROVE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC. TO PREPARE THE GENERAL PLAN SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE. DATE:May 26, 2020 BACKGROUND: California state law requires that each city and county adopt a general plan to guide its physical growth and development for the next 15 to 20 years. The general plan represents a community’s vision of its future and is a statement of its values, priorities, needs and concerns. The general plan is required to be prepared in accordance with the requirements of California Government Codes Section 65300 et seq . The general plan addresses the seven mandatory elements of the California Government Code, which are land use, circulation, housing, open space, conservation, noise and safety. The City of Rolling Hills last Safety Element update was completed in 1990. DISCUSSION: In 2019, the City of Rolling Hills was awarded a Cal OES grant to update the City's Safety Element. The update will consist of a comprehensive update to the existing element. The updated Safety Element will comply with recently enacted State mandates, provide relevant maps, identify hazards and hazard abatement provisions relating to seismic hazards, fire hazards and landslides policies. Policies may also address hazard abatement provisions relating to crime and police services, electromagnetic fields (EMF), hazardous waste and land use impacts. The Safety Element update will be prepared in compliance with the California General Plan Guidelines. The final Safety Element will be reviewed by Cal-OES and approved by FEMA prior to the City Council's adoption. The update will take approximately fourteen months to complete to meet the Grant deadline requirement of August 2021. On April 13, 2020, staff advertised a Request for Proposal (RFP) for professional consultant firms to submit proposals to provide Safety Element update services. The proposer applying should have significant experience in providing the services required under this RFP and performing the necessary analysis and preparing reports of findings and recommendations. The objective of this Project is to to comply with the California General Plan Guidelines and meet the requirements of the CalOES Grant in timely manner. On May 8, 2020, two (2) proposals were received. Each proposal was evaluated based the proposer ’s expertise, experience, project approach, use of resources, and dedication of staff. Based 184 on the RFP’S evaluation criteria, Rincon Consultants, Inc. was identified as being the more qualified firm that submitted proposals for this RFP. FISCAL IMPACT: The total grant amount awarded by Cal OES for Safety Element update is $47,625. The City's match is $15,875 for a total project cost of $63,500. The split between Federal grant monies and local match is 75%: 25%. The two proposals received were from CSG Consultants and Rincon Consultants Inc. CSG Consultants proposed that the work can be completed for $64,115; and Rincon Consultants proposed that the work can be completed for $63,193. If the City Council approves staff's recommendation, the cost to update the Safety Element would be $63,193. Of this amount $47,395 (75%) of the total cost would be funded by the grant. The City would fund the remaining $15,798 from general fund. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve a Professional Service Agreement with Rincon Consultants, Inc. to update the City's General Plan's Safety Element in an amount not to exceed $63,193. ATTACHMENTS: Rolling Hills Safety Element Proposal.pdf Cost Proposal - Rolling Hills Safety Element .pdf Supplemental Agenda Packet Relating to 8A 185 Proposal Submittal for the City of Rolling Hills SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE SERVICES Submitted to: City of Rolling Hills Attn: Meredith T. Elguira, Director of Planning and Community Services 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 May 8, 2020 www.rinconconsultants.com Submitted by: Rincon Consultants, Inc. 250 East 1st Street, Suite 1400 Los Angeles, California 90012 213-788-4842 186 Rincon Consultants, Inc. 250 East 1st Street, Suite 1400 Los Angeles, California 90012 213 788 4842 OFFICE AND FAX info@rinconconsultants.com www.rinconconsultants.com Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers May 8, 2020 Project Number 20-09675 Attn: Meredith T. Elguira, Director of Planning and Community Services City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 Subject: Proposal – Safety Element Update Services Dear Ms. Elguira: Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) is pleased to submit this proposal to assist the City of Rolling Hills with a comprehensive update of the General Plan Safety Element Update, which was last updated in 1990. We understand that the goals of the update are to comply with recent State legislation and guidelines, incorporate new data and maps, and develop new policies and programs to address various hazards based on new requirements and planning principles. Rincon will use the full breadth of its in-house technical expertise, including certified planners, environmental scientists, geologists, engineers, and outreach specialists to provide the City with the comprehensive and collaborative effort required for the project. Our well-rounded team is experienced in working with natural and man-made hazard assessments, emergency response, climate change, and vulnerability and adaptation assessments, and providing community outreach. Leading the team will be Joe Power, AICP CEP. He has 28 years of experience directing urban planning projects, including planning and policy document preparation and CEQA analyses. Mr. Power will serve as Principal-in-Charge and contract administrator. Lexi Journey, MESM will serve as Project Manager in charge of day-to-day oversight and will serve as the City’s primary contact. She is currently overseeing Safety Element updates for such cities as Burbank, Port Hueneme, Palmdale, and Thousand Oaks. To augment our in-house expertise, we have retained RRM Design Group to assist with community outreach and stakeholder engagement. Rincon and RRM have a longstanding relationship and have successfully collaborated on general plans for such cities as Port Hueneme, Calabasas, Alhambra, and Lompoc. Joe Power is authorized to bind Rincon to the terms of the proposal. Services will be primarily managed out of Rincon’s Los Angeles office. Mr. Power’s contact information is provided below. Joe Power, MA, Senior Principal/Vice President Rincon Consultants, Inc. 250 East 1st Street, Suite 1400 Los Angeles, California 90012 213-788-4842 x12, jpower@rinconconsultants.com This proposal will remain valid for 90 days from the due date for the proposal. 187 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services Rincon Consultants, Inc. 2 Thank you for considering Rincon for this assignment. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have questions about this proposal or need additional information. Sincerely, Rincon Consultants, Inc. Lexi Journey, MESM Supervising Planner Phone: 213-788-4842 x43 Email: ljourney@rinconconsultants.com Contact for Clarification Joe Power, MA Senior Principal/Vice President Phone: 213-788-4842 x12 Email: jpower@rinconconsultants.com Authorized to contractually obligate and negotiate on behalf of Rincon Consultants, Inc. 188 Table of Contents Rincon Consultants, Inc. i Table of Contents 1 Background and Project Summary ......................................................................................................... 1 2 Methodology .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Task 1 Project Kick-Off and Existing Conditions ................................................................................... 2 Task 1.1 Project Kick-Off Meeting with City Staff .................................................................. 2 Task 1.2 Existing Conditions Report ....................................................................................... 2 Task 2 Preparation of the Safety Element Update ............................................................................... 4 Task 2.1 Element Outline ....................................................................................................... 4 Task 2.2 Administrative Draft Element .................................................................................. 4 Task 2.3 Public Review Draft Element .................................................................................... 4 Task 2.4 Final Safety Element ................................................................................................. 4 Task 3 Community Engagement Program ............................................................................................ 5 Task 3.1 Safety Element Advisory Committee Meetings ....................................................... 5 Task 3.2 Workshops/Study Sessions ...................................................................................... 5 Task 4 Public Meetings ......................................................................................................................... 6 Task 4.1 Attendance at Public Meetings ................................................................................ 6 3 Staffing.................................................................................................................................................... 8 4 Qualifications ........................................................................................................................................ 11 4.1 Firm Profile .............................................................................................................................. 11 4.2 Demonstrated Capabilities ...................................................................................................... 13 4.3 Certifications and Registrations .............................................................................................. 14 4.4 Relevant Experience ................................................................................................................ 15 4.5 References ............................................................................................................................... 17 5 Cost Estimate ........................................................................................................................................ 18 5.1 Fee Schedule ........................................................................................................................... 19 6 Insurance Requirements ...................................................................................................................... 20 Proposal City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services 189 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services ii Appendices Appendix A Resumes of Key Personnel 190 Background and Project Summary Rincon Consultants, Inc. 1 1 Background and Project Summary The City of Rolling Hills is seeking proposals to prepare a comprehensive update to the Safety Element of the City’s General Plan, which was last updated in 1990. The City has been awarded Cal Office of Emergency Services (OES) funding to update the Safety Element. Rolling Hills encompasses about three square miles and, per the 2010 Census, has a population of 1,860. Incorporated in 1957, the City is completely residential and maintains a rural ranch-like character, with no traffic lights, large spaces between houses, and wide equestrian paths along streets. No hospitals, commercial uses, corporations, or transportation corridors are located within the City limits. The City owns several properties within the City but only one property – City Hall - has a structure: City Hall. Throughout its history, Rolling Hills has dealt with various natural hazards, including earthquakes, wildfires, droughts, and land movement. As the population of the City continues to age, the exposure to hazards creates an even higher risk than previously experienced. Prior to incorporation, the County of Los Angeles determined that a portion of the City known as the Flying Triangle is in a landslide area. At the time, the area was vacant, but the County allowed this area to be developed. In 1973, a large fire in the Flying Triangle burned vegetation as well as homes, stables, and other structures. All the homes were rebuilt, with a signed waiver to ensure that the owners were aware that this is a slide area and indemnifying the City and County from any liability. The City has also been identified as being located in a “Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone”. As a result, the City has amended its building and safety codes to include special requirements such as fire-rated materials for new construction. The Safety Element update will incorporate the following recently enacted State mandates:  SB 1241 – Fire Hazard Safety  SB 379 – Natural Hazard Adaptation and Resiliency  AB 2140 – Integration of Local Hazard Mitigation Plan The Safety Element update will include:  Updates to relevant maps  Incorporation of references to relevant maps in the Safety Element text  Relevant technical updates The updated Safety Element will identify hazards and hazard abatement provisions relating to:  Seismic Hazards  Fire Hazards  Landslides Policies may also address hazard abatement provisions relating to:  Crime and Police Services  Electromagnetic Fields (EMF)  Hazardous Waste  Land Use The Safety Element Update will be prepared in compliance with the recently updated California General Plan Guidelines. The final Safety Element will be reviewed by OES and approved by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) prior to City Council adoption. 191 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services 2 2 Methodology The Rincon team’s proposed work program is described below. To ensure that the City’s needs are met and that the schedule for the project is expedited as necessary, the entire team will effectively serve as an extension of City staff. To that end, we will manage all aspects of the work program, limiting City staff involvement to coordination meetings, review of internal work products, and assistance in coordinating community meetings/workshops. We will proactively manage all aspects of the assignment, establishing project timelines and prompting staff for needed input and decisions as necessary to keep the process moving forward. We anticipate having bi-weekly check-in calls to ensure that City staff are aware of the project status and that issues are addressed in a timely manner. Task 1 Project Kick-Off and Existing Conditions Task 1.1 Project Kick-Off Meeting with City Staff The Rincon team will prepare for and participate in a formal kick-off project meeting with City staff to discuss the refined scope and project schedule and collect relevant information, set-up advisory committee lists, and further familiarize the team with key concerns in the City. This meeting will be either in person or via teleconference, depending on the COVID-19 situation. Task 1.2 Existing Conditions Report This Existing Conditions Report will serve as the basis for the Safety Element Update since it will inform the goals, policies, and objectives needed to address identify natural and human-related hazards. Rincon will compile available data and investigate any gaps in knowledge to identify natural and human-related hazards. We will collect and share data according to the City’s specification (e.g., coordinate system and projection for spatial data) and share data with the City using a project geodatabase. All spatial data will be compiled into an ArcGIS online-mapping database that will be shared with the City to aid in data review. We have extensive experience collecting the data needed to address these hazards and showcasing them in a format that is useful not only to planners, but other City staff and the public (See interactive online mapping tool for Rancho Mirage General Plan Update). We also have the field experience to supplement existing data with primary data collection for any areas that the City may have specific concerns about. The assessment will be presented in a technical report that addresses the following topics in accordance with State requirements. 192 Methodology Rincon Consultants, Inc. 3 Hazard Type Main Concern How Rincon Will Assess Existing Resources Natural Hazards Seismic risks Continued but relatively low-risk due to fault rupture, ground shaking, tsunami, dam failure, subsidence, liquefaction. Utilize most recent seismic information to map risks throughout City. Evaluate whether current City policies need to be updated to address new areas of risk or be consistent with updated State Guidelines.  California Geological Survey Mapping  Alquist Priolo Fault Map  General Plan Guidelines Mapping Tool Flooding Higher precipitation events may lead to flash flooding. Identify known areas vulnerable to flooding and review and potentially update city-wide flood maps.  FEMA Mapping  General Plan Guidelines Mapping Tool Wildland and Urban Fires The City is in a designated high fire severity zone. Identify fire hazards zones and coordinate with surrounding cities and Los Angeles County regarding potential emergency communication policies and protocol.  CalFire Mapping  Los Angeles County Fire Mapping Climate Change Effects Climate change may the risk associated with extreme heat, drought, and air quality pollution. Review climate change modeling provided by CalAdapt and determine if any information gaps exist and need to be supplemented with other resources.  CalAdapt Human-Related Hazards Hazardous Waste Continued risks due to hazardous waste sites. Compile and re-map hazardous waste sites and Hazardous emission generators (such as from AB 2588 Toxic Hot Spots inventory).  SWCRB’s Geotracker Database  DTSC’s EnviroStor Database  Cortese List Peak Load Water Supply Requirements The delivery of peak water load may stress the integrity or capacity of existing water supply infrastructure. Characterize existing water supply infrastructure, including age and size of storage and transmission facilities. Assess how existing infrastructure is accommodated to facilitate peak load water supply demand.  Local water purveyors Minimum road widths and clearance around structures Status and maintenance of road widths and clearances in risk areas. Evaluate road widths and clearances in potential risk areas and identify potential deficiencies.  CalFire  General Plan Guidelines  Rolling Hills 2017 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan  Rolling Hills Wildfire Mitigation Survey Evacuation Routes Sufficient evacuation capacity and protocol Review existing evacuation plans and work with City staff to assess evacuation needs.  Rolling Hills 2017 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan  Rolling Hills Wildfire Mitigation Survey In addition to the above, we will address such issues as crime and police services and electromagnetic fields (EMF). Data and recommendations regarding crime/police will be obtained in coordination with the Lomita Station of the County Sheriff's Department. EMF data and any recommendations will be from various sources, such as the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. 193 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services 4 Deliverables Agenda for and attend one project kick-off meeting, summary of meeting notes, Existing Conditions Report (in Microsoft word and Adobe PDF format, including addressing two rounds of review with consolidated comments); ArcGIS online-mapping database (for internal use). Task 2 Preparation of the Safety Element Update Task 2.1 Element Outline Rincon will prepare an outline of the Safety Element for staff review and approval before drafting the Element. The outline will incorporate information gathered from the existing conditions report, the Existing Safety Element, advisory meetings, community meetings, and public hearings. Task 2.2 Administrative Draft Element The Element will include information about the regulatory and governance issues surrounding natural and human-related hazard abatement including applicable local, state, and federal policies and regulations. Rincon will use the State’s Office of Planning & Research 2017 General Plan Guidelines to update the Safety Element to ensure consistency with the State’s latest requirements and guidance, including: SB 379 Vulnerability and Adaptation; SB 1241 Fire Risks; and SB 1030 Safety Element Update Requirements. Rincon’s primary objective will be to develop a document that is actionable, with information aimed at implementation of hazard abatement provisions to guide local decisions related to zoning, subdivisions and entitlement permits. Rincon will present the background information and policies in a clear, informative way, with graphics showing hazards in a digestible way. Strategies for specific areas of Rolling Hills will be shown with maps for context. Meeting summaries and reports produced in earlier tasks will be designed to be integrated into the Element as discrete technical appendices. The Safety Element Update will focus on ensuring alignment with and/or integration of other City plans such as the Local Coastal Plan and the local Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Element will set up the framework for any necessary municipal code updates, including the potential for a disaster recovery ordinance to help the City organize and expedite recovery in advance of a declared disaster and to mitigate hazardous conditions before and after such a disaster. Task 2.3 Public Review Draft Element Rincon will respond to one round of consolidated City comments on the Administrative Draft Element in addition to comments received at the Safety Element Advisory Committee Meeting (Task See 3.3). The Public Review Draft Safety Element will also be submitted to Cal OES/FEMA for review. Comments provided by the public and Cal OES and FEMA will be addressed before the Draft Element goes to City Council. Task 2.4 Final Safety Element Rincon will inventory all public comments on a comment/proposed response sheet for review/concurrence by the City’s project lead. We will flag conflicting comments and consult with City staff to rectify them. We will seek sign-off on the comment/response sheet before incorporating changes into the final Element. The final Element will be formatted and designed to facilitate ease of use. 194 Methodology Rincon Consultants, Inc. 5 Deliverables Safety Element Update Outline, Administrative Draft, Public Review Draft, and Final Element (in Microsoft word and Adobe PDF format, including addressing two rounds of review with consolidated comments in each one) Task 3 Community Engagement Program We believe an effective community outreach program creates confidence in the planning process, promotes broad-based understanding, and reflects the interests and needs of the community. RRM will work with City staff and Rincon Consultants to develop, refine, and customize an outreach process that will effectively educate, build interest and obtain consensus regarding the project. As part of the strategy, existing City communication channels will be leveraged, such as the Rolling Hills News. Preliminarily, the outreach strategy provides for the following activities. Activities will be either in person or via teleconference, depending on the COVID-19 situation. Task 3.1 Safety Element Advisory Committee Meetings In collaboration with City staff, the project team will identify departments, agencies, individuals, and small groups of interest-based stakeholders with local knowledge of the community area and facilitate Safety Element Advisory meetings to obtain targeted feedback related to existing conditions, specific concerns and issues, and policy recommendations. The Safety Element Advisory Committee will include City staff, decision-makers and representatives of contracted services for the Los Angeles County Fire Department, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, building services provider, and other affected agencies and organizations. Additional members may potentially include representatives from local organizations such as the Block Captains, Caballeros Club, and senior’s organizations. City staff will be responsible for meeting notification, facility, and logistics. Task 3.2 Workshops/Study Sessions Up to two workshops/study sessions are assumed at key project stages. This could include a joint study session with the Planning Commission and City Council with the broader community invited, and a community open house to present draft Safety Element concepts. Efforts during the first phase of the project are intended to focus on refining Safety Element direction, gathering information, and assessing current conditions. Subsequent community engagement will present concepts and confirm direction. RRM will be responsible for creating materials associated with workshops/study sessions. City staff will be responsible for meeting notification, facility, and logistics. We welcome further discussion to refine the community engagement task to include online engagement/surveys, additional community workshops, or other outreach strategies to best serve the effort and reflect City priorities. Flexibility during this time of uncertainty is particularly important and providing an adept and responsive outreach program will be needed. This task provides a number of hours that can potentially be reallocated to support different types of engagement activities. Deliverables Refined community engagement strategy memorandum, Up to two (2) Safety Element Advisory Committee Meetings and Up to two (2) community workshops/study session. 195 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services 6 Task 4 Public Meetings Task 4.1 Attendance at Public Meetings Rincon will attend and respond to questions regarding the Safety Element at two public hearings. The team will take notes of comments and make the necessary revisions based on feedback provided by the City decision makers. Rincon will also attend an additional public hearing before the City Council for adoption of the Safety Element Update. Deliverables Attendance at two public hearings and addressing any public hearing comments in the Safety Element Update. 196 Methodology Rincon Consultants, Inc. 7 Estimated Schedule Task June 2020 July 2020 Aug 2020 Sept 2020 Oct 2020 Nov 2020 Dec 2020 Jan 2021 Feb 2021 June 2021 July 2021 Aug 2021 Task 1.1 Project Kick-Off Meeting with City Staff Task 1.2 Existing Conditions Report Task 2.1 Element Outline Task 2.2 Administrative Draft Element Task 2.3 Public Review Draft Element Task 2.4 Final Safety Element Task 3.1 Advisory Committee Meetings Task 3.2 Workshops/ Study Sessions Task 4.1 Attendance at Public Meetings Public Review Work in Progress City Review Meetings/Workshops Hearing (Potential Dates) 197 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services 8 3 Staffing The experience and qualifications of key members of the Rincon team are described below. The Rincon includes experts General Plan preparation, all the technical areas of concern for Safety Elements, and public outreach. Joe Power, AICP CEP, Vice President Education: M.A., Architecture and Urban Planning, UCLA Graduate School of Architecture and Urban Planning B.A., Urban and Economic Geography, University of Georgia Certification: American Institute of Certified Planners, Certified Environmental Planner Role: Principal-in-Charge and Contract Manager Joe Power has more than 28 years of experience and is an expert in interpreting state and federal planning and environmental law, as well as in developing environmental documentation that is informative, readable, and legally defensible. Mr. Power has prepared specialized technical reports on a range of planning and environmental topics, including noise, air quality, greenhouse gases, sustainability, and water supply. Mr. Power has managed general plans and plan elements for the cities of Calabasas, Ventura, Avalon, Camarillo, Pasadena, Rancho Mirage, and Calipatria. He is also currently overseeing the City of Alhambra General Plan Update as well as Rincon’s efforts for EIRs for General Plan updates in Indio and Beaumont. Lexi Journey, MESM, Senior Environmental Planner Education: M.E.S.M., Bren School of Environmental Science & Management, University of California, Santa Barbara B.S., Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, University of California, Los Angeles Lexi Journey is a Senior Environmental Planner in Rincon’s Environmental and Land Use Planning Group. Ms. Journey’s experience includes project management, planning policy analyses, technical analyses, and outreach for assignments such as Vulnerability Assessments, General, Plans, Coastal Land Use Plans, Safety Elements, and Climate Action Plans. Due to the large reach of the programs she manages, she is proficient in working with diverse stakeholders, including local, State, and Federal government agencies, as well as private companies and non-profit organizations. She has led many community workshops and presented at decision-maker meetings. She has prepared wide variety of technical studies for topics regarding climate vulnerability, climate adaptation, and natural hazards She has worked on vulnerability assessments in various jurisdictions including the cities of Oxnard, Merced County, Pasadena, South Pasadena, Alhambra, and Rancho Mirage. She is currently leading the community engagement program for the South Pasadena Climate Action Plan, where she was featured in a recent article by the South Pasadena Review, Spotlight Is Put On Climate Playbook. She has managed various projects including the Local Oxnard Coastal Plan Update, the City of Alhambra General Plan Update, and the City of Rancho Mirage General Plan Update. She has prepared Safety, Elements for the cities of Alhambra and Seaside and is currently overseeing Safety Element updates for such cities as Burbank, Port Hueneme, Palmdale, and Thousand Oaks. 198 Staffing Rincon Consultants, Inc. 9 Lindsay Ellingson, MS, EIT, Environmental Engineer Education: M.S., Geological Engineering, Michigan Technological University B.S., Geological Engineering, University of Minnesota Ms. Ellingson is a Geological Engineer by training and has over 3 years of experience in environmental remediation, environmental planning and permitting, water quality regulation and compliance, and water resources engineering. The focus of Ms. Ellingson’s master’s studies was the mitigation of natural geologic hazards, with a focus on landslide hazard and inundation modeling. Her experiences also include contaminated site investigations, development of long-term site management strategies, remedial optimization strategies, reporting and management of operation and maintenance activities, and data gap investigations for complex sites. Ms. Ellingson is a Project Manager in Rincon’s environmental site assessment group and provides technical expertise to several of Rincon’s service lines. Jon Montgomery, GIS Analyst Education: Masters of Environmental Science & Management, UC-Santa Barbara BA, University of Wisconsin, Madison Jon Montgomery has broad professional GIS, GPS and graphics experience, including work with local and regional government agencies, nonprofit organizations, and consulting firms. His expertise includes spatial analysis, cartography, model/tool development, web mapping and graphics production with extensive ESRI software experience. Previously, Jon worked for organizations including; City of Santa Barbara, University of California, Santa Barbara, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Los Padres ForestWatch, and Good Oak Ecological Services. Recently Jon has completed local hazard mapping and modeling for the Oxnard Local Coastal Plan vulnerability and adaptation assessments. He also built an online mapping tool for the Rancho Mirage General Plan. Walt Hamann, PG, CEG, CHG, QSD/P, Vice President Education: M.S., Geology, University of California, Los Angeles B.A., Geological Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara Certifications: Professional Geologist, California (#4742) Certified Engineering Geologist, California (#1635) Certified Hydrogeologist, California (#208) Qualified SWPPP Developer and Qualified SWPPP Practitioner (#22181) Walt Hamann is a founding Partner of Rincon and has over 30 years of professional experience preparing engineering geology and geologic hazards studies, geology/soils, hydrology/water quality, and hazards/hazardous materials sections for EIR documents for properties throughout California. Mr. Hamann is a California Certified Hydrogeologist and is knowledgeable of soils and groundwater issues throughout California. Mr. Hamann has worked closely with the DTSC, RWQCB, and other local regulatory agencies, including fire and environmental health departments. Walt is also a California Certified Hydrogeologist and is knowledgeable of soils and ground water issues throughout the greater Los Angeles area. Past work has included the preparation of technical evaluation for the City of Thousand Oaks Safety Element and geology and hazardous materials assessments for various projects throughout the region. He has served as an expert witness on numerous environmental site characterization and remediation studies in southern California. 199 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services 10 Camila Bobroff, BS, Climate Change Intern Education: M.E.S.M., Coastal Marine Resources Management, Bren School of Environmental Science & Management University of California, Santa Barbara (expected June 2020) B.A., Environmental Studies, B.S., Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Santa Cruz Camila Bobroff is a Climate Change Intern within Rincon’s Environmental and Land Use Planning Group. Ms. Bobroff is a graduate student at the Bren School of Environmental Science and Management at the University of California, Santa Barbara, where she studies climate change mitigation and adaptation. At the Bren School, she is modeling projected impacts of climate change on water supply for the City of Santa Barbara. Ms. Bobroff has professional experience in data analysis, environmental modeling, and technical writing. Ms. Bobroff is currently responsible for assisting in the preparation of Vulnerability Assessments, Climate Action Plans, Carbon Inventories, and General Plans. She is supporting the development of the, Port Hueneme General Plan Update, Livermore Climate Action Plan, Merced County Climate Action Plan, and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Climate Action Plan. Diane Bathgate, AICP, CNU-A, Principal Education: Graduate Studies, Public Administration, California State University, Long Beach B.A., Environmental Studies and Psychology, University of California, Santa Barbara With experience in planning for both the public and private sectors, Diane has managed a wide range of RRM’s land use planning, urban design, and environmental assignments. Her background as the former mayor, city councilmember and planning commissioner of San Juan Capistrano, and as a professional planning, urban design, and environmental consultant makes Diane a versatile strategist and project manager. She understands the importance of stakeholder support and the necessary resolution of the sometimes many layers of agency requirements. Diane's understanding of multiple perspectives and policy frameworks are vital elements in successfully addressing the unique challenges that each project brings. She anticipates and resolves issues collaboratively with property owners, developers, citizens, community organizations, and agency staff. 200 Qualifications Rincon Consultants, Inc. 11 4 Qualifications 4.1 Firm Profile Rincon is a multi-disciplinary planning and environmental science consulting firm that provides quality professional services to government and industry. Our principal service is to provide planning and environmental support to create and sustain innovative solutions to social, sustainability, and environmental issues. Rincon prides itself on the considerable depth of its staff, which includes certified urban planners, sustainability experts, environmental scientists and engineers, accredited LEED professionals, and specialists in such areas as housing, cultural resources, climate change, noise, and air quality. We are responsive and ready to initiate requested tasks in a moment’s notice and respond to any planning, environmental, and technical needs. Our approach to every project is centered upon the design and development of innovative solutions that respond to our clients’ specific needs in a cost-effective manner. Rincon’s corporate culture focuses on providing planning and environmental consulting services in a manner that is beneficial to both the environment and our client’s needs. When hired, we perceive ourselves as an extension of our client’s team and function with the best interests of the client in mind. By managing each project with a focus on three primary objectives – efficiency, technical excellence, and sustainability – we provide superior service that efficiently and effectively meets the needs of our clients. We have categorized our environmental consulting services into six core areas:  Land Use and Environmental Planning  Biological Resources  Water Resources  Cultural Resources  Site Assessment and Remediation  Sustainability Services We also maintain a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Graphics Communications group to enhance our documents and support our data analyses for projects addressing issues in these service areas. The following is a summary of the services that Rincon provides. Legal Name: Rincon Consultants, Inc. Founded: December 1994 Legal Form: California “S” Corporation Professional Staff: 275+ California Offices: 12 Los Angeles, Ventura, Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, Redlands, Carlsbad, San Diego, Monterey, Santa Cruz, Fresno, Oakland, and Sacramento Website: www.rinconconsultants.com Company Highlights:  Received three AEP awards in 2019  Received one APA award in 2019  Named one of the "Best Places to Work" by Zweig-White (2019, 2017, 2015, and 2009)  Named Hot 100 Firm list, recognizing revenue growth over time (2019, 2018, 2016, 2015, 2011, 2009, and 2004)  Headquarters is LEED EBOM Certified Silver 201 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services 12 Rincon’s Services Land Use and Environmental Planning  Planning Services: General Plans and General Plan Elements, Specific Plans, and Neighborhood, Community, and Area Plans  CEQA Compliance: EIRs, ISs, Categorical Exemptions, Addendums, MMRPs  NEPA Compliance: EISs, EAs, FONSIs  Community Involvement Programs  Recreation and Open Space Planning  Grant Application Assistance  Noise Studies, including Bio-Acoustic Evaluation  Air Quality Analysis, including Health Risk Assessment Biological Resources Assessment and Regulatory Compliance  Biological Construction and Mitigation Monitoring  Baseline Biological Resources Inventories and Vegetation Mapping  Biological Resources Effects/Impacts Analyses: Biological Assessments, Biological Evaluations, Natural Environment Studies  Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Plant and Wildlife Species Surveys  Nesting Bird Surveys  Jurisdictional Delineations: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regional Water Quality Control Board, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and California Coastal Commission Methodologies  California Rapid Assessment Method for Wetlands  Tree Inventory, Health Assessment, Risk Assessment, and Tree Protection Plans  Certified Arborist Tree Surveys and Impacts Assessments  Regulatory Permitting: USACE Clean Water Act Section 404, RWQCB CWA Section 401, CDFW Fish and Game Code Section 1602  Federal Endangered Species Act Section 7 Consultations and Section 10 Habitat Conservation Plans  California Endangered Species Act Section 2081 Permits/Memorandum of Understandings  Wetland, Riparian, and Upland Habitat Revegetation and Restoration Planning Cultural Resources  Literature Reviews/Records Searches/Archival Research  Native American Consultation  Cultural Resource Surveys  Paleontological Resource Surveys  California Register of Historical Resources and National Register of Historic Places Eligibility Evaluations: Archaeological Site Testing, Historic Built Environment Resource Evaluation, Traditional Cultural Property Evaluation  Archaeological Data Recovery Programs  Paleontological Monitoring  Native American Monitor Training Programs  Section 106 Consultation  Memoranda of Agreement  Findings of Effects  State Historic Preservation Officer Consultation  Historic Preservation Plans  Cultural Resources and Paleontological Management Plans  Third Party Peer Review  Phase I, II, and III Cultural Resources Analysis  Archeological and Native American Monitoring Environmental Site Assessment and Remediation  Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments  Hazardous Waste Characterization  Site Remediation: Planning, Design, and Construction  Site Monitoring: Groundwater, Air, Soil, and Vapor  Underground Storage Tank Removal and Investigation  Health Risk Assessments  Environmental Construction/Grading Monitoring  Methane Soil Gas Testing  Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan  Transaction Screens  Asbestos/Lead Based Paint Testing  Geological and Seismic Studies Water Resources  Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans  Storm Water Management and Compliance Monitoring  Water Supply Assessments  Water Rights Permitting  Watershed Management and Planning Sustainability  Climate Action Plans  GHG Emissions (GHG) Inventories  Assembly Bill (AB) 32 GHG/Gas Offset Verification  Green Building Analysis – LEED® and Build It Green™  Strategic Growth Council Prop 84 Sustainable Community Planning Grants Projects  Energy Action Plans  Grant Writing for Sustainability and Climate Action Planning  Comprehensive Public Engagement and Outreach Programs  ASHRAE Level 1 and 2 Energy Audit 202 Qualifications Rincon Consultants, Inc. 13 4.2 Demonstrated Capabilities General Plans Rincon has prepared General Plans and General Plan elements throughout California in various types of environmental and socioeconomic settings. See Figure to the right for jurisdictions, Rincon has completed General Plans for. In 2018, Rincon’s Rancho Mirage General Plan won a Merit Award for Outstanding Planning Document from AEP, and the Merit Award for Best Practices from the APA Inland Empire chapter. The Safety Element was updated with a natural hazards vulnerability assessment and policies pertaining to climate change were added in accordance with SB 379. As a full-service environmental firm, we excel in the technical aspects of long-range planning, such as addressing environmental hazards and vulnerability, air quality, greenhouse gases, and noise. Our team of planners, scientists, engineers, geologists, and biologists work collaboratively to develop policies and programs that are technically feasible but also improve the safety and quality of life of the community. For example, using natural restoration projects and low impact development to mitigate climate change impacts and increasing transportation options to increase safety and provide greater access to public health resources. Thus, with this extensive expertise and knowledge of the Santa Monica community, we are confident that you will find our team highly qualified to update the City’s Safety Element. Rincon General Plan Experience 203 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services 14 Geological and Environmental Hazards Rincon’s experienced geologists perform geologic hazard evaluations and seismic studies on properties throughout California. These studies are performed to determine geologic conditions or constraints on parcels of land. As projects encroach onto geologically active regions, property owners and planning officials need to understand how geologic hazards may constrain the use of certain parcels or activities. Our Geologic Hazard Evaluations commonly consider the following issues: faults, seismically induced ground shaking, ground surface rupture, liquefaction, slope instability and landslides, erosion and scour, tsunami, seiche, flooding, and geological special study zones. Rincon’s environmental scientists also conduct Environmental Site Assessments to evaluate whether a chemical release has occurred, the nature and extent of contamination, and the significance of the contamination relative to established threshold levels or risk-based criteria. Our assessments have included underground storage tanks (USTs), dry cleaners, wastewater clarifiers, sumps, hazardous waste storage areas, oil fields, oil refineries, landfills, metal plating facilities, miscellaneous manufacturing sites, machine shops, agricultural land, military bases, and crude oil tank farms. Chemicals typically evaluated include: motor vehicle fuel, solvents, pesticides, petroleum, radioactive isotopes, explosives, herbicides, oil-based paint, metals, PCBs, and semi-volatile constituents. 4.3 Certifications and Registrations Our staff credentials include the following professional certifications and registrations that are relevant to this contract with the City:  American Institute of Certified Planners  Registered Professional Geologist, California  Certified Engineering Geologist, California  Certified Hydrogeologist, California  Certified Inspector of Sediment and Erosion Control  Certified Professional Soil Scientist  Certified Environmental Professional  Professional Engineer, California  40-hour Hazardous Waste Operations Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) Certification  Qualified SWPPP Developer/ Qualified SWPPP Practitioner 204 Qualifications Rincon Consultants, Inc. 15 4.4 Relevant Experience The following select projects highlight Rincon’s experience providing services similar to the requested scope of work. Safety Element – Seaside General Plan Update and EIR City of Seaside/Raimi and Associates Dates: February 2016 to Present Rincon is currently part of a team authorizing an update to the City of Seaside General Plan. Specifically, Rincon prepared the Safety, Noise, and Conservation/Open Space Elements of the General Plan and assisted with preparation of the Parks and Recreation Element. As a coastal community, the updated General Plan will guide the future of Seaside and its residents with respects to new land uses, economic opportunities, and safety concerns due to climate change and sea level rise. The General Plan will work to protect the coastal community by preserving the natural habitat that extends beyond the City’s boundaries in balance with Seaside’s desire to be developed as a well-rounded mixed-use community. Relevance to the RFP: Through collaborative efforts with multiple City Departments, the Element identified and outlined proactive measures to minimize public safety challenges to community residents, structures, public facilities, and infrastructure, and to enable the City to expediently and efficiently respond in the event of a public safety challenge. Ms. Journey was the primary author of the Seaside Safety Element and addressed safety issues including geological hazards, urban and coastal flooding, wildfire, hazardous materials, and emergency operation services. Oxnard Local Coastal Plan Comprehensive Update City of Oxnard Dates: September 2015 to Present Rincon is preparing a Local Coastal Plan (LCP) Comprehensive Update for the City of Oxnard. The LCP has two components, a Land Use Plan (LUP), which set forth the policies for development and protection for environmental hazards, and an Implementation Plan (IP), which establishes standards and procedures to implement the LUP policies. The LCP reflects the unique characteristics of Oxnard’s local coastal community, such as residential beach communities, coastal power plants, agricultural land, and environmentally sensitive wetland and dunes areas. Additional studies and existing programs incorporated into the update, include: 1) restoration and habitat management plans for land owned and managed by The Coastal Conservancy and The Nature Conservancy; 2) the certified Public Works Plan for half of the Channel Islands Harbor which is owned and managed by the Ventura 205 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services 16 County Harbor Department; and 3) McGrath State Beach Master Plan which calls for relocating McGrath State Beach camping and visitor facilities within the park boundaries. The update will bring the LCP into conformance with latest Coastal Commission policy directives and approaches to address climate change adaptation strategies for coastal hazards. Relevance to the RFP. Rincon’s heavy involvement in this project will provide the City with a large breadth of experience regarding the coastal hazard policy update guidance recently released by the Coastal Commission. Also, due to Ms. Journey’s climate change expertise, she has been involved in all levels of this project, from technical analyst, to policy specialist, to project manager. She worked with coastal engineers, economists, and sea level rise modelers to complete a vulnerability and adaptation assessment prepared specifically for the City of Oxnard to inform new policies and implementation measures. She managed all aspects of agency coordination and outreach, including meetings including governmental agencies, technical advisories, non-governmental organizations, and the local public. And now she is currently working with the Coastal Commission to finalize the LCP policies and implementation ordinances. City of Morro Bay General Plan/Local Coastal Program Update, ESHA, and EIR Michael Baker International Dates: 2015 to Present Rincon is part of a multidisciplinary consultant team hired to lead the City’s General Plan, Local Coastal Program, and Zoning Ordinance Updates and associated Environmental Impact Report as an extension of City staff. In cooperation with Michael Baker International, Rincon assisted with the preparation of the Community Baseline Assessment reports to identify the current environmental conditions in the City to inform the analysis of the General Plan, Local Coastal Program, and Zoning Ordinance Updates in the EIR. Rincon is assisting with the preparation of various General Plan element updates, including the updated Noise Element, and is preparing the Environmental Impact Report for the proposed updates. Relevance to the RFP. Rincon analyzed the potential future effects to Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas resulting from climate change and associated sea level rise. The analysis included a projection of future effects of sea level rise and associated coastal flooding and erosion events on ESHAs within the Morro Bay coastal zone, based on previously completed hazard analysis and sea level rise analysis, existing sea level rise models for the region, and the current location and extent of ESHAs in the City. 206 Qualifications Rincon Consultants, Inc. 17 4.5 References Rincon is proud of its reputation as a leader in the environmental consulting industry. We invite you to contact any of the individuals listed below regarding our qualifications, skills, and project management. Vulnerability Assessment and Fiscal Impact Report and Adaptation Strategy Report, Oxnard Local Coastal Plan Comprehensive Update Client: City of Oxnard Contact: Isidro Figueroa, Principal Planner Address: 214 S C Street, Oxnard, California 93030 Email/Phone: 805-385-8207, isidro.figueroa@oxnard.org Rancho Mirage General Update Client: City of Rancho Mirage Contact: Jeremy Gleim, Development Services Director Address: 69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, California, 92270 Email/Phone: 760-328-2266, jeremyg@RanchoMirageCA.gov Seaside General Plan Client: City of Seaside Contact: Kurt Overmeyer, Economic Development Manager Address: 440 Harcourt Avenue, Seaside, California 93955 Email/Phone: 831-899-6839, kovermeyer@ci.seaside.ca.us 207 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services 18 5 Cost Estimate Per the request of the RFP, the cost estimate has been submitted separately. 208 Cost Estimate Rincon Consultants, Inc. 19 5.1 Fee Schedule Standard Fee Schedule for Environmental Sciences and Planning Services Professional, Technical and Support Personnel* Hourly Rate Principal II $240 Director II $240 Principal I $220 Director I $220 Senior Supervisor II $205 Supervisor I $195 Senior Professional II $175 Senior Professional I $160 Professional IV $145 Professional III $130 Professional II $115 Professional I $105 Associate III $95 Associate II $90 Associate I $82 Project Assistant $75 Senior GIS Specialist $140 GIS/CADD Specialist II $125 GIS/CADD Specialist I $112 Technical Editor $112 Production Specialist $88 Clerical $75 *Professional classification includes: environmental scientists, urban planners, biologists, geologists, marine scientists, GHG verifiers, sustainability experts, cultural resources experts and other professionals. Expert witness services consisting of depositions or in-court testimony are charged at the hourly rate of $350 Reimbursable Expenses Direct Cost Rates Photocopies – Black and White $0.20 (single-sided), $0.36 (double-sided) Photocopies – Color $1.50 (single-sided), $3.20 (double-sided) Photocopies – 11 x 17 $0.50 (B&W), $3.20 (color) Oversized Maps $8.00/square foot Digital Production $15.00 (CD) and $20.00 (flash drive) Light-Duty and Passenger Vehicles* $85.00/day 4WD and Off-Road Vehicles* $135.00/day * $0.65/mile for mileage over 50 and for all miles incurred in employee-owned vehicles Other Direct Costs associated with the execution of a project, that are not included in the hourly rates above, are billed at cost plus 15%. These may include, but are not limited to, laboratory and drilling services, subcontractor services, authorized travel expenses, permit charges and filing fees, mailings and postage, performance bonds, sample handling and shipment, rental equipment and vehicles other than covered by the above charges. Annual Escalation. Standard rates subject to annual escalation Payment Terms. All fees will be billed to Client monthly and shall be due and payable upon receipt. Invoices are delinquent if not paid within ten (10) days from receipt. 209 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services 20 6 Insurance Requirements Rincon will obtain and keep in force during the term of this Agreement, a policy of Comprehensive General Liability Insurance, a policy of Comprehensive Automobile Liability Insurance, and a policy of Workers’ Compensation Insurance per the City’s requirements during the life of this project. 210 Appendix A Resumes of Key Personnel 211 Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers EDUCATION M.A., Architecture and Urban Planning, UCLA Graduate School of Architecture and Urban Planning (1991) B.A., Urban and Economic Geography, University of Georgia (1985) AFFILIATIONS American Planning Association American Institute of Certified Planners # 010273 - Certified Environmental Planner EXPERIENCE Rincon Consultants, Inc. (1996 – present) Planning Consultants Research (1996) Fugro West, Inc. (1991 – 1996) City of West Hollywood (1990 – 1991) South Coast Air Quality Management District (1989 – 1990) Joe Power, AICP CEP SENIOR PRINCIPAL Joe Power is a Principal and Planning Manager with Rincon Consultants. He has over 27 years of experience in the planning field and has managed or primarily authored successful planning and environmental and planning studies on projects ranging from affordable housing to urban redevelopment to citywide transportation systems. Mr. Power has prepared numerous CEQA and NEPA environmental documents and is an expert in interpreting state and federal planning and environmental law, as well as in developing environmental documentation that is informative, readable, and legally defensible. He has prepared specialized technical reports on a range of planning and environmental topics, including noise, air quality, greenhouse gases, sustainability, and water supply. Mr. Power is a skilled public presenter and moderator, having facilitated public workshops for various General Plan Elements and EIRs, and conducted professional presentations at both the California and National American Planning Association conferences. DETAILED PROJECT EXPERIENCE Principal in Charge, City of Avalon General Plan/Local Coastal Plan and EIR Mr. Power oversaw the preparation of a Comprehensive Update of the General Plan and Local Coastal Plan, Housing Element Update, and Environmental Impact Report for the City of Avalon, the only incorporated city on the otherwise unincorporated Santa Catalina Island. The focus of the General Plan/Local Coastal Plan Update was to help the City serve the needs of its permanent residents and tourist population while protecting the natural resources that make it a popular destination. As such, the General Plan/Local Coastal and EIR address a number of issues that are important to the coastal community including environmental conservation, sustainability, and cultural resources. Principal in Charge, City of Calabasas 2030 General Plan and Development Code Update and EIR Rincon Consultants prepared the 2030 General Plan Update and EIR for the City of Calabasas. The 2030 General Plan update program was designed to build upon the vision and community values that have made Calabasas a special place to live, work, and visit and to address new issues that had emerged since the development of the previous long range planning program. Key issues in the environmentally-conscious community revolved around the preservation of open space, development of new recreational opportunities, and incorporation of sustainability and green building concepts. Rincon’s responsibility for this General Plan Update was overall management, public outreach, and development of the updated General Plan Elements, including Land Use (with RRM Design Group), Conservation, Open Space, Noise, Safety, Parks and Recreation, Cultural Resources, and Communication, Technology, and Infrastructure. Principal in Charge, City of Ventura Comprehensive Plan and EIR Mr. Power oversaw Rincon’s efforts of the Ventura Comprehensive Plan and EIR. Rincon was part of inter-disciplinary consulting team assisting the City of Ventura with the Comprehensive Plan revision. Our broad role included providing GIS support, environmental and land use analysis, and CEQA documentation, as well as serving as authors of the technical elements (noise, safety, conservation and open space). Rincon provided a detailed GIS analysis that enabled the advisory committee to select 212 Joe Power, AICP CEP, Page 2 Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE, CONT’D targeted growth areas and make critical decisions about adjusting an urban limit line. The plan was particularly complicated because most of the undeveloped periphery of the City is controlled by voter-participation overlays. Project Manager, Palisades Bluffs Improvement Project CEQA/NEPA Compliance, Santa Monica, California Mr. Power was the project manager in charge of preparing the CEQA and NEPA documentation for the Palisades Bluffs Improvement Project for the City of Santa Monica. The bluffs extend about 1.6 miles along Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) from the McClure Tunnel northwest to the City’s northern limits. Palisades Park, which sits atop the bluff, has been an important recreational and visual resource for the City for over 100 years. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was completed per CEQA guidelines and a Categorical Exemption (CE) and a series of Technical Studies were completed for NEPA. The technical studies included traffic, earth resources and geotechnical constraints, biological and historical resources, noise and visual resources. PROJECT EXPERIENCE GENERAL PLANS, SPECIFIC PLANS, AND MASTER PLANS  City of Calipatria General Plan Update and Zoning Ordinance  City of Chino Hills General Plan Update – Air Quality and GHG Analysis  City of Coachella General Plan Update EIR (Noise, Air Quality and GHG) and Noise Element  City of Calabasas 2030 General Plan, Development Code, and EIR  City of Avalon General Plan and EIR  City of Alhambra General Plan Update and EIR  City of Pomona General Plan and Corridors Specific Plan EIR  City of Ventura 2005 General Plan and EIR  City of Carpinteria Noise and Safety Elements and General Plan EIR  City of Fillmore General Plan and EIR  North Fillmore Specific Plan EIR  North Fillmore Business Park Master Plan EIR  City of Santa Clarita Circulation Element Update EIR  E. Colorado Boulevard Specific Plan EIR, City of Pasadena  City of Ventura Downtown Specific Plan EIR  West Los Angeles Community Plan EIR, City of Los Angeles  Hueneme Beach Park Shore Protection Project, City of Port Hueneme  Goleta Beach Master Plan EIR, Chambers Group  Westmont College Master Plan SEIR, County of Santa Barbara  Caltech Master Plan SEIR, City of Pasadena  TOD Pedestrian Master Plan IS-MND, City of Long Beach SANTA MONICA PROJECTS  Target Downtown Department Store EIR, City of Santa Monica  St. Monica Church Campus Enhancement Project EIR, City of Santa Monica  Carryout Bag Ordinance EIR, City of Santa Monica  City of Santa Monica Conservation Element Update (Sustainable Community Component)  Memorial Park Reservoir MND/EA, City of Santa Monica 213 Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists . Planners . Engineers EDUCATION MESM, Bren School of Environmental Science & Management, University of California, Santa Barbara (2015) BS, Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, University of California, Los Angeles (2010) Lexi Journey, MESM PROJECT MANAGER Lexi Journey is a Senior Environmental Planner within Rincon’s Environmental and Land Use Planning Group. Ms. Journey ‘s experience includes project management, planning policy analyses, technical analyses, and outreach for assignments such as General, Plans, Coastal Land Use Plans, and Climate Action Plans, as well as CEQA and NEPA environmental assessments. She has worked with a diverse range of clients, including local, State, and Federal government agencies, as well as private companies and non-profit organizations. She has managed various projects including the Local Oxnard Coastal Plan Update, the City of Alhambra General Plan Update, and the City of Rancho Mirage General Plan Update. She has prepared Community Design/Land Use, Quality of Life, Safety Elements for the cities of Alhambra and Seaside. In addition to policy development and outreach she also prepared technical studies for long-range plans such as Vulnerability and Adaptation Assessments to analyze risk to climate change vulnerabilities and provide an economic comparison of different adaptation strategies. SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE City of Oxnard Local Coastal Program (LCP) Update, City of Oxnard Ms. Journey is currently managing the update of Oxnard’s LCP in order to conform with Coastal Commission policy directives and approaches to address climate change adaptation strategies, such as those for sea level rise (SLR). The update involves the assessment of Oxnard’s coastal resources, the vulnerability of these resources and development of the implementation tools for protection and mitigation. Ms. Journey is responsible for managing the project and coordinating with the Coastal Commission as well as agency and community stakeholders. County of Merced Vulnerability Analysis and Climate Action Plan (CAP), County of Merced Ms. Journey is currently managing the County’s first Climate Action Plan that includes a County-wide greenhouse inventory of urban and agricultural emissions. Because approximately 65% of Merced County’s greenhouse gas emissions are due to agricultural practices, which have historically not been included in Climate Action Planning, the project involves coordination with a diverse group of stakeholders including the Farm Bureau, California Air Resources Board, and San Joaquin Air Quality District. Extensive coordination and outreach will ensure that the County’s Climate Action Plan will have mitigation measures that are implementation ready and championed by the community. This CAP will allow Merced County to become a leader in agricultural sustainability and provide more opportunity to receive competitive grant funding. City of Rancho Mirage General Plan Update, City of Rancho Mirage Ms. Journey assisted the City of Rancho Mirage with a General Plan Update. The General Plan Update was a “technical” update to ensure compliance with recently adopted State laws, and to modernize the look, organization and user friendliness of the General Plan. As part of this process, the General Plan Update’s goals, policies and programs were updated to coincide with the City Council’s current vision for the future of the City; maps and exhibits were updated to reflect the current makeup of 214 Lexi Journey, MESM, Page 2 Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists . Planners . Engineers the City; the Circulation Element was updated based on a new traffic model; a high quality graphically designed General Plan document was created; and GIS maps were created for use in the General Plan Update document and to be used as an interactive online tool. City of Alhambra, General Plan Update, City of Alhambra. Ms. Journey is an assistant project manager for the update of City of Alhambra’s General Plan titled, “Vision 2035 – A Community’s Mosaic.” The General Plan Update includes a complete re-write and reorganization of the current plan to allow for ease of use for the community. The plan includes the seven State required elements but is reorganized in six chapters titled: Land Use/Community Design, Quality of Life, Resources, Services and Infrastructure, Health and Safety, and Mobility. SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE CEQA AND NEPA COMPLIANCE  900 S. Dwight Avenue Project EA, Los Angeles County  9908 South Santa Monica Boulevard Project EIR, City of Beverly Hills  Center for Early Education IS MND, City of West Hollywood Swansea Park Senior Apartments Phase 2 and Swansea Village Projects IS-MND, City of Los Angeles  Northrup Grumman Lab Expansion IS-MND, City of Redondo Beach  Hilton Garden Inn Expansion IS-MND, City of Calabasas  Skechers Design Center and Office Building Initial Study, City of Hermosa Beach  CSUN Master Plan EIR Addendum, Cal State Northridge  CSUN Hotel IS-MND, Cal State Northridge  Trumark Homes Mixed Use Project IS-MND, City of Chino Hills Monte Vista Assets Warehouse IS-MND, City of Rialto  Port of Hueneme Dredging Project IS-MND, Port of Hueneme  Recycled Water Pipelines Project IS-MND, United Water Conservation District  Water Resource Recovery Facility Facilities Plan EIR, City of San Luis Obispo  Carmel Rio Road Subdivision EIR, San Luis Obispo County  Ventura County Medical Center Supplemental EIR, City of Ventura  CAR Overlay Zone IS-MND, City of Calabasas  8555 South Santa Monica Boulevard EIR, City of West Hollywood  Palm Desert Groundwater Replenishment Project EIR, Coachella Valley Water District  Bluffs at Ridgemark EIR, San Benito County TECHNICAL STUDIES  CoreSite LA3 Data Center Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study, City of Los Angeles  Swansea Park Senior Apartments Phase 2 and Swansea Village Projects Air Quality Study, City of Los Angeles  Palm Desert Groundwater Replenishment Project Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Study, Coachella Valley Water District  La Verne Wilderness Management Plan Fire Hazards Study Report, City of La Verne  Wooley Road Residential Development Noise Study and Railroad Risk Analysis, City of Oxnard PUBLICATIONS Journey, L., Drury, J.P., Haymer, M., Rose, K., Drury, J.P., Blumstein, D.T. 2013. Vivid birds respond more to acoustic signals of predators. 215 Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists . Planners . Engineers EDUCATION MS, Geological Engineering, Michigan Technological University, 2017 BS, Geological Engineering, University of Minnesota, 2013 CERTIFICATIONS/ LICENCES Licensed Engineer in Training #1441268 Certified 40-hr HAZWOPER Lindsay Ellingson, MS, EIT ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER Ms. Ellingson is a Geological Engineer by training and has over 3 years of experience in environmental remediation, environmental planning and permitting, water quality regulation and compliance, and water resources engineering. The focus of Ms. Ellingson’s master’s studies was the mitigation of natural geologic hazards, with a focus on landslide hazard and inundation modeling. Her experiences also include contaminated site investigations, development of long-term site management strategies, remedial optimization strategies, reporting and management of operation and maintenance activities, and data gap investigations for complex sites. Ms. Ellingson is a Project Manager in Rincon’s environmental site assessment group and provides technical expertise to several of Rincon’s service lines. SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE Gloucester Watershed Management Study, Gloucester, Massachusetts Ms. Ellingson prepared wildfire and landslide hazard models for the City of Gloucester Massachusetts as a part of a Watershed Management Study for the area. The investigation included the compilation of data for the region including topographic, climatic, and anthropologic data. The likelihood of wildfire occurrence was assessed and used to identify areas that may result in slope failure following a wildfire that would have a high probability of impacting important surface water bodies in the region. Ms. Ellingson used an infinite slope model to determine the extent of inundation from a landslide occurring post wildfire. Camino Del Mar Bridge Replacement, Del Mar, California Assistant project manager for the Project Approvals and Environmental Document phase of a bridge replacement project in the Coastal Zone in Del Mar, California. This investigation included bridge and roadway design, geotechnical investigations and associated permitting, investigation of the impacts of Sea Level Rise, and oversight of technical studies for environmental approvals.. Ellingson worked closely with Caltrans and the City of Del Mar to develop a strategy for early consultation with the California Coastal Commission regarding the potential Sea Level Rise scenarios considered in the bridge design. Other duties included client coordination, coordination with Caltrans, preparing official meeting summaries and maintaining a record of important project decisions. South Bay Sewer Force Main Project, Coronado, California Ms. Ellingson assisted in the preparation of an Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration for the City of Coronado for the construction of a sewer force main and odor control system for the purpose of extending City of Coronado sewer services to the Naval Base Coronado Coastal Campus. Ms. Ellingson coordinated closely with the City of Coronado as well as U.S. Navy personnel in order to prepare the IS/MND. Ms. Ellingson prepared CEQA sections including Transportation/Traffic, Agriculture and Forestry, Cultural Resources, Geology/Soils, Recreation, and Wildfire. 216 Lindsay Ellingson, MS, EIT, Page 2 Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists . Planners . Engineers THESIS WORK Forensic Analysis of Shallow Precipitation Triggered Lahars in 2016 on Concepcion and Maderas Volcanoes, Ometepe Island, Nicaragua Ms. Ellingson worked to identify causes and precipitation thresholds for lahars through collection of climatic data, compilation of topographic data, collection of geotechnical data, site evaluations post landslide events, and interviews of local residents, government officials, and academics familiar with the volcanoes. Ms. Ellingson used a variety of geospatial models to recreate the climatic and topographic setting that precipitated slope instability on the island. The results of the study included landslide inundation models and landslide hazard maps for lahars and debris flows triggered by rain events. 217 Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists . Planners . Engineers EDUCATION Masters of Environmental Science & Management, UC- Santa Barbara, 2013 BA, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 2010 TECHNICAL SKILLS ArcGIS Desktop ArcGIS Pro ArcGIS Online Collector for ArcGIS Spatial Analyst Extension ModelBuilder QGIS Google Earth GPS (Trimble/Garmin) Pathfinder TerraSync CarryMaps Adobe Illustrator Adobe Photoshop AutoCAD Python R/R Studio HTML, CSS, JavaScript Jon Montgomery GIS ANALYST Jon Montgomery has professional GIS, GPS and graphics experience including work with local and regional government agencies, nonprofit organizations, and consulting firms. His expertise includes spatial analysis, cartography, model/tool development, web mapping and graphics production with extensive ESRI software experience. Previously, Jon worked for organizations including; City of Santa Barbara, University of California, Santa Barbara, Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, Los Padres ForestWatch, and Good Oak Ecological Services. SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE City of Oxnard Local Coastal Program (LCP) Update, City of Oxnard Mr. Montgomery served as the lead GIS Analyst for this project highlighting climate change adaption strategies for the City of Oxnard. Mr. Montgomery was responsible for managing data and mapping a variety of climate change scenarios, hazards, important infrastructure and assets throughout different planning horizons. This included database organization, metadata creation and management, detailed atlas creation, and analysis of The Nature Conservancy’s Coastal Resilience Project’s Coastal Hazards datasets. City of Rancho Mirage General Plan Update, San Bernardino County As the lead GIS analyst for this project, Mr. Montgomery lead efforts to compile, create, and attribute dozens of datasets for figure creation as part of the City’s General Plan update. Additionally, Jon deployed a web mapping portal through ArcGIS Online, which served as a centralized mapping and data hub for the project team. As part of the mapping portal, Jon created interactive web maps to accompany each General Plan Figure. SoCalGas, Pipeline Safety Enhancement Plan, Southern California Mr. Montgomery served as one of the lead GIS Analyst for this ongoing program since 2016, covering dozens of project sites across Southern California. Using Python and ModelBuilder, Jon developed several custom tools that have streamlined project workflows, including an initial project assessment tool that highlights all environmental concerns and hazards in a project’s vicinity to help with the jump start a project’s analysis. Jon created this program’s figure templates and has created figures for dozens of the program’s projects each year. United Water Conservation District , Multiple Species HCP, Ventura County Mr. Montgomery served as lead GIS Analyst for this project which entailed gathering and documenting data from a variety of sources, discussing data and graphical needs with the client, and producing the dozens of figures to accompany a reworked habitat conservation plan highlighting select species of concern throughout Ventura County. 218 Jon Montgomery, Page 2 Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists . Planners . Engineers ADDITIONAL PROJECT EXPERIENCE  California High-Speed Train Project Merced to Fresno Section Permitting Phase 1, – Created a variety of figures to accompany permit reports, web map creation for internal staff use, monthly data deliverables to agencies.  SCE Santa Barbara County Reliability Project, Henkels & McCoy – Multi-year linear utility construction biological monitoring project spanning over 30 miles, managed the data needs for a large team, provided daily data updates, field collection tools, and training. Managed the engineering, construction, civil design, biological, and cultural datasets for this project with detailed schema and metadata requirements.  Caltrans District 6 & 10 Oncall, HDR Engineering, Inc. – Lead the GIS efforts and figure creation for a multitude of oncall biology projects throughout central and eastern California. GIS responsibilities on these projects included data organization, documentation and delivery, figure production to accompany reports and permits, and spatial analysis.  Camarillo Grove Park Map – Pleasant Valley Recreation & Park District, Camarillo, California - Developed Park Map and associated topographic and spatial datasets. Used Trimble GPS unit and software to collect extensive trail and feature data of subject property. Created kiosk and brochure sized park maps highlighting park’s trail system, key features, and topography. 219 Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers EDUCATION M.S., Geology, University of California, Los Angeles B.A., Geological Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara CERTIFICATIONS Professional Geologist, California (#4742) Certified Engineering Geologist, California (#1635) Certified Hydrogeologist, California (#208) Qualified SWPPP Developer & Qualified SWPPP Practitioner (#22181) American Institute of Professional Geologists, Registered Professional Geologist Walt Hamann, PG, CEG, CHG, QSP, QSD VICE PRESIDENT Mr. Hamann is a founding Partner, Principal and Senior Geologist with Rincon Consultants and provides technical support and expertise with regard to groundwater, geology, and contaminated materials. He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in geology from the University of California, Santa Barbara and a Master of Science degree in geology from the University of California, Los Angeles. Mr. Hamann is a Professional Geologist (#4742), Certified Engineering Geologist (#1635), and Certified Hydrogeologist (#208) with the State of California. Mr. Hamann has over 30 years of experience preparing engineering geology and geologic hazards studies, geology/soils, hydrology/water quality, and hazards/hazardous materials sections for EIR documents for properties throughout California. A certified engineering geologist, Mr. Hamann has performed modeling for seismic risk and ground shaking, fault rupture potential soils, and overseen numerous geologic and geologic hazards studies, including the recently completed geologic hazards study for the proposed Plains All American Pipeline Company Line 901/903 replacement project through Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, and Kern counties. Mr. Hamann has also overseen Seismic Safety/Safety Element studies for several California municipalities, and has provided expert review of third-party reports. PROJECT EXPERIENCE ENGINEERING GEOLOGY PROJECTS  Geologic hazards study of the Plains All American Pipeline route through Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, and portions of Kern County, California  Geologic and Geotechnical document review of a large commercial property to be developed with a residential structure, Burbank, California  Geologic evaluation of the former Casmalia landfill, Santa Barbara County, California  Groundwater flow and quality evaluation, community of Los Osos, San Luis Obispo County, California  Groundwater flow and quality evaluation, City of Malibu, California SEISMIC EVALUATIONS  Fault study, Ventura Fault, Ventura, California  Geologic and fault evaluation, San Cayetano Fault, Fillmore, California  Geologic hazards and fault evaluations, school projects throughout California 220 Walt Hamann, PG, CEG, CHG, QSP, QSD, Page 2 Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers PROJECT EXPERIENCE, CONT’D REMEDIATION PROJECTS  EPA Superfund site, chlorinated solvents in soil and groundwater, soil vapor extraction  Dry cleaners, air sparging and soil vapor extraction for chlorinated solvents, multiple sites  Military installation, Santa Cruz Island, enhanced bioremediation of fuel hydrocarbons  Excavation and offsite disposal of fuel, pesticides, and heavy metals, multiple sites  Free-phase cutting oil recovery, manufacturing site  Gasoline service stations, soil excavation, soil vapor extraction, free phase recovery, multiple sites FIELD ASSESSMENTS  Nuevo Energy/Torch Operating Company, Ventura and Santa Barbara Counties  Seneca Resources, Kern County, California  Unocal, Santa Barbara County, California  Stocker Resources, Los Angeles, Santa Barbara offshore, and San Luis Obispo Counties, California SWPPP PROJECTS  Interstate 5 expansion, Burbank and Los Angeles, California  Harbor Freeway Expansion, Los Angeles, California  US 101 Widening, Santa Barbara, California  California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo Recreation Facility Expansion  Residential Development, Carpinteria, California EXPERT WITNESS/LITIGATION SUPPORT  Charnock MTBE Superfund site responsible party, Culver City, California  Burbank-Glendale US EPA Superfund area designated expert  Solvent and nickel contaminated property, Torrance, California  Contamination in a municipal water supply well, Norwalk, California  Environmental assistance and review, Halaco EPA Superfund Site, Oxnard, California  Environmental assistance and sampling, Omega Chemical EPA Superfund Site, Whittier, California EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES  Elementary 14 – Phase I ESA, Preliminary Environmental Assessment (PEA), Subsurface Site Investigation (SSI), Remedial Action Workplan (RAW), Geologic Study, Ceres Unified School District  Whitmore Junior High School – Phase I ESA, PEA, IS-MND, Geologic Study, Ceres Unified School District  Camarillo Special Education School– Phase I ESA, IS-MND, Geologic Study, PEA, CDE Consulting, Ventura County Office of Education  Alessandro II Elementary – PEA, SSI Technical Memo, SSI, San Bernardino City Unified School District  Westside Elementary – Phase I ESA, PEA, Remediation, Ventura Unified School District  Miscellaneous School Projects – Phase I and II ESA, Soil Vapor Assessment, Ventura Unified School District School Assessments or PEAs for Irvine, Santa Ana, Ventura, Ceres, and Saugus school districts 221 Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists · Planners · Engineers Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists . Planners . Engineers EDUCATION MESM, Coastal Marine Resources Management, Bren School of Environmental Science & Management, University of California, Santa Barbara (expected June 2020) BA, Environmental Studies, B.S., Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California, Santa Cruz AFFILIATIONS Student Board Member, American Planning Association California Association of Environmental Professionals Camila Bobroff PLANNING/CLIMATE CHANGE INTERN Camila Bobroff is a Climate Change Intern within Rincon’s Environmental and Land Use Planning Group. Ms. Bobroff is currently responsible for assisting in the preparation of Climate Action Plans, Carbon Inventories, and General Plans. She is supporting the development of the Merced County Climate Action Plan and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Climate Action Plan. Ms. Bobroff is a graduate student at the Bren School of Environmental Science and Management at the University of California, Santa Barbara, where she studies climate change mitigation and adaptation. At the Bren School, she is modeling projected impacts of climate change on water supply for the City of Santa Barbara. Ms. Bobroff has professional experience in data analysis, environmental modeling, and technical writing. SELECT PROJECT EXPERIENCE Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Climate Action Plan Ms. Bobroff prepared the carbon inventory for the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Climate Action Plan. She quantified carbon sinks and sources for seven counties in the Metropolitan Water District. Ms. Bobroff also identified measures for increasing carbon sequestration and estimated the costs associated with these carbon sequestration practices. Merced County Climate Action Plan Ms. Bobroff is serving as a climate change planner for the Merced County Climate Action Plan. She conducted the vulnerability assessment related to greenhouse gas emissions in Merced County. She was also responsible for preparation of mitigation measures for reducing agriculture-related greenhouse gas emissions. Ms. Bobroff also contributed to the quantification of future greenhouse gas emissions reductions assuming implementation of the mitigation measures proposed for the Climate Action Plan. City of South Pasadena Climate Action Plan, Los Angeles County Ms. Bobroff was the climate change planner responsible for preparing a public outreach plan for the City to use as they develop and implement their Climate Action Plan. The outreach plan discussed the types of outreach methods, number of public meetings, and the content of these meetings to gather public input regarding the draft City of South Pasadena Climate Action Plan. City of Rohnert Park General Plan 2020 Update, Sonoma County Ms. Bobroff was the environmental planner responsible for the preparation of goals and policies in the Environmental Conservation Element of the Rohnert Park General Plan 2020 Update. The Environmental Conservation Element included discussions of environmental resources such as historic and archaeological resources, habitat and biological resources, water quality, and air quality. City of Thousand Oaks General Plan Update, Ventura County Ms. Bobroff was the environmental planner responsible for assisting in the development of the Thousand Oaks Background Environmental Report as part of the General Plan Update. She prepared the chapters outlining the existing conditions of greenhouse gases, climate change and climate resiliency, and public services in the City of Thousand Oaks. 222 Camila Bobroff, Page 2 Rincon Consultants, Inc. Environmental Scientists . Planners . Engineers ADDITIONAL EXPERIENCE Data Intern – National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis and Science for Nature and People Partnership  Synthesized data on the impacts of agricultural Best Management Practices on soil health and record relevant data needed for the final literature review  Conducted searches of the academic literature and identify suitable papers Programs and Administrative Associate – California FarmLink, Santa Cruz, CA  Assessed the organization’s measurable impact and provided recommendations for improving data collection and evaluation as a part of the Impact Metrics Committee  Assembled U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Census research central in forming grant proposals and presentations  Furthered development goals in submitting government grant materials and researching new funding sources  Assisted the Communications Team by maintaining the website and donor correspondence Recruitment Coordinator and Office Manager – Clean Water Action, Oakland, CA  Executed recruitment efforts for field canvass: posted weekly job advertisements, performed 40+ job calls per week; scheduled and hosted 20 to 30 in-person interviews per week  Engaged and educated the public around Clean Water Action’s campaigns to protect drinking water and reduce waste in waterways  Used Raiser’s Edge database to update and maintain Clean Water Action member data (1,000,000+ members) Climate Research Intern – Research Experience for Undergraduates, National Science Foundation, Huaraz, Peru  One of two undergraduates selected to support Professor Jeffrey Bury with the project, “Hydrologic Transformation and Human Resilience to Climate Change in the Peruvian Andes”  Collected water quality samples, captured infrared photos of glaciers, and conducted informal interviews with local people  Gathered water use information from archives in public libraries of Lima, Peru 223 Education Bachelor of Arts, Environmental Studies and Psychology, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA Graduate Studies, Public Administration, California State University, Long Beach, CA Course Work, Planning Law, Environmental Design, Architecture, University of California, Irvine, CA Affiliations American Planning Association (APA) American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP) OCAPA Executive Advisor Presentations “Defending Infill Development: Going Up, Not Out,” CDA Conference, Monterey, CA, September 2006 With almost three decades of experience in planning for the public and private sectors, Diane has managed and supported a wide range of RRM’s planning, urban design and environmental assignments. Her background as the former mayor, City Council member and Planning Commissioner of San Juan Capistrano, and as a professional planning, urban design and environmental consultant makes Diane a versatile strategist and analyst who understands the importance of consensus and stakeholder support and of reconciliation of the many layers of regulations and affected agencies. Diane’s understanding and integration of multiple perspectives and policy frameworks are key elements in successfully addressing the unique challenges that each project brings. She has also developed the ability to anticipate and resolve planning issues cooperatively and collaboratively with property owners, developers, government agencies, citizens, community organizations and agency staff. Related Project Experience Calabasas General Plan Update, Calabasas, CA Diane served as Project Manager and was responsible for extensive public outreach and participation program for a comprehensive update to the City of Calabasas General Plan and Development Code. She organized, supported and facilitated General Plan Advisory Committee (20 members) meetings, public workshops and Planning Commission and City Council study sessions. Diane facilitated the preparation of public relations materials including vision posters, notices, media releases and website materials and issue analyses and community design policies. Fullerton Downtown Core & Corridors Specific Plan, Fullerton, CA As a result of a national recruitment process, the City of Fullerton retained RRM Design Group to prepare the 1,100-acre Fullerton Downtown Core and Corridors Specific Plan. Diane serves as the project manager for the project. The resulting Specific Plan will provide clear direction on how properties within the various districts should be developed, as well as address a variety of issues including traffic, bike and pedestrian improvements, and streetscape enhancements. Additional Related Project Experience • Anaheim On-Call Planning Services, Anaheim, CA • Azusa TOD General Plan/Development Code Update and Specific Plan • Camarillo General Plan Circulation Element Update, Camarillo, CA • Chula Vista Urban Core Specific Plan and Design Guidelines, Chula Vista, CA • San Ysidro Community Plan Update, San Ysidro, CA • South and Southeast Los Angeles New Community Plan Updates and TOD Implementation Zoning, Los Angeles, CA • Stanton Livable Beach Boulevard Mobility Plan, Stanton, CA • Temecula Citywide Design Guidelines, Temecula, CA • Yorba Linda Town Center Specific Plan, Yorba Linda, CA DIANE BATHGATE, AICP Principal Planner 224 Rincon Consultants, Inc. 250 East 1st Street, Suite 1400 Los Angeles, California 90012 213 788 4842 OFFICE AND FAX info@rinconconsultants.com www.rinconconsultants.com Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers May 8, 2020 Project Number 20-09675 Attn: Meredith T. Elguira, Director of Planning and Community Services City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 Subject: Proposal – Safety Element Update Services Dear Ms. Elguira: Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) is pleased to submit this proposal to assist the City of Rolling Hills with a comprehensive update of the General Plan Safety Element Update. Our technical proposal has been submitted separately. Rincon maintains the insurance requirements specified in the Sample Contract included with the Request for Proposals and can provide proof of insurance coverage, if requested. Thank you for considering Rincon Consultants for this assignment. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have questions about this proposal or need additional information. Sincerely, Rincon Consultants, Inc. Lexi Journey, MESM Supervising Planner Phone: 213-788-4842 x43 Email: ljourney@rinconconsultants.com Contact for Clarification Joe Power, MA Senior Principal/Vice President Phone: 213-788-4842 x12 Email: jpower@rinconconsultants.com Authorized to contractually obligate and negotiate on behalf of Rincon Consultants, Inc. 225 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services Rincon Consultants, Inc. 1 Fee Schedule Standard Fee Schedule for Environmental Sciences and Planning Services Professional, Technical and Support Personnel* Hourly Rate Principal II $240 Director II $240 Principal I $220 Director I $220 Senior Supervisor II $205 Supervisor I $195 Senior Professional II $175 Senior Professional I $160 Professional IV $145 Professional III $130 Professional II $115 Professional I $105 Associate III $95 Associate II $90 Associate I $82 Project Assistant $75 Senior GIS Specialist $140 GIS/CADD Specialist II $125 GIS/CADD Specialist I $112 Technical Editor $112 Production Specialist $88 Clerical $75 *Professional classification includes environmental scientists, urban planners, biologists, geologists, marine scientists, GHG verifiers, sustainability experts, cultural resources experts and other professionals. Expert witness services consisting of depositions or in- court testimony are charged at the hourly rate of $350 Reimbursable Expenses Direct Cost Rates Photocopies – Black and White $0.20 (single-sided), $0.36 (double-sided) Photocopies – Color $1.50 (single-sided), $3.20 (double-sided) Photocopies – 11 x 17 $0.50 (B&W), $3.20 (color) Oversized Maps $8.00/square foot Digital Production $15.00 (CD) and $20.00 (flash drive) Light-Duty and Passenger Vehicles* $85.00/day 4WD and Off-Road Vehicles* $135.00/day * $0.65/mile for mileage over 50 and for all miles incurred in employee-owned vehicles Other Direct Costs associated with the execution of a project, that are not included in the hourly rates above, are billed at cost plus 15%. These may include, but are not limited to, laboratory and drilling services, subcontractor services, authorized travel expenses, permit charges and filing fees, mailings and postage, performance bonds, sample handling and shipment, rental equipment and vehicles other than covered by the above charges. Annual Escalation. Standard rates subject to annual escalation. Payment Terms. All fees will be billed to Client monthly and shall be due and payable upon receipt. Invoices are delinquent if not paid within 10 days from receipt. 226 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services Rincon Consultants, Inc. 2 Cost Estimate Cost Estimate Principal II / Director IISenior Professional I Professional III GIS/CADD Specialist I Clerical/Administrative Assistant I Tasks Labor Cost Direct Expense Hours $240 $160 $130 $112 $75 Task 1: Project Kick-Off and Existing Conditions Report Task 1.1 Project Kick-off $1,920 $137 10 4 6 Task 1.2 Existing Conditions Report $12,710 90 8 20 40 20 2 Task Subtotal $14,630 $137 100 12 26 40 20 2 Task 2: Preparation of the Safety Element Update Task 2.1 Element Outline $1,340 9 1 2 6 Task 2.2 Administrative Draft Element $11,995 81 10 20 40 10 1 Task 2.3 Public Review Draft Element $6,227 43 4 12 20 6 1 Task 2.4 Final Safety Element $4,851 32 4 12 12 3 1 Task Subtotal $24,413 165 19 46 78 19 3 Task 3: Community Engagement Program Task 3.1 Safety Element Advisory Committee Meetings $4,000 20 10 10 Task 3.2 Workshops/Study Sessions $4,000 $411 20 10 10 Task Subtotal $8,000 $411 40 20 20 Task 4: Public Meetings Task 4.1 Attendance at Public Meetings (2)$4,000 $274 20 10 10 Task Subtotal $4,000 $274 20 10 10 SUBTOTAL COST 51,043$ 822$ 325$ 14,640$ 16,320$ 15,340$ 4,368$ 375$ Direct Cost Detail Vehicle Costs 822$ Subconsultant - RRM (Outreach Program)9,850$ General and Administrative 1,478$ Subtotal Additional Costs:12,150$ Summary Professional Fees Subtotal $51,043 Direct Costs Subtotal $12,150 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 63,193$ RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC. City of Rolling Hills, General Plan Safety Element Update Rincon Labor Classification  227 Supplemental Agenda Packet Relating to Item 8A Posted May 26, 2020 228 Rincon Consultants, Inc. 250 East 1st Street, Suite 1400 Los Angeles, California 90012 213 788 4842 OFFICE AND FAX info@rinconconsultants.com www.rinconconsultants.com E n v i r o n m e n t a l S c i e n t i s t s P l a n n e r s E n g i n e e r s May 8, 2020 Project Number 20-09675 Attn: Meredith T. Elguira, Director of Planning and Community Services City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, California 90274 Subject: Proposal – Safety Element Update Services Dear Ms. Elguira: Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) is pleased to submit this cost proposal to assist the City of Rolling Hills with a comprehensive update of the General Plan Safety Element Update. Our technical proposal has been submitted separately. As shown in the attached cost table, our bid is $63,190. Rincon maintains the insurance requirements specified in the Sample Contract included with the Request for Proposals and can provide proof of insurance coverage, if requested. Thank you for considering Rincon Consultants for this assignment. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have questions about this proposal or need additional information. Sincerely, Rincon Consultants, Inc. Lexi Journey, MESM Supervising Planner Phone: 213-788-4842 x43 Email: ljourney@rinconconsultants.com Contact for Clarification Joe Power, MA Senior Principal/Vice President Phone: 213-788-4842 x12 Email: jpower@rinconconsultants.com Authorized to contractually obligate and negotiate on behalf of Rincon Consultants, Inc. 229 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services Rincon Consultants, Inc. 1 Fee Schedule Standard Fee Schedule for Environmental Sciences and Planning Services Professional, Technical and Support Personnel* Hourly Rate Principal II $240 Director II $240 Principal I $220 Director I $220 Senior Supervisor II $205 Supervisor I $195 Senior Professional II $175 Senior Professional I $160 Professional IV $145 Professional III $130 Professional II $115 Professional I $105 Associate III $95 Associate II $90 Associate I $82 Project Assistant $75 Senior GIS Specialist $140 GIS/CADD Specialist II $125 GIS/CADD Specialist I $112 Technical Editor $112 Production Specialist $88 Clerical $75 *Professional classification includes environmental scientists, urban planners, biologists, geologists, marine scientists, GH G verifiers, sustainability experts, cultural resources experts and other professionals. Expert witness services consisting of depositions or in- court testimony are charged at the hourly rate of $350 Reimbursable Expenses Direct Cost Rates Photocopies – Black and White $0.20 (single-sided), $0.36 (double-sided) Photocopies – Color $1.50 (single-sided), $3.20 (double-sided) Photocopies – 11 x 17 $0.50 (B&W), $3.20 (color) Oversized Maps $8.00/square foot Digital Production $15.00 (CD) and $20.00 (flash drive) Light-Duty and Passenger Vehicles* $85.00/day 4WD and Off-Road Vehicles* $135.00/day * $0.65/mile for mileage over 50 and for all miles incurred in employee-owned vehicles Other Direct Costs associated with the execution of a project, that are not included in the hourly rates above, are billed at cost plus 15%. These may include, but are not limited to, laboratory and drilling services, subcontractor services, authorized travel expenses, permit charges and filing fees, mailings and postage, performance bonds, sample handling and shipment, rental equipment and vehicles other than covered by the above charges. Annual Escalation. Standard rates subject to annual escalation . Payment Terms. All fees will be billed to Client monthly and shall be due and payable upon receipt. Invoices are delinquent if not paid within 10 days from receipt. 230 City of Rolling Hills Safety Element Update Services Rincon Consultants, Inc. 2 Cost Estimate Cost Estimate Principal II / Director IISenior Professional I Professional III GIS/CADD Specialist I Clerical/Administrative Assistant I Tasks Labor Cost Direct Expense Hours $240 $160 $130 $112 $75 Task 1: Project Kick-Off and Existing Conditions Report Task 1.1 Project Kick-off $1,920 $137 10 4 6 Task 1.2 Existing Conditions Report $10,622 76 6 16 36 16 2 Task Subtotal $12,542 $137 86 10 22 36 16 2 Task 2: Preparation of the Safety Element Update Task 2.1 Element Outline $1,080 7 1 2 4 Task 2.2 Administrative Draft Element $10,355 71 8 16 36 10 1 Task 2.3 Public Review Draft Element $6,227 43 4 12 20 6 1 Task 2.4 Final Safety Element $4,851 32 4 12 12 3 1 Task Subtotal $22,513 153 17 42 72 19 3 Task 3: Community Engagement Program Task 3.1 Safety Element Advisory Committee Meetings $3,520 18 8 10 Task 3.2 Workshops/Study Sessions $3,520 $411 18 8 10 Task Subtotal $7,040 $411 36 16 20 Task 4: Public Hearings Task 4.1 Attendance at Public Hearings (2)$4,000 $274 20 10 10Task 4.4 Blank Task Subtotal $4,000 $274 20 10 10 SUBTOTAL COST 46,095$ 822$ 295$ 12,720$ 15,040$ 14,040$ 3,920$ 375$ Direct Cost Detail Vehicle Costs 822$ Subconsultant - RRM (Outreach Program)9,850$ Subconsultant - Wildland Fire Specialist 4,300$ General and Administrative 2,123$ Subtotal Additional Costs:17,095$ Summary Professional Fees Subtotal $46,095 Direct Costs Subtotal $17,095 TOTAL PROJECT BUDGET 63,190$ RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC. City of Rolling Hills, General Plan Safety Element Update Rincon Labor Classification → 231 FOR Safety Element Update PREPARED BY CSG Consultants, Inc. May 8, 2020 PROPOSAL TO THE City of Rolling Hills 232 2 THIS DOCUMENT IS FORMATTED FOR DOUBLE-SIDED PRINTING 233 3 Meredith T. Elguira Director of Planning and Community Services City of Rolling Hills 2 Portuguese Bend Road Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Re: Safety Element Update Services CSG Consultants, Inc. (CSG) is pleased to present this Proposal for Safety Element Update services to the City of Rolling Hills (City). We understand the City is seeking to update its 1990 General Plan Safety Element including updating its hazard and hazard abatement plans, particularly in relation to fire and seismic hazards. For 29 years, CSG has worked solely for public agencies, providing a variety of municipal services. We currently provide planning, fire prevention, building and safety, public works, code enforcement and other services to over 175 municipalities throughout the State of California. Our Director of Planning Services, Mr. Ethan Edwards will serve as the main point of contact for any communication. If you require additional information or would like to further discuss our qualifications, please contact Ethan: Ethan Edwards, AICP Director of Planning Services (714) 568-1010 Office | (714) 699-4297 Mobile ethane@csgengr.com CSG acknowledges that the submitted proposal is valid for 90 days from the date of this submittal. Sincerely, Cyrus Kianpour, PE President, CSG Consultants, Inc. Cover Letter 234 4 THIS DOCUMENT IS FORMATTED FOR DOUBLE-SIDED PRINTING 235 5 Table of Contents Cover Letter ............................................................................................................................3 Background and Project Summary .........................................................................................7 Methodology .........................................................................................................................8 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN .........................................................................................................8 SCOPE OF WORK .....................................................................................................................8 Task 1: Project Kick-off ...............................................................................................................8 Task 2: Review of Existing Data and Data Collection ....................................................................8 Task 3 Hazard Profiles and Mapping ............................................................................................9 Task 4 Community Outreach and Engagement ............................................................................9 Task 5 Draft Safety Element Update ..........................................................................................10 SCHEDULE ............................................................................................................................10 ASSUMPTIONS .....................................................................................................................10 Qualifications and Staffing ....................................................................................................13 References ...........................................................................................................................23 236 6 THIS DOCUMENT IS FORMATTED FOR DOUBLE-SIDED PRINTING 237 7 Background and Project Summary The CSG Team understands that the City of Rolling Hills (City) is requesting the services of a consulting firm to update their General Plan Safety Element. The existing Safety Element was created in 1990 and the City is anticpating an update tin accordance with recently enacted State mandates AB 2140, SB 1241, and SB 379. The updated Element will be prepared in compliance with the California General Plan Guidelines, and will identify hazards and hazard abatement provisions relating to Seismic Hazards, Fire Hazards, Landslides, Crime and Police Servcies, Electromagnetic Fields (EMF), Hazardous Waste, and Land Use Impact Identification. This update will be exempt from NEPA and CEQA documentation. It is CSG’s understanding that the entire City of Rolling Hills is identified as a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Since incorporation in 1957, the City has experienced a number of natural hazards such as earthquakes, wildfires, droughts, and land movement. Given the rural character of the City and the recent fire hazard issues across the State of California, CSG understands that this effort will include updates to Goals and Policies, maps, and technical reports. The Safety Element update will be reviewed by Cal-OES and ultimately approved by FEMA and must be consistent with the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Finally, we understand that the Safety Element update must occur in an expedited manner in order to meet the funding requirements of the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. The process is approximately 15 months behind, therefore we propose a “catch up” plan as described in the following methodology section. 0.3m i0.3m i0.3m i0.3m i0.3m i -118.333 33.776 Degrees – Land slid e Inventory (B eta) rolling hills, ca  Show search results fo r rolling hills, ca 238 8 Methodology IMPLEMENTATION PLAN The updated Safety Element will aim to reduce the potential short and long-term risk of death, injuries, property damage, and economic and social dislocation resulting from fires, floods, droughts, earthquakes, landslides, climate change, crime, EMF, hazardous waste, and other hazards. CSG can also address Pandemics as an optional task. As part of this effort, we will include climate adaptation and resiliency strategies to satisfy SB 379. Our proposed implementation plan includes assigning a project team consisting of planners, environmental planners and Fire Life and Safety specialists who have broad experience in hazard mitigation planning. The CSG Fire Services Division will recommend goals and policies to ensure compliance with CCR Title 14, Div 1.5 (Department of Forestry and Fire Protection), CCR Title 24 (California Fire Code) and adopted local amendments. The CSG Team will implement an extensive public outreach component as part of this effort. However, in light of the current public health concerns due to the COVID-19 pandemic all coordination efforts and meetings will be conducted via teleconferencing media such as Skype or Microsoft Teams conference calls in order to involve all internal and external stakeholders, while keeping the health and safety of the community a top priority. CSG will lead all outreach activities and facilitate all web-based meetings. Residents as well as interested agencies will be notified of all upcoming meetings and will be invited to either participate or provide their comments and questions via email or the City’s website. We propose to conduct all meetings and outreach remotely until State and locally-mandated group activity limits are lifted. CSG’s project management philosophy is built upon the anticipation of, and preparation for, all issues that may arise throughout the project process. By constantly considering and developing the appropriate process and plan to address political, environmental, social, and design challenges/ opportunities, we can better serve the City while delivering the highest quality product. Strong and effective project management is essential in completing successful projects. Our assigned Project Manager, Ms. Guisar, will manage all consultant activities and work products, as well as creating and monitoring the project schedule (with milestones), in order to efficiently reach the Project close-out date of September 2021. SCOPE OF WORK Task 1: Project Kick-off The CSG team will conduct a kick-off meeting, confirm the work program and schedule, establish project coordination procedures, and learn about key planning objectives and issues through an engaged conversation with City staff. We will provide a preliminary list of relevant information and documents that are needed for the analysis. We will establish project protocols providing a detailed schedule of tasks, deliverables, and responsibilities for the project duration. These project protocols will also set forth a method to track, monitor and report completion of milestones, provide submittal and review procedures and confirm formats for submittal of invoices to the City. We will discuss the management details of the process, including an identification of team responsibilities, important milestones, and quality control procedures. Finally, the anticipated level of City staff support will be identified. Following the kickoff meeting, we will tour the planning area. We will also develop a Public Outreach Plan (see Task 4 below). Adaptation Planning Guide 239 9 Task 2: Review of Existing Data and Data Collection The CSG Team will compile, research, and analyze all relevant data and studies required to inform the development of the Safety Element Update. Data will be summarized to describe existing and potential hazards and will be utilized to help determine whether policies should be retained, revised or completely deleted. As part of this task, we will consult with the appropriate agencies, including the California Geological Survey of the Department of Conservation and the Office of Emergency Services. These agencies will also receive a draft for review prior to adoption. Task 3 Hazard Profiles and Mapping CSG will assist the City in profiling hazard events. We anticipate the profile to include at a minimum, specific geographic areas of the City that are high hazard risk; the extent of the risk in terms of magnitude or severity; the likelihood of recurring hazard events; and all past hazard occurrences/ impact areas in and around the City. Maps will be created by CSG’s in-house GIS personnel to record data in an easily understood format. Maps, particularly related to fire hazards, will be consistent with Local hazard Mitigation Plan 60, the Safety Element update will be prepared to be compliant with recent State mandates such as SB 1241, SB 379 and AB 2140. CSG will inventory and analyze specific community assets that may be potentially impacted by a hazard event. The objective is to determine where greatest hazard damages may occur, the severity or repetitiveness of a certain hazard for the area, (e.g.: fires more than flooding), and potential mitigation measures. The asset inventory would be separated by type of hazard, type of facility (buildings, infrastructure, transportation, etc.), and an explanation of the extent to which any hazard impacts would be on these resources. Existing City plans and documents would also be referenced. Prior to finalizing the Element for City Council adoption, CSG will assist the City in coordinating with CAL-OES and FEMA to get these agency approvals on the updated Safety Element. Task 4 Community Outreach and Engagement The goal of the public outreach process is to evaluate the City of Rolling Hills residents understanding of the existing safety hazards in their community, development appropriate goals, policies, and programs, and educate residents on safety protocols following a hazard event. Comments received during the outreach process will be incorporated in the updated Element Goals and Policies, as appropriate. Under the existing public gathering restrictions as the result of COVID -19, community outreach will most likely necessitate online meetings engagement. Our proposed outreach program includes the following: • CSG will conduct a minimum of Four (4) public meetings or workshops (online or in person), to inform the public of the purpose of the Safety Element Update (includes one kick-off meeting); • CSG will provide monthly update postings on the City’s website; • CSG will prepare an introductory mailout alerting residents to the start of the proposed project, project details and ways in which the residents can provide their input. Residents and stakeholders will also receive mailer notifications when the public draft document is available for review and comment and at Project completion and adoption; • CSG will keep the City’s various Boards, Commissions, and Committees apprised of Methodology 240 10 the Safety Element update progress through meetings, email and mailers, as appropriate. We will provide presentation materials for any meetings, and document all input and comments; • CSG will provide monthly updates to the Safety Element Advisory Committee (SEAC), in order to ensure their input and guidance at various stages of the Element’s development.; and • CSG proposes two (2) presentations to the City Council – the first to be held mid- way through the process and the other to present the final Safety Element update for consideration and approval by the City Council. Task 5 Draft Safety Element Update The current Safety Element will be updated in accordance with the City’s Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, per AB 2140 requirements. This draft update will include revisions and updates to the existing Safety Element background, maps, goals and policies. The Draft Element will be made available for review and comment from the City, residents and interested agencies, as appropriate. Task 6 Prepare Final Safety Element for Adoption Once all input has been received from the public, the SEAC, stakeholders and City Council input has been received, CSG will work with City staff to finalize the Goals, Policies and Implementation Strategies for the updated Element. SCHEDULE CSG is aware that the City of Rolling Hills is looking to expedite the project schedule in order to meet its grant deadlines. To that end, CSG will identify tasks that may be eliminated, such as those that may have already been undertaken by the City or those that may be redundant. We will also identify tasks that may occur simultaneously (such as certain public outreach efforts alongside map development). In addition, in order to keep the project on track, CSG proposes bi-weekly project meetings with the City. These meetings may be conducted via teleconferences and will serve to update the City on CSG’s progress for that month, identify any ongoing data needs, and allow the City to provide on-going project insight as the Element is being developed. We believe this will assist in accelerating the internal review processes. Please see page 11 for a detailed project schedule. ASSUMPTIONS The CSG Team makes the following assumptions regarding the Safety Element Update process: • Gena Guisar, AICP, Principal Planner, will serve as the direct contact with the City of Rolling Hills. Gena will be available to address any City questions or concerns, ensure that project deliverables are submitted for City review on time, provide all draft and final documents for review within two weeks, and coordinate all public participation efforts. • Project protocols, including coordination between the appropriate City staff, CSG Project Manager, progress updates, schedule regarding document reviews and revisions, will all be prepared in conjunction with the City. • In order to meet grant deliverables, it is recommended that the City conduct as many public meetings online. Meeting time are then minimized without the need for travel by CSG staff, setting up meeting areas, etc. • The City will assign one staff member who will be the lead City connection to answer all project questions, coordinate City and CSG reviews/revisions, and provide CSG with requested information. • It is assumed that the City will undertake all noticing and public communication requirements (such as posting of project updates on its website, updating residents on public meetings, etc.). • It is assumed that City reviews of draft and final documents will be undertaken in a maximum of two weeks, per review. Methodology 241 11 Schedule TaskDuration20202021JunJulAugSepOctNovDecJanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugProject Initiation Kick-off Meeting1 day Public Outreach Plan1 dayReview and evaluation existing data Data Collection9 days Review existing data9 daysHazard Profiles and Mapping Review existing maps5 days Review hazard conditions for maps5 days Prepare maps10 daysCommunity Outreach Community kick-off meeting1 day Community Workshops4 total SEAC meetingsmonthly PC and CC presentations2 totalDraft Safety Element125 daysSubmit Draft to Cal OES/FEMA1 dayPlanning Commission Hearing1 dayFinal Safety Element19 daysCity Council Hearing1 dayProject Close-out5 days242 12 THIS DOCUMENT IS FORMATTED FOR DOUBLE-SIDED PRINTING 243 13 Qualifications and Staffing CSG’s staff provide planning services to several jurisdictions in Los Angeles County and throughout California. Our planning and environmental staff has assisted the cities of Carson and El Segundo Planning Departments since 2016. Our Fire Services team comprises of former firefighters with extensive experience in fire-related inspections/investigations across communities in Northern and Southern CA, in accordance with appropriate laws, codes, ordinances regulations and standards. We take pride in providing personnel who have a variety of project experience and certification, who are motivated to achieve the highest level of performance, greatest value, and who have the passion crucial to on-the-job success. Our team below is representative of the personnel and expertise available to the City. Resumes are also provided. Gena Guisar, AICP Principal Planner Masters in Urban and Regional Planning, University of California, Irvine AICP Certification Gena Guisar, AICP will serve as the secondary contact for this contract. Ms. Guisar has completed several General Plan Updates, Specific Plans and Master Plans and has led numerous entitlement projects. She has extensive project management experience in the public and private sectors and will serve as the project manager and main point of contact for the update process. Ms. Guisar will also coordinate with relevant agencies and participate in public outreach activies. Ethan Edwards, AICP Director of Planning Bachelor of Science in Urban and Regional Planning, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, CAAICP Certification Ethan Edwards, AICP has vast experience in both public and private planning, making him a valuable asset to any team. Mr. Edwards serves as a Principal Planner for CSG Consultants. To this role, he brings expertise in current and advanced planning, design review, coastal development review and CEQA – from over 20 years of increasingly complex land use planning and project management experience in Orange and Los Angeles Counties and the State of Oregon. Mr. Edwards will provide oversight and quality control fr this effort Anna Choudhuri Senior Planner Masters in Urban and Regional Planning, University of New Orleans, New Orleans, Masters, Financial Economics University of New Orleans Anna Choudhuri is an experienced project manager with 18 years professional experience in the oversight and delivery of projects, as well as in ensuring that projects are scoped and completed within schedule and budget while meeting clients’ expectations. Ms. Choudhuri will conduct research and provide quality assurance/quality control for this effort. She will also participate in public outreach activities. George Apple Fire Services Manager Bachelor of Science, Engineering Technology – Fire Protection and Safety, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK Mr. Apple oversees the Fire Services Division for CSG, which is responsible for plan review and inspections of new residential and commercial projects as well as conducting annual inspections, and staff augmentation for various jurisdictions. Mr. Apple has extensive experience providing plan reviews of architectural, civil, mechanical, and fire suppression and detection plans for new construction and building renovation projects. He has also been responsible for performing fire-related inspections in accordance with appropriate laws, codes, ordinances, regulations, and standards. Mr. Apple will assist in fire hazard assessment for this update. 244 14 Jason Walsh Fire Services Specialist Bachelor of Fire Science, Columbia Southern University, Orange Beach, AL Mr. Walsh serves as a Fire Services Specialist for CSG. Mr. Walsh has over 20 years of experience in the fire services field. Prior to joining CSG, he served as the Assistant Fire Marshal, Fire Safety Specialist, Fire Inspector, and Volunteer Firefighter for the County of Riverside. Mr. Apple will assist in fire hazard assessment for this update. Leila Carver, PTP Associate Planner, CSG Masters in Urban and Regional Planning, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, CAProfessional Transportation Planner Certification Leila Carver, PTP, will provide her expertise in local development-intergovernmental review and CEQA review coordination as needed. Ms. Carver’s skills include coordinating intergovernmental review of all district environmental projects from local jurisdictions and facilitating response to these partner cities. Ms. Carver has developed expertise in CEQA, GIS and demographic research and excels in project management, leadership and customer service. Ms. Carver will conduct research and analysis, prepare maps, prepare document drafts, participate in meetings and public outreach and coordinate with pertinent agencies. Nancy Mith Associate Planner, CSG Bachelor of Science in Urban and Regional Planning, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, CA Nancy Mith will be available for project support as needed. Ms. Mith will provide planning services using her knowledge of administering municipal codes, application of CEQA knowledge to entitlements and design reviews, and her highly developed verbal and written communication skills in providing information to the public and other departments. Ms. Mith will conduct research and analysis, assist with document draft preparation and will help coordinate public outreach. Qualifications and Staffing 245 15 8 Ethan EDUCATION Bachelor of Science, Urban and Regional Planning California State Polytechnic University | Pomona, CA PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS American Planning Association| Orange County Chapter Los Angeles Chapter American Institute of Certified Planners International City/County Management Association Edwards AICP Director of Planning Services Mr. Edwards serves as the Director of Planning Services for CSG Consultants. To this role, he brings expertise in current and advanced planning, design review, coastal development review, CEQA compliance, project and planning staff management – from over 20 years of increasingly complex land use planning and management experience in Orange and Los Angeles Counties, northern California and multiple jurisdictions within the State of Oregon. Prior to joining CSG, Mr. Edwards served as an Associate Planner at the City of Huntington Beach where he managed complex entitlement projects and coordinated the Zoning Administrator agenda and review process. He recently served as the Acting Community Development Director and before that the Acting Planning Manager at the City of Carson and Principal Planner at the City of El Segundo. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Acting Community Development Director/Planning Manager | City of Carson, CA Mr. Edwards recently served as the Acting Planning Manager and Community Development Director for the City of Carson where his duties included oversight of the Planning Department (which includes CSG staff), project management, scheduling, budgeting, agenda review and participation in public hearings. He also managed the City’s comprehensive General Plan Update. Principal Planner | City of El Segundo, CA As a contract Principal Planner, Mr. Edwards manages complex discretionary and administrative permits including Development Agreement negotiation, environmental impact report management; prepares agendas, reviews and prepares reports; conducts presentations to elected officials, commissions, and citizen groups. Associate Planner | City of Huntington Beach, CA While working with the City of Huntington Beach, Mr. Edwards managed discretionary and administrative permits; mentored staff; prepared agendas, reviewed and prepared reports, and interpreted zoning regulations as the Zoning Administrator Liaison; oversaw environmental consultants; and provided City management solutions for permit processing streamlining and customer service strategies. Planning Manager | Baysinger Partners Architecture, Portland, OR Mr. Edwards’ duties as Planning Manager included: supervising the planning and entitlement division; managing staff priorities and department budget; preparing and processing applications for public and private development projects; and providing consultant coordination and project management. Associate Planner | City of Beaverton, OR As Associate Planner for the City of Beaverton, Mr. Edwards provided project management for current planning projects; assisted in design review code revisions; led code update workshops for elected officials, commissions, and citizen groups; and was staff liaison for an inter-jurisdictional commuter rail project. Associate Planner | City of Santa Monica, CA Mr. Edwards processed entitlement applications in preparation for zoning administrator, planning commission, and design review board consideration. Associate Planner | Civic Solutions, San Juan Capistrano, CA Mr. Edwards provided contract planning services for the City of Rancho Santa Margarita and City of Santa Monica. Assistant Planner | RBF Consulting (now Michael Baker Int.), Irvine, CA Mr. Edwards prepared development code updates and design guidelines, assisted with urban design community outreach and revitalization implementation plans, and provided contract planning services including the General Plan Update for the City of San Gabriel. 246 16 9 Gena EDUCATION Masters, Urban and Regional Planning University of California | Irvine, CA Bachelor of Arts, Social Science Research & Analytical Methods University of California | Irvine, CA Honors Graduate PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS American Planning Association American Institute of Certified Planners Urban Land Institute ULI NEXT Council Member UCI MURP Graduate Student Mentor APPOINTMENTS 2018 Spring Faculty - PPD 275 Planning for Sustainability Lecturer, UC Irvine, CA AWARDS PCBC Gold Nugget Award of Merit Parkside Family Apartments PCBO Gold Nugget Award of Merit Yixing Master Plan APA Focused Planning Award Loma Vista Community Centers MPD Guisar AICP Principal Planner Gena Guisar, AICP, is a highly experienced urban planner in both the private and public sectors. Ms. Guisar has designed and managed a wide variety of development applications and led teams through the entitlement and environmental review process. Her approach to General Plan Updates, Specific Plans, master planning, yield studies, code analysis, historic research, demographic studies, conceptual grading and conceptual landscape design involves placemaking, sustainability, and economic feasibility. Ms. Guisar’s thorough knowledge of the principles and practices of urban and regional planning, zoning, and subdivision concepts makes her an asset to any development team. The scale and scope of Ms. Guisar’s projects not only require her to be creative and detail oriented, but flexible, adaptable and multidisciplinary. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Contract Principal Planner | City of Carson, CA Ms. Guisar currently serves as a planner for the City of Carson where she manages several complex discretionary permit cases. Ms. Guisar conducts project review, manages schedules, prepares staff reports and notices, presents to elected officials and stakeholders and coordinates with applicants and their consultants as part of these efforts. Contract Principal Planner | City of El Segundo, CA As a contract planner, Ms. Guisar manages complex discretionary and administrative permits; prepares agendas, reviews and prepares reports; conducts presentations to elected officials, commissions, and citizen groups. Contract Planner | City of Garden Grove, CA In her role as a contract Planner for the City of Garden Grove, Ms. Guisar manages a variety of development applications, reviews and processes administrative permits, and participate in long range planning efforts. Ms. Guisar services also include the preparation of reports and presentations to the Zoning Administrator, Planning Commission and City Council. Contract Principal Planner | City of Millbrae, CA Ms. Guisar served as a contract Planner for the City of Millbrae where she managed the entitlements for two high profile TOD development projects adjacent to the BART station. Combined, the sites boast 844 residential dwelling units, including 80 affordable units, 382,000 square feet of office space, approximately 44,000 square feet of retail area, and a 164-room hotel. These projects represent the first implementing projects of the Millbrae Area Station Specific Plan, which provides the vision and strategies to guide in the creation of Millbrae’s new economic center with vibrant, diverse, and sustainable transit-oriented developments. Senior Planner | Danielian Assoc. Architecture and Planning, Irvine, CA Ms. Guisar served as the project manager for several large development projects throughout the United States and abroad. Gena was responsible for both policy and physical planning activities, including the creation and management of Specific Plans, General Plan Updates, and Master Plans, and managed entitlement packages for a broad spectrum of land development projects. Project Manager | Paradise Valley Specific Plan, Riverside County, CA Ms. Guisar led the effort to entitle a 5,000-acre Sustainable New Town with 8,500 dwelling units and over 1.8 million square feet of commercial, office, entertainment and service uses. The project has a development footprint of 1,800 acres and will dedicate over 3,100 acres of conservation land in perpetuity. Ms. Guisar’s responsibilities included writing and managing the specific plan, sub- consultant coordination, and extensive contribution to a program level EIR and project Climate Action Plan. 247 17 10 Anna EDUCATION Masters, Urban and Regional Planning University of New Orleans | New Orleans, LA Masters, Financial Economics University of New Orleans | New Orleans, LA Bachelor of Arts, English Saint Xavier’s College | Calcutta, India PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Association of Environmental Professionals Chapter Board APA / AEP Liaison American Planning Association (CA Chapter) APPOINTMENTS Louisiana Brownfields Association | Board of Directors City of Davis Planning Commission | Member & Chair City of Davis Innovation Park Task Force State of Louisiana Post Katrina Task Force AWARDS Outstanding Graduate Student Paper | Southwest Finance Association PUBLICATIONS & PRESENTATIONS CEQA Basics for The Planning Commissioner - CA League of Cities Conference, Pasadena, CA The Role of the Planning Commissioner -CA League of Cities Conference, San Jose, CA How to Read an EIR over the Weekend – CA League of Cities Conference, Pasadena, CA Through Their Eyes: Survey Results of Lower Income Residents in the Louisiana Industrial Corridor (with Dr. Raymond Burby and Jennifer Fallon), College of Urban and Public Affairs, University of New Orleans Environmental Resource Directory (with Jennifer Fallon, Hunter Harvath, Danielle Joseph, Marie Bottino), Choudhuri Senior Environmental Planner City of Belvedere, Belvedere General Plan Update MND, Project Manager – Anna served as the environmental project manager for the City of Belvedere’s General Plan Update and Housing Element MND. She was responsible for completion of the MND, coordination with the city and planning consultant, resolution of environmental concerns raised by the public and interested groups, and presentation of the final MND. The proposed Belvedere 2030 General Plan was a comprehensive update of the current 1994 General Plan. The proposed General Plan Update was intended to reflect the wishes of Belvedere residents and decision-makers for the future development and operation of the city through the year 2030. Key environmental issues associated with this project included infill development, climate change, and sea level rise. City of Ione, Ione General Plan Update EIR, Project Manager – The City of Ione initiated a comprehensive update to its General Plan. This update also included a corresponding update to the City’s Zoning Code, amendments to the City’s Sphere of Influence (SOI) in order to accommodate expansions to its current Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP), to expand two existing Special Planning Areas, and to annex three parcels currently located outside the city limits. Key environmental issues included traffic and circulation, land use densities, mix of land uses, public services, open space, and mineral resources. City of Livingston, Livingston General Plan Update EIR, Project Manager –The City of Livingston initiated an update to its existing 1999 General Plan, in order to properly plan for and guide the anticipated growth in its General Plan Planning Area. The proposed project area consists of two components: the 20-year Buildout Area that includes the areas within the existing city boundary, the existing and proposed Spheres of Influence (SOI), and, the City’s projected 50-year growth boundary. These two components included approximately 8,398 acres. Key environmental issues associated with this project included agricultural resources, land use, traffic, and growth effects. City of Livingston, Livingston General Plan Update Revised EIR, Project Manager – In response to a lawsuit on its General Plan Update, the City of Livingston was revising its General Plan Update EIR to respond to those issue areas included in the lawsuit. These issue areas include the Project Description, impacts to agricultural resources, impacts to population and housing, project alternatives, and cumulative impacts analysis related to growth inducing impacts. City of Mendota, 2005-2025 Mendota General Plan EIR, Senior Planner – Anna served as one of the senior planners for the City of Mendota’s General Plan update. She assisted with the analysis and drafting of several sections of the document. County of Napa, Napa County General Plan Update, Senior Planner – Anna served as the transportation planner for the County of Napa’s General Plan update project. City of Pinole, Pinole General Plan Update EIR, Project Manager –The City had prepared an update to its existing General Plan, which included updates to the City’s General Plan and Zoning Code and created the Three Corridors Specific Plan for San Pablo Avenue, Pinole Valley Road, and Appian Way. Key environmental issues associated with this project included traffic and transit, jobs/housing balance, infill development, public services, noise, air quality and climate change. City of Taft, Taft General Plan Update EIR, Project Manager –The City of Taft initiated a comprehensive update to the City’s existing General Plan. Unlike most communities in the Central Valley, Taft has not experienced significant growth in recent years. However, the City expected future growth will require the annexation of unincorporated portions of Kern County. In addition, the City desired to maintain and enhance the lifestyle of the region characterized by small cities and towns surrounded by agriculture production and natural resource protection. Key environmental issues associated with this project included impacts to water supply, biological resources, population and growth inducing impacts. 248 18 11 George LICENSES & CERTIFICATIONS CSFM Certified Fire Prevention Officer | #000122 CSFM Certified Fire Prevention Specialist | #260-2480 CSFM Certified Plans Examiner | 360-2480 CSFM Certified Fire Investigator I | #092708 CSFM Certified Fire Officer | #150-2180 CSFM Certified Fire Marshal | #460-2480 ICC Certified Fire Inspector II | 528431-67 EDUCATION Bachelor of Science, Engineering Technology – Fire Protection and Safety Oklahoma State University | Stillwater, OK Apple Fire Services Manager Mr. Apple has over 22 years of fire service experience from having served as a firefighter for the City of Isleton, CA to serving as Assistant Chief-Fire Marshal for the Cosumnes Fire Department and servicing the Cities of Elk Grove and Galt. Currently Mr. Apple serves as the Fire Services Manager for CSG Consultants. In this capacity, Mr. Apple oversees the Fire Services Division. The Fire Services Division is responsible for plan review and inspections of new residential and commercial projects as well as conducting annual inspections, and staff augmentation for various jurisdictions. He has extensive experience providing plan reviews of architectural, civil, mechanical, and fire suppression and detection plans for new construction and building renovation projects. He has also been responsible for performing fire-related inspections in accordance with appropriate laws, codes, ordinances, regulations, and standards. Mr. Apple has served on code development committees and is highly experienced with the code development process. He also serves as an adjunct instructor in Careers and Technology at Cosumnes River College, developing curricula and lecturing classes in Fire Prevention, Systems and Equipment; Fire Protection Organization; Tactics and Strategies; Fire Investigation; Combustion and Fire Chemistry; and Fire Law. Mr. Apple has been conducting fire investigations in his role in the fire service for the past 20 years. He is a Certified Fire Investigator I in the State of California and has completed the Fire Investigation 2 series of instruction through the California State Fire Training System. Mr. Apple is also a Certified Post Blast Investigator through the Federal Bureau of Investigations. Additionally, Mr. Apple is a Peace Officer in accordance with Penal Code Section 830.37(a). RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Assistant Chief – Fire Marshal | Cosumnes CSD Fire Department, Elk Grove, CA As an Assistant Chief - Fire Marshal, Mr. Apple was the Department Liaison with City of Galt and City of Elk Grove officials, and managed day-to-day activities of the Fire Prevention Bureau, including new construction, code enforcement, public education, fire investigations, and global information systems. He ensured that necessary training was provided to maintain proficiency of plan reviewers, inspectors, investigators and public education officers. Assistant Fire Marshal | Elk Grove CSD Fire Department, Elk Grove, CA Mr. Apple served in capacities of increasing responsibility within the Elk Grove CSD Fire Department including Fire Inspector II and Assistant Fire Marshal. Mr. Apple developed and managed the budget for the Fire Prevention Bureau as well as the Bureau’s day-to-day activities, ensuring that all plan reviews and inspections were completed within the District’s goals. Fire Inspector II | Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District, Sacramento, CA Fire Protection Engineer | Stanford University, Stanford, CA Fire Protection Engineer | Mount Prospect Fire Department, Mount Prospect, IL Fire Inspector/Plan Reviewer | Orland Fire Protection District, Orland Park, IL Fire Fighter | Isleton Fire Department, Isleton, CA 249 19 12 Jason LICENSES & CERTIFICATIONS ICC CFI-I | 8137905 ICC CFI-II | 8137905 ICC CFPE | 8137905 NFPA Fire Inspector I | CFI-17-0387 NFPA Fire Inspector II | CFI-18-1058 NFPA Fire Plans Examiner | CFPE-18- 0137 CSFM Fire Prevention Officer | 160- 4691 CSFM Fire Protection Specialist | 260- 4691 CSFM Fire Plans Examiner | 360-4691 NFPA CFI-I | 17-0387 EDUCATION Bachelor of Fire Science Columbia Southern University | Orange Beach, AL PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS Riverside County Fire Prevention Officers Association: Executive Board 2008-2012 President 2012 Southern CA Fire Prevention Officers Association – Code Development Committee & Wildlands Urban Interface Committee CSFM Residential Care Facility Advisory Committee International Code Council (ICC) National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Walsh Fire Services Specialist Mr. Walsh serves as a Fire Services Specialist for CSG. Mr. Walsh has over 20 years of experience in the fire services field. Prior to joining CSG, he served as the Assistant Fire Marshal, Fire Safety Specialist, Fire Inspector, and Volunteer Firefighter for the County of Riverside. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Assistant Fire Marshal | County of Riverside Fire Department, CA Mr. Walsh supervised and coordinated fire prevention programs and activities of the Fire Prevention Section and daily activities of fire prevention employees. He reviewed, researched and evaluated fire protection for building and development plans and specifications for compliance with applicable laws, codes and regulations concerning fire protection and life safety systems. He assisted with developing and implementing the Fire Prevention goals and objectives, work plans, priorities, and policies and procedures with his assigned section while also preparing and updating the Riverside County Master Fire Plan. Mr. Walsh served as contract Fire Marshal for partner cities and developed, implemented, and supervised the localized fire prevention program and local service operations while managing program consistency across jurisdictions and department divisions. Additional responsibilities included developing Code Amendments and participating in the code adoption process; writing technical guidelines, bulletins, and interpretations; conducting quality control of fire prevention operations; supervising fire safety inspection of commercial, institutional, and industrial occupancies; pursuing legal remedies for non-compliance with fire codes; and providing support to a variety of boards and commissions. Fire Safety Specialist | County of Riverside Fire Department, CA Mr. Walsh reviewed, researched and evaluated fire protection plans and equipment for effectiveness in fire prevention and protection; recommended alternatives and/or improvements to fire protection plans and devices, reviewed and evaluated building and development plans and specifications for conformance with applicable laws, codes, and regulations concerning fire protection and life safety. He also assisted in the preparation and updating of the Riverside County Master Fire Plan; conducted special inspections and investigations relating to fire codes and applicable laws; and coordinated plan checking with other departments. Fire Inspector | County of Riverside Fire Department, CA Mr. Walsh inspected assigned building and development projects for conformance with applicable laws, codes, and regulations relating to fire protection and life safety. He also witnessed and/or certified the installation and testing of specialized fire protection systems that included, but were not limited to hydrants, hood suppression systems, sprinklers, standpipe systems, self-contained high-rise systems, and alarms. Volunteer Firefighter | County of Riverside Fire Department, CA Mr. Walsh performed a full-range of firefighting duties including responding to all types of fires as well as medical and rescue incidents as a member of an engine crew; assisted in conducting fire prevention inspections and building, grounds and equipment maintenance and repairs. 250 20 13 Leila CERTIFICATIONS Professional Transportation Planner Transportation Professional Certification Board EDUCATION Master, Urban and Regional Planning California State Polytechnic University | Pomona, CA Bachelor of Arts, Political Science California State University | Fullerton, CA AWARDS Superior Accomplishment Award, 2015 Participation and leadership on the Caltrans LD-IGR Geobased Tracking System (GTS) software application project MEMBERSHIPS American Planning Association (APA) | Vice Director of Administration and Finance, Board Member for APA CA Orange Section Carver PTP Senior Planner Ms. Carver serves as a Senior Planner for CSG Consultants. Ms. Carver has expertise in CEQA, GIS and demographic research and excels in project management, leadership and customer service. She gained skills and knowledge in many areas of transportation from her nine years of experience with Caltrans where she coordinated intergovernmental review of environmental projects from local jurisdictions and facilitated responses to partner cities. Ms. Carver is an independent worker, has outstanding verbal and written communication skills, and is an integral part of the CSG team. She is currently serving as a Contract Planner at the City of Carson and serves as a Board Member for the APA California Chapter, Orange Section. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Associate Planner | City of Carson As a contract Associate Planner, Ms. Carver reviews various development plans, prepares comment letters, conducts research, presents to Planning Commission, and provides transportation planning expertise. A few examples of Ms. Carver’s recent projects include: • Birch Specific Plan (BSP), a 32-Unit condominium project; • Victoria Greens, 175-unit townhome project; • Carson Apartments, a 300-unit apartment mixed-use project; • Carson Town Center Façade and site remodel of former Super K-mart; • McDonald’s Façade remodel; • Kia Auto Inventory Storage Facility, an off-site auto storage facility; • Mobile Mini cargo container storage facility with three modular office buildings, and maintenance canopy; • DWP Utility Corridor Truck Yard project; • Calpak Warehouse, a 100,000 square foot logistics facility and new company HQ; • Over 50 small cell wireless communication facilities for major carriers; • Assist in Citywide Community Facilities District and Development Impact Fee formation; Associate Transportation Planner | Caltrans District 12 Planning & Local Assistance Division in County of Orange, CA & Caltrans District 11 Planning Division in County of San Diego & Imperial, CA Ms. Carver provided transportation planner services for Caltrans District 11 and 12. Her duties included: local development-intergovernmental review and CEQA review coordinator and specialist; participating in internal working group for GP guidance 2013 update and SB-743, Level-of-Service and auto delay alternative analysis with OPR; participating on the Caltrans project management team for the CA HSR Project; participating in Caltrans project development process and delivery; participating in Excess Land reviews; serving as Treasurer and Board Member for District 11 Employee Fitness Center; participating in District Director’s External Advisory Liaison Committee for District 11; and conducting field observation and studies. Transportation Planner | Caltrans District 11 As a transportation planner for Caltrans District 11, Ms. Carver provided CEQA/local development- intergovernmental review LD-IGR coordinator services and served as District 11’s liaison on the California Interregional Blueprint (Statewide Evaluation and Visioning of Transportation Systems and Programs in California). She performed duties including: reviewing environmental impact reports and technical studies; reviewing private development plans and provided support to the Encroachment Permit; serving as lead person for District 11 LD-IGR online tracking system including participating in development of Phase 2 with SANDAG and Caltrans GIS groups; and preparing quarterly reports for HQ Local Development-IGR statewide program. 251 21 14 Nancy EDUCATION Bachelor of Science, Urban and Regional Planning California State Polytechnic University | Pomona, CA Mith Associate Planner Ms. Mith serves as an Associate Planner for CSG Consultants. With her five years of experience with jurisdictions in Southern California, Ms. Mith provides planning services to cities using her knowledge of administering municipal codes, application of CEQA knowledge to entitlements and design reviews, and her highly developed verbal and written communication skills in providing information to the public and other departments within the cities. Ms. Mith has a strong creative background and is proficient in AutoCAD, architectural drafting, Sketch Up, GIS and Photoshop. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Associate Planner | City of Carson, CA As a contract Associate Planner, Ms. Mith reviews various development plans, prepares comment letters, conducts research, presents to Planning Commission, and assistance at the public counter. Housing Specialist | City of Hawaiian Gardens, CA Ms. Mith current serves as a Housing Specialist with the City of Hawaiian Gardens where she is responsible for the City Beautification Program. Ms. Mith’s responsibilities include Project Management, soliciting and reviewing applications, site visits, creating scopes of work, writing and distributing requests for proposals for contractors, and consultant coordination. She also writes staff reports and prepares presentations for public hearings regarding the Program. Associate Planner | City of Garden Grove, CA As a contract Associate Planner, Ms. Mith reviewed various development plans, drafts and sends comment letters to applicants whose projects require additional review, conducts research of the City’s Municipal Codes and Specific Plans to ensure development proposals compliancy with the City’s standards. Assistant Planner | City of West Hollywood, CA As a contract Assistant Planner, Ms. Mith reviewed various multi-family residential development plans, drafted and sent out corrections notices to applicants whose projects required additional review, provided assistance with drafting conditions of approval documents as well as staff reports, researched the City’s Municipal Codes to ensure development proposals were in compliance with the City’s standards, and assisted with a development study to research and compile data on the existing conditions of multi-family residential developments. Assistant Planner | City of Claremont, CA Ms. Mith provided Assistant Planner services for the City of Claremont. Her duties included: conducting design reviews for residential developments; reviewing sign permit applications; reviewing and processing entitlements; applying CEQA knowledge to entitlements and design reviews; reviewing landscaping plans; generating neighborhood notices for project proposals; coordinating site visits; reviewing lighting plans; processing solar panel applications; coordinating with the Engineering Division on projects involving encroachment onto public right-of-ways; reviewing and verifying home occupation applications and business license applications meet zoning and parking standards; coordinating with the Building Division to ensure projects meet the Planning standards; and assisting phone calls and emails regarding plans, city code inquiries and general process questions. Planning Intern | City of Downey, CA As an intern for the City of Downey, Ms. Mith supported the Planning Department with processing and reviewing entitlements, managing and assisting with counter plan checks and permit processes, assisting the Building and Safety Department with plan checks, conducting plan checks for residential projects and tenant improvements preparing zoning verification and rebuild letters, and assisting the City and Principal Planners. 252 22 THIS DOCUMENT IS FORMATTED FOR DOUBLE-SIDED PRINTING 253 23 References Project Description During our role as the Town’s contracted planning staff, CSG led the efforts to update the General Plan, Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, Climate Action Plan, Development Fee Ordinance, Smoking Ordinance, Housing Ordinances, Economic Development Plan, and the 2009 and 2015 Housing Elements. Currently, CSG staff is also managing the General Plan, associated EIR and technical studies for the General Plan update. Active Years 2011-Present Project Manager Anna Choudhuri Contact Town of ColmaBrian Dossey, City Manager(650) 997-8318Brian.dossey@colma.ca.gov Project Description CSG is currently assisting in the General Plan update, which includes an overall to the existing Safety Element. CSG also provides planning services in both current and advanced planning, serving in areas such as entitlement processing, land use project reviews, public counter services, technical plan check, map review, and CEQA compliance. Active Years 2017-Preseent Project Manager Gena Guisar, AICP Contact City of Carson Saied Naaseh, Community Development Director (310) 952-1770 snaaseh@carson.ca.us Project Description CSG provided planning staff augmentation services, which included project management for the General Plan Update. CSG staff has also provided Design Review and project management services for the City. Active Years 2014-2019 Project Manager Gena Guisar, AICP Contact City of Millbrae Khee Lim, Acting Community Development Director 650-59-2341 K.lim@cimillbrae.ca.us Town of Colma City of Carson City of Millbrae 254 24 Cost Estimate The Cost Estimate is provided under separate cover. 255 25 SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, NOTICE WILL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE POLICY PROVISIONS. INSURER(S) AFFORDING COVERAGE INSURER F : INSURER E : INSURER D : INSURER C : INSURER B : INSURER A : NAIC # NAME:CONTACT (A/C, No):FAX E-MAILADDRESS: PRODUCER (A/C, No, Ext):PHONE INSURED REVISION NUMBER:CERTIFICATE NUMBER:COVERAGES IMPORTANT: If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(ies) must have ADDITIONAL INSURED provisions or be endorsed. If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AFFIRMATIVELY OR NEGATIVELY AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. THIS CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ISSUING INSURER(S), AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OR PRODUCER, AND THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. OTHER: (Per accident) (Ea accident) $ $ N / A SUBRWVDADDLINSD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. $ $ $ $PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY (Per accident) BODILY INJURY (Per person) COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT AUTOS ONLY AUTOSAUTOS ONLY NON-OWNED SCHEDULEDOWNED ANY AUTO AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY Y / N WORKERS COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY OFFICER/MEMBER EXCLUDED?(Mandatory in NH) DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS belowIf yes, describe under ANY PROPRIETOR/PARTNER/EXECUTIVE $ $ $ E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE E.L. EACH ACCIDENT EROTH-STATUTEPER LIMITS(MM/DD/YYYY)POLICY EXP(MM/DD/YYYY)POLICY EFFPOLICY NUMBERTYPE OF INSURANCELTRINSR DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS / VEHICLES (ACORD 101, Additional Remarks Schedule, may be attached if more space is required) EXCESS LIAB UMBRELLA LIAB $EACH OCCURRENCE $AGGREGATE $ OCCUR CLAIMS-MADE DED RETENTION $ $PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $GENERAL AGGREGATE $PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $MED EXP (Any one person) $EACH OCCURRENCE DAMAGE TO RENTED $PREMISES (Ea occurrence) COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS-MADE OCCUR GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: POLICY PRO-JECT LOC CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE DATE (MM/DD/YYYY) CANCELLATION AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ACORD 25 (2016/03) © 1988-2015 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. CERTIFICATE HOLDER The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD HIREDAUTOS ONLY 2/4/2020 Arthur J.Gallagher &Co.Insurance Brokers of CA,Inc.LIC #07262931255BatteryStreet,Suite 450SanFranciscoCA94111 415-536-8617 415-536-8627 certrequests@ajg.com Arch Insurance Company 11150 CSGCONS-01 Redwood Fire and Casualty Insurance Co 11673CSGConsultants,Inc.550 Pilgrim DriveFosterCity,CA 94404 Zurich American Insurance Company of IL 27855 Travelers Property Casualty Co of America 25674 569432560 C X 1,000,000 X 500,000 5,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 X Y Y CPO-7414724-00 2/2/2020 12/4/2020 2,000,000 No Ded C 1,000,000 X Y Y CPO-7414724-00 2/2/2020 12/4/2020 No Ded D X X 5,000,000YZUP-21P37869-20-NF 2/2/2020Y 12/4/2020 5,000,000 X 0 B X N Y CSWC036787 12/4/2019 12/4/2020 No Ded 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 A Professional Liabilityretrodate:1/1/1991 Y PAAEP0008804 12/4/2019 12/4/2020 Each ClaimAggregateDeductible: $5,000,000$5,000,000$50,000 re:Agreement for Professional Services.City of Rolling Hills,its elected and appointed officers,agents,and employees are included as additional insureds onaPrimary&Non-Contributory basis on GL &Auto with 30 Day Notice of Cancellation per attached.30 Day Notice of Cancellation on Professional per attached.30 Day Notice of Cancellation on WC is not available. City of Rolling Hillsattn:City Manager2PortugueseBend RoadRollingHillsCA90274 256 26 OFFICESTHROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA • Foster City • San Jose • Pleasanton • SACRAMENTO REGION • Sacramento • CENTRAL VALLEY • Newman • SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA • Orange • Redlands • WWW.CSGENGR.COM 888.794.2016 257 CSG Team Total Staff Director Principal Planner Senior Planner Assoc Planner Fire Specialist Admin Total Hours Labor Total Hourly Rate $165 $140 $120 $100 $150 $65 Subtotals Kick-off Meeting 4 4 6 0 0 0 14 $1,940 Public Outreach Plan 2 4 6 2 0 0 14 $1,940 Project Initiation Total 6 8 12 2 0 0 28 $3,880 Data Collection 4 8 16 16 0 0 44 $5,300 Review existing data 4 6 8 12 2 0 32 $3,960 Review and evaluate exsting data Total 8 14 24 28 2 0 76 9,260 Review existing maps 2 2 4 8 2 0 18 $2,190 Review hazard conditions for maps 2 2 2 8 2 0 16 $1,950 Prepare maps 2 2 4 24 0 8 40 $4,010 Hazard Profiles and Mapping Total 6 6 10 40 4 8 74 8,150 Community kick-off meeting 4 4 4 4 0 0 16 $2,100 Community Outreach Review and evaluate exsting data Rolling Hills Safety Element Update May 8, 2020 Hazard Profiles and Mapping Project Initiation 258 Community Workshops 8 12 16 24 0 8 68 $7,840 SEAC meetings 8 12 32 20 0 4 76 $9,100 PC and CC presentations 4 12 12 12 0 4 44 $5,240 Community Outreach Total 24 40 64 60 0 16 204 24,280 Draft Safety Element 12 16 20 32 4 8 92 $10,940 Submit Draft Safety Element to Cal OES/FEMA 1 1 1 2 0 0 5 $625 Planning Commission Hearing 2 4 6 0 0 4 16 $1,870 Final Safety Element 2 4 6 6 0 0 18 $2,210 City Council Hearing 2 4 6 6 0 1 19 $2,275 Project Close-out 1 1 1 2 0 2 7 $755 Total Hours 64 98 150 178 10 39 539 Total Fees $10,560 $13,720 $18,000 $17,800 $1,500 $2,535 $64,115 259 Agenda Item No.: 8.B Mtg. Date: 05/26/2020 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:MEREDITH ELGUIRA, PLANNING DIRECTOR THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:CONSIDER AND APPROVE SUBSCRIPTION TO IWORQ PERMIT TRACKING SOFTWARE. DATE:May 26, 2020 BACKGROUND: Today, majority of Planning and Community Services Department's transactions are conducted in person and manually. Applicants come in to pick up applications, inquire about property history, research zoning requirements, submit applications over the counter and pick up approved plans at City Hall. All of these steps are time consuming and inefficient. Automating these steps saves time, money and improves applicant and staff's productivity. As the City continues to adopt digital technology to improve customer service and project delivery, permit tracking is one of the critical components that will help reduce manual and labor-intensive work. Project time savings translate to money savings for residents. Automating planning and code enforcement workflows make the process more efficient, consistent and transparent. Staff will be able to accomplish more with better tools. DISCUSSION: Implementing a permit tracking program will allow applicants to file applications electronically. They can fill out applications and submit plans online, check on their project status and access project history from their computers at home. A unique code will be assigned to each project to protect privacy. In addition, this process will help reduce paper use while helping grow the City's electronic records retention program. City staff will be able to review and mark up plans online and send comments to the applicant via the IworQ program. The permit tracking program will also be used by the Code Enforcement Division. The program can run reports on active and closed cases, send reminders of deadlines, provide accessible case related narratives and photographs, and generate letters. The program allows code enforcement personnel to efficiently manage inspections, and access all needed documents and information in the field. This program will allow personnel to track more projects efficiently and achieve resolution quickly. With limited staff, the City needs to use technology to help optimize project management and 260 production. The IworQ software will help improve processes which typically add time to plan reviews and approvals. It will improve the City's record files and record management and thus, staff will be able to respond to inquiries more quickly with more accurate information. Applicants will be able to submit applications and receive approvals electronically from anywhere in the world. Lastly, the program will also help ensure public compliance with city code by managing complaints and violations quickly and efficiently. As the nation begins to adjust to the new normal, having the tools ready and available to help our residents and stakeholders continue to conduct their business effectively will be beneficial to all those involved in the process. The City began incorporating technology in its recent business practice to improve customer service e.g., transitioned to the cloud which put the City ahead of many southbay cities when responding to COVID-19 and it began accepting electronic plans to accommodate social distancing. Permit tracking is another tool that will further advance the City's goal in optimizing customer service and staff productivity while having limited resources. FISCAL IMPACT: The subscription to IworQ will cost $4,000 annually with a one time set up of fee of $1,000. There is sufficient budget in FY 2019/2020 in the Planning Department to fund the subscription to the permit tracking program. The solicitation for service was performed consistent with the Municipal Code Title 3. Cost for a permit tracking program was also provided by Accella ($5,600 annual license fee and $25,000 for implementation) and IdtPlans (year one subscription cost at $13,349 and subsequent year subscription at $12,099). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve subscription to iWorQ permit tracking software. ATTACHMENTS: Price Proposal for Rolling Hills CA 05222020.pdf Supplemental Agenda Packet Relating to 8B 261 Service Agreement for Rolling Hills, CA Community Development & Public Works Software 262 Table of Contents iWorQ Pricing Proposal Executive Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Project Initiation & Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Implementation Phases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Pricing Information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Services & Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Guidelines & Signature Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 263 Executive Summary Thank you for your interest in iWorQ Systems! We have been providing government software solutions since 2001 and serve more than 1,500 customers throughout the United States and Canada. We lead the industry in delivering hosted web-based solutions and were the first vendor in this market to provide a fully web-based system. Since cities and counties often have limited capital budgets, we lease our applications so that our clients are not confronted with large capital investments and our annual support and maintenance fees do not increase year to year. We have found that this model allows agencies to plan for growth in a cost-conscious way. To access our applications all you need is an internet connection and your choice of device including desktops, laptops, smartphones (iPhone, Android) and tablet devices (iPad, Galaxy, etc.) The system's graphical user interface, including all screens and dashboards, is natively touch screen enabled allowing your staff the flexibility to determine which device to utilize inside the office or in the field. We are confident in providing a solution that can improve your internal communication as well as increase your responsiveness to your citizens and customers while reducing the time and effort from your staff. We also provide additional access through our Citizen Engagement mobile app and web portal for internal staff and citizens. Thank you again for considering iWorQ, we will follow up with you to review any questions you may have about this proposal and the next steps in our consultative sales process. Best Regards, Adam Laing Vice President 264 Application Description iWorQ software solutions and professional services together provide a seamless fit for Rolling Hills software project. Having implemented over 1,500 customers and configuring a unique fit for each one provides our team the experience and background required to ensure a successful implementation. iWorQ's browser-based software is an off-the-shelf system which requires no custom modifications to the code, only configuration of the application which requires no coding. As it is already utilized by hundreds of offices of all different sizes, we can scale and configure as much as needed for each implementation in order to meet your project goals. The system will provide access in the field and in the office, assuring your staff will be efficient and have all the data necessary to run a paperless system. iWorQ's hosted solution provides a smooth transition from your current system because much of the complexity of setting up the server hardware and networking environment is not required, which helps save time, money, and resources. Since iWorQ's applications are configurable, we are able to provide a familiar and intuitive system that easy to use and understand. For example, when a user logs in, their screen contains only the fields on their dashboard that are pertinent to them, which makes the training process resonate with each of the end users. iWorQ implementers will consult with each department during the set-up process to configure the applications in order to meet the unique needs of each of your departments. Project Initiation and Management Throughout the history of our company, iWorQ's success with adding and maintaining customers can be accredited to our carefully structured methodology and approach with each implementation. Our phased project methodology allows regular checkpoints and freq uent opportunities to ensure that all of our team members are in sync. During the planning phase, our project teams meet to analyze how each department operates today, and how you would like your new system to work going forward. Based on our discussions, we create a project plan, agree on major milestones, and set a project schedule. The project plan will also address communications, managing risk and change management. Throughout the project, iWorQ will hold regular status meetings in which both teams report on progress, tasks, and timelines, as agreed upon during the planning phase and outlined in the project plan. The iWorQ project manager acts as your main point of contact during the project and works with your staff to ensure that adequate communication takes place, assuring that the project moves along smoothly. iWorQ has standard documentation to record decisions made during the project. These documents list tasks, person responsibilities, decisions made, etc. 265 Developing Specific Deliverables for Your Project The iWorQ team works with your subject matter experts (that you assign) during the initiating and planning phases to determine what deliverables to build for your solution (e.g., reports, documents, templates, and dashboards etc.). After we create a deliverable, we test it to ensure it meets your specifications and then pass it to your team for user acceptance. Figure 1.1 The above image shows how easy it is to create a permit template with prefilled information. Figure 1.2 iWorQ's report builder provides a user interface that only requires a user to simply click on the "+" button below to instantly report on desired input. This enables you to add new fields when desired and create adhoc and saved reports. 266 Figure 1.3 Map above shows Responsive interface- Showing the parcel layer with highlighted parcels. The map is showing the permits issued last year. User can select, display, and edit data directly from the map. Figure 1.4 The screenshot shows iWorQ's Mobile HTML 5 Interface making access in the field easy to use, which includes icons to help assure your field staff will be successful accessing the system. 267 Implementation Phases Your project is configured through a four-phased approach that includes Initiation, Planning, Executing, and Closing phases. Throughout these phases, iWorQ bears the bulk of the project risk. We provide as much training and services as you need to be successful throughout the project. This section discusses: • Initiation Phase • Planning Phase • Executing Phase • Closing Phase Initiation Phase During this phase, we install your software in our secure, hosted (SaaS) data center utilizing Amazon Web Services (AWS). During this phase, you should determine what staff members will assist with the project. We ask you to complete worksheets that allow us to import data into iWorQ dropdown fields. These worksheets do not require that you understand iWorQ data structures to complete this phase. Planning Phase During the Planning phase, the iWorQ project team works with your team to define how processes at Rolling Hills work today and how you would like your new system to operate going forward. As part of this, your team should analyze the reports and documents you currently have to determine which ones you need to have in iWorQ. Based on our discussions, we create a project plan that includes project timelines, goals, priorities, and responsibilities. Our project team will work with you to set a clear project plan with detailed requirements. Both teams follow this plan during the executing phase. Executing Phase During the Executing phase, we train your project team and together configure the solution. Concurrent with your system configuration, our data integration team will work with you to build data interfaces and migrate data if they are part of the project scope. After our teams complete these tasks, we train your staff members. Your success is our highest priority. While each of our training phases has a specific plan, we provide additional or repeat trainings at no additional cost if necessary for a successful implementation. As a customer, we will provide additional training anytime it is desired for no additional cost. The time completion of project phases is often dependent upon Rolling Hills go-live goals and staff availability. 268 Go Live After the configuration, iWorQ will train each of your staff members. During our training, attendees learn by doing actual data entry. They should come to the training with any materials they regularly use to enter cases (e.g., a stack of permits or code cases to be entered). Instructors will provide the training online. Instructors provide personal assistance to attendees, answer specific questions, and personalize teaching styles to meet the needs of individual attendees. Closing Phase During the closing phase, your iWorQ project team continues to work with you to answer any questions and resolve any configuration questions. We hold a project closure meeting to ensure a smooth transition from our project team to our IWorQ customer suppor t team, who will support you going forward and as long as you are a customer. Training Your administrator and other individuals you designate receive several different types of training that cover iWorQ's key functionalities. Our training involves guiding staff to use iWorQ to complete actual work tasks. Instructors provide personal assistance to attendees, answer specific questions, model examples and exercises, and personalize teaching styles to individual attendees. This informal style helps your staff relax and feel comfortable asking and responding to questions. These trainings are described in further detail below: Administrator Training: Administrator training teaches your iWorQ administrator(s) how to manage iWorQ going forward. This training covers items such as setting up code tables (options in drop-down lists); security rules; and iWorQ tools. Configuration Training: During the configuration phase, your administrators make many decisions about configuring iWorQ to make your office its most efficient. During Configuration Training, iWorQ's project team helps trainees understand approaches, methodologies, and best practices for making these decisions and recognizing the ramifications of the decisions they make. Go-Live Training: Prior to Go-Live, every user on the system will receive training pertinent to their role type on the system. We provide unlimited training during implementation and after Go-Live via conference calls, webinars, or online screen share and we offer an annual, national users' conference to learn new and advanced skills. 269 Rolling Hills Quote creation: 5/22/2020 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Prepared by: Adrian Stewart and Dalton Mickelsen 1. QUOTE Rolling Hills- hereafter known as "Customer", enters into the following Service Agreement with iWorQ Systems, "iWorQ", headquartered Logan, UT. Customer will pay an annual fee for the services and a one-time setup fee detailed below: Population: 1,860 Community Development Applications and Services Package Price Billing Community Development (Department) *Permit Management *Code Enforcement *Portal Home Quarterly upload of parcel information to iWorQ's GIS Map Track contractors, inspections, property information Track code violations, fees, and activities Unlimited reports and ad-hoc reporting Unlimited access to iWorQ's template library including 3 custom letters & 3 custom forms for Portal Home Premium Data (25MB Uploads & 100GB Storage) Additional Storage – 200 GB; 300 GB Total Plan Review Management - Draw & annotate on plans - Save data in layers on plans - Place watermarks on plans - Must have premium data to use $4,500 $4,000 Annual ANNUAL TOTAL $4,000 Setup, training, and system configuration $2,500 $1,000 Once Grand total due $6,500 $5,000 Notes 1- Invoices for amount will be sent out 2 weeks after signature. Terms of the invoicing is Net 30 days. 2- This quote and the discounts herein are provided at the customer's request and valid until May 29th, 2020. 3- This quote cannot be disclosed or used to compete with other companies. 270 4- Pricing is based on population and number of applications. Removing any items from this quote may require application prices to be updated. 2. ADDITIONAL SERVICES iWorQ provides additional applications and services that can be purchased as part of the Community Development solution. These can be added to the customer's annual* cost, upon request. Licensing – track business, animal, liquor, rental, and other license types. Includes customized automated reminder letters and online renewal. Price based on Population Annual Additional Storage – Each unit of storage contains an additional 100 GB. $250 Annual Onsite Backup – iWorQ will send a *.BAK on a scheduled basis to an FTP server maintained by the customer. $500 Annual Monthly Parcel Update – iWorQ will import an electronic file on a scheduled basis from a file stored on an FTP server maintained by the Customer. $500 Annual Payment Processing – Online credit/debit card processing. Payments are recorded and tracked in iWorQ, reporting to track historical transactions $500 Annual Additional letters/forms Quote Required Annual *Additional services are subject to setup fees which are 2/3 of the annual cost. 3. GUIDELINES 3.1 Getting started iWorQ will assign an account manager to your account to begin the setup and training process upon contract signature. Send the signed service agreement to iWorQ Systems: Email: sales@iworq.com Mailing address: Physical address: PO Box 3784 1125 W. 400. N. Suite 102 Logan, UT 84323 Logan, UT 84321 3.2 Billing information iWorQ will invoice Customers on an annual basis. Customers reserves the right to cancel service at any time after the initial year, by providing iWorQ a 30-day written notice. 271 3.3 Data conversion As part of the project setup, iWorQ provides a data conversion service. This service consists of importing data, sent by the Customer, in an electronic (relational database) format. iWorQ provides contact information and an upload site where the electronic data can be sent. Additional costs apply for data that does not meet the criteria listed above. 4. SERVICES and SUPPORT 4.1 Data ownership All customer data remains the property of the customer. Customer can request data electronically or on disk, upon cancellation of Service Agreement. iWorQ will disburse data within 30 days of written notification. 4.2 FREE training iWorQ provides FREE training and support. iWorQ provides webinars, phone support, written manuals, web videos, documentation and help files. Training is available to any Customer with a login. 4.3 FREE updates All updates, bug fixes, and upgrades are FREE to the Customer. iWorQ is a web-based application. Customer only needs to login to get any updates to the applications. 4.4 FREE support Customer support and training are FREE and available from 6:00 A.M. to 5:00 p.m. Mountain Standard Time. 4.5 FREE data back up iWorQ does back-ups twice weekly and offsite once weekly. 4.6 Proprietary letters/forms Letters and forms, including permits, certificates, or other documents must be owned by the customer and have a clear copyright. 4.7 Data upload and storage limits Standard data plan includes uploads of up to 3 MB per file and 10 GB total storage. iWorQ offers a premium data plan available for an additional annual cost. 4.8 Software Terms and Limitations The iWorQ Software is the proprietary information and a trade secret of iWorQ, Systems Inc. and this agreement grants no title or rights of ownership with the software. The software is protected by United States copyright laws and international copyright treaties, as well as other intellectual property laws. Customer shall not permit any user or other party to, (a) copy or otherwise reproduce, reverse engineer or decompile all or any part of the iWorQ Software, (b) make alterations to or modify the Software, (c) grant sublicenses, leases or other rights, or (d) permit any party access to the Licensed Software for purposes of programming against it. 272 5. SETUP & BILLING INFORMATION *Please fill out all fields to ensure our team can reach the implementation & billing contacts 5.1 Community Development Implementation Contacts Primary Contact_______________________________________ Title _______________________________ Phone _____________________________________ Cell ______________________________________ Email _________________________________________________ Additional Contact(s)_______________________________________ Title _______________________________ Phone _____________________________________ Cell ______________________________________ Email _________________________________________________ 5.2 Billing information Billing Contact _______________________________ Phone ___________________ Cell ____________________ Email _______________________________________ Prefer to receive invoice by email? Yes No Billing Address________________________________________________________________________________ City _____________________________________ State ___________________ Zip _______________________ PO# __________________________ (if required) Tax exempt ID# __________________________ 6. SIGNATURE Signature of this Agreement is based on the understanding and acknowledgement of the terms and conditions stated within this Service Agreement. ______________________________________ ________________________________ _______________________________ (Phone) (Mobile) (Email) ______________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ (Signature) (Print Name & Title) (Date) 273 Supplemental Agenda Packet Relating to Item 8B Posted May 26, 2020 274 2633 Camino Ramon, Suite 500, San Ramon, CA 94583 | t (925) 659.3200 | (888) 722.2352 | © 2020 Accela, Inc. All rights reserved. Growing strong, safe and viable communities Solution Overview / Accela Planning ™ Planning departments have a big job. With continuously increasing community development, planners must: Challenges in planning are oten the result of manual processes which typically add time to plan reviews and approvals, increases the likelihood of errors in data with employees manually capturing and rekeying information, and oten require code ocers to make multiple trips to the oce. In addition, planners face: Planning Today Planning Challenges Promote economic growth — Accela Planning reduces much of the manual and labor-intensive work of enforcing and regulating local codes and ordinances to maintain compliance with a community’s master plan. The solution speeds plan reviews, zoning changes, variance requests and more for faster devel- opment of growing commu- nities. In addition, planners can share plan and code data with building depart- ment personnel to improve accuracy, speed, and security when sharing information. Saves money — Accela Planning automates the workows associated with plan review and approvals, allowing agency employees to process more reviews, code enforcement ocers to perform more inspec- tions, and employees to spend less time searching for plans or information. This saves time, money and improves agency productivity. Improves builder eciency — Getting plans reviewed faster, online, and with less work means developers can keep their projects on schedule and on budget. The increase of planning information managed in Accela Planning means less confusion, faster approvals, and the ability to always know where plans are in the process, so builders, contractors, and citizens can manage their time and resources more productively. Improves citizen satisfac- tion – With an online citizen portal, agencies can respond faster to citizen requests, while providing complete transparency throughout the process. This in turn helps agencies meet the demands and needs of communities in unprecedented times where digital services are vital. Benets Ensure communities are safe, appealing and suitable for a wide variety of citizens, from aging baby boomers to millennials starting their families Develop balanced and consistent land use and zoning policies, solidify community infrastructure and provide services to support the needs of the public Oversee public and private developments, so land and structures are safe and in compliance with master plans, and are reviewed and approved in a way that promotes growth With the expected expansion of urban areas, the need for sustainable growth, smart cities, and a renewed focus on social values and communal resources, planners need to work hard to develop or transform communities to meet rapidly changing demands. Ineciencies in enforcing local code, regulation and ordinances that are in compliance with master plans A looseness and ambiguity in planning with many moving parts, which requires close case management Long waits and extremely high costs for developers and contractors in getting proposals reviewed and approved, slowing development times and driving up costs for project owners Manual communications and data sharing with Building Departments for plan reviews, conditional use permits and variance requests. Inspection les must include code information and approvals, so inspectors have what they need to inspect building sites Time and money for collecting and handling planning fees in agency oces 275 Solution Overview / Features Accela Planning helps communities build and grow safely with rezoning, site plan reviews and approvals, issuing land use entitlements, complaint management, and code enforcement automation. It provides a way for planners to be strategic, collaborate across teams, capture multiple types of information, visualize planning data with mapping tools, and maintain zoning and code data within a searchable database. This automation improves the speed, eectiveness, and accuracy of the analysis, processing, and ongoing management of community planning. Accela Planning is built on a full featured platform and is designed to optimize and accelerate community development processes. The solution is SaaS-based hosted on a Microsot Azure infrastructure for increased security and performance. The system is exible and congurable to accommodate the unique needs of any agency. Plus, it was also designed for ease-of-use for citizens. Accela Planning comes with a pre-built set of solution components to speed implementation and lower overall costs. These include workows, user interfaces, record types (specic data elds), and reports and notications. The pre-built components were created through numerous engagements with Planning Departments across various agencies and incorporate planning best practices to provide value to Accela customers. Accela Planning About Accela Accela provides market-leading SaaS solutions that empower state and local governments to build thriving communities, grow businesses and protect citizens. Powered by Microsot Azure, Accela’s open and exible technology helps agencies address specic needs today, while ensuring they are prepared for any emerging or complex challenge in the future. Accela is headquartered in San Ramon, California, with additional oces around the world. Learn More Visit www.accela.com or call us at (888) 722-2352 Modern and intuitive user interface with HTML5 and responsive design providing a seamless experience for both agency sta and citizens on any device, anywhere. Online citizen portal provides a one-stop-shop to submit proposals, verify status updates, pay outstand- ing fees, reducing in-person visits, emails and phone inquiries, and improves the citizen experience. Built-in reporting to give administrators, managers and planning commissions or boards the critical insight they need to manage agency productivity, uncover bottlenecks and highlight areas for process improvement. Online payments system with credit card, ACH, and trust account capability to increase convenience for citizens and remove the manual payment processing work from agency employees. Platform-wide integration capabilities with APIs, SDKs, and open data, allowing developers to integrate with existing sotware solutions to meet the unique needs of any community. GIS mapping to easily produce interactive maps and visualizations, making planning and code enforcement data easy to leverage and understand. Electronic Document Review and Management to ensure all relevant documents are searchable, secure, and that employees are always working with the correct versions. Full-featured mobile platform with role-based apps to allow inspectors and code enforcement personnel to eciently manage their inspection routing, access all needed documents and information in the eld, and get more work done. Workow management system to automate the tasks and functions needed for planning processes. The system can assign tasks, track reviews, associate documents and information to tasks, and keep the most complex processes running smoothly. 2633 Camino Ramon, Suite 500, San Ramon, CA 94583 | t (925) 659.3200 | (888) 722.2352 | © 2020 Accela, Inc. All rights reserved. Code enforcement to ensure public compliance with city code and regulation by managing complaints and violations to achieve resolution quickly and eciently. 276 Re: City of Rolling Hills, CA & Accela Aashish Mehan <amehan@accela.com> Thu 5/21/2020 10:50 AM To: Meredith Elguira <melguira@cityofrh.net> Cc: Delia Aranda <daranda@cityofrh.net>; Stephanie Grant <sgrant@cityofrh.net> 1 attachments (6 MB) Accela-Planning-Solution-Overview.pdf; Hello Meredith, You’re looking at about $5,600 to $7,000 for the licensing. A typical implementaƟon from a plaƟnum partner will cost roughly $25,000. I have aƩached our whitepaper on planning. We’d love to set up a Ɵme to discuss it and have a demonstraƟon. Depending on your calendar of needs. Looking forward, Aashish Avatar/Logo $DVKLVK0HKDQ Account Executive M: (650) 960-6679 E: amehan@accela.com facebook linkedin twitter ZZZDFFHODFRP Accela's COVID-19 Response Solutions help governments ensure citizen service continuity and immediate impact response. This message, including any attachments, is Accela’s confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please reply to the sender and delete the message. Accela, Inc. is only bound by agreements signed by its authorized executives—not email. From: Meredith Elguira <melguira@cityofrh.net> Date: Thursday, May 21, 2020 at 9:01 AM To: Aashish Mehan <amehan@accela.com> Cc: Delia Aranda <daranda@cityofrh.net>, Stephanie Grant <sgrant@cityofrh.net> Subject: Re: City of Rolling Hills, CA & Accela CAUTION: This email originated outside our organizaƟon; please use cauƟon. Firefox https://outlook.office.com/mail/search/id/AAQkAGI5ZmVmYmY1L... 1 of 5 5/25/2020, 2:18 PM 277 idtPlans LLC. - (520) 319-0988 x 1 - adam.griffen@idtplans.com - https://idtplans.com/ Improve efficiency, increase transparency, and empower your constituents. Electronic Plan Review w/ citizen access portal -PLAN REVIEW DASHBOARD -CONCURRENT REVIEWS &VERSION CONTROL -COMMENT LIBRARY -PROFESSIONAL PLAN REVIEW TOOLS -DOCUMENT TEMPLATE DESIGNER -AUTOMATE AND TRACK EMAILS Permits w/ citizen access portal -PERMIT MANAGER -FLEXIBLE WORKFLOW -SMART PERMIT ASSIGNMENTS -2-CLICK PERMIT CREATION -COMPLETE LIFE-CYCLE MANAGER -CONTROL CONTACTS Inspections w/ citizen access portal -INSPECTION SCHEDULER -CUSTOM INSPECTION CHECKLISTS -NO WIFI? NO PROBLEM. (ANYWHERE ACCESS) -PHOTO COMMENTS -AUTOMATED INSPECTION MANAGER 278 idtPlans LLC 255 N Rosemont Blvd #13086 Tucson, AZ 85732-3086 (520) 319-0988 idtplans.com P a g e | 1 Meredith Elguria Pricing Proposal:CARollingGLN2020 City of Rolling Hills Expires: July 31st, 2020 May 22nd, 2020 PRICING PROPOSAL: Pre-Configured eGovernment Suite, “Go Live Now” The pre-configured eGovernment Suite from idtPlans is available to the City o f Rolling Hills, CA. In terms of customizations included in this option, is limited only to the following: • Support links/references • Logo/Seal • Jurisdiction/Company references Everything else included in this option is pre-set and customizations would require a separate scope and purchase order to move forward. Items included are as follows: • One standardized application and corresponding workflow. • Seven permits, including: o Building Permit o Electrical Permit o Mechanical Permit o Plumbing Permit o Land Disturbance and Grading Permit o Zoning Compliance Permit o Certificate of Occupancy • Eleven standardized inspections, including: o Building o Civil o Electrical o Final o Fire o Mechanical o Plumbing o Roofing o Site o Structural o Zoning • Eight system-generated documents, including: o Comment Letter o All Permit/Certificate Documents for the Above-Noted Permits 279 idtPlans LLC 255 N Rosemont Blvd #13086 Tucson, AZ 85732-3086 (520) 319-0988 idtplans.com P a g e | 2 Timeline, we can have the portal online and available for use within two (2- 3) weeks from receipt of funds. However, this may be longer, and it is largely dependent upon the number of users to be trained and how quickly that training can take place. For example, if there are 5 users – we would schedule training courses via webinar (5 users to a class). Due to scheduling and availability, it may take up to two weeks to complete all training. With that in mind, a realistic estimate to say 2-4 weeks from receipt of funds to go live. Once the pre-configured portal is implemented – The City of Rolling Hills may customize through integrations or by scoping new portal components specific to your use. Further, you and other city officials will have the option to take an expanded training course to learn how to configure it internally, if that is your preference. The pre-configured portal is your foundation. What you choose to build on top of it is entirely based off of needs and functionality. We want our clients to be able to get the assistance they need to be successful without having to be concerned about support cost overruns. Additional expense is incurred (at a rate of $250/hour), only when writing custom scripts to the base application or if on-site training or support is requested. Please let me know if you have any questions, comments, or if there’s anything else that I can help with. Sincerely, Jace Coleman | CEO (520) 329-5223 | jace.coleman@idtplans.com 280 idtPlans LLC 255 N Rosemont Blvd #13086 Tucson, AZ 85732-3086 (520) 319-0988 idtplans.com P a g e | 3 Annual Hosting, Training, Go Live Now Cost Item Qty Cost Total E-government Suite (up to 10 named users) 1 $12,000 $12,000 Bluebeam Licenses 1 $349 $349 Multi-User Training Course 1 $1,000 $1,000 *Total Initial Go Live Now Cost: $13,349 Annual Recurring Maintenance (Starting Year 2) Item Qty Cost Total Plan Review (up to 5 named users) 1 $12,000 $12,000 Bluebeam Annual Maintenance (Optional) 1 $99 $99 Total Maintenance Cost Per Year: $12,099 Additional Customization Costs (as needed) Item Qty Total Application & Workflow Configuration (Simple) <4 Hours 1 $1,000 Application & Workflow (Complex) <8 Hours 1 $2,000 E-Commerce Integration (Standard) 1 $5,000 E-Commerce Integration (Complex) 1 $7,500 Permit Configuration 1 $500 Inspection Configuration 1 $500 Custom Document Configuration 1 $750 Document Archival (Laserfiche) 1 $5,000 Custom Report 1 $1,000 ArcGIS 1 $5,000 ADFS Integration 1 $5,000 Outlook Calendar Integration 1 $5,000 281 Service Agreement for Rolling Hills, CA Community Development & Public Works Software 282 Table of Contents iWorQ Pricing Proposal Executive Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Project Initiation & Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5 Implementation Phases. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Pricing Information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Services & Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Guidelines & Signature Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 283 Executive Summary Thank you for your interest in iWorQ Systems! We have been providing government software solutions since 2001 and serve more than 1,500 customers throughout the United States and Canada. We lead the industry in delivering hosted web-based solutions and were the first vendor in this market to provide a fully web-based system. Since cities and counties often have limited capital budgets, we lease our applications so that our clients are not confronted with large capital investments and our annual support and maintenance fees do not increase year to year. We have found that this model allows agencies to plan for growth in a cost-conscious way. To access our applications all you need is an internet connection and your choice of device including desktops, laptops, smartphones (iPhone, Android) and tablet devices (iPad, Galaxy, etc.) The system's graphical user interface, including all screens and dashboards, is natively touch screen enabled allowing your staff the flexibility to determine which device to utilize inside the office or in the field. We are confident in providing a solution that can improve your internal communication as well as increase your responsiveness to your citizens and customers while reducing the time and effort from your staff. We also provide additional access through our Citizen Engagement mobile app and web portal for internal staff and citizens. Thank you again for considering iWorQ, we will follow up with you to review any questions you may have about this proposal and the next steps in our consultative sales process. Best Regards, Adam Laing Vice President 284 Application Description iWorQ software solutions and professional services together provide a seamless fit for Rolling Hills software project. Having implemented over 1,500 customers and configuring a unique fit for each one provides our team the experience and background required to ensure a successful implementation. iWorQ's browser-based software is an off-the-shelf system which requires no custom modifications to the code, only configuration of the application which requires no coding. As it is already utilized by hundreds of offices of all different sizes, we can scale and configure as much as needed for each implementation in order to meet your project goals. The system will provide access in the field and in the office, assuring your staff will be efficient and have all the data necessary to run a paperless system. iWorQ's hosted solution provides a smooth transition from your current system because much of the complexity of setting up the server hardware and networking environment is not required, which helps save time, money, and resources. Since iWorQ's applications are configurable, we are able to provide a familiar and intuitive system that easy to use and understand. For example, when a user logs in, their screen contains only the fields on their dashboard that are pertinent to them, which makes the training process resonate with each of the end users. iWorQ implementers will consult with each department during the set-up process to configure the applications in order to meet the unique needs of each of your departments. Project Initiation and Management Throughout the history of our company, iWorQ's success with adding and maintaining customers can be accredited to our carefully structured methodology and approach with each implementation. Our phased project methodology allows regular checkpoints and freq uent opportunities to ensure that all of our team members are in sync. During the planning phase, our project teams meet to analyze how each department operates today, and how you would like your new system to work going forward. Based on our discussions, we create a project plan, agree on major milestones, and set a project schedule. The project plan will also address communications, managing risk and change management. Throughout the project, iWorQ will hold regular status meetings in which both teams report on progress, tasks, and timelines, as agreed upon during the planning phase and outlined in the project plan. The iWorQ project manager acts as your main point of contact during the project and works with your staff to ensure that adequate communication takes place, assuring that the project moves along smoothly. iWorQ has standard documentation to record decisions made during the project. These documents list tasks, person responsibilities, decisions made, etc. 285 Developing Specific Deliverables for Your Project The iWorQ team works with your subject matter experts (that you assign) during the initiating and planning phases to determine what deliverables to build for your solution (e.g., reports, documents, templates, and dashboards etc.). After we create a deliverable, we test it to ensure it meets your specifications and then pass it to your team for user acceptance. Figure 1.1 The above image shows how easy it is to create a permit template with prefilled information. Figure 1.2 iWorQ's report builder provides a user interface that only requires a user to simply click on the "+" button below to instantly report on desired input. This enables you to add new fields when desired and create adhoc and saved reports. 286 Figure 1.3 Map above shows Responsive interface- Showing the parcel layer with highlighted parcels. The map is showing the permits issued last year. User can select, display, and edit data directly from the map. Figure 1.4 The screenshot shows iWorQ's Mobile HTML 5 Interface making access in the field easy to use, which includes icons to help assure your field staff will be successful accessing the system. 287 Implementation Phases Your project is configured through a four-phased approach that includes Initiation, Planning, Executing, and Closing phases. Throughout these phases, iWorQ bears the bulk of the project risk. We provide as much training and services as you need to be successful throughout the project. This section discusses: • Initiation Phase • Planning Phase • Executing Phase • Closing Phase Initiation Phase During this phase, we install your software in our secure, hosted (SaaS) data center utilizing Amazon Web Services (AWS). During this phase, you should determine what staff members will assist with the project. We ask you to complete worksheets that allow us to import data into iWorQ dropdown fields. These worksheets do not require that you understand iWorQ data structures to complete this phase. Planning Phase During the Planning phase, the iWorQ project team works with your team to define how processes at Rolling Hills work today and how you would like your new system to operate going forward. As part of this, your team should analyze the reports and documents you currently have to determine which ones you need to have in iWorQ. Based on our discussions, we create a project plan that includes project timelines, goals, priorities, and responsibilities. Our project team will work with you to set a clear project plan with detailed requirements. Both teams follow this plan during the executing phase. Executing Phase During the Executing phase, we train your project team and together configure the solution. Concurrent with your system configuration, our data integration team will work with you to build data interfaces and migrate data if they are part of the project scope. After our teams complete these tasks, we train your staff members. Your success is our highest priority. While each of our training phases has a specific plan, we provide additional or repeat trainings at no additional cost if necessary for a successful implementation. As a customer, we will provide additional training anytime it is desired for no additional cost. The time completion of project phases is often dependent upon Rolling Hills go-live goals and staff availability. 288 Go Live After the configuration, iWorQ will train each of your staff members. During our training, attendees learn by doing actual data entry. They should come to the training with any materials they regularly use to enter cases (e.g., a stack of permits or code cases to be entered). Instructors will provide the training online. Instructors provide personal assistance to attendees, answer specific questions, and personalize teaching styles to meet the needs of individual attendees. Closing Phase During the closing phase, your iWorQ project team continues to work with you to answer any questions and resolve any configuration questions. We hold a project closure meeting to ensure a smooth transition from our project team to our IWorQ customer suppor t team, who will support you going forward and as long as you are a customer. Training Your administrator and other individuals you designate receive several different types of training that cover iWorQ's key functionalities. Our training involves guiding staff to use iWorQ to complete actual work tasks. Instructors provide personal assistance to attendees, answer specific questions, model examples and exercises, and personalize teaching styles to individual attendees. This informal style helps your staff relax and feel comfortable asking and responding to questions. These trainings are described in further detail below: Administrator Training: Administrator training teaches your iWorQ administrator(s) how to manage iWorQ going forward. This training covers items such as setting up code tables (options in drop-down lists); security rules; and iWorQ tools. Configuration Training: During the configuration phase, your administrators make many decisions about configuring iWorQ to make your office its most efficient. During Configuration Training, iWorQ's project team helps trainees understand approaches, methodologies, and best practices for making these decisions and recognizing the ramifications of the decisions they make. Go-Live Training: Prior to Go-Live, every user on the system will receive training pertinent to their role type on the system. We provide unlimited training during implementation and after Go-Live via conference calls, webinars, or online screen share and we offer an annual, national users' conference to learn new and advanced skills. 289 Rolling Hills Quote creation: 5/22/2020 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA 90274 Prepared by: Adrian Stewart and Dalton Mickelsen 1. QUOTE Rolling Hills- hereafter known as "Customer", enters into the following Service Agreement with iWorQ Systems, "iWorQ", headquartered Logan, UT. Customer will pay an annual fee for the services and a one-time setup fee detailed below: Population: 1,860 Community Development Applications and Services Package Price Billing Community Development (Department) *Permit Management *Code Enforcement *Portal Home Quarterly upload of parcel information to iWorQ's GIS Map Track contractors, inspections, property information Track code violations, fees, and activities Unlimited reports and ad-hoc reporting Unlimited access to iWorQ's template library including 3 custom letters & 3 custom forms for Portal Home Premium Data (25MB Uploads & 100GB Storage) Additional Storage – 200 GB; 300 GB Total Plan Review Management - Draw & annotate on plans - Save data in layers on plans - Place watermarks on plans - Must have premium data to use $4,500 $4,000 Annual ANNUAL TOTAL $4,000 Setup, training, and system configuration $2,500 $1,000 Once Grand total due $6,500 $5,000 Notes 1- Invoices for amount will be sent out 2 weeks after signature. Terms of the invoicing is Net 30 days. 2- This quote and the discounts herein are provided at the customer's request and valid until May 29th, 2020. 3- This quote cannot be disclosed or used to compete with other companies. 290 4- Pricing is based on population and number of applications. Removing any items from this quote may require application prices to be updated. 2. ADDITIONAL SERVICES iWorQ provides additional applications and services that can be purchased as part of the Community Development solution. These can be added to the customer's annual* cost, upon request. Licensing – track business, animal, liquor, rental, and other license types. Includes customized automated reminder letters and online renewal. Price based on Population Annual Additional Storage – Each unit of storage contains an additional 100 GB. $250 Annual Onsite Backup – iWorQ will send a *.BAK on a scheduled basis to an FTP server maintained by the customer. $500 Annual Monthly Parcel Update – iWorQ will import an electronic file on a scheduled basis from a file stored on an FTP server maintained by the Customer. $500 Annual Payment Processing – Online credit/debit card processing. Payments are recorded and tracked in iWorQ, reporting to track historical transactions $500 Annual Additional letters/forms Quote Required Annual *Additional services are subject to setup fees which are 2/3 of the annual cost. 3. GUIDELINES 3.1 Getting started iWorQ will assign an account manager to your account to begin the setup and training process upon contract signature. Send the signed service agreement to iWorQ Systems: Email: sales@iworq.com Mailing address: Physical address: PO Box 3784 1125 W. 400. N. Suite 102 Logan, UT 84323 Logan, UT 84321 3.2 Billing information iWorQ will invoice Customers on an annual basis. Customers reserves the right to cancel service at any time after the initial year, by providing iWorQ a 30-day written notice. 291 3.3 Data conversion As part of the project setup, iWorQ provides a data conversion service. This service consists of importing data, sent by the Customer, in an electronic (relational database) format. iWorQ provides contact information and an upload site where the electronic data can be sent. Additional costs apply for data that does not meet the criteria listed above. 4. SERVICES and SUPPORT 4.1 Data ownership All customer data remains the property of the customer. Customer can request data electronically or on disk, upon cancellation of Service Agreement. iWorQ will disburse data within 30 days of written notification. 4.2 FREE training iWorQ provides FREE training and support. iWorQ provides webinars, phone support, written manuals, web videos, documentation and help files. Training is available to any Customer with a login. 4.3 FREE updates All updates, bug fixes, and upgrades are FREE to the Customer. iWorQ is a web-based application. Customer only needs to login to get any updates to the applications. 4.4 FREE support Customer support and training are FREE and available from 6:00 A.M. to 5:00 p.m. Mountain Standard Time. 4.5 FREE data back up iWorQ does back-ups twice weekly and offsite once weekly. 4.6 Proprietary letters/forms Letters and forms, including permits, certificates, or other documents must be owned by the customer and have a clear copyright. 4.7 Data upload and storage limits Standard data plan includes uploads of up to 3 MB per file and 10 GB total storage. iWorQ offers a premium data plan available for an additional annual cost. 4.8 Software Terms and Limitations The iWorQ Software is the proprietary information and a trade secret of iWorQ, Systems Inc. and this agreement grants no title or rights of ownership with the software. The software is protected by United States copyright laws and international copyright treaties, as well as other intellectual property laws. Customer shall not permit any user or other party to, (a) copy or otherwise reproduce, reverse engineer or decompile all or any part of the iWorQ Software, (b) make alterations to or modify the Software, (c) grant sublicenses, leases or other rights, or (d) permit any party access to the Licensed Software for purposes of programming against it. 292 5. SETUP & BILLING INFORMATION *Please fill out all fields to ensure our team can reach the implementation & billing contacts 5.1 Community Development Implementation Contacts Primary Contact_______________________________________ Title _______________________________ Phone _____________________________________ Cell ______________________________________ Email _________________________________________________ Additional Contact(s)_______________________________________ Title _______________________________ Phone _____________________________________ Cell ______________________________________ Email _________________________________________________ 5.2 Billing information Billing Contact _______________________________ Phone ___________________ Cell ____________________ Email _______________________________________ Prefer to receive invoice by email? Yes No Billing Address________________________________________________________________________________ City _____________________________________ State ___________________ Zip _______________________ PO# __________________________ (if required) Tax exempt ID# __________________________ 6. SIGNATURE Signature of this Agreement is based on the understanding and acknowledgement of the terms and conditions stated within this Service Agreement. ______________________________________ ________________________________ _______________________________ (Phone) (Mobile) (Email) ______________________________________ ________________________________ ________________________________ (Signature) (Print Name & Title) (Date) 293 Agenda Item No.: 8.C Mtg. Date: 05/26/2020 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:MEREDITH ELGUIRA, PLANNING DIRECTOR THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:CONSIDER AND APPROVE SUBSCRIPTION TO LOS ANGELES COUNTY'S GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEM (GIS) DATE:May 26, 2020 BACKGROUND: Early this year staff reached out to LA County GIS Department to discuss the possibility of providing mapping services for the City. City staff is currently using paper zoning map with very limited information. The map, produced years ago, does not reflect any of the recent adopted lot line adjustments or subdivision. The map's scale, font size and font type make it very difficult to find parcels, address numbers, streets, overlay zones and land use designations. If additional information is needed with regards to lot size, parcel number, and existing development, staff would have to access the LA County's Parcel Viewer webpage to get more information or search through paper files. The current practice is time consuming, inefficient and sometimes inaccurate. DISCUSSION: As the City continues to improve and expand its services to residents and other stakeholders, more advanced tools will be needed to help deliver accurate information more efficiently and quickly. Having proper tools will help augment the lack of manpower while increasing productivity. GIS maps will be useful in conducting research on projects by staff, residents and applicants. In addition, local organizations and other public agencies will be able to use the GIS program to map: fire hazard areas, landslide, water drainage course, topography, utility poles and lines, trails, block captain zones, generate mailing labels and more. The map will continue to grow as more information and layers are added. GIS is a great tool because it provides easily accessible accurate information that could be filtered and expanded depending on one's needs. Attached, are sample maps that range from one-layer map to more complex maps with multiple layers of information. Subscribing to LA County's GIS mapping services will provide the City with the latest city map updated with approved new lot lines and subdivisions, overlay zone, legible addresses and street names and assigned land use designation. The City will also have access to the LARIAC system which provides the latest aerial view of the City, building envelop that is measurable, measuring tools, contour lines and drainage patterns. Below is a list of deliverables that will be provided by LA County with the City's subscription.294 The LA County GIS Department's proposal provides the following deliverables: Deliverable 1: Database set-up at LA County Create a City Rolling Hills database at an internal County server for spatial dataset hosting. Task Descriptions: Create a City Rolling Hills database and create separate user name and login with editing permission Load spatial datasets into the database Deliverable 2: Zoning spatial dataset Convert hard copy zoning map to a spatial dataset Select LA County parcel data in Rolling Hills boundaries. Manually assign zoning code, overlay information, etc. to each parcel. Load zoning data into City Rolling Hills database Deliverable 3: Incorporate map service into County’s GIS Viewer Modify the current LA County GIS Viewer to include map service(s) containing City of Rolling Hill’s spatial dataset. Task Descriptions: Create an ArcMap.mxd using symbology from the hard copy zoning map. Create and configure labels. Publish.mxd as a map service onto internal ArcGIS server at LA County Add map service into the County’s GIS Viewer, restrict access of layer(s) to City of Rolling Hill’s login, and configure map service (feature description, field alias, visibility, etc.) in Latitude Geographics’ Geocortex software Train users (either online or in person) in navigating the GIS Viewer Deliverable 4: Ongoing Data & Infrastructure Support Incorporate any data updates from City of Rolling Hills, republish service, reconfigure map service in Geocortex software, and troubleshoot services (e.g. infrastructure, ArcGIS) as needed. FISCAL IMPACT: The subscription cost to LA County's GIS program is $2,400 annually with a one time set up fee of $4,916 and membership to LARIAC is $16,660. Updating the map with new layers is based on an hourly rate provided in the attachment. There is available budget for FY 2019-2020 in Administration to fund the subscription, one time set up fee and membership to LARIAC. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve the subscription to LA County's GIS mapping 295 program. ATTACHMENTS: SR_Rolling_Hills_Tasks_Deliverables_20200511.pdf Sample Maps.docx Sample Arcadia.pdf Layers.pdf LARIAC6 - City of Rolling Hills.pdf 296 Internal Services Department (ISD) UR-GIS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Justification of work: ISD/UR-GIS is to assist City of Rolling Hills with Geographic Information Systems (GIS) related requests. Deliverables and Tasks: 1. Deliverable 1: Database set-up at LA County Create a City_Rolling_Hills database at an internal County server for spatial dataset hosting. Task Descriptions: a. Create a City_Rolling_Hills database and create separate user name and login with editing permissions b. Load spatial datasets into the database 2. Deliverable 2: Zoning spatial dataset Convert hard copy zoning map to a spatial dataset a. Select LA County parcel data in Rolling Hills boundaries. Manually assign zoning code, overlay information, etc. to each parcel. b. Load zoning data into City_Rolling_Hills database 3. Deliverable 3: Incorporate map service into County’s GIS Viewer Modify the current LA County GIS Viewer to include map service(s) containing City of Rolling Hill’s spatial dataset. Task Descriptions: a. Create an ArcMap .mxd using symbology from the hard copy zoning map. Create and configure labels. Publish .mxd as a map service onto internal ArcGIS server at LA County b. Add map service into the County’s GIS Viewer, restrict access of layer(s) to City of Rolling Hill’s login, and configure map service (feature description, field alias, visibility, etc.) in Latitude Geographics’ Geocortex software c. Train users (either online or in person) in navigating the GIS Viewer 4. Deliverable 4: Ongoing Data & Infrastructure Support Incorporate any data updates from City of Rolling Hills, republish service, reconfigure map service in Geocortex software, and troubleshoot services (e.g. infrastructure, ArcGIS) as needed. 297 2 5. Assumptions: - City of Rolling Hills should provide ISD/UR-GIS with the instructions/guidance on the business needs and should be available for questions from the ISD/UR-GIS. 6. Schedule: Deliverable Completion Date 1: Database set-up at LA County (internal ISD deadline) June 8, 2020 2: Zoning spatial dataset June 15, 2020 3: Incorporate map service into County’s GIS Viewer June 30, 2020 4: Ongoing Data and Infrastructure Support June 30, 2020 7. Estimated Hours and Costs: Deliverable Number of Hours Rate Per Hour Amount 1 2 $163 $326.00 2 15 $163 $2,445.00 3 8 $163 $1,304.00 4 4 $163 $652.00 Subtotal: $4,727.00 Contract Cities Liability Surcharge (4%) $189.08 Total estimates: $4,916.08 8. Project Management and Billing:  Change in technical scope from the original requirements will impact the delivery date, and requires that ISD Project Management Change Management processes be followed. FORM #78 1848(4/95) SERREQFM.DOT 298 Typical zoning map where layers can be turned on and off depending on the information needed. The viewer can be used to create mailing labels, search property owner information including owner’s names and mailing address and much more. Property owners can research their parcels to find associated zoning, general plan, HOA, and other data layers.299 Property owners can search for their parcels to find associated zoning, general plan, HOA, and other data layers. View orthogonal imagery and oblique imagery from four cardinal directions. There are handy measurement tools to measure features (e.g. signs, height of homes). Additional data layers may be onto sub-organizations account (i.e. City of Rolling Hills) for other users to view and use. EagleView (also knowns as Pictometry) can provide training for any staff/dept at the City. 300 301 302 County of Los Angeles INTERNAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT 9150 Imperial Hwy. Downey, California 90242 SELWYN HOLLINS Interim Director “To enrich lives through effective and caring service” Telephone: (323) 267-2103 FAX: (323) 264-7135 January 21, 2020 Elaine Jeng City Manager City of Rolling Hills Dear Elaine Jeng, LOS ANGELES REGION IMAGERY ACQUISITION CONSORTIUM (LARIAC6) Established in 2005, the Los Angeles Region Imagery Acquisition Consortium (LARIAC) has delivered highly accurate digital aerial image ry and elevation datasets to participants at substantial cost savings, and has become a national model for collaborative data acquisition. LARIAC participants have included 52 cities, 27 County departments, 16 local, state, and federal agencies, and seven educational institutions. To ensure the currency of the aerial imagery, we are working with consortia members to plan and initiate the next LARIAC cycle – LARIAC6. This document describes LARIAC, highlights its benefits, provides a status update, and discusses the proposed scope, schedule, and cost. Your portion of the cost of LARIAC6 will be $16,660, which is the same cost as LARIAC5. To conserve paper, we will also E-mail a digital copy of this letter and Participant Agreement to current LARIAC participants. These participants are listed on Attachment I. LARIAC BACKGROUND LARIAC is a consortium of the County of Los Angeles, in partnership with cities and agencies, which collaboratively acquires valuable digital aerial data, including imagery and elevation data. Leveraging the combined buying power of the member agencies, LARIAC reduces costs, enabled participants to acquire more data than would be possible individually and provides consistent and comparable data over time. The LARIAC Website (http://egis3.lacounty.gov/dataportal/lariac/) provides comprehensive information about the project, including detailed data descriptions and samples, product guides, documentation, and agreements. 303 LARIAC6 January 21, 2020 Page 2 DIGITAL AERIAL IMAGERY AND ELEVATION BENEFITS Digital aerial imagery and elevation data provide valuable support for decision making within agencies, as well as cost savings for operations. High quality image data enables staff to make virtual site visits that improves and may replace field work, reducing information collection costs. Some examples include:  Public Safety: Fire and Police personnel can plan for and “see” the location of incidents and addresses, improving dispatch, crime analysis, incident response, and officer safety.  Public Works: Reduces the need for field visits, supports traffic and pavement management, storm drain and flood protection, and enhances project planning and infrastructure management.  Planning: Improves code enforcement, site plan review, and understanding impacts of new projects.  Economic Development: Improves outreach to businesses by providing detailed site information for potential developments and surrounding areas.  Disaster Planning and Response: Improves planning and response before, during, and after disasters, providing a foundation for a Common Operating Picture.  Community Outreach: Improves communication with residents by providing a picture of the area of discussion, increasing citizen engagement.  Operational Efficiency: A consistent view of a city or agency supports collaboration, integration, and efficiency to lower operational costs. LARIAC BENEFITS High resolution data provided through LARIAC data offers key benefits when compared to aerial imagery from online providers (“free mapping websites” like Google or Bing), and off-the- shelf vendors. These include:  Enhanced resolution (4-inch rather than 1-foot) shows greater detail and provides more information (you can see manhole covers and road striping);  Unparalleled accuracy (+/- 2-feet accuracy) ensures information captured from the imagery is in the right location, supporting facilities management, planning, and operations;  Breadth of products (orthogonal and oblique imagery, building footprints, and elevation data) to support of city or agency’s business needs;  Multiple access methods, including desktop, handheld, and mobile, as well as local and remotely hosted solutions to eliminate agency hardware and software costs;  Variety of formats and compressed formats to enable use within existing applications in the field;  Historical data from previous LARIAC image acquisitions to assess change over time; and 304 LARIAC6 January 21, 2020 Page 3  Complete control of LARIAC data products, including availability for use by your contractors. LARIAC participation allows for data use and deployment across your entire agency in all applications, from planning to emergency services to public works. One of the key benefits of LARIAC is cost sharing, which lowers costs as more cities and agencies participate. Cost savings are passed back to participants in the form of additional data products, more frequent image capture and maintaining the price point over time. The more participants join, the lower the cost. To date, 102 cities, County departments, agencies, and educational institutions have benefited from these cost savings. These entities are listed in Attachment I. We invite you to contact these participants to learn more about their use and benefit from the LARIAC. LARIAC6 LARIAC is in its sixth round (LARIAC6) of digital aerial data acquisition, scheduled for winter 2020 with delivery by December 2020. LARIAC6 will update its highly accurate orthogonal and oblique imagery with color infrared, as well as derived data including building outlines. Elevation data, which was acquired in 2016 as part of LARIAC4, will not be updated. Additionally, high resolution (3-inch) normal color imagery acquisitions each spring and fall began in late LARIAC5 (2019) and are planned to continue in LARIAC6. LARIAC6 Product List Orthogonal Imagery  4-band orthogonal imagery (including color infrared) at 4-inch resolution in the urban areas, and 9-inch in the National Forest.  Multiple formats (TIFF, JPEG2000, and compressed ECW).  3-band orthogonal imagery acquired 1-2 times a year (3-inch resolution) for internal use – provided as an image service. Oblique Imagery  3-band color oblique imagery at 4-inch resolution.  Online hosted access for desktop and mobile devices. Building Outlines  Building outlines updated for all buildings over 300 square feet. Additional Data Product(s) as Feasible 305 LARIAC6 January 21, 2020 Page 4 Hosted Solution  EagleView CONNECTExplorer and CONNECT Products (e.g. EagleView for Esri Web AppBuilder, Integrated Pictometry Application).  Image service provided as WMS, WMTS, TMS, and Esri REST GIS Viewer Access  Enhanced access to the LARIAC data, current parcel information, other County GIS data, and mapping and GIS tools through the County’s GIS Viewer. The table below shows the various LARIAC data acquisitions. Data 2006 (L1) 2008 (L2) 2011 (L3) 2014 (L4) 2017 (L5) 2020 (L6) Orthogonal Imagery (4-inch) X (including Infrared) X X X (including 2012 and 2103 1-foot imagery) X (including Infrared imagery and multiple acquisitions per year) X (including Infrared imagery in 2020 and multiple acquisitions per year through 2022) Oblique Imagery X X X X X X Building Outlines X (400 sq ft) X (400 sq ft) X (300 sq ft) X (300 sq ft) Elevation Data X X Derived Data (tree canopy, solar insolation, slop, hillshade, height model, land cover, etc.) X X X 306 LARIAC6 January 21, 2020 Page 5 LARIAC6 COSTS While final costs will be determined upon contract execution, we anticipate that overall LARIAC6 contract costs will be approximately the same as LARIAC5, based upon the addition of multiple acquisitions per year offsetting the elimination of terrain data acquisition. Your portion of the cost of LARIAC6 will be $16,660. To provide funding flexibility, the County can accept payments over two fiscal years to reduce the budget impact of a single, large payment. LARIAC6 PARTICIPATION We look forward to your city’s participation in LARIAC6. If your agency is interested in joining LARIAC6, please complete, sign, and return the attached “Letter of Intent” on your business letterhead. We recognize this Letter of Intent is subject to final approval by your City Council or authorizing Board of Directors. To confirm your city/agency’s commitment to participating in funding LARIAC6, complete and return the attached “Participant Agreement,” authorizing the County to invoice your city/agency for the initial payment. Please return either the signed “Letter of Intent” or “Participant Agreement” to: Attention: Steven Steinberg County of Los Angeles Internal Services Department Mailstop #3 9150 Imperial Highway Downey, CA 90242 If you have any questions, please contact one of us below: LARIAC Project Director LARIAC Project Manager LARIAC Outreach Coordinator Steven Steinberg Christine Lam Nick Franchino (562) 392-7126 (562) 940-3844 (213) 893-0881 SSteinberg@isd.lacounty.gov CLam2@isd.lacounty.gov NFranchino@planning.lacounty.gov Sincerely, Steven J. Steinberg, Ph.D., GISP Geographic Information Officer (GIO) County of Los Angeles 307 LARIAC6 January 21, 2020 Page 6 CC: Mr. Steve Burrell Attachments (3) 308 LARIAC6 January 21, 2020 Page 7 ATTACHMENT I LARIAC PARTICIPANTS LARIAC1 LARIAC2 LARIAC3 LARIAC4 LARIAC5 Cities City of Agoura Hills X X X City of Arcadia X X City of Azusa X X X X City of Bellflower X City of Beverly Hills X X X X X City of Burbank X X X X X City of Carson X X X X X City of Cerritos X X X City of Claremont X X X X City of Covina X X X City of Culver City X X X X X City of Diamond Bar X X City of Downey X X X X City of Duarte X City of El Monte X City of El Segundo X X X X X City of Gardena X X City of Glendale X X X X X City of Hermosa Beach X X X X X City of Industry X X X X X City of Inglewood X X X X X City of Irwindale X X City of La Canada Flintridge X X X X X City of La Habra Heights X X City of Lakewood X X X X X City of Lancaster X City of Long Beach X X X City of Los Angeles X X X X X City of Malibu X X City of Manhattan Beach X X X X X City of Monrovia X 309 LARIAC6 January 21, 2020 Page 8 City of Monterey Park X X X City of Norwalk X City of Palmdale X City of Palos Verdes Estates X City of Pasadena X X X X X City of Rancho Palos Verdes X X City of Redondo Beach X X X X City of San Dimas X X X City of San Fernando X City of Santa Clarita X X X X X City of Santa Fe Springs X X X City of Santa Monica X X X X X City of Signal Hill X X City of South El Monte X X City of South Pasadena X City of Temple City X City of Torrance X X X X X City of West Covina X City of West Hollywood X X City of Westlake Village X X City of Whittier X X X X X County Departments Agricultural Commission/Weights and Measures X X X X X Animal Care & Control X X X X Arts Commission X Assessor X X X X X Auditor Controller X Beaches & Harbors X X X X X Board of Supervisors Executive Office X Chief Executive Office/Office of Emergency Management X X X X X Child Support Services X Children & Family Services X X X X Consumer Affairs X Coroner X Fire X X X X Health Services X X X X X Internal Services Department X X X X X 310 LARIAC6 January 21, 2020 Page 9 Library X X X X Mental Health X X X X Parks & Recreation X X X X X Probation X X X X Public Health X X X X X Public Social Services X X X X Public Works X X X X X Regional Planning X X X X X Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk X X X X X Sheriff X X X X Treasurer and Tax Collector X Workforce, Development, Aging, and Community Services X X X X Local, State, and Federal Agencies Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority X Amigos de Los Rios X California Department of Transportation X X Catalina Island Conservancy X Los Angeles Air Force Base X X Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) X X Los Angeles County Sanitation District X X X X X Los Angeles Region Gang Information Network (LARGIN) X X Port of Los Angeles X X X X Port of Long Beach X Santa Catalina Island Conservancy X X X X Santa Clarita Valley Water Agency X Southern California Edison (Catalina Island) X US Geological Survey X X X US National Guard X X Water Replenishment District of Southern California X X Educational Institutions Palos Verdes on the NET X California State Polytechnical University, Pomona X X California State University Long Beach X X X X X California State University Los Angeles X X 311 LARIAC6 January 21, 2020 Page 10 Rio Hondo Community College X University of Southern California X X X University of California at Los Angeles X X X X 312 LARIAC6 January 21, 2020 Page 11 ATTACHMENT II SAMPLE LETTER OF INTENT 313 LARIAC6 January 21, 2020 Page 12 <Current Date> Steven Steinberg County of Los Angeles Internal Services Department Mailstop #3 9150 Imperial Highway Downey, CA 90242 Dear Dr. Steinberg: It is our intent to participate in the 20 20 Los Angeles Region Imagery Acquisition Consortium (LARIAC6). LARIAC6 will acquire 4-inch color orthogonal in urban areas (9-inch in National Forests), 4-inch oblique aerial photography, building representations (outlines), and updated imagery 1-2 times per year. We understand the cost will be $16,660. Recognizing that our final commitment is contingent upon approval by our organization. It is understood this approval must be obtained prior to confirming our participation in this project. If you have questions, please contact <Name and Title of Primary Contact> at <Telephone, Fax and E-mail Address>. Sincerely, _________________________ __________________________ Signature Print Name ___________________________ ____________________________ Title Date 314 Page | 1 ATTACHMENT III PARTICIPANT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES AND PARTICIPATING ENTITIES FOR THE LOS ANGELES REGION – IMAGERY ACQUISITION CONSORTIUM 6 ("LARIAC6") PROJECT 315 Page | 2 PARTICIPANT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES AND PARTICIPATING ENTITIES FOR THE LOS ANGELES REGION – IMAGERY ACQUISITION CONSORTIUM 6 ("LARIAC6") PROJECT This Participant Agreement (Agreement) is made and entered into by and between the County of Los Angeles (County), a political subdivision of the State of California, and City of Rolling Hills, a California city, special district, agency, or educational institution. Each individual city, district, educational institution, or agency is referred to herein individually as a “Participating Entity” and collectively as the “Participating Entities”. The County and the Participating Entities are hereinafter referred to collectively as the “Parties” and each individually as a "Party". A. WHEREAS, County has planned to acquire new digital orthogonal and oblique aerial imagery in the winter of 2020 Project; B. WHEREAS, County has become aware that various Participating Entities have similar projects currently underway or plans to undertake similar projects in the near future; C. WHEREAS, in order to avoid the duplication of efforts and costs by th e Parties, the Parties desire to pool their resources to collectively undertake the Project; and D. WHEREAS, the Parties intend to participate in the Project upon the terms and conditions set forth herein below. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein set forth and the mutual benefits to be derived therefrom, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Purpose The purpose of this Agreement is to provide a vehicle for the collective participation in the Project by the Parties. The Project shall focus on the acquisition of certain aerial imagery digital data which may include, but are not limited to, products listed in Attachment A ("Digital Data"). It is the intent of the Parties that Digital Data shall be acquired under this Agreement for areas within the County of Los Angeles covered by the jurisdictions of the Parties. 316 Page | 3 2. Responsibilities of the County A. Identify and provide specifications for Digital Data (or their derivatives) to the contractors hired to complete the Project. B. Develop all necessary procurement documents for necessary services to be provided by one or more qualified contractors in connection with the acquisition and administration of the Digital Data. C. Select the most qualified contractor or contractors to provide the necessary services in connection with the acquisition and administration of the Digital Data and thereafter, manage the entire acquisition and administration of the Project. D. With the assistance of one or more selected contractors, provide Quality Control (QC) for all Digital Data delivered under this Agreement. E. Arrange for the delivery of the Digital Data (or portions thereof) to the Participating Entity upon Project completion. F. Provide monthly reports to the Participating Entities on the statu s of the Project. 3. The Participating Entity Has the Right to A. Participate in identifying and providing technical specifications for the Digital Data (or their derivatives). B. Provide currently available geodetic points (with necessary standards and accuracy) for County's QC process. D. Acquire additional digital aerial products from the contractors through this Agreement, provided that a Statement of W ork is provided. County assumes no liability for the completion of these products. 4. Mutual Responsibilities; Maximum Contribution The Parties shall be mutually responsible for the following: A. Financing the acquisition and administration of the Digital Data including, but not limited to, costs related to QC and the subsequent distribution ther eof. The total cost of such acquisition and administration (Total Cost) shall be allocated among the Parties and the Participating Entities. The portion of the Total Cost allocated to a Party hereunder shall be hereinafter referred to as the Party’s "Maximum Contribution." Each Participating Entity will transfer its Maximum Contribution to a LARIAC account which has been established by the County for this Project (LARIAC Account) and as further described in Paragraph 5 of this Agreement. 317 Page | 4 The Maximum Contribution of the Participating Entity shall be $16,660. B. In the event the Project is terminated for any reason before the execution of any contract with a contractor for the provision of goods and/or services in connection with the Project, each Participating Entity shall be refunded its Maximum Contribution (or such portion of the Maximum Contribution as shall have been paid to the County by such Participating Entity) in its entirety. 5. Payment of Maximum Contribution; Administration of LARIAC Account A. A Participating Entity shall have the following options in paying its Maximum Contribution to the County hereunder: i. The Participating Entity may elect to pay its Maximum Contribution to County in its entirety upon execution of this Agreement. ii. The Participating Entity may elect to pay its Maximum Contribution to County as follows: (a) fifty percent (50%) of the Maximum Contribution upon its execution of this Agreement; and (b) fifty percent (50%) upon delivery of the Digital Data to the Participating Entity. B. The LARIAC Account established by the County in connection with the Project, shall be subject to the following: i. All funds held in the LARIAC Account shall be used solely for the payment of contractors selected by County to provide goods and services in connection with the Project. ii. Any funds held in the LARIAC Account not expended upon the completion of the Project or the termination of this Agreement shall be held, administered, and returned to Parties based on their prorated contribution to the total costs of the Project. 6. General Terms and Conditions A. This Agreement shall take effect upon execution and shall remain in effect through final delivery of all Digital Data and through the duration of the license- use term. B. The term of this Agreement may be extended by an Amendment to this Agreement. C. It is the intention of the Parties that the Participating Entity shall receive, with the delivery of the Digital Data, an unlimited irrevocable perpetual, royalty- free license. The license may be used to, modify, edit, reuse, reproduce, translate, create derivatives, compile, other works based upon the Digital Data, 318 Page | 5 and combine the data with other contents selected by the Participating Entity in its own operation, with an unlimited number of seats; including, but not limited to Internet and intranet applications, copying, and printing. D. The Participating Entity shall have the right to transfer, sublicense, and distribute any form of media either now kn own or hereinafter desired the Digital Data to its subcontractors or consultants on projects which are outsourced from its own operations. In this connection, the Participating Entity shall require each subcontractor or consultant to whom the Digital Data is transferred to execute a written acknowledgement and agreement to abide by such Participating Entity’s license to use the Digital Data. Such acknowledgement and agreement is provided in Attachment B (Los Angeles Regional Imagery Acquisition Consortium (LAR-IAC) 6 Authorized User Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Agreement). E. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, a Participating Entity shall not have the right to sell, resell, or otherwise transfer its license to use the Digital Data to any other person or entity. F. This Agreement may be amended or modified by County only after collaboration and consultation with the Participating Entities. G. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to give any person or entity, other than the Parties hereto, any legal or equitable right, remedy, or claim under or in respect to this Agreement or any provision herein contained. This Agreement and the provisions hereof are intended to be and are for the sole and exclusive benefit of the Parties. H. No Party may terminate its participation under this Agreement after the execution of contract(s) for the acquisition of the Digital Data without the prior written consent of County. I. Any other California city, special district, agency, or educational institution may become a Participating Entity under this Agreement if: (i) Such entity executes this Agreement, and (ii) Such entity makes its Maximum Contribution to County as provided for under this Agreement. Any such contribution shall be deposited into the LARIAC Account and administered in accordance with sub- paragraph 5.B of this Agreement. J. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and the signed counterparts shall constitute a single instrument. The signatories to this Agreement represent that they have the authority to bind their respective party to this Agreement. 319 Page | 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Participant Agreement for the Los Angeles Region – Imagery Acquisition Consortium 6 Program on the date indicated below. PARTICIPANT ENTITY COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES City of Rolling Hills INTERNAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT By: __________________________________ By: ______________________________ Date: _________________________________ Date: _____________________________ 320 Page | 7 ATTACHMENT A DIGITAL DATA All data will be acquired in 2020 unless otherwise noted. Orthogonal Imagery  4-band orthogonal imagery (including color infrared) at 4-inch resolution in the urban areas, and 9-inch in the National Forest (Map 1).  Multiple formats (TIFF, JPEG2000, and compressed ECW).  3-band orthogonal imagery acquired 1-2 times a year (3-inch resolution) for internal use – provided as an image service. Oblique Imagery  3-band color oblique imagery at 4-inch resolution (Map 2).  Online hosted access for desktop and mobile devices. Building Outlines  Building outlines updated for all buildings over 300 square feet. 321 Page | 8 ATTACHMENT B LOS ANGELES REGIONAL IMAGERY ACQUISITION CONSORTIUM (LAR-IAC) 4, LAR-IAC5, LAR-IAC6 AUTHORIZED USER CONFIDENTIALITY AND NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT (NDA) 1. Pictometry International Corp., a Delaware company with offices at 25 Methodist Hill Drive, Rochester, NY 14623 (“Pictometry”), and the County of Los Angeles (“County”) have entered into that certain agreement dated December 3, 2013 as amended from time to time (“Agreement”) for delivery of licensed digital mapping data and software (“Licensed Products”) to the County. Under the Agreement, certain governmental entities (“Authorized Entities”), including County Departments and non-County Authorized Participants, which participate in the LAR-IAC may be granted copies of or otherwise provided access to the Licensed Products through a Participant Ag reement. 2. Pursuant to Paragraph 11.2 (Authorized Users) of the Agreement, Licensed Products may only be accessed or otherwise used by an Authorized User, which includes any contractor or consultant of an Authorized Entity using the Licensed Products either at the facilities of such Authorized Entity or for any Project (as defined below) of such Authorized Entity. 3. The undersigned is an Authorized User of an Authorized Entity under the Agreement and desires to use the Licensed Products solely for internal, noncommercial use and for purposes no greater than reasonably needed to achieve the objectives of an actual project undertaken in connection with the relationship with the Authorized Entity (“Project”). 4. The undersigned Authorized User understands and agrees that the Licensed Products contain proprietary, trade secret and/or confidential information (“Confidential Information”) of Pictometry. Therefore, by signing this Authorized User Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Agreement (“NDA”), the Authorized User agrees to use the Licensed Products solely for the Project, which is a nonexclusive, nontransferable and non -assignable right, from the effective date of this NDA until the expiration or termination of the Project for which the undersigned A uthorized User was engaged by the particular Authorized Entity. 5. Pictometry and the County acknowledge that the Agreement and certain information and documentation (collectively, "Records") may be subject to public record requests (e.g., California Public Record Act Request or Freedom of Information Act Request) or other compelled legal disclosure requests (e.g., a subpoena or warrant) (collectively, "Compelled Disclosure Requests"). Should the Authorized Entity reasonably believe that Records, in whole or in part, are subject to production via a valid, properly submitted Compelled Disclosure Request, the Authorized Entity will promptly notify County and Pictometry of such request providing five (5) days advance notice prior to producing any of the requested Records. Pictometry explicitly reserves the right to object to any such production and to pursue any and all remedies it has in both law and in equity to prevent the release of such Records. The Authorized User and the Authorized Entity, at Pictometry’s expense, shall reasonably cooperate with Pictometry in connection with the foregoing. 6. The undersigned Authorized User agrees to protect and maintain any Confidential Information the Authorized User is given access to under this NDA using at least the same protections and to the same extent the Authorized Entity uses to protect and maintain its own confidential information of a similar nature. 7. To the extent any Confidential Information that is not in the public domain is revealed through the operation or other use of the Licensed Products, the Authorized User agrees that it will not make use of, disseminate or in any way disclose such Confidential Information without the County’s prior written consent, which County may first need to obtain from Pictometry. 322 Page | 9 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned Authorized User, by his/her authorized signature, agrees to all terms and conditions of this NDA as of the date set forth below. AUTHORIZED USER: Signature: Address: Name: Organization: City/Zip: Date: Phone: AUTHORIZED BY: Signature: Name: Title: Date: Authorized Entity: County’s Project Director: Note: Submit completed form and a copy of the contract between the Authorized Entity and the Authorized User that details the “Project” to Dr. Steven Steinberg, LARIAC Project Director, at SSteinberg@isd.lacounty.gov and Cc’ Christine Lam, LARIAC Project Manager, at CLam2@isd.lacounty.gov for review and approval. 323 Page | 10 Map 1: Areas for Orthogonal Imagery Products 324 Page | 11 Map 2: Areas for Oblique Imagery Products 325 Agenda Item No.: 8.D Mtg. Date: 05/26/2020 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:TERRY SHEA, FINANCE DIRECTOR THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:RECOMMENDATIONS FROM FINANCE/BUDGET/AUDIT COMMITTEE ON PROPOSED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2020/2021. DATE:May 26, 2020 BACKGROUND: On May 18, 2020, the City Council Finance/Budget/Audit Committee reviewed the completed and in progress budget items programmed for Fiscal Year 2019/20 and reviewed the proposed Fiscal Year 2020/21 Budget. The Proposed Fiscal Year 2020/21 Budget projected a General Fund deficit after transfers of $478,845. Staff went over the Proposed Budget in detail for each of the General Fund Departments and all of the City's other Funds. With the exception of the Utility Fund there were no major changes in the other Funds. For the Utility Fund Budget there were two projects. (1) Under grounding the Utility Poles on Crest Road for $1,100,000, of which $880,000 was to be reimbursed by a grant and the City's match of $220,000 using Rule 20A funds. (2) Sewer Design of $85,000 and Sewer Construction of $315,000 for the Sewer Mainline Extension. DISCUSSION: The Committee recommended the following changes to the Fiscal Year 2020/21 Budget. In the Utility Fund remove the Crest Road Utility Pole Under-grounding Project and when the grant is approved bring the project back to the City Council. In the Utility Fund remove the $315,000 in construction costs for the Sewer Main Line Extension Project for Fiscal Year 2020/21, as the project would probably not be ready for construction during Fiscal Year 2020/21. FISCAL IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council receive a report from the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee and 326 approve the Committee's recommendations on the proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2020/2021. ATTACHMENTS: Finance Budget Audit Comittee Notes 05-18-20_v2.docx RHFY2019-2020Accomplishments_v2.pptx 327 1 Finance / Budget / Audit Committee May 18, 2020 6:00 PM Meeting Notes Participants Jeff Pieper, Mayor James Black, Councilmember Elaine Jeng P.E., City Manager Terry Shea, Finance Director Receive and File a Review of Completed and in Progress Budget Items Programmed in Fiscal Year 2020-21 The City Manager discussed the staffing levels between March 2019 and May 2020 and that there is currently one vacancy: Senior Management Analyst. The City Manager discussed the Council’s FY2019/2020 priorities completed or near completion in this Fiscal Year except for the Tennis Court Improvements: City Hall ADA Design Modernizing the IT structure Sewer Feasibility Study Phase II Records Management Employee Handbook The City Manager also highlighted other accomplishments this fiscal year as follows: Two rounds of Fire Fuel Abatement in the Preserve Utility Underground Assessment District Pursuit of a State Grant for Housing Element, and in-house revisions to the 5th Cycle Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) Block Captain Program Cal OES Grant Investigating alternative MS4 compliance methods Investigate drainage issues within the City Improving communications, new City website and participating in the South Bay Alert System Review Proposed Fiscal Year 2020/21 Budget and Provide Recommendations Staff went over the Staff Report as follows: The General Fund proposed revenues are $2,060,400 and proposed expenditures are $2,385,718 resulting in a deficit of $325,318, and after transfers out to the other Funds a proposed deficit of $478,845.328 Page 2 of 3 For Property Taxes we are projecting a 4% increase over the prior year budget in the amount of $45,800. For Building Permit and Other Fees we are projecting 51.76% decrease under the prior year budget in the amount of $301,750. The City will be subsidizing the Refuse Rate, the amount per residence is $193.64, for a total amount of $132,643. The proposed expenditures for the General Fund before transfers out are $32,118 higher than previous year’s adjusted budget. The main highlights or differences for each of the General Funds Departments as listed on the Staff Report were discussed. Councilmember Black asked about the reason for the Housing Element funds proposed in the Fiscal Year 2019/20 Budget if staff was taking on the edits in-house. Staff responded the in-house edits were to get the State approve an approach to compliance and that technical assistance is still needed. Budget was set aside of consulting services this year but that those funds were not spent. The main highlights or differences for each of the Other Funds as listed on the Staff Report were discussed. Councilmember Black asked about the Fiscal Year 2019/20 Striping and if it was completed. He indicated that on Lower Black water Canyon there was no center line. The City Manager indicated she would look into it and get back to him. Councilmember Black asked Staff to keep track of all funds spent on the Sewer Mainline Extension Project and make it available. The City Manager indicated the City would keep track and assign a project number to it and report the amounts to the City Council on quarterly basis. Mayor Pieper asked about the Crest Road Utility Pole Undergrounding Project costs of $1,100,000 and proposed grant amount of $880,000. The City Manager indicated the total cost of the project is the $1,100,000, the Grant is for 80% which is the $880,000. The City’s match is 20% and we will be using our Rule 20A funds. The City has to spend their own money first and request reimbursement from the Grantor and that is the reason it is shown that way on the budget. Mayor Pieper asked if the City could use the Proposition A and Proposition C money instead of selling and gifting. The City Manager indicated the Proposition A money is transit related and the Proposition C money is for major arterial streets and the City cannot use either one. Staff went over the Preliminary Proposed Budget Highlights Schedule in detail. Councilmember Black asked about the Salary amounts in the Administration Department and why it did not go down if we are short the one position. The City Manager explained the plan is to fill the position beginning in July 2020 and it is a needed position as the Staff are working long days. Mayor Pieper asked about the election costs and if it all goes to a mail in ballot how that will affect our costs. 329 3 Councilmember Black asked how much we are spending on Storm Water Management no matter what the source of funds is. The City Manager indicated that for Fiscal Year 2019/20 the amount is $185,000 and for Fiscal Year 2020/21 the amount is $155,000. Councilmember Black asked about the Housing Element costs and if those were going to be pushed off to later fiscal years. The City Manager indicated the amount that was budgeted was for the 5th Cycle and it will be completed in Fiscal Year 2020/21 and the City is in the process of applying for a State Grant to cover the costs. Councilmember Black asked why the current year costs for Wild Life Management were lower than budgeted. The City Manager explained that County Supervisor Hahn’s office is subsidizing these costs. Mayor Pieper asked why the City’s utility costs were so high. The City Manager explained it included the Community Association’s as a part of the lease agreement. Mayor Pieper asked if the City Staff have audited the number of parcels for the Refuse Billing. City Staff indicated for Fiscal Year 2019/20 an audit and a reconciliation was done and going forward we will be billed for the same number of parcels that we are assessing. Mayor Pieper asked about the amounts we receive when we exchange the Prop A money and if we normally gift the Prop C money to the same entity as we exchange the Prop A. Staff indicated we usually exchange the Prop A with Palos Verdes Transit at 75 cents on the dollar and gift the Prop C to Rolling Hills Estates. Mayor Pieper asked if we gift the Prop C money to the same entity we exchange the Prop A with we might be able to get a better rate. Staff indicated they would look into it. Councilmember Black asked if the City Council knew the City was planning to spend $400,000 on the Sewer Mainline Extension Project. Staff indicated yes, as the amounts were listed on the capital projects budget that was presented to the City Council. The Committee Members indicated they would like to remove the $315,000 for the construction portion of the Sewer Mainline Extension Project from Fiscal Year 2020/21 as it would most likely be pushed to Fiscal Year 2021/22. The City Manager agreed. The Committee Members indicated they would like the Crest Road Utility Undergrounding Project be removed from this budget as the City has not received the final word on the whether the grant has been approved. The City Manager indicated the grant award notice should be coming within a month or so, and when we receive it we will come back to the Council to approve the budget amounts for the project. Notes prepared by: Terry Shea 330 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS REVIEW OF FY 19/20 BUDGET ITEMS BUDGET COMMITTEE May 18, 2020 331 STAFFING LEVEL FY 2018-2019 •March 2019 – June 2019 – 3 full time staff •City Clerk resignation •Senior Planner resignation FY 2019-2020 •July 2019 – Oct 2019 – 4 full time staff •New City Clerk •Oct 2019 – Dec 2019 – 5 full time staff •Planning Director retirement •New Planning Director •New Fire Fuel Abatement Manager/Code Enforcement Officer •Jan 2020 – Feb 2020 – 6 full time staff •Senior Management Analyst employed for 1 months and resigned •Mar 2020 – April 2020 – 5 full time staff •May 2020 – June 2020 – 4 full time staff •Administrative Clerk on medical leave 332 VACANCIES •Administration •Vacancy: Senior Management Analyst •Planning Department •Fire Fuel Abatement Manager/Code Enforcement Officer •Part-time Administrative Clerk •City Clerk Department •Administrative Clerk 333 COMPLETED BUDGET PRIORITIES FY 2019-2020 •CONSTRUCTION OF TENNIS COURTS ADA IMPROVEMENTS •Budget $300,000, ON HOLD •DESIGN OF ADA IMPROVEMENTS AT CITY HALL PER CITY’S TRANSITION PLAN •Budget $30,000, Actual $37,000 •Modernization of the City’s Information Technology Infrastructure to address reliability issues •Budget $37,000, Actual $37,000 •Completion of Phase II of the Sewer Feasibility Study (mainline along Portuguese Bend Road) •Budget $49,000, Actual $30,000 •Update of Employee Handbook •Budget $5,000, Actual less than $1,000 •Strategic Planning •$0, Actual $0 •Implementation of records management •Budget $45,0oo, Actual less than $2,000 334 OTHER FY 2019-2020 ACCOMPLISHMENTS •FIRE FUEL ABATEMENT IN THE PALOS VERDES LAND CONSERVANCY •Two rounds of work plus annual spring mow and kill •UTILITY UNDERGROUND ASSESSMENT DISTRICT •Potential final project vote in June 2020. •HOUSING ELEMENT •Grant pursuit, SB2 funding of $160,000 •In-house edits of Housing Element for 5th Cycle •BLOCK CAPTAIN PROGRAM •In-house produced CWPP •Deployed senior assistance program during pandemic 335 OTHER FY 2019-2020 ACCOMPLISHMENTS (CONT.) •CAL OES GRANTS •Project Management for all grant projects including supplying info to grantor on continuous basis •INVESTIGATION TO ALTERNATIVE COMPLIANCE METHODS FOR MS4 PERMIT •Capital improvement projects to dam City discharge points •Additional review of potential monitoring stations just capturing City flow •DRAINAGE ISSUES WITHIN THE CITY •Investigate resident driven complaints •Coordinate with LA County Flood Control to take over drainage channels •IMPROVEMENTS TO COMMUNICATION METHODS WITH RESIDENTS •New website •Southbay Alert 336 Agenda Item No.: 8.E Mtg. Date: 05/26/2020 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:TERRY SHEA, FINANCE DIRECTOR THRU:ELAINE JENG P.E., CITY MANAGER SUBJECT:BUDGET WORKSHOP. DATE:May 26, 2020 BACKGROUND: Annually, staff holds a budget workshop with the City Council to review proposed budget for the next fiscal year. DISCUSSION: The FY 2020/21 proposed budget projects $2,060,400 in revenues in relation to $2,385,718 in expenditures resulting in a deficit of ($325,318) before transfers and a deficit of ($478,845) after transfers. FY 2020/21 revenues are based on the following assumptions. FY 2020/21 property taxes are projected to be $45,800 or 4.0% higher and building activity will be $301,750 or 51.76% lower than FY 2019/20. The City will also be providing its residents a reprieve from the annual increase it imposes each July 1st for its Refuse Collection. This will equate to a $193.64 savings for each resident in its annual rate and cost the City $132,643 from its Refuse Collection Fund. The City will include a transfer to the Refuse Fund for the General Fund to offset this absorbed increase. FY 2019/20 proposed expenditures before transfers are $32,118 or 1.04% higher than the FY 2019/20 adjusted budget. The highlights of each Department are listed below: The differences in the City Administration Department is $30,000 for the cost of the upcoming election, and increased PERS unfunded liability costs of $9,300. For the Finance Department there is a projected increase of $3,433. For Planning and Development the main differences are a decrease of $61,000 for Storm Water Management, a decrease of $45,000 for LA County Building Inspection as there is a projected decrease in related revenues. There is an increase of $91,400 in Special Project Study and Consultants for the required updates to the Housing Element. For Law Enforcement there is a projected increase of 5%, but an overall decrease of $5K as the additional costs will be offset by the COPS Fund.337 For the Non-Department Fund there is a decrease in proposed expenditures of $7,300. For the City Properties Department there is a decrease in proposed expenditures of $12,000, for Repairs and Maintenance. OTHER FUNDS The other City Funds are similar to prior years. Of note: 1. Community Facilities Fund - annually, the City asks Caballeros, the Tennis Club and the Women’s Club if it has programs for which it would like to request City funding. Each club gave a formal request and staff budgeted in the Community Facilities Fund the following: $5,000 (Caballeros), and $5,000 (Women’s Club) for programs and $5,000 for annual Tennis Maintenance Expense. The General Fund will transfer $11,000 to the Community Facilities Fund in FY 2020/21. 2. The Refuse Fund includes a transfer to the General Fund of ($24,000). This transfer includes ($12,000) for the administration of refuse services and ($12,000) to cover staff time and costs associated with administering the storm water management program. Also, the City will be providing its residents a reprieve from the annual increase it imposes each July 1st for its Refuse Collection. This will equate to a $193.64 savings for each resident in its annual rate and cost the City $132,643. Also, the City changed FY 2020/21 Cash Reserve Policy from $66,200 to the annual General Fund subsidy less the cash available at June 30, 2020, the projected transfer is $57,528. 3. The Traffic Safety Fund includes $20,000 for other work outside of the annual striping. The General Fund will be budgeting a transfer of $20,000 to the Traffic Safety Fund in FY 2020/21. 4. The COPS Fund revenues are projected to increase by $15,000, to $155,000. Fiscal Year 2020/21 proposed expenditures will increase to $164,898 to cover the 2020/21 LA County Sheriff ’s Department increase of 5.0% and will cover the 275 supplemental hours for Traffic Enforcement estimated to be $25,800 in FY 2020/21. 5. The Utility Fund includes $85,000 for the design of the 8” Sewer Main along Rolling Hills Road (Mainline). The General Fund will not transfer monies to the Utility Fund. 6. The Capital Projects Fund will budget an additional $50,000 for Tennis Court Improvements, $7,000 for City Hall ADA Design and $32,000 for Acacia Removal. The General Fund will transfer $89,000 to the Capital Projects Fund. 7. The Transit Funds for Proposition A will have an exchange of $75,000 and for Proposition C a gifting of $60,000. For Measure M and Measure R there are no proposed expenditures or gifting as the City is accumulating these funds for the future parking lot project. 8. For the Measure W Fund the City is projecting income of $110,000 and we are proposing an expenditure for Storm Water Management of $38,750. 9. For the new Measure A Fund the City is projecting income of $26,100 with no proposed expenditures for Fiscal Year 2020/21. FISCAL IMPACT: The Fiscal Impact will be determined when the Fiscal Year 2020/21 Budget has been prepared after the City Council’s review of these projections. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council review the draft proposed Fiscal Year 2020/21 Budget for each 338 Staff recommends that the City Council review the draft proposed Fiscal Year 2020/21 Budget for each Fund and provide staff with comments and direction. With the Council’s input, the budget documents will be finalized for presentation to the City Council at its Council meeting on June 8, 2020 for adoption. ATTACHMENTS: FY 20-21 V1 Budget Highlights 5-26-2020 Budget Workshop.pdf Copy of FY 20-21 Graph 339 REVENUESFY 19/20 FY 19/20 FY 19/20ADJUSTED PROJECTED PROPOSEDACCOUNT BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET COMMENTPROPERTY TAXES 1,144,500$     1,112,541$     1,190,300$     4.00% INCREASE $45,800 From FY 19/20 BudgetMOTOR VEHICLE IN LIEU 223,500          226,066          232,500          4.00% INCREASE $9,000 From FY 19/20 BudgetREAL ESTATES TRANSFER TAX41,800            39,437            33,500            20% Decrease ($8,300) From FY 19/20 BudgetBUILDING & OTHER PERMITS583,000          236,712          281,250          51.76% Decrease ($301,750) From FY 19/20 BudgetVARIANCE, PLANNING & ZONING40,000            9,831              20,000            50% Decrease ($20,000) From 19/20 BudgetPROPOSITION A EXCHANGE‐                  ‐                  56,250            NO BUDGET FOR 19/20CITY HALL LEASE RHCA84,000            83,976            68,000            Decrease by $16K, STRIPING OFFSETINTEREST INCOME 100,000          134,090          100,000          FLAT 19/20MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE17,500            4,132              37,800            FY 20/21 $30,300 Retiree HealthTOTAL REVENUES 2,278,300$     1,887,597$     2,060,400$    NOTE: TOTAL FY 20/21 PROPOSED GENERAL FUND BUDGET OF $2,2060,400 IS ($274,150) LOWER(LESS FY 20/21 PROP A 56K)THAN THE FY 19/20 ADJUSTED BUDGET OF $2,2278,300.EXPENDITURESCITY ADMINISTRATIONFY 19/20 FY 19/20 FY 19/20ADJUSTED PROJECTED PROPOSEDACCOUNT BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET COMMENTSALARIES 409,300$        336,866$        424,600$        FY 20/21 SALARIES ARE 3.74% HIGHER THAN FY 19/20SALARIES PART TIME 10,500            ‐                  10,500            FY 20/21 PART TIME EMPLOYEE ‐ NO BENEFITSTOTAL SALARIES 419,800$        336,866$        435,100$       ANNUAL UNFUNDED LIABILITY  63,100            49,363            72,400            $9K ALLOCATION FY 20/21 PERS UNFUNDED LIABILITYGROUP INSURANCE 40,800            35,451            47,600            9K HIGHER THN FY 19/20  FY 20‐21 MEDICAL CAP $1,642OFFICE SUPPLIES & EXPENSE60,000            49,569            60,000            FLAT 20/21 BUDGETEQUIPMENT LEASING COSTS4,100              5,181              4,100              FLAT 20/21 BUDGETCITY COUNCIL EXPENSE10,000            6,557              10,000            FLAT 20/21 BUDGETOTHER GENERAL ADMIN. EXPENSE10,000            5,542              10,000            FLAT 20/21 BUDGETELECTION EXPENSE0 300                  30,000 FY 20/21 ELECTION EXPENSECITY ATTORNEY90,000 83,211            90,000 FLAT 20/21 BUDGETCONSULTING FEES 77,600 70,897              74,200$15K doc scanning, DACTRACK $5K, IT $37K, HR Assistance $5K, Southbay Fiber $12KCAPITAL OUTLAY ‐ EUIPMENT‐                  ‐                  10,000            WIRING $5K, PHONES $5KTOTAL CITY ADMINISTRATION 924,000$        762,073$        981,800$        (B)$67,800 ^7.42% HIGHER THAN FY 19/20  (B)NOTE: TOTAL FY 20/21 PROPOSED BUDGET OF $981,800 ‐ INCLUDES $30K CITY ELECTION, $49K IT RELATED SERVICES, $20K DOCUMENT MANAGEMENCOMPARED TO FY 19/20 ADJUSTED BUDGET OF 914,000 IS AN INCREASE OF 68K ‐ 7.42% HIGHER.GENERAL FUNDCITY OF ROLLING HILLSPRELIMINARY PROPOSED BUDGET   05/26/20 ‐ COUNCIL WORKSHOPFY 20/21 BUDGET HIGHLIGHTSFY 20‐21 V1 Budget Highlighits 5‐26‐2020 Budget Workshop.xlsx 15/21/2020      7:37 AM340 FINANCEFY 19/20FY 19/20FY 19/20ADJUSTED PROJECTED PROPOSEDACCOUNT BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET COMMENTCONSULTING FEES101,700$        101,618$        103,683$        $1,700 ^1.91% INCREASE IN RAMS CONTRACTANNUAL AUDIT17,100            16,780 17,100            FLAT 20/21TOTAL FINANCE 119,450$        118,708$        122,883$        (C)^ TO FY 19/20 BUDGET $3K ^2.87%(C) NOTE: TOTAL FY 20/21 PROPOSED BUDGET IS AN INCREASE OF $2K 1.91% INCREASE IN RAMS CONTRACTPLANNING & DEVELOPMENTFY 19/20FY 19/20FY 19/20ADJUSTED PROJECTED PROPOSEDACCOUNT BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET COMMENTSALARIES FULL TIME 193,500$        219,454$        196,700$        FLAT 20/21SALARIES PART TIME 15,750            8,333              15,750            FLAT 20/21TOTAL SALARIES 209,250$        227,787$        212,450$       ANNUAL UNFUNDED LIABILITY  29,800            29,502            33,800            $4K ALLOCATION FY 20/21 PERS UNFUNDED LIABILITYGROUP INSURANCE 19,000              13,434              16,200             BUDGETED $3K LESS THAN FY 19/20  ‐  FY 20/21 MEDICAL CAP$1,642BUILDING INSPECTION LA COUNTY/WILLDAN195,000          97,242            150,000          45K DECREASE REDUCTION IN FY 20/21 BUILDING PERMITSSTORM WATER MANAGEMENT 185,000            113,415            124,000           W OFFSET $32k, $70K MS4 PERMIT, $40K CIMP, $11K SMB, $9500 Trash, $16.5K Harbor, $8K FeeSPECIAL PROJECT STUDY & CONSULTANT105,000          92,520            196,400          91K INCREASE FROM FY 19/20 ‐ 5TH & 6TH HOUSING $110KCAPITAL OUTLAY ‐ EUIPMENT‐                  ‐                  2,000              FY 20‐21 DISASTER EQUIPMENT NO CAPITAL OUTLAYTOTAL PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT828,800$        643,675$        824,400$        (D)^ TO FY 20/21 BUDGET $14.4K LOWER ‐ DECREASE  ^1.72% (D) NOTE: TOTAL FY 20/21 PROPOSED BUDGET OF $52K HIGHER ^7.26% HIGHER COMPARED TO 19/20 ADJUSTED BUDGET OF $718,800LAW ENFORCEMENTFY 19/20FY 19/20FY 19/20ADJUSTED PROJECTED PROPOSEDACCOUNT BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET COMMENTLAW ENFORCEMENT  221,700$        198,637$        232,785$        FY 20/21 GF FLAT $11K OR 5.00% INCREASE FROM FY 19/20  OTHER LAW ENFORCEMENT EXPENSE3,000              2,333              3,000              FLAT 20/21WILD LIFE MANAGEMENTWILD LIFE MGMT & PEST CONTROL ‐ LA COUNTY49,500            10,102            42,000            7K LESS THAN FY 19/20PEAFOWL12,000            5,050              8,000              4K LESS THAN 19/20TOTAL WILD LIFE MANAGEMENT61,500            15,152            50,000            11K LESS THAN 19/20ANIMAL CONTROL ‐ LA COUNTY11,000            5,437              6,000              5K DECREASE LESS THAN 19/20TOTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT297,200$        221,559$        291,785$        (E)5K LESS 1.82% LESS THAN 19/20(E) NOTE: TOTAL FY 20/21 PROPOSED BUDGET OF $291,785 COMPARED TO 19/20 ADJUSTED BUDGET OF $297,200 IS 5K LESS ^1.82% LOWERFY 20‐21 V1 Budget Highlighits 5‐26‐2020 Budget Workshop.xlsx 25/21/2020      7:37 AM341 NON‐DEPARTMENTFY 19/20FY 19/20FY 19/20ADJUSTED PROJECTED PROPOSEDACCOUNT BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET COMMENTSOUTH BAY COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION 4,100$             3,100$             4,100$             FLAT 20/21CONTINGENCY25,000            5,000              25,000            FLAT 20/21INSURANCE & BOND EXPENSE34,900            28,106            27,600            DECREASE $6K EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS29,000            9,770              29,000            FLAT 20/21TOTAL NON‐DEPARTMENT 104,650$        53,538$          97,350$          (F)DECREASE OF $7K ^6.97% COMPARED TO FY 19/20(F) NOTE: TOTAL FY 20/21 PROPOSED BUDGET OF $97,350 IS A DECREASE OF $7K ^6.97% LOWER COMPARED TO 19/20 ADJUSTED BUDGET OF $104,650CITY PROPERTIESFY 19/20FY 19/20FY 19/20ADJUSTED PROJECTED PROPOSEDACCOUNT BUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET COMMENTUTILITIES 34,000$           31,744$           34,000$           FLAT 20/21REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE 32,000$           25,763$           20,000$           FY 20/21 $12K LESS FOR REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE  AREA LANDSCAPING 13,500            11,878            13,500            FLAT 20/21TOTAL CITY PROPERTIES 79,500$          69,385$          67,500$         ^ TO FY 19/20 BUDGET DECREASE $12K ^15.09% LOWER  TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES2,353,600$     1,868,938$     2,385,718$    ^ TO FY 19/20 ADJUSTED BUDGET $32K HIGHER ^1.4%  NET REVENUES BEFORE TRANSFERS (75,300)$          18,659$           (325,318)$       FY 20/21 DEFICIT IS 250K HIGHER THAN FY 19/20 ADJUSTEDBUDGET DEFICIT OF $75K.FUND TRANSFERS (OUT) INTRAFFIC SAFETY FUND(54,500)           (18,606)           (20,000)           INCLUDES $20K WORK OTHER THAN STRIPINGCAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND (340,000)          (103,686)          (89,000)            TRANSFER TO CIP ‐ TENNIS COURTS $50K + $7K CITY HALL ADA DESIGN + $32k FOR ACACIA REMOVALUNDERGROUND UTILITY FUND‐                  ‐                  ‐                  NO TRANSFER FY 20/21COMMUNITY FACILITIES(3,500)             ‐                  (11,000)           TRANSFER OUT FY 19/20 $11,000REFUSE COLLECTION FUND ‐ TRANSFER IN24,000            24,000            24,000            TRANSFER $24,000 FOR ADMINISTRATIONREFUSE COLLECTION FUND ‐ TRANSFER OUT‐                  (57,527)           REFUSE FUND CASH RESERVE REQUIREMENTTOTAL TRANSFERS (374,000)        (98,292)          (153,527)       NET REVENUE (DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS (449,300)$        (79,633)$          (478,845)$       TOTAL FY 20/21 DEFICIT IS $30K HIGHER THAN FY 19/20 BUDGETFY 20‐21 V1 Budget Highlighits 5‐26‐2020 Budget Workshop.xlsx 35/21/2020      7:37 AM342 FY 19/20 FY 19/20 FY 19/20ADJUSTED PROJECTED PROPOSEDBUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET COMMENTCOMMUNITY FACILITIES FUNDEQUESTRIAN FACILITIES MAINTENANCE5,000$             ‐$                 5,000$             CABALLEROSTENNIS MAINTENANCE EXPENSE5,000              5,000              5,000              TENNIS ANNUAL MAINTENANCE EXPENSEWOMENS'S CLUB 5,000              2,350              5,000              WOMEN'S CLUB15,000$           7,350$             15,000$           TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND $11K IN FY 20‐21MUNICIPAL SELF INSURANCE FUND3,000$             ‐$                 3,000$             NO CHANGEREFUSE COLLECTION FUNDSERVICE CHARGES768,900$        762,300$        770,000$        FLAT COMPARED TO FY 19‐20CONSRUCTION & DEMO PERMITS7,000              23,000            7,000              FLAT COMPARED TO FY 19‐20MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE65,000           TOTAL REVENUE 840,900          785,300$        777,000$       REFUSE SERVICE CONTRACT825,089          825,100          905,548          $1,293.64 X 700= $905,548MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSE18,700           825,089          843,800          905,548         OPERATING TRANSFER OUT TO GENERAL FUND24,000            24,000            24,000            TRANSFER $24,000 FOR ADMISISTRATIONTOTAL EXPENDITURES849,089$        867,800$        929,548         (152,548)       OPERATING TRANSFER IN FROM GENERAL FUND57,528            TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND ‐ FY 20/21 SUBSIDYNET REVENUES (DEFICIT) AFTER TRANSFERS (95,021)            CASH RESERVE (66,200)           (66,200)          ‐                 FY 20/21 NO CASH RESERVE ‐ ZERO FUND BALANCEUNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE BEGINNING 95,021$           UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE ENDING38,132$          28,821$          ‐$                TRAFFIC SAFETY FUNDROAD STRIPING ‐ DELINEATORS ‐ PAVING 40,000$            49,590$            20,000$           $20K LESS THAN FY 19‐20, FOR OTHER WORK OUTSIDE OF ANNUAL STRIPINGTRAFFIC ENGINEERING & SURVEY12,000            5,542              ‐                 ROAD SIGNS & MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSE3,182              ‐                  ‐                 TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND18,606            18,606            20,000           TRANSFER FROM CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND36,526            36,526           TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND $20K IN FY 20‐21FUND BALANCE  ‐                  ‐                  ‐                 PROPOSITION APROPOSITION A EXCHANGE‐$                 ‐$                75,000$           FY 20/21 PROP A EXCHANGEPROPOSITION CPROPOSITION C GIFTED‐$                 ‐$                60,000$           FY 20/21 PROP C GIFTEDOTHER FUNDSFY 20‐21 V1 Budget Highlighits 5‐26‐2020 Budget Workshop.xlsx 45/21/2020      7:37 AM343 FY 19/20FY 19/20FY 19/20ADJUSTED PROJECTED PROPOSEDBUDGET ACTUAL BUDGET COMMENTMEASURER RMEASURER R GIFTED‐$                 ‐$                 ‐$                FY 20/21 NO CHANGEMEASURER MMEASURER M GIFTED‐$                 ‐$                 ‐$                FY 20/21 NO CHANGECOPS FUNDCOPS ALLOCATION 140,000$        155,948$        155,000$        15K HIGHER IN FY 20/21COPS PROGRAM EXPENDITURES 160,000            183,434            164,898           COPS ALLOCATION $139K LA COUNTY SHERIFF'S ‐ $25,800 TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENTCLEEP FUNDCLEEP ‐ TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM 2,700$              2,700$              2,700$             FY 20/21 NO CHANGE AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READER MONTHLY MAIN.UTILITY FUNDUNDERGROUND UTILITY PROJECT150,000$        9,444$             150,000$        BUDGET SAME AS LAST YEARSEWER DESIGN ‐ CONSTRUCTION PROJECT22,000            31,108            85,000            FY 20/21 SEWER DESIGN ‐ CONSTRUCTION PROJECT172,000$        40,552$          235,000$       TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND‐                  ‐                  ‐                 NO TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND IN FY 19‐20CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDMISCELLANEOUS REVENUE10,000$           ‐$                 FY 19/20 RHCA PORTION OF TENNIS COURT LIGHTSNON‐BUILDING IMPROVEMENTS ‐ TENNIS COURTS249,274$        7,960$             50,000$           TENNIS COURT IMPROVEMENTS CONSTRUCTION $50KCITY HALL IMPROVEMENTS ‐ ADA DESIGN30,000            25,000            7,000              CITY HALL ADA DESIGNACACIA REMOVAL96,200            96,200            32,000$          375,474          129,160          89,000$          TRANSFER FROM GENERAL FUND340,000          103,686          89,000            FY 20/21 TRANSFER TO CIP ‐ FROM GENERAL FUND TRANSFER TO TRAFFIC SAFETY FUND(36,526)           (36,526)          ‐                 ‐                 MEASURE WGRANT REVEUNE ‐ MEASURE W120,000$        ‐$                 110,000$        FY 20/21 10K LESS THAN FY 19/20STORM WATER MANAGEMENT120,000$        ‐                  38,750            FY 20/21 ELIGIBLE FOR 70% NEW SPENDINGMEASURE AGRANT REVEUNE ‐ MEASURE A‐$                 ‐$                26,100$          NEW PROGRAM ‐ THREE YEARS 2018, 2019, 2020 REV.‐                  ‐                  ‐$                OTHER FUNDS (Continued)FY 20‐21 V1 Budget Highlighits 5‐26‐2020 Budget Workshop.xlsx 55/21/2020      7:37 AM344 $3,221,894 $3,321,129 $3,110,058 $3,340,499 $3,831,115 $4,372,689 $4,600,994 $4,806,155 $5,120,797 $5,795,780 $5,485,139 $5,006,294 $1,502,538 $1,620,797 $1,463,120 $1,740,747 $1,972,182 $2,023,119 $2,019,757 $2,119,324 $2,350,094 $2,352,611 $1,887,597 $2,060,400 $1,437,199 $1,578,562 $1,697,941 $1,502,107 $1,481,983 $1,502,876 $1,540,402 $1,684,550 $2,033,984 $1,858,812 $1,868,938 $2,385,718  $‐ $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 $7,000,0002009‐10 2010‐11 2011‐12 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15 2015‐16 2016‐17 2017‐18 2018‐19 2019‐20 2020‐21City of Rolling Hills ‐General Fund Historical Revenue & Expenditure Trends ‐FY 2020/21 Budget AmountsFund BalanceRevenuesExpendituresLinear (Fund Balance)Fiscal years 2009/10 to 2018/19 are actual amounts, FY 2019/20 projected amounts, FY 2020/21 proposed budget amounts345