2500 Planning - Consideration of a Report Regarding Grading Confirmation Administrative Modification ProcessPLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS
CONSIDERATION .. OF A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE •.PLANNING
COMMISSION REGARDING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE- GRADING
CONFIRMATION PROCESS. •
City Manager Nealis presented the staff report outlining the recommendation of the
Planning Commission supporting staff's proposed amendments to the grading plan
confirmation process prior to plans being submitted to the Planning Commission.
Following discussion, Councilmembers concurred the proposed process will minimize the
likelihood of as -graded conditions beyond the scope of approval. Hearing no further
• •••-�--�- x,11.,1 Few a motion.
Councilmember Pernell moved that the City Council approve the report as presented.
Mayor Pro Tem Lay seconded the motion which carried unanimously.
Mayor Murdock commended the Planning Commission and staff for their efforts in
devising this process.
.t
the r Y U1-02 Budget.
CONSIDERATION OF METHODS TO IMPROVE THE ACCURACY OF GRADING
PLANS SUBMr f1'ED TO THE CITY.
Mayor Pernell noted the arrival of Mayor Pro Tem Murdock.
City Manager Nealis presented the staff report providing background regarding this subject.
He explained how staff reviews preliminary grading plans and explained the County's review
of grading plans when applicant's are seeking their grading permits. He expressed concern
that even though the plans are stamped by a licensed civil engineer, staff has no way of
knowing if they are accurate or not. City Manager Nealis summarized the options that were
provided in the staff report for the City Council to consider. In response to Councilmember
• Heinsheimer, City Manager Nealis stated that staff currently has the discretion to have a
County or independent review of the grading plan if staff feels the case is highly sensitive.
Discussion ensued regarding the balanced cut and fill requirements of the Municipal Code.
Councilmember Lay queried whether there is a method to determine in the field if a plan
actually has a balanced cut and fill. Councilmember Hill commented on the grading process
and the discovery of a soil condition on a property that may change the project cut and fill
ratio.
Discussed ensued on methods that may be used to bring preliminary and final grading plans
more in tune with one another. Councilmembers concurred that it is difficult to know what
the underlying soil conditions are on a particular project. Councilmember Lay stated that he
feels that the Planning Commission should have confidence in the plans that are being
presented to them. Councilmember Heinsheimer suggested that grading plans include an in -
process sequence and proposed depth of excavation exhibited to the Planning Commission
during their review as well as an estimate on how long the grading process will take.
Further discussion ensued regarding the grading process and the 40% maximum disturbance
provision in the Municipal Code. City Attorney Jenkins suggested that a special grading
condition could be added to the Planning Commission Resolution of Approval.
Councilmembers concurred with this suggestion and directed that staff advise the Planning
Commission that they may impose a condition of approval that grading must adhere to the
preliminary grading plan presented during the public hearing. City Manager Nealis explained
that if modifications of this plan are necessary following County review of soils and geology
and other related reports that staff would determine whether a minor or major modification is
required under existing zoning code provisions. He stated that if it is determined to be a
major modification, the plan would be brought back before the Planning Commission for
further review. Councilmembers concurred that this process may have an effect on the
accuracy of grading plans that are submitted to the City.
Minutes
City Council Meeting
10/30/00 -2-
♦i
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
City 0/!2lF..e JlfP,
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityotrh@aol.com
Agenda Item No.: 3-E
Mtg. Date: 10/30/00
HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
CONSIDERATION OF METHODS-TO.IMPROVE THE ACCURACY
OF GRADING PLANS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY.
OCTOBER 30, 2000 -
BACKGROUND
Site Plan Review approval is required for expansion of a structure by more than 25%
and at least 1000 sq. ft. or when the proposed structure or addition will require grading
that exceeds a cut or fill of 3 ft. in height or depth or affects more than 2000 sq. ft. of
surface area. All Site Plan Review applications are required to incorporate balanced cut
and fill grading. At a recent City Council meeting, concerns were expressed regarding
the results of grading on a residential project that differed from the original approved
grading plan.
Currently, staff reviews grading plans submitted in conjunction with Site Plan Review
or other development applications. The plan is presented to the Planning Commission
and discussed in the public hearing process. On sensitive issues, staff may request that
soils and geology review be conducted by the County prior to submittal of the plan to
the Commission in an effort to identify any suspected grading or potential instability
issues.
Uncertainties of subsurface, soil conditions exist. Uncertainties can include large.
subsurface rocks or soil so that compaction standards of the County are unable to be
met to support the approved structure.
•
Several years ago, the City Council amended the Municipal Code to provide the
authority for staff to permit the importation or exportation of up to 500 cu. yds. of soil
in conjunction with an approved grading project under specified conditions. This
Municipal Code Section (attached) addresses the fact that uncertainties in projects may
require importation or exportation of soil. Therefore, from time -to -time, after a grading
job has commenced, the scope of the grading or the quantity of soil may change based
upon these factors.
-1-
Printed on Recycled Paper.
The question has been proposed as what methods or procedures are available to better
evaluate grading plans prior to their submission to the Planning Commission.
Options that the City Council may wish to consider include:
• Establish a procedure where grading plans would be administratively evaluated by
the County to determine expected accuracy of the proposal. This procedure would
identify errors in grading proposals on a broad basis. It is estimated that this would
cost approximately $200 for review of an average plan consisting of a 5,000 square
foot house requiring 2,500 cy. of cut and 2,500 cy. of fill. However, this represents a
new service that will have to be established by the County. Turn around time for
this service could not be firmly established at this time.
• Establish a procedure where the grading plan must be submitted to the County for
grading plan approval prior to submitting the application to the Commission.
This option would ensure the most accurate grading plan because the
information submitted to the County would be based on required soils and
geology reports that are supplied by the applicant in anticipation of grading.
However, it is common that the size, placement or other issues relating to the
proposed structure, or the grading plan itself, can be amended during the public
hearing process. Under those circumstances, a full revised grading plan and
application may have to be prepared by the applicant and resubmitted to the
County following approval by the Commission.
• Establish a procedure where the City would hire an independent engineering firm to
complete administrative evaluation of the grading plan prior to the application
being considered by the Planning Commission.
This option is similar to a procedure that has been implemented on specific cases
where we have requested an independent contract engineer to verify the
accuracy of a grading plan and final pad elevation. It is estimated that this will
cost, at a maximum, $1,000 to review a 5,000 square foot house with a 2,500 cy.
cut and 2,500 cy. fill plan under this option. In cases where we have used this
service before, turn around time has been a few days.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that members of the City Council consider this subject and provide
appropriate direction to staff.
CRI\1:mlk
10/30/00gradplan.sta
-2-
15.04.150 Section 7015.5 added. Section 7015 of the
Building Code, entitled "Excavations," is amended to read
as follows:
7015.5 BALANCED CUT AND FILL RATIO.
1. No export or import of soil shall be permitted
from or to any lot in the City.
172 (Rolling Hills 11/99)
15.04.160
2. No grading plan for which a permit is required
shall be approved unless the amount of soil to be cut
from the site equals the amount of soil to be filled
on the site.
3. The City Manager may grant an exception to the
requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph to
allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed
?500 cubic yards if he or she finds, based upon written.
reports and other information submitted, that all of
the following conditions are present:
(a) construction of a structure on the lot or
parcel has commenced,
(b) that the need to import or export the soil
could not have been foreseen prior to commencement of
construction, and
(c) that either the structure cannot be completed
without the requested import or export of soil or that
an emergency condition exists due to the threat of
land subsidence or other imminent danger.
4. The City Manager may grant an exception to the
requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph to
allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed
500 cubic yards for remedial repair of a hillside or
trail if he or she finds, based upon written reports
and other information submitted, that all of the fol-
lowing conditions are present:
(a) the project does not require a grading permit
(a cut that is less than three feet or a fill that is
,less than three feet or 'covers less than 2,000 square
feet); and
(b) the import or export of soil is no greater
than necessary to avoid a threat of land subsidence or
other imminent danger.
(Ord. 277-U §1(part), 1999).
15.04.160 Section 7016.3 amended. Section 7016.3 of
Section 7016 of the Building Code, entitled "Fill Slope,"
is amended to read:
7016.3 FILL SLOPE. Fill slopes shall not exceed a
steepness of two horizontal to one vertical, or exceed
a vertical height of thirty (30') feet, unless the
owner receives a variance for a steeper or higher
vertical height fill slope from the Planning Commis-
sion of the City of Rolling Hills, pursuant to the
173 (Rolling Hills 11/99)
15.04.170
provisions of Title 17 of the Municipal Code of the
City. In applying for a variance to the provisions of
this paragraph, the owner shall submit soil test data
and engineering calculations and shall provide in
writing any specific safety and/or stability problems
on the property that presently exist or may exist if
the requested variance is granted and the proposed
grading plans are approved.
(Ord. 277-U §1(part), 1999).
15.04.170 Section 7016.9 added. Section 7016 of the
Building Code, entitled "Fills," is amended to add subsec-
tion 7016.9 to read:
7016.9 BALANCED CUT AND FILL RATIO
1. No export or import of soil shall be permitted
from or to any lot in the City.
2. No grading plan for which a permit is required
shall be approved unless the amount of soil to be cut
from the site equals the amount of soil to be filled
on the site.
3. The City Manager may grant an exception to the
requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph to
allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed
500 cubic yards if he or she finds, based upon written
reports and other information submitted, that all of
the following conditions are present:
(a) construction of a structure on the lot or
parcel has commenced,
(b) that the need to import or export the soil
could not have been foreseen prior to commencement of
construction, and
(c) that either the structure cannot be completed
without the requested import or export of soil or that
an emergency condition exists due to the threat of
land subsidence or other imminent danger.
4. The City Manager may grant an exception to the
requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph to
allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed
500 cubic yards for remedial repair of a hillside or
trail if he or she finds, based upon written reports
and other information submitted, that all of the fol-
lowing conditions are present:
174 (Rolling Hills 11/99)
15.04.180--15.08.010 ;{
11 1;1
r1'
(a) the project does not require a grading permit
(a cut that is less than three feet or a fill that is
less than three feet or covers less than 2,000 square
feet) , and
(b) the import or export of soil is no greater
than necessary to avoid a threat of land subsidence or
other imminent danger.
(Ord. 277-U §1(part), 1999).
15.04.180 Violations and penalties. A. It is unlaw-
ful for any person to erect, construct, enlarge, alter,
repair, move, improve, remove, convert, demolish, equip,
use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or per-
form any grading in the City of Rolling Hills, or cause the
same to be done, contrary to or in violation of any of the
provisions of the Building Code.
B. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violat-
ing any of the provisions of the Building Code shall be
deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person shall
be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every
day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of
the provisions of the Building Code is committed, continued
or permitted, and upon conviction of any such violation
such person shall be punishable by a fine of, not more than
one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail
for a period of not more than six months, or by both such
fine and imprisonment. (Ord. 277-U §1(part), 1999).
175 (Rolling Hills 11/99)
t
ft
eity 0/ PP S Jdff,
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 •
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377.1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
Agenda Item No.: 3 -A
Mtg. Date: 10/30/2000
DATE: OCTOBER 30, 2000
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
ATTN: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
FROM: LOLA M. UNGAR, PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: LAND USE APPLICATION PROCEDURES IN CASES INVOLVING PRE-
EXISTING AND/OR UNAUTHORIZED GRADING AND BUILDING
ACTIVI 1'1ES.
BACKGROUND
Currently, pre-existing and/or unauthorized grading and building activities are
reported by concerned residents, the Rolling Hills Community Association, and the
observance of Rolling Hills staff. Usually, staff calls the suspected violator and visits the
site with the County Building Inspector.
City and County staff determines whether the violation requires permits, plans and
possible submittal to the Planning Commission. At the outset, the City gives the
property owner the option of removing or acquiring building permits for minor
infractions. If the violation requires Planning Commission review and approval, the
property owner is required to submit a preliminary plan to allow staff to determine the
extent of the violation(s) and required applications.
When unauthorized grading or building activity is discovered, the City issues a "Stop
Work Order" until the property owner complies with approved plans or until a
Variance, Conditional Use Permit or Site Plan Review is obtained from the Planning
Commission. An administrative fee of $400 is added to the application fee for illegal or
"as built" grading or structures, and an additional fee of $200 is added for each
additional "Stop Work Order" that is issued beyond the original "Stop Work Order" for
illegal or "as built" grading or structures that require Planning Commission review.
If these staff actions do not achieve compliance within reasonable periods of time,
follow-up letters are sent. Usually, compliance is achieved within reasonable time
periods.
®Printed on Recycled Paper
Eventually, the City may prosecute building or grading cut/fill violation(s) as a
misdemeanor under the Municipal Code. This involves the filing of a criminal
complaint against the property owner(s)/builder with the District Attorney. Very few
such complaints have been filed, those that were filed achieved compliance with
negotiation, and no case has gone to court in the last ten years.
A staff report on a related topic that was presented at the City Council Planning
Commission meeting in April, 2000 is attached.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that members of the City Council consider this subject and provide
appropriate direction to staff.
3
City `l2 fF..s J!.•Pl,
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
Agenda Item No.: 3-D
Mtg. Date: 04/05/00
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: METHODS TO DISCOURAGE AS -BUILT PROJECTS.
DATE: APRIL 5, 2000
BACKGROUND
From time -to -time, applications are presented to the Planning Commission that include
requests for as -built grading or projects. As -built structures are defined as those that
are built without the benefit of permit and/or Planning Commission approval.
In January, 1999, the City Council approved a $400 additional administrative fee that is
charged against applications that include as -built grading or structures that require a
public hearing before the Planning Commission. Staff has required this administrative
fee in one case since it was adopted.
It has been suggested that the Planning Commission and City Council discuss methods
to discourage as -built projects. Possible methods to discourage as- built projects could
include:
• Increasing the administrative fee for as -built project applications.
• Refusal to consider as -built projects and require properties to be brought back into
conformance prior to accepting an application to permit new construction.
Staff continually reminds residents of the need to . check with the City prior to
commencing grading or building. This communication is provided through the
Citywide Newsletter and through discussions with professionals in the business at City
Hall. Further, announcements regarding the as -built administrative application fee
were communicated to all architects and engineers generally providing work within the
City.
-1-
®Panted On Recycled Paper.
Additionally, each year, I address the Palos Verdes Board of Realtors and communicate
how important it is for residents or potential property owners to contact City Hall to
discuss the requirements for construction activities in Rolling Hills.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that members of the City Council and Planning Commission discuss
this subject and provide appropriate direction to staff.
CRN:mlk
asbuilt.ssta
-2-
hillside construction. Soils reports are required by the County and the City of Rolling
Hills. This may be as simple as a County engineer walk-through, stating that no adverse
soil conditions exist, or the County may require that core samples be taken and
evaluated. When satisfactory compliance is reached and your plan is approved, a
Building Permit is issued. A fee is paid to cover inspections during key phases of
development.
6. PRACTICAL POINTS AND TIPS TO FACILITATE YOUR PROJECT
• Work with City and Community Association Officials to meet each entity's own
separate requirements. Don't surprise Officials and your neighbors by beginning
the project or grading without a permit.
• It may be worth your time to read °Eleven Practical Tips for Getting Your Project
Approved in Califomia," page 13 of the 1994 Califomia Permit Handbook (Ref.
7.2).
• Any man-made alterations or changes to the 'natural grade' or ground surface in
its natural state is considered 'grading.' The City of Rolling Hills Building Code
requires that a grading permit be obtained from the County when there is to be a
cut or fill exceeding 3 feet in depth or 3 feet in height or covering more than 2,000
square feet of the existing ground surface area. A grading permit is not required
when there is to be a cut or fill less than 3 feet in depth or less than 3 feet in height
that covers less than 2,000 square feet of the existing ground surface. All soil must
be balanced on site. No exportation or importation of soil to or from any lot in the
City shall be permitted unless approved by the City under certain conditions,
• An engineer and architect who have worked in the City or on the Peninsula and
understand hillside construction should move the project along more expeditiously
than those without that experience or knowledge.
• Begin construction of your project with all required permits and approvals within
one year of your project being approved by the City.
• Build according to approved plans and note that all architectural exterior changes
require Architectural Committee approval.
• Contact Planning staff immediately to facilitate rectification of serious erosion or
hillside slippage.
• A useful guide on hiring contractors is found in Ref.7.6.
• Make *sure your contractor and subcontractors have a permit to enter and work in
Rolling Hills, and know the rules. For example, cogcrete trucks enter only at the
Main Gate. Workers will be delayed until and unless they have Community
Association permits.
• Stay on good terms with your neighbors and inform them In advance of proposed
development plans.
7. f EFERENCE DOCUMENTS
7.1 "Concepts Applicable to Land Use Control," CA Municipal Law Handbook,
League of California Cities.
7.2 "1994 California Permit Handbook," Office of Permit Assistance, CA Trade
& Commerce Agency. (Available at City Hall).
7.3 "Rolling Hills General Plan," City of Rolling Hills, 1991 (Available at City
Hall).
7.4
1 7.5
7.6
7.7
7.8
7.9
"Rolling Hills Municipal Code," City of Rolling Hills, 1995 (Available at City
Hall).
"Rolling Hills Community Association Building Regulations," Rolling Hills
Community Association of Rancho Palos Verdes, 1991 (Available at the
Community Association).
"What You Should know Before You Hire a Contractor," Contractor's License
Board, Dept. of Consumer Affairs, State of CA (Available at County Building &
Safety).
Residential Development Highlights (Available at City Hall).
Planning Commission Application Deadline Schedule (Available at City Hall).
Grading Process Guide (Available at City Hall).
8. DIRECTORY
City of Rolling Hills Planning Department
2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Rolling Hills Community Association
1 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Los Angeles County Building & Safety: Plan Check
24320 Narbonne Avenue, Lomita, CA 90717
Los Angeles County Geology, Soils, and Drainage
900 S. Fremont Ave., Alhambra, CA 91803
9. )ENTITY FINDER*
Accessory uses & structures
Bridle Trails
Building permits & subdivisions
Conditional use permit
Drainage
Easements
Exterior appearance of Improvement
Fence design, color & location
Geology & soils
Grading inquiries
Landscaping
Mod./repair/alteration of structures
Native Flora & Fauna
New building/structures
Paint
Roofing approvals
Site Plan Review for development
Street Maintenance
Traffic & road signage
Views
"C = City 377-1521 A = Community Association 544-6222 L = LA County 534-3760
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD, ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-MAIL: CITYOFRH@AOL.COM
C
A
A, C, L
C
L
A
A
A
L
C
A, C
A, C
C
A, C
A
A, C
C
A
C
A, C
(310) 377-1521
(310) 544-6222
(310) 534-3760
(818) 458-4923
Planning Process
Guide
for the
Residents of
Rolling Hills
PERMITS - APPROVALS
DON'T GO TO WORK WITHOUT THEM!
Published 4/98
011
1. INTRODUCTION
This Guide has been written by the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills to
help our residents understand and implement the permit process in our City. Related
responsibilities and functions of the City of Rolling Hills ("City") and the Rolling Hills
Community Association ("Community Association"), an independent homeowners
association, are noted. Our City, its officials and organizations, are empowered by the
Califomia Constitution to uphold all the elements of the City's General Plan. The General
Plan is written and updated approximately every ten years by our residents with some
elements updated every five years. The City's General Plan takes a strong position on
maintaining the rural character of this beautiful City.
2. GOVERNMENT ENTITIES AFFECTING LAND DEVELOPMENT
IN ROLLING HILLS
The Califomia State Constitution gives power to cities and counties to enact and enforce
planning and land use regulations to protect the public health, safety and welfare of the
•^^'- -nts. In 1971, the Legislature enacted statutes which required comprehensive,
unity -wide land use planning by way of a General Plan to be adopted by each city
o consideration of zoning and development in that city. Further, all zoning,
subdivisions and development permits must be consistent with the cities' general plans.
The Rolling Hills General Plan is the constitution for future development within the
community and, as such, sits atop the hierarchy of all land use controls. The City's
regulation of land development is accomplished by the use of three types of controls: (1)
The General Plan through which community goals and development policies are
determined; (2) The Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) through which
environmental controls mandate environmental review of both planning and permit
controls to assure long term protection of the environment and (3) Zoning and subdivision
entitlements through which individual development projects are considered and approved
or disapproved in accordance with the established General Plan and environmental
criteria (Ref. 7.1 and 7.2).
All property in the City of Rolling Hills is subject to the laws and regulations of two
governing entities: THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS and THE ROLLING HILLS
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION. The duties and obligations of the City and Community
Association are totally separate and distinct. Some of the City's Zoning Code requirements
are summarized in a document available from the City entitled,"Residential Development
Highlights" (Ref. 7.7).
3 THE PLANNING COMMISSION
The Planning Commission is an official City body that consists of five residents appointed
by the City Council. The Commission may act on all applications for variances, conditional
use permits and site plan reviews of new developments. The Commission is advisory to
the City Council only for ordinances and subdivisions. The Commission is required to
review and approve applications for development projects, variances, and conditional
use permits. The Commission is charged with the responsibility of assuring that the
proposed use of the land is in compliance with the General Plan (Ref. 7.3) and with the
Rolling Hills Municipal Code (Ref. 7.4), adopted by the City Council. (An independent
review is conducted concurrently by the Community Association Architectural Committee
to satisfy deed restrictions, easements and building architecture. These are the province
of the Community Association and its Architectural Committee and help to ensure that
the original concept of a rural community has been maintained.) The Planning
Commission action is reflected in a written resolution either approving or denying the
application, which is sent to the City Council as a report item for their meeting agenda.
These functions are conducted in compliance with Califomia State Law requiring
information on and coordinated review of development project applications. A Planning
Commission Application Deadline Schedule is available at City Hall.
The Planning Commission meets the 3rd Tuesday of each month at
7:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers at 2 Portuguese Bend Road.
4. HIGHLIGHTS OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE ROLLING
HILLS GENERAL PLAN
The Rolling Hills General Plan (Ref. 7.3) provides a long-range plan for future
development in the City which is sensitive to existing development patterns. The
document represents the desires of the community and is the result of extensive public
participation through a citizens' survey, the General Plan Advisory Committee and public
hearings. Thus, the public plays an important role in both the preparation and
implementation phases of the General Plan. Because the General Plan reflects
community goals and objectives, citizens must be involved with issues identification,
goals formulation and policy criteria. The General Plan is updated approximately every
ten years (Housing Element every five years) under order of the City Council and in
compliance with state law.
The Rolling Hills General Plan describes our community as follows:
• Rural residential community
• Low density development
• One -to -five acre parcels
• Country atmosphere with three -rail fences
• One story, ranch style houses
• Easement trails
• Abundant equestrian facilities
• Preservation of native flora and fauna
The City's General Plan contains, among others, the following goals:
Goal 1: Maintain Rolling Hills' distinctive rural residential character.
Goal 2: Accommodate development which is compatible with and complements existing
land uses.
Goal 3: Accommodate development that is sensitive to natural environment and accounts
for environmental hazards.
Policy Statements, describing the approach used to implement these goals can be found
in Ref. 7.3, pp .15-16.
Califomia court decisions have recognized that a city's General Plan sits atop the
hierarchy of local government law regulating land use (Ref. 7.1). Consequently,
consistency between the General Plan and all other land use plans, policies and programs
is required. Zoning ordinances, specific plans and individual project plans must be
consistent with the goals, policies and standards in the General Plan.
The Planning Commission is guided by the Land Use Element of the General Plan (Ref.
7.3) and to the Municipal Code (Ref. 7.4) which enforces key elements of that Plan.
5. PERMIT PROCESS
State law requires every City and County to designate a single administrative entity,
usually the planning agency or department, to provide information and coordinate the
review of development project applications (Refs. 7.2 and 7.3). The permit process in
Rolling Hills, involves the City, the Community Association, and the County, and begins
by the applicant submitting a preliminary plot plan for review at the counters of both the
City and the Community Association. With their approval, the plans can then be submitted
to the County for Plan Check.
The City
In an over-the-counter conference, the Planning Director for the City provides feedback
on the completeness of the plans and guidance on application requirements. With some
exceptions, such as building a stable that does not require a grading permit, an application
for Site Plan Review approval is required. An application fee is paid to the City to cover
the City's cost of processing the application. Public testimony is taken at a Planning
Commission hearing. At the hearing, a field trip is scheduled for the Commission and
interested parties to view a silhouette of the proposed project and to take additional
public testimony. The Commission then determines findings that are formulated into a
resolution for approval or denial of the proposed development project. The resolution is
sent to the City Council (Zoning Code Section 17.54.010). The City Council may take
jurisdiction of the application or hear an appeal thereto, whereupon, the Planning
Commission's decision is stayed until the City Council completes its public hearings.
With Site Plan Review approval, the applicant agrees to carry out the conditions of
approval. Both the City and the Community Association must approve preliminary plans
before a Plan Check may be conducted by the County.
Residential Development Highlights is a handout currently given to prospective property
development applicants at City Hall (Ref. 7.7).
The Community Association
The permit process begins by submitting over-the-counter a plot plan and elevations to
determine completeness for Architectural Committee review which, using Association
Building Regulations (Ref. 7.5), studies and evaluates the layout from the perspective of
maintaining the rural character of the community. Deed restrictions and easements are
reviewed as well. An Association fee is paid for this Plan Check Application at the start.
Following Plan Check approval, a Building Permit fee is paid to cover inspection during
key phases of the development.
Approval by the City of any plan or particular element of a plan does not constitute approval
by the Community Association of that particular element or plan. The permit process and
jurisdiction of the City and the Association are separate.
Please consult the City, Community Association, and County on fee structure.
Los Angeles County
Two sets of a plot plan, elevations and engineering calculations are presented to the Los .
Angeles County Department of Public Works, Building & Safety Division located at 24320
Narbonne Ave., Lomita, CA. Building officials assess the completeness of your plans at
the counter to begin a Plan Check. They request that you complete the form "Application
for Building Permit" and pay a Plan Check fee. Be prepared to provide a valuation for the
land use improvement being proposed. This valuation is used for assessing additional
property taxes for your development improvement. As part of the plan check, the County
will complete a four -page "Residential Plan Corrections" list. This corrections list will
address such things as, for example, requiring additional structural engineering details,
approval of drainage proposed, requiring 24 inch rather than 18 inch deep foundations
because of "expansive" soil, etc. Particular attention is paid to engineering aspects of
•
t_�
Cu, o/ leo fl,.S JUL
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT HIGHLIGHTS
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX (310) 377.7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
All property in the City of Rolling Hills is subject to the laws and regulations of two governing entities:
THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS and THE ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION. The
duties and obligations of the City and Community Association are totally separate and distinct. Following
are some of the highlights ofthe more important facts from the CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ZONING
CODE relating to uses and construction on property in this unique community:
SETBACKS: Front yard - 50' from front easement line in RA -S-1 and RA -S-2 Zones
Side yards - 20' from property line in RA -S-1 Zone
35' from property line in RA -S-2 Zone
Rear yard - 50' from property line in RA -S-1 and RA -S-2 Zones
EASEMENTS
All property is subject to perimeter easements varying in width around each property boundary and in
some instances, road easements, granted by the property owner to the Community Association, a
corporation, or another person or entity for the purpose of construction and/or maintenance and use of
streets, driveways, trails, utilities, drainage facilities, sewers, open space, and/or a combination of these
uses. The Community Association requires that all easements must be kept free of buildings, fences,
plantings or other obstructions.
PERMITTED USES IN RA -S-1 AND RA -S-2 ZONES
1. Single family residence with minimum two car garage
2. Tree, bush, and field crops
ACCESSORY USES AND STRUCTURES (permitted within allowable yards)
1. Barn/stable without grading except in front yard
2. Corral/pen without grading except in front yard
3. Greenhouse
4. Hobby shop
5. Noncommercial radio antenna
6. Domestic animals/no swine
7. Aggregate of 3 recreational vehicles/
boats/trailers/horse trailers
8. Satellite dish antenna (requires
Planning Commission approval)
9. Swimming pool/spa/bath/jet pool
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE
Planning Commission approval and City Council concurrence of development plans are required for any
of the following:
1. More than one driveway
2. Cabana & detached recreation room
3. Corral/pen requiring grading
4. Detached garage
5. Guest house (cooking facilities prohibited)
6. Horseback riding ring
7. Mixed use structure
8. Recreational game court (i.e.; Tennis court)
®Printed on Recycled Paper.
SITE PLAN REVIEW
Planning Comnssion approval and City Council concurrence of development plans are required for any
of the following:
1. Any grading requiring grading .permit;
2. Any new building or structure except barn/stable without grading;
3. Expansion, modification, alteration, or repair of any existing building which (i) requires a grading
permit; or (ii) increases the size of structure by at least 1,000 square feet and has the effect of
increasing the size of the structure by more than 25% in any 36 -month period.
The Site Plan must minimize grading; preserve terrain and natural drainage courses; be harmonious in scale
and mass with the building pad, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences; preserve native
vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses, and land forms; and must be convenient and safe for the
movement of pedestrians, equestrians and vehicles.
BUILDING HEIGHT:
ROOFING:
STRUCTURAL LOT COVERAGE:
TOTAL LOT COVERAGE:
BUILDING PAD COVERAGE:
MAXIMUM DISTURBED AREA:
STABLE & CORRAL:
VIEWS:
Single story.
Class A roof, non -reflective.
20% of net lot area maximum.
35% of net lot area maximum.
The Planning Commission has established a guideline of 30%
coverage.
40% of net lot area.
Minimum 450 square foot stable.
Minimum 550 square foot corral.
Vehicular accessway needed for Conditional Use Permit
and/or Site Plan Review per Ordinance No. 252,
Municipal Code Section 17.16.170 (B).
Neighbors are encouraged to work together to preserve views.
GEOLOGY & SOILS: Required for all construction.
BUILDING PERMITS & SUBDIVISIONS
Requires approval of City of Rolling Hills, Community Association and L.A. County Building & Safety.
The L. A. County Building and Safety - Lomita Office is at 24320 Narbonne Avenue, Lomita, CA 90717
(310) 534-3760.
THESE HIGHLIGHTS SHOULD BE READ CAREFULLY AND APPLICANTS SHOULD
BE ADVISED OF THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS ACCORDING TO THE 1993 CITY OF
ROLLING HILLS ZONING CODE. APPLICANTS SHOULD ALSO FAMILIARIZE
THEMSELVES WITH THE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION BUILDING REGULATIONS.
7/23/99 LMU
csg?gi::i:>:x�n
Hra;2y,::::„u`v:::R:<: ;i91<,^:AS> :;;C:.g�.v..x::2C:: o2a,:: :.tt.::,c:::Ao22:::C`;8
.Rtt.:;;£u%;aAcc:o:A;>::o:A3: �:. :0::3�::c:2},",�•.;c::cbLT::::cfia`22.;f4�:;:of5w::;C.v
NEW ADMINISTRATIVE FEE
for ILLEGAL or "AS BUILT"
GRADING or STRUCTURES
In an effort to curb illegal grading and previously constructed (known as "as built")
structures from being presented to the Planning Commission, the City Council adopted
an additional $400 administrative fee on January 25, 1999 that will be charged on
applications for illegal grading or "as built" structures that require Planning Commission
review. Additionally, $200 will be charged for each additional "Stop Work Order" that is
issued beyond the original stop work order for illegal grading or construction that
requires Planning Commission review.
Planning Commission review is required for structures that encroach into the front, side
or rear yard setbacks, for sports courts, for any new structure (any size) or building
addition of 1,000 or more square feet. and has the effect of increasing the size of the
structure by more than 25% in any 36 -month period, and any grading where there is
going to be a cut or fill of soil exceeding 3 feet in depth or 3 feet in height or covering
more than 2,000 square feet of the existing ground surface area to change the shape of
a building pad or hillside.
For more information, please contact Rolling Hills City Hall at (310) 377-1521. Thank
you for your cooperation.
IT IS SAFE TO ASSUME THAT IT IS GRADING IF WORK IS BEING
DONE THAT REQUIRES THE USE OF HEAVY EQUIPMENT.
CI'I7 OfF ROLLING HILLS
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX (310) 377-7288
1
JANUARY 19, 2000
EQUESTRIAN TRAILS ARE
NOT FOR MOTORCYCLES,
ATV'S OR BICYCLES!
Motorcycles or other
motorized vehicles and
bicycles are not permitted on equestrian trails
in the City. If you observe anybody utilizing
motorized vehicles or bicydes on trails, contact
City Hall or the Los Angeles County Sheriff's
Department at (310) 539-1661 immediately.
Your cooperation is appreciated.
DISCHARGING OF
FIREARMS IS PROHIBITED
It is unlawful to discharge
firearms within the City of
Rolling Hills. If you hear or
observe anybody using any
type of firearm, please contact the Sheriff's
Department immediately at (310) 539-1661.
PERMITS!
APPROVALS!
DON'T GO TO
WORK WITHOUT
THEM!!
Do you want to add
a room, build a deck, move a wall, put in new
windows or doors, build a guest house or a
stable, reroof, build a sports court or perform
grading?
If you answered "yes", you will need
approvals and permits from the City,
Community Association and County if you
want to alter, construct, convert, demolish,
improve or repair any building or structure.
Don't go to work without approvals or
permits. JUST ASK US. Call City Hall at (310)
377-1521, the Community Association at (310)
544-6222 or the County at (310) 534-3760 for
details.
A Planning Process Guide has been prepared
to assist residents who are considering making
improvements to their property. If you would
like a copy of this Guide, call City Hall and we
will mail one to you.
SEEK APPROVAL BEFORE GRADING
OR MOVING SOIL
The City of Rolling Hills is responsible for
administering the grading permit process. The
County of Los Angeles, via contract through
the City, approves grading permits at the
County level. However, the Rolling Hills
Issue No. 00-02
Planning Commission is responsible for
reviewing site plan review applications that
exceed the City's threshold of grading.
Residents should rely on information from the
City of Rolling Hills when questioning the
need for a grading permit within the City. You
are urged to contact the City to determine
whether or not all necessary approvals have
been obtained regarding your grading
application. Should you wish to discuss this
further, please do not hesitate to contact City
Hall at (310) 377-1521.
REPORT QUAIL SIGHTINGS
Members of the Wildlife
Preservation Committee remind
residents of the importance of reporting
wildlife sightings to City Hall. The Com ee
reviews this information at their monthly
meetings and plots the sightings on a map m
the City Council Chambers. The Committee is
specifically interested in knowing if residents
have sighted quail in the City. If you observe
any quail or other wildlife, please call City Hall
at 377-1521. Thank you for your cooperation.
rr►rrr►rrrrrrrrrrrrrr
CABALLEROS
VALENTINE'S DAY
RED CARPET LUNCHEON
February 9t", 12 Noon
at the home of Sally Swart
2 Meadowlark Lane
New residents welcome!
RSVP by February 5t"
Teresa Hassanally at 541-1671.
rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
UPCOMING IMPORTANT EVENTS
City Council Meeting
1 /24/00 and 2/14/00 at 730 p.m.
Wildlife Preservation Committee Meeting
2/22/00 at 6O0 p.m.
Planning Commission Meeting
2/15/00 at 730 p.m.
BULLETIN BOARD
HOUSEKEEPER AVAILABLE: RH nanny has available days
for housekeeping. Outstanding deaner, 100% trustworthy.
Unconditionally recommended. Call Kathy for personal
reference, 544-9536.
HOUSEKEEPER NEEDED: 3-4 days per week, must drive
and speak English. Cali 733-8170.
PASTURE NEEDED: Pasture use needed for 1 year old
horse. Please call 377-9855.
FOR SALE Heirloom antique couch, circa. civil war, very
good condition 3950. Call 377-4243.
SEPTEMBER 8,1999
WILDLIFE PRESERVATION
COMMITTEE GUZZLER PROJECT
Several years ago, the Wildlife
Preservation Committee built a
guzzler below the Clif Hix Riding
Ring which establishes a safe and
clean supply of drinking water for
wildlife. Occasionally, the Committee
notices that people have turned off
the water supply or disturbed the
plumbing for the guzzler. The
guzzler is a drip system that is an
important source of water for local
wildlife. If you would like more
information regarding the guzzler, please feel free to
contact Rolling Hills City Hall at (310) 377-1521.
A MESSAGE FROM CABALLEROS .. .
PARK VEHICLES SAFELY
Caballeros asks residents to please remind their guests
and workers not to park on the easements in a manner
that obstructs walking/riding trails. This is particularly
critical on weekends when groups may ride or walk and
can be forced into the roads to get around parked cars.
Thanks for keeping the trails safe.
SEEK APPROVAL BEFORE GRADING
OR MOVING SOIL
The City of Rolling Hills is responsible for handling the
grading permit process. The County of Los Angeles, via
contract through the City, approves grading permits at
the County level. However, the City of Rolling Hills
Planning Commission is responsible for reviewing site
plan review applications that exceed the City's threshold
of grading. Rolling Hills residents should rely on
information from the City of Rolling Hills when
questioning the need for a grading permit within the
City. You are urged to contact the City of Rolling Hills to
determine whether or not all necessary approvals have
been obtained regarding your grading application.
Should you wish to discuss this further, please do not
hesitate to contact Rolling Hills City at (310) 377-1521.
DISASTER PREPAREDNESS SURVEYS
The City of Rolling Hills conducted a disaster
preparedness survey several years ago. The purpose of
this survey was to gather information regarding
emergency equipment and expertise of Rolling Hills
residents that can be called upon in the event of a local
disaster.
It is now time to update our survey information for
submission to the Disaster Preparedness Block Captains.
Please watch your mailbox for this survey. It will be
provided with a self-addressed, stamped envelope for
easy return. Your cooperation in completing this survey
will be appreciated.
Issue No. 99-16
SCHOOL I5 STARTING . . .
WATCH OUT FOR CHILDREN
With the start of the new school
year, more children will be out
and about during the commute
hours. We reaiind_sidents to
obey local speed laws and be sure to 4 your children
off or pick them up on the proper sideof the street.
4K 4K arc +r 4K +r +a der[ 4t+a
15" Annual California Coastal Cleanup bay
Saturday, September 18"
9:00 a.m. - Noon.
To volunteer or for more information, call
1 -800 -HEAL BAY
arc .ar" daft 4k 4Dc arc disc .111ri +r
✓� (Special ay
To all of you who remember Dorothy
Natland:
We have learned that she will reach the
esteemed age of 90 years on September 24"'. Dorothy and
her late husband, Manley, lived on Crest Road for many
years and she was active in many groups. Upon his
retirement, they moved to Laguna Beach where Dorothy
still resides. She is in very good health with the
exception of her eyesight. Her spirits are good and she
remembers everything.
It would be nice if her old friends would remember
Dorothy on her special day. And, if you remember any
special times with her, please write them on a 8-1/2 x 11"
sheet that could be put into a Memory Book. An old
photo or two would also be appreciated.
Greetings can be sent to Dorothy Natland, 333
Weymouth Place, Laguna Beach, CA 92651. Please send
it so it will arrive by September 24'".
Thanks, Her friends.
42ND ANNUAL PORTUGUESE BEND NATIONAL HORSE
SHOW TO BENEFIT CHH.DRENS HOSPITAL Los ANGELES
SEPTEMBER 102", 11r", & 12T"
ERNIE HOWLETT PARK
25851 HAwrnoRNE BLVD., RHE
FOR INFORMATION, PLEASE CALL (310) 791-4933
UPCOMING IMPORTANT EVENTS
City Council Meeting
9/13/99 and 9/27/99 at 7:30 p.m.
Wildlife Preservation Committee Meeting
9/20/99 at 6:00 p.m. at the Native Plant Demonstration Garden
Planning Commission Meeting
9/21/99 at 7:30 p.m.
Traffic Commission Meeting
9/23/99 at 8:30 a.m.
BULLETIN BOARD
FOR SALE: Lawn mower (for golf putting green), wheel chair
("light") and Porta Patti. Call Bill (310) 377-1850 or (949) 492-1524.
WANTED: Looking to buy or share small, gentle horse, 16 hands or
smaller. Call (310)541-1671.
HORSE RIDER AVAILABLE: Recommended by RH resident, PV
area intermediate -level rider to ride your horse when you're too
busy, vacationing, etc. Call Mrs. Brooke Genese, (310) 373-7596.
4
JUNE 9,1999
BUDGET HEARING
A public hearing will be conducted by the City
Council on Monday, June 14, 1999, to consider
the FY 1999-00 Budget. Public comment is
welcome. The City Council meeting will
commence at 7:30 p.m. in the City Council
Chambers at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road.
MAINTAIN YOUR POOL AND
SPA AND STILL SAVE THE
FISH AND PROTECT
THE OCEAN •
Some 160 toxic chemicals,
many of them carcinogens,
have been identified in the
urban runoff that flows through the storm drains into
our coastal waters every day. Fish and the ocean are
affected when toxic chemicals, pesticides, paint or oil
are dumped into storm drains.
Swimming pool and spa water containing chlorine
and copper -based algaecides pose a hazard to aquatic
and human life when these toxic substances enter the
ocean.
• You are discouraged from discharging chlorinated
pool or spa water to a street, storm drain or trail.
• You should have the chlorinated pool water
trucked out of the City.
• Do not use copper -based algaecides unless
absolutely necessary. Control algae with chlorine
or other alternatives to copper -based pool
chemicals. Copper is a powerful herbicide. Even
sewage treatment technology cannot remove all of
the metals that enter a treatment plant.
The solution to this problem is not at the end of the
pipes where the stormwater empties into the ocean.
The solution is at the source --at our homes. Good
housekeeping practices, such as handling, storing,
and disposing of pool maintenance materials
properly can prevent pollutants from entering the
storm drains. Dispose of toxic chemicals at
Household Hazardous Waste Roundups. Call
1(888)253-2652 for more information on
environmental programs offered by Los Angeles
County.
HOURS OF CONSTRUCTION
Rolling Hills residents are
reminded that construction
work on their property is only
permitted between the hours
of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.,
Monday through Saturday.
Please check with City Hall
and the Community
Association prior to beginning any project on your
property to determine whether approvals are
necessary. If you have any questions, please call City
Hall at (310) 377-1521.
i
WEED ABATEMENT
... BE FIRE SAFE
with
The Los Angeles County
Fire Department has
commenced inspecting
properties for compliance
fire prevention weed abatement standards.
Issue 99-10
Weed abatement standards are strictly enforced and
are designed to reduce the likelihood of residential
structures becoming involved in a wildfire. For more
information regarding brush clearance on your
property, contact Los Angeles County Fire
Department Station 56 in Rolling Hills at (310) 377-
1584.
CABALLEROS HORSE
SHOW NEWS
On Saturday, May 1", the
Caballeros Horse Show
took place at the
Caballeros Ring at
Hesse's Gap. We had
beautiful spring sunshine
and the arena looked wonderful, having been
dragged, weeded and hosed down by Art from the
Rolling Hills Community Association.
We had a variety of classes judged by. Corrine
Haines, including equitation, jumping and even a
"Jack Benny" (for older riders). These were followed
by some fun gymkhana lasses like musical chairs,
pole bending and a potato race.
Food and drink was provided by Susan Daigh, whose
daughter Stacy rode in the show and brought her •
"Pony Club" friends. There was excellent
competition, but sad to say, out of a total of nineteen,
only five riders were from Rolling Hills.
The show was put on by Sally Swart with able help
from Caballeros President Jill Smith. We had ribbons
for everyone and "high point" ribbons and prizes
that were kindly donated by Lomita Feed.
A good time was had by all and another show is
planned for the fall — IF enough interest is shown by
Rolling Hills riders! Please Call Sally at (310) 541-
2299 if you are interested in participating in the Fall
Horse Show.
101 &)$750310&7l0&11010$0B01IiO$01087
cSaue 7 e Dale
Women's Gommuni y Gilu6
garden rUour `7uno/1Talser guiy MIS
>X101087101010101010S 1 1O130fnirM
i
UPCOMING IMPORTANT EVENTS
City Council Meeting
6/14/99 and 6/28/99 at 7:30 p.m.
Planning Commission Meeting
6/15/99 at 7:30 p.m.
Wildlife Preservation Committee Meeting
6/21/99 at 6:00 p.m.
i
BULLETIN BOARD
HOUSESITTER AVAILABLE: Mature college couple with well-
behaved dog is moving back to the South Bay for grad school. Looking
to housesit for rent in a situation where they can offset some of the rent
by doing light maintenance, odd jobs, gardening, etc. Looking for July
1 move -in date. Responsible and hard working. Call Josh at (805) 534-
9156 or local parents at (310) 541-4031.
GARDENER WANTED: E9/hour. Spanish OK. own car. Ca0 544-
1707.
FREE TO A GOOD HOME: Beautiful 1 year old chocolate Lab.
Neutered male, AKC, all shots. Call 373-7603.
SQUIRREL CAGE Whoever borrowed a large cage from our house
on Portuguese Bend Road on Monday, 3/27. please call 377-0746 to
return it. We will pick it up.
FEBRUARY 17, 1999
Issue 99-4
West
The West Vector Control District has reported
that Africanized Honey Bees have been found
on Santa Bella Road in Rolling Hills Estates.
Therefore, the District considers the City of
Rolling Hills to be colonized by Africanized
Honey Bees.
AFRICANIZED HONEY BEE INFORMATION
AVAILABLE AT CITY HALL
At the regular City Council meeting held on
Monday, February 8`", representatives of the
Vector Control District provided information
regarding the local introduction of the Africanized Honey
Bee.
The • West Vector Control • District' is• investigating all
known natural bee hives to determine if the hive has been
"Africanized". Africanized Honey Bees take over a regular
European Honey Bee hive and over a fairly brief time,
convert that hive to Africanized.
West Vector Control District officials report that bees
that are foraging on flowers and plants, whether
Africanized or European, do not pose a significant danger.
However, Africanized Honey Bees, when encountered
near their hive, can be extremely dangerous.
& if you know of a location of a natural bee hive or
observe bees in a swarm or coming or going from a certain
portion of a tree, stump, crevice or other specific location,
please contact the the West Vector Control District at (310)
915-7370 immediately or the City of Rolling Hills at (310)
377-1521. The hive will be investigated. If it is determined
that the hive is European Bees, the bees will be re-released
into the environment.
,47PrThe City has received information regarding the
Africanized Honey Bees which we can send to you at your
request. Additionally, we have video tapes that are
available for you to check-out that further describe the
aggressive characteristics of the Africanized Honey Bees
and steps that people should take in dealing with this
insect. For more information, please call the City of
Rolling Hills at ( 310) 377-1521 or the West Vector Control
District at (310) 915-7370.
REMINDER ... ADMINISTRATIVE FEE FOR "AS
BUILT" STRUCTURES
In an effort to curb "as built" structures from being
presented to the Planning Commission, the City Council,
on January 25th, .adopted an additional $400 administrative
fee that will be charged on applications for illegal or "as
built" structures or grading that requires Planning
Commission review (as a general rule...it's grading if the
work being done on your property requires the use of
heavy equipment). Additionally, $200 will be charged for
each additional "stop work order" that is issued beyond the
original stop work order for illegal construction that
requires Planning Commission review.
Planning Commission review is required for structures
that encroach into the front, side or rear yard setbacks, for
items such as sports courts and for a new structure (any
size) or adding on to an existing structure by more than
1,000 sq. ft. which represents more than a 25% increase in
the original structure size. These types of projects, whether
proposed or illegally constructed, require Planning
Commission approval through the public hearing process.
The public hearing process is designed to ensure that all of
the neighbors and interested parties have an opportunity
to discuss a project prior to it being constructed. For more
information, please feel free to contact City Hall at (310)
377-1521.
BIRD DISPLAY/SEMINAR
presented by
Gty of Rolling Hills Wildlife Preservation Committee
and
South Bay Wildlife Rehab
Monday, March 15''
7:00 P.M.
Rolling Hills City Hall
2 Portuguese Bend Road
FALCONS OWLS HAWKS
see these beautiful birds up close
4• learn about falconry
:• learn about wildlife rehabilitation and what we can do to protect
and support these birds and their environment
d• learn what is fact vs. fiction regarding these birds
BRING THE ENTIRE FAMILY!
REFRESHMENTS WILL BE SERVED
MARK YOUR
CALENDAR
NOW!
THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS' ANNUAL SPRING CLEANUP
WILL TAKE PLACE ON SATURDAY, MAY 81/1
and SATURDAY, MAY l 5'
Place unwanted Items at roadside on May 8t' or May
15th and BFI will pick them up and dispose of them
for you. Do not place Items at roadside more that 24
hour prior to each pickup date.
TENNIS CLUB INVITATION
The Rolling Hills Tennis Club is
inviting all
Rolling Hills tennis enthusiasts, who are not
members of the Rolling Hills Tennis Club, to join
us as our guests at one of our upcoming social
tennis events. We want to encourage more residents to
join us and enjoy tennis, dinner and fun at our newly
refurbished facilities. These events are held on Sunday
afternoons, once per month. Please contact Ann and Allan
Roberts at 377-5607 for details, and your reservation.
MESSAGE FROM THE ROLLING HILLS
ASSOCIATION
AD residence aloes will be ogees ate 10% reduction in January
and February. Order a replacement alga for $60.001
UPCOMING IMPORTANT EVENTS
• City Council Meeting
2/22/99 and 3/8/99 at 7:30 p.m.
• Wildlife Preservation Committee Meeting
2/24/99 at 6:00 p.m.
• Commission Meeting
3/1 /99 at7:30p.m.
i
BULLETIN BOARD
a WAIYIED: Rolling Bills resident looking to rent/house sit your Rolling Hills
home from April through July. Call 377-9855.
O HOUSEKEEPER AVAILABLE: Recommended by RH resident, has 3 days
available. Call 541-2299.
O FOR SAL& 1998 05400 LOCUS, 4 door, 3,000 miles...443,000. Call 377-
7802.
O VACATION: Penthouse suite in Cabo San Lucas available 3t29.4/5, sleeps
8. Call 544.6607.
FEBRUARY 3, 1999
Issue 99-3
City Hall will be
closed on Monday,
February 15th in
observance of the
Presidents' Day
Holiday.
d' SPECIAL PRESENTATION ON
AFRICANIZED HONEY BEES sue'
:A special presentation on the
status of the Africanized Honey Bee in
the South Bay will be made by the
West Vector Control District at the City
Council Meeting on Monday, February
8"' at 730 p.m. You are invited to
attend this presentation at City Hall, 2
Portuguese Bend Road. For more
information, please call City Hall at
377-1521. airt
WILDLIFE BIRD
DISPLAY/SEMINAR
Members of the Rolling
Hills Wildlife Preservation
Committee will host a
special Wildlife Bird Display and Seminar on
March 15"' at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall. Please plan
to join the Wildlife Committee for this
opportunity to see live falcons, owls and hawks
and learn about falconry, wildlife rehabilitation
and what you can do to protect and support
these birds in their native environment. This is
a wonderful opportunity to learn what is fact
versus fiction about these important birds.
For more information, please feel free to contact
Rolling Hills City Hall at (310) 377-1521.
CITY COUNCIL ADOPTS ADMINISTRATIVE
FEE FOR "AS BUILT" STRUCTURES
In an effort to curb "as built" structures from
being presented to the Planning Commission,
the City Council, on January 25", adopted an
additional $400 administrative fee that will be
charged on applications for illegal or "as built"
structures or grading that requires Planning
Commission review (as a general rule...it's
grading if the work being done on your property
requires the use of heavy equipment).
Additionally, $200 will be charged for each
additional "stop work order" that is issued
beyond the original stop work order for illegal
construction that requires Planning
Commission review. •
Planning Commission review is required for
structures that encroach into the front, side or
rear yard setbacks, for items such as sports courts
and for a new structure or adding on to an
existing structure by more than 1,000 sq. ft.
which represents more than 25% increase in the
original structure size. These types of projects,
whether proposed or illegally constructed,
require Planning Commission approval
through the public hearing process to be built or
remain "as built". The public hearing process is
designed to ensure that all of the neighbors and
interested parties have an opportunity to
discuss a project prior to it being constructed.
For more information, please feel free to contact
City Hall at (310) 3774521.
MESSAGE FROM THE
ROLLING HILLS COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION
All residence signs will be
offered at a 10% reduction in
January and February. Order a
• replacement -sign-for- $50.001
UPCOMING IMPORTANT
EVENTS
■ City Council Meeting
2/8/99 and 2/22/99 at 7:30 p.m.
■ Wildlife Preservation Committee
Meeting
2/24/99 at 6:00 p.m.
■ Planning Commission Meeting
2/16/99 at 7:30 p.m.
BULLETIN BOARD
O Rolling Hills resident looking to rent/house sit your
Rolling Hills home from April through July. Call
377-9858.
O A Calico cat with large orange & black spots was
found dead on Outrider Road, during the holidays.
If this is your pet and you would like further
information, call 833-7222.
O FOUND: Green parrot w/red & yellow marking in
vicinity of 26 Portuguese Bend Road. For
information call 544-6005.
JANUARY 20, 1999
Issue 99-2
MARK
YOUR CALENDAR
NOW!
0 A special presentation on the status of the
Africanized Honey Bee in the South Bay will
be presented by the West Vector Control
District at the City Council Meeting on
Monday, February 8th at 7:30 p.m. You are
invited to attend this important
presentation.
0 The Wildlife Presentation Committee will
host a Bird Display/Seminar on Monday,
March 15th, beginning at 700 p.m.
Both of these special meetings will take place
in the City Council Chambers at City Hall, 2
Portuguese Bend Road. Your attendance is
encouraged. Watch for further details in
upcoming newsletters.
CITY COUNCIL TO
CONSIDER
ADMINISTRATIVE
FEE PENALTIES
FOR "AS BUILT'
PROJECTS
Members of the City Council
will conduct a public hearing at
the City Council meeting on
Monday, January 25'" to
consider an administrative fee
of $400 and $200 for each stop
work order issued for "as built"
projects. "As built" projects are
projects that are constructed
within the City without appropriate permits issued after a
public hearing before the Planning Commission. Typical
examples could include building into a setback without a
Variance, adding a sports court without a Conditional Use
Permit or grading or building to the extent that requires
Site Plan Review Approval by the Planning Commission.
This public hearing will begin at approximately 7:30 p.m. in
the Rolling Hills City Council Chambers, 2 Portuguese
Bend Road. Public input is encouraged.
AFRICANIZED HONEY The Los Angeles County West
Vector Control District has
BEES IDENTIFIED IN reported . that a hive of
THE SOUTH BAY Africanized Honey Bees was
found and destroyed in the City
of Lawndale on December 15th.
It is reported that this is the
first recorded colony of
. Africanized Honey Bees found
in Los Angeles County. According to the District, it is
believed that the hive had been at that location for more
than a year and converted to the Africanized Honey Bees
within the last few months. It is also believed that a
number of Africanized Honey Bee swarms may have
emerged from this colony during that period and may
have established new colonies elsewhere.
Africanized Honey Bees are identical in appearance to the
European Honey Bees already found in the City of Rolling
Hills. However, Africanized Honey Bees respond to what
they perceive. as a threat in a significantly more aggressive
manner thari European Honey Bees. This situation in
Lawndale involved an established European Honey Bee
hive that was converted by the Africanized Honey Bees
taking over the hive which resulted in aggressive behavior
by the bees that was observed by people in the area.
If you observe any natural bee hives in the City of Rolling
Hills, please contact the Los Angeles County West Vector
Control District at (310) 915-7370 or the City of Rolling Hills
at (310) 377-1521.
The West Vector Control District has provided a video
entitled "Living with Africanized Honey Bees" and
"Children and Africanized Honey Bees". If you would like
to view this video, please call City Hall at (310) 377-1521 so
that we can arrange for you to borrow a copy.
PALOS VERDES PENINSULA UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT FACILITIES
COMMUNITY FORUMS
/ Y°4 \ The Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified
School District is currently working with
community members on the issue of facilities usage as it
relates to student enrollment growth. The Facilities Design
Team, comprised of representatives from various
Peninsula organizations, was formed to provide input of
the community's perspective and desire for future
facilities.
The Team has been reviewing information concerning
student enrollment, cost analysis, staffing requirements,
etc. The Team members have suggested their desired
conditions, brainstormed potential scenarios, and discussed
pros and cons for the options created.
A list of scenarios that encompasses all grade levels has
been developed by the Team, which is attempting to
narrow its choices for a recommendation that will be
presented to the Board of Education in the near future.
The School District has scheduled two community forums
to answer questions and update residents on the progress
of the Facilities Design Team. The community forums will
be held on Wednesday, February 3rd at 7:00 p.m. in both the
Miraleste Intermediate School Theatre Arts Building and
the Palos Verdes Intermediate School Multipurpose room.
These forums will be instrumental in collecting feedback
from the community. For further information on the
forums, call Peter Lyons at 378-9966, extension 230.
t
MESSAGE FROM THE ROLLING
HILLS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
All residence signs will be offered at a
10% reduction in January and
February.
5u0ry. Order a replacement sign
UPCOMING IMPORTANT EVENTS
• City Council Meeting
1/25/99 and 2/8/99 at 7:30 p.m.
■ Wildlife Preservation Committee Meeting
2/24/99 at 6:00 p.m.
• Planning Commission Meeting
2/16/99 at 7:30 p.m.
i
BULLETIN BOARD
0 Elderly lady needs caretaker/assistant 5 p.m. — 9 a.m.
daily/English & Drivers license a must. Call 377-8464.
O Grounds Keeper, misc. duties; English/car/3-5 day week
depends on ability/$7.00 to $8.00/hr. Call 377-8464.
0 Lovely baby crib with mattress for sale — like new, light brown
wood. Make offer. Call Jeanne, 377-3243.
O A white cat with large orange & black spots was found dead on
1/10 on a property on Georgeff Road If this is your pet and you
would like further Information, call 534-3681.
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
C1i,, 0/ /0f/L. Jh//
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
Agenda Item No.: 4-A
Mtg. Dater 04/14/97
HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE
PLANNING COMMISSION REGARDING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
GRADING PLAN CONFIRMATION PROCESS.
DATE: MARCH 14, 1997
BACKGROUND
At the regular meeting of the Rolling Hills Planning Commission held Tuesday,
March 15, 1997, Planning Commissioners recommended that the City Council
approve the attached proposal relating to changes in the grading plan confirmation
process prior to plans being submitted to the Planning Commission.
As indicated in the attached report, it is staff's goal to have the most accurate
information as possible presented to the Planning Commission. Oftentimes,
conditions in the field become evident after a gradingsite plan is approved, which
necessitate amendments to the grading plan.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that members of the City Council approve this report as
presented or provide appropriate direction.
CRN:mlk
ccgradconf.sta
Mr George Shaw
Edward Carson Beall
Associates
23727 Hawthorne Blvd.
Torrance, CA 90505
Mr. Torn Montague
Tomel Development, Inc.
4219 Charlemagne Ave.
Long Beach, CA 90808
Mr. Ross N. Bolton
Bolton Engineering Corporation
2603 Coral Ridge Road
Rancho Palos Verdes CA 90275
Mr. Darryl Dalcin
Dalcin Cummins Associates
17625 Crenshaw Blvd.
Torrance, CA 90504
Mr. Doug McHattie
South Bay Engineering
304 Tejon Place
Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274
Ar. Nap Bakkhoum Ir. Dutch Phillips
Edward Carson Beall P.O. Box 7834
Associates Laguna Niguel, CA 92607
23727 Hawthrone Blvd.
Torrance, CA 90505
Mr. Anthony Inferrera
1967 Upland St.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Ms. Karina R. Bird
Bolton Engineering Corporation
2603 Coral Ridge Road
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
Mr. Criss Gunderson
Criss Gunderson Architect
1840 S. Elena Ave., Ste. 203
Redondo Beach, CA 90040
Mr. Roger North
Robinson North Architects
26360 Plaza Del Amo, Ste. 200
Torrance, CA 90501
Mr. George Sweeny Mr. Bob Lamb
Architect 56 Eastfield Drive
• 3 Malaga Cove Rolling Hills, CA 90274
Palos Verdes Estates, CA 90274
Mr. Thomas Blair
Blair and Associates
2785 Pacific Coast Highway
Torrance, CA 90505
Mr. David Breiholz
Breiholz Qazi Engineering, Inc.
2785 Pacific Coast Highway
Torrance, CA 90505
Mr. Richard Linda
Richard Linde & Associates
2200 Amapola Court, Ste. 200
Torrance, CA 90501
Mr. Lamar Robinson
Robinson North Architects
26360 Plaza Del Amo, Ste. 200
Torrance, CA 90501
Cuy o` l2 PPn9 Jh/I
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
JODY MURDOCK
Mayor
B. ALLEN LAY
Mayor Pro Tem
THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER
Councilmember
' FRANK E. HILL
Councilmember
GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S.
Councilmember
April 16, 1996
Mr. George Shaw
Edward Carson Beall Associates
23727 Hawthorne Blvd.
Torrance, CA 90505
Dear Mr. Shaw:
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377.1521
FAX: (310) 377.7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
SENT TO THE ATTACHED LIST.
At the regular meeting of the Rolling Hills City Council held April 14, 1997, City
Councilmerribers approved the attached staff report regarding the grading plan
confirmation process. As indicated in the report, it is staff's desire to have the most
accurate grading plans as possible presented to the Planning Commission.
We urge you to review this material and let us know if you have any questions.
Should you wish to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
$46J41
Craig R. Nealis
City Manager
CRN:mlk
gradconyrocltrs
cc: City Council
Planning Commission
Lola Ungar, Principal Planner
Lata Thakar, LA County
Rafael Bernal, LA County
Peggy Minor, RHCA Manager
®Panted on Recvcied
TO:
CI, 0/ ROilirtf JUL
9D
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1937
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310)377.1521
FAX (310) 377.7281
E•mait eityalrl+6aol.com
Agenda Item No.: 9-D
Mtg. Date: 03/18/97
HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
REGARDING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE GRADING
CONFIRMATION PROCESS.
DATE: MARCH 18, 1997
BACKGROUND
At the joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission held on
Monday, February 3rd, a report was presented regarding the grading confirmation
process. At that time, staff was directed to return to the Planning Commission with
recommendations on how to improve the grading inspection/site plan analysis
procedures. A copy of that staff report is attached for your information.
As indicated in that report, a grading permit is required when the cut or fill exceeds
3 feet or the disturbance exceeds 2,000 sq. ft. of the existing ground surface.
Currently, the grading plan inspection services are provided through the County of
Los Angeles. Eight -five percent (85%) of the grading permit applications are
handled through the Los Angeles County office in Alhambra. The remaining
fifteen percent (15%) are handled through the County Lomita office.
Currently, if a grading plan does not involve the construction of a new structure, a
visit to the actual site is not conducted by the County soils and geology engineer. In
most cases, involving minor grading, this probably does not present an issue. In
cases where a new structure is proposed, the County soils and geology personnel
inspect the site. In either case, recommendations/amendments from the County are
provided to the grading contractor/engineer.
Therefore, the situation can arise where the grading plan that was presented to the
Planning Commission must be amended to meet either safety standards imposed by
the County and/or address soils conditions that have been identified in the soils and
-1-
engineering report. This report is the responsibility of the applicant and is required
by the County. This can result in a significant change .to the grading plan that was
considered by the Planning Commission. Currently, these deviations are resolved
through staff approval of the revised grading plan (Minor modification RHMC
17.46.070 A,B,C) or a reapplication before the Planning Commission (Major
modification RHMC 17.46.070 A,D).
The County relies heavily on the civil engineer's stamped plan that is submitted by
the engineer for a particular project. Specifically, Section 7020.5 of the 1994 Uniform
Building Code requires the field engineer, soils engineer or engineering geologist to
notify the building official in writing of non-conformance with an approved
grading plan. However, history has show us that often times these corrections take
place without the County or the City being advised of the need to amend the grading
plan.
Goal of Proposed Grading Plan Check Modifications
The goal of modifying the grading plan check procedures for the City of Rolling
Hills is quite simple. It is staff's desire to have the Planning Commission review, as
closely as possible, what represents the actual proposed grading activity in the field
when they are considering plans during the public hearing process. We recognize,
however, that there may be deviations based upon actual field conditions which
cannot be handled until they are actually encountered in the field.
Our second goal is to have the grading plan in the most final status when it is
reviewed by the Planning Commission which will minimize the likelihood of as -
graded conditions beyond the original scope of approval being presented to the
Planning Commission is an "as -graded" modification fashion.
Proposed Modifications
As stated earlier, the County reviews not only the grading plan but the soils and
geology reports required for the grading permit following approval of the project by
the Planning Commission. Staff proposes to implement the following which can be
implemented by staff on a discretionary basis depending upon the quantity, location,
or sensitivity of the graded area. Discretionary implementation of these procedures
would be as follows:
Step 1,: Upon reviewing an initial plan being submitted for Planning
Commission review, staff will have the discretion to request that the County soils
engineering geology personnel review that plan to determine its probable feasibility
as presented on the grading plan itself. This would serve as an administrative
review of the plan by the County.
Step 2: If it is felt that the grading represents activity that is more sensitive,
staff will require the County to conduct a field inspection of the proposed site and
-2-
grading plan beyond the administrative review (Step 1). This will be conducted
during normal working hours and will involve staff, the applicant and the County.
Step 3: If the grading plan appears to be highly sensitive, staff will require the
applicant to prepare the soils and geology reports to be submitted and evaluated by
the County prior to submission of the case to the Planning Commission.
It is our hope that implementing one or more of these steps will enable the
Planning Commission to review a grading plan that has been evaluated in terms of
its feasibility in the field. It is also felt that staff currently has the discretion to
require this information of applicants. However, this represents a change in the
way we currently conduct business and it is hoped that presentation of this
information to the Planning Commission will assist staff in implementing these
new procedures.
Costs For This Increased Service
Currently, the County already charges the City and the applicant for review of a soils
and geology report in conjunction with a grading permit. These costs will not
change.
However, office review of grading plans (Step 1) are estimated to take approximately
2-4 hours at the County office at $56.00 per hour. Therefore, the cost for the office
review is estimated to be $112.00-224.00 per project.
1 staff initiates the second level (Step 2) and requires a field visit by the County
personnel, that cost is estimated to be an additional $280.00 per project. Therefore,
approximate costs associated with a field review prior to Planning Commission
review will be $329.00-504.00.
Presently, staff is not proposing to amend the fees associated with the site plan
review process to cover any of these costs. It is recommended that we embark on
these new review procedures and review any amendments to our fee schedule in
the future as appropriate.
It is not staff's desire to create unnecessary delays for applications. That is primarily
why we have recommended that staff have the discretion to implement Step 1, 2 or
3 depending upon the scope and nature of the project. According to the County of
Los Angeles, it is estimated that the office review of the grading plan will take
approximately 5 days. To complete a field review with the office review, will take
just a few days longer.
Clearly, if we require an applicant to prepare the soils and geology reports prior to
submission to the Planning Commission, delays will result. However, it should be
understood that the preparation of a soils and geology report is already required by
an applicant. However, this is normally completed following Planning
Commission approval for a project.
-3-
Summary
It cannot be over -emphasized that it is staff's goal to present to the Planning
Commission the most accurate grading plan as possible. It is hoped that these added
procedures will assist applicants with presenting a more detailed grading plan so
there are fewer amendments following actual approval.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that members of the Planning Commission consider these
recommendations and provide a recommendation to the City Council.
CRN:mlk
gradconfproc.sta
-4-
4/5/97
Craig:
Following our meeting the other day in your office, I reread the your Memo
entitled: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
REGARDING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE GRADING CONFIRMATION
PROCESS. Somehow in the last Planning Commission meeting, we focused on
our differences in the use of specification tolerances for grading quantities. It all
got started from the word "confirmation" in the title of the memo itself which
sidetracked the main issue. Because of our meeting, I better understand where
the ideas are focused. I have the following thoughts:
1. I basically agree with the concept put forth in the memo of providing an
improved process resulting in more realism in deriving grading estimates before
the applicant comes before the Planning Commission. THis improvement should
"drive" the estimated numbers much closer to their final graded values. The
applicant will benefit from a better estimate of the size and cost of the job. This
will save the Planning Commission a lot of time as the projected numbers should
be accurate enough that a second or third appearance before us, caused by
overly "optimistic" numbers, will be unnecessary.
2. I recommend you change the word "Confirmation" in the memo title, to
"Estimation"
3. Staff has identified a serious problem in the first paragraph on p2 of the
memo. That is, that key persons(like soils engineer, geologist and/or field
engineer) on the job were not consistently reporting non-conformance to the
grading plan. Where is the flaw in this process? Obviously, this problem has to
be rectified. I would hope that the "Notice" that I offered on the subject of
"Unapproved Site Development" would help put some extra teeth in our code
requirements re the actions/inactions of contracting professionals.
Arvel h
PS A thought on estimating grading quantities shrinkage: Shrinkage quantities
need to be estimated not as a percentage of the net cut and fill quantities, but
rather on the basis of overall excavation quantities which are moved. I think it'd
be a good idea to have total grading quantities identified & documented at our
meetings in addition to net quantities which we currently require. That way, we all
could be sensitive to shrinkage, especially when fill quantities are being counted
on for a specific use other than just spreading the fill over the property. Take an
example where cut and fill are approved at 1000 cu. yds, but 10,000 cu. yds. are
moved to stabilize the property. Assuming 10% shrinkage on 10,000 cu. yds.,
there'd be no fill dirt left for the cut and fill balance and, the shortage exceeds the
export criterion.
C144 0/ /20 1l..y
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90271
(310) 377-1321
FAX (310) 377.7288
E -malt citydrt@ad.coat
Agenda Item No.: 3-E
Mtg. Date: 02103/97
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING GRADING
CONFIRMATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE MODIFICATION
PROCESS.
DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 1997
BACKGROUND
At the regular City Council meeting held Monday, January 27, 1997, Councilmember
Tom Heinsheimer requested that this item be presented at this evening's meeting.
Grading Confirmation Process
Currently, the County of Los Angeles provides grading inspection and plan check
services to the City of Rolling Hills through a contract. The County of Los Angeles
serves as the City's Building and Safety Inspector in this capacity.
A grading permit isrequired when the cut or fill exceeds 3 feet or the disturbance
exceeds 2,000 sq. ft. of the existing ground surface. Authority for this permit
requirement is provided under Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 15.04.120
(attached). According to Los Angeles County District Engineer Lata Thakar, 85% of
the grading permit applications in the City of Rolling Hills are handled through the
Los Angeles County office in Alhambra.
In cases where grading is proposed on an undeveloped lot, the site is visited by the
Los Angeles County Geologist from Alhambra prior to the issuance of a grading
permit. If, however, the grading is proposed on a developed lot, an inspection is
normally not conducted by the County Geologist. The remaining 15% of grading
permits generally involve minor requests which are handled through the local
County offices in Lomita.
-1-
p. - ., P,., , : c ,: •
Following issuance of the grading permit, major deviations from the approved
grading plan are reported to the County through the normal building inspection
process handled by the local inspector out of the Lomita office. In all of the
inspection procedures, the plans submitted by the engineer for the project weigh
heavily in the determination of the appropriateness of the grading. All plans are
required to be stamped and certified by a certified civil engineer as accurate and
correct.
From time to time, staff is alerted to alleged violations of approved soil
import/export conditions on specific lots. Staff has implemented the following
changes to our procedures to help alleviate this activity in the future.
First, we have modifiedthe presentation of our staff reports to include a separate
paragraph identifying whether a basement is included in a proposed development.
The City does not generally regulate basements, however, they are regulated by the
County for safety purposes.
Our site plan review application contains a question as to whether a basement is
proposed in conjunction with a specific development. However, even when that
application is submitted indicating that a basement is not proposed, oftentimes
when the building plan is submitted to the County for plan check, it contains a
basement. This results in excess soil which, if it cannot be balanced on the site
becomes available for exportation.
It is our hope that adding a declaration to each staff report that a basement is or is
not proposed, that handling of any excess soil on site can be addressed during the
Planning Commission public hearing process.
Second, we have significantly changed our procedures for the administrative
approval of the export or import of soil authorized under Sections 15.04.150 and
15.04.170 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. Highlights of these changes include
the requirement that a certified engineer must submit this request and that the
County will conduct a pre-import/export inspection, a during construction
import/export inspection and a post import/export inspection. Correspondence to
area engineers and graders regarding this new procedure is included with this staff
report.
Third, we are finalizing our Planning Department property profile system which
will eventually enhance the application process and add another level of detailed
information that will be considered by the Planning Commission. We anticipate
that we will have a demonstration ready for this system in early March.
Administrative Modifications to Development
Section 15.04.150 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code prohibits the export or import
of soil to or from any lot in the City. Additionally, that Section requires that grading
plans shall only be approved for grading that is balanced on the site. Paragraph (3) of
-2-
that Section allows the City Manager to grant an exception to the requirements of
the import/export or balanced cut and fill requirements under specified conditions.
These conditions include that construction of a structure on the lot or parcel has
commenced, that the need to import or export the soil could not have been foreseen
prior to commencement of construction, and, that either the structure cannot be
completed without the requested import or export of soil or that an emergency
condition exists due to the threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
Additionally, Section 17.16.230 of the Municipal Code entitled "Balanced Grading
Required", establishes the prohibition of export or import of materials in connection
with any grading performed in the City.
Under Section 17.46.070 of the Municipal Code entitled "Subsequent Modifications",
the City Manager has the authority to review and act upon minor modifications to
development projects. The Planning Commission reserves the right to review and
act upon major modifications.
Under Paragraph (C) of that Section, evidence of an approved minor modification
shall be provided in writing to the property owner and shall be filed with the
original site plan review approval.
Traditionally, minor modifications usually involve minor additional structures to
an approved project in an area that was not considered the subject of contention
during the original site plan application. Minor modifications are determined by
the nature of the amendment and how that portion of the project was received at
the Planning Commission level.
In all of the cases, either a stamped City approval on a request for the minor
amendment by the applicant or a formal letter of approval for the amendment is
included in the case file for that particular property.
Reasons that administrative modifications are granted include:
• A modification at the request of the applicant which does not drastically change
the scope of the project.
• A modification at the request of adjoining property owners to settle matters of
differences.
RECOMMENDATION
It would be in order for members of the Rolling Hills City Council and Planning
Commission to consider this report and provide appropriate direction to staff. The
City Council may wish to consider if they would like staff to return with a report
with recommendations on how to improve the grading inspection/site plan
analysis procedures.
CRN:mlk
gradsng sta
-3-
15.04.120 Section 3306.1 amended. Section 3306.1 of
the Building Code is amended to read:
Section 3306.1: A person shall not perform any
grading without first obtaining a grading permit to do
so from the Building Official. A separate permit
shall be obtained for each site.
EXCEPTIONS: A grading permit shall not be required
for:
(8) An excavation and/or fill or a combination
thereof which is less than three feet in depth below
the existing ground surface, provided that said exca-
vation and/or fill or combination thereof which is
less than three feet in depth does not cover more than
2,000 square feet of existing ground surface.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
JOOY klUAOOC.K
Maye
8. ALLEN LAY
Ma)u PhD Tom
T}IOMAS F. FENSHEIMER
C tivI'nemDo►
FRANC E. Hu.
Carchrento
00 PERNELL O.O.S.
c,0 *ernbe►
December 6, 1996
City (Potting JAIL
INCORPORATED JANUARY 29, 19$7
SENT TO ATTACHED LIST
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROILING NILLS. CALIF. 90274
W01371.1621
FAX D110) 377.12941
Emit cltyoly 4sc.00m
Sections 15.04.150 through 15.04.180 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code provide the
conditions and authority for the importation or exportation of soil to and from a
development site following the commencement of construction. This provision
was added to the Rolling Hills Municipal Code in 1991. From time to time, the City
receives complaints that importation or exportation of soil may have exceeded the
quantity of soil permitted. We have handled these complaints on a case -by -case
basis and have worked with the professionals in charge of the developments on
these sites. This process has not proved to be completely effective.
ation or
It has come to our w thoutn at too often the knowledgee of theLtted City.level of It seemsn haft the vast
exportation is exceeded g
majority of soil exportation occurs on projects where a basement is added to a
residential development after approvals have been granted by the Planning
Commission. Although the City does not generally regulate basements beyond
building safety, the movement of soil to and from properties is a genuine concern to
the City. The addition of a basement on a previously balanced cut and fill project
may lead to the availability of soil which then may result in the importation of soil
to another property in the community. The Site Plan Review Application already
contains a question for the applicant to identify whether or not a basement is
proposed for a residential development project.
Page 2
Therefore, in order to maintain the integrity of the process and in fairness to all
parties, we are implementing the following changes for consideration of
importation or exportation of soil on development projects.
Effective immediately, basement soil cuts shall be included in all balanced cut and
fill ratios when any application is submitted. Additionally, a separate paragraph will
be included in staff reports presented to the Planning Commission identifying
whether the plicant has declared that a basement will or not__ a pa o e
uroieci.
For importation or exportation of soil following commencement of construction,
effective immediately, written requests will only be considered by the City when
they are submitted by a certified civil engineer on engineering company letterhead.
The letter must contain the information required under the Municipal Code
(attached).
When this letter is presented, the County will conduct (1) a pre -soil
importation/exportation inspection on all affected properties, (2) inspection during
the actual transfer of soil, and (3) a follow-up inspection upon completion of the soil
transfer. At that point, a signed letter by the certified civil engineer will be required
and must state the quantity of soil that was actually exchanged. Quantity of soil per
truck, and number of truck trips information must also be included. Failure to
comply with these provisions will result in a stop work order.
We understand that from time to time, conditions in the field warrant the
importation or exportation of soil. However, when it is anticipated that the export
or import exceeds the specifically authorized quantity or 500 cubic yards maximum,,
it is imperative that City staff be contacted immediately to address the situation.
Provisions to seek a Variance exist in the Municipal Code or remedies are available
at the staff level to address these situations.
Additionally, should the County of Los Angeles require soil importation or
exportation to satisfy safety issues, you must contact City staff immediately so that
we can become involved in this process as early as possible.
Disregard of these provisions cannot be tolerated. Should these provisions be
violated, staff will have no choice, but to forward violations to the office of the
District Attorney.
We appreciate your cooperation and look forward to maintaining the orderly
development of properties in this community. We hope to work with you to assist
you in completing your paperwork, but ask that accurate information be provided at
all stages of the development process.
OD-
Page 3
Should you wish to discuss any of this further, you are urged to contact this office at
your convenience. As always, our City Hall office doors remain open and we are
willing to discuss any aspects of this situation that you deem necessary.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
y,A
Craig R. Nealis
City Manager
CRN:mtk
soi rmpo►t/enpo•1.Q rs
cc City Council
City Attorney
Planning Commission
RHCA Board of Directors
Peggy Minor, RHCA Manager
RHCA Architectural Committee
Lola Ungar, Principal Planner
Lata Thakar, District Engineer
Rafael Bernal, Building Inspector
Ed Acosta, Building Inspector
74, Gump Slow
Geer. Cats% 1esl A»o,vtes.
AJA AesociMs
2312? ik.worm lit
Unimak CA10!03
Mr. Ti. Moran
Tare Oe.eapraal he.
4219 ClMiyaa Aoa.
tore Duck CA 90601
Mr. Ras N. t#s9tar
Bottom Sagioserirs Corporroor
2603 Cora Rrd1c Reed
Rardro Pars Verdes, CA
90273
W Darryl Akin
O ►kr Cs.rsis Associates
17123 Orman, Bi t
Tomes. CA 90304
W Dog *Ron
Soar Ile, Eapre^st
304 Top Rao
Poke Verdes Eauuc CA 90274
Me Gear Swe4
94 up Caw
rocs Verde Gaarn► CA 90174
W. Nap L battcam
Wind Canty Scan Associates.
MA A Asaacisaes
n721 Naama+e s.A
Tames, CA 90503
III. Aarlrw7 Worm
1x7 Upland Si.
Lando Nos Verdes. CA
Ma Sarkis R. tlr.d
Sake i+tinarias Cor►ormio4
260) Cara R.dr Rand
Ranch Nos 'lades. CA
90273
W. Cries Cardenas
Cries CMd. non A,chncl
1610 S Eli*. An . Ste )0)
Ram* a. ac* CA 90010
W. Rep Moral
Rotor+os Non! A,c d.cs
I1360 hats pea Aso, Su 200
Tames. CA 90301
Mr Dena hair.
P.O la 7154
Lapis Nigel. CA 12607
W. flares Main
%air std Maociate
211$ ►wtc Cow Ni9k.s7
Tarns. CA 90306
W. Q.id Ilreato4
Dear* oat. EwSirsoi11. Isc.
1132 Lawn 11.1
Losnt CA 90717
W Raid tick
Rwrd Lode £ Auonatn
2 7C A". WA Cave, Si. 700
Tansna.CA 90501
W Loma. Sarnia,
RoAaos Niok Arelrtecis
19360 hw DO AIM. Sr 200
Tourer. CA 90301
.15.04.ISC ction 7015.4 amended. ' Lon 7015 of
the BUTTER, .ode, entitled •Excavation_,• __ amended to
add subsection 7015.4 to read:
7015.4 BALANCED CUT AND FILL RATIO.
1. No export or import of soil shall be permitted
from or to any lot in the City.
2. No grading plan for which a permit is required
shall be approved unless the amount of soil to be cut
from the site equals the amount of soil to be filled
on the site.
3. The City Manager may grant an exception to the
'requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph (d) to
allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed
500 cubic yards if he or she finds, based upon written
reports and other information submitted, that all of
the following conditions are present: (a) construc-
tion of a structure on the lot or parcel has com-
menced, (b) that the need to import or export the soil
could not have been foreseen prior to commencement of
construction, and (c) that either the structure cannot
be completed without the requested import or export of
soil or. that. an emergency condition exists due to the
threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
173 (Rolling Hills 5/96)
15.__.160--15.04.170
15.04.160 Subsection 7016.3 amended. Subsection
7016.1 of Section7016ofthe Building Code, entitled 'Fill
Slope,' is
7016.3 FILL SLOPE. Fill slopes shall not exceed a
steepness of two horizontal to one vertical, or exceed
a vertical height of thirty (30') feet, unless the
owner receives a variance for a steeper or higher
vertical height fill slope from the Planning Commis -
Ilion of the City of Rolling Hills, pursuant to the
provisions of Title 17 of the Municipal Code of the
City. In applying for a variance to the provisions of
this paragraph, the owner shall submit soil test data
and engineering calculations and shall provide in
writing any specific safety and/or stability problems
on the property that presently exist or may exist if
the requested variance is
granted and the proposed
grading plans are approved.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
15.04.170 Subsection 7016.9 added. Subsection 7016
of the Building Code, entitled 'Fills,' is amended to add a
new subsection 7016.9 to read:
7016.9 BALANCED CUT AND FILL RATIO.
1. No export or import of soil shall be permitted
from or to any lot in the City.
2. No grading plan for which a permit is required
shall be approved unless the amount of soil to be cut
from the site equals the amount of soil to be filled
on the site.
3. The City Manager may grant an exception to the
requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph (d) to
allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed
500 cubic yards if he or she finds, based upon written
reports and other information submitted, that all of
the following conditions are present: (a) construc-
tion of a structure on the lot or parcel has com-
menced, (b) that the need to import or export the soil
could not have been foreseen prior to commencement of
construction, and (c) that either the structure cannot
be completed without the requested import or export of
soil or that an emergency condition exists due to the
threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
(Ord. 257-U S1(part), 1995).
174 (Rolling Hills 5/96)
15.04.180--15.08.010
15.04.180 Violations and penalties. A. It is un-
lawful for any person to erect, construct, enlarge, alter,
repair, move, improve, remove, convert, demolish, equip,
use, occupyor maintain any building or structure or per-
form any grading in the City of Rolling Hills, or cause the
same to be done, contrary to or in violation of any of the
provisions of the. Building Code.
B. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violat-
ing any of the provisions of the Building Code shall be
deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person shall
be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every
day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of
the provisions of the Building Code is committed, continued
or permitted, and upon conviction of any such violation
such person shall be punishable by a fine of, not more than
one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail
for a period of not more than six months, or by both such
fine and imprisonment. (Ord. 257-U S1(part), 1995).
17.16.230 Balanced aradina required. Per the re-
quirements of the City's Building Code (Title 15 of the
Municipal Code), no export of cut materials nor import of
fill materials shall be permitted in connection with any
grading performed in the City, unless otherwise permitted
by the provisions of Title 15. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993).
17.46.070 qubseauent modification. A. After a site
plan review application has been approved, modification of
the approved plans and/or any conditions imposed, including
additions or deletions, may be considered by the City Man-
ager or the Planning Commission. The City Manager or his
designee shall have the authority to review and act upon
minor modifications, and the Planning Commission shall have
the authority to review and act upon major modifications,
as prescribed in the following paragraphs. The City Manag-
er shall establish criteria for minor and major modifica-
tions.
B. Any property owner, or his designated representa-
tive, seeking to modify an approved site plan review shall
notify the City Manager of the intent. The property owner
shall provide the City Manager, or his designee, with two
copies of the modified plans and a written description of
the proposed modifications. The City Manager, or his
designee, shall determine whether the proposed modifica-
tions are considered minor modifications or major modifica-
tions.
C. Minor modifications may be approved by the City
Manager, or his designee, as an administrative item and
shall not require a public hearing or notice. Evidence of
an approved minor modification shall be provided in writing
to the property owner and shall be filed with the original
site plan review approval. An action of the City Manager
to deny a request for minor modifications may be appealed
to the Planning Commission as provided for in Chapter
17.54.
D. Major modifications shall be considered a new pro-
ject. As such, a new application for Site Plan Review
shall be required, and the application shall be reviewed as
provided for in this chapter. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993).
Grp o/l? 1F.n9
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: LOLA UNGAR, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: GRADING PENALTIES/SAFEGUARDS
DATE: APRIL 15, 1997
As you know, at the City Council meeting held Monday, April 14th, several issues
relating to the above mentioned topic were discussed by the City Council. Please
study these issues regarding economic penalties and/or other disincentives for after
the fact grading with the Assistant City Attorney. Further, please identify methods
of increasing the monitoring of a project, with a possible fee structure to provide for
weekend monitoring.
Please also determine the feasibility/status of licensing graders and methods to hold
the property owner and the grader/engineering official accountable for any
deviations from an approved grading plan.
I do not expect this to be an overnight task. However, you should plan on having
this in front of the Planning Commission no later than July, 1997. Thank you for
your cooperation.
CRN:mlk
grading/pe.mem
®Printed on Rni ycied Paper
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
City 0/ leffiny
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
Agenda Item No.: 4-A
Mtg. Date: 04/14/97
HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE
PLANNING COMMISSION REGARDING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
GRADING PLAN CONFIRMATION PROCESS.
DATE: MARCH 14, 1997
• BACKGROUND
At the regular meeting of the Rolling Hills Planning Commission held Tuesday,
March 15, 1997, Planning Commissioners recommended that the City Council
approve the attached proposal relating to changes in the grading plan confirmation
process prior to plans being submitted to the Planning Commission.
As indicated in the attached report, it is staff's goal to have the most accurate
information as possible presented to the Planning Commission. Oftentimes,
conditions in the field become evident after a grading site plan is approved, which
necessitate amendments to the grading plan.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that members of the City Council approve this report as
presented or provide appropriate direction.
CRN:mlk
ccgradconf.sta
cliv
0/ i2lL•ny Jijid
9D
INCORPORATGO JANUARY 21, 1937
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377.1521
FAX (310) 377.7288
E•mait cityolrl►Oao&com
Agenda Item No.: 9-D
Mtg. Date: 03/18/97
TO: HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
REGARDING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE GRADING
CONFIRMATION PROCESS.
DATE: MARCH 18, 1997
BACKGROUND
At the joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission held on
Monday, February 3rd, a report was presented regarding the grading confirmation
process. At that time, staff was directed to return to the Planning Commission with
recommendations on how to improve the grading inspection/site plan analysis
procedures. A copy of that staff report is attached for your information.
As indicated in that report, a grading permit is required when the cut or fill exceeds
3 feet or the disturbance exceeds 2,000 sq. ft. of the existing ground surface.
Currently, the grading plan inspection services are provided through the County of
Los Angeles. Eight -five percent (85%) of the grading permit applications are
handled through the Los Angeles County office in Alhambra. The remaining
fifteen percent (15%) are handled through the County Lomita office.
Currently, if a grading plan does not involve the construction of a new structure, a
visit to the actual site is not conducted by the County soils and geology engineer. In
most cases, involving minor grading, this probably does not present an issue. In
cases where a new structure is proposed, the County soils and geology personnel
inspect the site. In either case, recommendations/amendments from the County are
provided to the grading contractor/engineer.
Therefore, the situation can arise where the grading plan that was presented to the
Planning Commission must be amended to meet either safety standards imposed by
the County and/or address soils conditions that have been identified in the soils and
-1-
engineering report. This report is the responsibility of the applicant and is required
by the County. This can result in a significant change .to the grading plan that was
considered by the Planning Commission. Currently, these deviations are resolved
through staff approval of the revised grading plan (Minor modification RHMC
17.46.070 A,B,C) or a reapplication before the Planning Commission (Major
modification RHMC 17.46.070 A,D).
The County relies heavily on the civil engineer's stamped plan that is submitted by
the engineer for a particular project. Specifically, Section 7020.5 of the 1994 Uniform
Building Code requires the field engineer, soils, engineer or engineering geologist to
notify the building official in writing of non-conformance with an approved
grading plan. However, history has show us that often times these corrections take
place without the County or the City being advised of the need to amend the grading
plan.
Goal of Proposed Grading Plan Check Modifications
The goal of modifying the grading plan check procedures for the City of Rolling
Hills is quite simple. It is staffs desire to have the Planning Commission review, as
closely as possible, what represents the actual proposed grading activity in the field
when they are considering plans during the public hearing process. We recognize,
however, that there may be deviations based upon actual field conditions which
cannot be handled until they are actually encountered in the field.
Our second goal is to have the grading plan in the most final status when it is
reviewed by the Planning Commission which will minimize the likelihood of as -
graded conditions beyond the original scope of approval being presented to the
Planning Commission is an "as -graded" modification fashion.
Proposed Modifications
As stated earlier, the County reviews not only the grading plan but the soils and
geology reports required for the grading permit following approval of the project by
the Planning Commission. Staff proposes to implement the following which can be
implemented by staff on a discretionary basis depending upon the quantity, location,
or sensitivity of the graded area. Discretionary implementation of these procedures
would be as follows:
Step 1: Upon reviewing an initial plan being submitted for Planning
Commission review, staff will have the discretion to request that the County soils
engineering geology personnel review that plan to determine its probable feasibility
as presented on the grading plan itself. This would serve as an administrative
review of the plan by the County.
Step 2: If it is felt that the grading represents activity that is more sensitive,
staff will require the County to conduct a field inspection of the proposed site and
-2-
grading plan beyond the administrative review (Step 1). This will be conducted
during normal working hours and will involve staff, the applicant and the County.
Step 3: If the grading plan appears to be highly sensitive, staff will require the
applicant to prepare the soils and geology reports to be submitted and evaluated by
the County prior to submission of the case to the Planning Commission.
It is our hope that implementing one or more of these steps will enable the
Planning Commission to review a grading plan that has been evaluated in terms of
its feasibility in the field. It is also felt that staff currently has the discretion to
require this information of applicants. However, this represents a change in the
way we currently conduct business and it is hoped that presentation of this
information to the Planning Commission will assist staff in implementing these
new procedures.
Costs For This Increased Service
Currently, the County already charges the City and the applicant for review of a soils
and geology report in conjunction with a grading permit. These costs will not
change.
However, office review of grading plans (Step 1) are estimated to take approximately
2-4 hours at the County office at $56.00 per hour. Therefore, the cost for the office
review is estimated to be $112.00-224.00 per project.
If staff initiates the second level (Step 2) and requires a field visit by the County
personnel, that cost is estimated to be an additional $280.00 per project. Therefore,
approximate costs associated with a field review prior to Planning Commission
review will be $329.00-504.00.
Presently, staff is not proposing to amend the fees associated with the site plan
review process to cover any of these costs. It is recommended that we embark on
these new review procedures and review any amendments to our fee schedule in
the future as appropriate.
It is not staff's desire to create unnecessary delays for applications. That is primarily
why we have recommended that staff have the discretion to implement Step 1, 2 or
3 depending upon the scope and nature of the project. According to the County of
Los Angeles, it is estimated that the office review of the grading plan will take
approximately 5 days. To complete a field review with the office review, will take
just a few days longer.
Clearly, if we require an applicant to prepare the soils and geology reports prior to
submission to the Planning Commission, delays will result. However, it should be
understood that the preparation of a soils and geology report is already required by
an applicant. However, this is normally completed following Planning
Commission approval for a project.
-3-
Summary
It cannot be over -emphasized that it is staff's goal to present to the Planning
Commission the most accurate grading plan as possible. It is hoped that these added
procedures will assist applicants with presenting a more detailed grading plan so
there are fewer amendments following actual approval.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that members of the Planning Commission consider these
recommendations and provide a recommendation to the City Council.
CRN:mlk
gradconfproc.sta
-4-
4/5/97
Craig:
Following our meeting the other day in your office, I reread the your Memo
entitled: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
REGARDING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE GRADING CONFIRMATION
PROCESS. Somehow in the last Planning Commission meeting, we focused on
our differences in the use of specification tolerances for grading quantities. It all
got started from the word "confirmation" in the title of the memo itself which
sidetracked the main issue. Because of our meeting, I better understand where
the ideas are focused. I have the following thoughts:
1. I basically agree with the concept put forth in the memo of providing an
improved process resulting in more realism in deriving grading estimates before
the applicant comes before the Planning Commission. THis improvement should
"drive" the estimated numbers much closer to their final graded values. The
applicant will benefit from a better estimate of the size and cost of the job. This
will save the Planning Commission a lot of time as the projected numbers should
be accurate enough that a second or third appearance before us, caused by
overly "optimistic" numbers, will be unnecessary.
2. I recommend you change the word "Confirmation" in the memo title, to
"Estimation"
3. Staff has identified a serious problem in the first paragraph on p2 of the
memo. That is, that key persons(Iike soils engineer, geologist and/or field
engineer) on the job were not consistently reporting non-conformance to the
grading plan. Where is the flaw in this process? Obviously, this problem has to
be rectified. I would hope that the "Notice" that I offered on the subject of
"Unapproved Site Development" would help put some extra teeth in our code
requirements re the actions/nactions of contracting professionals.
Arvel
PS A thought on estimating grading quantities shrinkage: Shrinkage quantities
need to be estimated not as a percentage of the net cut and fill quantities, but
rather on the basis of overall excavation quantities which are moved. I think it'd
be a good idea to have total grading quantities identified & documented at our
meetings in addition to net quantities which we currently require. That way, we all
could be sensitive to shrinkage, especially when fill quantities are being counted
on for a specific use other than just spreading the fill over the property. Take an
example where cut and fill are approved at 1000 cu. yds, but 10,000 cu. yds. are
moved to stabilize the property. Assuming 10% shrinkage on 10,000 cu. yds.,
there'd be no fill dirt left for the cut and fill balance and, the shortage exceeds the
export criterion.
C1ty o` l?>!P•ny Jh//J
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(3101377.1521
FAX (310) 377.7288
E-mail eiydrh@aottom
Agenda Item No.: 3-E
Mtg. Date: 02/03/97
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING GRADING
CONFIRMATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE MODIFICATION
PROCESS.
DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 1997
BACKGROUND
At the regular City Council meeting held Monday, January 27, 1997, Councilmember
Tom Heinsheimer requested that this item be presented at this evening's meeting.
Grading Confirmation Process
Currently, the County of Los Angeles provides grading inspection and plan check
services to the City of Rolling Hills through a contract. The County of Los Angeles
serves as the City's Building and Safety Inspector in this capacity.
A grading permit is required when the cut or fill exceeds 3 feet or the disturbance
exceeds 2,000 sq. ft. of the existing ground surface. Authority for this permit
requirement is provided under Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 15.04.120
(attached). According to Los Angeles County District Engineer Lata Thakar, 85% of
the grading permit applications in the City of Rolling Hills are handled through the
Los Angeles County office in Alhambra.
In cases where grading is proposed on an undeveloped lot, the site is visited by the
Los Angeles County Geologist from Alhambra prior to the issuance of a grading
permit. If, however, the grading is proposed on a developed lot, an inspection is
normally not conducted by the County Geologist. The remaining 15% of grading
permits generally involve minor requests which are handled through the local
County offices in Lomita.
l
-1-
Following issuance of the grading permit, major deviations from the approved
grading plan are reported to the County through the normal building inspection
process handled by the local inspector out of the Lomita office. In all of the
inspection procedures, the plans submitted by the engineer for the project weigh
heavily in the determination of the appropriateness of the grading. All plans are
required to be stamped and certified by a certified civil engineer as accurate and
correct.
From time to time, staff is alerted to alleged violations of approved soil
import/export conditions on specific lots. Staff has implemented the following
changes to our procedures to help alleviate this activity in the future.
First, we have modified the presentation of our staff reports to include a separate
paragraph identifying whether a basement is included in a proposed development.
The City does not generally regulate basements, however, they are regulated by the
County for safety purposes.
Our site plan review application contains a question as to whether a basement is
proposed in conjunction with a specific development. However, even when that
application is submitted indicating that a basement is not proposed, oftentimes
when the building plan is submitted to the County for plan check, it contains a
basement. This results in excess soil which, if it cannot be balanced on the site
becomes available for exportation.
It is our hope that adding a declaration to each staff report that a basement is or is
not proposed, that handling of any excess soil on site can be addressed during the
Planning Commission public hearing process.
Second, we have significantly changed our procedures for the administrative
approval of the export or import of soil authorized under Sections 15.04.150 and
15.04.170 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. Highlights of these changes include
the requirement that a certified engineer must submit this request and that the
County will conduct a pre-import/export inspection, a during construction
import/export inspection and a post import/export inspection. Correspondence to
area engineers and graders regarding this new procedure is included with this staff
report.
Third, we are finalizing our Planning Department property profile system which
will eventually enhance the application process and add another level of detailed
information that will be considered by the Planning Commission. We anticipate
that we will have a demonstration ready for this system in early March.
Administrative Modifications to Development
Section 15.04.150 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code prohibits the export or import
of soil to or from any lot in the City. Additionally, that Section requires that grading
plans shall only be approved for grading that is balanced on the site. Paragraph (3) of
-2-
that Section allows the City Manager to grant an exception to the requirements of
the import/export or balanced cut and fill requirements under specified conditions.
These conditions include that construction of a structure on the lot or parcel has
commenced, that the need to import or export the soil could not have been foreseen
prior to commencement of construction, and, that either the structure cannot be
completed without the requested import or export of soil or that an emergency
condition exists due to the threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
Additionally, Section 17.16.230 of the Municipal Code entitled "Balanced Grading
Required", establishes the prohibition of export or import of materials in connection
with any grading performed in the City.
Under Section 17.46.070 of the Municipal Code entitled "Subsequent Modifications",
the City Manager has the authority to review and act upon minor modifications to
development projects. The Planning Commission reserves the .right to review and
act upon major modifications.
Under Paragraph (C) of that Section, evidence of an approved minor modification
shall be provided in writing to the property owner and shall be filed with the
original site plan review approval.
Traditionally, minor modifications usually involve minor additional structures to
an approved project in an area that was not considered the subject of contention
during the original site plan application. Minor modifications are determined by
the nature of the amendment and how that portion of the project was received at
the Planning Commission level.
In all of the cases, either a stamped City approval on a request for the minor
amendment by the applicant or a formal letter of approval for the amendment is
included in the case file for that particular property.
Reasons that administrative modifications are granted include:
• A modification at the request of the applicant which does not drastically change
the scope of the project.
• A modification at the request of adjoining property owners to settle matters of
differences.
RECOMMENDATION
It would be in order for members of the Rolling Hills City Council and Planning
Commission to consider this report and provide appropriate direction to staff. The
City Council may wish to consider if they would like staff to return with a report
with recommendations on how to improve the grading inspection/site plan
analysis procedures.
CRN:mlk
grading sta
-3-
15.04.120 Section 3306.1 amended. Section 3306.1 of
the Building Code is amended to read:
Section 3306.1: A person shall not perform any
grading without first obtaining a grading permit to do
so from the Building Official. A separate permit
shall be obtained for each site.
EXCEPTIONS: A grading permit shall not be required
for:
(8) An excavation and/or fill or a combination
thereof which is less than three feet in depth below
the existing ground surface, provided that said exca-
vation and/or fill or combination thereof which is
less than three feet in depth does not cover more than
2,000 square feet of existing ground surface.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
JooY M PON
Maya
e. ALLEN uY
Mayor pro rem
THOW S F. I EINSN£IMER
Camirentity
FRANKEHILL
aulamentef
OO PEiiNELL. O.O.S.
Cour cRnembe►
December 6, 1996
Coy Jiiit
INCORPORAT&O JANUARY 24, 11$7
SENT TO. ATTACHED LIST
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE SENO ROAD
ROLLING HILLS.,CALIF. 10214
13101377.1121
FAX qto! 311.72111
E•m.R atyormvea.cam
Sections 15.04.150 through 15.04.180 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code provide the
conditions and authority for the importation or exportation of soil to and from a
development site following the commencement of construction. This provision
was added to the Rolling Hills Municipal Code in 1991. From time to time, the City
receives complaints that importation or exportation of soil may have exceeded the
quantity of soil permitted. We have handled these complaints on a case -by -case
basis and have worked with the professionals in charge of the developments on
these sites. This process has not proved to be completely effective.
It has come to our attention that too often the permitted level of importation or
exportation is exceeded without the knowledge of the City. It seems that the vast
majority of soil exportation occurs on projects where a basement is added to a
residential development after approvals have been granted by the Planning
Commission. Although the City does not generally regulate basements beyond
building safety, the movement of soil to and from properties is a genuine concern to
the City. The addition of a basement on a previously balanced cut and fill project
may lead to the availability of soil which then may result in the importation of soil
to another property in the community. The Site Plan Review Application already
contains a question for the applicant to identify whether or not a basement is
proposed for a residential development project.
Page 2
•
Therefore, in order to maintain the integrity of the process and in fairness to all
parties, we are implementing the following changes for consideration of
importation or exportation of soil on development projects.
Effective immediately, basement soil cuts shall be included in all balanced cut and
fill ratios when any application is submitted. Additionally, a separate paragraph wiU
be included in staff reports presented to the Planning Commission identifying
whether the pphcant has declared that a basement will or will not_ a part o t e
Mc.
For importation or exportation of soil following commencement of construction,
effective immediately, written requests will only be considered by the City when
homey are submitted by a certified civil engineer on engineering company letterhead.
The letter must contain the information required under the Municipal Code
(attached).
When this letter is presented, the County will conduct (1) a pre -soil
importation/exportation inspection on all affected properties, (2) inspection during
the actual transfer of soil, and (3) a follow-up inspection upon completion of the soil
transfer. At that point, a signed letter by the certified civil engineer will be required
and must state the quantity of soil that was actually exchanged. Quantity of soil per
truck, and number of truck trips information must also be included. Failure to
comply with these provisions will result in a stop work order.
We understand that from time to time, conditions in the field warrant the
importation or exportation of soil. However, when it is anticipated that the export
or import exceeds the specifically authorized quantity or 500 cubic yards maximum,.
it is imperative that City staff be contacted immediately to address the situation.
Provisions to seek a Variance exist in the Municipal Code or remedies are available
at the staff level to address these situations.
Additionally, should the County of Los Angeles require soil importation or
exportation to satisfy safety issues, you must contact City staff immediately so that
we can become involved in this process as early as possible.
Disregard of these provisions cannot be tolerated. Should these provisions be
violated, staff will have no choice, but to forward violations to the office of the
District Attorney.
We appreciate your cooperation and look forward to maintaining the orderly
development of properties in this community. We hope to work with you to assist
you in completing your paperwork, but ask that accurate information be provided at
all stages of the development process.
Page 3
Should you wish to discuss any of this further, you are urged to contact this office at
your convenience. As always, our City Hall office doors remain open and we are
willing to discuss any aspects of this situation that you deem necessary.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Craig R. Nealis
City Manager
CRN:mlk
sw li m po rt/c r port.l2 ►s
cc City Council
City Attorney
Planning Commission
RHCA Board of Directors
Peggy Minor, RHCA Manager
RHCA Architectural Committee
Lola Ungar, Principal Planner
Lata Thakar, District Engineer
Rafael Bernal, Building Inspector
Ed Acosta, Building Inspector
Mr Gar s7,..
E41•.4 Cif Ka11aI Aa.oci.rS.
MA & Aawtio%
23721)I..lkr . tlna
Tana. CA 10603
Mr. Ton Mcsar.
Tasd Drrsop.erl 1.c
4219 C1.Ae.ag.i Ara
Lon Durk CA 901102
Mr. Mau N. folio.
Bohr. ficrearift Ccnor)6o.
2603 Coal L i Road
Ra.Oro r.ks Vades. CA
90271
Mr Demi Akre
D.k.. Ctr.wir. Anociob
17623 G.reA . eht
Toluca. CA 90505
Mr Doss Mc11ads
SoibMrfAprari4
301 T.p. Aar
Prior Verdes %wet. CA 90274
Me Gap %way
Aiclret
MArss ewe
Irks tiaras 6.rl CA 90274
Mr. Nip L B.t)o.r.
fa•ad Cato. *c a Aa.avra
MA it Auociar.
27771 Ha.mor.e 40.0.
Tartvo.. CA 90307
W. Areal l.twua
1%7 Wand Si.
Rartdr0 Palos Verdi. CA
►4 Rari.i R. Wd
folio. fiiinaasaS Cow n6o.
260) Coral 11.49e Ro.d
Ra.dro Nat V ads, CA
90271
Mr. Cris& Cn rdego.
Gin Carderso. Arch.ct
INC 1. biro A+t . Sis 24)
Radmdo Si ark CA 90050
Mr. Row More
Rd.ra 11ort>t Mamas
26360 %us& Del A. Sr 200
Torr..c5, CA 90301
w owa run*
P.O w.7U4
LRtwa Merl. CA 92607
Mr. Tiow n Mai
aai ad Anacists'
27R3 Perak Corsi Hip.ar
Tanrtat. CA 90706
17.,i4 MINA
Dre.rol. t)►ci G'i`hrerinI. lac.
1152 Loom et.l
La.•iti. CA 90717
Mr Lewd U.
Rr)ard Lrrdi t Awe quori
2)00 AMpors Can. Sri 200
To.s.a.CA 90601
Mr Lase Ro6.rw.
Ra6..ror Noel Ardwrre
20)60 hsu Del Asa Ss&. 700
Ta.ar.e. CA 90301
.15.04.130 ction 7015.4 amended. Lon 7015 of
•the Build n, .ode, entitled •Excavation_,' __ amended to
add subsection 7015.4 to read:
7015.4 BALANCED CUT AND FILL RATIO.
1. No export or import of soil shall be permitted
from or to any lot in the City.
2. No grading plan for which a permit is required
shall be approved unless the amount of soil to be cut
from the site equals the amount of soil to be filled
on the site.
3. The City Manageri may grant an exception to the
'requirements of parts l and 2 of this paragraph (d) to
allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed
500 cubic yards if he or .she finds, based upon written
reports and other information submitted, that all of
the following conditions are present: (a) construc-
tion of a structure on the lot or parcel has com-
menced, (b) that the need to import or export the soil
• could not have been foreseen prior to commencement of
construction, and (c) that either the structure cannot
be completed without the requested import or export of
soil or. that. an emergency condition exists due to the
threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
173 (Rolling Hills 5/96)
15....160--15.04.170
15.04.160 Subsection 7016.3 amended. Subsection
7016.3 of Section
7016rof the Building Code, entitled 'Fill
Slope,' is amended to
7016.3 FILL SLOPE. Fill slopes shall not exceed a
steepness of two horizontal to one vertical, or exceed
a vertical height of thirty (30') feet, unless the
owner receives a variance for a steeper or higher
vertical height fill slope from the Planning Commis-
.sion of the City of Rolling Hills, pursuant to the
provisions of Title 17 of the Municipal Code of the
City. In applying for a variance to the provisions of
this paragraph, the owner shall submit soil test data
and engineering calculations and shall provide in
writing any specific safety and/or stability problems
on the property that presently exist or may exist if
the requested variance is granted and the proposed
grading plans are approved.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
15.04.170 Subsection 7016.9 added. Subsection 7016
of the Building Code, entitled 'Fills,' is amended to add a
new subsection 7016.9 to read:
7016.9 BALANCED CUT AND FILL RATIO.
1. No export or import of soil shall be permitted
from or to any lot in the City.
2. No grading plan for which a permit is required
shall be approved unless the amount of soil to be cut
from the site equals the amount of soil to be filled
on the site.
3. The City Manager may grant an•exception to the
requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph (d) to
allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed
500 cubic yards if he or she finds, based upon written
reports and other information submitted, that all of
the following conditions are present: (a) construc-
tion of a structure on the lot or parcel has com-
menced, (b) that the need to import or export the soil
could not have been foreseen prior to commencement of
construction, and (c) that either the structure cannot
be completed without the requested import or export of
soil or that an emergency condition exists due to the
threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
(Ord. 257-U S1(part), 1995).
174 (Rolling Hills 5/96)
15.04.180--15.08.010
15.04.180 Violations and penalties. A. It is un-
lawful for any person to erect, construct, enlarge, alter,
repair, move, improve, remove, convert, demolish, equip,
use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or per-
form any grading in the City of Rolling Hills, or cause the
same to be done, contrary to or in violation of any of the
provisions of the. Building Code.
B. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violat-
ing any of the provisions of the Building Code shall be
deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person shall
be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every
day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of
the provisions of the Building Code is committed, continued
or permitted, and upon conviction of any such violation
such person shall be punishable by a fine of, not more than
one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail
for a period of not more than six months, or by both such
fine and imprisonment. (Ord. 257-U S1(part), 1995).
17.16.230 Balanced grading required. Per the re-
quirements of the City's Building Code (Title 15 of the
Municipal Code), no export of cut materials nor import of
fill materials shall be permitted in connection with any
grading performed in the City, unless otherwise permitted
by the provisions of Title 15. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993).
17.46.070 Subseauent modification. A. After a site
plan review application has been approved, modification of
the approved plans and/or any conditions imposed, including
additions or deletions, may be considered by the City Man-
ager or the Planning Commission. The City Manager or his
designee shall have the authority to review and act upon
minor modifications, and the Planning Commission shall have
the authority to review and act upon major modifications,
as prescribed in the following paragraphs. The City Manag-
er shall establish criteria for minor and major modifica-
tions.
B. Any property owner, or his designated representa-
tive, seeking to modify an approved site plan review shall
notify the City Manager of the intent. The property owner
shall provide the City Manager, or his designee, with two
copies of the modified plans and a written description of
the proposed modifications. The City Manager, or his
designee, shall determine whether the proposed modifica-
tions are considered minor modifications or major modifica-
tions.
C. Minor modifications may be approved by the City
Manager, or his designee, as an administrative item and
shall not require a public hearing or notice. Evidence of
an approved minor modification shall be provided in writing
to the property owner and shall be filed with the original
site plan review approval. An action of the City Manager
to deny a request for minor modifications may be appealed
to the Planning Commission as provided for in Chapter
17.54.
D. Major modifications shall be considered a new pro-
ject. As such; a new application for Site Plan Review
shall be required, and the application shall be reviewed as
provided for in this chapter. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993).
City eja e/in9 JUL
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
JODY MURDOCK
Mayor
B. ALLEN LAY
Mayor Pro Tem
THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER
Councilmember
FRANK E. HILL
Councilmember
GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S.
Councilmember
March 24, 1997
Ms. Lata Thakar, District Engineer
Los Angeles County Department of
Building and Safety
24320 Narbonne Ave.
Lomita, CA 90717
SUBJECT: GRADING CONFIRMATION PROCESS
Dear Ms. Thakar:
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377.1521
FAX: (310) 377.7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
Attached is a staff report that was recommended for approval by the Planning
Commission at their meeting on Tuesday, March 18, 1997. During deliberation, the
process of grading plan amendments at the County level was discussed.
Please remind your colleagues in Alhambra and at your local office that if grading
plans deviate from the approved plan of the City, City staff needs to be alerted
immediately. It is our hope that we can discuss the rationale for any amendments
with the County and the applicant and initiate the appropriate approval process in a
timely manner. As in recent cases, major deviations would require Planning
Commission approval. Minor changes will be handled at the City staff level.
Should you wish to discuss this further, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
5'‘114
Craig R. Nealis
City Manager
CRN:mlk
03/20/97thakar.ltr
cc: Lola Ungar, Principal Planner
®Printed on Recycled Paper.
941l
o` Allin,
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377.1521
FAX (310) 377-7288
E-mait cityofrh@eol.com
Agenda Item No.: 9-D
Mtg. Date: , 03/18/97
TO: HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
REGARDING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE GRADING
CONFIRMATION PROCESS.
DATE: MARCH 18, 1997
BACKGROUND
At the joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission held on
Monday, February 3rd, a report was presented regarding the grading confirmation
process. At that time, staff was directed to return to the Planning Commission with
recommendations on how to improve the grading inspection/site plan analysis
procedures. A copy of that staff report is attached for your information.
As indicated in that report,,a grading permit is required when the cut or fill exceeds
3 feet or the disturbance exceeds 2,000 sq. ft. of the existing ground surface.
Currently, the grading plan inspection services are provided through the County of
Los Angeles. Eight -five percent (85%) of the grading permit applications are
handled through the Los Angeles County office in Alhambra. The remaining
fifteen percent (15%) are handled through the County Lomita office.
Currently, if a grading plan does not involve the construction of a new structure, a
visit to the actual site is not conducted by the County soils and geology engineer. In
most cases, involving minor grading, this probably does not present an issue. In
cases where a new structure is proposed, the County soils and geology personnel
inspect the site. In either case, recommendations/amendments from the County are
provided to the grading contractor/engineer.
Therefore, the situation can arise where the grading plan that was presented to the
Planning Commission must be amended to meet either safety standards imposed by
the County and/or address soils conditions that have been identified in the soils and
-1-
Pnnted on Recycled Papery
engineering report. This report is the responsibility of the applicant and is required
by the County. This can result in a significant change to the grading plan that was
considered by the Planning Commission. Currently, these deviations are resolved
through staff approval of the revised grading plan (Minor modification RHMC
17.46.070 A,B,C) or a reapplication before the Planning Commission (Major
modification RHMC 17.46.070 A,D).
The County relies heavily on the civil engineer's stamped plan that is submitted by
the engineer for a particular project. Specifically, Section 7020.5 of the 1994 Uniform
Building Code requires the field engineer, soils engineer or engineering geologist to
notify the building official in writing of non-conformance with an approved
grading plan. However, history has show us that often times these corrections take
place without the County or the City being advised of the need to amend the grading
plan.
Goal of Proposed Grading Plan Check Modifications
The goal of modifying the grading plan check procedures for the City of Rolling
Hills is quite simple. It is staff's desire to have the Planning Commission review, as
closely as possible, what represents the actual proposed grading activity in the field
when they are considering plans during the public hearing process. We recognize,
however, that there may be deviations based upon actual field conditions which
cannot be handled until they are actually encountered in the field.
Our second goal is to have the grading plan in the most final status when it is
reviewed by the Planning Commission which will minimize the likelihood of as -
graded conditions beyond the original scope of approval being presented to the
Planning Commission is an "as -graded" modification fashion.
Proposed Modifications
As stated earlier, the County reviews not only the grading plan but the soils and
geology reports required for the grading permit following approval of the project by
the Planning Commission. Staff proposes to implement the following which can be
implemented by staff on a discretionary basis depending upon the quantity, location,
or sensitivity of the graded area. Discretionary implementation of these procedures
would be as follows:
Step 1: Upon reviewing an initial plan being submitted for Planning
Commission review, staff will have the discretion to request that the County soils
engineering geology personnel review that plan to determine its probable feasibility
as presented on the grading plan itself. This would serve as an administrative
review of the plan by the County.
Step 2: If it is felt that the grading represents activity that is more sensitive,
staff will require the County to conduct a field inspection of the proposed site and
-2-
grading plan beyond the administrative review (Step 1). This will be conducted
during normal working hours and will involve staff, the applicant and the County.
Step 3: If the grading plan appears to be highly sensitive, staff will require the
applicant to prepare the soils and geology reports to be submitted and evaluated by
the County prior to submission of the case to the Planning Commission.
It is our hope that implementing one or more of these steps will enable the
Planning Commission to review a grading plan that has been evaluated in terms of
its feasibility in the field. It is also felt that staff currently has the discretion to
require this information of applicants. However, this represents a change in the
way we currently conduct business and it is hoped that presentation of this
information to the Planning Commission will assist staff in implementing these
new procedures.
Costs For This Increased Service
Currently, the County already charges the City and the applicant for review of a soils
and geology report in conjunction with a grading permit. These costs will not
change.
However, office review of grading plans (Step 1) are estimated to take approximately
2-4 hours at the County office at $56.00 per hour. Therefore, the cost for the office
review is estimated to be $112.00-224.00 per project.
If staff initiates the second level (Step 2) and requires a field visit by the County
personnel, that cost is estimated to be an additional $280.00 per project. Therefore,
approximate costs associated with a field review prior to Planning Commission
review will be $329.00-504.00.
Presently, staff is not proposing to amend the fees associated with the site plan
review process to cover any of these costs. It is recommended that we embark on
these new review procedures and review any amendments to our fee schedule in
the future as appropriate.
It is not staff's desire to create unnecessary delays for applications. That is primarily
why we have recommended that staff have the discretion to implement Step 1, 2 or
3 depending upon the scope and nature of the project. According to the County of
Los Angeles, it is estimated that the office review of the grading plan will take
approximately 5 days. To complete a field review with the office review, will take
just a few days longer.
Clearly, if we require an applicant to prepare the soils and geology reports prior to
submission to the Planning Commission, delays will result. However, it should be
understood that the preparation of a soils and geology report is already required by
an applicant. However, this is normally completed following Planning
Commission approval for a project.
-3-
Summary
It cannot be over -emphasized that it is staff's goal to present to the Planning
Commission the most accurate grading plan as possible. It is hoped that these added
procedures will assist applicants with presenting a more detailed grading plan so
there are fewer amendments following actual approval.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that members of the Planning Commission consider these
recommendations and provide a recommendation to the City Council.
CRN:mlk
gradconfproc.sta
-4-
ly olleollinF
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377.1521
FAX (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
Agenda Item No.: 3-E
Mtg. Date: 02103/97
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING GRADING
CONFIRMATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE MODIFICATION
PROCESS.
DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 1997
BACKGROUND
At the regular City Council meeting held Monday, January 27, 1997, Councilmember
Tom Heinsheimer requested that this item be presented at this evening's meeting.
Grading Confirmation Process
Currently, the County of Los Angeles provides grading inspection and plan check
services to the City of Rolling Hills through a contract. The County of Los Angeles
serves as the City's Building and Safety Inspector in this capacity.
A grading permit is required when the cut or fill exceeds 3 feet or the disturbance
exceeds 2,000 sq. ft. of the existing ground surface. Authority for this permit
requirement is provided under Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 15.04.120
(attached). According to Los Angeles County District Engineer Lata Thakar, 85% of
the grading permit applications in the City of Rolling Hills are handled through the
Los Angeles County office in Alhambra.
In cases where grading is proposed on an undeveloped lot, the site is visited by the
Los Angeles County Geologist from Alhambra prior to the issuance of a grading
permit. If, however, the grading is proposed on a developed lot, an inspection is
normally not conducted by the County Geologist. The remaining 15% of grading
permits generally involve minor requests which are handled through the local
County offices in Lomita.
Pnnted on Recycled Pyoc..r
Following issuance of the grading permit, major deviations from the approved
grading plan are reported to the County through the normal building inspection
process handled by the local inspector out of the Lomita office. In all of the
inspection procedures, the plans submitted by the engineer for the project weigh
heavily in the determination of the appropriateness of the grading. All plans are
required to be stamped and certified by a certified civil engineer as accurate and
correct.
From time to time, staff is alerted to alleged violations of approved soil
import/export conditions on specific lots. Staff has implemented the following
changes to our procedures to help alleviate this activity in the future.
First, we have modified the presentation of our staff reports to include a separate
paragraph identifying whether a basement is included in a proposed development.
The City does not generally regulate basements, however, they are regulated by the
County for safety purposes.
Our site plan review application contains a question as to whether a basement is
proposed in conjunction with a specific development. However, even when that
application is submitted indicating that a basement is not proposed, oftentimes
when the building plan is submitted to the County for plan check, it contains a
basement. This results in excess soil which, if it cannot be balanced on the site
becomes available for exportation.
It is our hope that adding a declaration to each staff report that a basement is or is
not proposed, that handling of any excess soil on site can be addressed during the
Planning Commission public hearing process.
Second, we have significantly changed our procedures for the administrative
approval of the export or import of soil authorized under Sections 15.04.150 and
15.04.170 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. Highlights of these changes include
the requirement that a certified engineer must submit this request and that the
County will conduct a pre-import/export inspection, a during construction
import/export inspection and a post import/export inspection. Correspondence to
area engineers and graders regarding this new procedure is included with this staff
report.
Third, we are finalizing our Planning Department property profile system which
will eventually enhance the application process and add another level of detailed
information that will be considered by the Planning Commission. We anticipate
that we will have a demonstration ready for this system in early March.
Administrative Modifications to Development
Section 15.04.150 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code prohibits the export or import
of soil to or from any lot in the City. Additionally, that Section requires that grading
plans shall only be approved for grading that is balanced on the site. Paragraph (3) of
-2-
that Section allows the City Manager to grant an exception to the requirements of
the import/export or balanced cut and fill requirements under specified conditions.
These conditions include that construction of a structure on the lot or parcel has
commenced, that the need to import or export the soil could not have been foreseen
prior to commencement of construction, and, that either .the structure cannot be
completed without the requested import or export of soil or that an emergency
condition exists due to the threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
Additionally, Section 17.16.230 of the Municipal Code entitled "Balanced Grading
Required", establishes the prohibition of export or import of materials in connection
with any grading performed in the City.
Under Section 17.46.070 of the Municipal Code entitled "Subsequent Modifications",
the City Manager has the authority to review and act upon minor modifications to
development projects. The Planning Commission reserves the right to review and
act upon major modifications.
Under Paragraph (C) of that Section, evidence of an approved minor modification
shall be provided in writing to the property owner and shall be filed with the
original site plan review approval.
Traditionally, minor modifications usually involve minor additional structures to
an approved project in an area that was not considered the subject of contention
during the original site plan application. Minor modifications are determined by
the nature of the amendment and how that portion of the project was received at
the Planning Commission level.
In all of the cases, either a stamped City approval on a request for the minor
amendment by the applicant or a formal letter of approval for the amendment is
included in the case file for that particular property.
Reasons that administrative modifications are granted include:
• A modification at the request of the applicant which does not drastically change
the scope of the project.
• A modification at the request of adjoining property owners to settle matters of
differences.
RECOMMENDATION
It would be in order for members of the Rolling Hills City Council and Planning
Commission to consider this report and provide appropriate direction to staff. The
City Council may wish to consider if they would like staff to return with a report
with recommendations on how to improve the grading inspection/site plan
analysis procedures.
CRN:mlk
grading.sta
-3-
15.04.120 Section 3306.1 amended. Section 3306.1 of
the Building Code is amended to read:
Section 3306.1: A person shall not perform any
grading without first obtaining a grading permit to do
so from the Building Official. A separate permit
shall be obtained for each site.
EXCEPTIONS: A grading permit shall not be required
for:
(8) An excavation and/or fill or a combination
thereof which is less than three feet in depth below
the existing ground surface, provided that said exca-
vation and/or fill or combination thereof which is
less than three feet in depth does not cover more than
2,000 square feet of existing ground surface.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
JOOY MURDOCK
Mayor
B. ALLEN LAY
Mayor Pro Tem
THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER
Councinember
FRAMs E. HILL
Coir>ciriember
GODFREY PERNELL. D.D.S.
Caroc/member
December 6, 1996
Coy P.M" JUL
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1937
SENT TO ATTACHED LIST
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90214
(310 377.1621
FAX (310) 377.7288
E•mait cltyotrn®aolcom
Sections 15.04.150 through 15.04.180 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code provide the
conditions and authority for the importation or exportation of soil to and from a
development site following the commencement of construction. This provision
was added to the Rolling Hills Municipal Code in 1991. From time to time, the City
receives complaints that importation or exportation of soil may have exceeded the
quantity of soil permitted. We have handled these complaints on a case -by -case
basis and have worked with the professionals in charge of the developments on
these sites. This process has not proved to be completely effective.
It has come to our attention that too often the permitted level of importation or
exportation is exceeded without the knowledge of the City. It seems that the vast
majority of soil exportation occurs on projects where a basement is added to a
residential development after approvals have been granted by the Planning
Commission. Although the City does not generally regulate basements beyond
building safety, the movement of soil to and from properties is a genuine concern to
the City. The addition of a basement on a previously balanced cut and fill project
may lead to the availability of soil which then may result in the importation of soil
to another property in the community. The Site Plan Review Application already
contains a question. for the applicant to identify whether or not a basement is
proposed for a residential development project.
co
Page 2
Therefore, in order to maintain the integrity of the process and in fairness to all
parties, we are implementing the following changes for consideration of
importation or exportation of soil on development projects.
Effective immediately, kasement soil cuts shall be included in all balanced cut and
fill ratios when any application is submitted. Additionally, a separate paragraph will
be included in staff reports presented to the Planning Commission identifying
whether the applicant has declared that a basement will or will not be a part of the
project.
For importation or exportation of soil following commencement of construction,
effective immediately, written requests will only be considered by the City when
they are submitted by a certified civil engineer on engineering company letterhead.
The letter must contain the information required under the Municipal Code
(attached).
When this letter is .presented, the County will conduct (1) a pre -soil
importation/exportation inspection on all affected properties, (2) inspection during
the actual transfer of soil, and (3) a follow-up inspection upon completion of the soil
transfer. At that point, a signed letter by the certified civil engineer will be required
and must state the quantity of soil that was actually exchanged. Quantity of soil per
truck, and number of truck trips information must also be included. Failure to
comply with these provisions will result in a stop work order.
We understand that from time to time, conditions in the field warrant the
importation or exportation of soil. However, when it is anticipated that the export
or import exceeds the specifically authorized quantity or 500 cubic yards maximum,
it is imperative that City staff be contacted immediately to address the situation.
Provisions to seek a Variance exist in the Municipal Code or remedies are available
at the staff level to address these situations.
Additionally, should the County of Los Angeles require soil importation or
exportation to satisfy safety issues, you must contact City staff immediately so that
we can become involved in this process as early as possible.
Disregard of these provisions cannot be tolerated. Should these provisions be
violated, staff will have no choice, but to forward violations to the office of the
District Attorney.
We appreciate your cooperation and look forward to maintaining the orderly
development of properties in this community. We hope to work with you to assist
you in completing your paperwork, but ask that accurate information be provided at
all stages of the development process.
QD.
Page 3
Should you wish to discuss any of this further, you are urged to contact this office at
your convenience. As always, our City Hall office doors remain open and we are
willing to discuss any aspects of this situation that you deem necessary.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Craig R. Nealis
City Manager
CRN:mlk
soi li mpo rdtrpo►t.lt rs
cc City Council
City Attorney
Planning Commission
RHCA Board of Directors
Peggy Minor, RHCA Manager
RHCA Architectural Committee
Lola Ungar, Principal Planner
Lata Thakar, District Engineer
Rafael Bernal, Building Inspector
Ed Acosta, Building Inspector
Mr. George Pon
Wined Cara Beal Associates,
MA t Maxims
2372714swdwes awl
Tonasoo. CA 90505
Mr. To. Montague
Tomd Dusaspnewt. la.
4219 Clarlasape Ave.
Lang Beach CA 90801
Mt. Rau N. Bohai
Bottom Ealrteenal Capoesuon
2603 Coral Ridge Road
Rondo Palo Verdes, CA
90275
Me. Darryl Micas
ak.. Gwnwisa Associates
17625 CeenaMw *hd
Torrance. CA 90504
Mt. Doll McHusia
Senna Bay Ew4.eena/
304 Type Ham
Palos . Verde Eames, CA 90274
Mr George Sauey
Me.un
3 Matta Cow
Palos Verde Esuae, CA 90274
Mr. Nap R. Bathoum
Edward Carsot Beau Auc uses,
AIA £ Associates
2727 Hawthorne Blvd.
Tornna. CA 90505
Mt. Amdtony Intones
1967 Upland Si.
Rondo Palos Verdes, CA
Ms. Karim 11 Bird
Bolan En4ineeriss Corporation
260! Coral Ridge Road
Rancho Pala Vudes, CA
90275
Mr. Criss Gunderson
Clio Gunderson Archness
1640 S Elena Ave . Se 203
Redondo Buck CA 90040
Ms. Rope North
Robotics North Architects
26360 Plus Del A. Sae. 200
Tanana, CA 90501
Mr. Duna Phillip
P.O. Boa 7134
Vgues Niguel, CA 92607
Mr. Torus Blair
Blai and Associates
2785 Pacific Coast Highway
Torrance, CA 90505
Me. David Beeiooli
Brci'ola Da[i Enlinurirq, Inc.
1152 Lomita Wed.
Loaut., CA 90717
Mr. Richard Linde
Richard Linde & Associties
2200 Amapola Cant. Ste. 200
Tanana. CA 90501
Mr. Lamas Robinson
Robeson North Architects
26360 tau Del Arno. Ste 200
Torrance, CA 90501
15.04.1$41Fection 7015.4 amended. --tion 7015 of
the-Bu[1difl e, entitled •Excavation,_, s amended to
add subsection 7015.4 to read:
7015.4 BALANCED CUT AND FILL RATIO.
1. No export or import of soil shall be permitted
from or to any lot in the City.
2. No grading plan for which a permit is required
shall be approved unless the amount of soil to be cut
from the site equals the amount of soil to be filled
on the site.
3. The City Manager may grant an exception to the
'requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph (d) to
allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed
500 cubic yards if he or she finds, based upon written
reports and other information submitted, that all of
the following conditions are present: (a) construc-
tion of a structure on the lot or parcel has com-
menced, (b) that the need to import or export the soil
could not have been foreseen prior to commencement of
construction, and (c) that either the structure cannot
be completed without the requested import or export of
soil or. that. an emergency condition exists due to the
threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
173 (Rolling Hills 5/96)
15....160--15.04.170
15.04.160 Subsection 7016.3 amended. Subsection
7016.3 of Section 7016 of the Building Code, entitled 'Fill
Slope,' is amended to read:
7016.3 FILL SLOPE. Fill slopes shall not exceed a
steepness of two horizontal to one vertical, or exceed
a vertical height of thirty (30') feet, unless the
owner receives a variance for a steeper or higher
vertical height fill slope from the Planning Commis-
,sion of the City of Rolling Hills, pursuant to the
provisions of Title 17 of the Municipal Code of the
City. In applying for a variance to the provisions of
this paragraph, the owner shall submit soil test data
and engineering calculations and shall provide in
writing any specific safety and/or stability problems
on the property that presently exist or may exist if
the requested variance is granted and the proposed
grading plans are approved.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
15.04.170 Subsection 7016.9 added. Subsection 7016
of the Building Code, entitled 'Fills,' is amended to add a
new subsection 7016.9 to read:
7016.9 BALANCED CUT AND FILL RATIO.
1. No export or import of soil shall be permitted
from or to any lot in the City.
2. No grading plan for which a permit is required
shall be approved unless the amount of soil to be cut
from the site equals the amount of soil to be filled
on the site.
3. The City Manager may grant an exception to the
requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph (d) to
allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed
500 cubic yards if he or she finds, based upon written
reports and other information submitted, that all of
the following conditions are present: (a) construc-
tion of a structure on the lot or parcel has com-
menced, (b) that the need to import or export the soil
could not have been foreseen prior to commencement of
construction, and (c) that either the structure cannot
be completed without the requested import or export of
soil or that an emergency condition exists due to the
threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
174 (Rolling Hills 5/96)
15.04.180--15.08.010
15.04.180 Violations and penalties. A. It is un-
lawful for any person to erect, construct, enlarge, alter,
repair, move, improve, remove, convert, demolish, equip,
use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or per-
form any grading in the City of Rolling Hills, or cause the
same to be done, contrary to or in violation of any of the
provisions of the. Building Code.
B. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violat-
ing any of the provisions of the Building Code shall be
deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person shall
be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every
day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of
the provisions of the Building Code is committed, continued
or permitted, and upon conviction of any such violation
such person shall be punishable by a fine of, not more than
one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail
for a period of not more than six months, or by both such
fine and imprisonment. (Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
17.16.230 Balanced grading required. Per the re-
quirements of the City's Building Code (Title 15 of the
Municipal Code), no export of cut materials nor import of
fill materials shall be permitted in connection with any
grading performed in the City, unless otherwise permitted
by the provisions of Title 15. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993).
17.46.070 Subseauent modification. A. After a site
plan review application has been approved, modification of
the approved plans and/or any conditions imposed, including
additions or deletions, may be considered by the City Man-
ager or the Planning Commission. The City Manager or his
designee shall have the authority to review and act upon
minor modifications, and the Planning Commission shall have
the authority to review and act upon major modifications,
as prescribed in the following paragraphs. The City Manag-
er shall establish criteria for minor and major modifica-
tions.
B. Any property owner, or his designated representa-
tive, seeking to modify an approved site plan review shall
notify the City Manager of the intent. The property owner
shall provide the City Manager, or his designee, with two
copies of the modified plans and a written description of
the proposed modifications. The City Manager, or his
designee, shall determine whether the proposed modifica-
tions are considered minor modifications or major modifica-
tions.
C. Minor modifications may be approved by the City
Manager, or his designee, as an administrative item and
shall not require a public hearing or notice. Evidence of
an approved minor modification shall be provided in writing
to the property owner and shall be filed with the original
site plan review approval. An action of the City Manager
to deny a request for minor modifications may be appealed
to the Planning Commission as provided for in Chapter
17.54.
D. Major modifications shall be considered a new pro-
ject. As such, a new application for Site Plan Review
shall be required, and the application shall be reviewed as
provided for in this chapter. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993).
Ciiy oneolling -WSJ
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
Agenda Item No.: 9-D
Mtg. Date: 03/18/97
TO: HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
REGARDING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE GRADING
CONFIRMATION PROCESS.
DATE: MARCH 18, 1997
BACKGROUND
At the joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission held on
Monday, February 3rd, a report was presented regarding the grading confirmation
process. At that time, staff was directed to return to the Planning Commission with
recommendations on how to improve the grading inspection/site plan analysis
procedures. A copy of that staff report is attached for your information.
As indicated in that report, a grading permit is required when the cut or fill exceeds
3 feet or the disturbance exceeds 2,000 sq. ft. of the existing ground surface.
Currently, the grading plan inspection services are provided through the County of
Los Angeles. Eight -five percent (85%) of the grading permit applications are
handled through the Los Angeles County office in Alhambra. The remaining
fifteen percent (15%) are handled through the County Lomita office.
Currently, if a grading plan does not involve the construction of a new structure, a
visit to the actual site is not conducted by the County soils and geology engineer. In
most cases, involving minor grading, this probably does not present an issue. In
cases where a new structure is proposed, the County soils and geology personnel
inspect the site. In either case, recommendations/amendments from the County are
provided to the grading contractor/engineer.
Therefore, the situation can arise where the grading plan that was presented to the
Planning Commission must be amended to meet either safety standards imposed by
the County and/or address soils conditions that have been identified in the soils and
-1-
Printed on Recycled Pancr
engineering report. This report is the responsibility of the applicant and is required
by the County. This can result in a significant change .to the grading plan that was
considered by the Planning Commission. Currently, these deviations are resolved
through staff approval of the revised grading plan (Minor modification RHMC
17.46.070 A,B,C) or a reapplication before the Planning Commission (Major
modification RHMC 17.46.070 A,D).
The County relies heavily on the civil engineer's stamped plan that is submitted by
the engineer for a particular project. Specifically, Section 7020.5 of the 1994 Uniform
Building Code requires the field engineer, soils engineer or engineering geologist to
notify the building official in writing of non-conformance with an approved
grading plan. However, history has show us that often times these corrections take
place without the County or the City being advised of the need to amend the grading
plan.
Goal of Proposed Grading Plan Check Modifications
The goal of modifying the grading plan check procedures for the City of Rolling
Hills is quite simple. It is staff's desire to have the Planning Commission review, as
closely as possible, what represents the actual proposed grading activity in the field
when they are considering plans during the public hearing process. We recognize,
however, that there may be deviations based upon actual field conditions which
cannot be handled until they are actually encountered in the field.
Our second goal is to have the grading plan in the most final status when it is
reviewed by the Planning Commission which will minimize the likelihood of as -
graded conditions beyond the original scope of approval being presented to the
Planning Commission is an "as -graded" modification fashion.
Proposed Modifications
As stated earlier, the County reviews not only the grading plan but the soils and
geology reports required for the grading permit following approval of the project by
the Planning Commission. Staff proposes to implement the following which can be
implemented by staff on a discretionary basis depending upon the quantity, location,
or sensitivity of the graded area. Discretionary implementation of these procedures
would be as follows:
Step 1: Upon reviewing an initial plan being submitted for Planning
Commission review, staff will have the discretion to request that the County soils
engineering geology personnel review that plan to determine its probable feasibility
as presented on the grading plan itself. This would serve as an administrative
review of the plan by the County.
Step 2: If it is felt that the grading represents activity that is more sensitive,
staff will require the County to conduct a field inspection of the proposed site and
-2-
grading plan beyond the administrative review (Step 1). This will be conducted
during normal working hours and will involve staff, the applicant and the County.
Step 3: If the grading plan appears to be highly sensitive, staff will require the
applicant to prepare the soils and geology reports to be submitted and evaluated by
the County prior to submission of the case to the Planning Commission.
It is our hope that implementing one or more of these steps will enable the
Planning Commission to review a grading plan that has been evaluated in terms of
its feasibility in the field. It is also felt that staff currently has the discretion to
require this information of applicants. However, this represents a change in the
way we currently conduct business and it is hoped that presentation of this
information to the Planning Commission will assist staff in implementing these
new procedures.
Costs For This Increased Service
Currently, the County already charges the City and the applicant for review of a soils
and geology report in conjunction with a grading permit. These costs will not
change.
However, office review of grading plans (Step 1) are estimated to take approximately
2-4 hours at the County office at $56.00 per hour. Therefore, the cost for the office
review is estimated to be $112.00-224.00 per project.
If staff initiates the second level (Step 2) and requires a field visit by the County
personnel, that cost is estimated to be an additional $280.00 per project. Therefore,
approximate costs associated with a field review prior to Planning Commission
review will be $329.00-504.00.
Presently, staff is not proposing to amend the fees associated with the site plan
review process to cover any of these costs. It is recommended that we embark on
these new review procedures and review any amendments to our fee schedule in
the future as appropriate.
It is not staff's desire to create unnecessary delays for applications. That is primarily
why we have recommended that staff have the discretion to implement Step 1, 2 or
3 depending upon the scope and nature of the project. According to the County of
Los Angeles, it is estimated that the office review of the grading plan will take
approximately 5 days. To complete a field review with the office review, will take
just a few days longer.
Clearly, if we require an applicant to prepare the soils and geology reports prior to
submission to the Planning Commission, delays will result. However, it should be
understood that the preparation of a soils and geology report is already required by
an applicant. However, this is normally completed following Planning
Commission approval for a project.
-3-
Summary
It cannot be over -emphasized that it is staff's goal to present to the Planning
Commission the most accurate grading plan as possible. It is hoped that these added
procedures will assist applicants with presenting a more detailed grading plan so
there are fewer amendments following actual approval.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that members of the Planning Commission consider these
recommendations and provide a recommendation to the City Council.
CRN:mlk
gradconfproc.sta
-4-
Cuy 0//2!!.•ns Jd,PP,
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
Agenda Item No.: 3-E
Mtg. Date: 02/03/97
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING GRADING
CONFIRMATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE MODIFICATION
PROCESS.
DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 1997
BACKGROUND
At the regular City Council meeting held Monday, January 27, 1997, Councilmember
Tom Heinsheimer requested that this item be presented at this evening's meeting.
Grading Confirmation Process
Currently, the County of Los Angeles provides grading inspection and plan check
services to the City of Rolling Hills through a contract. The County of Los Angeles
serves as the City's Building and Safety Inspector in this capacity.
A grading permit is required when the cut or fill exceeds 3 feet or the disturbance
exceeds 2,000 sq. ft. of the existing ground surface. Authority for this permit
requirement is provided under Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 15.04.120
(attached). According to Los Angeles County District Engineer Lata Thakar, 85% of
the grading permit applications in the City of Rolling Hills are handled through the
Los Angeles County office in Alhambra.
In cases where grading is proposed on an undeveloped lot, the site is visited by the
Los Angeles County Geologist from Alhambra prior tothe issuance of a grading
permit. If, however, the grading is proposed on a developed lot, an inspection is
normally not conducted by the County Geologist. The remaining 15% of grading
permits generally involve minor requests which are handled through the local
County offices in Lomita.
,o
Printed on Recycled Paper
Following issuance of the grading permit, major deviations from the approved
grading plan are reported to the County through the normal building inspection
process handled by the local inspector out of the Lomita office. In all of the
inspection procedures, the plans submitted by the engineer for the project weigh
heavily in the determination of the appropriateness of the grading. All plans are
required to be stamped and certified by a certified civil engineer as accurate and
correct.
From time to time, staff is alerted to alleged violations of approved soil
import/export conditions on specific lots. Staff has implemented the following
changes to our procedures to help alleviate this activity in the future.
First, we have modified the presentation of our staff reports to include a separate
paragraph identifying whether a basement is included in a proposed development.
The City does not generally regulate basements, however, they are regulated by the
County for safety purposes.
Our site plan review application contains a question as to whether a basement is
proposed in conjunction with a specific development. However, even when that
application is submitted indicating that a basement is not proposed, oftentimes
when the building plan is submitted to the County for plan check, it contains a
basement. This results in excess soil which, if it cannot be balanced on the site
becomes available for exportation.
It is our hope that adding a declaration to each staff report that a basement is or is
not proposed, that handling of any excess soil on site can be addressed during the
Planning Commission public hearing process.
Second, we have significantly changed our procedures for the administrative
approval of the export or import of soil authorized under Sections 15.04.150 and
15.04.170 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. Highlights of these changes include
the requirement that a certified engineer must submit this request and that the
County will conduct a pre-import/export inspection, a during construction
import/export inspection and a post import/export inspection. Correspondence to
area engineers and graders regarding this new procedure is included with this staff
report.
Third, we are finalizing our Planning Department property profile system which
will eventually enhance the application process and add another level of detailed
information that will be considered by the Planning Commission. We anticipate
that we will have a demonstration ready for this system in early March.
Administrative Modifications to Development
Section 15.04.150 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code prohibits the export or import
of soil to or from any lot in the City. Additionally, that Section requires that grading
plans shall only be approved for grading that is balanced on the site. Paragraph (3) of
-2-
that Section allows the City Manager to grant an exception to the requirements of
the import/export or balanced cut and fill requirements under specified conditions.
These conditions include that construction of a structure on the lot or parcel has
commenced, that the need to import or export the soil could not have been foreseen
prior to commencement of construction, and, that either the structure cannot be
completed without the requested import or export of soil or that an emergency
condition exists due to the threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
Additionally, Section 17.16.230 of the Municipal Code entitled "Balanced Grading
Required", establishes the prohibition of export or import of materials in connection
with any grading performed in the City.
Under Section 17.46.070 of the Municipal Code entitled "Subsequent Modifications",
the City Manager has the authority to review and act upon minor modifications to
development projects. The Planning Commission reserves the right to review and
act upon major modifications.
Under Paragraph (C) of that Section, evidence of an approved minor modification
shall be provided in writing to the property owner and shall be filed with the
original site plan review approval.
Traditionally, minor modifications usually involve minor additional structures to
an approved project in an area that was not considered the subject of contention
during the original site plan application. Minor modifications are determined by
the nature of the amendment and how that portion of the project was received at
the Planning Commission level.
In all of the cases, either a stamped City approval on a request for the minor
amendment by the applicant or a formal letter of approval for the amendment is
included in the case file for that particular property.
Reasons that administrative modifications are granted include:
• A modification at the request of the applicant which does not drastically change
the scope of the project.
• A modification at the request of adjoining property owners to settle matters of
differences.
RECOMMENDATION
It would be in order for members of the Rolling Hills City Council and Planning
Commission to consider this report and provide appropriate direction to staff. The
City Council may wish to consider if they would like staff to return with a report
with recommendations on how to improve the grading inspection/site plan
analysis procedures.
CRN:mlk
grading.sta
-3-
15.04.120 Section 3306.1 amended. Section 3306.1 of
the Building Code is amended to read:
Section 3306.1: A person shall not perform any
grading without first obtaining a grading permit to do
so from the Building Official. A separate permit
shall be obtained for each site.
EXCEPTIONS: A grading permit shall not be required
for:
(8) An excavation and/or fill or a combination
thereof which is less than three feet in depth below
the existing ground surface, provided that said exca-
vation and/or fill or combination thereof which is
less than three feet in depth does not cover more than
2,000 square feet of existing ground surface.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
JOOY MURDOCK
Mayor
8. ALLEN LAY
Mayor Pro Tern
THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER
Councknember
FRANK E. HILL
Councimember
GODFREY PERNELL, O.O.S.
Council -neater
December 6, 1996
CE o/ /2of/n ._ihl/6 INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
SENT TO ATTACHED LIST
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90271
(310)377.1521 •
FAX: (310) 377.7288
E•mait ciyolrtteao&com
Sections 15.04.150 through 15.04.180 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code provide the
conditions and authority for the importation or exportation of soil to and from a
development site following the commencement of construction. This provision
was added to the Rolling Hills Municipal Code in 1991. From time to time, the City
receives complaints that importation or exportation of soil may have exceeded the
quantity of soil permitted. We have handled these complaints on a case -by -case
basis and have worked with the professionals in charge of the developments on
these sites. This process has not proved to be completely effective.
It has come to our attention that too often the permitted level of importation or
exportation is exceeded without the knowledge of the City. It seems that the vast
majority of soil exportation occurs on projects where a basement is added to a
residential development after approvals have been granted by the Planning
Commission. Although the City does not generally regulate basements beyond
building safety, the movement of soil to and from properties is a genuine concern to
the City. The addition of a basement on a previously balanced cut and fill 'project
may lead to the availability of soil *which then may result in the importation of soil
to another property in the community. The Site Plan Review Application already
contains a question for the applicant to identify whether or not a basement is
proposed for a residential development project.
D
® C... ,.., pn Ci... , «• f C'.., w.
Page 2
Therefore, in order to maintain the integrity of the process and in fairness to all
parties, we are implementing the following changes for consideration of
importation or exportation of soil, on development projects.
Effective immediately, basement soil cuts shall be included in all balanced cut and
fill ratios when any application is submitted. Additionally, a separate paragraph will
be included in staff reports presented to the Planning Commission identifying
whether the applicant has decla,red that a basement will or willnot be a part of the
project.
For importation or exportation of soil following commencement of construction,
effective immediately, written requests will only be considered by the City when
they are submitted by a certified civil engineer on engineering company letterhead.
The letter must contain the information required under the Municipal Code
(attached).
When this letter is presented, the County will conduct (1) a pre -soil
importation/exportation inspection on all affected properties, (2) inspection during
the actual transfer of soil, and (3) a follow-up inspection upon completion of the soil
transfer. At that point, a signed letter by the certified civil engineer will be required
and must state the quantity of soil that was actually exchanged. Quantity of soil per
truck, and number of truck trips information must also be included. Failure to
comply with these provisions will result in a stop work order.
We understand that from time to time, conditions in the field warrant the
importation or exportation of soil. However, when it is anticipated that the export
or import exceeds the specifically authorized quantity or 500 cubic yards maximum,,
it is imperative that City staff be contacted immediately to address the situation.
Provisions to seek a Variance exist in the Municipal Code or remedies are available
at the staff level to address these situations.
Additionally, should the County of Los Angeles require soil importation or
exportation to satisfy safety issues, you must contact City staff immediately so that
we can become involved in this process as early as possible.
Disregard of these provisions cannot be tolerated. Should these provisions be
violated, staff will have no choice, but to forward violations to the office of the
District Attorney.
We appreciate your cooperation and look forward to maintaining the orderly
development of properties in this community. We hope to work with you to assist
you in completing your paperwork, but ask that accurate information be provided at
all stages of the development process.
Cl
Page 3
Should you wish to discuss any of this further, you are urged to contact this office at
your convenience. As always, our City Hall office doors remain open and we are
willing to discuss any aspects of this situation that you deem necessary.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
Craig R. Nealis
City Manager
CRN:mlk
soilim port/ezport.ltrs
cc: City Council
City Attorney
Planning Commission
RHCA Board of Directors.
Peggy Minor, RHCA Manager
RHCA Architectural Committee
Lola Ungar, Principal Planner
Lata Thakar, District Engineer
Rafael Bernal, Building Inspector
Ed Acosta, Building Inspector
Mr. George Shaw
Edward Canoe Beal Associates,
AlA & Associates
23727 Hawthorne Blvd,
Torrance, CA 90505
Mr. Tom Montague
Tomel De.eopueK Inc.
4219 Cluronagne Ave.
Long Beadle CA 90808
Mr. Ross N. Bohai
Bolton Engineering Corporation
2603 Coral Ridge Road
Rancho Pelts Verdes, CA
90275
Mr. Darryl Dekko
Orkin Ceramists Associates
17625 Crenshaw Blvd.
Torrance, CA 90504
Mr. Doug McHanw
South Bay Eagineering
304 Teem Place
Palos Verde Enures, CA 90274
Mr George Sweeny
Architect
Malay Cow
Palos Verdes GUM, CA 90274
Mr. Nap R. Bathoum
Edward Carson Beall Associates,
A1A & Associates
23727 Hawthorne Blvd.
Torrance, CA 90505
Mr. Anthony Inkrrcra
1967 Upland Si.
Rancho Peke Verdes, CA
Ma Karitta R. Bird
Bolton Engineering Corporation
2603 Coral Ridge Road
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA
90275
Mr. Criss Gunderson
Criss Gunderson Architect
IMO S. Elena Ave., Ste 203
Redondo Beach, CA 90040
Mr. Roger North
Robinson North Architects
26360 Plus Del Arno, Sr. 200
Torrance, CA 90501
Mr. Dutch Phillips
P.O. Boa 7814
Laguna Niguel, CA 92607
Mr. Thomas Blair
Blair and Auociata
2785 Pacific Coast Highway
Torrance, CA 90505
Mr. David Breihols
Brcihots Dui Engineering, Inc.
1852 Lomita Blvd.
Leant*, CA 90717
Mr. Rrdnard Linde
Richard Linde & Asaociiea
2200 Amapds Court, Ste. 200
Torrance, CA 90501
Mr. Lamar Robinson
Robinson North Architects
26360 Plaza Del Arno, Ste X10
Torrance, CA 90501
15.04.151 section 7015.4 amended. tion 7015 of
the Build n, :.oae, entitled 'Excavation._, +s amended to
add subsection 7015.4 to read:
7015.4 BALANCED CUT AND FILL RATIO.
1. No export or import of soil shall be permitted
from or to any lot in the City.
2. No.grading plan for which a permit is required
shall be approved unless the amount of soil to be cut
from the site equals the amount of soil to be filled
on the site.
3. The City Manager may grant an exception to the
'requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph (d) to
allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed
500 cubic yards if he or she finds, based upon written
reports and other information submitted, that all of
the following conditions are present: (a) construc-
tion of a structure on the lot or parcel has com-
menced, (b) that the need to import or export the soil
could not have been foreseen prior to commencement of
construction, and (c) that either the structure cannot
be completed without the requested import or export of
soil or. that an emergency condition exists due to the
threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995)..
173 (Rolling Hills 5/96)
15....160--15.04.170
15.04.160 Subsection 7016.3 amended. Subsection
7016.3 of Section 7016 of the Building Code, entitled 'Fill
Slope,' is amended to read:
7016.3 FILL SLOPE. Fill slopes shall not exceed a
steepness of two horizontal to one vertical, or exceed
a vertical height of thirty (30') feet, unless the
owner receives a variance for a steeper or higher
vertical height fill slope from the Planning Commis-
.sion of the City of Rolling Hills, pursuant to the
provisions of Title 17 of the Municipal Code of the
City. In applying for a variance to the provisions of
this paragraph, the owner shall submit soil test data
and engineering calculations and shall provide in
writing any specific safety and/or stability problems
on the property that presently exist or may exist if
the requested variance is granted and the proposed
grading plans are approved.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
15.04.170 Subsection 7016.9 added. Subsection 7016
of the Building Code, entitled 'Fills,' is amended to add a
new subsection 7016.9 to read:
7016.9 BALANCED CUT AND FILL RATIO.
1. No export or import of soil shall be permitted
from or to any lot in the City.
2. No grading plan for which a permit is required
shall be approved unless the amount of soil to be cut
from the site equals the amount of soil to be filled
on the site.
3. The City Manager may grant an exception to the
requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph (d) to
allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed
500 cubic yards if he or she finds, based upon written
reports and other information submitted, that all of
the following conditions are present: (a) construc-
tion of a structure on the lot or parcel has com-
menced, (b) that the need to import or export the soil
could not have been foreseen prior to commencement of
construction, and (c) that either the structure cannot
be completed without the requested import or export of
soil or that an emergency condition exists due to the
threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
174 (Rolling Hills 5/96)
15.04.180--15.08.010
15.04.180 Violations and penalties. A. It is un-
lawful for any person to erect, construct, enlarge, alter,
repair, move, improve, remove, convert, demolish, equip,
use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or per-
form any grading in the City of Rolling Hills, or cause the
same to be done, contrary to or in violation of any of the
provisions of the. Building Code.
B. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violat-
ing any of the provisions of the Building Code shall be
deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person shall
be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every
day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of
the provisions of the Building Code is committed, continued
or permitted, and upon conviction of any such violation
such person shall be punishable by a fine of, not more than
one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail
for a period of not more than six months, or by both such
fine and imprisonment. (Ord. 257-U §l(part), 1995).
17.16.230 Balanced qradinq required. Per the re-
quirements of the City's Building Code (Title 15 of the
Municipal Code), no export of cut materials nor import of
fill materials shall be permitted in connection with any
grading performed in the City, unless otherwise permitted
by the provisions of Title 15. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993).
17.46.070 Subseauent modification. A. After a site
plan review application has been approved, modification of
the approved plans and/or any conditions imposed,, including
additions or deletions, may be considered by the City Man-
ager or the Planning Commission. The City Manager or his
designee shall have the authority to review and act upon
minor modifications, and the Planning Commission shall have
the authority to review and act upon major modifications,
as prescribed in the following paragraphs. The City Manag-
er shall establish criteria for minor and major modifica-
tions.
B. Any property owner, or his designated representa-
tive, seeking to modify an approved site plan review shall
notify the City Manager of the intent. The property owner
shall provide the City Manager, or his designee, with two
copies of the modified plans and a written description of
the proposed modifications. The City Manager, or his
designee, shall determine whether the proposed modifica-
tions are considered minor modifications or major modifica-
tions.
C. Minor modifications may be approved by the City
Manager, or his designee, as an administrative item and
shall not require a public hearing or notice. Evidence of
an approved minor modification shall be provided in writing
to the property owner and shall.be filed with the original
site plan review approval. An action of the City Manager
to deny a request for minor modifications may be appealed
to the Planning Commission as provided for in Chapter
17.54.
D. Major modifications shall be considered a new pro-
ject. As such, a new application for Site Plan Review
shall be required, and the application shall be reviewed as
provided for in this chapter. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993).
City
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS, CALIF. 90274
(310) 377-1521
FAX: (310) 377-7288
E-mail: cityofrh@aol.com
Agenda Item No.: 3-E
Mtg. Date: 02/03/97
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
HONORABLE CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: CRAIG R. NEALIS, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A REPORT REGARDING GRADING
CONFIRMATION AND ADMINISTRATIVE MODIFICATION
PROCESS.
DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 1997
BACKGROUND
At the regular City Council meeting held Monday, January 27, 1997, Councilmember
Tom Heinsheimer requested that this item be presented at this evening's meeting.
Grading Confirmation Process
Currently, the County of Los Angeles provides grading inspection and plan check
services to the City of Rolling Hills through a contract. The County of Los Angeles
serves as the City's Building and Safety Inspector in this capacity.
A grading permit is required when the cut or fill exceeds 3 feet or the disturbance
exceeds 2,000 sq. ft. of the existing ground surface. Authority for this permit
requirement is provided under Rolling Hills Municipal Code Section 15.04.120
(attached). According to Los Angeles County District Engineer Lata Thakar, 85% of
the grading permit applications in the City of Rolling Hills are handled through the
Los Angeles County office in Alhambra.
In cases where grading is proposed on an undeveloped lot, the site is visited by the
Los Angeles County Geologist from Alhambra prior to the issuance of a grading
permit. If, however, the grading is proposed on a developed lot, an inspection is
normally not conducted by the County Geologist. The remaining 15% of grading
permits generally involve minor requests which are handled through the local
County offices in Lomita.
,o
Printed on Recycled Paper.
Following issuance of the grading permit, major deviations from the approved
grading plan are reported to the County through the normal building inspection
process handled by the local inspector out of the Lomita office. In all of the
inspection procedures, the plans submitted by the engineer for the project weigh
heavily in the determination of the appropriateness of the grading. All plans are
required to be stamped and certified by a certified civil engineer as accurate and
correct.
From time to time, staff is alerted to alleged violations of approved soil
import/export conditions on specific lots. Staff has implemented the following
changes to our procedures to help alleviate this activity in the future.
First, we have modified the presentation of our staff reports to include a separate
paragraph identifying whether a basement is included in a proposed development.
The City does not generally regulate basements, however, they are regulated by the
County for safety purposes.
Our site plan review application contains a question as to whether a basement is
proposed in conjunction with a specific development. However, even when that
application is submitted indicating that a basement is not proposed, oftentimes
when the building plan is submitted to the County for plan check, it contains a
basement. This results in excess soil which, if it cannot be balanced on the site
becomes available for exportation.
It is our hope that adding a declaration to each staff report that a basement is or is
not proposed, that handling of any excess soil on site can be addressed during the
Planning Commission public hearing process.
Second, we have significantly changed our procedures for the administrative
approval of the export or import of soil authorized under Sections 15.04.150 and
15.04.170 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code. Highlights of these changes include
the requirement that a certified engineer must submit this request and that the
County will conduct a pre-import/export inspection, a during construction
import/export inspection and a post import/export inspection. Correspondence to
area engineers and graders regarding this new procedure is included with this staff
report.
Third, we are finalizing our Planning Department property profile system which
will eventually enhance the application process and add another level of detailed
information that will be considered by the Planning Commission. We anticipate
that we will have a demonstration ready for this system in early March.
Administrative Modifications to Development
Section 15.04.150 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code prohibits the export or import
of soil to or from any lot in the City. Additionally, that Section requires that grading
plans shall only be approved for grading that is balanced on the site. Paragraph (3) of
-2-
that Section allows the City Manager to grant an exception to the requirements of
the import/export or balanced cut and fill requirements under specified conditions.
These conditions include that construction of a structure on the lot or parcel has
commenced, that the need to import or export the soil could not have been foreseen
prior to commencement of construction, and, that either the structure cannot be
completed without the requested import or export of soil or that an emergency
condition exists due to the threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
Additionally, Section 17.16.230 of the Municipal Code entitled "Balanced Grading
Required", establishes the prohibition of export or import of materials in connection
with any grading performed in the City.
Under Section 17.46.070 of the Municipal Code entitled "Subsequent Modifications",
the City Manager has the authority to review and act upon minor modifications to
development projects. The Planning Commission reserves the right to review and
act upon major modifications.
Under Paragraph (C) of that Section, evidence of an approved minor modification
shall be provided in writing to the property owner and shall be filed with the
original site plan review approval.
Traditionally, minor modifications usually involve minor additional structures to
an approved project in an area that was not considered the subject of contention
during the original site plan application. Minor modifications are determined by
the nature of the amendment and how that portion of the project was received at
the Planning Commission level.
In all of the cases, either a stamped City approval on a request for the minor
amendment by the applicant or a formal letter of approval for the amendment is
included in the case file for that particular property.
Reasons that administrative modifications are granted include:
• A modification at the request of the applicant which does not drastically change
the scope of the project.
• A modification at the request of adjoining property owners to settle matters of
differences.
RECOMMENDATION
It would be in order for members of the Rolling Hills City Council and Planning
Commission to consider this report and provide appropriate direction to staff. The
City Council may wish to consider if they would like staff to return with a report
with recommendations on how to improve the grading inspection/site plan
analysis procedures.
CRN:mlk
grading.sta
-3-
15.04.120 Section 3306.1 amended. Section 3306.1 of
the Building Code is. amended to read:
Section 3306.1: A person shall not perform any
grading without first obtaining a grading permit to do
so from the Building Official. A separate permit
shall be obtained for each site.
EXCEPTIONS: A grading permit shall not be required
for:
(8) An excavation and/or fill or a combination
thereof which is less than three feet in depth below
the existing ground surface, provided that said exca-
vation and/or fill or combination thereof which is
less than three feet in depth does not cover more than
2,000 square feet of existing ground surface.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
JOOY MURDOCK
Mayor
B. ALLEN LAY
Mayor Pro Tem
THOMAS F. HEINSHEIMER
Councimember
FRANK E. HILL
Counainember
GODFREY PERNELL, D.D.S.
Cotncanember
December 6, 1996
City 4/4/ling ilia
INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957
SENT TO ATTACHED LIST
NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD
ROLLING HILLS. CALIF. 90271
(310) 377.1621
FAX (310) 377.7288
E•mait cityofr$@aol.com
Sections 15.04.150 through 15.04.180 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code provide the
conditions and authority for the importation or exportation of soil to and from a
development site following the commencement of construction. This provision
was added to the Rolling Hills Municipal Code in 1991. From time to time, the City
receives complaints that importation or exportation of soil may have exceeded the
quantity of soil permitted. We have handled these complaints on a case -by -case
basis and have worked with the professionals in charge of the developments on
these sites. This process has not proved to be completely effective.
It has come to our attention that too often the permitted level of importation or
exportation is exceeded without the knowledge of the City. It seems that the vast
majority of soil exportation occurs on projects where a basement is added to a
residential development after approvals have been granted by the Planning
Commission. Although the City does not generally regulate basements beyond
building safety, the movement of soil to and from properties is a genuine concern to
the City. The addition of a basement on a previously balanced cut and fill project
may lead to the availability of soil which then may result in the importation of soil
to another property in the community. The Site Plan Review Application already
contains a question for the applicant to identify whether or not a basement is
proposed for a residential development project.
D
®P.....1 on Fin, ,. .., P.qw.
Page 2
Therefore, in order to maintain the integrity of the process and in fairness to all
parties, we are implementing the following changes for consideration of
importation or exportation of soil on development projects.
Effective immediately, basement soil cuts shall be included in all balanced cut and
fill ratios when any application is submitted. Additionally, a separate paragraph will
be included in staff reports presented to the Planning Commission identifying
whether the applicant has declared that a basement will or will not be a part of the
project.
For importation or exportation of soil following commencement of construction,
effective immediately, written requests will only be considered by the City when
they are submitted by a certified civil engineer on engineering company letterhead.
The letter must contain the information required under the Municipal Code
(attached).
When this letter is presented, the County -will conduct (1) a pre -soil
importation/exportation inspection on all affected properties, (2) inspection during
the actual transfer of soil, and (3) a follow-up inspection upon completion of the soil
transfer. At that point, a signed letter by the certified civil engineer will be required
and must state the quantity of soil that was actually exchanged. Quantity of soil per
truck, and number of truck trips information must also be included. Failureto
comply with these provisions will result in a stop work order.
We understand that from time to time, conditions in the field warrant the
importation or exportation of soil. However, when it is anticipated that the export
or import exceeds the specifically authorized quantity or 500 cubic yards maximum,
it is imperative that City staff be contacted immediately to address the situation.
Provisions to seek a Variance exist in the Municipal Code or remedies are available
at the staff level to address these situations.
Additionally, should the County of Los Angeles require soil importation or
exportation to satisfy safety issues, you must contact City staff immediately so that
we can become involved in this process as early as possible.
Disregard of these provisions cannot be tolerated. Should these provisions be
violated, staff will have no choice, but to forward violations to the office of the
District Attorney.
We appreciate your cooperation and look forward to maintaining the orderly
development of properties in this community. We hope to work with you to assist
you in completing your paperwork, but ask that accurate information be provided at
all stages of the development process.
cc
Page 3
Should you wish to discuss any of this further, you are urged to contact this office at
your convenience. As always, our City Hall office doors remain open and we are
willing to discuss any aspects of this situation that you deem necessary.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely,
7A
Craig R. Nealis
City Manager
CRN:mlk
soili mportfexpo►t.It rs
cc City Council
City Attorney
Planning Commission
RHCA Board of Directors
Peggy Minor, RHCA Manager
RHCA Architectural Committee
Lola Ungar, Principal Planner
Lata Thakar, District Engineer
Rafael Bernal, Building Inspector
Ed Acosta, Building Inspector
Mr. George Shaw
Edward Carson Bed Associate,
AlA & Maxims
23727 Hawthorne Blvd.
Tmnroe, CA 90505
Mr. To. Montague
Tomel Devaopaess, Inc.
4219 Charlemagne Ave.
Lang Beach, CA 90808
Mr. Rae N. Bohos
Bolton Engineering Corporation
2603 Conl Ridge Road
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA
90275
Mr. Donl Da3cia
Dacia Cu..... Associates
17625 Crenshaw Blvd
Torture, CA 90504
Mr. Dosg McHattie
South Bay Engineering
304 Tern Plant
Palos Ve,des Emma, CA 90274
Mr. George Sweeny
Architect
3 *gap Cow
Palos Verdes GUM, CA 90274
Mr. Nap R. Bakhoum
Edward Caron Bull Associates,
A1A • A .ociaw
23717 Hawhorn Blvd.
Torrance, CA 90505
Mr. Anthony Intern -fa
1967 Upland St.
Rancho Pala Verdes, CA
Ma. Karin R. Bird
Bolton Engineering Corporation
2603 Coral Ridge Road
Rancho Pala Verdes, CA
90275
Mr. Criss Gunderson
Cries Gunderson Architect
1840 S. Elena Ave., Ste. 203
Redondo Beach, CA 90040
Mr. Roger North
Robinson North Architect
26360 Pius Del Amo, Ste. 200
Torrance, CA 90501
Mr. Dutch Phillips
P.O. Boa 7834
Laguna Niguel, CA 92607
Mr. Thomas Blair
Blair and Associates
2785 Pacific Coast Highway
Torrance, CA 90505
Mr. David Breihol:
Brcihot Our Engineering, Inc.
1852 Lomita Blvd.
Lomita, CA 90717
Mr. Rickard Linde
Richard Linde & Associates
2200 Amapola Court, Ste. 200
Torrance, CA 90501
Mr. Lamas Robinson
Robins. Plonk Architect
26360 Plus Del Arno, Ste. 200
Torrance, CA 90501
15.0 ;() Section 7015.4 amender Section 7015 of
the Building erode, entitled 'Excavatit..._,' is amended to
add subsection 7015.4 to read:
7015.4 BALANCED CUT AND FILL RATIO.
1. No export or import of soil shall be permitted
from or to any lot in the City.
2. No grading plan for which a permit is required
shall be approved unless the amount of soil to be cut
from the site equals the amount of soil to be filled
on the site.
3. The City Manager may grant an exception to the
'requirements of parts 1 and 2 of this paragraph (d) to
allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed
500 cubic yards if he or she finds, based upon written
reports and other information submitted,. that all of
the following conditions are present: (a) construc-
tion of a structure on the lot or parcel has com-
menced, (b) that the need to import or export the soil
could not have been foreseen prior to commencement of
construction, and (c) that either the structure cannot
be completed without the requested importor•export of
soil or.that an emergency condition exists due to the
threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
173 (Rolling Hills 5/96)
15.04.160 Subsection 7016.3 amended. Subsection
7016.3 of Section 7016 of the Building Code, entitled 'Fill
Slope,' is amended to read:
7016.3 FILL SLOPE. Fill slopes shall not exceed a
steepness of two horizontal to one vertical, or exceed
a vertical height of thirty (30') feet, unless the
owner receives.a variance for a steeper or higher
vertical height fill slope from the Planning Commis-
vsion of the City of Rolling Hills, pursuant to the
provisions of Title 17 of the Municipal Code of the
City. In applying for a variance to the provisions of
this paragraph, the owner shall submit soil test data
and engineering calculations and shall provide in
writing anyspecific safety and/or stability problems
on the property that presently exist or may exist if
the requested variance is granted and the proposed
grading plans are approved.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
15.04.170 Subsection 7016.9 added. Subsection 7016
of the Building Code, entitled 'Fills,' is amended to add a
new subsection 7016.9 to read:
7016.9 BALANCED CUT AND FILL RATIO.
1. No export or import of soil shall be permitted
from or to any lot in the City.
2. No grading plan for which a permit is required
shall be approved unless the amount of soil to be cut
from the site equals the amount of soil to be filled
on the site.
3. The City Manager may grant an exception to the
requirements of parts 1 and.2 of this paragraph (d) to
allow for the import or export of soil not to exceed
500 cubic yards if he or she finds, based upon written
reports and other information submitted, that all of
the following conditions are present: (a) construc-
tion of a structure on the lot or parcel has com-
menced, (b) that the need to import or export the soil
could not have been foreseen prior to commencement of
construction, and (c) that either the structure cannot
be completed without the requested import or export of
soil or that an emergency condition exists due to the
threat of land subsidence or other imminent danger.
(Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
174 (Rolling Hills 5/96)
15.04.180--15.08.010
15.04.180 Violations and penalties. A. It is un-
lawful for any person to erect, construct, enlarge, alter,
repair, move, improve, remove, convert, demolish, equip,
use, occupy or maintain any building or structure or per-
form any grading in the City of Rolling Hills, or cause the
same to be done, contrary to or in violation of any of the
provisions of the. Building Code.
B. Penalty. Any person, firm or corporation violat-
ing any of the provisions of the Building Code shall be
deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and each such person shall
be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every
day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of
the provisions of the Building Code is committed, continued
or permitted, and upon conviction of any such violation
such person shall be punishable by a fine of, not more than
one thousand dollars or by imprisonment in the County Jail
for a period of not more than six months, or by both such
fine and imprisonment. (Ord. 257-U §1(part), 1995).
17.16.230 Balanced grading required. Per the re-
quirements of the City's Building Code (Title 15 of the
Municipal Code), no export of cut materials nor import of
fill materials shall be permitted in connection with any
grading performed in the City, unless otherwise permitted
by the provisions of Title 15. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993).
17.46.070 Subseauent modification. A. After a site
plan review application has been approved, modification of
-the approved plans and/or any conditions imposed, including
additions or deletions, may be considered by the City Man-
ager or the Planning Commission. The City Manager or his
designee shall have the authority to review and act upon
minor modifications, and the Planning Commission shall have
the authority to review and act upon major modifications,
as prescribed in the following paragraphs. The City Manag-
er shall establish criteria for minor and major modifica-
tions.
B. Any property owner, or his designated representa-
tive, seeking to modify an approved site plan review shall
notify the City Manager of the intent. The property owner
shall provide the City Manager, or his"designee, with two
copies of the modified plans and a written description of
the proposed modifications. The City Manager, or his
designee, shall determine whether the. proposed modifica-
tions are considered minor modifications or major modifica-
tions.
C. Minor modifications may be approved by the City
Manager, or his designee, as an administrative item and
shall not require a public hearing or notice. Evidence of
an approved minor, modification shall be provided in writing
to the property owner and shall be filed with the original
site plan review approval. An action of the City Manager
to deny a request for minor modifications may be appealed
to the Planning Commission as provided for in Chapter
17.54.
D. Major modifications shall be considered.a new pro-
ject. As such, a new application for Site Plan Review
shall be required, and the application shall be reviewed as
provided for in this chapter. (Ord. 239 §11(part), 1993).